Semi-pelagian Controversy

With the condemnation of Pelagianism the doctrine of Augustine in its

logically worked out details was not necessarily approved. The necessity

of baptism for the remission of sins in all cases was approved as well as

the necessity of grace. The doctrine of predestination, an essential

feature in the Augustinian system, was not only not accepted but was

vigorously opposed by many who heartily condemned Pelagianism. The ensuing

discussion, known as the Semi-Pelagian controversy (427-529), was largely

carried on in Gaul, which after the Vandal occupation of North Africa,

became the intellectual centre of the Church in the West. The leading

opponent of Augustine was John Cassian (ob. 435), abbot of a monastery at

Marseilles, hence the term Massilians applied to his party, and his pupil,

Vincent of Lerins, author of Commonitorium, written 434. The chief

Augustinians were Hilary and Prosper of Aquitaine. The discussion was not

continuous. About 475 it broke out again when Lucidus was condemned at a

council at Lyons and forced to retract his predestinarian views; and again

about 520. The matter received what is regarded as its solution in the

Council of Orange, 529, confirmed by Boniface II in 531. By the decrees of

this council so much of the Augustinian system as could be combined with

the teaching and practice of the Church as to the sacraments was formally

approved.





(a) John Cassian. Collationes, XIII. 7 ff. (MSL, 49:908.)





John Cassian, born about 360, was by birth and education a man of

the East, and does not appear in the West until 405, when he went

to Rome on some business connected with the exile of Chrysostom,

his friend and patron. In 415 he established two monasteries at

Marseilles, one for men and the other for women. He had himself

been educated as a monk and made a careful study of monasticism in

Egypt and Palestine. Western monasticism is much indebted to him

for his writings. De Institutis Coenobiorum and the

Collationes. In the former, he describes the monastic system of

Palestine and Egypt and the principal vices to which the monastic

life is liable; in the latter, divided into three parts, Cassian

gives reports or what purports to be reports of conversations he

and his friend Germanus had with Egyptian ascetics. These books

were very popular during the Middle Ages and exerted a wide

influence.





Ch. 7. When His [God's] kindness sees in us even the very smallest spark

of good-will shining forth or which He himself has, as it were, struck out

from the hard flints of our hearts, He fans it and fosters it and nurses

it with His breath, as He "will have all men to be saved and to come unto

the knowledge of the truth" [I Tim. 2:4]. For He is true and lieth not

when He lays down with an oath: "As I live, saith the Lord, I will not the

death of a sinner, but that he should turn from his way and live" [Ezek.

33:11]. For if he willeth not that one of His little ones should perish,

how can we think without grievous blasphemy that He willeth not all men

universally, but only some instead of all be saved. Those then who perish,

perish against His will, as He testifieth against each of them day by day:

"Turn from your evil ways for why will ye die, O house of Israel?" [Ezek.

33:11] The grace of Christ is then at hand every day, which, while it

"willeth all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth,"

calleth all without exception, saying: "Come all unto me all ye that labor

and are heavy laden and I will give you rest" [Matt. 11:28]. But if he

calls not all generally but only some, it follows that not all are heavy

laden with either original sin or actual sin, and that this saying is not

a true one: "For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God" [Rom.

3:23]; nor can we believe that "death passed on all men" [Rom. 5:12]. And

so far do all who perish, perish against the will of God, that God cannot

be said to have made death, as the Scripture itself testifieth: "For God

made not death, neither hath He pleasure in the destruction of the living"

[Wisdom 1:13].



Ch. 8. When He sees anything of good-will arisen in us He at once

enlightens it and strengthens it and urges it on to salvation, giving

increase to that which He himself implanted or He sees to have arisen by

our own effort.



Ch. 9. But that it may be still more evident that through the good of

nature, which is bestowed by the kindness of the Creator, sometimes the

beginnings of a good-will arise, yet cannot come to the completion of

virtue unless they are directed by the Lord, the Apostle is a witness,

saying: "For to will is present with me, but to perform what is good I

find not" [Rom. 7:18].



Ch. 11. If we say that the beginnings of a good-will are always inspired

in us by the grace of God, what shall we say about the faith of Zacchaeus,

or of the piety of that thief upon the cross, who by their own desire

brought violence to bear upon the Kingdom of Heaven, and so anticipated

the special leadings of their callings?



Ch. 12. We should not hold that God made man such that he neither wills

nor is able to do good. Otherwise He has not granted him a free will, if

He has suffered him only to will or be capable of evil, but of himself

neither to will nor be capable of what is good. It cannot, therefore, be

doubted that there are by nature seeds of goodness implanted in every soul

by the kindness of the Creator; but unless these are quickened by the

assistance of God, they will not be able to attain to an increase of

perfection; for, as the blessed Apostle says: "Neither is he that planteth

anything nor he that watereth, but God that giveth the increase" [I Cor.

3:7]. But that freedom of will is to some degree in a man's power is very

clearly taught in the book called The Pastor,(179) where two angels are

said to be attached to each one of us, i.e. a good and a bad one, while

it lies in a man's own option to choose which to follow. And, therefore,

the will always remains free in man, and it can either neglect or delight

in the grace of God. For the Apostle would not have commanded, saying,

"Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling" [Phil. 2:12], had he

not known that it could be advanced or neglected by us. But that they

should not think that they did not need divine aid he adds: "For it is God

who worketh in you both to will and accomplish His good pleasure" [Phil.

2:13]. The mercy of the Lord, therefore, goes before the will of man, for

it is said, "My God will prevent me with His mercy" [Psalm 59:10], and

again, that He may put our desire to the test, our will goes before God

who waits, and for our good delays.





(b) Vincent of Lerins, Commonitorium, chs. 2, 23, 26, (MSL, 50:659.)





The rule of Catholic verity.





Vincent of Lerins wrote his Commonitorium in 434, three years

after the death of Augustine, who had been commended in 432 to the

clergy of Gaul by Celestine of Rome [Ep. 21; Denziger, nn.

128-142; Mansi IV, 454 ff.]. Vincent attacked Augustine in his

Commonitorium, not openly, but, so far as the work has been

preserved, covertly, under the pseudonym of Peregrinus. The work

consists of two books, of which the second is lost with the

exception of what appear to be some concluding chapters, or a

summary taking the place of the book. In the first book he lays

down the general principle as to the tests of Catholic truth. In

doing so he is careful to point out several cases of very great

teachers, renowned for learning, ability, and influence, who,

nevertheless, erred against the test of Catholic truth, and

brought forward opinions which, on account of their novelty, were

false. It is a working out in detail of the principles of the idea

of Tertullian in his De Proescriptione [v. supra, § 27]. The

Augustinian doctrines of predestination and grace could not stand

the test of the appeal to antiquity. After laying down his test of

truth it appears to have been the author's intention to prove

thereby the doctrine of Augustine false. The so-called "Vincentian

rule" is often quoted without a thought that it was intended,

primarily, as an attack upon Augustine. The Commonitorium may be

found translated in PNF, ser. II, vol. XI.





Ch. 2 [4]. I have often inquired earnestly and attentively of very many

men eminent for sanctity and learning, how and by what sure and, so to

speak, universal rule I might be able to distinguish the truth of the

Catholic faith from the falsehood of heretical pravity, and I have always,

and from nearly all, received an answer to this effect: That whether I or

any one else should wish to detect the frauds of heretics as they arise,

or to avoid their snares, and to continue sound and complete in the faith,

we must, the Lord helping, fortify our faith in two ways: first, by the

authority of the divine Law, and then, by the tradition of the Catholic

Church.



But here some one, perhaps, will ask: Since the canon of Scripture is

complete and sufficient for everything, and more than sufficient, what

need is there to add to it the authority of the Church's interpretation?

For this reason: because, owing to the depth of Holy Scripture, all do not

accept it in one and the same sense, but one understands its words one

way, another in another way; so that almost as many opinions may be drawn

from it as there are men. Therefore it is very necessary, on account of

so great intricacies, and of such various errors, that the rule of a right

understanding of the prophets and Apostles should be framed in accordance

with the standard of ecclesiastical and Catholic interpretation.



Moreover, in the Catholic Church itself all possible care should be taken

that we hold that faith which has been believed everywhere, always, and by

all. For that is truly and properly "Catholic" which, as the name implies

and the reason of the thing declares, comprehends all universally. This

will be the case if we follow universality, antiquity, and consent. We

shall follow universality in this way, if we confess that one faith to be

true which the whole Church throughout the world confesses; antiquity, if

we in nowise depart from those interpretations which it is manifest were

notoriously held by our holy ancestors and fathers; consent in like

manner, if in antiquity itself we adhere to the consentient definitions

and determinations of all, or at least almost all, priests and doctors.



Ch. 23 [59]. The Church of Christ, the careful and watchful guardian of

the doctrines deposited in her charge, never changes anything in them,

never diminishes, never adds; does not cut off what is necessary, does not

add what is superfluous, does not lose her own, does not appropriate what

is another's, but, while dealing faithfully and judiciously with ancient

doctrine, keeps this one object carefully in view--if there be anything

which antiquity has left shapeless and rudimentary, to fashion and to

polish it; if anything already reduced to shape and developed, to

consolidate and strengthen it; if any already ratified and defined, to

keep and guard it. Finally, what other objects have councils ever aimed at

in their decrees, than to provide that what was before believed in

simplicity, should in the future be believed intelligently; that what was

before preached coldly, should in the future be preached earnestly; that

what before was practised negligently, should henceforth be practised with

double solicitude?





Passage referring especially to Augustine.





Ch. 26 [69]. But what do they say? "If thou be the Son of God, cast

thyself down"; that is, "If thou wouldest be a son of God, and wouldest

receive the inheritance of the Kingdom of Heaven, cast thyself down; that

is, cast thyself down from the doctrine and tradition of that sublime

Church, which is imagined to be nothing less than the very temple of God."

And if one should ask one of the heretics who gives this advice: How do

you prove it? What ground have you for saying that I ought to cast away

the universal and ancient faith of the Catholic Church? he has only the

answer ready: "For it is written"; and forthwith he produces a thousand

testimonies, a thousand examples, a thousand authorities from the Law,

from the Psalms, from the Apostles, from the prophets, by means of which,

interpreted on a new and wrong principle, the unhappy soul is precipitated

from the height of Catholic truth to the lowest abyss of heresy. Then with

the accompanying promises, the heretics are wont marvellously to beguile

the incautious. For they dare to teach and promise that in their church,

that is, in the conventicle of their communion, there is a certain great

and special and altogether personal grace of God, so that whosoever

pertain to their number, without any labor, without any effort, without

any industry, even though they neither ask, nor seek, nor knock,(180) have

such a dispensation from God, that borne up of angel hands, that is,

preserved by the protection of angels, it is impossible they should ever

dash their feet against a stone, that is, that they should ever be

offended.





(c) Council of Orange, A. D. 529, Canons. Bruns II, 176. Cf.

Denziger, n. 174.





The end of the Semi-Pelagian controversy.





The Council of Orange, A. D. 529, was made up of several bishops

and some lay notables who had gathered for the dedication of a

church at Orange. Caesarius of Arles had received from Felix IV of

Rome eight statements against the Semi-Pelagian teaching. He added

some more of his own to them, and had them passed as canons by the

company gathered for the dedication. It is noteworthy that the lay

notables signed along with the bishops. Boniface II, to whom the

canons were sent, confirmed them in 532: "We approve your above

written confession as agreeable to the Catholic rule of the

Fathers." Cf. Hefele, § 242. For the sources of the canons, see

Seeberg, History of Doctrines, Eng. trans., I, 380, note 3. For

the sake of brevity the scriptural quotations are not given,

merely indicated by references to the Bible.





Canon 1. Whoever says that by the offence of the disobedience of Adam not

the entire man, that is, in body and soul, was changed for the worse, but

that the freedom of his soul remained uninjured, and his body only was

subject to corruption, has been deceived by the error of Pelagius and

opposes Scripture [Ezek. 18:20; Rom. 6:16; II Peter 2:19].



Canon 2. Whoever asserts that the transgression of Adam injured himself

only, and not his offspring, or that death only of the body, which is the

penalty of sin, but not also sin, which is the death of the soul, passed

by one man to the entire human race, wrongs God and contradicts the

Apostle [Rom. 5:12].



Canon 3. Whoever says that the grace of God can be bestowed in reply to

human petition, but not that the grace brings it about so that it is asked

for by us, contradicts Isaiah the prophet and the Apostle [Is. 65:1; Rom.

10:20].



Canon 4. Whoever contends that our will, to be set free from sin, may

anticipate God's action, and shall not confess that it is brought about by

the infusion of the Holy Spirit and his operation in us, that we wish to

be set free, resists that same Holy Spirit speaking through Solomon: "The

will is prepared by the Lord" [Proverbs 8:35, cf. LXX; not so in Vulgate

or Heb.], and the Apostle [Phil. 2:13].



Canon 5. Whoever says the increase, as also the beginning of faith and the

desire of believing, by which we believe in Him who justifies the impious,

and we come to the birth of holy baptism, is not by the free gift of

grace, that is, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit turning our will

from unbelief to belief, from impiety to piety, but belongs naturally to

us, is declared an adversary of the apostolic preaching [Phil. 1:6; Ephes.

2:8]. For they say that faith by which we believe in God is natural, and

they declare that all those who are strangers to the Church of Christ in

some way are believing.



Canon 6. Whoever says that to us who, without the grace of God, believe,

will, desire, attempt, struggle for, watch, strive for, demand, ask,

knock, mercy is divinely bestowed, and does not rather confess that it is

brought about by the infusion and inspiration of the Holy Spirit in us

that believe, will, and do all these other things as we ought, and annexes

the help of grace to human humility and obedience, and does not admit that

it is the gift of that same grace that we are obedient and humble, opposes

the Apostle [I Cor. 4:7].



Canon 7. Whoever asserts that by the force of nature we can rightly think

or choose anything good, which pertains to eternal life, or be saved, that

is, assent to the evangelical preaching, without the illumination of the

Holy Spirit, who gives to all grace to assent to and believe the truth, is

deceived by an heretical spirit, not understanding the voice of the Lord

[John 15:5], and of the Apostle [II Cor. 3:5].



Canon 8. Whoever asserts that some by mercy, others by free will, which in

all who have been born since the transgression of the first man is

evidently corrupt, are able to come to the grace of baptism, is proved an

alien from the faith. For he asserts that the free will of all has not

been weakened by the sin of the first man, or he evidently thinks that it

has been so injured that some, however, are able without the revelation of

God to attain, by their own power, to the mystery of eternal salvation.

Because the Lord himself shows how false this is, who declares that not

some, but no one was able to come to Him unless the Father drew him [John

6:4], and said so to Peter [Matt. 16:17] and the Apostle [I Cor. 12:3].





The canons that follow are less important. The whole concludes

with a brief statement regarding the points at issue, as follows:





And so according to the above sentences of the Holy Scriptures and

definitions of ancient Fathers, by God's aid, we believe that we ought to

believe and preach:



That by the sin of the first man, free will was so turned aside and

weakened that afterward no one is able to love God as he ought, or believe

in God, or do anything for God, which is good, except the grace of divine

mercy comes first to him [Phil. 1:6, 29; Ephes. 2:8; I Cor. 4:7, 7:25;

James 1:17; John 3:27].



We also believe this to be according to the Catholic faith, that grace

having been received in baptism, all who have been baptized, can and

ought, by the aid and support of Christ, to perform those things which

belong to the salvation of the soul, if they labor faithfully.



But not only do we not believe that some have been predestinated to evil

by the divine power, but also, if there are any who wish to believe so

evil a thing, we say to them, with all detestation, anathema.



Also this we profitably confess and believe, that in every good we do not

begin and afterward are assisted by the mercy of God, but without any good

desert preceding, He first inspires in us faith and love in Him, so that

we both faithfully seek the sacrament of baptism, and after baptism with

His help are able to perform those things which are pleasing to Him.

Whence it is most certainly to be believed that in the case of that thief,

whom the Lord called to the fatherland of paradise, and Cornelius the

Centurion, to whom an angel of the Lord was sent, and Zacchaeus, who was

worthy of receiving the Lord himself, their so wonderful faith was not of

nature, but was the gift of the divine bounty.



And because we desire and wish our definition of the ancient Fathers,

written above, to be a medicine not only for the clergy but also for the

laity, it has been decided that the illustrious and noble men, who have

assembled with us at the aforesaid festival, shall subscribe it with their

own hand.