Pelagian Origins

Ligon Duncan

    Ecclesiastical historians of the last one hundred years have tended to approach the discussion of Pelagius, Pelagian doctrine and Pelagian origins in a way which is substantially different from their colleagues in previous eras. R.F. Evans (among many others) has pointed out the way Pelagius has been victimized by misrepresentation (Evans, Pelagius: Inquiries and Reappraisals, 1-3). This re-evaluation of the subject is due, in part, to the publication of a number of important Pelagian treatises beginning in 1890, according to Gerald Bonner (Augustine and Modern Research on Pelagianism, 5ff.). The initial publication, says Bonner, "showed precisely how far Pelagianism was removed from being the rationalistic, humanitarian movement which it is so often deemed to be." Next, Bonner reminds, recent historians have attempted to understand Pelagius as a fifth-century theologian rather than a heresiarch. These recent developments and trends have not made the task of the historian any simpler in assessing the Pelagian controversy however. In fact, Bonner warns against our presuming that we have a definitive picture of the issue, though we may be now seeing things more clearly.

    The accuracy of Bonner 's comments is easily made evident by a quick survey of the opinions of J.N.D. Kelly, Peter Brown and Gerald Bonner as to the central characteristic of Pelagianism. Even if Brown and Bonner are seen to be in basic agreement, their emphases differ. It is not surprising then, that out of these "new" trends in Pelagian scholarship that a radical assessment should arise. Peter Brown supplies it: "Indeed, Pelagianism as we know it, that consistent body of ideas of momentous consequences, had come into existence; but in the mind of Augustine, not of Pelagius," (Augustine of Hippo, 345).

    Brown's statement is actually more careful than it first appears, but still the question remains as to what we are to make of the Pelagian controversy? It will be the task of this essay to go a little way toward answering the query by considering the origins of the movement.

What did Pelagius and his supporters stand for?
   Before tackling this question directly, we would do well to pay heed to the background of the controversy sketched out by R.F. Evans. After Alaric's sack of Rome in 410, the Pelagian party had its own version of the diaspora. While Caelestius landed in Africa, Pelagius himself moved on to Palestine — the territory of his once and future nemesis, Jerome. Evans argues that Jerome's distraction in this time frame can be seen in his commentary on Jeremiah and is due to the activity of Pelagius. Evans suggests that Jerome's alarm over Pelagius' teaching was two-fold: (1) Pelagius was no longer teaching his heresy in distant Rome but in Jerome's own backyard, and (2) Pelagius had revived the old charges of Rufinus against Jerome. The charges were of two kinds. First, Jerome was accused of being reliant on Origen's teachings in his commentary on Ephesians, while at the same time Jerome claimed to be entirely free from any form of "Origenist heresy." Second, Jerome was criticized for going too far in responding to Jovinian concerning marriage. Jerome was, indeed, accused of depreciating marriage. Evans proposes that these charges really hit Jerome where it hurt because there was a modicum of truth in the allegations. This would in turn explain Jerome's passionate reply and his hardening of vulnerable (indefensible?) positions. In response Jerome labels the Pelagian heresy as simply a rehashing of Rufinus' and Origen's old ideas. Pelagianism was a nova ex veteri haeresis (Evans, Pelagius: Inquiries and Reappraisals, 17). Pelagius then retaliated using the old Rufinian charges against Jerome, at the same time being personally reminded of his debt to Origen. Therefore, according to Evans, it is not surprising that Jerome, in countering Pelagius, concentrated on the charges which would link Pelagius with Origen — the idea of sinlessness and its relation to the doctrine of God. Evans continues:

. . . the course of events leading to Pelagius condemnation, in which Augustine played such a prominent role, is in fact an indirect result of the final phase of Jerome's Origenist controversies (Evans, Pelagius: Inquiries and Reappraisals, 25).

    As we mentioned before Pelagius is critical of Jerome's teaching on marriage. Hence, Jerome sees in Pelagius a disciple of Jovinian, in view of the fact that he is critical of his treatment of marriage as found in Against Jovinian (though Pelagius was, himself, a critic of Jovinian on this subject). In connection with this, Jerome aligned Pelagius with Jovinian in their doctrine of sinlessness. Pelagius was not content to refute Jerome's improbable charges, and charged Jerome with false teaching concerning marriage.

    Evans, at this point, suggests that Pelagius had attacked Jerome on this very issue years before. He postulates that Pelagius is the "unnamed monk" in Jerome's Letter 50, who was saying that "Jerome condemns marriage." This monk was in Rome. Evans produces twelve arguments for accepting this identification between the two. On the basis of this he concludes: "the figure of Pelagius first comes into view as an opponent of Jerome's ascetic teaching on marriage (Evans, Pelagius: Inquiries and Reappraisals, 42)."

     Meanwhile, Caelestius had experienced considerable success in spreading the teachings of Pelagianism in Africa until he was condemned and excommunicated by a Carthaginian council in 411. Still, Augustine did not play a major role in the anti-Pelagian campaign until 415 ¾ though he did preach and write letters against Pelagian teaching. Augustine's initial reserve may have been because of Pelagius’ reputation for holiness, the fact that they shared many common friends in the influential Roman classes, or simply because of his taxing workload (Bonner, Augustine and Modern Research on Pelagianism, 41). Whatever the reasons, his attitude changed around 415/416. Evans suggests that at this time Augustine read De Natura and found out that among other Catholic authors cited, he himself was quoted in support of Pelagius' views. Further, in 416 Augustine received the disturbing news that not one but two councils had acquitted Pelagius of false teaching. In these acts Augustine saw the very heart of his theology being brought into question. This crisis compelled Augustine to take the lead in stamping out the heresy.

    What then did the heretics believe? Brown offers: "there is only one definition of a Pelagian by Pelagius: he was a Christianus; his followers strove to be integri Christiani — ‘authentic Christians’ (Brown, Religion and Society in the Age of St. Augustine, 192). He later says:

What strikes the modern reader in the Pelagian writings are the extreme positions: we see Pelagianism, therefore, in terms of its radical emphasis on the independence of the individual, for instance, or on the equity of God's law; or in its extreme views on the redistribution of wealth. What we forget, often, is that these extreme positions are only arcs on a circle; they point to a centre . . . .

    We should not ignore the center, says Brown, though it is often taken for granted. Pelagius attached his message to the oldest and most powerful theme in Western Christian thought — the idea of the church. Pelagius’ ‘center’ was the aim to produce not only the perfect individual but the perfect religious group (Brown, Religion and Society in the Age of St. Augustine, 194). And this religious group was defined by baptism. It marked a radical change, a break with the past, with the possibility of perfection in the future. To this description we add Bonner' s:

We have, then, two elements which determined the character of Roman Pelagianism: (i) the ascetic impulse, which it shared with other Christian movements, but which had a peculiar intensity in the life of the Christian Roman aristocracy at the end of the Fourth century; and (ii) the theological views of Rufinus the Syrian, which were destined to have profound consequences in the future (Bonner, Augustine and Modern Research on Pelagianism, 31).

    After noting that a common affinity for asceticism bound fellow Pelagians together who had various theological views, Bonner gives a suggestion for Pelagius contribution to Pelagianism: the provision of a "theological basis to defend Christian asceticism against any charge of Manichaeism and to justify the assurance that a virtuous life is possible for the Christian if he will only try (Bonner, Augustine and Modern Research on Pelagianism, 34)." The hallmark of Pelagianism for Bonner is the denial in various forms of the (Augustinian) doctrine of original sin. Bonner adds that before one attempts to exculpate Pelagius, one must take into account at least two other factors. First, the ambiguity of Pelagius' language on grace is a problem. "If he [Pelagius] were really so near to what Augustine regarded as the mark of Catholic doctrine, why did he never make an unambiguous declaration of a true internal assisting Grace?" ("How Pelagian was Pelagius?," Studia Patristica 9:356). Second, it must be noted that it was Pelagius who was regarded as the leader of the movement.

To what circle did they appeal?
   Pelagianism appealed to the Roman Christian aristocracy and to the laity in the church (as distinct from the clergy). Bonner says, "the ethos of Pelagianism is, then, an aristocratic asceticism, with the hauteur and exclusiveness which goes with it," and "Roman Pelagianism was a lay movement. It had, it is true, clerical supporters . . . but its real strength was to be found among the laity (Bonner, Augustine and Modern Research on Pelagianism, 13)." Brown answers our query succinctly in a helpful paragraph:

Pelagius lived in Rome until 410. In Rome, he wrote his Commentary on the Epistles of St. Paul; it was 'to a Roman' that he addressed his exhortations. His most considered manifesto — his letter to Demetrias — was written at the invitation of leading members of the Anicii, the doyens of the Christian aristocracy of Rome. His acquaintances included Paulinus of Nola, a man intimately connected with Roman Christian society; his patrons, a Roman priest, Sixtus — who later became pope. Pelagian ideas had an immediate resonance in just those areas of Italy that had always been overshadowed by Rome and its aristocratic residents; in Campania and, most notably, in Sicily, an island of senatorial estates, noted, in the Later Empire, for the delights and the eccentricities of the senatorial life of otium (Brown, Religion and Society in the Age of St. Augustine, 185).

Another quote from Brown will be helpful in concluding this section:

Pelagianism in its hey-day, therefore, between 390 and 410, had appealed directly to a powerful centrifugal tendency in the aristocracy of Rome — a tendency to scatter, to form a pattern of little groups, each striving to be an elite, each anxious to rise above their neighbours and rivals — the average upper-class residents of Rome (Brown, Religion and Society in the Age of St. Augustine, 189).

What currents in Fourth and Fifth Century Christianity did the Pelagians represent?
   We have already noted the stream of asceticism which runs in the thought of the Pelagians. It reflects Pelagianism's place in the broader context of Christianity in the Fourth and Fifth centuries. Bonner stresses this element in Pelagianism when he says:

I would maintain that what characterises Roman Pelagianism in its formative years is its combination of asceticism and moralism. Mr. Peter Brown, an authority on these matters, has described the ascetic discipline and aims of Pelagianism as "the least original aspect of the movement," and this judgement is incontrovertible; but it is precisely the ascetic discipline and aims of Pelagianism which provide the common element which links such different thinkers as Pelagius, Caelestius and the Sicilian Anonymous; and if we are to discover the ordinary Pelagian — a personage hardly less elusive than the ordinary man, but no less important in determining the general development of events — we shall probably not go far wrong if we look for him in the ascetic group of the Christian Roman aristocracy of the late Fourth and early Fifth centuries . . . (Bonner, Augustine and Modern Research on Pelagianism, 11-12).

    It has also been noticed that Pelagianism attaches peculiar importance to the idea of the church, which is an important idea for Western Christendom (Brown, Religion and Society in the Age of St. Augustine, 194).

    Pelagianism reflects the continuing struggle in the Fourth and Fifth centuries to determine the exact nature of Christian perfection. Evans says that "perhaps most of the controversial issues exercising the Western Church in the latter two decades of the fourth and the first two decades of the fifth centuries were related to one large question: the nature of Christian perfection. One confronts this question in the controversies over Jovinian, Helvidius, Vigilantius, Origen, the Pelagians, the Manichees, and the Donatists. Jovian and Pelagius fit clearly and easily into this general picture, each of them as it were making a contribution toward the definition of Christian perfection (Evans, Pelagius: Inquiries and Reappraisals, 28-29)."

    Finally, Pelagianism evidences a reaction to the Manichaean doctrines that were making their way about Catholic Christianity in the late fourth and early fifth centuries. This is particularly important for Pelagius himself who seems to have had a case of Mani-phobia. It should also be remembered that a typical charge of the Pelagian party against their Augustinian opponents was that of holding to Manichaean views. This is but one example of Pelagius’ desire to be an "orthodox" Catholic theologian.

How did the Pelagians relate to Greek Christianity and to the earlier tradition?
   Concerning Pelagianism’s relationship to Greek Christianity, we have already called attention to the fact that the Origenist controversy is the early background for Pelagius' battle with Jerome. Pelagius was wont to draw from some of Origen's more theologically acceptable ideas. Further, Rufinus brought with him from the east an impressive body of Greek monastic literature that would have greatly enhanced the credibility of Pelagius' teaching. Later, Julian of Eclanum would attempt to seize the moment, by playing the popularity of John Chrysostum as a Pelagian trump card in the West. A Pelagian translator made available the sermons of John to the Latin West and was careful to point out that John too, had been deposed and exiled without a fair trial.

    How should Pelagianism be viewed in relation to the earlier Christian tradition? Here Brown is emphatic. Augustine's dramatic conversion experience's influence on his theology had 'worn off' in his later years. The drastic change from the bondage of Manichaeism to the freedom of the early semi-platonic days of Catholic Christianity had now changed for Augustine. The Christian life was not so much a break with the struggles of the sins in the past, but a long recovery from the sickness of sin in the hospital of the Catholic Church. Brown says: "In so doing [adopting a view that did not stress the radical change of life at one's conversion], Augustine had abandoned a great tradition of Western Christianity. It is Pelagius who had seized the logical conclusions of this tradition: he is the last, the most radical, and the most paradoxical exponent of the ancient Christianity — the Christianity of discontinuity (Brown, Religion and Society in the Age of St. Augustine, 200)."

 Bibliography