Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub

surd; that it would lead to the disapproval of matrimony; and that, affirming the corruption of human nature, and a connate worthiness of punishment, was making God the author of evil, and an unrighteous judge.

SEC. 93. Second point, grace and free will.

Desirous of explaining, precisely, the activity of man, and the influences of God, Pelagius discriminated between the power, the will, and the act; and he attributed the first to God, the second to man, and the third to both united. [When a man wills to do good, God gives him the power, and so both have a part in the act.] By the ambiguous term grace, he understood, sometimes, divine instructions, and sometimes, other means of moral improvement; but never, any divine energy that impaired the free operations of the will. Augustine, on the contrary, subverted, substantially at least, the freedom of the will; and derived all that was good in man, solely from divine grace; by which he understood an internal operation upon the soul, whereby it received, not only the power, but also the will, to do good. This grace, he maintained to be indispensable to man, at all times, and for all duties: without it, no man can do a good act; and even with it, no man is entirely free from sin. All this he inferred either from his idea of hereditary sin, or from such passages of Scripture as John viii. 31, 32. Phil. ii. 13. 2 Cor. iii. 5, 6. But he exposed himself to the objection, that, like the Manichaeans, he annihilated the freedom of the will, and must look upon all precepts and exhortations to virtue as nugatory.

SEC. 94. Third point, election.

From his conviction, that all men are totally depraved, and incapable of good deeds, there was no way leít, for Augustine to answer the question, Why are some converted and saved, and others not,-but to ascribe it to the sovereign will of God. And thus was formed, his doctrine of unconditional predestination; according to which, God destined some men to blessedness, without

regard to their merits and conduct, from his mere good pleasure while he leaves others in their sins, and sentences them to punishment, in order to exhibit his justice. These doctrines not only forced themselves upon him, as consequences of the other parts of his system; but he believed, they could be established by the scripture, Rom. ix: and he took great pains to soften down their harsh features, and to meet the objections to their injurious practical tendency. From them flowed, spontaneously, the ideas of irresistible divine influences, of special grace, and particular redemption, and of the infallible perseverance of the elect.

SEC. 95. Progress of the doctrine, after Augustine.

Great as the influence of Augustine was, his principles gained no currency, among the Eastern christians; and even in the West, opposition was raised; especially by the Gallican divines, who believed that, men still have some ability to do good, by means of which, though they cannot merit divine grace, yet they can prepare themselves to receive it; and that God's purpose to save, depends on the foreseen use made of this power. John Cassianus was the most noted divine of this party; and Faustus, Bishop of Riez,brought Lucidus an Augustinian, to change his sentiments, A. D. 475., The controversy between the Massilians, (Semi-Pelagians,) and those called Predestinarians, continued for some time; but in the year 529, the opinions of the former were condenmed, in the Councils of Arausio (Orange) and Valentia (Valence;) and the decision was confirmed by the Romish Bishops.

References. Jo. Cassianus, Collationes patrum Sceticorum, Collat. XIII. Opp. p. 591–627.

Prosper of Aquitain, de Gratia et Arbitrio Liber, contra Collatorem; in Opp. Cassian. p. 887.

Faustus, Ep. ad Lucidum: and, de Gratia et libero Arbitrio Lib. II.-in Biblioth Patr.

Praedestinatus; in Opp. J. Sirmondi, Tom. I.

SEC. 96. What Christ has done for mankind. Historians. J. Fr. Cotta, Dissertatio, historiam doctrinae de Redemptione ecclesiae sanguine J. C. factâ exhibens; in Jo. Gerhardi Locis theolog. ed. Cotta, Tom. IV. p. 105. Wern. Car. Lud. Ziegler, Historia dogmatis de Redemptione, seu de modis, quibus redemptio Christi explicabatur; Gotting. 1791.—also in Velthusen, Küinöl et Ruperti, Commentatt. Theolog. vol. V. p. 227 &c.

The doctrines concerning sin and grace, stand closely connected with those concerning Christ; for it is through him, that sins are blotted out, and the grace of God imparted. Jesus Christ was described, as being, in various respects, the greatest benefactor of mankind; and for proof, mention was made of his excellent instructions, his noble example, the communication of powers for holiness, his overthrowing the dominion of evil spirits, and procuring immortality. At the same time, as Irenaeus (1), and even Gregory of Nazianzum, assert,, the theologians were left free, to form their own conceptions of the design and effects of the incarnation and sufferings of Christ and it is not strange, therefore, that we should find them to have entertained different views.

(1) adv. Haeres. I. c. 10.

:

SEC. 97. Effects of Christ's death.

Both Irenaeus (1) and Origen(2) had, in their day, represented the death of Christ, sometimes, as a ransom given to the devil, and sometimes, as a debt paid to God. In accordance with the first of these hypotheses, most of the fathers spoke of the death of Christ, as being the means of the rescue of mankind from the dominion of the devil, under which sin had brought them: and they sometimes go upon the assumption, that on the principle of distributive justice, the power of the devil was taken from him, because he misused it upon Jesus Christ(3); at other times, they represent redemption as being, either a combat (4), or a bargain(5), with the devil. Gregory of

Nazianzum, however, rejects the idea, that Jesus Christ paid a ransom to the devil(6). Others of the fathers,as Athanasius(7) and Cyril (8),—go upon the principle of a debt paid to God; and they consider the death of Christ, as the stipulated condition, on which God can, without injury to his veracity, release men from the death threatened to them. Some of them also assert, that Jesus Christ paid more, than was necessary for the redemption of the human race (9). Lastly, there were some, who supposed, that the whole mass of human nature, was elevated and ennobled, by the Son of God's participating in it(10). It remained undetermined, whether the death of Christ was indispensable, in order to the salvation of men(11). Respecting the extent of redemption, Origen(12) advanced the idea, that Christ died, not merely for men, but for all intelligent creatures: but this idea. was, by all the other fathers, except perhaps Gregory(13) of Nyssa and Didymus(14), either silently rejected, or expressly disapproved.

(1) adv. Haeres. Lib. V. c. 1, 16, 21.

(2) Comment. in Matth. Opp. T. III. p. 726, and p. 321. and T. IV. p. 495. Homil. VI. in Exod. Lib. II. contra Cels. Lib. I. § 31.

(3) Augustine, de, Lib. Arbitrio. Lib. III. c. 10. (Opp. T. I. p. 622 &c.) also de Trinit. Lib. XIII. c. 10-15. Chrysostom, Homil. LXVI. (T. VIII. p. 432, 433.) Homil. XXIV. in 1 Ep. ad Cor. (T. XI. p. 262.)—Hilary of Poict. Tract. in Ps. lxviii. § 8. p. 218.-Leo the Gr. Serm. LIX. c.4. (Tom. I. p. 132. ed. Quesn.) Serm. LXVII. c.3. p.145.--Gregory the Gr. Moral. Lib.XVII.

[ocr errors]

(4) Irenaeus, adv. Haer. V. c. 21, § 3.-Origen, contra Cels. Lib. I. § 31.-Theodoret, de Provident. Orat. X. (Opp. T. IV. p. 660.)--Hilary Pictav. Comment. in Matth. c. 3. § 1, 5. p. 618, 620.--Leo the Gr. Orat. XXII. (Opp. I. p. 72.)-Gregory the (ir. Moral. Lib. XXVI.

c. 18.

(5) Irenaeus, adv. Haeres. V. c. 1.--Origen, Comment. in Matth. (Opp. T. III. p. 726.)-Basil the Gr. Homil. in

Ps. xlviii. (Opp. I. p. 179 &c.)-Jerome in Ep. ad. Ephes. cap. I. (Opp. IX. p. 263.)-Ambrose Epp. Lib. IX. Ep. 77.-Rufinus, Expos. Symb. Apostol. (sub Opp. Cypr. p.21, 22. ed. Brem.) That the devil was overreached, say: Cyril of Jerus. Catechet. XII. p. 170. and Gregory Nyss. Orat. catechet. c. 22—26.

(6) Gregory Nazianz. Orat. XLII. (Opp. T. I. p. 691,692.) and the author of the Dialogue, de Recta fide, sec. 1. inter Opp. Origenis, T. I. p. 820.

(7) de Incarnat. (Opp. T. I, p. 60–62, or p. 52 &c. ed. Montf.) Orat. III. (II.) in Arianos, (T. I. p. 439, 440, or p. 535 &c. ed. Montf.)

(8) Catech. XIII. § 33.

(9) Cyril of Jerus. Catech. XIII. § 33.

(10) Gregory Nyss. Orat. Catech. c. 16, 32, 37. and Opp. Tom. II. p. 17, 588. Tom. III. p. 72, 73, 92, 102.--Hilary Pictav. de Trinitit. Lib. II. § 24, 25. and in Ps. li. § 15. (11) Affirmed by: Basil the Gr. Homil. in Ps. xlviii. (Opp. I. 179, 180.)--Cyril Alex. Dial. de incarnatione unigeniti, (Opp. V. p. 684.)-Leo the Gr. Serm. L. c. 1, 2. Denied by: Athanasius, Qrat. III. (II.) in Arian. (Opp. I. p. 438, 439.)--Gregory Naz. Orat. IX. p. 157.Gregory Nyss. Orat. catechet, c. 17.-Theodoret, de graecar. affectt. Curatione, Lib. VI. (Opp. IV. p. 875, 876.) Cyril Alex. contra Jul. Lib. VIII. p. 284, 285. Augustine, de Agone Christi. c. 11. and de Trinit. Lib. XIII. c. 10.

(12) Comment. in Joh. (Opp. T. IV. p. 41, 42.) contra Cels. Lib. II. p. 409. Lib. VII. p. 706.

(13) Orat. Catechet. c. 26.

(14) Enarrat. in I.Ep. Petri; in Gallandi Biblioth. Patr. VI. p. 293.--That Christ suffered in our stead, was taught by: Eusebius, Demonstrat. Evang. Lib. X. p. 467, and Lib. 1. p. 38.--Gregory Nizanz. Orat. XXXVI. p. 580, and Cyril Alexand. de recta fide ad Reginas, Opp. Tom. V. p. 131.

SEC. 98. Forgiveness of sin.

It was universally admitted, that men obtain forgiveness of sin, through Jesus Christ. But a distinction

« PoprzedniaDalej »