What you fail to realize is that Pelagius' writings are not available only to ~us~.
I would think that his writings were in ample supply at the time of the controversy with Augustine.
I would also think that he was somewhat influential -so much so that Augustine felt the need to defend the orthodox faith.
If he was just this lone unheard of voice without much influence, it is inconceivable that Augustine would have spent the time battling him as he did.
Thus, instead of dealing with the substance of Augustine's doctrines, you seem to now have the need to attack his character.
Your seeming attempts to paint Pelagius as a nice, mild-mannered gentleman living a secluded life and, perhaps, tending to a garden somewhere "up north" only to be unjustly libeled by a mean, nasty, vengeful Augustine is a little ridiculous.
This is the same attempt the liberals use in order to soften public sentiment against all sorts of immoral practices.
Just look how successful the homosexual community has been at painting those of us who are against homosexuality as being "hateful" and "mean".
When you can't substantively defend your doctrine in the face of opposing doctrine, resort to character attacks.
Speculate about Augustines motivations -something you have no way to verify or prove- and then call it "reason to doubt".
You've done well, xzins.
Jean
There is reason to doubt the accuracy of the record.
There is no reason to doubt that "pelagianism" is an unbiblical doctrine.
There is reason to doubt that that teaching is what was taught by Morgan of Wales.
Morgan was identified with the group that rejected Augustine in his failed mission to incorporate the Celtic Church into Roman Catholicism.