THE OXFORD GUIDE TO THE HISTORICAL RECEPTION OF AUGUSTINE Volume 3 EDITOR-IN-CHIEF: KARLA POLLMANN EDITOR: WILLEMIEN OTTEN CO-EDITORS: JAM ES A. ANDREWS, A I. F. X ANDER ARWE ILER, IRENA BACKUS, S l LKE-PETRA BERGJAN, JOHANN ES BRACHTENDORF, SUSAN N EL KHOLI, MARK W. ELLIOTT, SUSANNE GAT ZEME I ER, PAUL VAN GEEST, BRUCE GORDON, DAVID LAMBERT, PETERLlEB REGTS, HILDEGUND MULLER, HI LMAR PABEL,JEAN-LOUlS QUANTlN, ER IC L. SAAK, LYDIA SC H UMACHER, ARNOUD VISSER, KONRAD VOSS l NG, J ACK ZUPKO. OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS 1478 I ORTHODOX CHURCH (SINCE 1453) --, Et~twickltmgsgesdLiclite des Erbsiit~dendogmas seit da Rejomw­ Augustiniana. Studien uber Augustin us Lmd .<eille Rezeption. Festgabefor tiall, Geschichtc des Erbsundendogmas. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte Willigis Eckermmm OSA Z llll l 6o. Geburtstag (Wiirzburg 1994) des Problems vom Ursprung des Obels 4 (Munich 1972 ). 25<,> - 90. P. Guilluy, 'Peche originel', Ca tl~al icis m e 10 (1985) 1036-61. R. Schwager, Erbsu11de und Heilsd,·ama im Kontcxt von Evolution, P. Henrici, '1l1e Philosophers and Original Sin', Conm1Unio 18 (•99•) Gcntechnology zmd Apokalyptik (Miinster 1997 ). 489-901. M. Stickelbroeck, U.-s tand, Fall 1md HrbsLinde. ln der nacilaugusti­ M. Huftier, 'Libre arbitrc, liberte et peche chez saint Augustin', nischen Ara bis zum Begimz der Sclwlastik. Die lateinische Theologie, Recherches de tlu!ologie a11 ciwne et medievale 33 (1966) 187-281. Handbuch der Dogmengeschichte 2/3a, pt 3 (Freiburg 2007 ) . M. F. johnson, 'Augustine and Aquinas on Original Sin; in B. D. Dau­ C. Straw, 'Gregory I; in A. D. Fitzgerald (ed.), Augusti11e through the phinais, B. David, and M. W. Levering (eds), Aq~<inas tile Aug11stinia11 Ages. An Encyclopedia (Grand Rapids, Ml1999) 402-5. (Washington 2007) •4s- s8. M. Strohm, 'Der Begrift' der natura vitia te/ bei Augustin; Theologische A. Kasujja, Polygenism and tile 11JCology of Original Sin Today (Rome 1986 ). Quartalschrift 135 ( 1955) 184- 203. J. D. Korsmeycr, EvolL< ti oll and Ede11. Balanci11g Origit~al Sin and Con­ G. Vandervelde, Two Major Trends in Con temporary Roman Catholic temporary Science (New York 1998). Reinterpretati o11 (Amsterdam 1975). 1-l. Koste r, Urstond, Fall tmd Erbsundc. Von der Reformation bis :wr J.P. van Dooren, Michael Baiu s. Zij 11leer over de mens (Assen 1958). Gegenwa rt, Handbuch der Dogmengcschichte 2/3c (Freiburg 1982). A. Vanneste, 'Le Decret du Concile de Trente sur le peche originel', M. Lamberigts, 'Julien d'Eclane et Augustin d'Hippone. Deux con­ Nouvelle Revue thcologiq11e 87 ( 1965) 688-726. ceptions dl\dam', in B. Bruning, M. Lamberigts, and J. Van Houtem --, The Dogma of Original Sin (Brussels 1975). (eds), Collecta11 ea Augus ti11iana. Mela11ges T. f. van Bavel (Louvain --, 'Le De prima hominis just itia de M. Baius; in Nature et grace 1990) 373-410. dans Ia theologie occidentale. DialogLIC avec H. de Lubac (Louvain --, 'lulianus Aeclanensis', AL<gustitLL<S-Lexikon 3 (Basel 2004- 10) 1996a) 185- 228. 836- 47· --,Pour 1me relecture critique de l'Augustinus de Jan senius, in Nature --and L. Ken is (eds), L:AL1gusti11isme a/'a~~cienne Facu/te de theolo- et grace dans Ia theo logie occidentale. Dialogue avec H. de Lubac (Lou­ gie de Louvain (Louvain 1994). vain 1996b) 229- 50. 0. Lattin, 'Les Theories sur le peche originel de Saint Ansel me :\. Saint A. de Villalmonte, El pecado original. Vei nticinco aiios de controversia l11omas dl\quin; in id. (ed.), Psychologic et morale aux Xll '-Xlll' siecles, (195D-75) (Salamanca 1978). vol. 4/l (Louvain 1954) l!- 280. S. Visser and T. Williams, Ame/m (Oxford 2009). J. MacEvoy, 'Eriugena,John Scottus; in A. D. Fitzgerald (ed.), Augus­ N. Wentsel, Natuur en gc11ade. Een introductie in en confrontatie met de lille tl~rough tiLe Ages. An Encyclopedia (Grand Rapids, Ml 199 9) jongsteo11twikkelinge 11 in de Ronms-kntiLOlieke theologie inzake dit therna 315- 16. (Kampen 1970). G. Madec, jean Scot ct scs a11teurs. Annotations erigeniennes (Paris T. Wiley, Original Sin. OrigiiiS, Developments, Contemporary Meanings 198 8). (Mahwah, NJ 2002). J.-M. Maldame, Le Pee he originel. Foi clm'henne, mythe et metaphisiquc (Paris 2008). N. Merlin, Saint Augusti11 et les dogmes du peche originel et de Ia grace. Orthodox Church (since 1453) Analyses detaillees de scs ouvragcs sw· ces matUres, completees par ······ ········· ··· ················· ·········································· d'importantes explications de sa pen see, et suivies de conclusions 1l1e fall of Constantinople in 1453 is one of the key moments in the theologiqu es (Paris 1931 ). history of the Orthodox Church. When the Mother Church of Con­ D. Ogliari, Gratia et certame11. 17Le Relationship between Gra ce and stantinople (see BYZANTINE WORLD) became dependent on Mus­ Free Will in the Discussio11 of Augustine with the so-called Semipelagians lim rule, it ceased to serve as a pillar of truth for many orthodox (Louvain 2003). Christians. The status of supreme authority over doctrinal issues that H. Rondet, Le Peche origi11el dans/a tradition patristique et theologique the Church of Constantinople had held for more than a thousand (Paris 1967 ). years was already challenged at the time of the Union of Ferarra­ L. Scheffczyk, Urstand, Fall und Erbsiinde. Von der Schrift bis Fiorence (1439) when, for the sake of Western political and military Augustin us, Handbuch der Dogmengeschichte 2/3a, pt 1 (Freiburg help, the Byzantine emperor and court theologians were ready to 1982). make compromises over religious matters. For many non-Greek K. Schelkens and M . Gielis, 'From Driedo to Bellarmine. The Con­ Orthodox Christians the Greek 'apostasy' in Florence was the justifi­ cept ofPure Nature in the Sixteenth Century ;Augustiniana 57 ( 2007) cation for proclaiming ecclesiastical independence from Constantin­ 425-48. ople, and the fall of Constantinople was seen as an apocalyptic token M. Schrama, 'Nachwirkung der jiingeren Augustinerschule im and testimony (Florovsky 1981, u ). Th e Russian Church gained its Denken Blondels', in A. Zumkell er and A. Krummel (eds), Traditio ecclesial independence during the years between Florence and the O R THODOX C HURC H ( S I N C E 14 53) I 14 79 fall of Constantinople, while th e Bulga ri an and the Serbian Church idides wro te a service to A ug. in 19 14 ( Galad za 120 - 2 ) 1 Victor lvbt· already had patriarchates at that time. thaios, fron1 the H o ly Transfigurati o n JV1.ona ste ry in Kro niza Kouvarn In such a complex situation, when there was no centre of visible Attiki, placed a memorial and a more ex tensive life of Aug. in his Syll­ unity among O rthodox Christians and consequently no supreme axa rion (1950), and Metropolitan Sophro nios Eustratiadis (1872 - authority in reli gious matters (because the right to convene a general 1947) included th e li fe of Aug. in his Lives of th e Sa i11ts of tl1c Orthodo x and ecumenical council belonged onl y to the emperor in Constanti­ Church (Hagiologio11 ). Since 1968, Aug. has been included in the oAi­ nopl e), the local churches continued to live th eir own li ves. lt is cialmenology of the Greek Church (Galad za 124). therefore hard to speak of a single reception of Aug. in the O rthodox It is difficult to spea k of a single Slavoni c reception, because when Church. Many local churches with diffe rent nati onal and liturgical Slavonic was a common liturgical and spoken language among the languages had different approaches to Aug. These so-called 'national' broad group of O rthodox Slavs (ninth to fo urteenth centuri es), the approaches did not differenti ate in many points and all of them had name of Aug. was not mentioned. Aug."s name appea red in the Ru s­ the common attitude of appreciation for Aug., but disagreement with sian O rthodox tradition as a consequence of its encounter with t·he some of his teachings. West. Di mitri ofRostov ( 165 1- 1709) mentioned Au g., prelate oft he It remains di ffi cult to speak of a single recepti on of Aug. in the Church o f Hippo, and hi s co ntemplations ove r the Nati vity in his Orthodox tradition in spite of the agreement of O rthodox theolo­ compilatio n From th e Great Co llcctioll oft he Lives of the Sai11t s, vol. 4, gians from different national and ethnic backg rounds over the in the Homily of the Nati vity of Christ on 25 December. Hi s compi ­ defects of Aug:s theology. TI1e frequent deviations from the Ortho­ lation was heavily based on Western sources. Archbishop Fila ret dox standpoint caused by inclinations toward scholas ticism and the Gumil evs ky of Chernigov (1805-66) mentions Aug.'s name, the Counter-Reformati on on the one side, or 'Luther and 'Calvin on date of his feast ( 1s june), and the tro parion in hi s mcnology and the other, are the main reason fo r the lack of a single reception. The patrology (Gumilevsky 3:1 6). TI1e name of Aug. appeared in the Orthodox reception of Aug. has wavered between Roman Catholic menologycompilcd by Kosolapov and published in 188o ( Kosolapov and Protestant receptio ns depending on which side Orthodox theo­ 277 ) ; this is mainly based on the Greek Mwaio11 and Russia n mcnol­ logians have inclined. The tra diti on that celebra ted Aug. as a saint of ogy and patrology of G umilevsky. l l1 e service to Au g. did not exist the Univers al Church in spite of his doctrinal discordance with th e in the Slavo ni c Mcnaion, until hi eromonk Ambrose Pogodin in 1955 Orthodox fai th shaped by the Eastern early Christian writers is the wrote the Church Slavoni c Canon to Aug.