No, I'm not...they're really not even close. To the Pelagian Christ started out as man and became God through his actions, to the Pelagian there was only one nature and one person of Christ, infact to look at their Christology in these terms, they were really monophysites, though monophysites with a strange twist. To the Nestorians Christ was two persons, one Human and one Divine, the former sanctified by the latter.Here are the doctrines of Pelagianism that I was able to extract from the Catholic Encyclopedia as recorded by deacon Paulinus of Milan and submitted to the bishop Aurelius:
(1) Even if Adam had not sinned, he would have died.
(2) Adam's sin harmed only himself, not the human race.
(3) Children just born are in the same state as Adam before his fall.
(4) The whole human race neither dies through Adam's sin or death, nor rises again through the resurrection of Christ.
(5) The (Mosaic Law) is as good a guide to heaven as the Gospel.
(6) Even before the advent of Christ there were men who were without sin. Below are the canons of Carthage which condemned Pelagianism as heresy:
(1) Death did not come to Adam from a physical necessity, but through sin.
(2) New-born children must be baptized on account of original sin.
(3) Justifying grace not only avails for the forgiveness of past sins, but also gives assistance for the avoidance of future sins.
(4) The grace of Christ not only discloses the knowledge of God's commandments, but also imparts strength to will and execute them.
(5) Without God's grace it is not merely more difficult, but absolutely impossible to perform good works.
(6) Not out of humility, but in truth must we confess ourselves to be sinners.
(7) The saints refer the petition of the Our Father, "Forgive us our trespasses", not only to others, but also to themselves.
The saints pronounce the same supplication not from mere humility, but from truthfulness.
(9) Some codices containing a ninth canon (Denzinger, loc. cit., note 3): Children dying without baptism do not go to a "middle place" (medius locus), since the non reception of baptism excludes both from the "kingdom of heaven" and from "eternal life".
That is semi-pelagian at best, the main problem with Pelagianism was the notion of salvation and deification independent of God, or even, potentially, contrary to the will of God. But this danger is negated by a basic neo-platonic ontology.Below is the doctrine of semipelagianism as recorded by Prosper of Aquitaine:
(1) In distinguishing between the beginning of faith (initium fidei) and the increase of faith (augmentum fidei), one may refer the former to the power of the free will, while the faith itself and its increase is absolutely dependent upon God;
(2) the gratuity of grace is to be maintained against Pelagius in so far as every strictly natural merit is excluded; this, however, does not prevent nature and its works from having a certain claim to grace;
(3) as regards final perseverance in particular, it must not be regarded as a special gift of grace, since the justified man may of his own strength persevere to the end;
(4) the granting or withholding of baptismal grace in the case of children depends on the Divine prescience of their future conditioned merits or misdeeds.
At times there is an accidental relationship between the two, hardly the foundation of good Dogma. Furthermore, you must view this in the light of the times; this was an era of, with few exceptions, superstition and ignorance on matters of medicine and biology. We cannot leave modern science out of this discussion.
I don't think this has much really to do with superstition and ignorance but is a central component of dogma in that the fall or separation from God who is the true source of being and life will always lead to spiritual corruption and may also result in physical corruption...
Well, I believe that Paradise is a theoretical metaphor, so sure, why not say we couldn't have suffered in this non-existant and never-existant myth. Anyway, back to reality.
I never suggested that Paradise was a literal fairy land but more than anything it metaphorically reflects the perfect relationship man possessed with God and hence through God his harmony with nature...
I think you stretch the notion of Apokatastasis much further than many of the ancient fathers may have or would be willing to do so...