▾
Augustine of Hippo, On the Proceedings of Pelagius
⎗←→⎘
▾
On the Proceedings of Pelagius
2. [I.]—The First Item in the Accusation, and Pelagius’ Answer.
3.—Discussion of Pelagius’ First Answer.
5. [III.]—The Second Item in the Accusation And Pelagius’ Answer.
9.—The Third Item in the Accusation And Pelagius’ Answer.
12. [IV.]—The Fourth Item in the Accusation And Pelagius’ Answer.
13. [V.]—The Fifth Item of the Accusation And Pelagius’ Answer.
16. [VI.]—The Sixth Item of the Accusation, and Pelagius’ Reply.
17.—Examination of the Sixth Charge and Answers.
20.—The Same Continued. Pelagius Acknowledges the Doctrine of Grace in Deceptive Terms.
21. [VIII.]—The Same Continued.
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.
36.—The Same Continued. The Monk Pelagius. Grace is Conferred on the Unworthy.
37—The Same Continued. John, Bishop of Jerusalem, and His Examination.
39. [XVI.]—The Same Continued. Heros and Lazarus Orosius.
40. [XVII.]—The Same Continued.
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.
49. [XXV.]—Pelagius’ Behaviour Contrasted with that of the Writers of the Letter.
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.
55.—Pelagius’ Letter Discussed.
56. [XXXI.]—Is Pelagius Sincere?
59. [XXXIV.]—Although Pelagius Was Acquitted, His Heresy Was Condemned.
60. [XXXV.]—The Synod’s Condemnation of His Doctrines.
64.—How the Bishops Cleared Pelagius of Those Charges.
10.—Pelagius’ Answer Examined. On Origen’s Error Concerning the Non-Eternity of the Punishment of the Devil and the Damned.
But what Pelagius added, “Who believes differently is an Origenist,” was approved by the judges, because in very deed the Church most justly abominates the opinion of Origen, that even they whom the Lord says are to be punished with everlasting punishment, and the devil himself and his angels, after a time, however protracted, will be purged, and released from their penalties, and shall then cleave to the saints who reign with God in the association of blessedness. This additional sentence, therefore, the synod pronounced to be “not opposed to the Church,”—not in accordance with Pelagius, but rather in accordance with the Gospel, that such ungodly and sinful men shall be consumed by eternal fires as the Gospel determines to be worthy of such a punishment; and that he is a sharer in Origen’s abominable opinion, who affirms that their punishment can possibly ever come to an end, when the Lord has said it is to be eternal. Concerning those sinners, however, of whom the apostle declares that “they shall be saved, yet so as by fire, after their work has been burnt up,”23 1 Cor. iii. 12, 15. inasmuch as no objectionable opinion in reference to them was manifestly charged against Pelagius, the synod determined nothing. Wherefore he who says that the ungodly and sinner, whom the truth consigns to eternal punishment, can ever be liberated therefrom, is not unfitly designated by Pelagius as an “Origenist.” But, on the other hand, he who supposes that no sinner whatever deserves mercy in the judgment of God, may be designated by whatever name Pelagius is disposed to give to him, only it must at the same time be quite understood that this error is not received as truth by the Church. “For he shall have judgment without mercy that hath showed no mercy.”24 Jas. ii. 13.
10. Quod autem addidit Pelagius, «Et si quis aliter credit, Origenista est:» hoc acceperunt judices, quod revera in Origene dignissime detestatur Ecclesia, id est, quod etiam illi quos Dominus dicit aeterno supplicio puniendos, et ipse diabolus atque angeli ejus, post tempus licet prolixum purgati liberabuntur a poenis, et sanctis cum Deo regnantibus societate beatitudinis adhaerebunt. Hoc ergo Synodus dixit, «alienum non esse ab Ecclesia,» non secundum Pelagium, sed potius secundum Evangelium, quod tales iniqui et peccatores aeternis ignibus exurentur, quales tali supplicio dignos judicat Evangelium; et quod detestabiliter cum Origene sentiat, quisquis dixerit aliquando eorum finiri posse supplicium, quod Dominus dixit aeternum. De illis vero peccatoribus, quos dicit Apostolus, exusto eorum opere, tanquam per ignem salvos futuros, quoniam nihil Pelagio de iis evidenter objectum est, nihil judicaverunt. Quapropter, qui dicit iniquos et peccatores, quos aeterno supplicio veritas damnat, aliquando inde posse liberari, non inconvenienter eum Pelagius Origenistam vocat: sed rursus, qui nullum peccatorem in Dei judicio misericordia dignum existimat, quod vult ei nomen imponat, dum tamen et hunc errorem ecclesiastica veritate non recipi intelligat. Judicium enim sine misericordia fiet illi, qui non fecit misericordiam (Jacobi II, 13).