Semipelagianism is a Christian theological and soteriological school of thought on salvation; that is, the means by which humanity and God are restored to a right relationship. Semipelagian thought stands in contrast to the earlier Pelagian teaching about salvation (in which man is seen as effecting his own salvation), which had been dismissed as heresy. Semipelagianism in its original form was developed as a compromise between Pelagianism and the teaching of Church Fathers such as Saint Augustine, who taught that man cannot come to God without the grace of God. In Semipelagian thought, therefore, a distinction is made between the beginning of faith and the increase of faith. Semipelagian thought teaches that the latter half - growing in faith - is the work of God, while the beginning of faith is an act of free will, with grace supervening only later.[1] It too was labeled heresy by the Western Church in the Second Council of Orange in 529.
The Roman Catholic Church condemns semipelagianism but affirms that the beginning of faith involves an act of free will. It teaches that the initiative comes from God, but requires free synergy (collaboration) on the part of man: "God has freely chosen to associate man with the work of his grace. the fatherly action of God is first on his own initiative, and then follows man's free acting through his collaboration".[2] "Since the initiative belongs to God in the order of grace, no one can merit the initial grace of forgiveness and justification, at the beginning of conversion. Moved by the Holy Spirit and by charity, we can then merit for ourselves and for others the graces needed for our sanctification, for the increase of grace and charity, and for the attainment of eternal life."[3]
The term Semipelagian is used retrospectively by theologians to refer to the original formulation, and has been used as an accusation in theological disputes over salvation, divine grace and free will.
Contents |
Pelagianism is the teaching that man has the capacity to seek God in and of himself apart from any movement of God or the Holy Spirit, and therefore that salvation is effected by man's efforts. The doctrine takes its name from Pelagius, a British monk who was accused of developing the doctrine (he himself appears to have claimed that man does not do good apart from grace in his letters, claiming only that all men have free will by God's gift); it was opposed especially by Augustine of Hippo and was declared a heresy by Pope Zosimus in 418. Denying the existence of original sin, it teaches that man is in himself and by nature capable of choosing good.[4]
In Semipelagian thought, man doesn’t have such an unrestrained capacity, but man and God could cooperate to a certain degree in this salvation effort: man can (unaided by grace) make the first move toward God, and God then increases and guards that faith, completing the work of salvation.[5] This teaching is distinct from the traditional patristic doctrine of synergeia, in which the process of salvation is cooperation between God and man from start to finish.
The popular phrase "God helps those who help themselves" is [6][7] as an example of Semipelagian thought in modern culture.
After this confusion had been deemed an error, the term Semipelagianism was retained in learned circles as a designation for the heresy advocated by monks of Southern Gaul at and around Marseille after 428. It aimed at a compromise between the two extremes of Pelagianism and Augustinism, and was condemned as heresy at the local Councils of Orange in 529 after disputes extending over more than a hundred years; the term Semipelagianism itself was unknown in antiquity.
The Epitome of the Lutheran Formula of Concord (1577) rejects "the false dogma of the Semi-Pelagians, who teach that man by his own powers can commence his conversion, but can not fully accomplish it without the grace of the Holy Spirit."[8]
Between 1590 and 1600 the term "semipelagianism" was applied to Luis de Molina's doctrine of grace, which at that time was accused of similarity to the teaching of the Massilians.[9]
The Eastern Orthodox Church generally adheres to the doctrine of theosis in its conception of salvation as a process of personal transformation to the likeness of God in Christ. Theosis closely links the ideas of justification and sanctification; salvation is achieved by the divinisation of man. This doctrine is sometimes labeled Semipelagian by theologians of the historic Protestant traditions on the grounds that it suggests that man contributes to his own salvation.[10] The accusation is rejected by the Eastern Orthodox, which unlike these Western traditions was relatively uninfluenced by Augustine and holds that "for the regenerated to do spiritual good – for the works of the believer being contributory to salvation and wrought by supernatural grace are properly called spiritual – it is necessary that he be guided and prevented [preceded] by grace … Consequently he is not able of himself to do any work worthy of a Christian life".[11]
John Cassian, known particularly for his teachings on theosis, is considered to be a Saint in the Eastern Church as well as in Roman Catholicism. He is generally considered to have been an early proponent of semi-Pelagianism[12][13][14][15] But some recent scholars deny that his views were in fact semi-Pelagian. Lauren Pristas writes: "For Cassian, salvation is, from beginning to end, the effect of God's grace. It is fully divine."[16] Augustine Casiday states that Cassian "baldly asserts that God's grace, not human free will, is responsible for 'everything which pertains to salvation' - even faith."[17] Others hold that "the view of Cassian as the ringleader of 'semi-Pelagianism' rests on a conjectural chronology".[18] The Roman Catholic Church includes John Cassian in its official list of recognized saints, with a feastday on 23 July,[19] and cites him in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.[20] West and East consider both John Cassian and Augustine of Hippo as saints.
In more recent times, the word has been used in the Reformed Protestant camp to designate anyone who deviates from the Augustinian doctrines of sovereignty, original sin, and grace, most notably Arminian Protestants and Roman Catholics. Although Calvinist and Lutheran theologies of salvation differ significantly on issues such as the nature of predestination and the salvific role of the sacraments (see means of grace), both branches of historic Protestantism claim the theology of Augustine as a principal influence.
Many Arminians disagree with this generalization and believe it is libelous to Jacobus Arminius and the Remonstrants, The Anglican defender of Arminianism and Methodism founder, John Wesley, as well as other prominent classical and Wesleyan Arminians, maintain the doctrines of original sin and the total depravity of the human race. Likewise, Catholics will refer to the Roman Magisterium's condemnation of Semipelagianism and its historical support for and defense of Augustine since the Council of Orange.
In the 18th century, the Jesuits accused the Jansenists of affirming the radical Augustinian doctrines of Calvinism; the Jansenists, in turn, accused the Jesuits of Semipelagianism.[21] The 1713 papal bull of Pope Clement XI, Unigenitus, in declaring Jansenism heretical, upheld the Jesuits' objections.[22]
An issue in the modernist controversy was the role of divine grace in the development of human reason. In this regard, Rousseau and others were accused of being at least Semipelagian, if not wholly Pelagian, because the philosophy of that era held that grace could purely and simply be substituted for human reason.
It was during this period that the dogma of the Immaculate Conception was promulgated, and at the time it was best understood as a solid reaction against all forms of Semipelagianism and Pelagianism, which minimized the role of grace and sin.
The pastoral constitution Gaudium et Spes is seen by its critics as Semipelagian. In his 1969 commentary on the document, Joseph Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) accused parts of it of using "downright Pelagian terminology" in its discussion of free will.[23]