Chapter 10.—Why the Pelagians Falsely Accuse Catholics of Maintaining Fate Under the Name of Grace.

But, as I was somewhat more attentively considering for what reason they should think it well to object this to us, that we assert fate under the name of grace, I first of all looked into those words of theirs which follow. For thus they have thought that this was to be objected to us: “Under the name,” say they, “of grace, they so assert fate as to say that unless God inspired unwilling and resisting man with the desire of good, and that good imperfect, he would neither be able to decline from evil nor to lay hold of good.” Then a little after, where they mention what they maintain, I gave heed to what was said by them about this matter. “We confess,” say they, that baptism is necessary for all ages, and that grace, moreover, assists the good purpose of everybody; but yet that it does not infuse the love of virtue into a reluctant one, because there is no acceptance of persons with God.”110    Rom. ii. 11; Col. iii. 25. From these words of theirs, I perceived that for this reason they either think, or wish it to be thought, that we assert fate under the name of grace, because we say that God’s grace is not given in respect of our merits, but according to His own most merciful will, in that He said, “I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy.”111    Ex. xxxiii. 19; Rom. ix. 15. Where, by way of consequence, it is added, “Therefore it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy.”112    Rom. ix. 16. Here any one might be equally foolish in thinking or saying that the apostle is an assertor of fate. But here these people sufficiently lay themselves open; for when they malign us by saying that we maintain fate under the name of grace, because we say that God’s grace is not given on account of our merits, beyond a doubt they confess that they themselves say that it is given on account of our merits; thus their blindness could not conceal and dissimulate that they believe and think thus, although, when this view was objected to him, Pelagius, in the episcopal judgment of Palestine, with crafty fear condemned it. For it was objected to him from the words of his own disciple Cœlestius, indeed, that he himself also was in the habit of saying that God’s grace is given on account of our merits. And he in abhorrence, or in pretended abhorrence, of this, did not delay, with his lips at least, to anathematize it;113    See On the Proceedings of Pelagius, 30. but, as his later writings indicate, and the assertion of those followers of his makes evident, he kept it in his deceitful heart, until afterwards his boldness might put forth in letters114    See On the Proceedings of Pelagius, 34. what the cunning of a denier had then hidden for fear. And still the Pelagian bishops do not dread, and at least are not ashamed, to send their letters to the catholic Eastern bishops, in which they charge us with being assertors of fate because we do not say that even grace is given according to our merits; although Pelagius, fearing the Eastern bishops, did not dare to say this, and so was compelled to condemn it.

10. Unde autem hoc eis visum fuerit nobis objicere, quod fatum asseramus sub nomine gratiae, cum aliquanto attentius cogitarem; prius eorum verba quae consequuntur inspexi. Sic enim hoc nobis objiciendum putarunt: «Sub nomine,» inquiunt, «gratiae ita fatum asserunt, ut dicant, quia nisi Deus invito et reluctanti homini inspiraverit boni, et ipsius imperfecti, cupiditatem, nec a malo declinare, nec bonum possit arripere.» Deinde aliquanto post, ubi ipsi quae defendant, commemorant, quid de hac re ab eis diceretur, attendi. «Baptisma,» inquiunt, omnibus necessarium esse aetatibus confitemur: gratiam quoque adjuvare uniuscujusque bonum propositum, non tamen reluctanti studium virtutis immittere, quia personarum acceptio non est apud Deum» (Coloss. III, 25). Ex his eorum verbis intellexi, ob hoc illos vel putare vel putari velle, fatum nos asserere sub nomine gratiae, quia gratiam Dei non secundum merita nostra dicimus dari, sed secundum ipsius misericordissimam voluntatem, qui dixit, Miserebor cui misertus ero, et misericordiam praestabo cui misericors fuero. Ubi consequenter adjunctum est, Igitur non volentis, neque currentis, sed miserentis est Dei (Rom. IX, 15, 16). Posset etiam hinc quispiam similiter stultus fati assertorem Apostolum putare vel dicere. Verum hic se isti satis aperiunt. Cum enim propterea nobis calumniantur, dicentes nos fatum gratiae nomine asserere, quia non secundum merita nostra dari dicimus Dei gratiam; procul dubio confitentur quod ipsi eam secundum nostra merita dari dicunt: ita caecitas eorum occultare ac dissimulare non potuit, hoc se sapere atque sentire, quod sibi objectum Pelagius in episcopali judicio Palaestino subdolo timore damnavit. Objectum quippe illi est ex verbis quidem discipuli sui Coelestii, quod etiam ipse diceret, «gratiam Dei secundum merita nostra 0578 dari.» Quod ille detestans, vel quasi detestans , ore duntaxat anathematizare non distulit: sed sicut ejus libri posteriores indicant, et istorum sectatorum ejus nudat assertio, ficto corde servavit, donec postea, quod tunc metu texerat negantis astutia, etiam in litteras proferret audacia. Et adhuc non reformidant, nec saltem verecundantur episcopi Pelagiani litteras suas catholicis orientalibus episcopis mittere, quibus nos assertores fati esse criminantur, quia non dicimus gratiam Dei secundum merita nostra dari, quod Pelagius episcopos orientales metuens, et dicere non ausus, et damnare compulsus est.