GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Aircorn ( talk · contribs) 02:31, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi Buidhe. Willing to review this. Don't know much about the subject so expect a few questions. AIRcorn (talk) 02:31, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
During the fourth and fifth centuries, the church was experiencing rapid change due to the Constantinian shift to Christianity.Shouldn't it be Church. and maybe a link to Christian Church.
As Christians were no longer persecuted, they faced a new problem: how to avoid backsliding and nominal adherence to the state religion while retaining the sense of urgency originally caused by persecution.This reads oddly to me. I am not sure problem is the right descriptor as retaining a sense of urgency and persecution seem worlds apart.
In the early centuries, Christians to a large extent had their identity defined for them: they were a persecuted group, at odds with the society, culture and religions of their day, forced either to deny their faith or to defend it to the point of death. Selfdenial, denial of the world, an ideology of martyrdom, a sense of fighting for one’s faith against the powers that be, were characteristic features of Christian life for all the faithful who belonged to the pre-Constantinian church... Most importantly, how were they to retain the knife-edge sense of urgency, rigour and absolute self-denial which had so far defined the Christian life? How were they to avoid easy compromise, unchallenged backsliding, nominal adherence to a favoured (and therefore favourable) cult, unthinking observance of what had become the traditional religion of the state. For many, asceticism - a life of strict self-denial and unfaltering observance of all the commandments to the letter - was the answer.
Syrian tradition, including the second-century figures Theophilus and Irenaeus, included views asserting that physical death is natural rather than the result of the fall of man.How does this fit? New paragraph and some context maybe?
and even the early Augustine. Isn't this a person. Should be wikilinked too.
were condemned outside of Northern Africa.Is this saying they were accepted in North Africa
But in fact all of the condemnations of Pelagianism outside North Africa had to do with positions characteristic of Caelestius and only secondarily with Pelagius.I rewrote to clarify
Jerome also disputed that free will was as strong as Pelagius saidFirst mention of free will so we don't know what Pelagius said. I get the impression it is important and should be introduced earlier.
key turning point in the controversyagain this is the first mention of controversy, except for the heading. Maybe needs an earlier intro. Also not clear how this was a key turning point
especially other monks.I don't think we mentioned that he was a monk? He is introduced as a layman
Many of them later had to seek shelter with the Greek bishops Theodore of Mopsuestia and Nestorius, leading to accusations that Pelagian errors lay beneath the Nestorian controversy over Christology.This seems a bit coatracky. Is there more to this? Theres nothing in the linked article.
He and several other bishops, condemned because of their refusal to subscribe to the Tractoria, took refuge with Theodore of Mopsuestia, then with Nestorius—compromising these bishops in the eyes of the West during the controversy with Cyril after 418 over the person of Christ. Augustine had already written to Cyril to ensure that Pelagius’s errors not lie hidden among the Greeks.18 The doctrines of Caelestius were condemned along with those of Nestorius at the Council of Ephesus in 431, and a letter was sent to the West confirming the condemnation of Pelagius, Caelestius, Julian, and others. Julian was expelled from Cilicia, Constantinople, and Rome.
but this has been criticized by others such as Liebeschuetz. Is there a better way to say this. Criticized could mean a few things. Did he disagree with it or just criticse aspects.
It has been suggested by J. N. L. Myres, John Morris, and others that the alleged Pelagian denial of grace represented, in fifth-century Britain, an attack on political gratia (corrupt patronage and favour), thus understanding Pelagianism as a reforming movement in a society seeking to shake off Roman imperial decadence and to revive the traditional Roman virtues. The topic is too large to be fully discussed here. It may, however, be said that it has been powerfully criticized by J. H. W. G. Liebeschuetz (1963; 1967) and has failed to convince scholars who have studied Pelagianism as a theological system.
which struck him as ManicheanPreviously it says he opposed Manichean. Unless you are meaning that believing humans are evil is Manichean in which case it is not very clear.
...because it would be unjust for any person to be blamed for another's actions.This has already been said above
(in Augustine's opinion)A few of these. I am not sure they are all necessary as they are usually prefaced as being someones opinion.
and it could be argued that the rabbis shared a Weltanschauung with PelagiusIs there any reason not to use worldview. There are quite a few difficult words in this, maybe it is better to limit them when possible for easier reading.
(The "semi-Pelagians" all accepted the condemnation of Pelagius, believed grace was necessary for salvation, and were followers of Augustine.)WHy is this in brackets in its own sentence
argued for prevenient grace that individuals had a choice to accept or reject.Is the grammar here correct?
represents the consensual Pauline interpretation that is found in the Greek exegetical traditionI have no idea what this means
and therefore unequal wealth is undeserved.Isn't this a Pelagianism idea?
I probably should have stated at the start that I treat these more as suggestions then requirements. Obviously some things need to be done to reach GA standard, but while I am reading it I like to make other comments as well. Thus unambiguously meets the GA criteria so I have no issues in passing it. I hope my comments have provided some useful feedback. Regards AIRcorn (talk) 07:28, 8 October 2020 (UTC)