 Section 1 of Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 2. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 2 by John Calvin, translated by Henry Beverage. Section 1. Book 2. Of the Knowledge of God the Redeemer in Christ, as first manifested to the Fathers under the Law and thereafter to us under the Gospel, argument. The first part of the Apostles Creed, Viz, the Knowledge of God the Creator, being disposed of, we now come to the second part, which relates to the Knowledge of God as a Redeemer in Christ. The subjects treated accordingly are, first, the occasion of redemption, Viz, Adam's fall, and, secondly, redemption itself. The first five chapters are devoted to the former subject and the remainder to the latter. Under the occasion of redemption, the fall is considered not only in a general way, but also especially in its effects. Hence, the first four chapters treat of original sin, free will, the corruption of human nature, and the operation of God in the heart. The fifth chapter contains a refutation of the arguments usually urged in support of free will. The subject of redemption may be reduced to five particular heads. 1. The character of him in whom salvation for lost man must be sought. Chapter 6. 2. How he was manifested to the world, namely, in a twofold manner. First, under the Law, here the Decalogue is expounded, and some other points relating to the Law discussed. Chapter 7 and 8. Secondly under the Gospel, here the resemblance and difference of the two dispensations are considered. Chapters 9, 10, and 11. 3. What kind of person Christ was and behaved to be in order to perform the office of mediator, Viz, God, and man in one person. Chapters 12, 13, and 14. 4. For what end was he sent into the world by the Father? Here Christ's prophetical, kingly, and priestly offices are considered. Chapter 15. 5. In what way, or by what successive steps, Christ fulfilled the office of our Redeemer? Chapter 16. Here are considered his crucifixion, death, burial, descent into hell, resurrection, ascension to heaven, and seat at the right hand of the Father. Chapter 17 contains an answer to the question, whether Christ is properly said to have merited the grace of God for us. End of Section 1. Recording by David Lawrence, July 2009 in Brampton, Ontario. Section 2 of Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 2. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 2 by John Calvin, translated by Henry Beverage. Chapter 1. Through the fall and revolt of Adam, the whole human race made a cursed and degenerate of original sin. 1. How necessary the knowledge of ourselves is, its nature, the danger of mistake, its leading parts. Sections 1, 2, 3. 2. The causes of Adam's fearful fall. Section 4. 3. The effects of the fall extending to Adam's posterity and all the creatures. Section 5. To the end of the chapter, where the nature, propagation, and effect of original sin are considered. Sections. 1. The knowledge of ourselves is most necessary. To use it properly, we must be divested of pride and clothed with true humility, which will dispose us to consider our fall and embrace the mercy of God in Christ. 2. Though there is plausibility in the sentiment which stimulates us to self-admiration, the only sound sentiment is that which inclines us to true humbleness of mind. Pretexts for pride. The miserable vanity of sinful man. 3. Refuse taken by carnal wisdom and by conscience, which appeals to divine justice as its standard. The knowledge of ourselves consisting of two parts, the former of which having already been discussed, the latter is here considered. 4. In considering this latter part, two points to be considered. 1. How it happened that Adam involved himself and the whole human race in this dreadful calamity. This the result not of sensual intemperance, but of infidelity, the source of other heinous sins, which led to revolt from God, from whom all true happiness must be derived. An enumeration of the other sins produced by the infidelity of the first man. 5. The second point to be considered is the extent to which the contagious influence of the fall extends. It extends, one, to all the creatures, though unoffending. And two, to the whole posterity of Adam, hence hereditary corruption or original sin, and the deprivation of a nature which was previously pure and good. This deprivation communicated to the whole posterity of Adam, but not in the way supposed by the Pelagians and Celestians. 6. Deprivation communicated not merely by imitation, but by propagation. This proved, one, from the contrast drawn between Adam and Christ, confirmation from passages of scripture. Two, from the general declaration that we are the children of wrath. 7. Objection that if Adam's sin is propagated to his posterity, the soul must be derived by transmission. Answer. Another objection, that is, that children cannot derive corruption from pious parents. Answer. 8. Definition of original sin. Two parts in this definition. Exposition of the latter part. Original sin exposes us to the wrath of God. It also produces in us the works of the flesh. Other definitions considered. 9. Exposition of the former part of the definition, that is, that hereditary depravity extends to all the faculties of the soul. 10. From the exposition of both parts of the definition, it follows that God is not the author of sin, the whole human race being corrupted by an inherent viciousness. 11. This, however, is not from nature, but is an adventitious quality. Accordingly, the dream of the manachese as to two principles vanishes. 1. It is not without reason that the ancient Proverbs so strongly recommended to man the knowledge of himself. For if it is deemed disgraceful to be ignorant of things pertaining to the business of life, much more disgraceful is self-ignorance, in consequence of which we miserably deceive ourselves in matters of the highest moment, and so walk blindfold. But the more useful the precept is, the more careful we must be not to use it preposterously, as we see certain philosophers have done. For they, when exhorting man to know himself, state the motive to be that he may not be ignorant of his own excellence and dignity. They wish him to see nothing in himself but what will fill him with vain confidence and inflate him with pride. But self-knowledge consists in this, first, when reflecting on what God gave us at our creation and still continues graciously to give, we perceive how great the excellence of our nature would have been had its integrity remained, and at the same time remember that we have nothing of our own but depend entirely on God, from whom we hold at pleasure whatever he has seen it meet to bestow. Secondly, when viewing our miserable condition since Adam's fall, all confidence and boasting are overthrown, we blush for shame and feel truly humble. Whereas God at first formed us in his own image, that he might elevate our minds to the pursuit of virtue and the contemplation of eternal life, so to prevent us from heartlessly burying these noble qualities which distinguish us from the lower animals, it is of importance to know that we were endued with reason and intelligence in order that we might cultivate a holy and honorable life, and regard a blessed immortality as our destined aim. At the same time, it is impossible to think of our primeval dignity without being immediately reminded of the sad spectacle of our ignominy and corruption ever since we fell from our original in the person of our first parent. In this way, we feel dissatisfied with ourselves and become truly humble, while we are inflamed with new desires to seek after God in whom each may regain those good qualities of which all are found to be utterly destitute. 2. In examining ourselves, the search which divine truth enjoins and the knowledge which it demands, are such as may indispose us to everything like confidence in our own powers, leave us devoid of all means of boasting, and so incline us to submission. This is the course which we must follow if we would attain to the true goal both in speculation and practice. I am not unaware how much more plausible the view is, which invites us rather to ponder on our good qualities than to contemplate what must overwhelm us with shame, our miserable destitution and ignominy. There is nothing more acceptable to the human mind than flattery, and accordingly, when told that its endowments are of a high order, it is apt to be excessively credulous. It is not strange that the greater part of mankind have erred so egregiously in this matter. Owing to the innate self-love by which all are blinded, we most willingly persuade ourselves that we do not possess a single quality which is deserving of hatred, and hence independent of any countenance from without, general credit is given to the very foolish idea that man is perfectly sufficient of himself for all the purposes of a good and happy life. If any are disposed to think more modestly and concede somewhat to God, that they may not seem to irrigate everything as their own, still in making the division, they apportion matters so that the chief ground of confidence and boasting always remains with themselves. Then if a discourse is pronounced which flatters the pride spontaneously springing up in man's inmost heart, nothing seems more delightful. Only in every age, he who is most forward in extolling the excellence of human nature is received with the loudest applause. But be this heralding of human excellence what it may, by teaching man to rest in himself, it does nothing more than fascinate by its sweetness, and at the same time so delude as to drown in perdition all who are sent to it. For what avails it to proceed in vain confidence to deliberate, resolve, plan, and attempt what we deem pertinent to the purpose, and at the very outset prove deficient and destitute both of sound intelligence and true virtue, though we still confidently persist till we rush headlong on destruction. But this is the best that can happen to those who put confidence in their own powers, whosoever therefore gives heed to those teachers who merely employ us in contemplating our good qualities, so far from making progress in self-knowledge, will be plunged into the most pernicious ignorance. 3. While revealed truth concurs with the general consent of mankind in teaching that the second part of wisdom consists in self-knowledge, they differ greatly as to the method by which this knowledge is to be acquired. In the judgment of the flesh, man deems his self-knowledge complete when, with overweening confidence in his own intelligence and integrity, he takes courage and spurs himself on to virtuous deeds, and when, declaring war upon vice, he uses his utmost endeavor to attain to the honorable and the fair. But he who tries himself by the standard of divine justice finds nothing to inspire him with confidence, and hence the more thorough his self-examination, the greater his despondency. Abandoning all dependence on himself, he feels that he is utterly incapable of duly regulating his conduct. It is not the will of God, however, that we should forget the primeval dignity which he bestowed on our first parents, a dignity which may well stimulate us to the pursuit of goodness and justice. It is impossible for us to think of our first original, or the end for which we were created, without being urged to meditate on immortality and to seek the kingdom of God. But such meditation, so far from raising our spirits, rather casts them down and makes us humble. For what is our original, one from which we have fallen? What the end of our creation, one from which we have altogether strayed, so that, weary of our miserable lot, we groan, and groaning, sigh for a dignity now lost? When we say that man should see nothing in himself which can raise his spirits, our meaning is that he possesses nothing on which he can proudly plume himself. Hence in considering the knowledge which man ought to have of himself, it appears proper to divide it thus, first, to consider the end for which he was created, and the qualities, by no means contemptible qualities, with which he was endued, thus urging him to meditate on divine worship and the future life. And secondly, to consider his faculties, or rather want of faculties, a want which, when perceived, will annihilate all his confidence and cover him with confusion. The tendency of the former view is to teach him what his duty is, of the latter, to make him aware how far he is able to perform it. We shall treat of both in their proper order. 4. As the act which God punished so severely must have been not a trivial fault but a heinous crime, it will be necessary to attend to the peculiar nature of the sin which produced Adam's fall, and provoked God to inflict such fearful vengeance on the whole human race. The common idea of sensual intemperance is childish. The sum and substance of all virtues could not consist in abstinence from a single fruit amid a general abundance of every delicacy that could be desired, the earth with happy fertility yielding not only abundance but also endless variety. We must therefore look deeper than sensual intemperance. The prohibition to touch the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was a trial of obedience that Adam, by observing it, might prove his willing submission to the command of God. For the very term shows the end of the precept to have been to keep him contented with his lot and not allow him arrogantly to aspire beyond it. The promise which gave him hope of eternal life as long as he should eat of the tree of life, and on the other hand the fearful denunciation of death, the moment he should taste of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, were meant to prove and exercise his faith. Hence it is not difficult to infer in what way Adam provoked the wrath of God. Augustine indeed is not far from the mark when he says that pride was the beginning of all evil, because had not man's ambition carried him higher than he was permitted he might have continued in his first estate. A further definition, however, must be derived from the kind of temptation which Moses describes. When by the subtlety of the devil the woman faithlessly abandoned the command of God, her fall obviously had its origin in disobedience. This Paul confirms when he says that by the disobedience of one man all were destroyed. At the same time it is to be observed that the first man revolted against the authority of God not only in allowing himself to be ensnared by the wiles of the devil, but also by despising the truth and turning aside to lies. Assuredly when the word of God is despised all reverence for him is gone. His majesty cannot be duly honored among us, nor his worship maintained in its integrity unless we hang as it were upon his lips. Hence infidelity was at the root of the revolt. From infidelity, again, sprang ambition and pride together within gratitude, because Adam, by longing for more than was allotted him, manifested contempt for the great liberality with which God had enriched him. It was surely monstrous impiety that a son of earth should deem it little to have been made in the likeness unless he were also made the equal of God. If the apostasy by which man withdraws from the authority of his maker, nay, petulantly shakes off his allegiance to him, is a foul and extricable crime, it is in vain to extenuate the sin of Adam. Nor was it simple apostasy. It was accompanied with foul insult to God, the guilty pair assenting to Satan's calamities when he charged God with malice, envy, and falsehood. In fine infidelity opened the door to ambition, and ambition was the parent of rebellion, man casting off the fear of God, and giving free vent to his lust. Hence Bernard truly says that, in the present day, a door of salvation is opened to us when we receive the gospel with our ears, just as by the same entrance, when thrown open to Satan, death was admitted. Never would Adam have dared to show any repugnance to the command of God if he had not been incredulous as to his word. The strongest curb to keep all his affections under due restraint would have been the belief that nothing was better than to cultivate righteousness by obeying the commands of God, and that the highest possible felicity was to be loved by him. Man therefore, when carried away by the blasphemies of Satan, did his very utmost to annihilate the whole glory of God. 5. As Adam's spiritual life would have consisted in remaining united and bound to his maker, so estrangement from him was the death of his soul. Nor is it strange that he who perverted the whole order of nature in heaven and earth deteriorated his race by his revolt. The whole creation groaneth, saith St. Paul, being made subject to vanity not willingly, Romans 8, 20 and 22. If the reason is asked, there cannot be a doubt that creation bears part of the punishment deserved by man, for whose use all other creatures were made. Therefore, since through man's fault a curse has extended above and below over all the regions of the world, there is nothing unreasonable in its extending to all his offspring. After the heavenly image in man was effaced, he not only was himself punished by a withdrawal of the ornaments in which he had been arrayed, that is, wisdom, virtue, justice, truth and holiness, and by the substitution in their place of those dire pests, blindness, impotence, vanity, impurity and unrighteousness, but he involved his posterity also and plunged them in the same wretchedness. This is the hereditary corruption to which early Christian writers gave the name of original sin, meaning by the term the deprivation of a nature formerly good and pure. The subject gave rise to much discussion, there being nothing more remote from common apprehension than that the fault of one should render all guilty and so become a common sin. This seems to be the reason why the oldest doctors of the church only glance obscurely at the point, or at least do not explain it so clearly as it required. This timidity, however, could not prevent the rise of a Pallagius with his profane fiction, that Adam sinned only to his own hurt, and did no hurt to his posterity. Satan, by thus craftily hiding the disease, tried to render it incurable, but when it was clearly proved from scripture that the sin of the first man passed to all his posterity, recourse was had to the caval, that it passed by imitation and not by propagation. The orthodoxy, therefore, and more especially Augustine, labored to show that we are not corrupted by acquired wickedness but bring an innate corruption from the very womb. It was the greatest imprudence to deny this, but no man will wonder at the presumption of the Pallagians and Celestians, who has learned from the writings of that holy man how extremely effrontery of these heretics was. Surely there is no ambiguity in David's confession. I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me. Psalm 51 verse 5. His object in the passage is not to throw blame on his parents, but the better to commend the goodness of God towards him, he properly reiterates the confession of impurity from his very birth. As it is clear that there was no peculiarity in David's case, it follows that it is only an instance of the common lot of the whole human race. All of us, therefore, descending from an impure seed, come into the world tainted with the contagion of sin. 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 verse 4. 6. We thus see that the impurity of parents is transmitted to their children, so that all, without exception, are originally depraved. The commencement of this depravity will not be found until we ascend to the first parent of all as the fountainhead. We must, therefore, hold it for certain that, in regard to human nature, Adam was not merely a progenitor, but, as it were, a root, and that, accordingly, by his corruption, the whole human race was deservedly vitiated. This is plain from the contrast which the apostle draws between Adam and Christ, quote, wherefore is by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord. Romans 5 verses 19 to 21. To what quibble will the Pelagians here recur, that the sin of Adam was propagated by imitation? Is the righteousness of Christ then available to us only in so far as it is an example held forth for our imitation? Can any man tolerate such blasphemy? But if, out of all controversy, the righteousness of Christ, and thereby life, is ours by communication, it follows that both of these were lost in Adam that they might be recovered in Christ, whereas sin and death were brought in by Adam that they might be abolished in Christ. There is no obscurity in the words, as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. Accordingly, the relation subsisting between the two is this, as Adam, by his ruin, involved in ruined us, so Christ, by his grace, restored us to salvation. In this clear light of truth I cannot see any need of a longer or more laborious proof. Thus, too, in the first epistle to the Corinthians, when Paul would confirm believers in the confident hope of the resurrection, he shows that the life is recovered in Christ which was lost in Adam, 1 Corinthians 15 verse 22. Having already declared that all died in Adam, he now also openly testifies that all are imbued with the taint of sin. Condemnation indeed could not reach those who are altogether free from blame. But his meaning cannot be made clearer than from the other member of the sentence in which he shows that the hope of life is restored in Christ. Everyone knows that the only mode in which this is done is, when by a wondrous communication Christ transfuses into us the power of his own righteousness, as it is elsewhere said, the spirit is life because of righteousness, 1 Corinthians 15 verse 22. 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, and that not only in one fault in a matter not pertaining to us, but by the corruption into which he himself fell, he infected his whole seed. Paul never could have said that all are by nature the children of wrath, Ephesians 2, 3, if they had not been cursed from the womb. And it is obvious that the nature there referred to is not nature such as God created, but as vitiated in Adam, for it would have been most incongruous to make God the author of death. Adam therefore, when he corrupted himself, transmitted the contagion to all his posterity. For a heavenly judge, even our Saviour himself, declares that all are by birth vicious and depraved, when he says that, that which is born of the flesh is fleshly, John 3.6, and that therefore the gate of life is closed against all until they have been regenerated. 7. 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. It should be enough for us to know that Adam was made the depository of the endowments which God was pleased to bestow on human nature, and that therefore, when he lost what he had received, he lost not only for himself, but for us all. Why feel any anxiety about the transmission of the soul, when we know that the qualities which Adam lost he received for us not less than for himself, that they were not gifts to a single man, but attributes of the whole human race? There is nothing absurd, therefore, in the view that when he was divested, his nature was left naked and destitute, that he, having been defiled by sin, the pollution extends to all his seed. Thus, from a corrupt root, corrupt branches proceeding, transmit their corruption to the saplings which spring from them. The children being vitiated in their parent conveyed the taint to the grandchildren. In other words, corruption commencing in Adam is, by perpetual dissent, conveyed from those proceeding to those coming after them. The cause of the contagion is neither in the substance of the flesh nor the soul, but God was pleased to ordain that those gifts which he had bestowed on the first man, that man should lose as well for his descendants as for himself. The Pelagian cavalry, as to the improbability of children deriving corruption from pious parents, whereas they ought rather to be sanctified by their purity, is easily refuted. Accordingly, as Augustine says, both the condemned unbeliever and the acquitted believer beget offspring not acquitted but condemned, because the nature which begets is corrupt. Moreover, though godly parents do in some measure contribute to the holiness of their offspring, this is by the blessing of God. A blessing, however, which does not prevent the primary and universal curse of the whole race from previously taking effect. Guilt is from nature whereas sanctification is from supernatural grace. 8. But lest the thing itself of which we speak be unknown or doubtful, it will be proper to define original sin. I have no intention, however, to discuss all the definitions which different writers have adopted, but only to deduce the one which seems to me most according to with truth. 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 sin, Galatians 5-19. While the works which proceed from it, such as adultery, fornication, theft, hatred, murder, revelings, he terms in the same way the fruits of sin, though in various passages of Scripture and even by Paul himself they are also termed sins. The two things, therefore, are to be distinctly observed. That is, that being thus perverted and corrupted in all parts of our nature, we are merely on account of such corruption deservedly condemned by God, to whom nothing is acceptable but righteousness, innocence, and purity. This is not liability for another's fault, for when it is said that the sin of Adam has made us obnoxious to the justice of God, the meaning is not that we, who are in ourselves innocent and blameless, are bearing his guilt, but that since by his transgression we are all placed under the curse, he is said to have brought us under obligation. Through him, however, not only has punishment been derived, but pollution instilled, for which punishment is justly due. Hence Augustine, though he often terms it another's sin, that he may more clearly show how it comes to us by descent, at the same time asserts that it is each individual's own sin. And the apostle most distinctly testifies that, quote, doth past upon all men, for that all have sinned. Romans 5, verse 12. That is, are involved in original sin and polluted by its stain. Hence, even infants bringing their condemnation with them from their mother's womb suffer not for another's, but for their own defect. For although they have not yet produced the fruits of their own unrighteousness, they have the seed implanted in them. Nay, their whole nature is, as it were, a seedbed of sin, and therefore cannot but be odious and abominable to God. Hence it follows that it is properly deemed sinful in the sight of God, for there could be no condemnation without guilt. Next comes the other point, that is, that this perversity in us never ceases, but constantly produces new fruits in other words, those works of the flesh which we formerly described, just as a lighted furnace sends forth sparks and flames or a fountain without ceasing pours out water. Hence those who have defined original sin as the want of the original righteousness which we ought to have had, though they substantially comprehend the whole case, do not significantly enough express its power and energy. For our nature is not only utterly devoid of goodness, but so prolific in all kinds of evil that it can never be idle. Those who term it conscupiscence use a word not very inappropriate, provided it were added, this, however, many will by no means concede, that everything which is in man, from the intellect to the will, from the soul even to the flesh, is defiled and pervaded with this concupiscence, or to express it more briefly, that the whole man is in himself nothing else than concupiscence. 9. I have said, therefore, that all the parts of the soul were possessed by sin ever since Adam revolted from the fountain of righteousness, for not only did the inferior appetites entice him, but abominable impiety seized upon the very citadel of the mind, and pride penetrated to his inmost heart. Book 4, Chapter 15, Sections 10-12, so that it is foolish and unmeaning to confine the corruption thence proceeding to what are called sensual motions, or to call it an excitement which allures, excites, and drags the single part which they call sensuality into sin. Here Peter Lombard has displayed gross ignorance. When investigating the seed of corruption, he says it is in the flesh, as Paul declares, not properly indeed, but as being more apparent in the flesh, as if Paul had meant that only a part of the soul and not the whole nature was opposed to supernatural grace. Paul himself leaves no room for doubt when he says that corruption does not dwell in one part only, but that no part is free from its deadly taint. For speaking of corrupt nature, he not only condemns the inordinate nature of the appetites, but in particular declares that the understanding is subjected to blindness and the heart to depravity, Ephesians 4, 17 and 18. The third chapter of the Epistle to the Romans is nothing but a description of original sin. The same thing appears more clearly from the mode of renovation, for the spirit which is contrasted with the old man and the flesh denotes not only the grace by which the sensual or inferior part of the soul is corrected, but includes a complete reformation of all its parts, Ephesians 4, 23. And accordingly Paul enjoins not only that gross appetites be suppressed, but that we be renewed in the spirit of our mind, Ephesians 4, 23, as he elsewhere tells us to be transformed by the renewing of our mind, Romans 12, 2. Hence it follows that that part in which the dignity and excellence of the soul are most conspicuous has not only been wounded, but so corrupted that mere cure is not sufficient. There must be a new nature. How far sin has seized both on the mind and heart we shall shortly see. Here I only wished briefly to observe that the whole man from the crown of the head to the soul of the foot is so deluged as it were that no part remains exempt from sin, and therefore everything which proceeds from him is imputed as sin. Thus Paul says that all carnal thoughts and affections are enmity against God and consequently death. Romans 8, verse 7. 10. Let us have done, then, with those who dare to inscribe the name of God on their vices, because we say that men are born vicious. The divine workmanship which they ought to look for in the nature of Adam, when still entire and uncorrupted, they absurdly expect to find in their depravity. The blame of our ruin rests with our own carnality, not with God, its only cause being our degeneracy from our original condition. And let no one hear glamour that God might have provided better for our safety by preventing Adam's fall. This objection, which, from the daring presumption implied in it, is odious to every pious mind, relates to the mystery of predestination, which will afterwards be considered in its own place. 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. It is true that nature has received a mortal wound, but there is a great difference between a wound inflicted from without and one inherent in our first condition. It is plain that this wound was inflicted by sin, and therefore we have no ground of complaint except against ourselves. This is carefully taught in scripture, for the preacher says, quote, lo, this only have I found that God made man upright, but they have sought out many inventions. Ecclesiastes 7, verse 29. Since man, by the kindness of God, was made upright, but by his own infatuation fell away unto vanity, his destruction is obviously attributable only to himself. 11. We say, then, that man is corrupted by a natural viciousness, but not by one which proceeded from nature. In saying that it proceeded not from nature, we mean that it was rather an adventitious event which befell man than a substantial property assigned to him from the beginning. We, however, call it natural to prevent anyone from supposing that each individual contracts it by depraved habit, whereas all receive it by a hereditary law. And we have authority for so calling it. For, on the same grounds the apostle says, that we are, quote, by nature the children of wrath. Ephesians 2, verse 3. How could God, who takes pleasure in the meanest of his works, be offended with the noblest of them all? The offense is not with the work itself, but the corruption of the work. Wherefore, if it is not improper to say that, in consequence of the corruption of human nature, man is naturally hateful to God, it is not improper to say that he is naturally vicious and depraved. Hence, in the view of our corrupt nature, Augustine hesitates not to call those sins natural, which necessarily reign in the flesh wherever the grace of God is wanting. This disposes of the absurd notion of the manatees, who, imagining that man was essentially wicked, went the length of assigning him a different creator, that they might thus avoid the appearance of attributing the cause and origin of evil to a righteous God. End of Section 2. Section 3 of Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 2. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 2. By John Calvin. Translated by Henry Beverage. Chapter 2. Part 1. Man now deprived of freedom of will and miserably enslaved. Having in the first chapter treated of the fall of man and the corruption of the human race, it becomes necessary to inquire whether the sons of Adam are deprived of all liberty, and if any particle of liberty remains, how far its power extends. The four next chapters are devoted to this question. This second chapter may be reduced to three general heads. 1. The foundation of the whole discussion. 2. The opinions of others on the subject of human freedom see two through nine. 3. The true doctrine on the subject see ten through twenty-seven. Sections. 1. Connection of the previous with the four following chapters. In order to lay a proper foundation for the discussion of free will, two obstacles in the way to be removed. Viz. Sloth. And Pride. The basis and sum of the whole discussion. The solid structure of this basis, and a clear demonstration of it by the argument, a majorie add minus, also from the inconveniences and absurdities arising from the obstacle of pride. 2. The second part of the chapter containing the opinions of others. First, the opinions of philosophers. 3. The vibrance of philosophers, a summary of the opinion common to all the philosophers. 4. The opinions of others continued. Viz. The opinions of the ancient theologians on the subject of free will. These compose partly of philosophy and partly of theology, hence their falsehood, extravagance, perplexity, variety, and contradiction. Two great fondness for philosophy in the church has obscured the knowledge of God and of ourselves. But better to explain the opinions of philosophers, a definition of free will given, why difference between this definition and these opinions. 5. Certain things annex to free will by the ancient theologians, especially the schoolmen, many kinds of free will according to them. 6. Puzzles of Scholastic Devines in the explanation of this question. 7. The conclusion that so trivial a matter ought not to be so much magnified. Objection of those who have a fondness for new terms in the church. Objection answered. 8. Another answer. The Fathers, and especially Augustine, while retaining the term free will, yet condemn the doctrine of the heretics on the subject as destroying the grace of God. 9. The language of the ancient writers on the subject of free will is, with the exception of that of Augustine, almost unintelligible. Still they set little or no value on human virtue, and ascribed the praise of all goodness to the Holy Spirit. 10. The last of the chapter containing a simple statement of the true doctrine, the fundamental principle is that man first begins to profit in the knowledge of himself when he becomes sensible of his ruined condition. This confirmed, first, by passages of scripture. 11. Confirmed by the second, by the testimony of ancient theologians. 12. The foundation being laid to show how far the power both of the in-elect and will now extends, it is maintained in general and in conformity with the views of Augustine and the schoolmen that the natural endowments of man are corrupted, and the supernatural almost entirely lost. A separate consideration of the powers of the in-elect and the will. Some general considerations. First, the in-elect possesses some powers of perception. Still it labors under a two-fold defect. 13. Man's intelligence extends both to things terrestrial and celestial. The power of the in-elect in regard to the knowledge of things terrestrial, first with regards to matters of civil polity. 14. The power of the in-elect secondly with regard to the arts, particular gifts in this respect conferred on individuals and attesting the grace of God. 15. The rise of this knowledge of things terrestrial. First that we may see how human nature, not withstanding of its fall, is still adorned by God with excellent endowments. 16. The use of this knowledge continued. Secondly that we may see that these endowments bestowed on individuals are intended for the common benefit of mankind. They are sometimes conferred even on the wicked. 17. Some portion of human nature still left. This, whatever be the amount of it, should be ascribed entirely to the divine indulgence. Reason of this? Examples. 18. Part of discussion, namely that which relates to the power of the human intellect in regards to things celestial. These reducible to three heads, namely divine knowledge, adoption, and will. The blindness of man in regard to these proved and thus tested by a simile. 19. Proved moreover by passages of scripture showing first that the sins of Adam are endued with some light, but not enough to enable them to comprehend God. Reasons. 20. Adoption not from nature, but from our heavenly Father being sealed in the elect by the spirit of regeneration. Obviously from many passages of scripture, that, previous to regeneration, the human intellect is altogether unable to comprehend the things related to regeneration. This fully proved. First argument. Second argument. Third argument. 21. Fourth argument. Scripture ascribes the glory of our adoption and salvation to God only. The human intellect, blind as to heavenly things, until it is illuminated. Disposal of a heretical objection. 22. Human intellect ignorant of the true knowledge of the divine law. This proved by the testimony of an apostle, by an inference from the same testimony, and from a consideration of the end and definition of the law of nature. Plato obviously mistaken in attributing all sins to ignorance. 23. The mystias nearer the truth in maintaining that the delusion of the intellect is manifested not so much in generals as in particulars, exception to this rule. The mystias. However mistaken in thinking that the intellect is so very seldom to see you to ask to generals. Blindness of the human intellect when tested by the standard of the divine law in regard both to the first and second tables. Examples. 25. A middle view to be taken. Viz. That all sins are not imputable to ignorance. And at the same time that all sins do not imply intentional malice. All the human mind conceives and plans in this matter is evil in the sight of God. Need of divine direction every moment. 26. The will examined. The natural desire of good which is universally felt, no proof of the freedom of the human will. Two fallacies as to the use of terms appetite and good. 27. The doctrine of the school men on this subject opposed to and refuted by scripture. The whole man being subject to the power of sin, it follows that the will, which is the chief seat of sin, requires to be most strictly curbed, nothing ours but sin. 28. First 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 and if any portion still remains how far its power extends. In order to facilitate the answer to this question it may be proper in passing to point out the course which our inquiry ought to take. The best method of avoiding error is to consider the dangers which beset us on either side. Man being devoid of all uprightness immediately takes occasion from the fact to indulge in sloth and having no ability in himself for the study of righteousness treats the whole subject as if he had no concern in it. On the other hand man cannot irrigate anything, however minute to himself without robbing God of his honor and through rash confidence subjecting himself to a fall. To keep free of both these rocks our proper course will be first to show that man has no remaining good in himself and is beset on every side by the most miserable destitution and then teach him to aspire to the goodness of which he is devoid and the liberty of which he has been deprived thus giving him a stronger stimulus to exertion than he could have if he imagined himself possessed of the highest virtue. How necessary the latter point is everybody sees. As to the former several seem to entertain more doubt than they ought for it being admitted as incontrovertible that man is not to be denied anything that is truly his own. It ought also to be admitted that he is to be deprived of everything like false boasting. If man had no title to glory in himself when by the kindness of his maker he was distinguished by the noblest ornaments how much ought he to be humbled now when his ingratitude has thrust him down from the highest glory to extreme ignomy at the time when he was raised to the highest pinnacle of honor all which scripture attributes to him is that he was created in the image of God thereby intimating that the blessings in which his happiness consisted were not his own but derived by divine communication what remains there for now that man is stripped of all his glory than to acknowledge the God for whose kindness he failed to be grateful when he was loaded with the riches of his grace not having glorified him by the acknowledgement of his blessings now at least he ought to glorify him by the confession of his property in truth it is no less useful for us to renounce all the praise of wisdom and virtue than to aim at the glory of God those who invest us with more than we possess only add sacrilege to our ruin for when we are taught to contend in our own strength what more is done than to lift us up and then leave us to lean on a reed which immediately gives way indeed our strength is exaggerated when it is compared to a reed all that foolish men invent and prattle on this subject is mere smoke 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 it was necessary to premise this much for the sake of some who when they hear that human virtue is totally overthrown in order that the power of God in man may be exalted conceived an utter dislike to the whole subject as if it were perilous not to say superfluous whereas it is manifestly both most necessary and most useful two having lately observed that the facilities of the soul are seated in the mind and the heart let us now consider how far the power of each extends philosophers generally maintain that reason dwells in the mind like a lamp throwing light on all its councils and like a queen governing the will that is so pervaded with divine light as to be able to consult for the best and so in dude with vigor as to be able perfectly to command that on the contrary since is dull and short-sighted always creeping on the ground groveling among inferior objects and never rising to true vision that the appetite when it obeys reason and does not allow itself to be subjugated by sense is born to the study of virtue holds a straight course and becomes transformed into will but that when enslaved by sense it is corrupted and depraved so as to degenerate into lust in a word since according to their opinion the faculties which i've 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 in dude 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 in dude that at the same time the inferior movement which is turned sense and by which the mind is led away to air and delusion is of such a nature that it can be tamed and gradually subdued by the power of reason to the will moreover they give an intermediate place between reason and sense regarding it as possessed of full power and freedom whether to obey the former or yield itself up to be hurried away by the latter three sometimes indeed convinced by their own experience they do not deny how difficult it is for man to establish the supremacy of reason in himself in so much as he is at one time enticed by the allurements of pleasure at another deluded by a false semblance of good and at another impelled by unruly passions and pulled away to use Plato's expression as by ropes or sinews for this reason Cicero says that the sparks given forth by nature are immediately extinguished by false opinions and depraved manners they confess that when once diseases of this description have seized upon the mind their course is too impetuous to be easily checked and they hesitate not to compare them to fiery steeds which have thrown off the chariteer scampered away without restraint at the same time they set it down as beyond dispute that virtue and vice are in our own power for they say if it is in our choice to do this thing or that it must also be in our choice not to do it again if it is in our choice not to act it must also be in our choice to act but both in doing and abstaining we seem to act from free choice and therefore if we do good when we please we can also refrain from doing it if we commit evil we can also shun the commission of it nay some have gone the length of boasting that it is the gift of the gods that we live but our own that we live well and purely hence Cicero says in the person of Cata that as everyone acquires virtue for himself no wise man ever thank the gods for it we are praised says he for virtue and glory in virtue but this could not be if virtue were the gift of god and not from ourselves a little after he adds the opinion of all mankind is that fortune must be sought from god wisdom from ourselves thus in short all philosophers maintain that human reason is sufficient for right government that the will which is inferior to it may indeed be solicited to evil by sins but having a free choice there is nothing to prevent it from falling reason as its guide in all things four among ecclesiastical writers all there is none who did not acknowledge that sound reason in man was seriously injured by sin and the will greatly entangled by vicious desires yet many of them made too near an approach to the philosophers some of the most ancient writers appear to me to have exalted human strengths from a fear that a distinct acknowledgement of its impotence might expose them to the jeers of the philosophers with whom they were disputing and also furnish the flesh already too much disinclined to good with a new pretext for sloth therefore to avoid teaching anything which the majority of mankind might deem absurd they made it their study in some measure to reconcile the doctrine of scripture with the dogmas of philosophy at the same time making it their special care not to furnish any occasion to sloth this is obvious from their words Christastom says god having placed good and evil in our power has given us full freedom of choice he does not keep back the unwilling but embraces the willing again he who is wicked is often when he so chooses changed into good and he who is good falls through sluggishness and becomes wicked for the lord is made our nature free he does not lay us under necessity but furnishing opposite remedies allows the whole to depend on the views of the patient again as we can do nothing rightly until aided by the grace of god so until we bring forward what is our own we cannot obtain favor from above he had previously said as the whole is not done by divine assistance we ourselves must of necessity bring somewhat accordingly one of his common expressions is let us bring what is our own god will supply the rest in unison with his Jerome says it is ours to begin gods to finish it is ours to offer what we can his to supply what we cannot from these sentences you see that they have bestowed on man more than he possesses for the study of virtue because they thought that they could not shake off our innate sluggishness unless they argued that we sin by ourselves alone with what skill they have thus argued we shall afterward see assuredly we shall soon be able to show that the sentiments just quoted are most inaccurate moreover although the greek fathers above others and especially christostom have exceeded due bounds in extolling the powers of the human will yet all ancient theologians with the exception of augustin are so confused vacillating and contradictory on this subject that no certainty can be obtained from their writings it is needless therefore to be more particular in enumerating every separate opinion it will be sufficient to extract from each as much as the exposition of the subject seems to require succeeding writers everyone courting applause for his acuteness in the defense of human nature have uniformly one after the other gone more wildly astray until the common dogma came to be that man was corrupted only in the sensual part of his nature that reason remained entire and will was scarcely impaired still the expression was often on their lips that man's natural gifts were corrupted and his supernatural taken away of the thing implied by these words however scarcely one in a hundred had any distinct idea certainly where i desire is clearly to express what the corruption of nature is i would not seek for any other expression but it is of great importance attentively to consider what the power of man now is when vitiated in all the parts of his nature and deprived of supernatural gifts persons professing to be the disciples of christ have spoken too much like the philosophers on this subject 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 presumptive term this a textual vision as if man had still full power in himself but since the principle entertained by all even the vulgar is that man is endued with free will while some who would be thought more skillful know not how far its power extends it will be necessary first to consider the meaning of the term and afterwards ascertain by a simple appeal to scripture what man's natural power for good or evil is the thing meant by free will though consistently occurring in all writers few have defined origin however seems to have stated the common opinion when he said it is a power of reason to discern between good and evil of will to choose the one or other nor does augustin differ from in when he says it's a power of reason and will to choose the good grace assisting to choose the bad grace desisting bernard while aiming at greater acuteness speaks more obscurely when he describes it as consent in regard to the indestructible liberty of the wills and the inalienable judgment of reason ancillum's definition is not very intelligible to ordinary understandings he calls it a power of preserving rectitude on its own account peter lombard and the schoolmen preferred the definition of augustin both because it was clear and did not exclude divine grace without which they saw that the will was not sufficient of itself they however add something of their own because they deem it either better or necessary for clear explanation first they agree that the term will arboretum has reference to reason whose office it is to distinguish between good and evil and that the epitaph free properly belongs to the will which may incline either way wherefore since liberty properly belongs to the will thomas equinus says that the most congruous definition is to call free will an elective power combining intelligence and appetite but inclining more to appetite we now perceive in what it is they suppose the faculty of free will to consist viz in reason and will it remains to see how much they attribute to each five in general they are want 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 author of the work devoke tione gentium on the calling of the gentiles wishing to show this describe the will as threefold viz sensitive animal and spiritual the two former he says are free to man but the last is the work of the holy spirit what truth there is in this will be considered in its own place our intent at present is only to mention the opinions of others not to refute them when writers treat a free will their inquiry is chiefly directed not to what its power is in relation to civil or external actions but to the obedience required by the divine law the latter i admit to be the greater question but i cannot think the former should be altogether neglected and i hope to be able to give the best reason for so thinking the schools however have adopted a distinction which enumerates three kinds of freedom the first a freedom from necessity the second a freedom from sin and the third a freedom from misery the first naturally so inherent in man that he cannot possibly be deprived of it while through sin the other two have been lost i willingly admit this distinction except in so far as it confounds necessity with compulsion how widely the things differ and how important it is to attend to the difference will appear elsewhere six 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 received through regeneration for i stay not to consider the extravagance of those who say that grace is offered equally and promiscuously to all but it has not yet been shown whether man is entirely deprived of the power of well-doing or whether he still possesses it in some though in a very feeble and limited degree a degree so feeble and limited that it can do nothing of itself but when assisted by grace it is able also to perform its part the master of the sentences wishing to explain this teaches that a twofold grace is necessary to fit for any good work the one he calls operating to it it is owing that we effectually will what is good the other which succeeds this good will and aids it he calls cooperating by objection to this division is that while it attributes the effectual desire of good to divine grace it insinuates that man by his own nature desiring good in some degree though ineffectually thus bernard while maintaining that a good will is the work of god concedes this much to man viz that of his own nature he longs for such a good will this differs widely from the view of augustin though lombard pretends to have taken the division from him besides there is an ambiguity in the second division which has led to an erroneous interpretation for it has been thought that we cooperate with subsequent grace in so much as it pertains to us either to nullify the first grace by rejecting its or to confirm it by obediently yielding to it the author of the work devoke tione gentium expresses it thus it is free to those who enjoy the faculty of reason to depart from grace so that the not departing is a reward and that which cannot be done without the cooperation of the spirit is imputed as merit to those whose will might have made it otherwise it seemed proper to make these two observations in passing that the reader may see how far i differ from the sounder of the schoolman still further do i differ from more modern sophists who have departed even more widely than the schoolman from the ancient doctrine the division however shows in what respect free will is attributed to man for lombard ultimately declares that our freedom is not to the extent of leaving us equally inclined to good and evil enact or in thought but only to the extent of freeing us from compulsion this liberty is compatible with our being depraved the servants of sin able to do nothing but sin seven 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 an admirable freedom that man is not forced to be the servant of sin while he is however ethenlo dulo a voluntary slave his will being bound by the fetters of sin i abominate mere verbal disputes by which the church is harassed to no purpose but i think we ought religiously to sju terms which imply some absurdity especially in subjects where error is of pernicious consequence how few there are who when they hear free will attributed to man do not immediately imagine that he is the master of his mind and will in such a sense that he can of himself incline himself either to good or evil it may be said that such dangers are removed by carefully expounding the meaning to the people but such is the pronuss of the human mind to go astray that it will more quickly draw air from one little word than truth from a lengthened discourse of this the very terming question furnishes too strong a proof for the explanation given by ancient christian writers having been lost sight of almost all who have come after them by attending only to the etymology of the term have been led to indulge a fatal confidence end of section three recording by liall wilson haymarket virginia august 2009 section four of institutes of the christian religion book two this is a libra vox recording all libra vox recordings are in the public domain for more information or to volunteer please visit libra vox dot org institutes of the christian religion book two by john calvin translated by henry biffridge chapter two part two number eight as to the fathers if there are authority ways with us they have the term constantly in their mouths but they at the same time declared what extent of meaning they attached to it in particular augustin hesitates not to call the will a slave in another passage he is offended with those who deny free will but his chief reason for this is to explain when he says only lest anyone should presume so to deny freedom of will from a desire to excuse sin it is certain he elsewhere admits that without the spirit the will of man is not free in so much as it is subject to lusts which chain and master it and again that nature began to want liberty the moment the will was vanquished by the revolt into which it fell again that man by making a bad use of free will lost both himself and his will again that free will having been made a captive can do nothing in the way of righteousness again that no will is free which has not been made so by divine grace again that the righteousness of god is not fulfilled when the law orders and man acts as it were by his own strength but when the spirit assists and the will not the free will of man but the will freed by god obeys he briefly states the ground of all these observations when he says that man at his creation received a great degree of free will but lost it by sinning another place after showing that free will is established by grace he strongly invades against those who irrigate anything to themselves without grace his words are how much so ever 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 2nd Corinthians 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 that the will is indeed free but not freed free of righteousness but enslaved to sin the same idea he elsewhere repeats and explains when he says that man is not free from righteousness saved by choice of his will and is not made free from sin saved by the grace of the savior declaring that the freedom of man is nothing else in the emancipation or manumission from righteousness he seems to jest at the emptiness of the name if anyone then chooses to make use of this terms without attaching any bad meaning to it he shall not be troubled by me on that account but as it cannot be retained without very great danger i think the abolition of it would be of great advantage to the church i am unwilling to use it myself and others if they will take my advice will do well to abstain from it 9 it may perhaps seem that i have greatly prejudice my own view by confessing that all the ecclesiastical writers with the exception of augustin have spoken so ambiguously or inconsistently on this subject that no certainty is attainable from their writings some will interpret this to mean that i wish to deprive them of their right of suffrage because they are opposed to me truly however i have no other end in view than to consult simply and in good faith for the advantage of pious minds which if they trust to those writers for their opinion will always fluctuate in uncertainty at one time they teach that man having been deprived of the power of free will must flee to grace alone at another they equip or seem to equip him in armor of his own it is not difficult however to show that notwithstanding of the ambiguous manner in which those writers express themselves they hold human virtue in little or no account and ascribe the whole merit of all that is good to the holy spirit to make this more manifest i may hear quote some passages for them what then is meant by sypion in the passage so often lauded by augustin let us glory in nothing because nothing is ours unless it be that man being utterly destitute considered in himself should entirely depend on god what is meant by augustin and uterius when they expound that christ is the tree of life and that who so puts forth this hand to it shall live that the choice of the will is the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and that he forsaking the grace of god taste of it shall die what is meant by christostom when he says that every man is not only naturally a sinner but holy sin there is nothing good in us if man from the crown of the head to the soul of the foot is holy sin if it is not even lawful to try how far the power of the will extends how can it be lawful to share the merit of a good work between god and man i might quote many passages to the same effect from other writers but lest any cavalier should say that i select those only which serve my purpose and cunningly pass by those which are against me i desist this much however i dare affirm that though they sometimes go too far in extolling free will the main object which they had in view was to teach man entirely to renounce all self-confidence and place his strength in god alone i now proceed to a simple exposition of the truth in regard to the nature of man ten here however i must again repeat what i premised at the outset of this chapter 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 man is in no danger of taking too much from himself provided he learns that whatever he wants is to be recovered in god but he cannot irrigate to himself one particle beyond his due without losing himself in vain confidence and by transferring divine honor to himself becoming guilty of the greatest impiety and assuredly whatever our minds are seized with a longing to possess a somewhat of our own which may reside in us rather than in god we may rest assured that the thought is suggested by no other counselor than he who enticed our first parents to aspire to be like gods knowing good and evil it is sweet however to have so much virtue of our own as to be able to rest in ourselves but let the many solemn passages by which our pride is sternly humbled deter us from indulging this vain confidence cursed be the man that trusted in man and make it flesh his arm Jeremiah 17 5 he delighteth not in the strength of the horse he taketh not pleasure in the legs of a man the lord taketh pleasure in those that fear him in those that hope in his mercy psalm 147 10 and 11 he giveth power to the faint and to them that have no might he increases strength even the youth shall faint and be weary and the young man shall utterly fall but they that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength Isaiah 40 29 through 31 the scope of all these passages is what we must not entertain any opinion whatever of our own strength if we would enjoy the favor of God who resisteth the proud but giveth grace and to the humble James 4 6 then let us call to mind such promises as these I will pour water upon them that is thirsty and floods upon the dry ground Isaiah 44 3 oh everyone that thirsts come ye to the waters Isaiah 55 1 these passages declare that none are admitted to enjoy the blessings of God save those who are pining under a sense of their own poverty nor ought such passages as the following be admitted the sun shall no more be thy light by day neither for brightness shall the moon give light unto thee but the Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light and thy God thy glory Isaiah 60 19 the Lord certainly does not deprive his servants of the light of the sun or moon but as he would alone appear glorious in them he dissuades them from confidence even in those objects which they team most excellent 11 I have always been exceedingly delighted with the words of Christastom the foundation of our philosophy is humility and still more with those of Augustine as the orator when asked what is the first precept of eloquence answered delivery what is the second delivery what the third delivery so if you ask me in regard to the precepts of the Christian religion I will answer first second and third humility by humility he means not when a man with the consciousness of some virtue refrains from pride but when he truly feels that he has no refuge but in humility this is clear from another passage let no man says he flatter himself of himself he is a devil his happiness he owes entirely to God what have you of your own but sin take your sin which is your own for righteousness is of God again why presume so much on the capability of nature it is wounded maimed vexed lost the thing wanted is genuine confession not false deference when anyone knows that he is nothing in himself and he has no help from himself the weapons within himself are broken and the war is ended although weapons of impiety must be bruised and broken and burnt in the fire you must remain unarmed having no help in yourself the more in firm you are the more the Lord will sustain you so in expounding the 17th Psalm he forbids us to remember our own righteousness in order that we may recognize the righteousness of God and shows that God bestows his grace upon us that we may know that we are nothing that we stand only by the mercy of God seeing that in ourselves we are all together wicked let us not contend with God for our right as if anything attributed to him were lost to our salvation as our insignificance is his exultation so the confession of our insignificance has its remedy provided in his mercy I do not ask however that man should voluntarily yield without being convicted or that if he has any powers he should shut his eyes to them that he may thus be subdued to true humility but that getting quit of the disease of self-love and ambition fill out a key fill on a Ikea under the blinding of what she 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 12 I feel pleased with the well-known saying which has been borrowed from the writing 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 has been raised to the hope of eternal salvation hence it follows that he is now in exile from the kingdom of God so that all things which pertain to the blessed life of the soul are extinguished in him until he recovered them by the grace of regeneration among these are faith love to God charity towards our neighbor the study of righteousness and holiness all these when restored to us by christ are to be regarded as advantages and above nature if so we infer that they were previously abolished on the other hand soundness of mind and integrity of heart were at the same time withdrawn and it is this which constitutes the corruption of natural gifts for although there is still some residue of intelligence and judgment as well as will we cannot call a sound mind an entire which is both weak and immersed in darkness as to the will its depravity is but too well known therefore since reason by which man discerns between good and evil and by which he understands and judges is a natural gift it could not be entirely destroyed but being partly weakened and partly corrupted a shapeless ruin is all that remains in this sense it is said in john one five that light shineth in the darkness and the darkness comprehended it not these words clearly expressing both points fizz that in the perverted and degenerate nature of man there are still some sparks which show that he is a rational animal and differs from the brutes in so much as he is endued with intelligence and yet this light is so smothered by clouds of darkness that it cannot shine forth to any good effect in like manner the will because inseparable from the nature of man did not perish but was so enslaved by depraved lust as to being capable of one righteous desire the definition now given is complete but there are several points which require to be explained therefore proceeding agreeably to that primary distinction by which we divide the soul into intellect and will we will now inquire into the power of the intellect to charge the intellect with perpetual blindness so as to leave it no intelligence of any description whatever is repugnant not only to the word of god but to common experience we see that there have been implanted in the human mind a certain desire of investigating truth to which it never would aspire unless some relish for truth antecedently existed there is therefore now in the human mind discernment to this extent that it is naturally influenced by the love of truth the neglect of which in the lower animals is a proof of their gross and irrational nature still it is true that this love of truth fails before it reaches the goal forthwith falling away into vanity as the human mind is unable from dullness to pursue the right path of investigation and after various wanderings stumbling every now and then like one groping in darkness at length gets completely bewildered so its whole procedure proves how unfit it is to search the truth and find it then it labors under another grievous defect in that it frequently fails to discern what the knowledge is which it should study to acquire hence under the influence of a vain curiosity it torments itself with superfluous and useless discussions either not adverting at all to the things necessary to be known or casting only a cursory and contemptuous glance at them at all events it scarcely ever studies them in sober earnest profane writers are constantly complaining of this perverse procedure and yet almost all of them are found pursuing it hence Solomon throughout the book of Ecclesiastes after enumerating all the studies in which man think they attain the highest wisdom pronounces them vain and frivolous 13 still however man's efforts are not always so utterly fruitless as not to lead to some result especially when his attention is directed to inferior objects nay even with regard to superior objects though he is more careless in investigating them he makes some little progress here however his ability is more limited and he is never made more sensible of his weakness than when he attempts to soar above the sphere of the present life it may therefore be proper in order to make it more manifest how far our ability extends in regard to these two classes of objects to draw a distinction between them 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 in 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 by heavenly things i mean the pure knowledge of god the method of true righteousness and the mysteries of the heavenly kingdom to the former belong the matters of policy and economy all mechanical arts and liberal studies to the latter as to which see the 18th and following sections belong the knowledge of god and of his will and the means of framing the life in accordance with them as to the former the view to be taken in this since man is by nature a social animal he is disposed from natural instinct to cherish and preserve society and accordingly we see that the minds of all men have impressions of civil order and honesty hence it is that every individual understands how human societies must he regulated by laws and also is able to comprehend the principles of those laws hence the universal agreement in regard to such subjects both among nations and individuals the seeds of them being implanted in the breasts of all without a teacher or law giver the truth of this fact is not affected by the wars and dissensions which immediately arise while some as thieves and robbers would invert the rules of justice loosen the bonds of law and give free scope to their lusts and while others a vice of most frequent occurrence deem that to be unjust which is elsewhere regarded as just and on the contrary whole that the praiseworthy which is elsewhere forbidden for such persons do not hate the laws from not knowing that they are good and sacred but inflamed with headlong passion quarrel with what is clearly reasonable and licentiously hate with their mind and understanding approved quarrels of this latter kind do not destroy the primary idea of justice for while men dispute with each other as to particular enactments their ideas of equity agree in substance this no doubt proves the weakness of the human mind which even when it seems on the right path halts and hesitates still however it is true that some principle of civil order is impressed on all and this is ample proof that in regard to the constitution of the present life no man is devoid of the light of reason 14 next come manual and liberal arts in learning which as all have some degree of aptitude the full force of human acuteness is displayed but though all are not equally able to learn all the arts we have sufficient evidence of a common capacity in the fact that there is scarcely an individual who does not display intelligent in some particular art and this capacity extends not merely to the learning of the art but to the devising of something new or the improving of what we have previously learned this led Plato to adopt the erroneous idea that such knowledge was nothing but recollection so cogently does it oblige us to acknowledge that its principle is naturally implanted in the human mind but while these proofs openly attest the fact of a universal reason and intelligence naturally implanted this universality is of a kind which should lead every individual for himself to recognize it as a special gift of god to this gratitude we have a sufficient call from the creator himself when in the case of idiots he shows what the endowments of the soul would be were it not pervaded with his light though natural to all it is so in such a sense that it ought to be regarded as a gratuitous gift of his beneficence to each moreover the invention the methodical arrangement and the more thorough and superior knowledge of the arts being confined to a few individuals cannot be regarded as a solid proof of common shrewdness still however as they are bestowed indiscriminately on the good and the bad they are justly classified among the natural endowments 15 therefore in reading profane authors the admirable light of truth displayed in them should remind us that the human mind however much fallen and perverted from the original integrity is still adorned and invested with admirable gifts from its creator if we reflect that the spirit of god is the only fountain of truth we will be careful as it would avoid offering insult to him not to reject or condemn truth wherever it appears in despising the gifts we insult the giver how then can we deny that truth must have been beamed on those ancient law givers who arranged civil order and discipline with so much equity shall we say that the philosophers in their exquisite researches and skillful description of nature were blind shall we deny the possession of intellect to those who drew up the rules for discourse and taught us to speak in accordance with reason shall we say that those who by the cultivation of the medical art expended their industry in our behalf were only raving what shall we say of the mathematical sciences shall we deem them to be the dreams of madmen nay we cannot read the writings of the ancients on these subjects without the highest admiration an admiration in which their excellence will not allow us to withhold but shall we deem anything to be noble and praiseworthy without tracing it to the hand of god far from us to be such in gratitude and in gratitude not chargeable even on heathen poets who acknowledge that philosophy and laws and all useful arts are the invention of the gods therefore since it is manifest that men whom the scripture term carnal are so acute and clear-sighted in the investigation of unfair things their example should teach us how many gifts the lord has left in possession of human nature notwithstanding of its have been despoiled of the true good 16 moreover let us not forget that there are most excellent blessings which the divine spirit dispenses to whom he will for the common benefit of mankind for if the skill and knowledge required for the construction of the tavernacle behaved to be imparted to beziel by the spirit of god exodus 31 2 and 35 30 it is not strange that the knowledge of those things which are of the highest excellence in human life is said to be communicated to us by the spirit nor is there any ground for asking what concourse the spirit can have with the ungodly who are altogether alienated from god for what is said as to the spirit dwelling in believers only is to be understood of the spirit of holiness by which we are consecrated to god as temples notwithstanding of this he fills moves and invigorates all things by the virtue of the spirit and that according to the particular nature which each class of beings has received by the law of creation but if the lord has been pleased to assist us by the work and ministry of the ungodly in physics dialects mathematics and other similar sciences let us avail ourselves of it less by neglecting the gifts of god spontaneously offered to us we be justly punished for our sloth lest anyone however should imagine a man to be very happy merely because with reference to the elements of this world he had been in dude with the great talents for the investigation of truth we ought to add that the whole power of intellect thus bestowed is in the sight of god fleeting in vain whenever it is not based on a solid foundation of truth auguston to whom it has been observed the master of sentences and the schoolmen are forced to subscribe says most correctly that as the gratuitous gifts bestowed on man were withdrawn so the natural gifts which remain were corrupted after the fall not that they can be polluted in themselves and so far as they proceed from god but that they have ceased to be pure to polluted man lest he should by their means obtain any praise 17 the sum of the whole is this from a general survey of the human race it appears that one of the essential properties of our nature is reason which distinguishes us from the lower animals just as these by means of sense are distinguished from inanimate objects for although some individuals are born without reason that defect does not impair the general kindness of god but rather serves to remind us that whatever we retain ought justly to be ascribed to the divine indulgence had god not so spared us our revolt would have carried along with it the entire destruction of nature in that some excel in acuteness and some in judgment while others have greater readiness in learning some peculiar art god by this variety commands his favored towards us lest anyone should presume to irrigate to himself that which flows from his mere liberality for whence is it that one is more excellent than another but then in a common nature the grace of god is specially displayed in passing by many and thus proclaiming that it is under obligation to none we may add that each individual is brought under particular influences according to his calling many examples of this occur in the book of judges in which the spirit of the lord is said to have come upon those whom he called to govern his people judges 634 in short in every distinguished act there is a special inspiration thus it is said of sol that there went with him a band of men whose hearts the lord had touched first samuel 1026 and when is inauguration to the kingdom is foretold samuel thus addressed him the spirit of the lord will come upon thee and thou shall prophesy with them and shall be turned into another man first samuel 1026 this extends to the whole course of government as it is afterwards said of david the spirit of the lord came upon david from that day forward first samuel 1613 the same thing is elsewhere said with reference to particular movements nay even in Homer men are said to excel in genius not only according as jupiter has distributed to each but according as he leads them day by day and certainly experience shows when those who were most skillful and genius stand stuptified that the minds of men are entirely under the control of god who rules them every moment hence it is said that he porth contempt upon princes and causeth them to wander in the wilderness where there is no way psalm 107 40 still in this diversity we can trace some remains of the divine image distinguishing the whole human race from other creatures 18 we must now explain what the power of human reason is in regard to the kingdom of god and spiritual discernments which consists chiefly of three things the knowledge of god the knowledge of his paternal favor towards us which constitutes our salvation and the method of regulating of our conduct in accordance with the divine law with regard to the former two but more properly the second men otherwise the most ingenious were blinder than moles i deny not indeed that in the writing of philosophers we meet occasionally with shrewd and opposite remarks on the nature of god though they invariably savor somewhat of giddy imagination as observed above the lord has bestowed on them some slight perception of his godhead that they might not plead ignorance as an excuse for their impiety and has at times instigated them to deliver some truths the confession of which should be their own condemnation still though seeing that they saw not their discernment was not such as to direct them to the truth far less to enable them to attain but resemble that of the bewildered traveler who sees the flash of lightning glance far and wide for a moment and then vanish into the darkness of the night before he can advance a single step so far is such assistance from the enabling him to find the right path besides how many monstrous falsehoods intermingle with those minute particles of truth scattered up and down in their writings as if by chance in short not one of them even made the least approach to that assurance of the divine favor without which the mind of man must ever remain a mere chaos of confusion to the great truths what god is in himself and what he is in relation to us human reason makes not the least approach and of section four recording by Lyle Wilson Haymarket Virginia November 2009