Confused how some Catholics can be labeled "Pelagians"?

Recently, there's been a lot of fingerpointing at traditional Catholics. Some of it is the same old, same old (insert stale Pharisees joke here). Some of it, however, is very new and very confusing.

Some Catholics have recently been identified -- more than once -- as "Pelagians."

This will undoubtedly bolster the morale of other Catholics while, yet again, making life next to impossible for the traditional-minded parish priest who is, now more than ever, being accused by his flock of putting himself "above the Church" by his devotion to reverence in the liturgy and traditional Catholic teaching.

Below, you will find a very solid retort from a Catholic priest, who is in "full communion":

11th Sunday after Pentecost “by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace in me has not been fruitless.”

Recently, there has been some mentioning of the ancient heresy called Pelagianism. I have heard this term used a number of times in recent months and it seems some confusion has surrounded its employment. So, without passing any judgment on those who are using the term, let us take some time this Sunday to look into this ancient heresy. If we do this well, we might be surprised at how relevant this matter really is today.

Pelagianism takes its name from an austere monk, most likely of Irish descent, named Pelagius. He died around 418. He should not be confused with the two Popes who shared this same name.

Pelagianism can simply be thought of as the self-help heresy. It essentially “denies the elevation of man into the supernatural state, and denies original sin. According to Pelagians the sin of Adam affected his descendants by way of bad example only” (Ott, pp. 222-3). This means that Christ’s saving work of redemption consists above all in His teaching and His example of virtue. For Pelagius, Jesus was just a great teacher as was Moses before Him. Furthermore,

“Pelagianism regarded grace as within the natural capacity of man.” According to this view man has a natural capacity to live a sinless and holy life and merit eternal bliss by exercising his free will. The Pelagians believed this natural capacity was aided by external graces given to us by God… things like the Mosaic Law, the Gospel, the example of virtue set by Our Lord and His Mother and others. This means that man can achieve even the remission of his sins by his own power, by the act of turning his will away from sin. This makes Pelagianism pure naturalism.

To re-capitulate, Pelagianism holds “(i) that the sin of our first parents was not transmitted to their posterity; [Adam’s sin harmed only himself, not the human race, and children just born are in the same state as Adam before his fall.] (ii) that Christ came into the world, not to restore anything we had lost, but to set up an ideal of virtue, and so counteract the evil example of Adam; (iii) that we can, of our own natural powers, and without any internal assistance from God, [do good that is pleasing to God and thereby] merit the happiness of the Beatific Vision” (cf. Apologetics and Catholic Doctrine, Archbishop Michael Sheehan, p. 456). (iv) the Law of Moses is just as good a guide to heaven as the Gospel. Finally, (v) Pelagians considered death to be natural to man and not a consequence of Adam’s sin. So even if Adam had not sinned, he would have died in any case.

This heretical, erroneous way of thinking and acting was countered heavily by the Doctor of Grace, St. Augustine, as well as many others like St. Jerome and ultimately condemned as heretical by several Popes and Councils, most notably the Papal approved Council of Carthage (418).

This Council taught authoritatively what we still profess today, namely: (i) Death did not come to Adam from a physical necessity, but through sin. (ii) New-born children must be baptized on account of original sin. [Note that the current Code of Canon Law emphasizes this must be done within a couple of weeks of birth]. (iii) Sanctifying grace not only avails for the forgiveness of past sins, but also gives assistance for the avoidance of future sins. (iv) The grace of Christ not only discloses the knowledge of God's commandments, but also imparts strength to will and execute them. (v) Without God's grace it is not merely more difficult, but absolutely impossible to perform good works. (vi) Not out of humility, but in truth must we confess ourselves to be sinners… (cf. Dz. nos. 101-8).

This is all very interesting in light of what has been transpiring over the last half century or so. In fact, having made this little study, it is amazing to see how much Pelagianism has returned in our own day.

First, consider that today infant baptism is very often delayed and put off for months and even years with little or no concern for the infant’s eternal welfare. Many parishes and priests directly violate the Canon Law by making baptisms available to their people only once a month, whereas the Church demands that their baptism not be delayed over a week or two…and if they are in the danger of death, they are to be baptized without delay, even if a priest is not available. Why this nonchalance attitude toward baptizing infants? Because the prevailing thought today is that all children who die in infancy, baptized or not, go to heaven. De facto, they are considered to be like Adam before the fall! This is Pelagianism. No wonder there has been many efforts over the last decades to do away with the traditional teaching of the Limbo of the Infants, that place where unbaptized infants go.

On the other hand, it has been my experience that traditional minded Catholics seek very diligently to have their newborns baptized as soon as possible. Why? Because His Majesty, Our Lord Jesus Christ, taught that we must be born of water to be saved. St. Paul said in Ephesians, “were by nature children of wrath” (2:3). But we are reborn children of adoption by the waters of baptism! It has also been my experience that faithful Catholics always take the Traditional doctrine of the Limbo of the Infants very seriously. No Pelagianism here!

Second, it is bandied about recently that even atheists can do good works. Pelagius would agree because, as we heard, he held that any man, believer or not, baptized or not, can do good. “The root of this possibility of doing good - that we all have - is in creation” (Pope Francis). In other words, all that is needed to be good is found in nature. Of course, Pelagius also added that the good example of Christ, the written law and Gospel help man to this goodness as external aids. It is interesting to note how Pope John XXIII said at the start of the Vatican Council, “Nowadays… the Spouse of Christ… considers that She meets the needs of the present day by more clearly demonstrating the validity of her teaching rather than by condemnations...” He wanted to see the Magisterium be “predominantly pastoral in character” … “to teach more efficaciously” … “raising the torch of Catholic truth” (cf. The Second Vatican Council: the Unwritten Story, Mattei, pp. 174-5). All that is needed is to teach the truth and people will see the light and do the good.

From this it follows that Pelagius would not be very supportive spending much time in prayer. Why pray if we do not need grace to be good!? Surely, Pelagius would not spend much time kneeling down to pray the Rosary to gain a heavenly favor. Why have priests? Who needs the Sacraments? Sadly, over the last century and still continuing on today, we have had a religious and priests who put work ahead of prayer. There was the worker priest movement. We have seen the rise of laicism…where the laity takes over various roles of the priests. We have seen priests and religious became activists, going to many meetings and opening soup kitchens while neglecting the divine office, their holy hours and spiritual reading. Knowing this, few are surprised at the numerous scandals and loss of vocations. All this flows perfectly from Pelagianism.

Yet, St. Paul clearly stated today in the lesson, “by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace in me has not been fruitless.” Any man can do a naturally good action…saying giving a banana to a friend in need.

Yet, only when the action is done with supernatural charity infused in the soul co-operating with an actual grace given by God for that particular action can it be pleasing to God and worthy of Him. St. Paul is crystal clear on this point: “if I should distribute all my goods to feed the poor, and if I should deliver my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profits me nothing” (1Cor 13:3). This is precisely why Traditional minded Catholics strive to offer everything up… This is precisely why such faithful souls pray the Rosary so often… attend the Holy Mass as much as possible, frequently confess their sins and use Sacramentals. They are beseeching God for grace to grow in holiness. No Pelagianism here. St. Padre Pio prayed multiple Rosaries everyday, even up to 30…pleading for Our Lady’s intercession and aid in the conversion of sinners. Surely, no one would consider this great stigmatic a Pelagian for saying so many Rosaries!

Third, consider how it has been bandied about for some decades now that the Jews do not need to convert, that they have all they require in the Old Law to be saved… as if Our Lord, the Messiah, the very fulfillment of the Old Testament types and prophecies, did not come in the Flesh to establish the New and Everlasting Covenant in His own Blood. Besides most Jews do not follow the Old Law but rather the Talmud. In any case, Pelagius would love this…for, as we heard, he held the Mosaic Law is just as good for going to heaven as the Gospel. Once again, faithful Catholics believe that the Old Law has been fulfilled and completed in the New. That the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is the only Sacrifice pleasing to God. No Pelagianism here.

Fourth, consider how Pelagius held that death was natural to man. He would find many in agreement with him today simply because the theory of evolution holds the same. Sad to say, most members in the Church at this time seem to think that evolution is the how things came about. Given that that Pelagius very much agreed with man asserting his will to get things done, I wonder what he would think today about man intervening in nature to force evolution to a new level… as, for example,we are doing in genetically modified foods, environmental controls, and other areas.

The Traditional Catholic, however, is repulsed by evolution, knowing that God did not create death and destruction, but rather death is the wages of sin. Furthermore, the faithful Catholic knows that the Church has given multiple teachings against the pseudo-science of evolution by Her teachings on creation. No Pelagianism here!

Fifth, the use of confession has greatly diminished over the last 40 years. Fewer and fewer souls consider sin a serious concern or a blockage to heaven. Everyone who dies now, goes to heaven. Sinners often are heard saying: “God will understand” and “I will not do it again…”. Pelagius strikes again. Man can overcome sin by himself. God will understand!

The faithful Catholic, however, knows that sin is deeply offensive to God and can only be erased by the application of the Precious Blood of Christ, most especially available in the Confession, and by making reparation through penance and amendment of life. This is why hundreds of thousands of people went to St. Jean Vianney and St. Padre Pio… so that these gifted saints would look into their souls and make sure there were no more sins that needed removal.

Finally, consider how Pelagius denied that Christ Our Lord came to restore what Adam had lost but rather He came merely to provide a good example. Thus, it seems to me that Pelagius would not be a big supporter of any movement of restoration whereas the faithful Catholic longs to see the whole world come under the social reign of Christ Our Majestic and Glorious King. Thus, they love the phrase given to us by St. Paul: “To restore all things in Christ!”

The only point that coincides between the monk Pelagius and traditional minded Catholics is the matter of discipline and austerity. I wish this were more true. Would that more Traditional Catholics were austere with themselves… and more willing to do penance and acts of reparation. Oh how they would please Our Lady who asked us over and over again for nearly 200 years… Penance! Penance! Penance! For the salvation of souls!

It is clear to me that the modern Church in her membership has become more Pelagian than ever whereas Traditional minded Catholics are seeking to hold the line against this most pestiferous return of heresy… striving not to let the precious grace of God granted them be in vain! Labels: A Vatican II Moment, Church of Vatican II Posted by Adfero at 8/04/2013 04:49:00 PM

“I have a slight disagreement with the description of Pelagians. I submit, humbly that it is not grace that is within the power of humans but rather virtue. We can avoid sin today. We can decide to follow a path of virtue for an hour, for a day, for a week, for a month. Pelagius had a list of biblical characters that he asserted were virtuous, to include the Virgin Mary, Enoch who was translated, Elijah, John the Baptist.”

This is, actually, Pelagian, or at best, semi-Pelagian, both of which were condemned by the “Doctor of Grace” this article briefly mentions; though, unfortunately, the RCC does not take the remedy the doctor offers, nor, more importantly, heeds the Apostles whom they claim to succeed.

Augustine observes, commenting on the scripture, that virtue is the product of the grace of God, with grace being the unmerited favor of God freely given. It (virtue) is not inherent in man, nor is it foreseen in man to be the reason for God’s election, but is rather the work of God predestinated (seen by Augustine as the “preparation of grace” for those unworthy sinners chosen from out of the world) before the world began, in order to make the elect holy and conformed to the image of the Son (the application of grace). Even the virtue of faith is itself the gift of God, and therefore does not proceed naturally from the rotten core of the unregenerate. As Augustine says for himself, with many scriptural proofs:

“When, therefore, He predestinated us, He foreknew His own work by which He makes us holy and immaculate. Whence the Pelagian error is rightly refuted by this testimony. But we say, say they, that God did not foreknow anything as ours except that faith by which we begin to believe, and that He chose and predestinated us before the foundation of the world, in order that we might be holy and immaculate by His grace and by His work. But let them also hear in this testimony the words where he says, “We have obtained a lot, being predestinated according to His purpose who works all things.” Ephesians 1:11 He, therefore, works the beginning of our belief who works all things; because faith itself does not precede that calling of which it is said: “For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance;” Romans 11:29 and of which it is said: “Not of works, but of Him that calls” Romans 9:12 (although He might have said, of Him that believes); and the election which the Lord signified when He said: “You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you.” John 15:16 For He chose us, not because we believed, but that we might believe, lest we should be said first to have chosen Him, and so His word be false (which be it far from us to think possible), “You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you.” Neither are we called because we believed, but that we may believe; and by that calling which is without repentance it is effected and carried through that we should believe.” (Augustine, Treatise on the Predestination of the Saints, Book 1, Chp. 38 — What is the View of the Pelagians, and What of the Semi-Pelagians, Concerning Predestination.)

Pelagianism takes its name from an austere monk, most likely of Irish descent, named Pelagius. He died around 418. He should not be confused with the two Popes who shared this same name. Pelagianism can simply be thought of as the self-help heresy. It essentially “denies the elevation of man into the supernatural state, and denies original sin. According to Pelagians the sin of Adam affected his descendants by way of bad example only” (Ott, pp. 222-3). This means that Christ’s saving work of redemption consists above all in His teaching and His example of virtue. For Pelagius, Jesus was just a great teacher as was Moses before Him. Furthermore, “Pelagianism regarded grace as within the natural capacity of man.” According to this view man has a natural capacity to live a sinless and holy life and merit eternal bliss by exercising his free will. The Pelagians believed this natural capacity was aided by external graces given to us by God… things like the Mosaic Law, the Gospel, the example of virtue set by Our Lord and His Mother and others. This means that man can achieve even the remission of his sins by his own power, by the act of turning his will away from sin. This makes Pelagianism pure naturalism.

To re-capitulate, Pelagianism holds “(i) that the sin of our first parents was not transmitted to their posterity; [Adam’s sin harmed only himself, not the human race, and children just born are in the same state as Adam before his fall.] (ii) that Christ came into the world, not to restore anything we had lost, but to set up an ideal of virtue, and so counteract the evil example of Adam; (iii) that we can, of our own natural powers, and without any internal assistance from God, [do good that is pleasing to God and thereby] merit the happiness of the Beatific Vision” (cf. Apologetics and Catholic Doctrine, Archbishop Michael Sheehan, p. 456). (iv) the Law of Moses is just as good a guide to heaven as the Gospel. Finally, (v) Pelagians considered death to be natural to man and not a consequence of Adam’s sin. So even if Adam had not sinned, he would have died in any case.

Interesting. IMO, the only people who defend Pelagius are those who seek to rehabilitate a historically heretical theology.

Princeton theologian B. B. Warfield considered Pelagianism "the rehabilitation of that heathen view of the world," and concluded with characteristic clarity, "There are fundamentally only two doctrines of salvation: that salvation is from God, and that salvation is from ourselves. The former is the doctrine of common Christianity; the latter is the doctrine of universal heathenism."
-- from the thread Pelagianism: The Religion of Natural Man

“I understand that some would condemn my poor attempts to be and do good. I do not believe that G-d is among those who would condemn someone for being and doing good.”

God would certainly condemn even your “righteous” efforts, which though sparkling in your eyes are but filthy rags in His.

Isa_64:6 But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

The only righteousness that can be grasped is that which comes by faith, by the imputation of the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ who did what we could not, the only one who ever lived a “good” life (Rom 1:17, Gal 3:11). Your works can in no way do anything for you, nor can you ever call yourself “good,” for only one is good, and that is God (Luke 18:19).

You can tickle yourself with your Pelagian vanities, but vanity is all they are in the sight of God.

“I suppose you think it would be better to be a child molestor relying on the grace of the Divine.

I don’t. We differ on that.”

What we actually differ on is the source of good works in the elect, who are taken from a state of profound rebellion, and quickened by the Holy Spirit, by whom the Father conforms us into the image of His Son, working in us “both to will and to do of his good pleasure.” (Php 2:13, Eph 2:1-5) You believe that you are virtuous in and of yourself, and that your works please God and merit heaven, when, in reality, no works done outside of faith is pleasing to God. “For whatsoever is not of faith is sin” (Rom 14:23).

If you really believe that you are “good,” and that this good arises from your own willing and working, and not God who works in you, then odds are you’ll burn right next to that child molester as the reward for your “good” works.

“No, you assert that the child molestor who asks for grace will be saved. You claim you will have him next to you in heaven, while I will be in hell.”

How about you try reading what I actually said instead of making false statements? Or, rather, what I endorsed?

Here, read it again, real slow:

So, do I believe that the child molestor asked for grace to be saved? Or do I believe that God shows His favor on whom He will, and brings Him out of His sins through His effectual power, thus making a holy man out of a wretch? As Augustine puts it in another place:

“Those whom the Lord wills to be converted, He converts Himself; who not only makes willing ones out of them who were unwilling, but makes also sheep out of wolves and martyrs out of persecutors, transforming them by His all-powerful grace.” (Augustine, qtd in Calvin’s Treatise on the Eternal Predestination of God, Section II)

And if that is my actual position, and if that is the position of the scripture, then “what hast thou that thou didst not receive?” (1 Co 4:7).

Your arrogance would be amusing if it weren't so insane.

Oh, I'm sorry - you don't dismiss the life of another human being and flip his soul into hell because of your own will and working to determine the truth of God and assume the power of judgement - no!

Rather, when you scorn another person and spit at their efforts to follow God's teachings, and teach that they are hell bound, why, that's God working in you, not your ego, not your own efforts. No, that's God's grace, the flow of Christ through your mind and your heart and your words and your scorn and your rejection and your caustic damning.

I spit at you.

“Rather, when you scorn another person and spit at their efforts to follow God’s teachings, and teach that they are hell bound, why, that’s God working in you, not your ego, not your own efforts.”

Yet it’s true, because unless you believe that Jesus is the Christ and shed His blood for our sins, no matter how good you think you are, you ARE hellbound. And it is my duty to break down all your false righteousness and self-made delusions which tell you that you can get into heaven based on your own righteousness, so that you rely on Christ alone for the righteousness that can come only by faith. Spit all you like, but the scripture condemns your theology.

“How is anyone responsible for their choices?”

The “responsibility” for the punishment of sin was taken up by Jesus Christ on the cross, whose perfect life and perfect sacrifice truly washed away all sin for His people. Thus, there is no place for works in salvation. Works, then, in their place, can only be worked in faith (in other words, for the glory of God, and not for ourselves, knowing that the battle is won by Christ already), and with both faith and works themselves being wrought by God.

The reprobate, on the other hand, though they do not receive it from God to believe, are yet condemned with Adam through original sin, and through their own additional sinning thereafter. Or as Augustine explains,

“Every sinner is inexcusable, either on account of his original sin and sinful nature, or else from the additional act of his own will, whether he knew that he was sinning, or knew it not; whether he had a judgment of what is right, or had it not. For ignorance itself, in those who will not understand, is undoubtedly sin; and in those who cannot understand ignorance is the punishment of sin.” (Augustine, qtd in Calvin’s Treatise on the Eternal Predestination of God)

But as for why God, not merely permitting that these people should be born and left in their own sins, but actively works in the world that they, individually and personally should be born, though they are doomed to die without the vivifying grace of God, the Apostle replies to those who bark against God for it:

Rom 9:20-21 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? (21) Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

And as Augustine explains it, “Who created the reprobate but God? And why? Because He willed it. Why did He will it? ‘Who art thou, O man, that repliest against God?’” (Ibid)

“Seems you are saying that Adam is responsible and/or God is responsible for sin. So in your own your words..”

I don’t know how I “seem” to say that, when I asserted with Augustine that the damned are condemned for their own sin. At best, I wasn’t clear, though your conclusion is still not founded on anything I said.

The difference between those whom God has mercy on, and those who have it not, is that in the former case God, through monergistic action, pulls them from a depraved state of mind and miraculously saves them. He puts His laws into their hearts, and causes them to walk in His precepts. Though they possess a will, it is a reformed will that, being given to them to believe, is changed so that they desire to believe in God (Jeremiah 32:39; Ezekiel 36:27; Hebrews 8:10; 10:16; John 6:64-65). This is the work of God from beginning to end. In the latter case, they are sinners already, justly condemned already by the death which passed down from Adam, (which God is fully just to condemn them with) with natures so depraved that they can do no good thing, and cannot even ascribe to themselves even the slightest of good things to themselves (Romans 3:12; 2 Corinthians 3:5). We do not teach that they do not have a will either, but that their will, not merely being prone to sin, is utterly subject to sin; and so mankind, in and of himself, is utterly worthless and incapable of coming to God aright. Not that God forces them to, but because they want to.

But if it be said that God is ultimately responsible, because He created these people, knowing full well they would be damned, and utterly ordaining that it would be so, when He chose to elect some and to pass them by, and then using them to accomplish His own purpose, as Pharaoh or Judas... well, that is a debate you have to have with God, and not me.

Pro_16:4 The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.