mission of actual sin, is remitted on baptism alone; still we hold, that the infection of that sin remains even in the renati. The word renati occurs twice in the Latin Article, and in the English Article it is translated first regenerated,' and secondly baptized.' It will be seen hereafter, on what principles the Church identifies 'baptized' and 'regenerated;' it is sufficient for our purpose now to observe, that both ideas are embraced in the word used here. Now, that the baptized and regenerate Christian is not free from the infection of original corruption, but has to fight against it, as an enemy still striving to keep him down, and, if possible, to destroy him, appears from the following considerations. St. James urges Christians not to be in a hurry to be teachers, and gives as a reason, that in many things all Christians offend; 'In many things we offend, all' (James iii. 2). St. Paul, speaking of his own exertions in the service of the Church, says, that it will not do for him, when working for others, to neglect himself, but on the contrary, says he, 'I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection; lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway' (1 Cor. ix. 27). He bids the Galatians, If a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted' (Gal. vi. 1). To those, who 'are risen with Christ,' and whom he bids to 'seek those things which are above,' he yet adds the warning to mortify their earthly members (that is, the members or characteristics of their old man), which he describes as 'fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence and covetousness and further bids them put off 'anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication, lying,' as being suitable only to the old man, which they had put off, and unfitted for the new man, which they had put on (Col. iii. 1, 5, 8, 9). St. Peter, addressing the Church, as 'new-born babes' in Christ (1 Pet. ii. 2), yet exhorts them (ver. 11), ‘As pilgrims and strangers to abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul.' Now all these passages, which clearly concern baptized and regenerate Christians, prove this; that there is still left in them a liability to sin; that, without much care and anxiety, all will fall into sin; and that, even under all circumstances, all do offend in many things.' Accordingly, St. John says of those, whose fellowship is with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ,' that 'if they say, that they have no sin, they deceive themselves, and the truth is not in them' (1 John i. 8). Can anything account for this universally applicable language, except the fact, as stated by our Church, that the infection of original sin remains even in the regenerate or baptized? 3 Lastly, the Article asserts, that 'concupiscence and lust hath the nature of sin.' The Council of Trent admitted the existence of lust and concupiscence in the regenerate, and admitted, that such concupiscence arose from original sin, and tended to actual sin, but denied, that it was sin in itself. The English Church is here at issue with the fathers of the Council. Her opinion on this point is defended by such passages as these: Let not sin reign in your mortal bodies, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof' (Rom. vi. 12), where the lusts of sin seem clearly to be spoken of as sinful. Again, Rom. vii. 7: 'I had not known sin but by the Law; for I had not known lust, except the Law had said, Thou shalt not covet.' Here lust and sin seem to be identified. Again, in Matt. v. (especially vv. 28, 29) our Lord speaks of the desire of sin as being itself sin. And in the passage quoted in the Article (Gal. v. 17), St. Paul says, that 'the flesh lusteth against the Spirit.' Now we can hardly understand, how the lusts of the natural man should be opposed to the Spirit of God, and yet be sinless. We conclude, therefore, that 'concupiscence and lust hath of itself the nature of Sin." ARTICLE X. Of Free Will. THE Condition of man after the fall of Adam, is such, that he cannot turn and prepare himself by his own natural strength and good works to faith, and calling upon God; wherefore we have no power to do good works, pleasant and acceptable to God, without the grace of God by Christ preventing us, that we may have a good will, and working with us,1 when we have that good will. De Libero Arbitrio. EA est hominis post lapsum Adæ conditio, ut sese naturalibus suis viribus et bonis operibus ad fidem et invocationem Dei convertere ac præparare non possit. Quare absque gratia Dei (quæ per Christum est) nos præveniente, ut velimus, et coöperante dum volumus, ad pietatis opera facienda, quæ Deo grata sint et accepta, nihil valemus. THE SECTION I.-HISTORY. HE Article on Free Will naturally follows that concerning Original Sin; and much which was said on the latter subject, may be applicable to the explication of the former. The sentiments of the Apostolical Fathers on Free Will are probably nowhere very distinctly expressed. Their writings are rather practical than controversial; and hence these topics are not very likely to be discussed in them. That they fully and plainly teach the weakness of man, and the necessity of Divine grace, cannot be questioned. The opinions of Justin Martyr are more clearly and definitely put forth in his extant works, than are those of the Apostolical Fathers. In answer to objections, which the Jews urged against the scheme of Christian doctrine, viz., that according to it there was an inevitable necessity that Christ should suffer, and therefore a necessity and constraint laid upon the Jews to crucify Him; Justin denies that God's foreknowledge of wicked actions made Him the author of those actions. He puts no restraint upon men's wills, but foretells certain evil actions, not because He causes, but simply because He foresees them.' In like manner, in the first Apology, which was addressed to heathens, he explains that, our belief in the predictions of the Prophets does not oblige us to believe, that things take place according to fate; for, if men acted under a fatal necessity, one could not be praised nor another blamed. And in the second Apology he maintains, in opposition to the Stoics, who believed in an inevitable fate (kal' εiμapμévns ἀνάγκην πάντα γίνεσθαι), that it is the nature of all men to have a capacity for virtue and vice; for unless there were a power of turning to either, there could be nothing praiseworthy. Yet with such a belief in the freedom of human choice, Justin fully maintained the necessity of Divine grace and the impossibility of attaining salvation without the light and aid of God's spirit.* In the earliest ages the Gnostic and other heretics held, to a great extent, the doctrines of material fatalism. We have already seen, that some of the Gnostics considered actions as influenced by the stars. We have seen also, that Florinus taught that God was the Author of evil, and, that Irenæus, who had formerly been his friend, wrote against him. Against such statements Irenæus constantly maintained human freedom, and denied that the will was a mere machine, acted on by good or evil principles, and itself passive under them. But the necessity of the grace of God's Holy Spirit he as strongly expressed, when occasion required." The Marcionites maintained, that the universe was governed by two independent principles, one of good, and the other of evil. This naturally led to the belief in a physical restraint on the will of the creature. Accordingly, Tertullian, in disputing against them, strenuously contends, that freedom of the will was given to 1 Dial. cum Tryphone, Opera, p. 290. 4 Eg. Ἐπὶ θεὸν τὸν πάντα ποιήσαντα ἐλπίζειν δεῖ πάντας, καὶ παρ' ἐκείνου μόνου σωτηρίαν καὶ βοηθείαν ζητεῖν· ἀλλὰ μὴ, ὡς λοιποὺς τῶν ἀνθρώπων, διὰ γένος ἢ πλοῦτον ἢ ἰσχὺν ἡ σοφίαν νομίζειν δύvaolaι owsεolai.-Dial. c. Tryph. Opp. p. 329. Concerning Justin Martyr's opinions on free will, consult Bp. Kaye's Justin Martyr, p. 75, ch. III.; Faber's Primitive 5 See History of the Ninth Article. 6 E. g. Sicut arida terra, si non percipiat humorem, non fructificat: sic et nos, aridum lignum existentes primum, nunquam fructificaremus vitam, sine suprema voluntaria pluvia.-Adv. Hær. III. 19. Concerning the opinions of Irenæus on free will, see Faber as above, and Beaven's Account of Irenæus, ch. XI. p. 112. Adam.' From the same father we learn, that Valentinus taught, that man was created of three different kinds,-spiritual, animal, and terrestrial; the first sort as Seth, the second as Abel, the third as Cain; and that, as the distinction was from birth, it was consequently immutable. The first kind were destined to certain salvation, the last to certain perdition, the lot of the second was uncertain, depending on their greater inclination on the one hand to the spiritual, on the other to the carnal.' The fathers who were contemporary with these heretics, were naturally led, in disputing against them, to use strong language on the freedom of the will; so that it is no wonder if, after the rise of Pelagius, his followers were ready to quote some of the ancients in defence of their errors. Origen was one of those, who opposed the Marcionite and Valentinian heresies; and his peculiar system of theology specially led him to more than ordinarily strong assertions of the freedom of the will. He took up the Platonic notion of the pre-existence of souls. The state of all created beings he believed to be regulated by their former actions. All souls were created free. Every rational creature was made capable of good or of evil. Angels and devils were alike created capable of holiness or of wickedness. The devil and his ministers fell by abuse of freedom: the holy angels stood by a right use of it. Every reasoning being is capable of degenerating or of improving, according as he follows or resists reason. Men have been placed in different positions in this world; but it is because of their conduct in a former existence. Jacob was beloved of God more than Esau, because in the former life he had lived more holily. And, as good or evil are substantially in none but the Holy Trinity, but all holiness is in creatures only as an accident, it follows, that it is in us and in our own wills to be holy, or through sloth and negligence to decline from holiness to wickedness and perdition." Holiness is attained or lost, much as music or mathematics. No man becomes a mathematician, or a musician, but by labour and study, and if he becomes idle and negligent, he will forget what he has learnt, and cease to be skilful in his science &c. Tertull. adv. Marcion. Lib. II. 8, 9, 2 Tertullian, De Anima, c. 21—30. See Bishop Kaye's Tertullian, pp. 330, 522. 3 De Princip. Lib. 1. cap. 5. 4 Lib. II cap. 9, num. 7. 5 Et per hoc consequens est in nobis esse, atque in nostris motibus, ut vel beati vel sancti simus, vel per desidiam et negligentiam a beatitudine in malitiam et perditionem vergamus, in tantum ut nimius profectus (ut ita dixerim) malitiæ, si quis in tantum sui neglexerit, usque ad eum statum deveniat, ut ea quæ dicitur contraria virtus efficiatur.-Lib. I. cap. 5, num. 5. |