A Treatise of Original Sin, Part 4 · Chapter 5

A Treatise of Original Sin · Part 4 · Chapter 5

p. 526CHAP. V.

Eternal Damnation, another Effect of Original Sinne.

SECT. I.

What is meant by Wrath in this Text.

EPHES. 2. 3.

And were by nature the children of wrath as well as others.

AS I began this Subject of original ſinne with the Text in hand, ſo I ſhall conclude with it. My purpoſe in re-aſſuming of it, is to treat of the laſt and moſt dreadfull effect of our native pollution, which is, The deſert of everlaſting damnation. From this alone had we no actual ſins, we are made heirs of Gods wrath, as this verſe doth fully evince.

I ſhall not inſiſt upon the Coherence and Explication of the words, that work is done already. I ſhall only adde ſome obſervable particulars that were not formerly taken notice of, and that will be done in anſwering of two Queſtions,

1. What is meant by wrath here? And

2. What is meant by nature?

For the firſt, no doubt we are to mean Gods wrath; Therefore Tertullian's Expoſition of this place is ſingular and much forced; he underſtands wrath here ſubjectively, as if it were mans wrath, making the ſenſe to be. We are all by nature ſubject to paſſions, eſpecially that of anger is predominant. When it is ſaid (Lib. 3. de anima, cap. 16. ſaith he) that we were by nature the children of wrath, …rationale indignativum ſuggillat, &c. he reproveth that irrational anger we are ſubject to, which is not nature, as it cometh from God, but of that which the Devil hath brought in. Tertullian affirming theſe three parts or powers of the ſoul, the rational, the iraſcible, and the concupiſcible, which he calleth indignativum & concupiſcentivum. In the iraſcible, he ſpeaketh of a good indignation, and an evil one, applying this Text to the later. Cerda his Commentator illuſtrating this, ſaith, Tertullian's meaning is, That we are by nature children to our paſſions, we are not at our own diſpoſing, we are under their power; adding, That Paul mentioneth wrath rather than any other affection, becauſe of that anger and fury, by which he once perſecuted the Church of God. Thus he mentioning alſo another Expoſition, That by anger is to be underſtood the Devil, who may ſo be called, becauſe of the p. 527cruelty he exerciſeth upon men: but this is ſo improbable that it needeth no refutation. The wrath then, is Gods wrath, which like himſelf is infinite, and the effects thereof intollerable; So that it is as much as to be Children of hell, children of everlaſting damnation, even whatſoever the wrath of God may bring upon a man in this world, and the world to come.

SECT. II.

What is meant by Nature.

THe ſecond Queſtion is, What is meant by Nature? As for thoſe who would have it to ſignifie no more then prorſtus and vere, altogether or indeed, we have heretofore confuted; yet granting that this is part of the leaſe, but not the principal. For we are to take nature here for our birth-deſcent, as appeareth partly, becauſe the Apoſtle uſeth the word foreign, which doth more properly relate to our nativity, whereas before he calleth the children of diſobedience foreign partly, becauſe the Apoſtles order is obſervable; for in the original it is, We were children by nature of anger, that is, natural children oppoſed to adopted ones; and partly, becauſe the Iews pretended holineſs by their nativity, becauſe they were the ſeed of Abraham; which pride the Apoſtle would here abate, making them equal herein to the Heathen Idolaters. Neither by nature are we to underſtand cuſtome only, as if the Apoſtle meant by it the conſtant cuſtome of our actual iniquities, which uſeth to be called a ſecond nature, we are made children of wrath; for the Apoſtle doth no where uſe the word ſo, no not in that place, 1 Cor. 11. 14. Doth not nature … you? &c. For nature is taken both for the firſt principles, and alſo the immediate concluſions deduced from them, which later the Apoſtle doth call nature. Therefore it is matter of wonder, that the late Annotator in his paraphraſe on Epheſ. 2. ſhould take in the orthodox ſenſe (viz. And were born, and lived, and continued in a damning condition, as all other Heathens did (obſerve that, born in a damning condition) ſhould yet referre to his notes, on 1 Cor. 11. where he ſeemeth to contradict any ſuch birth-damnation, from this of the 2^d to the Epheſians: For he would underſtand foreign of the national cuſtome of Idolatry amongſt the Heathens; and if ſo then foreign is not to relate to our nativity or birth, as ſome tranſlate it, which he alſo noteth in the margin. But though cuſtome may be called nature, yet there is commonly ſome limiting expreſſion; as when he quoteth out of Galen, that cuſtoms are acquired natures, or out of Ariſtotle, cuſtome is like nature: Here are reſtrictive expreſſions, whereas Paul ſpeaketh abſolutely. And as for that inſtance which the learned Annotator hath out of Suidas, which the late Writer maketh uſe of for the corrupting of this Text, ( Ʋnum Neceſſar. cap. 6. Sect. 2.) it doth very fairly make againſt them. For Suidas upon the word foreign inlarging himſelf, and particularly making it to ſignifie the principle of motion, and reſt of a thing, eſſentially and not by accident (alluding happily to Ariſtotles definition) doth after this, adde, But when the Apoſtle ſaith we we were by nature the children of wrath, foreign, he doth not ſpeak of nature in this ſenſe, becauſe this would be the fault of him that created us. All which is very true, and doth directly oppoſe Manicheiſm; We do not ſay, there is any evil nature, or that the primordials of our nature were thus corrupted. They that hold pure naturals cannot anſwer this reaſon of Suidas, it doth militate againſt them. But we affirm this corruption of our nature came in by Adam's voluntary tranſgreſſion. So that in this ſenſe we call it naturale malum, as Auſtin; and quodammod… p. 528naturale, as Tertullian. So Suidas his meaning ſeemeth to be, That the wrath of God is not naturally due to us, as the creatures have their natural principles of motion and reſt within them; but that Suidas doth not by nature wholly mean an evil cuſtome, appeareth, in that he ſaith, two things are implied in this expreſſion:

The firſt is, foreign and foreign, an in dwelling abiding evil affection (by which we may very genuinely underſtand; that innate corruption in us, that ſinne which dwelleth in us.) And

The ſecond is foreign, A continual and wicked cuſtome. Theſe are not to be confounded as the ſame thing, but one is the cauſe of the other. Original ſinne is that evil, in-dwelling affection; from whence proceedeth evil cuſtoms in ſin. But it is not worth the while to examine, what the opinion of Suidas was in this particular. Varinus doth better diſcourſe upon the word foreign, making it to be the individual property of a thing, as the fire to burn, and ſaith, it differeth from foreign: for this is the eſſence of a thing, and foreign the foreign, the power or efficacy of a thing; and thus from him we may ſay, original ſinne is not foreign, but the foreign, though ſtill we muſt remember, that it is not a primordial, but a contracted property. It's made ſo upon Adam's tranſgreſſion.

SECT. III.

That by nature through the original ſinne we are born in, all are heirs of Gods wrath, all are obnoxious to eternal damnation.

NOw my purpoſe is to inſiſt chiefly upon the Predicate in ths Propoſiton, We are children of Wrath, and that by nature, even of Gods wrath. So that thus Text doth contain the heavy doom of all mankind. For it's obſerved to be the form of ſpeech, which the Jewiſh Judges uſed, when they paſſed ſentence upon any capital offenders, to pronounce, That ſuch were the ſons of death. From hence we may obſerve,

That by nature, through the original ſinne we are born in, all are heirs of Gods wrath, all are obnoxious to eternal damnation. This is the moſt bitter herb in all this diſcourſe of original ſinne. Here all the adverſaries to it, ſeem to be moſt impatient, when you utter ſuch words as theſe, by nature deſerving damnation as ſoon as ever we are born, before any actual ſinne committed, it is juſt with God to throw us into hell, that every Infant is obnoxious to this vengeance: At theſe words they are ready to rend their garments, and to ſay, we have ſpoken blaſphemy. The late Writer will in ſome ſenſe (though in effect it be none at all) grant that Adam's ſinne may be imputed to us for ſome temporal evils, but that the effect of it ſhould be to put us into a ſtate of eternal condemnation: This ſeemeth horrid to him. But who may let his heart work in pitifull thoughts againſt Scripture affirmations? Why ſhould not all ſay, it agreeth not with the mercy of God, that men ſhould for ever lie roaring in hell, for the ſins committed here in a tranſient manner? But of this in its time. We muſt judge of God by Scripture-light, not by our humane affections. And as Gregory ſaith well, He that cannot find out a reaſon of Gods doings, may eaſily find in himſelf a reaſon, why he cannot find it out. This Text doth clearly declare the condition of all mankind by nature, and therefore it muſt be for original ſinne, and not actual, we have alſo the Apoſtle Rom. 5. 16. in that compariſon between the firſt Adam and the ſecond fully eſtabliſhing this, The judgement was of one p. 529(ſaith he) to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences to juſtification: here we ſee attributed to this ſinne, not onelyonly foreign, but foreign, judgement and condemnation, which cannot be limited onelyonly to temporal curſes, becauſe condemnation is oppoſite to juſtification, and to eternal life through Chriſt: Yea that Text Rom. 3. 19. may like an oath, put an end to all controverſies and ſtrifes in this matter; where the Apoſtle proving all men both Jew and Gentile to be under ſinne, maketh this the conſequent of it, That every mouth may be ſtopped, and all the world become guilty before God. Here we ſee all mankind is guilty before God: They are all ſo many damned men, if the grace of God doth not interpoſe; ſo that what is naturally ours, whether original or actual, is wholly damnable. Therefore to the ſenſe of the word nature, already given, we may take in Eraſmus his Interpretation alſo, who maketh nature to be oppoſed to the grace and mercy of God, mentioned in the following verſes. So that from this Text we may conclude, Every man in his naturals, whether originally or actually conſidered, is expoſed to Gods vengeance, which might take hold upon him as ſoon as ever he hath a being. Therefore Chryſoſtome explaineth the Text thus, We are by nature the children of the wrath of God, and nothing elſe; for as he, who is the ſonne of a men, is by nature a man, ſo are we the children of wrath. Thus he. And the Apoſtle addeth, as others, to ſhew, That no Church-priviledges which the Jews enjoyed, made them any wayes better in this reſpect, then the Heathens.

SECT. IV.

What is comprehended in this Expreſsion, Children of wrath.

BUt let us ſee the wonders of God in this deep point. And

Firſt, What is comprehended in this expreſſion, Children of wrath? And

1. There is implied, That we all by nature have inherent corruption in us, that we are unclean and filthy in the eyes of God, for Gods wrath is not any where, but where ſinne is. Gods anger doth ſuppoſe ſinne, what God indeed may do by abſolute Sovereignty in afflicting of an innocent creature, is diſputed by Divines; but all agree, de facto, that now God doth not make any miſerable, but who are ſinfull: And if this be true of temporal miſeries, much more doth it hold of eternal. It doth not ſtand with the goodneſs and juſtice of God to damn any, but ſinners: If then Infants new born are by nature the children of wrath, it followeth, there is ſuch an internal defilement in them, whereby they do deſerve it. Therefore they who hold, God puniſheth man for Adam's ſinne, though it be but temporally, when we have no ſin by nature inherent in us, are injurious to the goodneſs and juſtice of God: we muſt be children in ſin before we can be children of wrath.

2. Here is implied, That for this pollution of nature, we bring with us into the world, God is greatly offended with us and displeaſed. Let Infants be accounted never ſo pretty and innocent babes, yet when we think Scripture-thoughts, we muſt conclude, they are children of wrath, that they are part of that world, which is guilty before God. God (I ſay) is offended with them, not ſimply, becauſe born, or becauſe the children of men, but becauſe born in ſinne, and the children of corrupt ſinfull men. Let not then our humane and carnal reaſonings argue ſaying, They have no underſtanding or will, they have no actual conſent to any iniquity, why ſhould ſuch a ſevere curſe be inavoidably laid upon p. 530them, who know not the right hand from the left? For this is plain, we cannot be by nature the children of Gods wrath, unleſs he be greatly offended and diſpleaſed with us; How ſad then is it to conſider, upon what terms every child cometh into the world? Gods wrath is againſt it, he is offended with it, as not having his Image, but the Devils; and hereby mans condition is worſe and more miſerable then the young ones of beaſts, even the vileſt of them, Toads and Serpents: for though man hateth ſuch, yet God doth not.

3. This wrath is Gods wrath, not mans, which maketh our eſtate to be farre more dreadfull. Now Gods wrath is like himſelf infinite, and that which a creature is never able to ſtand under. Hence it is that we can never ſufficiently apprehend his wrath; for if the wrath of all the great men of the world were put together, (and yet the wrath of a King is (ſaid to be) like the roaring of a Lion, Prov. 19. 12.) it is but as a ſpark to a great fire in compariſon of Gods anger. The Scripture repreſenteth it in a more dreadfull manner, then we are able to think of. Hence the Pſalmiſt crieth out, Who knoweth the power of thy anger? according to thy fear, ſo is thy wrath. Pſal. 90. 11. where by fear may be meant Gods word, that teacheth us to fear, as Pſal. 19. 9. The fear of the Lord is clean, enduring for ever; by which we are taught, that no man till he apply himſelf to the word of God, can rightly apprehend Gods wrath. It is indeed diſputed by the Schoolmen, Whether anger be properly in God, or no? And ſome do conclude, That it is as properly in him, as love; onelyonly we muſt not underſtand it to be in him, as it is in us, with paſſion and imperfections. It is an act of Gods holy will, whereby he abhorreth ſinne, and decreeth to puniſh it.

4. This wrath being thus great and unſpeakable, hence there is no evaſion of it, but by the bloud of Chriſt, for he onelyonly who was God and man could remove this; and therefore it is, that Infants do need Chriſt a Saviour, which could not be, if they were not children of wrath; for if he be a Saviour, it is to ſuch who are leſt. Neither is that any better than Adam's fig-leaves to cover his nakedneſs, which the Pelagians of old, and others of late would runne unto, That Infants indeed need Chriſt to carry them to Heaven, though they have no ſinne in them; for this they ſuppoſe without the grace of Chriſt (though that they diſtinguiſhed into nature at laſt) was not of it ſelf able to bring to Heaven; though it had no ſinne in it, yet it had imperfection (ſay they) But this is to make Chriſt, a Chriſt, to whom he was not a Saviour; for he is a Saviour, Becauſe he did ſave his people from their ſinnes, Mat. 1. 21. If then he bringeth Infants to eternal glory, he muſt do it as a Chriſt, not as a Saviour; which diſtinction can no wayes be founded upon Scripture.

5. From this wrath of God there ariſeth an obligation to eternal damnation. For you may ſay, If God be angry with man thus by nature, doth it follow therefore that man muſt be obliged to eternal death? Will not temporal death, and the miſeries of this life be enough? No, from Gods wrath thus againſt us, there is a debt and obligation lying upon us to everlaſting miſery: And the reaſon is, Becauſe this corruption we are born in, is truly and properly a ſin and to every ſin there is adhering the merit of utter deſtruction. So that the Schoolmen and ſome Papiſts, who diſpute, Whether original ſinne deſerve everlaſting damnation in hell; and concluding upon the negative, that it hath ſome leſſe puniſhment, is frivolous and abſurd. For if it have truly and properly the nature of ſinne in it, then it cannot be denied, according to Scripture-grounds, but hell is the proper reward of it.

Laſtly, This wrath may be conſidered either immanently, as it is in God, viz. his will abhorring all ſinners, or tranſiently in the effects thereof. For that it is of great uſe in Divinity to diſtinguiſh between the Attributes and Effects of them; p. 531for the Attributes as they are in God, cannot receive any intenſion or remiſſion, but the effects may and do. Now the godly they were the children of wrath by nature, as the Apoſtle ſpeaketh here, but they are not ſo now. For though original ſinne doth ſtill abide in ſome meaſure, yet it is not imputed unto a godly man; ſo that they are not for the preſent under Gods wrath, though once they were, not that any change is made in God, but in man, who is the object. The effects of this wrath are partly in the temporal miſeries of this life, and partly in thoſe eternal torments which ſhall be in the world to come. The child cometh weeping into the world, as prognoſticating it's miſery, thus it is miſerable before it hath any actual ſinne; So that whereas the Infant cannot without teaching learn to ſpeak or go, of it's own ſelf it inclineth to weep. Cerda upon Tertullian (De animâ lib. 3. cap. 19.) ſpeaketh of ſome that thought Infants by theſe complaints did accuſe our firſt parents, and that the male children cry A, as if they intended Adam; and the females E, as if they meant Eve, though he ſaith others attribute it to their different ſtrengths of nature: But this is a fooliſh and ridiculous fancy. It is certain, that theſe weepings and complaints do argue the miſery of our natures, though but new born, and ſo by conſequence the ſinfulneſs of them. The other effect is eternal damnation in hell, which God might inflict upon every child new born; ſo that he might go weeping hence, into that place of weeping in hell, of which we have many more things as yet to ſpeak.

SECT. V.

Some Propoſitions in order to the proving, That the wrath of God is due to all mankind becauſe of Original Sinne.

NOw becauſe this curſe ſeemeth cruell and unjuſt to humane reaſon, till by actual ſinnes men have procured wrath upon their own heads; It is good to eſtabliſh it upon Scripture-grounds, which is ſo ſure a rock, that though the ſtormes and tempeſts of mens rage do ariſe againſt it, yet it will abide immoveable. But before we do that we are to premiſe ſomething, by way of Obſervation tending thereunto. As

Firſt, In deciding of the doctrinal truths of Religion, we are not to attend to our own humane affections, but meerly to the voice of God in the Scriptures. Gods diſpenſations are not to be regulated according to our pitifull affections; moſt of the Arminian Tenents are ſuited to humane compaſſions, rather then commenſurated to Scripture-regulations: But if men will give way to that, why ſhall not Origen's poſition of the ſalvation of all the damned; yea Devils and all at laſt be received as moſt commending of Gods mercy, and moſt ſuitable to our pittifull affections? And why ſhould not all embrace the pleaſing and pitiful Doctrine of one Georgius Siculus, mentioned by Crakanthorpt? (Defenſ. Eccleſ. Anglic. contra Spalat. cap. 37.) by whoſe Books he ſaith many were bewitched. His opinion was, that neither this or that particular man was predeſtinated to ſalvation, but that God had appointed a time when he would ſave the whole world, and quicquid de pradeſtinatione tradimus, philoſophicâ tantum argutiâ niti; and what was delivered (by learned orthodox men as we muſt ſuppoſe) was grounded onelyonly upon philoſophical niceties. Is not this abſolute ſalvation of all men very agreeable to humane deſires and affections; yea and why doth not God vouchſafe not only the immediate offers of grace to all men, and effectually bleſs the ſame to all, ſo that all men ſhall be converted and ſaved, for he can as eaſily ſave all men as one if he pleaſe? Nay p. 532if we do conſult with our own pitifull eſtates, how offenſive would ſeveral paſſages of Gods providence in many outward temporal judgements be unto us: As in the drowning of the world, where many children had not corrupted their wayes, as men of the world had; yet they were all miſerably deſtoyed: thus alſo in the terrible deſtruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, all the little children therin who could not be guilty of ſuch hainous tranſgreſſions, as the Sodomiſtes were, yet did partake of that dreadful judgment, wheras at another time God in his conviction of Jonah, why he would not deſtroy that great City of Nineveh, uſeth this Argument. Jonah 4. 11. to ſpare that place, becauſe there were more then ſixſcore thouſand perſons, that could not diſcern between their right hand and leſt: If then a man ſhould give liberty to his humane affections, to expoſtulate why theſe tender babes that knew nothing of their fathers ſinnes, ſhould be involved in ſuch ſad calamities, with their ungodly parents, how hardly would he keep within the bounds of ſobriety and modeſty? Thus it is about this Doctrine of original ſinne, whereby we are all in our very birth expoſed to eternal damnation; Some call it a rigid and cruel Doctrine, and all becauſe they judge of God according to their own affections: But as Bellarmine well obſerveth in the diſpute about the ſtate of Infants dying in their original ſinne without Baptiſme, (Lib. 6. de Amiſſione, grat.) naming five ſeveral opinions, ſome whereof are more rigid, others more favourable, That our opinions cannot at all alter or change the ſtate of Infants ſo deceaſed; The rigid opinion doth not hurt them, neither doth a favourable opinion do them any good, but the Word of God that will ſtand; our favourable and pitifull opinions will not make the natural eſtate of any man the better; yea when ſuch Doctrines are found to be contrary to the Word of God, they may do a great deal of hurt, plunging of them into dangerous conſequences, that may flow therefrom. Therefore to ſuch Diſputants, we may well reply that which Acoſta the Jeſuite (Lib. 5. de procur. Indorum ſalute cap. 3.) ſaith to ſome of his own Religion, that held even Heathens might be ſaved without the knowledge of Chriſt; and that the contrary Doctrine was inhumane and ſevere: Non hic agitur (ſaith he) durumne hoc & ſeverum ſit, an benignum & liberale; ſed utrum verum necne.

Secondly, As we are not to attend to humane affections in this point; ſo neither to humane and natural reaſonings; Why God ſhould impute Adam's ſinne to us. and we all be accounted as ſinners in him, and from him the curſed root we the curſed branches do ſpring, ariſeth from the juſt proccedings of God, though happily the cauſes the thereof be unknowen to us: When therefore the Scripture of God doth plainly affirm ſuch a ſinful, and curſed eſtate, let not philoſophical Arguments obſtruct our faith, leſt if we do ſo in other myſteries of Religion, as well as in this, at laſt we fall into plain Atheiſme; Let us be content with our own meaſure of underſtanding, not invading the ſecrets of God, leſt we herein betray notoriouſly our original ſinne, while we labour to deny it. For Luther ſpeaking againſt theſe Curiſlae and Quaeriſtae as he calleth them, (In Gen.) whereby men will demand a reaſon of Gods proceedings, and affect to be like God in knowledge as Adam did, hath this expreſſion, Fieri Deorum eſt originale peccatum, original ſinne is the affection of a Deity.

Thirdly, We are alwayes in this controverſy to diſtinguiſh between the merit of condemnation, and the actual condemnation it ſelf: It is unqueſtionably true, that all by nature do deſerve this eternal damnation; but then concerning the actual damnation thereby, there are different opinions; Some have delivered poſitively, that none is ever damned for original ſinne only; as ſome Papiſts, and the Remonſtrants; yea there are many ſay, that this actual condemnation by original ſinne, is univerſally taken off all mankind by Chriſt; ſo that as by the firſt Adam all were put into a ſtate of Gods anger, ſo by the ſecond Adam all are put into a ſtate of actual reconciliation by Chriſt, till by their actual ſins p. 533they do refuſe Chriſt, and ſo procure to themſelves damnatation, not upon any account of Adam's ſinne, but their own voluntary tranſgreſſon; Concerning Infants alſo dying in their infancy, great Diſputes there are; Some concluding all that die ſo, though of Unbelievers and Pagans, that they are ſaved; original ſinne not damning any others; they conclude otherwiſe: but then they are divided into ſeveral opinions amongſt themſelves; of which in time more is to be ſaid. For we are not as yet come to that point, concerning the actual condemnation of any by original ſinne meerly, but the merit and defect of it, what every man doth deſerve by it as ſoon as he is born; though every ſinne deſerveth …, yet this obligation to eternal puniſhment may be taken off, yea and that while the ſinne abideth; as original ſinne doth in ſome meaſure in a godly man. There are indeed ſome who make the reatus poenae, the guilt of puniſhment to be the forme of a ſinne, and if this were true, then they could not be …: Others make it a proprium to ſinne, but this cannot be underſtood of actual guilt, but potential guilt. Every ſinne, and ſo original doth, deſerve that thoſe who are infected therewith, ſhould periſh in hell torments eternally; but yet the actual obligation hereunto may be removed by the grace of God, the ſinne ſtill remaining in ſome degree, as the fire had a power to burn the three Worthies, though the actual working thereof was hindered.

SECT. VI.

Arguments to prove, that by Nature we are all as ſo many damned men; That Damnation belongs to the Sinne we are borne in.

THis being premiſed, let us now conſider thoſe Arguments, which may firmly eſtabliſh us in this truth, That by nature we are all as ſo many damned men; that of our ſelves we can expect no other; and that though we were free from actual tranſgreſſion, It is the grace of God only, that delivereth us: All mankind is like that wretched Infant, Ezek. 16. ſpoken of by the Prophet, wallowing in bloud, filthy and loathſome, neceſſarily periſhing, unleſſe the grace of God ſpeak unto us, to live; we all lie like Ezekiel's any bones, of whom we may ſay, Can theſe live? Can theſe be ſaved? Not one, unleſſe God give life. And

Firſt, All deſerve eternal damnation by original contagion, Becauſe it is a ſtate of ſinne and ſpiritual uncleanneſſe we are born in. And therefore if once it be granted to be a ſinne, the wages thereof muſt be hell and damnation: Inſomuch that ſome Popiſh Writers are very abſurd, who diſputing againſt Pelagians. That our birth-ſinne is properly and univocally ſinne, yet afterwards queſtion. Whether children dying therein do go to hell or no? Some aſſign them a Paradiſe, wherein they have a natural happineſs, as Catharinus (Opuſc. de ſtatu pucrorum, &c.) Others, as Bellarmine, that they have poena damni, but not ſenſus, as if there were half an hell, or that one might be ſhut out from the beatifical fruition of God, and yet not be tormented with ſenſible pain. This is certain, if it be truly and directly a ſinne, as the Scripture ſo often calleth it; then without the grace of God, there is no poſſibility of eſcaping hell thereby. why then ſhould damnation becauſe of it be thought ſo horrid, when it is acknowledged to be a ſinne? Job (you heard) ſaith, Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Job 14. 4. here we are all unclean. Now what doth the Scripture pronounce of ſuch, Revel. 21. 29. There ſhall not in any wiſe enter into the heavenly Jeruſalem, any thing that is unclean, or that defileth. No unclean thing can enter into the kingdom of heaven; and if they do not enter in there, p. 534they muſt enter into the kingdom of hell; There is no middle place, Qui inducis medium recede de medio, as Auſtin. The Scripture alſo calleth it ſinne, Pſal. 51. 5. Behold in ſinne did my mother conceive me; and what is the wages of ſinne but death? Rom 6. 23. not only bodily death, but that eternal death, which is oppoſite to everlaſting life; and the Apoſtle ſaith, The ſting of death is ſinne, 1 Cor. 15. 56. which Auſtin expounds in this ſenſe, as that by ſinne death is cauſed, as that is called Poculum mortis, a cup of death, which cauſeth death; or as ſome ſay, The Tree of life is called ſo, becauſe it was the cauſe of life. If then original ſinne be a ſinne, it muſt have a ſting, and this ſting is everlaſting death. So that if we attend to what the Scripture ſpeaketh concerning us, even in the womb and the cradle, that we are in a ſtate of ſinne; we muſt conclude, becauſe it is a ſinne, therefore it deſerveth damnation. Hence you heard the Apoſtle Rom. 5. expreſly ſaith, Judgement came by one to condemnation; and Rom. 3. That the whole world is guilty before God.

Secondly, The Scripture doth not only ſpeak of this birth-pollution as a ſinne, but as an hainous ſinne in its effects, whereby it doth admis of many terrible aggravations, (as you have heard.) It is the Law in our members, it's the fleſh, tho body of ſin, the ſin that doth ſo eaſily beſet us, the ſin that warreth againſt the mind and the Spirit of God, that captivateth even a godly man in ſome meaſure, which maketh Paul groan under it, and cry out of his miſerable condition thereby; ſo that it is not meerly a ſinne, but a ſinne to be aggravated in many reſpects, and therefore neceſſarily cauſing damnation, unleſſe God in his mercy prevent. Let Bellarmine and others extenuate it, making it leſſe then the leaſt ſinne, that is (of which more afterwards) let them talk of venial ſinnes, that do not in their own nature deſerve hell; yet becauſe all ſinne is a tranſgreſſion of Gods Law, the curſe of God belongeth thereunto, therefore it hath an infinite guilt in reſpect of the Majeſty of God, againſt whom it is committed; and they who judge ſinne little, muſt alſo judge the Majeſty of God to be little alſo. What ſhall one reſpect of involuntarineſs, which is in original ſinne, make it leſſe then others, when … ſo many other reſpects (ſome whereof do more immediately relate to the nature of ſinne, then voluntarineſs can do) farre exceed other ſinnes?

Thirdly, Original ſinne muſt needs deſerve damnation, becauſe it needeth the bloud of Chriſt to purge away the guilt of it, as well as actual ſins. Chriſt is a Saviours to Infants, as well as to grown men, and if he be a Saviour to them, then they are ſinners; if he ſave them, then they are loſt. As for that old evaſion of the Pelagian, Infants need Chriſt, not to ſave them from ſinne, but to bring them to the Kingdom of Heaven, it's moſt abſurd and ridiculous; for the whole purpoſe of the Goſpel is to ſhew, That Chriſt came into the world to bring ſinners to Heaven through his bloud; his death was expiatory and by way of atonement, therefore it did ſuppoſe ſinne: hence he is ſad to be the Lamb of God that taketh away the ſinne of the world, John 1. 29. which is both original and actual.

Fourthly, That eternal damnation belongeth to the ſinne we are born in, appeareth by thoſe remedies of grace, and Ordinances of ſalvation which were appointed by God both in the Old and New Teſtament, for the taking away of this natural guilt. Circumciſion in the Old Teſtament did declare, that by nature the heart was uncircumciſed and that every one was deſtitute of any inherent righteouſneſſe; hence circumciſion is called, The ſeal of the righteouſneſſe, which is by faith, Rom. 4. 11. To this Baptiſm doth anſwer in the New Teſtament, the external never whereof with the formal Rite of Adminiſtration doth abundantly convince us of our ſpiritual uncleanneſs, as alſo the need we have of the bloud of Chriſt, and alſo of his Spirit for our cleanſing.

Now becauſe the known Adverſary to this truth, affirmly, That he knoweth p. 535of no Church that in her Rituals doth confeſſe and bewail original ſinne: As alſo that we might ſee the Judgement of our firſt Reformers in England about Baptiſm, as relating to original ſinne; It is good to obſerve, what is ſet down in the Publique Adminiſtration of Baptiſm, as by the Common-Prayer-Book was formerly to be uſed; there the Miniſter uſeth this Introductory, Foraſmuch as all men be conceived and born in ſinne; adding from hence, That none can enter into the kingdom of Heaven, unleſſe he be born again. It is the ſinne he is born in (not pure Naturals, as the Doctor ſaith) that inferreth a neceſſity of regeneration.

Again, In the Prayer for children to be baptized, there is this paſſage, That they coming to thy holy Baptiſm may receive remiſſion of ſins. Now what ſinnes can children have but their original? It is ſpoken in the plural number, becauſe more than one child is ſuppoſed to be baptized. Again in the ſame Prayer, we meet with this Petition, That they being delivered from thy wrath; What can more aſhame the Doctors opinion then this? That which he accounteth ſo horrid, is here plainly aſſerted, That children are born under Gods wrath; therefore prayer is made, that they may be delivered from it.

Laſtly, In another Prayer after the Confeſſion of Faith, we have this Petition, That the old Adam in theſe children may be ſo buried, that the new man may be raiſed up in them. Why doth he not ſeoff at this expreſſion, ſaying, (as he doth upon another occaſion) That they change the good old man with theſe things; that he never thought of? No doubt but he will force theſe paſſages by ſome violent Interpretation, as he doth the 9^th Article; but certainly it would be more ingenuity in him to flie to his principles of liberty of propheſying, rather then to wreſt theſe publick profeſſions of original ſinne. It is true, the Ancients, and ſo the Papiſts put too much upon Baptiſm. For Auſtin thought, every child dying without Baptiſm; yea and without the participation of the Lords Supper was certainly damned. But of this extream more afterwards. It is enough for us, That Chriſts Inſtitution of ſuch a Sacrament, and that for Infants, doth evidently proclaim our ſinfulneſſe by nature, and therein our deſert of eternal wrath.

Fifthly, To original ſinne there muſt needs belong eternal wrath, becauſe of the nature of it, and inſeperable effects flowing from it. The nature of it is the ſpiritual death of the ſoul; by this a man is alienated from all life of grace; and therefore till the grace of God appear, it's true of all by nature, as followeth in the Chapter where this Text is, verſ. 12. Without Chriſt alient from the Commonwealth of Iſrael, ſtrangers from the Covenants of promiſe, having no hope, and without God in the world. Thus Davenant upon that Text, Dead in ſinne, Col. 2. 13. ſaith, All the ſons of Adam are accounted dead; firſt, becauſe they lie in a ſtate of ſpiritual death, having loſt the Image of God: and partly, becauſe they are under the guilt of eternal death, being obnoxious to the wrath of God, for by nature we are the children of wram. If then original ſinne put us into a ſpiritual death, if thereby we be deprived of all ſpiritual life, How can it be avoided but that eternal damnation muſt fo…ow thereupon by the deſert thereof? And as for the inſeparable effects of it, which are to carry us on neceſſarily to ſinne in all that we do, to make us utterly impotent and unable for any thing that is good; What can this produce but everlaſting miſery to our ſouls?

Sixthly, Original ſinne is of a damnable nature, becauſe of that ſpiritual bondage and vaſſalag; we are thereby put into even to the Devil himſelf. For not being the children of God, we are neceſſarily the children of the Devil: And therefore to be children of Gods wrath in the Text, is no more then to be the children of hell, and of the Devil; for which reaſon he is called, The Prince of the World. Seeing then the Devil hath power over all mankind, p. 536they are in his bondage, and Chriſt came as a Redeemer to deliver us from him. This doth argue in what a wofull and dreadfull eſtate we are left in by this original filthineſſe. To have the Devil poſſeſſe our bodies, how terrible is it? But he poſſeſſeth the ſouls of every one by nature, till Chriſt doth deſtroy him, and caſt him out. Hence the Apoſtle celebrateth that powerfull grace of God, whereby we are delivered from the power of darkneſs into the kingdom of his dear Sonne, Col. 1. 13. from which children are not to be excluded.

Seventhly, That original ſinne hath merit of demnation, is plain, Becauſe by it we are in an unregenerate, eſtate, John 3. Whatſoever is born of the fleſh is fleſh, and therefore unleſſe a man be born again of the Spirit, and from above, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven: yea none that are in the fleſh can pleaſe God, Rom. 8 8. If then no unregenerate man can be ſaved, and by original ſinne we come to be in that ſtate of carnality, it is plain, that by nature we are prepared fuel for eternal flames in hell.

Eighthly, That original ſinne deſerveth damnation, appeareth, in the conſequents of it. For when Adam fell into this ſpiritual death, which is the ſame with original ſinne in us, (though it could not be called ſo in him, becauſe he had not it from his firſt being, neither was it derived to him from any other) we may take notice of two ſad and terrible effects thereof, beſides many others. The firſt whereof was the terrour and fear upon his conſcience, when God called him by name, ſaying, Adam, where art thou? He then flieth from God, and would have hid himſelf from his face: How cometh Adam thus to be afraid, thus to tremble, who had ſuch peaceable enjoyment of God before? Was it not becauſe he had now loſt the Image of God? And this impreſſion is ſtill upon all men by nature. There is an inward terrour and fear of God, knowing he is an holy, juſt and omnipotent God, who cannot but hate and puniſh ſin, and therefore we being conſcious of that ſinfulneſs and pollution which is in us, are afraid of him, dare not think of him, or draw nigh to him, horror is ready to ſurprize us, when we think of God, while in our natural eſtate. The other conſequent upon Adam's pollution, was the caſting him out of Paradiſe, and in him all his poſterity was likewiſe ejected. Now this was a type (as it were) of our being caſt out of Heaven. This is like that ſolemn curſe at the laſt day, Depart from me ye curſed. So that if all theſe Arguments be duly conſidered, we cannot any longer reſiſt the light of this truth, That to us belongeth hell and damnation, as ſoon as ever we are born, even before we have committed any actual ſinne at all.

SECT. VII.

Some Concluſions deduceable from the Doctrine of the damnableneſs of Original Sinne.

THe Doctrine of our native impurity, and the damnable conſequent thereof being thus eſtabliſhed upon the Scripture rock, which will daſh in peices all errours that beat upon it: I ſhall proceed to ſome Concluſions deduceable thence from. As

Firſt, That poſition of ſome, though of different principles, is wholly contrariant to the word of God, that none are damned for original ſinne; For ſeeing this ſinne hath the ſame damnable guilt with it as actual ſinne hath, there is no more reaſon for the non-damnation of perſons in one more then in another, neither can p. 537we conceive God obliged to forgive one more then another; why then ſhould it thus univerſally be acknowledged, that for actual ſinnes God may and doth damn men, but not for original ſinne? It is true, when we ſpeak of perſons growen up, we cannot ſeperate their actual ſinnes and original, becauſe original ſinne is alwayes acting and conceiving, putting it ſelf forth into many divers luſts; and thereupon we cannot ſay of any adult perſon, that he is damned meerly for original ſinne, becauſe to this original hath been ſuperadded many actual tranſgreſſions; and thereupon all impenitent perſons dying ſo, are condemned for both; yea their condemnation is inhanced thereby; for the deſert of damnation by original and actual ſinne both, is greater then by original or actual ſeverally. Seeing then many die in the guilt of their natural and actual uncleanneſs, it is an unſavoury Doctrine to affirm, that no man is damned for original ſinne. It is true, ſome men do dogmatize, that original ſinne in reſpect of the guilt of it, is univerſally taken off all, and that all mankind is put into a ſtate of reconciliation by the ſecond Adam, as they were into a ſtate of wrath by the firſt; but this over-throweth the Doctrine of ſpecial election, and doth confound nature and grace together; yea it maketh Chriſt to have died in vain, of which more fully in its time. For the preſent, ſeeing that ſo many die unconverted in their ſtate of unregeneracy, it muſt neceſſarily follow, that many are damned both for their original, and actual ſinne alſo. For ſhall the root be leſs damning, then the branches or fruit? actual ſinnes demonſtrate the effect and power or original ſinne, and the aggravation of the effect doth neceſſarily, aggravate the cauſe: As they ſaid to Gideon deſiring he ſhould ſlay them, Judg. 8. 21. As is the man, ſo is his ſtrength: Thus it is here, as a mans corrupt nature is, ſo are his actions; the one is actus primus, and the other is actus ſecundus: Thus as life though an actus primus, yet is alwayes expreſſed in ſecond acts, and the effects thereof: ſo it is with original ſinne; it is by way of a fountain in us, yet alwayes emptying it ſelf into ſtreames. It is then a ſubtle deviſe of Bellarmine, who being unwilling to make damnation, as it comprehends the puniſhment of ſenſe, to be the conſequent of original ſinne, to ſay, that one dying in his original ſinne, is not damned by reaſon of his original ſinne, but ratione ſubjecti, it bringeth damnation, becauſe ſuch a ſubject is deſtitute of ſpiritual life and grace: But this is to confront the Scripture, which attributeth condemnation and … to this ſinne, becauſe of the intrinſecal evil and hainouſneſs thereof. The eſſence is of one to condemnation ſaith the Apoſtle Rom 5. and the Text ſaith we are by nature the children of wrath. Beſides this is a ridiculous and abſurd …; for original ſinne is nothing but the ſpiritual death of the ſoul; and doth wholly deſtroy that reſpect and habitude, which the ſoul had unto God. Father, this Popiſh evaſion is of no ſtrength with us, who hold no venial ſinnes in their ſenſe. For they ſay a man may be damned in hell for venial ſins, not becauſe they, of their own nature, deſerve ſo; but becauſe of the ſubject ſometimes, who may die deſtitute of all grace; and then his venial ſinnes encreaſe his condemnation. But this Doctrine of a venial ſinne, in the Popiſh ſence is immediately oppoſite to Scripture, and contrary to the Majeſty of the moſt holy God.

Concluſ. 2. In that original ſinne is thus meritotious of eternal damnation, Thoſe learned men who hold the corrupt Maſs of mankind to be that ſtate, out of which God chooſeth, ſome to eternal life, leaving others in this wretched and ſinfull condition they have by Adam, do thereby affirm nothing injurious to God, or any thing that may juſtly be complained of by ſound reaſon. It is not my intent to launch into that vaſt Ocean of the diſpute about the object of election and reprobation, no not as it is confined among the orthodox; they themſelves diſputing whether it be Maſſa para, or Maſſa corrupta, from whence ariſeth that diſtinction of p. 538Supralapſarians, and Sublapſarians. It is enough at the preſent to affirm, that if the corrupt Maſs of mankind be made the object of election and reprobation, the juſtice of God is abundantly cleared againſt all Papiſts, Arminians, and others in this particular, becauſe original ſinne doth deſerve eternal damnation. This was the opinion of Auſtin and many moderate learned men; think this opinion leſs obnoxious to cavils and more conſonant to Scripture, then that of thoſe, who hold Gods decrees herein to be, ſuppoſing Maſſa pura, or man conſidered as man, meerly in a common ſenſe: Thus God ſpeaketh of hating Eſau, and loving Jacob in reſpect of his purpoſe according to election, and that before they had done good or evil, Rom 9 11. which relateth to their actual evil: Yea this was Calvins opinion, as appeareth, (Lib 1. de eterna Dei predeſtinatione contra Pighium, alledged by Crakanthorpe, Defenſ. Eccleſ. Anglic. cap. 37.) where Calvin ſaith, when we treat of predeſtination, Vnde exordiendum eſſe ſemper docui, at que bodie doceo, jure in morte relinqui omnes reprobos, qui in Adam mortui ſunt & damnati, jure parice qui naturâ ſunt filii irae; ita nemini cauſam eſſe cur de nimio Dei rigore qu…ratur, quando reatum in ſe omnes incluſum geſtant: Thus Calvin. And how orthodoxly and vehemently doth Crakanthorpe, (though of the Epiſcopal judgement) defend this? Poteſtne quiſquam (ſaith he) te Spal… to, quiſquam ex veſtris Dei juſtitiam in damnandis reprobis luenlentiùs aſſerere? In Adamo in maſſâ perditirei omnes mortis, eorum alios ex iſtâ Maſſâ per miſericordiam liberat, alios in eâdem Maſſâ per juſtitiam damnandos relinquit. For Gods election and reprobation is about Infants, as well as Adult perſons; neither may we think it any cruelty or injuſtice of God, if he leave an Infant in his natural impure eſtate, ſeeing grace is free if it be grace, and God is not bound to adde a new favour where the former is loſt; and although ſuch an Infant had no voluntary perſonal acting to this corrupt eſtate he is born in, for which God eternally paſſeth him by with a negative preterition, as ſome Divines expreſs it; yet becauſe ſinnes in the Scripture-language are called debts, that which is juſt between man and man, may be much more between God and man, who cannot be any wayes obliged to ſhew favour to him, and that is amongſt men; children are liable to their parents debts, and what their parents did wickedly and voluntarily contract by their prodigality and luxury, that the children ſtand engaged to pay, though they had no influence into thoſe ſuppoſed debts. Thus all mankind ſtands engaged for Adam's debt, (I mean as the conſequent corruption of his nature by his voluntary diſobedience, doth hereditarily deſcend to all his poſterity,) and the rather, becauſe it is both aliena, and nſtra culpa, as Bernard, both Adam's debt and our own alſo: No wonder then if mankind lying in this bloud, God ſpake to ſome, to live, and leaveth the reſtin their undone eſtate; but I muſt not enlarge on this. When that mutable Euripus, and miſerable Ecebolius, (though not crying out afterwards as he did, Culcate me inſipidum ſalem; Spalatenſis had objected this as a puritanical opinion, (and alſo the Doctrine of the Church of England,) That Infants dying with Baptiſme may yet be damned; Crakanthorpe defendeth the Church of England herein, (Defenſ. cap. 40) yet with ſuch aſſertions that cannot pleaſe the late Antagoniſt of original ſin: Vbi è Scripturis habes Infantes, morientes cum Baptiſmo non poſſe damnari, (ſaith he:) An tu à Dei conſili…s es, ut ſine Scripturâ hoc ſcias? ut ſcias tales omnes Infantes electos eſſe? You ſee he putteth their ſalvation upon election that are ſaved, concluding indeed that in the judgement of charity, we think ſuch may be ſaved, but as for a judicium certitudinis & veritatis, he doth leave that to God, but you muſt remember he ſpeaketh not of all Infants, though of Infidels.

p. 539SECT. VIII.

A Conſideration of their Opinion that hold, a Univerſal Removal of the Guilt of Original Sinne from all mankind by Chriſts Death: Anſwering their Arguments, among which, that from the Antitheſis or Oppoſition which the Apoſtle maketh Rom. 5. between the firſt Adam and the ſecond Adam.

THirdly, In that original ſinne is meritorious of eternal condemnation, yea and doth produce this effect actually in ſome, Hence that Doctrine ſo confidently avouched by ſome, that by Chriſt the guile of original ſinne is wholly taken off ſtom all mankind, and every one by nature is now born in a ſtate of Gods love and reconciliation, till by actual ſinnes be doth exclude himſelf from this mercy, is alſo an unſavoury opinion, and contrary to the Word of God. But becauſe this Doctrine is very plauſible, and hath had confident avouchers of it, let us throughly ſearch into all the receſſes of it. And

Firſt, We may take notice, that Puccius wrote a book for this purpoſe, to prove, that as by Adam we were truly, properly, and de facto put into a ſtate of ſinne and wrath, and that antecedently to our knowledge or conſent; ſo by the ſecond Adam all mankind in the ſame latitude is put into a ſtate of ſavour and reconciliation with God, properly actually, and de facto; and that antecedently to any faith, or knowledge that they have Chriſt; but as Adam's ſinne was efficacious in men, as men, quatenus homines, to their condemnation, ſo was Chriſts obedience efficacious for their juſtification to all men, as men. This opinion he proveth by an hundred and twenty Reaſons, and concludeth with exceſſive confidence of truth on his ſide, that he hath it by the Spirit of God; and that though for the preſent it ſeemeth not to be approved, yet he is confident the whole world will at laſt entertain it. Inſomuch that his boaſtings and preſumptions are ſuch, that you would think not much learning, but much pride had made him mad. This man conſidering the diverſity of Sect; and Opinions in Religion, for two and twenty years wandered up and down to Jews, Manumetans, Arians, and others, that having knowledge of all kind of opinions, he might at laſt judge which was the true Religion; but this is not the way to find the truth; God rather in juſt judgement leaveth ſuch to errors. In this univerſal road Jacobus Andraas and Hube…ius are ſaid alſo to go, though with ſome little variation. The man foundation they all build up … is, the compariſon made by the Apoſtle Rom. 5. between the firſt and ſecond Adam, wherein the extent of juſtification to life by Chriſt, ſeeme … to be as univerſal, as that of condemnation by Adam, the Apoſtle uſing the ſame words of many and all. This opinion ſaith Puccias is moſt conſonant to that … of God, which the Scripture commends, and removeeth from God … all ſuſpicion of cruelty and injuſtice. By this inſtance we may ſee, there is no ſtop or bounds can be put to mens errours, when once they will judge of Gods love and mercy according to humane compaſſionate principles. And therefore let ſuch, who deny original ſinne, or extenuate it, pleading the awe they have in their hearts reſpectively to God, that men may have no hard thoughts of him; Let ſuch (I ſay) conſider, whether Puccius and his followers do not farre tranſcend them in this kind; yea, whether by their principles they muſt not neceſſarily come off to his way. For although he doth aſſert original ſinne, yet he maketh it wholly taken away by Chriſts death, and that to all mankind, ſo that now we are not born in a ſtate of wrath and enmity againſt God.

p. 540Secondly, There are others that do not receive this opinion of Gods gracious love in Chriſt to men, as they are men, but as they are believers, that yet affirm, The guilt of original ſinne wholly taken away by Chriſt, as to all mankind, ſo that no man lieth under this guilt; and thereupon conclude, That all Infants, though of Heathens and Pegans, are certainly ſaved; for having no actual ſinne, and their original being removed, the doore is ſet open for them to enter into Heaven, which is afterwards to be conſidered.

Thirdly, There are yet ſome who deſervedly are reputed as more honourable for learning and orthodoxy then the former, who though they hold original ſinne, and Gods ſpecial election of ſome perſons to eternal glory, do yet withall maintain a poſſibility of ſalvation to every one lying in the corrupt maſſe of mankind. Thus Crocius (Duod…c. Diſſert. Diſſert. 1^a. de peccato origin.) although he denieth the Huberian way of aſſuming all men into a ſtate of favour, ſo that no man is obnoxious to damnation by original ſinne, yet affirmeth, That none is neceſſarily damned for it, without the acceſſion of new ſins, and that therefore there is a way of poſſibility of ſalvation for every one. This opinion hath many learned Abettors, but if it be throughly purſued, it muſt either fall into the old known orthodox way, or empty it ſelf into the Arminian chanel. Yea it ſeemeth to be of ſo brittle ſubtilty, that it doth not avoid any of thoſe inconven…ercies, which they labour to do; neither doth it practically give any comfort to a man rationally doubting in his conſcience about his intereſt in Chriſts death, or ſtirre up and provoke to obedience unto thoſe Commands and Exhortations that are preſſed upon us. But this Controverſie belongeth not ſo properly to my ſubject.

I ſhall conclude againſt the former opinions mentioned, That by original ſinne we are children of Gods wrath; yea and for that, as well as their actual ſinnes, ſome are eternally condemned; which Doctrine hath received witneſs and teſtimony to its truth from the moſt eminent Guides and Paſtors in Gods Church in all Ages. Inſomuch that Fulgentius cometh with his Firmiſſime tene & nullatenus dubita, &c. Believe moſt firmly, and doubt not in the leaſt manner, but that every one by nature is obnoxious to the wrath of God, that perſon cannot be ſaved. It is true, he addeth without the Sacrament of Baptiſm; of which opinion in its time (De incarnatione ad Petrum Diacon.)

The Synod of D…ri alſo rejecteth the errour of ſuch, who teach, All men are aſſumed into a ſtate of reconciliation, ſo that none is either damned, or obnoxous to eternal damnation for original ſinne, but all are free from its guilt; which opinion (they adde) repugneth the Scripture, affirming us to be by nature children of wrath. (Acta Synod. Dordr…ct. cap. 2 de morte Chriſti reject Erro. 5.)

But let us conſider, What Arguments are brought to prove this univerſal removal of the guilt of original ſinne, from all mankind by Chriſts death. And

Firſt, They urge the love of God to mankind, ſo often mentioned in the Scripture: Inſomuch that they ſay, it doth not ſtand with the … and mercy of God, when man is plunged thus into an undone eſtate, there to leave him, and not deliver him out of it. But to this many things may be ſaid. As

Firſt, We grant, that notwithſtanding our original ſinne, yet God loveth mankind, and demonſtrateth much mercy to men, even becauſe they are his creatures. And it muſt be granted, That the Scripture doth often celebrate this mercy of God to man, though in a ſinfull condition: But then we muſt diſtinguiſh between the general love of God, and his ſpecial love, between his p. 541love of benevolence and love of complacency, as ſome expreſs it. God doth love all mankind with a general love, or love of benevolence, ſo as to do good in a liberal manner to them. This love of beneficence is demonſtrated both to the good and the bad; yet this doth not remove the guilt of ſinne, we may be children of wrath for all this. Therefore there is the other ſpecial love and grace of God, a love of complacency and acceptance of us in Chriſt; and this is only to ſome of mankind, as the Scripture in many places doth ſhew: And yet we muſt adde, that when any are damned, we cannot ſay it is for any defect of Gods particular love and grace, as if the fault were to be laid there, but upon the original and actual ſinfulneſs of the perſon ſo condemned; for every mans perdition is of himſelf.

Secondly, It is no injuſtice in God, if he let men alone in their loſt eſtate by Adam; for he did at firſt endow him with all heavenly ability to ſtand in that glorious eſtate, and thereby to bring happineſs to his poſterity alſo. Now when Adam by his voluntary diſobedience, had deprived himſelf of all this excellency, was God bound to reſtore him a ſecond time? If a Debtor by his own prodigality make himſelf unable to pay his Creditor, is the Creditor bound to beſtow money upon that man, and to put him into his former condition again? Now if man own not this to man, much leſſe doth God to man.

Laſtly, The condition of the apoſtate Angels, and Gods diſpenſation towards them, doth abundantly diſcover, what God might do in this caſe; for there is no reaſon in man, why he ſhould be more kind to him, then an apoſtate Angel, ſeeing all are ſinfull. Now when the Angels fell, was God bound to recover theme? Did he deliver any one of them out of that wretched eſtate? No more would God have been unjuſt, if he had not ſaved any one out of all mankind.

Let us therefore admire at the goodneſs of God in chooſing of ſome, and tremble under his juſtice in paſſing by of others, taking heed of pride and curioſity in ſearching into theſe myſterious wayes of God, eſpecially of his preſcience and providence in this particular, which heads in Divinity are full of comfort, as well as excellent in dignity: but to be wiſe in them according to ſobriety is operae pretium, to erre periculum, to acquieſce miraculum, as Junius excellently in his cloſe of his diſpute with the foreſaid Puccius.

In the next place, let us conflict with their Goliah, the chiefeſt ſupport of their cauſe, and that is from the Antitheſis or Oppoſition which the Apoſtle maketh Rom. 5. 15. between the firſt man Adam, and the ſecond man Jeſus Chriſts, wherein the Excellency and Preheminence is given to Chriſt, that his grace doth much more abound to life and juſtication then Adam's ſinne can to condemnation; Yea the Apoſtle uſeth the ſame note of Vniverſality for the ſubject of either; ſometimes all, and ſometimes many, plainly declaring hereby, That as there is by Adam a Catholical enmity and offence that we are plunged into, in reſpect of God towards us, ſo there is alſo as Catholical and Vniverſal Reconciliation and favour with God, that we are inſtated into, through Chriſt our Mediater; otherwiſe it ſeemeth much to derogate from the honour and glory of Chriſt, that his favour and love ſhould be more ſtraitned and limited than Adam's efficacy to our condemnation.

To this many things are to be conſidered by way of anſwer:

Firſt, That if they will rigidly and ſeverely urge the collation made between Adam and Chriſt, then they muſt conclude of the actual ſalvation of every man, not one excluded. For it Adam's ſinne did de facto, put all into a ſtate of condemnation; ſo that if Gods grace had not wrought an evaſion for ſome, all had actually periſhed. Thus it followeth much more than on Chriſts part, that all muſt be de facto ſaved, and delivered from Adam's tranſgreſſion with the conſequents thereof. But the Scripture doth clearly evidence this, That in respect p. 542of the event, the greater part of mankind will be damned. The way to hell is a broad way, and many enter therein; So that Chriſt is not actually a cauſe of ſaving more than Adam is of damning; if you reſpect the event and iſſue, farre more through Adam's diſobedience go to hell, then through Chriſts obedience are admitted into Heaven, and yet the Adverſaries themſelves muſt confeſs, here is no derogation to the honour and glory of Chriſt, And if it be ſaid, That it is mans actual unbelief and impentency, whereby he doth wilfully and frowardly refuſe Chriſt the Phyſician of his ſoul: Chriſt hath put him into a ſtate of favour; but he doth voluntarily caſt himſelf out again, and ſo is made unworthy of the grace, which cometh by Chriſt. It is anſwered, that is true. But

1. How cometh it about that men have ſuch an actual rebellion againſt Chriſt? Whence is it that they have ſuch an inclination within them, to refuſe him that is a Saviour, though he come for their good? Though their ſinnes and the Devil will never be that help to them, which Chriſt would be, yet they imbrace the later, and refuſe the former; Is not all this from the polluted nature we receive from Adam? So that hereby Adam may be thought more univerſally to deſtroy, then Chriſt to heal.

Again, In the ſecond place, Why is it that through Chriſt they are not delivered from this rebellion? Why is it that he doth not vouchſafe a more tender and pliable heart? for condemnation cometh by one ſinne, but the Apoſtle aggrava…eth the free gift by Chriſt, that it is of many offences unto Juſtification; If then of many, why is there any ſtint or limit of this free gift? It is plain, that rebellious diſpoſion by ſome againſt Chriſt, is wholly ſubdued and conquered by him, and the ſame power he could put forth in others alſo, if he pleaſed, but he will not do it; and therefore the ſtate of reconciliation by Chriſt, is not as extenſive, as of condemnation by Adam; if then for the event it is plain, that Adam's condemnation is larger than Chriſts reconciliation (all wicked men being damned in hell both for their original and actual ſinnes and) then the purpoſe or decree about this event, was no wayes tending to the diſhonour of Chriſt.

Secondly, It is to be conſidered more diligently, in what method the Apoſtle doth here ſpeak of the Vniverſality of the Subject relating to Adam and Chriſt. For the Apoſtle twice ſpeaking in the general of our condemnation, doth uſe the word all, verſ. 12 Death paſſed upon all men, in that all have ſinned. And verſ. 18. Judgement came upon all men to condemnation; but to theſe generals, he doth preſently ſubjoyn a diſtribution of this all, and then uſeth the word many: By which it is apparent, that the Apoſtle on purpoſe altering his ſpeech, and diſtributing this all afterwards into many of two kinds, he doth underſtand the word all, not univerſally, but commonly and indifinitely; e…ſe why ſhould he immediately upon the word all, preſently interpret it diſtributively? So that if the Apoſtles expreſſion, and the Coherence of his Diſcourſe be more exactly ſearched into, it will be found not to patrocinate any ſuch ſuppoſed Catholical reconciliation; For the Apoſtle divideth the all, into the many condemned by Adam eventually, and the many juſtified and ſaved by Chriſt effectually.

Thirdly, When the Apoſtle maketh this compariſon between the firſt Adam to condemnation and Chriſt to Juſtification, giving the ſuperiority … This is not to be underſtood in reſpect of the number of men, but of the nature of theſe gracious effects we hate by Chriſt. This compariſon is not for expreſſe in quantity but quality. The Apoſtle doth not ſay, O, how many more (as the P…l…gians of …d applying Chriſts benefits to Infants bringing them to the Kingdom of Heaven, who yet (they ſaid) received no polu… … hurt by Adam) but how much more ſhall the grace of God abound through Chriſt to many? The how much more lieth not in the number, but in the nature of theſe gracious p. 543effect; which come by Chriſt, though to ſome onelyonly; for that the Apoſtle doth not intend an exceſs of Chriſs grace, in reſpect of the number, it is plain, becauſe that had been impoſſible, there could have been but an equality at moſt: If it ſhould be granted, That Chriſt hath reconciled all thoſe that Adam loſt, this would be an equality only, we could not ſay, Chriſt redeemed more than Adam deſtroyed, for that could not have been; therefore it is plain, that the ſuperabundance attributed by the Apoſtle to Chriſt, in reſpect of Juſtification, is to be underſtood intenſively, not extenſively, in reſpect of the nature of thoſe bleſſed effects we receive by him, and ſo indeed there is a great tranſcendency in Chriſt in reſpect of Adam. For

1. By Chriſt we have vivification and quickning to grace and glory, whereas by Adam we have ſinne and condemnation. Now it is farre eaſier to occaſion the damnation of many, then to procure the ſalvation of one. To juſtifie and ſave one man, is more than to deſtroy all mankind. As we ſee amongſt men, it's eaſier to deſtroy a thing, then to build it up; one man may kill many men, but yet the ſame man cannot bring any one of thoſe to life again. If therefore Chriſt had ſaved but one of all mankind, he was infinitely to be exalted above Adam, by whoſe diſobedience mankind was plunged into a periſhing eſtate. So that if we do compare Death with Life Heaven with Hell, Damnation with Salvation, and that the one cometh from a deficient cauſe, the other from an efficient; we muſt neceſſarily conclude, that Chriſt hath infinitely the preheminence above Adam.

2. There are ſome that diſtinguiſh between the ſufficiency and worth that is in Chriſts mediation, and the actual application of it, Now (ſay they) the ſecond Adam was infinately more able to ſave, then Adam to deſtroy, and that if we reſpect the number of men, for Chriſt is able to ſave a thouſand of worlds beſides this, if there were ſo many; and therefore if we ſpeak of Chriſt in reſpect of his ſufficiency, Adam in a deſtructing way is no more comparable to Chriſt in a ſaving way, then a drop to the ocean, or a ſinite to an infinite. For the obedience of Chriſt is the obedience of God and man. Now though this anſwer may in a good explained ſenſe be received, yet I ſhall not ſo much avouch it, partly becauſe the diſtinction is made uſe of to a farre other end, then the Orthodox do intend; and then partly, becauſe the Apoſtle doth not here attend, in his compariſon, ſo much to what is ſufficient in Chriſt, as to what is actual; not ſo much to what he is able to do, as what he will do. It's efficacy not ſufficiency the Apoſtle aimeth at; therefore we ſtick to the former anſwer, though in many other reſpects, the excellency of the ſecond Adam to the firſt, night be declared, which are not here to be repeated; only that one the Apoſtle inſtanceth in, is not to be paſſed over, which is, that it is but one offence to condemnation, whereas the grace of Chriſt extendeth to the aboliſhing of many offences, that one ſinne is enough to damn, but the grace of Chriſt appeareth, not only to the abolition of that, but alſo all offences that do actually flow from it. Thus every godly ſoul may comfortably improve this truth, that there is more in Chriſt to ſave, then is in all ſinne, whether original or actual to damn; Chriſt is more able to juſtifie, then Adam is to condemn. Therefore ſome Schoolmen deny, that Adam's ſinne did demerit the death and damnation of all mankind, it deſerved his own damnation, and his own death only. All other mens deaths, and other mens damnation have for their meritorious cauſe their original ſin inherent in them. Adam did not meritoriouſly deſerve theſe; but when fallen, then his poſterity deſcending from him, did naturally fall into ſuch a corrupted eſtate, as he himſelf was plunged into; and the reaſon they give of this is, becauſe no meer man can either m…rer… or demereri, for the whole nature of mankind; if Adam had ſtood, all his poſterity would have been holy and happy: but we cannot ſay, Adam would have merited this for all mankind; for that is a p. 544peculiar thing to Chriſt only, which is incommunicable to a meer man, to merit; for the whole race of mankind. And although there is a great difference between merit and demerit; (a man may put himſelf into a demerit of eternal glory, but not into a merit) yet in this they are alike. This reaſoning of ſome Schoolmen admitted (which ſeemeth very plauſible) then it neceſſarily followeth, that Chriſts power to ſave is ſuperlative, more than Adams to deſtroy.

Laſtly, That Chriſt in his efficacy of grace, doth exceed Adam in his condemning guilt, appeareth, In that at laſt, he will utterly remove original ſin from all, that are his members; and ſo totally vanquiſh it, that it ſhall not remain in the leaſt ſpot thereof. Although Chriſt came into the world to take away all ſin, yet ſome Schoolmen conclude, that principally it was to deliver us from original ſin; Becauſe (ſaith Suarez, De Incar. Chriſti) this is the cauſe and the root of all actual iniquities. It is not enough for Chriſt to purge us from our actual impieties, but he alſo intends to heal our natures. Now becauſe original ſin infecteth the nature, chiefly as it is in perſons, ſo alſo doth Chriſt principally intend the ſanctification of our natures. And although this be not preſently and immediatly done, yet it wil at laſt be done, in that good time he hath appointed for that end. Thoſe indeed that limit the efficacy of Chriſts grace to original ſin only, as if actual ſins were to be removed by our voluntary penances and ſatisfaction, they make Chriſt but a ſame. Saviour, and a ſemi mediator. But yet it may well be affirmed, becauſe this original corruption is the pollution of the nature, and is the cauſe of all actual defilements, therfore the bloud of Chriſt doth in the moſt principal place cleanſe from this. And therefore this ſhould exceedingly comfort the godly, who groan under the reliques of this defilement upon them, that Chriſt will never leave them, till he hath reſtored them perfectly to their primitive integrity; for this end he came into the world, ſo that he would be but an impefect Saviour, if he ſhould not at laſt cure thee of this nature-defilement; for this lieth upon him to do, that he bring al things to their former, yea a better perfection; that ſo all may admire the goodneſs, wiſdom and mercy of God in Chriſt; and that all cavillers may ſtop their mouths, who uſually demand, Why did God ſuffer Adam to fall? Why did he not prevent ſin, when it was in his power? Now when all the world ſhall ſee, that a greater good is wrought by the ſecond Adam, than evil was by the firſt; this will make us break out into holy exclamations, ſaying, Oh the wiſdom of God, how unſearchable are his wayes? And this may ſuffice for the razing of that foundation they build ſo much upon.

In the third place, I find that urged for an univerſal cleanſing of all mankind, and that none is in a ſtate of wrath now by nature; Becauſe in that viſion which Peter had, Act. 10. 28 he ſaith, God had ſhewed him, that he ſhould not call any man common, or unclear. But this doth not any way contradict this Doctrine o… ſpiritual uncleanneſs, which Job ſaith is upon all men; but uncleannes is there underſtood of that Jewiſh ſanctity, which was vouchſafed to the nation of the Jews; whereby that people alone were intituled to Church-priviledges (and all Heathens abiding ſtrangers from this Covenant of grace, were as dogs not children; they were accounted as unclean, unto whom the word of grace was not to be preached) called therefore Gal. 2. 15. Jews by nature, and not ſinners of the Gentiles, until Chriſt came, and broke down this parition wall: So that the meaning is, We are not now to include the Goſpel within the Jews, but every nation is as clean in this reſpect, as they are: Inſomuch that we are not to forbear preaching unto any people under the heavens; otherwiſe if we regard this ſpiritual filthineſs, we are to call every man unclean, as being the child of Gods wrath. Hence Auſtin of old did urge that phraſe, He that believeth not, the wrath of God abideth on him. Joh. 3. 36. he doth not ſay, it cometh upon him, it will fall upon him, but it abideth on him, implying, that it was there before, even in reſpect of his natural pollution, though he had never committed thoſe actual ſins of unbelief and diſobedience to the Goſpel of Chriſt.

But that I may come out of this controverſie I ſhall inſtance in one Objection p. 545more, and that is, the promiſe made by God to Adam after his fall. For Gen. 3. 15. when Adam had caſt himſelf into this curſed eſtate, and through the fear and horrour that was upon him he aid flee from the preſence of God; God did in mercy look upon him, and made: but gracious promiſe concerning the ſeed of the woman, which ſhould bruiſe the head of the ſerpent: hereby (ſome conceive) is a re-aſſuming of all mankind into Gods favours again and that the promiſe is made to Adam and Eve, as the two principles and … of mankind, and that hereby they are made an holy root, wherein all branches … made holy. This place is indeed mentioned by Puccius (but Sneanus Method deſ. conſ. ſal. & dam. c. 3. &c. 4.) out of whoſe loins came Arminius and his followers, doth much inſiſt on this place; whereby he maketh it a blaſphemy to think, that Adae maleficium ſhould extend further than Chriſti beneficium not indeed in the Huoerian or P…cian ſenſe, who hold an abſolute reconciliation antecidently to mans faith and repentance; but conditional, or conciliabilty, or ſalvability of all, it they do repent and believe. But this Text cannot be a foundation for ſuch a Doctrine. Indeed it is very difficult, and many grammatical and real doubts there are upon the place; only we muſt take it for granted, that there is declared the firſt promiſe of a Chriſ: till Adam heard this from God, he could have no more hopes for his ſalvation, than the devils have. Therefore we are to abominate the Socinian Doctrin, who make this to be only a malediction of the ſerpent, or a cu…ſe upon that creature, putting a natural enmity between that and a man; affirming alſo, That Adam and Eve underſtood no more from God then that thing. But we ſee other Scriptures plainly alluding to this, as when Chriſt is ſaid to be made of a woman, Gal. 4. 4. and that he came into the world to deſtroy the works of the devil. 1 Joh. 3. 8. and in other places we find the devil called the old ſerpent, and the red dragon, which ſeduced the whole earth, Rev. 12. 9, 10. Yea Paul did allude to this promiſe, when he uſeth that expreſſion, Rom. 16. 20. The God of peace ſhall ſhortly tread or bruiſe Satan under your feet. And whereas the Socinian asketh, How it can be a promiſe, ſeeing it is a curſe? Can cold and hot come out of the ſame month? The anſwer is eaſie: therefore there is a promiſe, becauſe of the curſe; for in that the devil and his ſeed is in a myſtical ſenſe curſed by God, thereby is a promiſe made concerning Chriſt and his ſeed for victory over the devil; ſo that the promiſe is of excellent uſe and comfort; no godly man ought to fear either devil or wicked men, as long as he remembreth this promiſe. If Satans head be not yet bruiſed, if he have ſome life ſtill, if he ſometimes ſting thee, be not diſcouraged; for though this promiſe was made long ago, yet God hath not forgotten it. But although this be ſo, yet we cannot from hence conclude, that God is become reconciled with all mankind; or that all after Adam's fall are received into equal grace. For we ſee plainly, there are two kinds diſtinguiſhed in the Text, there is the Womans ſeed, and there is the ſerpents ſeed; and between theſe there is an enmity placed; The womans ſeed is Chriſt and his members (as we will here take for granted) The ſerpents ſeed are all wicked men reprobated in their ſins; for by nature we are all the ſerpents ſeed; but here it ſpeaketh of ſuch a ſeed as ſhall continue in oppoſition to Chriſt and his people: That therefore ſome are the womans ſeed, ſome the ſerpents ſeed; on one part it cometh from the meer grace of God, and on the other part from the juſtice of God. So that this Text, if rightly conſidered, doth rather overthrow than eſtabliſh ſuch an univerſal Reconciliation of all mankind. It is true, for thoſe who are made Chriſts by free diſcriminating grace, both this promiſe, and that diſcourſe of Pauls, Rom. 5. do proclaim admirable comfort and conſolation. For that condition thou wert ſo irrecoverably plunged into; that ſinne and devil thou wert ſo afraid of, is wholly conquered by Chriſt. Hold up thy head therefore thou member of Chriſt and be exceeding glad, for the ſecond Adam hath taken off that ſinne, that wrath, that vengeance which the firſt Adam had brought upon thee. And alas! how free was this grace of God to thee? What did God p. 546ſee in thee more then in the ſonnes and daughters of Adam? Waſt not thou in the ſame filth with them? Waſt not thou wallowing in the ſame blood with them? Had not Adam infected thee, condemned thee, as well as others? Oh ſtand for ever admiring the unſearchable wayes of Gods grace to thee, who of a child of wrath, hath made thee a child of ſuch ſpecial favour and mercy!

SECT. IX.

Of the ſtate of Infants that die in their Infancy, before they are capable of any Actual Tranſgreſsions, and that die before Baptiſme.

THe next particular in order to be treated upon is, concerning the ſtate of thoſe Infants, who die in their Infancy, before they are capable of any actual tranſgreſſion. Theſe having only original ſinne upon them, what may we conclude about their final eſtate? for we will take for granted, that the Doctrine of the Lutherans is to be exploded, who hold that Infants have actual ſinnes, and that ſome do partake of actual grace; this is repugnant to reaſon and experience. Now to proceed more orderly in this point, we are to take notice of theſe enſuing particulars.

Firſt, That it is one thing to be a child of wrath by nature, and another thing to be reprobated for ever by God, never to be admitted into his favour. When the Apoſtle calleth us children of wrath, the meaning is not, as if there were a final and total rejection from all grace; for then the meaning would be, that all men are damned, which is manifeſtly contradicted by many places in Scripture. Though therefore all Infants are by nature the children of wrath, yet all are not reprobated; though all deſerve to be damned, yet all are not actually damned.

Secondly, We are to know that thoſe, who hold ſome Infants dying in their original ſinne to be damned, do yet acknowledge that it is (as Auſtin calleth it) mitiſſima omnium poena, the mildeſt of all puniſhments, becauſe they have no actual ſinnes joyned with their original, to encreaſe the torments of hell. It is true, we told you original ſinne in the nature of it is very great and hainous, even ſo great, that none are able to expreſs the loathſomneſs thereof; yet becauſe it hath this diminiſhing circumſtance, that it is not voluntary perſonally in an Infant, therefore we may conclude, that they have leſſer torments in hell, then Adult perſons. For that there are degrees of torments in hell, ſome puniſhed more extreamly then others, is acknowledged by all, though ſome learned men queſtion, whether there be any degrees of glory in heaven.

Thirdly, As for the Doctrine of the learned about the ſtate of Infants dying in their Infancy, there are ſeveral opinions; Some hold that all Infants dying ſo, whether in the Church, or out of the Church, whether of believing, or unbelieving parents, are ſaved. They think this opinion doth moſt ſuit with the goodneſs and mercy of God: of this opinion are not only the Heterodox Doctors, but even learned Junius in his anſwer to Puccius; Zuinglius alſo is alledged for this. Others they make a diſtinction of Infants dying in their Infancy. For either they die without Baptiſme, or with Baptiſme; if without Baptiſme, then they conclude of their damnation; and in this rigid way Auſtin went, and many follow him; yea Auſtin thought, that if they died without the Sacrament of the Lords Supper alſo: for at that age it was generally held that both the Sacraments were neceſſary to ſalvation, and therefore both to be applyed to Infants: p. 547But then for theſe Infants, who die partakers of Baptiſme, they concluded undoubtedly of their ſalvation, this being their Doctrine, that Baptiſme doth waſh away original ſinne: The Papiſts they all agreeing in this likewiſe, that Baptiſm is neceſſary neceſſitate medii to ſalvation, either really, or in voto, in deſire; and becauſe an Infant dying without Baptiſme, cannot have a deſire thereunto; Hence they conclude of eternal death, as a puniſhment unto ſuch; yet Eliſius a Papiſt in his piorum clypeus, &c. (Queſt. 10. Art. 3.) is very bold, ſaying that opinion which many Divines and the Church holdeth, concerning the ſtate of Infants dying without Baptiſme according to the ordinary law, eſt ſa…dura & oneroſa, is very hard and burdenſome, and not conformable to the precepts of Chriſt, which are ſweet and eaſy; and therefore he alledgeth Gerſon and Cajetan for this opinion, which he is ſo farre from judging heretical, that he calls it pietati conformis; but generally the Papiſts go otherwiſe: But then they differ amongſt themſelves. Some of them, as Catharinus, place Infants ſo dying, in a terreſtrial Paradiſe, where they have a natural, though not a ſupernatural happineſs, (Opuſ de ſtatu parv) Others make their condition more miſerable, viz. that they have the privative part of eternal death, though not the poſitive; they have the poena damni, the puniſhment of loſs, though not of ſenſe, they are ſhut out from enjoying God, but yet they ſay this will not work any ſorrow in them, becauſe they know, that they were not in a capacity for enjoying the face of God, as (ſay they) a Country Peaſant is not grieved, becauſe he is not a King, becauſe he never was in any probability for ſuch a dignity. But, as a Popiſh Writer, (Flor. Conrius Archip. Thuani.) obſerveth, confuting his own party, and rigidly following Auſtin, in a Tractate joyned to Janſenius his Works: Theſe Infants (ſaith he) knowing that they are ſhut from the face of God, muſt needs be exceedingly grieved; becauſe in Adam they had a capacity to enjoy God, even as a poor man may mourn that he is not a King, when his anceſtors had a right to it, but ſinfully loſt it, and this is the caſe of all Infants; ſo that it is a meer figment that many Papiſts have, to make an half hell, and a ſemi-damnation, as if we might be deprived of Gods favour, and not be poſitively damned. It is true, here alſo the Papiſts are divided; Bellarmine maketh five divers opinions concerning the ſtate of dying Infants, and he joyneth with thoſe that hold they have inward ſorrow in that eternal death, but yet not ſo great as to be called hell fire, or the worm of conſcience. For this end they write and ſpeak ſo much of a limbus Infantum, a border or fringe as it were in hell; where Infants are all diſpoſed, being without the Viſion of God, yet not tormented with boddy pain; but there is no Scripture for ſuch a place: and therefore we leave this limbus to theſe limbatis pontificiis, who love to enlarge their limbos, and ſimbrias, as one ſaith. Laſtly, There are others, and they diſtinguiſh of Infants dying: either they are ſuch as are within the Covenant, and are of believing parents; and of ſuch they conclude their ſalvation: for they look upon their federation, as an external ſign of their election; but then for all ſuch as die without the Covenant, the children of Pagans; they ſay, that by the Scripture, they cannot conclude of any hope of ſalvation for them. Thus you ſee into how many divers wayes they go, who handle this Queſtion: I might adde another opinion mentioned by Vorſtius, (Anti Bellar. in Qu…rt. Tom. Cenſur. ad Theſ. Duodes) of ſome, who affirm Infants do wholly periſh as beaſts; but (ſaith he) theſe are not to be accounted inter Evangelicos, amongſt the Evangelical Churches; yet within a little while after, he reproveth Bellarmine for not touching upon all the opinions of others about Infants, ſaying, That there are not wanting ſome amongſt Chriſtians, who think either ſome or all Infants are through death wholly aboliſhed, as beaſts; whoſe Arguments (ſaith he) Bellarmine ſhould have anſwered, but herein Vorſtius ſeemeth to manifeſt his good will to the Socinian party, and though he excludeth them from the Evangelici, p. 548yet he acknowledgeth them Chriſtiani. All that I ſhall ſpeak to it ſhall be comprehended in theſe particulars:

Firſt, That concerning Infants, there are many difficulties in Divinity, for the Scripture ſpeaking for the moſt part of perſons growen up, hence it is that we cannot ſo clearly diſcover the truth about them, as how Infants are juſtified, ſeeing they have no actual faith to lay hold upon Chriſt; as alſo how the Spirit of God doth work in them regeneration, and make them new creatures; for ſeeing it is plain that of ſuch Infants is the kindome of heaven, and Gods promiſe is to the believer, and his ſeed; it neceſſarily followeth, that they are juſtified, and they are ſanctified, though we know not how the Spirit of God doth this in them. Thus in the matter of the Reſurrection and the day of Judgment, we muſt neceſſarily acknowledge, that Infants will then be raiſed with perfect bodies, all imperfections being then to be removed from glorified bodies, as alſo that they will be called to Judgement: Though the judicial proceſs mentioned by the Evangeliſt inſtanceth only in actual ſinnes and duties, we muſt then be ſober in this inquiſition, ſeeing the Scripture ſpeaketh not ſo expreſly of Infants, neither is the Queſtion neceſſarily to be known, and therefore if we be over curious in enquiting what God will them: Let us … we deſerve not Peter's reproof, Joh. 20. buſily asking about John, What is … to thee? follow thou me; ſo God ſay, What is that to thee, how I will … of Infants? thou art an adult perſon, do thou follow me.

Secondly, We muſt neceſſarily make a diſtinction between ſuch as … under the Covenant, and ſuch whoſe parents and their ſeed are ſtrangers … it, and therefore with the Remorſtrants to conclude, That all Infants … born of Pagans, are ſurely ſaved, is to put no difference between … Covenant of grace, and to be without, which yet the Scripture doth; … it ſaith of the children of unbelievers that they are unclean, 1 Cor. 7. and Heathens they are ſaid to be without; and therefore according to the Rule of the Scripture, we ſee no more viſible way for the children of Heathens, then for Heathens themſelves to be ſaved; but yet the Orthodox do adde, that they leave theſe things to the judgement of God, and content themſelves … that which Paul ſaith, 1 Cor. 5. 12. What have I to do to judge thoſe that are without: although the Apoſtle doth not there ſpeak of a Doctrinal Judgement, but a Judgement of Juriſdiction, which Church Officers cannot exerciſe upon thoſe that are without the Church, though this be ſo, we muſt alwayes remember to put a difference between that general love of God to mankind, and that ſpecial grace of his to his Church, and therefore we muſt needs be injurious to this grace of God, if we make children without the Covenant to be partakers of the ſame ſpecial priveledge which others within do receive, then the Goſpel is no ſuch extrordinary mercy, then the Covenant of grace is no ſuch ſignal favour, then believing parents have no ſuch cauſe to bleſs God for his mercifull diſpenſations towards them, if Heathens children are in as prepared a way for reconciliation with God, as their poſterity is.

3. Therfore the fountain and ſpring head of the ſalvation of children dying in their Infancy, is the election of God as well as in grown perſons, it holdeth in them, as well as in adult perſons, that election doth obtain, and he hath mercy on whom he will have mercy, election and reprobation is amongſt Infants dying, ſo as well as of thoſe that are men, though this Doctrine be rejected by Arminians, yet believing parents who loſe their children while in the bloſſom, are greatly to comfort their ſouls concerning their children ſo early deceaſed; for although they are not able to look into the Book of … which is in heaven, and thereby know which childs name is written there, and which not; yet in that they are externally brought under the Covenant of grace, and ſo in proxime capacity to Church-Communion; they may well ſatisfie themſelves in p. 549this, as an effect of their election, and that becauſe God hath choſen them to eternal glory, therefore are they in time received into this grace and favour, as to be of the reputed members of Chriſt, and in this we muſt reſt, not doubting but that God doth internally go along with the Ordinance; and that if the child be taken away in its Infancy, it is done both in mercy to the child, and to the parents: Of this ſubject it is good to peruſe Peter Martyr, Comment. 1 Cor. 7.

Laſtly, Therefore in this great buſineſs of the ſalvation of children dying in Infancy, it is election, and the Covenant of greace that maketh the difference, and not Baptiſme: This was Auſtin's miſtake of old, and the Popiſh errour in theſe latter dayes, to lay too much upon Baptiſme, as if that by its very work done, opere operato, (as they ſay) did take away original ſinne, and put us into a ſtate of grace, from which men by actual impietis might afterwards fall away; ſo that the errours about Baptiſme are extream, either ſuch as think it only a temporary Ordinance for the initiation of the Church at firſt, as the Socinians, or elſe ſuch as make it to be the efficacious inſtrument of grace, and that from the meer work done, though there be no good actual motion, or ſtirring of the heart at the time, though adminiſtred to an adult perſon: Hence it is that by ſome the Ordinance of Baptiſme is exalted too much, as if the outward waſhing would ſave a man, not at all looking to the inward grace repreſented thereby, and by others it is wholly rejected as not being commanded us now in theſe times, or if it be ſo, is only commemorative of our duty not ſeating and obſignative of any grace of God to us, for which cauſe the Remonſtrants ſay, That the Doctrine of the Sacraments as it is now delivered by Proteſtant Authors, is vehemently ſuſpected by them, but we are to ſail between theſe two rocks, neither giving it too much or too little, for we may obſerve that the Scripture ſpeaketh two wayes of Sacraments. Firſt when men do reſt on them, never at all attending to that grace they ſignifie, then the Scripture doth debaſe them, attributeth no glory at all to them, making Sacraments to be no Sacraments, if they be not received in a right manner; Thus the Apoſtle ſaith, Circumciſion is become uncircumciſion to him that keepeth not the Law: and 1 Cor. 11. This is not to eat the Lords Supper, yea unworthy receivers eat and drink their own ſalvation: Thus the Scripture when it attends to mens either reſting upon them as if they could ſave, or the ſinful abuſe of them, by not attending to the grace ſignified doth ſpeak in an undervaluing way of them; But then at other times, when it doth reſpect the inſtitution of Chriſt, and the effects thereof, then glorious and great things are ſpoken of them; yet though the Scripture commends and commandeth them as the inſtitution of Chriſt for ſupernatural effects, notwithſtanding that old Rule is to be received, that not the privation, but the contempt of Sacraments doth damn; ſo that the after ages of the Church which came to idolize Baptiſme, and to put ſo much vertue even in the very external act done, can no wayes be juſtified, yea ſo greatly did ſuperſtition grow in this kind, that they thought Baptiſme did alſo work ſome wonderfull temporal effects; for whereas there is a traditon, (though it be juſtly reckoned among the vulgar errours) that the Jewes have by way of puniſhment an offenſive ſmell or ſtink inflicted upon their body, they inſtance in Jewes baptized, that therby were cleanſed from this filthineſs. The Poet Fortunatus ſaid, Sanct. Comment. in Jer. 31. 29.

Abluitur Judeus odor Baptiſmate divo.

Thus abſurd did many grow in their thoughts about the efficacy of Baptiſme; but the truth is, That although Baptiſm be an Ordinance appointed by God for the ſealing of the remiſſion of original ſinne, yet it hath not this effect in all, neither is the benefit of Baptiſme to be limited to that time only, but it extendeth p. 550it ſelf to our whole life; ſo that we are daily to make an improvement of it both for duty and comfort. And thus much may ſuffice for the deciding of this Queſtion with ſobriety and modeſty.

Now if any ſhall ſay upon the hearing of this damnable eſtate that we are plunged into by ſinne, as the Diſciples in another caſe, It is good not to marry; yea that it is good to have no children; it is good to be no Parents, becauſe our Infants do thus come into the world upon worſe terms then the young ones of bruit beaſts, becauſe they are the children of Gods wrath, whereas the creatures are not the creatures of Gods wrath. To ſuch as ſhall thus conclude, I ſhall propound theſe enſuing particulars:

Firſt, That it is juſt and righteous with God, to continue the propagation of mankind, though man hath thus corrupted his nature. Becauſe Adam fell, and ſo all his poſtcrity would be propagated in a damnable estate, ſhall he therefore deſtroy the whele ſpecies of men, and raze out every individuum? Seeing then its Gods will, that men ſhould increaſe and multiply, that there ſhould be parents and children; for which end he hath inſtituted marriage, we are to regard the will of God in this way more than the adherent corruption; and the rather, becauſe this damnable guilt doth adhere to our natures, not from Gods primitive Inſtitution, but by Adam's voluntary tranſgreſſion. It being then a duty to ſome to marry, it being by God appointed a remedy againſt ſinne; for thee to abſtain from that way, and to deſire no children under pretence of original ſinne, is a meer deluſion.

Secondly, You are to know, That though children be born in this defiled and curſed eſtate, yet they are in themſelves mercies and comforts, which mace our Saviour ſay, That a woman, becauſe of the joy that a man child is born, ſhe forgetteth all her ſorrow and pangs that ſhe was in, John 16. 21. So that at the ſame time, they may be by nature children of wrath, and yet in another reſpect comforts and mercies in themſelves; for which end God promiſeth children as a mercy, and threatneth it, as a puniſhment, to be barren and childleſs.

Thirdly, Thou that art a believing parent, and haſt thy child dying in its infancy, thou haſt cauſe to aſſure thy ſelf of the mercy of God to thy child, becauſe he taketh parents and children into the ſame promiſe. Oh but I know not that God hath elected him; So neither canſt thou thy own, à priori I you muſt begin at the lower round of the ladder, in Gods Election; The effects and fruits thereof; And now what greater pledge and argument canſt thou have of his ſalvation, then being born under the Covenant of grace? You cannot expect actual expreſſions of regeneration and grace from a dying Infant; therefore thou muſt runne to the Covenant of grace, whereby God doth receive ſuch, as his members; yea thou haſt cauſe to admire the goodneſs of God to thy child, and his mercy, when ſo many thouſands, and thouſands of Pagans children dying, have no viſible way of ſalvation; we cannot by the Scripture (as you heard) ſee any Ark provided for them, as God in mercy hath done for thee.

Fourthly, The conſideration of Gods juſt and ſevere proceedings againſt Pagans and their children, may make thee the more admire the grace of God in ſaving of thee. For how many Heathens periſh in hell, who it may be never committed ſuch groſs and ſoul ſins in their life time, as thou haſt done? To be ſure their Infants never committed ſuch actual inquities, as thou haſt done; yet they appear according to Gods ordinary way of proceedings, to be left in that loſt eſtate of nature. And therefore that is a good quickning meditation which Ved…lius …, (Hilar. cap 3. pag. 119.) To make a godly man thankfull for Gods grace, ſeeing by nature we deſerve otherwiſe. Ah quot ſunt, erunt in inferno miſelli infantuli, &c. Ah how many little Infants are, and ſhall be in hell, who never had the knowledge of good and evil, and might not God have left thee in the ſame miſery? This (I ſay) is a pious meditation. Though p. 551that ſcoffing Remonſtrant prefix this expreſſion amongſt others in the front of his Book, as if it were no leſſe then blaſphemy, Vedel. Rhapſod.

Fifthly, Thou who art a parent exerciſed with this temptation about thy children, it grieveth thee to think thou bringeſt them forth to be Gods enemies, and the Devils children: Let not this diſcourage thee, but provoke thee the more earneſtly to be much in prayer for them, and to be more carefull in their education. Let them be the children of thy prayers and tears, the children of thy care and godly diſcipline, and thou mayeſt comfort thy ſelf that ſuch ſhall not periſh; however thou haſt done thy duty, and ſo art to leave all to the wiſe and righteous God, who is not accountable to man for any of his proceedings.

That the encouragement and hopes of parents are great in the faithfull diſcharge of their duties, notwithſtanding the guilt of original ſinne, may further appear, as to the woman, in that famous and noble Text, 1 Tim. 2. 14, 15. But the woman being deceived was in the tranſgreſſion; Notwithſtanding ſhe ſhall be ſaved in child-bearing, if they continue in the faith &c.

The Apoſtle having ſtrictly charged, That women ſhould not uſurp authority over the man, for two reaſons,

1. From the primitive Creation, even before ſinne; Adam was firſt formed, then Eve: So that in the ſtate of integrity, the wife was to have been ſubject to her husband, even as children to parents; but it would have been without that difficulty and reluctancy which ſinne hath now brought upon mankind.

The other reaſon is, Becauſe the woman was firſt in the tranſgreſſion, and thereby through her original ſinne infected all. Now leſt this ſhould afflict women too much, and they conceive their eſtate deſperate; the Apoſtle mingleth honey with this gall, he informeth them of comfortable conſiderations, even from that very particular; wherein they ſee the evident diſpleaſure and wrath of God; and that is the ſorrows and pangs they bring forth children with, She ſhall be ſaved in child-bearing.

How this is to be underſtood ſeemeth difficult. For may not maids, or ſuch married perſons that never have children be ſaved? How ſhall they do that have no children, if the woman be ſaved in child-bearing?

To this it is eaſily anſwered, That the Apoſtle doth not ſpeak of the meritorious cauſe of ſalvation, which is Chriſt; for in him all believers are one; there is neither male or female, Jew or Gentile, married or unmarried, that do differ, as to juſtification and ſalvation through him. Therefore the Apoſtle ſpeaketh here only of ſuch women, as are married, and have children. Now becauſe ſuch might be diſcouraged, becauſe of the curſe laid upon the woman at firſt, in bringing forth of children, he addeth, That notwithſtanding this ſhe ſhall be ſaved; Thoſe pangs and ſorrows do not exclude her from ſalvation; therefore the Greek Prepoſition foreign for foreign, as Rom. 2. 27. compared with 29. it doth not ſignifie, ſhe is ſaved by that, as a cauſe. For how many women are there, who through their impenitency in wicked wayes will be damned, though they be the mothers of many children? It ſignifieth only the way and means wherein ſhe may obtain ſalvation. So that what was at firſt in it ſelf a curſe, may now be ſanctified, and ſo prove no impediment to their ſalvation. It is true, ſome would have this foreign, to be meant of the Virgins bearing of Chriſt, as if the meaning were, She ſhall be ſaved▪ by Chriſt born of a woman. Eraſmus on the place, ſaith, Theophilact mentioneth this, but rejecteth it. The late Annotatour mentioneth it with approbation; but the Context doth no wiſe agree with this; for he ſpeaketh of every woman in the Church bearing her children; therefore addeth, If they abide in faith and charity; neither can any argument be put upon the Article foreign, as if the Apoſtle meant that ſignal and eminent bearing of a child, when Chriſt was born; for if this were ſo, none but the Virgin Mary, and no other woman could take comfort from this palce. p. 552Heinſius by foreign underſtandeth marriage, She ſhall be ſaved in the way of marriage, which is called ſo (ſaith he) from the end of marriage, which is to have children; for (as he affirmeth) the Grecians have not one word to expreſſe marriage by, and therefore in ſtead thereof they uſe foreign, and ſo here foreign; but this hath no probability: We adhere therefore to the former Expoſition; the ſenſe whereof is, That notwithſtanding Eve did through original ſinne bring a ſad curſe upon child-bearing, yet to thoſe women that are godly, the curſe is taken off; yea and doth become a ſanctified meanes of their ſalvation; not of it ſelf to every one (for then no child-bearing woman could be damned) but if they do walk in thoſe wayes God hath commanded. Therefore it followeth, If they abide, &c. which denoteth the neceſſity of abiding and continuing in all holy duties. Some indeed referre this to the children, If the children continue in what is good. And if it be ſaid, When a godly mother doth her duty, ſhe may have notwithſtanding wicked and ungodly children, and ſhall that prejudice her ſalvation? To this they anſwer, That for the moſt part the wickedneſs of children is laid upon the parents neglect; but if it be not, then God will accept of the mother faithfully diſcharging her duty, though the children do wickedly miſcarry; but it is farre more probable to referre it to the woman. And though the number be changed into the plural, If they abide, yet that is ordinary in Scripture, eſpecially when the word is a collective, as in the 5^th Chapter of this Epiſtle verſ. 4. where foreign in the ſingular number, and foreign in the plural relateth to it. The qualification then that is neceſſary to all women, that would find the curſe in child-bearing taken away, and original guilt accompanying that ſorrow removed, is to abound in all ſaving graces, and to continue therein; and then that woman who is a wife and a mother of many children, let her not torment her ſelf about the ſtate of her children, and the condition they are born in, but quiet her ſoul with this Text of Scripture.

The laſt particular, that may ſatisfie the ſouls of ſuch parents who may be exerciſed in theſe particulars about original ſinne, is to remind themſelves, That the whole matter about original ſinne in reference to Adam, and all his poſterity, is not without the wiſe and holy appointment of God, who would never have ſuffered this evil to be, could he not have raiſed out thereby a greater good. For although it be true, That Adam did ſinne from his meer internal liberty, there being no decrees or execution thereof that did neceſſitate him to do ſo; yet all this could not be without the Decree of God permitting, as alſo wiſely ordering all things for his own glory. No doubt but God could have confirmed Adam in his holineſs; yea he might have ſo ordered it, that every man and woman ſhould ſtand or fall upon their perſonal account, as the Angels did: yet ſuch was his will and Covenant, that in Adam all his poſterity ſhould be involved, and the ſame iſſue ſhould attend both them and him. This then being the appointment of a juſt, wiſe and mercifull God, we ought wholly to acquieſce, knowing that the buſineſs of mans life and death, his ſalvation and damnation, could not have been ordered better otherwiſe, though all the wiſdome of men and Angels had been put together. And therefore when thou who art a parent, but tempted about the ſtate of thy children thou haſt brought forth, art turmoiling thy ſelf in theſe diſputes, ſhake off theſe vipers, and conclude, That God regardeth his own glory and honor, more then thou canſt do; he hath taken that way wherein he will magnifie his own glorious Attributes. And truly this ſhould preſently ſilence all thy diſputations. For wouldſt thou have God loſe part of his glory? Wouldſt thou have his honour in any degree laid in the duſt, that thy will and deſires may be accompliſhed? Farre be this from thee. Surely the great and high thoughts we ought to have of Gods wiſdom, goodneſs and holineſs ought to keep us from opening our mouths any more in this point, ſaying, p. 553As I leave my ſelf, ſo my children in the hands of God, who diſpoſeth all things according to his own will. And as we ſay of the nature of God, he is that Bonum quo nihil melius cogitari poteſt; The ſame muſt we apply to all his diſpenſations likewiſe.

Furthermore we are to remember, That whatſoever the firſt Adam hath brought upon mankind, the ſecond Adam will totally and fully remove in all that are his members: Inſomuch that at the laſt, there ſhall not remain (as it were) an hoof of any of theſe calamities. That original corruption within thee ſhall no longer tempt thee inceſſantly like Joſeph's Miſtreſs, ſaying, Come, and lie with me; we ſhall then in the iſſue of all have more cauſe to rejoyce, becauſe of Chriſt, and the benefits by him, then ever we were caſt down and dejected, becauſe of the tranſgreſſion of the firſt Adam, and the unſpeakable evil that came by him. So that if theſe particulars be duly conſidered, every believer may with comfort and quietneſs ſit down under this truth, while men of phariſaical and ſelf-juſtifying ſpirits rage and revile at theſe things.

But you will ſay, Grant that there is ſuch a thing as Original Sinne, and that we have delivered nothing but Scripture truth in this point, yet may we not be too tragical in exclamations about it? As there are thoſe who erre in the defect, ſo are there not many that do offend in the exceſs, that make it more hainous then it is? This is the laſt Queſtion, wherewith I ſhall conclude this Subject. And

Firſt, All the Popiſh, Arminian, Socinian party with their adherents, look upon the Calviniſts, as exceſſive in this point; hence are there ſeveral complaints of them about this matter in all their works. But certainly, if we do regard the ſcope of the Scripture, it is wholly to debaſe man, and exalt Chriſt; To diſcover our incurable and ſinfull eſtate, that thereby Chriſt may be the more magnified, which is done by nothing ſo much, as to make known that horrid pollution, which is upon all by nature. And certainly that one Text, Geneſ. 6. 5. affirming, The thoughts of the imagination of a mans heart to be only evil, and that continually, ſpeaketh more emphatically the deplored and ſinfull eſtate of man, then ever any Calviniſt hath yet expreſt. Yet though this be ſo, we grant, that ſome may go too farre in their opinions, and expreſſions about original ſinne, though for the moſt part ſuch is a mans ſelf-fulneſs and ſelf-righteouſneſs, that Pelagianiſm is likelier to poiſon the world, then Flacci…iſm. We muſt know therefore that one Illyricus a Lutheran in oppoſition to Victorinus Strigelius a Lutheran alſo, but a Synergiſt, holding the will of man to concurre actively with the grace of God to a mans converſion, and thereby extenuating original ſinne. This Illyricus (I ſay) out of a vehement oppoſition to that party, and the School-Doctrine about original ſinne, making it to be an accident in a man, did fall into another extream, ſaying, That original ſinne was a ſubſtantial evil in a man, and that the very ſubſtantial form of a man was now made ſinfull. This Illyricus was a man of a very turbulent and unquiet ſpirit, a deſperate enemy to Melancthon, whoſe heart it is ſaid he broke. (Melch. Adam in vita Illyrici.) At firſt he was well reputed of by the Orthodox, and being ſadly tempted in his ſpirit about ſinne, and the wrath of God, but afterwards delivered from it; it was judged ſo great a mercy, that thanks was given to God in the publick Congregation for his behalf; but afterwards among other erroneous aſſertions, he maintained, That original ſinne was a ſubſtantial evil in a man. We may read his whole opinion with the declaration of himſelf and his Arguments, in his Tractate on purpoſe concerning this point (Clavis Script. 2^d parte Tractat. 6. de originali peccato.) wherein he hath many abſurd and monſtrous expreſſions. Although it muſt be acknowledged, that with that dung and filth he hath, there is alſo ſome gold. Some there are that wholly excuſe him, ſaying, That his words only were improper, but that his ſenſe was orthodox; and that out of hatred to that Doctrine, which extenuateth p. 554original ſinne; he would, pretending the Scripture for his Rule, uſe ſubſtantive expreſſions, to declare the nature of it. But whatſoever his end may be, certainly his ſenſe and opinion, as declared in his words, is juſtly to be condemned and exploded. For by Adam's fall he maketh a ſubſtantial change to be made upon a man; That the Image of God is turned into the image of the Devil, not accidentally, but ſubſtantially; as when wine is made vinegar, or when the parts of a ſtatue, or houſe that were built in ſome comely harmony, repreſenting ſome glorious thing, they ſhould be pulled down, and built into another deformed ſhape. As ſuppoſe the Image of ſome comely perſon ſhould be pulled in pieces, and made the image of an horrible Dragon or Serpent. He diſtinguiſheth of the material ſubſtance of a man, and his formal; He granteth, That the matrial ſubſtance of a man, ſtill remaineth our body, and parts thereof, but the formal ſubſtance is altered. As when a veſſel that was once made a veſſel of honour, is afterwards made a veſſel of diſhonour; the material ſubſtance is the ſame, but not the formal. He doth no wayes endure, that we ſhould call original ſinne an accident; for he ſaith, This ſinne is a tranſcendent, and is in all predicaments; it's ſometimes a quality, ſometimes an action, &c. ſometimes a ſubſtance. Neither will he diſtinguiſh between the ſubſtance, of a man, and his ſin adhering thereto, between the ſubject and the privation in it, between the abſtract and concrete: God (he ſaith) is angry with concretes, puniſheth concretes, not abſtracts; and therefore he ſaith, Thoſe that diſtinguiſh between the ſubſtance of a man and his ſinne, do as the Alchimiſts ſeparating from the oyl, oleity; from a ſtone, lapideity; ſo theſe from Adam, Adameity. Thus he, and much more. But certainly herein he betrayeth horrible ignorance in Philoſophy and Theology; for both theſe will neceſſitate us to diſtinguiſh between the ſubſtance of a man, and the ſinfull privation in him; otherwiſe Chriſt could not have taken the ſame nature with us upon him, ſinne only excepted; and regeneration would be a ſubſtantial change, not a qualitative: Neither by this opinion could the ſame ſubſtantial bodies be ſaid to be glorified in Heaven. So that as the Leproſie in the body, is not the body; neither is original ſinne in man, the nature of man; and therefore when we read, that the fleſh and ſpirit are oppoſite, that oppoſition muſt be underſtood in praedicamento qualitatis, not ſubſtantiae. The greateſt ſupport that this man hath for this errour, is, becauſe the Scripture uſeth ſubſtantive expreſſions, it is called an evil heart, a ſtony heart, &c. But this is becauſe of the corruption adhering to it: As we ſay, a rotten tree, or a poiſoned fountain; The heart as it is a fleſhly ſubſtance is not evil, but as it is the principle of our motions and actions, not in a phyſical, but moral ſenſe. It is true, we ſay, That through original ſinne man cometh ſhort of his end: And ſo as the hand when its dead cannot do the works of an band; or ſalt, when it hath loſt its ſeaſoning is good for nothing: Thus it is with man in regard of any ſupernatural actions, yet he hath not loſt any thing that was ſubſtantial and eſſential; Only the power of the ſoul want the primitive rectitude they once had; and therefore whenſoever they act, it is with deordination. Indeed we will grant, That Illyricus his adverſary Victorinus Strigelius, did not fully expreſs original corruption, in the Diſputation between them; who compared a man to a Loadſtone, of which (they ſay) when rubbed with Garlick, it will not draw iron; but if that be wip'd off by Goats bloud, it will be as attractive as before. For this ſimilitude is not full enough: becauſe original ſin doth not only hinder the doing of good actions, but infecteth the very powers and principles of them. It is true, there are thoſe, (as Contzen in Rom. 5.) that ſay, becauſe the Calviniſts hold, That concupiſcence is ſinne, they cannot avoid Flaccianiſm but that is a meer calumny. We alwayes diſtinguiſh between the nature and ſubſtance of a man; and the ataxy and diſorder that doth now accompany it. Neither when we call it an accident do we thereby extenuate the p. 555nature of original ſinne; for we do not make it a light ſuperficial one, but which is inbred with us, and doth diffuſe it ſelf over all the parts and powers of the ſoul. Neither do we ſay, it is a tranſient, temporary accident, but that which is fixed and permanent in us. Thus we ſee in what ſenſe, there may be exceſſive expreſſions about original ſinne; otherwiſe we cannot ſay enough to affect our hearts with the loathſomneſs of it, provided we keep cloſe to the Scripture directions herein.

Thus at laſt by the good hand of God we are come out of theſe deeps into the haven; we have waded through all the ſeveral parts of this vaſt Subject, and are now come to the ſhore. It remaineth as a duty upon every one, to haſten out of this captivity and bondage, not to ſtay a day or hour in this damnable eſtate, and above all things to take heed of ſuch opinions, that do either leſſen or nullifie this ſinne; for this is to erre in the foundation; Chriſt and grace, and regeneration can never be built thereupon. This Doctrine hath ſtood as a firm … in all ages, upon which the contrary errors have daſhed and broken themſelves; and without this we are never able to performe thoſe two neceſſary duties, To know our ſelves, and to know Chriſt. This hath alwayes been the Catholique Doctrine of the Church of God. Neither did the Fathers before Auſtin's time generally ſpeak otherwiſe, as late Writers would make us believe: Even as the Socinians ſay, the Ancients affirmed otherwiſe about Chriſt, than after Athanaſius his time, and the Council of Nice, was uſually done in the Church: Scripture, the Conſent of the Church, and every mans own experience doth proclaim this truth, Quis ante prodigioſum di…cipulum Pelagii Coeleſtium reatu praevaricationis Adae omne genus humanum negavit aſtrictum? Lyr. cont. Haereſ. c. 24.

FINIS.