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

But you will say, Grant that there is such a thing as Original Sin, and that we have delivered nothing but Scripture truth in this point, yet may we not be too tragical in exclamations about it? As there are those who err in the defect, so are there not many that do offend in the excess, that make it more heinous then it is? This is the last Question, wherewith I shall conclude this Subject. And

But you will say, Grant that there is such a thing as Original Sinne, and that we have delivered nothing but Scripture truth in this point, yet may we not be too tragical in exclamations about it? As there are those who erre in the defect, so are there not many that do offend in the excess, that make it more hainous then it is? This is the last Question, wherewith I shall conclude this Subject. And

First, All the Popish, Arminian, Socinian party with their adherents, look upon the Calvinists, as excessive in this point; hence are there several complaints of them about this matter in all their works. But certainly, if we do regard the scope of the Scripture, it is wholly to debase man, and exalt Christ; To discover our incurable and sinful estate, that thereby Christ may be the more magnified, which is done by nothing so much, as to make known that horrid pollution, which is upon all by nature. And certainly that one Text, Genes. 6. 5. affirming, The thoughts of the imagination of a mans heart to be only evil, and that continually, speaketh more emphatically the deplored and sinful estate of man, then ever any Calvinist hath yet expressed. Yet though this be so, we grant, that some may go too far in their opinions, and expressions about original sin, though for the most part such is a mans self-fullness and self-righteousness, that Pelagianism is likelier to poison the world, then Flacci••ism. We must know therefore that one Illyricus a Lutheran in opposition to Victorinus Strigelius a Lutheran also, but a Synergist, holding the will of man to concur actively with the grace of God to a mans conversion, and thereby extenuating original sin. This Illyricus (I say) out of a vehement opposition to that party, and the School-Doctrine about original sin, making it to be an accident in a man, did fall into another extreme, saying, That original sin was a substantial evil in a man, and that the very substantial form of a man was now made sinful. This Illyricus was a man of a very turbulent and unquiet spirit, a desperate enemy to Melanchthon, whose heart it is said he broke. (Melch. Adam in vita Illyrici.) At first he was well reputed of by the Orthodox, and being sadly tempted in his spirit about sin, and the wrath of God, but afterwards delivered from it; it was judged so great a mercy, that thanks was given to God in the public Congregation for his behalf; but afterwards among other erroneous assertions, he maintained, That original sin was a substantial evil in a man. We may read his whole opinion with the declaration of himself and his Arguments, in his Tractate on purpose concerning this point (Clavis Script. 2d parte Tractat. 6. de originali peccato.) wherein he hath many absurd and monstrous expressions.