A BRIEFE CONSIDERATION Of Mans Iniquitie, and Gods Iustice: Wherein the distinction of

  • 1. Sinnes into
    • Ʋeniall,
    • Mortall,
  • 2. Sinnes and Punishments into
    • Aequall,
    • Ʋnequall

Is Scholasticallie Examined.

Miserere mei Domine indigna faci­entis, & digna patientis.

S. Aug.

Imprinted at London, for Roger Iackson, and are to be sold at his shop in Fleetstreet, neere the Conduit. 1608.

¶ The Authour to the Pretended Catho­liques.

THE CHVRCH (in the princi­pall significati­on of the word) is a Body vnited togither, in all the partes ioyned with the Head by a mysticall vnion. And the Old Enemie hath diuerslie assaulted both Head and Bodie, with vn­placable malice, but limited po­wer.

Yet still hee attempteth some­thing, and as he is a spirituall E­nemie, so are his weapons spiri­tuall.

Sometimes he prouoketh vs to sinne in Morall things, as in sins of action, Contra bonum.

Sometimes in things Intellectu­all, as in sins of Opinion Contra ve­rum.

The latter is of two sorts: either haereticall against the Head: Or schismaticall against the Body.

The Heresies against the Head, are eyther against his Natures or Persons, or Offices.

The two former were olde he­resies, and long since condem­ned.

The latter, are diuers heresies sprung vp as tares amongst good wheat in succeding ages.

Such are diuers of your opini­ons, & namely against the Priest­hood of Christ consisting in Satis­faction and Intercession.

The former you haue sundry waies violated, and not a little by [Page] your misapplyed distinction of Veniall and Mortall sinnes: which I haue a little rectified in this briefe Declaration, and also re­mooued that imputation of the Aequality of sinne and punish­ment, which you say, must necessa­rily ensue, if your conceipt should vanish.

If you make no answere hereun­to, you either want Charitie to free me from errour, or ability to discharge your selues from suspi­tion thereof. And if you make any aunswer, let your lynes be more full of substance to satisfie the point, then of malice to disgrace the Author: who entirely wishing your saluation in Christs Iustice, commendeth you to Gods mercy in him.

Fare ye well,

A Briefe Consideration, &c.

VENIALL sins are rather prae­ter legem, The Papists opinion briefly reci­ted. then Contra legem.

Veniall & mortall are so to bee e­steemed from their owne nature: For veniall condignely deserue onely temporall punishmentes, and mortall deserue a ternall puni­shments, and both these in diuine iustice. And hence is the inaequality of sinne most properly, and prin­cipally [Page 2] conceiued. In which res­pect there are certaine temporary punishments also in Purgatorie, remaining for those, whose sinnes in this life are not sufficiently pur­ged, and for which they haue not worthily satisfied.

The Prote­stants opi­nion recited and decla­red.ALL sins ex natura sua & merito are mortall, deseruing condign­ly in diuine Iustice, eternall death.

These sinnes are also veniall, not propriè, but impropriè & ex euentu onely. They are veniall by grace according to the quality and man­ner of our Repentance, by which we are capable of pardon. Quod verum est in adultis, &c.

But to say Peccatum and yet Ve­niale simply, and not Mortale pro­perlie, it is a virtuall Contradicti­on. For they are in that sense, termini incompossibiles, and can con­sist together, no more then fire [Page 3] and cold, water and dry, or the like; the accident being such as is repugnant to the proper, or per­petuall quality of the subiect. For there is no composition of merely opposites, nor construction of mutually destructiues.

And if any man aske, 1. how peccatum can be a subiect, it selfe being in nature nothing, or 2. be­ing but an accident, how can it be the subiect of an accident?

We answere,

To the first: that though nothing hath Being, which is not from God, and so sinne is nothing be­cause it is not from God, yet the forme of it, being an obliquity in the substance, or quality, or action of a reasonable creature, taking integrity from the same, so farre as it proceedeth: Sinne hath esse priuatinum, in that which hath esse positinum from God. And there­fore [Page 4] Subiectum mali est bonum, quia malum subsistit in ente, quod in sebo­num est.

To the second, that though mortale in peccato haue not so pro­per an inherency, as ordinary Ac­cidents haue in their subiects, yet it is so naturally in it, that it is in nature inseparable from it: but vltimum et independens subiectum, est homo peccans, vel Angelus pec­cans.

Wherefore the distinction of sinnes into Veniall and Mortall, ariseth not ex ipsis Rebus, but Per­sonis: and hence it followeth, [...]t all sinnes are damnable in all me [...], not to all men; all deseruing, [...] not all receyuing damnation. [...] to the Reprobate, no sinne is final­ly veniall, and to the Elect, no sinne is finally mortall.

Notwithstanding it must bee obserued, that one sinne simpliciter [Page 5] & vniuersaliter est mortale, because it is not onely punishable, but e­uermore punished with eternall death, in all that commit the same & this is Peccatum contra Spiritum Sanctum.

For though it be not fully clee­red (at leaste in the iudgement of many men) what this Sinne is, and wherein the formality of the same consisteth, yet wee obserue this difference betwixt this, and other mortall sinnes (I call sinnes Mor­tall two wayes: first by way of Ex­plication, and so to say a mortall sin,Mortale, est genera­liter nota explica­tiua, specialiter est nota di­stinctiua. it is to shew the nature of all sins: secondly by way of distinction: and so to say a mortall sinne, it is to de­signe this sinne, whereof I now speake.)

That Impenitencie maketh other remissible sinnes not to be remit­ted, but doth not perpetually and necessarily attend those sinnes: [Page 6] Whereas this sinne is simply ir­remissible, the party so sinning beeing euermore obdurate by his owne vniust action, and the iust subtraction of Gods grace, so that Impenitency followeth it ne­cessitate ineuitabili: and therefore it is called mortall in an eminent de­gree, and is neuer veniall: not be­cause God in his absolute power, cannot forgiue it, but because in his iust will he hath decreed neuer to forgiue it.

This is it which our Lord spea­keth of, Mathew 12.31. and which his beloued Disciple vnderstan­deth, saying: There is a sinne vnto death: and there is a sinne not vnto death: distinguishing not betwixt some sinnes mortall in nature, and others veniall in nature; but be­twixt one sinne simply mortall in nature, and in necessary effect vnto all: and all other sinnes simplie [Page 7] mortall in nature, but not in neces­sary effect vnto all: and therefore possibly veniall.

And if any Papist say, that Veni­all Sinnes must bee repented of: I aunswer, that this Repentance be­ing omitted, maketh not a Veniall Sinne to be a mortall sinne in their iudgement: For then they shoulde agree with vs, who say that a mor­tall sinne is veniall by repentance, and that a veniall sinne (as all sins except one, are, propter possi [...]ilita­tem Poenitentiae) for want of Repen­tance is finally mortall. But the Pa­pists say, that sinnes veniall not re­pented of, are not mortall, nor me­ritoriously punishable by eternall death. If they say not thus, there is no controuersy betwixt vs: and if they say thus, there is no reconci­liation, as far as I can conceiue.

The Ancients speaking of mor­tall sinnes, vnderstand great sins, [Page 8] Peccata vastantia conscientiam, such as vsually exclude grace, by which our sinnes become veniall vnto vs.

To returne a little back againe, that wee may proceede forward more orderly, we note that Impae­nitency is not the Sinne against the Holy Ghost, because it is in Pa­ganes also, who neuer knewe his Diuine Person, nor felt his liuelie motion. It is not formale huius pec­cati, but consequens. In all other sins it is rather contingent, then con­sequent. For as no sinne can bee forgiuen without repentance, so this sinne excludeth possibility of repentance, and therefore cannot be forgiuen. Heb. 6.4.

NOW as Death is the wages of all sinnes, so Christ onely is the propitiation of all sins, and both by merite.

He taketh away Originall sinne: yet Baptisme is required ordinarily as the instrument.

Hee taketh away Actuall sinne: yet Repentance is required euermore in those that are of Capacity.

Neither doth hee take away some sort of Sins onely, and not al sorts. For hee taketh away all Kinds of sins, Actuall aswell as Originall: all degrees of Actuall, the lesser, as well as the greater, leauing no­thing vnsatisfied, either in the guilt or punishment.

For if hee tooke away some kinds of sinne, Originall and not Actuall: or some degree of actuall, great and not little: Or if hee tooke away the guilt, and not the punishment: or part of the punishment (as beeing satisfactory) and not all, hee were not an whole, but an halfe Redee­mer, which is an impious doctrin: and wee not wholly, but halfe sa­ued, [Page 10] which is an vncomfortable doctrine.

He alone trode the winepresse, &c.But he hath done all these things alone, helping vs, not by meriting grace for vs to helpe our selues withall: and sauing vs, not by gi­uing vs power to saue our selues withall: but performing euerie part, and parcell of satisfaction, by actiue obedience, in fulfilling the law, and passiue obedience in suffering for our transgressing of the law; that euery part and par­cell of meryt being entirely in his own person, he might haue all the glory in such an excellent benefyt of his redeemed brethren. Thou art worthy O Lord, &c. Apo. 5.9.

Therefore as it is true, which S. Augustine saith: He that made thee without thy selfe, doth not saue thee without the selfe; because in Creation God required nothing of vs, but in Saluation hee requireth some­what [Page 11] of vs; a sanctified heart,But these also are his gifts, Da quod iu­bes, & iubo quod uis. a re­formed will, which must be obedi­ent to his diuine will: so it is true, Hee that made vs without our selues, saueth vs without our selues also: because as man did not concurre operatiuely with God in Creation, so he doth not concur meritoriously with him in Saluation. Wherefore though Man must do somthing toward his saluation in the Court of new obedience, after his acquittall in the Court of Iustificati­on, yet he can doe nothing by way of merit in either; because he hath not power in the state of sinne, or grace, actiuely or passiuely to satis­fie Gods Iustice.

For though God afflicteth his Children, and though his chil­dren must liue conformably to his Lawe; yet the first being a fa­therly and gentle correction, it looseth the property of Punish­ment, [Page 12] and the second being a filial (but vnperfect) obedience,Poena. it can­not haue the estimation of Righte­ousnesse: Iustitia. so that neither is satisfacto­rie in the Court of the supreme Iudge.

For sinne is the transgression of the law (without the law there be­ing no sinne) and no ignoraunce herein can totally excuse the of­fender, though inuincible igno­rance may mitigate the degree of his offence. Therefore euery sinne is committed (mediatly at leaste) against an infinite Obiect, God the Author of the law, who conse­quently requireth an infinite pu­nishment.

Wherefore as it was necessarie, that our Redeemer should haue our true humane nature, that sinne in it might be punished Iustly: So this humane nature was to subsist in an infinite Person, that sinne by [Page 13] it might be conquered fully. And hence was the incarnation of our blessed Lord,By power­full assump­tion, not by naturall generation. who tooke our na­ture (sanctified by the holy Ghost) into the vnity of his person.

Such a Redemer we were to haue, considering the quality of our sinne, and Gods Iustice: that hee might make proportionable satisfa­ction.

But when God is to punish a sin­ner according to the proper merit of his vnpardoned sinne, hauing not meanes to satisfie his iustice vpon any infinitenesse of mans person, which he is to punish, he chooseth the infinitenesse of time, wherein he will punish him, there­by to make some manner of pro­portion betwixt the sinne of man, and his owne Iustice.

But because the person sinning and punished, is in no manner matchable with the person (or ra­ther [Page 14] nature) offended and punish­ing, therefore this punishment may be truely called Passion, but is not Satisfaction: whereas the in­finitenesse of our Redeemers per­son, made his passion to bee a true satisfaction, sufficient for the sinne of ten thousand worlds.

Hence it followeth, that all our sufferings in this life, whatsoeuer, are but expurgations of the matter of sinne, not satisfaction for the guilte thereof, nor may stand in place of condigne punishment: which are both taken away suffi­ciently by Christ: the first beeing imputed to him, & the second in­flicted on him in his death, that we might haue the reall benefit there­of effectually by the working po­wer of the Spirit.

And therefore no sinne is so ve­niall in its nature, as that any man may worthily satisfie for the same [Page 15] in this life, or in the life to come.

Secunda Quaestio.

YET notwithstanding we say, that there is inequality in Culpa, and consequently in poena also.

For if the punishment were e­quall, wee must suppose that all sins are equall, which is false: or that God is not iust, which is im­pious; or that he doth not punish a greater sinne, more then a lesser, because he is mercifull, which is a senselesse opinion, obscuring the cleare distinction of his Iustice. Only, to make his Iustice and mer­cy consist together in punishing the very Diuells, & other damned miscreants, we say, that he punish­eth them not so much as their sins haue deserued. Which if it seeme an hard saying, it is to those that know not how to value the sin of man, and the Iustice of God.

[Page 16]1. First concerning the Inaequa­lity of sinne, wee say that it may be considered principally in three things.

Diuersitas Obiecti in quod pec­camus.1. In respect of the Obiect against which we sinne: so a sinne against God, is greater then a sin against man: a sinne against the first Table then the second. But this must be truely conceiued.

For if wee compare a sinne in the least part of a commandement of the first Table, with a sinne in the greatest part of a commande­ment of the second Table, the lat­ter sinne is more haynous then the former. For though Charitas primò ordinatur in Deum, and euery breach of the law be a breache of charity,Peccamus in Deum immediatè in quibus­dam pecca­tu & me­diatè in alijs. yet some comparison is to bee obserued, as well in the de­gree of the act, as in the order of the act.

Though in the order of the act, [Page 17] charity bee more broken in the least sinne against God, then in the greatest against man, yet in the degree and quality of the act, it is more broken in the greatest sinne against man immediately, thē in the least sinne against God immediatly. Which is manifest, because the Sabbath was made dispensable propter opera necessitatis & charitatis, as it appeareth by Christ, the interpreter of the law, who was the giuer thereof.

Yet if the same lawgiuer did not forbid the greatest sinne against man, who forbiddeth the least sin against himselfe, this rule could not hold.

But if we compare a sinne against the first Table, with a sin against the second in aquall & parallell acts, the first is simply the greater sin.

Likewise, as generally a sinne against God, is greater then a sinne [Page 18] against mā for the essentiall diuersi­ty of the Obiect; so a sinne against one man, may bee greater then a sinne against an other, for the acci­dentall diuersitie of the obiect: As in the eminency of place against a King: in the propinquity of bloud against a Parent, &c.

For though all men naturallie con­sidered are the same, yet ciuilly, and morally, they are not. And therfore the degree of sinne is much varied for these respects.

2. In respect of the matter where­in we sinne:Diuersitas materiae circa quā peccamus, vel quan­titatis e­iusdem materiae. so murder is a greater sin then theft, because life is more pretious then goods.

Likewise if we compare sinnes in the same kind or matter, one may be greater then another, ac­cording to the extent, or quantita­tiue measure. As to kill three men it is a greater sin then to kill two: to steale 100 pound, then 10: if no­thing [Page 19] els be interuenient. For great diuersity of sinne, ariseth out of the variety of circumstan­ces.

3. In respect of the manner how we offend: so a sinne of malice,Diuersitas modi quo peccamus. is greater then a sinne of infirmitie, a sinne of ignorance, then a sin of negligence.

Th. Aquin. in quae. de ordine praecept: Decalogi, obserueth, that the last commandements are well distin­guished, Propter peccatum operis, in the commandement Non furtum facies. Propter peccatum Oris, in the commandement Non loquêris fal­sum &c. Propter peccatum Cordis, in the commandement Non concu­pisces. But he distinguisheth the last into two, without good con­gruity. For to couet an other mans wise, and to couet another mans Oxe, is the same manner of coue­ting, but the matter is not the same [Page 20] which maketh not this to be two commandements: For the manner of coueting, which is concupiscen­tia sine consensu, being but one, and the matter coveted be diuers, the commandement is one, and not diuers: But the same things being forbidden in the seauenth & eighth commandements to be coueted cum consensu, there the commandements are diuers, be­cause they are broken principally in Opere, not in Corde only. Wher­as this last is broken not in Opere, but only in Corde without full con­sent to the tentation.

And whereas some sins consist onely in immanent action being fi­nished in the mind, either proper­ly or fully, as pride, or vnproperly and casually as murther (for pride is absolutely complete in the mind, but murther is not) & some in transient action, beeing accom­plished [Page 21] by the body; the last is greater then the first, because there is a farther addition in it thē in the first. The lusting after a wo­man is mentall adultery, though it proceed no farther, which is for want of meanes only. For Adulter animo, non nisi inuito castus est cor­pore.

A sinne in mynd is more easily committed then a sin in the body, because it findeth lesse impedi­ment: and a sinne in the order of it, is committed first in the minde, and secondly by the body, as it ap­peareth in the first sin of our first Parents. Euery farther additiō, ma­keth the sinne more intense in de­gree.

Now since there is such ina­quality in Culpa, there is also ine­quality in Poena, because the good­nesse of Gods Iustice, whence it proceedeth, hath a relatiue respect [Page 22] to our sin, which, in what kind so­euer it be, is meritoriously puni­shable by eternall death.

The punishment is double, Pri­uatiue and Positiue.

1. The Priuatiue payne (called Poena Damni) is the want of desira­ble good. Such is the exclusion out of heauen, and the consequēt priuation of vnspeakable ioyes; the most excellent whereof is, the fruition of the sacred Trinitie in blissefull vision. This paine is equall to all, Tempore et Gradu. In time, be­cause it is an eternall depriuation: In degree, because it is a totall de­priuation, ioyned with infallible despayre.

2. The positiue payne (called Poena Sensus) is partly inward from an inward cause, and partly out­ward from an outward cause.

Poena au­tem vehe­ment, &c. Inuenal.The inward payne is the sting of conscience, the gnawing of that [Page 23] worme, which hath her life per­petuated in our death.

This payne is equall to all, in duration but not in degree, because it is varied according to the guilt whence it doth proceed.

The outward payn is affliction in the whole man, Body, & Soule, by such exquisite instrumentall meanes as God decreeth in his wisedome, & executeth by his po­wer, to demonstrate his Iustice.

And if any man doubt, how that can be called an outward punish­ment, which is inflicted on the Soule, beeing an inward substance in her coniunction with the Body: I answer, The Fa­thers gene­rally are of opiniō, that there is Fire (pro­perly taken in hell: S. Aug. l. 21: de Ciuit. Dei: ca: 10 S. Hieron. ad Auitum S. Aug. vide. Zanch. de Ope. parte 1. lib. 4. cap 19. without all doubt there is outward meanes of sensible pu­nishment. That the sensible punish­ment of Fire, is called outward, be­cause it is originally extra ani­mam, as the other sensible punish­ment of the worme is called inward because it springeth within the soule it selfe.

Likewise the sensible punishment by Fire is outward, as it worketh on the body, being an outward substance: and inward as it work­eth on the soule, which is an in­ward substance by her vnion with the body.

And as the soule hath one state in her selfe independēt, vpon her se­paration from the body, and an other in the body vpon her reuni­on with it: so in the first, she suffe­reth outward payne immediately, and in the second, shee suffereth outward paine immediatly, parti­cipating eternall tormēt, with the old companion of her momenta­ny pleasure.

And as the outward payne of Fire primarily inflicted on the body, doth worke effectually to af­flict the soule: so the inward payne of the worme arising, and dwelling within the soule, worketh effectu­ally [Page 25] to vex the body: That as they had mutuall offices in the transi­tory delight of their sinnes, so they may haue mutuall offices in the horror of their excessiue pangs.

In this outward paine two things are to be noted as before: Tempus & Gradui.

In time this payne is equall to all men. And this is common in all the payns of hell, all being equal­led in eternity, because in respect of duration, there is neither more nor lesse in that with in Infinite.

Hence is that wofull sentence, Go ye cursed into euerlasting fire. E­uerlasting, not temporarie, as Origen falsly cōceiued, preiudicing Gods Iustice in extolling his mercy: both which are one in him, but differ in their effects towards vs.

In degree, this payne is vnequall according to the inequality of sin: God in his distributiue Iustice, al­lotting [Page 26] seuerall portions of paine, according to the seuerall propor­tions of sinne.

For though there be a proper designed place of Hell, and in it some common instrument of payne, yet God most prouidently ordereth the execution of his Iu­stice.

And though we are not directly led by expresse Scripture to affirm it confidently, yet we may suppose it very probably, that God eyther cohibiteth the actiue power of the instrument, or strengtheneth the ability of the Patient, or both, to make a difference of payne.

Howsoeuer, this is vnquestiona­ble, that for this purpose hee vseth such wise meanes as seeme best to his will; which being perpetually accompanied with singular equi­ty, can purpose nothing vniustly: and being assisted with illimited [Page 27] might, can enterprise nothing vn­effectually.

Concerning all the paines, of what kind, number, or quality soe­uer they are, we must know (God grant we neuer feele) that there is neither case in them, nor release from them. The pitifull vnpitied wretches suffer vnsufferably, in measure of time vnmeasurable.

THVS then we acknowledge, that sinnes are veniall by grace, but mortall in their proper desert: and that sinnes are vnaequall many wayes, and that the punishment of all sinnes is aequall in time, but vnaequall in degree.

Now to obtayne absolution à Culpa & Poena, we must haue re­course to Gods mercy, because his Iustice doth punish vs consi­dering vs, as we are of our selues.

And to find this mercy, we must [Page 28] haue recourse to God, in Iesus Christ our Lord, because we are not worthy of it, for any thing in our selues. This is both pietie and safety.

Neither must we doe thus in profession only,Concil. Trid. Sess. 6. cap: 9: as sometimes the Papists doe, but in action also, as sometimes they doe not, as it ap­peareth by their opinion before deliuered, and farther shall ap­peare in their doctrine ensuing.

But first we obserue, that as Christ only is via meriti, for which we are meritoriously pardoned, so there is required also via medij, by which we may actually receiue this pardon, because the salue of his merits must be applied to the soares of our soules. For nothing can produce an effect in that which it doth not Contingere vel substantia, vel virtute saltem. As the Sun being in his substance placed [Page 29] so farre aboue, cannot produce any effect by working vpon infe­riour bodyes, but by a virtuall con­tact.

Our Lord hath a double ope­ration: Extraordinary & Immediate: or Ordinary and Mediate.

The first we are to beholde and admire, but we cannot safely rely on it. For we must herein remem­ber an old rule (applyable to o­ther purposes) Notandum si semel, vtendum vt saepè.

The second therefore is that, whereunto wee now bend our eyes.

To this end there are certayne Euangelicall meanes, with which Christ doth concur.

They are such, as are assigned by him.

They are assigned by him, which expressely, or consequently are contained in his word. For wee [Page 30] must estimate the things of God, according to a rule deliuered by him, either speaking with his mouth, or dictating by his spirit.

Hereupon we deseruedly reiect that position of the Church of Rome,Rhem. Test. annot. in Iob. 13.10. Veniall sinnes may be remitted by holy water, and other sacred Cere­monies: which sentence hath in it a double impiety and falshood.

The first in diminishing the na­ture of our sinnes, which are in their proper merit condignly pu­nishable by eternall death.

The second in extolling the va­lue of their ceremonies, which cā ­not haue in them so gratious a power.

Neither is it enough to say, that these ceremonies, as holy water & the like, worke not this effect vi sua, but virtute Christi.

For as the power of remission of [Page 31] sinnes is only in God (a ministeri­all office being in the Church by commission from him) so the meanes which we must vse to re­ceiue the remission by, must be such, as hee appointeth by his re­uealed will.

For as to diuide the first to any person from him, so to communi­cate the second to any meanes not decreed by him, it is to euacuate the high price of our Redempti­on, and to trample vnder feet, the blessed couenant of happy peace. Neyther is it enough to say, that the Church deuiseth not these things simply of her selfe, but that it is Christs promise to concurre with the Church by his infallible Spirit:

For they must remember, that it is the duety of the Church to con­cur with him, according to infalli­ble directions deliuered in his [Page 32] word.

As for immediate reuelations, none but Enthusiasts rely thereon. But we know that the Spirit doth rather aspirare, then inspirare in these dayes.

Wherefore leauing vnwarranta­ble aspersions to such Aquarij, as a nouell conceipte, proued one­ly by an ingenious delusion: We acknowledge that Naturall bloud and water, issuing out of our Lords sides, doe per viam meriti purchase the remission of all our sinnes: and that the sacramentall bloud & water in the holy mysteries figured ther­in, doe per viam medij, apply, seale, and confirme the same vnto vs in­strumentally, by the effectuall operation of the Holy Ghost.

He that diminisheth the merit of Christs death, destroieth the hope of his owne life.

I liue in him, who died for me.


The Author to the Reader.

COurteous Reader:

If any faults haue escaped me, in penning this little discourse (which I may be occasioned hereafter to call Principium doloris mei) I can­not expect, that thou shouldest esteeme them venial, because I haue left that plea, and gained a losse vnto my selfe.

If I should craue pardon for diuulging it, thou mightest iust he answer, VVhile it remained, appertained it not vnto thee? And after it was printed, was it not in thine owne power?

Though I coulde fullie remooue such likelie imputations, yet the reason being priuate, which caused me to make this publike, (and Secreta mea mihi) I must depend vpon thy gentle interpretation. Onelie thus much I giue thee to vnder­stand, that I rather sought profit hereby to learne from others, then credit to teache anie.

But if my successe proue answerable to my honest desire, thou shalt find in time, that my Tongue and Pen, are consecrated to thy good. Farewell.

Thine in our Lord IESVS, Theophilus Pyggons.

Pag. 3. lin. 18.

Whereas it is sayd, that the forme of sinne is an obliquity in the substance, —dum breuis esse laboro Ob­scurus fio. or quality, or action of a reasonable Creature, it is to be vnderstood, that Malum subiectatur (as the Schoolemen speake) the euill of sinne, and the deformity (which is the form of it) hath its subsistence finally in a Substance, as being the last, and independent subiect ther­of. But it is immediately in the ac­tion, and corrupt quality of the Agent.

Pag. 20. this should haue bin added as a Marginall note ouer against the fift line.

If the last commandement (as wee esteeme it) should be diuided into two, propter diuersitatem Obiecto­rum: by the same reason it should be no commandement at all, be­cause the same things are forbid­den in the seuenth & eighth com­mandements before. The diffe­rence therefore of the manner of forbidding these things, distingui­sheth the tenth commandement from the seuenth and eighth: But the difference of the matter in it, doth not make it distinguished in­to two seuerall precepts, as Papists affirme. But as our Lord epitomi­zeth and reduceth ten comman­dements vnto two, so here all the particulars make but one. And as to make the first and second com­mandements [Page] one, it is to ioyne things separate, so to make this one commandement two, it is to separate things conioyned. To do the first, it is to match together in seuerall Tribes, and to doe the lat­ter, it is to make a diuorce of parties lawfully married. The Author that made this confusion, and diuision, is greater then his reason: for though S. Augustine beganne it, yet his reason to make three commandements in the first Table propter Trinitatem, is a witty Analogy onely: and his reason to make seauen in the second Table by diuiding the last, is of no solidi­ty. Zanchius his seuere, but true censure, touching this particular, is worthy to be considered: Zanch. de Red. in Tractat. de Decalogo, Thesi tertia.

Some principall errors in the im­pression, correct thus:

Pag. 2. Lin. 12 For Persons (as it is printed in some Copies, and is plaine Nestoria­nisme) read Person, in the Epistle to the Papists.

Pag. 20. line 5. For these words, and the matter coueted be diuers, reade (though the matter coueted be diuers)

Pag. 24. In the margent, these words, S. August. are superfluous.

Pag. 24. lin. 15. For immediatelie in the second place, reade, mediatelie.

Pag. 25. lin. 14. For within, reade, which is.


This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this EEBO-TCP Phase II text, in whole or in part.