1. Some of God’s precepts are impossible to the just, who wish and strive to keep them, according to the present powers which they have; the grace, by which they are made possible, is also wanting.The condemnation of these five statements was then affirmed by Alexander VII (Constitution, "Ad sacram beati Petri Sedem," October 16, 1656 and Constitution "Regiminis apostolicis," February 15, 1665)(more discussion and links here)
Declared and condemned as rash, impious, blasphemous, condemned by anathema, and heretical.
2. In the state of fallen nature one never resists interior grace.
Declared and condemned as heretical.
3. In order to merit or demerit in the state of fallen nature, freedom from necessity is not required in man, but freedom from external compulsion is sufficient.
Declared and condemned as heretical.
4. The Semipelagians admitted the necessity of a prevenient interior grace for each act, even for the beginning of faith; and in this they were heretics, because they wished this grace to be such that the human will could either resistor obey.
Declared and condemned as false and heretical.
5. It is Semipelagian to say that Christ died or shed His blood for all men without exception.
Declared and condemned as false, rash, scandalous, and understood in this sense, that Christ died for the salvation of the predestined, impious, blasphemous, contumelious, dishonoring to divine piety, and heretical.
It is interesting to note that Innocent X appears to be affirming perfectionism (contra 1), denying irresistible grace (contra 2 and 4), denying compatible free will (contra 3),and denying limited atonement (contra 5), and on each of these points appears to err, since Scriptures teach that we continue to struggle with sin in this life, Scripture teaches irresistible grace, Scripture teaches that free will is compatible with divine necessity, and Scripture teaches that Christ died specifically for the elect.
- TurretinFan
