"But it was not into one city," says Jerome, "that he introduced those blasphemous opinions, but to the utmost of his ability he spread them through the world."

Ruffinus had been under the tuition of Evagrius Ponticus, the Hyperborean, the author of a metaphysical work, which held forth the doctrine of impeccability, or the possibility of attaining to a state of absolute purity.

As Celestius and Pelagius were so closely linked together, there can be no doubt that their errors flowed from the same source: and we see that Celestius imbibed his notions from Origen and Evagrius Ponticus, through the medium of Ruffinus. The notions of the two persons in question were not therefore peculiar to themselves, but had been sanctioned before by great

names.

Origen was sportive in imagination, and greatly attached to the works and philosophy of Plato. Among other fancies he held the pre-existence of human souls; and this alone would tend to destroy the doctrine of original sin. But the principal feature in the system appears to be certain conclusions drawn from the doctrine of the free-agency of man, the tendency of which was to deny the received opinions respecting the consequences of the first transgression.

Celestius being a man of a more bold and forward turn than Pelagius, the latter made use of him as his agent and right-hand man. It is said that at first he only proposed his doubts respecting certain points of doctrine generally received, as if he wished to be more

trine: hence Origen had many admirers in the east; and both Celestius and Pelagius were treated with greater lenity in the east than among the clergy of the western or Latin church.

fully satisfied respecting original sin, and the necessity of Divine grace. But after awhile he was no longer able to disguise his sentiments; and then he met with vehement opposition from all quarters.

"These monks," says Mosheim, "looked upon the doctrines which were commonly received, concerning the corruption of human nature, and the necessity of Divine grace, to enlighten the understanding and purify the heart, as prejudicial to the progress of holiness, of virtue, and tending to lull mankind in a presumptuous and fatal security. They maintained that these doctrines were false, as they were pernicious; that the sins of our first parents were imputed to them alone, and not to their posterity; that we derive no corruption from their fall, but are born as pure and unspotted as Adam came out of the forming hand of his Creator. That mankind, therefore, are capable of repentance and amendment, and of arriving to the highest degrees of piety and virtue, by the use of their natural faculties and powers; that, indeed, external grace is necessary to excite their endeavours, but that they have no need of the internal succours of the Divine Spirit." This is a summary of the notions attributed to Celestius and Pelagius; and Dr. Mosheim has expressed himself as favourably and as softly as he could do, consistently with truth, if the accounts of ancient writers are to be depended on.

At the approach of the Goths, A. D. 410, these two champions retired from Rome; and went into Africa, where they freely published their doctrine. Pelagius left his associate in Africa, and proceeded himself into Palestine, where he met with Christians from various countries; and among the rest with some from Britain. In the mean while Celestius remained at Carthage, with a view of obtaining a place among the Presbyters of that city; but his sentiments being investigated, they were

condemned at a council, held there in the year 416, in consequence of which he left that city, and went into the east. "It was from this time," says Mosheim, "that Augustine began to attack the tenets of Pelagius and Celestius, in his learned and eloquent writings." "To him," he says, "is due the glory of having suppressed this sect in its very birth." But some may be disposed to think, that these plaudits given to Augustine require to be a little qualified; for that celebrated character, in the heat with which he opposed the errors of Pelagius, was not clear from certain errors of an opposite kind, no less pernicious in their tendency. When the dignity of human nature is cried up, and the doctrine of the fall and corruption of mankind is denied or invalidated, we can perceive little need of the gospel salvation: but, on the other hand, to deny the free agency of man, and to maintain the necessity of an irresistible power in order to conversion, is to destroy every principle of moral obligation. Some have attributed the doctrine of absolute predestination to Augustine, while others think that it is at least intimately connected with the tenets which are held forth in the writings of that Father. The modern predestinarians regard him as the early patron of their opinions; and some of them are ready to look upon all as Pelagians, or at any rate as a kind of Semi-Pelagians, who do not profess the Calvinistic tenets respecting election and irresistible grace; with which are necessarily associated the doctrine of partial redemption and reprobation. When Augustine affirmed that there must be free grace, or we could not be saved; but if there be no free will God cannot judge the world; and that He who made us without ourselves, will not save us without ourselves; in saying thus he hit the golden mean between opposite extremes. But that celebrated man's warmth too frequently betrayed him into tenets

too rigid to be true; and too bitterly expressed to consist with Christian charity. No controversies have been more fiercely carried on among persons, who had otherwise every cause to respect each other, than those which concern the measures of God's grace, and the free agency of man. Man being corrupted by his fall in Adam, and vitiated by sinful habits and practices, some cannot comprehend, and therefore will not believe, that he can be saved without the interposition of an irresistible operation from above; which others cannot conceive to be consistent with the state of man, as a rational and accountable being. These points, when nicely investigated, are tenets of philosophy and metaphysics, rather than of religion; and it does not appear that there ever was any extensive controversy respecting them, until the disputes of which we are now treating.

At the council of Carthage the doctrines which Celestius was convicted of teaching were the following:

I. That Adam was created mortal; and that, whether he had sinned or continued innocent, he would have been subject to death.

II. That the sin of Adam affected him only, and not the race of mankind.

III. That men might be saved as well by the laws, as by the gospel.

IV. That previous to the coming of Christ men were without sin.

V. That new-born infants are in the same state as Adam was before the fall.

VI. That it is not owing to the sin of Adam that all mankind are subject to death; nor is it through the resurrection of Christ, that all men shall rise again.

VII. That it is possible for man to live without sin, and keep the commands of God, and that without Divine grace.

The above positions must be considered as utterly subversive of the Christian religion: but whether the opponents of Celestius have fairly stated his cause in the above summary it is impossible to decide with nicety. But we have some account of the matter in the conversation that is stated to have passed between him and some of the clergy who composed that council. When asked pointedly whether he believed in the doctrine of original sin, or the depravity of human nature, he rather prevaricated: he attempted to turn off the question by saying, that he had known some Presbyters who denied it; but that as to himself he hesitated what to assert. As to the state of infants, he said that he considered their being polluted by the sin of Adam as a disputable point, on which he thought one might be at liberty without being deemed heretical.

Augustine was not present at this assembly, which was rather of a private or select nature, and to be distinguished from one which was more public and general, held in the year 418.

Pelagius found a friend in John, Bishop of Jerusalem, who was disposed to countenance him from the resemblance of his principles to certain tenets of Origen, to which the bishop was attached; and we find that the Origenists in general favoured Pelagius.

At a synod of bishops, which was convened at Jerusalem, A. D. 415, Pelagius was arraigned, at the instigation of Orosius; and a charge of heresy brought against him. The accused denied some articles of the charge; and with regard to others he gave such a turn \to the expressions which he had used, that the charge was not established, especially as he made a verbal renunciation of certain opprobrious doctrines, which he was accused of holding.

The principal point of debate, at that time, was the