found in the nature of the offspring, which is derived from the sin of our first parent, carries with it the nature of Original Sin, provided it be in a subject which is susceptible of blame Anselm also (as cited by Thomas*) affirms, that not only is the defect or total deprivation, but even the diminution of the soul's beauty imputed for sin.

In whatever faculty, therefore, susceptible of sin, we shew that either the contrary disposition, or privation, or diminution of original rectitude remains, in that we clearly prove, that the remains of Original Sin still continue. For the notion which the Papists are in the habit of putting forward† —that the very many defects of that perfection or rectitude which was bestowed upon Adam, may indeed be called vices, or wounds of the soul, but not sins-is but puerile. But this is to play with words; for the vice or wound caused to a power capable of sin, cannot be supposed to mean anything else than sin. There are some natural diseases, inconsistent with a state of primitive perfection, which are not part of Original Sin, but punishments; such, for instance, as bodily infirmity, corruptibility, and other things of that kind, which cleave to a subject unsusceptible of sin; or are not, as it were, the source of actual sins. But those which inhere in the mind, defile it, and in themselves make it guilty of sin. Others are wont to say, that there may be certain defects of original perfection, even in the mind, yet so as to have nothing else in them except the mere material, not the formal nature of sin. But first, it is not very rational to talk of I know not what forms and materials in Original Sin, which has the nature of privation. For what can the form of privation be, except a want of the contrary quality which ought to be in it? If then we can prove that such a defect exists, we at the same time prove Original Sin, even in the formal shape. Next, if we wish to have a ground for sin, that will be rather the materia in qua than ex qua. For example, in actual sin, the material is the act itself to which the malice or deformity inheres as the formal. The material, therefore, of sin, is something good; and hence these defects, which our opponents are compelled to acknowledge to be certain

Quæst. disp. de Orig. Peccat. art. 2.

+ Vide Greg. de Valent. de Peccat. Orig. cap. 8. That is, its constituent element.-See Note p. 67.

evils, vices, or wounds of the soul, are falsely and foolishly called the material of sin; for evil does not take root except in good; Aquin. de Creat. qu. 3. art. 6. Lastly, since that which is called the form hath its seat in its material, it is absurd to seek the material of original sin in one faculty of the soul, and place its form in another: which all those are compelled to do, who adopt this foolish distinction. But let us now come to our arguments.

That there are in the rational or intellectual power of regenerate men certain defects or evil dispositions which must necessarily be assigned to that infected disposition arising from Original Sin, I shall shew by briefly stating the principal.

1. Curiosity, or the desire of knowing things not necessary, or hidden and mysterious, which it is not lawful to search out, when it exercises itself, is manifest actual sin; therefore that habitual or constitutional proneness of the mind to such knowledge is Original Sin. Parisiensis elegantly calls this curiosity,* a prostitution of rational virtue; and powerfully argues, That it is no light sin or small turpitude, for the intellect once wedded to primal truth, to prostitute itself, and violate, by manifold adulteries, this venerable alliance. Now it is manifest that this evil propensity is not wholly extirpated from the minds of the faithful. For few there are who do not more readily and diligently search after the knowledge of frivolous and useless things, than the things necessary to salvation; few there are too, who, applying themselves to the knowledge of Divine things, do not rather endeavour to enquire into those things which God intended should be concealed, than into those which he has revealed to direct our faith and life. In fine, there is no man who, if he gave way to his natural inclination, but would be eager in enquiring into useless and unlawful subjects in preference to the knowledge of the Gospel, which is the power of God unto salvation. This is the innate disease of the multitude; † hence they eagerly follow new teachers, new doctrines, and especially discussions of questions by no means necessary; while they scarcely hear without loathing what tends to the correction of morals, or confirmation in • De Tentat. et Resistent. cap. 1. † Athenian-like, Acts xvii. 22.-Translator.

mediately falling asleep, after asking the remission of sins from God in the name of Christ. But according to the Apostle, if any one say of himself, or of any other person whatsoever, this man hath no sin, he lies. Bellarmine meets us and answers that the words are to be understood of daily actual little sins. But such an interpretation is not at all consistent with the truth of the Apostolic saying; for Bellarmine himself, before he has advanced three lines, affirms, it is possible that, for a short time, a person may be free even from all venial sin. Let this then be assumed :- If that man may say for this short time, I have no sin, he would not be deceiving himself, and the truth would be in him. John therefore was [of course] mistaken, and there was no truth in this Apostolic saying. Admirable answer doubtless of Bellarmine which, to render man void of sin, makes the Holy Spirit the author of a lie! But Bellarmine quibbles on — Although any one may be without sin for a short time, yet no one can affirm it of himself, because Job truly said (ix. 21.) Although I should be simple, even this my soul shall be ignorant of. Yet this is not sufficient to defend the truth of the Apostolic saying: For although this would not be proper in the person affirming, yet if it were true that he had no sin, he would not deceive himself by asserting it, but rather by asserting the contrary; neither could it be truly said of him, the truth is not in him, but humility is not in him. Augustine will stop the mouth of Bellarmine, who, as though he had forescen the subterfuge of the Papists, thus writes on this passage: Neither is it written for the avoidance of arrogance and pride, IF WE SAY THAT WE HAVE NO SIN, WE DECEIVE OURSELVES, otherwise it would not be added, AND THE TRUTH IS NOT IN US; but he would have said, AND HUMILITY IS NOT IN US.‡ He has similar things in his book, De Nat. et Grat. cap. 34.

But with respect to what was objected concerning persons asleep, and infants, because he could not seriously solve it, Bellarmine attempts to elude it by a silly joke. Just as if (says he) infants or persons sleeping could say, that they had

• De amiss. Grat. lib. 5. cap. 11.

Our version of this passage is, Though I were perfect, yet would I not know my soul. The Translator has given the Douay version above, as most accordant with Bellarmine's.

In enarrat. in Psal. cxviii. conc. 2.

no sin!-Any one may, however, easily perceive, that the stress is not to be laid on the person affirming, but on the thing affirmed. If therefore any other person should affirm respecting any infant, or a person asleep, This man has no sin, the Apostle convicts him of a falsehood. This passage, then, furnishes an unanswerable reason for showing the remains of sin to be in every man.

And thus far we have proved generally, that none of the regenerate are free from sin, and that by express testimonies of Scripture: we shall now consider the powers of the soul singly, and shall prove argumentatively, that sin dwells in each of them.

CHAPTER XVI.

ARGUMENTS SHEWING THAT ORIGINAL SIN IS INHERENT IN THE REGENERATE.

We are now to prove that the remains of sin cleave even to the regenerate, and that not only in the inferior part of the soul, but in all the powers capable of sin. But one thing must be first premised-that this Original Sin is just that disposition which is contrary to, and resists the rectitude of man's primitive constitution in every faculty of the soul susceptible of sin. But under this contrary disposition I comprise the deficiency of the righteousness which ought to be in us, and the corrupt inclination connected with this deficiency, of which I have before spoken.

Now that such a disposition or habit hath the true nature of Original Sin, the very Schoolmen concede. Thus William of Paris* says, Whatsoever God has not ordained in us, and yet is found naturally in us, is vice or sin in us. And a little after, Because personal rectitude is the good disposition in man when first created, original perversity resisting this is rightly called sin. Even Aquinas† admits that every defect

De Vitiis et Pec. cap. 2.

+ Quæst. disp. de Orig. Peccat. art. 2.

the faith. The learned themselves are not free from this weakness, as the many frivolous questions of the Schoolmen testify. In fact even the very Apostles were not themselves entirely free from this disease, since Christ had to reprove them, because they were curiously desiring a knowledge of things by no means appertaining to them, John xxi. 21. Acts i. 7.

2. Original Righteousness rendered the human mind. apt and ready to put faith in the Divine teachings and revelations; but now there is a certain slowness to believe even in the minds of the regenerate, which, unless it is overcome by some efficacy of the enlightening Spirit, either never, or with difficulty, would yield to the teaching of saving faith. Christ himself charged even his Disciples with this innate weakness. Although the death and resurrection of Christ are the fundamentals of human salvation, yet we find the Disciples themselves assenting tardily, and with great difficulty to their Master Christ, when propounding these things. Peter was so backward to put faith in the doctrine of the death of Christ, that he presumed to rebuke him when speaking of it, and hence brought deservedly upon himself the appellation of Satan. Matt. xvi. 22, 23. As to the resurrection, although Christ himself foretold that he should rise again the third day, yet this inbred tardiness was an hindrance to their believing the fact, when accomplished, and though sufficiently attested. Hence he upbraided some of his Disciples with this, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the Prophets have spoken; Luke xxiv. 25. Aud he charges the Apostles themselves with this same incredulity and slowness of heart, Mark xvi. 14. No one doubts that these were born again before the resurrection of Christ; but that this slowness of heart to believe is a great fault, and that too inbred and original, is beyond dispute. There remains therefore something of Original Sin even after regeneration.

3. Original Righteousness not only disposed and fitted the mind for exercising a ready faith in the Divine declarations; but also after faith was received and embraced, it kept the mind so firm in the obedience of faith, that it was freed from all vacillation, hesitation, or doubt. But in its present state doubts arise now and then in the minds of the