Dear Conway

I entirely agree with your reading of St Erkenwald as stressing the importance of baptism
and NOT involving pelagianism or semi-p. And
I would go further and argue that  evidence of pelagianism or
 semi-p. in the Trajan-episode in Piers
Plowman is meagre and/or ambiguous.

Alastair Minnis


On Wed, 9 Jul 1997 14:39:24 GMT0BST S.F.C. CHURCHILL wrote:

> From: S.F.C. CHURCHILL <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 14:39:24 GMT0BST
> Subject: St Erkenwald
> To: [log in to unmask]
> 
> Hi Bella
> 
> Thank you for the suggestion that I read the fourteenth century poem. 
> In fact I have already done so and found it very useful. However I'm 
> not too sure how I feel about Ruth Morse's interpretation of it as 
> she seems to suggest that there is a distinctly Pelagian element, 
> which frankly I think, although it is her opinion and must be 
> respected as such, is wrong. As she seems to miss the point that 
> baptism plays a key part, which raises notions that the pagan judge 
> has entered heaven by the grace of God, which I think is something to 
> which Pelagius would object, given that he felt that good works were 
> sufficient for eternal bliss. Hence the notion of the 'just pagan.'
> 
> I have also considered the similarities between this poem and the 
> Gregory/ Trajan legend, with a view (I think) to working out what 
> Erkenwald's view on doctrinal matters were. There are obvious 
> similarities. The only main difference being that Gregory is punished 
> for his presumptiousness in praying for a damned soul which questions 
> the authority of God. Erk on the other hand is successful in his 
> attempts to obtain redemption for the judge. Which I guess means that God 
> approved of what he was doing; the logical corollary of this being 
> that he must have adhered to the correct doctrinal procedure. Thereby 
> refuting Ruth Morse's notion of Pelagianism or perhaps semi 
> pelagianism..
> 
> Having said all this, and I'd be really glad if you'd let me have 
> your objections(!), it has to be remembered that the poem was written 
> in the fourteenth century looking back to the seventh century, 
> looking back to a period long before the birth of Christ (as you will 
> know the judge says as much). Immeadiately we are faced with the 
> different theological and philosophical standpoints of each period, 
> which kind of alters the way in which the poem can be interpreted.
> 
> In fact I am in the process of reading an article by Monika Otter 'St 
> Erkenwald, St Albans, and the medieval sense of the past - Journal of 
> Medieval and Renaissance Studies 1994 no.24. Hers is a long and 
> tortuous argument relating to, as you might have guessed, the past 
> looking at the past looking at the past and I am trying very hard to 
> extract some useful stuff from it.
> 
> I do accept that the poem is useful for considering the life of Erk 
> in the same way that Beowulf is useful for considering Hygelac, but 
> it would be even more useful if I could find a chronicle for example, where he 
> is mentioned even in passing.
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Conway Churchill
> University of Leeds
> [log in to unmask]





%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%