Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:07:19.024Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Justification by Faith in Augustine and Origen

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 January 2017

C. P. Bammel
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Origen and Austine might be thought to represent opposite extremes in Pauline exegesis. In working out his characteristic understanding of Pauline theology Augustine developed emphases which were different from those of Origen. In his early works of Pauline exegesis of 394–6 a central point for Augustine is the relationship between works of the law and grace. Origen’s Commentary on Romans develops many Pauline themes, but he takes a more historical approach than Augustine, and a prominent emphasis for him is the relationship between Jews and Gentiles in the divine dispensation. Augustine is an independent thinker, who digests his reading and does not plagiarise. It is not always easy to identify his use of earlier writers. The example to be discussed in the following paper is of particular interest, since it gives us the opportunity of seeing Augustine’s reaction to Origen on the central point of justification by faith at a period just before the outbreak of the Pelagian controversy.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Ecclesiastical History , Volume 47 , Issue 2 , April 1996 , pp. 223 - 235
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For comparison of Augustine and Origen in their interpretation of Romans see Bammel, C. P., ‘Augustine, Origen and the exegesis of St Paul’, Augustinianum xxxii (1992), 341–68 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and ‘Die Juden im Römerbriefkommentar des Orígenes’, in Frohnhofen, H. (ed.), Christlicher Antijudaismus und jüdischer Antipaganismus, Hamburg 1990, 145–51 Google Scholar. Both these articles are reprinted in Bammel, C. P., Tradition and exegesis in early Christian writers, Aldershot 1995 Google Scholar. For a study of the characteristic emphases in Origen’s exegesis of Romans see Heither, Theresia, Translatio religionis: die Paulusdeutung des Orígenes, Cologne-Vienna 1990 Google Scholar, and the review ofthat book in Journal of Theological Studies n.s. xliv (1993), 348-52.

2 Enarratio ii in Ps, 31, CCL xxxviii. 224-44.

3 Ibid. 1.4: ‘praecedens hune psalmum lectio’; 2. 2-3 ‘ apostolus Paulus; unde ipsam lectionem uobis legi uoluimus’.

4 De Römerbriejkommentar des Orígenes, ed. Hammond Bammel, Caroline P., ii, Freiburg 1996, iv. 1. 18–21 Google Scholar: ‘Nam (1) si is qui ex operibus iustificatur non habet glóriám apud Deum, (2) Abraham autem constat habere glóriám apud Deum, (3) ergo non ex operibus sed ex fide iustificatus est Abraham ut necessario habeat glóriám apud Deum.’ For the sections of Origen’s commentary that will be considered here some Greek fragments survive, but we will concentrate on Rufinus’ translation, since this is the version that Augustine used. For the Greek fragments see Jean Scherer, Le Commentaire d’Origine sur Rom. III.5-V. 7, Cairo, 1957.

5 See also Mates, Benson, Elementary logic, Oxford 1972, 204 Google Scholarff. and 213ff. (on Stoic logic).

6 Enarratio 2. 20-31: ‘Quia enim fatemur, et ipsa est fides nostra de sancto patriarcha, qui placuit Deo, ut dicamus eum et nouerimus ad Deum habere gloriam, ait apostolus: Certe notum est nobis et manifestum, quia (2) Abraham ad Deum habet gloriam; (i) at si ex operibus iustificatus est Abraham, habet gloriam, sed non ad Deum; (2) ad Deum autem habet gloriam; (3) non ergo ex operibus iustificatus est. Si ergo non ex operibus iustificatus est Abraham, und iustificatus est? Sequitur, et dicit unde: Quid enim scriptura dicit? id est: Unde dicit scriptura iustificatum Abraham? Credidit autem Abraham Deo et reputatum est illi ad iustitiam. Ergo ex fide iustificatus est Abraham.’

7 Schelkle, Karl Hermann, Paulus Lehrer der Väter: die altkirchliche Auslegung von Römer 1-11, Düsseldorf 1956, 124 Google Scholar. As Schelkle points out, Augustine understands this passage quite differently in his Expositio quarundam propositionum ex epistula ad Romanos 20, on Rom. iv. 2.

8 Bammel, ‘Augustine, Origen’, 341, 343, 358-63.

9 Zarb, S., Chronologia Enarrationum S. Augustini in Psalmos, Malta 1948 Google Scholar. This work was unfortunately not available to me.

10 De Blic, J., ‘La date du sermon de saint Augustin “in psalmum 31” (ML 36, 257-75)’, Gregorianum xvii (1936), 407–12 Google Scholar.

11 Rondet, H., ‘Chronologie des “Enarrationes in Psalmos”’, Bulletin de littérature ecclésiastique lxi (1960), 281-4Google Scholar.

12 De peccatorum mentis et remissione, ii. 35, 57, CSEL lx. 125. 24-126. i; Enarratio, CCL xxxviii-xl. 31.2, 1. 41-52.

13 When he wrote the De spiritu et litiera Augustine was reacting more critically to his reading of Origen’s Commentary on Romans: Bammel, ‘Augustine, Origen’, 361-2.

14 In the De peccatorum mentis ii. 35. 57 only one of the two opposite errors (that of claiming to be without sin) is relevant to the context. Augustine appears to be repeating an idea which he had developed more relevantly in the sermon.

15 On the timing of Augustine’s visits to Carthage see Perler, O., ‘Les voyages de saint Augustin’, Recherches augusliniennes i (1958), 5ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar, with the chronological table at pp. 14-15.

16 It arises most obviously from the disagreement between Paul and James; Rondet, ‘Chronologie’, 282 n. 10, points out that in about 411 Augustine wrote a commentary on James, which is now lost. He describes it in his Retractationes 2. 32 immediately before the De peccalorum mentis. In fact Augustine had anticipated much of what he says in the sermon in his De diversis quaestionibus 76 on James ii. 20, where he had argued that there is no real dsagreement between the two apostles, on the grounds that Paul’s words ‘sine operibus’ refer to works prior to faith (CCL xlivA. 218ff.).

17 In Romanos iii. 28: Pelagius’s expositions of thirteen epistles of St Paul, ed. Souter, A., Cambridge 1926, 34 Google Scholar: ‘Abutuntur quidam hoc loco ad destructionem operum iustitiae, solam fidem [baptizato] posse sufficere adfirmantes... ‘ The Pelagian work De malis doctoribus is also directed against those who think that having faith means that they can sin with impunity (see, for example, iii. 1-2, PL Suppl. 1, 1421).

18 He states this himself in De peccatorum mentis iii. 1. 1 (p. 129).

19 Pelagius’ brief section quotes 1 Cor. xiii. 2, Rom. xiii. 10 and James ii. 26. In the De fide et operibus Augustine introduces this problem at xiv. 21 (CSEL xli. 61), and quotes first Gal. v. 6 (a verse which he makes much use of in the sermon), and then 1 Cor. xiii. 2 and Rom. xiii. 10 in quick succession (p. 62), and later also James ii. 26 (xiv. 23, p. 64, 16-17). In the sermon his quotations of Rom. xiii. 10 and 1 Cor. xiii. 2 are widely separated by other quotations and discussion (5. 8, p. 227 and 6. 15-16, p. 229).

20 De Römerbriefkommentar, 249 (’Sed fortassis haec aliquis audiens resoluatur, et bene agendi neclegentiam capiat, si quidem ad iustificandum fides sola sufficiat’), 250-1.

21 Commentarium iii. 6. 86-7 [De Römerbriefkommentar, 251).

22 Enarratio 2 (p. 225).

23 Ibid. 3. 9-16: ‘dico de ipso Abraham, quod inuenimus etiam in epistola alterius apostoli... Iacobus enim in epistola sua, contra eos qui nolebant bene operari de sola fide praesumentes, ipsius Abrahae opera commendauit, cuius Paulus fidem’.

24 Commentarium iv. 1. 69-72: ‘Propterea ergo et in alio scripturae loco dicitur de Abraham quia ex operibus fidei iustificatus sit quia certum est eum qui uere credit opus fidei...operari.’

25 Enarratio 3. 17-19.

26 Commentarium iii. 6. 64 (works which are not built on the foundation of faith - ‘supra fundamentum fidei’- cannot justify their doer); iv. 1.113-18 (’fides... tamquam radix... surgant ex ea rami qui fructus operum ferant’).

27 Cf. Origen’s words at ibid. ii. 6. 64, quoted in the previous footnote.

28 Ibid. iv. 1. 29-56.

29 Ibid. ii. 1. 7-14; iv. 4. 105-13.

30 This verse is not quoted by Origen and would be less effective in Greek, since ‘quae operatur’ renders not Ίργαζομέυη' but ‘ΕνΕργουμένη‘.

31 Enarratio 5. 52f.: ‘illo ergo loco a fide coepit apostolus’

32 Commentarium iv. 6. 44-7: ‘ Et puto quod prima salutis initia et ipsa fundamenta fides est; profectus uero et augmenta aedificii spes est, perfectio autem et culmen totius operis caritas, et ideo maior omnium dicitur caritas.’

33 Ibid. iii. 6. 62-6: ‘ Ubi uero fides non est quae credentem iustificet, etiamsi opera quis habeat ex lege tarnen quia non sunt aedificata supra fundamentum fidei quamuis uideantur esse bona tarnen operatorem suum iustificare non possunt, quod eis deest fides.’ He also states (ibid. iv. 5. 106-10) that complete obedience to the natural law is not enough; faith is necessary for justification.

34 See, for example, ibid. ii. 7. 10-18, 30-3; Bammel, ‘Augustine, Origen’, 362 nn. 89-90.

35 Commentarium iv. 1. 150-2: ‘ in fide quidem gratia sit iustificantis, in opere uero iustitia retribuentis’; see also 174fr.

36 Ibid. iv. i. 152ff.

37 Ibid. iv. 1. 33-5.

38 Ibid. iv. 1. 218-23.

39 Enarratio 9. 4ff.; the emphasis on understanding in section 8 looks forward to this section.

40 See Commentarium v. 9. 133-4, 162-3; vi. 12. 51. These are passages which influenced Augustine when he was writing his De peccatorum mentis: Bammel, ‘Augustine, Origen’, 359, 366.

41 Commentarium, iv. 1. 224-36.

42 Ibid. iii. 6. 92-3; Enarratio 12. 22.

43 Commentarium, iii. 6. 3-20; cf. iv. i. 11-16.

44 Ibid. iii. 6. 108-13; iv. i. 11-14.

45 Sermo ii (‘de Abraam ubi temptatur a Deo’), g. 229-41, CCL xli. 16.

46 See Bammel, ‘Augustine, Origen’, 362, 368.

47 In his De spiritu et littera xxxii. 55ff. (CSEL xl. 212ff.), Augustine asks what kind of faith is commended by the apostle.

48 Cf. the opening words of his sermon: ‘ Psalmus gratiae Dei et iustificationis nostrae nullis praecedentibus meritis nostris, sed praeueniente nos misericordia Domini Dei nostri.’

49 See also below pp. 233f.

50 Contrast Augustine at Enarratio 7. 15: ‘Bonis [operibus] quid debetur? Regnum caelorum.’

51 Cf. ibid. 1. 1-2: ‘nullis praecedentibus meritis nostris’.

52 Ibid. 4. 1 ff.: ‘ea enim ipsa opera quae dicuntur ante fidem... inania sunt’.

53 Commentarium iii. 6. 62-7; Scherer, ‘Le commentaire d‘Origene’, 166, lines 4-6.

54 Commentarium iv. i. 146-7: ‘ex multis partibus fidei in unum coaceruata perfectio quae mereretur ad iustitiam reputari’ iv. 1. 228-9 and iv. 1. 228-9 and iv. 3. 20-i: ‘fidei meritum’ Scherer, ‘Le commentaire d’Origene’, 178. 15 (‘τη άξίαδικαιώσΕωξπίστει’), 186, 16-19.

55 Commentarium iv. 153-5: ‘uix mihi suadeo quod possit ullum opus esse quod ex debito remunerationem Dei deposcat’; Scherer, ‘Le commentaire d‘Origene’, 184. 8-12 (‘ούδεν...ώς όφείλων δίδωσιν άλλά ττάντα & ţ χάριν δωρεΐταΓ’).

56 Commenlarium iv. 5, 17-34, 60-75; Scherer, ‘Le commentaire d’Origene’, 204. 14-205. 8.

57 See, for example, Dodd, C. H., The Epistle of Paul to the Romans, London 1932 Google Scholar, 51. Of course the Old Testament background must also be taken into account. See Ritschi, Albrecht, Die christliche Lehre von der Rechtfertigung und Versöhnung, ii, Bonn 1882, 304 Google Scholarff, 321 flf.

58 Origen himself is clear. See Scherer, ‘Le commentaire d’Origéne, 162, lines 14-16: ‘ Î πιστίύσασιν τον ‘ Ιησοΰυ ή sis τόν Θεον διά топ Ιησοϋ λογίζεται ò Θεος τήν πίστιν eis δικαιοσύυηυ, κα'ι οθτω δικαιοΐ τον έκ πίστεωζ Ιησοΰ. See also ibid. 184, lines 6-7: ήντινα πίστιν ούσαυ δικαιοσύνηυ λογιζεται δικαιοσύνην ό Θεός’

59 Commentarium iii. 5, 23-6: ‘Deus enim iustus est et iustus iustificare non poterat iniustos; ideo interuentum uoluit esso propitiatoris ut per eius fidem iustificarentur qui per opera propria iustificari non poterant.’

60 Ibid. iii. 5. 237-9: ‘Si uero sustentet et patiatur [Deus] in praesenti saeculo recte erit iustus iudex in futuro. Iustificat ergo eum qui ex fide est.’

61 Section 6, PL xxxviii. 1324A.

62 Expositio 15-16, CSEL lxxxiv. 9-10.

63 Enarratio 6. 26-7: ‘Si iustificatur impius, ex impio fit iustus.’ See also ibid. 24. 6-7: ‘Unde iusti? Non meritis uestris, sed gratia illius. Unde iusti? Quia iustificati.’

64 De spirilu et lettera ix. 15, CSEL lx. 167. 7-8: ‘iustitia dei...qua induit nominen, cum iustificat impium’; x. 16, p. 168. 17: ‘imustus, ut iustificetur, id est ut iustus fiat’

65 CSEL lx. 199. 10-12, 23-6.

66 De spiritu et lettera xxvii. 47, p. 201, 24-5; xviii. 48, p. 202, 24-9.

67 Enarratio - Ps 118 1. 37-8, CCL xl. 1753.

68 Retractationes, CCL lvii. 117.

69 Commentarium iv. 1. 101-36.

70 Ibid. iii. 6. 27-52.

71 Cf. ibid. iii. 6. 53-60.

72 Cf. Scherer, ‘Le commentaire d’Origene', 186, lines 10-12: ‘Δικαιοϊ ούν τον άσεβή διά τήΐ πίστεωξ μεταθέμενον άπο τήζ άσεβείας ώστε λογίζεσθαι τήν μεταθΕΪσαν αώτον òrrrò тг|С άσεβείαξ πίστιν EÎÇ δικαιοσύνην. ‘

73 In a later sermon, Sermo civili (sections 4ff., PL xxxviii. 864f.), Augustine explicitly asks the question whether we are already justified. Those who are baptised, whose sins are forgiven, who are ‘iustificati a peccatis’, who have faith, have ‘aliquid iustitiae’. Yet conflict with the flesh, the world and the devil still remain. If we say that we have no sin we deceive ourselves. So it is necessary to progress injustice (‘Iustificati sumus: sed ipsa iustitia, cum proficimus, crescit’).

74 CSEL lx. 79. 19ff.

75 For example De spiritu et littera iii. 5, p. 157. 10-11, 13-16; ix. 15, p. 167. 11-12; xiii. 22, p. 176. 14-17; xvi. 28, p. 181. 24ff.: ‘hic autem spiritus dei, cuius dono iustificamur, quo fit in nobis ut non peccare delectet’ xviii. 31, p. 184, 12-14.

76 Augustine’s ideas on justification have often been discussed in connection with those of the reformers. To the bibliography in Angelo di Berardino, Patrology 4, Westminster, Maryland 1988, 444, may be added G.R.Evans, ‘Augustine on justification’, Studia Ephemeridis ‘Augustinianum’ xxvi (1987), 275-84.

77 On Augustine’s selective reading see Doutreleau, L., Didyme l’Aveugle, Traité du Saint-Esprit, Paris 1992, 126.Google Scholar

78 See Bammel, ‘Augustine, Origen’, 358ff.