The African clergy were by no means satisfied with this result, as might be expected. They accordingly again met in general council in Carthage in 418, and drew up a full statement of their views, showing why they could not accept the ex]ilanation of Pelagius and Ccelestius, and why they still adhered to their former sentence against them. In their letter to pope Zosi-
mus they say, "We have ordained that the sentence given by the venerable bishop Innocent shall subsist until they shall confess without equivocation that the grace of Jesus Christ does assist us not only to know, but also to do justice in every action; insomuch that without it we can neither think, saj-, nor do anything whatever that belongs to true piety. Ccelestius's hav- ing said in general terms that he agrees with Innocent's letter is not satisfactory in regard to persons of inferior understanding, but you ought to anathematize in clear terms all that is bad in his writings, lest manv should believe that the apostolical see approves of their errors." The council having entered fully into an examination of the various heretical opinions of Pelagius and Cceles- tius, drew up and published in nine separate proposi- tions— canones — doctrinal statements in opposition to the errors which they condemned.
Zosimus was induced, by the various representations that were made, to reconsider the matter. He accord- ingly summoned Ccelestius before him, that he might examine into his opinions. He fled, however, from Rome without submitting to such a trial, whereupon Zosimus recalled the sentence of approval he had for- mally given, and confirmed that of his predecessor, " haereticorum calliditate detecta." At the same time he sent an " Epistola Tractoria," or circular letter, in accordance with the new decision he had come to, ac- cepting the decision of the Council of Carthage against Pelagius, addressed to all the bishops of the Western Church for their approval. They all subscribed it, with the exception of eighteen Italian bishops, the chief of whom was Julian, bishop of Eclanum, a small village in Apulia, "a man of a penetrating genius, learned in the Scriptures, and an accurate scholar both in the Greek and Latin languages." These refractory bishops were all deposed from their office as favorers of the opinions of Pelagius. They afterwards fled to Constan- tinople, where they associated with Nestorins and his party. Some of them, however, again returned to Rome, and, retracting their errors and professing penitence, they were restored to their office. Julian continued to espouse the cause of Pelagius, whereupon, as Petavius remarks, "Cum Augustino grande certauien iniit, homo lingua promptus ac disertus sed procax et temerarius."
The civil as well as the ecclesiastical authorities were now moved to pronounce against Pelagianism. The case having been represented to the emperor Honorius, he issued a " Sacrum Rescriptum," dated from Ravenna, in April, 418, addressed to the pra'torian prefect of Italy, who immediately, in conjunction with the prefects of the East and of Gaul, published an edict, commanding that all who were convicted of holding the errors of Pe- lagius should suifer banishment aiul confiscation of their goods. Such an appeal to the civil powers was quite in accordance with the opinions which Augustine had al- ready propounded during the Donatist controversy as to the sphere of the magistrate's authority. In replying to Julian, who complained that an ajipeal had been made to the civil magistrate in a matter that ought to be de- cided by an appeal to "reason," he says — "Vis non timere potestatem? bonum fac. Non estautem bonum, contra apostolicum sensum exserere et asserere hajreli- cum sensum. Damnata ergo hairesis ab episcopis non adhuc examinanda, sed coercenda est a potestatibus Christianis."
From the time of these decrees against him Pelagius passes away from the field of history. It is not known what was his subsequent career. It is conjectured by some tliat he returned to his native country, and there continued to teach the same doctrines which had al- ready elsewhere involved the Church in so much con- troversy.
III. Subsequent ConI rover sies on Ihe Subject. — In 429 Marius Mercator published in the East, and dedicated to Theodosius II, his work entitled Commonitoriuin ad- ve7\ius hteresiii Pelagii et Coelestii. It was translated into Latin, and published in the West in 431. That
PELAGIANISM
812
PELAGIANISM
work contains a powerful vindication of the Christian doctrine of sin and of grace, in opposition to Pelagianism, very much after the manner of Augustine. The East- ern (Ecumenical Council of Ephesus, also held in 431, gave forth a sentence in liarmony with those that had been issued at Carthage against Pelagius and his opin- ions. Thus it became manifest that the agitations of these years had resulted in a triumphant overthrow of the heresy which was taught by relagius. Yet it is obvious that the influence of the teachings of Origen, which prevailed so generally in the East, mitigated and modilied to a great degree the opposition of the Church there to Pelagius and his opinions.
There was a violent antagonism, on the subject of divine grace, between the views of Pelagius and those of Augustine. Augustine held the doctrine of salvation by grace in the strictest Calvinistic sense of the phrase —that every one who is saved owes his salvation en- tirely to divine grace, without any meritorious co-oper- atiou of his own.