CHAPTER FOUR

SOURCES OF AUGUSTINE'S DOCTRINE OF THE TWO CITIES

A. MANICHAEISM

1. 'Manichaeism' as an accusation For Augustine world history was one uninterrupted linear process, directed towards a final destination: the total separation of the two cities. Eternal blessedness awaits the citizens ofthe city of God; eter• nal damnation those of the city of the devil. In this present age, the period between creation and the end of the world, the Church as the community of the children of God is in peregrination; she is looking forward to her definitive homecoming in the city of God, the heavenly Jerusalem. A number of investigators have referred to Manichaeism as the source of Augustine's clear-cut duality of the two cities and of vari• ous concepts more or less related to it. This is not surprising. For nine years at least, the future bishop was an adherent of this gnostic religion, in the very period which is often regarded as being of criti• cal importance for one's later view of life. Much of his first work seems to be imbued with Manichaean modes of thought!. Seeing that Augustine composed, towards the end of his life, a major work in which he placed the theme of the two kingdoms or cities in a cen• tral position and strongly emphasized the absolute antithesis be• tween these two societies, and stressed moreover the idea of the citizen of God's city sojourning as an alien here on earth, the ques• tion of possible reminiscences of Manichaean ideas cannot be side• stepped. Furthermore, it is known that in hi~ lifetime Augustine was al• ready accused more than once of being a Manichaean. Objections were made against his ordination as (Catholic) auxiliary bishop of Hippo Regius. Megalius of Calama, the primate of Numidia, re• fused at first to ordain him2. Particularly from the Donatist camp

, 1 See Con! IV, 20-27 about De pulchro et apto, already lost to A.; cf. esp. Alfaric, Evolution, 222-225. 2 Cf. C. litt. Petit. III, 16, 19 and C. Cresco III, 80, 92. 200 CHAPTER FOUR the accusations did not cease3 . In the eyes of many Donatists Au• gustine was a crypto-Manichaean and friends of his such as Profutu• rus, Fortunatus and Alypius, now Catholic bishops, were also seen this way. Finally, during the last years of Augustine's life, it was Julian of Eclanum who vigorously attacked the supposed Mani• chaean remnants in his theology4. Were Julian and the other opponents right? A comprehensive an• swer to this question is not necessary in this framework. It suffices to indicate the extent to which his contemporaries suspected or even claimed to have evidence for Augustine's adherence to Manichae• ism. It must be said that Julian turned out to be an acute critic and was able to put forward cogent reasons. Most of the others, however, could do no more than produce unfounded accusations. In this context it should be realized that in those days' Manichae• ism' was already becoming a technical term for any form of suspect• ed dualism and even for heresy in general. Not only was the former Manichaean Augustine charged with it, but Jerome and, for in• stance, Ambrose too. And for his part Ambrose accused his oppo• nent Jovinianus of adherence to Manichaeism5. It was becoming customary to label others in this way for a real or supposed devia• tion. In later centuries, for example Patriarch Nikephoros of Con• stantinople considered the adversaries of the veneration of icons to be inspired by Manichaean writings6 . It is common knowledge that in Western Europe the accusation 'Manichaeism' was heard through almost the entire medieval period7. This was still true at the time of the Reformation: Luther, Melanchthon and Calvin were each in turn labelled as Manichaeus redivivul'. The importance still given then to Mani's doctrine is ap-

3 For a discussion of the texts on this subject, see esp. Courcelle, Recherches, 238-245; Frend, 'Manichaeism', passim, and Lamirande, BA 32, 711-712. 4 E.g. Opus imp. c. lui. II, 31-33; in IV, 42 the venomous remark: 'Si mutabit Aethiops pellem suam aut pardus varietatem, ita et tu a Manichaeorum mysteriis elueris' . 5 Cf. De Veer, BA 23, 810-81l. 6 Cf. Alfaric, Ecritures, I, 119. 7 E.g. S. Runciman, The Medieval Manichee. A Study of the Christian Dualist Heresy. Cambridge 1955 2; H. Grundmann, Ketzergeschichte des Mittelalters, Giittingen 19672. 8 SeeJ.P. Asmussen, 'Manichaeism', in: C.J. Bleeker - G. Widengren (eds.), Historia Religionum. Handbookfor the History of Religion, I, Leiden 1969, 608. For the accusations on the part of Erasmus et al. directed at Luther, see A. Adam, 'Die Herkunft des Lutherwortes vom mensch lichen Willen als Reittier Gottes', LuJ 29 (1962) 33-34.