The Ancestral Sin is not Pelagian

Journal of Analytic Theology 11:1-13 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Various thinkers are concerned that the Orthodox view of Ancestral Sin does not avoid the age-old Augustinian concern of Pelagianism. After all, the doctrine of Ancestral Sin maintains that fallen human beings do not necessarily or inevitably commit actual sins. In contemporary literature, this claim could be articulated as a denial of the ‘inevitability thesis.’ A denial of the inevitability thesis, so contemporary thinkers maintain, seems to imply both that human beings can place themselves in right relation to God as well as the Pelagian denial that all require Christ's work to attain this right relation to God. This article demonstrates that the Ancestral Sin, along with a denial of the inevitability thesis, is neither Pelagian nor Semi-Pelagian. I show that the doctrine of Ancestral Sin denies (Semi-) Pelagianism in various ways. I show that, for Ancestral Sin to entail (Semi-) Pelagianism, one must commit to several assumptions, each of which is plausibly deniable and none of which Orthodox thinkers affirm.

Similar books and articles

Frege’s Ancestral and Its Circularities.Ignacio Angelelli - 2012 - Logica Universalis 6 (3-4):477-483.
Primitive Recursion and Isaacson’s Thesis.Oliver Tatton-Brown - 2019 - Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 8 (1):4-15.
The middle ground-ancestral logic.Liron Cohen & Arnon Avron - 2019 - Synthese 196 (7):2671-2693.
Descartes and Pelagianism.Thomas Lennon - 2013 - Essays in Philosophy 14 (2):194-217.
Is Frege's Definition of the Ancestral Adequate?Richard G. Heck - 2016 - Philosophia Mathematica 24 (1):91-116.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-10-26

Downloads
99 (#176,292)

6 months
94 (#49,951)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Parker Haratine
University of South Carolina at Aiken

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations