anglicanguide.com v0.1

Rogers on Article IX: Of Original or Birth-sin

Thomas Rogers, 1607

Commentaries on Article IX: Rogers (1607)Ellis (1660)Burnet (1699)Beveridge (d. 1708)Welchman (1713)Practical Exposition (1716)Veneer (1725)Madan (1772)Hey (1796)Tomline (1799)Wilson (1821)Jones (1849)Trollope (1850)Browne (1850)Forbes (1867)Boultbee (1871)Maclear & Williams (1895)Green (1896)Gibson (1896)Jackson (1900)Bicknell (1919) · Article 9: text, context and Study

Article IX. Of Original or Birth-sin

Original Sin standeth not in the following of Adam, (as the Pelagians do vainly talk;) but it is the fault and corruption of the Nature of every man, that naturally is ingendered of the offspring of Adam; whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and is of his own nature inclined to evil, so that the flesh lusteth always contrary to the spirit; and therefore in every person born into this world, it deserveth God's wrath and damnation. And this infection of nature doth remain, yea in them that are regenerated; whereby the lust of the flesh, called in the Greek, "Phronema Sarkos", which some do expound the wisdom, some sensuality, some the affection, some the desire, of the flesh, is not subject to the Law of God. And although there is no condemnation for them that believe and are baptized, yet the Apostle doth confess, that concupiscence and lust hath of itself the nature of sin.

Text: Book of Common Prayer (1662)

Transcription from EEBO-TCP (CC0): https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eebo/A10958.0001.001. Text: The Faith, Doctrine, and Religion, Professed, & Protected in the Realme of England (Cambridge: John Legatt, 1607), the edition later reprinted as The Catholic Doctrine of the Church of England. Transcription from EEBO-TCP A10958 (CC0), in its original spelling; special characters normalised; marginal references appear as notes; [?] marks an illegible letter and [...] an illegible passage in the source.

The propositions.

  1. There is Originall sinne.

  2. Originall sinne is the fault, and corruption of the nature of euery man, &c.

  3. Originall sinne remaineth in God his deere children.

  4. Concupiscence, euen in the regenerate, is sinne.

1. Proposition. There is Originall sinne.

The proofe from Gods word.

In the holy Scripture we finde of Originall sinne, the cause, the subiect, and the effects: the cause thereof is Adams fall 1, partly by the subtill suggestions of the deuill 2, partly through his owne freewill: and the propagation of Adam his corrupted nature vnto his seede and posteritie.

Except a man be borne againe, he cannot see the kingdom of God, saith our Sauiour Christ3. As by one man sinne entred into the world, and death by sinne, and so death went ouer all men: forasmuch as all men haue sinned, saith S. Paul d. As new borne babes desire the sincere milke of the word, that yee may grow thereby, saith S. Peter 4. And S. Iames 5, Of his owne will begate he vs with the word of truth, that we should be as the first fruits of his creatures. And the fore-mentioned Apostle Paul againe6: You that were dead in trespasses and sinnes, &c. and were by nature the children of wrath, as wel as others. But God, which is rich in mercy, through his great loue wherewith he loued vs, euen when we were dead by sinnes, hath quickned vs together in Christ, &c.

The subiect thereof, is the olde man, with all his powers, minde, will, and heart. For in the minde there is darkenes, and ignorance of God, and his will 7: and in the will and heart of man, there is concupiscence, and rebellious affections against the law of God 8.

And the effects of this Birth, or Originall sinne, are first actuall sinnes, and they both inward, as vngodly affections; and outward, as wicked lookes, prophane speech, and diuelish actions 9; next, an euill conscience 10, which bringeth the wrath of God 11, death 12, and eternall damnation 13.

All churches of God beleeue this, and some in their publike confessions testifie so much 14.

The Errors, and adversaries vnto this truth.

Thus armed with authoritie, and forces from the word of God, and assisted with the neighbour churches, we offer battell,

  1. To the Iewes 15, Carpocratians 16, and Familie of Loue17, who flatly denie there is any originall sinne.

  2. To the Papists, which say, that

Originall sinne is of all the least sinne, and lesse then any veniall sinne.

Originall sinne is onely the debt of punishment for the sinne of Adam, and not his fault.

Originall sinne is not properly sinne: all this hath Ruardus Tapperus 18.

Such as are infected onely with Originall sinne, are free from all sensible punishment 19.

  1. To Florinus and Blastus, who make God the author of sinne 20.

  2. To the Sabbatarians among vs, who teach, that

The life of God in Adam before his fall, could not continue without a Sabbath 21.

The Sabboth was ordained before the fall of Adam, and that not onely to preserue him from falling 22, but also that being holy and righteous still, he might haue bin preserued in the fauour of God 23; which D. B. deliuereth in his Sabboth doctrine.

  1. We are also adversaries to the like curiously affected, who enquire.

Whether it was Gods will, that Adam should fall?

Whether God enforced our first parents to fall?

Why God stayed not Adam from falling? &c.

2. Proposition. Originall sinne is the fault, and corruption of the nature of euery man, &c.

The proofe from Gods word.

Originall sinne is not the Imitation of Adam his disobedience: For the Scripture speaketh of no such thing; neither doth Gods people so thinke, and some Churches, by their extant Confessions, with vs denie the same: as the Church in France 24, and the Lowe countries 25: but it is, partly the Imputation of Adam his disobedience vnto vs 26, and partly the fault, and corruption of mans nature 27, as the Churches also acknowledge 28.

The adversaries vnto this truth.

Aduersaries vnto this truth, are,

The Pelagians 29, and Familie of Loue 30, who say that Originall sinne commeth not by propagation, but by Imitation,

Such as ascribe Originall sinne in no sort vnto man, but either vnto God, as did the Hermogenians 31, or vnto the deuil, as did the Valentinians 32.

The Manichies, who preached that this sinne is another, and a contrary substance within vs, and proceeded no[?] from our corrupted nature33.

The Appollinarians, who held originall sinne to be from nature 34.

The Papists, who affirme that some persons, and namely the virgine Mary 35, is free from this Originall sinne sinne.

3. Proposition. Originall sinne remaineth in God his deere children.

The proofe from Gods word.

I allow not that which I doe; for what I wouid, that doe I not; but what I hate, that doe I, saith S. Paul 36.

The flesh lusteth against the spirit; and the spirit against the flesh: so that yee cannot doe the same things that yee would 37.

Euery man is tempted, when he is drawen away by his own concupiscence, and is entised 38.

Dearely belooued, I beseech you, as strangers, absteine from fleshly lusts, which fight against the soule 39.

Nothing is more true in the iudgement of Gods people, 40.

The Errors, and adversaries vnto this truth.

We stand therefore in this point,

Against the Papists, who say that Originall sinne was not at all, much lesse remained in the Virgine Mary 41.

Against Giselbertus, whose doctrine is, that Baptisme once receiued, there is in the baptized no sinne at al, either originall, or actuall42.

Against the Familie of Loue, who affirme that the elect, and regenerate sinne not 43.

Against the Carpocratians, whereof some boasted themselues to be euery way as innocent as our Sauiour Christ.44.

Against the Adamites both old 45 and newe 46, who said they were in so good a state as Adam was before his fall, therefore without originall sinne.

Against the Begadores in Almaigne, affirming they were impeccable, and had attained vnto the very top, and pitch of perfection, in vertue, and godlines 47.

4. Proposition. Concupiscence, euen in the regenerate, is sinne.

Concupiscence in whomsoeuer, lusteth against the Spirit 48, fighteth against both the soule 49, and the lawe of the minde 50, and therefore (but that there is no condemnation to them which are in Christ Iesus 51, it bringeth death, and damnation 52.

Mortifie therefore your members, which are vpon earth (saith S. Paul 53 vnto the Colossians) fornication, vncleanes, the inordinate affection, euill concupiscence &c. for the which things sake, the wrath of God commeth on the children of disobedience.

And vnto all Christians, S. Peter, I beseech you, as strangers, abstaine from fleshly lusts 54.

To the same purpose is both the doctrine, and Confessions of Gods people 55.

Errors, & adversaries vnto this truth.

Therefore wee mislike their opinions, as vnsound, which say that cōcupiscēce either is no sinne at all; or but a veniall sin, the former was an assertion of the Pelagians 56, and is of the Papists: that latter was one of Glouers errors.

Francis, the Monke of Colen counted concupiscence no sin, but said it was as naturall, and so no more offensiue before God, for man to lust, then for the Sunne to keepe his course.

Petrus Lombardus saith, that Concupiscence afore Baptisme is both a punishment, and a sinne, but after Baptisme is no sinne, but onely a punishment 57.

The Church of Rome, both teacheth that the power of lusting is not, but the vse of wicked concupiscence, is euill, and numbred amongst most greiuous sinnes 58; and decreeth how, Concupiscence is not sinne, but proceedeth from sinne, and inclineth vnto sinne 59.

Glouer, the Brownist said that the intemperate affections of the mind, issuing from Concupiscence, are but veniall sinnes 60.

Footnotes

  1. Rom. 5.15. 1. Cor. 15.21. ↩

  2. Gen. 3.4. 2. Cor. 11.3. ↩

  3. Ioh. 3.3. ↩

    1. Pet. 2.2.
    ↩

  5. Iames 1.18. ↩

  6. Eph. 2.1, 3, 4. ↩

  7. Math. i2.34. Rom. 8.7. 1 Cor. 2.14. 1. Ioh. 3.1. & 5 19, 20. ↩

  8. Math. 5.29. Act. 7.39. and 15.9. Rom. 1.21. Iam. 1.13, 14. ↩

  9. Math. 15.19. ↩

    1. Ioh. 3.21.
    ↩

  11. Rom. 1.18. Coloss 3. 5, 6. ↩

  12. Ioh. 8.24. Rom. 5.12. Iam. 1.15. ↩

  13. Rom. 5.18. ↩

  14. Confess. Helvet. 1. ar. 8. & 2. c. 8. Basil. ar. 2. Bohem. c. 4. Gal. ar. 9.11. Belg. ar. 15. August. ar. 1. Saxon. ar. 2. ↩

  15. Fr. Laur. à Villa. nin. de forman. S. concion. l. 1. c. 13. ↩

  16. Clem. Alex. strom. lib. 3. ↩

  17. Display in Allens confess. ↩

  18. Tapp. tract. de pec. Orig. ↩

  19. Th. Aquin. l. 4. dist. 16. q. 1. ar. 2. ↩

  20. Confess. Helv. 2. c. 8. ex Iren. ↩

  21. Sah. doct. 1. booke, p. 15. ↩

  22. Jbid. ↩

  23. Ibid. 2. booke, pag. 182. ↩

  24. Confess. Gal. ar. 10. ↩

  25. Confess. Belg. ar. 15. ↩

  26. Rom. 5.12, 16. Confess. August. ar. 2. Saxon. ar. 2. VVitt. c. 4. ↩

  27. Rom. 3 23. and 7.18. Eph. 2.3. ↩

  28. Confess. Helv. 2. c. 8. Gal. ar. 10. Bohem. c. 4. August. ar. 2. Saxon. ar. 2. VVittemb. c. 4. ↩

  29. August. de pec. meritis, c. 1, 2, 3. ↩

  30. Display in Allens confess. ↩

  31. Tertull. ↩

  32. Augustin. ↩

  33. August. de haeres. ↩

  34. Athan. de incar. Christi. ↩

  35. Concil. Trid. sess. 5. decr. de pec. Orig. Alb. Mag. c. 74. super Euang. Missus est, &c. Paulus de Palacio in Math. c. 11. p. 463. ↩

  36. Rom. 7.15. ↩

  37. Gal. 5.17. ↩

  38. Iam. 1.14. ↩

    1. Pet. 2.11.
    ↩

  40. Confess. Helv. 1. ar. 8. & 2. c. 8. Basil. ar. 2. Gal. ar. 11. Saxon. ar. 11. ↩

  41. Concil. Basil. sess. 36. Test. Rhem. annot. Rom. 5.14. ↩

  42. Giselb. lib. altercat. Synag. & eccles. c. 8. ↩

  43. H.N. document. sent. c. 2. § 1. c. 13. § 5. ↩

  44. Iren. l. c. 24. ↩

  45. Epiphan. ↩

  46. Aeneas Sylv. hist. Bohem. c. 41. ↩

  47. Carcauza, summā Concil. ↩

  48. Gal. 5.17. ↩

    1. Pet. 2.11.
    ↩

  50. Rom. 7.23. ↩

  51. Rom. 8.1. ↩

  52. Gal. 5.17.21. Iam. 1.14, 15. ↩

  53. Coloss. 3.5. ↩

    1. Pet. 3.11.
    ↩

  55. Confess. Helv. 2. c. 9. Saxon. ar. 2.10. ↩

  56. Confess. Aug. ar. 2. ↩

  57. Lomb. l. 2. dist. 32. ↩

  58. Catech. Trid. praecep. 9. ↩

  59. Concil. Trid. ses. S. decreto de pec. Orig. ↩

  60. Bred. detect. p. 69.119. ↩

Source: EEBO-TCP, https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eebo/A10958.0001.001