Pelagianism

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kirovsakya
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

Kirovsakya

Guest
Pelagianism, Semi-Pelagianism, Anti-Palagianism

Can anyone explain the doctrine(s), identify their original proponents/opponents, and what makes each distinctive of the others. Were any of the positions so compelling as to achieve consensus within the early Church.

Where (if anywhere) do each of the various doctrines appear on the theological spectrum of the modern Church.
 
Kirovsakya said:
Pelagianism, Semi-Pelagianism, Anti-Palagianism

Can anyone explain the doctrine(s), identify their original proponents/opponents, and what makes each distinctive of the others. Were any of the positions so compelling as to achieve consensus within the early Church.

Where (if anywhere) do each of the various doctrines appear on the theological spectrum of the modern Church.
Click to expand...
Pelagianism is the belief that original sin did not taint human nature and that mortal will is still capable of choosing good or evil without special Divine aid. Condemned as heresy.

Semipelagianism teaches that growing in faith. is the work of God, while the beginning of faith is an act of free will. Also condemned as heresy.

Antipelagianism basically holds that no fallen human being can attain personal union with God by his own powers, nor can any mere human being can attain personal union with God by his own powers, nor can a mere creature can attain personal union with God by its own powers.

I see nothing here with which I, as a Catholic, would disagree, but I defer to the Church. Just don’t have time to research it at the moment.
 
Kirovsakya said:
Pelagianism, Semi-Pelagianism, Anti-Palagianism

Can anyone explain the doctrine(s), identify their original proponents/opponents, and what makes each distinctive of the others. Were any of the positions so compelling as to achieve consensus within the early Church.

Where (if anywhere) do each of the various doctrines appear on the theological spectrum of the modern Church.
Click to expand...
Apparently, this has to do with the transmission of original sin and its effects for human nature. See paragraph 406, in small print, of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition. scborromeo.org/ccc/para/406.htm

***Regarding how small print is used in the Catechism, please read paragraphs 20-21
scborromeo.org/ccc/para/20.htm
scborromeo.org/ccc/para/21.htm

For the Catholic position, check out CCC 404-405. However, I would suggest starting with CCC 396 and checking the footnotes and the cross-references in the margins.
vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM
scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
 
Kirovsakya said:
Pelagianism, Semi-Pelagianism, Anti-Palagianism

Can anyone explain the doctrine(s), identify their original proponents/opponents, and what makes each distinctive of the others. Were any of the positions so compelling as to achieve consensus within the early Church.

Where (if anywhere) do each of the various doctrines appear on the theological spectrum of the modern Church.
Click to expand...
Does this sound oddly like the wording of a homework assignment? You wouldn’t be using CAF to get around studying would you?
 
Pelagianism was founded by Pelagius who taught the error that Adam and Eve only gave us a bad example, but didn’t transmit to us a fallen nature or Original Sin. Likewise, Jesus didn’t redeem us from sin, but gave us a positive example. We end up in Heaven or Hell not through dying in a State of grace, but through becoming a good person (works righteousness) by following the example of Jesus instead of the examples of Adam and Eve. Pelagianism was fought by St. Augustine, see On Merit and the Forgiveness of Sins
 
PietroPaolo said:
Pelagianism was founded by Pelagius who taught the error that Adam & Eve only gave us a bad example, but didn’t transmit to us a fallen nature or **Original Sin. **Likewise, Jesus didn’t redeem us from sin, but gave us a positive example. We end up in Heaven or Hell not through dying in a State of grace, but through becoming a good person (works righteousness) by following the example of Jesus instead of the examples of Adam and Eve. Pelagianism was fought by St. Augustine, see On Merit and the Forgiveness of Sins
Click to expand...
OK. Pelagius. Augustine. Adam & Eve. Original Sin. Fallen Nature.
Total depravity is a theological doctrine derived from the Augustinian concept of original sin. It is the teaching that, as a consequence of the Fall of Man, every person born into the world is enslaved to the service of sin and, apart from the efficacious or prevenient grace of God, is utterly unable to choose to follow God, refrain from evil, or accept the gift of salvation as it is offered.
Click to expand...
It is advocated to various degrees by many Protestant confessions of faith and catechisms, including those of Lutheranism, Arminianism, and Calvinism. (from wikipedia)
Click to expand...
So St. Augustine stood in direct opposition to Pelagius, thereby defining the anit-Pelagian position, summed up by the wiki quote… Who else of similar stature (theologian, church doctor, whatever) agreed with the Augustian theory on Original Sin and its effect on Man? Did Augustine have contemporaries? Or did the Church just accept his theory without challenge?

Why did St. Augustine’s proclamations on this topic give such aid and comfort to Reformation Protestants?
 
Kirovsakya said:
OK. Pelagius. Augustine. Adam & Eve. Original Sin. Fallen Nature.

So St. Augustine stood in direct opposition to Pelagius, thereby defining the anit-Pelagian position, summed up by the wiki quote… Who else of similar stature (theologian, church doctor, whatever) agreed with the Augustian theory on Original Sin and its effect on Man? Did Augustine have contemporaries? Or did the Church just accept his theory without challenge?

Why did St. Augustine’s proclamations on this topic give such aid and comfort to Reformation Protestants?
Click to expand...
Total Depravity is the 1st of the five points of Calvinism (TULIP). They deny free will.

There’s 4 books from St. Augustine: Against Two Letters of the Pelagians

It appears that Orosius a student of St. Augustine and St. Jerome also participated and helped to fight Pelagianism.

St. Jerome also fought against Pelagianism.
 
Isaiah45_9 said:
Total Depravity is the 1st of the five points of Calvinism (TULIP). They deny free will.

There’s 4 books from St. Augustine: Against Two Letters of the Pelagians

It appears that Orosius a student of St. Augustine and St. Jerome also participated and helped to fight Pelagianism.

St. Jerome also fought against Pelagianism.
Click to expand...
Before Augustine and Pelagius addressed the issue, what did the Church teach on Original Sin and the Fall?

Is “total depravity” a Catholic concept adopted by Protestants? Or was it a protestant concept, developed by Catholics?
 
PietroPaolo said:
Neither. The Church has never taught “total depravity.”
Click to expand...
Are you saying that the theory of total depravity went directly from Augustine to the Reformers?

Before Augustine and Pelagius addressed the issue, what did the Church teach on Original Sin and the Fall?

Anyone?
 
Kirovsakya said:
Are you saying that the theory of total depravity went directly from Augustine to the Reformers?

Before Augustine and Pelagius addressed the issue, what did the Church teach on Original Sin and the Fall?

Anyone?
Click to expand...
No, I’m saying St. Augustine did not teach the theory of total depravity. It’s a reformation idea, not an Augustinian one. The Pelagians taught that man could achieve Heaven, do good, and choose God without the aid of grace. That Christ came to give us an example to follow through our own free will, apart from grace. This position was opposed by many Church Fathers most notably St. Augustine who taught that Original Sin made it impossible for man to choose God without grace. This position was restated and refined by St. Thomas Aquinas and has always been the teaching of the Church. Pelagianism was officially condemned by the Second Council of Orange.

The Reformers taught total depravity, that man’s actions are all displeasing to God, even after regeneration (even with Grace) and that man lost free will with the fall. The reformers claimed to be following St. Augustine, but took his teachings on Original Sin in a direction opposed to the constant teaching of the Church and their position (total depravity) was condemned by the Council of Trent: *“If any one saith, that, since Adam’s sin, the free will of man is lost and extinguished; or, that it is a thing with only a name, yea a name without a reality, a figment, in fine, introduced into the Church by Satan; let him be anathema.” *(Session 6, Canon 5). The Reformers were good for claiming the mantle of St. Augustine while ignoring much of what he taught.

Does that help?
 
Kirovsakya said:
Are you saying that the theory of total depravity went directly from Augustine to the Reformers?

Before Augustine and Pelagius addressed the issue, what did the Church teach on Original Sin and the Fall?

Anyone?
Click to expand...
My apology. Currently, my time on CAF is limited.

St. Paul, speaking on behalf of the “Church” explained Original Sin.
Romans 5: 12-21 is informative along with other passages.

My childhood education was in doctrine and not necessarily Scripture. Therefore, my suggestion is to use the footnotes to paragraphs 374-421 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition. In addition, use the cross-references in the margin.

Obviously, not every verse of Scripture and every word of Church writers automatically becomes doctrine. Therefore, my suggestion is to use the Catechism’s “Index of Citations” which begins on page 689. St. Augustine begins on page 742

To understand how the Holy Spirit operated in the early centuries (chapter 14, Gospel of John), my suggestion is to read CCC 66-67, and to understand why there is small print, read CCC 20-21 which is part of “Practical Directions For Using This Catechism”, page 11.

As I am trying to catch up with Scripture, I have been working on the first three chapters in Genesis which not only clarifies the initial basics of Original Sin but also includes the Protoevangelium (“first gospel”) the first announcement of the Messiah and Redeemer. CCC 410.
 
Kirovsakya said:
Pelagianism, Semi-Pelagianism, Anti-Palagianism

Can anyone explain the doctrine(s), identify their original proponents/opponents, and what makes each distinctive of the others. Were any of the positions so compelling as to achieve consensus within the early Church.

Where (if anywhere) do each of the various doctrines appear on the theological spectrum of the modern Church.
Click to expand...
Pelagianism and semi-pelagianism involve what man can do or not do without the grace of God. In pelagianism, man can effect is own salvation without the grace of God. In semi-pelagianism, man can begin his conversion without the grace of God but needs the grace of God to grow in holiness.

St Augustine was the stauch opponent of both these forms of pelagiansim and his teaching on grace became the official teaching of the Catholic Church. Man needs God’s prevenient grace to begin his conversion and man needs God’s grace throughout his life to do any good which leads to salvation. God’s grace always comes first, man cooperates with God’s grace with his free will.

On the other extreme of pelagianism is Martin Luther’s “Sola gratia,” by grace alone.

The Catholic Church steers a middle course. God and man/woman work together.
 
Richca said:
On the other extreme of pelagianism is Martin Luther’s “Sola gratia,” by grace alone.
Click to expand...
You’re correct to note that Lutherans do not believe they are capable of aiding in their own salvation. But I’m not sure it’s accurate to say that Lutherans are the “other extreme.” Lutherans made it a point to combat Flacius’ mistaken points regarding total depravity and whether a sinner is still made in the image of God. I would say that the “other extreme” is more accurately credited to Flacius or Calvin.

Picky-picky, I know. 😛
 
Kirovsakya said:
Before Augustine and Pelagius addressed the issue, what did the Church teach on Original Sin and the Fall?

Is “total depravity” a Catholic concept adopted by Protestants? Or was it a protestant concept, developed by Catholics?
Click to expand...
Pietro already gave a good answer.

I’d like to add that the earliest Church Fathers that touched extensively on Adam (That I know so far, assistance is greatly appreciated) are:

Justin Martyr in his Dialogue with Trypho - Starting on Chapter 19.

and

Irenaeus of Lyons in Against Heresies (Book III, Chapter 23)

Again, I very much welcome more references 🙂
 
PietroPaolo said:
The reformers claimed to be following St. Augustine, but took his teachings on Original Sin in a direction opposed to the constant teaching of the Church and their position (total depravity) was condemned by the Council of Trent…
Click to expand...
I don’t think it was your intent, but it seems anachronistic to use a teaching that wasn’t codified until the Council of Trent (which took place after the Reformation) as a proof of “the constant teaching of the Church.”

I am not as well-versed on the early fathers as some… Are there any pre-Tridentine (or pre-Reformation, for that matter) writings that directly refute the Lutheran understanding of Original Sin and the condition of Man (I’m referring to what Luther outlined in “On the Bondage of the Will,” and what the Lutherans defined in the Formula of Concord)? From what I’ve read of Augustine and Aquinas, it seems the Lutheran understanding would have been considered at least an acceptable Catholic stance (until Trent, of course). I mean, Luther and Erasmus couldn’t have been the first to debate it, could they?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top