Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

nurfing fathers, and queens nurfing mothers to the Christian church, this cannot, in reafon, be fuppofed to intend any more than that kings and queens fhould take Chrift's people into their protection; and defend and fecure them, a nurfe doth her child, from every evil that they are expofed to, upon the account of their profeffion; but it will not follow from hence, that they were to make men chriftians by force and violence, or to deftroy the common rights of mankind.

even as

TRACT

AN

ENQUIRY

Concerning SIN, in which is confidered Original Sin.

T

HIS enquiry is threefold; first, what fin is. Secondly, who are guilty of it, fo as to be properly called finners. Thirdly, whether one perfon may be, guilty of the fin which is actually committed in and by the person of another.

First, To ufe St. John's definition, as in 1 John iii. 4. Sin is the tranfgreffion of the law; or to exprefs it more fully, fin is an irregular, diforderly, wicked act, either of the mind fingly, or of the mind and practice in conjunction; by which a perfon chufes to do what in reafon and juftice he ought not, or chufes to avoid what in reason and juftice he ought to do.

Secondly, Such, and fuch only, are guilty of fin,' fo as to be properly called finners, who tranfgrefs the law; or who chufe to do, or to avoid doing, as aforefaid.

Thirdly, When any perfon, by advifing, approving of, confenting to, or not using his endeavour to prevent the fin committed by another; or any other way makes himself an acceffory to another's crime, either before or after the fact, fuch a perfon nay, in fome fenfe, be faid to be guilty of the fin which is committed in and by the perfon of another, because he becomes a partner

with the criminal in his folly. Not, but properly fpeaking, every one in this cafe is guilty only of the part be bore in, or contributed to the fin committed; and is not guilty of the part which others bore in, or contributed towards it. Thus, if one man advises another to murder his neighbour, and another approves of, and juftifies the fact, after it is committed, the latter, in this case, will not be guilty of advising to, nor of actually committing the murder, but only of juftifying and approving it, when done; which was the part he bore in this wickedness.

If it be afked, may not one perfon be guilty of another's fin, except he is fome way or other acceffory to it? I anfwer, he cannot; for as as guilt arifes from the irregularity and wickedness of the act to which it cleaves, fo it cannot, in the nature of the thing, extend itself any farther than to the perfonal actor, and to all thofe that are fome way or other, in fome kind or degree, acceffory to it; for as it is altogether unreafanable, and unjust, to charge that upon a perfon which he did not act, nor was any way acceffory to, fo there can be no fuch thing in nature as a perfon to be guilty of a crime which was wholly out of his power to prevent, which he never confented to, or approved of, nor was any way acceffory to, either before QF after the fact.

Objection, Tho' in the nature of the thing the guilt of any act can extend no farther than the actor, and thofe who are fome way or other ac ceffory to it, yet as God is an abfolute and uncon troulable Being, who can difpofe of his creatures as he lifts, fo he can impute the guilt of one perfon's acts to another, tho' the perfon he imputes it to be no way acceffory to that act. Thus God imputes the guilt of Adam's fin to all his pofterity, tho' they were no way acceflory to his crime,

Answer

Anfwer, Tho' God is abfolute and uncontroulable with relation to his creatures, and in that refpect can do with them as he lifts, yet he is not fo with relation to himself; because he is influenced and governed by thofe divine perfections of wif dom and goodness, truth and righteousness, which dwell everlastingly in him. And tho' God is under no restraint, with refpect to any thing without himself, yet he is so far restrained (in all his dealings with his creatures) by the moral rectitude of his nature, as that he never will act contrary to the principles of wisdom, goodness, truth, and juftice; and confequently, to fay that he imputes the fin of one perfon to another, which was in no refpect acceffory thereto, is to impute unrighteoufnefs and iniquity to the most holy God; than which there can be no greater ander or defamation. 'That to impute fin, as aforefaid, is contrary to the principles of juftice and equity is manifeft, not only from the nature and reafon of the thing, but alfo from the teftimony of God, who hath declared it to be fo, in his holy word, as in Ezek. xviii. where, when God, by his prophet, had affured the people of Ifrael that as all fouls were his, fo the foul that finned fhould die; and that if a good man had an evil fon, the fon only, and not the father, fhould be chargeable with the guilt of his actions, and the like of a wicked father and a good fon; and that the father should not bear the iniquity of the fon, nor the fon the iniquity of the father, but that the righteousness of the righteous fhall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked upon him he then appeals to the judgment of thofe very Ifraelites who complained of the iniquity of his dealings with them, whether he did not govern himself in this refpect by the principles of juftice and equity, as at verfe 25, 29. Hear now, "O house of Ifrael, are not my ways equal? From

hence

hence I infer, that as the charging every man's fins upon himself, and not upon another, was just and equal in God's account, fo the contrary to this, viz. the charging or imputing one man's fin to another, that was no way acceffory thereto, is unequal and unjuft in his account alfo. And as God declared, by the mouth of his prophet, that he would deal equally with his creatures in this refpect, by charging the guilt of every man's fin upon himself, and not upon another; fo whoever afferts otherwife of God, is guilty of flander and falfe accufation against the most High; confequently God will not impute Adam's fin to his pofterity.

If it should be here replied, that tho' this is true with respect to actual, yet it is not fo with refpect to original fin. Every common father fhall be chargeable only with the guilt of his own fin; but Adam was more than a common father, he being the bead and reprefentative of all mankind, and therefore the guilt of this his fin is chargeable upon all his pofterity. Anfwer, if by original fin is here meant the fin of Adam in eating the forbidden fruit, this was as much an actual fin as any that hath been committed by any other man; and God is as much obliged, by the rectitude of his nature, to deal equally in charging the guilt of this fin upon no other than him that actually committed it, and thofe that were fome way or other acceffory to that crime, as he is obliged to deal fo with all other fins and finners. And if we confider Adam as a head and reprefentative to his pofterity, it makes no alteration in the cafe, becaufe it was not his pofterity, but almighty God which constituted that relation, and therefore his pofterity ought not, in juftice, to be fufferers by it. If the body of mankind had chofen Adam to be their head, and had given him power and authority

« AnteriorContinuar »