On Man's Perfection in Righteousness

(1) The First Breviate of Cœlestius

“First of all,” says he, “he must be asked who denies man's ability to live without sin, what every sort of sin is—is it such as can be avoided? Or is it unavoidable? If it is unavoidable, then it is not sin; if it can be avoided, then a man can live without the sin which can be avoided. No reason or justice permits us to designate as sin what cannot in any way be avoided.” Our answer to this is, that sin can be avoided, if our corrupted nature be healed by God's grace, through our Lord Jesus Christ. For, in so far as it is not sound, in so far does it either through blindness fail to see, or through weakness fail to accomplish, that which it ought to do; “for the flesh lusts against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh,” so that a man does not do the things which he would.

(2) The Second Breviate

“We must next ask,” he says, “whether sin comes from will, or from necessity? If from necessity, it is not sin; if from will, it can be avoided.” We answer as before; and in order that we may be healed, we pray to Him to whom it is said in the psalm: “Lead Thou me out of my necessities.”

(3) The Third Breviate

“Again we must ask,” he says, “what sin is—natural? Or accidental? If natural, it is not sin; if accidental, it is separable; and if it is separable, it can be avoided; and because it can be avoided, man can be without that which can be avoided.” The answer to this is, that sin is not natural; but nature (especially in that corrupt state from which we have become by nature “children of wrath”) has too little determination of will to avoid sin, unless assisted and healed by God's grace through Jesus Christ our Lord.

(4) The Fourth Breviate

“We must ask, again,” he says, “What is sin—an act, or a thing? If it is a thing, it must have an author; and if it be said to have an author, then another besides God will seem to be introduced as the author of a thing. But if it is impious to say this, we are driven to confess that every sin is an act, not a thing. If therefore it is an act, for this very reason, because it is an act, it can be avoided.” Our reply is, that sin no doubt is called an act, and is such, not a thing. But likewise in the body, lameness for the same reason is an act, not a thing, since it is the foot itself, or the body, or the man who walks lame because of an injured foot, that is the thing; but still the man cannot avoid the lameness, unless his foot be cured. The same change may take place in the inward man, but it is by God's grace, through our Lord Jesus Christ. The defect itself which causes the lameness of the man is neither the foot, nor the body, nor the man, nor indeed the lameness itself; for there is of course no lameness when there is no walking, although there is nevertheless the defect which causes the lameness whenever there is an attempt to walk. Let him therefore ask, what name must be given to this defect—would he have it called a thing, or an act, or rather a bad property in the thing, by which the deformed act comes into existence? So in the inward man the soul is the thing, theft is an act, and avarice is the defect, that is, the property by which the soul is evil, even when it does nothing in gratification of its avarice, even when it hears the prohibition, “You shall not covet,” and censures itself, and yet remains avaricious. By faith, however, it receives renovation; in other words, it is healed day by day, — yet only by God's grace through our Lord Jesus Christ.