A Work on the Proceedings of Pelagius 56
56 Is Pelagius Sincere? PL 44, 352
How, then, can it be believed that Pelagius (if indeed this epistle is his) could have been sincere, when he acknowledged the grace of God, which is not nature with its free will, nor the knowledge of the law, nor simply the forgiveness of sins, but a something which is necessary to each of our actions; or could have sincerely anathematized everybody who entertained the contrary opinion:—seeing that in his epistle he set forth even the ease wherewith a man can avoid sinning (concerning which no question had arisen at this trial) just as if the judges had come to an agreement to receive even this word, and said nothing about the grace of God, by the confession and subsequent addition of which he escaped the penalty of condemnation by the Church?
Quomodo igitur credi potest, Pelagium (si tamen haec epistola ejus est) et Dei gratiam, quae neque natura est cum libero arbitrio, neque legis scientia, neque tantum remissio peccatorum, sed ea quae in singulis nostris est actibus necessaria, veraciter fuisse confessum, et veraciter anathematizasse quisquis contra ista sentiret; quando in epistola sua et facilitatem posuit non peccandi, de qua nulla in hoc judicio quaestio fuit, quasi judicibus etiam de hoc verbo placuerit, et gratiam Dei non posuit, quam confitendo et addendo, poenam ecclesiasticae damnationis evasit?