(Heb. xii, 1:) In this description will be classed that of St. Paul against Ananias the High Priest, if indeed he may be said to have sinned in that matter. (Acts xxiii, 3.)

VI. Nearly allied to this is the distribution of sin into that which is contrary to conscience, and that which is not contrary to conscience. (1.) A sin against conscience is one that is perpetrated through malice and deliberate purpose, laying waste the conscience, and (if committed by holy persons) grieving the Holy Spirit so much, as to cause Him to desist from his usual functions of leading them into the right way, and [exhilarandi] of making them glad in their consciences by his inward testimony. (Psalm li, 10, 13.) This is called, by way of eminence," a sin against conscience;" though, when this phrase is taken in a wide acceptation, a sin which is committed through infirmity, but which has a previous sure knowledge that is applied to the deed, might also be said to be against conscience. (2.) A sin not against conscience is either that which is by no means such, and which is not committed through a wilful and wished-for ignorance of the law; as the man who neglects to know what he is capable of knowing: Or it is that which, at least, is not such in a primary degree, but is perpetrated through precipitancy, the cause of which is a vehement and unforeseen temptation: Of this kind was the too hasty judgment of David against Mephibosheth, produced by the grievous accusation of Ziba, which happened at the very time when David fled : This bore a strong resemblance to a falsehood. (2 Sam. xvi, 3, 4.) Yet that which, when once committed, is not contrary to conscience, becomes contrary to it when more frequently repeated, and when the man neglects self-correction.

VII. To this may be added, the division of sin from its causes, with regard to the real object about which the sin is perpetrated. This object is either "the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, or the pride of life," that is, either pleasure specially so called, or avarice, or arrogant haughtiness; all of which, proceeding from the single fountain of self-love or inordinate affection, tend distinctly towards the good things of the present life,-haughtiness, towards its honours,-avarice, towards its riches,―and pleasure, towards those things by which the external senses may experience self-gratification. From these arise those works of the flesh which are enumerated by the apostle in Gal. v, 19-21, perhaps with the exception of Idolatry: Yet it may be made a legitimate subject of discussion, whether Idolatry may not be referred to one of these three causes.

VIII. Sin is also divided into Venial and Mortal: But this distribution is not deduced from the nature of sin itself, but accidentally from the gracious estimation of God. For every sin is in its own nature mortal, that is, it is that which merits death; because it is declared universally concerning sin, that "its wages is death," (Rom. vi, 23,) which might in truth be brought instantly down upon the [offenders] were God wishful to enter into judgment with his servants. But that which denominates sin venial, or capable of being forgiven, is this circumstance, -God is not willing to impute sin to believers, or [statuere] to place sin against them, but is desirous to pardon it; although with this difference, that it requires express penitence from some, while concerning others it is content with this expression, "Who can understand his errors? Cleanse thou me, O Lord, from secret faults." (Psalm xix, 12.) In this case the ground of fear is not so much lest, from the aggravation of sin, men should fall into despair,―as lest, from its extenuation, they should relapse into negligence and security; not only because man has a greater propensity to the latter than to the former, but likewise because that declaration is always [præsens] at hand: "I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth," that is, of the sinner who has merited death by his transgressions, "but that he be converted and live." (Ezek. xviii, 32.)

IX. Because we say, that "the wages of every sin is death," we do not on this account, with the Stoics, make them all equal. For, beside the refutation of such an opinion by many passages of Scripture, it is likewise opposed to the diversity of objects against which sin is perpetrated, to the causes from which it arises, and to the law against which the offence is committed. Besides, the disparity of punishments in the death that is eternal, proves the falsehood of this sentiment: For a crime against God is more grievous than one against man; (1 Sam. ii, 25;) one that is perpetrated with [elata] a high hand, than one through error; one against a prohibitory law, than one against a mandatory law: And far more severe will be the punishment inflicted on the inhabitants of Chorazin and Bethsaida, than on those of Tyre and Sidon. (Matt. xi, 23.) By means of this dogma the Stoics have endeavoured to turn men aside from the commission of crimes; but their attempt has not only been fruitless, but also injurious, as [will be seen] when we institute a serious deliberation about bringing man back from sin into the way of righteousness.

X. Mention is likewise made, in the Scriptures, of "a sin

a sin

unto death;" (1 John v, 16;) which is specially so called, because it in fact brings certain death on all by whom it has been committed. Mention is made in the same passage, of " which is not unto death," and which is opposed to the former. In a parallel column with these, marches the division of sin into pardonable and unpardonable. (1.) A sin which is "not unto death" and pardonable, is so called, because it is capable of having subsequent repentance and thus of being pardoned, and because to many persons it is actually pardoned through succeeding penitence: Such as that which is said to be committed against "the Son of Man."-(2.) The " sin unto death" or unpardonable, is that which never has subsequent repentance, or the author of which cannot be recalled to penitence: Such as that which is called "the sin" or "blasphemy against the Holy Ghost;" (Matt. xii, 32; Luke xii, 10;) of which it is said, "it shall not be forgiven, either in this world, or in the world to come." For this reason St John says, we must not pray for that sin.

XI. But, though the proper meaning and nature of the sin against the Holy Ghost are with the utmost difficulty to be ascertained, yet we prefer to follow those who have furnished the most weighty and grievous definition of it, rather than those who, in maintaining six species of it, have been compelled to explain "unpardonable" in some of those species, for that which is with difficulty or is rarely remitted, or which of itself deserves not to be pardoned. With the former class of persons, therefore, we say, that the sin against the Holy Ghost is committed when any man, with determined malice, resists Divine and in fact evangelical truth, for the sake of resistance,—though he is so overpowered with the refulgence of it, as to be rendered incapable of pleading ignorance in excuse. This is therefore called "the sin against the Holy Ghost," not because it is not perpetrated against the Father and the Son; (for how can it be that he does not sin against the Father and the Son, who sins against the Spirit of both?) but because it is committed against the operation of the Holy Spirit, that is, against the conviction of the truth through miracles, and against the illumination of the mind.

XII. But the cause why this sin is called "irremissible," and why he who has committed it cannot be renewed to repentance, is not the impotency of God, as though by his most absolute omnipotence He cannot grant to this man repentance unto life, and thus cannot pardon this blasphemy. But since it is necessary, that the Mercy of God should stop at some point, being circumscribed by the limits of his Justice and Equity according to the VOL. II.

M

prescript of his Wisdom, this sin is said to be "unpardonable," because God accounts the man who has perpetrated so horrid a crime, and has done despite to the Spirit of grace, to be altogether unworthy of having the Divine Benignity and the operation of the Holy Spirit occupied in his conversion, lest He should Himself appear to esteem this sacred operation and kindness at a low rate, and to stand in need of a sinful man, especially of one who is such a monstrous sinner!

XIII. The Efficient Cause of actual sins is, man through his own free will. The Inwardly-working Cause is the original propensity of our nature towards that which is contrary to the Divine law, which propensity we have contracted from our first parents, through carnal generation. The Outwardly-working Causes are the objects and occasions which solicit men to sin. The Substance, or Material Cause, is an act which, according to its nature, has reference to good. The Form, or Formal Cause of it, is a transgression of the law, or an anomy. It is destitute of an End; because sin is aμapria, a transgression, which wanders from its aim. The Object of it is [commutabile] a variable good; to which when man is inclined, after having deserted the unchangeable Good, he commits an offence.

XIV. The Effect of actual sins are all the calamities and miseries of the present life, then death temporal, and afterwards death eternal. But in those who are hardened and blinded, even the effects of preceding sins become consequent sins themselves.

DISPUTATION IX.

ON THE RIGHTEOUSNESS AND EFFICACY OF THE PROVIDENCE OF GOD CONCERNING EVIL.

Respondent, RALPH DE ZYLL.

I. AMONG the causes and pretences by which human ignorance has been induced, and which human perverseness has abused, to deny the Providence of God, the entrance of evil (that is, of sin) into the world, and its most wonderful and fertile exuberance, do not by any means occupy the lowest stations. For since, with Scripture as our guide and nature as our witness, we must maintain that God is good, omniscient, and of unbounded power; (Mark x, 18; Psalm cxlvii, 5; Rev. iv, 8; Rom. i, 20;) and since this is a truth of which every one is fully persuaded who has formed in his mind any notion of the Deity; men have concluded from this, that evil could not have occurred under the three preceding conditions of the Divine Majesty, if God managed all

things by his Providence, and if it was his will [curare] to make provision respecting evil according to these properties of his own nature: And therefore, since, after all, evil has occurred, they have concluded that the Providence of God must be entirely denied. For they thought it better to set up a God that was at repose and negligent of mundane affairs, especially of those in which a rational creature's freedom of will intervened, than to deprive Him of the honour of his Goodness, Wisdom, and Power: But it is not necessary to adopt either of these methods; and that it is possible to preserve to God without disparagement these three ornaments of Supreme Majesty, as well as his Providence, will be shewn by [commoda] a temperate explanation of the Efficacy of God concerning evil.

II. A few things must be premised about this evil itself, as a basis for our explanation. (1.) What is properly sin? (2.) Was it possible for it to be perpetrated by a rational creature, and how? (3.) That a chief evil cannot be granted, which may contend on an equality with the Chief Good, as the Manichees asserted; otherwise, of all the evils which can be devised, sin, of which we are now treating, is in reality the Chief; and, if we may speak with strictness, sin is the only and sole evil: For all other things are not evils [in themselves,] but are [mala, evils] injurious to some one.

III. 1. Sin is properly an aberration from a rule: This rule is the equity which is pre-conceived in the mind of God, which is expressed to the mind of a rational creature by legislation, and according to which [fas est] it is proper for such a creature to regulate his life. It is therefore defined by St. John in one com-pound word, avoua," the transgression of the law;" (1 John iii, 4;) whether such a law be preceptive of good, or prohibitory of evil, (Psalm xxxiv, 14,)-hence the evil of commission is perpetrated against the prohibitory part, and that of omission against the preceptive. But in sin, two things come under consideration: (1.) The act itself, which has reference to natural good; but under the act we comprehend likewise the cessation from action. (2.) Anomy, or "the transgression of the law," which obtains the place of a moral evil. The act may be called the Substance, or Material Cause, of sin; and the transgression of the law, its Form or Formal Cause.

IV. 2. But it was possible for sin to be perpetrated by a rational creature: For, as a creature, he was capable of declining or revolting from the Chief Good, and [affici] of being inclined towards an inferior good, and towards the acts by which he might