Institut d’Études Augustiniennes

56/1

56/2

Abstracts:

Sébastien MORLET, La datation du Contra Christianos de Porphyre. À propos d’un passage problématique d’Eusèbe de Césarée (Histoire ecclésiastique, VI, 19, 2), p. 1-18

Critics generally date the composition of the Contra Christianos to Porphyry’s sojourn in Sicily, and thus most often around 270 AD. This date stems only from a misreading of Eusebius’ testimony in the History of the Church, VI, 19, 2, where the allusion to Porphyry’s Sicilian sojourn is not a way to date his antichristian work, but rather the activity of the philosopher as a whole. All the arguments often put forward to favour a later date are not more convincing, but one should admit with T.D. Barnes that Eusebius’ text has generally been misunderstood. The only certainty is that the Contra Christianos was written between the publication of a work on which it depends, the History of the Ptolemies by Callinicus Sutorius (between the end of 270 AD and summer 272 AD), and the death of Porphyry himself, around 305 AD.

Back to the table of contents

Marie-Pierre BUSSIÈRES, L’esprit de Dieu et l’Esprit Saint dans les Questions sur l’Ancien et le Nouveau Testament de l’Ambrosiaster, p. 25-44

Among the quaestiones of Ambrosiaster that have undergone rewriting, one encounters some notable texts where the spirit of God is not always identified as the Holy Spirit. From one version to the other, moreoever, the author introduces the notion of consubstantiality in order to explain the nature of the Holy Spirit, which is uncommon in the Latin West at the end of the 4th century. We attempt to analyze what is behind these modifications, chiefy in light of contemporary exegeses of Gen 1:2, and to propose a date for the different versions of Ambrosiaster’s quaestiones on the matter.

Back to the table of contents

Theodore S. DE BRUYN, Ambrosiaster’s Revisions of His Commentary on Romans and Roman Synodal Statements about Holy Spirit, p. 45-68

Ambrosiaster’s Commentary on Romans exists is three apparently sequential versions (alpha, beta, and gamma). In alpha and beta Ambrosiaster modified the comments on Romans 1:3 and 8:26-27 to emphasize that the Holy Spirit is divine (against the Pneumatomachians) and that Christ is fully human (against Apollinaris). These changes are examined in light of contemporary Roman synodal letters from the 370s and early 380s. The comments on Romans in alpha appear to belong to a period before 375 and possibly before 371, the changes introduced in beta correspond to theological developments in Rome in the second half of the 370s, and the changes introduced in gamma appear to belong to the early 380s. However, there are still difficulties in the dating of the versions that remain to be resolved.

Back to the table of contents

Stephen COOPER - David G. HUNTER, Ambrosiaster redactor sui: The Commentaries on the Pauline Epistles (Excluding Romans), p. 69-91

Ambrosiaster’s multiple versions of his Questions and Commentaries offer evidence for discerning developments in his thought and for dating more precisely the different redactions of the Pauline commentary. This article examines the revisions Ambrosiaster made in his commentaries on the Corinthian correspondence and the minor epistles with a view to identifying lines of connection between the unknown exegete and his world. Significant for this purpose are the revisions revealing a heightened concern for Donastism, Manicheanism, the pneumatological controversy, and the debate between Jerome and Helvidius. To account for these revisions we propose a date of 384 for the gamma recension of the commentary on the minor Pauline epistles.

Back to the table of contents

Fabienne JOURDAN, Le Logos de Clément soumis à la question, p. 135-172

Two questions, inspired by later doctrines, are sometimes put to Clement’s work, which is then either suspected of heterodoxy or praised for its precocious orthodoxy: Did the Alexandrian distinguish two Logoi? If it were the case, would he have considered them as successive or would he, on the contrary, have conceived an early version of the notion of eternal generation? To answer these questions, this article proposes a new analysis of the most often quoted texts and focuses more particularly on the 23th fragment of the Hypotyposes transmitted by Photius. The author examines this passage and reviews its modern interpretations. Through this analysis she tries to transform the “questioning”, which tortures Clement’s thought, into a listening of the latter and its witnesses. By adopting as a hermeneutic hypothesis the idea that the text cited by Photius can trully be attributed to Clement, she invites the reader to discover a distinction between the πατρικὸς λόγος, the πατρῷος λόγος, and the Holy Spirit as three different aspects of the same and unique divine Logos. Clement could have wanted to draw such a distinction in the polemical and theological context of his time, perhaps to react against the excesses of monarchianism or more probably to develop a reflection on the Holy Spirit.

Back to the table of contents

Clemens WEIDMANN, Vier unerkannte Predigten des Augustinus, p. 173-196

The sermon on Psalm 25 (en. ps. 25/2) and three sermons on John 5, 19–30 (Io. eu. tr. 20–22) were, according to the references in the Indiculus, not meant by Augustine for the Enarrationes in psalmos or the Tractatus in Iohannis Euangelium, respectively. The sermons have come down to us only because they were embedded, probably without Augustine’s consent, in the two major exegetical compilations. The identification of the frequently-cited testimony ep. 23A*, 3, 2 dictaui contra Arrianos ... tres sermones mittendos Carthaginem with the three sermons on John demonstrates that they were not preached by Augustine, but dictated to be delivered by others. Probably in the environment of Aurelius, bishop of Carthage, they were inserted into the forthcoming edition of the tractatus. The large amount of irregularities in the manuscripts can be explained as an attempt of scribes to rectify the sequence of the texts, which was disturbed because of the interpolation. The four sermons should henceforth be cited as sermo 166A and 126A–C.

Back to the table of contents

Pierre DESCOTES, Saint Augustin et la crise pélagienne: le témoignage de la correspondance (Epistulae 186, 187 et 194), p. 197-227

While studying St Augustine’s correspondence, the reader discovers a wide variety of often little-known texts, which allow us to discover the bishop of Hippo under an interesting and original light, as he appears not only as the famous “doctor gratiae” (that we already know quite well through his polemical writings) but also as a bishop who must deal with the strategical problems encountered by the African Church, and as a friend who worries about his correspondents’ orthodoxy. Through the study of three letters which Augustine wrote at the very heart of the pelagian crisis (epistulae 186 to Paulinus of Nola, 187 to Dardanus and 194 to Sixtus), we would like to show that each epistle reveals, through its own original structure, tone and litterary style, how the bishop of Hippo intended to send letters carefully written to match their adressees’s needs and personal situation—and this seems to be the main interest of the correspondence, which shows that Augustine’s concern was first and foremost pastoral and practical, more than speculative and abstract.

Back to the table of contents

Marie FORMARIER, Afrae aures de correptione uocalium uel productione non iudicant (De Doctrina Christiana, 4, 10, 24). Les oreilles africaines entendaient-elles les rythmes latins?, p. 229-248

According to Cicero’s principles, Latin orators paid much attention to rhythms, which charm the hearers and take part to persuasion. However, in Augustine’s times, many people used to talk without referring to classical linguistic rules. Consequently, how did Augustine manage to create musicality thanks to Latin rhythms and, at the same time, to communicate efficiently and to be understood by everybody? In this paper, I connect the De Doctrina Christiana and the De Musica. I study Augustine’s statement about the Afrae aures in its linguistic and cultural context, particularly its rhetorical and prosodic meaning. Thus, I identify the socio-cultural typologies which Augustine established according to the different categories of rhythmic perception, more precisely the cognitive and emotional process through which illiterate hearers were pleased by Latin rhythms. Finally, I analyse some examples in order to understand how acoustic experience provoked significant modifications in rhythmic practice.

Back to the table of contents

Catherine BROC-SCHMEZER, L’interdit de l’inceste et autres questions matrimoniales chez Jean Chrysostome, p. 249-273

This article written in response to a question posed by Philippe Moreau shows that John Chrysostom speaks at least three times about incest. In each case he justifies the interdiction by the necessity of establishing links of charity outside the limited scope of the family. Through his imprecise formulations and inconsistent vocabulary—for instance, when he comments on the hymn to agape in 1 Co 13 using the word philia—he gives the impression that this is someone else’s thought and not his own. Unfortunately, it is not possible to identify his source. We might speculate that the origin was probably Greek, pagan, and probably the same as that used by Augustine who expresses the identical idea in the City of God, XV, 16, 1-2. It is hardly probable that Chrysostom deals with this theme in other places. On the contrary, he seems to intentionally avoid the problem when commenting on texts which could lead to such a thematic, for instance, regarding the marriage between Isaac and Rebecca. Although he insists on the necessity of developing social links, one cannot say, as D. O’Roark does, that he encourages “arranged marriage”; while accepting the practices of using intermediaries and giving dowries, he clearly expresses his opposition to choosing a wife for personal gain.

Back to the table of contents

Maria Valeria INGEGNO, Matrimonio e divorzio in Gilberto Porretano, p. 275-290

Despite the rich bibliography existing today on the thinking of Augustine about the holy matrimony, we are still lacking recent contributions on the medieval success of the bishop of Hippo on this matter. In spite of the possible suspicions of heresy which could be set on him, in his unpublished commentary to the 1st Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians (I Cor. VII, 1-16) Gilbert Porreta develops an orthodox exegesis of Augustinian origin that on one hand frames matrimony as essential element in the Salvation Project, and on the other hand justifies it as a solution to the status of infirmitas peculiar of man as a consequence of original sin. However our exegete sees marriage as downright gifts of God owning to the three goods which are intrinsic to it: the fides, the proles, the sacramentum. Therefore Gilbert excludes the possibility for husband and wife to contract a second marriage or to ask for a divorce. Yet, a provision is made by the commentator on the grounds of the auctoritas of Ambrosiaster in the case of fornicatio spiritualis …

Back to the table of contents