MOST SURE AND JUST PUNISH- MENT OF SINS.. THE TENTH SERMON, We have lastly now to discourse of sin, which, as I told you, is to be referred to the treatise of the law. Of which that I may lawfully, religiously, rightly, and profitably speak to the edifying of you all, 1 shall desire you to make your humble prayers with me to God the Father, in the name of Christ his Son, our gracious Lord and Mediator. of Sin is of most men taken for error; for that, I mean, whereby we do not only err from the thing which is true, right, just and good, but do also follow and decline to that which is naught. The Latins derive their word peccatum, sin, of pellicatus, whore-hunting; which is a fault of wedded people that are corrupted with the spirit of fornication, as when men prefer harlots before their lawful wives. And this definition, verily, doth wonderfully agree to this present treatise. For all we that do believe are by faith hand-fasted to our God, as to our spouse and husband: if therefore we prefer other gods before him, or choose rather to serve them; if, I say, we let pass the true goods in deed, to follow the shadow of goods, vain hopes, and the pernicious pleasures of this world; then”do we sin indeed, and commit fornication against our spouse and husband?, But the learned sort do for the most part put a difference betwixt peccatum and delictum, which both, in effect, do signify sins: but they call that delictum, when the thing is not done that should be done; and that they call peccatum, when that is done that should be left undone. St Hierome seemeth to have taken delictum for the first fall to sin
[1 The Father—Mediator, added by the translator.] [2 and—husband, an addition of the translator’s.] [8 which—sins, the translator’s.] [ —queerimus quid significent (delicta), quove distent a peceatis..]
[Aiunt enim quod παραπτώματα (delicta) quasi initia peccatorum sint:]
[cum cogitatio tacita subrepit, et ex aliqua parte conniventibus nobis,]
[necdum tamen nos impulit ad ruinam.Peccatum vero esse, quum]
St Augustine sayeth that peccatum is committed of him that sinneth wittingly, and delictum of him that sinnneth of ignorance. I see that those words are in some places confounded, and that the one is used for the other. In some places the error, or delictum, is used as the milder term; peccatum, in a more grievous sense; and an heinous crimea mischief, a revolting or wickedness, for the greatest of 4116, For St Augustine saith: “Neither is every peccatum crimen?, because every erimen is peccatum.” Therefore we say, that the life of a man living in this transitory world may be found to be without that heinous offence, crimen, for which all the world doth cry out upon and accuse him?: but “if we say we have nullum peccatum, no sin,” (as the apostle saith,) “we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” Among the Hebrews sin is called by sundry names, which do import and signify overthwartness, perverseness, a fault, an error, a revolting, infirmity, vice, ignorance, and transgression. For to transgress doth signify to depart from the truth, from our duty or office, not to keep the right path, but to turn away from the preseript rule of the law of God. Now that rule, or law of God, is of the Hebrews called Thora, that is to say, a direction, or a leading by the hand; for it doth direct a man in the ways that are acceptable to the Lord: and therefore the Greeks call sin by the names of ἀνομία καὶ παρανομία. Again, in the Hebrew tongue, sin is as much to say as a turning away from good to evil; also a revolting, as when thou drawest thy neck from out of the yoke of his power to whom thou art a servant: finally, it signifieth the crime or guilt whereby we endanger ourselves to the rod of punishment.
[quid opere consummatum pervenit ad finem.—Hieron. Comment. in]
[Ep. ad Ephes. cap. 2, Tom. 1v. col. 338, Par. 1706.] [> Potest etiam videri illud esse delictum quod imprudenter, id est,]
[ignoranter; illud peccatum quod ab sciente committitur.—Aug. Queest.]
[sup. Levit. cap. 20, Opp. Tom. 1v. fol. 43, col. 2, Par. 1531.) [6 Crimen vero, scelus, defectionem et impietatem multo gravis-]
[simam, Lat.; but erimen for heinous wickedness, &e.] [7 Neque enim quia peccatum est omne crimen, ideo crimen est]
[etiam omne peccatum.—Aug. Enchir. ad Laurent. cap. 64, Opp. Tom.]
[1 fol. 37, col. 4.] [8 sanctorum hominum, Lat.; of saints.] [9 for which—accuse him, added by the translator. ] [10 a recto, Lat.] [11 See Decade 1. Serm. 1. p. 49. ]]
Verily St Augustine taketh much pains to find out a proper definition of sin. In his second book De Consensu Evangelistarum he saith: “Sin is the transgression of the lawl.” Ad Simplicianum, Lib. 1.: “Sin is an inordinateness or perverseness of man; that is, a turning from the more excellent Creator, and a turning to the inferior creatures.” De Fide contra Manicheos, cap. 8, he saith: “What is it else to sin, but to err in the precepts of truth, or in the truth itself3?” Again, Contra Faustum Manicheum, Lib. xxIL. cap. 27: “Sin is a deed, a word, or a wish, against the law of God%” The same Augustine, De duabus animabus contra Manicheos, cap. 11, saith: Sin is a will to retain or obtain that which justice forbiddeth, and is not free to abstain” And In Retract. Lib. 1. cap. -15, he saith: “That will is a motion of the mind, without compulsion, either not to lose or else to obtain some one thing or others.”
All which definitions as I do ποὺ utterly reject, so do I wish this to be considered and thought of with the rest: Sin is the natural corruption of mankind, and the action which ariseth of it contrary to the law of God, whose wrath, that is, both death and sundry punishments, it bringeth upon us. Thou hearest how well this definition doth consist upon his parts. Thou hearest in it of our natural corruption; in the naming whereof appeareth, how this definition [! Porro peccatum est legis transgressio.—Aug. de Consens. Evang. Lib. 11. cap. 4, Tom. 1v. fol. 85, col. 4.]
[2 Est autem peccatum hominis inordinatio atque perversitas; id est, a pracstantiore conditore aversio, et ad condita inferiora conversio. —Id. ad Simplic. Lib. 1. Tom. 1v. fol. 135, col. 3.]
[8 Peccare enim quid aliud est, nisi in veritatis preeceptis, vel in ipsa errare veritate?—Id. de Fide con. Manich. cap. 8, Tom. ΥἹ. fol. 117, col. 4.]
[6 Ergo peccatum est factum, vel dictum, vel concupitum aliquid contra sternam legem.—Id. cont. Faust. Manich. Lib. xxi. cap. 27, Tom. vi. fol. 84. col. 1.] abbreviation in old copies ef un.) liberum est abstinere —Id. de duab. [5 Ergo peccatum est voluntas retinendi vel consequendi quod justitia vetat, et unde (Bullinger reads, ez non, probably by mistaking the
[anim. cont. Manich. cap. 11, Tom. vi. fol. 32, col. 2.] [6 Ipsam voluntatem definivi dicens: Voluntas est animi motus,]
[cogente nullo, ad aliquid vel non amittendum vel adipiscendum.—1Id.]
[Retract. Lib. 1. cap. 15, Tom. 1. fol. 5, col. 3.]]
doth not agree to the sin of our first parents, in whom there was no natural corruption: of which I mean to speak in place convenient. Thou hearest the action named, which ariseth of the natural corruption, and is repugnant to the law of God. Thou hearest that sin doth bring upon us the wrath of God, that is, death and sundry sorts of punishments appointed by the mouth of God to plague us for our sins. Of which I will speak in order as they lie, so far forth as the Lord shall give me grace and ability.
Now therefore it seemeth that this treatise may most aptly be begun at the discussing of the original cause and beginning? of sin. Some there be that do derive the original cause of evil or sin from the influence of the planets, saying, “I sinned, because I was born under an unlucky planet.” Other there are, which, when they sin and are rebuked for it, do make this answer: “Not I, but the devil is in fault, that I have committed this grievous crime.” And sometime, laying aside all excuses, they do directly cast the blame upon God, and say: “Why, God would that it should be so; for if he would not have had it so, I had not sinned.” Another saith: “Since God could have letted it, and would not, he is the cause and author of my sin.” But it is no new thing now that men do whet their blasphemous tongues against God, the maker and ruler of all things; for our first parents, when they had sinned and were accused of it by God himself, found a shift for to translate the sin, which they committed, from themselves to other, and would not confess the truth as it was in very deed. Such is the abominable wickedness of man. For Adam, as it were, answering God overthwartly, casteth the fault of his offence, not only? upon his wife which God had coupled unto him, but also upon God himself. The woman,” saith he, “whom thou gavest to be with me, gave me of the tree!, and I did eat.” As if he should have said; If thou hadst not given me the woman, I had not sinned. But the Lord coupled him to a wife, not to the end that she should be an occasion of evil, but that the man might be in
[7 et auctore, Lat. omitted; and author. ] [8 homines, Lat.; men. ]]
[᾿ς [9 non tam—quam, Lat.; not so much upon his wife, as upon God.] [10 dedit mihi pomum, Lat.; gave me the apple.]]
the better case and condition. Again, the woman doth simply impute the cause of that evil unto the devil, saying: “The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.” Lo, these are most corrupt, false, wicked, and detestable opinions touching the original cause of sin, wherewith the justice and truth of « God is mightily offended. Neither is the nature of man the cause of sin. For God, which created all things, did also create the nature of man, and made it good, even as all things else which he created were also good. Therefore the nature of man was good. For it is an accidental quality that happened to man either in, or immediately after, his fall, and not a substantial property, to have his nature so spotted with corruption as now it is>. Now we, being born in sin of sinful progenitors, have sin by descent as our natural property; for St Augustine, writing, De Fide contra Manicheos, cap. 9, saith: “And if we say that any men are evil by nature, we mean, that they are so because of the original descent of our first parents’ sin, wherein we mortal men are wholly born3” But this now requireth a more exact and ample declaration.
That the devil alone is not the author of sin, so that, when we sin, the blame thereof should redound to him, and we that sinned escape without fault, this doth greatly argue; because it is in his power to egg and persuade, but not to enforce a man to do evil. For God by his power restraineth the devil from being able to do the thing that he would do: he can do no more than God permitteth him to do. For if he had no power over an herd of filthy swine, how much less authority hath he over the excellent souls of God’s most excellent creatures! He hath, I confess, great subtilties, and more than rhetorical force, wherewith to persuade us: but God is stronger, and never ceaseth to prompt good and wholesome counsels unto the souls of his faithful servants. Neither doth he permit more to Satan than is for our commodity: as is to be seen in the example of that holy man, the patient Job; and
[1 valde bona, Lat.; very good.] [2 mox ab initio talis qualis nunc est indita, Lat.; which is even]
[from the first imparted so as it now is. [3 Sed et si aliquos naturaliter dicimus malos, propter originem]
[veteris peccati dicimus, in quo jam nostra mortalitas nascitur.— August.]
[de Fide cont. Manich. cap. 9, Opp. Tom. v1. fol. 117, eol. 4.]]
ol χ.7 OF SIN, AND OF THE KINDS THEREOF. 363 also in the example of Paul, 2 Cor. xii., and in his words, saying, “God is faithful, which will not suffer us to be tempted above that we are able to bear%” They therefore are vainly seduced, which cast the fault of their sin upon the devil’s shoulders.
To proceed: if thou demandest of them which lay the blame of their sin upon their evil destiny, what destiny is? they will answer, either that it is a course knit together by eternity and linked to itself, as it were a certain chain and continual row of counsels and works necessarily following one upon another’s neck according to the disposition and ordinance of God; or else that it is the evil stars or planets. Now, if thou demandest again, who made the stars? they have none other answer but God: it followeth therefore, consequently, that they enforce the cause of their sin upon God himself. But all the ancient and best philosophers did never pretend or allege destiny, much less such Christians as did freely confess the mighty power of their God and Maker. And even among our men, I mean, among them that would seem to be Christians, they which stood in the opinion of destiny and constellations, were such kind of fellows as wise men would be ashamed to follow them as authors. Bardesanes imputed to destiny the conversations of mortal men. And the Priscillianists, who were condemned in the first council held at Toledo, thought and taught that man is tied to fatal stars, and hath his body compact according to the twelve signs in heaven, placing Aries in the head, Taurus in the neck, and so consequently to every sign his several limbs”. St
[4 1 Cor. x. 13, vos—potestis, Lat.] [> as did—maker, not in Lat.] [6 Bardesanes was a Syrian, of Edessa, and lived in the second]
[century of the Christian era. Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Lib. 1v. cap. 30.]
[Mosheim, Eccles. Hist. Book 1. cent. 2, part 2, chap. 5, 8.] [7 Astruunt etiam (Priscillianistee) fatalibus stellis homines colli~]
[gatos, ipsumque corpus nostrum secundum duodecim signa cceli esse]
[compositum, sicut hi qui mathematici vulgo appellantur: constituentes]
[in capite arietem, taurum in cervice, geminos in humeris, cancrum in]
[pectore; et cetera nominatim signa percurrentes, ad plantas usque]
[perveniunt, &e.—August. de Heres. cap. 70, Opp. Tom. v1. fol. 6, col.]
[4 Priscillian lived in the middle of the fourth century, in Spain.]
[Mosheim, Eccles. Hist. Book 1m. Cent. 4, part 2, chap. 5, δ 21, 22.—]
[The first council of Toledo was held A.p. 405.]]
Augustine, In opusculo LXXX1L questionum, Quest. 45, confuting soundly the destinies of planets, among other his reasons Agint saith: “The conceiving of twins in the mother’s womb, because ny “ame.. a. it is made in one and the same act, as the physicians testify (whose discipline is far more certain and manifest than that of the astrologers), doth happen in so small a moment of time, that there is not so much time as two minutes of a minute betwixt the conceiving of the one and the other. How therefore cometh it, that in twins of one burden there is so great a diversity of deeds, wills, and chances, considering that they of necessity must needs have one and the same planet in their conception, aud that the mathematicals do give the constellation of them both as if it were but of one man’? “To these words of St Augustine great light may be added, if you annex to them and examine narrowly the example of Esau and Jacob’s birth and sundry dispositions. The same Augustine, writing to Boniface against two epistles of the Pelagians, Lib. π. cap. 6, saith: “They which affirm that destiny doth rule, will have not only our deeds and events, but also our very wills, to depend upon the placing of the stars at the time wherein every man is either conceived or born, which placing they are wont to call constellations. But the grace of God doth not only go above all stars and heavens, but also above the very angels.themselves. Moreover these disputers for destiny do attribute to destiny both the good and evil that happen to men. But God, in the evils that fall upon men, i doth duly and worthily recompense them for their ill deserts: but the good, which they have, he doth bestow upon them not for their merits, but of his own favour and merciful goodness through grace, that cannot be looked for of duty; laying both good and evil upon us men not through the temporal course of planets, but by the deed and eternal counsel of his severity and goodness. So then we see that neither the falling out of
[1 Conceptus autem geminorum, quoniam uno concubitu efficitur]
[attestantibus medicis, quorum disciplina multo est certior atque mani-]
[festior, tam parvo puncto temporis contingit, ut in duas minutas mi-]
[nutarum non tendatur. Unde ergo in geminis tanta diversitas actionum]
[et eventuum et voluntatum, quos necesse est eandem constellationem]
[conceptionalem habere, et amborum unam constellationem dare mathe-]
[maticos, tanquam unius hominis >—Lib. de divers. queest. 83. quest.]
[45 Tom. 1v. fol. 116, col. 4.]]
good or evil hath any relation unto the planets?” Therefore this place may be concluded with the words of the Lord in the prophet Jeremy, saying: “Thus saith the Lord, Ye shall not learn after the manner of the heathen, and ye shall not be afraid for the tokens of heaven; for the heathen are afraid of such. Yea, all the observations of the Gentiles are vanity3.” For the planets have no force to do either good or evil And therefore the blame of sins is not to be imputed thereunto. I have now to prove unto you, that God is not the cause of sin, or the author of evil. “God,” say they, would have it 50. For if he would not have had it so, I had not sinned; for who may resist his power Ὁ Again, “Since he could have letted it, and would not, he is the author of my sin and wickedness.” As though we knew not the crafty quarrels and subtle shifts of mortal men. Who, I pray you, knoweth not, that God doth not deal with us by his absolute power, but by an appointed law and ordinance; I mean, by commodious means and a probable order? God could, I know, by his absolute power keep off all evil; but yet he neither can nor will either corrupt or mar his creature and excellent order. He dealeth with us men therefore after the manner of men: he appointeth us laws, and layeth before us rewards and punishments: he commandeth to embrace the good and eschew the evil; to the performing whereof he doth neither deny us his grace, without which we can do nothing; neither
[2 Fatum quippe qui affirmant, de siderum positione ad tempus quo]
[concipitur quisque vel nascitur, quas constellationes vocant, non solum]
[actus et eventa, verum etiam ipsas nostras voluntates, pendere con-]
[tendunt. Dei vero gratia non solum omnia sidera et omnes ccelos,]
[verum etiam omnes angelos supergreditur. Deinde fati assertores et]
[bona et mala hominum fato tribuunt: Deus autem in malis hominum]
[merita eorum debita retributione persequitur, bona vero per indebitam]
[gratiam misericordi voluntate largitur; utrumque faciens non per]
[stellarum temporale consortium, sed per suse severitatis et bonitatis]
[sternum altumque consilium. Neutrum ergo pertinere videmus ad]
[fatum.—Id. cont. duas epist. Pelag. ad Boniface. Lib. 11. cap. 6, Tom.]
[vir. fol. 182, col. 2.] [83 Ergo quod sidus Saturni inclemens et asperum vel crudele, Ve-]
[neris benignum et mite ab astrologis appellatur, vanitas est vanitatum,]
[omitted; therefore, that the star of Saturn is called by astrologers]
[unkind and harsh or cruel, and the star of Venus kindly and mild,]
[is vanity of vanities. ] [4 legitimo, Lat.)]
doth he despise our diligent good-will and earnest travail. Herein if man be slack, the negligence and fault is imputed to man himself, and not to God, although he could have kept off the sin!, and did not; for it was not his duty to keep it off, lest peradventure he should disturb the order and destroy the work which he himself had made and ordained. Therefore God is not the author of sin or naughtiness. Touching which matter I will first add some? testimonies of the holy scripture; then answer to sundry objections of the adversaries of this doctrine; and lastly declare the original cause or headspring of sin and wickedness.
The testimonies which teach that God is not the author all ΟΥ̓ sin or naughtiness are many in number: but among the rest this is an argument of greatest force and probability, because God is said to be good naturally; and that all which he created were made good? in their creation. Whereupon it js that Solomon saith: “God hath not made death; neither hath he delight in the destruction of the living: for he created all things, that they might have their being; and the beginnings of the world were healthful; and there is no poison of destruction in them, nor the kingdom of hell upon the earth: for righteousness is immortal, (but unrighteousness bringeth death:) and the ungodly call it to them both with words and works, and thereby come to nought:” and so forth, as is to be seen in the first chapter of the book of Wisdom; which words do passingly agree with the first chapter of that most excellent prophet Moses.
In the fifth psalm David saith: “Thou art the God that hast no pleasure in wickedness: neither shall any evil dwell with thee. The unjust shall not stand in thy sight: for thou hatest all them that work iniquity. Thou shalt destroy them that speak leasing: the Lord doth abhor both the bloodthirsty and deceitful man.” Lo, thou canst devise nothing more contrary to the nature of God than sin and naughtiness: as
[[ potentia sua, Lat. omitted; by his power.] [2 clara, Lat. omitted; clear.] [8 valde bona, Lat.] [6 sapiens ille, Lat.; the wise man. Bullinger says not Solomon.]
[Cf. Vol. τ. p. 225, note 12.] [5 This parenthesis is not in Bullinger’s Latin, nor in the Septua-]
[gint, nor Vulgate, nor Auth. Ver.; but it is in Coverdale’s Bible, 1535.] [6 cum primis capitibus, Lat. ]]
thou mayest more at large perceive in the thirty-fourth chapter of the book of Job.
The wise man saith: “God created man good; but they sought out many inventions of their own.” And therefore the apostle Paul” deriveth sin, damnation, and death, not from God, but from Adam; and from God he fetcheth grace, forgiveness, and life, through the mediator Jesus Christ. That place of Paul is far more manifest than that it needeth any large exposition: let it not only be considered and? diligently weighed of the readers and hearers; whom I would wish always to bear in mouth and mind the very words and meaning of this notable sentence?: Even as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin:” and so forth as followeth.
The same apostle in the seventh to the Romans doth evidently declare that the law is holy, the commandment good and just; and thereby he doth insinuate, that in God or in his will there is not, and in his law, which is the will of God, there springeth not, any spot or blur of sin or naughtiness. In our flesh, saith he, the evil lurketh, and out of us iniquity ariseth. “I know,” saith he, “that in me, that is in my flesh, there is no good.” In that chapter there are many sentences to be found which do wonderfully confirm this argument.
Again, in the third to the Romans the same apostle saith: “If our unrighteousness setteth forth the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous which taketh vengeance? (I speak after the manner of men;” that is, I use the words of wicked people;) “God forbid: for how then shall God judge the world? For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why am I as yet judged as a sinner?” &c. Verily, if God were the author of sin and all evil, and that he would have the wicked to be such as in very deed they are, then why, I pray you, should he judge or punish them as transgressors, since they by sinning fulfilled his will?
[7 ad Roma. 5 cap., Lat.) [8 rather, but:—But ed. 1577 has, let it only be considered and]
[diligently, &c.] [9 The translator has here paraphrased Bullinger’s one word,]
[Recita.]]
To this place also doth belong that testimony of the blessed evangelist and apostle John, in his canonical epistle, i. where he saith: “If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him, For all that is in the world, as the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that fulfilleth the will of the Father! abideth for ever.” Lo here, God is utterly free from all evil: evil, saith he, is not of the Father, but of the world. And he which doeth the will of the Father! doeth not what the world will, but what God will. Therefore these two, good and evil, sin and the will of God, are directly opposed and repugnant the one against the other. These testimonies, though few in number, are notwithstanding, in my judgment, sufficiently significant and able to persuade a godly-disposed hearer.
Now upon this we do first infer a conclusion, and boldly warrant that point of Catholic doctrine, which hath ever since the apostles’ time always been defended with much diligence against the unpure philosophy of some, (although yet I do not utterly condemn all the parts of philosophy, knowing very well that some points thereof are very necessary and profitable to the zealous lovers of God and godliness,) that God is not the author of evil, or cause of sin. Then out of the same testimonies we gather, that the original cause of sin or evil is derived of man himself, and his suggester and provoker, the devil: so yet that we say, that the devil, being first himself corrupted, did corrupt man, being nevertheless not able of himself to have done anything, had not man of his own accord consented unto evil.
And here we must set before our eyes the fall of our first father Adam, that by the consideration thereof we may be the better able to judge of the original cause of sin and iniquity.
God created Adam, the first father of us all, according to his own similitude and likeness; that is to say, he made him good, most pure, most holy, most just, and immortal, and adorned him with every excellent gift and faculty, so that there was nothing wanting to him in God, which was available to perfect felicity. Touching this similitude or
[1 Dei, Lat.]
likeness to God I shall take occasion upon the words of Paul to speak hereafter. So then he was endued with a very divine, pure, and sharp understanding. His will was free, without constraint, and absolutely holy: he had power to do either good or evil. Moreover God gave him a law, which might instruct him what to do and what to leave undone. For God in saying, Thou shalt not eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil,” did simply require at his hands faith and obedience, and that he should wholly depend upon God: all which he had to do, not by compulsion or necessity, but of his own accord and free good-will. For very truly and holily writ the wise man in the fifteenth of Ecclesiasticus?, saying: “God made man in the beginning, and left him in the hand of his counsel. He gave him his commandments and precepts: if thou wilt, thou shalt keep my commandments, and they shall preserve thee.” Therefore, when the serpent tempted the mind of man, and did persuade him to taste of the forbidden tree, man knew well enough what peril was laid before him, and how the serpent’s counsel was flatly repugnant to the Lord’s commandment. In the mean time neither did God compel him, nor Satan in the serpent enforce him to sin, while he resisted and did withstand him. For God had said: “Ye shall not eat of that tree, nor touch it: if ye do, ye shall die for it.” Therefore he was at his own free choice, and in the hand of his own counsel, either to eat or not to eat: yea, God declared his mind unto him in giving precise commandment, that he should not eat; and to the commandment he annexed the danger of the breach thereof, withdrawing him thereby from the eating of the fruit, and saying, Lest perhaps thou die.” And as Satan could not, so also he did not, shew any violence, but used such probable words to counsel him as he could, and did indeed at length persuade him. For when the woman’s will gave ear to the word of the devil, her mind departed from the word of God; whereby she rejected the good law of God, did of her own perverse will commit that sin, and drew her husband that yielded of his own accord into the fellowship of the same offence: as the scripture doth most significantly express in these words:
[2 verses 14—16, according to the Vulgate. Our Authorised Version]
[is a little different, following the Greck LXX.] 24 [BULLINGER, 11.]]
“And the woman, seeing that the tree was good to eat of, and pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise!, took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave to her husband with her, and he did eat also.” Lo, here thou hast the beginning of evil, the devil: thou hast heard what it was that moved the mind or will of man unto that evil, to wit, the false persuasion of the devil, or his subtle praise of the fruit of the tree, and so consequently a mere lie; and the pleasant shew of the delicate tree. But that which our first parents did, they did of their own accord and free good will, being led by hope to obtain a more excellent life and profounder wisdom, which the seducer had falsely promised them, We do therefore conclude, that sin doth spring not of God, which hateth and doth prohibit all evil, but of the devil; the? free election of our grand-parents and their corrupted will, which was depraved by the devil’s lie, and the false shew of feigned good. So then the devil and the yielding or corrupted mind of man are the very causes of sin and naughtiness,
To proceed now: this evil doth by descent flow from our ο. first parents into all their posterity, so that at this day sin doth not spring from elsewhere but of ourselves, that is to say, of our corrupt judgment, depraved will, and the suggestion of the devil. For the root of evil is yet remaining in our flesh by reason of that first corruption: which root bringeth forth a corrupt branch in nature like unto itself: which branch Satan even now, as he hath done always, doth by his sleights, subtilties, and lies, cherish, tend, and tender, as an imp of his own planting; and yet notwithstanding he laboureth in vain, unless we yield ourselves to his hands to be framed as he listeth.
Now therefore, that there may herein appear less doubt or darkness, I will, for confirmation’s sake, add two most evident testimonies; the one out of the writings of the evangelists, the other out of the doctrine of the apostles.
The Lord in the gospel saith: “The devil was a murderer from the beginning, and stood not in the truth, because the truth is not in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own; because he is a liar, and the father
[1 concupiscibile ad contemplandum, Lat. ] [2 and the, Lat.] [3 voluntas, Lat.] [4 et declarandi, Lat.]]
of lies” By these words of the Lord we gather, that evil is to be referred to the devil, who, being created in truth and goodness, did not stand fast in truth and goodness, but degenerated from his nature wherein he was made good, and fell into another nature corrupt and wicked, and hath out of himself dispersed all evil (as it appeared by the history of our first parents) into the world; to wit, murder and lies (under which two are comprehended all other evils), of which he is expressly said to be the father, that is, the cause, the author, the well-spring, and beginning: not because he was made such an one of God, but because he stood not fast in the truth. To them therefore that do demand’, of what beginning Satan came, and whether God made him or no? our answer is, That God indeed made all the angels, and those also which afterward did become reprobates and wicked devils: but we do not therefore say that the cause of evil doth redound to God. For we know that God in the beginning made all the angels good; for all things which he made were good. Furthermore it is said that the devil stood not in the truth; that is, that he revolted from the truth: from which he could not have revolted, if he had never stood in it. Therefore God in the beginning did place all his angels in the truth. He required of them truth, faith or fidelity, and the duty that they ought? him: which they were able to have done, if they themselves would. But they did disloyally fall from their allegiance, and sinned, as the apostle Peter testifieth, against the Lord; and therefore the fault of their falsehood and of all their naughtiness was not in God, but in the rebellious and revolting angel. For since the time of his fall there is no truth, no fidelity, no integrity, no fear of God, no light or goodness to be found in him. Therefore truly said St John in the canonical epistle: “He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning.” For he is the first sinner, and the beginning of sin. To this also may this note be added?, that of Peter and John the devil is said to sin. For sin is repugnant to the will of
[6 disertissimis, Lat.; most express. ] [6 sua culpa, Lat. omitted; by his own fault.] [7 objicientibus, Lat.] [8 i.e. owed.] [9 in his omnibus illud observabile, Lat. ] 24—2]
God: therefore God would not have had him perish: whereupon, since he perished, it followeth that he perished, not by the fault of God, but by his own fault.
Let us now hear the other testimony concerning the corrupt will of man, which is in very deed the cause of sin. Β0 James the apostle saith: “Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man. But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away and enticed of his own concupiscence. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin; and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.” In these words St James, I hope, doth evidently enough make God to be free from all fault of sin, and doth derive it of us ourselves, shewing by the way the beginning and proceeding of sin, Neither doth James in this place gainsay the place in Genesis, where Moses said, God tempted Abraham.” For in Moses to tempt doth signify to make a trial or a proof: but in this argument of ours it signifieth to stir or draw to evil, and so to corrupt us. Therefore God, as he cannot, saith he, be tempted of evil; that is to say, as God is by nature good and uncorrupt; so doth he not corrupt, deprave, or defile! any man with evil; for that is contrary to the nature of God. From whence then hath sin his beginning? The holy apostle answereth, saying: “Yea, every one is tempted, corrupted, and drawn into evil, while he is withdrawn and enticed with his own concupiscence.” Lo here, sin taketh beginning of our concupiscence, and is accomplished and finished by our own work and labour. Note here, by the way, what a weight and emphasis every one of the apostle’s words doth carry with it. For first, he maketh concupiscence our own, or proper to us all, even as the Lord before did say of Satan, “When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own.” Now because concupiscence is our own, therefore sin is our own also. For concupiscence doth withdraw us from that that is true, just, and good, to that which is false, unjust, and evil. The same concupiscence enticeth us, that is, by making ἃ shew of false hope it doth deceive us: as fowlers are wont with meat to entice birds into their nets, which, when they have deceived them, they catch up and kill. What, I pray you, could be
[1 immergit, Lat.]]
spoken more plainly? We are by our own concupiscence cast into evil: this concupiscence draweth us from God; it doth entice, and utterly deceive us. And then, having laid the foundation of sin and opened the well-spring from whence it floweth, he doth very properly allude and by an allegory shew us the genealogy, that is, the beginning and proceeding of sin. That concupiscence, saith he, which is proper unto us all, doth, as it were a matrix, conceive sin in us; and immediately after doth bring it forth; to wit, when our lust bursteth out into the act when we do greedily prosecute that which we lusted after, and, being once obtained, we do enjoy it against the law of God: upon the neck whereof death doth follow without intermission; for the reward of sin is death.”
I have, I trust, by these evident proofs of scripture plainly declared that God is not the cause of evil; but our corruptible will or concupiscence, and the devil, which stirreth, provoketh, and inflameth our depraved nature to sin and wickedness, as he which is the tempter and utter enemy to mankind and his salvation?.
It will not be amiss here to hear the objections of certain Objections cavillers against this doctrine, and to learn how to answer them according to the truth. Some there are which, when they see that we derive sin not of the nature of God but of the corruptible will of man and false suggestion of the devil, do presently object, that God created Adam, and so consequently created sin in Adam To this we answer; that sin is the corruption of the good nature made by God, and not a creature created by God either in or with man. God created man good: but man, being left to his own counsel, did through the persuasion of Satan, by his own action and depraved will, corrupt the goodness that God created in him: so now that sin is proper to man, I mean, man’s corrupt action against the law of God, and not a creature created in him of God. To this they reply: But the will and ability that was in Adam, was it from elsewhere than from God himself? Undoubtedly, no; it was from God. Therefore, say they, sin is of God. I deny it; for God gave not to Adam will and power of working, to the end that he
[2 corruptam, Lat.] [ omnis boni, Lat.] [4 in Adam, not in Lat.] [6 proprium hominis, Lat.]
should work evil; for by express commandment he forbad him to do wickedness. Therefore Adam himself did naughtily apply the will and power, which he received of God, by using them untowardly. The prodigal son received money at his father’s hand; whose meaning was, not that he should waste it prodigally with riotous living, but that he might have whereupon to live and supply the want of his necessities. Wherefore when he had lavishly lasht it out, and utterly undone himself, the fault was in himself for abusing it, and not in his father for giving it unto him!. Furthermore, to have the power to do good and evil, as Adam had of God, is of itself a thing without fault: even as also to have poison, to bear a weapon, or wear a sword, is a thing that no man can worthily blame. They have in them a force to do good or harm; they are not naught unless they be abused: and he that giveth thee them doth leave to thee the use thereof. If he be a just man, he putteth them into thy hand not to abuse, but to use as equity and right requireth. Wherefore, if thou abusest them, the fault is imputed to thyself, and not to him that gave thee them. Now since God, which gave Adam that will and power, is of himself most absolutely just, it followeth consequently, that he gave them to Adam not to do evil but good: why then is the most just God blamed in such a case as sinful man is without all blame in? We do therefore conclude: because affection in Adam, being moved by sense and egged on by the serpent, did persuade him to eat of the forbidden fruit, when nevertheless his understanding did yet hold the word of God which forbad him to eat; and that his will was at free choice and liberty to incline to whether part it pleased him; he did notwithstanding will and choose that which God had forbidden him; we do therefore, I say, conclude, that sin is properly to be imputed to man which willingly transgressed, and not to God? which charged him that he should not sin.
Here again the adversaries ask this question, Why God [1 sua, non patris, culpa perit, tametsi pecuniam acceperit a patre, 1 in pejorem inclinavit, Lat. omitted; incline to the worse part, Lat.
[3 legislatoris, Lat.; not to the lawgiver.]]
[and.]
did create man so frail, that he of his own Might incline to evil: why did he not rather confirm in him the goodness and perfect soundness of nature, that he could not have fallen or sinned? To this the scripture answereth, saying: “What art ἔ thou that disputest with God? Woe to him that striveth with his Maker! Woe to him that saith to the father, Why begottest thou? and to the mother, Why broughtest thou forth?” Unless God had made man fallable, there had been no praise of his works or virtue; for he could neither have willed nor choosed but of necessity have been good. Yea, what if man ought altogether to be made fallable? Tor so did the counsel of God require him to be. God giveth not his own glory to any creature. Adam was a man, and not a God. But to be good of necessity is the proper glory of God, and of none but God%. And as God is bountiful and liberal, so also is he just: he doth good to men; but will therewithal that men acknowledge him and his benefits, and that they obey him, and be thankful for the same. He had bestowed innumerable benefits upon Adam: there lacked nothing therefore but to give him an occasion to declare and shew his thankfulness and obedience to his good God and benefactor; which occasion he offered him by the making of that law, or giving his commandment. We see therefore that God ordained not that law to be a stumbling-block in Adam’s way, but rather to be a staff to stay him from falling: for in the law he declareth what he would have him to do. He sheweth, that he wisheth not the death or destruction of Adam: he teacheth him what to do, that he may escape death and live in felicity and perfect happiness. For which cause also he provided that the law should be a plain and easy commandment: “Of the tree of knowledge of good and evil thou shalt not eat,” saith the Lord; for if thou doest, thou shalt die the death: but of any other tree in the garden thou shalt eat.” What else was this, than as if he should have said, Thou shalt in all things have an eye to me; thou shalt stick to me, obey me, be subject unto me, and serve me: neither shalt thou from elsewhere fetch the forms of good and evil than of me; and
[6 Rom. ix. 20. Isai. xlv. 9, 10. Coverdale’s Bible, 1535, also has]
[Why. Bullinger’s Latin is Quid.) [5 i. e. liable to fall; labilis, Lat.] [ὁ But to be—but God, the translator’s addition. ]]
in so doing thou shalt shew thyself obedient and thankful unto me thy Maker? Did God in this desire any unjust thing, or more than he should, at the hands of Adam? He shewed him the tree as a sacrament or! sign of that which he enjoined him by the giving of the law; to wit, that the tree might be a token to put him in memory that he ought to obey the Lord alone, as a wise, bountiful, excellent, and greatest God and Maker. And what difficulty, I pray you, or darkness was there herein? St Augustine is of the same opinion with us, who in his book De Natura Boni adversus Manicheos, cap. 35, saith: “He did therefore forbid it, that he might shew that the nature of the reasonable soul ought to be, not in man’s own power, but in subjection unto God; and that by obedience it keepeth the order of her salvation, which by disobedience it doth corrupt and mar. And hereupon it cometh, that he called the tree, which he forbad, by the name of the tree of knowledge of good and evil; because Adam, if he touched it against the Lord’s commandment, should by trial feel the punishment of his sin, and by that means know what difference there was betwixt the good that followeth obedience and the evil which ensueth the sin of disobedience” Now therefore, when the serpent was crept in and began to tell man of other forms of good and evil directly contrary to the law of God, and that man had once received them as things both true and credible, he did disloyally revolt from God, and by his own fault through disobedience he wrought his own destruction. Therefore God did always deal justly with him; and man contrarily dealt too too unjustly, and was utterly unthankful, howsoever men will go about to cloak or not to hear of his unthankful stubbornness,
[1 a sacrament or, not in Lat.] [2 Ad hoc enim prohibuerat, ut ostenderet naturam anime ratio-]
[nalis, non in sua potestate, sed Deo subditam esse debere, et ordinem]
[sue salutis per obedientiam custodire, per inobedientiam corrumpere.]
[Hine et arborem quam tangi vetuit sic appellavit, dignoscentise boni et]
[mali: qui, cum eam contra vetitum tetigisset, experiretur pcenam pec-]
[cati, et eo modo dignosceret, quid interesset inter obedientize bonum et]
[inter inobedientiee malum.—August. de Nat. Boni adv. Manich. Opp.]
[Tom. v1. fol. 115, col. 4, Par. 1531.] [3 as—ecredible, not in Lat. ] [64 howsoever—stubbornness: utcunque rem wstimes, Lat ]]
x.] OF SIN, AND THE KINDS THEREOF. 377 But whereas we say that man was made fallable, we will not have it to be so understood, that any man should think that there was in Adam any one jot or prick of infirmity before his fall; for as he was in all points most absolutely perfect, so was he in no point created so frail that he should sin or perish by death. For God, which is one in substance and three in persons, said: “Let us make man in our image, after our own likeness.” Note here, that Zelem doth signify the picture or counterfeit of another thing, and that Demuth importeth the very pattern whereby any picture is drawn or image portrayed’. Therefore in God is the example or pattern, to the resemblance whereof there was a picture or similitude framed: but that representing likeness cannot be this body of ours; for God is a Spirit, in no point like to the nature of dust and ashes: we must of necessity therefore resemble the image of God to spiritual things, as to immortality, truth, justice, and holiness. For so hath the apostle Paul taught us, where he saith, “Be ye renewed in the spirit of your mind; and put on that new man, which after God is shapen in righteousness and holiness of truth?” Wherefore there was no want in our grandfather Adam of any thing that was available to absolute perfectness: so that even a blind man may perceive, that man was not created to death and destruction, but unto life, felicity, and absolute blessedness.
But, say they, God did foreknow the fall of man, which, if he would, he could have withstood: now, since he could and would not, God is to be blamed because Adam sinned. It is a goodly matter indeed, when, all fear of God being laid aside, men will at their pleasure fall flatly on railing against the majesty of God almighty. I answered in the beginning of this discourse to this objection; and yet this I add here moreover, that upon God’s foreknowledge there followeth no necessity, so that Adam did of necessity sin because God did foreknow that he would sin. A prudent father doth foresee, by some untoward tokens, that his son will one day
[5 m7 is more than phy: this expresses the general form or de-]
[lineation; that, the conformity or resemblance of the parts. Parkhurst,]
[Heb. Lex. in voe. ΠΣ.} [6 luti, is Bullinger’s one word.] {7 Eph. iv. 23, 24. Marg. Auth. Ver.] [8 egregia censebitur disputatio, Lat.]]
a a σ. 9.»»ν.Κ. 378 THE THIRD DECADE. [sERM. come to an ill ending!: neither is he deceived in his foresight; for he is slain, being taken in adultery. But he is not therefore slain, because his father foresaw that he would be slain; but because he was an adulterer. And therefore St Ambrose, or whosoever it is that was author of the second book De Gentium Vocatione, cap. 4, speaking of the murder which Cain committed, saith: “God verily did foreknow to what end the fury of the mad man would come. And yet, because God’s foreknowledge could not be deceived, it doth not thereupon follow, that necessity of sinning did urge the crime upon him?” &e. And St Augustine, De Libero Arbitrio, Lib. xm. cap. 4, saith: “As thou by thy memory dost not compel those things to be done that are gone and past, so God by his foreknowledge doth not compel those things to be done which are to come. And as thou rememberest some things that thou hast done, and yet hast not done all things which thou rememberest; so God foreknoweth all things which he doth, and yet doth not all which he foreknoweth. But God is a just revenger of that whereof he is no evil author3.” And so forth. Like unto this is another objection, which they make that say: God did before all beginnings determine with himself to deliver mankind from bondage: therefore it could not otherwise be, but that we should first be tangled in bondage: therefore it behoved us to be drowned in sin, that by that means the glory of God might shine more clearly; as the
v. 20. apostle said, “” Where sin was plenteous, there was grace more plenteous.” But it is marvel that these cavillers do not better consider, that God of himself, without us, is sufficient to himself unto absolute blessedness and most perfect felicity; and that his glory could (as it doth) of itself reach above all
[[! perimendum gladio, Lat.] [2 Et utique preesciebat Deus ad quem finem insanientis esset pro-]
[gressura conceptio. Neque ex eo, quod falli scientia divina non]
[poterat, necessitate peccandi urgebatur facinus voluntatis.—De Vocat.]
[Gent. Lib. 11. cap. 4, col. 540, Ambros. Opp. Tom. 1v. Par. 1614.] [3 Sicut enim tu in memoria tua non cogis facta esse, quae pree-]
[terierunt; sic Deus preescientia sua non cogit facienda que futura sunt.]
[Et sicut tu queedam quee fecisti meministi, nec tamen que meministi]
[omnia fecisti; ita Deus omnia quorum ipse auctor est preescit, nee]
[tamen omnium que preescit ipse auctor est. Quorum autem non est]
[malus auctor, justus est ultor.— August. de Lib, Arbit. Lib. m1. cap. 4,]
[Tom. 1. fol. 141, col. 3, Par. 1531.]]
heavens, although there had never been any creature brought into light. Is not God without beginning? But we his creatures had a beginning. God is glorious from before all beginnings: therefore he is glorious without us: and his glory would be as great as it is, though we were not. But what dullard is so foolish as to think, that that eternal light of God doth draw any brightness of glory at our darkness, or out of the stinking dungeon of our sin and wickedness? Should God’s glory be no glory, if it were not for our sins? The wise man in Ecclesiasticus saith: “Say not thou, It is the Lord’s fault that I have sinned: for thou shalt not do the thing that God hateth. Say not thou, He hath caused me to do wrong; for he hath no need of the sinner:” or, for the wicked are not needful unto him. “God hateth all abomination of error; and they that worship God will love none such.” Why therefore do we not change our manner of reasoning, and so consider of the matter as it is in very deed? God, of his eternal goodness and liberality, whereby he wisheth himself to be parted among us all to our felicity, did from everlasting determine to create man to his own similitude and likeness: but for because he did foresee that he would fall headlong into a filthy and miserable bondage, he did therefore by the same his grace and goodness ordain a deliverer to bring us out of thraldom; to the end that so he might communicate himself unto us, that we might praise his gracious favour, and render thanks to his fatherly goodness. And so, whatsoever we men have sinned and turned to our own destruction, that same doth God convert again to our commodity and salvation: even as he is read to have done in the case of Joseph and his brethren; which is, as it were, a certain type of spiritual things and cases of salvation. And we must wholly endeavour ourselves to do what we may in reasoning of this argument so to turn it, that all glory may be given to God alone, and to us nothing else but silence in the sight of God?.
[[ and his glory—were not, the translator’s addition. ] [5 a putore illo, Lat.) [6 distrahi quasi, Lat.; as it were parted.] [7 fatherly, not in Lat.] [8 harum rerum, Lat.; of these things. The rest is the translator’s]
[paraphrase. ] [9 confusio faciei, Lat. Dan. ix. 8, in—God, not in Lat. ]]
Now last of all, there are yet behind some places of scripture, which must by the way be run through and ex-
28. pounded. The apostle, verily, saith: “God gave them up to meng, reprobate sense.” But this kind of giving over is, as Augustine also saith, a work of judgment and justice; for they were worthy to be given up unto a reprobate sense. The cause is prefixed in the words of the apostle: for God had made himself manifest unto them; but they were not only unthankful towards him, but waxed wise also in their own conceits, and went about to obtrude unto him I wot not what manner of religion and worship. Therefore, that they might by proof see that they were fools and ungodly, God gave them up unto filthy lusts. In like manner king Amazias would not give ear and hearken to the Lord, because God had determined to punish his iniquities; as is to be read in the fourth book of Kings, the fourteenth chapter, and second Paralipom. twenty-fifth chapter. Likewise did the Lord put the spirit of error into the mouths of the false prophets, and they seduced Egypt: Esay nineteen. So also did a seducing spirit? go out from the Lord of judgment, and was a lying spirit in the mouth of all the prophets: as is to be seen in the last chapter of the third book of Kings. Now the Lord doth all these things with just and holy judgment.
Again, God is said to blind men’s eyes, so often as he doth revoke, or take away, the contemned light of his truth and sincerity, leaving them that delight in darkness to walk and stick in their darkness still. For then the Lord permitteth his words to be preached to the unthankful and ungodly receivers unto their judgment or condemnation; for so, verily, doth the evangelical and apostolical doctrine teach us 19] to think. This,” saith the Lord, is condemnation,” or, this is judgment, “that” the Son of God, the very true “light, came into the world, and the world loved darkness more than light.” And Paul said: “If yet the gospel be hid, it is hid in them that perish: in whom the God of this world hath blinded the senses of the unbelievers,” &ec.
[[! Paulus, Lat. omitted. ] [2 Augustine treats of these words of St Paul in Psalm lvii. enarr.]
[Opp. Tom. vir. fol. 121, col. 2, and argues that these sins of the]
[heathen are just punishments from God.] (3 vel cacodsemon, Lat. ] [ evangelium nostrum, Lat.]]
In the same sense God is said to harden man. For when the Lord calleth man and he resisteth, making himself unworthy of the kingdom of heaven, he doth then permit him unto himself: that is, he leaveth man unto his own corrupt nature, according unto which the heart of man is stony, which is mollified and made tractable by the only grace of God: therefore the withdrawing of God’s grace is the hardening of man’s heart; and when we are left unto ourselves, then are we hardened. Pharao, king of Egypt, did by his murdering of the Israelitish infants, by his tyranny, and many other vices horribly committed against the law of nature, offend the eyes of God’s most just and heavenly majesty: therefore it is no marvel that he hardened his heart. But if any man will not admit or receive this exposition, yet can he not deny that God in the scriptures doth use our kinds of phrases and manner of speeches. Now we are wont to say, This father doth by too much cockering or over gentle dealing mar or harden his son he maketh him stubborn and stiff-necked; and yet the father doth not tender him to destroy, but to save him: the son indeed by the abuse of his father’s clemency doth both destroy and harden himself. Therefore whereas the son is hardened, that cometh by his own and not his father’s fault, although the father bear the name to have hardened him, or made him past grace’. And verily, if thou dost diligently consider the history of Pharao, thou shalt oftener than once find this sentence repeated there: And God hardened Pharao’s heart,” namely, when some benefit or delivery from evil was wrought before: as though the scripture should have said, By this benefit of delivering him from evil did God harden the heart of Pharao, while he abused the goodness of God, and supposed that all things would be afterwards out of peril and danger, because God had taken away this present punishment and did begin to do him good. And yet I confess, that God, before he had benefited, or laid any punishments upon, Egypt, did immediately upon the calling of Moses say: “I know that the king of Egypt will not let you depart;” and again: “See that thou do all these signs and
[6 Macht in halsztarck, omitted, but interpreted, by the translator. ] [6 non ideo indulget, Lat.] [7 or—grace, the translator’s addition.) [8 in Exodo, Lat. omitted. ]]
wonders, which I have put in thy hand, before Pharao: but I will harden Pharao’s heart, that he shall not let the people go.” But these sayings do not tend hereunto, that we should make God the author of all Pharao’s falsehood, rebellion, and stubborn dealing against the Lord; but rather they were spoken to the comfort and confirmation of Moses, who is therefore so premonished, that, when he dealeth earnestly with the king and yet cannot obtain his suit, he should notwithstanding know that he had God’s business in hand, and that God by his long sufferance is the cause of that delay’, when as notwithstanding at the last he would temper all things to his own honour and glory. The case, by a similitude, is all one as if an householder should send his servant to his debtors, saying: Go thy way, and demand my debts; but yet I know that thou shalt receive none of them; for I by my sufferance and gentle dealing will cause them to be the slacker to pay it: but yet do thou thy duty; and I in the meanwhile will see what is needful to be done.
To this may be added, that even in those very chapters where it is so often said, “God hardened Pharao’s heart,” this also is afterward annexed, which layeth the hardening of Pharao’s heart upon Pharao’s own head, saying, “He hard- Ὁ ened his heart, and hearkened not unto them.” In the ninth of Exodus, when Pharao was well whipped, he crieth: “1 have now sinned; the Lord is just, but I and my people are unjust or wicked:” and immediately after again: “But when Pharao saw that it ceased raining, he sinned yet more, and hardened his heart, and it was hardened.” So then these and such like places must be conferred with these words, “I have hardened Pharao’s heart; and out of them must be gathered a godly sense; such a sense, I mean, as maketh not God? the author of evil.
Now also the prophet Amos doth very plainly say: “There is no evil in a city, but the Lord doth it.” But Augustine, contra Adimantum, cap. 26, did very religiously write: Eyil in this place is not to be taken for sin, but for punishment; for the word (evil) is used in two significations: the one is the evil which a man doeth; the other evil is the pain which he suffereth. Now the prophet in this place speaketh
[[ pertinacie illius, Lat.; of that stubborn dealing.] [2 Deum justissimum, Lat.] [3 orthodoxe, Lat.)]
of that evil which is the punishment that men do suffer. For
by the providence of God, which ruleth and governeth all things, man doth so commit the evil which he will, that he may suffer the evil which he would not. Therefore the evil that God doth is not evil in respect of God, but is evil to them upon whom his vengeance lighteth. So then he, in respect of himself, doth good; because every just thing is good: that vengeance of his is just, and so consequently it is good” The place of Esay also must be none otherwise understood in his forty-fifth chapter, saying: “I am the Lord, and there is else none. It is I that created light and darkness: I make peace and evil: yea, I, even I the Lord, do all these things.” For here he taketh evil for war, and maketh it the contrary to peace.
Again St Augustine, De Natura Boni contra Manichawos chap. 28, saith: “When we hear that all things are of him, and by him, and in him, we must understand it to be spoken of all the natures that are naturally. For sins are not of him, because they do not keep, but defile, nature; which sins the holy seriptures do diversly testify to be of the will of them which commit them5” Thus much St Augustine.
Neither is it a matter of any great difficulty to answer to that sentence of Salomon’s, where he saith, God created all things for his own sake; yea, the ungodly against the evil day.” Proverbs xvi. For we believe that the most just God hath appointed a day of affliction, judgment, or punishment?, which shall come upon them in due time and season.
[[ Malum hoc loco non peccatum, sed peena intelligenda est. Du-]
[pliciter enim appellatur malum; unum quod homo facit, alterum quod]
[patitur pena. De poenis ergo loquebatur Propheta, cum hoc diceret.]
[Divina enim providentia cuncta moderante et gubernante, ita homo]
[male fecit quod vult, ut male patiatur quod non vult.—Ita ergo Deus]
[malum facit, quod non ipsi Deo malum est, sed eis in quos vindicat.]
[Itaque ipse, quantum ad se pertinet, bonum facit; quia omne justum]
[bonum est, et justa est illa vindicta.—August. Opp. Tom. γι. fol. 43,]
[col. 3. Par. 1531.] [6 Cum autem audimus, Omnia ex ipso, et per ipsum, et in ipso;]
[omnes utique naturas intelligere debemus que naturaliter sunt. Neque]
[enim ex ipso sunt peccata, que naturam non servant sed vitiant; quee]
[peccata ex voluntate esse peccantium multis modis sancta scriptura]
[testatur.—Id. Tom. v1. fol. 115, col. 2.] [8 certum diem, Lat.] [7 impiis, Lat. omitted; for the ungodly.]]
But whereas the apostle saith, He hath mercy on whom he will, and whom he will he hardeneth;” we must not so wrest it to say, that God doth of necessity drive any man to sin, and that therefore he is the cause of sin. For the will of God is good and just, and willeth nothing but what is expedient, and not repugnant to nature and the word of God. And therefore it is that the prophet crieth: “The Lord is just in all his ways, and holy in all his works.” Psal. exly.
Thus have I out of much that may be said picked out a little, and laid it before your eyes, dearly beloved, for you to consider, of the cause of sin.
We are now come to demonstrate the first parts which
“4
were set down in the description of sin immediately upon the beginning of this sermon. They are in number two: the first is, “Sin is the natural corruption of mankind;” the latter is, “And the action that riseth of it contrary to the law of God.” Some verily, in setting down the kinds or differences of sins, do very well and advisedly say, “Of sins, one is original, and another actual.” I mean in order to speak of both, so far as God shall give me grace: and first, of the same natural corruption in mankind; that is, of original sin. sim. Now therefore it is called original sin, because it cometh from the first beginning, being derived from our first parents into us all by lineal descent and continual course from one to another; for we bring it with us in our nature from our mother’s womb into this life.
Of this sin there are many definitions made, which as they do not disagree among themselves, so yet is one of them more full and evident than another of them is. Some say, Original sin is the corruption of nature from the first perfectness. Other some say, It is the corruption of man’s nature, which maketh that we do not truly obey the law of God, and are not without sin. Again; some call it a want, or defect; other call it concupiscence; which might better seem to be the fruit of original sin, that is, of our corruption. Other call it an inordinateness of appetites, which is left in nature. An-selmus, a late writer, saith: Original sin is the want of
[1 The various definitions of original sin from the fathers and]
[schoolmen, &c., are collected in Jod. Coccii Thesaur. Cathol. p. 100,]
[&c. Colon. 1620.]]
original righteousness?” But this is thought to have been spoken somewhat too briefly; for the force of sin seemeth to be not sufficiently expressed: for our nature is not only void and barren of goodness, but also most abundant and fruitful of all evils and naughtiness. Therefore the definition of Hugo is taken for the better, who saith: Original sin is ignorance in the mind, and concupiscence in the flesh.” But yet this seemeth to be a far fuller and better definition: ‘ Original sin is the vice or depravation of the whole man, whereby he cannot understand God and his will; but of a perverse judgment of things doth overthwartly, and perverteth all things.”
And now among all these definitions I wish you, dearly beloved, to consider of this also: Original sin is the inheritably descending naughtiness or corruption of our nature, which doth first make us endangered to the wrath of God, and then bringeth forth in us those works which the scripture calleth the works of the flesh. Therefore this original sin is neither a deed, nor a word, nor a thought; but a disease, a vice, a depravation, I say, of judgment and concupiscence; or a corruption of the whole man’, that is, of the understanding, will, and all the power of man; out of which at last do flow all evil thoughts, naughty words, and wicked deeds.
This sin taketh beginning at and of Adam; and for that cause it is called the inheritably descending naughtiness and corruption of our nature. Concerning the corruption and sin of Adam, out of whom we are all born sinners, I have already sufficiently spoken, where I treated of the cause of sin; and by and by hereafter shall follow somewhat more of the same
[2 Hoc peccatum, quod originale dico, aliud intelligere nequeo in]
[eisdem (al. ipsis) infantibus, nisi ipsam, quam supra posui, factam per]
[inobedientiam Ade justitize nuditatem.—Anselmi Opp. de Concept.]
[Virg. et Orig. Pec. cap. 27. p. 106. Lutet. Par. 1675.) [3 Hoc autem vitium originis humange duplici corruptione naturam]
[inficit: ignorantia scilicet mentem, et concupiscentia carnem.—Hugo]
[de 8S. Victore de Sacr. Fid. Lib. 1. par. 7. Tom. 11 p. 397. col. 2.]
[Mogunt. 1617.] [ nec animo persequi, Lat. omitted; nor follow after with his]
[mind. ] [5 Vid. Bucer. de Vera Eccles. &e. compos. p. 105. ed. 1543.] [6 morbus sive vitium, Lat.] [7 totius humans naturze, Lat. ] [8 See above, page 371.] 25 [BULLINGER, IL]]
argument; so that I have no need to repeat anything here: I will therefore now pass forth to the rest.
The Pelagians denied that this evil of original sin was hereditary; for these are the very words of Pelagius himself: “As without virtue, so are we also born without vice; and before the action of our own will, that alone is in man which God created.” These words of his are somewhat obscure; but Coelestius, the partner of Pelagius, did more openly spue out this poison, and say: “We did not therefore say that infants are to be baptized into the remission of sins, to the end that we should seem thereby to affirm that sin is ex traduce, or hereditary; which is utterly contrary to the catholic sense: because sin is not born with man, but is afterward put in ure by man; because it is declared to be, not the fault of the nature, but of the will?” Again Pelagius said, “That that first sin did not hurt the first man only, but all mankind also, his issue and offspring:” but he doth immediately add, “not by propagation, but by example;” that is to say, not that “they which came of him drew any vice of him, but because they that sinned afterward did in sinning imitate him that sinned first and before them?” This is to be seen in Aurelius Augustinus De peccato original contra Pelagium et Ceelestium, Lib, τι. cap. 6, 13, and 15. τ We therefore must prove by the testimonies of holy is. “1… scripture, that the evil is hereditary in man; and that original sin is born together with us, that is, that all men are born sinners into the world. The prophet therefore doth plainly ery, Psalm li, “Behold, I was born in wickedness,
[[! Ut sine virtute, ita et sine vitio procreamur: atque ante actionem:]
[propriee voluntatis id solum in homine est, quod Deus condidit.—]
[August. de Pec. Orig. contra Pelag. et Celest. Lib. 11. cap. 13. Opp.]
[Tom. vi fol. 163. col. 2.] [2 In remissionem autem peccatorum baptizandos infantes, non]
[ideirco diximus, ut peccatum ex traduce firmare videamur: quod longe]
[a catholico sensu alienum est; quia peccatum non cum homine nascitur,]
[quod postmodum exercetur ab homine; quia non naturse delictum,]
[sed voluntatis esse demonstratur.—Ibid. Tom. vir. fol. 162. col. 3.] [3 Dicit (Pelagius) non tantum primo homini, sed etiam humano]
[generi primum illud obfuisse peccatum, non propagine sed exemplo ὁ j]
[id est, non quod ex illo traxerint aliquod vitium, qui ex illo propagati]
[sunt; sed quod eum primum peccantem imitati sunt omnes, qui postea]
[peccaverunt.—Ibid. fol. 163. col. 2.]]
and in sin hath my mother conceived me;” or, as another translation out of the Hebrew saith: “” Behold, I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin my mother cherished or warmed me?:” that is to say, sin did then immediately cleave unto me, when I was once conceived and nourished in my mother’s womb, Now that happened, undoubtedly, not by any vice of matrimony, (for the wedlock-bed is holy and undefiled;) but ex traduce, and by propagation. For Job in his fourteenth chapter saith manifestly: “Who can make or bring forth a pure or clean thing of that which is unclean? no body undoubtedly is able to do it.” Of that sort also there are many other sayings in the fifteenth and five and twentieth chapters of the same book, And Paul, the holy apostle of Christ, in the fifth to the Romans, doth most evidently say: “As by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; even so death entered into all men, insomuch as all have sinned. For unto the law was sin in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam unto Moses, over them also that had not sinned with like transgression as did Adam,” &e. Doth not the apostle in these words manifestly shew the propagation of sin, saying, “Sin entered by one man into the world; death entered into all men, insomuch as they have all sinned;” to wit, insomuch as they are all subject to corruption? And, that no men either before or after Moses might be excepted, he addeth: ‘ Death reigned from Adam unto Moses over them also which had not sinned with the like transgression as did Adam;” that is to say, over them which had not? sinned of their own will, as Adam had, but drew from him original sin by propagation. St Augustine doth more fully excuss and handle this argument in his first book De peccatorum meritis et remissione, in the ninth, tenth, and eleventh chapter, and the rest as they follow in order Again, Paul in the seventh to the Romans calleth this evil the sin that dwelleth in us, that is to say, the sin
[4 Vulg. Vers. Ps. 1. 7.]. [5 Calvin. in loc, cit.] [6 ex immunda (nimirum massa) Lat.; out of an unclean (he]
[means) lump. ] [7 nondum, Lat.; not yet.] [8 Hoe autem apostolicum testimonium in quo ait, Per unum homi-]
[nem, &c.— Aug. Opp. Tom. vir. fol. 135. col. 1.]”]
that is begotten and born with us: for he addeth, “I am carnal, sold under sin;” and, “I know that in me (that is, my flesh) there dwelleth no good.” And therefore the blessed apostle and evangelist John telleth us, that if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” He saith very significantly, we have,” and not, we have had,’ or, we shall have;’ for by our corrupt nature we have that proper unto us. Therefore it is manifest that the fiction of the Pelagians is false, whereby they affirm that we are born without vice: it is false, that the voluntary action only, and not the corruption or depravation which is not yet burst forth to the deed’, is sin.
And Augustine doth in one place call even that voluntary sin original sin; and that two sundry ways: first, not simply of itself, but in respect of Adam; because it, being committed by the naughty will of Adam, is drawn and made hereditary in us: secondly, because a naughty lust may be named a will2z, For Lib. Retract. 1. cap. 15, he saith: “If any man doth say, that even the very lust is nothing else but will, such a will yet as is vicious and subject to sin, he needeth not to be gainsaid: for where the thing is manifest, we must not strive about terms and words. For so it is proved, that without will there is no sin either in deed or in propagation;” that is, either actual or original. Thus much Augustine, who doth also allege other sayings like to this in his third book Contra Julianum Pelagianum, chap. δ. It shall be sufficient to us even without them to learn by the testimonies of the holy scriptures, that sin is not only
[[! in opus pravum, Lat.; to the evil deed.] [2 Et illud quod in parvulis dicitur originale peccatum..non ab-]
[surde vocatur etiam voluntarium, quia ex primi hominis mala voluntate]
[contractum, factum est quodammodo heereditarium.—Aug. Retract,]
[Lib. 1. cap. 13. Opp. Tom. 1. fol. 4. col. 3.] [3 Quod si quisquam dicit etiam ipsam cupiditatem nihil esse aliud]
[quam voluntatem, sed vitiosam peccatoque servientem, non resistendum]
[est, nec de verbis, cum res constat, controversia facienda est. Sic]
[enim ostenditur sine voluntate nullum esse peccatum, sive in opere]
[sive in origine.—Id. ibid. cap. 15. Tom. 1. fol. 5. col. 4.] [# that is—original; the translator’s addition.] [5 Frustra itaque putas ideo in parvulis non esse delictum, quia]
[sine voluntate, que in eis nulla est, esse non potest, &c.—Id. contr.]
[Jul. Pelag. Lib. mr. cap. 5. Tom. vir. fol. 204. col. 4.]]
a voluntary action, but also an hereditary corruption or depravation that cometh by inheritance.
Not unlike to all this is that sentence in Ezechiel, where the Lord saith: “The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, but every man shall die in his own sin.” For Adam’s fall should do us no harm, if it were not so that even from him there is sprung up in us such a perverseness as is worthy of God’s just judgment. But now, since all the inclination, disposition, and desire of our nature, even in a child but one day old, is repugnant to the pureness and will of God, which is only good; no man therefore is punished for his father, but every one for his own iniquity: and calamities fall even on the youngest babes, whom we see to be touched with many afflictions by the holy and just judgment of the most just God.
Neither is their objection any whit stronger which say, that the children of holy parents cannot draw or take any spot of their parents; for they have their lineal descent of the fleshly generation, and not of the spiritual regeneration. And whereas the apostle said, The unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they clean:” it is not repugnant to our former allegations. For they are called holy, not by the prerogative of their birth or generation, as though children were born? holy without any spot or vice at all; but for because they, being born by nature corrupt, are by the virtue of the covenant and grace made pure, and uncleanness is not imputed to them, for Christ his sake, or the remission of sins which is pronounced in these words: “I will be thy God, and the God of thy seed after thee.” For of old, even those children which of the seed of Abraham were holy and blessed received notwithstanding the sign of circumcision. Now what need, I pray you, had they had of circumcision, or purging, if by their birth they had had no uncleanness in them?
That therefore is utterly false which ye heard even now that Ceelestius, the Pelagian, did utter in these words: We did not therefore say that infants are to be baptized into
[6 His omnibus nihil repugnat, Lat. ] [7 sie, Lat. omitted; under these circumstances.)]
the remission of sins, to the end that we should thereby seem to affirm that sin is ez traduce, or hereditary; which is utterly contrary to the catholic sense.” For it is catholic and true doctrine, that the children of the Jews were circumcised, not so much only because they were partakers of the divine covenant, as for because that all the antiquity of holy fathers did so confess, that in infants there was somewhat which had need of cutting, that is, which had need to be remitted by the grace of God, and not be imputed to them unto death. It is catholic and true doctrine, that the infants of Christians are baptized, not so much because they are the children of God and freely received into the covenant; as for because there is in them, even from their birth, somewhat which the Lord by his grace doth wash away, lest it should bring upon them death and damnation. Yea, that cannot be catholic, which doth so manifestly repugn so many evident places of scripture, which prove that in infants there is sin by propagation. To confirm this we may add, that St Augustine in his first book Contra Julianum Pelagianum, cap. 2, gathereth together the testimonies of the most excellent learned bishops and doctors in the primitive! church, by which he proveth that all the ministers of the churches, even from the apostles’ time, did both acknowledge and openly teach original sin. In that place οἱ he citeth the testimonies of Irenzus, Cyprian, Reticius, Olym- (with pius, Hilary, and Ambrose, his father and master in christian κα, doctrine’, Innocent, Gregory, Basil, and John Chrysostom; and at length he inferreth: “Wilt thou now call so great a consent of catholic priests a conspiracy of naughty men? Neither think thou that St Hierome is to be contemned, because he was but a priest only, and no bishop; who, being skilful in the Greek, Latin, and Hebrew tongues, and passing from the west unto the east church, lived in holy places and the study of the sacred scripture, even to his crone and ~~ crooked age. He read all, or in a manner all, the works of them which in both parts of the world did write of ecclesiastical doctrine; and yet he neither held nor taught any otherwise of this point of doctrine.” And again the same Augustine,
[1 primitive, not in Lat.] [2 in Christo, Lat.] [3 crones: old ewes who have lost their teeth. Grose’s Provincial]
[Glossary, in voc. ] [4 An tantam consensionem sacerdotum catholicorum conspira-]
in his third book De Peccatorum Meritis et Remissione, cap. 6, saith: “Hierome, expounding the prophecy of Jonas, when he came to that place where mention is made that even the little children were chastened with fasting, saith: It began with the eldest, and came even to the youngest. For there is none without sin; no, not he which is but one day old, nor he whose grey head hath seen many years. For if the stars are not clean in the sight of God, how much more unclean are dust and putrefying earth, and those which are in subjection to the sin of Adam’s transgression!’” To these words of Hierome doth Augustine himself annex this that followeth: “If it were so that we might easily ask it of this most learned man, how many teachers of the holy scriptures in both the tongues, and how many writers of christian treatises would he reckon up, which, since the time that Christ his church was first planted, have themselves neither thought, of their predecessors learned, nor taught their successors, any other than this doctrine touching original sin! I verily, though I have read nothing so much as he, do not remember that I have read any other doctrine of Christians which admit or receive both the testaments, whether they were in the unity of the catholic church, or otherwise in schisms and heresies: I do not remember that I have read any other thing in them, whose writings touching this matter I could come by to read them, if either they did follow, or thought that they did follow, or would have men believe that they did follow, the canonical scriptures.” Thus far hath Augustine; teaching, in
[tionem dicturus es perditorum? Nec sanctum Hieronymum, quia]
[presbyter fuit, contemnendum arbitreris; qui Greco et Latino, insuper]
[et Hebreeo eruditus eloquio, ex occidentali ad orientalem transiens ec-]
[clesiam, in locis sanctis atque in literis sacris usque ad decrepitam]
[vixit setatem. Hic omnes vel pene omnes, qui ante illum ex utraque]
[parte orbis de doctrina ecclesiastica scripserant, legit, nec aliam de hac]
[re tenuit prompsitque sententiam.—Aug. Opp. Tom. vi. fol. 197.]
[col. 1.] [6 vermis, Lat.; a worm. [6 Nam in eo quod in Jonam prophetam scripsit (Hieronymus),]
[cum ad eum venisset locum, ubi commemorantur etiam parvuli jejunio]
[castigati: Major, inquit, tas incipit, et usque ad minorem pervenit.]
[Nullus enim absque peccato, nec si unius quidem diei fuerit vita ejus,]
[et innumerabiles anni vite illius. Si enim stelle munde non sunt in]
[conspectu Dei, quanto magis vermis et putredo, et ii qui peccato of-]
[fendentis Adam tenentur obnoxii! Hune doctissimum virum si facile]
392 THE THIRD DECADE. [sERM. the very beginning, that all the saints did by a full consent and agreement in doctrine most expressly grant and confess, that original sin is even in new-born infants. Methinketh that St Hierome did not only in Jonas, but also much more evidently in Ezechiel, confess and affirm original sin. His words are to be seen, Comment. lib. x1v. in cap. 47, ad Ezechielem, and are verbatim as followeth: What man can make his boast that he hath a chaste heart, or to whose mind by the windows of the eyes the death of concupiscence, or (to use a milder term) the tickling of the mind, doth not enter in? For the world is set in wickedness; and even from his childhood the heart of man is set to naughtiness; so that not the very first day of a man’s nativity his nature is free from sin and naughtiness. Whereupon David in the Psalm saith: For behold I was conceived in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me.” Not in the iniquities of my mother, or in mine own sins; but in the iniquities of our mortal state. And therefore the apostle saith, Death reigned from Adam to Moses, over them also which had not sinned with the like transgression as did Adam!’” Thus much hath Hierome. And we have hitherto alleged all these sayings, to the end
[interrogare possemus, quam mulfas utriusque linguse divinarum serip- i]
[turarum tractatores et Christianarum disputationum scriptores com.]
[memoraret, qui non aliud ex quo Christi ecclesia est constituta]
[senserunt, non aliud a majoribus acceperunt, non aliud posteris tra-]
[diderunt! Ego quidem, quamvis longe pauciora legerim, non memini]
[me aliud audisse a Christianis, qui utrumque accipiunt testamentum,]
[non solum in catholica ecclesia, verum etiam in qualibet heeresi vel]
[schismate constitutis; non memini me aliud legisse apud eos, quos de]
[his rebus aliquid scribentes legere potui, qui scripturas canonicas]
[sequerentur, vel sequi se crederent credive voluissent.—August. Opp.]
[Tom. vir. fol. 148. col. 4.] [! Quis enim hominum gloriari potest castum se habere cor? vel]
[ad cujus mentem per oculorum fenestras mors concupiscentize non]
[introivit, et, ut parum dicam, animi titillatio? Mundus enim in ma-]
[ligno positus est; et a pueritia appositum est cor hominis ad ma-]
[lum: ut ne unius quidem diei a nativitatis suse exordio sine peccato sit]
[humana conditio. Unde et David confitetur in Psalmo, Ecce enim in]
[iniquitatibus conceptus sum, et in peccatis concepit me mater mea,]
[Non in iniquitatibus matris mez, vel certe meis; sed in iniquitatibus]
[humans conditionis. Unde et apostolus dicit, Regnavit mors ab Adam]
[usque ad Moysen, etiam super eos qui non peccaverunt in similitudinem]
[preevaricationis Adee.—Hieron, Opp. Tom. m1. col. 1055, Par. 1704.]]
we might prove that original sin is the natural or hereditary corruption of man’s nature.
Let us now see what and how great the hereditary naughtiness or corruption of our nature is, and what power it hath to work? in man. Our nature verily, as I shewed you above, was before the fall most excellent and pure in our father Adam: but after the fall it did by God’s just judgment become corrupt and utterly naught, which is in that naughtiness by propagation, or ex traduce, derived into all us which are the posterity and offspring of Adam; as both experience and the thing itself do evidently declare, as well in ~ sucklings or infants as those of riper years. For even very babes give manifest tokens of evident depravation so soon as they once begin to be able to do anything; yea, before they can perfectly sound any one syllable of a whole word. All our understanding is dull, blunt, gross, and altogether blind in heavenly things. Our judgment in divine matters is perverse and frivolous. For there arise in us most horrible and absurd thoughts and opinions touching God, his judgments, and wonderful works. Yea, our whole mind is apt and ready to errors, to fables, and our own destruction: and when as our judgments are nothing but mere folly, yet do we prefer them far above God’s wisdom, which we esteem but foolishness in comparison of our own conceits and corrupt imaginations; for he lied not which said: “The natural man perceiveth not the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness unto him; neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” Now Paul calleth him the natural man3, which liveth naturally by the vital spirit, and is not regenerate by the Holy Ghost: and since we all are such, we are therefore wholly overcome and governed of philautia, that is, too great a self-love and delight in ourselves, whereby all things that we ourselves do work do highly please us; looking still very busily to our own selves and our commodity, when in the meantime we neglect all others, yea, rather do afflict them. Neither did Plato unadvisedly esteem that vice of self-love to be the very root of every evil, Furthermore, our whole will is
[2 quid efficiat, Lat.] [3 animalem hominem, Lat.] [8 Stobei Floril. Tit. xxiii, Tom. 1. p. 427. ed. Gaisford. Oxon.]
[1822.]]
← 37. Decade 3, Sermon 9, Part 2 · Contents · 39. Decade 3, Sermon 10, Part 2 →