6 April 681 A.D. Prudentius of Troyes—A Medieval Predestinarian; The Man Semi-Pelagobates Want You to Forget
6 April 681 A.D. Prudentius of Troyes—A Medieval Predestinarian; The
Man Semi-Pelagobates Want You to Forget
Gumerlock, Francis X. “The Tractorian of Prudentius of Troyes
(d.861). Kerux. May 2010. http://francisgumerlock.com/wp-content/uploads/Gumerlock-The-Tractoria-of-Prudentius-of-Troyes1.pdf. Accessed 5 Nov 2014.
Kerux 25:1 (May 2010):11-23
The Tractoria of
Prudentius of Troyes (d. 861)
by Francis X. Gumerlock
Introduction: Prudentius and the
Ninth-Century Predestination Controversy
When the doctrine of predestination, the
relationship of grace to free will, and the extent of Christ’s atonement became
topics of debate in the mid-ninth century, Gottschalk of Orbais was not alone
in asserting the inability of the human will to choose good apart from special
enabling grace, God’s predestination of the elect to salvation and the
reprobate to merited punishment, and the shedding of Christ’s blood for all
believers.1
Remigius of Lyons, Florus of Lyons, Lupus
of Fierrières, and Prudentius of Troyes similarly promoted such strict
Augustinian tenets as the faith of the Church. This article briefly introduces
the life and writings of Prudentius, and provides a translation of his Tractoria,
which contains four chapters that succinctly illustrate his doctrine of grace.
The Life and Writings of Prudentius
Related to Predestination
Born in Spain and then named Galino,
Prudentius moved to the Frankish empire, was educated in the palace school. He
was appointed chaplain to the Frankish court of Louis the Pious and later
elevated to the bishopric of Troyes sometime before 847.2 Some of his writings
are printed in Volume 115 of Patrologia Latina. Four of them are related
to his theology of grace during the Gottschalk controversy.
1 For an argument against the notion that
Gottschalk stood virtually alone in a world gone Semi-Pelagian, see Francis X.
Gumerlock, “Predestination in the Century Before Gottschalk,” (Part 1) Evangelical
Quarterly 81:3 (July 2009):195-209; (Part 2) Evangelical Quarterly 81:4
(Oct 2009):319-337.
1.Letter to Hincmar and Pardulus
(Epistola ad Hincmarum et Pardulum). The priest-monk Gottschalk of Orbais
was tried and condemned for errors related to predestination at a synod in
Mainz in 848 and afterward at another synod at Quierzy in the spring of 849. At
the latter council Hincmar, bishop of Reims, had Gottschalk flogged and
defrocked, and then imprisoned him in the monastery at Hautvilliers. Since
Gottschalk’s teaching had been fairly influential and his writings were well
circulated, Hincmar invited a number of theologians to dialogue on the issues
that Gottschalk raised.
Probably in 849, Prudentius wrote to
Hincmar and Pardulus of Laon in this letter divided into thirteen chapters.3
Perhaps concerned that Augustine’s doctrine was not being condemned with
Gottschalk, Prudentius begins in the first chapter by saying that the Roman
popes attested to the catholic orthodoxy of Augustine, and mentions Innocent,
Zosimus, Celestine, Leo the Great, and Gregory the Great as supporters of
Augustine. In
2 On Prudentius, see A.H. Tegels,
“Prudentius of Troyes, St.,” New CatholicEncyclopedia, 2nd ed., Vol. 11
(New York: Gale, 2003), 793; Michael Walsh, “Prudentius Galindo,” in his Dictionary
of Christian Biography (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2001), 988;
E.A. Livingston and F. L. Cross, eds., The Oxford Dictionary of the
Christian Church, 3rd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997), 1342.
3 PL 115:971-1010.
the second chapter Prudentius shows how
Prosper of Aquitaine and Fulgentius of Ruspe defended Augustine’s doctrine.
Chapter three and four speak of three questions that were currently in dispute:
the predestination of the reprobate, whether the death of Christ died only for
the elect, and whether it is the will of God that all humans be called and
saved.
Chapters five through the end contain a
collection of citations from church fathers which
answered these matters:
Chs. 5-7 From the writings of Augustine
Ch. 8 From Fulgentius’ Ad Monimum
Ch. 9 From Gregory the Great’s Moralia
in Iob
Ch. 10 From Isidore of Seville and Jerome
Ch. 11 From Prosper of Aquitaine’s Responsiones
ad Capitula Gallorum
Ch. 12 From Cassidorus’ On the Psalms and
Bede
Ch. 13 From various authors on the issue
of grace and free will.
The citations are mainly on the subject of
predestination and show that Prudentius believed in the predestination of the
elect and the just foreordination of the punishment, but not the sin, of the
reprobate. Toward the end of the letter, Prudentius shows his sentiment on
grace and free will: that the human will is not free for righteousness, but
that freeing grace must precede the movement of the will toward God.
This letter is unavailable in English
translation.
2. On Predestination against John the
Scot (De Praedestinatione contra Joannem Scotum cognmento Erigenam). When
Hincmar realized that many leaders in the church, while not condoning
Gottschalk’s behavior (which was seen by both sides as arrogant, rebellious,
and somewhat bizarre), held positions regarding the doctrine of salvation that
resembled Gottschalk’s, he invited John Scottus Eriugena, an erudite teacher in
the palace school, to write on the issue. At the end of 850 or in early 851
Eriugena wrote a book on predestination in nineteen chapters that denied
two-fold predestination.4 Soon afterward, Wenilo the bishop of Sens excerpted
many statements that Eriugena had written, and sent them to Prudentius for
refutation. Against these, Prudentius took up his pen in the autumn of 851 or
in 852, and published On Predestination against John the Scot with a
preface addressed to Wenilo.5
Prudentius’ method was to cite a short
statement from Eriugena’s work that he considered erroneous, and to follow it
with a lengthy correction. Prudentius supported his corrections with three
hundred and fifteen patristic quotes from the writings of Jerome, Augustine,
Fulgentius, Leo, Gregory the Great, Isidore of Seville, and Bede.6
According to James C. Prichard, a
historian of the nineteenth-century, Prudentius found Eriugena’s propositions
“full of Pelagianism and other heresy, and accused their author of making an
impudent and treacherous attack upon catholic doctrine, under the pretext of
opposing Godeschalcus.”7
According to a 1988 book on Eriugena by
John J.
4 John Scottus Eriugena, Treatise on
Divine Predestination. Mary Brennan, trans. (Notre Dame, IN: University of
Notre Dame Press, 1998).
5 PL 115:1009-1366.
6 For the number of patristic quotes, John
J. O’Meara, Eriugena (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988), 48.
7 James C. Prichard, The Life and Times
of Hincmar, Archbishop of Rheims (London:
John Henry Parker, 1849), 149. On
Prudentius’ use of Augustine, see Pierre Petitmengin,
O’Meara, Prudentius’ refutation accused
the Scot “of Pelagianism, of impudent blasphemy, sophistical folly, vanity, and
the use of vain knowledge instead of the opinion of Scripture and the
Fathers.”8
Positively, Prudentius taught in this work
that God ordains, disposes, dispenses,destines, and predestines the things that
He did or is going to do (Isa 45:11), and this includes his creation and
destining of the fire of hell (Matt 25:41).9 On free will, Prudentius asked:
“How can you call that free which, you say, has been so spoiled as a punishment
for original sin that it can neither wish to live rightly nor is able to live
so, if it wishes…?”10 For Prudentius, divine grace creates in man a will to do
good, as the Apostle said: For it is God who works in you to will and to do (Phil
2:13).11
On Predestination against
John the Scot is
also not available in English translation. “D’Augustin a Prudence de Troyes:
les citations augustiniennes dans un manuscript d’auteur,” in De Tertullien
aux Mazarabes. Mélanges Jacques Fontaine, Vol. 2 (Paris, 1992).
8 O’Meara, Eriugena, 48.
9 PL 115:1022
10 PL 115:1087. Citation from John
Marenbon, “John Scotus and Carolingian Theology: From the De
Praedestinatione, Its Background and Its Critics, to the Periphyseon,”
in Margaret T. Gibson and Janet L. Nelson, eds., Charles the Bald. Court and
Kingdom, 2nd rev. ed. (Burlington, VT: Viviarum, 1990), 312.
11 PL 115:1052; Cf. David Ganz, “The
Debate on Predestination,” in Gibson and Nelson, Charles the Bald,
285-302 at 293.
3. Tractate or Letter to Wenilo
(Epistola Tractoria ad Venilonem).12 In 856, a gathering of bishops met in
Sens for the ordination of a certain Aeneas to the bishopric of Paris.13 On
this occasion Prudentius addressed this letter to Wenilo, the archbishop of
Sens, and to the other bishops in attendance. He said that he could not attend
due to sickness, but was sending a priest named Arnold as a legate from his
church. Prudentius continued that he consents to the ordination, if Aeneas
would subscribe to four “chapters,” or brief statements representing the
teaching of the church against the
Pelagians. Because Prudentius addressed
the letter not only to Wenilo but to all of the bishops, it is referred to as a
Tractoria, meaning a tractate or treatise. It was Prudentius’ hope that
all of the bishops in attendance would affirm their consent to the chapters.
The first chapter expresses the inability
of the human will to choose anything good after the Fall, and assigns the
beginning of a good will to the grace of God. The second asserts two-fold
predestination. The third says that the blood of Christ was shed for all
believers; and the fourth states that the saving will of God extends to those
who are actually saved.
12 PL 115:1365-1368.
13 For the date of 856, Friedrich Kempf,
Hans-Georg Beck, Eugen Ewig, and Josef Andreas Jungmann, The Church in the
Age of Feudalism. Anselm Biggs, trans. (Saint Louis: Herder and Herder,
1969), 163; Pietro Palazzini, Dizionario dei Concili, Vol. 5 (Vatican
City: Città Nuova Editrice, 1963), 151; Michael Ott, “Prudentius,” The
Original Catholic Encyclopedia at http://oce.catholic.com.
Realizing that some of the bishops
(including possibly himself) had subscribed to the canons of Quierzy in 853,
Prudentius nevertheless wants it known that these four chapters are what
the Church every day confesses, preaches, and holds.
How the bishops gathered at Sens responded
to the Tractoria is unknown, but there is no evidence of a negative
reaction to it. Hence, the four chapters are often referred to in literature as
the canons of the Council of Sens of 856.
The Tractoria is translated below.
4. The Annals of St. Bertin (Annales
Bertiniani). Prudentius also edited a good portion of a historical
chronicle called the Annals of St. Bertin. The short entries in the
chronicle for the years 835-861 that Prudentius wrote provide valuable
additions to our historical knowledge of the mid-ninth century.
Interestingly, under the year 859,
Prudentius explained that Pope Nicholas I confirmed the teaching of double
predestination and particular redemption. He wrote:
“Pope Nicholas faithfully confirmed and
catholicly [sic] decreed concerning the grace of God and free will, the truth
of double predestination, and the blood of Christ and how it was shed for all
believers.”14 What exactly Prudentius was referring to in this statement would
make a great subject for research, an academic paper, or an article.
Another value of the Annals is its
entry about Gottschalk. It reads:
14 Janet L. Nelson, trans., The Annals
of St-Bertin. Ninth-Century Histories, Vol. 1 (Manchester: Manchester
University Press, 1991), 91.
15 On Pope Nicholas, see Jane Carol
Bishop, “Pope Nicholas I and the First Age of Papal Independence,” Ph.D. diss
(Columbia University, 1980).
Gottschalk, a man of Gaul, a monk and
priest of the monastery of Orbais of the parish of Soissons, was bloated with
his knowledge and given to certain superstitions. He went to Italy in the name
of religion, but was then shamefully banished. He next sought out Dalmatia,
Pannonia, and Noricum, and taught there with pernicious speech and writing
certain things—especially under the name of
predestination—opposed to our salvation.
In the presence of King Louis the German he was discovered and convicted by a
council of bishops. Finally he was forced to return to the metropolitan city of
his diocese, Rheims, over which that venerable man Hincmar presides. To the
extent that he deserved to be punished for his lack of faith, he received it there.
That most strenuous defender of the Christian faith, King Charles [the Bald]
called together a council of the holy bishops of that diocese and commanded
Gottschalk to be presented before them. [Gottschalk] was lead in, was publicly
whipped, and was forced to cast into flames his books with their many
assertions.16
This short account offers a helpful
chronology, written by a contemporary, of the travels of Gottschalk and the
ecclesiastical trouble into which he landed. The language with which Prudentius
refers to Gottschalk in the entry is evidence that many of the strict
Augustinians, whose theology was similar to that of Gottschalk, had distanced
themselves from his person.17 Gottschalk’s request in his Longer Confession for
a trial
16 Cited in Paul Edward Dutton, ed., Carolingian
Civilization. A Reader (Petersborough, Ontario: Broadview, 1993), 50.
17 Bernard Boller, Gottschalk d’Orbais
de Fulda à Hautvillers: une dissidence (Paris: Editions SDE, 2004), 124,
note 257, makes this same observation.
by ordeal did not sit well with them; and
this is probably what Prudentius had in mind when he wrote that he was “given
to certain superstitions.”18 Prudentius also described Gottschalk’s speech as
“pernicious” and opposed to salvation. An almost universal criticism among
Gottschalk’s contemporaries was the manner in which he taught twofold
predestination, in a way that seemed to leave no room for the conversion of
sinners through repentance.19
In addition, Prudentius referred to
Gottschalk as one “bloated” with knowledge. The ecclesiastical leaders of the
time were amazed at Gottschalk’s ability to recite large portions of church
fathers from memory,20 but interpreted his tendency to be argumentative as a
sign of pride. Florus of Lyons, whose theological views, like those of
18 Cyrille Lambot, ed., Oeuvres
théologiques et grammaticales de Godescalc d’Orbais (Louvain: “Spicilegium
Sacrum Lovaniense” Bureaux, 1945), 74-5. An English translation of Gottschalk’s
Longer Confession is in Ronald Hanko, “Gotteschalk’s Doctrine of Double
Predestination,” Protestant Reformed Theological Journal 12:1
(1978):31-64. A new translation of it is forthcoming in Victor Genke and
Francis X. Gumerlock, Gottschalk of Orbais: Translated Texts of a Medieval
Predestination Controversy, which is completed and currently under
consideration for publication by an academic press in the United States. On
Gottschalk, Matthew Gillis is currently finishing
his doctoral dissertation at the
University of Virginia entitled “Reform and Authority in the Carolingian World:
A Study of Gottschalk of Saxony.”
19 Francis X. Gumerlock, “Gottschalk of
Orbais: A Medieval Predestinarian,” Kerux 22:3 (Dec 2007):17-34 at 26-7.
20 Hincmar of Reims, Epistola ad
Nicholam, PL 126:45-46.
Prudentius, resembled Gottschalk’s in many
respects, also seemed annoyed by the wandering monk’s pugnacity, stubbornness,
and unwillingness to receive correction. At the end of his Sermon on
Predestination, Florus exhorted his readers to close their ears “against
the wicked tongue of this very vain and very wretched man [Gottschalk].” He
continued: For, although he is ready to argue and is obstinate against the
truth, this unfortunate man, inflated with a diabolical spirit [i.e. pride],
preferred to separate himself from the church of Christ and its ministers than
to turn away from his
profane and vain speech.21
An English translation of The Annals of
St. Bertin by Janet L. Nelson was published in 1991.
Other Writings of Prudentius Volume 115 of
Migne’s Patrologia Latina contains a historical notice on Prudentius,
dated 1861, that lists other writings by him including Praecepta ex Veteri
et
Novo Testamento (Precepts
from the Old and New Testaments), Poemata (Poems), Vitam
beatae Maurae [sic]
virginis Trecensis (Life of the Blessed Virgin Mary from Troyes),
and possibly Collectanea ex CL psalmis
(Commentaries on the 150 Psalms).22
21 Florus of Lyons, Sermo de
praedestinatione. PL 119:102 and PL 125:59. Translation mine. A translation
of the entire sermon is forthcoming in Genke and Gumerlock, Gottschalk of
Orbais.
22 PL 115:971-972.
A Puzzling Question
Hincmar, in Chapter 21 of his De
Praedestinatione dissertatio posterior, written in 856 after Prudentius’ Tractoria,
expressed amazement that Prudentius had subscribed to a canon on free will at
the Council of Quierzy (in 853) but afterward wrote the ‘four chapters’ to
Wenilo.23 If this account is accurate, it means that after Prudentius’ Letter
to Hincmar and Pardulus, and after writing his treatise On
Predestination against Eriugena, Prudentius consented, approved of, and
subscribed to the canons of Quierzy which can be summarized as follows: There
is only one predestination, that of the elect; the free will of man is healed
through grace; God wills all men to be saved; and Christ suffered for all
men.24 Then shortly thereafter Prudentius wrote the Tractoria, which
counters the canons of Quierzy.
Several explanations have been put forward
in the literature for why Prudentius would have approved the canons of Quierzy.
Victor Genke questions the veracity of Hincmar’s account.25 C.J. Thorne, Jr.
suggested that Prudentius subscribed “either out of reverence for Hincmar or
fear of Charles the Bald”, the king of France (West Franks) and grandson of
Charlemagne who had called the council to stop the dispute over
23 Hincmar, De praedestinatione
dissertatio posterior, 21. PL 125:182.
24 The canons are in PL 121:1085-1086; PL
125:63-64. English translation in Henry Denzinger, The Sources of Catholic
Dogma. Roy J. Deferrari, trans. (Saint Louis: Herder, 1957), 126-7.
25 Genke and Gumerlock, Introduction to Gottschalk
of Orbais: “If Hincmar is to be trusted at this point, Prudentius of Troyes
subscribed to the document, too.”
predestination.
26 Paul Burns wrote similarly that
Prudentius may have been intimidated by the presence of the emperor at the
Council of Quierzy.27
I think another possibility exists.
Because Quierzy was convened for the purpose of settling the controversy that
had polarized the Frankish ecclesiastical leaders, perhaps Prudentius saw the
canons as vague enough to allow for his strict Augustinian interpretation of
them. Predestination could rightly be explained as one, but having two aspects,
as Gottschalk had explained in his Longer Confession.28 And what strict
Augustinian would disagree with the statement of Quierzy that free will is
healed through grace? As for God wanting all to be saved and Christ suffering
for all, there is similar phraseology in Scripture,29 so perhaps he affirmed
the statement with the knowledge that
so-called “universalist” passages can be
interpreted as synecdochic figures of speech meaning “many.”
Or perhaps, as Prichard thinks,30 the
views of Prudentius were not as solidified in 853 at the time of the Council of
Quierzy as they would later become, especially after
26 For example, C. G. Thorne, Jr.,
“Prudentius (Galindo) (d. 861),” in J.D. Douglas, ed., The New International
Dictionary of the Christian Church, Revised ed. (Grand Rapids, MI:
Zondervan, 1978), 810.
27 “St. Prudentius, Bishop (861)” under
April 6 in Paul Burns, ed., Butler’s Lives of the Saints. New Full Edition,
Vol. 4 (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2000), 36.
28 Gottschalk, Longer Confession.
Lambot, 67-8.
29 1 Tim 2:4; Rom 8:32.
30 Prichard, Life and Times of Hincmar,
154: “It appears indeed that Prudentius was long in much uncertainty as to
these questions, and with difficulty made up his mind.”
855 when the bishops of Lyons, Vienne, and
Arles opposed the doctrine of Eriugena at the Council of Valence and upheld
two-fold predestination.31 The similarity in theology between the later
theology of Prudentius and that of the theologians of Lyons, and the
possibility of their influence upon Prudentius, is hinted upon by James Ussher
and Timothy Roberts.32
The question of Prudentius’ alleged
inconsistency merits additional research.
Such research might include a comparative
investigation between Prudentius’ earlier and later writings on the issue, and
comparison of Prudentius’ Tractoria with the theology of Remigius and
Florus of Lyons and with the canons of the Council of Valence, which reflected
the theology of these leaders from Lyons.
Conclusion: The Contributions of
Prudentius
According to one scholar, “Prudentius was
regarded by his contemporaries as being among the most learned theologians of
his day.”33 His writings show that he held a prominent place in the discussion
on predestination in the Frankish Church in the mid-
31 The canons of the Council of Valence
are translated in Denzinger, Sources of Catholic Dogma, 127-32.
32 James Ussher, Gotteschalci, et
praedestinationae controversiae ab eo motae, Historia (Dublin, 1631),
reprinted in The Whole Works of the Most Rev. James Ussher, Vol. 4.
(Dublin: Hodges, Smith, and Co., 1864), 172; Timothy Roland Roberts, “A
Translation and Critical Edition of Ratramnus of Corbie’s De Predestinatione
[sic] Dei,” Ph.D. diss (University of Missouri-Columbia, 1977), 15.
33 Burns, Butler’s Lives of the Saints,
New Full Edition, 4:37.
ninth century. After Hincmar condemned
Gottschalk and opened the discussion on predestination to other theologians,
Prudentius poured through the writings of the Fathers, and found that Augustine
and others did teach that the punishment of the reprobate, merited by their
sins, was divinely foreordained. This he expressed in his Letter to Hincmar
and Pardulus.
When Eriugena’s On Predestination entered
the debate, archbishop Wenilo of Sens saw many problems with Eriugena’s
treatment of the issues, and entrusted to Prudentius the task of refuting it.
This shows that Wenilo very much respected
Prudentius’ orthodoxy, his command of the Fathers, and his ability to refute
Eriugena, one of the most distinguished teachers in the empire. There is no
doubt that Prudentius’ On Predestination against John the Scot influenced
the widespread distaste for Eriugena’s treatise.34
In the Annals of St. Bertin,
Prudentius uniquely informed posterity that Pope Nicholas I decreed that double
predestination and definite atonement were Catholic doctrines. Finally,
Prudentius’ Tractoria to Wenilo and the bishops gathered for the
ordination of Aeneas contains strict Augustinian tenets in its four chapters,
and strongly encouraged both Aeneas and the other bishops to subscribe to them.
Prudentius’ insistence on making subscription to two-fold predestination and
particular redemption a requirement for ordination is very unusual in ancient
and medieval Christianity. In the
34 The Council of Valence in 855 expressed
its disgust for Eriugena’s treatise referred to as “Scottish hodge-podge,” and produced
canons against its propositions. After such reactions, even Hincmar distanced
himself from Eriugena.
middle ages it seems to be an anomaly; and
for this Prudentius deserves a place in the history of doctrine.
Prudentius of Troyes
Tractate
Epistle of Saint
Prudentius, bishop of Troyes, to Wenilo, which he sent through a vicar on the
occasion of the ordination of Aeneas of Paris, since he was not able to be
there.
Prudentius most sincerely wishes eternal
salvation in the Lord to the venerable father and the rest of the fathers and
brothers, beloved and reverend fellow bishops.
Having been afflicted with almost every
known infirmity, I am prohibited from attending your holy and desirable
gathering. This [infirmity] is understood to pertain to the most just judgment
of God as far as it concerns the merit of my sins, but as far as it concerns
His undeserved and unfailing mercies, it pertains to His most merciful bounty.
However, as far as I am able, I exhibit
the presence of my consent through letters and through our church’s legate, the
priest Arnold. Because he who should be ordained, having been instructed by all
in the apostolic see and by the writings and sayings of the blessed fathers
Innocent, Zosimus, Boniface, Sixtus, Leo, Gelasius, Celestine, Gregory, Hilary,
Ambrose, Augustine, Isidore, Primasius, Fulgentius, Gregory, Jerome,
Cassiodorus, Bede, and other equally catholic and orthodox men, wishes by
confessing to subscribe, and by subscribing to confess, particularly to the
four chapters which the whole catholic church has fought for and been
victorious against Pelagius and the followers of his heresy, and has entrusted
for the memory of posterity in very extensive literature carrying authority and
truth, I profess my consent to his ordination. However, if [he confesses and
subscribes] to other opinions, I absolutley do not consent, nor do I recommend
that the faithful of Christ consent.
Although I have no doubt that your
prudence is more vigorous than my aged knowledge, I have judged it necessary to
briefly attach a series of four chapters, set forth so that your goodness may
more easily recognize what I believe and to what truth I consent.
Concerning Free Will
First. Evidently, that one should confess
that free will, lost in Adam by the merit
of disobedience, is restored to us and
freed through our Lord Jesus Christ. Meanwhile
[we live] in hope [of salvation]; later
[we shall possess it] in reality, just as the Apostle
says, “For in hope we have been saved”
(Rom 8:24). Nevertheless, we should assign the
grace of the omnipotent God to every good
work, whether in proposing, beginning,
working out, or finishing with
perseverance. And we should know that without it we are
in no way able to do anything good,
whether to propose, or to will, or to work.
Concerning Twofold Predestination
Second. That one should believe and
confess that by the most high and secret counsel of the omnipotent God, some
were predestined to life by the gratuitous mercy of God before all ages, and
some were predestined to punishment by an inscrutable judgment. Evidently,
whether unto salvation or unto damnation, He has predestined what he had
foreknown He was going to do in judging, as the prophet says, “He who made the
things that are future” (Isa 45:11).
Concerning the Death of Christ
Third. That one should believe and confess
with all catholics that the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ was shed for all
persons believing in Him throughout the whole world, but not for those who
never believed in Him, do not believe today, or will never believe, as the Lord
Himself says, “For the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve and
to give His life as a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28).
Concerning the Will of God
Fourth. That one should believe and
confess that the omnipotent God wills to save whomever [He wants], and that no
one is in any way able to be saved unless He saves them; and all those to be
saved, He willed to be saved. And from this, [concerning] those who are not
saved, it is clearly not His will that they should be saved, as the prophet
says, “All things whatsoever God willed, He did in heaven and on earth, in the
sea, and in all of the abyss” (Ps 135:6).
Also, it may be that some have consented,
approved, and subscribed to other opinions, which the Church universally
condemned against Pelagius. Nevertheless, against him and his companions, the
Church every day rejoices over, confesses, preaches, holds, and will hold these
things, having been delivered from his very depraved opinions through the
apostlolic see, at the insistence of the most blessed Aurelius, bishop of
Carthage, and Augustine, with two hundred and fourteen other bishops, and
having been made common throughout the whole world through many epistles as
well as books. May
He [God], through His bounty, deign to
forever preserve these things happily through all of your consent, [knowing
that] your praiseworthy paternity and fraternity is unbreakable and very strong
through heavenly grace.
Comments
Post a Comment