The Process of Appropriation

chapter 5 The Process of Appropriation

To comprehend the total picture of Augustine’s appropriation of Cyprian, it is necessary to uncover and examine the place(s) where Augustine first showed signs of using Cyprian exclusively as an authority to support his own views. This step was taken in Chapter 3, where I examined Augustine’s earliest ex- amples of appropriation: De doct. Chr., C. Faust., Conf., and especially S. 37, s. 305A, s. 313A, s. 313B, s. 313C, and s. 313E. Then, in Chapter 4, I presented a close analysis of Augustine’s first two major anti-Donatist works, C. ep. Parm. and De bapt. Yet that important analysis only told the beginning of a story that would last till Augustine’s death and beyond, as North African Christianity retained its Donatist-flavour well into the Islamic period. Evidence of Augustine’s most vigorous Cyprian-appropriation came only later, between 404 and 430. In this sense, we can say that what formally began in C. ep. Parm. and De bapt. really only drew to a close with Augustine’s C. Iul. imp., that is, with his death in 430. Tracing Augustine’s long-term reinterpretation of Cyprian is really the point where the two most career-altering dramas in Augustine’s life overlap, therefore actually making them into a somewhat parallel set of controversies. So far each chapter has had as its main concern tracking the method by which Augustine entered into his anti-Donatist campaign, the influences that drove him, his own pastoral and theological responses, and the complexities that resulted. I have also tracked the way external events such as the Maximi- anist schism deeply altered the course Augustine would follow as the controversy dragged on. Most crucially, I have recovered in his texts his slow arrival at authoritative sources to serve as polemical fodder against the Donatists, the culmination of which was when he settled upon Cyprian of Carthage as his leading argument. I then analysed the consequences of Augustine’s appropriation of Cyprian, and what stood out was that Augustine had to go to extreme lengths to reconcile Cyprian’s differing views and theology (and therefore also those of North Africans/Donatists) with his own. Since he could not avoid the fact that Cyprian’s theology differed from his own, Augustine had no other op- tion but to redefine Cyprian’s intention and over-accentuate Cyprian’s virtues. This was in order to show that because he was so humble, charitable, and def- erential, Cyprian’s spirit dictated that unity and peace were the most important priorities, and that a Christian must always opt for the good of the greater Catholic Church. With such foundational work already complete, it is now appropriate to look more deeply into the mechanics of Augustine’s Cyprian-appr opriation as

148 chapter 5 it matured through the 400s and 410s. To facilitate this analysis, the chapter moves beyond the earliest years of the anti-Donatist campaign and launch- es instead into a treatment of how Augustine sustained his polemic in the decades after the conflict became a fully-fledged affair in 400/01. The first section of this chapter is primarily concerned with the ‘nuts and bolts’ (the fine details) of Augustine’s appropriation of Cyprian. A thorough analysis and inventory is made of Augustine’s post-400/01 works, and how these evince the impact of the Donatist controversy. This analysis entails a close look at recur- ring themes and methods Augustine used, not only to drive home his anti- Donatist message, but to associate his thought more closely with the authority of Cyprian.

Appropriation in the Medium Term

The effect of Augustine’s audacious appropriating manoeuvre in C. ep. Parm. and De bapt. is most evident when one analyses the amount of times he re- used the Cyprian legacy straight after those premier anti-Donatist works and then throughout the remainder of his career. Using Ground Theory methodology throughout this chapter, I analyse the occurrences of important thematic terms that evidence the evolution and construction of Augustine’s polemical and theological concepts.1 When using this methodology the resulting data is startling. Consider that Augustine uses the word ‘Cyprian’ a grand total of 39 times before C. ep. Parm.! This number includes De doct. Chr., Conf., C. Faust., s. 37, s. 305A, s. 313A, and s. 313E.2 This total drops to just 17 if s. 37 and s. 313E are removed from consideration because of their problematic dating. This means that of the 600+/− total appearance of ‘Cyprian’ in the works of Augustine, only 5.8 percent of those appeared before Augustine launched his full anti-Donatist

1 Ground Theory methodology is particularly useful in this regard as Augustine’s literary cor- pus is extensive, and the theory is a qualititative research methodology that allows for the exploration of concepts, the identification of relationships in raw data, and the organisation of concepts and the relationships into a theoretical scheme. The methodology of Ground Theory was pioneered by A. Strauss and J. Corbin in Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (Thousand Oaks, ca: Sage, 1998). This methodology is well suited to the purposes of this research, in that the theory emphasises the need for developing multiple concepts and their linkages in order to capture the central phenonomenon. 2 Doct. Chr. 2,61; 4,31; 4,45; 4,47; 4,48; Conf. 5,15; C. Faust. 5,8; 13,4; 20,21; s. 37,3; s. 305A,2; 4; s. 313B,2(x2); 4(x3); s. 313C,2(x2); s.313E,1; 2(x3); 5(x4); 6(x4); 7(x4); 8.