No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Reading Contra Julianum in Light of the City of God
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 January 2024
Abstract
Augustine's rejection of pagan virtue in the City of God is often connected to his anti-Pelagian works and so exaggerated. However, Augustine's actual account of pagan virtue, both in the City of God and Contra Julianum, is much more nuanced than is commonly recognized. Augustine connects true virtue to true religio, its end in the beatific vision, and the grace without which it is impossible, and consistently highlights the connection between virtue and worship. Nevertheless, the category of the pagan virtues, habits sufficient to promote the flourishing of Rome, is an important part of Augustinian virtue theory. Attending to the presence of pagan virtue in the City of God shines light on why Augustine repeatedly claims that his theology, and not that of Julian, is most opposed to Manichean claims. The City of God provides useful context for interpreting Augustine's theology of grace in the anti-Pelagian works, and so avoiding an over exaggerated theology of the Fall.
- Type
- Original Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © 2019 Provincial Council of the English Province of the Order of Preachers
References
1 Doctr. Chr. II, IX, 14, tr. R.P.H. Green (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997), p. 37.
2 Dodaro, Robert, Christ and the Just Society in the Thought of Augustine (Cambridge, UK; New York;: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 80CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
3 See e.g. Dodaro, Robert, “Political and theological virtues in Augustine, Letter 155 to Macedonius,” Augustiniana 54, 1-4 (2004)Google Scholar.
4 See Gaul, Brett, “Augustine on the Virtues of the Pagans,” Augustinian Studies 40, no. 2 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hundert, E.J., “Augustine and the Sources of the Divided Self,” Political Theory 20, no. 2 (February 1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and especially Milbank, John, Theology and Social Theory: Beyond Secular Reason (Oxford: Blackwell, 2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
5 From the “Introduction” to “Answer to Julian” in Answer to the Pelagians, II, ed., tr. Roland J. Teske, S.J., Works of St. Augustine I, vol. 24 (New York: New City Press, 1998), 223. Unless otherwise noted, this is the translation cited in all of the quotes of Contra Julianum.
6 Van Oort, Johannes, Jerusalem and Babylon: A study into Augustine's City of God and the sources of his doctrine of the two cities, Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae 14 (Leiden: Brill, 1991), 357CrossRefGoogle Scholar. O'Donnell, J.J., “The Inspiration for Augustine's De Civitate Dei.” Augustinian Studies 10 (1979), 76Google Scholar, emphasizes the difference between the Manichean account of the two cities and the Augustinian use of the same term.
7 Brown, Peter Robert Lamont, Augustine of Hippo: a biography (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000), 314Google Scholar.
8 MacKinnon, Patricia L., “Augustine's City of God: The Divided Self/The Divided Civitas,” in The City of God: A Collection of Critical Essays, ed. Donnelly, Dorothy F. (New York: Peter Lang, 1995)Google Scholar.
9 Augustine consistently adverts to these three concepts as the framework of the second half of the City of God; see e.g. XI, 1.
10 Ciu., XIV, 1.
11 Ciu., XIV, 28.
12 Ciu., tr. Henry Bettenson (Penguin Classics, 2003), XI. 9. Unless otherwise noted, all quotations from the City of God come from this translation.
13 Ibid., XI, 11 and 13.
14 Ibid., XII. 1. For additional consideration of Augustine's theology of creation, see Janet Soskice, “Aquinas and Augustine on Creation and God as ‘Eternal Being’,” New Blackfriars 95, issue 1056 (February, 2014), pp. 190-207.
15 The analogy, like all analogies, limps. Crucially, while the demons were created good, they were never a part of the eschatological heavenly city because that city is constituted by those “predestined to reign with God for all eternity” and the demons were not so predestined (XV, 1). That said, Augustine's eschatology of the two cities should not distract from his treatment in other places of a person's movement from one city to another, from earthly to heavenly. On this point, see James K. Lee's excellent article “Babylon Becomes Jerusalem: The Transformation of the Two Cities in Augustine's Enarrationes in Psalmos,” Augustinian Studies 47, no. 2 (2016), 157-180.
16 Cui., XII, 22.
17 Ibid., XII, 24.
18 Ibid., XII, 25-26.
19 Ibid., XII, 28.
20 Ibid., XII, 28.
21 Ibid., XIV, 1.
22 Cui., XXI, 1.
23 In addition to Gaul, Hundert, and Milbank, see Fortin, Ernest, “Chapter 1: The Political Thought of St. Augustine,” in Classical Christianity and the Political Order: Reflections on the Theologico-Political Problem, Collected Essays 2, ed. Benestad, J. Brian (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1996)Google Scholar, and Herdt, Jennifer, Putting on Virtue: The Legacy of the Splendid Vice (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar and “Redeeming the Acquired Virtues,” Journal of Religious Ethics 41, no. 4 (2013): 727-740CrossRefGoogle Scholar. In contrast, Pierre Manent affirms pagan virtue, noting that in the case of Regulus, the most virtuous pagan Roman, is a case of “a paganism on the point of overcoming itself, of an earthly city in process of becoming – but it is impossible – a heavenly city;” see Metamorphoses of the City: On the Western Dynamic, tr. Marc LePain (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2013), 248-249.
24 Cui., XIX, 4.
25 Idem.
26 Idem.
27 “Ep. 138,” 3, 17 and 3, 18. In Augustine, Letters 100-155, ed. Boniface Ramsey, tr. Roland J. Teske, SJ, in The Works of Saint Augustine: A New Translation for the 21st Century II/2 (New York: New City Press, 2002).
28 Ibid., 3, 18.
29 Ep. 138,” 2, 15.
30 Cui., V, 13.
31 Cui., V, 12.
32 Idem.
33 Ibid., V, 20.
34 Ibid., V. 12.
35 Cui., V. 12.
36 Idem.
37 Idem.
38 C. Iul., I, 9, 44. Earlier Augustine makes his reading of the good and bad trees even clearer in affirming that the goodness of human nature is what makes marriage a good; “For that divine teacher certainly does not want us to understand that the tree from which there comes the fruit about which he was speaking is a nature,” I, 8, 38.
39 van Oort, H, “Augustine and Manichaeism: new discoveries, new perspectives,” Verbum et Ecclesia 27 (2): 2006, 724CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
40 BeDuhn, Jason David, “The Problem of Paul.” In Augustine's Manichaean Dilemma, Volume 2: Making a “Catholic” Self, 388-401 C.E., 192-238 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2013), 193Google Scholar. For a mostly positive review of this text, see van Oort, Johannes, “Augustine's Manichaean Dilemma in Context,” Vigiliae Christianae 65 (2011) 543-567CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
41 Ibid., 224.
42 New American Bible translation. All scripture citations are taken from the NAB unless otherwise noted.
43 C. Iul., I, 9, 44.
44 Ibid., IV 3, 33.
45 Ibid., I, 9, 44.
46 Idem.
47 Ibid., III, 26, 66.
48 Ibid., IV, 14, 68.
49 C. Iul., IV, 5, 34.
50 Ibid., V, 7, 25.
51 Ibid., V, 16, 59.
52 St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, tr. Fathers of The English Dominican Province (Christian Classics: Ave Maria, FL, 1981), III Q. 15 A.4.
53 C. Iul., V, 16, 62.
54 Cui., XIV, 9.
55 “Cicero and Augustine on the Passions,” Revue des Études Augustiniennes, 43 (1997), 289-308
56 C. Iul., IV, 3, 18.
57 Ibid., IV, 3, 18.
58 Ibid., IV, 3, 17. “True righteousness” is a translation of veram iustitiam: “Porro si veram iustitiam non habent impii; profecto nec alias virtutes comites eius et socias, si quas habent, veras habent [quia cum non ad suum referuntur auctorem dona Dei, hoc ipso mali his utentes efficiuntur iniusti] : ac per hoc nec continentia sive pudicitia vera virtus est impiorum.”
59 C. Iul., IV, 3, 21.
60 “Splendid Vices and Secular Virtues: Variations on Milbank's Augustine,” Journal of Religious Ethics 32, no. 2 (2004), 272Google Scholar.
61 Augustine: Ancient Thought Baptized (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 172Google Scholar. Rist's later works consider Augustine in a less flattering light. See Rist, John, Augustine Deformed: Love, Sin and Freedom in the Western Moral Tradition (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
62 C. Iul., IV, 3, 23.
63 Idem.
64 Dodaro, Christ and the Just Society, 183.
65 C. Iul., IV, 3, 29.
66 Peter Brown, Augustine, 405, citing Contra Julianum III 11, 22. In the specific context at hand, Augustine is citing this event as proof that concupiscence is active even in the old; he is not making an argument about sin, grace, virtue, or another disputed question in theological anthropology in broad brush strokes, but is rather making a particular point, one closely related to questions of biology, that the old still feel sexual desire and can still be lead astray by it.
67 C. Iul., III, 26, 65.