Sunday, April 24, 2022

Excerpts from Pelagius' Commentary on 1-2 Thessalonians and the Pastoral Epistles

English text used: Pelagius, Commentaries on the Thirteen Epistles of Paul with the Libellus Fidei (trans. Thomas P. Scheck; Ancient Christian Writers 76; New York: The Newman Press, 2022), hereafter “Scheck”

 

Latin text consulted: Alexander Souter, Pelagius's Exposition of Thirteen Epistles of St. Paul, II: Text and Apparatus Criticus (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1926), hereafter “Souter”


2 Thess 1:8

 

“To give vengeance in a flame of fire.” If at God’s command the flame was able not to touch the three youths at all [cf. Dan. 3:50], why should the same power not be believed to be able to become more severe to some, milder to others? This contradicts those who have dreamed up a punishment of conscience, since this [other kind] seemed impossible to them (hoc contra eos qui propterea poenam conscientiae somniarunt, quia hoc illis inpossibile uidebatur). (Scheck, 309; Souter, 441)

 

I believe that this criticism is primilary directed against Origen’s purgatorial and corrective understanding of punishment, but Jerome’s views may also be included. Jerome tended to understand hellfire as metaphorical for the bitter pangs of conscience that will afflict sinners. Cf. Jerome, Com in Isa 30:27-29; 50:11; In Ezek. 44:4. J. P. O’Connell, The Eschatology of St. Jerome, Dissertationes ad Lauream 16, Pontificia Facultas Theologica Seminarii Sanctae Mariae ad Lucum (Mundelein, IL., 1948), 145-46, noticed the similarity between Jerome’s description of hell and the language of Origen. “Whether Jerome means to say that the fire or that the furnace is metaphorical is not perfectly evident. However, [these passages] could be interpreted in us to suspect Jerome of Origenistic leanings in regard to the nature of hell’s punishments since they speak of remorse as the meaning of hellfire, other texts in Jerome show that he did not exclude the understanding of hell as extrinsic punishment. The Origenistic error is not merely explaining the fire and torments of hell as the sinner’s consciousness of his guilt, but the denial of other punishments (149). (Scheck, 406-7 n. 1)

 

2 Thess 2:15

 

Now it is the apostolic tradition that is celebrated throughout the whole world, such as the mysteries of baptism (apostolica autem traditio est, quae in toto mundo celebratur, ut baptismi sacramenta). (Scheck, 312; Souter, 446)


1 Tim 2:4

 

“Who wants all men to be saved.” Based on this, it is proven that God does not use force to make anyone believe, nor does he remove the freedom of choice (Hinc probatur deum nemini ad credendum uim inferre nec tollere arbitrii libertatem); moreover, one resolves by this passage the matter concerning the hardening of Pharaoh and the remaining objection of the questions of this sort [cf. Exod 7:22; Rom 9:17-18]. “And to come to the knowledge of the truth.” If, however, they themselves want to consent to the God who calls (Si ipsi tamen uoca[n]ti deo consentire uoluerint). (Scheck, 318; Souter, 480)

 

To my knowledge, the late Augustine was the first to teach the views that Pelagius, following his predecessors, rejects here. Augustine claimed that God does not will that all people be saved but that the “all” in 1 Tim 2:4 is limited to “all the predestined.” Those who are so predestinated cannot resist divine grace. See A. Hwang, “Augustine’s Interpretation of 1 Tim 2:4 in the Context of His Developing View of Grace,” Studia Patristica 43 (2006): 137-42. The Council of Trent’s Decree on Justification, ch. 5, affirmed clearly that God wills the salvation of all without exception and that humans are able to reject divine grace and can refuse to assent to it (cf. Canon 4). (Scheck, 408 n. 4)

 

1 Tim 2:5

 

“For there is one God.” One God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit; that is, [there is] one nature of deity in three persons (Unus deus pater et filius et spiritus sanctus: id est, una in tribus personis natura [est] deitatis), [and lest anyone should say to him, “Why did Christ alone merit this?” he answers that there had to be one mediator, just as there is one God] “And one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” Just as God is one, so too there is one mediator between God and all men, that is, there is no one else like him, not Moses, not any of the prophets, since he was both God and man. But since he was going to speak about his being delivered up, he named him now solely a man. (Scheck, 318; Souter, 480)

 

1 Tim 2:15

 

. . . since through baptism which is the production of the children of God (quia per baptismum quod est filiorum dei generatio). . . (Scheck, 319; Souter, 483)

 

Titus 2:13

 

He calls Christ the great God because we await his advent (Christum dicit magnum deum, quia ipsius expectamus aduentum). (Scheck, 346; Souter, 532)

 

Titus 3:5

 

“By the bath of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit.” Since the Holy Spirit renewed us through baptism (Qui[a] nos sanctus spiritus per baptismum renouauit). (Scheck, 346; Souter, 533)