A treatise of original sin ... proving that it is

In the second place, He was made caput morale, God did appoint him to be our moral head, covenanting with him, that if he persevered, the good promised should redound to him and to all his posterity, but if he did apostatize then he and all his off-spring shall be plunged into the evil threatened, and this Covenant was made known to Adam, that so he might be the more careful to look to his duty; Neither was it requisite that God should expect Adam's consent, or ours to this agreement, seeing God is the absolute Sovereign and Lord of all, and herein did consult for our good, better then if he had taken any other way, as ⟨p. 430⟩is more to be insisted on. But against this Covenant many rise up with open mouth; Soto the Papist he derides it, the late Writer, so often mentioned, saith, he knoweth of no such thing, and which is the greater pity; Jausenius more orthodox, though a Papist, then many who call themselves Protestants, in the Pelagian Controversies, he following Austin too rigidly calleth it, Novum pacti mysterium, &c. the new mystery of a Covenant founded upon no Scripture, Tradition, or solid Reason, but excogitated by mere humane Authority (De Stat. Nat. lap. lib. 1. cap. 16.) But though this Covenant with Adam be not expressed, yet evident and inseparable consequences from the Scripture will compel us to believe it, For was the commination of death only to him as a singular person, was he only interested in the punishment of death, if he did disobey; The event demonstrateth the clean contrary, for do not all die upon his voluntary transgression? Is not this then plainly to say, that God made a Covenant with him as a public person? And if Austin were not of that mind, how could he say, Omnes homines fuernnt ille unus homo? We were not all that one man physically and naturally, therefore morally and by Covenant in Gods estimation, per jurisfictionem (as they say) though we must not think this was a mere fiction or imaginary thing, as the Remonstrants call it, only a dispensative Covenant, not as if God were really angry with mankind for this transgression. Again, If there were not this Covenant, the Apostle could not lay it still upon one man, Rom. 5. and 1 Cor. 15. but if it were only because the root is defiled, then our parents sins would be accounted to us as well as Adam's, which compelled Austin to incline to that opinion also.