If now that man,5 too, were to confess that he had once been implicated in this error as a person possessed, but that he now anathematized all that hold these opinions, whoever should withhold his congratulation from him, now that he was in possession of tlie way of truth, would surely surrender all the bowels of love. As the case, however, now stands, lie has not only not acknowledged his liberation from his pestilential error; but, as if that were a small thing, he has gone on to anathematize men who have reached that freedom, who love him so well that they would fain desire his own emancipation. Amongst these are those very men who have expressed their good-will towards him in the letter, which they forwarded to me. For he it was whom they had chiefly in view when they said how mucli they were affected at the fact of my having at last written that work. " If, indeed, it has happened," they say, " that some are removed from the influence of this clearest light of truth, whose blindness required its illumination, yet even to them," they go on to remark, " we doubt not, the self-same grace will find its way, by the merciful favour of God." Any name, or names, even they, too, thought it desirable as yet to suppress, in order that, if friendship still lived on, the error of the friends might the more surely die.
CHAP. 50. — PELAGIUS HAS NO GOOD REASON TO BE ANNOYED IF HIS NAME BE AT LAST USED IN THE CONTROVERSY, AND HE BE EXPRESSLY REFUTED.
But now if Pelagius thinks of God, if he is not ungrateful for His mercy in having brought him before this tribunal of the bishops, that thus he might be saved from the hardihood of afterwards defending these anathematized opinions, and be at once led to acknowledge them as deserving of abhorrence and rejection, he will be more thankful to us for our book, in which, by mentioning his name, we shall open the wound in order to cure it, than for one in which we were afraid to cause him pain, and, in fact, only produced irritation, — a result which causes us regret. Should he, however, feel angry with us, let him reflect how unfair such anger is; and, in order to subdue it, let him ask God to give him that grace which, in this trial, he has confessed to be necessary for each one of our actions, that so by His assistance he may gain a real victory. For of what use to him are all those great laudations contained in the letters of the bishops, which he thought fit to be men- 5 Pelagius.
Chap. 53.]
20= tioned, and even to be read and quoted in his favour, — as if all those persons who heard his strong and, to some extent, earnest exhortations to goodness of life could not have easily discovered how perverse were the opinions which he was entertaining?
CHAP. 51 [XXVI.] — THE NATURE OF AUGUSTIN'S LETTER TO PELAGIUS.
For my own part, indeed, in my letter which he produced, I not only abstained from all praises of him, but I even exhorted him, with as much earnestness as I could, short of actually mooting the question, to cultivate right views about the grace of God. In my salutation I called him " /ord " ^ — a title which, in our epistolary style, we usually apply even to some persons who are not Christians, — and this without untruth, inasmuch as we do, in a certain sense, owe to all such persons a service, which is yet freedom, to help them in obtaining the salvation which is in Christ. I added the epithet " most beloved;'^ and as I now call him by this term, so shall I continue to do so, even if he be angry with me; because, if I ceased to retain my love towards him, because of his feeling the anger, 1 should only injure myself rather than him. I, moreover, styled him '■'most longed for" because I greatly longed to have a conversation with him in person; for I had already heard that he was endeavouring publicly to oppose grace, whereby we are justified, whenever any mention was made of it. The brief contents of the letter itself indeed show all this; for, after thanking him for the pleasure he gave me by the information of his own health and that of his friends (whose bodily health we are bound of course to wish for, however much we may desire their amendment in other respects), I at once expressed the hope that the Lord would recompense him with such blessings as do not appertain to physical welfare, but which he used to think, and probably still thinks, consist solely in the freedom of the will and his own power, — at the same time, and for this reason, wishing him " eternal life " Then again, remembering the many good and kind wishes he had expressed for me in his letter, which I was answering, I went on to beg of him, too, that he would pray for me, that the Lord would indeed make me such a man as he believed me to be already; that so I might gently remind him, against the opinion he was himself entertaining, that the very righteousness which he had thought worthy to be praised in me was " not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy." ^ This is the sub- ■ This term corresponris snmewhat to our Sir; but Augustin here refers to its more expressive meaning of Master, or Lord. - Rom. ix. 16.
Stance of that short letter of mine, and such was my purpose when I dictated it. This is a copy of it: CHAP. 52 [xXVn. AND XXVril.] THE TEXT OF THE LETIER.
" To my most beloved lord, and most longedfor brother Pelagius, Augustin sends greeting in the Lord. I thank you very much for the pleasure you have kindly afforded me by your letter, and for informing me of your good health. May the Lord requite you with blessings, and may you ever enjoy them, and live with Him for evermore in all eternity, my most beloved lord, and most longed-for brother. For my own part, indeed, although I do not admit your high encomiums of me, which the letter of your iienignity 3 conveys, I yet cannot be insensible of the benevolent view you entertain towards my poor deserts; at the same time requesting you to pray for me, that the Lord would make me such a man as you suppose me to be already." Then, in another hand, it follows: " Be mindful of us; may you be safe, and find favour with the Lord, my most beloved lord, and most longed-for brother."
CHAP. 53 [XXIX.] — PELAGIUS' USE OF RECOMMEN- DATIONS.
As to that which I placed in the postscript, — that he might " find favour with the Lord," — I intimated that this lay rather in His grace than in man's sole will; for I did not make it the subject either of exhortation, or of precept, or of instruction, but simply of my wish. But just in the same way as I should, if I had exhorted or enjoined, or even instructed him, simply have shown that all this appertained to free will, without, however, derogating from the grace of God; so in like manner, when I expressed the matter in the way of a wish, I asserted no doubt the grace of God, but at the same time I did not quench the liberty of the will. Wherefore, then, did he produce this letter at the trial? If he had only from the beginning entertained views in accordance with it, very likely he would not have been at all summoned before the bishops by the brethren, who, with all their kindness of disposition, could yet not help being offended with his perverse contentiousness. Now, however, as I have given on my part an account of this letter of mine, so would they, whose epistles he quoted, explain theirs also, if it were necessary; — they would tell us cither what they thought, or what they were ignorant of, or with what purpose they wrote to him. Pelagius, therefore, may boast to his heart's content of the friendship of holy men, 3 Turp Benigiiitaiis Epistola is more than " your kind letter." " fieiiigititus" is a complimentary abstract title addressed to the correspondent.
[Chap. 54.
he may read their letters recounting his praises, he may produce whatever synodal acts he pleases to attest his own acquittal, — there still stands against him the fact, proved by the testimony of competent witnesses, that he has inserted in his books statements which are opposed to that grace of God whereby we are called and justified; and unless he shall, after true confession, anathematize these statements, and then go on to contradict them both m his writings and discussions, he will certainly seem to all those who have a fuller knowledge of him to have laboured in vain in his attempt to set himself right.
CHAP. 54 [XXX.] ON THE LETTER OF PELAGIUS, IN WHICH HE BOASTS THAT HIS ERRORS HAD j BEEN APPROVED BY FOURTEEN BISHOPS. I For I will not be silent as to the transactions which took place after this trial, and which rather j augment the suspicion against him. A certain j epistle found its way into our hands, which was ' ascribed to Pelagius himself, writing to a friend ■ of his, a presbyter, w4io had kindly admonished j him (as appears from the same epistle) not to allow any one to separate himself from the body of the Church on his account. Among the other contents of this document, which it would be both tedious and unnecessary to quote here, Pekigius says: " By the sentence of fourteen bishops our statement was received with approbation, in which we affirmed that ' a man is able to be without sin, and easily to keep the commandments of God, if he wishes.' This sentence," says he, " has filled the mouths of the gainsayers with confusion, and has separated asunder the entire set which was conspiring together for evil." Whether, indeed, this epistle was really written by Pelagius, or was composed by somebody in his name, who can fail to see, after what manner this error claims to have achieved a victory, even in the judicial proceedings where it was refuted and condemned? Now, he has adduced the words we have just quoted according to the form m which they occur in his book of " Chapters," as it is called, not in the shape in which they were objected to him at his trial, and even repeated by him in his answer. For even his accusers, through some unaccountable inaccuracy, left out a word in their indictment, concerning which there is no small controversy. They made him say, that " a man is able to be without sin, if he wishes; and, if he wishes, to keep the commandments of God." There is nothing said here about this being " easily " done. Afterwards, when he gave his answer, he spake thus: " We said, that a man is able to be without sin, and to keep the commandments of God, if he wishes; " he did not then say, " easily keep." but only " keep." So in another place, Timongst the statements about which Hilary consulted me, and I gave him my views, it was objected to Pelagius that he had said, " A man is able, if he wishes, to live without sin." To this he himself responded, " That a man is able to be without sin has been said above." Now, on this occasion, we tlo not find on the part either of those who brought the objection or of him who rebutted it, that the word " easily " was used at all. Then, again, in the narrative of the holy Bishop John, which we have partly quoted above,' he says, " W' hen they were importunate and exclaimed, ' He ii a heretic, because he says, It is true that a man is able, if he only will, to live without sm; ' and tlien, when we questioned him on this point, he answered, ' I did not sav that man's nature has received the power of being impeccable, — but I said, whosoever is willing, in the pursuit of his own salvation, to labour and struggle to abstain from sinning and to walk in the commandments of God, receives the ability to do so from God.' Then, whilst some were whispering, and remarking on the statement of Pelaguis, that ' without God's grace man was able to attain perfection,' I censured the statement, and reminded them, besides, that even the Apostle Paul, after so many labours, — not, indeed, in his own strength, but by tlie grace of God, — said, 'T laboured more abundantly than they all; yet not I, but the grace of God that was with me.'"^ And so on, as I have already mentioned.
CHAP. 55. — pelagius' LETTER DISCUSSED.
What, then, is the meaning of those vaunting words of theirs in this epistle, wherein they boast of having induced the fourteen bishops who sat in that trial to believe not merely that a man has ability but that he has "facility" to abstain from sinning, according to the ])Osition laid down in the " Chapters " of this same Pelagius, — when, in the draft of the proceedings, notwithstanding the frequent repetition of the general charge and full consideration bestowed on it, this is nowliere found? How, indeed, can this word fail to contradict the very defence and answer which Pelagius made; since the Bishop John asserted that Pelagius put in this answer in his presence, that " he wished it to be understood that the man who was willing to labour and agonize for his salvation was able to avoid sin," while Pelagius himself, at this time engaged in a formal inquiry and conducting his defence,^ said, that " it was by his own labour and the grace of God that a man is able to be without sin?" Now, is a thing ^^^•j' when labour is required to effect it? For I suppose that ever}- man would agree with us in the opinion, that wherever there is labour there J Ch. i6. At the Synod of Diospolls. The proceedings before Jiilin, bi.-ihop of Jerusalem, wtrc; iioi duly registered. See above, 59.
Chap. 57.]
cannot be facility. And yet a carnal epistle of windiness and inflation flies forth, and, outrunning in speed the tardy record of the proceedings, | gets first into men's hands; so as to assert that \ fourteen bishops in the East have determined, not only " that a man is able to be without sin, and to keep God's commandments," but " ^asi/v to keep." Nor is God's assistance once named: it is merely said, " If he wishes; " so that, of course, as nothing is affirmed of the divine grace, for which the earnest fight was made, it remains that the only thing one reads of in this episUe is the unhappy and self-deceiving — because represented as victorious — human pride. As if the Bishop John, indeed, had not expressly declared that he censured this statement, and that, by the help of three inspired texts of Scripture, • he had, as if by thunderbolts, struck to the ground the gigantic mountains of such presumption which they had piled up against the still over-towering heights of heavenly grace; or as if again those other bishops who were John's assessors could have borne with Pelagius, either in mind or even in ear, when he pronounced these words: " We said that a man is able to be without sin and to keep the commandments of God, if he wishes," unless he had gone on at once to say: " For the ability to do this God has given to him " (for they were unaware that he was speaking of nature, and not of that grace which they had learnt from the teaching of the aposde); and had afterwards added this qualification: " We never said, however, that any man could be found, who at no time whatever from his infancy to his old age had committed sin, but that if any person were converted from his sins, he could by his own exertion and the grace of God be without sin." Now, by the very fact that in their sentence they used these words, " he has answered correctly, 'that a man can, when he has the assistance and grace of God, be without sin; ' " what else did they fear than that, if he denied this, he would be doing a manifest wrong not to man's ability, j but to God's grace? It has indeed not been defined when a man may become without sin; it has only been judicially settled, that this result can only be reached by the assisting grace of God; it has not, I say, been defined whether a man, whilst he is in this flesh which lusts against the Spirit, ever has been, or now is, or ever can be, by his present use of reason and free will, either in the full society of man or in monastic solitude, in such a state as to be beyond the necessity of offering up the prayer, not in behalf of others, but for himself personally: " Forgive us our debts; " ^ or whether this gift shall be consummated at the time when " we shall be like Him, when we shall see Him as He is," ^ — ' See above, 37.
2 Matt. vi. 12.
3 I John iii. 2.
when it shall be said, not by those that are fighting: " I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind," "* but by those that are triumphing: " O death, where is thy victory? O death, where is thy sting? "s Now, this is perhaps hardly a question which ought to be discussed between catholics and heretics, but only among catholics with a view to a peaceful settlement.^ CHAP. 56 [XXXI.J — IS PELAGIUS SINCERE?
How, then, can it be believed that Pelagius (if indeed this epistle is his) could have been sincere, when he acknowledged the grace of God, which is not nature with its free will, nor the knowledge of the law, nor simply the forgiveness of sins, but a something which is necessary to each of our actions; or could have sincerely anathematized everybody who entertained the contrary opinion: — seeing that in his epistle he set forth even the ease wherewith a man can avoid sinning (concerning which no question had arisen at this trial) just as if the judges had come to an agreement to receive even this word, and said nothing about the grace of God, by the confession and subsequent addition of which he escaped the penalty of condemnation by the Church?
CHAP. 57 [XXXII.] — FRAUDULENT PRACTICES PUR- SUED BY PELAGIUS IN HIS REPORT OF THE PRO- CEEDINGS IN PALESTINE, IN THE PAPER WHEREIN HE DEFENDED HIMSELF TO AUGUSTIN.
There is yet another point which I must not pass over in silence. In the paper containing his defence which he sent to me by a friend of ours, one Charus, a citizen of Hippo, but a deacon in the Eastern Church, he has made a statement which is different from what is contained in the Proceedings of the Bishops. Now, these Proceedings, as regards their contents, are of a higher and firmer tone, and more straightforward in defending the catholic verity in opposition to this heretical pestilence. For, when I read this paper of his, previous to receiving a copy of the Proceedings, I was not aware that he had made use of those words which he had used at the trial, when he was present for himself; they are few, and there is not much discrepancy, and they do not occasion me much anxiety, [xxxiii.] But I could not help feeling anno\ance that he can appear to have defended sundry sentences of Ccelestius, which, from the Proceedings, it is clear enough that he anathematized. Now, some of these he disavowed for himself, simply remarking, that " he was not in any way responsible for * This point, nowever, was definitely settled a year or two afterwards, at a council held in Carthage. (See its Canons 6-8.) See also, above, the Preface to the treatise On the Perfection 0/ Man's Ktghteousneis.
[Chap. 58.
them." In his paper, however, he refused to anathematize these same opinions, which are to this effect: " That Adam was created mortal, and ■ that he would have died whether he had sinned or not sinned. That Adam's sin mjured only himself, and not the human race. That the law, no less than the gospel, leads us to the kmgdom. That new-born infants are in the same condition that Adam was before he fell. That, on the one hand, the entire human race does not die owing to Adam's death and transgression; nor, on the other hand, does the whole human race rise again through the resurrection of Christ. That infants, even if they die unbaptized, have eternal life. That rich men, even if they are baptized, unless they renounce and give up all, have, whatever good they may seem to have done, nothing of it reckoned to them; neither shall they possess the kingdom of heaven." Now, in his paper, the answer which he gives to all this is: " All these statements have not been made by me, even on their own testimony, nor do I hold myself responsible for them." In the Proceedings, however, he expressed himself as follows on these points: " They have not been made by me, as even their testimony shows, and for them I do not feel that I am at all responsible. But yet, for the satisfaction of the holy synod, I anathematize those who either now hold, or have ever held, them." Now, why did he not express himself thus in his paper also? It would not, I suppose, have cost much ink, or writing, or delay; nor have occupied much of the paper itself, if he had done this. Who, however, can help believing that there is a purpose in all this, to pass off this paper in all directions as an abridgment of the Episcopal Proceedings. In consequence of which, men might think that his right still to maintain any of these opinions which he pleased had not been taken away, — on the ground that they had been simply laid to his charge but had not received his approbation, nor yet had been anathematized and condemned by him.
CHAP. 58. THE SAME CONTINUED.
He has, moreover, in this same paper, huddled together afterwards many of the points which were objected against him out of the "Chapters," of Ccelestius' ]>ook; nor has he kept distinct, at the intervals which separate them in the Proceedings, the two answers in which he anathematized these very heads; but has substituted one general reply for them all. This, I should have supposed, had been done for the sake of brevity, had I not perceived that he had a very special object in the arrangement which disturbs us. For thus has he closed this answer: " I say again, that these opinions, even according to their own testimony, are not mine; nor, as I have already said, am I to be held responsible for them. The opinions which I have confessed to be my own, I maintain are sound and correct; those, however, wjiich I have said are not my own, I reject according to the judgment of the holy Church, pronouncing anathema on every man that opposes and gainsays the doctrines of the holy and catholic Church; and likewise on those who by inventing false opinions have excited odium against us." This last paragraph the Proceedings do not contain; it has, however, no bearing on the matter which causes us anxiety. By all means let them have his anathema who have excited odium against him by their invention of false opinions. But, when first I read, " Those opinions, however, which I have said are not my own, I reject in accordance with the judgment of the holy Church," being ignorant that any judgment had been arrived at on the point by the Church, since there is here nothing said about it, and I had not then read the Proceedings, I really thought that nothing else was meant than that he promised that he would entertain the same view about the "Chapters " as the Church, which had not yet determined the question, might some day decide respecting them; and that he was ready to reject the opinions which the Church had not yet indeed rejected, but might one day have occasion to reject; and that this, too, was the purport of what he further said: " Pronouncing anathema on every man that opposes and gainsays the doctrines of the holy catholic Church." But in fact, as the Proceedings testify, a judgment of the Church had already been pronounced on these subjects by the fourteen bishops; and it was in accordance with this judgment that he profes.sed to reject all these opinions, and to pronounce his anathema against those persons who, by reason of the said opinions, were contravening the judgment which had already, as the Proceedings show, been actually settled.
For already had the judges asked: " \\'hat says the monk Pelagius to all these heads of opinion which have been read in his presence? For this holy synod condemns them, as does also God's holy catholic Church." Now, they who know nothing of all this, and only read this pai:>er of his, are led to suppose that some one or other of these opinions may lawfully be maintained, as if they had not been determined to be contrary to catholic doctrine, and as if Pelagius had declared himself to be ready to hold the same sentiments concerning them which the Church had not as yet determined, but might have to determine. He has not, therefore, expressed himself in this paper, to which we have so often referred, straightforwardly enough for us to discover the fact, of which we find a voucher in the Proceedings, that all those dogmas by means of which this heresy has been stealing along and Chap. 6i.]
growing strong with contentious audacity, have been condemned by fourteen bishops presiding in an ecclesiastical synod! Now, if he was afraid that this fact would become known, as is the case, he has more reason for self-correction than for resentment at the vigilance with which we are watching the controversy to the best of our ability, however late. If, however, it is untrue that he had any such fears, and we are only indulging in a suspicion which is natural to man, let him forgive us; but, at the same time, let him continue to oppose and resist the opinions which were rejected by him with anathemas in the proceedings before the bishops, when he was on his defence; for if he now shows any leniency to them, he would seem not only to have believed these opinions formerly, but to be cherishing them still.
CH.A.P. 59 [XXXIV.] — ALTHOUGH PELAGIUS WAS ACQUITTED, HIS HERESY WAS CONDEMNED.
Now, with respect to this treatise of mine, which perhaps is not unreasonably lengthy, considering the importance and extent of its subject, I have wished to inscribe it to your Reverence, in order that, if it be not displeasing to your mind, it may become known to such persons as I have thought may stand in need of it under the recommendation of your authority, which carries so much more weight than our own poor industry. Thus it may avail to crush the vain and contentious thoughts of those persons who suppose that, because Pelagius was acquitted, those Eastern bishops who pronounced the judgment approved of those dogmas which are beginning to shed very pernicious influences against the Christian faith, and that grace of God whereby we are called and justified. These the Christian verity never ceases to condemn, as indeed it condemned them even by the authoritative sentence of the fourteen bishops; nor would it, on the occasion in question, have hesitated to condemn Pelagius too, unless he had anathematized the heretical opinions with which he was charged. But now, while we render to this man the respect of brotherly affection (and we have all along expressed with all sincerity our anxiety for him and interest in him), let us observe, with as much brevity as is consistent with accuracy of observation, that, notwithstanding the undoubted fact of his having been acquitted by a human verdict, the heresy itself has ever been held worthy of condemnation by divine judgment, and has actually been condemned by the sentence of these fourteen bishops of the Eastern Church.
CHAP. 60 [XXXV.] — THE SYNOD'S CONDEMNATION OF HIS DOCTRINES.
This is the concluding clause of their judgment. The synod said: " Now forasmuch as we have received satisfaction in these inquiries from the monk Pelagius, who has been present, who yields assent to godly doctrines, and rejects and anathematizes those which are contrary to the Church, we confess him still to belong to the communion of the catholic Church." Now, there are two facts concerning the monk Pelagius here contained with entire perspicuity in this brief statement of the holy bishops who judged him: one, that "he yields assent to godly doctrines; " the other, that " he rejects and anathematizes those which are contrary to the Church." On account of these two concessions, Pelagius was pronounced to be " in the communion of the catholic Church." Let us, in pursuit of our inquiry, briefly recapitulate the entire facts, in order to discover what were the words he used which made those two points so clear, as far as men were able at the moment to form a judgment as to what were manifest points. For among the allegations which were made against him, he is said to have rejected and anathematized, as " contrary, " all the statements which in his answer he denied were his. Let us, then, summarize the whole case as far as we can.
CHAP. 61. HISTORY OF THE PELAGIAN HERESY.
THE PELAGIAN HERESY W.\S RAISED BY SUNDRY PERSONS WHO AFFECTED THE MONASTIC STATE.
Since it was necessary that the Apostle Paul's prediction should be accomplished, — " There must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you," ' — after the older heresies, there has been just now introduced, not by bishops or presbyters or any rank of the clergy, but by certain would-be monks, a heresy which disputes, under colour of defending free will, against the grace of God which we have through our Lord Jesus Christ; and endeavours to overthrow the foundation of the Christian faith of which it is written, " By one man, death, and by one man the resurrection of the dead; for as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive;" * and denies God's help in our actions, by affirming that, " in order to avoid sin and to fulfil righteousness, human nature can be sufficient, seeing that it has been created with free will; and that God's grace lies in the fact that we have " been so created as to be able to do this by the will, and in the further fact that God has given to us the assistance of His law and commandments, and also in that He forgives their past sins when men turn to Him;" that "in these things alone is God's grace to be regarded as consisting, not in the help He gives to us for ' I Cor. xi. 19.