and Eve, (i) τοῖς ἡμαρτηκόσι μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῖς ἐξ ἐκείνων βεβλαςηκόσ but on those also who proceeded from their Loins: The Fathers who generally held that the punishment of that fin was only mortality, and the want of that which Adam having loft, could not derive on his pofterity, declare that God fubjected them to this mortality, not out of anger, but out of wisdom and clemency, to beget in them an hatred of fin, and that fin might not be eternal in them. Against the doctrine of the Valentinian and Baflidian Heretics that some Men were φύσει φαῦλοι, evil by Nature, or that matrimony was evil, because it produceth feed polluted, ἐκ γενητῆς, from the birth, we have produced the teftimonies of (k Irenaeus,Clemens of Alexandria,and others : To which add, That the doc trine which taught that men were finners from the birth, is exprefsly condemned by (1) Crysoftom, Cyril of Alexandria, and Theophylatt, in their commentaries on the ninth chapter of St. John's Gofpel, where they teach, (ft.) That the queftion of the difciples, Whether he that wes born blind had finned, was, ἐρώτεσις ανοντος καὶ ἐσφαλμένη, a foolif Suestion grounded upon Error, it being therefore not to be laid that ἥμαρτεν ὗτος ἐκ γενετῆς γὰρ ἐςι τύφλος, he had finned because he was blind from his Birth. (adly) Because as it was abfurd to imagine that the child who had done no evil fhould be punished for the fin of his parents, fo was it to imagine that he could be either a finner before he was born, or from his birth. In fine, that the doctrine of thefe Manichees was an ciently confuted upon the fame principles by which the doctrine of these men is equally confuted, hath been abundantly made good in our fourth difcourfe, Chapt. the 4th and the 6th.

Nor feems it eafy to difcern any advantageous difference betwixt the doctrine of these Decretalifts, and thofe condemned Heretics; or how it would be worfe with those who lie under their abfolute decree of reprobation, if it indeed were with them, according to the doctrine of thofe Heretics. For,

1. Are they not as certainly wicked by the fall of Adam, and as cer. tainly damned after God's decree, De non dando auxilium neceffarium

(i)' (ι) Ου τοίνυν ὀργῆς ἡ τιμωρία αλλ οικονομία σοφίας μεγίσης, ἵνα γαρ μισή ท τὴν ἁμαρτίαν τῶν ἀνθρώπων τὸ γένος ως αιτίαν θανάτε γεγενημένην μετὰ τὴν πα ράβασιν τῆς ἐντολῆς ἐπιφέρει το θανάτε τὴν ψῆφον ὁ πανσόφος. Theodoret. in Gen. qu. 37.

(k) Ejecit eum de Paradifo, & a ligno vitæ longe tranftulit, non invidens ei lig num vitæ, quemadmodum quidam dicunt, fed miferans ejus, ut non perfeveraret femper tranfgreffor neq, immortale effet quod effet circa eum peccatum, & malum interminabile, & infanabile, prohibuit autem ejus tranfgreffionem, interponens mortem, & ceffare faciens peccatum. Iren. 1. 3. c. 37. Ὁ Θεὸς μεγάλην ἐυεργεσίας πάρεχε τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ τὸ μὴ διαμείναι ἀυτὸν εἰς τὸν ἀιώνα ἐν ἁμαρτία ὄντα, Theophyl. ad Autol. 1. 2. p. 103. Τὸν θάνατον ὁ θεὸς πρὸς αναίρεσιν τῆς ἁμαρτίας ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἕυρατο, ἵνα μὴ ἐν ἀθανάτοις ἡμῖν ἀνατείλασα, αθάνατος ἦ. Method. apud Epiph Hær. 64. § 69. Ἵνα μὴ ἀθάνατον ἡ τὸ κακόν. Naz. Orat. 38. p. 169. Bafil. Hom. Quod Deus non fit Author Mali. To. 1. p. 368.

(1) Οιδὲ γαρ ἔνι ἁμαρτάνοντες ἑτέξε κολάζ εσθαι ἔτερον ἔπει, οι τέτο δω σομεν κακεινο δώσομεν, ὅτι πρὸ γενέσεως ημαρτεν, ὥσπερ ἐν ειπων ὅτι ἔτε ἔτος ημαρτεν ἐ τελο λέγει ὅτι ἔνι ἐκ γενετῆς ἁμαξίειν, ὅτως, απων ἔτεοι γονεις αυτό τετο είπιν ὅτι ἔνι διὰ γονέας κολασθῆναι.—Chryfo, ibid.

ad vitandum peccatum, of not affording to them the Help necessary to avoid that fin to which he hath threatened Damnation, as they would be by being left under the power of the heathen Arimanius, or of the antigod of Manes, which by the Fathers are pronounced blasphemous doctrines?

2dly. Are they not as certainly wicked, and de massa perdita, by being born of Adam, and being left remedilefly in that state of perdition, as they would be according to the doctrine of the Stoicks, and Origenists, the Marcionites and Valentinians, by being compounded of that flesh or matter which did neceffitate them to fin? Or is there any great difference betwixt being Qúơu Qaữλo, naturally evil, which was the doctrine condemned by the Fathers in thofe Heretics, and being Púơu rixva õgyňa, by Nature Children of eternal Wrath, as being born of human nature lapsed, which is their fenfe of the Apostle's words?

SECTION III.-It also may deferve to be confidered that the most stiff and eager patrons of thefe doctrines, laid the foundation of them not in holy Scripture, which is our only rule of faith, or in the doctrine of Chrift, our only teacher and our guide in matters of faith, but rather in thofe impure ftreams of the Scholaftical Divines, who had but little knowledge of the text, and lefs on the fenfe of Scripture; or in the doctrine of St. Austin who writ much and fast, and oft against his former, and his better felf.

Of this (not to mention Dr. Twiss and Rutberford) the good Bishop (m) Davenant is a remarkable instance; for when he comes to lay down the imputation of original fin, we hear of little or nothing from the holy Scriptures, but his whole scheme is borrowed from the Schools.

Thus when he tells us of God's imaginary compact with Adam, That if he prevaricated he should procure not only to himself but to all his Posterity, the Death both of the Body and the Soul, as he attempts not to prove this from Scripture, so doth he in it manifeftly contradict the exprefs words of God, In the Day that thou eareft thereof, thou shalt die the Death; for that phrase, Thou shalt Die the Death, frequently occurs in the law of Moses, and always fignifies death temporal, as the (n) places) below cited thew. Moreover God gives this reafon of that threat, for Duft thou art, and unio Duft shalt thou return, which cannot in the leaft relate unto the foul. I conclude then with (0) Origen, That that fentence, σώματος καταδίκην ἐμφαίνει καὶ ὁ ψυχῆς, imports the Condemnation not of the Soul but of the Body only.

2dly. When he adds, that Adam finning, geffit perfonam generis humani ex Dei decreto, sustained the Person of all Mankind by the Decree of God; as he cites this from the Schoolmen, so the plain import of it is, That all mankind were made finners, not by any action of their own, but purely by God's decree.

3dly. When he adds from the fame Schoolmen, that the Pofterity of Adam are guilty of his firft Sin, Ex Arbitrario Dei Decreto, by the Arbitrary Decree of God, but not of his other Sins, nor were they intereffed in bis Repentance, because God's Decree extended not to thofe Sins, or

(m) Animadv. upon Hoard. from p. 244 to 248, and from p. 294 to 298. (n) Gen. xvi. 2. Ex. ii, 12, 15, 16, 17, 20. Lev, ii. 9, 10, 11, 13, 15, 1 Sam. XIV. 24 —(0) Dial. contra Marcion. p 51.

that Repentance: He in effect affirms that his Pofterity, who had no more hand in his first, than in his following fins, were by God's arbitra: ry decree made guilty of that fin alone, from which they would otherwife have been as free as from his other fins; and who then was the author of that fin, fince Adam was only perfonally the author of his own fir, and it was God's decree only which made him the author of our fin, or rather us the author of his fin. And,

4thly. From the fame Schoolmen he adds, That an Infant may be properly guilty of Sin, and so obnoxious to Damnation, because Voluntas Ad. ami, quodammodo eft voluntas parvuli ex Dei Decreto, The will of Adam is in some sort the Will of the Infant by virtue of God's decree; and fo the poor innocent is fent to hell by the arbitrary decree of God alone which made Adam's will his will, when otherwife Adam might have finned on to the day of his death, and the poor child might have died as he was born an Innocent. That the Schoolmen are his only warrant for all thefe fond and horrible imaginations, you may fee in the places cited. The 5th of the Romans, v. 12, 19. being fo far from proving any of these notions, that they are evidently confuted by it, as you may fee in the notes there; nor was any fuch inference from thofe words owned by any of the Fathers till St. Auftin's time, as you may learn from the commentaries of Origen, St. Chrysoftom, and Theodores upon the place.

As for their other patrons, St. Austin, Prosper and Fulgentius, it must be granted they were good Latin Scholars, but yet they wanted skill both in the Hebrew and the Greek tongues, and fo it was not to be expected that we should learn the true fenfe of the Scripture from them.

Some there are who tell us that thefe Decrees and difpenfations of God in reference to men's eternal state are Myferies; and truly as they are managed and afferted by them, I fear they may be fo in the worst fenfe. And if they understand the word as it feemeth to be ftill used by St. Paul, for a doctrine not yet revealed, fee the Note on 1 Cor. ii. 7. they grant that which I chiefly have endeavored in thefe difcourfes to make good, viz. that their doctrine is not taught in holy Scripture.

Others perhaps may fay that fome things here afferted are Pelagianism, and others Semipelagianism, it being ufual for men hard preffed to fall to railing'; but the firft chapter of the Third Discourse will be fufficient to convince them they cannot juftly faften either of thefe names upon me, though Semipelagianism never was condemned by the church of God, and they who in St. Auftin's time maintained it, were by him owned as good Catholics and Chriftian Brethren, as you may fee in Voffius, Hiftor. Pelag. 1. 6. Th. 18. p. 621.

SECTION IV.-Laftly, If any man fay I contradict the doctrine of the Church of England touching these points, he will condemn almost the whole body of that Church, it being certain that after the restoration, almost all the Bibops, and the great body of the Clergy, who were eminent for learning, were of my opinion concerning thefe Five Points, and ftill, I believe, are fo. He therefore out of reverence both to the living and the dead, ought rather to affirm only that I expound fome of her Articles otherwife than he would do,or thinks they ought to be expounded. It hath been ufually faid that the Church of England contrived her Articles in fuch a latitude as to leave place for men of contrary judg

ments to fubscribe them; and if it be considered that in her Catechism The declares that she learns from her Creed, to believe in God the Son who bath redeemed me and all Mankind: That in her prayer at the confecration of the facrament fhe declares, That Jefus Chrift by his own oblation of himself upon the Cross, hath made a full, perfect and sufficient Sacrifice, Oblation and Satisfaction for the fins of the whole world. And in her third Collect on Goodfriday the prays, that all Jews, Turks, Infidels and Hereticks may be saved among the number of true Israelites; and that the other doctrines here pleaded for, do follow from that of universal redemption, as hath been hewed in the close of that discourse, there will be fufficient reason to be of this opinion; but of this more in the Bishop of Sarum's excellent difcourfe upon that article, p. 168, 169.

In fine, the church of England by (p) Canon doth enjoin all preachers especially to take care that they never teach any thing to their people, as religiously to be believed and held, which is not agreeable to the doctrine of the Old and New Teftament, and that which the Catholic Fathers, and the Ancient Bishops gathered from that very Doctrine. That this rule hath been carefully observed by us, and is as constantly transgreffed by them who do maintain the contrary doctrines to be Articles of Chriftian faith, I hope, hath fully been demonftrated in these papers, which are fubmitted to the judgment of the learned reader,

By his Friend, and Servant in the Gospel,

DANIEL WHITBY.

(p) Imprimis vero videbunt nequid unquam doceant pro concione quod a populo religiofe teneri & credi velint; nifi quod confentaneum fit doctrinæ Veteris aut Novi Teftamenti, quodque ex illa ipfa doctrina Catholici Patres & veteres Epifcopi collegerint. Sparrow's Collection, p. 238.

B