Perichoresis Volume 14. Issue 2 (2016): 21-37 DOI: 10.1515/perc-2016-0008 SPACE IN COERCIVE POETRY. AUGUSTINE’S PSALM AGAINST THE DONATISTS AND HIS INTERPRETATION OF THE FEAR OF GOD IN ENARRATIONES IN PSALMOS PAUL J. J. VAN GEEST * Tilburg University ABSTRACT. This contribution consists of two parts. The first part identifies Augustine’s qualities as a mystagogue on the basis of the only poem he wrote that has been handed down: the Psalm against the Donatists . It shows that little is to be gained by studying Augustine as both poeta and mystagogue. Not his poetry itself, but his commentary on poetry as such reveals the transform- ative power that he ascribes to this genre. For this reason the second part examines Augustine’s Enarrationes in psalmos . In this work, he makes explicit the transformative power that is contained in the 150 Psalms, which are both poetry and prayer. This part asks the question how Augustine articulates or heightens fear when the Psalmist in his dialogue with God ‘compels’ him to do this, as it were, by expressing fear of enemies or of the Last Judgement. He shows that he acknowl- edges that fear alone can lead to an unbalanced, and even a bad relationship with God. Fear should result in introspection and should be a guarantee against pride. That Augustine further- more is not content to heighten the fear of God alone, but wants it to coincide with desire, joy, and hope, shows that he wishes to prevent any imbalance in the human who seeks a relationship with God. For Augustine, fear is necessary, b ut it is ‘only’ an ancilla of hope, joy, love, and desire. But as such, timor is indispensible. Fear causes attentiveness and carefulness: virtues that love presuppose and that also correlate with it. Nevertheless, love does not stand at the service of fear; for Augustine, it is the reverse. KEY WORDS: Mystagogy, poetry, psalms, patristics, Augustine Introduction Augustine has not gone down in history as an author who sought to establish a transformation in his readers’ hearts or attitude to life by writing poetry. On the contrary. It is true that Augustine’s parenetic desire to change the behaviour of, and even effect a deeper transformation in, people who already shared his world view can be discerned in all of the books of his Confessions. It is also clear that he had the protreptic wish to effect a change of world view among those who did not yet share this world view. Thus it has been demon- * PAUL J. J. VAN GEEST (PhD 1996, Catholic Theological University of Utrecht) is pro- fessor of church history and historical theology at Tilburg University. Email: p.j.j.vang- [email protected]. © EMANUEL UNIVERSITY of ORADEA PERICHORESIS 14.2 (2016) 22 PAUL J. J. VAN GEEST strated convincingly that he strove to initiate the Manicheans in the inscruta- bility of the human soul, and, as the books progress, also in the mystery of the inscrutability of God, Creator and Father (book XI ), Son (book XII ) and Holy Spirit (book XIII ) (Kotzé 2004: 58ff; Bettetini 2015: 74-76). The Confes- sions therefore certainly show Augustine as a mystagogue. But this magisterial book is a work of Latin prose, of which Augustine was a master, and it does not establish his reputation as a poet. Augustine does mention in the Confessions that he participated in his youth in poetry competitions, and he quotes three lines from a catechetical poem of praise of the Easter candle in classically shaped hexameters in The City of God (Confessiones 4.1; 4.3; De ciuitate Dei 15.22). He also composed an elegy in eight hexameters, an acrostic, for Naborius, a local martyr who fell victim to Don- atist violence. This poem in particular demonstrates that he was familiar with classical and Christian poetry, to a greater degree even than his critique of poetry in Confessions 1.20-23 would suggest (Hunink 2005a: 88-91). Augustine’s poetry cannot match—either in quality or in quantity —his Confessions , The City of God , or his vast collection of sermons, Enarrationes in Psalmos , treatises on creation and other theological works. The fact that he produced one substantial work of poetry does not negate this contention. The Psalmus contra partem Donati consists of circa three hundred lines and has al- ways been received in history as: ‘an almost unpleasant little work … that seems lacking in any stylistic pretension ’ ( Hunink 2005a: 7). The current contribution consists of two parts. The first will attempt to identify Augustine’s mystagogical qualities on the basis of the Psalm against the Donatists . It will reveal that little is to be gained by studying Augustine as both poeta and mystagogue at the same time. Not his poetry, but his commentary on poetry demonstrates the transformative power that he ascribes to this genre. In the second part, therefore, I propose to examine his Enarrationes in Psalmos . It becomes evident there that he places great value on the transform- ative power of the Psalms, which are both poetry and prayer. This part asks the question how Augustine makes explicit or intensifies fear when the Psalm- ist in his dialogue with God ‘compels’ him to do so, for instance by arti culating his fear of enemies or of the Last Judgement. Augustine’s Psalm against the Donatists The Psalmus is Augustine’s first work against Donatism. Augustine wrote it in 393, two years after his ordination to the priesthood. His bishop, Valerius, badly needed Augustine’s support in the struggle against heretical move- ments such as the Donatists. The Donatists themselves traced back their origins to the persecutions of Christians that occurred under the Emperor Diocletian (284-305). His im- provement of the military, monetary, and administrative structures of the PERICHORESIS 14.2 (2016) Space i n Coercive Poetry. Augustine’s Psalm against the Donatists 23 Roman empire led to restrictions on the rights of Christians, and, from 303 onwards, to the last and most serious wave of persecutions of Christians within his Empire. That year, he ordered that the holy books of Christianity had to be handed over to the civil authorities for destruction. 1 Christians were required to demonstrate their loyalty to the emperor and the gods of the empire by performing the so-called thurificatio (purification). Many Chris- tians submitted to the imperial command out of fear of death or loss of pos- sessions. Christians who had handed over holy books were called traditores ‘squanderers ’.2 It was forbidden to have contact with them; re-admittance to the church was only possible after a long process of penance. Because there were no publicly accessible lists of these traditores , it was un- clear at the end of the persecution in 305 who had in fact been one and who had not. Nevertheless, seventy Numidian bishops declared the consecration of Caecilianus, who had been elected the primate of Africa in 311 or 312 in Carthage, null and void because one of the consecrating bishops was sus- pected of having been a traditor . Although Caecilianus had the backing of Constantine —the emperor wanted unity in his empire through unity in the Christian church —the Numidian bishops chose Majorinus as their primate. From 313 onwards, his charismatic successor Donatus succeeded in rallying the regional establishment to the church that bore his name. When an eccle- siastical court in Rome and an imperial synod in Arles (314) failed to restore unity, Constantine himself decided in favour of Caecilianus post episcopalia iu- dicia (cf. Epistula 88, 2-3; Epistula 105.8). It was to no avail. Extremist armed circumcelliones even regarded Donatism as a nationalist movement against the emperor. In their struggle against the emperor they tortured and assassinated Catholic clerics and renegade Don- atists, and carried out suicide killings (Augustine, Epistula 134, 2; c. Litt. Pet. II, 91, 201 et passim ). Nor did the imperial commissary Macarius refrain from using violence in his attempts to compel the pars Donati to return to the Cath- olic church. Although the Emperor Constans issued a law in 347 that made unity with the Catholica compulsory, the schism between Donatists and Cath- olics became final around 360 (Codex Theodosianus XVI 6, 2). From that time on, the pars Donati developed its own theology of ministry and its own ecclesiology. These were distinct from their Catholic equivalents in that the Donatists traced their notion of holiness back to the idea that they were the successors of the martyrs who had refused to hand over the books —an idea that lacked historical evidence. In addition, just as in classical Roman religion, 1 For the history of the Donatists, see mainly Lancel (1999: 606-622). Cf. Optatus of Mileve (1844: 673-784), Monceaux (1920: 311-328.329-333.335-339), and Tilley (2011). 2 Cf. Acta Martyrum Saturnini presbyteri, Felicis, Dativi, Ampelii et aliorum , in PL 8, col. 688- 703, especially 690. PERICHORESIS 14.2 (2016) 24 PAUL J. J. VAN GEEST the Donatist bishops considered that the holiness of the community was ef- fected through the performance of clearly defined rituals, which they derived from the purity laws in the Old Testament ( c. ep. Parm. II, 7,12; Sermo 268, in PL 38, col. 1232-1234). Although there were exceptions, such as Tyconius, for most Donatists striving for holiness did not primarily involve personal transformation. One consequence was that they developed an ecclesiology based on strict opposition between the church and the world. Their church contained those who were integer , whole, on the basis of their second baptism; outside it were those who were profanus or adulter .