(Read Part One, Part Two and Part Three)

Pelagius

In the controversy over the ideas of Pelagius, it was Augustine’s theology that eventually won out. Although the Catholic doctrine moved more in a semi-Pelagian direction in the 16th Century, many Protestant denominations, particularly those derived from Calvinism, retained many Augustinian notions of Original Sin and Grace. There are several reasons for why the Church accepted Augustine’s ideas. These reasons are a complex mixture of political reasons, theological reasons, and for reasons involving the politics of the Church itself.

Political Reasons for the Acceptance of Augustine

One of the main reasons why the Church accepted the Augustinian position was the prestige and authority of Augustine himself. At the time of the Pelagian controversy, Augustine was already successful in defending orthodoxy and having the Donatist and Manichean sects declared heresies. Augustine was a well-known, respected, and established Bishop. Pelagius, on the other hand, was just a layperson. Although some of his contemporaries called him a monk, he was not a part of any religious order. So Augustine was definitely the man of influence and credentials in this debate.

Another political aspect of the development of Pelagius was that as his doctrine continued to be attacked, his followers appealed for the protection of the Bishop Nestorius in the Eastern part of the Chruch. This protection was granted. However, Nestorius himself was condemned as a heretic shortly thereafter. After Nestorius was condemned, Pelagius and his followers were again attacked by Augustine, Jerome, and others as heretics.

Another political factor that may have turned Church opinion against Pelagius was the destruction of St. Jerome’s church. Jerome, a noted clergyman of the time, wrote a tract against Pelagianism. Shortly after the publication of this treatise, followers of Pelagius marched on Jerome’s church and destroyed it. This incident undoubtedly removed a lot of sympathy for Pelagius and his followers, which may have affected the outcome of the controversy. (Though to be fair, Augustine himself never used this line of attack against the Pelagian theology.)

Theological Reasons for the Acceptance of Augustine

There are several reasons that Augustine’s theology was accepted from a theological perspective. One reason is that Augustine’s interpretation of Original Sin is much more consistent with a literal interpretation of Genesis. Of particular importance to Augustine and others at the time was the institution of infant baptism. Most bishops and theologians of the time accepted the need for infant baptism. In their eyes, Pelagius’ rejection of the need for infant baptism might damn Christians. Another reason for the rejection of Pelagius in favor of Augustine is that many felt that Pelagius’ view exaggerated the importance of Man in his own Salvation, denying God any credit. To many Christians of the time, this took away from the glory of God and led down a path of excessive pride. Augustine’s theology is far more theocentric than Pelagius’, and this may have also been a large influence on the views of the Church.

Augustine and the Preservation of the Church

Many of the other reasons for the acceptance of Augustine’s ideas involve the preservation of the Church. Many people felt that Pelagius’ views, in making the Chruch unnecessary for Salvation, might weaken the Church itself. This idea is bolstered by the fact that Pelagius held heterodox notions about the relationship of laypeople to the clergy. Pelagius felt that laypersons had a duty to teach each other about the Faith, while most of the clergy thought that it was the responsibility of the Church hierarchy to do so.

Also, Leszek Kolakowski points out that the idea of Predestination energizes a core of believers to the Church. Since these people feel that they are the chosen of God, then they tend to lead exemplary Christian lives. However, they feel that their “virtuous conduct is not the cause of their salvation but rather its symptom.” To these militants, Pelagius’ view would judge the Church by the virtue of its congregation, and would reduce the Church to a “spiritual aristocracy” since not many would be able to achieve great virtue. For a similar reason, the Donatist heresy was rejected.

For many Christians, the innocence of the Church as an institution was irrelevant to the sins and virtues of the clergy. This idea was developed in response to the Donatists, who felt that priests who had committed deadly sins would not be able to perform Mass. Although Pelagius was not a Donatist, Augustine and others felt that his ideas of salvation might lead the church in a Donatist direction because clergy would be judged by their ability to be free of sin. This would negate the idea that the Church, as an institution, is sinless. Without this sinlessness, many felt that the Church would have no power of Redemption.

Conclusion

For modern observers, both Augustine’s theology of Salvation and his theodicy are difficult to support. There are simply too many questions regarding the nature of God and predestination that Augustine leaves unanswered. Although Augustine’s theology was eventually accepted by the Church for various political and theological reasons, Pelagius’ theology provides a worldview that is consistent with the words of Christ, and also works well with Hick’s ideas of a vale of soul-making and Adams’ paradigm of redemptive suffering. In other words, it was Pelagius, not Augustine, who was keeping with the true spirit of Christ.