Augustine's Attitude Towards the 'Religious Other'

Augustine’s Attitude towards the ‘Religious Other’ Anthony Dupont

Abstract. – Against the background of the religious diversity that colored late antiquity, the current article studies how Augustine of Hippo (354-430) approached the ‘religious others’ of his era. His dealing with religious diversity is exemplified through two case studies: his attitude vis-à-vis the Donatists as ‘Christian others’ and his appreciation of the pagans as illustration of his attitude to the ‘religious other’ ad extra. Augustine’s initial invitation for a peaceful dialogue was not accepted by the Donatists. This refusal caused him to accept a by the state organized policy of forced conversions of the Donatists, during which he appropriated Cyprian’s adage “salus extra ecclesiam non est.” He however did not accept the forced conversion of non- Christians to Christianity, as the example of his approach of the pagans clarifies. In theory, Augustine only saw truth and salvation within the one Catholic Church. In concrete life he was tolerant, and was of the opinion that nobody should, or even could, be forced to convert.

Religious diversity characterised the late-antique world of Augus- tine.1 Judaism, tensions between Christianity and a still present and combative paganism, and an internally divided Christianity determined the religious pluralistic landscape of that era. Christianity in fifth century North Africa sought its way in the midst of Manichaeism, Arianism, Pelagianism, Donatism and a more orthodox, Catholic interpretation.2

1. This contribution revises, elaborates and brings together research results which were partly published in: Anthony Dupont, “The Relation between Pagani, Gentes and Infideles in Augustine’s Sermones ad Populum: A Case Study of Augustine’s Doctrine of Grace,” Augustiniana 58 (2008) 95-126; Matthew A. Gaumer & Anthony Dupont, “Algunos elementos para entender el cambio y la justificación agustiniana de la coerción religiosa efectuada por el estado y su contexto dentro de la polémica donatista del Norte de África,” Augustinus 54 (2009) 345-371; Matthew A. Gaumer & Anthony Dupont, “Donatist North Africa and the Beginning of Religious Coercion by Christians: A New Analysis,” La Ciudad de Dios: Revista Agustiniana 223 (2010) 445-466. 2. E.g., Peter Brown, Religion and Society in the Age of Saint Augustine (London: Faber and Faber, 1973). Henry Chadwick, “Orthodoxy and Heresy from the Death of Constantine to the Eve of the First Council of Ephesus,” The Late Empire A.D. 337-425, ed. Averil Cameron & Peter Garnesey (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998)

997461.indb7461.indb 133133 119/09/149/09/14 14:1914:19 134 ANTHONY DUPONT

To be more precise, what we understand today as Christian orthodoxy arose in the confrontation between different tenets, of which some were afterwards designated as heterodox. Augustine played a main role in this process. In this context of religious plurality and confessional frictions, it is interesting to investigate how Augustine conceived religious diversity and relationships with people who thought differently. The ‘religious other’ Augustine personally experienced, had mainly four forms: Manichaeism, Donatism, Paganism and Pelagianism. The religious scope of that era was more expanded, but in practice Augustine mainly met the representatives of these four tenets, with whom he was involved in controversies and against whom he explicitly wrote several books. Augustine’s approach to Manicheans, Donatists, pagans and Pela- gians reveals Augustine’s attitude vis-à-vis the ‘religious other’. In this contribution, Augustine’s approach of the ‘religious other’ ad intra will be illustrated by his entanglement in the Donatist controversy.3 Augustine’s approach to the pagans will function as paradigm for his attitude to the religious other ad extra.4

561-600; F. Ferrère, La situation religieuse de l’Afrique romaine depuis la fin du IVe siècle jusqu’à l’invasion vandale (429) (Paris: F. Alcan, 1897). 3. For relevant bibliography on Augustine’s dealing with the Donatists, see for instance Rémy Crespin, Ministère et Sainteté: Pastorale du clergé et solution de la crise donatiste dans la vie de saint Augustin (Paris: Études Augustiniennes, 1965); W. H. C. Frend, “Donatismus,” Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum 4, no. 25 (1959) 128-147; Ernst Ludwig Grasmück, Coercitio: Staat und Kirche im Donatistenstreit (Bonn: Röhrsheid, 1964); Emin Tengström, Donatisten und Katholiken: Soziale, wirtschaftliche und politische Aspekte einer Nordafrikanischen Kirchenspaltung (Göteborg: Elander, 1964); Geoffrey G. Willis, Saint Augustine and the Donatist Controversy (London: SPCK, 1950). 4. Henry Chadwick, “Augustin et les païens,” Augustin Prédicateur (395-411): Actes du Colloque International de Chantilly (5-7 septembre 1996), ed. Goulven Madec (Paris: Études Augustiniennes, 1996) 323-326. Wolfgang Hübner, “Gentes,” Augustinus- Lexikon, Vol. 2, Fasc.1/2, ed. Cornelius Mayer & Karl Heinz Chelius (Basel: Schwabe & Co., 2004) 140-147; André Mandouze, “Saint Augustin et la religion romaine,” Recherches Augustiniennes 1 (1958) 187-223; Aimé Solignac, “Le salut des païens d’après la prédication d’Augustin,” Augustin Prédicateur, ed. Madec, 419-428. See also: François Bovon, De Vocatione Gentium: Histoire de l’interprétation d’Act. 10, 1-11, 18 dans les six premiers siècles (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1967); Paul Hacker, “The Religions of the Gentiles as Viewed by Fathers of the Church,” Zeitschrift für Missionswissenschaft und Religionswissenschaft 54 (1970) 253-278; Johann Riedl, “Röm 2, 14ff. und das Heil der Heiden bei Augustinus und Thomas,” Scholastik 40 (1965) 189-213. For Augustine’s preaching in this perspective, see: Augustin Prédicateur, ed. Madec: C. Lepelley, “L’aristocratie lettrée païenne: Une menace aux jeux d’Augustin,” 327-342; S. A. H. Kennell, “Ut adhuc habeat fides nostra reprobatores: Augustine’s Hostile Hearers,” 343-352; J. Schneid, “Les réjouissances des calendes de janvier d’après le sermon Dolbeau 26: Nouvelles lumières sur une fête mal connue,” 353-365; R. Dodaro, “Christus sacerdos: Augustine’s Preaching against Pagan Priests in the Light of S. Dolbeau 26 and 23,” 377-393. See also Goulven Madec, “Le Christ des païens d’après le ‘de consensu euangelistarum’ de saint Augustin,” Recherches Augustiniennes 26 (1992) 3-67.

997461.indb7461.indb 134134 119/09/149/09/14 14:1914:19 AUGUSTINE’S ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE ‘RELIGIOUS OTHER’ 135

I. Ad intra Within Christianity

1. Definitions In order to understand Augustine’s attitude vis-à-vis internal religious otherness, we will first present his definitions of heresy and schism, which are not always clearly distinguished from each other by Augustine. Augustine perceives heresy as persevering in an error, in a wrong convic- tion condemned as such by the Church.5 A schism is seen as separating oneself from the ecclesial community.6 A schism is a rupture7 in the peace and love of the Church community.8 For this reason, a schism is worse than heresy according to Augustine. Heresy indicates a ‘sect’ in which several convictions and rites exist, while a schism refers to a dis- sociated group of people who follow the same faith and ritual praxis.9 Augustine reproaches haeretici, such as Donatists and Pelagians, for their pride.10 This superbia is also the cause of the inner division of haeretici.11 Schismatici rob themselves from the peace of Jesus Christ by detaching themselves from community with Him. What they do is sacrilege, the worst heresy.12 Schismatici literally are rifting, splitting: they tear the ecclesial ‘fishnets of unity’.13 Schism and heresy are quite close. Schism is actually a form of heresy, since it denies the doctrine of the unity of the Church.14 The term haeresis is in Augustine’s writings connected with Manicheans and Pelagians.15 Donatism mostly is called a schism.16

5. In Epistulam Iohannis ad Parthos 1. 6. Retractationes 2, 27; Epistula 43, 8. 7. In Epistulam Iohannis ad Parthos 7; Epistula 44, 4; 69, 1. 8. Sermo 47, 22; Contra Gaudentium 1, 25. 9. Contra Cresconium 2, 3, 4. Malae filiae, haereses have the same mother: sacraments and Scripture (Sermo 37, 27). 10. A schism is following a human (Donatus, Cecilianus) instead of following Christ (Sermo 358, 3). This definition approaches Augustine’s understanding of pagan idolatry: worshipping an earthly creature instead of the heavenly Creator. The pride of Donatists consists in the fact they put Donatus in the place of Christ, that their shepherds consider their sheep as their property and not Christ’s, they pretend to be capable of making the distinction between iusti and mali (Sermo 47, 17-18; 197, 4; 198, 4; 295, 5). 11. Sermo 47, 17; 71, 3-5. 12. Contra Gaudentium 1, 25; Contra Epistulam Parmeniani 1, 13; 3, 29. 13. Sermo 248; 249; 250; 251; 252; 252A. Sermo 251, 4 makes this explicit: Donatists, Arians, Photinians, Cataphrygians, Manicheans. Donatists placed themselves outside the bound of unity of caritas. Also in other countries there are heresies (Arians, Photinians) cut off the Catholic tree (Sermo 162A, 7-12). 14. Contra Epistulam Parmeniani 3, 29. 15. De Origine Animae 1, 9, 11; 2, 15, 21; 3, 13, 19; Contra Duas Epistulas Pelagianorum 2, 8, 17; 4, 11, 29. See also the unfinished De Haeresibus (427). 16. De Fide et Operibus 4, 6.

997461.indb7461.indb 135135 119/09/149/09/14 14:1914:19 136 ANTHONY DUPONT

The weeds that according to the preacher Augustine will be destroyed by fire are Arius, Eunomius, Photinus, Donatus, Mani, and Priscil- lianus.17 To summarize it very schematically, heresy refers to non- Catholic Christians and schismatics to fallen away Catholics.

2. Changing Attitude versus Donatists The case study of Augustine’s personal changing attitude from peaceful dialogue towards the acceptance of religious coercion regarding the Donatists, is the best illustration of his coping with the internal religious other.18 North-African Christianity in Augustine’s time was deeply divided, mainly because of the Donatist controversy.19 Holiness is central for Donatists. The Donatist axiom is that all that is sinful must be removed from the Church, all sinners have to expulsed. This is the basis for their rigorist ecclesiology, elitist sacramentology and fervent adoration of martyrs, three positions vehemently debated by Augustine. At the moment of Augustine’s Episcopal ordination around 395, Donatism was peaking and especially in Numidia, the Church province to which the diocese of Hippo belonged. Hippo had also a Donatist bishop. Augustine thus was daily confronted with the Donatist ‘religious others’. Before addressing Augustine’s concrete approach of Donatists, we have to notice that the content of his refutation of Donatist sacramentology is also relevant for the topic we discuss in this contribution. Augus- tine recognizes the validity of the sacraments of the Donatists, contrary to the Donatists who claim that only sacraments administered within the Donatist church are valid. Augustine argues that Donatist sacraments are valid, but are however not fruitful, not effective. For this, they need the H. Spirit, and the H. Spirit only resides within the one Catholic

17. Sermo 73A, 2. 18. Peter R. L. Brown, “St. Augustine’s Attitude to Religious Coercion,” Great Political Thinkers 3, Augustine 1, ed. John Dunn & Ian Harris (Cheltenham/Lyme: Elgar, 1997) 382-391; Donald X. Burt, “Augustine on the Morality of Violence: Theo- retical Issues and Applications,” Congresso internazionale su S. Agostino nel XVI centenario della conversione (Rome: Augustinianum, 1987) 25-54; Mervyn Himbury, “Augustine and Religious Persecution,” St. Augustine – The Man Who Made the West, ed. Mark Garner & John Stanly Martin (Melbourne: University of Melbourne, 1990) 33-37; Henk Jans, “De verantwoording van geloofsdwang tegenover ketters volgens Augustinus’ correspondenties,” Bijdragen 22 (1961) 133-163, 247-263; Émilien Lamirande, Church, State and Toleration: An Intriguiging Change of Mind in Augustine (Villanova, PA: Vil- lanova University Press, 1975). 19. Cf. Frend, “Donatismus”; Tengström, Donatisten und Katholiken; Willis, Saint Augustine and the Donatist Controversy.

997461.indb7461.indb 136136 119/09/149/09/14 14:1914:19 AUGUSTINE’S ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE ‘RELIGIOUS OTHER’ 137

Church.20 Even worse, a baptism outside the Church is not only not effective, but will bring the ‘heretic’ eternal death, since he committed one of the worst possible sins: breaking ecclesial unity. This brings Augustine to quote the famous claim of Cyprian of Carthage: “salus extra ecclesiam non est, there is no salvation outside the Church.”21 Official state repression of Donatists was a well established fact in Augustine’s time. Several measures, ordered by Constantine and his suc- cessors, varied from the restriction of civil rights to execution.22 Augustine however always rejects capital penalty or physical torture.23 Augustine is moreover convinced that executions are counter-productive, because it takes away the opportunity to convert, which is actually the only motivation for coercive measures. During the first years of Augustine’s episco- pacy, he used only friendly persuasion. He tried to open dialogues in personal contacts, public discussions and letters.24 He thought that Donatists should be persuaded through argumentation of the Catholic faith’s truth. Augustine for example writes a father who wanted to force his Donatist daughter to come back to the Catholic Church, that he should not do this. His daughter has to do this from her own will and longing.25 Augustine was even, in the beginning, not in favour of applying the imperial legislation against heresy on Donatists.26 To avoid inauthentic conversions, Augustine initially opposed all forced conversions.27 Before 400, Augustine was pro absolute religious freedom and dialogue. After 400, a change of mind can be observed, also according to

20. That is why a Donatist, when he enters the Catholic Church, should not be (re)baptised, since Augustine recognizes the validity of the Donatist baptism. The bishop however will impose his hands on the convert, in order to administer the Holy Spirit. 21. Cyprian, Epistula 73, 21, 2 in: Augustine, De Baptismo 4, 17, 24. “A Roman rigorist, Novatian (d. 257/58), led a schism against bishop Cornelius (d. 253), attacking his policy on reconciliation as too lenient. Some of Novatian’s party sought allies in Carthage. Recognizing the threat to episcopal authority and to church unity, Cyprian wrote De unitate, defending the authority of the bishop (in this case, at Rome) and rejecting Novatian’s faction. This is the context for two of his sayings: “There is no salvation outside the Church” and “One cannot have God as Father who does not have the Church as Mother” (De unitate 6). While both were used in later centuries to con- demn those who refused to convert to Christianity, Cyprian wrote them to induce schismatic Christians to return to the fold.” Maureen Tilley, “Cyprian of Carthage,” Augustine through the Ages: An Encyclopedia, ed. Allan D. Fitzgerald (Grand Rapids, MI/ Cambridge: William B. Eerdmans, 1999) 262-264. 22. Grasmück, Coercitio: Staat und Kirche im Donatistenstreit. 23. Epistulae 100 and 103. 24. Epistulae 23, 7; 34, 1. 25. Epistula 35, 4. 26. Epistula 88, 7. 27. Retractationes 2, 5.

997461.indb7461.indb 137137 119/09/149/09/14 14:1914:19 138 ANTHONY DUPONT

himself.28 He, pressured by his fellow-bishops who were in favour of coercive measures, disappointed by the fact that the Donatists stubbornly refused every form of negotiation and consensus, and intimidated by the increased use of violence by the Donatists (especially committed by the circumcelliones, an armed bloodthirsty private militia with links to the Donatist camp), came to the acceptance of a moderate form of coercive measures. From 400 onwards he begins to justify the use of some coercive measures regarding Donatists. Conversion of pagans, Manicheans and Jews do not belong, according to Augustine, to the tasks of the Church, since they were never a part of the Church. For this reason, Augustine rejected the legal suppression or forced conversion of pagans, Manicheans and Jews. They should be treated in a Christian way and not with violence.29 Donatists however are fundamentally different. Donatists are: ‘bad brothers, but still brothers’30, ‘bad, lost sons’31. Donatists remain essen- tially connected with the Church, still belong to the Church. That is why the paternal responsibility of the Church concerning Donatists is much larger than concerning non-Christians. The Church has the duty to pro- tect her members against error. Coercion can be a means to help erring members to recognize the truth.32 A biblical motive in Augustine’s argumentation in this regard is the parable of the wedding banquet in Luke 14:23. The parable tells that the master orders his servants to force all unwilling guests to enter (compelle intrare). The banquet symbolises the unity of the Church, the unwilling guests schismatici and haeretici.33 From 405 it is clear that the bishop of Hippo favours coercive measures regarding Donatists, although he always opposes torture and execution. As a correcting measure Augustine accepts the abolishment of some civil rights of the Donatists. Augustine allows for example the prohibition of certain religious acts – worship in general and the Donatist praxis of rebaptizing converts, specifically – as an instrument of repression.34

28. Epistula 93; 185. 29. Enarratio in Psalmum 65, 5; 149, 13; Sermo 90, 10; In Epistulam Iohannis 10, 7; Epistula 91; De Haeresibus 46, 15-17. 30. Enarratio in Psalmum 46, 31. 31. Contra Epistulam Parmeniani 3, 1. 32. Epistula 93, 16. Sermo 359, 4: Christians do not want to fight the Donatists, but on the contrary want the best profit for them, namely that they re-enter the unity and share with the other Christians the heritage of God. 33. Sermo 112, 1-8; Epistula 173. Cf. Contra Gaudentium 1, 28-29. 34. Edict of February 12, 405. Augustine also approves the confiscation of Donatist churches and church properties (Contra Litteras Petiliani 1, 102; Contra Gau- dentium 1, 50-51; Contra Epistulam Parmeniani 2, 18-20). For Augustine’s six lines of argumentation in favour of coercion towards the Donatists in his epistulae, see: Jans, “De verantwoording van geloofsdwang,” 139-158.

997461.indb7461.indb 138138 119/09/149/09/14 14:1914:19 AUGUSTINE’S ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE ‘RELIGIOUS OTHER’ 139

Augustine advocates two kinds of punishment. Strokes with a stick, as was common in schools and Episcopal courts, are a possible punishment, however only during a juridical investigation and to discover the guilty as quickly as possible.35 A fine is another possibility. This should be a moder- ated fine, which leaves the guilty enough to live from.36 Augustine also approves that the emperor declares the last wills of Donatists to be inva- lid.37 In this juridical and penal context, Augustine advises officials to act as gently as possible and to be quite forgiving when the good intentions of the guilty become noticeable.38 It is crucial that nobody is forced to convert unwillingly.39 Inner consent is always necessary. External pressure however can stimulate and promote this.40 When force is the only way out, that force should be joined by instruction aimed at inner conversion.41 Punishment and coercion are thus never ends as such. In the period of the Carthage Conference (411) with the Donatists – the last official debate between the Catholic and Donatist parties –, after which the emperor outlawed Donatism, Augustine preached that people who refuse to be defeated by truth, actually are defeated by error. He exhorts Donatists to tear down the wall of error, so they could become brothers again. Only truth overcomes and this truth is caritas. It is very clear that Augustine situates this ueritas and caritas within the Catholic Church, built on Christ as rock.42 Augustine seems at first sight to be intolerant in religious matters, since he endorses a certain degree of coercion and repression. This attitude however is not caused by a radical aversion to everything that is heterodox. Augustine argues that the suppression of the Donatists (1) does not only not harm them, (2) but actually damages the Catholic Church. (1) Punishment of the Donatists by their Catholic brothers has only one goal and motivation: their own redemption and salvation. That is why the suppression is not harmful to them, but rather medici- nally healing and pedagogically nurturing. (2) The Church not only suffers from the (physical) violence perpetrated against it by the Donatists, but it especially suffers from the division and discord. Because

35. Epistula 133, 2. 36. Epistula 104, 4. 37. Sermo 47, 22. 38. Epistula 153. This however does not imply that Augustine neglected committed crimes and stimulated a kind of impunity. His purpose is not to punish, but to save. Moreover, being merciful is an imitation of God, who calls to love the enemy. 39. Cf. Contra Gaudentium 1, 8; 1, 28. 40. Sermo 112, 8. 41. Epistula 93, 2. 42. Sermo 358, 1, 4-5.

997461.indb7461.indb 139139 119/09/149/09/14 14:1914:19 140 ANTHONY DUPONT

the Donatists are ontologically united with the Catholic Church, it is the Catholic Church that suffers pain and sadness due to the division, as a father would due to errant sons. In In tractatus epistulam Iohannis 7, 9, a series of sermons aimed at the conversion of the Donatists, Augustine preaches in this context: “dilige, et quod uis, fac,” as princi- ple to distinguish unjust forms of persecution/religious coercion from just forms. Love and truth are according to Augustine his main concerns. Love for truth and love for the other urges him to bring the erring other in a loving way back to truth. That truth is love, the love community of the one Church. In the end Augustine respects human freedom. Faith cannot be forced upon somebody since it fundamentally is a matter of grace. Salva- tion implies free acceptance of grace. When a Donatist comes back to the Church, this is God’s work.43 Only God can realize an inner acceptance. Coercion and punishment sometimes can be useful, since it forces people to reflect and can help them understand that they are erring. Augustine’s interpretation of men as weak and sinful, makes him empha- sise the responsibility of everybody in power, especially in the Church. It has also to be pointed out that Augustine in his sermons after the change of mentality in 400 actually remains silent about coercive measures, but is always pleading for a peaceful dialogue aimed at reconciliation, to give a good example, to not act like Donatists are acting themselves.44 Speaking about religious coercion happens almost exclusively in letters to (ecclesial and imperial) officials, responsible for implementing the imperial legislation regarding Donatists. This legislation provided a large scope of coercive measures, while Augustine requests to opt only for the most moderate forms. Despite the fact that Augustine allows religious coercion only in the specific case of Donatists (to avoid a bloody civil war) and the observa- tion that he advocates only a very limited use of this coercion, we have to acknowledge that he principally does not reject this religious coercion.

II. Ad extra Towards Non-Christians

As already indicated, Augustine opposed the legal suppression of Manicheans, Jews and pagans, and rejected their forced conversion to

43. Sermo 360, 1. 44. In Sermo 357, 3-5 (411) he asks his community in a homily not to act as the Donatists – who hate peace – but to treat them gently, to pray for their healing.

997461.indb7461.indb 140140 119/09/149/09/14 14:1914:19 AUGUSTINE’S ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE ‘RELIGIOUS OTHER’ 141

Christianity.45 Manicheans believed in Christ. There is a scholarly discussion about the degree in which Augustine considered Manichaeism different from mainstream Christianity, whether he saw them as a Christian sect or as a non-Christian tenet. External religious others Augustine thus encountered were the Jews46 and pagans. Probably Augustine did not have personal contacts with Jews, making his reflections on Jews rather eschatological of nature than concrete and experience based. Despite the fact that the Jews did not recognize Christ and remained with a literal and carnal interpretation of the Law, Augustine gives them a distinct place in salvation history: they are evidence of the Christian truth. The Jews preserve the Old Testament – the writings which prophecy the coming of Christ and which are fulfilled in the New Testament – and as such prove that the Christians did not fabricate or manipulate those prophecies themselves post factum. As a litmus test of Augustine’s dealings with the religious other ad extra, we will focus on his reflections on the salvation status of pagans – an issue of debate in a second controversy Augustine was involved in, the Pelagian controversy (411-430) – a debate on the relation between divine grace and human freedom. The problem of Les vertus des païens within the Augustine research was brought to the foreground by the study of J. Wang Tch’ang Tche. He observes: À partir de la controverse pélagienne, le langage de saint Augustin au sujet des “vertus” des païens, se fait donc de plus en plus net, même

45. Enarratio in Psalmum 65, 5; 149, 13; Sermo 90, 10; In Epistulam Iohannis 10, 7; Epistula 91; De Haeresibus 46, 15-17. 46. Jesús Alvarez, “St. Augustine and Antisemitism,” Studia Patristica 9, Texte und Untersuchungen, 94 (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1966) 340-349; Bernhard Blumenkranz, Die Judenpredigt Augustins (Basel: Helbing und Lichtenhahn, 1946; repr. Paris: Études Augustiniennes, 1973); id., “Augustin et les juifs: Augustin et le judaïsme,” Juifs et Chré- tiens: Patristique et Moyen Âge, ed. Bernhard Blumenkranz (London: Variorum, 1977) 225-241 (= Recherches augustiniennes 1 [1958] 225-241); Marcel Dubois, “Jews, Judaism and Israel in the Theology of Saint Augustine,” Immanuel 22, no. 23 (1989) 162-214; Paula Frederiksen, “Excaecati Occulta Iustitia Dei: Augustine on Jews and Judaism,” Jour- nal of Early Christian Studies 3 (1995) 299-324; id., Augustine and the Jews (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2010); Franklin T. Harkins, “Nuancing Augustine’s Herme- neutical Jew: Allegory and Actual Jews in the Bishop’s Sermons,” Journal for the Study of Judaism 36 (2005) 41-64. Kurt Hruby, Juden und Judentum bei den Kirchenvätern (Zürich: Theologischer Verlag, 1971); Thomas Raveaux, “Aduersus Judaeos – Antisemitismus bei Augustinus?,” Signum pietatis: Festgabe für Cornelius Petrus Mayer OSA zum 60. Geburtstag, ed. Adolar Zumkeller (Würzburg: Augustinus-Verlag, 1980) 37-51; Johannes van Oort, “Israel / Israelitae,” Augustinus-Lexikon, Vol. 3, Fasc. 5/6, 747-751; id., “Iuda(s),” ibid., 779-781; id., “Iudaei,” ibid., 781-792; id., “Iudaeos (Aduersus -),” ibid., 792-796; id., “Iudas Iscariotes,” ibid., 796-798; id., “Jews and Judaism in Augustine’s Sermones,” Minis- terium Sermonis: Philological, Historical and Theological Studies on Augustine’s Sermones ad Populum, ed. Gert Partoens, Anthony Dupont, Mathijs Lamberigts, Instrumenta Patristica et Mediaevalia, 53 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2009) 243-265.

997461.indb7461.indb 141141 119/09/149/09/14 14:1914:19 142 ANTHONY DUPONT

quand il en parle dans ses prédications populaires. Il reconnaît bien que parmi les païens, il y en a, et même beaucoup, qui paraissent bons et honnêtes, fidèles observateurs de la loi naturelle. Mais, puisqu’ils se trouvent en dehors du bercail du Christ, ils accomplis- sent ces œuvres sans savoir à quelle fin les rapporter. Soit qu’ils ignorent par aveuglement, soit qu’ils méprisent par orgueil la fin véritable qui est la vie éternelle et qui ne se réalise que dans le Christ, il est toujours clair que leurs œuvres n’ont aucune valeur véritable ni ne peuvent être regardées comme de vraies vertus [Tract. in Jo. xlv, 2: XXXV, 720].47 Augustine’s stance, developed especially in his debate with Julian of Aeclanum – the second phase of the Pelagian controversy –, in this regard is very clear: there is no salvation without Christ, outside the Church. Pagans are outside the Church, without Christ, and thus they are doomed.48 Augustine stressed in the Pelagian controversy the unicity of Christ’s salvific death on the cross, which redeems fallen humanity only in baptism. During the previous Donatist controversy, Augustine already stipulated that the only fruitful and efficient baptism is to be found within the unity of the one Catholic Church. The result of this argument is quite obvious: pagans go to hell. This conclusion is the consequence of the core content of Augustine’s doctrine of grace, as he developed this in the Pela- gian controversy. He argued that, since all humanity shared in Adam’s first sin (peccatum originale), everybody is also born with the guilt and penal

47. Joseph Tch’ang-Tche Wang, Saint Augustin et les vertus des païens, Études de Théologie Historique (Paris: Beauchesne, 1938) 116. 48. “Wichtig ist, dass der entscheidende Unterschied nicht zwischen den ver- schiedenen Formen des Heils zu suchen ist, sondern zwischen Heil und Nicht-Heil (Unheil). Es ist entscheidend, ‘innen’ zu sein, innerhalb des rettenden Zirkels, ausserhalb dessen der Schrecken der berechtigten Angst vor der Vernichtung der Gottlosen auf- grund mangelnder Einsicht der Gnade Gottes herrscht (forinsecus terret). ‘Draussen’ kann einem nicht einmal Christus helfen. Nur wer von vornherein ‚innen‘ vom Jenseits des inneren Menschen und seines Willens her vom magister interior das Wollen und Wirken bereitet bekomme, kann wenigstens hoffen.” Josef Lössl, Intellectus gratiae: Die erkennt- nistheoretische und hermeneutische Dimension der Gnadenlehre Augustins von Hippo, Sup- plements to Vigiliae Christianae, 38 (Leiden/New York/Cologne: Brill, 1997) 192. Cf. “Sein [Julians] intellectus gratiae besagt, dass sich alle Menschen auf eine von allen als eine einzige wahrnehm- und mitteilbare, durch Gottes Schöpfergnade auf natürlicher Basis aufruhender Wirklichkeit beziehen. Auch die spirituell-moralische Basis der Mensch heit is eine einzige. Auch die uirtutes der Heiden tragen bereits im eigentlichen, gnadentheologischen Sinne zum von Gott intendierten Heil aller Menschen bei. Wenn Augustin meint, diese natürlichen Fähigkeiten für wertlos oder gar für Laster erachten zu müssen, um die Taufgnade als allwirksam für das Heil zu profilieren zu können, denkt er pervers. Julians intellectus gratiae besagt, dass in der Schöpfung nichts verloren gehen kann. Natürlich ist auch für Julian die durch die Taufe vermittelte Gnade allwirksam für das Heil. Das nimmt aber der Heilswirksamkeit der natürlichen moralischen Fähigkeiten nichts von ihrer Bedeutung.” Ibid., 351-352.

997461.indb7461.indb 142142 119/09/149/09/14 14:1914:19 AUGUSTINE’S ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE ‘RELIGIOUS OTHER’ 143

consequences (mortality, concupiscence) of Adam’s fall. All humans are sinners in a twofold way: original sin, transmitted from Adam, and indi- vidual sins. All thus who die without baptism – pagans and even infants –, die without having found forgiveness of sins in baptism, are not free from sin. Hence they cannot enter heaven, and since there is no middle position between hell and heaven, hell is their fate. Augustine pushes the matter even further. Augustine is sceptical regarding pagan virtues. Especially in the discussion with Julian of Aeclanum, he argues that pagans, if they would possess virtues, these would be vain, since they are not grounded in God’s love. The existence of pagan virtues would make Christ’s death senseless, because it would mean that everybody could attain justice without needing Christ. More- over, not the action itself but the aim of the action makes a virtue truly a virtue, and this aim is glorifying God. Pagans can only act virtuous when they recognize that they accomplish this not with their own capacities, but acknowledge that they have received their virtues from Christ. It is actually also Christ’s grace that saved the just from the Old Testament: they believed in the promise of Christ and in circumcision they received, in a typological way, baptism/purification of sins.49 Without Christ, one cannot act in a good way, and anyway, one does not know what the good life is. Ignorantia is one of the penal consequences of Adam’s fall. Through the loss of knowledge because of the Fall, an absolute freedom of choice is no longer possible. Libertas perdita is a loss of knowledge of the Good that can only be restored through Christ. In other words, pagans cannot obtain uera iustitia, since they do not possess uera sapientia, which can only be known through faith. As such, Augustine actually does not believe in ‘virtuous pagans’: without Christ, one cannot genuinely be virtuous. Augus- tine admits that pagans sometimes seem to be virtuous, but he fundamentally believes that they cannot have genuine virtues because this is impossible without Christ. The ‘anonymous Christian’ option, the fact that pagans perhaps could genuinely be virtuous, because they unknow- ingly believe in Christ, is not really considered by Augustine. Augustine however does not think that pagans are completely excluded from salvation provided they become Christian: before the incarnation like the Old Testament just (allegorically believing in Christ), and after the incarnation by converting to Christ and entering the baptismal font. In conclusion,

49. Cf. Pierre-Marie Hombert, Gloria gratiae: Se glorifier en Dieu, principe et fin de la théologie augustinienne de la grâce, Collection des Études Augustiniennes: Série Antiquité, 148 (Paris: Études Augustiniennes, 1996) 279-281; Robert Dodaro, “Ausein- andersetzung mit dem ‘Heidentum’,” Augustinus Handbuch, ed. Volker H. Drecoll (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007) 203-208.

997461.indb7461.indb 143143 119/09/149/09/14 14:1914:19 144 ANTHONY DUPONT

one has to be Christian to be virtuous and to be saved. Augustine develops this mainly in his debate with Julian of Aeclanum, which is elaborately studied by Mathijs Lamberigts.50 Augustine’s thinking on pagans is, besides in his anti-Pelagian trac- tates, also present in his sermones ad populum. His sermones show a vivid interaction between preacher and audience. Moreover, the ‘religious others’ were sometimes physically present during Augustine’s preaching. Augustine himself, for example, attended Ambrose’s sermons in Milan before his own conversion. Augustine preaches about the ‘religious other’, and addresses them at the same time. As such, the combination of Augustine’s theoretical and practical dealing with the ‘religious other’ can be observed. Sermo 286, 5 states that immortality is not given to infideles. Baptism is the conditio sine qua non: So just as the unbelieving man is sanctified in his [believing] wife, and yet perishes if he isn’t baptized; in the same way the children of the faithful, even though sanctified in some fashion, perish all the same if they are not baptized.51 In his sermons, Augustine rebukes the proud and non-heavenly attitude of the pagan. Reconciliation, forgiveness and conversion cannot be found without God. Moreover, human natura, created good by God, appears to be insufficient for salvation: additional grace is needed, namely Christ. Augustine clearly holds the opinion that unbelievers cannot be virtuous.52 Even more, he equates infides with iniustitia. Regarding the infideles pagani, Augustine indicates that without belief in Christ, without Christ’s grace, iustitia, forgiveness and salvation are impossible. This assertion is the consequence of the link he perceives between fides and iustitia – iustitia as an eschatological and also as a moral category. Augustine finds scriptural grounds for this in Rom 4:5: “however, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness”

50. Mathijs Lamberigts, De polemiek tussen Julianus van Aeclanum en Augustinus van Hippo, 4 vols. (unpublished doctoral dissertation Theology, Catholic University Leuven) (Leuven, 1988); id., “In Defence of Jesus Christ: Augustine on Christ in the Pelagian Controversy,” Augustinian Studies 36 (2005) 159-194; id., “Julian of Aeclanum on Natural Virtues and Rom. 2,14,” Augustiniana 58 (2008) 127-140. 51. Sermo 294, 8, in Sermons III/8 (273-305A), On the Saints, ed. John E. Rotelle, trans., notes Edmund Hill, The Works of Saint Augustine: A Translation for the 21st Century, III/8 (Hyde Park, NY: New City Press, 1994) 193. 52. The praesentia uirtutis of sermo 62, 4-5, does not contradict this. Augustine indicates that Christ already was the norm for the moral life of the gentes that will convert, without them knowing this. Christ is constitutional for being virtuous. So, when gentes are called virtuous before their conversion, they were virtuous because of Christ’s hidden presence in their hearts. Because of the absence of Christ in the hearts of pagani, they cannot be virtuous.

997461.indb7461.indb 144144 119/09/149/09/14 14:1914:19 AUGUSTINE’S ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE ‘RELIGIOUS OTHER’ 145

(“credendo in eum qui iustificat impium, ut deputetur fides eius ad iustitiam”)53 and especially in Rom 1:17/Gal 3:11/Hab 2:4: “the righteous will live by faith” (“iustus ex fide uiuit”),54 quoted frequently in his anti- Pelagian writings in general, and in his anti-Pelagian sermons in particular. In sermo 26, 5 Augustine says that being just and being a believer – Hab 2:4 (Rom 1:17/Gal 3:11) linking iustitia with fides – comes from God and not from man.55 Sermo 363, 2 (412-416) combines this idea with Rom 4:5. This induces Augustine to say about the people of God (the baptized): You steered your people with your justice, as they were not relying on their own justice, but living by faith under your grace; this people of yours which you set free (Ex 15:13).56 Aided by Hab 2:4 (Rom 1:17/Gal 3:11) iustitia and fides are cou- pled in sermo 143, 4 and 158, 4. Fides is donated to man. Christians already possess some iustitia – by believing what they cannot see (John 20:27-29) – but this iustitia still has to grow day by day through receiving the Holy Spirit.57 This strong and explicit link between faith and justice implies that non-believers cannot be considered just – virtuous – according to Augustine.58

III. Conclusion

In theory, Augustine does not seem to be open to the ‘religious other’. He sees only one place of truth and true worship: the Catholic

53. Sermo 2, 9; 10, 3; 125, 2; 130A, 3; 292, 6. 54. Sermo 10, 2; 49, 2.4-5; 158, 4; 189, 2; 260D, 1; 335M, 5; 361, 6. 55. Sermo 26, 5. Fideles sumus – si tamen sumus quando ista contra gratiam dispu- tamus – sed ecce fideles sumus. Etiam fideles, etiam iustos, quia iustus ex fide uiuit, ipse fecit nos, et non ipsi nos (Corpus Christianorum: Series Latina 41, 97-98). 56. Sermo 363, 2. […] per fidem iustificati sunt […], sed gubernasti iustitia tua populum tuum, non praesumentem de iustitia sua, sed ex fide uiuentem sub gratia tua: populum tuum hunc, quem liberasti. (PL 39, 1637/14), in Sermons III/10 (341-400), On Various Subjects, ed. John E. Rotelle, trans., notes Edmund Hill, The Works of Saint Augustine: A Translation for the 21st Century, III/10 (Hyde Park, NY: New City Press, 1995) 273. Cf. Sermo 160, 7. 57. Sermo 158, 5. 58. “Le véritable et le dernier argument du saint Docteur contre les ‘vertus’ des païens, est donc tout simplement l’affirmation du principe de la nécessité absolue de la foi au Christ pour l’acquisition de toute vraie vertu, et rien de plus. D’ailleurs, Augustin s’est bien gardé, en 412 comme en 421, de donner une explication définitive de ces bonnes œuvres par lesquelles un païen accomplit la loi ‘naturellement’. C’est toujours une double hypothèse qu’il présente pour maintenir la vérité fondamentale du Christia- nisme: Si quelqu’un a de vraies vertus, c’est qu’il a la foi au Christ; si quelqu’un n’a pas la foi au Christ, il ne peut pas avoir de vraies vertus.” Wang, Saint Augustin, 137.

997461.indb7461.indb 145145 119/09/149/09/14 14:1914:19 146 ANTHONY DUPONT

Church. In concrete life however Augustine seems to be tolerant: nobody should be forced to convert. Eventually, there is only one true religio, Christianity. For this reason, Augustine does not oppose to some coercive measures regarding Donatists. Actually they belong to the Church, but they only need a ‘small push’. We can conclude that Augustine hardly can be called the founder father of a violent inquisition, conversions by the sword, and bloody persecutions of ‘heretics’, despite the fact that his permission for limited force towards the Donatists will be the theological motivation for these later aberrations in the history of Christianity. Despite his profound belief in his proper truth – namely in the one Church as the sole locus ueritatis and fons salutis –, he does not reject the other, rather he con- stantly attempts reconciliation with Donatists, as (lost) brothers in faith, and dialogue with pagans and Jews, as fellow humans. In theory Augus- tine can be considered an exclusivist – no salvation outside the Church – but in praxis he rather seems to be tolerant of plurality.

Anthony Dupont is attached to the Research Unit History of Church and Theology at the Faculty of Theology and Religious Studies, KU Leuven, as a Postdoctoral Fellow of the Research Foundation Flanders (FWO). The main focus of his research concerns Christian Antiquity in general, and the inter- related topics of divine grace and human freedom in the writings of Augustine of Hippo (354-430) in particular. Address: St.-Michielsstraat 4/3101, BE-3000 Leuven, Belgium. E-mail: [email protected].

997461.indb7461.indb 146146 119/09/149/09/14 14:1914:19