Note 609 — APPENDIX II. ON THE CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE OF SIN[609].

A sermon preached before the University of Cambridge, at Great St. Mary's Church, on Sunday, March 17, 1889, by the Rev. Charles Gore, and printed in the Guardian, March 27. A paragraph of practical exhortation is omitted at the end. Some apology is no doubt needed for the introduction of a Sermon into a volume of Essays. But it was felt (1) that there was under the circumstances an advantage in producing what was not written in view of the criticisms on Lux Mundi; (2) that the sermon was not specially homiletic.

[610] The first is that of the Manichaeans and some Gnostics. The second that of the Platonists and other Gnostics. But both the theories represent tendencies very commonly at work both among Orientals and in Europe. Recently John Stuart Mill was disposed to embrace the latter theory: see Three Essays on Religion, 3rd edition, London, 1874, pp. 58, 243.

[611] The Service of Man, London, 1887, p. 295. Cf. p. 293, 'It will perhaps be said that this view does away with moral responsibility.... To which the answer is, that the sooner the idea of moral responsibility is got rid of, the better it will be for society and moral education.'

[612] See, for instance, Tertullian, de paenit. 3; Anselm, Cur Deus Homo, i. 11.

[613] Augustine, de Trin. i. 10. 21.

[614] Aug. de mor. Man. ii. 3, 'Ut ab essentia deficiant et ad non esse tendant? quod malum generale esse clamat verissima ratio.' Op. imp. c. Jul. i. 114, 'Non enim potest esse ullum malum nisi in aliquo bono; quia non potest esse nisi in aliqua natura; omnis autem natura, in quantum natura est, bonum est.'

[615] For references, see p. 290, note.

[616] Rom. v. 6: see Godet's Commentary in loc. Clark's Foreign Theol. Libr. i. p. 416; and cf. Col. ii. 11, τὸ σῶμα τῆς σαρκός.

[617] S. Luke xvi. 9.

[618] See Origen, C. Cels. iv. 65-66; Athan. C. Gentes, 6-7; and cf. the index to S. Augustine s. v. malum. So far, however, as each individual identifies himself with sin, it becomes 'his nature': a false nature, obscuring the true, but never annihilating it; cf. Tertullian, de An. 41, 'Naturae corruptio alia natura est,' etc.; and Bernard, in Cant. Serm. 82. 2,—admirable passages.

[619] See in Mozley, Lectures, etc., x. p. 159.

[620] Cf. in explanation of this, the Preface, p. xviii.

[621] There is a fundamental mistake in the popular excuse for sensual sin—that it is 'natural.' The mistake lies in the idea that man's animal and spiritual natures are separable, that he can live as pure animal in one part of his life, and pure spirit in another. But as a fact man's life is only lived 'according to nature,' where every part of it is lived 'in flesh and in spirit': the spiritual motive must control the bodily organ. Only so are his acts really human. If he tries to act as a mere animal he becomes sinful. The evidence of this lies in the fact that while the physical nature of animals contains within itself the check on sensual indulgence, the check in man's case lies in his spiritual faculties. You can have a 'dissipated' man, i.e. a man whose bodily impulses are uncontrolled by will or spirit; you cannot have a 'dissipated' animal.

[622] It is not intended as a complete account, cf. Rom. ii. 14-15.

[623] In answer to the question whether Adam was formed perfect or imperfect τέλειος ἤ ἀτελής, Clement replies: 'They shall learn from us that he was not perfect [i.e. complete in development, τέλειος] in respect of his creation, but in a fit condition to receive virtue.' Clem. Alex. Strom. vi. 12. 96. Cp. Iren. c. haer. iv. 38.

[624] But we can recognize that before civilisation had developed the checks which society supplies against abrupt deterioration, collapse into savagery would have been much more rapid than it can be in a more developed state.

[625] Cf. Aubrey Moore's Evolution and Christianity (Oxford House Papers), pp. 32-3. 'The change which took place at the Fall was a change in the moral region; but it could not be without its effect elsewhere. Even the knowledge of nature becomes confused, without the governing truth of the relation of man to God. The evolution which should have been the harmonious development of the whole man, is checked and impeded in one part, and that the highest part of his nature. And therefore, in spite of all the physical and intellectual advance which man has made, he is always and everywhere the worse for the Fall. However great his development has been, it is still a retarded development, a development slower than it need have been, less regular and less sure than God meant it to be.'

[626] Aug. De gen. ad litt. vi. 36, 'Mortalis erat conditione corporis animalis.'

[627] Athan. de Incarn. 4.

[628] Cf. Westcott's Ep. to the Hebrews, p. 54 (on Hebr. ii. 16).

[629] Athan. C. Gentes 7; cf. Aug. on Gen. iii. 18 (De Gen. ad litt. iii. 18, 28), where it is said that it is difficult to suppose that 'thorns and thistles' were first produced on the occasion of sin: but we may understand that they then first began to be obstacles to man in the cultivation of the ground: 'spinas et tribulos pariet tibi.'