There is yet another interesting discussion regarding Justification over at Titusonenine. As often happens, a comment by Will Witt caught my eye. In this one he is referencing Prosper of Aquitaine:
# William Witt Says:
August 9th, 2006 at 5:14 pm
The above definition of semi-Pelagianism is inaccurate. What distinguished semi-Pelagianism from Augustinianism was that the semi-Pelagians believed that the initium fidei (beginning of faith) took place through the will�s own powers, and grace followed.
Against semi-Pelagianism, the 2nd Council of Orange insisted that the initium fidei was itself the gift of God. The Council also rejected negative predestination. The orthodox Catholic position is represented by Prosper of Aquitaine who affirmed that God wills all to be saved; that any are saved is the gift of God; that any are damned is their own fault.
The orthodox Catholic position (certainly affirmed by St. Augustine) is that �human free will is compatible with God�s sovereignty.� In fact, all who follow St. Augustine (including Aquinas, Luther, Calvin, Hooker and Arminius) would say that human free will is compatible with God�s sovereignty because divine grace frees the fallen will, enslaved to sin. The issue of disagreement would be about how grace frees the will, and whether grace can be refused.
Technorati Tags: theology