2. [I.]—The First Item in the Accusation, and Pelagius’ Answer.

First of all, then, I offer to the Lord my God, who is also my defence and guide, unspeakable thanks, because I was not misled in my views respecting our holy brethren and fellow-bishops who sat as judges in that case. His answers, indeed, they not without reason approved; because they had not to consider how he had in his writings stated the points which were objected against him, but what he had to say about them in his reply at the pending examination. A case of unsoundness in the faith is one thing, one of incautious statement is another thing. Now sundry objections were urged against Pelagius out of a written complaint, which our holy brethren and fellow-bishops in Gaul, Heros and Lazarus, presented, being themselves unable to be present, owing (as we afterwards learned from credible information) to the severe indisposition of one of them. The first of these was, that he writes, in a certain book of his, this: “No man can be without sin unless he has acquired a knowledge of the law.” After this had been read out, the synod inquired: “Did you, Pelagius, express yourself thus?” Then in answer he said: “I certainly used the words, but not in the sense in which they understand them. I did not say that a man is unable to sin who has acquired a knowledge of the law; but that he is by the knowledge of the law assisted towards not sinning, even as it is written, ‘He hath given them a law for help’” 1    Isa. viii. 20. Upon hearing this, the synod declared: “The words which have been spoken by Pelagius are not different from the Church.” Assuredly they are not different, as he expressed them in his answer; the statement, however, which was produced from his book has a different meaning. But this the bishops, who were Greek-speaking men, and who heard the words through an interpreter, were not concerned with discussing. All they had to consider at the moment was, what the man who was under examination said was his meaning,—not in what words his opinion was alleged to have been expressed in his book.

CAPUT PRIMUM.

2. Primum itaque Domino Deo, rectori custodique meo , ineffabiles ago gratias, quod me de sanctis fratribus et coepiscopis nostris, qui in ea causa judices consederunt, opinio non fefellit. Responsiones enim ejus non immerito approbaverunt, non curantes quomodo ea quae objiciebantur, in opusculis suis posuerit, sed quid de his in praesenti examinatione responderit. Alia est enim causa fidei non sanae, alia locutionis incautae. Denique in his quae de libello, quem dederunt sancti fratres et coepiscopi nostri Galli, Heros et Lazarus, qui propter gravem (sicut postea probabilius comperimus) unius eorum aegritudinem, praesentes esse minime potuerunt, recitata sunt objecta Pelagio, illud est primum, 0321 quod in libro suo quodam scribit, «Non posse esse sine peccato, nisi qui legis scientiam habuerit.» Quo recitato Synodus dixit: «Tu hoc edidisti, Pelagi?» At ille respondit: «Ego quidem dixi, sed non sicut illi intelligunt: non dixi, non posse peccare qui scientiam legis habuerit; sed, adjuvari per legis scientiam ad non peccandum, sicut scriptum est, Legem in adjutorium dedit illis» (Isai. VIII, 20, sec. LXX). Hoc audito, Synodus dixit: «Non sunt aliena ab Ecclesia, quae dicta sunt a Pelagio.» Plane aliena non sunt, quae respondit: illud vero quod de libro ejus prolatum est, aliud sonat. Sed hoc episcopi, Graeci homines, et ea verba per interpretem audientes, discutere non curarunt; hoc tantum intuentes, quid ille qui interrogabatur, sensisse se diceret, non quibus verbis eadem sententia in ejus libro scripta diceretur.