A14350:900
The Common Places
The common places of the most famous and renowned divine Doctor Peter Martyr divided into four principal parts: with a large addition of many theological and necessary discourses, some never extant before. Translated and partly gathered by Anthony Marten, one of the sewers of her Majesties most honourable chamber.The common places of the most famous and renowmed diuine Doctor Peter Martyr diuided into foure principall parts: with a large addition of manie theologicall and necessarie discourses, some neuer extant before. Translated and partlie gathered by Anthonie Marten, one of the sewers of hir Maiesties most honourable chamber.
Imprinted at London : In Pater noster Rowe, by Henry Denham and Henry Middleton at the costs and charges of Henry Denham, Thomas Chard, William Broome, and Andrew Maunsell, 1583Imprinted at London : In Pater noster Rovve, by Henry Denham and Henry Middleton at the costs and charges of Henrie Denham, Thomas Chard, VVilliam Broome, and Andrew Maunsell, 1583
No title page in the transcription: set from the catalogue record.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
1First, we will see, whether there be any original sin or no: for there be some, which utterly deny the same to be: then we will declare, what it is; lastly, what properties it hath, and how by succession it is conveyed to the posterity, and by what means it is released. As touching the first, we must remember, that both in the holy scriptures, & also among the fathers, it hath divers names; for in the seventh chapter of the epistle to the Romans, 2it is called sin, and the law of the members, and concupiscence. Else-where, it is called the want of original righteousness, a corruption of nature, a lump of wickedness, a froth, a weakness natural, 3the law of the flesh, and such other like. The Pelagians in old time denied this sin; at this day, the Anabaptists deny it. These in a manner may be accounted their arguments. First they say, that the fall of Adam was sufficiently punished in himself, and that there is no cause why God will revenge it in his posterity; especially seeing it is written in the prophet Nahum, that God doth not twice punish one and the self-same thing: for it sufficeth him that he had once punished. Moreover, it is also written, 4that The son shall not bear the fathers iniquity, but the soul that sinneth, the same shall die. Further, that the body, when it is formed in the womb, is the workmanship of God, and hath nothing that ought to be blamed; nay rather, which is not worthy of great admiration: that the soul also is either created or infused by GOD: and that the means of propagation cannot be accounted evil; because marriage in the holy scriptures is commended, and that from the beginning God commanded man to beget children. Wherefore among so many defences of innocency, they demand by what entrances sin could insinuate it self.
1FIrst, wee will sée, whether there be anie originall sin or no: for there be some, which vtterlie denie the same to bée: then wée will declare, what it is; lastlie, what properties it hath, and how by succession it is conueighed to the posteritie, and by what meanes it is released. As touching the first, we must remember, that both in the holie scriptures, & also among the fathers, it hath diuers names; for in the seuenth chapter of the epistle to the Romans,