a son in his own likeness. The devils upon one sin, became obstinate in all the wickedness that their nature is capable of. 2. This one act was a breach of covenant with God, upon the tenor and observation whereof, depended the enjoyment of all that strength and rectitude with God, wherewith, by the law of his creation, man was endued withal. 3. All man's covenant good for that eternal end to which he was created, depended upon his conformity to God, his subjection to him and dependance on him, all which by that one sin he wilfully cast away, for himself and posterity (whose common, natural, and federal head he was), and righteously fell into that condition which we described. 4. The apostle is much of a different mind from our catechists, Rom. v. 15, 16, &c. as hath been declared.

4. What is credible concerning God and his goodness with these gentlemen I know not. To me, that is not only in itself credible which he hath revealed concerning himself, but of necessity to be believed. That he gave man a law, threatening him and all his posterity in him and with him, with eternal death upon the breach of it, that upon that sin, he cast all mankind judicially out of covenant, imputing that sin unto them all, unto the guilt of condemnation, seeing it is his judgment that they who commit sin are worthy of death, and that he is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity, is to us credible, yea, as was said, of necessity to be believed. But they will answer the proofs that are produced from Scripture, in the asserting of this original sin.

'Q. But that there is original sin, those testimonies seem to prove, Gen. vi. 5. Every cogitation of the heart of man is only evil every day;' and Gen. viii. 21. The cogitation of man's heart is evil from his youth.'

A. These testimonies deal concerning voluntary sin : from them therefore original'sin cannot be proved. As for the first, Moses sheweth it to be such a sin for whose sake

Veruntamen esse peccatum originis illa testimonia docere videntur, Gen. vi. 5, &c. viii. 21.Hæc testimonia agunt de peccato voluntario: ex iis itaque effici nequit peccatum originis quod autem ad primum attinet, Moses id peccatum ejusmodi fuisse docet cujus causa pœnituisse Deum quod hominem creâsset, et eum diluvio punire decrevisset: quod certe de peccato quod homini natura inesset, quale peccatum originis censeat, affirmari nullo pacto potest. In altero vero testimonio docet, peccatum hominis eam vim habiturum non esse, ut Deus mundum diluvio propter illud puniret: quod etiam peccato originis nullo modo convenit.

God repented him that he had made man and decreed to destroy him with a flood: which certainly can by no means be affirmed concerning a sin which should be in no man by nature, such as they think original sin to be. In the other he sheweth, that the sin of man shall not have that efficacy, that God should punish the world for it with a flood: which by no means agreeth to original sin.'

That this attempt of our cathechists is most vain and frivolous will quickly appear; for, 1. Suppose original sin be not asserted in those places, doth it follow there is no original sin? Do they not know that we affirm it to be revealed in the way of salvation, and proved by a hundred places besides? And do they think to overthrow it by their exception against two or three of them? when if it be taught in any one of them it suffices. 2. The words as by them rendered, lose much of the efficacy for the confirmation of what they oppose, which in the original they have. In the first place, it is not every thought of man's heart, but every imagination or figment of the thoughts of his heart. The motus primo primi,' the very natural frame and temper of the heart of man, as to its first motions towards good or evil, are doubtless expressed in these words so also is it in the latter place.

We say then, that original sin is taught and proved in these places : not singly or exclusively to actual sins, not a parte ante, or from the causes of it, but from its effects. That such a frame of heart is universally by nature in all mankind, and every individual of them, as that it is ever, always, or continually casting, coining, and devising evil, and that only, without the intermixture of any thing of another kind that is truly and spiritually good, is taught in these places; and this is original sin. Nor is this disproved by our catechists.

For,

1. Because the sin spoken of is voluntary, therefore it is not original, will not be granted. Original sin, as it is taken peccatum originans, was voluntary in Adam; and as it is originatum in us, is in our will habitually, and not against them, in any actings of it, or them. 2. The effects of it in the coining of sin and in the thoughts of men's hearts, are all voluntary; which are here mentioned to demonstrate

and manifest that root from whence they spring, that prevailing principle and predominant habit, from whence they so uniformly proceed.

2. Why it doth not agree to original sin, that the account mentioned, ver. 6. of God's repenting that he had made man, and his resolution to destroy him, these gentlemen offer not one word of reason to manifest. We say, (1.) that it can agree to no other but this original sin, with its infallible effects, wherein all mankind are equally concerned, and so became equally liable to the last judgment of God; though some, from the same principle had acted much more boldly against his holy Majesty than others. (2.) Its being in men by nature doth not at all lessen its guilt. It is not in their nature as created, nor in them so by nature but is by the fall of Adam come upon the nature of all men, dwelling in the person of every one; which lesseneth not its guilt, but manifests its advantage for provocation.

3. Why the latter testimony is not applicable to original sin, they inform us not. The words joined with it, are an expression of that patience and forbearance which God resolved and promised to exercise towards the world, with a non obstante, for sin. Now what sin should this be, but that which is the sin of the world? That actual sins are excluded we say not; but that original sin is expressed and aggravated by the effects of it, our catechists cannot disprove. There are many considerations of these texts, from whence the argument from them, for the proof of that corruption of nature which we call original sin, might be much improved; but that is not my present business, our catechists administering no occasion to such a discourse. But they take some other texts into consideration.

'Q. What thinkest thou of that which David speaks, Psal. li. 7. Behold, I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me?'

A. It is to be observed, that David doth not here speak of any men, but himself alone, nor that simply but with respect to his fall and uses that form of speaking, which you have

Quid vero ea de re sentis quod David ait, Psal. li. 7.—Animadvertendum est, bic Davidem non agere de quibusvis hominibus, sed de se tantum ; nec simpliciter, sed habita ratione lapsus sui: et eo loquendi modo usum esse, cujus exemplum apud eundem Davidem habes Psal. lviii. 4. Quamobrem nec eo testimonio effici prorsus potest peccatem originis.

in him again, Psal. lviii. 4. Wherefore original sin cannot be evinced by this testimony.' But,

1. Though David speak of himself, yet he speaks of himself in respect of that which was common to himself with all mankind, being a child of wrath as well as others. Nor can these gentlemen intimate any thing of sin and iniquity, in the conception and birth of David, that was not common to all others with him. Any man's confession for himself of a particular guilt in a common sin, doth not free others from it. Yea, it proves all others to be partakers in it, who share in that condition wherein he contracted the guilt.

2. Though David mention this by occasion of his fall, as having his conscience made tender, and awakened to search into the root of his sin and transgression thereby; yet it was no part of his fall, nor was he ever the more or less conceived in sin and brought forth in iniquity, for that fall, which were ridiculous to imagine. He here acknowledges it, upon the occasion of his fall, which was a fruit of the sin, wherewith he was born; James i. 14, 15. but was equally guilty of it before his fall and after.

3. The expression here used, and that of Psal. Iviii. 3. 'The wicked are enstranged from the womb, they go astray as soon as they be born speaking lies;' exceedingly differ. Here David expresses what was his infection in the womb, there what is wicked men's constant practice from the womb. In himself he mentions the root of all actual sin; in them the constant fruit that springs from that root in unregenerate men. So that by the favour of these catechists, I yet say, that David doth here acknowledge a sin of nature, a sin wherewith he was defiled from his conception, and polluted when he was warmed, and so fomented in his mother's womb, and therefore this place doth prove original sin.

One place more they call to an account, in these words. 'Q. But Paul saith, that in Adam all sinned;' Rom. v. 12. 'A. It is not in that place, 'in Adam all sinned.' But in the Greek the words are p' which interpreters do frequently

• At Paulus ait Rom. v. 12. in Adamo, &c.-Non habetur eo loco, in Adam omnes peccâsse; verum in Græco verba sunt e' quæ passim interpretes reddunt latine, in quo, quæ tamen reddi possunt per particulas quoniam aut quatenus, ut e locis similibus, Rom. viii. 3. Phil. iii. 12. Heb. ii. 18. 2 Cor. v. 4. videre est. Apparet igitur neque ex hoc loco extrui posse peccatum originis.

render in Latin in quo, ' in whom,' which yet may be rendered by the particles quoniam or quatenus, 'because,' or 'inasmuch,' as in like places, Rom. viii. 3. Phil. iii. 12. Heb. ii. 18. 2 Cor. v. 4. It appeareth, therefore, that neither can original sin be built up out of this place.

1. Stop these men from this shifting hole, and you may with much ease entangle and catch them twenty times a day. This word may be rendered otherwise, for it is so in another place. A course of procedure that leaves nothing certain in the book of God. 2. In two of the places cited, the words are not p', but iv, Rom. viii. 3. Heb. ii. 18. 3. The places are none of them parallel to this; for here the apostle speaks of persons, or a person in an immediate precedency, in them of things. But, 4. Render p' by quoniam, because,' or 'for that,' as our English translation doth; the argument is no less evident for original sin, than if they were rendered by, 'in whom.' In the beginning of the verse the apostle tells us that death entered the world by the sin of one man, that one man of whom he is speaking, namely, Adam, and passed upon all men of which dispensation, that death passed on all men, he gives you the reason in these words, 'for that all have sinned;' that is, in that sin of that one man, whereby death entered on the world, and passed on them all. I wonder how our catechists could once imagine, that this exception against the translation of those words should enervate the argument from the text, for the proof of all men's guilt of the first sin; seeing the conviction of it is no less evident from the words, if rendered according to their desire.

And this is the sum of what they have to offer, for the acquitment of themselves from the guilt and stain of original sin, and for answer to the three testimonies on its behalf, which themselves chose to call forth, upon the strength whereof they so confidently reject it at the entrance of their discourse, and in the following question triumph upon it, as a thing utterly discarded from the thoughts of their catechumens: what reason or ground they have for their confidence, the reader will judge. In the meantime it is sufficiently known, that they have touched very little of the strength of our cause; nor once mentioned the testimonies and arguments, on whose evidence and strength in this business we rely. And for themselves who write and teach