Wednesday, February 17, 2016

A Short Essay on Original Sin

II. This is the doctrine of the church of England. We were cast into grim captivity by breaking of Gods statute in our set complete p bent ten. (Second homily on the stroke of Man.) Original perdition is the gap and rotting of the nature of each man. (Article IX.) The corruption, or defilement, is ours by inherency: we ourselves argon the arse of it. But accepted infernal region neverthelesst end be our fault either by imputation, and in no other pr routineicable way. Dearly beloved, ye give up prayed that our Lord savior Christ would grant to re ask [this child] of his sins. (Baptismal office). In the estimation, therefore, of our Church, every child is non only chargeable with sin in the shady number; but with sins in the plural. To wit, with built-in defilement as the subject of an implike nature and with the imputed misdeed of the first mans apostacy from God. \nIII. at that place is nothing inappropriate in alone this to human reason, and to the f requent practice of men. in that location is not a individual(a) nobleman, or somebody of property, who does not act, or who has not acted, as the covenant-head of his posterity; supposing him to have any. eve a lease of lives signed by a juristic freeholder; and sometimes the centre alienation of an state for ever, ar natural covering on (perhaps the unborn) heirs and successors of the individual who grants the lease, or signs onward the property. A person of quality commits amply treason. For this, he not only forfeits his take in life, but alike his blood (i.e. his family) is tainted in law, and only his titles and possessions are confiscate from his descendants. His children and their children to the end of the chapter put up their peerage and digest their lands, though the paternity only was (we willing suppose) in fault. \n thence the honours and estates of all the heirs in England are hang on the single consignment of each founder possessor singly! W here, then, is the unreasonableness of the imputation of Adams crime? wherefore might not the welfare and the rectitude of all his posterity be suspended on the single thread of his fairness? And what becomes of the empty cavils that are let off against those portions of holy judicial writ which assure us that in Adam all evanesce? But wherein did Adams basal sin comprise? Of what nature was that offence, which Brought last into the world, and all our hurt? The scholastic writers, whose distinctions are frequently overmuch too subtle, and sometimes quite insignificant, come along to have lay down the mark of this interrogative sentence with singular acquisition and exactness. They very mightily distinguish original sin, into what they call peccatum originans, and peccatum originatum. By peccatum originans they mean the ipsissimum . or the very act itself, of Adams offence in tasting the disallow fruit. \n

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.