Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 13.djvu/773

 SEMIPELAGIANISM

705

SEMIPELAGIANISM

viction that thoy could not successfully engage such learned and respected opponents, Prohper and Hilary journeyed to Rome about 431 to urge Pope Celestine I to take official steps against the Semipelagians. Without issuing any definitive decision, the pope contented himself with an exhortation to the bishops of Gaul (P. L., L, 528 sqq.), protecting the memory of Augustine from calumniation and imposing silence on the innovators. On his return Prosper could claim henceforth to be engaging in the conflict "in virtue of the authority of the Apostolic See" (cf. P. L., LI, 17S: "ex auctoritate apostolicae sedis). His war was "pro Augustino", and in every direc- tion he fought on his behalf. Thus, about 431-32, he repelled the "calumnies of the Gauls" against Augustine in his " Responsiones ad capitula objec- tionum Gallorum" (P. L., LI, 155 sqq.), defended temperately in his "Responsiones ad capitula objec- tionum Vincentianarum" (P. L., LI, 177 sqq.), the Augustinian teaching concerning predestination, and finally, in his "Responsiones ad excerpta Genuen- sium" (P. L., LI, 187 sqq.), explained the sense of excerpts which two priests of Genoa had collected from the writings of Augustine concerning predes- tination, and had forwarded to Prosper for inter- pretation. About 433 (434) he even ventured to attack Cassian himself, the soul and head of the whole movement, in his book, "De gratia et libero arbitrio contra Collatorem" (P. L., LI, 213 sqq.). The already delicate situation was thereby embittered, notwithstanding the friendly concluding sentences of the work. Of Hilary, Prosper's friend, we hear nothing more. Prosper himself must have regarded the fight as hopeless for the time being, since in 434 — according to Loofs; other historians give the year 440 — he shook the dust of Gaul from his feet and left the land to its fate. Settling at Rome in the papal chancery, he took no further part directly in the controversy, although even here he never wearied propagating Augustine's doctrine concerning grace, publishing several treatises to spread and defend it. The Massilians now took the field, confident of vic- tory. One of their greatest leaders, the celebrated Vincent of I^rins, under the pseudon\'m of Peregrinus made in 434 concealed attacks on Augustine in his classical and otherwise excellent work, "Common- itorium pro catholics fidei veritate" (P. L., L, 637 sqq)j and in individual passages frankly espoused Semipolagianism. This booklet should probably be regarded as simply a "polemical treatise against Augustine".

That Semipelagianism remained the prevailing tendency in Gaul during the following period, is proved by Arnobius the Younger, so called in contrast to Arnobius the Polder of Sicca (about 303). A Gaul by birth, and skilled in exegesis, Arnobius wrote about 460 extensive explanations of the Psalms ("Commentarii in Psalmos" in P. L., LIII, 327 sqq.) with a tendency towards allegorizing and open tilts at Augustine's doctrine of grace. Of his per- sonal life nothing is known to us. Certain works from other pens have been wrongly ascribed to him. Thus, the collection of scholia ("Adnotationes ad quisdam evangeliorum loca" in P. L., LIII, 569 sqq.), formerly attributed to him, must be referred to the pre-Constantine period, as B. Grundl has recently proved (cf. "Theol. Quartalschr.", Tiibingen, 1897, .5.55 sqq.). Likewise, the work "Conflictus Arnobii catholici cum Serapione ^gyptio" (P. L., LIII, 239 sqq.) cannot have been wTitten by our Arnobius, inasmuch as it is entirely Augustinian in spirit. When Biiumer wished to assign the author- ship to Faustus of Riez ("Katholik", II, Mainz, 1887, pp. 398 sqq.), he overlooked the fact that Faustus also was a Semipelagian (see below), and that, in any case, so dilettante a writing as the above could not be ascribed to the learned Bishop of Riez. XIII.— 45

The true author is to be sought in Italy, not in Gaul. His chief object is to prove against Monophysitism, in the form of a disputation, the agreement in faith between Rome and the Greek champions of Ortho- doxy, Athanasius and Cyril of Alexandria. Natu- rally Arnobius overcomes the Egyptian Serapion. One can therefore scarcely err in regarding the "Cathohc Arnobius" as an obscure monk living in Rome. Until recent times the authorship of the work called the "Liber prajdestinatus " was also commonly ascribed to our Arnobius. The sub-title reads: " Praedestinatorum hsresis et libri S. Augus- tino temere adscripti refutatio" (P. L., LIII, 587 sqq.). Dating from the fifth century and divided into three parts, this work, which was first publi-shed by J. Sirmond in 1643, attempts under the mask of ecclesiastical authority to refute Augustine's doctrine of grace together with the heretical Predcstinarian- ism of pseudo-Augustine. As the third part is not merely Semipelagianism but undisguised Pelagianism, von Schubert has of late rightly concluded ("Der sog. Pra?destinatus, ein Beitrag zur Gesch. des Pel- agianismus", Leipzig, 1903) that the author wrote about 440 in Italy, perhaps at Rome itself, and was one of the associates of Julian of Eclanum (for further particulars see Predestinari.\nism).

The most important representative of Semi- pelagianism after Cassian was undoubtedly the celebrated Bishop Faustus of Riez. When the Gallic priest Lucidus had drawn on himself, on account of his heretical predestinationism, the condemnation of two synods (Aries, 473; Lyons, 474), Faustus was commissioned by the assembled bishops to write a scientific refutation of the condemned heresy; hence his work, "De gratia hbri 11" (P. L., LVllI, 783

sqq.). Agreeing neither with the "pestifer doctor Pelagius" nor with the "error prsedestinationis" of Lucidus, he resolutely adopted the standpoint of

John Cassian. Like him, he denied the nc((\ssity of prevenient grace at the beginning of justification, and compares the will to a "small hook" (quaedam voluntatis ansula) which reaches out and seizes grace. Of predestination to heaven and final perseverance as a "special grace" {gratia specialis, personalis) he will not hear. That he sincerely believed that by these propositions he was condemning not a dogma of the Church, but the false private views of St. Augustine, is as certain in his case as in that of his predecessors Cassian and Hilary of Aries (see above). Consequently, their objectively reprehensible but subjectively excusable action has not prevented France from honouring these three men as saints even to this day. The later Massilians were as little conscious as the earlier that they had strayed from the straight line of orthodoxy, and the in- fallible authority of the Church had not yet given a deci-sion.

One should, however, speak only of a predomi- nance, and not of a supremacy, of Semipelagianism at this period. In proof of this statement we may cite two anonymous writings, which appeared most probably in Gaul itself. About 430 an unknown writer, recognized by Pope Gelasius as "probatus ecclesiae magister", composed the epoch-making work, "De vocatione omnium gentium" (P. L., LI, 647 sqq.). It is an honest and skilful attempt to* soften down the contradictions and to facilitate the passage from Semipelagianism to a moderate Augus- tinism. To harmonize the universality of the will of redemption with restricted predestination, the anony- mous author distinguishes between the general pro- vision of grace {benignitas generalis) which excludes no one, and the special care of God (gratia specialis), which is given only to the elect. As suggestions towards this distinction are already found in St. Augustine, we may say that this work stands on Augustinian ground (cf. Loofs, "Dogmengesch.", 4th