III perpetual purity of the mind (for sin is to the mind what disease is to the body) cannot be maintained without God; that if we are invited to perfection in Scripture, this is to be understood of good things to come. The Lord addressing his disciples calls them evil. Abraham fell to the ground from a sense of his own weakness c. It is said in Genesis I have seen God face to faced. It is said again Thou canst not see my face, for no man can see my face and live. And again The invisible and only God, whom no man hath seen or can see1. And No man hath seen God at any time ɛ. The latter expressions teach you how to understand the first. p. 1037 A resemblance to God and a true contemplation of him is then promised when he shall appear in his glory.

Pelagius writing to a widow in what manner saints should pray prescribes a form exhibiting a proud self confidence, like that of the Pharisee in the Gospel. Compare that prayer with the form commanded by our Lord. p. 1040 Our Lord says Lead us not into temptation. You with Jovinian say that after baptism there is no temptation and no sin. Pelagius flatters that widow and is not ashamed to ascribe to her a piety and truth which even the angels do not claim. p. 1041 Those two clauses of prayer and panegyric Pelagius is wont to deny to be his own, though the style confirms them to be his.

Critobulus exclaims Grant at least that children are without sin, who from their age are incapable of transgressing. Atticus replies I grant it, if they are baptized. Infants are baptized that their sins may be remitted by baptism. Critobulus enquires What evil had they done? Is any one loosed who is not bound? Atticus quotes St. Pauli Death reigned from Adam to Moses even over those who had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression. He argues that all men are liable either on their own account or through Adam; that children by baptism are loosed from the guilt derived from Adam; adults both from that and from their own personal sins. He quotes Cyprian p. 1043 who calls the nature derived from Adam "the contagion of the old death." Atticus mentions Augustine ad Marcellinum de infantibus baptizandisk, and a letter of Augustine to Hilarius against the doctrine of Pelagius; and concludes p. 1044 If the remission to children by baptism of the sin which another

b Matt. VII. 11.

c Genes. XVII. 3.

d Gen. XXXII. 30.

e Exodus XXXIII. 20.

f 1 Timoth. VI. 16.

g John I. 18.

i Rom. V. 14.

k Scripsit dudum Augustinus ad

Marcellinum duos libros &c.-Tertium quoque ad eundem Marcellinum contra eos qui dicunt-posse hominem sine peccato esse si velit. Sc. tom. 13 Augustini Opp. ed. Ven. p. 2-103. Written A. D. 412.

1 He refers to Augustine Ep. 89 (157) Hilario Syracusano p. 453 ed. Lugdun.

has committed seems to you unjust, because he who could not sin "wants not that remission, go to your favourite Origen m. You 'follow him in other matters, and may also adopt his error in this."

THEODORUS OF MOPSUESTIA.

We will now add from the work of Theodorus of Mopsuestia "against those who affirm that men sin by nature and "not by their own will," (which has been described already at No 219,) the argument against Hieronymus, so far as it is set forth in the abstract of Photius Cod. 177, to which we will add the remarks of Photius himself.

before, and incur sin by This second proposition

The chief dogmas of this sect are these: that men sin through nature and not through their own will; and this not a nature such as that with which Adam was originally created, for this they say was good, the workmanship of a good God, but such a nature as was afterwards allotted to him upon his transgression, when he received in exchange an evil nature for a good, and a mortal for an immortal. In this manner then it is affirmed that men become by nature evil, who were by nature good nature and not through their own will. follows from the former; that not even new born infants are free from sin, inasmuch as the nature of man is founded in sin. For after the transgression of Adam (as they affirm) a sinful nature extended to all his posterity. And they bring such texts as I was born in sinn to confirm their dogmas. The sacrament of Baptism itself, and the sacrament of the Lord's Supper they apply to the remission of sins; and to establish their own opinions they administer these sacraments even to infants. Moreover, as a consequence of their original proposition they affirm that no one among men is just, and they apply the text In thy sight no flesh shall be justifiedo. In the fourth place (O blasphemous and impious words) they hold that not even Christ himself, who is our God, is pure from sin, because he received a corrupt nature: and yet, as Theodorus affirms, in other parts of their blasphemy it may be seen that they do not ascribe to him the human nature in reality and in truth, but only by a figure. Fifthly they hold that marriage and the union of the sexes by which the race of man is con

m Transite ad amasium vestrum. sc. Origenem. Conf. ad Ctesiph. p. 901 Doctrina tua Origenis ramusculus est. o Psalm CXLIII. 2.

n Psalm LI. 5.

tinued are the works of a sinful nature-of that sinful nature into which Adam fell through his transgression, when he received from the inherent wickedness of his nature a mass of evils.

Such are the maxims of these heretics; and Theodorus does well to reject them, and sometimes excellently and forcibly rebukes their absurd and blasphemous opinions, and, adapting an opposite sense to those texts of Scripture which they have misinterpreted, he convicts them of utter ignorance. But he is not always right; for in many passages he may be seen to incline to the Nestorian dogma, and to hold with Origen that future punishments will not be eternal. Moreover when Theodorus asserts that Adam was originally created mortal, and that God threatened him with death, and pronounced death to be the consequence of sin, only to deter men from committing it, this dogma, as it seems to me, is not founded upon sound principles and might be fully refuted and disproved if it were to be examined; however much this opinion, as he affirms, may be adverse to those heretics. For we are not to conclude at once an argument to be good, because it combats a bad one; for evil will contradict itself. But if any thing is consonant to right reason and recognised by Scripture, this is to be accepted, even though no heresy ventures to oppose it.

Neither do I admit that sentiment among true dogmas, a sentiment superfluous and unheard of in the church, that there are two remissions of sins, the one of sins committed, the other a security against sinning in future, which I know not how to call, as he does, a remission of sins; for we shall need, as it seems, many explanatory interpretations to make this new form of remission of sins intelligible; which in exact language would be called impeccability, but which he names the complete and perfect remission and extinction of sin. What then is this remission, and where given, and whence proceeding? It began (he says) to manifest itself at the Advent of Christ; and to be given as a pledge. It is given completely both for works themselves and in the restitution of things at the resurrection; to obtain which both we and infants are baptized. Thus far all is splendid, and prepares us to expect the end. Tell us then what follows; we listen with attentive ears. What is that perfect remission of sins? After the resurrection, you say, there will be no more sin. From what hopes you have snatched us away! For not to enquire how this can be called remission of sins, I briefly ask, was it for this that Christ assumed flesh and was crucified, that after the resurrection you should sin no more? Did those then sin who died before the Advent? Will the unbaptized, whether adults or

infants, sin in that future world? Will unbelievers repent of their sins in that state? For whom you have not found adequate punishment for what they have committed here.

I have pointed out what I cannot admit in his doctrine concerning the remission of sins. Perhaps however he has not willingly come to this conclusion himself, but has endeavoured to solve the difficulty which they create, when they ask wherefore are children admitted to the sacraments of the Lord's Supper and of Baptism if they themselves are not full of sin implanted in their nature. For these sacraments are administered for the remission of sins. But he ought to have solved that difficulty, which admits of many other solutions, in some other way, and, duly considering the absurdities which follow from his scheme, to have avoided so extravagant a supposition.

This is the Theodorus who in 28 books contended not amiss with Eunomius, and supported the opinions of Basil of Cæsarea, which are truth itself.

Photius then, although he disapproves of the explanation offered concerning the remission of sin, and although he disapproves also of those three other points,-the assertion that Adam was created mortal, the inclination to the dogma of Nestorius, and the adoption of the opinion of Origen that future punishments would have an end,-yet agreed with Theodorus in condemning the doctrine of Augustine and Hieronymus concerning Original Sin, and thus with him may be charged with adopting the Pelagian principle.

§. 9. TESTIMONIA PATRUM.

It remains in conclusion to collect the testimony of the Fathers to some important questions which force themselves on the attention of earnest and thoughtful minds.

Some have been apt to hold the authority of the Fathers in too high respect, while others passing to the opposite extreme have rejected it altogether. But in the first place their evidence is important. They possessed the advantage of being near the apostolical times, and within reach of tradition of what the apostles taught. With reference to the

ministry of Christ upon earth, we of these latter daysa behold Him but not nigh. The immediate successors of the apostles might converse with those who remembered the time when He dwelt among them full of grace and truth. Even Hierony. mus and Chrysostom were scarcely more distant from the Resurrection and Ascension than we are from Luther. But in the next place, besides their value as reporters of evidence, the ancient Fathers with all their imperfections are valuable interpreters in may respects. In the fundamental doctrines they are generally safe guides. If, in the display of an impassioned eloquence, they are often inconclusive reasoners; if, in the heat of contest, they sometimes press an argument too far, the same or equal faults may be charged upon many modern preachers and interpreters. The Greek Fathers also possessed the important advantage that the language in which the New Testament is written was their own vernacular tongue, the language in which they thought and discoursed and wrote. In their commentaries they expounded the original text. Hence the petition in the Lord's prayer, ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ, is interpreted in its true meaning by Chrysostom in Matth. Opp. tom. 7 p. 254 A tovηpòv dè ἐνταῦθα τὸν διάβολον καλεῖ. They comprehended every shade of meaning which that unrivalled language was capable of conveying; and when they set forth the abstruse doctrines they could express themselves with greater force and clearness in Greek than in most other languages. Augustine, though imperfectly acquainted with the Greek language, yet was conscious of its superiority to the Latin; and felt the difficulty of expressing in the latter language the difference between ovola and imóσтaσis. Of his own knowledge of Greek

a It may not be uninteresting to the reader to be informed that the manuscript of the lamented Author of this Epitome terminates with these words. The unfinished sentence was never completed by him. He was transcribing from the larger work, and the sentence is finished by the Editor as it stands in that work. From an entry in the Author's Journal it appears that this last page of the manuscript of the Epitome was written about 18 days before his decease. The cause of the abrupt termination of the

manuscript in the middle of a sentence is not known. That he did use his pen again is evident from further entries in his Journal, which was completed to the day previous to his departure. The last entry is the following: (1852) "Octr. 23. Received the "Holy Sacrament from G. H. H.-Pre"sent K-, E-, A-." He expired early on the morning of the 24th.

For the compilation of the remainder of the Epitome the Editor is responsible. See Preface.