demned by a Council at Ephesus in 431, and as to his latter years his life is involved in obscurity. Though he wrote a confession of his faith, and various epistles, none of them come down to us entire. We can say less about Pelagius. It is supposed that he returned to Britain, and spent the remainder of his days in peace and quietness. With the exception of a Commentary on Paul's Epistles, and a few other documents, and these somewhat mutilated, all his works have been lost, so that we are put to the serious disadvantage of finding out his distinctive doctrines from the declarations of others, and chiefly of his great theological antagonist, Augustine.

The Pelagian controversy was one of the most remarkable, as an exercise of intellectual energy, in the early ages of the Christian era. Pelagius seems to have been drawn into it, not so much from a theoretical, as from a practical interest. He yearned for a nobler and sublimer manifestation in daily life of the principles of Christianity. He had a sincere desire to guard his fellow-Christians against errors which appeared to him injurious to morality. We may mention here that upwards of thirty Councils were held, within the space of twenty-five years, for the express purpose of discussing the doctrines of Pelagius. One authority says-" Pelagianism lay at the bottom of all the conflicts in the medieval philosophic schools."

THE DOCTRINES OF THE PELAGIANS.

Having sketched the external history of the Pelagian controversy, it now devolves upon us to define the distinctive views of the Pelagians.

I. The Natural Condition of Man.-The anthropological views of the Pelagians were the most important feature in their system. Indeed, most, if not all of their other doctrines were evolved out of this one. They maintained that man, as coming from God, was pure and perfect, and was possessed of all the natural powers necessary for the attainment of salvation. They ridiculed the idea that these God-given powers had been polluted by Adam's sin. Human nature had not been changed by the fall. Man had still the ability to do the right, or the wrong (posse non peccare). Adam's body was as subject to disease and death before the fall, as after the fall. The death referred to in Genesis ii, 17, was, according to them, not temporal, but spiritual (Anima quae peccat ipsa morietur). Julian held that, if Adam had not sinned, he would have obtained immortality by eating of the tree of life. Pelagius admitted, that Adam had a greater advantage than his posterity, from the fact that no example of human sin was

before him. He said, that those who held so tenaciously to their notions of the corruption and weakness of human nature, cast a slur upon God himself. He appealed to the splendid example of the virtuous pagans, he pointed to the perfect characters revealed in the Bible, for example, Abel and Mary, and declared that Christians, because of their grander privileges, might be able to excel the noblest of their ancestors.

We cannot but admire the clear way in which these views of the primitive state of man were stated, but at the same time, we cannot but deplore some of his deductions. He overestimated the ability of man, and overlooked the possibility of a physical corruption, derived by natural generation. He was right in thinking that God does not conceive sin in us, but he was perhaps somewhat blind to the fact, that we are conceived and brought up in the midst of sinful environments.

II. Original Sin.-In opposition to Tertullian, Cyprian, Ambrose, and Augustine, Pelagius rejected the Traducian theory, that sin is propagated, or that Adam's sin had influence on the moral constitution of his posterity. Augustine held that every natural man is in the power of the devil, and that, as all men existed in the loins of Adam, the whole human race was potentially in him, all sinned with him (In quo omnes peccaverunt). Pelagius opposed this view-(1) Because it did not accord with the express declarations of the Bible; (2) Because it made God the author of evil-the God of the Traducianists was not the God of the Gospel; and (3) Because it made God an unjust judge. In common with Clemens, Irenæus, and Origen, he denied that either sin or guilt was propagated, or that man had lost all capacity for good. Adam was responsible for his own transgression. Posterity alone are answerable to God for their own personal acts.

We are disposed to say Amen, to the most of the statements of Pelagius in regard to this doctrine. We deny that moral corruption is propagated, and we deny that guilt or blameworthiness lies on any man until he has actually sinned. We think, however, that Pelagius misunderstood Paul's argument (Romans v, 12-19) as to the federal headship of Adam, and the imputation of his sin to posterity; and as to the federal headship of Christ, and the imputation of his righteousness to believers.

III. Free Will.-Pelagius maintained that the will could not be free, if it stood in need of divine aid. Augustine maintained that before the fall the will was free, but after the fall, it was free only to sin, and was incapable of doing good. Pelagius, on the other hand, held that, after the fall, the will had the same capacity. "Free will is as much free will after sins,

as before sins." Julian says, "Even the individual cannot, by means of a simple transgression, suffer a change in his moral nature; he retains the same freedom of the will." We think Pelagius was right in maintaining the self-determining power of the will.

IV. Grace. In opposition to the doctrines of Augustine, who held that divine grace was irresistible, and was absolutely necessary for every holy act, Pelagius maintained that God has provided man with all requisite powers; that human capacities and capabilities were the result of God's grace, though the use of these was man's act; that man's free will, under the canopy of the law and the Gospel, is sufficient; that there was not such a thing as irresistible grace; and that grace is given according to our deservings, but is always subservient to man's will. "God upholds us," says Pelagius, "by his instructions and his revelation; by opening the eyes of the heart; by revealing to us visions of the future life, that we may not be carried away with the things of the present; by discovering to us the arts of the adversary; by enlightening us by means of various and ineffable gifts of the heavenly grace." In expounding Phil. ii, 13, "It is God that worketh in us, both to will and to do," Pelagius beautifully expresses himself thus-" He worketh in us to will what is good and holy when he consumes what is offered to our earthly desires by the greatness of the future glory and the promise of rewards, when he excites the will to longing after God by the revelation of his wisdom, and when he counsels us to all goodness." Julian also says that God helps praecipiendo, benedicendo, sanctificando, coërcendo, provocando, illuminando.

We are charmed with these quotations; they have no odour of heresy. Pelagius seemed to be strongly inclined to exclude anything and everything in the sphere of God's grace, if it did not harmonize with his views of free will. He said that the human nature itself, in which we are made, is grace. He granted that heavenly aid might facilitate the particular work, and thus bring about a higher degree of moral perfection; but he denied that this aid was indispensable to its accomplishment. It is certain, however, that his views on this point were somewhat modified, after the publication of the Pope's decree. (Epistola Tractoria.)

V. The Atonement.-Here Pelagius boldly took up a position of theological hostility to Augustine. He held that the atonement was not merely for the elect, but for all. The Pelagians believed," that the human nature, which God created good originally, was by Christ made still better-raised to a higher stage of advancement, which consists in sonship to God, fur

nished with new powers; and assured of a state of felicity resulting from adoption into the kingdom of God, to the attainment of which the powers of nature are inadequate." Christ supplied many new motives to moral effort, bestowed on men a new power to gain the victory over the impulses of sense and the allurements of sin." Julian says, "The fulness of the divine love, which gave things their existence, revealed itself in this, that the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us."

The error of Pelagius, on this point, was in under-estimating the virulence of the moral disease in man. Hence, though he believed that sinners are pardoned by God simply for Christ's sake, and though he believed that Christ tasted death for every man; yet, to those who were sinless, that atonement could not be looked upon as propitiatory, but as exemplary, and as precursive of better influences to follow. He was greatly offended, on one occasion, when he heard a bishop utter the words of the prayer of Augustine, "My God, bestow on me what thou commandest, and command what thou wilt."

VI. Predestination.-Augustine maintained that the race is a corrupt mass (perditionis massa), and, according to strict justice, was doomed to everlasting damnation; that none can be saved from the mass but the elect, who alone receive gratia efficax; and that perseverance is a gift to the elect, effectually preventing them from apostasy. The glaring inconsistency of Augustine was seen in the fact that, while he derived the first sin from man's free will, he made everything else depend on an unconditional divine predetermination, which inconsistency was well exposed by Julian.

Pelagius, on the other hand, declared that predestination was conditional, and that God designed for salvation those who, as he foreknew, would believe in Christ, and keep the commandments, and reprobated those, and those only, who, as he foreknew, would remain in sin. He held that saints might, by the exercise of their free will, fall away and be for ever lost.

VII. Baptism. In regard to this subject the Pelagians were evidently greatly perplexed. They tried, in vain, to be consistent. They believed, with others, that the rite was necessary; but, then, came the question, if necessary, how could they harmonize this with their lofty views of the purity of human nature? Why baptise an uncorrupted thing? They tried to obviate the difficulty by making an extraordinary distinction between eternal life and the kingdom of heaven. Infants were admitted to the former, but the rite, they said, would admit them to the latter. By and bye they shuffled themselves forward to the position of maintaining that the rite was prospective, and that it remitted sins which might afterwards be committed.

Augustine held that baptised infants will be saved; and that adults would be saved from original and actual sin, by baptism, but could not, except in certain cases, where the rite was impossible, be saved without it. The heathen, being unbaptised, are all lost, said Augustine. An esteemed writer remarks, " In holding the necessity of baptism, Augustine descended from his high predestination ground, and became a conditionalist."

Pelagius did not believe in a purgatory (ignis purgatorius); but maintained the eternity of punishment. He was, as might be expected, hazy on the subject of regeneration. He acknowledged the doctrine of justification, and as to sanctification, it was placed in the background. He strongly recommended the study of the Word of God.

But we must close. We have endeavoured to do our best to exhibit Pelagius and Pelagianism. Though his writings have been nearly all lost; though we have to look at him through the statements of others; though he has been a bull's-eye for many a theological rifleman; and though he has got a bad name from Augustinians and Calvinists, we are, nevertheless, constrained to think, that he was a truly noble Christian, and an honest searcher after God's truth, and one intensely anxious to benefit his fellow-creatures. Let us go and do likewise; and let us drop the dross, while we retain the pure gold.

R. H.-G.

THE REV. DAVID MACRAE AND THE CONFESSION OF FAITH. THE whole country was taken by surprise, on the 17th of January, when it woke up to find from the morning papers that the Rev. David Macrae, of Gourock, had made, on the previous day, at the meeting of the Paisley Presbytery, to which he belongs, one of the most damaging attacks on the Westminster Confession of Faith which it has had to sustain for many a day. We had, indeed, noticed in the newspapers that, at the previous meeting of the Paisley Presbytery, Mr. Macrae had given his notice of motion; but as he was well known to be fully read up in scientific lore, we had concluded, in our own mind, that the minister of Gourock intended to run a geological tilt at the "six natural days of creation," or some of the other blemishes which the keen British Association men are accustomed to point out in that venerable document.

But judge of our surprise and delight when we found that this young David from the Frith of Clyde had attacked the Goliath of the high Predestinarian Standards of his own