read; and even St. Benedict had prescribed the reading of Cassians's Collations in the monasteries. Hence, without being sensible of it, men might easily swerve from pure Augustinism; and this was the more likely to take place, because more moderate sentiments were to be found, in abundance, in the writings of Augustine himself. Isidore of Seville held strictly with Augustine ;the twofold predestination not excepted. So also did Beda and Alcuin. But when Gottschalk advanced the same twofold predestination, he was oppressed, through the influence of Rabanus Maurus, and Hincmar of Rheims. As Prudentius of Troyes, Servatus Lupus, Ratramnus and Remigius, appeared in defence of Gottschalk, and as the treatise of John Scotus was confuted by Prudentius and by Florus; Hincmar caused the four following propositions, to be established, in the Council of Chiersy A. D. 853. I. God hath predestinated some men unto salvation; but not others to perdition. II. We lost free will, by Adam; and recover it by Christ. III. God wills the salvation of all men. IV. Christ died

for all men. But a great part of the French churches deemed these propositions inconsistent with the purethat is, with the Augustinian doctrine; and the decisions of Chiersy, were contravened by others, made in the councils of Valence (A. D. 855.) and Langres (A. D. 859.) Although Hincmar was not able fully to overcome such opposition, yet from this time onward, there was less hesitation, to soften down some points of the Augustinian system.

Notices. Veterum auctorum, qui saeculo IX. de praedestinatione et gratia scripserunt, Opera; cura et studio Guilberti Mauguin. Paris 1650. II. vol. 4to. Ludov. Celloti, Historia Godeschalci; Paris 1655. Fol.

The most noticeable things in the life and writings of Hincmar, Abp. of Rheims; (in German,) by Wolfg. Fried. Gess; Gotting. 1806. p. 15-95.

SEC. 131. Doctrine of the Scholastics concerning sin. The scholastics received the Augustinian doctrine, that, by Adam's transgression, mortality, sin, and guilt passed

upon his posterity; but they introduced various new explications and definitions. Augustine considered hereditary sin, to be sensuality (concupiscentia). Anselm, the better to explain, how Christ was born without sin, looked upon it, as being the want of original righteousness (defectus justitiae originalis); which is imputed to all Adam's posterity, though not in the same degree, as if they had sinned personally. Peter Lombard followed Augustine; Bonaventura and Thomas Aquinas endeavored to combine the ideas of both; Duns Scotus held with Anselm. The earlier doctors, including Anselm and Pulleyn, adopted Augustine's opinion, that unbaptized infants are damned, on account of hereditary sin. Peter Lombard softened this doctrine, by discriminating between a deprivation of the vision of God, and punishments by remorse of conscience and other pains; and by holding that, only the former impended over these infants. This solution met so general approbation, that Gregory of Rimini (d. 1378,) by adhering to the harsher opinion, incurred the appellation of the Infant-Tormenter. To explain the manner, in which hereditary sin is propagated, concerning which Augustine made no decision, cost the scholastics much trouble. Some supposed a propagation of the soul itself; others, the contamination of the soul by the corrupt body; and others, as Anselm and Thomas, an imputation of sin, to all participaters in hu→ man nature. Finally, the Thomists differed from the Scotists in this, that the former adhered more strongly to the Augustinian opinion, of a complete. incapacity for goodness; while the latter conceded to men, a capacity for, at least some imperfect goodness.

SEC. 132. Sinless conception of Mary.

The fathers had, in former times, exempted Christ from the contamination of hereditary sin; and had considered this as the reason of his miraculous conception; but the idea had not yet occurred, that this privilege was also extended, to Mary the mother of Jesus. The ever

increasing veneration, for the mother of God, however, made no distinction appear too great, to be ascribed to her. Paschasius Radbert was, perhaps, the first that expressed the thought, that Mary was conceived without hereditary sin. In the twelfth century, this opinion was spread in France; and a festiva! devoted to it, began to be observed. Yet both the opinion and the festival, were expressly disapproved, by St. Bernard; and rejected, by Albert the Great, and Thomas Aquinas; and were not received, even by the Franciscan John Bonaventura, who was so great an admirer of Mary. But, after Duns Scotus came forth as a warm defender of the immaculate conception, the Franciscans made it a point of honor with their order, to maintain this opinion against the Dominicians; and when John de Montesono, (A. D. 1387,) declared it an error, the whole university of Paris rose up against him. The Council of Basle declared in favor of the Franciscans. The Popes ventured not, to decide the contest between these two powerful orders; yet Sixtus IV. favored the Franciscans, by approving a ritual for their festival, (A. D. 1476,) and by threatening with excommunication, (A. D. 1483,) whoever should represent belief in the immaculate conception, to be a heresy.

Notices. Histoire du Concile de Trent, par Fra Paolo Sarpi; traduite par P. Fr. de Courayer, T. I. P. 322-325. Fried. Ulr. Calixti Historia immaculatae conceptionis beatae virginis; Helmst. 1696. 4to.

SEC. 133. Doctrine of grace.

Attempts were made, to fix the import of the ambiguous term grace, by discriminating gratia gratis dans, gratis data, gratum faciens, praeveniens s. operans, comitans s. cooperans. But the chief difficulty was, to reconcile the sentiments expressed by Augustine, with the idea of freedom and the doctors seemed more and more to incline towards Pelagianism; against which, Anselm and Bernard of Clairveaux made resistance. Peter Lombard

held, for the most part, to the Augustinian principles; but without being able, to solve all the difficulties. Thomas Aquinas likewise admitted, that withont regenerating grace, a man can perform nothing well pleasing to God; but, that being awaked by preventing grace, a man can prepare himself for regenerating grace. He ascribed to all good works, so far as they are the product of grace, the merit of congruity (meritum ex congruo); and so far as the man himself is active, the merit of fitness (meritum ex condigno). Duns Scotus on the contrary, believed, that without grace, a man may acquire the merit of fitness, but not that of congruity; and that he can, in some measure, make himself fit to become a subject of grace; while yet, it is impossible to remove from God the charge of partiality. Peter Abelard asserted, in very strong terms, that the heathen are capable of virtue, and of salvation; but people did not venture to follow him and at most they only admitted, that Gregory the Great, had rescued the Emperor Trajan from hell, by his intercessions. cation (justificatio) was considered, as an effect of grace, and was viewed, as the infusing of righteousness, with which the forgiveness of sin was connected. But of the fact, whether a person has grace or not, according to Thomas Aquinas, there may be probable, but not certain evidence.

1

SEC. 134. Predestination.

Justifi

In substance, the earlier Scholastics, as Peter Lombard and Thomas, adhered to the Augustinian doctrine of unconditional decrees; for they held, that the ground for reprobation, was the sinfulness of men; but that the only ground of election, is the good pleasure of God. Yet John Bonaventura asserted, that the susceptibility or unsusceptibility of men, was a reason, though not the sole basis of the divine decrees. This idea was eagerly seized by the later Scholastics, and was extended still farther. The Scotists referred election directly to the foreknowledge of God; and the Thomists also, sought to

introduce some palliations. Mere displeasure, at seeing almost the whole world verging towards the errors of Pelagius, induced Thomas of Bradwardina (d. 1349), to defend unconditional election, in its strictest form; and John Wickliff held similar views.

Notices. Thomae Bradwardini de causa Dei, contra Pelagium; studio Henr. Savilii; Lond. 1618. Fol.

Joan. Wiclefi Dialogorum Libri IV. Francf. et Lips. 1753.

4to.

SEC. 135. Redemption by Christ.

John Damascenus borrowed from Gregory Nizianzen, a renunciation of the opinion, that Christ paid his life a ransom to the devil; and in this, Robert Pulleyn agreed with him. Anselm of Canterbury, in his work, Cur Deus homo, endeavored to explain more fully, the object of redemption; and he represented the sufferings of Christ, as a satisfaction offered to divine justice, for the sins of men; and which no one, unless he were both God and man, could have accomplished. Abelard doubted, whether mankind were under the power of the devil, from which they needed to be rescued; but he was strenuously opposed by St. Bernard. Peter Lombard made no use of Anselm's theory, but stopped short with the position, that men are delivered from sin and the dominion of the devil, and are brought to love God, by Jesus Christ. Albert the Great, and Alexander Hales, made use of Anselm's ideas; but Thomas Aquinas discussed the subject the most fully. He is the first, that treated extensively of the high-priestly office of Christ. He showed, that the death of Christ, is to be considered as a satisfaction and an offering; and that its efficacy, is not only adequate, but more than adequate, (superabundans meritum,) to redeem men from the guilt and punishment of sin, and from the power of the devil, and to open to them the gates of heaven. Duns Scotus contradicted Thomas; and would not allow the sufferings of Christ, to be a full