Mozley: A Treatise on the Augustinian Doctrine of

Augustinian Doctrine
CHAP. V.
statements, given at the commencement of this chapter,
of the doctrine of predestination, naturally led, has only
obtained confirmation and accuracy from further examina
tion and the into which we have
subsequent particulars
entered. The characteristic of S. Augustine s doctrine,
compared with the scriptural one is, that it is a definite
and absolute doctrine. Scripture, as a whole, as has been
said, 1
only informs us of a mystery on the subject ; that
is to say, while it informs us that there is a truth on the
subject, it makes no consistent statement of it, but asserts
contrary truths, counterbalancing those passages which
convey the predestinarian doctrine by passages as plain the
other way ; but S. Augustine makes predestinarian state
ments and does not balance them by contrary ones. Kather
he endeavours to explain away those contrary statements
in Scripture. Thus he evades the natural force of the
text that G-od would have all men to be saved, by sup
posing that it only means that no man is saved except
through the will of Grod 2
or that all means not all
;
men,
but some out of all classes and ranks of men : on the same
rule on which we understand the phrase ye tithe all herb, 3
as meaning not that the Pharisees gave literally a tenth
of all the herbs in the world, but only of all kinds of
herbs. 4
1
Chapter II. is no difference, all deserving eon-
2 Enchiridion, c. ciii. ; Contra demnation. Upon this ground S.
Jwl. Pelag. 1. 4. c. viii. ; Ep. 217. Augustine rejects his opponent s
c. vi. application of this text 3 Luke ii. 42.
altogether
as incorrect : Nee ulla est acceptio
4
Neque enim Phariscei omnia personarum, in duobus debitoribus
olera decimabant. . . . Ita et illic
omnes homines, omne hominum
sequaliter reis, si alteri dimittitur
alteri exigitur, quod pariter ab
genus intelligere possumus. Enchiridion,
utroque debetur. Contra Duas, Ep.
c. ciii. 1. 2. c. 7. Cur ergo in The text that God is no respecter
regnum
coelorum, non accepto regenerationis
of persons is, in its general spirit, a lavacro, parvulus nullus intrabit?
counter text to the predestinarian
ones. But its opposition is not
Nunquidnam ipse sibi parentes infi-
deles A r exact, because it supposes a differel
negligentes, de quibus nas-
ceretur elegit ? Quid dicam de inoence
of rank, or other advantages,
in the individuals, which is not repinatiset
repentinis innumerabilibus
mortibus, quibus ssepe etiam religio-
spected ; whereas predestination ap- sorum Christianorum prsesumuntiir,
plies to those between whom there et baptismo praeripiuntur infantes;