Divine Truths in Jesus Christ, Chapter 9
CHAP. IX.
Chap. 9 The Doctrine of Original ſin, the great moment of it. Adam's ſin imputed to us. The proof of it from Scripture. Adam's capacity. Adam's righteouſneſs. Objections anſwered. Our inherent pravity. The proof of it from Scripture. The experience of our hearts. The actual ſins in the world. The doctrine of Original ſin manifeſted from Chriſts extraordinary Conception. His Headſhip oppoſed to Adam's, from the inſtitution of Baptiſm. The wickedneſs of the Jews in crucifying of Chriſt. The purchaſe of Regeneration and Salvation made by Chriſt. A ſhort improvement of this Doctrine.
IN the next place I ſhall proceed to conſider Original ſin, the Doctrine of which is very momentous. The Pſalmiſt in the fourteenth Pſalm notably ſets forth the corrupt eſtate of man by nature; and again, he ſets it forth in the 53. Pſal. almoſt in the ſame words, pointing out to us the great neceſſity and utility of this Doctrine,Moll. Com. in Pſal. 53. which admirably tends to undeceive and deliver us from that faſcinating opinion of our own righteouſneſs and worthineſs, which too much charms the hearts of all men; and withal to prepare and make us ready to accept a cure from Chriſt, and his regenerating Grace. This is a moſt neceſſary fundamental Doctrine.De peccat. Or. lib. 2. cap. 24. St. Auſtin ſpeaking of Adam and Chriſt, ſaith, In horum duorum hominum cauſa proprie fides Chriſtiana conſiſtit: the Chriſtian faith ſtands in the knowledg of thoſe two men; the one the ſpring of ſin and death; the other the ſpring of grace and life. And ſpeaking of the Pelagians as denying Original ſin, he charges them,Epiſt. 90, & 94. fundamenta Chriſtianae fidei evertere, to overturn the foundations of the Chriſtian faith. Without the knowledg of this ſin, that excellent rule, foreign, know thy ſelf, becomes altogether unpracticable; a man though near to his own ſoul, is a ſtranger to it; though he hath a reflecting faculty, yet he cannot make a true inſpection into his heart he ſees only his outſide: within there is a deadly wound, yet he feels it not; a ſink, a chaos of corruptions, yet he perceives it not: that holy image which was the beauty and pure rectitude of his nature, is departed and gone; yet he is not concerned at it. He is, as Nazianzen ſpeaks, totus lapſus, all fallen, all out of order; yet it ſeems to him as if all were well and in a due poſture: he is miſerable, and poor, and blind, and naked, and yet inſenſible in all theſe, according to that falſe or rather no-judgment that he hath of himſelf: he is happy in his miſery, rich in his poverty, ſeeing in his blindneſs, beautiful in his ſhame and ſpiritual nakedneſs; in the midſt of ſtraits and neceſſities he finds no need of Chriſt, or regenerating grace: the neceſſity and excellency of theſe appears in ſuch proportion as the depth and breadth of that ſin is apprehended to be. Hence it is obſervable on the one hand, Thoſe who own Adam to be a fountain of ſin and death, do withal own Chriſt to be a fountain of righteouſneſs and life. Thoſe who ſee the horrible ataxy and pravity in our nature, ſee alſo the neceſſity and excellency of Grace in the repairing of it. On the other hand the Pelagians and Socinians, who deny Original ſin, are enemies to Grace; it is in the power and will of man; vel nitere flore virtutum, vel ſentibus horrere vitiorum; Auſt. de Grat. Chriſt. c. 18.to make himſelf beautiful with the flowers of virtue, or horrid with the brambles of vice. So Pelagius. In noſtra poteſtate ſitum eſt, ut Deo obtemperemus, Cap. 10.it is in our power to obey God. So the Racovian Catechiſt. And what room is there for Grace,Auſt. ad Boniſ. lib. 1. cap. 21. when the power and free-will of man may do the work? The Pelagians affirmed, that before the Law men were ſaved by Nature, afterwards by the Law,Socin. de Serv. pars 3. cap. 2. afterwards by Chriſt. The Socinians ſay, that under the Old Teſtament good men were ſaved without any reſpect to Chriſt or faith in him, and what need then was there of Chriſt, or his ſatisfactory ſufferings for us? the great work might be done without him. Hence it appears that to deny Original ſin is to caſt off Chriſt and Grace. The Jewiſh Rabbins, who made the evil figment in mans heart to be but a light matter, ſmall as a thread, weak as a woman, ruleable by the good figment of our own reaſon, were very ignorant of that great point of Regeneration. Hence Nicodemus a Maſter in Iſrael was ſtartled and ſtood at a maze at our Saviours Doctrine about it, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the ſecond time into his mothers womb and be born? ſaith he, Joh. 3.4. Such carnal and groſs expoſtulations could never have dropt from him if he had had a true ſenſe of Original ſin, but for want of that Regeneration was a ſtrange and unintelligible myſtery to him. The Pagan Philoſophers had ſome glimmerings of Original ſin; hence they complained that the ſoul had loſt her wings, and crept upon theſe lower things; that it was in the body as a priſon, and there lookt out at the grates of ſenſe; that it was fallen from the happy Region, and inclined to evil. But, becauſe theſe were but glimmerings, they did not ſo much as dream of Grace or Regeneration; becauſe they did not ſee the depth and venom of our Original wound, they thought there was medicamentum in latere, enough in the Power and Free-will of the ſoul to heal it ſelf: they reckoned all virtues to be among the foreign, the things in our power; and accounted the will to be ſuch a miſtreſs of it ſelf, that it might make it ſelf good and excellent at its pleaſure. By all theſe inſtances we ſee plainly, that the Doctrine of Original ſin is very uſeful and momentous.
Original ſin is ſet forth by many names in Scripture. It is called Sin, The ſinning ſin, The ſin that dwelleth in us, The ſin that doth eaſily beſet us, The Law of ſin and death, The Law in the Members, The fleſh and the old man, The root of bitterneſs, The plague of the heart: in the Fathers it is called the paternal poyſon, The firſt radical ſin, The venom and ſtroke of the old ſerpent, The contagion of the ancient death, The weight of the ancient crime, The injury of our Original. And St. Auſtin, that he might aſcertain that in which he oppoſed the Pelagians, called it Original ſin, from whence that name was afterwards frequent in the Church: it was ſo called, partly becauſe we have it in our Original; it is interwoven with our nature, and may ſay to every one of us, As ſoon as thou wert, I am; partly becauſe it is derived to us from Adam, the head and original of mankind.*Non peccat iſte qui naſcitur, non peccat ille qui genuit, non peccat iſte qui condidit, per quas rima… inter tot praeſidia innocentiae peccatum fingis ingreſſum? Auſt. de Nup. l. 2.28. Hence when Julian the Pelagian argued thus againſt Original ſin: He ſins not who is born: he ſins not who begets: he ſins not who creates. By what chinks or cranies among ſo many guards of innocence,Quid quaerit latentem rimam, cum habeat a pertiſſimam januam? Per unum hominem, ait Apoſtolus, quid quaerit amplius? do you feign that ſin did enter? St. Auſtin anſwers him thus: Why doth he ſeek a chink or a crany, when he hath an open gate? By one man, ſaith the Apoſtle, what would he have more? It is that one man Adam, the original of mankind, by whom ſin entred into the world; it is by him that it is derived to us. That one Text, touching the one man, is enough to break and ſweep away all the ſubtile cobwebs which the Pelagians and Socinians have ſpun out of their Wit and carnal Reaſon to oppoſe the Doctrine of Original ſin.
Original ſin conſiſts in two things:
1. In that Adams firſt ſin is imputatively ours.
2. In that we have an inordination and inherent pravity derived upon us from him.
The firſt thing is, Adams firſt ſin imputatively ours: not that God reputes us to have done it in our own perſon; not that it is imputed to us in the full latitude, as it was to Adam. We ſinned not as the head and root of mankind, we murdered not the whole humane nature; we did not uſher in ſin and death upon the world: no, as the Apoſtle ſaith, this was foreign, by one Adam; but as ſoon as any man becomes proles Adae, in conjunction with him, it is imputed to him, pro menſura membri, in ſuch ſort and proportion as is competent to him, being a part and piece as it were of Adam. 12. Queſt. 81. Art. 1.Aquinas illuſtrates this by a notable inſtance: Murder as a ſin is not imputable to the hand in it ſelf, as diſtinct or ſeparate from the body; but as it is a Member in man, and moved by his Will: in like manner the ſin of Adam is imputed to us, not ſo properly as we are in our ſelves, but as we are parts and pieces of him, and derived our nature from him. Adams ſin was paſt before we were born. It is therefore, as Bellarmine well expreſſes it,Nobis communicatur co modo, quo communicari poteſt id quod tranſiit, nimirum per imputationem, De Amiſſ. Grat. l. 5. c. 17. communicated to us in that manner, as a thing paſt can be communicated, namely by imputation; we did not perſonally commit it. It is therefore imputed to us in that meaſure, as is fit and juſt for it to be imputed to thoſe who are parts and members of Adam. In that capacity it is conſtructively and interpretatively ours, and accordingly God juſtly reckons and imputes it unto us. That this is ſo, I ſhall offer ſome Conſiderations;
1. That of the Apoſtle is very pregnant; by one man ſin entred into the world, and death by ſin, and ſo death paſſed upon all men, for that all have ſinned, Rom. 5.12. In the Original it is, foreign, in him, that is, in Adam all have ſinned. Thoſe words foreign are Relative. Three things, as St.Cont. 2. Epiſt. Ptl. l. 4. c. 4. Auſtin obſerves, are ſet down in this verſe before; Adam, Sin, and Death: thoſe words relate not to ſin, for Sin in the Greek is a Feminine; nor to death, for men do not ſin in death, but dye in ſin; therefore they relate to Adam, in him all have ſinned. It's true, others take the words, foreign cauſally, for that all have ſinned. But I think that, as I ſaid before, they are to be taken Relatively, in him all have ſinned. Thus thoſe three things, which the Apoſtle conjoyned together in this verſe, that is, the propagation of ſin, the original of death, and the foundation of both, very well cohere together in this manner. The firſt we have in thoſe words, By one man ſin entred into the world. The ſecond in thoſe, Death paſſed upon all. The third in thoſe, In him all have ſinned. Thus thoſe phraſes, ſin entred, death paſſed, have a plain explication. Sin did not ſtay in Adam, but it entred into the world: But if Adams ſin be not imputatively ours, how did it enter? It entred by Imitation, ſay the Pelagians: but how vain is this? Sin entred upon all, upon whom death paſſed, and death paſſed upon all without exception. But neither infants, who ſin not actually, or after the ſimilitude of Adams tranſgreſſion; nor thoſe adult perſons, who ſin actually, but never ſo much as heard of Adams ſin, could have ſin from Adam by Imitation. We are all ſinners, and children of wrath, not by Imitation, but by nature; Adams ſin was not meerly his own, but ours by Imitation. Thus ſin entred into the world, and as a penal fruit of it, death paſſed upon all; it did not ſtay at Adam, but paſſed upon all: and if Adams ſin became not ours, how ſhould that be? The Apoſtle doth not barely ſet down ſin and death, but ſets them down in their order and connexion. Firſt ſin entred, and then death paſſed, and that not as a meer infelicity or miſery, but as a juſt puniſhment for ſin. Hence it is obſervable, that the Text ſaith, That death came by ſin, and ſo paſſed upon all. The Particles (by and fo) ſhew that death paſſed upon all as a puniſhment. If Adams ſin were not all mens, how could death paſs upon infants, who have no actual ſin? God is not, cannot be unjuſt; where there is no fault, there is no room for puniſhment; if infants in no ſenſe tranſgreſſed the Command in Adam, the death in the threatning cannot fall upon them,De Incar. c. 14. Quâ juſtitiâ parvulus ſubjicitur peccati ſtipendio, ſi nulla eſt in eo peccati pollutio? ſaith Fulgentius; With what juſtice can an infant be ſubject to the wages of ſin, if the pollution of it be not in him? May there be poena ſine cauſa, a puniſhment without a why or a wherefore? It cannot be. If therefore, even Infants in Adam died, as the Apoſtle ſpeaks, 1 Cor. 15.22, then in Adam all ſinned, as he tells us in the frequented Text. That this is the genuine meaning of it, doth not only appear by the Text it ſelf, but by that which followeth: By one mans diſobedience many were conſtituted ſinners, v. 19. No. unimputed ſin can do this. If therefore Adams ſin conſtitute us ſinners, it is imputed to us. To ſay, as the Socinians and ſome others do, to conſtitute us ſinners, is only to make us obnoxious to death, and ſo to be treated as ſinners, is a thing vain and repugnant to the Text. To be treated as a ſinner, is not to be conſtituted ſuch. To be treated as a ſinner, when a man is not ſuch, is very unjuſt and unequal. To be a ſinner, is to be culpable or guilty of a fault; and the proper ſignification muſt be retained. The Apoſtle in this Chapter evidently diſtinguiſhes between ſin and death, tranſgreſſion and condemnation, and makes Adam the origine of both, firſt of ſin; and then, by ſin, of death: Therefore Adam firſt makes us ſinners, and then obnoxious to death. Thus the words being taken relatively, In him all have ſinned, the concluſion is plain, That Adams ſin is imputed to us. Nay, if the words be taken cauſally, for that all have ſinned, the concluſion is the very ſame; If death paſſed upon all men, becauſe all have ſinned, then Infants, becauſe death paſſes upon them, have ſinned: And how have they ſinned? Not in their own perſons, they are not capable of ſinning actually; but in Adam, the root of mankind: Not by an Imitation, they are not capable of ſuch a thing; but by a participation of the firſt ſin, which by a juſt Imputation becomes theirs.
2. The capacity which Adam was in, is very conſiderable. He was not conſidered as a meer individual perſon, but as the Principle and Origine of Human nature. The admirable endowments of righteouſneſs and immortality, were truſted and depoſited in his hands, not meerly for himſelf, but for his poſterity. The command was not given to him as to a ſingular perſon, but as the Root and Head of Mankind. The Covenant made with him, run thus: If he did (as he was able) obey the command, he ſhould transfer innocency and life to his poſterity; If not, he ſhould transfer ſin and death to it. We were in him naturally, as latent in his Joins; and legally, as comprized within the Covenant. This is very clear, becauſe the death in the threatning annexed to the command given to him, falls upon his poſterity. Had not the command extended to his children, the threatning could not have reached them. Had not they ſinned in Adam their Head and Root, death could not have faln upon them in ſuch ſort as it doth; that is, in a ſtate of infancy, void of any actual ſin of its own. This being the true ſtate of things, it is no wonder at all that Adams ſin ſhould be imputed to us as parts and pieces of him. Adam was here conſidered as the Root and Origine of mankind: his Perſon was the fountain of ours; his Will the repreſentative of ours. Omnes nos unus ille Adam; We were one with him, and branches of him. Hence we ſinned in his ſin, and putrified in him as in the root. Theſe things, if weighed, give an eaſie ſolution to all the cavils and objections which the Pelagians and their followers make againſt the imputation of Adams ſin to us. Firſt, They ſay, Deus, qui propria peccata remittit, non imputat aliena: God, who forgives us our own ſins, doth not impute to us another mans. But here is a great miſtake, as if Adams ſin were juſt nothing at all to us. Adam was the Root, and bore all mankind in himſelf; we were ſeminally and legally in him: His ſin therefore was not alien altogether to us, but in a ſort our own. We ſinned in him as our Head: We fell with him as the branches fall with the body of the Tree. St. Austin ſaith,Contr. Jul. l. 6: cap. 4. Though Adams ſin were alien proprietate actionis; yet it was ours contagione propaginis. Gregory Nazianzen ſpeaking of Adams ſin, cryes out pathetically, O infirmitatem meam! O my infirmity! St.Serm. 1. Dom. 1. Poſt. 8. Epiph. Bernard notably expreſſes it, Culpa aliena eſt, quia in Adam omnes neſcientes peccavimus, noſtra, quia etſi in alio nos tamen peccavimus, & nobis juſto Dei judicio imputabatur, licet occulto: Adams ſin was alien to us, becauſe we ignorantly ſinned in him; yet it was ours, becauſe we ſinned, though in another; and it was to us imputed by the juſt, though ſecret counſel of God. Again they ſay, That which is properly ſin in us, is voluntary, and an act of our will; but Adams was not ſuch. I anſwer: The foundation of this Objection, That all proper ſin is voluntary, or an act of our will, is not univerſally true: Vain thoughts are ſin, and ſuch as are the objects of a good mans hatred, much more of the hatred of the Holy One; yet they are no acts of our will. The firſt riſings and ſtirrings of luſt, which antecede conſent, are ſins, and yet no acts of our will. The mutinies and rebellions of the lower faculties againſt Reaſon, are ſins, and yet no acts of our will. But might this rule hold in actual ſin, yet ſurely it cannot in original; for then there ſhould be no ſuch thing as original ſin, though Scriptures, Fathers, Councils, aſſert it; though the Church have been poſſeſſed of this truth in all ages; yet it is an error, there is really no ſuch thing: For neither was Adams tranſgreſſion the act of our will, neither is the inherent pravity in us ſuch. If then we confeſs original ſin, we muſt acknowledg that the rule extends not to it. Thus when Julian objects, That there is no ſin in Infants, becauſe they have not the exerciſe of free-will; St. Auſtin diſtinguiſhes thus: Hoc recte dicitur propter proprium cujuſ que Contr. Jul. lib. 3. cap. 5.peccatum, non propter primi peccati originale contagium; Whatever may be ſaid in actual ſin, it is not ſo in original. Further, Adams ſin as to us, may be ſaid to be voluntary, in two reſpects; the one is this: It was voluntary, voluntate primi parentis, in the will of Adam the Head of Mankind, while he ſtood in his integrity. He was the moral Head of Mankind, and, as Bellarmine ſpeaks, Totius humani generis geſſit perſonam, he ſuſtained the perſon of all mankind; his will therefore was interpretatively ours; our will was virtually in his. Murder is imputed to the hand, becauſe the will, though it be not there, is yet in that perſon of whom the hand is a part. In like manner Adams ſin is imputed to us, becauſe the will, though it was not perſonally in us, was yet in him, of whom we are parts and members. Thus that learned Profeſſor Dr.De Peccat. Or. 107. Ward, Ex voluntate primi parentis, ex quo tota poſteritas derivatur, peccatum illud in poſteris, velut in membris Adae, voluntarium eſſe cenſetur; The will of the firſt Parent, from whom all the poſterity is derived, renders his ſin voluntary in all men, as being members of him. The other reſpect is this, it is voluntary in us, in our own perſons habitually; there is in us an evil frame and diſpoſition to ſin and tranſgreſs as Adam did; the act was his, yet a ſeed of it is found in us. Further, they ſay, It is againſt juſtice and equity, that Adams ſin ſhould be imputed to us; that we, innocent in our ſelves, ſhould be guilty by a ſin not our own. I anſwer, Adams capacity conſidered, there is no injuſtice in it; he was the head and root of mankind, he was the common Truſtee of righteouſneſs and immortality for all; the Covenant was made with him for himſlf and for his poſterity; his ſin therefore was not meerly his, but ours; neither are we born innocent, but guilty: If it were againſt juſtice and equity to impute his ſin to us, then it was againſt juſtice and equity to puniſh us for it with death temporal, ſpiritual, eternal: But the latter is falſe; ſo therefore is the former. Death falls as a puniſhment upon Infants void of actual ſin of their own: Thus the Apoſtle lays it down clearly, Sin entered into the world, and death by ſin; and ſo death paſſed upon all men, Rom. 5.12. Death was not a meer miſery or infelicity, but a juſt puniſhment. Surely it conſiſts not with juſtice and equity, that proper puniſhment ſhould fall on perſons altogether void of guilt; or that the threatning of death ſhould ſeize upon thoſe who no way tranſgreſſed that command to which it was annexed; therefore the imputation of Adams ſin to us, is ſo far from being againſt juſtice and equity, that without it, the equity and juſtice of God in inflicting death as a puniſhment upon all men, cannot be reaſonably cleared. I need add but one thing more, God dealt with Adam the head of mankind, upon terms of abundant equity: for as Adam ſinning, was to transfer ſin and death to us; ſo Adam obeying, was to transfer righteouſneſs and immortality to us: The terms were equal on both hands; we were in him as our head, as well for the obtaining of bleſſedneſs upon his obedience, as for the incurring puniſhment upon his diſobedience. Theſe objections being removed out of the way, I conclude, That the capacity which Adam ſtood in at firſt, is a clear evidence, that his ſin is imputed to us.
3. If Adams ſin be not imputed to us, then neither was his righteouſneſs ſo; then we never were righteous, we never were eſteemed ſuch in Gods account; then we are not fallen creatures, we are meerly ſimply as God made us: Then what need of renovation or regeneration? An unfallen creature is uncapable of reparation; Whence then, or by what way could it poſſibly come to paſs, that there ſhould be an innate inordination or proneneſs to evil in us? Such things cannot be found in an unfallen rational creature, yet doubtleſs they are found in us. The Scripture tells us, that we are naturally dark; nay, darkneſs it ſelf: That the heart is deceitful above all things, and deſperately wicked. Nay, the very Philoſophers ſpied out this. Hence Tully ſaith, That man was brought forth into life, not by nature as a Mother, but as a Step-mother; with a body naked, frail, infirm, with a mind anxious in troubles, low in fears, ſoft in labours, prone to luſts. Upon which St. Auſtin gloſſes thus,Contr. Jul. l. 4. cap. 12. Naturam accuſavit, rem vidit, cauſam neſcivit, latebat eum cur eſſet grave jugum ſuper filios Adam. He accuſed nature, the thing he ſaw, the cauſe he knew not, the grievous yoke on the ſons of Adam was hid from him. Nay, the very Socinians, though in the point of Original ſin they are more blind and void of ſenſe than Pagans, confeſs thus much, Homines ad peccandum ſunt naturâ proni: Volk. de Rel. l. 1. c. 6.Men are by nature prone to ſin: Nay, it is added, ſenſe and appetite draw them, as it were, with chains to vice. Thus ſaith one of them, Whence then is this natural inordination and pravity? Is it from the fall? We are not fallen creatures. Is it from the Creator? It is impoſſible. Darkneſs cannot be from the Father of lights, nor pravity from the fountain of infinite goodneſs. Adams ſin not being imputed to us, no tolerable account can be given, how it ſhould ever come to exiſt among men. But ſuppoſing what is moſt true, That it is naturally in us; yet, unleſs Adams ſin be imputatively ours, it is not ſin in us: What though we want knowledg and righteouſneſs? It is not Carentia juſtitiae debitae ineſſe, a want of what ought to be in us; it is not a privative want, a want of what we once had in Adams righteouſneſs, and afterwards loſt in his ſin; but it is a meer negative want, a want of that we never had, nor never forfeited. Adams righteouſneſs being not imputed to us, we never had it; Adams ſin being not imputed to us, we never forfeited it; ſuch a meer negative want, is no ſin. What though there be a pravity and propenſity to all manner of ſin in us? It is no ſin in unfallen creatures, it is no ſin to be made or created, it is no ſin to be born or brought forth; it is no ſin, if there be no cauſe or foundation of it in us; and there can be no cauſe or foundation of it in us, if we no way participate of Adams ſin; it may be called miſery, but it is no ſin: Hence that ſaying of St. Auſtin, Nulla foret hominis culpa, ſi talis a Deo creatus eſſet, qualis nunc naſcitur; There would be no fault in man, if he were created ſuch by God, as he is now born; the pure primordials of nature cannot be culpable. That man, who is meerly what his Creator made him, is as he ought to be. The reſult of all is this: Adams ſin not being imputed to us, there can be no ſuch thing as original ſin; though this Doctrine hath been maintained in the Church in all ages; yet there is no ſuch thing, neither is Adams ſin imputatively ours; nor yet is the natural pravity in us any ſin. If therefore we will acknowledg original ſin, we muſt acknowledg that Adams ſin is ours by a juſt Imputation. Thus much touching the firſt original thing in ſin: Adams ſin is imputatively ours.
The other is this, We have an inordination, and inherent pravity in us; this depends upon the former. All habitual ſin, hath an eſſential relation to ſome actual ſin precedent; no man can can be a ſinner habitually, who is totally free from actual ſin. If we had not in ſome ſenſe ſinned in Adams ſin, we could not have been habitually vitiated by it. At firſt man was an excellent creature, ſparkling with a divine image of knowledg and righteouſneſs; all was in harmony, the rational powers of the Soul were ſubordinate to God their Creator; the ſenſitive powers were ſubject to the rational; in every part there was a juſt decorum: But upon the fall, which was interpretatively ours, the Crown fell from our head, the Glory of the Divine Image departed, the Soul became naked, the very ſhame of the body told it, that the primitive rectitude was wanting; darkneſs fell upon the Mind, the once region of light; bondage and impotency fell upon the Will, the once ſeat of power and liberty; all was out of frame: The rational powers turned rebels to God; the ſenſitive were all in a mutiny againſt the rational. There was in us a pravity, an horrible propenſity to all manner of iniquity; a Belial-heart, ſuch as is evil, and only evil, and that continually. This pravity runs parallel with our being and humanity; it overſpreads the whole Fabrick of our nature, and ſo adheres to it, that even in the Saints it is not utterly extinct till the laſt breath; nor totally cleanſed away, till the Clay-walls of the body fall into the grave. This is the foreign, the conceiving-luſt; the womb where all iniquity is formed. This is the Grave or Sheol in man, which in its unreaſonable deſires never hath enough. This is that Concupiſcence, which, as the Rabbins ſay, doth aedificare inferos, make and build an Hell for men. Now that there is ſuch an inordination and inherent pravity in us, doth eaſily appear by the following Conſiderations.
1. The Scripture doth abundantly teſtifie it. Adam begat a ſon in his own likeneſs (after his image), and called his name Seth, Gen. 5.3. Adam was created in the likeneſs of God, v. 1; but after his fall he begat a ſon in his own likeneſs. When God created man in his likeneſs, it was ſanctus ſanctum, an Holy God created an holy man: But when Adam begat a ſon in his likeneſs, it was corruptus corruptum, polluted Adam begat a polluted ſon: and in the Text there are two words (likeneſs and image) to ſet the greater brand upon corrupt nature. It is remarkable, that the Text doth not here ſpeak of Abel, who dyed without iſſue; nor of Cain, all whoſe progeny was drowned in the flood; but of Seth, by whom all mankind hath hitherto been continued in the world: which ſhews that none are exempted from it. God ſaw that every imagination of the thoughts of mans heart, was only evil continually, Gen. 6.5: and afterwards God ſaith, that it was ſo from his youth, Gen. 8.21; according to the original it is, Every formation or figment of the heart; all that was framed or effigiated there, is only evil, and that from his youth: Where the Hebrew word uſed, reaches in other Scriptures even to infancy. Which ſhews, that we are tranſgreſſors from the womb. Hence one of the Jewiſh Rabbins being asked when the evil imagination was put into man? anſwered, From the hour that he is formed. Hence that ancient ſaying, Ipſe ortus in vitio eſt; Our firſt riſe is iniquity. Job ſpeaking of mans birth, ſaith, Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one, Job 14.4. Man; who is of unclean Parents, muſt needs be unclean. Nothing but ſupernatural grace can purifie ſuch an one; none but the Holy One can make us clean. David cries out, Behold I was ſhapen in iniquity, and in ſin did my mother conceive me; in the Hebrew it is, warm me. Pſal. 51.5, He confeſſes that there was iniquity even in primo ardore, in the firſt warmth of natural conception: before he was born or ſaw the light, he was polluted and unclean. Antequam naſcimur, Apol. Dav. cap. 11.maculamur, ſaith St. Ambroſe; Before we are born, we are polluted. Our Saviour ſpeaking of Regeneration, ſaith, That which is born of the fleſh, is fleſh, Joh. 3.6. In natural generation there is nothing but fleſh or corrupt nature; the Spirit or Divine nature is from Regeneration only. St. Paul ſtiles this inward pravity, a body of ſin, Rom. 6.6. It is a loathſome carkaſs made up of vile matter. It is not ſo much one ſin, as virtually all; other ſins are parts and branches of it. The weight and preſſure of this body made even St. Paul cry out, O wretched man that I am, who ſhall deliver me from the body of this death! Rom. 7.24. Thus, and much more, doth the Scripture bear witneſs to this truth.
2. No man, who ſeriouſly looks into the frame of his own heart, can want a proof of this truth. Upon a faithful inſpection into himſelf, a ſink of ſin, a Chaos of turpitudes and horrible irregularities will appear to be in him. Reaſon was lighted up by God; but it is now as a beam prodigiouſly cut off from the fountain of light. Leaving the firſt Truth, it wanders and loſes it ſelf in a wilderneſs of Errors. Forgetting its great Original, it gropes in the dark about the Supreme End, and cannot of it ſelf find the dore to true happineſs. It doth, and that by a ſingular priviledg above other creatures, know its Maker; and yet in an unreaſonable manner it turns away from him, and ſeeks an happineſs in the lower World, or at beſt in it ſelf. It ſhould, like the Celeſtial bodies, move circularly; and after a ſurvey of all creatures, return back to the ſame point from whence it came, which is the boſom of God himſelf; and yet it flies away from him, and makes its neſt in one Creature-vanity or other. It hath a natural and indelible inſtinct after happineſs, and perpetually cryes out, Who will ſhew us any good? And yet it is not able ſo much as by a holy thought to aſpire after the great Bleſſedneſs ſet forth before it in the Goſpel. Heavy things deſcend by a right line to their center: Brutes haſten to thoſe things which are congruous and convenient to their natures: Only Man, though endowed far above theſe with Reaſon and Liberty, falls ſhort, and miſſes the mark. Pure Precepts, excellent Promiſes, heavenly Myſteries, are ſet before him in the Goſpel, yet without a ſupernatural illumination, he cannot perceive or receive them; at moſt he ſees them only in the image or picture of the Letter, but not in their livelineſs and ſpiritual glory: a form or ſhell of knowledg he may have, but he doth not taſt or ſavour the ſweetneſs of them. And all this becauſe his Reaſon, though active enough in naturals, is in ſpirituals but as an eye without an optick faculty, dark, nay darkneſs it ſelf. The Will, though its proper object be good, turns away from God, who is Goodneſs it ſelf, and ſeeks its chief good ſomewhere elſe. It opens it ſelf in a free choice to every vanity that paſſes by; yet is it ſhut to God and all the offers of grace; forſaking God the Fountain of Liberty, it becomes an arrant Slave and Drudg to ſin; and, which is wonderfully prodigious, it is in love with its chains, and loth to be made free indeed. All the goodneſs in God, Chriſt, Heaven, Bleſſedneſs, outwardly propoſed, move it not to ſtir a foot towards ſuch attracting objects; ſtill it hangs in vanity, and lyes upon the dunghill of the world, and rowls it ſelf in the mire of one luſt or other. It hath an enmity againſt God, who made it free; it would be above his Will who is Supreme: rather than its inordinate luſts ſhould be reſtrained, it would have God ceaſe to be. There is in every man,De Civit. l. 14. cap. 28. as St. Auſtin ſpeaks, Amor ſui uſ que ad contemptum Dei, a love of himſelf, even to the contempt of God. The Affections are all vain, earthly, carnal, mutinous againſt reaſon; inſomuch, that they by an unnatural violence depoſe it, and ſo unman the man: Hence he becomes as the beaſts that periſh. The Reaſon ſaith, this or that is good; but the Affections repugn and reſiſt. The Soul is paralytick, Reaſon moves to the right hand, Affection to the left, and carries all before it: Hence that ſaying, Video meliora probo que , deteriora ſequor. The Affections, which primitively were ſervants to Reaſon, are now upon the Throne. Reaſon, though once a Royal Prince, is dethroned and become ſervile. That which is the glory of our nature, and proves us to be men, that is hurried up and down by the rude rabble of luſts and malapert paſſions. This being the natural frame and temper of man, let us ſit down and conſider; Was it thus from the beginning? Was humane nature ſuch in the firſt impreſſion? Did God put his Reaſon under a Cloud, or his Will into chains and ſervitude? Was it from God, that the one turns away from the firſt truth, and the other from the chief good? Did God put into man an inſtinct after happineſs in vain, or inſpire into him an immortal ſpirit, that it might creep upon the earth, and pour out it ſelf to every vanity? Did God create man at variance with himſelf, and at firſt, ſet up that unnatural inteſtine war, which is between the rational and ſenſitive powers? Was it his pleaſure, that the inferior faculties in man ſhould contumaciouſly reluct againſt the ſuperior; or that the ſuperior ſhould baſely ſerve the inferior? Without doubt it cannot be. God is light, purity, Wiſdom it ſelf; theſe things are darkneſs, corruption, ataxy, and cannot be from him. No other account can be given of them but this; That they are the bruiſes of the fall, the wounds of corrupt nature.
3. No man, who looks abroad into the World, can with any colour oppoſe this truth. The millions of actual ſins, which as a mighty deluge overſpread the world, are as ſo many pregnant proofes of that original pravity which is in us. In the old world all fleſh had corrupted its way, Gen. 6.12. Afterwards, all nations walked in their own ways, Acts 14.16. That is, in ſinful ones: ſin is the courſe of the world, Epheſ. 2.2. It is the element and proper ubi of it; the whole world lies in it, 1 Joh. 5.19. And whence is it, that ſin is ſo univerſal, that iniquity abounds in all times and places? Our Saviour opens the bloody fountain of it, Out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, falſe-witneſs, blaſphemies, Matt. 15.19. All theſe black troops of wickedneſs, iſſue out from the corrupt heart of man; the inherent pravity which is there, is ſeminally all the monſters of vice. The Apoſtle Paul proving all under ſin, doth thus deſcribe the corrupt eſtate of men; There is none righteous, no not one. There is none that underſtandeth, none that ſeeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable, there is none that doeth good, no not one. Their throat is an open ſepulcher, with their tongues they have uſed deceit, the poiſon of aſps is under their lips: Whoſe mouth is full of curſing and bitterneſs: Their feet are ſwift to ſhed blood: Deſtruction and miſery are in their ways: The way of peace have they not known: There is no fear of God before their eyes, Rom. 3. Here the Apoſtle paints out corrupt nature; not that all men actually do theſe things, but that there is in every one, even from their infancy, a foreign, an univerſal ſeminary of iniquity, a venemous root of all actual ſins. In this reſpect, the deſcription appertains to all, even to little infants; and the ſcope of the Text requires, that it ſhould be ſo interpreted: for before this deſcription, the Apoſtle tells us, that all are under ſin, verſ. 9; and after it, that every mouth is ſtopped, that all the world is guilty before God; that by the deeds of the law, no fleſh ſhall be juſtified in his ſight, verſ. 19, 20: and afterwards, that all have ſinned, and come ſhort of the glory of God, verſ. 23. If the deſcription did not reach all men, his concluſions drawn from thence would not hold; the deſcription might extend to ſome, yet others, at leaſt little Infants, might not be ſinners or guilty; and conſequently might be juſtified by the Law, as having nothing againſt them. The Apoſtle therefore here, by the actual ſins of ſome, proves original ſin in all; and upon that account proves all to be guilty, under ſin, and unjuſtifiable by the Law; becauſe all have that inherent pravity, which is the root of actual ſins. St. James tells us, That every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own luſt and enticed, Jam. 1.14. Luſt or original concupiſcence, is the great tempter; it doth not only entice as an object, but by a kind of impetus and importunity, it draws us away from God the infinite goodneſs, to one creature-vanity or other; by its motions and titillations it wooes for a conſent, and afterwards it brings forth the outward act of ſin. The world tempts outwardly, but this is domeſticus hoſtis, a traitor within in our own boſom; it tempts not objectively only, but effectively, really inclining us to ſin: it is a perpetual tempter, Reſiſt the Devil and he will fly from you, Jam. 4.7, but make never ſo great a reſiſtence againſt this luſt, it will not in this life fly from you, neither can you fly from it. This is that which conceives and brings forth all the actual ſins in the world: Nay, it is that which diſtils ſinfulneſs into the beſt actions of Saints; all the crying abominations in the world, and all the defects in the Church are the progeny of it. This is the root of all bitterneſs, the fomes peccati, the neſt and womb of all actual ſins.
It may be thought perhaps that all this diſcourſe is beſides the intended ſcope, original ſin was not exemplified in Chriſt: But I anſwer, It was not indeed exemplified in him, but the Doctrine of it may be undeniably drawn from him. To this end I ſhall offer theſe particulars.
1. The conception of Chriſt is very conſiderable. He was conceived in the Virgins womb, not in the ordinary way of nature; not by the conjunction of man and woman, but in a Divine and extraordinary manner; in a way above all the power and law of nature. Hence the Angel tells the Virgin Mary, The Holy Ghoſt ſhall come upon thee, and the power of the higheſt ſhall overſhadow thee, Luk. 1.35. Hence it is ſaid, that ſhe was found with child of the Holy Ghoſt, Matt. 1.18. That is, the body of Chriſt was formed by the infinite power and virtue, though not out of the ſubſtance of the Holy Spirit. The ſubſtance of Chriſts fleſh was taken out of the Virgin, and like unto ours; but the ſtructure and manner of framing of it, was infinitely ſurmounting that of ours. Hence his fleſh is ſaid, to be a tabernacle not made with hands, not of this building, Heb. 9.11. It was not ſet up in the natural way of generation, but in a miraculous ſupernatural manner; and why was it thus, but that his humane nature might, as St. Luke ſpeaks, be an holy thing, pure from the leaſt tincture of ſin? All men, who come from Adam in a natural way, contract guilt and pravity in their original; but his fleſh was formed out of the ſubſtance of a Virgin in a miraculous and extraordinary manner, that ſo he, though like to us in all things, might not be like to us in ſin; that he might partake of our fleſh and blood in a pure and unſpotted way: here we ſee, purity was his prerogative, the common lot of our nature is corruption. It's true, the Pelagians are not afraid to aſſert, That Chriſt was free from all contagion of ſin;Auſt. ad Bon. l. 4. c. 2. Non excellentia propria & gratia ſingulari, ſed communione naturae, quae omnibus ineſt infantibus; Not by any proper excellency and ſingular grace; but by a communion of that nature which is in all Infants. But this is in effect to ſay, that the coming of the Holy Ghoſt upon the Virgin, the overſhadowing her by the power of the Higheſt, were ſuperfluous and vain; all might have been as well in an ordinary way: this is to rob Chriſt of his prerogative, to bring down the Saviour to the common level of the ſaved, which can never indeed come to paſs. There is a great difference between Chriſt and us in this point; our bodies are formed in the ordinary courſe of nature, but his was formed in an extraordinary ſupernatural way. We were in Adam, ſecundum rationem ſeminalem; We deſcended from the ſeminal vertue in him. But he was in Adam only ſecundum ſubſtantiam corporalem; He took the materials of a body from the Virgin; but the modus conceptionis, the manner of framing of it, was ſupernatural. We come forth into the world by that common benediction, Increaſe and multiply; but he came into the fleſh by that ſingular promiſe, The ſeed of the woman ſhall break the Serpents head. We ſee here a plain difference. Hence it appears, that purity was a ſingular priviledg in Chriſts birth; and pollution is the common lot of ours.
2. The capacity Chriſt ſtood in is to be noted. He was ſet up to be a common head of righteouſneſs and life; and that tells us, that before him there was another, who by his fall was a common head of ſin and death. Famous is that place, Rom. 5, If by one mans offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace, and of the gift of righteouſneſs, ſhall reign in life by one Jeſus Chriſt. As by the offence of one, judgment came upon all men to condemnation; ſo by the righteouſneſs of one, the free gift came upon all men to juſtification of life. As by one mans diſobedience many were made ſinners; ſo by the obedience of one, ſhall many be made righteous. We ſee here two heads, Adam and Chriſt, both are ſet before us, the one cannot be well known without the other; the Pagans know neither, Chriſtians muſt confeſs both. If they ſay, Chriſt is an head communicating righteouſneſs and immortality to us; they muſt alſo ſay, Adam was an head communicating ſin and death to us; elſe the Apoſtles Parallel is vain and frivolous, in that Chriſt, who obeyed in a publick capacity, is oppoſed to Adam, who ſinned only in a private one. Both theſe heads muſt be admitted, or neither; if both, then there is ſin from Adam, as well as righteouſneſs from Chriſt.Epiſt. 190. Thus St. Bernard ſaith, Alius qui peccatorem conſtituit, alius qui juſtificat a peccato, alter in ſemine, alter in ſanguine; One Adam makes us ſinners, another makes us righteous; the one by his ſeed, the other by his blood: if neither, then the obedience of Chriſt is made fruitleſs and to no purpoſe. Hence St. Auſtin ſaith,De Nat. & Grat. c. 6. & 7. That the Doctrine of Original ſin muſt be defended againſt the Pelagians, Ne evacuetur crux Chriſti, leſt the Croſs of Chriſt be made of no effect: According to the tenour of that place, one head cannot ſtand without the other. If Adam derive not ſin to us, neither doth Chriſt derive righteouſneſs; both muſt be only patterns; neither, communicative heads; which to ſay, is utterly to overturn the ſcope of the place.
3. Our Saviour Chriſt inſtituted Baptiſm, and that for Infants; but if there be no Original pollution in them, What need a waſhing-ordinance for them? The waſhing of their bodies, whoſe pure, innocent, undefiled Souls are uncapable of ſpiritual waſhing, is but a ſhadow without ſubſtance, a Sacrament without internal grace, a thing too inſignificant for Chriſt the Wiſdom of God to inſtitute. Hence when the Pelagians on the one hand granted the Baptiſm of Infants, and on the other denied Original ſin;Contr. Jul. l. 3. c. 3. St. Auſtin ſaith, that they ſpoke wonderful things. In Sacramento Salvatoris baptizantur, ſed non ſalvantur, redimuntur ſed non liberantur, lavantur ſed non abluuntur; In our Saviours Sacrament Infants are baptized, but not ſaved; redeemed, but not delivered; waſhed, but not cleanſed. And a little after he asks, If they are ſaved, what was their ſickneſs? If delivered, what their ſervitude? If cleanſed, what their pollution? Take away the Doctrine of Original ſin, and the Baptiſm of Infants ſeems to be a very ridiculous thing. To avoid this abſurdity, the Pelagians aſſerted,Auſt. de Pecc. Orig. l. 2. c. 5. That the Baptiſm of Infants was neceſſary, not becauſe there was any Original ſin in them; but that they might be capable of the Kingdom of Heaven. But I anſwer, Where there is no defect, there is all due perfection. If Infants are pure and free from all ſin, then have they all the righteouſneſs and rectitude which ought to be in them; and if they have ſo, they are, without Baptiſm, capable of Heaven; or if they were not, the baptiſmal-waſhing, which imports pollution, ſeems to be a ceremony very unfit and incongruous to be applied to them who are without ſpot, or to render them apt for Heaven.
4. In and about the death of Chriſt, two things are conſiderable; The one is the horrible wickedneſs of the Jews in crucifying him: The other is, The infinite merit which is in his death and ſacrifice. Both will manifeſt the Doctrine of Original ſin.
Firſt, The horrible wickedneſs of the Jews in crucifying him will do it. The rottenneſs of the root ſhews it ſelf in the branches; the malignity of Original ſin appears in actual ones, eſpecially in thoſe which are of a deeper ſtain than others are. It was the aggravation of Solomons ſin, that his heart was turned from the Lord, who had appeared to him twice, 1 King. 11.9. The more eminently God appears to us, the more aggravated are our actual ſins againſt him; and the more aggravated thoſe are, the more vile and venemous doth the inward root of them appear to be. When God appears to us in Reaſon, which is a beam from him more precious than a world, it ſpeaks deſperate corruption in men, that the brutal part ſhould uſurp and rule over it; that the vile ſenſual luſts ſhould tread down that Divine ſpark, and, as it were, annihilate it, that nothing of God might have place in the heart. When God further appeared in the Law and the Prophets, to raiſe up a purer knowledg of himſelf than was to be found in Reaſon, as it lay in the duſt and rubbiſh of the fall, it argues a greater pravity and malignity in men, that they ſhould murder his Prophets, and trample his Sacred Laws, the images of his holy Will, under their impure feet; this was in effect, as much as in them lay, to explode God out of his own world, and practically to ſay, that he ſhould not reign there. When God yet more eminently appeared, when he ſent his own Son, very God of God, to be manifeſt in the fleſh; whoſe glory broke forth moſt illuſtriouſly in excellent Doctrines and Miracles; whoſe whole life among men was nothing but innocency, purity, mercy, meekneſs, goodneſs, humility, love, zeal, heavenlineſs, holineſs, obedience, and all manner of virtue, in ſpotleſs perfection; one might have thought that men would have reverenced the Son; that the indwelling-corruption, however it had rioted under other manifeſtations, would here have made a pauſe, and ſtood as one aſtonied and over-awed at ſo ſtupendious an appearance, infinitely tranſcending all other: For what is the little ſpark of Reaſon, to the brightneſs of Gods glory? Or the Law in the letter, to incarnate Sanctity and Holineſs? Or what are all the Prophets to him who came out of the Fathers boſom, and brought down ſupernatural Myſteries into the world? Here it might have been expected, that Iniquity ſhould have ſtopt her mouth, and held her hands; that the Divine Majeſty of this appearance ſhould have made Corruption to retire, and hide it ſelf in the ſecret of the heart. But alas, the event was quite contrary; Original Corruption here did its utmoſt, and ſhewed forth all its malignity; the wicked Jews cried out, This is the heir, come let us kill him: They reviled, raged, blaſphemed, perſecuted, apprehended, accuſed, condemned, buffeted, and at laſt crucified the Lord of Glory. Oh matchleſs wickedneſs! never did Original ſin ſo fully diſcover it ſelf, never did the Hell in the Belial-heart ſo deſperately break forth as here. We ſee here our Corruption in its true colours and malignity; it is the root and fountain of the higheſt impieties; Antichriſt-like, it oppoſes all that is called God; it would have nothing of God remain; it would trample down every appearance of him, not in Reaſon or Laws only, but in his own Son, in God incarnate; and, were it poſſible, it would even crucifie and annihilate the Deity it ſelf: rather than part with its dear luſts, it would have God ceaſe to be.
The next thing conſiderable, is the infinite Merit in Chriſts death: it procured two things for us, Regeneration and Salvation. Firſt, It procured Regeneration for us: This is a moſt precious thing, it new-frames and new-moulds us; it produces a new ſpiritual being; it draws the Divine image and likeneſs upon the heart; it ſets the ſoul into an holy order and rectitude; and whence is it but from the Spirit? Or how is that procured, but by Chriſt and his ſweet-ſmelling Sacrifice? The Apoſtle tells us, That the Holy Ghoſt which renews us, is ſhed on us abundantly through Jeſus Chriſt our Saviour, Tit. 3.5, 6. Through him it is that the Holy Spirit comes down and effects this excellent work in us. Again, it procured Salvation for us. That we are ſaved from our ſpiritual enemies, that we are at laſt crowned with lifeeternal, it is from Jeſus Chriſt alone. Hence the Apoſtle calls him the author of eternal ſalvation, Heb. 5.9; not the Miniſter, but the Author of it, meritoriouſly procuring, and efficaciouſly giving it to his people. But now if there be no ſuch thing as Original ſin, much of the precious purchaſe of Chriſt muſt be loſt; he purchaſed Regeneration, but there being no Original ſin, where or in whom will it be neceſſary? What, in Infants? In thoſe pure innocent ſouls there is nothing to be healed, nothing to be mended or newmade; where there is no ataxy of ſin, there all is in order and harmony; where there is no turpitude of ſin, there all is in ſplendor and glory: here's no need at all of Regeneration. Hence, as St. Auſtin obſerves,Auſt. de Pec. Or. l. 2. c. 29. the Pelagians denying Original ſin, were under a neceſſity to ſay, That Infants did not indigere medico, want the Phyſician Jeſus: and upon this that excellent Father paſſes this cenſure, That therein they erred not in ſome light matter, but in ipſa regula fidei, in the very Rule of Faith by which we are Chriſtians. Or what, in the Adult? I anſwer, They which are without Original ſin, may live without Actual: therefore the Pelagians, who denied Original ſin, held, very conſonantly to their Principles, That men might live without ſin. Thus they argued:Jer. Dial. adu. Pelag. l. 1. c. 2. He that can abſtain one day from ſin, may abſtain two days, three days, thirty days, three hundred days, nay for ever. And again, Si neceſſitatis eſt, peccatum non eſt; Auſt. de perfect. juſt.ſi… voluntatis eſt, vitari poteſt: If the thing be of neceſſity, it is no ſin; if of will, it may be avoided. Take away Original ſin, their arguments muſt hold good: Adam, while totally void of ſin, might have kept himſelf ſo: Why may not all others, if void of Original ſin, do ſo? Having no inward corruption to intice or draw them away unto ſin, they may live without it. Here again there is no need of Regeneration. To go on a little further: Suppoſe a man do fall into one act of ſin; yet one act of ſin, if we believe the Pelagians and Socinians, Auſt. ad Bon. l. 1. c. 1. Cat. Rac. c. 10. Volk. de Ver. Rel. l 5. c. 18.cannot corrupt the human nature or Will; the man may riſe again by his own Will, and all will be well again. As yet there is no need of Regeneration. Nay, ſuppoſe a man to fall into an habit or cuſtom of ſin, in ſome degree, yet why may not the Will, that noble Principle of freedom, extricate it ſelf? The Corruption is not ſeated in nature, but in a contracted habit; why may not the Will by contrary acts unravel that habit, and rid it ſelf of it? And that habit or inclination being gone, what need would there be of Regeneration? An outward Reformation may be neceſſary, but what need of Regeneration? That in Scripture is the renovation of a man originally corrupted: Hence our Saviour preſſing the neceſſity of Regeneration, doth not urge it from the actual ſins of men, but from their natural pravity: That which is born of the fleſh, is fleſh, Joh. 3.6: that is, thoſe who have only a carnal generation, and ſo are originally corrupt, are corrupt; therefore they ſtand in need of Regeneration, or the participation of a new ſpiritual nature. But if there be no ſuch thing as Original corruption, then according to our Saviour's argument, which preſſes it from thence, there is no need at all of Regeneration. Accordingly it may be obſerved, that thoſe men who deny Original ſin, do extremely fumble and ſlubber over that great point of Regeneration, for the moſt part confounding inward Principles with outward Actions.De Ver. Relig. lib. 4. cap. 4. Regenerari ad vitae mores & actiones referendum eſt, ſaith Volkelius: Regeneration is to be referred to the manner and actions of the life.De Servat. pars 4. cap. 6. Ex Chriſto naſci nihil aliud eſt quam ejus ſpiritus participemeſſe, Chriſti autem ſpiritus voluntatis divinae obedientia eſt, ſaith Socinus: To be born of Chriſt, is nothing elſe but to be partakers of his Spirit; and his Spirit is obedience to the Divine Will. All is placed in outward actions; nothing is ſaid of thoſe internal Principles of Grace which are the proper effect of Regeneration; and the Reaſon of this is, becauſe denying Original ſin, they know no other Regeneration, but outward Reformation only. Much after the ſame rate ſpeak ſome other Divines, who, not in expreſs terms denying Original ſin, do yet leſſen and diminiſh it; their diſcourſes of Regeneration proportionable to their Principles, have but little ſavour or ſpiritual reliſh in them: upon the whole matter, we ſee that there is little need of Regeneration. Again, Chriſt purchaſed Salvation, but there being no ſuch thing as Original ſin, Who ſhall be ſaved by him? Shall infants be ſaved by him? Indeed, of ſuch is the Kingdom of Heaven, but what are they ſaved from? Is it from ſin? There is no ſpot in them; Chriſt came in the likeneſs of ſinful fleſh, they do no more; they have no real fleſh of corruption in them. Is it from wrath? There can be none due to ſinleſs creatures. Is it from Satan? He may come and find nothing in them, nothing belonging to his black Kingdom. Is it from the world? They are not yet mentally, morally entred into it, ſo as as to be capable of falling into the ſnares of it; there is therefore nothing at all for infants to be ſaved from. Hence the Fathers in the Council of Carthage do in their Epiſtle to Pope*Non eſt quod in eis ſalvetur, vel tanto pretio redimatur, nihil eſt in eis vitiatum, nihil ſub diaboli poteſtate captivum, nec pro eis fuſus eſt ſanguis in remiſſionem peccatorum. Crab. Conc. Tom. 1. fo. 470. Innocent tell us, That according to the Pelagians, there is nothing in Infants to be ſaved or redeemed; nothing vitiated or held under the power of the Devil; neither was blood ſhed for their remiſſion. Hence St.†Qui dicit, infantilem aetatem non habere quod ſalvet Jeſus, omnibus fidelibus infantibus Chriſtum negat eſſe Jeſum, Jeſus quid eſt? interpretatur Jeſus ſalvator, ſalvator eſt Ieſus; quos non ſalvat, non habendo in eis quod ſalvet, non eſt illis Jeſus. Auſt. de Verb. Apoſt. Ser. 8. Auſtin argues thus, He that ſaith, that Infants have nothing to be ſaved from, denies Chriſt to be a Jeſus to them. What is Jeſus? Jeſus is by interpretation a Saviour, a Saviour is Jeſus; thoſe whom he doth not ſave, becauſe they have nothing to be ſaved from, he is not to them a Jeſus. Thus we ſee, that there being no Original ſin, Infants (which what Chriſtian heart can bear?) are not ſaved by Chriſt. Shall the adult be ſaved by him? As I noted before, they who are without Original ſin, may live without actual; and ſo, being void of all ſin, are uncapable of being ſaved, becauſe they have no ſin to be ſaved from. It was the opinion of*Proſper Con…a Collat. Caſſianus, That Chriſt was, aliorum ſalvator, aliorum ſuſceptor, the Saviour of ſome, the Suſceptor of others; the firſt were drawn in by Grace, the ſecond prevented Grace. This made Proſper ſay, Huic ſententiae is poteſt praebere conſenſum, qui ſe a Chriſto non vult eſſe ſalvatum. He may conſent to this opinion, who would not be ſaved by Chriſt. Caſſianus denied Original ſin; he thought, that in the firſt ſin Adam only ſinned, that the Will in us is as free to good, as it was in Adam before the fall; and hence he held, That the Church was particoloured, part of it was juſtified by Grace, part by Freewill. Theſe latter, whom nature advanced, were more glorious than thoſe whom grace freed: Theſe latter were uncapable of being ſaved, becauſe they had nothing to be ſaved from. Hence it follows, That Chriſt is not the Saviour of all his body, but of part of it; that he ſaves not all his people from their ſins, but ſome. We ſee clearly by theſe things, that if Original ſin be denied, much of Chriſts purchaſe will be made fruitleſs and of no effect. As therefore we would have a part in Chriſt and his purchaſe, we muſt confeſs our ſelves to be pieces of old Adam, and to have a ſhare in his ſin.
It being certain, That there is corruption in us, we ſhould reflect and take notice of it. This is that which depraves the whole man, and turns him into a man of ſin: every faculty groans under the burden of it, every part hath its wounds and putrifying ſores. The Underſtanding, a ſpark of immortality, is dropt out of its orb, fallen from the firſt truth and fountain of light; darkneſs covers it, a black vail holds back its eyes from the glories and beauties of the ſpiritual world. The Thoughts, which are the firſt-born of the mind, are vain empty things, like the Fools eyes in the ends of the earth, gariſh and running up and down from one thing to another, having no more dependance than is in the broken words or ſpeeches of diſtracted men; like Quickſilver never fixed, unleſs it be upon trifles or ſinful objects. The Will, the principle of liberty, turns away from the ſupreme good; as a ſlave it lies in the chains of luſt, impotent, and in it ſelf unable to lift up a choice or option towards happineſs: its averſeneſs to that good which would ennoble and beautifie it, reproaches it with the fall; its propenſity to that evil, which ſoils and deturpates it, upbraids it as an apoſtate from its original. The Affections have loſt their wings, and ſink down to the lower world as their center; there they lye in the mire and turpitude of inordinate luſts, and without the elevations of Grace they cannot raiſe up ſo much as a deſire towards the things above: they are Apoſtates from Heaven, and Rebels againſt that Reaſon which came down from thence to reign over them. The Members of the Body, are all inſtruments of iniquity, ready to execute all the commands of ſin; the whole man is overſpread with an univerſal contagion. This is the root of bitterneſs, the ſeed of all manner of impieties. Every one doth not actually ſay with Pharaoh, Who is the Lord? Nor with the bloody Jew, Crucifie the Son of God; nor like the proud Antichriſt, exalt himſelf above God: but all theſe are ſeminally in us, there is aliquid intus, ſomewhat in every ones heart anſwering thereunto. There is that in us, which would trample down every appearance of God in Reaſon, ſacred Laws, holy Motions, offers of Grace; nay, and that which, if it were poſſible, would annihilate God himſelf. This is an abyſs of all evil, this is a black chaos which hath all manner of iniquities in it; and upon the warmth of temptation, will be ready to bring them forth into act. Oh! What matter of lamentation is here? How ſhould we mourn over this innate corruption? Is it nothing to us to have immortal ſpirits void of God and all ſpiritual perfections? Nothing, to have a Reaſon without light, a Will without liberty? Nothing, to have a troubled ſea of inordinate paſſions, and innumerable luſts creaking there? Nothing, to carry an Hell in our own boſom, to have an enmity againſt that good, which, if received, would perfect and make us happy; and a proneneſs to that evil, which, being imbraced, will corrupt and make us miſerable for ever? May we here ſpare our tears? Or can we do leſs than fill our ſelves with ſhame and ſelf-abhorrency? Paulinus would not let his Picture be drawn, becauſe of the in-dwelling ſin. Erubeſco pingere quod ſum, ſaid he; I bluſh to paint what I am. St. Paul cryes out, O wretched man that I am, who ſhall deliver me from the body of this death! Rom. 7.24. How ſadly ſhould we look upon that forlorn ſpectacle, I mean our corrupt ſelves! How ſhould we lothe our ſelves, and lye low at Gods feet, if peradventure he may give us a better nature! Of what vaſt concern is it to wait upon God in Ordinances, and by ardent devotions to preſs into Heaven, that there may be a new-creation in us! And when that great work is wrought in us, How ſhould we lift up free-grace, and ſing Hoſanna's to it for ever! How often ſhould we have that in our mouths, What hath God wrought! We marred the firſt Creation, and he hath ſet up a ſecond. We lay in the ruines of the fall, and he came down thither to rear up his own image in us again. Graces are now growing there, where ſin had its ſeat; the Holy Spirit now inhabits there, where Satan dwelt and reigned: And what an excellent change is this! Let us diſtinguiſh our ſelves according to the two Adams. Whatever is vitious or defective in us, relates to the firſt Adam; whatever is gracious or perfective of our nature, relates to the ſecond. Never can we be too humble under the ſenſe of Original corruption which adheres to our nature. Never can we be too thankful for that ſupernatural grace which gave us a new nature. Becauſe we have a Divine nature in us, we ſhould live ſutably to it. Had we had but one ſingle creation, we had been eternally bound to ſerve and glorifie God; but when he ſets to his hand the ſecond time, to create us again in Chriſt Jeſus unto good works, how ſhould our lives anſwer thereunto! When in the horrible Earthquake at Antioch the Emperor Trajanus was drawn out of the ruines, it was a very great obligation upon him to ſerve and honour God who ſo ſignally delivered him; how much greater obligation lyes upon us, who are drawn by an act of grace out of the ruines of the fall? How ſhould we live in a juſt decorum to that Divine nature which we are made partakers of! We ſhould ſtill be bringing forth the fruits of the Spirit, and ſhewing forth the praiſes of him who hath called us out of darkneſs into his marvelous light. Again, becauſe the reliques of corruption are ſtill remaining even in the regenerate, we ſhould ever be upon our ſpiritual watch; we ſhould ſet guards within and without, that ſin may not creep in by the ports of ſenſe, nor riſe up out of the deep of the heart. When a temptation approaches to us, we ſhould ſay as an holy man did, Auferte ignem, adhuc enim paleas habeo; Take away the fire, yet I have chaff within. If a Jonah fall into a pet againſt God; if a David wallow in adultery and blood; if a Peter deny his Lord with a curſe, What may not we do! The remnants of Original ſin in us, ſhould make us keep a watch over our hearts, and ponder the path of our feet. Our fleſh is an Eve, a Tempter within us; nay, a kind of Devil, as an Ancient ſpeaks, Nemo ſibi de ſuo palpet, quiſque ſibi Satan eſt.