A,
History of the church is not so simple as you make it out to be.
Here is a small article from Wikipedia on Pelagius:
Pelagius (c. AD 354 – 418) was a theologian who advocated free will and asceticism. He was accused by Augustine of Hippo and others of denying the need for divine aid in performing good works. They understood him to have said that the only grace necessary was the declaration of the law; humans were not wounded by Adam's sin and were perfectly able to fulfill the law without divine aid. Pelagius denied Augustine's theory of original sin. His adherents cited Deuteronomy 24:16 in support of their position. Pelagius was declared a heretic by the Council of Carthage (418). His interpretation of a doctrine of free will became known as Pelagianism.
And here is what is said further down in the article:
Recent analysis of his thinking suggests that it was, in fact, highly orthodox, following in the tradition established by the early fathers and in keeping with the teaching of the church in both the East and the West. ... From what we are able to piece together from the few sources available... it seems that the Celtic monk held to an orthodox view of the prevenience of God's grace, and did not assert that individuals could achieve salvation purely by their own efforts...[1]
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelagius
The ECFs believed in free will.
They believed that all men could be saved if this is what they desired.
The DID NOT believe that God chose the saved and the lost, but that man had a PART in his salvation,,,known as synergism today.
They considered Pelagius to be a heretic because he felt man could not sin of his own will and strength and we know this to be not true....the Holy Spirit must assist us in keeping us from sin. God IS necessary; we cannot walk on our own but the Paraclete was sent to us for this very reason...each of the Trinitarian Persons having their own task although all are God. One God.
The Reformers conveniently picked Augustine to emulate.
The problem is that Augustine had a totally different outlook on Original Sin which was NOT what the ECFs believed about it.
I take the ECFs to be till about 325AD at the Council of Nicea.
Augustine comes into view at about 400AD.
And if the reformers wanted to choose Augustine,,, why not teach what he actually believed instead of changing it to double predestination? And then we'd have to ask at which point of Augustine's life did he believe what --- he changed his mind on different subjects as he became older.
In any case, he believed in predestination, not double predestination. NONE of the ECFs believed what he taught. The church DID accept his doctrine on Original Sin which is why infants are baptized in the Catholic church...to which he belonged.
I do wish his name would stop being used to promote something he did not believe.
The Catholic Church is from the beginning....
why do you suppose the reformers knew more about what Jesus taught than those that come directly after Him?
This has never made sense to me.
If we want to learn from men...and I do...
then why not learn from those that were discipled by Peter or John or Paul??? Wouldn't THEY know better what Jesus taught?
(than someone born 1,500 YEARS after??)