… No more than the surgeon creates by cutting off the leg of a man, does a man create sin by a self-originating destruction of his original righteousness, on which follows that inordinate state of the natural reason and appetites which theologians call concupiscence. The impulse to theft, to lying, to impurity, is not a substance, not a creature, but is the result of inordinate desire in which self-love now unchecked by original righteousness and kindled by the fomes of the self-corrupted will, reveal itself. It is not a creature, but a moral phenomenon of the creature — desire and purpose are not creatures, but exercises of the faculties of the creature. If sin be strictly a creature, it must be the creature of God, and this part of Dr. Shedd’s theory really would make God the author of sin, an inference, which, we are sure, no one could more earnestly resist than himself. The finite will can corrupt the creatures, but it cannot add to them.
Charles Porterfield Krauth
The Conservative Reformation and Its Theology