What are your views in regards to the "heretical" postion that humans are not born with original sin and that we have the free will to choose between good and evil?
To those unfamiliar, Pelagius was a contemporary and rival of St Augustine who believes that suffering is a result of our free will and that Adam's sin did not taint all of mankind. Additionally, due to being born sinless, babies who die in infancy are not banished to hell (or limbo as Augustine believes). Forgiveness of our sins are given to those who sincerely repent as a just God would grant forgiveness to all those who deserve it.
Most Christians that I know (Catholics & Anglicans) hold those beliefs despite being in stark contrast to the postion of St Augustine who claims that while we have free will we are unable to stop ourselves from sinning (a paradox) and we unable to choose good without divine intervention. As such, unbaptized infants will be consigned to hell as they are inherently evil and no one is worthy of forgiveness but it is nonetheless bestowed by God to those he deems worthy.
While Augustine position strengthens the role that Christ's death has in absolving us from sin, it worsened the problem of evil as God will punish us despite our nature preventing us from being free of sin.
As an American, one is presupposes to the idea of absolute free will that Pelagius espouses and indeed it takes away much of the atheists points against orthodox Christianity such as fate of the unlearned, problem of evil and status of infants. It is a popular and modern approach of Christianity that fits with 21st century morality (despite being an older postion than Augustinianism) and I wonder what are your thoughts on the "heresy".
Or do you believe it takes away from Jesus's sacrifice?
PS- I'm an atheist. I don't care much more about Pelagianism than Augustinianism, nor am I here to defend it. I'm merely presenting the thesis that Pelagianism is a much more humane and moral worldview than Augustinianism, which solves the Problem of Evil as well as remove the necessity of a human/god sacrifice for us to be absolved.
Hey all
I have struggled with some aspects of Christianity since coming to faith from atheism. For example, a literal Adam and Eve, original sin etc. And I've found myself coming into conflict with other Christians on these topics... So I've recently started a study of both the Bible and Church history to find out what I believe, and how it relates to Scripture. This process is still in it's infancy - I literally started last night with Ephesians and some initial Wikipedia browsing (to establish a lay of the land before diving in deeper with better sources).
In this process I came across the theological positions of Augustinism and Pelagianism - the latter of which was declared a heresy I believe. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelagianism#Pelagianism_and_Augustinianism) . I found that Augustinianism captures many of my current spiritual "issues" that I am working through. For example the concepts of inherited moral guilt and a corrupted nature, the inability to choose good absent divine grace, the fate of infants, predestination etc.
I find myself far more aligned with the Pelagianism position. Where I think I disagree is that I believe that a sinless life is practically impossible to achieve, that salvation will ultimately be bestowed by God's grace on all those who wish to be reconciled to him etc. I believe that process of reconciliation begins here in this life.
I am curious the views of those who were not raised in the Church on these issues. And perhaps some advice as to what I am missing here as Pelagianism seems to be rejected as heresy by global Christianity.
I fail to see the difference. Not looking for an argument. I am Orthodox.
So I've been reading Orthodox doctrine lately and I've read a few sources on the Orthodox view of Mary now that seem like Pelagianism to me.
As a Protestant I was always taught that Mary had other children and was not sinless but after reading early church sources on this I'm more open to the idea of her being ever virgin and kept free from sin. I know Roman Catholics believe that the grace of Jesus was specially applied to her and she was immaculately conceived and kept from sin by the grace of God, which I can see happening, but from what I'm reading about Eastern Orthodox beliefs she simply chose not to sin but was no different in her ability to than you or I. I understand Orthodoxy denies the immaculate conception because it doesn't believe in the stain of original sin, but wouldn't Mary simply not sinning of her own accord be Pelagianism? It's possible that the sources I'm reading are incomplete, but everything I've read so far has no mention of God keeping her from sin or doing this by his grace but that she simply chose to not sin, is there some hung I'm missing? Help a confused but curious Protestant out.
What I am going to write is not meant to be taken as any more than a reflection of mine upon the subject of the pelagic religion not a request nor anything of the sort, at most a humble suggestion
I would start saying I like a lot the idea of Pelagianism and that I think that it has great, great potential to be an exceptionally interesting lore and religion I’d love if it had a more Christian theme to it, this is mind you not for any religious reasons but simply because I find exceptionally fascinating how Christianity entered and blended with the European seafaring culture and mythos in the centuries, melding together exceptionally pagan themes and an often deep faith in the Christian god (such for example saint Nicolas syncretizing so deeply with the cult of Neptune to such a point that in a minor island of Greece to this day a lamb is sacrificed in his name or such as the seafaring Mediterranean cult of the black madonna that syncretizes the old Cananean goddess Astarte in the figure of Saint Mary) for as you probably all already know sailors were often very religious and very superstitious folk for they lived in a world, the sea with its capricious changes of will, where death could come at any moment.
I’m thinking of a very natural and immanent perception of "God" where the divine would be seen reflected in the sea itself as a manifestation of both the creative and destructive omnipotent power of the divine being that can give and take everything away at any moment.
I’m thinking about the myth of Jonah where the whale is the herald of the divine will, which, by the way, would fit perfectly with the themes already portrayed and all that has already been written about the religion which could remain untouched as the pagan and Christian would be one and the same, I’m thinking of the conception of God shown in novels such as the Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner, Le Novelle Marinaresche di Mastro Catrame by Emilio Salgari and Moby Dick.
The religion would have a very stern and protestant code of values paired with a very paganistic respect/fear of natural spirits (think of the Albatross) with a society shaped by the strict but justified hierarchy of power of seafaring people (a ship crew hierarchy obviously ) mostly focused on piety, humbleness, respect, honest hard work and the capacity to overcome ordeals, Captain Ahab would be seen both as an example of the perfect believer stern and hardworking, deeply devoted to his holy duty and in the constant
... keep reading on reddit ➡Since a bunch of people on r/Reformed have completely forgotten the differences between heretical and non-heretical soteriologies, as this thread clearly proves, allow me to provide a refresher.
Pelagianism teaches that the Fall did not corrupt man's nature or will at all, but only left him with a bad example. Divine grace is optional: it helps us to salvation but is not strictly necessary. Man is himself able to go from unbelief to faith to all benefits of salvation.
Semi-pelagianism teaches that, even after the Fall, man's natural powers are enough to bring him to genuine faith on his own, but the growth and perfection of faith require the aid of divine grace. Man is himself about to go from unbelief to faith, but grace is necessary to go from faith to all benefits of salvation.
Any and all systems which, with or without free will, require the gracious work of the Spirit before a response of faith is possible cannot be classed with Pelagian and Semi-pelagian heresy. This includes Arminianism and so-called Southern Baptist traditionalism. It is not heretical to affirm the continued existence of free will so long as it is at least unable to attain to saving faith apart from grace.
I don't know what ungracious spirit constantly prompts a number of Reformed people to abandon basic charity and logical precision to classify all non-Calvinistic systems as Pelagian or Semi-pelagian heresy, but the correct solution and response is repentance.
At a glance, Pelagius doesn't seem to have been spouting off anything too strange. Anti-predestination, pro-salvation through works. Why were so many in the church threatened by this?
Additionally, how strong did Pelagianism become in Britain, and did it ever have much hold beyond the island?
[Late Antiquity] - [UK] - [Religion]
In light of the recent discussions on these topics, I've put together a list of resources to help those who want to study this issue on a deeper level. I've also added these resources to our Christian Resources page.
- What is the biblical evidence for original sin?
- Sin, Wayne Grudem - Grudem's chapter on sin from his systematic theology.
- The Cause of God and Truth, John Gill - John Gill answers prooftexts and covers multiple topics including original sin from both biblical and historical perspectives.
- The Doctrine of Original Sin Defended, Jonathan Edwards
- Man in the State of Sin, Louis Berkhof - a very thorough and systematic treatment of the doctrine of sin, including thorough discussion on the doctrine of original sin.
I've been doing some research on Arminianism (my understanding is it's one of the core tenets of Methodism via Wesley), and I'm having some trouble understanding the issues. I've always understood Arminianism to be somewhat synonymous with Pelagianism which is synonymous with works based salvation, but reading more about Arminianism, I'm afraid I don't see the connection between the Five Articles of Remonstrance and works based salvation.
The pro-Arminian sites provide discussion about things I'm familiar with and believe in, such as being saved by faith and substitutionary atonement, but the anti-Arminian sites focus on other points like works being required for salvation that the pro-Arminian sites don't address. It's hard to really nail down the criticisms of Arminianism when the pro-Arminian sites say something like "those are common misconceptions that we don't actually believe."
Can someone more intimiately familiar explain the crux of what exactly is the issue with Arminianism from the reformed/protestant perspective? All the insight from /r/Christianity had a distinct non-reformed bent and I'm interested in both perspectives.
A new document from the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith highlights “some aspects of Christian salvation that can be difficult to understand today because of recent cultural changes.”
The Letter, entitled Placuit Deo, is dated 22 February, the feast of the Chair of Peter, and is addressed to the Bishops of the Catholic Church --and more generally, to all the faithful.
Placuit Deo focuses especially on two modern tendencies: on the one hand, a kind of “neo-pelagianism,” an individualism that believes human beings can save themselves; and, on the other, a form of “neo-gnosticism,” a vision of salvation that would consist entirely in interior union with God, while disregarding relationships with other people, and with all of creation.
http://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2018-03/congregation-doctrine-faith-placuit-deo-christian-salvation.html
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20180222_placuit-deo_en.html
Semi-Pelagianism in The Oxford Guide to the Historical Reception of Augustine, Ed. Karla Pollmann and Willemien Otten
http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199299164.001.0001/acref-9780199299164-e-603
Semi-Pelagianism in The Oxford Guide to the Historical Reception of Augustine, Ed. Karla Pollmann and Willemien Otten http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199299164.001.0001/acref-9780199299164-e-603
