A14350:995
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.
45 To the end that these words of the apostle may be plainly understood, let us examine three things, which are set forth by him; first, what the apostle meaneth by sin; secondly, what that one man is, by whom sin entered into the world; thirdly, by what means sin is spread abroad. As concerning the first, 1the apostle doth use this word sin generally and largely, that he may signify all that is against the law of God, and against his will. For by this sin, man departeth from the creation of nature, and from the image whereunto he was created: for God so made him at the beginning, that in him should shine forth his image; but that happeneth not, when we contend against the law of God. And this is the only and true cause, why man is not permitted to delight himself with every kind of pleasure; for if he should do so, 2he should draw near unto the nature of brute beasts, and not unto the similitude of God his creator: and God would have him to be his deputy in this world, and therefore to be most like unto him. Surely, if sin be understood thus at large, it doth not comprehend only original sin, that is, our depraved nature, and the corrupt powers both of our body & soul; 3but also all those evils which do ensue upon the same: namely, the first motions of the mind unto things forbidden, wicked deliberations, naughty endeavours, & corrupt customs. Wherefore the apostle, under the name of sin, comprehendeth both the root it self, and also all the fruit of the same.
45 To the end that these words of the apostle may be plainlie vnderstood, let vs examine thrée things, which are set foorth by him; first, what the apostle meaneth by sinne; secondlie, what that one man is, by whom sinne entered into the world; thirdlie, by what meanes sinne is spred abroad. As concerning the first, 1the apostle dooth vse this word sinne generallie and largelie, that he may signifie all that is against the lawe of God, and against his will. For by this sinne, man depareth from the creation of nature, and from the image wherevnto he was created: for God so made him at the beginning, that in him should shine foorth his image; but that happeneth not, when we contend against the lawe of God. And this is the onelie and true cause, why man is not permitted to delight himselfe with euerie kind of pleasure; for if he should doo so, 2he should drawe néere vnto the nature of brute beasts, and not vnto the similitude of God his creator: and God would haue him to be his deputie in this world, and therfore to be most like vnto him. Surelie, if sinne be vnderstood thus at large, it dooth not comprehend onelie originall sinne, that is, our depraued nature, and the corrupt powers both of our bodie & soule; 3but also all those euils which doo insue vpon the same: namelie, the first motions of the mind vnto things forbidden, wicked deliberations, naughtie indeuours, & corrupt customs. Wherefore the apostle, vnder the name of sin, comprehendeth both the root it selfe, and also all the fruit of the same.
Neither must they be hearkened unto, which babble that these things be no sins; for seeing the holy Ghost calleth them by this name, I see no cause why we also ought not so to speak and stand unto his doctrine. And moreover the •erie etymology of the word it self doth show, 1that the first motions of the mind, and corruption of nature be sins: for this word [Greek or Hebrew], that is, Sin, cometh of this verb [Greek or Hebrew], which signifieth, To err from the right scope appointed, by what means soever the same cometh to pass. 2And seeing it is the rule of our nature, and of all our actions, that we should be very conformable to God in all things: surely we being then prone unto those things which be forbidden us by the law of God, and even at the first push are carry straight headlong unto them; without all controversy we must be ⟨p. 242⟩said to sin, that is, to err from the scope, and from the end appointed unto us. The like signification there is of the Hebrew word; for that which is in that tongue called Chataa, is derived from the word Chata, which thou shalt find in the book of Judges, 3the 20. chapter used in the self same sense, wherein I declared the Greek word [Greek or Hebrew] to be taken: that is, To miss the mark. For it is there written of the seven hundred children of Benjamin, that they were wont so to throw stones out of a sling, as they could hit even a hear, and would not miss one whit. Besides this, experience it self teacheth, how grievous these evils are, even in us, which be regenerate: for we be so hindered by them, as we cannot fulfil the law; the which nevertheless we are bound to observe in every point. 4We are also commanded not to lust, to the which precept every one giveth his secret consent, and is witness to himself how much he doth withstand, by reason of our proneness unto sins, and first motions unto vices.
Neither must they be hearkened vnto, which babble that these things be no sinnes; for séeing the holie Ghost calleth them by this name, I sée no cause why we also ought not so to speake and stand vnto his doctrine. And moreouer the erie etymologie of the word it selfe dooth shew,
1But if the Fathers do seem to write sometime, that the law may be fulfilled by men regenerated in Christ, they spake of an obedience begun, and of such a kind of fulfilling, as hath much imperfection joined therewith. For they pronounce them to be perfect, 2and to perform the law of God, which can perceive their own imperfection, that they may daily say with others; Lord forgive us our trespasses: and acknowledge with Paul, that they have a great way further to go. Also the same Fathers do confess, that there is found none, no not the holiest, 3that hath most perfectly loved all virtues. For as Jerome saith; He that excelleth other in one virtue, doth oftentimes fail in another. And he citeth Cicero, who said, that There cannot easily be found one, which is most excellent, either in the knowledge of the law, or in the art of Rhetoric: but to find one that excelled in both kinds together, it was never heard of. Wherefore, that the apostle may make famous and renowned the entire benefit of God, through Christ bestowed upon us; he not only toucheth original sin, but also comprehendeth under one name of sin, all kinds of vices, which do flow from thence.
1But if the Fathers doo séeme to write sometime, that the lawe may be fulfilled by men regenerated in Christ, they spake of an obedience begun, and of such a kind of fulfilling, as hath much imperfection ioined therewith. For they pronounce them to be perfect, 2and to performe the lawe of God, which can perceiue their owne imperfection, that they maie dailie saie with others; Lord forgiue vs our trespasses: and acknowledge with Paule, that they haue a great waie further to go. Also the same Fathers doo confesse, that there is found none, no not the holiest, 3that hath most perfectlie loued all vertues. For as Ierom saith; He that excelleth other in one vertue, dooth oftentimes faile in another. And he citeth Cicero, who said, that There cannot easilie be found one, which is most excellent, either in the knowledge of the lawe, or in the art of Rhethorike: but to find one that excelled in both kinds together, it was neuer heard of. Wherfore, that the apostle maie make famous and renowmed the entire benefit of God, through Christ bestowed vpon vs; he not onelie toucheth originall sinne, but also comprehendeth vnder one name of sinne, all kinds of vices, which doo flowe from thence.
146 Now we must see, by which one man it is, that Paul saith, sin had such an entrance into the world. The same undoubtedly was the first Adam, who was as a certain common lump or mass, wherein was contained all mankind: which lump being corrupted, we cannot be brought forth into the world, but corrupted and defiled. 2And although Eve transgressed before the man, yet is the original of sinning ascribed unto Adam; because the succession is accounted in men, and not in women. Howbeit Ambrose; by One man, understood it to be Eve. But seeing that word One [in that place] is the masculine gender, the signification thereof cannot but hardly, and with much wrestling be applied to the woman. Others do think, that under the common name of man, both of them, as well Adam as Eve, are understood: so that this speech may not differ much from that, which is in the first chapter of the book of Genesis; Male and female created he them. 3Neither do they much regard this adjective, 4One, because the scriptures testify, that Adam and Eve were all one flesh. The first interpretation is the more sincere and easy; therefore I willingly follow the same. But we must remember, what Paul writeth unto Timothy, 5that although both those two first parents sinned, yet there was not one manner of transgression in them both: 6for he saith that Adam was not deceived. Which is gathered by that, which they answered God, when he reproved them: for the woman being asked wherefore she did it, she accused the serpent; 7The Serpent (saith she) deceived me. But Adam, when he was demanded the same question, said not, that he was deceived: but he said, The woman, 8whom thou hast given me, delivered me an apple, and I did eat. These things must not so be understood, as though we affirmed, that no error did happen unto man, when he transgressed:
This only we be taught, that man was not seduced by so gross a guile, as the women was. And this did very much further Pauls reason; for in the same place, he willed the woman to keep silence in the church, because she was an instrument fit to deceive. And this he confirmed by the example of the first parents; for she that persuaded man to sin, it is not likely that she can rightly instruct him: and she that could be seduced by the devil, and deceived by the serpent, it is not meet for her to bear office in the church. 1Yet the book of Ecclesiasticus saith that sin had his first beginning from the woman; which is not to be denied, if we consider the history of the book of Genesis. But Paul, (as we have already said) doth keep the usual manner of the scriptures, which ascribeth succession and procreation unto men, and not unto women. For his purpose was, not to teach at that time, whether of them did first sin, Adam or Eve: but his meaning was to show the root, 2out of which sin was spread in the world. And so is that likewise answered, which might be objected out of the book of wisdom; that Through the envy of the devil, sin came into the world. Also John writeth, that The devil did sin from the beginning. For here is not ⟨p. 243⟩treated of the imitation of the sin of another, or of the persuasion to sinning; otherwise it is true, that the first example of sin came from the devil, and he was the very persuaded & author of transgressions. But this is now the scope of the apostle, to teach out of what thing, as from the beginning, sin was conveyed by propagation to mankind. And that this is the meaning of the apostle, it may be proved by that Antithesis [or contrary comparison] which he maketh between Christ & the first Adam. For the Lord did not restore us, or make us just, only by laying an example before us of following him, or by showing himself to be a most faithful admonisher; but by altogether changing us, & making us new by the spirit and grace. Whereupon Augustine doth seem to have rightly expressed the discommodity brought by Adam, when he saith, that He brought mankind into a consumption; 3by which word he signifieth, that he by a certain contagion infected us all.
47 But against this doctrine the Pelagians are wont to use this argument; That which hath no being, cannot hurt; But original sin (if any be) is already wiped away by faith in Christ, and by baptism, and doth not remain; Therefore it cannot hurt the children which are baptised. But that which these men take, as granted; namely, that original sin is abolished in the believers, and in them which be baptised, that is not perfectly true. For in every sin, 1two things must be weighed; the action, or lewd affection, which is as it were the matter & offence or bond unto punishment, which they call guiltiness. But original sin herein differeth from those sins, which they call actual; because in them, the matter continueth not still: for so soon as one hath committed either adultery, or hath spoken blasphemy, the thing being done, those actions do forthwith cease, and are no more extant: only the offence against God, and the guiltiness remaineth. Wherefore, seeing by faith and repentance the bond unto punishment, or the offence against God is remitted; we may easily grant, that the whole sin is abolished. 2But in original sin, the consideration is otherwise; because the matter thereof passeth not away: for every one of us hath experience in himself, that the corruption of nature remaineth; seeing as yet also we run headlong continually into sin: but unto divine things, we be unapt both in body and in mind, which sins notwithstanding are not imputed unto the faithful. 3For the guiltiness and offence against God is forgiven in baptism, through faith in Christ, although the matter of sin be still remaining; which matter, though it be broken, and made of slender force in the godly; yet we shall not attain to the perfect abolishing of the same, until such time as we die.
47 But against this doctrine the Pelagians are woont to vse this argument; That which hath no being, cannot hurt; But originall sinne (if anie be) is alreadie wiped awaie by faith in Christ, and by baptisme, and doth not remaine; Therefore it cannot hurt the children which are baptised. But that which these men take, as granted; namelie, that originall sinne is abolished in the beléeuers, and in them which be baptised, that is not perfectlie true. For in euerie sin,
And seeing men which be regenerate, do procreate children; not in respect that they be regenerate, but by nature and flesh; 1thereof it comes to pass, that the children also of believers are borne subject unto original sin. For into them is poured the same defiled and corrupt nature that is in the parents; when as yet on the other side, forgiveness or imputation, which are apprehended by faith, cannot be poured into them. For the explicating of this matter, 2Augustine useth two similitudes. One is of the grains of corn, which although they be sown into the ground, being purged of their small leaves, chaff, straw, & ears; yet they grow up again with all those things: which hereof cometh to pass, because that cleansing cometh not unto those grains by nature, but by the art and industry of men: and forsomuch as the corn springeth not of these principles of art and industry, but of nature; it must needs be, that when they are sprung up, they follow the order of their own nature, and not of humane industry. The other similitude is, of a man circumcised, who nevertheless begetteth a child with his foreskin; which cometh to pass, because circumcision was not in the father by nature, but by violence used outwardly: and seeing that children are not begotten by that outward power, but by the inward strength of nature; it is of necessity, that when they are begotten, they do follow the order of nature: and therefore we bring forth no other children, but such as we our selves are. Seeing then we have in us the infection of original sin, they cannot be without the same: but we cannot impart unto our children, the remission and forgiveness of that sin; for that must be hoped for at the hand of God only.
And séeing men which be regenerate, doo procreate children; not in respect that they be regenerate, but by nature and flesh; 1therof it coms to passe, that the children also of beléeuers are borne subiect vnto originall sinne. For into them is powred the same defiled and corrupt nature that is in the parents; when as yet on the other side, forgiuenes or imputation, which are apprehended by faith, cannot be powred into them. For the explicating of this matter, 2Augustine vseth two similitudes. One is of the graines of corne, which although they be sowne into the ground, being purged of their small leaues, chaffe, strawe, & eares; yet they growe vp againe with all those things: which hereof commeth to passe, bicause that clensing commeth not vnto those graines by nature, but by the art and industrie of men: and forsomuch as the corne springeth not of these principles of art and industrie, but of nature; it must néeds be, that when they are sproong vp, they follow the order of their owne nature, and not of humane industrie. The other similitude is, of a man circumcised, who neuerthelesse begetteth a child with his foreskinne; which commeth to passe, bicause circumcision was not in the father by nature, but by violence vsed outwardlie: and séeing that children are not begotten by that outward power, but by the inward strength of nature; it is of necessitie, that when they are begotten, they doo followe the order of nature: and therefore we bring foorth no other children, but such as we our selues are. Séeing then we haue in vs the infection of originall sinne, they cannot be without the same: but we cannot impart vnto our children, the remission and forgiuenes of that sinne; for that must be hoped for at the hand of God onelie.
The very same thing we see happeneth in sciences and virtues, 1which although they be in the parents; yet they are not derived unto their issue; whereby it appeareth sufficiently, wherein the Pelagians were deceived. Neither can any man justly accuse us for these things, as though we pluck any thing away, either from faith, or baptism. 2For unto baptism we grant plentifully, that it sealeth unto us the remission of the guiltiness, and of the offence; and also grace, and the holy Ghost, and engrafting into Christ, and that it sealeth unto us the right to eternal life. Yet it followeth not thereof, that by it is abolished the corruption of nature, or the continual nourishment of sin. Wherefore Paul rightly saith, that By hope we are saved. 3But it is a great marvel, how the Pelagians can deny, that there is original sin in infants; seeing they perceive them to die every day. For the scripture manifestly teacheth, that The reward ⟨p. 244⟩of sin is death, and the sting of death is sin. 4Therefore, whom so ever thou shalt seclude from sin, him also thou must of necessity seclude from death: for by the testimony of the scripture, these are compared together, as the cause and the effect. 5But here we must except Christ only, who notwithstanding he knew not sin, yet for our sakes he died: but death had no dominion over him; for he of his own accord suffered it for our salvation. But to affirm, that there be some without sin, although all men do die, is even to join together things which be repugnant and contrary one with another. 6But besides this place, there be a great many of others also, which may prove, that infants be not without sin: for David saith; Behold I am conceived in iniquity, and in sin hath my mother conceived me. And Paul to the Ephesians calleth us The children of wrath by nature. And in Genesis it is written; The hart of man is prone to evil even from his infancy. Also there be many other places, which serve for this purpose, besides these which are brought forth by us.
48 Now, seeing it hath bin declared of me, what the apostle meaneth by Sin; and by what One man the same is entered into the world: there remaineth to consider, by what means the same hath bin spread abroad. The matter indeed is obscure and very hard, and therefore I purpose the less to stand upon it. For seeing the word of God doth plainly teach us, that there is original sin, and that it is conue•hed over unto the posterity; 1although we understand not the manner and way how it is poured [into them,] yet we must yield unto truth, and not to be too careful, or to trouble our selves in reasoning more than is necessary, as touching the way and manner, which is hard to be known, and may without damage be left unknown. Howbeit, I will not think much to rehearse those means, which I have observed amongst the Ecclesiastical writers; whose opinions, touching this matter, are four in number. The first is of them, which supposed that we receive of the parents the soul, together with the body; that even as GOD, by humane seed, doth frame the body; so of the same, he createth the soul. This opinion Augustine mentioneth, in his tenth book upon Genesis ad literam, and in many other places; and did never (so far as I can remember) disallow the same: yea rather he saith, that by this doctrine may be dissolved this knot of original sin. 2Tertullian, and many of the ancient writers, favoured this opinion; whose arguments when I examine diligently, I judge them probable, but yet not necessary: for that which they allege out of the 46. chapter of the book of Genesis, touching the 66. souls, which came forth of Jacobs thigh; 3it may be expounded not unfitly by the figure Synecdoche: so that by the soul, which is the chief part of man, is understood the body, which without controversy is begotten of the seed of parents. Also by the soul we may understand the grosser parts of the soul; such be the vegetative part, & the sensitive part, which doubtless are procreated of the seed. And that the holy scriptures sometime use this word Soul in that sense, Christ testifieth in the Gospel, where he saith; 4He that looseth his soul for my sake, shall find it.
Another of their reckons (as Augustine writeth in his tenth book upon Genesis) is this; In the creation of the woman, 12it is not written that God breathed into her a living soul: whereupon they gather, that she had not only her body from Adam, but her soul also. But this reason Augustine judgeth weak: for it might be replied upon, that it had bin once already said, that God breathed a soul into Adam, and that therefore there needed no repetition thereof. For if there had bin a new manner of procreation of souls brought in, the scripture would not have passed it over with silence: but seeing the scripture maketh no mention at all of a new manner, we ought to use that which it had before expressed; especially, seeing we see that Adam said of his wife; 3This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: but did not add, And soul of my soul; the which had bin more sweeter, and had rather served to express the knitting of matrimony. But Augustine confesseth, that the doubt is not therefore dissolved: for if we affirm that there be souls created every day, and so created, as in the bodies of them there goeth before no means of seed, which he calleth [Ratio seminalis, 4] then God shall not seem to have perfectly ceased from all his works the seventh day; seeing he still every day createth souls of nothing. But unto this argument it may peradventure be answered; that in the body derived from parents, it is sufficient if there be found qualities and conditions, whereby it is able to receive a reasonable soul, and this is that Seminalis ratio here spoken of.
Another of their reckons (as Augustine writeth in his tenth booke vpon Genesis) is this; In the creation of the woman, 12it is not written that God breathed into hir a liuing soule: wherevpon they gather, that she had not onlie her bodie from Adam, but hir soule also. But this reason Augustine iudgeth weake: for it might be replied vpon, that it had bin once alreadie said, that God breathed a soule into Adam, and that therefore there néeded no repetition therof. For if there had bin a new maner of procreation of soules brought in, the scripture would not haue passed it ouer with silence: but séeing the scripture maketh no mention at all of a new maner, we ought to vse that which it had before expressed; especiallie, séeing we sée that Adam said of his wife;
49 But whatsoever is to be said as touching these arguments and answers, so it is, 1that Augustine altogether inclineth this way, that at the lest wise he thinketh, that the soul of Christ proceeded not from the blessed virgin by propagation. Which he saith that others also did judge besides himself, and that they did affirm that the same might be proved by the epistle to the Hebrews: for there it is thus said, that The priesthood of Christ did excel the priesthood of Aaron, because Christ is a priest according to the order of Melchizedek. And the priesthood ⟨p. 245⟩of Melchizedek was more excellent than the priesthood of Aaron, because Levy gave tenths unto Melchizedek: for he was in the loins of Abraham, who paid tithes unto Melchizedek. But Christ also should have been no less in the loins of Abraham, 2than was Levy, if he had received both his soul and his body from him. And so in this respect the dignity of each priesthood had been alike, seeing either of them in Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek. But here they, which favour that opinion, might answer; that there was besides, some other manner of difference between Christ and Levy: because, albeit both of them were in the loins of Abraham, as well concerning the body, as touching the soul; yet did not both of them after one manner derive their nature from him. For Christ was borne of the virgin, by the means of the holy Ghost; but Levy was begotten and borne, after the ordinary manner that other men be procreated. Wherefore Augustine passeth over this reason, and bringeth another out of the book of Wisdom, wherein is written, as he thinketh, under the person of Christ; 3I have by lot obtained a good soul. For he thinketh, that this phrase of speech can have no place, if the soul of Christ had been derived by way of propagation, through the law of nature from his forefathers; unless we shall affirm, that nature doth work by chance. And he thinketh, 4that this word [Lot] did therefore take place in the soul of Christ, to the intent we should understand, that those ornaments, which we know were most abundant and plentiful in it, were not bestowed thereupon for any merits going before, but thorough the mere mercy of God: and that this was a very great ornament of the soul of Christ, to be joined to one and the self-same substance, and person with the word of God.
1But this testimony, forsomuch as it is not had out of the holy scriptures, which are reckoned canonical, it hath no great force.
1But this testimonie, forsomuch as it is not had out of the holie scriptures, which are reckoned canonicall, it hath no great force.
1Last of all, he leaveth indifferent the question as touching the derivation of souls [from parents] as a thing each way probable. And because they, which are against it, are wont to cite this place out of the 33. psalm; Which fashioned the harts of them severally: this (saith he) is also weak, because even they which defend the derivation of the soul [from parents] deny not, but that the souls be created by God, although they affirm that the same is done by a mean. For so we read in the book of Genesis, that the birds were not created of nothing, but at the commandment of God they issued forth out of the waters. And every one of us is said to be dissolved into the earth, from whence we were taken; when as nevertheless we have not bodies immediately out of the earth, but of the bodies of our parents. 2Thus this opinion cannot be confuted, and overthrown by the scriptures. Although I know, this is the opinion received in the church, that the souls are in creating, infused, and in infusing are created. Neither have I recited these things, to the intent that I would have any alteration concerning this doctrine; but that it may only be understood, what manner of propagation of original sin seemed most easy unto some of the ecclesiastical writers. And surely the School-men, 3when they refuse this doctrine, they only use natural reasons; to wit, that forsomuch as the reasonable soul in nature is altogether spiritual and indivisible, it cannot be sundered: which thing is required in derivation of the souls [from parents.] And for that they hold it to be the understanding part, and a thing of more worthiness, than that it can be drawn out of the matter or substance it self; they earnestly affirm, that it must not have his being by generation, but by creation.
1Last of all, he leaueth indifferent the question as touching the deriuation of soules [from parents] as a thing each waie probable. And bicause they, which are against it, are woont to cite this place out of the 33. psalme; Which facioned the harts of them seuerallie: this (saith he) is also weake, bicause euen they which defend the deriuation of the soule [from parents] denie not, but that the soules be created by God, although they affirme that the same is doone by a meane. For so we read in the booke of Genesis, that the birds were not created of nothing, but at the commandement of God they issued foorth out of the waters. And euerie one of vs is said to be dissolued into the earth, from whence we were taken; when as neuertheles we haue not bodies immediatelie out of the earth, but of the bodies of our parents.
146 Now we must sée, by which one man it is, that Paule saith, sinne had such an entrance into the world. The same vndoubtedlie was the first Adam, who was as a certeine common lumpe or masse, wherein was conteined all mankind: which lumpe béeing corrupted, we cannot be brought foorth into the world, but corrupted and defiled. 2And although Eue transgressed before the man, yet is the originall of sinning ascribed vnto Adam; because the succession is accompted in men, and not in women. Howbeit Ambrose; by One man, vnderstood it to be Eue. But séeing that word One [in that place] is the masculine gender, the signification therof cannot but hardlie, and with much wrestling be applied to the woman. Others doo thinke, that vnder the common name of man, both of them, as well Adam as Eue, are vnderstood: so that this spéech maie not differ much frō that, which is in the first chapter of the booke of Genesis; Male and female created he them. 3Neither doo they much regard this adiectiue, 4One, because the scriptures testifie, that Adam and Eue were all one flesh. The first interpretation is the more sincere and easie; therefore I willinglie followe the same. But we must remember, what Paule writeth vnto Timothie, 5that although both those two first parents sinned, yet there was not one maner of transgression in them both: 6for he saith that Adam was not deceiued. Which is gathered by that, which they answered God, when he reprooued them: for the woman being asked wherefore shée did it, shée accused the serpent; 7The Serpent (saith shée) deceiued me. But Adam, when he was demanded the same question, said not, that he was deceiued: but he said, The woman, 8whom thou hast giuen me, deliuered me an aple, and I did eate. These things must not so be vnderstood, as though we affirmed, that no error did happen vnto man, when he transgressed: 9for as it is plainelie taught in the Ethiks; In euerie kind of sinne there alwaies happeneth some error.
The verie same thing we sée happeneth in sciences and vertues, 1which although they be in the parents; yet they are not deriued vnto their issue; whereby it appéereth sufficientlie, wherein the Pelagians were deceiued. Neither can anie man iustlie accuse vs for these things, as though we plucke anie thing awaie, either from faith, or baptisme. 2For vnto baptisme we grant plentifullie, that it sealeth vnto vs the remission of the guiltines, and of the offense; and also grace, and the holie Ghost, and ingraffing into Christ, and that it sealeth vnto vs the right to eternall life. Yet it followeth not thereof, that by it is abolished the corruption of nature, or the continuall nourishment of sinne. Wherefore Paule rightlie saith, that By hope we are saued. 3But it is a great maruell, how the Pelagians can denie, that there is originall sinne in infants; séeing they perceiue them to die euerie daie. For the scripture manifestlie teacheth, that The reward ⟨p. 244⟩of sinne is death, and the sting of death is sinne. 4Therefore, whom so euer thou shalt seclude from sinne, him also thou must of necessitie seclude from death: for by the testimonie of the scripture, these are compared together, as the cause and the effect. 5But here we must except Christ onelie, who notwithstanding he knew not sinne, yet for our sakes he died: but death had no dominion ouer him; for he of his owne accord suffered it for our saluation. But to affirme, that there be some without sinne, although all men doo die, is euen to ioine together things which be repugnant and contrarie one with another. 6But besides this place, there be a great manie of others also, which maie prooue, that infants be not without sinne: for Dauid saith; Behold I am conceiued in iniquitie, and in sinne hath my mother conceiued me. And Paule to the Ephesians calleth vs The children of wrath by nature. And in Genesis it is written; The hart of man is prone to euill euen from his infancie. Also there be manie other places, which serue for this purpose, besides these which are brought foorth by vs.
49 But whatsoeuer is to be said as touching these arguments and answers, so it is, 1that Augustine altogether inclineth this waie, that at the lest wise he thinketh, that the soule of Christ procéeded not from the blessed virgine by propagation. Which he saith that others also did iudge besides himselfe, and that they did affirme that the same might be prooued by the epistle to the Hebrues: for there it is thus said, that The priesthood of Christ did excell the priesthood of Aaron, because Christ is a priest according to the order of Melchisedech. And the priesthood ⟨p. 245⟩of Melchisedech was more excellent than the préesthood of Aaron, bicause Leuie gaue tenths vnto Melchisedech: for he was in the loines of Abraham, who paid tithes vnto Melchisedech. But Christ also should haue béene no lesse in the loines of Abraham, 2than was Leuie, if he had receiued both his soule and his bodie from him. And so in this respect the dignitie of each préesthood had béene alike, séeing either of them in Abraham paid tithes to Melchisedech. But here they, which fauour that opinion, might answer; that there was besides, some other maner of difference betwéene Christ and Leuie: bicause, albeit both of them were in the loines of Abraham, as well concerning the bodie, as touching the soule; yet did not both of them after one maner deriue their nature from him. For Christ was borne of the virgine, by the meanes of the holie Ghost; but Leuie was begotten and borne, after the ordinarie maner that other men be procreated. Wherefore Augustine passeth ouer this reason, and bringeth another out of the booke of Wisedome, wherein is written, as he thinketh, vnder the person of Christ; 3I haue by lot obteined a good soule. For he thinketh, that this phrase of spéech can haue no place, if the soule of Christ had béene deriued by waie of propagation, through the lawe of nature from his forefathers; vnlesse we shall affirme, that nature dooth worke by chance. And he thinketh, 4that this word [Lot] did therefore take place in the soule of Christ, to the intent we should vnderstand, that those ornaments, which we knowe were most abundant and plentifull in it, were not bestowed thervpon for anie merits going before, but thorough the méere mercie of God: and that this was a verie great ornament of the soule of Christ, to be ioined to one and the selfe-same substance, and person with the word of God.
