Commentary on Romans, Chapter 5 (4 of 5)
Originall ſinne therefore is the corruption of the whole nature of man, traduced by generation from the fall of our firſt parent into his poſterity, which corruption, were it not for the benefite of Chriſt, adiudgeth al men borne therin in a maner to infinite euills, and to eternall damnation. In this definition are contained al kinds of cauſes. We hauehave for the matter or ſubiect, all the partes & ſtrengthes of man: The forme, is the deprauation of them al: The efficiēt cauſe is the will of Adam which ſinned: The inſtrument, is the propagation of traduction, which is done thorough the fleſh. The end and effect, is eternall damnation together with all the diſcomoditis of thys life. And hereof ſprange ſondryeSondry names of this ſinne. names of this ſinne: ſo that ſometimes it is called a defect or want, ſometimes peruerſenes, ſometimes vice, ſometymes a diſeaſe, ſometymes contagiouſnes, ſometymes malice, and Auguſtine calleth it an affected quality, and foreign that is a diſorder. And that the whole mā is corrupt, hereby appeareth, becauſe he was to this ende created, to cleaue vntounto God, as to the chiefe good. But now he vnderſtandethThe corruption of the partes of man is declared. not things pertayning vntounto God, nor with patience waiteth for the promiſes which are ſet forth in y• ſciptures: but wt grief he harkeneth vntounto y• preceptes of God: and the paynes & rewardes he vtterly cōtemneth. The affections rebelling agaynſt ſound reaſon do wantonly deride the word of God. The body neglecteth to obey the ſoule. All theſe thinges, although they be experimēts of naturall corruption, yet are they alſo confirmed by teſtimonies of the holy ſcriptures. Of the corruption of vnderſtanding Paul ſayth, The carnall man vnderſtandeth not thoſe thinges which are of the ſpirite of God: yea he can not: becauſe they are fooliſhenes vntounto him. In which wordes let vsus marke by the way agaynſtA proofe of the impoſſibility of the law. Pigghius, that the lawe was geuen of ſuch thinges which of vsus can not be performed. For the lawe doth chiefely commaund vsus to hauehave knowledge in things pertayning to God, which thinges yet Paul apertly affirmeth, that the carnall man can not vnderſtand. And to our purpoſe, we ſée that Paul affirmeth, that this blindnes or ignorance is grafted in man, and that of nature: for we can not imagine, that it commeth by reaſon of tyme or age. For the elder in yeares a man is, ſo much the more and more is he inſtructed concerning God. Wherefore in that he is carnall, and vnapt to vnderſtand thinges pertayning to God, it commeth of his corrupt nature. And this corruption is of ſo great waight, that Auguſtine in his 3. booke agaynſt Iulianus the 12. chapter ſayth, that by it the image of God is alienated from the life of man, by reaſon of the blindnes of the harte: whiche blindnes (he ſayth) is ſinne, neither is it very agreable with the nature of man. Blindnes of the hart is ſinne.The ſame Auguſtine (in his 1. booke of the merites and remiſſion of ſinnes, the 30. chapter, where he bringeth theſe wordes of Dauid, Remember not the ſinnes of my youth, and my ignorances) maketh mencion of moſt thicke darkenes of ignorance, which is in the hartes of infantes being yet in their mothers wombe: who know not why, from whence, and when they were thruſt in there. For theBlindnes and ignorance are not agreable with the nature of man. infant lyeth in the mothers belly vnlearned, vndocible, not able to vnderſtand the commaundement, being ignorant where he is, what he is, of whome he was created, and of whome he was begotten. All which thinges were far from the nature of man as it was firſt created: and are rather vices of nature. For Adam was not ſo created, but he was both able to vnderſtand the commaundement of God, and could alſo geue names vntounto his wife and to all other liuing creatures. But in infantes we muſt wayte a long tyme, that they may by little and little as it were diſgeſt this diſſines. Farther, that this ignorance is to be counted ſinne, Reticius the moſt auncient byſhop of Auſton is a witnes (as Auguſtine teſtifieth of him in his firſt booke agaynſt Iulianus) For when he ſpeaketh of baptiſme, thus he writeth: That it is the principall indulgence in the Reticius biſhop of Auſton in Fraunce.Church, wherein we put away all the waight of the olde crime, and we blot out the olde wicked actes of our ignorance, and put of the olde man with his naturall wicked actes. By theſe wordes we ſée that wicked actes are naturall in vsus, and that the ſinnes of ignorance are blotted out in baptiſme. Wherefore foraſmuch as infants are baptiſed, it is manifeſt by the authority of this father, that they hauehave ſinnes, and that their olde ignorance is blotted out in baptiſme. Now concerning theThe wil is alſo corrupt will, let vsus ſee whether it alſo be corrupt or no. The Apoſtle beareth manifeſt witnes of it, that the ſence and wiſedome of the fleſhe is enmity agaynſt God. And vnderunder this ſentēce he comprehēdeth all the affectiōs of men which are not yet regenerate. But I meruayle at the impudency of Pigghius, who becauſe he would by ſome meanes vnwrap himſelfe, ſayth, that this place is to be vnderſtand of the ſence of the letter, which he contendeth is agaynſt God, nether can it be ſubdued vntounto him. For both the wordes that go before, and the wordes that follow, are manifeſtly agaynſt hym. For Paul ſtraight way addeth the difference betweene men which are in the fleſhe, and them which are in the ſpirite. Wherfore it playnely appeareth, that he entreateth not of the diuerſity of the ſence of the ſcripture, but of the variety of men. The wordes that go next before that ſentence are, that which was impoſſible vntounto the lawe, in as much as it was weake by reaſon of the fleſhe, God ſending his ſonne in the ſimilitude of ſinfull fleſhe, by ſinne, condemned ſinne in the fleſhe, that the righteouſnes of the lawe might be fulfilled in vsus. Theſe wordes alſo teſtify that Paul ſpeaketh of vsus, and not of the ſpirite or letter of the ſcriptures. For in vsus is that weakenes, whereby the lawe was weakened, that it coulde not bringe vsus to ſaluation: and by Chriſt the righteouſnes of the lawe beginneth to be fulfilled in vsus. Neither ought we to harken vntountoThe ſcripture by fleſh vnderſtandeth not the groſſer part of the mind. them, which both in this place, and alſo in many other, will that by fleſhe we ſhould vnderſtand only the groſſer part of the mynde. For Paul when to the Galathians he rehearſeth the workes of the fleſh, doth not only number amongſt them adulteryes, fornications, wantonnes and other ſuch lyke, but alſo idolatry, whiche no man can deny, but that it pertayneth vntounto the mynde, and not vntounto the fleſhe. And Chriſt when he ſayth, That whiche is borne of fleſhe is fleſhe, and that whiche is borne of the ſpirite, is ſpirite, exhorteth vsus to regeneration, whiche vndoubtedly pertayneth not only to the ſubſtance of the bodye, or groſſer partes of the mynde, but alſo chiefely vntounto the will, and mynde. And when he ſayde vntounto Peter, Bleſſed art thou Simon Bariona: for fleſh and bloud hath not reueled theſe thynges vntounto thee. he ſignified, that he had not lerned thoſe thinges of naturall knowledge, but of the ſpirite of God. For vnderunder the name of fleſh, he comprehendeth thoſe things which pertaine vntounto the mynde and reaſō. Neither yet do we ſay (as Pigghius fondly cauilleth) that in the chiefeſt part of the minde, is nothing but fleſh. For we know, though Pigghius had not told vsus,Why the ſoule is called fleſh in the ſcriptures. that the ſoule is a ſpirite: which yet before regeneration is in the ſcriptures called fleſh: bicauſe when as it ought to make the fleſh, that is, his groſſer partes ſpirituall, and to bring it to the obedience of a minde inſtructed by the worde of God, it rather declineth vntounto the pleaſures therof, and ſo is made carnall. But they obiecte vntounto vsus that which is written to the Galathians: The fleſh lusteth againſt the ſpirite: and the ſpirite agaynste the fleſhe: as though this could not be poſſible, if we leue nothing vncorrupted in the mindes of men. But vntounto this obiection we thus eaſely aunſwer: Firſt, that Paul ſpeaketh thoſe wordes of the beleuers, which are alredy regenerate: which thing thoſe wordes which followe do ſufficiently declare: That ye ſhould do, not thoſe thinges which ye would: by which wordes he declareth, y• they had obteined a right will of the ſpirite of Chriſt, which yet they were not able to performe by reaſon of the daily conflictes of the minde, and their great infirmitie. Wherfore the Apoſtle in that place ment nothing els, then that whatſoeuer is in vsus which is not perfectly regenerate, altogether rebelleth againſt the ſpirite of God. Farther alſo we deny not, but that ſometimes there is ſome ſuch battaile inIn the mindes of thoſe that are not regenerate there are yet lawes of nature, and ſome illuſtration of the ſpirit of God. men which are not yet regenerate, not bicauſe their minde is not carnall, & prone to vices: but becauſe in it remaine ſtill grauen the lawes of nature, and bicauſe in it is ſome illuſtration of the ſpirite of God: although it be not ſuch an illuſtration which can either iuſtifie, or worke an healthful alteracion. Farther, that reaſon is corrupted in vsus, Pauls wordes ſufficiently declare, wherein he admoniſheth vsus, to put on the new man, which he ſaith ought continually to be renewed in vsus. Now foraſmuch as he will hauehave a man to be ſo vtterly chaunged, and a man conſiſteth not onelyonly of body and affections of the fleſh, but alſo, and that much more, of mind, will and reaſon, it followeth of neceſſity, that theſe thinges alſo were corrupte in him. For otherwiſe what nede hauehave they to be renewed? Neither is y• of ſo greatThinges which are to be renued, ought firſt to hauehave ben corrupt force, if a man ſay that theſe thinges ought to be vnderſtand of thoſe which are of full age, which thorough their owne choyſe and voluntary ſinnes hauehave corrupted theſe thinges in themſelues. For I would aſke, why all men vniuerſally that are not regenerate, hauehave ſo contaminated themſelues, that there is not one of them all found innocent? Vndoubtedly, vntounto this queſtion can nothyng els be aunſwered, but that in them, euen ſtreight way from the beginnyng the firſt groundes were corrupted and defiled. Auguſtine alſo teacheth that we are onelyonly ſo far forth regenerate, as we are made like vntounto Chriſt. For in that we are vnlike vntounto him in the ſame we are not regenerate, but retaine ſtill in vsus the olde man. Wherfore let vsus ſée, whether euen from the very beginning our minde, will, and reaſon, be lyke vntounto Chriſt? For if they be found vnlike, we muſt néedes conclude that they are corrupt and pertaine vntounto the olde man. And as touching the corruption of ye inferiour partes of the minde, daily experience ſufficiently teacheth vsus. Farther,The inferiour partes of the mind are diſperſed in the members. this is proper to the inferiour partes of the minde, to be diſperſed into the members, and to poure themſelues thoroughout all the partes of the fleſhe: which cannot agrée with the minde and reaſonable part, which are ſpirituall and vndeuiſible. The bodye alſo hath fallen from his nature, ſo that it is rebellious and repugnante vntounto the minde. Whiche thyng alſo Paul teacheth, when he cryeth out: O vnhappy man that I am, who ſhall deliuer me from the body of this death? And againThinges that are good ought not to be denied. Our ſentence agreeth with Auguſtine and Anſelmus. Wh…ther guiltines be the formal part in this ſinne. The batta…l & ſtrife againſt the law of God ſemeth to be the form of this ſin. How our nature is good and not good. The fleſh is in ſuche ſort good, that in it dwelleth no good thing. when he ſaith: I feele an other law in my members. Laſtly, that the whole man with all his ſtrengthes is vtterly corrupte, the commaundement of Chriſt ſufficiently proueth, in that he commaundeth vsus to denye our ſelues. If that our nature were innocent and perfect, we ſhould not nede to deny it. For good thinges are to be retained and not to be put away. With this our definition of originall ſinne, wel agréeth the want of originall iuſtice. Alſo with it agréeth the deſcription of Auguſtine, wherin he ſaith, that it is the concupiſcence of the fleſh: ſo that either of them be rightly vnderſtanded. The chiefe of the ſcholemen acknowledged this doctrine, as Thomas, Scotus, and in eſpeciall Bonauentura. Theſe appoint for the materiall part in this ſinne, the corruption of nature, or concupiſcence: and for the formal part, the want of originall righteouſnes: and ſo of theſe two opinions, which we hauehave now reherſed, they make but one. But yet ſome of our men will hauehave guiltines or imputation of God to be the formall part. But foraſmuch as that thing is vtterly ſeperated from ſinne, I rather leane to that ſentence, which putteth for the forme, the battaile and rebellion againſt the law of God. For, that is the principall cauſe why the vices of nature are to be called ſinnes. Neither ought we to geue eare vntounto them, which continually cry out, that our nature is good. For we graunt that to be true concerning nature, as it was firſt inſtituted, but not after that it fell. For it is in déede good, but yet ſo that it hath ſome corruption ioyned with it. But whē theſe men ſay, that concupiſcence is alſo good, they muſt pardon vsus if we rather beleue Paul, then them. But he ſaith: I know that there dwelleth no good in me, that is, in my fleſh. And ſtreight way, when I would do good, I finde by the law, that euill is adioyned vntounto me. Here he calleth concupiſcence euill. To the Galathians alſo he ſufficientlyNaturall luſt deſireth not alwaies thinges profitable. proueth it to be euill, when he admoniſheth vsus to crucifie it. It is falſe alſo which they ſay: namely, that it alwayes deſireth thinges profitable and preſeruatiue: for we hauehave experience, that it is euermore prone to thinges hurtfull, and to thoſe things which chiefly are enemies vntounto life. Farther if nature were ſo innocent and good, as theſe men fayne it to be, why ſhould God ſo greuouſly puniſh it?An argument taken from the puniſhments and diſeaſes of men. Amongſt all kinde of creatures we ſée none in a maner more full of miſery then man, if we looke vponupon his natiuity, infancy, childhode, education, and diſcipline. All things are ful of teares, ſorrow, ſighyng, infirmity, and labours. With the body he muſt labour to get his liuyng, the mind is perpetually vexed with troubleſome affections, the hart is moued with ſundry mocions, and the body afflicted with diuers diſeaſes. All which things when ſome diligently weighed, they ſayd: That Nature is not a mother, but a ſtepmother. I will not ſpeake how the bodies and mindes of infantes and children are ſometymes deliuered vntounto the deuill to be vexed. For ſoInfantes are ſometimes deliuered vntounto the Deuill to be vexed. we read in the Goſpell, that a child was ſo vexed of the Deuill, that he ſomtymes threw hym into the fire, and ſomtymes into the water. Wherfore the ſeuerity of God doth in ſuch ſort count the nature of man to be innocent, that it greuouſly puniſheth it. Farther the Ethnikes (it ſhould ſeme) ſaw more in this thing then theſe deuines. For Plato in his 2. booke of a publike wealth, ſaith: That men are of nature euill: as which can not be led, to kepe iustice of theyr owne accord: but onelyonly not to ſuffer iniury. And Socrates ſheweth, that vertues cannot be had, vnles men (as it is ſayde the Poetes were) be inſpired with ſome deuine power. And Cicero in his 3. booke of a publike wealth (as Augustine citeth him in his 4. booke againſt Iulianus) ſayth: That man is borne into the world of nature his ſtepmother beyng naked, frayle and weake of body, hauyng a mynde vexed wyth grieues, ſubiect to feares, weake to labors, prone to luſtes, wherby is ouer whelmed the louelove of God, and alſo the wyt, and mynde. Eccleſiaſticall writers alſo leaned to this opiniō: whoſe conſentes being many, Augustine gatherethConſentes of the fathers. together in his firſt boke againſt, Iulianus. Of Ireneus and Tertullian we hauehave already ſpoken. Ciprianus alſo ſayth, that Chriſte hath healed the woundes whyche Adam inflicted, and the poyſons wherewith the Deuil had infected our nature. Cyprianus acknowledgeth the infirmitye deriued from the ſynne of the fyrſte parente: wherebye we are ſo prouoked to ſinne, that none can flatter hymſelfe of hys owne innocencye. For who can boaste that he hath a chaſte harte? For as Iohn ſayth: If we ſaye we hauehave no ſinne, wee deceyue our ſelues, and the truth is not in vsus. Agayne Cyprianus in hys Epiſtle to Fidus, teacheth, that infants oughte to be baptiſed, that they pe…riſhe not for euer. Augustine alſo citeth the Biſhop Reticius: whoſe wordes we hauehave before rehearſed. He citeth alſo Olympius a biſhoppe of Spayne, who ſaith: That the ſinne of the first man was ſo diſperſed in the budde, that ſinne is borne together wyth man. He alſo citeth Hilarius, who writeth thus of the fleſhe of Chriſt: Therfore ſeyng he was ſent in the ſimilitude of ſinnefull fleſhe, ſo had he alſo ſin. But becauſe all fleſh is of ſinne: namely, of the ſinne deryued frō the first parent Adam, he was ſent in the ſimilitude of ſinnefull fleſh: ſo that there was not in hym ſinne, but the ſimilitude of ſinnefull fleſh. The ſame father in an other place expounding the xviij. Pſalme, vrgeth this ſentence of Dauid. Behold in iniquities was I conceiued, and in ſinnes hath my mother conceaued me. Alſo in his Homilie vppon the booke of Iob, he ſaith: That the body is a matter of malice: whiche can not be ſayd to hauehave bene ſo from the first constitution. And Ambroſe vponupon Luke ſaith: that the body is a stinking puddle, and an harbor of ſinnes: but by the benefite of Christ it is chaunged into the temple of God, and made a holy place of vertues. The ſame father againſt ye Nouatians ſaith that our byrth is in ſinne: and in his apologie of Dauid he ſaith: that before we are borne, we are blotted wyth contagiouſnes: and before we hauehave the vſe of lyght, we receaue originall iniuſtice: & are conceaued in iniquity. And of ye Lord he ſaith, It was mete that he which ſhould not hauehave in his body the ſinne of falling, ſhould fele no naturall contagiouſnes of generation. Wherefore worthely did Dauid be wayle in him ſelfe the corruptions of nature: & forth at that filthines begā in mā firſt before life. The ſame Ambroſe of the Arke of Noah: Whome then hath he now pronounced a iuſt man, but hym which is free from theſe bondes? whome doth the bondes of common nature not hold. Alſo vponupon the Goſpel of Luke he ſayth, That the infants which are baptiſed, are by the waſhinges of the healthfull miniſtery reformed from maliciouſnes. Ierome vponupon Ionas the prophete ſayth, that litle infantes are ſubiect vntounto the ſinne of Adam. And y• it ſhould not be thought that he ſpeaketh it only of guiltines, vponupon the 18. and 41. chap of Ezechiell he vrgethe, that not euen a child which is but a day old is without ſinne. He vrgeth this alſo, Who can make that cleane, which is conceaued of vncleane ſede? Gregorius Nazianzenus ſaith, The image of God ſhall pourge the ſpot of bodely inundacion: & afterward: HaueHave in reuerence the natiuity, whereby thou art deliuered frō the bōdes of thyne earthly natiuity: And intreating of baptiſme, by thys (ſayth he) the ſpotes of the firſt natiuity are purged, by which we are conceaued in iniquities, and our mothers hath in ſinnes begotten vsus. Auguſtine defēdeth Baſilius Magnus. For the PelagiansAuguſtine defendeth Baſile. would hauehave him to ſeme to be one theyr ſide. For he writeth againſt the Manichies, that euill is not a ſubſtance, but a conuerſation, which cōmeth only of the will: which ſaying he vnderſtode of thoſe which hauehave gotten the infection of conuerſation by their owne will: which conuerſation he ſayth may eaſely be ſeperated from the will of them that be ſicke. For if it could not be ſeperated from it, euil ſhould be a ſubſtantiall part thereof. All theſe thinges Auguſtine affirmeth to be vprightly ſpoken. For the Manechies affirmed, that euil is a certaine ſubſtance,In opinion of the Manechies. Euell may be ſeperated from vsus thoroug… the mercy of God. The perfect ſeperation from euell is hoped for in the life to come. and that that euill was the beginning of all thinges in the world. But Baſilius one the contrary ſide ſayth, that that euill is in a good thing, and that it happened to be euill, thorough the will of the man and woman which ſinned. But in that he ſayth, that it may eaſely be ſeperated from the will, he aſcribeth it not to our ſtrēgths, but to the mercy of God. And wheras he ſayth that there ſhalbe left no tokens therof, that alſo doo we hope for: but not in this life, but in the life to come. But that he acknowledged originall ſinne, his ſermon concerning faſt ſufficiently teſtifieth. For thus he ſayth, If Eue had faſted from the tree, we ſhould not now hauehave neded this faſt. For they that are whole hauehave no nede of a phiſitiō, but they that are ſicke. We hauehave bene ſicke thorough that ſinne: let vsus be healed by repentance. But repentance without faſting is vaine, By theſe wordes, Baſilius affirmeth, that by reaſon of the ſin of Adam we are not whole. Moreouer he citeth the 12. Biſhoppes of the Eaſt which condēned Pelagius. VntoUnto which ought Origen alſo to be added, who, whē he interpreceth y• ſentēce of Paul which we hauehave rehearſed, namely, Death hath gone ouer all men, ſaith, that Abel, Enoch, Mathuſalē, and Noah ſinned. But as for other fathers he ſayth he will not recken, bycauſe they hauehave eueryevery one ſinned. For there is not one cleane from filthynes, although he hauehave liued but one day only. But he ſpeaketh more manifeſtly vponupon the 6. chap. of this epiſtle whē he ſayth, that Baptiſme ought to be geuen vntounto infantes by the Apoſtolicall tradition: bycauſe the Apoſtles knew that there were in all men, naturall corruptions of ſinne, which ought to be waſhed away by water and the ſpirite. And Chriſoſtome vponupon Geneſis entreating this queſtion, why men are now afrayd of beaſtes, and are hurte of them, when as they were created to be lordes ouer them, thys thinge (he ſayth) happeneth by reaſon of ſinne, and by cauſe (ſaith he) we hauehave fallen from confidence and honour. And therby Auguſtine proueth, that the nature of infantes is fallen, bycauſe beaſtes doo not ſpare them. The ſame Chriſoſtome expounding y• place which we are now in hād with, ſayth, That that ſinne, whiche came thorough the diſobedience of Adam hath cōtaminated all. He hath alſo many other places, which ſerue for the confirmation of thys ſentence. And yet the Pelagians were not aſhamed, and eſpecially Iulianus to citeThe Pelagians went about to draw Chriſoſtome vntounto them. thys father for a witnes, as thoughe he made with them, bycauſe in his ſermon of thoſe that are baptiſed, rehearſing many giftes of Baptiſme, namely, that they which are Baptiſed doo not onelyonly receaue remiſſion of ſinnes, but alſo are made childrē and heires of God, brethern of Chriſt, and his fellow heires, members and temples of God, and inſtrumentes of the holy ghoſt, addeth at the laſt, Seeſt thou howe manye are the giftes of Baptiſme? And ſome thinke that the heauenlye grace conſiſteth in the remiſſion of ſinnes. But we hauehave reckened verye manye highe commendacions, and for that cauſe we baptiſe children beinge infantes: when as yet they are not defiled wyth ſinne, that to them myghte be geuen or added ryghteouſneſſe, holynes, adoption, inheritaunce, and brother hoode of Chryſte, to bee hys menbers. By theſe wordes Iulianus thoughte, that Chriſoſtome ment that there was no originall ſinne. But Auguſtine ſayth, that theſe his words are to be vnderſtand of ſinne, which they hauehave committed by their owne proper deliberation: from which ſinne childrē Infantes may be called innocentes as touchinge ſins whiche they hauehave committed of theyr own propre deliberatiō. We muſt vſe great warines in reading of the fathers. To hauehave proper ſins may be vnderſtande two maner of wayes.are without doubt free, and after this maner they may be called innocentes. According to which ſentence Paul writeth of thoſe two brethern, before they had done any euill or good: when as yet none at all is accepted from that which the Apoſtle ſayd, By the ſinne of one man, ſinne came on all men to condemnation, and alſo, By the diſobediēce of one mā, many are made ſinners. By this it appeareth how ware we ought to be in reading of the fathers. For ſometymes we reade in them that infantes hauehave not proper ſinnes of their owne: when as yet they do in eſpeciall acknowledge in them the vices of nature, that is originall ſinne. But to hauehave proper ſinnes may be vnderſtand two maner of wayes: Ether it may be vnderſtand of thoſe ſinnes, which they hauehave committed of their owne proper will, and frée choiſe: and after this maner that ſentence of Chriſoſtome concerning infantes, is counted true: Or els proper ſinnes are called proper vices of nature, wherewith we are both defiled and condemned: which ſinnes can not be ſeioyned from infantes, foraſmuch as they are borne in them, as Dauid manifeſtly proueth. Farther Auguſtine hath noted in the wordes of Chriſoſtome, which are in the Greke tonge, that there it is written ſinnes in the plurall number, and not ſinne in the ſingular number, as Iulianus had cited that place. For thus it is writtenGreeke wordes of Chriſoſtom in Greke, foreign that is, for this cauſe we baptiſe infantes, when as yet they hauehave no ſinnes. Whiche woorde foreign, that is, ſinnes, being in the plural number, is (as Auguſtine thinketh) moſt aptly applied vntounto thoſe ſinnes, which are called actuall. And he addeth,Why the auncient fathers ſpake little of Originall ſin. A ſimilitude that the auncient fathers diſputed not ſo largely of originall ſinne, becauſe the Pelagians were not yet ſprong vp which impugne it. Theſe ſo many ſentences of the fathers ought Pigghius diligently to hauehave weighed: eſpecially ſeing he counteth them for Egles, which ſée moſt ſharpely, and do alwayes flye vntounto the body. But me thinketh he reckeneth them as counters, wherewith men caſt accompt: which being put in ſondry places do ſometymes ſignify a pounde, and ſometymes a peny, as it pleaſeth him that caſteth the accompt. So Pigghius wyll ſometymes hauehave the authority of the fathers moſt ample, and ſometymes if they pleaſe him not very well, he will hauehave it to be none at all. And ſo ſometymes he reuerenſeth them as egles, and ſometimes he diſpiſeth them as Iays.Pigghius diſpiſeth his Romiſh church. But in this thing he ſemeth to contemne the iudgement of his owne Romiſhe Church, which otherwiſe he eueryevery where maketh equall euen with God him ſelfe. For, that Church doth in ſuch maner acknowledge or originall ſinne, that it ſuffereth not infantes dying without baptiſin e to be buried, no not euen in the churchyard of Chriſtians: and commaundeth that the deuill be by exerciſmes expelled out of infantes, when they are broughte to baptiſme, becauſe it iudgeth them to be the bondſclaues of the deuill. Which thing I do not therfore ſpeake, thereby either to allow thoſe exorciſmes, or that I would hauehave them ſtill retayned. For that ought to be obtayned of God by praye…s, and we ought not to do it, thereby to go about by a miracle to heale a … poſſeſſed with a deuill. For foraſmuch as at this day there is no ſuch gift in the Church, there isInnocent liued in Auguſtines time. They which diminiſh originall ſinne diminiſh the benefite of Chriſt. no cauſe why we ſhould deſire to retayne it. Neither do we graunt that infāts whiche are not yet baptiſed, are poſſeſſed of the deuill. Innocent alſo biſhoppe of Rome, which liued in Auguſtines tyme, condemning Pelagius concerning originall ſinne, was of the ſame mynde that we are of. We oughte not to extenuate this euill: otherwiſe we ſhall extenuate the benefite of Chriſt. And they which acknowledge not this ſpot, are neither ſory for it, neither yet do they ſéeke remedy of Chriſt. Vndoubtedly in this thinge Pigghius hath proceded farther thē euē the Pelagians. For they denied only the propagatiō of ſinne through Adam: Pigghius erreth more greuouſly in this thing then the Pelagions.But Pigghius crieth out, that that ſentence is wicked, and blaſphemous and contumelious agaynſt God. Agayne it ſuffiſed them to ſay, that infantes dying without Baptiſme, are both ſhut out of the kingdome of heauen, and alſo placed in the paynes of hell: but this man dreameth, that they ſhalbe happy through a certayne naturall bleſſednes, yea and ſo happy, that they ſhal bleſſe, prayſe and louelove God, with all their mynde, with all their hart, and wyth all their ſtrengthes. But now let vsus ſee, how he goeth aboute to darken and to obſcure this definitiō which we hauehave before put. Firſt he ſaith, that by theſe darknes and corruptions of nature ye vnderſtand, either mere priuations of the giftes of God, or certayne thinges poſitiue. If ye vnderſtand them to be priuations, then know I what ye meane. But your debatinges are nothing els, but tragicall names, and vayne wordes. But if ye will hauehave them to be thinges poſitiue, then foraſmuch as in an infant that is newly borne, there is nothing but the ſoule and the body, which are cleane, and hauehave nature and God for their author, from whence or by what hauehave theſe peſtilences burſt forth, which ye make mencion of? We anſwere, firſt, that the priuations which we here putWhat maner of priuations are vnderſtand in originall ſinne. are not like negations which take away the whole: as when we ſay, that Centaurus or Scilla are not: but we ſaye that they are ſuch that they leaue the ſubiect mayned, vnprofitable and deformed: as it appeareth in an eye which wanteth ſight, and in the hand of one which hath the palſey, which is euer ſhaking. In ſuch maner is originall ſinne in vsus. The powers indede and actions of the minde remayne, but they want their vprightnes, and therefore are wicked and corrupt. But Pigghius ſtill erreth, becauſe he fayneth that the nature of manA falſe imagination of Pigghius concerninge the nature of the firſt man. hath of it felfe a certayne naturall integritye whereunto were added thoſe ſupernaturall giftes geuen vntounto the firſt parent. But after ſinne, whē thoſe gifts were taken away, man fell into his olde eſtate. But this is a mere dreame: for the nature of man was inſtituted of God in ſuch ſort as was conuenient for it. Therefore the giftes being taken away, it is corrupted and hurt: and foraſmuch as it ſtrayeth from his conſtitution, it is ſubiect vntounto ſinne, Farther we ſay not that originall ſinne is only this priuation, but alſo it comprehendeth thinges poſitiue, as proneſſe to euill, violence of nature agaynſt the worde of God, and ſuch other like. And therefore Bernhardus ſayth, that in the coniunction of the ſoule with the body, it is euen as if it ſhoulde fall vponupon an heape of moſt ſharpe poteſhardes, and hurting ſtones. But among y• Schoolemen Gulielmus Pariſienſis in his booke called Summa de vitiis & virtutibus, bringeth this ſimilitude: That the ſoule is in ſuch maner let down into the body, as if a man ſhould fall into a myry, depe and ſtony place, and ſo ſhoulde both be drowned, be arayed with myre, and alſo be hurt. So, ſaith he, by originall ſinne we are drowned into the darkenes of ignorance, we are defiled with luſtes, and as touching the powers and facultyes of the mynde we are wounded. But in that Pigghius ſaith, that both the body and the ſoule are good things, and hauehave God for their author, I graunt that: And when he afterward demandeth, how thē ſhould they be corrupted, I anſwere with Paul: By one man which fell: and that by procreation, as a little here afterward ſhalbe declared. But whereas he ſayth, that they can by no meanes be corrupted, for that God is the author of them, to is no ſtrong reaſon. For they which are of full age hauehave both body and ſoule which are the workes of God, and are continually preſerued by his power: but yet may they be vitiated and corrupted. If he ſay that that commeth of mans will and free choyſe, ſo alſo anſwere we, that the ſame mayA falſe argument of Pigghius It is falſe that men cā not be corrupted but by will and free electiō. come of other cauſes, namely through propagation, & ſede. Wherfore Pigghius argueth frō that which is not the cauſe, as though it were the cauſe. For this is his meaning, if men be corrupted, y• can not be done but by will & free election, whiche thing is not true. All the argumentes which he obiecteth agaynſt vsus do ſpringe of this, that he ſayth, that he vnderſtandeth not how this corruption ſhould be deriued into our poſterity: and how it is poſſible that infantes ſhould be bounde by any lawe: and how there can be a law geuen of that thing, which we can not auoyd. But foraſmuch as the holy ſcriptures do ſpeake, teſtefy and teach theſe thinges, it is no matter how much Pigghius ether vnderſtandeth, or not vnderſtandeth. For we beleue many thinges, which we perceaue not, nor know by any ſure reaſon. Which yet ought not to be of any ſuch force, that eueryevery man ſhoulde obtrude vntounto vsus thinges to beleue, whatſoeuer they thinke good vponupon this pretence, becauſe although they can not be vnderſtand by reaſon, yet they ought to be cōprehended by faith, foraſmuch as God can bring to paſſe farre greater thinges. For firſt, that thinge which we ſeke to be beleued, ought to be proued by the holye ſcriptures. And then althoughe we can not attayne vntountoIn humane nature and in Ethnikes there is left ſome goodnes. it, yet let vsus leane to fayth, and laye aſide reaſon. And by our difinition it followeth not, that in nature, or in Ethnikes there is left no goodnes. Only thys we affirme, that this vice woulde deſtroye all, if God by Chriſt brought not a remedye in the regenerate. Alſo in thoſe whiche are not regenerate, God is ſometymes preſent, and illuſtrateth them with excellent and heroicall vertues: wherwith original ſinne is brideled, and publike wealths &God ſuffreth not Originall ſin to waſt and deſtroy ſo much as it might, or ſo much as Sathan de deſireth Empires are retained at the leaſte in ſome ciuill order. Socrates woulde not goe out of priſon, when he moughte: Aristides when he was exiled, wiſhed vntounto his citiſens, that they might neuer be in ſuch euill caſe, to hauehave any cauſe to remember him. Phocion euen now going to his death, and being demaunded if he would any thing vntounto his ſonne. I would (ſaid he) that he neuer remember the iniury done to me. The publike wealth of Rome had Curtians, Scipios, & Catos, men full of ciuill honeſty, and great louers of vertue. Which dueties, although, as they were in men which knew not God, they were ſinnes, yet were they bridels of originall ſin & of nature corrupted: leſt all thinges ſhould be turned vpſide down, good lawes ſhould fall to ruine, and the lighte of nature in a manner ſhoulde be extinguiſhed. Now ſéeyng we hauehave confirmed Originall ſynne by the teſtimonies of the ſcriptures, and hauehave confuted the opinion of Pigghius, and hauehave reiected their opinion, which thinke originall ſinne to be onelyonly a guiltines, and obligation contracted thorough the ſinne of Adam, and ſeing we hauehave alleaged Auguſtines definition, that originall ſinne is the concupiſcence of the fleſh, and Anſelmus definition, that it is the want of originall iuſtice, and laſtly ſeing we hauehave proued our definition largely, and by many teſtimonies: now reſteth for vsus to proſecute thoſe thinges which we put forth in the thirde place: namely, of the conditions and proprieties of originallWhat are the conditions and proprieties of original ſinne. ſinne how it is ſpred abrode, how it is aboliſhed, in what ſorte the remnants therof are in men regenerate, and what payne is due thereunto. And concernyng the maner how it ſpreadeth into our poſteritie, we hauehave before reherſed ſundry opinions. The firſt of thoſe opinions was of the traduction of ſoules: which we ſhewed by Auguſtines iudgement to be eaſier then the reſt, althoughe it be not receiued of all men: An other opinion was, which Auguſtine followeth: namely, that originall ſinne is traduced by the luſt and inordinate pleſure of ſuch as procreate. This opinion hath two errours: Firſt, becauſe it putteth this euill in procreation, as if it were of neceſſity: which yet may be ſeperated from it. And euen the ſcholemen thē ſelues graunt, that he which ſhould be begotten without the corrupt affection of y• parentes, ſhould yet neuertheles contract originall ſinne. For to it they ſay it is ſufficient, that he was in Adam, as in his firſt ſéede. An other error is, for that then originall ſinne ſhould conſiſt onelyonly in the filthy affection of luſt: when as in verye déede (as it is ſaide) it comprehendeth the corruption of the whole nature. Others thought, that God created the ſoule euill, becauſe it ſhould be a part of a man execrated and ſet vnderunder the curſe. But becauſe this ſemeth to be repugnant vntounto the nature of creation, that it ſhould be called a filthines, therfore that opinion is alſoWhat is the ſubiecte of Original ſinne. reiected. The laſt opinion is of moſt men receiued, and it is, that the ſoule contracteth originall ſinne by his coniunction with the body, which is alredy infected and corrupted of our parentes: ſo that if we be demaunded what is the place thereof, or (as they commonly ſpeake) what is his ſubiect, we anſwer: that the place therof is in the fleſhe, as in the roote and beginning: then out of that fountayne it alſoSeede is the inſtrument wherby this ſin is traduced. poſſeſſeth the ſoule: and ſo it is extended thoroughout the whole man. Wherfore, ſéede is the inſtrument, wherby this ſinne is traduced from the parentes into the children. Pigghius obiecteth, that vices can not be deriued by ſede into the poſterity, vnles peraduenture, it be thoſe vices which cleaue and ſticke in the body of the parent: as we ſée happeneth in the leproſie, in the falling ſickenes, and other diſeaſes of the body. Neither doth nature ſuffer, that in the very ſubſtance of ſéede, ſinne ſhould hauehave place, that by it, it ſhould be traduced into the children. Here we aunſwer,Not onelyonly the affections of the body are deriued from the parents into the children, but alſo the affections of the minde. firſt, that it is not true, that onelyonly the diſeaſes of the body of the parentes are deriued into the children. For we ſée many conditions of the minde, deriued from the parentes into the children: As wit, fury, ambition, gentlenes, hautines, & ſuch other. To the other we graunt in déede, that the euill qualitie or corruption which is brought by the ſéede, as it is in the ſede, is not ſinne, But yet that letteth not, but that the corruption brought into the children by ſeede, as by an inſtrument, may hauehave in it the nature of ſinne. As the qualities which we hauehave now reherſed, do not make the ſéede it ſelfe wittie, docible, or couetous: but yet thoſe qualities brought vntounto the child conceiued, do make him ſuch a one. But whether God may be putWhether God be the author of this traduction of originall ſinne the author thereof, they commonly ſay, that the deformitye and vnrighteouſnes which is in this ſinne, is drawn out of nature already corrupted: which as it was created of God, was not ſo vitiated, and ſo they graunte, that whatſoeuer is good in nature, the ſame to be of God. And whatſoeuer is therein euill, for as much as it is nothing ells but a defect or want, of it, it is not or neceſſity to put an efficient cauſe. For that which is but a want, it is not of neceſſity that it ſhould be made: for if it ſhould be made, it ſhould alſo remayne in it. But this is not enoughe. We agree indede with them, that God is the author of the ſubiect, or of the thing layd vnderunder the defect or want. But in that they ſay, that this defect it ſelfe hath not an efficiēt cauſe, therein we agree not with them. For there ought to be ſomething to remoue or prohibite that perfectiō which is wanting, and to with hold the grace and giftes, wherewith our nature was endewed at the beginning. Wherefore we muſt needes referre this priuation or defecte vntounto God, which geueth not perfection vtterly without want: which thing he euermore doth by his iuſt iudgement, although it be not alwayes manifeſt vntounto vsus. And it is moſt certayne by the ſcriptures, nether can it be denied, but that God puniſheth ſinnes by ſins. But yet they are not ſo laid on vsus of god, y• they ſhould be ſinnes as they depende of him: for whatſoeuer God doth, the ſame without all controuerſy is both righte and luſte. And euen puniſhementes, ſo farre forth as they are puniſhementes, pertaine to the nature of goodnes. Howbeit as they procede from vsus, they are ſinnes. For we doo not affirme, that God by himſelfeGod when he createth the ſoule corrupteth it not. when he createth the ſoule, corrupteth it. For it contracteth the filthines of ſin from a corrupt body where vntounto it is adioyned. But in this thing humane wiſedome is muche offended. For it thinketh, that by no meanes there ought to be made any ſuche coniunction. For it ſemeth to be like, as if a man ſhould caſt aWherein humane wiſedome is here offended. precious thinge into an vncleane veſſell. It ſemeth alſo vniuſt, that the ſoule which hath done nether good nor euil, ſhould be ioyned with abody, from which it ſhould contract originall ſinne. Yea rather, if it ſhould be ſo, men ought to abſteyne from procreation. As they that are leprous are alſo exhorted to abſteyne if it be poſſible, from procreatiō, leſt by it they ſhould cōtinew to infect humane nature. And bycauſe the end whereunto man is inſtituted, is eternall felicity: it ſemeth not agreable, that the ſoule ſhould be placed in that body whereby it ſhould be called backe from the end preſcribed. And as it is vniuſt, that the ſoule which hath not offended ſhould be puniſhed in hell fire: ſo alſo ſemeth it vniuſt y• it ſhould be caſt into that body, wherein it incurreth not payne, as in hell, but ſinne and hatred of God, which are thinges more grenous, and doth ſo incurre them, that it can by no meanes auoyde them. Theſe thinges are ſo hard and obſcure that they can not fully be ſatiſfied by mans reaſon. There are indede certayneTheſe obiections may be l…nified, but not ſo diſſolued, that they can ſatiſfy mans reaſō. conſolations gathered out of Eccleſiaſticall writers, which doo only mitigate and lenefie theſe obiections, ſo much as is ſufficient for godly myndes: but not ſo much as mans reaſon requireth. For the ſoule is ioyned with an vncleane and infected body, in conſideration of the whole world: that the kinde of man which is the chiefeſt, ſhould not be wanting in it. God ceſſeth not of from his office. He letteth not the courſe of nature: but the body being now made, according to his prefixed order he treateth the ſoule: and will rather a man to be,God will rather hauehave a man to be although he be corrupt, then that he ſhould be nothing. Of thoſe thinges which he gaue at the beginning he geueth certaine. He hath put forth the remedy of Chriſt. God myght otherwiſe hauehave helped if he had would. God ſheweth a form of his goodnes in renuing of this our kinde. A ſentence of Gregorius. although he be not borne without ſinne, then to be nothing. And though he geue not al thoſe thinges which he gaue at the beginning, yet of his mercy he geueth many of them. Farther he hath ſet forth the remedye of Chriſt our mediator, by whome the ſinne which we hauehave contracted ſhould be purged. Which corruption driueth the Elect, before their conuerſion, vntounto Chriſt: that feling the ſtrēgth of their diſeaſe they may receaue medicine of him. And then after they are once grafted into Chriſt, they hauehave this ſinne lefte to ſtriue and to wraſtle agaynſt, that at the laſt they might cary away the victories and triumphes. But thou wilt ſay, God mought by ſome other meanes hauehave ſaued mākind, that it ſhould not be aboliſhed, if he had ereated an other man pure and perfect, that Adam being dead without iſſue, all that other mans poſterity ſhould be procreated without corruption. There is no doubt but that God could hauehave done this, if he had would. But this had not bene to erect one that had falen, to ſaue that which was ſpilled, and to redeme him which had vtterly periſhed. God would ſhew forme of his goodnes, that notwithſtanding the corruption of nature, he might ſaue from deſtruction, as many as he had choſen. For he would not vtterlye breake the bruſed reede, nor quench the ſmoking flaxe. For he would bring forth Chriſt, as it were an other Adam: which mought in ſuch ſort ſaue his, as the other had deſtroyed them. Theſe and ſuch like thinges led Gregorius to crye out: O happy fault, which deſerued to hauehave ſuch a redemer. Which wordes I would not gladly pronoūce, foraſmuch as I ſe nothing in y• matter, which is not miſerable & to be lamented. For in y• ſo great ſaluatiō folowed, y• ſame is to be aſcribed to the goodnes of God, and not to the ſinne of Adam. For of it is deriued not ſo greate a good thing, but only by accidens, that is by chanſe. Theſe thinges although they can not ſatiſfie the obiections whiche we hauehave put, ſo much as humaneThe contraction of originall ſin condēneth not the elect. The order of nature requireth that a ſoule ſhould be ioyned to ſuch a body leſt the body ſhould be left without life. If we cocker our owne reaſō there wilbe no end of expoſtulating with God. The goodnes of procreation ought to be conſidered by the effect which is of it ſelfe. reaſon woulde require, yet by them we hauehave ſomewhat after a ſorte to anſwere them. The coniunction of the ſoule with the corrupt body, maketh nothing to the deſtruction of the elect. For in Chriſt as well the body as the ſoule is renued. And as by the body the ſoule is infected, ſo by fayth in Chriſt, which is in the mynde, the ſoule together with the body is repayred. The order of nature requireth, that an innocent ſoule whiche hath done nether good nor euyll, ſhoulde be ioyned with a corrupte body: except the body ſhoulde be left without a ſoule, and the worlde depriued of the kinde of man. And if we go aboute to expoſtulate with God, there ſhalbe no meaſure, or ende. For an infinite number of ſoules would complayne, for that they were created, and were not predeſtinate to be ſaued: which yet neuer deſerued it. Many would complaine, for that they were borne of vngodlye, vnbeleuinge, and barbarous parentes and died in their tender ago, whereby they coulde come to no knowledge of God. And a man might inuent a thouſand ſuch kinde of complayntes. As touching procreation we ſay, that it is laudable, foraſmuch as it conſiſteth of lawfull matrimony. In it is to be conſidered the man whiche is begotten, that is, (as they call it) the effect proper and naturall. But man is a good creature of God: and ſinne or corruption is added per accidens, that is, by chanſe. And this euill hath a remedy, which thinge happeneth not in the leproſy, and other vncurable diſeaſes. We graunt alſo, that man is created to the ende to attayne to eternall felicity. And whereas it is ſayde, that he is by the ſinne of the body called backe from this ende, we on the contrary ſay, that he is by the ſelfe ſame ſtirred vp to Chriſt. Laſtly we graūt, that it may ſeme a thing vnworthy, y• the innocent ſoule ſhould hauehave his place in hell: for y• there, there is no redemptionThe elect are by thys euell ſtirred vp vntounto Chriſt. Reaſons to proue that this ſinne is ſpread abroade by ſeede and generation. We depend of Adam by generation. to be hoped for. But being put in a body, though it be neuer ſo corrupt, yet it may attayne both redemption, and alſo ſaluation: Now let vsus bringe reaſons, firmely and ſurely to proue, that originall ſinne is ſpred abrode into men by ſéede and generation. And we will therefore declare it by the holy ſcriptures, becauſe many are agaynſt it, and thinke it to be a thinge altogether fayned. Firſt Paul ſayth, that ſinne by one man entred into the world. Wherefore let vsus conſider how men depend of Adam, thereby to be pertakers of his ſinne. And there can no other way be found, then ſede and generation. Farthermore, foraſmuch as the Apoſtle to the Epheſians ſayth, that we are by nature the children of wrath, and nature (as the naturall philoſophers affirme) is the beginning of mocion, we muſt nedes hauehave recourſe vntounto ſede and generation: for they are the ground of our motiō and beginning. But Dauid more expreſſedly declareth this thing, when he ſayth, Behold I was conceaued in iniquyties, and in ſinnes hath my mother cō ceaued me. By which wordes he apertly teacheth, that this ſinne is traduced by generatiō. But that is farre more manifeſt whiche Iob ſaith: who can make that cleane, which is borne of vncleane ſeede? By this place the infected ſeede of our elders is reproued as vncleane, how much ſoeuer Pigghius cryeth out againſt it. But now let vsus on the contrary ſide diligently conſider, by what meanes this ſinne may be taken away. Euen as it was brought in by one man, ſo alſo is itHow thys ſin may be taken away remoued away by one man. And euen as the ſinne is powred in from Adam by ſeede, and generation: ſo agayne on the other ſide there are ſome thinges (in that multitude which pertayneth vntounto Chriſt) which may hauehave the conſideration of ſeede, and thoſe are, election, or predeſtination, grace, the holy ghoſt, the worde of God, and baptiſme. Theſe two laſt inſtrumentes God vſeth for the regenerating of his. But if a man aſke whether the outward word, or viſible ſigneThe inward word is required of neceſſitye …n them that be of full age. The outward word is an ordinary inſtrument wherby they that are of full age are called. Baptiſm is not to be contemned. Baptiſme is threefold. Of the infantes of Chriſtians which dye without baptiſme. Some children of the Saintes pertaine not to predeſtination. The reliques of this ſinne which remaine after regeneratiō are not unputed vntounto death. of baptiſme be altogether neceſſary, we anſwere that indede the inward word, whereby men are moued vntounto Chriſt and are reformed, is vtterly required, if we ſpeake of them that be of perfect age: but in children, neither the inward word hath place, nor the outward word is an ordinary inſtrument. But doubtles the outward worde is an ordinary inſtrument, whereby God calleth thoſe that be of full age vntounto ſaluation: although in ſome he doth by an extraordinary way vſe only ye inward word. For ſo he called Abraham out of his countrye, and inſtructed Adam immediatly (as they are wont to ſpeake) without all outward miniſtery. The ſigne of baptiſme is in no caſe to be cōtemned. For ſuch as neglect it, whē they may attain to it, obtain not regeneratiō. But if they cā not attayne to it, it ſhalbe no hurt vntounto a godly man, and to him that is conuerted vntounto Chriſt, though he bee not baptiſed. And hereof it came, that the fathers made mencion of the Baptiſme of blood, and of the ſpirite. And Ambroſe vponupon the death of Valentinian the Emperor ſayth, that he wanted not the grace of Baptiſme, for as much as he ſo excedingly deſired it, although he were not baptiſed. But if I ſhould be demaunded concerning infantes of Chriſtians which dye without Baptiſme, I would anſwere, that we ought to hauehave a good hope of them, & that the ſame hope leaneth vntounto the word of God, namely, vntounto the league and couenaunt made with Abraham, wherein God promiſeth, to be not only his God, but alſo the God of his ſéede. Which promiſe yet, foraſmuch as it is not ſo generall, that it comprehendeth all, therefore I dare not perticularly promiſe ſaluation to any which ſo departeth: For there are ſome children of the ſaintes which pertayne not to predeſtination: as we rede of Eſau, Iſmaell, and many other: whoſe ſaluation was not therefore letted bycauſe they were not baptiſed. Howbeit whileſt we liue here, there remaine euen in them that be regenerate remnantes of this ſinne. For originall ſin is not vtterly taken away by regeneration. The guiltines indede is taken away: and ſuch thinges as remayne are not imputed to eternall death. But eueryevery …hinge ought to be iudged by that, that it is in it ſelfe: wherefore if we be demaunded, whether it be ſinne which remayneth in the regenerate, we anſwere, that it is ſinne. And if thou rede at any time, that it is not ſinne, thou muſt vnderſtand that to be ſpokē That which remaineth of this ſinne after regeneration is ſinne.of the guiltines thereof. But of this matter we will ſpeake more at large in the 7. chap. But in death this kinde of ſinne ſhall vtterly be ouerthrowne. For in the bleſſed Reſurrection, we ſhall hauehave a body renewed, and apt for eternall felicity. But in the meane time, ſo long as we are here, our old man and naturall corruption is cōtinually diſſolued, that in death at the laſt it may ceaſe to be. Now hauehave we ſene three thinges, how originall ſinne is ſpred abroade: by what thing it is takē away, and what is to be iudged of the remnantes thereof. Now let vsus ſpeake of the payne due thereunto. Some of the ſcholemen thinke that the payne ſhalbe without feling.What is the puniſhment of originall ſinne. The Pelagians thought that they ſhould only be baniſhed out of the kingdōe of heauen: and farther they affirme nothing: but Pigghius addeth this alſo that they which dye hauing but this ſinne only, ſhalbe bleſſed with a certayne naturall felicitye: and ſhall louelove God with all theyr hart, with all theyr ſoule, and with all theyr ſtrength, and ſhall ſet forth his name and praiſes. And although he dare not affirme theſe thinges as certayne, yet he alloweth thē as very likely. But Auguſtine de fide ad Petrum, and in other places alſo, oftentimes adiudgeth infantes that are not regenerate, if they dye ſo, to eternall fire. And in dede diuers ſentences of the holy ſcripture ſeme to agree with his opinion. For in the laſt iudgement ſentence ſhalbe geuen but to maner of wayes: nether is there appointed any third place betwene them that are ſaued, and them that are condemned. The Papiſtes alſo although they thinke that Purgatory ſhall continue vntounto the day of iudgement, yet after that day they put no middle place. And it is manifeſtly writtē, that they whiche beleue not in Chriſt, ſhall not only not hauehave eternall life, but alſo the wrath of God abideth vponupon them. And ſo longe as we be without Chriſt, we are called the childrē of wrath, nether is it to be doubted, but that God puniſheth thoſe with whome he is angry. Wherefore we will ſay with Auguſtine and with the holy ſcriptures, that they ſhalbe puniſhed, but how or in what ſort, we can not define: but that, for aſmuch as there are ſundry puniſhementes of hell (for euen the ſcriptures affirme, that ſome ſhall be delt with more tollorably then other ſome) it is credible, that they, foraſmuch as they hauehave not adioyned other actuall ſinnes vntounto originall ſinne, ſhallbe more eaſely puniſhed. Howbeit I alwayes except the children of the ſayntes, for that we doubt not but that they may be nombred with the beleuers, although in very dede by reaſon of age they beleue not as the children of the infidels are nombred among the vnbeleuers, although by themſelues they reſiſt not fayth. Wherfore the children of the godly departinge without Baptiſme may be ſaued, thorough the league which God hath made with theyr parentes, if ſo they partayne vntounto the nomber of them that are predeſtinate. I except alſo, if there be any other which by the ſecret counſell of God belong vntounto predeſtination
Theſe thinges being now thus diſcuſſed let vsus come vntounto the argumentes of the Pelagians, whereby they ſought to proue, that there is no originall ſin. TheirThe argumentes of the Pelagians againſt originall ſinne. firſt argument is, that it is not very likely, that God will ſtill perſecute the ſinne of Adam, whē as he hath long ſince ſufficiētly puniſhed it: eſpecially ſeing Nahū ye prophet ſaith, that God wil not twiſe iudge one & the ſelfe ſame thing. I know there be which āſwer, y• he hath not twiſe geuē iudgemēt vpō y• ſin, but …s only: for in one iudgement he cōprehēded Adā, & all his poſterity. But to declare ye thinge more manifeſtly, I ſay, that in eueryevery one of vsus, as often as we are puniſhed, thereEueryEvery man beareth his owne ſinne, and not an other mans How this is to be vnderſtande, that God reuengeth in vsus the ſinne of Adam. A ſimilitude is a cauſe, why we ought to be puniſhed: and therefore in eueryevery man is condemned his owne proper fault and not an other mans. And though we reade, that God doth reuenge in vsus the ſinne of Adam, that is ſo to be vnderſtand, by reaſon our ſinne had his beginning of him. As if a man being ſicke of the peſtilence ſhould infect other, and they dye, we can not ſay, but that eueryevery one of them died of his owne and proper peſtilence, and not of an other mans. But if a man will ſay, that they periſhed by his peſtilence from whome they drew the contagiouſnes, that is ſo to be vnderſtand, becauſe he brought in the peſtilēce firſt, and with tooch infected them. But that ſentence of Nahum the prophet makethA place of Nahum. nothing to this matter. In déede Ierome when he interpreteth that place, ſayth, that by thoſe wordes Marcion is confuted. For he falſely alledged, that the God of the olde teſtament ſemed a reuenger and cruell, becauſe he puniſhed men with moſt greuous puniſhementes. Which thing Ierome ſayth, is to be aſcribed vntounto goodnes, and not to cruelty. For God (ſaith he) did for no other cauſe puniſhe men ſo greuouſly in Sodom, in the floude, and at other tymes, but that they ſhould not periſh for euer. For he puniſhed thē once, that they ſhould not afterward be puniſhed agayne. But the ſame Ierome, peraduenture, becauſe he ſawe theſe reaſons not very ſtrong, obiecteth vntounto himſelfe: By theſe wordes it may ſeeme, that adulterers if they be taken, are in good caſe, for ſo it ſhould come to paſſe, that they being puniſhed with death, ſhould eſcape eternall puniſhementes of hell. Wherefore he aunſwereth, that the iudge of this world can not preuent the ſentēce of God, nether is it to be thought, that by a light puniſhement thoſe ſinnes are put away, which deſerue a greuous and longer In Ieroms time adulterers were puniſhed with death.puniſhement. In theſe wordes of Ierome are two thinges to be noted: the one is, that at that tyme adultery was puniſhed with death: and the other, that that interpretacion ſemed not to ſatiſfie him: wherefore he alledgeth an other expoſition of the Iewes, that God by thoſe wordes would ſignifie, that the Aſſirians ſhould not be able, after they had led away the ten tribes, to obtayne alſo the kingdome of Iudah, as they had attempted to do vnderunder Ezechyas. God (ſaith he) will not ſuffer a double vexatiō to ariſe. It is ſufficient to him, to hauehave deſtroyed ten tribes, he will hauehave the kingdome of Iuda preſerued. This expoſition, although it hauehave in it nothing contrary to piety, yet it ſemeth not to declare the minde of the prophet. For he propheſied the threatning of God agaynſt Niniue, and that it ſhoulde be ouerthrowen. And mindinge to exagerate the vengeance at hand, he ſayth, that the vehemēce of the deſtruction which the Chaldeyans ſhoulde bring, ſhoulde be ſo greate, that God ſhould not nede to afflict them againe: for he would puniſhe them ſufficiently in the firſt vengeance. For the kingdome of the Aſſirians was vtterly ouerthrowen of the Chaldeyans. And it is a common ſaying amongſt vsus, that when a man is beaten euen to the death, he was ſo ſtriken with one blowe, that he neded not the ſecond ſtroke. This is the Prophetes ſcope, and the proper ſenſe of this place. But as touching the matter, we deny not, but that afflictions in godly men do tende to this end, that they ſhould not be condemned with this world, as Paul ſaith. For they are fatherly chaſtiſementes, whereby God calleth them backe to repentance. But out of that we ought not to draw a generall rule, toGod puniniſheth many of the vngodlye both here and alſo will puniſh them in the world to come. aſcribe vntounto God a meaſure, that when he hath begon to puniſhe the vngodly in this life, he can not alſo puniſhe them in an other life, if they dye without faith and repentance. If they returne vntounto God, they ſhall ſuffer nothing in an other life: and yet not becauſe they hauehave in this life with theyr puniſhementes made ſatiſfaction vntounto God, but becauſe Chriſt hath throughly payd the price of redemption for them. Wherefore euen as vntounto the godly are certayne good thinges geuen in this life, which are vntounto them an erneſt peny, and beginning of the life to come, which ſhalbe accompliſhed in an other world: ſo in the vngodly, eternall puniſhementes are begon with the preambles of the afflictionsPuniſhmentes of this life are to the vngodly preambles of the puniſhmentes to come. A place of Ezechiel. of this life. Which thing alſo Chriſt ſemeth to ſignify, when he ſayth, Feare him, which can both kill the body, and alſo caſt the ſoule into hell fire. By theſe thinges I thinke it manifeſtly inough appeareth, that the oracle of the Prophete, which we hauehave playnely interpreted, pertayneth nothinge to the matter whiche we entreate of.
An other of their arguments is taken out of the Prophet Ezechiell: The ſonne ſhall not beare the iniquity of the father. To this we may briefly aunſwere, as we a little before ſayd: namely, that the children beare not the iniquity of their fathers, but their own & proper iniquity, which cleaueth vntounto eueryevery man frō his natiuity. But bicauſe that place is of diuers diuerſly expounded, we will briefly declare our iudgement therin. This was a prouerb much vſed among the Iewes: Our fathers hauehave eaten ſower grapes, and the childrens teeth are ſet on edge. And not only Ezechiell maketh mencion of this ſaying, but alſo Ieremy in his 31. chap. The meanyng of y• ſentence is this. Our fathers hauehave ſinned, and we are puniſhed for thē. And as the Rabines ſay, they which were of the kingdome of the ten tribes ſemed, to referre theſe things to Ieroboam the ſonne of Nabat, which firſt made the golden calues. But they which were of the kingdom of Iuda referred the ſame vntounto Manaſses: for whoſe impiety they thought, that that captiuity honge ouer their heds, which the Prophets denounced. This prouerbe God reproued, & ſayd: that it ſhould not be ſo henceforth. Myne are the ſoules (ſayth he) the ſonne ſhall not beare the iniquitye of the father: but eueryevery man ſhall dye in hys owne ſinne. Many will hauehave theſe wordes to be vnderſtand concerning ciuill puniſhment: bicauſe God in the 24. chapter of Deut. commaunded, that neither the parents ſhould be killed for the children, nor the children for the parents. Which thing alſo Amaſias king of Iuda obſerued, as it is written in the 14. chap. of the 2. booke of kinges. For he ſlew them that murthered his father, but ſpared their children, accordyng to the commaundement of y• law. Howbeit the Iſraelites did not alwayes obſerue this. For we read in ye booke of Ioſua the 7. chap. that not only Acham was put to death for the accurſed thyng,Ioſua did againſt the common law, when he puniſhed the children with the father. which he had ſtolen, but alſo together with him, both his ſonnes and daughters, & alſo his cattell. But this was done by a ſinguler commaundemēt of God. Neither is it preiudiciall vntounto the law vniuerſally geuen. Howbeit this expoſition concerning the ciuill law, agréeth not with the wordes of the Prophet. For the Iewes complained not of the puniſhment which was inflicted on them by the iudge, or by the Prince: but of thoſe calamities whiche God himſelfe had layde vppon themnamely, of the deſtructiō of their goods, of the ouerthrowing of the kingdom of Iudah, and of the captiuity of Babilon. In theſe thinges they ſpake euill of the iudgemēts of God, and murmured, that his way was not right. Wherfore others hauehave interpreted that place to be ſpoken of eternall puniſhments, of the withdrawyng of grace and the holy ghoſt: which things they ſay happē vntounto eueryevery man for their owne ſinnes, and not for the ſinnes of other mē. Howbeit in the meane time they affirme, that both the children do ſuffer temporall puniſhments for the parentes, and the people for the princes ſake. For God (ſay they) will puniſhe the fathers in the children. For the children are a certaine part of the parentes. Neither is it abſurd (ſay they) if the children by their afflictions profite their parentes, when as by this meanes both they are called backe to repentaunce, and alſo they hauehave no iniury done vntounto them, if foraſmuch as they be mortall, they ſuffer death. For God prudently diſpenſeth the tymes either to liuing or dying: and taketh away life frō the children, either that they ſhould not be corrupted with malitiouſnes, or if they be now already in ſinnes & in damnation, y• they ſhould not be more & more aggrauated, and that they might once at the length make an ende of liuing wickedly. And Augustine ſemeth ſomwhat to incline to this ſentence, in his queſtions vponupon the boke of Ioſua the 8. and 9. queſtion. And they which wil hauehave theſe remnants of originall ſinne which remaine after regeneration to be no ſinnes, are compelled ſo to ſay. For they can not ſay, that in infantes their owne ſinnes are puniſhed, for as much as they affirme that they hauehave none. But we, which ſay that they are vtterly ſinnes, do teach, that they are not in déede imputed to eternal death, but yet they are ſometimes puniſhed with ſome paynes, to the end we might vnderſtand, that God is diſpleaſed with thē. But neither doth that erpoſitiō of Augustines ſo well agrée with Ezechiels meanyng. For the Prophete ſayth, that it ſhould not ſo afterward come to paſſe, that the children ſhould ſay that for their parentes ſake, they ſuffred temporall puniſhments, ſuch as were baniſhment and captiuity. For the Lord ſayth: the ſonne ſhall not beare the iniquity of the father. Wherefore, thys nothyng helpeth them, in that they ſay, that this is true in ſpirituall puniſhementes, & in eternall dampnation. For the Prophete ſpeaketh moſt apertly of the bodely puniſhementes of thys lyfe. Augustine hathe an other interpretation in hys Enchiridion to Laurentius in hys 46. chapter: namelye, that it is a prophecye of the benefite whiche ſhoulde be geuen by Chriſt. For, foraſmuch as thorough his death ſatiſfaction is made for Originall ſinne, the Prophet ſayth: that the child henceforth ſhal not beare the ſinne of his father, but his owne. And Augustine ſéemeth to be led into this ſentence, bicauſe when as Ieremy in his 31. chap. writeth in a maner the ſelfe ſame thing, ſtreight way is added a promiſe of the new Teſtament. Behold ſaith he) the dayes ſhall come, and I wyll make a new couenaunt wyth the houſe of Iuda. But this ſence alſo ſemeth not to agrée with y• meanyng of ye prophet which we hauehave before reherſed. Moreouer although Chriſt ſuffered at a tyme appointed,Children in the old Teſtament were ſaued by the power and grace of the death of Chriſt. yet by the power & grace of his death, children were ſaued alſo in the old Teſtament. What neded then to ſay, that henceforth it ſhall not be ſo, when as in very dede it was not ſo before. Farther they alſo, which are without Chriſt, beare their owne iniquity, neither do they ſuffer puniſhmentes for an other mans ſinne, but for their owne. Wherfore we ſay, that the ſentence of the Prophet is generally true: and that all, both children, and alſo thoſe that be of full age as well of the olde Teſtament as of the new, do beare eueryevery one their owne iniquitie. For al mē that are borne, hauehave in themſelues ſinne and corruption, for which they ought to be puniſhed. Wherfore this ſentence confirmeth our opinion: ſo far is it of, that it can be alledged againſt vsus. But this maketh moſt of all againſt Pigghius: for he affirmeth, that children beare the ſinnes of the parentes, when as he ſayth: that otherwiſe they are cleane, and borne without ſinne. The Iewes publiſhed abrode that they themſelues were innocents, and that as for the puniſhments which they ſuffred, they ſuffred them for their parents ſake. For their parentes (ſaid they) had ſinned, and not they themſelues. But God ſayth, y• henceforth they ſhould no more vſe that prouerbe. For he would by the Prophet declare an aboundant illuſtration of the holy ghoſt, which ſhould come to paſſe in the new Teſtament. For his iudgements are not ſuch, that for an other mans ſinne he will puniſh one that is guiltles. Wherfore he doth not ſay, that henceforth it ſhould not be ſo, as though it werſo at any tyme before: but this he ſayth, that it ſhould come to paſſe, y• they ſhould not vſe any ſuch prouerbe, when they had once knowledge of the truth. But theHow God taketh vengeaunce vponupon the children for the iniquiries of the fathers. law ſemeth to be againſt this expoſition. For in it God ſayth: that he will viſite the iniquity of the fathers vponupon the chyldren vntounto the thyrd and fourth generation. Theſe thinges ſéeme not very well to agrée, y• God will both viſite the iniquitie of the fathers vponupon the children, and alſo that the children ſhall not beare the ſinnes of the fathers, To ſatiſfie this obiection, we will firſt interprete the wordes of the lawe. For ſo ſhall we perceiue, that there is no contrarietie betwene the Prophet and the law. This ſentence of the law, ſome referre to the mercy of God, ſome to hys ſeuerity and iuſtice. They which thinke that by theſe woordes is commended the mercy of God, do ſay that God is ſo good and mercifull, y• he will not ſtreight way deſtroy a man when he ſinneth, but rather will tary for his repentaunce. Therefore ſometimes when he ſpareth the father which hath ſinned, yet he puniſheth ye child, and ſometimes when he ſpareth both the father and the childe, he puniſhethAn example of Iehu. the childes childe: ſometimes alſo he differreth the puniſhments vntounto the fourth generation. As we ſée came to paſſe in Iehu kyng of Samaria. For although he him ſelfe greuouſly ſinned, yet God tooke not away the kingdome from his poſteritie, but after the fourth generation. Wherfore it ſéemeth, that by theſe wordes is ſet forth the goodnes of God, which ſo long reſtraineth his anger, nether doth ſtreight way poure it out. But others thinke that the goodnes of God is ſet forth, when it is ſayd that he will do good vntounto thoſe that louelove him euen to a thouſande generations. But contrarily, that his ſeuerity and iuſtice ſhould be known, it is added, that he will viſite ſinnes, not only vponupon them which hauehave ſinned, but alſo vppon theyr children, and childrens children, euen vntounto the fourth generation. And this they declare by examples. For Amalek had done many euils vntounto the Iſralites, wandringAn example of Amal…ch Iehez… the ſeruant of Helizeus as ſtrangers through the deſert: & a long time after his poſterity wer afflicted of ye Iſraelites, and ſo afflicted, that at the laſt God commaunded Saul vtterly to deſtroy eueryevery one of thē. Iehezi alſo the ſeruant of Helizeus, bicauſe he had in his maiſters name receiued money of Naaman the Sirian, was both hymſelfe ſtriken wyth leproſye, and alſo all hys poſteritie for euer. Eyther of theſe ſentences is godlye: and maye be confirmed by examples. Howbeit the latter ſemeth better to agree with the texte. But how God viſiteth the iniquity of the fathers vponupon the children vntounto the third and fourth generation, the law it ſelfe ſufficiently declareth.They beare the iniquity of their parents which hauehave alſo themſelues hated God. To hate God is taken two manner of wapes. For it is added. Of them that hate me. whereby it appeareth, that no other children ſhall beare the ſinnes of theyr elders, but thoſe which hauehave bene like vntounto theyr parentes. For if they depart from theyr wickednes, they ſhal not beare theyr ſinnes. But this is to be noted, that, To hate God, may be takē two maner of waies: ether in acte (as they ſpeake) which agreth only with thoſe that are of full age, or in proneſe and vice alredy contracted in nature: which hath place in infantes. But ſome will obiect, If we vnderſtand that God puniſheth thoſe onlye, which imitate the ſinnes of theyr parentes, what neded this addition, vntounto the third and fourth generation: when as he will perpetually puniſhe all ſinners what ſoeuer they be? Augustine was ſo moued with this obiection, that he ſayd, that by this forme of ſpeaking, vntounto the third and fourth generation, is vnderſtand the whole poſterity: for in it a determinate nomber is vſed for an infinite. For if a man adde 4. to 3. then isThe number of ſeuen is put for any other number. it the nomber of 7. Which is vſed to be put for any other nomber. After the ſame maner he ſayth it is written in Amos the Prophet, ouer three euills and ouer fower, I will not conuert him. And he ſayth, that this is the meaning of that place: If a man tranſgreſſe once or twiſe, God can forgeue hym: but if a man heape ſinnes vponupon ſinnes, and ſo procéede vnmeaſurably, then God can not forgeue hym. Here 3. and 4 ſinnes are put for a continuation of ſinnes. So God may be ſayd to puniſhe euen to the third and fourth generation of them which hate him: when as he will puniſhe all ſuch whatſoeuer they be be. But it may be anſwered otherwiſe, that God thereforeWhy God hath determined the third and fourth generation. hath determined the third and fourth generation, to ſhew that his anger is moderate, and ioyned with lenity: ſometimes to ſtaye from puniſhmentes and to go no far ther in puniſhing. Although there are others which thinke, that the third and fourth generation is expreſſedly put, bycauſe euen to that time the poſteritye are peraduenture entiſed to ſinne by the euill example of theyr great grandfather: for none of the elders liue paſt that, for for y• moſt part after the fourth generation they no longer liue. By theſe thinges we ſe, that the words of the Prophet are nothing repugnant vntounto the law, but doo rather interpret it. For he therefore ſayth, that the child ſhall not beare the iniquity of the father, bycauſe the law ſayth, that he viſiteth the iniquity of the fathers vponupon the children, if they alſo imitate the ſins of theyr parentes: that when they are puniſhed, they ſhould vnderſtand, that they are puniſhed for theyr owne ſinnes, and not for the ſinnes of theyr parentes. But it is ſayd, that God therefore puniſheth the ſinnes of the fathers in them, bycauſe the ſinnes began in them, and were continued vntounto the children. And if the childrē had not had fathers or grandfathers, which had ſo ſinned, paraduenture God had yet ſtill withheld his anger: and euen as by his patience he bare with theyr elders, ſo alſo paraduenture he had borne with them. But foraſmuch as both theyr elders hauehave ſinned, and they alſo depart not from theyr example, God will no longer differGod will not differ puniſhment longer then it behoueth leaſt he ſhould ſeme to hauehave caſt of the care of thynges. Of him that was borne blind▪ the puniſhment, leſt he ſhould ſeme to hauehave caſt of the care of worldly thinges, and ſo other men ſhould ſinne more ſecurely. Howbeit in the meane time, they which are ſo puniſhed can not be called innocent, when as they themſelues alſo doo hate God, Nether is that repugnant to theſe thinges, which Chriſt ſpake in Iohn concerning the man that was borne blind, Nether hath this man ſinned nor his parentes. For the meaninge of that place is not, that that blinde man was puniſhed without deſert. But only this is noted, that the prouidence of God had directed that fault of his eyes to an other end, then that the blinde man ſhould be puniſhed. For God would vſe that occaſion to illuſtrate the deuinity of Chriſt. So god diſtributeth paynes not only by them to puniſhe ſinnes, but alſo for other endes which he hath vntounto himſelf appointed. And thus much concerning that place of the prophet: whereby may be manifeſtly ſene that it nether repugneth with the law, nor yet with the definition by vsus alledged. Yea rather the ſame ſentence is to be returnes agaynſte our aduerſaries, whiche affirme that children are guiltye of an other mans ſinne.