Whereas the historical record of Pelagius’s contribution to our theological tradition is shrouded in the political ambition of his theological antagonists who sought to discredit what they felt was a threat to the empire, and their ecclesiastical dominance, and whereas an understanding of his life and writings might bring more to bear on his good standing in our tradition, and whereas his restitution as a viable theological voice within our tradition might encourage a deeper understanding of sin, grace, free will, and the goodness of God’s creation, and whereas in as much as the history of Pelagius represents to some the struggle for theological exploration that is our birthright as Anglicans, Be it resolved, that this 105th Annual Council of the Diocese of Atlanta appoint a committee of discernment overseen by our Bishop, to consider these matters as a means to honor the contributions of Pelagius and reclaim his voice in our tradition And be it further resolved that this committee will report their conclusions at the next Annual Council.
Submitted by the Rev. Benno D. Pattison, Rector, the Church of the Epiphany
Why is anyone conceivably upset about this? This represents the mainstream of TEC.
Of course, mainstream doesn’t make it right, but I think you are correct in commenting that it may very well be mainstream. I recently had a conversation with an Episcopalian from Tenn. and he was very supportive of Pelagius and not very concerned about his heresy. I thought the man a bit odd and now we have Georgia endorsing the man.
As my friends are aware of, one of my soapboxes is that the laity should as theologically educated and astute as the clergy for precisely this sort of situation where some “ordained” person proposes to lead us astray and the faithful lay leaders can say “not so fast”.
Why not? What’s one more heretic at this stage?
Hooboy.
We already have Bp. Spong and KJS.
Unreal but sadly not surprising. Next year, TEO will reinstate Arius.
Re # 6
Dan
They already have. Just read some of Ms. Schori’s sermons and interviews.
It’s interesting that the Spanish-speaking Christian web online has already picked up this development. It’s described here:
http://www.religionenlibertad.com/articulo.asp?idarticulo=18406
which one could translate adequately with any of the online translators available. One of the points made early in the article is that those proposing to re-instate Pelagius “no son católicos, sino episcopalianos (anglicanos progresistas de EEUU)”; that is, “are not Catholics, but Episcopalians (progressive Anglicans of the US).”
Catholics actually believe their beliefs are catholic, and that Episcopalians’ may not be, this proposed re-consideration of Pelagius’ thought serving as a prime example of not-catholic belief.
I think the reason most people, perhaps unconsciously, embrace a heresy is to make some sin go away by definition. I guess the big sin here would be pride of man, which would be seen as some sort of self-realization I would think. Anyone else care to venture what other sins will get a reprive by this action? And how likely is it to pass?
I thought the only heresy left in TEC was to believe that there actually is heresy. I mean, that’s not very inclusive…