Replies

I happen to think this is a fair interpretation from the Orthodox view. Those Arminians who are arguing their position should understand their views are really more in line with the eastern church fathers than the western church fathers-something I don’t think they fully grasp. Arminianism was never the view of the early western church.

The author does fail to address WHY the followers of Pelagius became “semi-Pelagian” only 100 years after the death of Pelagius. No matter how noble the author tries to paint Pelagius, the Pelagius’ doctrine was so corrupted and inconsistent that many rejected it. Semi-Pelagians came in and “repackaged” the theology for better consumption but that didn’t stop the early western church fathers from seeing though the heresy and denouncing it at the Council of Orange. The author excuses this by stating:

”Yet if we remember that Pelagius was not a systematic theologian but a moral reformer, and that his theological argumentation was made in reaction to writings that he believed undermined the authentic Christian spiritual life, we may perhaps more easily forgive his few exaggerations and omissions…”

And there you have it. Pelagius was a social activist. He wasn’t a theologian like Jerome or Augustine who took and harmonized the scriptures to rightly divine the word of truth. He was a Charles Finney of his time that picked and choose his scriptures as appropriate. Hence there has been a need to modify his theology several times over the course of centuries. The theology of Augustine and Jerome has stood the test of time.

I did find it interesting that Pelagius got most of his views from a lawyer: ”…but disassociated himself from the more extreme views of Celestius, a lawyer whom he had met in Rome….

No wonder Pelagius thoughts were all messed up. He got everything from a lawyer practicing theology. (Don’t tell P-Marlowe) ;O)

but disassociated himself from the more extreme views of Celestius, a lawyer whom he had met in Rome….

This doesn't say what you summarized it as saying.

However, I understand you are doing lawyer humor, so we'll let it pass. :>)

Pelagius disassociated himself from Celestius' views because they weren't his views. I think Pelagius views were little changed and that semi-pelagian is a closer approximation of what he taught.

I'm quite sure that Augustinianism has been modified by reformers as well. Not too many calvinists I know who argue for the perpetual virginity of Mary.

Those Arminians who are arguing their position should understand their views are really more in line with the eastern church fathers than the western church fathers-something I don’t think they fully grasp.

You say that as if it were a bad thing.

Thanks for the ping, xzins. Now I feel like digging up Pelagius' letter and reading it for myself too. If you do find and post it, please ping me.