Mozley: A Treatise on the Augustinian Doctrine of

CHAP. in. The Pelagian Controversy. 49
ment, which the human will was able to and must perform
without Divine assistance. And this position supplies the
clue to the solution of the Pelagian s apparently contradic
tory language about grace. The Pelagian asserts the ability
of nature at one time he asserts the ;
necessity of grace at
another. 1 Now his opponent explained this apparent in
consistency, by saying tha.t by grace he meant nature that
;
he used the word dishonestly in a sense of his own, and
only included in it the natural will and endowments of
man, which, as being Divine gifts, he chose to call gracs. 2
And, in the same way, he was charged with meaning by
grace only the outward means of instruction and edifica
tion, whicli (rod had given to man in the Bible and else
where, as distinct from any inward Divine influence. This
is the explanation of the Pelagian grace, as Lex et Natura,
which we meet so often in S. Augustine. But with all
deference to so great a name, I cannot think that this
adverse explanation is altogether justified by the language
of the Pelagians themselves. A verbal confusion of nature
with grace is undoubtedly to be found there ; nor is such
a confusion in itself unpardonable. In one sense nature is
grace ; freewill itself, and all the faculties and affections of
our nature being the gifts of (rod ; while, on the other
hand, grace may not erroneously be called nature, inas
much as when received, it becomes a power which we have,
and which belongs to us ; especially acting, as it does, too,
through the medium of our natural faculties, our conscience,
and good affections. And in this sense of nature, the
Pelagians asserted that nature was able to fulfil the law
Posse in natura 3
a statement, which so understood, is no
1 Anathemo qui yel sentit vel effectu locamus. De Grat. Christi.
dicit gratiam Dei non solum per n. 5.
singulas horas, aut per singula mo- 2 De Natura et Gratia, n. 12. 59. ;
menta, sed ttiam per singulos actus De Grat. Christi, n. 3.
nostros non esse necessariam. 3 To the objection of the Catholic,
Pelagius ap. Aug. De Grat. Christi, Protest quidern esse, sed per gran.
2. He repeats the same state- tiam Dei, Pelagius replies, Ego ne
ment often. De Grat. Christi, n. 5. abnuo qui rem confifcendo, confitear
29. 33.; Contra Duas. Ep. 1. 4. n. 13. necesse est et per quod res effici
On the other hand he says, Passe in potest ; an tu qui rem negan^o, et
naturd, velle in arbitrio, esse in quicquid illud est, per quod res