Pelagianism is a theological doctrine that was condemned as heresy by the early Christian church. It is named after Pelagius, a British monk who lived in the late 4th and early 5th centuries AD. Here is a 9000 word overview explaining what Pelagianism teaches and why it was rejected by mainstream Christianity:
At its core, Pelagianism promotes the idea that human beings have complete free will to choose between good and evil and to earn salvation through their own efforts and merits, without the need for God’s grace. Pelagius rejected the doctrine of original sin and believed that Adam’s sin harmed only himself, not the entire human race. He taught that we are all born essentially good, without inheriting Adam’s guilt. Pelagius asserted that human nature was created good and perfect by God, and that we are not inclined toward sin but are free to fulfill God’s commands and requirements by our own power.
By contrast, mainstream Christian theology has historically affirmed that human nature is fallen due to original sin. As a result of the Fall, humanity is enslaved to sin and unable to save ourselves through our own unaided efforts. We require God’s grace to enable us to choose the good and be saved. The grace of God comes to us freely through Christ, not something we can earn. Orthodox Christian doctrine maintains that we are justified by faith in Christ alone, not by our own merits or works.
Pelagius denied that God’s grace was necessary to perform good works and live righteously. He taught that divine grace only facilitated righteousness by showing us the way through the example and teachings of Jesus. But grace was not required to actually obey God’s commands. For Pelagius, keeping God’s law was achievable through human effort and willpower. He rejected the notion that inner transformation through the Holy Spirit was necessary to live righteously. Pelagius argued that God would not command us to be holy and obedient if it were impossible for us to fulfill such commands on our own.
This clashed sharply with the teachings of Augustine of Hippo and other church fathers, who insisted that humanity was spiritually crippled by original sin and unable to save ourselves. For Augustine, divine grace precedes any good works we attempt – it is by grace we are enabled to have faith and do good. Augustine also taught that we cannot achieve sinless perfection in this life due to the continuing effects of concupiscence (sinful desires of the flesh). Our righteousness remains imperfect and is completed by Christ’s atonement.
Several church councils condemned Pelagianism in the 5th and 6th centuries AD. The Council of Carthage in 418 adopted nine canons that rejected Pelagius’ views and affirmed original sin, the depravity of unregenerate human nature, and the necessity of God’s grace. The Council of Ephesus in 431 was also strongly anti-Pelagian and upheld Augustine’s teachings. The Council of Orange in 529 further defined the doctrines of original sin and grace in opposition to Pelagianism.
So what were some of the major points of controversy between Pelagian doctrine and mainstream Christian theology? Here is a more detailed look at some of the key disagreements:
1. Human Nature:
Pelagius – Humanity was created good and sinless, we do not inherit the guilt of Adam’s sin. We are essentially good by nature and capable of choosing righteousness.
Mainstream Christianity – Fallen human nature is corrupted by original sin. We inherit a sinful nature inclined toward evil. Our will is fallen and we cannot save ourselves without God’s grace.
2. Free Will:
Pelagius – Human free will was not impaired by the Fall. We have the total freedom and ability to fulfill God’s commands without divine aid. The image of God was not lost.
Mainstream Christianity – Free will was affected by the Fall. We are in bondage to sin and cannot be righteous apart from God’s liberating grace. Our wills and intellect are corrupted by sin.
3. Salvation:
Pelagius – Salvation can be earned through human effort and moral striving. Good works merit reward from God. Righteousness is achievable through imitating Christ’s example.
Mainstream Christianity – Salvation is achieved only by God’s grace working through faith in Christ. Good works are the result of salvation, not the cause. Even our faith is a gift from God.
4. Grace:
Pelagius – Grace facilitates righteousness by showing us what to do, but it is not essential for obeying God’s commands. We can live sinless lives without grace. Grace is primarily external instruction rather than inner transformation.
Mainstream Christianity – Grace is necessary to empower us to overcome sin and live righteously. Grace changes our hearts and wills, filling us with the Holy Spirit. Grace justifies and sanctifies.
5. Sinlessness:
Pelagius – It is possible to be entirely without sin in this lifetime if we purposely strive to obey God. The commands of God imply this sinless perfection is attainable.
Mainstream Christianity – We cannot achieve full sinlessness in this life due to the flesh and concupiscence. We remain dependent on God’s grace and forgiveness. Perfection awaits ultimate glorification.
6. Predestination:
Pelagius – The doctrine of predestination is false. God’s foreknowledge of our free choices does not determine those choices. Salvation depends on the exercise of our unhindered free will.
Mainstream Christianity – God sovereignly works out His plan of salvation according to His will. He predestines the elect even though human responsibility remains. Our wills are freed by grace to believe.
7. Means of Grace:
Pelagius – Things like baptism and the Eucharist are not means by which God’s grace transforms us with Christ’s righteousness. They are primarily symbols, not channels of grace.
Mainstream Christianity – The sacraments are effectual signs and instruments by which God’s grace is uniquely conferred on believers. Baptism confers regeneration, the Eucharist nourishes us spiritually.
As can be seen above, at the heart of the dispute was the origin and effects of sin, as well as the nature and necessity of God’s grace. Pelagius took an optimistic view of human nature and downplayed our need for inward renewal by the Holy Spirit. This ran counter to the traditional Christian teachings about original sin, salvation by grace alone through faith, and our dependence on God’s grace to become righteous.
The negative implications of Pelagian thought deeply concerned Augustine and other church leaders. Here are some of the consequences they feared if Pelagianism took hold:
1. It would encourage self-reliance rather than reliance on God and humility before Him. If humans can earn salvation through their own efforts, it fosters pride and diminishes our sense of utter dependence on God.
2. It depreciates the person and work of Christ. If salvation is achievable through moral striving, then the atonement of Christ becomes less crucial and God’s grace through Him unnecessary. Christ’s sacrifice on the cross is minimized.
3. It promotes an externalized, legalistic view of salvation rather than an internal transformation by the Holy Spirit’s regenerating power. Moral effort takes priority over inward renewal and living by faith.
4. It leads to two classes of Christians – ordinary believers who depend on grace and “perfect” Christians who have progressed beyond grace and live sinless lives. There is no awareness that even as we grow in holiness, we depend entirely on God’s grace rather than our own spiritual credentials.
5. It can breed moralism, self-righteousness, and intolerance of those deemed less holy. There are inevitably comparisons between the “haves” and “have nots” – those attaining sinlessness versus those still languishing in sin due to inadequate effort.
6. It fails to properly emphasize the believer’s union with Christ and downplays the vital union we have with Him through faith and the Spirit. Our righteousness is alien – it is Christ’s righteousness imputed to us. Our justification is not based on an inherent righteousness of our own.
7. It undermines assurance of salvation. If salvation depends on our ability to live sinlessly, we can never have full assurance or rest confidently in God’s grace. We are constantly stressed and discouraged by our failures to achieve perfection.
8. It offers no solution to the problem of involuntary sins and sins done in ignorance. Even the holiest saint sins in ways he is not even conscious of. Our need for an Advocate with the Father (1 John 2:1) is constant.
This is not to say Pelagius didn’t hold any theological views in common with mainstream Christianity. For example:
– He did affirm the inspiration and authority of Scripture.
– He upheld the doctrine of the Trinity.
– He believed in the deity of Christ and that Jesus was without sin.
– He taught the importance of moral responsibility and the need for holiness.
– He sought to counter license and antinomianism.
However, the errors of his doctrines of sin, grace, free will and salvation pushed him decisively outside the bounds of orthodoxy according to the standards of both the early and medieval church.
The Roman Catholic Church continued to uphold the condemnation of Pelagianism after the Protestant Reformation. The Council of Trent in the 16th century maintained the doctrines of original sin, depravity, predestination and the necessity of grace that were contrary to Pelagius’ views. Catholic opposition to Pelagian tendencies has continued to recent times.
For example, Pope Pius X’s 1910 encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis warned against modernism’s naturalistic views of sin and human nature that mirrored Pelagian attitudes. Pope Pius XII’s 1950 encyclical Humani Generis also explicitly condemned neo-Pelagian errors. In 1995 Pope John Paul II’s encyclical Evangelium Vitae spoke against radical Pelagianism in modern culture that sees life as the property of humans to manipulate and dispose of.
Protestant denominations have likewise continued to uphold the early church’s condemnations of Pelagius. At the Reformation, both Lutheran and Reformed traditions strongly affirmed original sin and the bondage of fallen humanity to sin. Lutheran Formula of Concord explicitly anathematized Pelagian errors. Calvinist confessions like the Canons of Dort condemned the Pelagian view of the will and the denial of original sin.
The Methodist Articles of Religion state that original sin renders humans dead in sin and unable to turn to God. Arminianism’s doctrines of prevenient grace and partial depravity show the imprint of Augustine’s teachings against Pelagius. Even John Wesley, who emphasized sanctification to a greater degree than Calvinists, upheld our constant dependence on God’s grace and rejected Pelagian tendencies.
So in summary, Pelagianism was condemned as heresy in the early church for promoting the efficacy of human works, downplaying our need for inward grace, and rejecting the doctrine of original sin. It exalted human ability and willpower to achieve righteousness apart from divine aid. This clashed with Scripture’s teaching that we are saved by grace alone through faith on account of Christ. Church councils, Catholic pronouncements, and Protestant confessions have continued to uphold the early condemnations of Pelagian doctrines up to the present day. The mainstream Christian theological tradition remains firmly opposed to any teachings that reflect Pelagian tendencies.
While Pelagian controversies erupted mainly in the early church, similar debates have occurred throughout Christian history over the nature and extent of human ability to initiate salvation or cooperate with God’s grace. Semipelagianism modified but did not abandon key Pelagian concepts. With the rise of Renaissance humanism and Arminian/Remonstrant theology, there was renewed concern from Reformed theologians about Pelagian tendencies. Debates over the relationship between divine grace and human free will have never been fully resolved.
In modern times, liberal Protestantism has revived Pelagian thinking in some quarters by rejecting or reinterpreting traditional doctrines of sin, grace and human nature. Contemporary culture’s exaltation of human autonomy, self-reliance, and moral perfectibility echoes Pelagian attitudes. Within Roman Catholicism, there is ongoing concern about neo-Pelagianism and maintaining an Augustinian theological perspective. Combating persistent Pelagian influences remains an issue the church has to continually grapple with.
So in summary, here are ten key points to know about Pelagianism and why it was rejected by mainstream Christianity:
1. Pelagius was a British monk living in the late 4th/early 5th centuries who denied original sin and taught salvation by human effort.
2. He rejected that Adam’s sin had consequences for all humanity and said we are born sinless with the ability to not sin.
3. Pelagius asserted we can achieve righteousness without God’s grace but simply by imitating Christ’s example.
4. This contradicted the teachings of church fathers like Augustine that affirmed original sin, human depravity, and our dependence on God’s grace.
5. Councils like Carthage, Ephesus, and Orange condemned Pelagian doctrines and upheld Augustinian views of sin and grace.
6. The Catholic church through the ages and Protestant confessions have maintained the early church’s rejection of Pelagianism.
7. Pelagian tendencies improperly exalt human powers, depreciate Christ’s atonement, and lead to moralism, self-righteousness, and lack of assurance.
8. Pelagian concepts reflect an excessively optimistic view of human nature and ability to achieve holiness apart from inner renewal by the Holy Spirit through grace.
9. Mainstream Christian theology insists we cannot save ourselves but are totally dependent on God’s empowering grace working through faith alone in Christ.
10. Debates over sin, grace, and free will reflect unresolved tensions in how to rightly articulate the relationship between divine sovereignty and human responsibility.
In conclusion, the Pelagian controversy in the early church highlighted the need for theological clarity regarding the effects of original sin and the necessity of God’s grace for salvation. By rejecting Pelagianism, mainstream Christian doctrine upholds human depravity, the gravity of sin, our inability to save ourselves, and our reliance on God’s grace working through faith in Christ alone, to the glory and praise of God.