Augustine and Predestination

Defining our Terms

With modern Arminianism aside, it would not be proper for Arminius to be characterized as a semi-Pelagian. What pelagian teaching did he maintain that was not already held prior to Pelagius and his disciple Celestius? However, Arminius continually defended himself against the charge of Pelagianism. (It is possible that followers of Arminius in the Remonstrant movement did adhere to true Pelagian concepts and therefore could be properly referred to as semi-Pelagian.) This would be a charge against some later Arminians as opposed to a critique of Arminius himself.

Augustine is one bishop among many in the Catholic Church. His positions on depravity, efficacious grace, and an absolute, particular predestination to life, have never been made dogmatic teaching, though predestination to life and efficacious grace are allowed as theological traditions in tension with established dogma.

The term semi-Pelagian is non-specific and connotes heresy. It is an unfortunate historical term and causes much confusion. To claim a position to be “semi-Pelagian” on the mere basis that it does not subscribe to all of Augustine’s positions can be misleading. What is often referred to as semi-Pelagianism could better be described as pre-Augustinianism in the context of semi-Augustinianism, or even pre-Pelagian for that matter. If one maintains the position that predestination is based on foreknowledge then it would be better to refer to them as pre-Augustinian. The fact that Pelagius as well as so-called semi-Pelagians maintained predestination on the basis of foreknowledge is only in continuity with ancient Christian tradition and was not a “heresy” which had originated from Pelagius.

Augustine and the Massilians

John Cassian, a disciple of Chrysostom, and the one whom had founded and presided over a monastery in Massilia, along with the monks and theologians of the community, protested against Augustine’s doctrine of Predestination. Since Cassian did not hold to the doctrine of Predestination he taught that the first movements of man towards God was unaided but still maintained the necessity of grace. (It is also stated that he did not hold any view which corresponded to Pelagius and so the term semi-pelagian contributed to him is misleading (Cross). Therefore he could be referred to as a semi-Pelagian on the basis that he maintained a doctrine of Pelagius, although modified. However, Cassian rejects the propositions of Pelagius. Therefore, it would be better to label him as a semi-Augustinian (Quasten 522).

Seven years after Augustine wrote his On Grace and Free Will, and On Rebuke and Grace, which was in 427AD, and four years after Augustine’s death, which was in 430AD, Vincent of Lerin, a member of the Massilian monastery, wrote his famous Commonitory for the Antiquity and Universality of the Catholic Faith. Although Augustine is not mentioned by name his work was designed to address the novelties of Augustine’s theology which were contrary to what was being “believed everywhere, always, and by all”. Augustine’s final two works On the Predestination of the Saints and On the Gift of Perseverance were written against the Massilians. The opponents of Augustine stated that grace is general, Christ died for all, and predestination is based on foreknowledge, all of which is consistent with early Christian teaching (Heick, 208). St. Prosper of Aquitaine championed the teachings of Augustine further against the dominate “semi-pelagian” teaching of Gaul (Cross 1258).

The Aftermath

Debates continued well into the 490’s when Pope Gelasuis decreed the sanctioning of the writings of Augustine and his disciple Prosper as well as placing the writings of Cassian and Faustus among the forbidden books (Schaff, 866). This move appears to be an attempt to limit the effects of the debate. The councils of Carthage in 418AD, Ephesus in 431AD, and Orange II in 529AD all condemned various elements which were taught by Pelagius and perpetuated by his followers, as well as the semi-pelagian position. These followers of Pelagius were not pre-Augustinian in that they still maintained some of the novelties of Pelagius himself which have no substantiation in Christian tradition. The second council of Orange maintained a moderate Augustinianism.

It is important to note that the council specifically rejected predestination to perdition. This would mean a positive and active reprobation, a decree of which is equal to predestination to life. Augustine did not teach a double predestination of this kind but rather maintained that the reprobate are simply passed over, a passive reprobation. In fact, beyond this rejection in the council, there are no other statements about predestination. This council did teach the inability of man without grace and maintained the doctrine of prevenient grace, a grace that leads to justification but is not the grace of justification. Prevenient grace was taught by Augustine, later by Aquinas, and defined by the Council of Trent (Cross 1121). The council of Orange was approved by Pope Boniface II (530-532) and the followers of Augustine, such as Prosper, Fulgentius, Caesarius, and Maxentius were all in harmony with the See of Rome (Walker 189, Heick 212).

The Catholic Church today is in harmony with the Council of Orange as well as Augustine’s view of justification which he taught as a gradual process of actually being made righteous, the fullness of which is not completed here on earth (Quasten 436). Additionally, the Catholic Church continues to maintain Augustine’s view of the Church’s role in salvation, sacramentalism, and the relation between grace and nature (It was the philosophical shift from Realism to Nominalism during the medieval age which created the tension in this teaching). Interestingly enough, it was Pelagius who taught that one is merely declared righteous in the Protestant sense (Schaff 812). If anything, the council of Orange is against the extreme elements in Augustine which are held by Calvinists, and the Protestant doctrine of justification is closer to Pelagius than to Augustine (Schaff 812).

In the 9th century a monk by the name of Gottschalk began to teach an exaggerated Augustinianism which maintained a kind of double predestination which included a positive, active reprobation which reduced the universal saving will of God and the universality of redemption (Cross 585; 1117). This teaching of reprobation was formally rejected at the 2nd council of Orange. Gottschalk may have been the first to conclude that a positive, active predestination to life logically required an equal positive, active reprobation (Wright 22). However, since this teaching was condemned a few centuries before there is reason to believe that such an idea did not originate with Gottschalk. The council of Quiercy condemned Gottschalk’s doctrine in 849AD, the second council to condemn his doctrine, not including Orange II. Through this council, Gottschalk was striped of his priesthood which he had received uncanonically and was sentenced to perpetual imprisonment. Gottschalk was sent to a monastery in Hautvillers where he continued to engage in theological studies and debate. The fact that there were others who may have supported this idea is without question, whether one can draw an affirmative conclusion from the support is suspect. The bishop, Hincmar, had to write a pastoral letter to his diocese in order to inform them of the heresy which was being spread by Gottschalk. Additionally, Prudentuis of Troyes, Ratramnus, and Servatus Lupus came to agree with a formula established by Hincmar at the council of Touzy in 859AD (Cross 585).