On the Proceedings of Pelagius

 1.—Introduction.

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

 3.—Discussion of Pelagius’ First Answer.

 4. [II.]—The Same Continued.

 5. [III.]—The Second Item in the Accusation And Pelagius’ Answer.

 6.—Pelagius’ Answer Examined.

 7.—The Same Continued.

 8.—The Same Continued.

 9.—The Third Item in the Accusation And Pelagius’ Answer.

 10.—Pelagius’ Answer Examined. On Origen’s Error Concerning the Non-Eternity of the Punishment of the Devil and the Damned.

 11.—The Same Continued.

 12. [IV.]—The Fourth Item in the Accusation And Pelagius’ Answer.

 13. [V.]—The Fifth Item of the Accusation And Pelagius’ Answer.

 14.—Examination of This Point. The Phrase “Old Testament” Used in Two Senses. The Heir of the Old Testament. In the Old Testament There Were Heirs of

 15.—The Same Continued.

 16. [VI.]—The Sixth Item of the Accusation, and Pelagius’ Reply.

 17.—Examination of the Sixth Charge and Answers.

 18.—The Same Continued.

 19.—The Same Continued.

 20.—The Same Continued. Pelagius Acknowledges the Doctrine of Grace in Deceptive Terms.

 [VII.] and for the obtaining of which we pray that we may not be led into temptation. This grace is not nature, but that which renders assistance to f

 21. [VIII.]—The Same Continued.

 21. [IX.]—The Same Continued.

 22. [X.]—The Same Continued. The Synod Supposed that the Grace Acknowledged by Pelagius Was that Which Was So Thoroughly Known to the Church.

 23. [XI.]—The Seventh Item of the Accusation: the Breviates of Cœlestius Objected to Pelagius.

 24.—Pelagius’ Answer to the Charges Brought Together Under the Seventh Item.

 25.—The Pelagians Falsely Pretended that the Eastern Churches Were on Their Side.

 26.—The Accusations in the Seventh Item, Which Pelagius Confessed.

 27. [XII.]—The Eighth Item in the Accusation.

 28.—Pelagius’ Reply to the Eighth Item of Accusation.

 29. [XIII.]—The Ninth Item of the Accusation And Pelagius’ Reply.

 30. [XIV.]—The Tenth Item in the Accusation. The More Prominent Points of Cœlestius’ Work Continued.

 31.—Remarks on the Tenth Item.

 32.—The Eleventh Item of the Accusation.

 33.—Discussion of the Eleventh Item Continued.

 34.—The Same Continued. On the Works of Unbelievers Faith is the Initial Principle from Which Good Works Have Their Beginning Faith is the Gift of G

 35.—The Same Continued.

 36.—The Same Continued. The Monk Pelagius. Grace is Conferred on the Unworthy.

 37—The Same Continued. John, Bishop of Jerusalem, and His Examination.

 38. [XV.]—The Same Continued.

 39. [XVI.]—The Same Continued. Heros and Lazarus Orosius.

 40. [XVII.]—The Same Continued.

 41.—Augustin Indulgently Shows that the Judges Acted Incautiously in Their Official Conduct of the Case of Pelagius.

 42. [XVIII.]—The Twelfth Item in the Accusation. Other Heads of Cœlestius’ Doctrine Abjured by Pelagius.

 43. [XIX.]—The Answer of the Monk Pelagius and His Profession of Faith.

 44. [XX.]—The Acquittal of Pelagius.

 45. [XXI.]—Pelagius’ Acquittal Becomes Suspected.

 46. [XXII.]—How Pelagius Became Known to Augustin Cœlestius Condemned at Carthage.

 47. [XXIII.]—Pelagius’ Book, Which Was Sent by Timasius and Jacobus to Augustin, Was Answered by the Latter in His Work “On Nature and Grace.”

 48. [XXIV.]—A Letter Written by Timasius and Jacobus to Augustin on Receiving His Treatise “On Nature and Grace.”

 49. [XXV.]—Pelagius’ Behaviour Contrasted with that of the Writers of the Letter.

 50.—Pelagius Has No Good Reason to Be Annoyed If His Name Be at Last Used in the Controversy, and He Be Expressly Refuted.

 51. [XXVI.]—The Nature of Augustin’s Letter to Pelagius.

 52. [XXVII. And XXVIII.]—The Text of the Letter.

 53. [XXIX.]—Pelagius’ Use of Recommendations.

 54. [XXX.]—On the Letter of Pelagius, in Which He Boasts that His Errors Had Been Approved by Fourteen Bishops.

 55.—Pelagius’ Letter Discussed.

 56. [XXXI.]—Is Pelagius Sincere?

 57. [XXXII.]—Fraudulent Practices Pursued by Pelagius in His Report of the Proceedings in Palestine, in the Paper Wherein He Defended Himself to Augus

 [XXXIII.] But I could not help feeling annoyance that he can appear to have defended sundry sentences of Cœlestius, which, from the Proceedings, it is

 58.—The Same Continued.

 59. [XXXIV.]—Although Pelagius Was Acquitted, His Heresy Was Condemned.

 60. [XXXV.]—The Synod’s Condemnation of His Doctrines.

 61.—History of the Pelagian Heresy. The Pelagian Heresy Was Raised by Sundry Persons Who Affected the Monastic State.

 62.—The History Continued. Cœlestius Condemned at Carthage by Episcopal Judgment. Pelagius Acquitted by Bishops in Palestine, in Consequence of His De

 63.—The Same Continued. The Dogmas of Cœlestius Laid to the Charge of Pelagius, as His Master, and Condemned.

 64.—How the Bishops Cleared Pelagius of Those Charges.

 65.—Recapitulation of What Pelagius Condemned.

 66.—The Harsh Measures of the Pelagians Against the Holy Monks and Nuns Who Belonged to Jerome’s Charge.

[XXXIII.] But I could not help feeling annoyance that he can appear to have defended sundry sentences of Cœlestius, 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 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 injured only himself, and not the human race. That the law, no less than the gospel, leads us to the kingdom. 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.

CAPUT XXXIII.

Moleste autem ferebam, quod aliquarum sententiarum Coelestii, quas cum gestis anathematizasse perspicuum est, servasse sibi defensionem, 0353 potest videri. Nam earum quasdam suas negavit esse, dicens tantummodo, «pro eis non se debere satisfactionem:» anathematizare autem in eadem chartula noluit, quae istae sunt: «Adam mortalem esse factum, qui sive peccaret, sive non peccaret, esset moriturus. Quod peccatum Adae solum ipsum nocuerit et non genus humanum. Quod lex sic mittat ad regnum coelorum, quemadmodum et Evangelium. Quod infantes nuper nati in illo statu sint, in quo fuit Adam ante praevaricationem. Quod neque per mortem vel praevaricationem Adae omne genus humanum moriatur, neque per resurrectionem Christi omne gemus humanum resurgat. Infantes, etiamsi non baptizentur, habere vitam aeternam. Divites baptizatos, nisi omnibus abrenuntiaverint, si quid boni videntur facere, non illis reputari, neque habituros illos regnum coelorum» . Ad ista quippe in chartula illa ita respondit: «Haec omnia secundum ipsorum testimonium a me dicta non sunt, nec pro eis debeo satisfactionem.» In gestis autem ad cadem ipsa ita locutus est: «Secundum ipsorum testimonium a me dicta non sunt, pro quibus ego satisfacere non debeo; sed tamen ad satisfactionem sanctae Synodi anathematizo eos qui sic tenent, aut aliquando tenuerunt.» Cur ergo non ita et in illa chartula scriptum est? Non multum, ut opinor, atramenti, nec litterarum, nec morae, nec ipsius chartulae, si ita fieret, impenderetur. Sed quis non credat id fuisse procuratum, ut tanquam pro gestorum illorum breviatione, ista charta usquequaque discurreret ? ubi putaretur, non esse ablatam quamlibet earum sententiarum defendendi licentiam, quod ei tantummodo objectae, nec ejus probatae fuissent, non tamen anathematizatae atque damnatae.