To Florus 1.106

With this conclusion of our discussion sealed in the sensible reader's mind, let us examine how your baptism, which you say was provided solely because of the stirring of the genitals, performs its entrusted task. It professes to cleanse human beings from sins. But when the will's case is heard before justice, a will that could not will otherwise is not pronounced guilty. When the accusation of guilt vanishes, the display of pardon vanishes too: one cannot forgive what one cannot rightly impute. Thus it fails to fulfill its promise. It finds no crimes whose forgiveness might earn it praise, nor anyone indebted to it for the benefit by which the bonds of sins are loosed, because it cannot convict those sheltered in the sanctuary of necessity of an evil will. All this shows it to be superfluous.

But the grace provided by Christ is not superfluous. Let us retain a rational account of its generosity, by which the sinner's will is proved guilty, since it could certainly have willed good just as it willed evil. The entire fiction of necessity therefore vanishes. Consequently, there is no sin from the condition of nature; free choice remains in human nature. You deny it with the Manichaeans; we acknowledge it with the apostles and all catholics.