was not bound to repair the Angels, thofe golden Chap. 10. Veffels, once inmates of Heaven; and who can, who dares conceive fuch a thought, That he was bound to repair men who are but Images of clay, dwelling in the lower World? I know many differences are af figned, Man finned by feduction, Devils by felf-motion; in the fall of Man, all the human nature fell; in the fall of Angels, all the Angelical nature fell not. The fin of Angels was more damnable than Mans, because their nature was more fublime than his. Men are capable of repentance, but Devils not; because whatever they once choose, they do will immovably. But alas! all these are but extra-Scriptural conjectures. Man, though tempted, was voluntary in the tranfgreffion; all men were involved in the fall, but that's no apology for the fin: The fin of Man, if not fo high as that of Angels, was yet a damnable one. It is a vain dream, to fuppofe, that Almighty Grace could not have wrought a gracious change in Devils. That which differences us from them, is, as the Scripture tells us, no other, than the meer Grace and Philanthropy of God towards us; he might justly have left us under that wrath, which our apoftacy deferved. Two things will make this evident.

1. Original fin, which reaches to all, is properly fin; and, being fuch, merits no less than eternal death. We all finned in Adams fin, by that one man, fin entred into the world: The disobedience of that one, conftituted all finners; which unless it had been imputatively theirs, it could never have done. The want of Original righteoufnefs is properly fin, because it is the want of that which ought to be in us; it ought to be in us, because the pure fpiritual

Ii2

Law

Chap. To. Law calls for an holy frame of heart: it ought to be in us, or else we are not fallen creatures, but are as we ought to be: If it ought to be in us, then the want of it is properly fin. The Apostle proving that all are finners, and fhort of the Glory of God, tells us, That there is none righteous, no not one; none that understandeth, none that feeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way. They are together become unprofitable. There is no fear of God before their eyes, Rom. 3. Which words denote a want of that habitual righteoufnefs which ought to be in all, even in little Infants: That want is fin, elfe the Apoftle could not from thence conclude, That all, Infants not excepted, have finned and come fhort of the glory of God. To want habitual righteousness, which ought to be in us, is to be finners, and fhort of our original. That original concupifcence, which is in all, is properly fin; it is over and over called fin in Scripture, it is the root and black fountain of all impiety, it is oppofite to the Law and Spirit of God, it impels to all fin, it fights against all graces, and particularly against that of love to God: where the creature is inordinately loved, there God is not loved with all the heart and Soul. Thefe things make it appear, That Original fin is properly fin; and if fo, it merits no less than death eternal. The Scripture abundantly teftifieth this, The wages of fin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life, through Jesus Christ our Lord, Rom. 6. 23. In which we have a double Antithefis, Wages is oppofed to Gift; and eternal Death to eternal Life. By one man fin entred into the world, and death by fin, Rom. 5. 12: Not meer infelicity, but fin entred; not meer temporal death, but eter

nal

* Hoc uno

fulmine, totus

ex officina

nal followed upon it. Hence the Apostle tells us, Chap. 10. That there was neïμzius xzJánea, judgment unto con demnation, and that upon all men, verf. 16, and 18. We are by nature children of wrath, even as others, Eph. 2. 3. He doth not fay, by practise or custom; but by nature, we are Children of wrath, that is, worthy of it. Nature, as corrupted, is here opposed to Grace; which, as the Text after fpeaks, faves us: wrath appertains to nature, falvation to grace. This one Text is as a ftroke of Lightning, to lay all men flat and proftrate before God: even little Infants, verbo, quafi being unclean in themselves, cannot, if unregene- homo,quantus rate, ftand at Gods right hand, and enter into the quantus eft, holy Heavens; they must therefore ftand at his left, profternitur: and go into darknefs. Hence St. Auftint tells the Pe- + Finge Pelalagians, who denied Original fin, That they must gine locum, forge out of their Shop of Herefy, a middle place perverfi dogfor fuch Infants, as are Aliens (from the Grace of maris tui, ubi Christ: If Infants are unregenerate, they cannot en- gratia vitam ter Heaven the place of blifs. If, as the Pelagians requiei & glofay, they are free from fin, they cannot go to Hell riæ poffidere the place of mifery. Tertium ignoramus, A third fint. dut. Hyp: place I know not, nor can find any fuch in Scripture: 15. They are therefore subject to eternal death for their Original fin. The fum of this Argument we have in Anfelm, Si originale peccatum fit aliquod peccatum, ne- De conc. ceffe eft omnem in eo natum, in illo non dimiffo damna- Virg. cap. 27. ́ri. If Original fin be fin, it is neceffary, that every one born in it, fhould be condemned for it, unless it be pardoned; it being impoffible, that any one should be faved, fo much as with one unremitted fin. If Original fin be indeed fin, and do merit death eternal, then God may juftly inflict that death for it,

*

seeing

alieni aChrifti

parvuli pof

Chap. 10. feeing he cannot be unjust in doing an act of justice, in inflicting that punishment, which is due to fin.

2. As on Mans part there is a merit of eternal death; fo on Gods, the miffion of Christ to save us was an act of meer Grace. This is set forth in Scripture, God commended his love towards us, in that while we were yet finners Chrift died for us, Rom. 5.8. In this was manifefted the love of God towards us, because he fent his only begotten fon into the world, that we might live through him, 1 Joh. 4.9. God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whofoever believeth in him, fhould not perish, but have everlafting life, Joh. 3. 16. We fee here, the fending of a Saviour was an act of meer Grace; and Grace, being furely free and felf moving, might have fufpended its own act; and that fufpenfion, had it been, would have left all men in the ruines of the fall, and that without any colour of injuftice at all in God. There is a vast difference between mercy in Man, and mercy in God; Man fhews it ex officio, out of duty, and in every failure he is unmerciful: but God fhews it, ex arbitrio, out of Sovereignty, in fuch fort as he pleases; and to do more he is not obliged. Hence Gods Purpose and Grace are joined together, 2 Tim. 1.9. His Mercy, though an infinite Ocean, lets not out a drop towards fallen creatures, but according to his good pleasure: If God antecedently to his own decree and promife, was bound to fend his Son to feek and to fave that which was loft; then the fending of him, was not an act of grace, but of juftice and neceffity: it muft, it ought to be fo; the Grace and Love revealed in the Gospel, is a meer nullity, a thing no way free or gratuitous: but if, as the truth

is, God were not bound to fend a Saviour, then he Chap. 10. might have fufpended his own act, and left all man

kind in the ruins of the fall.

No man who believes these two things, viz. That Original fin is fin, and merits wrath; That the Miffion of a Saviour is Grace and felf-moving; can poffiby have hard thoughts of Gods Decree in the point of Reprobation. We being by Original fin in a state of wrath, what might not God do with us? Might he not justly leave us in the corrupt Mafs? Or might he not justly punish us there? If not leave us; then, as he would be just, he was bound to give a Saviour, and by confequence the giving of him (which is horrendum dogma) is no more Grace or Mercy, but Neceffity: If not punish us, then as he would be juft, he was bound not to do an act of Justice; I' mean, not to inflict that death which is as due wages to every fin. To me it is clear, That God cannot be cruel or unjuft, either in denying a Redemption purely gratuitous, or in inflicting a death juftly due to a finful creature. St. Auftin brings in the Pelagians mur- Epist, 105. muring thus: Injuftum eft in una eademq; mala caufa, hunc liberari, illum puniri. And then answers, Nempe ergo juftum eft utrumq; puniri, quis hoc negaverit! If Original fin be fin, and Grace Grace; if God may be just in punishing, or free in giving, then he might without any colour of injuftice, have condemned all men; and if fo, he might have reprobated all men, and then no fcruple can be made touching the reprobating of fome. Theodore Corubert, who in his life Integrum Deo wrote against Calvin and Beza touching Predeftina- eft, fervare tion, at his death confeffed, That God might do his vellet an repleasure in faving or condemning him; there was no effe quod con

probare, nil

reafon queratur,.