|
If you are seeing this message, you may be experiencing temporary network problems. Please wait a few minutes and refresh the page. If the problem persists, you may wish to report it to your local Network Manager.
It is also possible that your web browser is not configured or not able to display style sheets. In this case, although the visual presentation will be degraded, the site should continue to be functional. We recommend using the latest version of Microsoft or Mozilla web browser to help minimise these problems.
Wiley InterScience | |||||||||
  American Journal of Economics and SociologyVolume 66 Issue 4, Pages 681 - 696 Published Online: 17 Oct 2007 © 2010 The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Inc.
Abstract | References | Full Text: HTML, PDF (Size: 79K) | Related Articles | Citation Tracking  Economics and Religion The Pelagian Controversy: An Economic Analysis *John H. Beck is a Professor of Economics at Gonzaga University, where he teaches public finance, labor economics, and history of economic thought. His main research interests are state and local government finance and public choice. An earlier version of this article was presented at the 2001 Public Choice Society meetings. The author is grateful to Rob Kugler, Keith Dougherty, the editor, and an anonymous referee for comments on earlier drafts. Copyright 2007 American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Inc. ABSTRACTAbstract. In recent years economic theory has been used to analyze the introduction of new religious doctrines as innovations that further the objectives of religious organizations and their leaders. The present study analyzes the decision of church authorities in the early fifth century to reject the doctrine advanced by Pelagius in favor of the position taken by Augustine. Accounts of the controversy reveal two self-interested motives for the church hierarchy to reject the Pelagian doctrine: (1) the Pelagian view would have undermined the authority of the church hierarchy; and (2) by making greater demands for moral conduct, it would have raised the "cost" of being a Christian and thereby discouraged growth in church membership, particularly among the Roman upper class. | 
| ||||||||
