The next objection was to the effect that Pelagius in that same book of his wrote thus: " A man is able, if he likes, to be without sin; " and that writing to a certain widow he said, flat- teringly: " In thee piety may find a dwelling- place, such as she finds nowhere else; in thee righteousness, though a stranger, can find a home; truth, which no one any longer recog- nises, can discover an abode and a friend in thee; and the law of God, which almost every- body despises, may be honoured by thee alone." And in another sentence he writes to her: " O how happy and blessed art thou, when that righteousness which we must believe to flourish only in heaven has found a shelter on earth only in thy heart! " In another work addressed to her, after reciting the prayer of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, and teaching her in what manner saints ought to pray, he says: " He wor- thily raises his hands to God, and with a good conscience does he pour out his prayer, who is able to say, ' Thou, O Lord, knowest how holy, and harmless, and pure from all injury and iniq- uity and violence, are the hands which I stretch out to Thee; how righteous, and pure, and free from all deceit, are the lips with which I offer to Thee my supplication, that Thou wouldst have mercy upon me.' " To all this Pelagius said in answer: " We asserted that a man could be without sin, and could keep God's command- ments if he wished; for this capacity has been given to him by God. But we never said that any man could be found who at no time what- ever, from infancy to old age, had committed sin: but that if any person were converted from his sins, he could by his own labour and God's grace be without sin; and yet not even thus would he be incapable of change ever afterwards. As for the other statements which they have made against us, they are not to be found in our books, nor have we at any time said such things." Upon hearing this vindication, the synod put this question to him: " You have denied having ever written such words; are you therefore ready to anathematize those who do hold these opin- ions? " Pelagius answered: " I anathematize them as fools, not as heretics, for there is no dogma." The bishops then pronounced their judgment in these words: " Since now Pelagius hasvvithhis own mouth anathematized this vague statement as foolish verbiage, justly declaring in his reply, ' That a man is able with God's assistance and grace to be without sin,' let him now proceed to answer the other heads of accusa- tion against him."
CH.\P. 17. — EXAMINATION OF THE SIXTH CHARGE AND ANSWERS.
Well, now, had the judges either the power or the right to condemn these unrecognised and vague words, when no person on the other side was present to assert that Pelagius had written the very culpable sentences which were alleged to have been addressed by him to the widow? In such a matter, it surely could not be enough to produce a manuscript, and to read out of it words as his, if there were not also witnesses forthcoming in case he denied, on the words being read out, that they ever dropped from his pen. But even here the judges did all that lay in their power to do, when they asked Pelagius whether he would anathematize the persons who held such sentiments as he declared he had never himself propounded either in speech or in writ- ing. And when he answered that he did anathe- matize them as fools, what right had the judges to push the inquiry any further on the matter, in the absence of Pelagius' opponents?
CHAP. 18. THE SAME CONTINUED.
But perhaps the point requires some consid- eration, whether he was right in saying that " such as held the opinions in question deserved anathema, not as heretics, but as fools, since it was no dogma." The question, when fairly con- fronted, is no doubt far from being an unim- portant one, — how far a man deserves to be described as a heretic; on this occasion, how- ever, the judges acted rightly in abstaining from it altogether. If any one, for example, were to allege that eaglets are suspended in the talons of the parent bird, and so exposed to the rays of the sun, and such as wink are flung to the ground as spurious, the light being in some mys- terious way the gauge of their genuine nature, he is not to be accounted a heretic, if the story happens to be untrue.' And, since it occurs in the writings of the learned and is very com- monly received as fact, ought it to be considered a foolish thing to mention it, even though it be not true? much less ought our credit, which gains for us the name of being trustworthy, to be af- fected, on the one hand injuriously if the story be believed by us, or beneficially if disbelieved.* If, to go a step further in illustration, any one were from this opinion to contend that there existed in birds reasonable souls, from the notion that human souls at intervals passed into them, then indeed we should have to reject from ' It is told by Pliny, Hisi. Nat. x. 3 (3), and Lucan, Pharsalia, ix. Q02, etc.
' Creditnin, however, is read in both clauses; we should expect ncn credit UDi in one, as one reading has it. [? — W.J Chap. 20.]
ON THE PROCEEDINGS OF PELAGIUS.
191 our mind and ears alike an idea like this as the rankest heresy; and even if the story about the eagles were true (as there are many curious facts about bees before our eyes, that are true), we should still have to consider, and demonstrate, the great difference that exists between the condition of creatures like these, which are quite irrational, however surprising in their powers of sensation, and the nature which is common (not to men antl beasts, but) to men and angels. There are, to be sure, a great many foolish things said by fool- ish and ignorant persons, which yet fail to prove them heretics. One might instance the silly talk so commonly heard about the pursuits of other people, from persons who have never learned these pursuits, — equally hasty and untenable whether in the shape of excessive and indiscrimi- nate praise of those they love, or of blame in the case of those they happen to dislike. The same remark might be made concerning the usual cur- ent of human conversation: whenever it does touch on a subject which requires dogmatic acuracy of statement, but is thrown out at ran- dom or suggested by the passing moment, it is too often pervaded by foolish levity, whether uttered by the mouth or expressed in writing.
Many persons, indeed, when gently reminded of their reckless gossip, have afterwards much regretted their conduct; they scarcely recol- lected what they had never uttered with a fixed purpose, but had poured forth in a sheer volley of casual and unconsidered words. It is, un- happily, almost impossible to be quite clear of such faults. Who is he " that slippeth not in his tongue," ' and " offendeth not in word? " ^ It, however, makes 'all the difference in the world, to what extent, and from what motive, and whether in fact at all, a man when warned of his fault corrects it, or obstinately clings to it so as to make a dogma and settled opinion of that which he had not at first uttered on purpose, but only in levity. Although, then, it turns out eventually that every heretic is a fool, it does not follow that every fool must immediately be named a heretic. The judges were quite right in saying that Pelagius had anathematized the vague folly under consideration by its fitting designation; for even if it were heresy, there could be no doubt of its being foolish prattle. Whatever, therefore, it was, they designated the offence under a general name. But whether the quoted words had been used with any definitely dog- matic purpose, or only in a vague and indeter- minate sense, and with an unmeaningness which should be capable of an easy correction, they did not deem it necessary to discuss on the present occasion, since the man who was on his trial before them denied that the words * See Ecdus. xix. i6.
* See Jas. iii. 2.
were his at all, in whatever sense they had been employed.
CHAP. 19. — THE SAME CONTINUED.
Now it so happened that, while we were read- ing this defence of Pelagius in the small paper which we received at first,^ there were present certain holy brethren, who said that they had in their possession some hortatory or consolatory works which Pelagius had addressed to a widow lady whose name did not appear, and they ad- vised us to examine whether the words which he had abjured for his own occurred anywhere in these books. They were not themselves aware whether they did or not. The said books were accordingly read through, and the words in question were actually discovered in them. Moreover, they who had produced the copy of the book, affirmed that for now almost four years they had had these books as Pelagius', nor had they once heard a doubt expressed about his authorship. Considering, then, from the integrity of these servants of God, which was very well known to us, how impossible it was for them to use deceit in the matter, the conclusion seemed inevitable, that Pelagius must be sup- posed by us to have rather been the deceiver at his trial before the bishops; unless we should think it possible that something may have been published, even for so many years, in his name, although not actually composed by him; for our informants did not tell us that they had re- ceived the books from Pelagius himself, nor had they ever heard him admit his own authorship. Now, in my own case, certain of our brethren have told me that sundry writings have found their way into Spain under my name. Such persons, indeed, as had read my genuine writings could not recognise those others as mine; although by other persons my authorship of them was quite believed.
CHAP. 20. — THE SAME CONTINUED. PELAGIUS ACKNOWLEDGES THE DOCTRINE OF GRACE IN DECEPTIVE TERMS.
There can be no doubt that what Pelagius has acknowledged as his own is as yet very obscure. I suppose, however, that it will become apparent in the subsequent details of these proceedings. Now he says: " We have affirmed that a man is able to be without sin, and to keep the com- mandments of God if he wishes, inasmuch as God has given him this ability. But we have not said that any man can be found, who from infancy to old age has never committed sin; but that if any person were converted from his sins, he could by his own exertion and God's grace 3 See below, in chap. 57 [xxxi.].
192 THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.
[Chap. 21.
be without sin; and yet not even thus would he be incapable of change afterwards." Now it is quite uncertain what he means in these words by the grace of God; and the judges, catholic as they were, could not possibly understand by the phrase anything else than the grace which is so very strongly recommended to us in the apostle's teaching. Now this is the grace where- by we hope that we can be delivered from the body of this death through our Lord Jesus Christ,' [vil] 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 assist- ance to frail and corrupted nature. This grace is not the knowledge of the law, but is that of which the apostle says: " I will not make void the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain." 3 There- fore it is not " the letter that killeth, but the life- giving spirit." 4 For the knowledge of the law, without the grace of the Spirit, produces all kinds of concupiscence in man; for, as the apostle says, " I had not known sin but by the law: I had not known lust, unless the law had said, Thou shalt not covet. But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence." s By saying this, however, he blames not the law; he rather praises it, for he says afterwards: "The law indeed is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good." ^ And he goes on to ask: " Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, wrought death in me by that which is good." ^ And, again, he praises the law by saying: " We know that the law is spiritual; but I am carnal, sold under sin. For that which I do I know not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. If then I do that which I would not, I con- sent unto the law that it is good." « Observe, then, he knows the law, praises it, and consents to it; for what it commands, that he also wishes; and what it forbids, and condemns, that he also hates: but for all that, what he hates, that he actually does. There is in his mind, therefore, a knowledge of the holy law of God, but still his evil concupiscence is not cured. He has a good will within him, but still what he does is evil. Hence it comes to pass that, amidst the mutual struggles of the two laws within him, — " the law in his members warring against the law of his mind, and making him captive to the law of sin," 9 — he confesses his misery, and ex- claims in such words as these: " O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from this body of death? The grace of God, through Jesus Christ our Lord." ■ CHAP. 21 [vni.]
■THE SAME CONTINUED.
It is not nature, therefore, which, sold as it is under sin and wounded by the offence, longs for a Redeemer and Saviour; nor is it the knowl- edge of the law — through which comes the discovery, not the expulsion, of sin — which delivers us from the body of this death; but it is the Lord's good grace through our Lord Jesus Christ. '^ CHAP. 21 [iX.] THE S.4ME CONTINUED.
This grace is not dying nature, nor the slaying letter, but the vivifying spirit; for already did he possess nature with freedom of will, because he said: " To will is present with me." " Nature, however, in a healthy condition and without a flaw, he did not possess, for he said: " I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) dwelleth noth- ing good." " Already had he the knowledge of God's holy law, for he said: " I had not known sin but through the law; " '^ yet for all that, he did not possess strength and power to practise and fulfil righteousness, for he complained: *' What I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I." '3 And again, "How to accomplish that which is good I find not." " Therefore it is not from the liberty of the human will, nor from the precepts of the law, that there comes deliverance from the body of this death; for both of these he had already, — the one in his nature, the other in his learning; but all he wanted was the help of the grace of God, through Jesus Christ our Lord.
CHAP. 2 2 [X.1 THE SAME COOT'INUED. THE SYNOD SUPPOSED THAT THE GRACE ACKNOWL- EDGED BY PELAGIUS WAS THAT WHICH WAS SO THOROUGHLY KNOWN TO THE CHURCH.
This grace, then, which was most completely known in the catholic Church (as the bishops were well aware), they supposed Pelagius made confession of, when they heard him say that " a man, when converted from his sins, is able by his own exertion and the grace of God to be without sin." For my own part, however, I re- membered the treatise which had been given to me, that I might refute it, by those servants of God, who had been Pelagius' followers.'* They, notwithstanding their great affection for him, plainly acknowledged that the passage was his; when, on tliis question being proposed, because he had already given off'ence to very many per- sons from advancing views against the grace of God, he most expressly admitted that " what he meant by God's grace was that, when our nature was created, it received the capacity of not sin- 2 Matt, vi 13. 3 Gal. ii. 21.
8 Rom. vii. 14-16. 9 Rom. vii. 23.
" Rom. vii. 18.
12 Rom. vii. 7.
'° Rom. vii. 25.
" Rom. vii. 15.. J u Timasius and Jacobus, at whose instance Augustm wrote, and to whom he addressed his book De Naturd et Gratid.
Chap. 24.]
ON THE PROCEEDINGS OF PELAGIUS.
193 ning, because it was created with free will." On account, therefore, of this treatise, I cannot help feeling still anxious, whilst many of the brethren, who are well acquainted with his discussions, share in my anxiety, lest under the ambiguity whicli notoriously characterizes his words there lies some latent reserve, and lest he should after- wards tell his followers that it was without preju- dice to his own doctrine that he made any admissions, — discoursing thus: " I no doubt asserted that a man was able by his own exer- tion and the grace of God to live without sin; but you know very well what I mean by grace; and you may recollect reading that grace is that in which we are created by God with a free will." Accordingly, while the bishops understood him to mean the grace by which we have by adoption been made new creatures, not that by which we were created (for most plainly does Holy Scrip- ture Instruct us in the former sense of grace as tlie true one), ignorant of his being a heretic, they acquitted him as a catholic' I must say that my suspicion is excited also by this, that in the work which I answered, he most openly said that '■ righteous.Abel never sinned at all." ^ Now, however, he thus expresses himself: " But we did not say that any man could be found who at no time whatever, from infancy to old age, has committed sin; but that, if any man were con- verted from his sins, he could by his own labour and Ciod's grace be without sin." 3 When speak- ing of righteous Abel, he did not say that after being converted from his sins he became sinless in a new life, but that he never committed sin at all. If. then, that book be his, it must of course be corrected and amended from his answer. For I should be sorry to say that he was insin- cere in his more recent statement; lest perhaps he should say that he had forgotten what he had previously written in the book we have quoted. Let us therefore direct our view to what after- wards occurred. Now, from the sequel of these ecclesiastical proceedings, we can by God's help show that, although Pelagius, as some suppose, cleared himself in his examination, and was at all events acquitted by his judges (who were, however, but human beings after all), that this great heresy,'* which we should be most un- willing to see making further progress or becom- ing aggravated in guilt, was undoubtedly itself condemned.
CH.\P. 23 [XT.J — THE SEVENTH ITEM OF THE ACCUSATION: THE BREVIATES OF CTELESTIUS OBJECTED TO PELAGIUS.
Then follow sundry statements charged against ' The reader may consult the treatise De NaturA et Gratid, chs 53 aiicl 54, on this opinion of Pel.igiiis. ^ See De iVaturd et Gratid, xxxvii (44). 3 See above, ch ib (vi ). ■• Hanc talem ha^resim.
Pelagius, which are said to be found among the opinions of his disciple Coelestius: how that " Adam was created mortal, and would have died whether he had sinned or not sinned; that Adam's sin injured only himself and not the human race; that tlie law no less than the gospel leads us to the kingdom; that there were sinless men previous to the coming of Christ; that new-born infants are in the same condition as Adam was before the fall; that the whole human race does not, on the one hand, die through Adam's death or transgression, nor, on the other hand, does the whole human race rise again through the resurrection of Christ." These have been so objected to, that they are even said to have been, after a full hearing, condemned at Carthage by your holiness and other bishops associated with you. 5 I was not present on that occasion, as you will recollect; but afterwards, on my arrival at Carthage, I read over the Acts of the synod, some of which I perfectly well remember, but I do not know whether all the tenets now mentioned occur among them. But what matters it if some of them were possibly not mentioned, and so not included in the con- demnation of the synod when it is quite clear that they deserve condemnation? Sundry other points of error were next alleged against him, connected with the mention of my own name.'^ They had been transmitted to me from Sicily, some of our Catholic brethren there being per- plexed by questions of this kind; and I drew up a reply to them in a little work addressed to Hilary,'' who had consulted me respecting them in a letter. My answer, in my opinion, was a sufficient one. These are the errors referred to: "That a man is able to be without sin if he wishes. That infants, even if they die unbap- tized, have eternal life. That rich men, even if they are baptized, unless they renounce all, have, whatever good they may seem to have done, nothing of it reckoned to them; neither can they possess the kingdom of God."'
CHAP. 24. pelagius' AN.SWER TO THE CHARGES BROUGHT TOGETHER UNDER THE SEVENTH ITE.M, The following, as the proceedings testify, was Pelagius' own answer to these charges against him: "Concerning a man's being able indeed to be without sin, we have spoken," says he, " already; concerning the fact, however, that before the Lord's coming there were persons without sin, we say now that, previous to Christ's advent, some men lived holy and righteous li\-es, according to the teaching of the sacred Scrip- tures. The rest were not said by me, as even their testimony goes to show, and for them, I 5 Compare Augustin's work /?(• /"ciTfrt/^ n^/^/wrt//, ch xi (12). " Sei same treatise as before, and same chapter. ' See Augustin's letter to Hilary, m Epist 157.
194 THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.
[Chap. 25.
do not feel that I am responsible. But for the satisfaction of the holy synod, I anathematize those who either now hold, or have ever held, these opinions." After hearing this answer of his, the synod said: " With regard to these charges aforesaid, Pelagius has in our presence given us sufficient and proper satisfaction, by anathematizing the opinions which were not his." We see, therefore, and maintain that the most pernicious evils of this heresy have been con- demned, not only by Pelagius, but also by the holy bishops who presided over that inquiry: — that ''Adam was made mortal;" (and, that the meaning of this statement might be more clearly understood, it was adiled, " and he would have died whether he had sinned or not sinned; " ) that his sin injured only himself and not the human race; that tlie law, no less than the gospel, leads us to the kingdom of heaven; that newborn infants are in the same condition that Adam was .before the fall; that the entire human race does .not, on the one hand, die through Adam's death and transgression, nor, on the otlier hand, does .the whole human race rise again through the resurrection of Christ; that infants, even if they die unbai)tized, have eternal life; that rich men, even if baptized, unless they renounce and give up all,.have, whatever good they may seem to have doae, nothing of it reckoned to them, neither can they ]:)0.ssess the kingdom of God;" — all these opinions, at any rate, were clearly con- •deraned in that ecclesiastical court, — Pelagius ,lironouncing the anathema, and the bishops the interlocutory sentence.