More on this book
Community
Kindle Notes & Highlights
“I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me,” (Ps. 51:5).
Nay, before we behold the light of the sun we are in God’s sight defiled and polluted. “Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Not one,” says the Book of Job (Job 14:4).
We thus see that the impurity of parents is transmitted to their children, so that all, without exception, are originally depraved.
Accordingly, the relation subsisting between the two is this, As Adam, by his ruin, involved and ruined us, so Christ, by his grace, restored us to salvation.
Therefore, the only explanation which can be given of the expression, “in Adam all died,” is, that he by sinning not only brought disaster and ruin upon himself, but also plunged our nature into like destruction;
Paul never could have said that all are “by nature the children of wrath,” (Eph. 2:3), if they had not been cursed from the womb.
and that therefore the gate of life is closed against all until they have been regenerated.
To the understanding of this subject, there is no necessity for an anxious discussion (which in no small degree perplexed the ancient doctors), as to whether the soul of the child comes by transmission from the soul of the parent.14
Guilt is from nature, whereas sanctification is from supernatural grace.
Original sin, then, may be defined a hereditary corruption and depravity of our nature, extending to all the parts of the soul, which first makes us obnoxious to the wrath of God, and then produces in us works which in Scripture are termed works of the flesh. This corruption is repeatedly designated by Paul by the term sin14
he is said to have brought us under obligation.14
The third chapter of the Epistle to the Romans is nothing but a description of original sin;
Meanwhile let us remember that our ruin is attributable to our own depravity, that we may not insinuate a charge against God himself, the Author of nature.
How could God, who takes pleasure in the meanest of his works be offended with the noblest of them all? The offence is not with the work itself, but the corruption of the work.
The opinions of the ancient theologians on the subject of free will.
The Fathers, and especially Augustine, while retaining the term Free Will, yet condemned the doctrine of the heretics on the subject, as destroying the grace of God.
Having seen that the dominion of sin, ever since the first man was brought under it, not only extends to the whole race, but has complete possession of every soul, it now remains to consider more closely, whether from the period of being thus enslaved, we have been deprived of all liberty;
The best method of avoiding error is to consider the dangers which beset us on either side.
On the other hand, man cannot arrogate any thing, however minute, to himself, without robbing God of his honour, and through rash confidence subjecting himself to a fall.
Wherefore, it is not without reason that Augustine so often repeats the well-known saying, that free will is more destroyed than established by its defenders (August. in Evang. Joann. Tract. 81).
In a word, since, according to their opinion, the faculties which I have mentioned above, namely, intellect, sense, and appetite, or will (the latter being the term in ordinary use), are seated in the soul, they maintain that the intellect is endued with reason, the best guide to a virtuous and happy life, provided it duly avails itself of its excellence, and exerts the power with which it is naturally endued;
As if human nature were still in its integrity, the term free will has always been in use among the Latins, while the Greeks were not ashamed to use a still more presumptuous term—viz. aujtexouvsion, as if man had still full power in himself.
Augustine differ from him when he says, It is a power of reason and will to choose the good, grace assisting,—to choose the bad, grace desisting.
Anselm’s definition is not very intelligible to ordinary understandings. He calls it a power of preserving rectitude on its own account.
Thomas Aquinas says (Part 1 Quast. 83, Art. 3), that the most congruous definition is to call free will an elective power, combining intelligence and appetite, but inclining more to appetite.
5. In general, they are wont to place under the free will of man only intermediate things—viz. those which pertain not to the kingdom of God, while they refer true righteousness to the special grace of God and spiritual regeneration.
the first, a freedom from necessity; the second, a freedom from sin; and the third, a freedom from misery:
All this being admitted, it will be beyond dispute, that free will does not enable any man to perform good works, unless he is assisted by grace; indeed, the special grace which the elect alone receive through regeneration.
In this way, then, man is said to have free will, not because he has a free choice of good and evil, but because he acts voluntarily, and not by compulsion.
This is perfectly true: but why should so small a matter have been dignified with so proud a title?
In particular, Augustine hesitates not to call the will a slave.15
In another passages he is offended with those who deny free will; but his chief reason for this is explained when he says, “Only lest any one should presume so to deny freedom of will, from a desire to excuse sin.”
Again, that man, by making a bad use of free will, lost both himself and his will.
“How much soever miserable men presume to plume themselves on free will before they are made free, or on their strength after they are made free, they do not consider that, in the very expression free will, liberty is implied. ‘Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty,’ (2 Cor. 3:17). If, therefore, they are the servants of sin, why do they boast of free will? He who has been vanquished is the servant of him who vanquished him. But if men have been made free, why do they boast of it as of their own work?
Are they so free that they are unwilling to be the servants of Him who has said, ‘Without me ye can do nothing’?” (John 15:5). In another passage he even seems to ridicule the word, when he says,15
“That the will is indeed free, but not freed—free of righteousness, ...
This highlight has been truncated due to consecutive passage length restrictions.
“That man is not free from righteousness save by the choice of his will, and is not made free from sin sav...
This highlight has been truncated due to consecutive passage length restrictions.
I am unwilling to use it myself; and others if they will take my advice, will do well to abstain from it.
Chrysostom, When he says, “That every man is not only naturally a sinner, but is wholly sin?”
that he who is most deeply abased and alarmed, by the consciousness of his disgrace, nakedness, want, and misery, has made the greatest progress in the knowledge of himself.
The Lord taketh pleasure in those that fear him, in those that hope in his mercy,”
Chrysostom, “The foundation of our philosophy is humility;”16
The thing wanted is genuine confession, not false defence.”
the weapons of impiety must be bruised, and broken, and burnt in the fire; you must remain unarmed, having no help in yourself.
under the blinding of which he thinks of himself more highly than he ought to think, he may see himself as he really is, by looking into the faithful mirror of Scripture.
I feel pleased with the well-known saying which has been borrowed from the writings of Augustine, that man’s natural gifts were corrupted by sin, and his supernatural gifts withdrawn; meaning by supernatural gifts the light of faith and righteousness, which would have been sufficient for the attainment of heavenly life and everlasting felicity.
Man, when he withdrew his allegiance to God, was deprived of the spiritual gifts by which he had been raised to the hope of eternal salvation. Hence it follows, that he is now an exile from the kingdom of God, so that all things which pertain to the blessed life of the soul ar...
This highlight has been truncated due to consecutive passage length restrictions.
Among these are faith, love to God, charity towards our neighbour, the study of righteousness and holiness. All these, when restored to us by Christ, are to b...
This highlight has been truncated due to consecutive passage length restrictions.
The distinction is, that we have one kind of intelligence of earthly things, and another of heavenly things.
By earthly things, I mean those which relate not to God and his kingdom, to true righteousness and future blessedness, but have some connection with the present life, and are in a manner confined within its boundaries.
