1. Seeing that man is the most excellent of all the visible works of God: for whose cause next unto God’s, all other things were created: we hold it a matter belonging unto a Divine, to entreat of the nature of man.

2. Man is neither the body, nor the soul, severally considered, but composed of both, that is, of soul and body joined together by a most straight, and most loving band.

3. The truth of God’s word doth witness, that there was but one man created at the first, who was to be the original of all other men.  And so, all those that proceeded from him, should be tied together by a common bond of blood.  We do then reject the opinion of such Philosophers, as have denied, one certain man to have had his beginning first of all other.

4. The body of that first man, was formed by God of the dust of the earth: that is, as we interpret it, of the four elements: that it should not be a grave of the soul, as PLATO thought, but a most excellent and a most meet instrument to perform the faculties of the mind.

5. Now in respect that this body was made of qualities repugnant one to the other, it was mortal in the first creation of it, (for repugnancy or discord, is the author of dissolution:) yet by the appointment of God, it was made immortal, that it should be the habitation of the immortal soul: but after the entrance of sin into the world, it returned unto the former necessity of mortality.

The PELAGIANS therefore do err, in holding that the bodies of men, were naturally subject unto death: and in attributing the cause of death, to be only the discord of the contrary qualities.

Other points that belong unto the frame and beauty of man’s body, we leave to be discussed by natural Philosophers and physicians.  As also many {31} things that they teach concerning the powers of the soul: because we think it meet that we contain ourselves within the bonds of divinity.  And now we will speak of the essence of the soul.

6. The essence of the soul can scarce be known: for it is not to be perceived by the instrument of any the senses of our bodies: yet by the faculties and operations of it, it doth in a sort open itself unto us.  And therefore it is usually described and pointed out, after this plain manner.

7. The soul of man is an essence, created according unto the image of God, infused into the body: that man consisting both of body and soul, should be capable to know and glorify God.

8. The soul of man is properly & truly called a soul, for that faculty which is in beasts and plants, is by reason of the scarcity of words so called of the Latins.  For seeing the same doth not subsist of itself, & that it is nothing else, but a power arising out of the properties of the matter & form; it scant retaineth the name of a being, much less deserveth to be called a soul.

9. The soul of man is of a spiritual and not of a bodily nature, subsisting by itself: not unadvisedly made of motes, nor a fire, or any other of the four elements, or yet any thing compact of the elements, nor any number, nor an harmony, nor any faculty brought forth out of the matter: briefly, not any part, cut as it were, out of the Deity: but wisely created of nothing after a manner unknown unto us, by God who worketh most freely.

10. Now although it hath a beginning, yet doth it remain immortal, not only because of its own substance, it is uncompounded, and void of all contrarieties and bodily accidents: but especially inasmuch as it is so created of God, that of itself, it can live, exist, and continue for ever.  And it doth rather afford life unto the body, than derive it from the same.  The which we do believe, inasmuch as it is proved unto us by the most sure testimonies of the holy scriptures, rather than because it is demonstrated by philosophical reasons. [Eccl. 8.8; 11.5; 12.7.] {32}

We condemn therefore, the MANICHEES, GNOSTICS, and PRISCILLIANISTS, who have said that the soul was of a double nature, whereof the one was from a good beginning, viz. a good God, the other from an evil.  The SELEUCIANS, HERMINIANS, PROCLIANS, who held that the soul was not made by God, but by Angels.  The LUCIFERIANS and TERTULLIANISTS, who were of opinion, that it was a bodily substance, and such as could fall off, or be shelled from the body, and remove from one body to another.  The ARABIANS, and the NAZARITES who thought it mortal: the ORIGENISTS, who judged that all souls should eternally live in heaven, and the APOLLINARISTS, whose opinion was, that one soul was begotten of another.

11. Neither is the soul of the same nature and sort, that the Angels are, as ORIGEN thought: who made only an accidental and not a substantial difference between Angels, and the souls of men.  Now, that essential difference although it cannot be easily known, is yet in some sort perceived by this adjunct, viz. that Angels can not be ordinarily joined unto bodies, whereas the souls may.  Now the soul is also not only the first mover of the body, but even the very chief and especial form of a man, whereby first of all and of itself, A man is that which he is, and for whose cause, the body is so framed as it is: to the end, that a most honorable lodging should be prepared for a most honorable guest.

12. The souls of all men are not one as THEMISTIUS and the followers of AVERROIS thought, but of every particular man, there is a particular soul, which can (as naked and bare forms) consist and remain, when they are severed from the body, as indeed they do for a time, when as they being out of the body, do expect the eternal and indissoluble conjunction, that they are to have with the same.

13. And seeing that the form of everything, doth not only make up the whole, but also every part thereof, and no part can effect the office thereof, except the form be {33} present, and seeing when the same departeth, it ceaseth from doing: we do defend that common opinion out of AUGUSTINE, viz. that the soul is wholly in the whole, and wholly in every part.  Although there be this diversity of the being of it in the whole and in the parts, as that it is first and of itself in the whole, whereas it is in the parts, but after a secondary manner.

Defended by JOHN CASTOLL of Geneva.

HAVING SET DOWN WHAT WE ARE to beleeue according unto the Scriptures, concerning the eſſence of the ſoule of man: nowe wee are to entreate of the powers thereof.

1. GOD alone is a most simple, and a most mere being.  And therefore, although the essence of the soul be a spiritual and no bodily substance, yet it is endued with faculties agreeable unto the nature of it, which, by their own spiritual manner are inherent in the essence thereof, as in their subject.

We do not therefore allow the opinion of the PERIPATETICS, who taught that the faculties of the soul, doth not differ from the essence of it indeed, but after a sort.

2. And although the very essence and substance of the soul, doth by the grace of God continue without all change and alteration: yet the powers thereof, were created of a changeable nature.

3. Now as man was created in one of his parts like unto all other living creatures, aswell in regard of the substance of their bodies, as of their natural life, (though in a far more excellent state); So it behoved, that the other part of his, should be endued with faculties meet for the {34} preservation of the natural life of his said body, namely: with the faculties of nourishing, and the power of outward senses; whereof, whatsoever might be farther spoken, we leave unto Physicians and natural Philosophers.

4. The other faculties are proper unto the soul of man, for the spiritual and immortal excellency whereof, it is also (and not only for the very essence of the soul) truly said to be created according to the image of God.

5. Yet inasmuch as the soul, in bringing forth the effects of these proper qualities, doth use the instrument of the body, whereunto it is personally united: in this respect also, man (wholly considered but not in part) may be truly held to be created after the image of God.

We do condemn therefore the dotages of the ANTHROPOMORPHITES, who placing the image of God in the very body of man, did therefore dream, that God was a bodily substance: as also the madness of OSIANDER, who referred the same unto the incarnation of the world.

6. These faculties we hold to be two: the understanding, (which is also called the mind,) and the will, or as sometimes they are called in the holy Scriptures, the spirit and the soul taken in a more narrow signification.

7. This Image considered, these two faculties is expressed of PAUL, by the names of righteousness and true holiness, whereby he declareth the agreement which it had with the pattern, according unto which it was created: A wonderful light being poured into the faculty of understanding, whereby it was endued with a most clear knowledge (and such as was obscured by no darkness,) of the true God, and his divine will: And an inward force being ingraffed into the will, whereby it was able to stir up itself by holy motions, without all shew of resistance unto that end, for the which man was created: the body, to be short, being framed in a most wonderful decent sort, to yield obedience most readily, and without all wearisomeness unto the soul when it moved the same.

8. Unto this agreeableness of man with God, and to the agreement and proportion that all the parts of man, {35} had among themselves, was adjoined (as it were another shining brightness of the divine Majesty) the dominion of all the inferiour creatures granted unto man: that by this means also, man might shine here beneath, as a precedent of the majesty and glory of God.

9. To the execution of this government, there was given unto man, an exact knowledge, (not gotten by labour and use, but naturally ingraffed in him,) both of the natures of all things, that he was to govern, and also of the best way to rule them.  Whereunto of the contrary side, the good and right disposition and inclination, which all the creatures, that were under man’s government, had to obey man, was answerable: the which harmony and agreement of the whole world, MOSES doth express by the name of the goodness, that was in every creature. [Gen. 1.4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25, and especially 31.]

Defended by JOHN FLORIDES of Augiers.

THE FACVLTIES OF THE VNDER­STANDING, and the will, are alwaies accompanied with that power, which is commonlie called Free-will: whereof wee will now ſpeake.

1. FREE-WILL, which the Grecians call αυτεξουσιον if the force of the word be strictly considered, is given neither to man nor Angel, nor yet shall ever be granted; but truly and absolutely doth agree unto God alone, for he only is αυτεξουσιος.

2. Yet of this high and sovereign authority, there were certain lineaments shadowed in Angels and men, at their first creation, when as both the one and other were endued by the Lord with understanding & will, whereby they were made capable of knowledge and understanding.

3. For man is not only stirred to desire by a natural & {36} lively motion, but even according unto advice or election, which cannot be, without either the true, or the apparent knowledge of the thing it desireth.

4. Such furthermore, was the state of the first man, before sin, that his understanding and will, did altogether agree with the will of God, and were wholly subject (which is the chiefest liberty) unto his commandment, without all resistance or strife that the affections had against the mind.

5. At that time therefore, man was indeed the Lord of his own actions, that is, endued with free-will.  Yet because he was mutable and changeable both ways, he did so incline from good to evil, that as AUGUSTINE saith, by sinning he lost both himself, and his liberty.

6. Not that he was turned unto a stock, and so bereaved of judgment and will.  For sin hath not utterly abolished nature, although it hath lamentably polluted the same: but such a liberty remaineth, as can will nothing, but what is evil, and that evilly, For whatsoever is done without faith, is sin. [Rom. 14.23.]

7. Now in things that are subject unto us, as many actions both natural and moral are: free choice is left unto man, that he can either will or not will, as he hath will either to speak or to hold his peace, to study or not study, and such like.

8. But in supernatural things, as are to know God, to love him, and to obey his will as we ought, we are altogether weak, and blind, or rather dead as PAUL speaketh.

We do condemn therefore the PELAGIANS, who say that the force of will remaineth in us unblemished, and that sin may be avoided by the mere light of nature.  And the PAPISTS also, who hold, that it is but blemished only.

9. For we acknowledge as the Scripture teacheth, that we are now, our nature being corrupted, dead in sin, the children of wrath, and enemies unto God: and we say, that we cannot by our own strength prepare any way {37} for us to come unto God, but that if we will come unto him, he must draw us. [John 6.44.]

10. It must needs be therefore, that he must first regenerate us, and make us the sons of God, and new creatures.  In which work, we are not co-workers with God, but merely such as stand still while he worketh, that we may be wrought upon, and reformed by him, even as we were at the first created by him, without any help of ours.

11. Now after regeneration, we are by faith drawn from death unto life, and to will is present with us, but so, as we are compassed about with many hindrances, by reason of the stings of sin and the flesh in us, which are not utterly done away, [Rom. 7.18]: yet we begin to be co-workers with God, and we are so wrought upon, as we also do work: And we shall then wholly obey him, and stick unto him, even when our full restitution being wrought, we shall enjoy that blessed and heavenly life.

12. The discourse concerning voluntary, changeable, and immutable things, we thought meet to be severed from the question of Free-will, and placed in the doctrine of God’s providence.

Defended by FRANCES BUEFETIUS of Angiers.

1. THE estate whereunto, both ADAM and all his posterity did fall, is contrary unto that integrity wherein he was created at the first.

2. For whereas the nature of man was then such, as he could have lived, according unto the upright and eternal law, (which is nothing else, but the will of God:) Sin hath brought him now to that pass, that he doth of a set purpose disobey the same.

3. Sin is not a bare want or privation of good, but a swerving from the will of God. {38}

4. And we think, that it may be thus fitly defined: Namely, that it is, whatsoever is against the law and will of God.

5. For the force of sin, doth not depend upon the breach of some human constitution; but upon the transgression of God’s will only.

And therefore, the definition of the Philosophers, is most unperfect, who account sin to be that only, which is repugnant unto reason.  For reason itself, can do nothing else, but go astray until it be enlightened by the light of God.  The Libertines also are to be condemned, who make that only to be sin, which a man’s own conscience thinketh to be sinful.

6. The seat or subject of sin, is the very soul itself, that is, the reason and the will.  For the former of these being ignorant of that which it should know, or else ruling amiss, as well in commanding, as in forbidding, hath sin cleaving unto it.  And the latter, either when it willeth amiss, that which it ought not to will, or when it willeth not that which it ought to be desirous of, sinneth: The body is only the instrument of the soul in sinning.

7. Some of the causes of sin, are inward: as the will, (which before sin came, was in ADAM only mutable; But after sin, as well in him as in his posterity, was both mutable and corrupt.)  Some outward, as the Devil, and the divers objects, that are laid before us.

8. But as concerning the Lord, he in no wise can be thought the Author of sin, who is so far from turning men from himself, that he rather seeketh to convert all men unto himself, as unto the only true and perfect end: Yet he is said to make them, to do that which is sinful, when he doth not restrain them from sinning, the which whole work, is only to be ascribed unto his wisdom and justice.

We do condemn then the MANICHEES, the VELENTINIANS, the SELEUTIANS, &c. who affirmed, that sin proceedeth from God.

9. The effect and wages of sin is death, and that eternally; {39} because it is committed against him, who is eternal and infinite.

That distinction of sin then into mortal and venial, is improper; save only in the diverse respects of the elect and the reprobate.  For unto the elect, all sins are venial through Christ: But unto the reprobates, there are no sins but they are mortal.  And it is manifest, that the PELAGIANS do err, when they say, that death is natural unto the body.

10. Yet for all this, we think not all sins to be equal, in that sense that the Stoicks did: But we acknowledge certain degrees in them, according unto the diversity of their objects and circumstances; yet the original corruption and guilt is alike equal in all men: Seeing all men are alike, the sinful sons of sinful ADAM.

Defended by STEPHEN BLOIUS of Augiers.

SEING WE HAVE SPOKEN OF SINNE in generall: now we will deale with the ſame in ſpeciall.

1. THE principal sorts of sin are named two, viz. Original and Actual; which notwithstanding, are rather issuing (than disagreeing) the one from the other: for the one is as it were the cause and the root; the other as the fruit and effect.

2. Original sin, is sometimes called absolutely sin: Otherwise flesh; old and first ADAM, the sin of nature, concupiscence, the lusts of the flesh, the law of the members, the heart of man, &c.

3. And it may be thus fitly defined; namely, an infection derived from ADAM unto all mankind.

4. The subject whereunto it cleaveth, is not only the body, but even the soul also.  For whole man, every part of him is altogether corrupted, and the powers and actions, {40} as well the superiour, as the inferiour, both of body and soul are polluted: whence it cometh, that in the affection and will, all things are depraved and perverted, and in the reason itself, there is nothing but blindness, the ignorance and hatred of God.

5. Now, although the soul which is not taken from Adam, but immediately created by God, may seem to be void of this infection; and that it seemeth not meet, that the sins of the Fathers should be punished in the Children: yet seeing ADAM is considered, not only as some particular man; but as the beginning, whence all mankind did issue, in whom also were all the gifts that were to be bestowed upon the whole offspring, he by his sin lost them, both to himself, and unto all men, that proceed from him; who are now, in that only respect that they are and do resemble the image of ADAM, hateful unto God.

We do condemn therefore, the PELAGIANS, who held, that men were sinners, not by birth, but only by imitation.

6. In all men, (Christ only excepted) there is the same original sin, and it hath spread itself alike upon all men: Neither are there any diverse sorts of original sin.

The Papists then do err, who do except others besides Christ, from original sin, as the virgin Mary.

7. There are two effects of original sin: the guilt or the offence, whereby all men (even infants, which yet have committed no actual sin) are made subject unto God’s wrath, and both deaths; and also the want and privation of original righteousness, and the inclination unto all sorts of wickedness.

Therefore, the scripture teacheth, that all men must be born again; even infants and all, unto whom for this cause, we do rightly maintain against the ANABAPTISTS, that the sign of Regeneration is to be admitted: Although we make no question, but that the reliques of corruption doth still remain, and is not utterly taken away, after Baptism, whatsoever the Papists say to the contrary.

8. Actual sin is, when the law of GOD is broken in {41} deed:—and that is two manner of ways: either when as that which God commandeth is omitted, or that which he forbiddeth is committed.  Whence those two sorts of sins, viz. omitted and committed, sprang up in the Schools.  The first whereof, ariseth, in that we are unmeet to do well: The latter, in that we are prone unto every evil.

9. There are other distinctions of actual sin.  For in respect of the object, some are said to be done against God, others against men; And in regard of the ends, some reach unto the soul only, others unto the body also.

Unto the first sort, of the latter division, do appertain all inordinate motions, whatsoever they are; and even all the evil cogitations, even the beginnings of them before they be fully framed, and though the will doth not assent unto them: and those in like sort, that the will (which especially maketh the form and giveth being unto sin) doth allow and strengthen: Unto the latter member, are all those referred, which are brought unto action, by the outward service of some part of the body.

The Papists therefore do err, in denying concupiscence, and those first inordinate motions to be sins; most absurdly affirming, that concupiscence is given to man, to the end, that wrestling with it, he should be more and more whetted on, to embrace virtue, and so should bind God so much the more unto him, by his mercy.

Defended by RAMOND PALOCANE of Bearne.