AUGUsxrmrs

220

connected with theory; they would take up aproblem of psychology, not anthropology, ratherthan one of pure metaphysics. Pelagius, theoriginator of the dispute on grace, was a Bretonmonk. Having entered a convent at an early age,he had lived in peace and solitude, far from theWorld and its temptations. He had never expe-rienced those severe backslidings which enable usto measure the depths of human corruption. Hislife, always regular in its course, had been spentquietly under the protecting shadow of the clois-ter. There, no doubt, he had also acquired thatdangerous spiritual pride which monkish asceti-cism uniformly tends to beget. Thus Pelagianismhas for its commentary the life and character ofPelagius, just as Augustianism takes us back tothe great miracle of the conversion of St. Augus-tine, who, wrested as it were by main force fromhis sins and his pride, fell prostrate and brokenat the foot of the cross.

Animated by an ardent zeal for the propaga-tion of his doctrines, Pelagius repaired to Romein the year 409, with Caelestius, the most distin-guished of his disciples. He then went into Africa,but did not stay there; Caelestius, whom he leftbehind him, and who had received the order ofpriesthood, sowed heresy in the church of Car-thage, whilst Pelagius diffused his ideas in Pa-lestine. Condemned by a synod held at Carthagein 412, Caelestius joined his master trusting tothat Eastern Church which was then the hopeof all heretics. The expectation of both thesemen was not deceived; the synod of Diospolis(415) decided in favour of Pelagianism, notwith-standing St. Jerome’s resistance. Acting underthe inspiration of St. Augustine, the AfricanChuixh, by way of retorting on that of Palestine,once more pronounced the condemnation of theheresy (416). This decision received the con-firmation of the Bishop of Rome, Innocent I.Pelagianism seemed to be vanquished, when itsupholders had the good fortune of winning overto their side Sozimus, the successor of Innocent,the first act of whose primacy was to proclaimthe orthodoxy of the heretical doctrines. TheAfrican bishops nevertheless maintained theirdecision in a new synod held at Carthage in 418.Having obtained the support of the emperorHonorius, they regained the Roman prelate byhis influence. After this defeat, Pelagianism re-appeared a little later in the south of Gaul witha few slight modifications which took nothingaway from its essential character. Whilst al-lowing more to the merits of Jesus Christ, thesemi-Pelagians had nevertheless not abjured thepernicious doctrine of the merits of works.Augustine renewed the contest: his works OnPredestination and On the Gift of Perseverancehad the same result as his polemical treatisesagainst Pelagius. The Marseille priests were con-demned by the synod of Valence in 436.

When confronted by Pelagius* denial of divinegrace, St. Augustine could not assume the calmattitude of a theologian. We feel that his in-dignation masters him : he longs to beat downhuman pride; he follows it from one lurking-place to the other; and he stops only when hehas annihilated both pride and man himself inthe presence of God and of His sovereign grace.Who comes and talks to us about the capacityfor good which is in our nature? Our naturewills nothing but evil, and can do nothing but

AUGUSTINUS

unmitigated evil. Our fall has been a completeone: it has not been limited to one man; inAdam all have sinned, in him all have been con-demned. “ By their birth all receive the taintof the ancient death which he has deserved”'{Epist. ad Vital. 5). “ After his sin, Adam

having been driven away from Eden, his entireposterity, which by his sin he had infected andcorrupted in himself, as in the stem of thehuman family, has been included with him inthe bonds of death and of damnation ” ( De Fide ,Spe 9 et Charit. 10). St. Augustine pictures tohimself humanity as if, like Lazarus, it were lyingin its tomb. He rolls the funeral stone againstthe door of the sepulchre, and engraves upon itthe mournful epitaph, “Without God, withouthope.” Mankind has not one spark of the divinelife; it can only recover life through a resur-rection, which, for it, is like a second creation.It is the work of that mediator “ who by hisone sacrifice has appeased the anger of God ”{De Fide , 13). Son of God and Son of man,equal to the Father, our mediator having re-ascended to heaven, the efficacious grace of Godis imparted to men, not for any merit or forany will on their part {Epist. ad Vital . 5), butsolely in the name of an entirely gratuitous actof God’s mercy. Man is quite passive in thescheme of his salvation; the Father draws himpowerfully to the Son, and if he remains in thefaith it is because he has received the gift orperseverance. “ When God preserves a just manfrom all scandal, and makes him appear beforeHis presence spotless and full of joy, what giftdoes He bestow upon him, if not that of perse-verance in what is good ?” {De Corrept. et Gratia ,32).

In order the better to show the complete pas-siveness of man in the ceconomy of salvationfrom the beginning to the end, St. Augustinequotes the example of children who are savedthrough baptism exactly as adults are throughfaith. “ In the reception of grace, not only dothose children manifest no act of their own willwhich can be regarded as a merit, but we evensee them cry and struggle when the holy sacra-ment of baptism is administered to them ” {DeGratia et lib. arbit. 13). This comparison be-tween children and adults is full of significance.Hot only does the divine vocation suppress everymerit in the sight of God, but likewise excludesfrom the fact of salvation every participation ofour own will. If it be asked, whence comes thedifference which exists amongst men ? Augustineanswers by stating the decree of predestinationwhich has beforehand determined the number ofthe elect who are to replace the fallen angels.“ Let us fully understand,” says St. Augustine,“ the character of that divine vocation whichmakes the elect, and by virtue of which they arechosen, not because they have believed, but inorder that they may believe. Divine grace, weknow, is not given to all men, and it is througha righteous judgment that those upon whom itis not bestowed are deprived of it.” “ How canone say,” adds he, “ that all men would receivegrace, if those to whom it is not given did notreject it of their own free will, because God willhave all men to be saved,—how can we say this,when we consider that there are so many childrento whom grace has never been given, and thatseveral of them.die without having received it,