Pelagius
In Confessions, Aurelius Augustine prays, “Command what you will and give what you command.” This simple prayer reflects the basic difference between Augustine’s understanding of grace and the understanding of many of his contemporaries. While Augustine was the foremost theologian in the Western church, his basic understanding of the work of operative grace in the life of the believer has been the source of continued debate throughout the history of the church since his first writing of these lines. This passage was written before he would knew of Pelagius which reveals that his understanding was not formed within the context of the controversy that would consume much of the later part of his life. However in the ensuing controversy he refined and articulated his view in numerous works. Augustine argued that the human condition is fallen and because of this fall needs God’s redemption. For Augustine this lies at the heart of the gospel. Salvation is the gift of God not dependent on merit but on grace. God’s grace according to Augustine is not simply the act of bestowing the beginning of faith, but the gift of continuing in the faith to one’s end. It is not possible to please God without this grace.
Nearly all of the present knowledge about the person of Pelagius comes from his correspondence. He was a monk from the western parts of the Roman empire. He came to Rome in 409 AD. He found in Rome a mixing of the pagan practices with increasingly prominent Christian faith. The moral laxity among many of the new Christians caused great concern for Pelagius. Apparently his reading of Augustine’s confessions raised even more concerns. For he found in the prayer of Augustine what he inferred to be resignation about the capacity for moral behavior. For Pelagius it seemed that Augustine’s work only served to encourage the moral laxity that was prevalent in Rome. Citing passages like Leviticus 19:1-2 “Be holy for the I am Holy.” Pelagius refused to concede that the power of self improvement had been irreversibly damaged by the fall of Adam. Man has no excuse for his own sins. Pelagius was horrified by the low moral stands and the people’s contentment in their moral debasement.
It is helpful to consider a basic overview of the major events of the Pelagian controversy. When he came to Rome in 409 AD, he converted Caelestius a young disciple who would also play an important role in the controversy. For several years Pelagius lived in Rome and through his example and moral exhortation developed a considerable following especially among the intellectuals. In 411 AD, he and Caelestius went to Africa. They stopped in Hippo, but did not meet Augustine who was away at the time. At this point they exchanged polite correspondence. In Africa Caelestius and Pelagius parted ways. Pelagius went on to Africa, while Caelestius stayed on in Carthage and applied to the presbytery. Caelestius initiated what would be the beginning of this controversy during this period. In his candidacy for the presbytery his views became known with regard to grace and original sin. This lead to a hearing in 412 AD during which he was asked to change his views. He refused and was denied ordination. The denial of ordination did not deter Caelestius who simply went to another presbytery and was ordained in Ephesus. The hearing and subsequent charges provided the basis for the dispute with the teachings of Pelagius.
In 416 AD two more synods were held in Africa which both condemned Pelagius and forwarded their condemnation to Innocent. The Pope agreed with the findings of the North African church but before he had an opportunity to question Pelagius and Caelestius he died. His successor Zosimus did not follow Innocent’s earlier inclination. He was troubled presumably by the reputations of some of those bringing the charges against Caelestius and Pelagius. After meeting with the two he declared them innocent of heresy. He sent a letter to the North African churches reprimanding what he considered a hasty condemnation of the Pelagians on matters that were not of essential importance.
At another council in Carthage in 417/418 over two hundred bishops protested Zosimus’ judgment. Subsequently there was some unrest among disciples of Pelagius that further complicated the matter. The unrest led the emperor to become involved in the dispute. Zosimus in 418 AD passed another encyclical this time he agreed with the African bishops. In this decree any person who did not renounce the Pelagian teaching with regard to nature, baptism and grace where to be removed from their posts. Eighteen bishops were deposed including a young man Julian of Eclanum who would become an articulate spokesman for the Pelagian position. By 430 AD the controversy had ended. Augustine died in that year. By 431 AD at the Third Ecumenical Council at Ephesus Pelagius was determined to be a false teacher.
The main proponents of the Pelagian position were Pelagius, Caelestius, and Julian. Their basic contention rested on the necessity of human freedom to be necessary for moral responsibility. Freedom they argued is the supreme good and cannot be lost. Every person has the ability to do good or evil. When the will decides it acts. As a person acts one develops habits If a person exercises their will to act virtuously then they will be truly free. Conversely the person who acts sinfully develops bad habits. These bad habits become binding leaving the person trapped in sin. Every acts goes to form a moral state. In relation to God humans are in a state of alienation and cannot be restored by their own will. Thus all people who sin need regenerating grace. Grace sets a person free to practice Christian virtue.
Adam does not stand for all humanity but was simply the first individual. His sin did not result in any guilt passed down to the rest of humanity. Pelagius did accept that Adam’s sin had consequence for everyone to follow. Namely he set a bad example. At the local Palestinian synod at Diopolis in 415 AD Pelagius condemned Caelestius teaching that Adam’s sin had no affect on humanity. For Pelagius the bad example of Adam set off a chain reaction. The bad example of Adam led to an increasing corruption of humankind thus alienation from God. Sin for Pelagius was not the result of a fallen nature, but the product of a will poorly formed. The universality of sin attests to the power of the evil example of corrupt humanity, but every person begins with a clean slate. He believed that each person’s soul was created by God (this of course touches on a very debated question in the earlier church period that is largely unasked today). For Pelagius the idea that the every soul was present in Adam was an imposition on the biblical text. Unlike Adam, every person since is born a child and so grows up influenced by the bad examples around them.
Pelagius understood moral acts to consist of three parts power, will and act. The power to do good is human’s natural condition which is the result of God’s grace. The will to make a decision for good or bad is within the capacity of the individual as is the act itself. Due to the preponderance of bad habits humans need more than the natural grace with which they are endowed. This need God provides in the gift of supernatural grace. Through God’s revelation humans are assisted by enlightenment to be able to will and to do the good. Christ’s instruction and example provide an alternative to the world. Instead of following the world the believer should follow Christ. Through humility one receives this supernatural grace. Grace for Pelagius is meant for all, but only those who deserve are able to receive it. They deserve this grace through a good use of their natural grace of the freedom of the will. A person who uses their will (natural grace) to humbly seek God receives enlightenment (supernatural grace) to be able to do good. These view of Pelagius were roundly rejected by the church. However in the reasoning that supported this rejection new questions would raise. From this controversy onward the label “Pelagian” would be affixed to a broader spectrum of theological claims. This can be especially recognized in the disagreement between John Cassian and Augustine.....more next time.
Nearly all of the present knowledge about the person of Pelagius comes from his correspondence. He was a monk from the western parts of the Roman empire. He came to Rome in 409 AD. He found in Rome a mixing of the pagan practices with increasingly prominent Christian faith. The moral laxity among many of the new Christians caused great concern for Pelagius. Apparently his reading of Augustine’s confessions raised even more concerns. For he found in the prayer of Augustine what he inferred to be resignation about the capacity for moral behavior. For Pelagius it seemed that Augustine’s work only served to encourage the moral laxity that was prevalent in Rome. Citing passages like Leviticus 19:1-2 “Be holy for the I am Holy.” Pelagius refused to concede that the power of self improvement had been irreversibly damaged by the fall of Adam. Man has no excuse for his own sins. Pelagius was horrified by the low moral stands and the people’s contentment in their moral debasement.
It is helpful to consider a basic overview of the major events of the Pelagian controversy. When he came to Rome in 409 AD, he converted Caelestius a young disciple who would also play an important role in the controversy. For several years Pelagius lived in Rome and through his example and moral exhortation developed a considerable following especially among the intellectuals. In 411 AD, he and Caelestius went to Africa. They stopped in Hippo, but did not meet Augustine who was away at the time. At this point they exchanged polite correspondence. In Africa Caelestius and Pelagius parted ways. Pelagius went on to Africa, while Caelestius stayed on in Carthage and applied to the presbytery. Caelestius initiated what would be the beginning of this controversy during this period. In his candidacy for the presbytery his views became known with regard to grace and original sin. This lead to a hearing in 412 AD during which he was asked to change his views. He refused and was denied ordination. The denial of ordination did not deter Caelestius who simply went to another presbytery and was ordained in Ephesus. The hearing and subsequent charges provided the basis for the dispute with the teachings of Pelagius.
In 416 AD two more synods were held in Africa which both condemned Pelagius and forwarded their condemnation to Innocent. The Pope agreed with the findings of the North African church but before he had an opportunity to question Pelagius and Caelestius he died. His successor Zosimus did not follow Innocent’s earlier inclination. He was troubled presumably by the reputations of some of those bringing the charges against Caelestius and Pelagius. After meeting with the two he declared them innocent of heresy. He sent a letter to the North African churches reprimanding what he considered a hasty condemnation of the Pelagians on matters that were not of essential importance.
At another council in Carthage in 417/418 over two hundred bishops protested Zosimus’ judgment. Subsequently there was some unrest among disciples of Pelagius that further complicated the matter. The unrest led the emperor to become involved in the dispute. Zosimus in 418 AD passed another encyclical this time he agreed with the African bishops. In this decree any person who did not renounce the Pelagian teaching with regard to nature, baptism and grace where to be removed from their posts. Eighteen bishops were deposed including a young man Julian of Eclanum who would become an articulate spokesman for the Pelagian position. By 430 AD the controversy had ended. Augustine died in that year. By 431 AD at the Third Ecumenical Council at Ephesus Pelagius was determined to be a false teacher.
The main proponents of the Pelagian position were Pelagius, Caelestius, and Julian. Their basic contention rested on the necessity of human freedom to be necessary for moral responsibility. Freedom they argued is the supreme good and cannot be lost. Every person has the ability to do good or evil. When the will decides it acts. As a person acts one develops habits If a person exercises their will to act virtuously then they will be truly free. Conversely the person who acts sinfully develops bad habits. These bad habits become binding leaving the person trapped in sin. Every acts goes to form a moral state. In relation to God humans are in a state of alienation and cannot be restored by their own will. Thus all people who sin need regenerating grace. Grace sets a person free to practice Christian virtue.
Adam does not stand for all humanity but was simply the first individual. His sin did not result in any guilt passed down to the rest of humanity. Pelagius did accept that Adam’s sin had consequence for everyone to follow. Namely he set a bad example. At the local Palestinian synod at Diopolis in 415 AD Pelagius condemned Caelestius teaching that Adam’s sin had no affect on humanity. For Pelagius the bad example of Adam set off a chain reaction. The bad example of Adam led to an increasing corruption of humankind thus alienation from God. Sin for Pelagius was not the result of a fallen nature, but the product of a will poorly formed. The universality of sin attests to the power of the evil example of corrupt humanity, but every person begins with a clean slate. He believed that each person’s soul was created by God (this of course touches on a very debated question in the earlier church period that is largely unasked today). For Pelagius the idea that the every soul was present in Adam was an imposition on the biblical text. Unlike Adam, every person since is born a child and so grows up influenced by the bad examples around them.
Pelagius understood moral acts to consist of three parts power, will and act. The power to do good is human’s natural condition which is the result of God’s grace. The will to make a decision for good or bad is within the capacity of the individual as is the act itself. Due to the preponderance of bad habits humans need more than the natural grace with which they are endowed. This need God provides in the gift of supernatural grace. Through God’s revelation humans are assisted by enlightenment to be able to will and to do the good. Christ’s instruction and example provide an alternative to the world. Instead of following the world the believer should follow Christ. Through humility one receives this supernatural grace. Grace for Pelagius is meant for all, but only those who deserve are able to receive it. They deserve this grace through a good use of their natural grace of the freedom of the will. A person who uses their will (natural grace) to humbly seek God receives enlightenment (supernatural grace) to be able to do good. These view of Pelagius were roundly rejected by the church. However in the reasoning that supported this rejection new questions would raise. From this controversy onward the label “Pelagian” would be affixed to a broader spectrum of theological claims. This can be especially recognized in the disagreement between John Cassian and Augustine.....more next time.
posted by Luke at
9:52 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home