I. In the allegation, preferred by Mr. Milner against Justin, he
appears to have entirely mistaken his real sentiments, p. 136. —

1. Justin enters upon the subject o^ Human Free WiU or o{ Hu-
man Freedom of Preference exactly five times : and, in all these
various instances, he is arguing, not, with an anticipative Pe-
lagianism, against The necessity of preventing and assisting
Grace ; but, with a just and catholic reprobation, against The
dogma of Absolute Fatalism whether Jewish or Stoical, p. 137.
2. A confirmatory citation and exhibition of the five passages,
p. 137. — 3. Proof, from Justin's own express declarations, that
he held The Necessity of Divine Grojce in order to man's accepta-
ble holiness, and consequently that he did not pelagianise by
anticipation, p. 143.
II. Respecting Human Free Will or Human Freedom of Prefe-
rence, the doctrine of Justin was precisely the same, as that both
of his contemporary Ireneus and of his distant successor even
Augustine himself, p. 144. — 1. The reasoning and doctrinal
principles of Ireneus. p. 144. — (1.) He maintained Human Free
Will against the Fatalism of the Gnostics, p. 145. — (2.) But he
also maintained The Necessity of Divine Chace, p. 146. — 2. The
maintenance of Human Free Will by Augustine, concurrently
with Divine Grace, is at once carried on, against professed Fa-
talism on the one hand, and against professed Pelagianism on
the other hand. p. 147.
