A14350:928
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.
12 Furthermore, Pighius disputeth, that this lusting, which Augustine calleth concupiscence, is the work of nature and of God, and therefore can not seem to be sin. But it is answered before, that it proceedeth not from the originals of nature, as the same was instituted by God; but from it being corrupted; for when man was created, he was made just, and (as the scripture speaketh) Unto the image of God. 1And therefore that same appetite in Adam, of things pleasant and preservative, when he was first created, was not raging and vehement, that he should do against right reason and the word of GOD; for that followed afterward. Wherefore the same must not (as Pighius saith) be called the work of God, but the naughtiness of sin, and corrupting of affections. And therefore Augustine calleth Julian the Pelagian, A shameless praiser of concupiscence; 2for he commended it, even as Pighius doth, to be a notable work of God. Moreover, Pighius is against Augustine, for the same very cause, that he saith concupiscence is sin before baptism, and denieth it [so to be] after baptism; whereas (saith ⟨p. 222⟩he) concupiscence is all one, God all one, and his law all one: wherefore he concludeth; that either sin must be in both, or else in neither of them. But here Pighius greatly erreth in two respects; 3first, because he thinketh that in regeneration, there is become no change: especially seeing he cannot deny, but that Christs remedy is added, his righteousness applied, and our guiltiness taken away; for God doth not impute that concupiscence, which remaineth after regeneration.
12 Furthermore, Pighius disputeth, that this lusting, which Augustine calleth concupiscence, is the worke of nature and of God, and therfore can not séeme to be sinne. But it is answered before, that it procéedeth not from the originals of nature, as the same was instituted by God; but from it being corrupted; for when man was created, he was made iust, and (as the scripture speaketh) Vnto the image of God. 1