Job in Augustine: Adnotationes in lob and the Pelagian Controversy

A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of St. Michael's College and the Theology Department of the Toronto School
of Theology. In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Theology
awarded by the University of St. Michael's College.

Colin Stephen Andrew Kerr

Toronto, 2009

2009 by Colin Kerr

1*1 Library and Archives
Canada
Published Heritage
Branch
395 Wellington Street
Ottawa ON K1A0N4
Canada
NOTICE:
The author has granted a non-
exclusive license allowing Library and
Archives Canada to reproduce,
publish, archive, preserve, conserve,
communicate to the public by
telecommunication or on the Internet,
loan, distribute and sell theses
worldwide, for commercial or non-
commercial purposes, in microform,
paper, electronic and/or any other
formats.
The author retains copyright
ownership and moral rights in this
thesis. Neither the thesis nor
substantial extracts from it may be
printed or otherwise reproduced
without the author's permission.
In compliance with the Canadian
Privacy Act some supporting forms
may have been removed from this
thesis.
While these forms may be included
in the document page count, their
removal does not represent any loss
of content from the thesis.
I+I
Canada
Biblioth&que et
Archives Canada
Direction du
Patrimoine de l'6dition
395, rue Wellington
Ottawa ON K1A 0N4
Canada
Your file Votre reference
ISBN: 978-0-494-68861-8
Our file Notre r6f6rence
ISBN: 978-0-494-68861-8
AVIS:
L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive
permettant a la BibliothSque et Archives
Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver,
sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public
par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, preter,
distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans le
monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, sur
support microforme, papier, electronique et/ou
autres formats.
L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur
et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. Ni
la these ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci
ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement
reproduits sans son autorisation.
Conformement a la loi canadienne sur la
protection de la vie privee, quelques
formulaires secondaires ont ete enleves de
cette these.
Bien que ces formulaires aient inclus dans
la pagination, il n'y aura aucun contenu
manquant.
 Abstract for

Job in Augustine: Adnotationes in lob and the Pelagian Controversy

The Faculty of St. Michael's College and the Theology Department of the Toronto School of Theology
Doctor of Philosophy in Theology, University of St. Michael's College

by

Colin Stephen Andrew Kerr

Toronto, 2009

This thesis investigates the impact of the Pelagian Controversy on Augustine's

understanding of the Old Testament book and character, Job. The focus lies in a
comparison of the pre-Pelagian Controversy Adnotationes in lob ("Notes on Job), written
c.399, with his later references to Job, c.412-30. It is argued that Augustine's history with
Job indicates greater consistency than might be supposed. Augustine's thought is set
against the appropriate exegetical and controversial background. The former considers
the treatment of Job by prior and contemporaneous Patristic writers. It is discovered that
Augustine's assertion that he is following the tradition of the Church in his view of grace
against the Pelagians is not baseless in the case of Job. Various Fathers looked to the
Book of Job as proving that sin is a universal phenomenon. The controversial background
pertains not only to his dispute with the Pelagians, against whom he had to defend the
primacy of grace in the good life and the ubiquity of sin in human life, but also to his
dispute with the Manichaeans, which found him defending the holiness of the Old
Testament saints. These two tasks, it is argued, did not involve Augustine in self-
contradiction. This study considers Augustine's doctrine of Scriptural interpretation
(especially as seen in his 'On Christian Doctrine'), his own view of his intellectual
development (as seen especially in 'Retractations'), and several of the principal themes
that he considers in his 399 study of Job to arrive at the conclusion that his interpretation
of Job did not alter radically over the years this study considers. This is an argument for
continuity in Augustine's thought.
 In my father's honour,

A student of wisdom, an editor of this thesis, sadly missed,

Dr. Stephen Roy Kerr

1939-2008

magister intus est. Nolite putare quemquam aliquid discere ab homine.

- In epistolam Johannis ad Parthos tractatus decern, 3.13

 CONTENTS

Chapter

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . 1

1. A Note on Methodology . . . . . . . 7

2. Exegesis of Job: The Scriptural Textual Foundation. . . . . 9

i. The Problem of Augustine's Biblical Text in Abstract . . . 9

ii. Why write Adnotationes? A Clue in the Choice of Biblical Text . 11
iii. Texts Compared . . . . . . . 14
iv. The Identification of Jerome's LXX and its Significance. . . 17

2. Exegesis in Adnotationes in lob . . . . . . . 22

1.1. A First Argument: Love and the Character of Job. . . . 22

1.2. Love in the Job of Confessiones . . . . . 26

2. The Content of Adnotationes by Subject . . . . . 30

In General . . . . . . . . 30
2.1. Correction, Conversion, Denial . . . . . 32
2.2. Ecclesiology . . . . . . . 35
2.3. Christology . . . . . . . 36
2.4. P e r s e c u t i o n . . . . . . . . 43
Conclusion to Chapter 2 . . . . . . . 48
1. The Spiritual Mode of Exegesis and the Reality of Salvation . . 48
2. An Objective Measure: Adnotationes and the Proceedings ofPelagius . 50
a. The Possibility of Living Sinless in this World. The Will. . 53
b. The External Grace of the Law . . . . 55
c. Reward in the Next Life - Merit . . . . 57

d. The Church . . . . . . . 58

3. Job in the Fathers of the Church . . . . . . . 62

Introduction . . . . . . . . . 62

A. Pre-Pelagian Job . . . . . . . . 63

1. Origen . . . . . . . . . 63
2. Gregory of Nyssa . . . . . . . . 67
3. Eusebius . . . . . . . . . 68
4. John Chrysostom . . . . . . . . 69
5. Hilary . . 71
 6. Ambrose 74

B. Job in the Pelagian Controversy . . . . . . 76

7. Jerome . . . . . . . . . 76

Conclusion to Chapter 3. . . . . . . . 78

4. Adnotationes and the Grace Controversy . . . . . . 85

1. Augustine's'Fear'of Job? . . . . . . . . 85

1.1 The Meaning of the'Unfinished'Work . . . . . . 86

1.2. Steinhauser's View of Augustine's Job . . . . . . 91

1.3. Another Look at Retractationes 2.39 . . . . . . 102

1.4. 'Rhetoric' and Retractationes . . . . . . . 109

2. The Development of Augustine's Grace Doctrine of Job . . . . 113

a) The Testimony in General . . . . . . . 115

b) The Testimony of Job in the Corpus:

399 Job vs. Job in the Pelagian Controversy . . . . . 127
i) The Sample in General . . . . . . 127
ii) References by Year . . . . . . . 129
iii) How much of Job was Quoted at these Stages . . . 131
iv) The History of some Key Verses . . . . . 134
fig.l chart: Popular Verses in the Fathers , . . 136
fig.2 chart: Verses that Appear More than Once,
Outside of the Five Most Popular . . . . 142

v) Why Augustine Quotes the Verses he does . . . . 143

3. Comparing Passages from Adnotationes with References made in the Later Works . 144

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . 157

Reference List . . . . . . . . . . 170

Introduction

When Erasmus prepared his version of the works of St. Augustine he placed

Retractationes at the front with Confessiones. Although the lesser known of the two,

Retractationes is yet for so many the favorite means of first encounter with Augustine's works.

Thus, those occasions upon which Augustine has taken a less than favorable view of certain

things that he has written are well known to students of his thought. And, likely, Retractationes'

short paragraphs have had a great influence on publishers' and translators' decisions about which

of his texts to present to the larger population. The entry in which Augustine considers the little-

known work, Adnotationes in lob, is not full of glowing praise and recommendation. Perhaps this

has something to do with why it has never been translated into English, and why it has never been

closely studied. Yet because of its form Retractationes is a work that it is easy to misinterpret.

Thus, it is easy to believe that in the absence of thorough study, Adnotationes'' true character has

not yet been well intuited.

Because of this, one half of the task of introducing Adnotationes to the English-speaking

audience is to refute whatever false views have arisen about it. And, in fact, lack of attention to

the text has led to mischaracterizations of it. An example of this is Steinhauser's recent article,

"Job Exegesis: The Pelagian Controversy."1 As the title of the article suggests, Job was an

important figure in perhaps the longest-lasting of all of the Augustinian controversies - that is to

say, that concerning grace and freewill. Steinhauser finds in the figure of Job and, consequently,

in Adnotationes itself, proof of the weakness of Augustine's teaching on grace, and, indeed, proof

of his duplicity in attempting to conceal this weakness. This thesis will argue that these assertions

are built upon a faulty interpretation of the development of Augustine's doctrine of grace, and

Adnotationes place within that development.

1
In Augustine: Biblical Exegete, ed. Frederick Van Fleteren (Villanova: Peter Lang, 2001), pp.299-
311.
 2

An important point lies at the heart of Steinhauser's considerations, as we will see. How

Augustine viewed the 'wise man' or the 'saint' definitely changed over time. The models from

his youth were the powerful and ubiquitous Cicero, Plato and Socrates, as well as a host of other

figures from his reading. 2 These were the heroes of the Roman educated milieu. A significant

point of change - and we can detect this in Confessiones3 - was when he discovered that there

were admirable figures within the Church that could be admired for their learning as well as their

holiness. Ambrose was one such figure, as was St. Anthony. It would be difficult to over-estimate

the importance that these two figures played in Augustine's conversion. He would give signal

proof that holiness and wisdom were important criterias of truth in one of his earliest works, On

the Morals of the Manichaeans and On the Morals of the Catholic Church. Thinking along these

lines was one of the things that had at one point made Manichaeism attractive to him.4

Disappointment in Faustus' wisdom had spelled disaster for his faith in that religion.5 He knew

what a weak spot Catholicism had in its defense of the Old Testament saints, but was certain that

there was some way to link the holiness of Anthony to that of the Patriarchs, for instance, some

way to do this, moreover, in keeping with the standards that he had adopted from paganism and

was sure were being lived out nowhere better than in his new Christian heroes. Augustine's

defense of these Old Testament figures was notably different from that of certain other Fathers, or

perhaps all the other Fathers. He was always quick to defend the hidden virtues of their acts. Why

he did this had everything to do with that basic intuition of his that the truth of his religion was

proven by a veritably unbroken line of holiness, from Old Testament times to his own.

But Augustine was to prove himself mistaken about a part of his thinking on this matter.

The first indisputable evidence of this came along in his 396 work, Ad Simplicianum. Was St.

Paul up to this time the very archetype for him of holiness and wisdom, such that it was

2
Ep. 6, Confessiones (Conf.), 3.4.7, and Retractationes (Retr.), 1.1.4 & 1.2.3.
3
Conf, 8.6.14.
4
He was later to describe them as "making a show of chastity and of notable abstinence..." {On the
Morals of the Catholic Church 1.2 (MEQ (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1401.htm))
5
Conf, 5.6.10.
 3

impossible for Augustine to include him among those who were still under the law and not yet

under grace!6 That it was Paul's writings that were at the heart of the conversion scene in

Confessiones was no accident.7 He was also the preferred New Testament writer of the

Manichaeans: his pedigree was challenge by none.8 In the last few years of the 390s Augustine

had to reconsider what was actually signified by 'holy' or 'wise.' He had been under a

misapprehension if he took from St. Anthony that this meant apatheia, which seems likely.9 How

this discovery related to his own realization that chastity was not some kind of guarantee of

perfection is a matter worth speculating about.10 But even if Augustine could not quiet all the

movements of his own 'members' this was not proof to him that the likes of Paul and Anthony

were similarly beset with this unrest. No, it was not primarily experience that was the teacher

here; it was his doctrine of God,11 especially as this was expanded by his encounter with the

Letter to the Romans.12 It took him some years with that epistle before he realized what it meant

for St. Paul's life, and indeed, for the lives of all the saints. It meant, he discovered, that man

6
See Conf. 7.21.27 and Ad Simplicianum (AS), 1.1-1.17.
7
Conf., 8.12.29.
8
Contra Faustum (CF), 12.2. "Although Faustus does not believe the prophets, he professes to
believe the apostles... he declares that he assuredly belives the Apostle Paul." (NPNF, www.newadvent.org
/fathers/140604.htm)

9
See Augustine Michael Casidy, "Apatheia and Sexuality in the Thought of Augsutine and
Cassian," St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly 45:4 (2001), pp.359-94. From MEC, we have every reason
to believe he was still operating under this assumption. There he writes, "they may have been so wise that
no painful feeling disturbed their mind in the exercise of compassion... And it is equally true that a wise
man ought to be free from all painful emotion when he assists the needy... There is no harm in the word
compassionate when there is no passion in the case." (27.53) The extremity that Augustine had in mind at
that point may be gauged from 22.40, "the soul turns to God wholly in this love..."; and, in general,
Augustine's use of the word 'perfect' in this work: see 10.17,11.19, 12.21,13.22, etc. But yet ambiguities
beset this work as regard the power that really makes this perfection possible. See, for instance, 17.31: "this
is the work of the pure and guileless God..." In most cases, one is depicted as 'receiving' this perfection.
10
Conf., 10.30.41.
11
As in De Patientia (DP) 15, "Whoso therefore contends that love of God may be had without aid
of God, what else does he contend, but that God may be had without God?" (http://www.newadvent.org/
fathers/1315.htm) And in CF 12.13, '"Lord by your favour You have given strength to my honour; You hid
Your face and I was troubled;' which teaches us that not in itself, but by participation in the light of God,
can any soul possess beauty, or honor, or strength."
12
It has been argued that this was in accord with his pre-Christian Platonism, however. See Phillip
Cary, Inner Grace: Augustine in the Tradition of Plato and Paul (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008).
Carol Harrison (Rethinking Augustine's Early Theology: An Argument for Continuity (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2008) likewise argues that the Ancient setting was conducive to Augustine's doctrine of
grace.
 4

stood continuously in need of grace because he could not attain to a state of perfection here on

earth.13 Were he able to attain to such a state, this would imply that he was no longer in need of

God's constant care. It was his doctrine of the good which led to his doctrine of grace which, in

turn, led to his doctrine of holiness. As we have suggested, Augustine began by seeing in the likes

of Cicero and Plotinus the quintessence of human life. After this, he moved through the

Manichaean elect, to arrive at the 'Catholics' - Ambrose, Anthony and Paul. Only after this had

he finally figured out that no one in this life could experience the sort of elevation he had

imagined was in store for the best of us. He was left with Christ alone. Of course, even his

doctrine of Christ was to fall short of certain things he had once imagined were possible,14 that is,

in terms of the emotional life even Christ had to contend with. This was not because he

discovered that the holiness of Christ was less than he once thought, rather, it was because -

probably in light of both his personal experience and his continuing Scriptural initiation - he had

reconfigured his understanding of human perfection in such a way as to include certain elements

of the emotional life that he had previously excluded as unbefitting the wise man.15

So he came to realize that St. Paul was never without struggle in this life, and that no

person in this world would ever be so free. How did this realization alter his view of the Old

Testament saints? To uncover this we would need to pay careful attention to his later comments

on Paul16 and, indeed, those concerning his other great New Testament hero, John the

Evangelist.17 But it would be difficult to imagine that once he had revised his view of Paul or of

himself or of human life in general he would have had any problem reconsidering the precise

character of the exemplary biblical virtue of the likes of Abraham or of Job. But things do not

always develop quite as one might anticipate, as Augustine's very first reference to the Book of

13
See conclusions of chapter 2, 'a'.
14
Conf. 7.18.24-20.26.
15
See On the City of God (DCD) 14.6-10 and Unfinished Work against Julian (OICI), 4.45-84.
16
As in Book 12 of the Literal Commentary on Genesis (LCG).
17
Which he does abundantly in his tractates on the Johannine writings, and in De consensu
evangelistarum 1.4.7 (DCE), for instance.
 5

Job indicates, again from On the Morals of the Catholic Church:

This man, in the loss of all his wealth, and on being suddenly reduced to the greatest
poverty, kept his mind so unshaken and fixed upon God, as to manifest that these
things were not great in his view, but that he was great in relation to them, and God
to him. If this mind were to be found in men in our day, we should not be so strongly
cautioned in the New Testament against the possession of these things in order that
we may be perfect; for to have these things without cleaving to them is much more
admirable than not to have them at all.18

We will see how greatly Augustine was to reshape the view exemplified in this passage. First of

all, it is a little surprising that Augustine would put Job so far above the "men in our day," that is,

men living in a time when the grace of Christ is available. And while it is true that he did this, this

has to be understood in its proper context. Augustine would always defend the Patriarchs, even

when Pelagianism provided him with a strong reason not to. But this 'praise of the Patriarchs'

was usually defensive,19 and even in his earliest works it was always wrapped in the mystery of

the divine plan, in such a way that does not at all conflict with his mature doctrine of grace: "I

would not find fault with the life of the ancient saints, even if I did not understand its mystical

character."20 Secondly, it should be noted that other Church Fathers would not have the same

difficulty speaking about Job of any Old Testament figure as 'faultless.' Augustine's history with

Job was to be somewhat different, however. He was always the one glossing over the flaws of the

Patriarchs to the Manichaeans.

Principally, we are interested in what his view of Job was in 399, the year he was to write

Adnotationes in lob. Augustine's thinking was to evolve a great deal in the decade between the

writing of the above passage and this later work, of course, but would this prove an 'updating'

sufficient to exempt it from the embarrassment Steinhauser believes Augustine must have felt

toward it when looking back upon it so many years later in Retractationes? We need to ask

18
MEC, 23.42.
19
As in Excellence of Marriage (EM), 19.21.
20
CF, 12.48. And, in reply to Faustus' assertion: All we look for in the prophets is prudence and
virtue, and a good example, which, you are well aware, are not to be found in the Jewish prophets..."
Augustine replies, "We must therefore prove the fact of the prophecies; and their use for the truth and
steadfastness of our faith; and that the lives of the prophets were in harmony with their words." (12.1 & 2)
 6

whether Augustine had been able to integrate the meaning of Job into his post-396 understanding

of the human context, or was it the case that he believed it to conflict with this new

understanding, and that he consequently dealt with this contradiction by doing his best to avoid

this biblical book and by marginalizing Adnotationes, as Steinhauser asserts?

To clarify the meaning of Adnotationes we propose to begin its thorough study. We do not

believe it has been adequately considered.21 It must be considered in light of Augustine's

evolving understanding of grace. 22 This is no simple matter, even once it is admitted that this

understanding did change.23 It is the details of this evolution that matter, and how one interprets

them will impact upon how one interprets Retractationes. Was Augustine aware that his

understanding of grace evolved? Is this acknowledged in Retractationes or is it concealed? If it is

acknowledged, was he correct about the details of his progression or even aware of them at all?

The answer to these questions determines whether or not we can consider Retractationes' view of

Adnotationes as accurate, and, more generally, his record as a polemicist as honest.

Our investigation of the text shall follow these steps: 1) the general description of the

text, and importantly the identification of the Scriptural text upon which it is based (inconsistently

identified in the literature as LXX ('Itala') in some cases and as Hebrew in other instances, or

some kind a mix of the two); 2) an analysis of several prominent subjects dealt with in

J. J. O'Donnel writes, "he [Augustine] was later sorry that so inadequate a work had gotten into
circulation." (See: Commentary on the Confessions, http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/jod/twayne/twaynebib.html.)
Also, Manlio Simonetti and Marco Conti exclude it from their Ancient Christian Commentary of Scripture:
Job (henceforth A CCS: Job) (Downers Grove, 111., Intervarsity Press, 2006) with the remark that 'the notes'
"are far from being a systematic commentary on the different sections of the biblical text. In fact, they
appear to be extremely free treatments of passages from Job, where the biblical text is not oscillated and
analyzed but is embedded in each treatment..." and thus they excluded from their study, (p. xxviii)
22
See especially J. Patout Burns, The Development of Augustine's Doctrine of Operative
Grace (Paris: Etudes Augustiennes, 1980). Studies of Augustine's doctrine of grace abound. Some of those
considered herein include: Gerald Bonner, St. Augustine: His Life and Controversies (Norwich: Canterbury
Press, 2002), esp. pp. 312-93; and Eugene TeSelle, Augustine the Theologian (New York: Herder, 1970).
23
Opinions on this have ranged widely, and for quite some time. See A. D. R. Polman, The Word of
God According to St. Augustine (Grand Rapids, Mi: Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1961), pp.9-12, who
critiques Gilson. The scholarship of the 20th century has favoured the position of 'change' as radical break
in Augustine, including his doctrine of grace. Recently the tide may have been changing with works such as
Carol Harrison, (op. cit. supra.), and Catherine Conybeare, The Irrational Augustine (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2006).
Adnotationes, with a view to establishing the parameters for a consideration of its teaching on

grace; 3) the history of the Christian appropriation of Job up to Augustine; 4) a comparison of

Adnotationes' doctrine of Job with the texts that refer to Job in the post-399 corpus, in order to

determine what adaptations Augustine may have made in his view of this Biblical character. It

will be seen how a true appreciation of a doctrine must to some degree be the result of various

relative measurements. In this case we consider Job as he appears in the early work of Augustine

(i.e. Adnotationes) verses later works; we also consider Adnotationes in light of several of its

themes, and not simply as if it were a work 'on grace'; and, of course, we also compare

Augustine's treatment(s) of Job against that of several important early Christian writers.

1. A Note on Methodology

This present study primarily revolves around the comparison of texts in Augustine's

corpus, both those written in the early part of his career and those of his most mature phase. As

such, this thesis will also be interested in the analysis of 'quantitative data.' This will be

especially evident in chapter 2, in the first place, where the frequency of word usage will be

instrumental in determining the characteristics of Augustine's interests as he composed

Adnotationes in lob. This methodology will also appear in that chapter for the purposes of inter-

textual comparison, that is, for the sake of comparing this work with other contemporaneous

writings of Augustine. Indeed, in chapter 4, this quantitative methodology will be employed as a

means of analyzing Augustine's use of the Book of Job over time. Whereas in chapter 2 the

interest lies in comparing the themes treated in Adnotationes with their treatment in other

contemporaneous writings, in chapter 4 it is the Book and figure of Job that are themselves the

focus of this quantification. The answer to the question of how frequently he cited the Book can

give rise to our consideration of why did he do so. Such an approach is required in this case when

it is considered how little this work has been studied, and, of course, in light of the fact that we
 8

are undertaking a study that potentially touches on the Augustinian corpus as a whole. Especially

useful to this end has been the Chadwyck-Healey database of the Patrologia Latina. I have

employed this database as well for part of the data that appears in chapter 3, when I undertake to

compare Augustine's frequency of use of the Book of Job with that of the various other relevant

Latin writers - Ambrose, Jerome and Hilary, for instance.

What might be considered, by contrast, a "qualitative study," we undertake in the final

section of chapter 4. Here we must attend to the finer points of detail in our juxtaposition of

Augustine's early view of Job with what characterizes his treatment of Job during the Pelagian

controversy. Indeed, this shift in methodology is necessary in light of the fact that no a priori

explanation is apparent why (or why not) Augustine would refer to the Book of Job with greater

or lesser frequency in this later stage compared to the earlier. Steinhauser has suggested that a

shift in Augustine's use of the Book of Job is apparent between these points. We must first

confirm whether that is actually the case or not, and, if it is, account for this incontrovertibly.

My study of this question has revolved around the analysis of Adnotationes in lob itself,

that is, an analysis of the text, its variants, textual history, themes, scriptural foundation, and

Augustine's attitude to it as seen in the Retractationes, not to mention the light that such texts as

De doctrina Christiana and various of the epistles cast on the subject of Job. I have also paid

attention to Augustine's doctrine of grace, especially insofar as it was a developing doctrine. To

this end I have examined Adnotationes'' teaching itself, various contemporaneous writings -

especially Confessiones, Contra Faustum, the two early Genesis commentaries, Ad Simplicianum,

Augustine's two studies of Romans, the later anti-Pelagian works, and, of course, various

prominent secondary studies devoted to this issue.

As for the text of Adnotationes itself, I have consulted both Latin editions, that is to say,

the CSEL and the PL, as well as the French Translation that appears in the 1908 Oeuvres

complete series.
 9

2. Exegesis of Job: The Scriptural Textual Foundation

i. The Problem of Augustine's Biblical Text in Abstract

The end of the fourth century was a key moment for the history of Christian theology. It

was the very time when Augustine was freely developing the views that would become so

troubling to so many. If it were not for Pelagius' reading of Confessiones, that history might have

turned out significantly differently. At that moment he felt it necessary to write some comments

in the margins of his copy of Job. We must be careful in offering a reason for why he would do so

precisely at that moment. A mistake about this would inevitably lead to misunderstanding the text

as a whole. A great deal of this present work shall be spent refuting one version that has been

offered of this 'why'. Although these 'notes' are not extensive, given the nature of the project, it

must have taken at least a few weeks to compose it such as it is. No hint appears in the extant

epistulae, c.399, that is, that he was preparing a good answer to a thought-provoking question, as

was the case with his work, Ad Simplicianum, composed just three years earlier. Of course, he

was always being asked hermeneutical questions. It is entirely possible that it was one such

question that began this study of Job. There is no reason to assume so, however. A targeted study

of Job at that time makes perfect sense, based upon what we know about his program of study

and the polemical forces at work on him.

Why, then, was Augustine scribbling these comments in the margins of his codex of the

Book of Job in 399? Where do they fit into the evolution of his mind? A significant part of the

answer to these questions is easy to provide. The specific day-to-day factors working on him are a

little more difficult to account for, though. Let us account for the simpler elements first.

These are notes, and they were written for a reason. Whatever might contribute to solving

the question of the 'why' Adnotationes was written might also allow us to provide a more

satisfactory answer to the 'what' of this work. It turns out that something of the 'why' is revealed

in the simple fact of what biblical text these were written upon. Let us present the historical
 10

setting and consider what Augustine's choice reveals.

The question of the text of Job that Augustine employed is not a simple one to answer. It

is not like the well-known Vetus Latinae. One prominent Augustine scholar has concluded that it

was made from "a difficult pre-Vulgate text of that book."24 The peculiarity of this view can only

be gauged in light of the controversy that erupted between Augustine and Jerome, over the issue

of biblical translations. Their heated exchange began in 394, four or five years before

Adnotationes was written. Of course, this was not concerned only with the matter of biblical

versions, although this was an important element in it. For as unrestrained as he was in offering

his opinion, Augustine's view is not as clear as we might suppose on the matters that concern us.

We know that Augustine possessed this translation of Job made by Jerome shortly after it was

rendered in 393. What is more, we know that Augustine liked Jerome's 393 LXX translation

enough to encourage Jerome most vigorously over the period of a few years to abandon his later

work on the Hebrew translation.25 But then a strangely incompatible statement appears in De

doctrina Christiana, where he commends the Itala, and does not even mention Jerome's text - the

text he is supposed to like so much. There are several other details that are just as difficult to

coordinate as this one, which we shall discuss below. But now that we have introduced the issues,

it is best simply to work through the evidence we have from the controversy with Jerome

chronologically. Our goal is to figure out why Augustine is saying what he is, when he is, in these

letters, so as to discover how the Adnotationes exercise fit into the developments that their

correspondence charts. All this is a necessary preamble to an eventual examination of the text of

Job in the commentary. It is hoped that Augustine provides us with some clues in his letters as to

Source unknown.
25
Henceforth Vetus Latina will be given as VL and the Septuagint as LXX. I will refer to pre-Jerome
Latin texts of the Bible as the Old Latin or VL, though scholars like to speak of both Vetus Latina and Itala
traditions. Itala was a word apparently coined by Augustine himself in the De doctrina Christiana, 2.15.22,
"In the case of translations themselves, however, the Itala is to be preferred to the others, since it combines
greater precision of wording with clearness of thought. In emending any Latin translation, we must consult
the Greek texts; of these the reputation of the seventy translators is most distinguished in regard to the Old
Testament..."
what he was doing in 399. The Scriptural text at the foundation of his James commentary was an

important factor in the 'negative' review he gave that work in Retractationes.26 Was this a factor

in Retractationes consideration of Adnotationes?

ii. Why write Adnotationes? A Clue in the Choice of Biblical Text

Notably absent in many of the entries of Retractationes is any word about why he chose

to write the works he did. This is particularly the case for the exegetical studies. It is important

that something be said about this if a work is to be truly understood. Now the fact that Augustine

corresponded with the translator of one of the texts upon which this commentary may have been

written, and the fact that that correspondence dealt with biblical textual issues, justifies the

examination of this correspondence.

We possess just under twenty letters that were exchanged between Augustine and

Jerome. These range over the period from about 394 to 419, that is to say, up until the death of

Jerome. The majority of these broadly revolve around the topic that was of central interest to both

of them - the Scriptures.

The first letter was written in 394/5. This letter is 28 of the Augustine corpus.27 It is here

that we learn that Augustine had possession of Jerome's LXX translation of Job at this early date.

He writes, "I beseech you not to devote your labour to the work of translating into Latin the

sacred canonical books, unless you follow the method in which you have translated Job.. ."28 It

seems as though he approved of Jerome's work, but not that he is willing to abandon all other

texts for it. He simply says, "so it may be seen plainly what differences there are between this

version of yours and that of the Septuagint."29

26
Retr. 2.58.
27
I am following the enumeration given for Augustine's epistles. There is another standard
numbering scheme for Jerome's, which I will ignore for sake of simplicity.
28
Ep. 28.2.2
 12

Epistle 71 provides an excellent window into Augustine's mind at the time. We must sift

through it carefully in order to determine what it implies about the work Augustine did on Job

four years earlier. First of all he tells us that "I heard that you have translated Job out of the

original Hebrew," but that he had at that time no "access to the manuscript of the translation from

the Hebrew."30 Doubtlessly, though, he had it in his possession at one time, since he is able to

compare Jerome's two versions (and again stating his preference for the LXX). Augustine adds

that, "your own translation of the same prophet from the Greek tongue we had already a version

of that book."31 This, moreover, he describes as edited with such "astonishing exactness,"32 and

displaying "scrupulous fidelity as to the words,"33 and "a work so useful that it cannot be too

highly praised."34 He concludes by saying, "For my part, I would much rather that you would

furnish us with a translation of the Greek version."35 This letter is a little surprising in light of 28.

Suddenly Augustine seems to really value Jerome's LXX Job. In this letter Augustine is no longer

equating Jerome's LXX translation with the rest of the VLs circulating around. Augustine's social

context is an important consideration: "You would therefore confer upon us a much greater boon

if you gave an exact Latin translation of the Greek Septuagint version," since Hebrew

manuscripts are scarce and Christians proficient in that language even rarer.36

Over this period of time Augustine had been writing De doctrina Christiana. He had

begun it in about 396. It was obviously a time of intense interest in the theory of scriptural

interpretation for him, and we see this reflected in the letters. In that work he refers to the state of

the Latin codices of the Bible. What is curious is that he failed to mention Jerome's LXX in that

Ep. 71.2.3
Ibid., 71.2.3.
Ibid., 2.3
Unlike the alternative: quae versa est ex hebraeo, non eadem verborum fides occurrit... (Ibid.,

Ibid., 4.6
Ibid., 2.4
DDC., 4.6
work37 Yet DDC does offer a clue to the mind of the author of Adnotationes: "the great number of

the translators proves a very great assistance, if they are examined and discussed with a careful

comparison of their texts." In other words, Jerome's LXX is not to be considered to replace all

previous Latin versions, as Epistle 71 would have us believe.

In 405 Augustine wrote letter 82.38 This would constitute Augustine's last word to Jerome

for another ten years (as far as we know). Relevant to our purposes he states, "I beg of you,

moreover, to send us your translation of the Septuagint, which I did not know that you had

published."39 This Epistle gives a slightly different impression than that suggested by DDC's

advocacy of several versions. This epistle considers the matter from the opposite perspective,

suggesting that many versions are a hindrance. This shift could have significant implications for a

work like Adnotationes. Here he assumes that Jerome can supply him with this best text. Yet if

this is the case, as it appears to be once again, what about the "missing" text of Jerome's LXX

translation of Job? How could he have lost this text, and how could he have failed to employ it in

Adnotationes, as at least one scholar believes he had? Based upon the evidence examined so far

the most cautious interpretation of Augustine's letters may be drawn together into a coherent

whole if we considered that at that point Augustine's main desire throughout this exchange was

simply to encourage Jerome in his work to secure the LXX for the Latin-speaking world. He had

not really changed his mind about the usefulness of multiple versions - it was a decent second-

best. But we know that one only wants multiple versions when confidence in any single one is

lacking. So to say that Jerome would be able to provide a text by which all the others could be

judged 'wanting' was exceeding the limits of strict truth.

The reply to one of Augustine's long-standing questions did not come until 416: "We

37
DDC 2.14.21.-15.22.
38
Three other letters were exchanged between them in 404, numbers 72, 73, and 75. These say very
little relevant to our purposes.
39
Ep. 82.5.35. See Catherine Brown Tkacz, "Labor Tarn Utilis," p.49. The author does not clearly
present the evidence for and against Jerome having translated all the LXX text. Can Augustine's request be
considered proof that he had? See also J.N.D. Kelly, Jerome: His life. Writings and Controversies
(Peabody, MA: Hedrickson Pub., 2000), p. 159.
 14

suffer in this province from a grievous scarcity of clerks acquainted with the Latin language; this

is the reason why we are not able to comply with your instructions."40 Yet it is Augustine's

reasoning and not Jerome's that is relevant in the present context.

iii. Texts Compared

La Bonnardiere states "that the works of Saint Augustine bear witness to several Latin

texts of the Book of Job."41 As for Adnotationes, she affirms the suggestion of "Paul Dhorme, in

his study of the hieronymian translation of the Latin version of Job according to the Septuagint,"

who "remarks that St. Augustine marginally annotated an exemplar of this translation" but she

adds that "he took no notice of the diacritical marks made by Jerome."42 This latter thought no

doubt owes its inspiration to Epistles 71 and 75, where we see Jerome criticizing Augustine for

failing to understand these marks. It is clear that, if indeed Augustine's "history" with the book

indicates that Augustine employed a variety of texts, the view that Augustine began his career

with the VL but eventually adopted Jerome's Vulgate exclusively is not true, neither for the Old

Testament in general, nor for Job in particular. Indeed, the Vulgate "is found to be employed

exclusively only in the Speculum quis ignorat.. ."43 La Bonnardiere tells us further that

"[t]he nine citations of Job due to the Pelagian Caelestius, and gathered by St.
Augustine in the De Perf. just. hom. [c.412],.. present the variants related to the text
of the Adnotationes; however, these do not conform to the text of the Vulgate. To
which Latin version do they witness?"44

Her opinion is that for Adnotationes: "the Latin text of Job is the one from the hieronymian

translation of the Septuagint. Some chapters, because they are cut short, one may wonder if

Ep. 172.2. Tkacz, "Labor Tam Utilis," p.46. Today there remains but one manuscript of that LXX
Job.
41
Anne-Marie LaBonnardiere, Le Livre de Job, Biblia Augustiniana (Paris: Etudes Augustiniennes,
1970), p. 110. All translations from this work are mine.
42
Ibid., p. 111. Also, see her "Le Speculum quis ignorat' in her Saint Augustin et la Bible (Paris:
Editions Beauchesne, 1986), pp.401-9.
43
Ibid., p. 111.
44
Ibid., p. 112.
Augustine had arranged an incomplete text, or if he had freely skipped verses." Is this reminiscent

of the passage from Retractationes on the Epistle of James: "we did not have an accurate

translation of the Epistle from the Greek"?45 Retractationes does not say this about Adnotationes.

Augustine tells us nothing at all about the Scriptural text from which it was made, and so we

should conclude that it was from one that was, to his mind, decent. Of course, we do hear a lot

about textual poverty in the letters. If La Bonnardiere is correct in both of her claims - that

Augustine used the LXX, and that this text was for some reason incomplete - what explains

Augustine's comments in the DDC: why does he recommend the Itala in 396/7 rather than

Jerome's, if this is the one he chose for Adnotationes. If we remember that Augustine, if he

indeed had possession of Jerome's LXX at that time, only had this book out of all the Old

Testament writings. This did not leave much to recommend. Perhaps Augustine wrote as he did in

396/7 out of the conviction that for as valuable as Jerome's LXX translation would have been, it

was by then a dead letter. In other words, the DDC could not recommend it to other Latin

Christians since it effectively did not exist. But there remains the question of when it was that

Augustine became convinced that Jerome's decision was final. Jerome was not to compose letter

172 for another twenty years. However, this explanation for the position of DDC relative to the

letters is not completely satisfactory when we consider the timeline involved. Augustine began

work on it before Adnotationes, and did not return to it after a hiatus of more than twenty years.

Since he received this version of Job in c.394, when he began working on DDC a few years later

had he any reason to doubt that Jerome would continue with this edition? The first indication we

have that Augustine was forced to realize this was letter 71 (c.403), by which time he had already

written the first part of DDC (begun in 396). It is reasonable to assume that by 396, or shortly

thereafter, he had heard rumors of Jerome's switch of attention onto the Hebrew. By the time he

began DDC he had reason to doubt that the LXX would ever be completed. It is noteworthy that

45
See Lossel "A Shift in Patristic Exegesis: Hebrew Clarity and Historical Verity in Augustine,
Jerome, Julian of Aeclanum and Theodore of Mopsuestia, Augustinian Studies 32:2 (2001), 157-75; esp.
159-63.
 16

Augustine did not seem surprised in letter 71 by Jerome's switch to the Hebrew. Evidently

Augustine had known about it for some time.

There yet remains the question of the missing LXX Job which Jerome sent Augustine. If

Augustine had it by 394, was it gone by 399? If La Bonnardiere is correct, and Augustine made

Adnotationes from it, how could Augustine have said that he had lost it, when it was there for one

of his disciples to come across all along? This is one mystery. It is also mysterious how he could

have professed to love Jerome's text so much and then lose it? Are we to believe that he forgot

about his extensive annotations? Perhaps the only alternative is to maintain ih&t Adnotationes was

not based upon Jerome's LXX after all? However, Yates tells us it is no simple matter to solve the

puzzle: "Where Augustine is concerned, a simple collection of texts based on the Vulgate edition

is out of the question: The boundaries between the so-called 'Old Latin' and the Vulgate textual

traditions are often quite difficult to establish."46 We have seen why this is so. Since Jerome's

recension the two text traditions have not ceased to contaminate each other. The text upon which

Adnotationes is based is clearly unrelated to the Vulgate and other quotations of Job found in

various of Jerome's writings.

An examination of these two texts make it clear that Adnotationes was made from

Jerome's LXX. Perhaps it was even written on the very codex Jerome had sent from his monastery

in Bethlehem in 393/4. We think it was made on this very codex. So Augustine's disciple must

have copied it after 403, but before 427. Yet that the 403 letter in no way acknowledges these

notes is what is primarily confusing. It is clear that Augustine simply took Jerome's LXX and

commented on those texts that seized his imagination.

46
Jonathan Yates, "The Presence and Use of the Letter of James in the Work of Augustine of Hippo
(354-430)," at http://www.theo.kuleuven.ac.be/php/doctoraatsfiche.php3?projectID=144.
iv. The Identification of Jerome's LXX and its Significance

Now that we have established that, indeed, Augustine put Jerome's LXX Job to

immediate use, what can we say about 'Augustine's Job' from the textual perspective? We have

discovered that we do in fact possess all of what constituted the text upon which Augustine was

resting his eyes in 399, even though he did not choose to comment upon all of it. What benefit

would there be in extending our gaze from the verses he actually commented on, to include as

well those he had not? Is there as much to learn from what he avoided, as from that upon which

he spilled ink?

It is difficult to answer the question why one did not do something. Yet if we are

fortunate enough that the texts upon which he commented are markedly different from those he

ignored then our chances for offering plausible hypotheses for any given act of discrimination

increases. The first verse Augustine commented upon was 1:3, and he abruptly terminated at

39:35, thereby ignoring the final three chapters. Augustine commented upon about 60% of Job in

Adnotationes. Throughout his whole career he consistently ignored about 280 of the roughly 1040

verses, or, just over one-quarter. We can dismiss from this 280 roughly 40, since this number is

spent in simply naming the speaker. The extent of commentary devoted to the verses he did

comment upon in Adnotationes, however, ranges from one or two words to the elaboration he

makes upon chapter 38, which itself constitutes about a tenth of Adnotationes on its own. In

general, Augustine becomes more verbose as he works through the Book. This fact is enough to

tell us that he had no modus operandi in this investigation, but was simply following the

movement of curiosity - a curiosity, it is worthwhile remarking, that increased as he went along.

He was in so many words resolving for his own benefit the peculiarities of the Hebrew world-

view, reformulating it into the language to which he was used. If he had a goal in this enterprise it

seemed to be none other than to replace the unsatisfactory Hebrew anthropomorphisms with his

own more rationalized cosmology. It suffices to say that Augustine's initial motivation behind
this study of Job had no clear directionality, and that he was simply interested in making sense

out of a very curious text. Adnotationes was a private study, and not an exposition meant for

public consumption. That means that Augustine was only interested in explaining things to

himself. We see him concentrating on aspects that are by no means typical of his homilies and

other 'public' writings. For instance, his interest in astronomy, which is generally speaking a

topic which he treated 'ad litteram,'47 but which appears here in an otherwise spiritual context.

Were this a public writing, far from ignoring chapters 1 and 2 and the epilogue, we would

anticipate them having received a sizeable portion of his attention.

Having Jerome's fresh translation at hand was doubtlessly the immediate precipitating

cause for Augustine to have undertaken Adnotationes. It is curious that his obvious initial

excitement with respect to this text did not continue indefinitely. Had it continued, Augustine

would not have forgotten where his copy was, or, indeed, that he had a copy of it. Of course, part

of Augustine's loss of enthusiasm surrounding this text was due to that natural loss of keen

interest that the completion of any project brings. He had by then 'figured out' Job - at least to his

own satisfaction, just as he had previously figured out the 'problem of evil', the problem of the

Patriarchs, or the genealogies of Christ, etc.

If the arrival of Jerome's text in Hippo presented a natural opportunity for this study, we

cannot fail to note that Job was therefore a subject that had to some degree intrigued Augustine.

There are none so eager to figure things out than those for whom the possibility was for so long

denied. Once he had gained from Ambrose the hope of 'figuring out' the Old Testament, he was

eager to do so. His principal obstacle was, of course, time. He was always weighing off the

relative urgency of projects. And that Adnotationes was more the fruit of his afternoon and

nighttime personal study or prayer time, and not of his 'formal' work, made its creation possible

at a time when its study was not actually demanded by force of pastoral necessity, as it would be

a decade or so later with the rise of Pelagianism. These things are clear from the lack of logical

47
See ULCG, 8.29-30 & 12.37.
construction behind Adnotationes, and, as well, the fact of its incompletion. In this sense we

cannot ask why Augustine chose to employ Jerome's text rather than any other. It was a study

that, in the short term at least, arose from his interest in Jerome's translation; it was not that the

project was first designed and then a text chosen in light of some prior criterion.

We can say nothing more about Augustine's choice of Jerome's text for Adnotationes

than that he believed not only in the soundness of Jerome's accomplishments and that he believed

in the privileged status of the LXX on account of the legend of its composition. He never gives an

indication his decision about a text was really a decision about particular readings, as had been

the case in the famous episode of the gourd in the Book of Jonah.48 Therefore, we cannot say that

when he examined a version of Job he was looking for anything in particular by which to evaluate

its worth. If any passage were to be looked to as a sort of litmus test for soundness of translation,

one would assume that it would be 19:25-26, a passage, as we will see in ch. 3, considered

especially important by Jerome.

Determining the text Augustine was employing in Adnotationes is, of course, interesting

on its own account. Augustine's attitude to Biblical versions has long interested scholars.49 Yet

for our present purposes it is important for what it allows us to see Augustine excluding.

Primarily he excludes the prologue and the epilogue. Other than for these parts, a governing

rationale for his selections in the main body of the Book eludes the casual glance we have made

in this chapter.

For our present purposes it is important most of all in what it reveals about why

Augustine undertook this commentary: this was a material cause - the acquisition of Jerome's

interesting translation. Of course, this does not exclude the need he felt for integrating the Old

Testament as a whole into his anti-Manichaean polemic. And because we can affirm that its

immediate cause was non-polemical we can look to its contents as the product of personal interest

48
See Eps. 81 and 82.5.35.
49
See especially, Anne-Marie LaBonnardiere, "Did Augustine Use Jerome's Vulgate?" Augustine
and the Bible, ed. and tfans. Pamela Bright (Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press, 1999), pp.42-51.
to a degree that puts it in a class of its own. As we have said, Augustine scholars are split between

those who would emphasize the significance of change in his understanding of grace and those

who would emphasize his consistency.50 In light of this debate we can see Adnotationes as an

authentic instance of Augustine's teaching, one that does not necessarily have to be heavily

filtered of its anti-Manichaeism, for instance. Both Julian and Augustine were aware of the

difficulties that arose for Augustine when attempting to coordinate his polemics against the

Manichaeans and the Pelagians. To whom Augustine was writing made a significant difference in

how he packaged his words, and, hence, how they ought to be interpreted by us. In the case of

Adnotationes, though, we can easily identify his preoccupations, and, what is more, we need not

worry about the consequences of incorrectly identifying the audience to whom he was addressing

this work. What this means in the concrete is that this is not 'Job against the Manichaeans,' as

Retractationes was to claim so often, nor even 'Job against the Donatists.' Whom Augustine was

writing 'against' or 'to' is an important question. That audience was none other than himself. This

distinguishes the Adnotationes project from Confessiones in an important way, and we must keep

this in mind as we analyze the implications of its teachings for his doctrine of grace.

What our discovery about why Augustine wrote Adnotationes when he did implies for

our thesis as a whole is fairly clear. Even before we examine the content of the work in its own

right we can see that the fact that he was interested in the Book of Job enough to read the whole

thing over and make rather detailed notes on it shows that he thought of it as a good resource for a

bishop like him. A 'resource' is as far away from a 'threat' as one can imagine. Let us remember

that this is Augustine so fully attentive to the 'new' insights of Ad Simplicianum and

Confessiones. If there was ever a time that he would be on the look-out for places that would help

him spell out his new understanding of Romans and Galatians it was 399. Is it possible to

50
See Carol Harrison, Rethinking Augustine's Early Theology: An Argument for Continuity (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2006); more succinctly, "The Most Intimate Feeling of My Mind": The
Permanence of Grace in Augustine's Early Theological Practice," Augustinian Studies 36-1 (2005), pp. 51-
58.
imagine that, all excited as he opened up the newly arrived codex from Jerome, he would find his

faith seriously challenged by this book of the Bible? It almost seems a preposterous notion to

entertain, but nevertheless, we shall consider it in the chapters that follow.

 22

Chapter 2

Exegesis in Adnotationes in lob

1.1. A First Argument: Love and the Character of Job

It is taken for granted that love plays an important role in Augustine's theology. Love

binds God to Himself, God to man, Christ to God and man, and it ought to bind man to God.

Adnotationes treats of love as just one of its basic concepts. It appears in the very first line of the

text.51 What picture his references to love in Adnotationes may give of Job is by no means

obvious. It is used there to describe the 'positive' movement of the heart and will. Yet, as well, it

is used in 'negative' senses: concupiscio, voluptas, libido, etc. But the fact that one loves does not

prove that he is just, good, perfect, or as he should be. We need to discover something about how

one is able to love, that is, by his own power or by God's. As he writes at 37.22:

Ab aquilone nubes colons aurei. Ab sceleratissima impietate, et a Deo longe remota,

veniunt tamen mundati atque conversi, et illuminati sapientia: unde, nisi per gratiam, qua
non merita attenduntur, sed peccata dimittuntur? Unde ille cum sibi vellet ignosci, Doceam,
inquit, iniquos vias tuas, et impii ad te convertentur: tanquam nubes ab oriente vel aquilone
jam coloris aurei, illuminatis tenebris suis. In his est magna gloria et honor Omnipotentis.
Cui plurimum dimittitur, plurimum diligit. Quoniam potest et impium justificare qui est
omnipotens.

Love may be good, love may be evil, but even when it is rightly ordered it may not be so much an

indication of one's personal virtue as it is of the mercy of God. With these complexities in mind,

then, it would be unhelpful to supply a statistical account for such a polyvalent concept as 'love'

is in Adnotationes. We can say, however, that it is one of the prevalent themes of the work. But

this fact fails to distinguish it from the corpus as a whole.

Is Job's moral stature a product of his love? Is it indicated that he suffers on account of his

voluptas? Or do harms beset him regardless, to purify and/or to teach himself or others? Of

course, it is a case of the latter, as passages of this work clearly indicate.52 Augustine does not

See 1.4.
For instance, 36.5.
 23

seem to distinguish here types of 'positive' love as a technical means to signify that proper to

God and that proper to neighbour. Whether he was under the impression that it was possible to

distinguish in an absolute sense normative 'positive' and 'negative' terms for love in Scripture in

399, he was later to deny that possibility in DCD.53 One would assume that it is the resolution of

the issue of Job's blameworthiness that is key to Augustine's interest in Adnotationes. But, in

fact, that this is not the case reveals a great deal about his approach to Job. Augustine does not

make his position on this question central in this study. Yet it is important, as we will see, that we

not apply a meaning to this that does not belong. Many possibilities remain in explanation of this:

perhaps it was too pedestrian a matter for him to treat of it in his personal notes, and that it was to

be an external force that would later occasion his commenting upon Job's 'blameworthiness,'

serves but to indicate the shallowness in their thinking in his view? The fact, but the fact that the

Pelagians compelled him to make judgment on Job's status, if nothing else, speaks to an interest

that was for one reason or another not native to him.

As an examination of Adnotationes' references to love reveals, one cannot ask the simple

question of whether or not Augustine accounted for Job's moral status in Adnotationes in terms of

how he loved. Job was not Job per se. Job appears here as the generic 'soul' and as a type of

Christ. His historical existence was secondary to Augustine.54 Typical of what he does in this

regard is seen at 3:7, where Job says of himself: "Sed nox ilia sit dolor," but which Augustine

turns into a universal statement: "quia dolorem facit diligentibus se." What are we to draw from

this as a biography of Job in Augustine's hands? We cannot be certain that Augustine was hereby

including Job among those who love themselves; we cannot conclude this, but neither can we

exclude it as a possibility. Similarly at 35.13, we have: "Et quos dilexeram, consurrexerunt in

me." But Augustine is not overtly interested in the 'me' of this passage, for he comments: "'Ipse

enim Omnipotens perspicit eos quifaciunt justitiam, et salvum me faciei' Sicut ipse videt

See DCD 14.7.

See Steinhauser, p.307, on the "Alexandrian influence."
facientes, qui cordis intima perspicit, sic ea salute salvos facit, quam ipse videt in occulto." The

subject once again moves from the first person singular to the third person plural, leaving flesh-

and-blood Job of history behind. We will see in chapter 3 how this approach very often stands in

marked contrast to Augustine's contemporaries.

Although Augustine is not overtly interested in describing the historical Job, these passages

'on love' actually reveal a great deal about how he must have considered him. But there is no

simple way to read these passages. As in the case just above, where Augustine seemingly ignores

the 'me' of the passage, we are still able to narrow-in on its implications. In the case of 35.13,

Augustine assumes the 'me' in question is on the side of those whom the Lord would want to

save by His 'secret' means. There is nothing altogether surprising in this. He considers the 'me'

to be Job even if he is simultaneously 'everyman,' even if he ignores Job with the bulk of his

commentary. In other words, Augustine is telling us here that God wants to save Job. In terms of

Augustine's overall characterization of Job as the subject who is doing the 'loving' in these

passages, no simple picture emerges. So much depends upon the context. When the word 'pain'

appears it is a matter of fact for Augustine that it must be the consequence of a false love. As we

have seen at 19.19, Augustine tends to take Job's protestations literally; he takes his self-

recriminations literally too. Sometimes it is surprising how he interprets the sense. As in 39.30,

where 'blood' is taken pejoratively, yet in light of the fact that his gaze 'extends from afar,' the

overall sense is, nevertheless, positive: this person is capable of sincere love. How Augustine

characterizes Job's virtue as a general effect of his love is a little hard to gauge since his thinking

is not always absolutely consistent. 39.30 makes it look like Job is capable of the hope and love

that saves. On the other hand, 38.32 tells us that these things are dependent upon God: "Nexus

eorum intelliguntur, quibus et invicem sibi et Deo connectuntur ne cadant." He makes an

equivalent declaration at 23.6: "Caeterum cum ad eum venero: in ilia libertate qua ego

annumerabor solio ejus, omnia amabo, et non mihi resistet virtus ejus ..." It is important that he

assumes that Job will be so numbered among these people - is it his innocence that makes it so? -
but it is equally important for our purposes that he will only be made perfect by an extrinsic

cause. Despite these referrals to divine grace - he even refers to divine grace in the earliest

problematic texts, let us recall55 - there is a certain preoccupation in Adnotationes with that native

human power that stands in contrast with his later works. Although Adnotationes is always quick

to point out the ubiquity of sin, it is not made clear that this fact in and of itself undermines any

way in which we might speak of man's intrinsic virtue.56 Love is usually treated as a bare fact:

one either loves or does not; he hardly ever explains how one came to be in love with God or

wisdom, or, on the other hand, with self and the flesh. Augustine does not simply tell us that we

ought to love God, he even tells us that there are those who do and those who do not. It is his

assertion that there are those who are able to attain "to that manly strength by which the

persecutor is despised" that is unsettling in light of his subsequent commitments.57 However, the

overall impression that these passages give about man's capacity to love is that Augustine usually

only thinks in terms of man's dependence on God in light of his inability to remain free from sin,

but he seems to believe that man has some kind of power to love. Now, in the abstract, he denies

that man has this capacity, as in 38.32, but, practically speaking, he did not dwell on these

limitations as he was to in his later works. How it could be that one cannot keep free from sin and

yet be intrinsically capable of love is a mystery. But it looks like he was not used to considering

them in opposition.

Another way to show how Augustine must have viewed this historical figure at this time is

with an examination of Job in Confessiones.

55
SeeRetr., 1.8.4.
56
As in 24.5.
57
SeeRetr. 1.22.1.
 26

1.2. Love in the Job of Confessiones

Job plays nearly as important a role in Confessiones as the 'Prodigal Son' 58 plays, but

how this character/book serves to develop the narrative of the work overall has been largely

ignored in the commentaries.59 It does supply a powerful subtext to that work, however. It is

probably not so surprising that Job functions as an analogue, so to speak, of Augustine in

Confessiones. Yet what implications this has for Augustine's view of Job at that time are a little

surprising.

The first time Confessiones references that work is at 1.4.4: "yet wearing down the proud

though they know it not." (Jb 9:5) Shortly thereafter, the same chapter is quoted: "I do not argue

my case against you." (Jb 9:2-3)60 A few paragraphs later appears a passage which was a favorite

of Augustine's: "No one is free from sin in your sight, not even an infant whose span of earthly

life is but a single day." (Jb 14:4-5)61 Now the clustering of these references might cause one to

suspect their importance - was it at this very moment that Adnotationes was being written? The

first and the third references are general; it is the second that actually puts Augustine in Job's

position. The biographical parallel between them is confirmed by the reappearance of Job at the

very beginning of Book 3. Now it has been suggested that it is only 'probable' that 3.1.1 refers to

Job, 62 but that is an unduly cautious assessment. It was clearly Augustine's intention to refer to

Job there, in order to 'biblically justify' his interpretation of this part of his life: "It [my soul] was

See Leo Ferrari, "The Theme of the Prodigal Son in Augustine's Confessions," Recherches
Augustiniennes 12(1977), pp.105-18.
59
For instance, O'Donnell, Commentary, fails to take note of how Augustine employed the character
and book of Job to develop his autobiography, likewise, A Reader's Companion to Augustine's
Confessions, eds. Paffenroth and Kennedy Westminster (Louisville: John Knox Press, 2003), although each
of these works, especially O'Donnell's, notes how Job links every man (including Augustine, obviously) to
Adam.
60
Confessiones, 1.5.6.
61
Ibid., 1.7.11.
62
See Confessions, trans. Sr. Maria Boulding (Hyde Park, NY: New City Press, 1997), p.75,
footnote 2, where Sister Boulding states that it 'probably' refers to Job, but that Augustine had Lazarus in
mind as well; O'Donnell likewise points out that, "ulcerosus for Afugustine] regularly refers to the story of
Dives and Lazarus..." (Commentary, http://www.stoa.org/hippo/comm3.html) In neither case was anyone
'flung' out of doors, but it is Job alone who rubs himself against something.
 27

covered with sores and flung out of doors, longing to soothe its misery by rubbing against

sensible things..." 63 It is important to see Augustine's intention here for what it was. It is

important to see that he is identifying himself with Job in this chapter specifically, and, indeed, to

some extent, in the work as a whole.

Another incidental reference to Job is made at 3.4.8. However, it is at the very end of

Book 4 that once again the parallel is presented, where he writes, "They did not forsake you, but

stayed safely in the nest of your Church to grow their plumage and strengthen the wings of their

charity on the wholesome nourishment of the faith."64 The reference here is to Job 39:26, which

reads, "Now is it by in your wisdom that the hawk is plumed?" In Adnotationes Augustine writes

that "sicut in sapientia Dei, quae est Christus, novus homo paulatim innovatur, conversationem

habiturus in coelestibus." It is interesting that the reference to Job made in 3.4.8 was to wisdom,

as is the next passage made to Job at 5.5.8. The passage in Book 4 combines the theme of wisdom

with that of charity, which is always on Augustine's mind when he speak of 'flight' and of 'high

things.' Job appears again at the very beginning of Book 6 (Jb 35:11), as a creature made with an

intention in mind by his Creator,65 and again, incidentally, so it seems, at 7.7.11 and at 7.8.12, in

light of the pride that is 'presuming upon one's own strength,' (Jb 15:26) a phrase ubiquitous in

Adnotationes, and 'the dust and ashes that we are.' (Jb 42:666) After this point, the narrative

moves away from Augustine's history to a consideration of man's life in general. It is not

surprising that his references to Job follow suit. Augustine calls upon Job to illustrate how one

will continue to experience temptation throughout life,67 and that he is, thus, obliged to seek its

meaning.68

Keeping in mind the importance of structure in Confessiones, that - for one - this work is

63
Conf 3.1.1.
64
Ibid., 4.16.31.
65
Ibid,. 6.1.1.
66
Repeated at ibid., 10.5.7.
67
Ibid., 10.28.39, 10.32.48,13.14.15, 13.17.20.
68
Ibid., 8.1.2, 10.6.9, 10.16.25, 10.17.26.
 28

chiastic as a whole, and that each of the 13 books is also so framed, it would be logical to assume

that, if Job functions as an important analogue for Augustine, then something important lies in the

'when' and the 'how' of Job's appearance in the narrative. The first point of importance lies in

the timing of the parallels in Books 3, 4 and 6. The important references to Job in those books,

come out in the 'book-ends': again, in Book 3, at the beginning, in Book 4, at the end, and in

Book 6, at the beginning. The 'agenda' of the Books is, of course, always set out at their

beginning, and the summaries or 'points' made in the end. In other words, Job's inclusion at these

three places is consequential. Added to this, we find Job at the head of the major chiasm that

begins in Book 1. It is with Job's mortality, with this book's testament to the pervasiveness of sin

(and temptation, naturally) in human life, and, yet, nevertheless, its characterization of this life as

a never-ending quest for understanding, that Augustine identifies. In the 'rising action' of the

major chiasm that (although diversely calculated by the experts69) runs roughly from Book 1 to

Book 8 (birth into death, terminating in birth into a new life), we find that the basic dimensions of

human life in general, and of Augustine's life in particular, spelled out with comparisons to Job.

Does the same thing hold with his use of the Prodigal Son parable? It does. Now, 'the falling

action,' which occupies the remainder of Confessiones, finds Augustine again sketching out the

broad parameters of anthropology with references to Job. Of course, Book 1 and the most notable

quote from Book 3 highlight the intimacy of this parallel. But the 'falling action' is characterized

by a more generalized consideration of anthropology than is the case for the more

autobiographical 'rising action.' And in this case, as in the 'schemata of Christian life' that is

Book 10, we find the lessons of Job front and centre.

So what does all of this signify about Augustine's view of Job roughly at the time of his

writing Adnotationesl Well, we see in the first case that, at least to some small degree,

Confessiones only took the form it did in light of his recent meditation on Job that was

See, for instance, Frederick J. Crosson, "Book Five: The Disclosure of Hidden Providence," in A
Reader's Companion to Augustine's Confessions, pp.71-87.
Adnotationes. Even more importantly, we see that unlike the case of Adnotationes, where Job was

more often than not a type of Christ, in Confessiones, Job is not Christ but 'man.' This is quite a

different approach, of course, in that in this later work we find a heavier emphasis placed on the

pervasiveness of sin and temptation than we do in Adnotationes, and, thus, Job becomes much

more a representative of the sinner and of the viator. This is in keeping with what we will find in

so many of Augustine's mature references to Job, that he is most of all a recipient of divine love.

Confessiones helps us to see that there is an essential problem with asking whether Job's

moral calabre is calculated by Augustine in terms of the love of which he is capable. We see that

at this time Augustine was increasingly considering love, not as a capacity issuing from the

individual toward God, but as a consequence of God's gift. The opposite of being mired in the

love of carnal things, which is a major theme in Adnotationes, certainly, is not ultimately a matter

of turning that love toward God instead, which view he tended to favour in his earliest works.

Ultimate opposition lies precisely in what Augustine will more and more frequently spell out

alongside of such passages that condemn false love, and that is that love is a gift, a divine

illumination. This fact was more heavily emphasized in Confessiones than it was in Adnotationes,

but we have seen that it is not absent from the latter. Thus, while Job can illuminate the negative

aspects of human life in Confessiones (which to recognize is itself positive, Augustine tells us),

which we see in the 'rising action' of Books 1-8, in the 'falling action' he can only illustrate that

even after rebirth life is still a series of trials, and not simply a matter of dwelling in the graces

that are themselves the hallmark of this new life. Why is that? It is reasonable to suppose that

Augustine did not automatically consider that Job illustrated the 'new' life. If this is the case, then

this will have important consequences for our argument in Chapter 4.

In Confessiones is Job a model of fallen man? Can this be maintained in light of what we

have said about Augustine not being interested in the actual history of Job, at least in

Adnotationes? It is possible. It is possible to maintain that Augustine simply assumed him to be a

model of the pre-Christian man without thinking all that much about the actual details of his
history. Yet should Augustine not have postulated a diametric opposition between the situation of

the unbaptized, non-Christian and the Christian who has simply to endure the ongoing struggles

of life, i.e., that bit of life illustrated by Books 10-13, but of Book 10 especially? If Augustine

tends to think of Job as an illustration of pre-Christian man why does he continue to make an

appearance in the last three books, even if it is to a diminished degree? I don't think he thought

exactly in terms of pre-Christian versus Christian. It would be better to speak in terms of states of

perfection. In this work Job serves to illustrate to Augustine the truth of man's incompleteness in

this life. Job's lack of happiness prompted Augustine to associate Job with the 'struggle side' of

life, more than his great integrity prompted him to think of Job as exemplary of the good life.

Here we see how it is possible for a pre-Christian figure to personifiy the plight that is Christian

life. Job had to be relevant to the current Christian context, of course. And if it was impossible (or

at least extremely problematic) to account for the forensic side of things by reference to the Old

Testament saints - and Augustine did not attempt to for Job, neither in Confessiones nor in

Adnotationes, as he had been forced to several times with respect to Abraham, for instance - Job

could quite aptly act as proof for some basic facts, such as that life was full of sin and suffering,

and nevertheless, full of meaning and the possibility of receiving God's love.

In Confessiones Augustine does not say a single thing about Job directly, yet what he

states in an indirect manner helps to clarify the omissions of Adnotationes itself. The latter work

does not make any generalizations about Job, but because Confessiones confines itself to such

generalizations it is valuable to us as a supplement.

2. The Content of Adnotationes by Subject

In General

In what follows in this chapter we shall examine the content of Adnotationes according to

some of its prominent themes. This will provide the background that will enable us to properly
 31

draw out the implications of his 'teaching on grace.' We employ this conditional sense in

speaking about this work 'teaching on grace' simply because it is by no means certain, a) that he

was teaching with this text, or b) that he was concentrating on grace, as he was in the case of the

concurrent Confessiones, or, especially, as he would be later in his conflict with the Pelagians.

Although (a) is the less significant of these two considerations for the purposes of this thesis, it is,

in fact, irresolvable. On the other hand, (b) will be determined by our investigation, and it is of

pivotal significance. It will be determined in light of our thorough consideration of Adnotationes'

content and 'form.' In the case of Confessiones, for example, we know that it was intended as an

exhortation to reliance upon grace. In other words, its occasioning of the Pelagian controversy

was not simply accidental to it, although, of course, Augustine never set out to create a

controversy with this work.70 Confessiones can be examined as a work 'on grace', that is, that it

can be considered as a source by which we may evaluate his formal teaching on this subject. Can

Adnotationes? Or is it even possible to speak of the 'form' of an incomplete work, a work we

have already referred to as of haphazard construction? We would answer with a resounding 'yes,'

to this question since 'form' is given by intention alone, and need not have anything to do with

genre. Again, the investigation of Adnotationes' contents will bring this matter closer to light. But

to the other question, whether Adnotationes can itself be considered a work 'on grace,' we would

answer 'no'. It does not attempt to hammer home a single point on any subject. This is not to say

that it does not 'have' a doctrine of grace, but only to deny that Augustine intended to teach about

grace with it.

Although some of the topics treated below are less directly relevant to the discussion of

Adnotationes' teaching on grace than others, it is, nevertheless, necessary to consider them so that

70
It is important to ask, nevertheless, whether Augustine has a particular object in mind with
Confessiones' position on grace, such as the refutation of attitudes he perceived in the Church. After all, in
its tone and in its comprehensiveness Ad Simplicianum is so much like the anti-Pelagian works as to
naturally give rise to the question, 'What for?' It would be a mistake to view either Ad Simplicianum or
Confessiones as totally outside of the category of 'occasional,' that is, as if it were not responding to
something Augustine would have considered a problem in the Church. Now, if this is the case, this would
have significant implications for Adnotationes.
 32

a proper understanding of Augustine's intentions for the work be gained. It is not a work 'on

grace'; it is a work 'on Job.' Only by understanding it according to its actual content will we be

able to gain a correct understanding of what is of ultimate interest to us. It is a work about history,

providence, morality, the Church, and Christ. All of these things are components of a doctrine of

grace. To Augustine Adnotationes was a study of Job, to turn to its teaching on grace we must

first discover what he thought about Job. Only then will we be in a position to grasp what it was

Augustine thought Job illuminated of the mystery of grace.

2.1. Correction, Conversion, Denial

One of the most important themes of this work is conversion - it is also relevant to this

thesis. More often than not, Job's trials refer to nothing other than the wise use God makes of

ostensible injustices for the betterment of the soul enduring them. The counterpart of this is,

naturally, the soul that fails to heed the warning. Augustine considers both at length. Job is more

than anything else a handbook on how God deals with men.71 It must have constituted the only

significant rebuttal for the tried-and-true ancient truism that God rewards the good man and

punishes the bad in this lifetime. It was a problem tackled by many of the prominent figures of

Antiquity. The tragic victory of Christ had yet to create a culture that could take Job's

observations for granted. Yet even in Augustine's time, it was so often taken for granted that truth

lay on the side of might.72 It was the age of Eusebius, a time when theological truth was so often

considered to be revealed by political success. But, of course, Augustine was never convinced

that a material calculus could elucidate God's purposes. His doctrine of the sacraments

71
Adnotationes 1 is the most moving example of Augustine's consideration of these matters.
72
Matt. 19:8 always functioned as the hermeneutical key toward his coordination of Judaism and
Christianity, which he quoted dozens of times in the context of marriage, but also as a matrix by which the
'supercession' can be comprehended, as in Contra Adimantum 3.2. See as well De consensu
Evangelistarum, De sermone domini in monte libros duos, 1.1.2, and UC, 7.19.
 33

consistently steered clear of the 'material' criteria, so too did his underlying doctrine of election

to grace, and his sense of the church-inside-the-church.

Conversion is not only about directionality - that it is about a 'forward' movement. It

also has something to say about power of movement - that it is more or less voluntary or

gracious. Thus, we also need to account for the power of change - does it comes from God, from

the person, or somehow from both together? These concerns were at the heart of the grace

controversy. It is important to examine Augustine's treatment of these themes in this work. How

did he conceptualize moral agency? Confessiones is of course famous for its novel approach to it

- novel insofar as Pelagius was concerned. How much of this spilled over into the work that he

was composing as he was writing Confessiones! Word usage alone cannot indicate what it is

Augustine intends in any given case. The words he drew upon, correptio, emmendatio, correctio,

corrigere,73 and, of course, conversio/convertere, are always susceptible to the ambiguity.

In Adnotationes, correptio appears three times.74 Emendatio does not. Correctio appears

seven times;75 corrigere ten times.76 One might expect conversio to figure more prominently than

these other terms, and, indeed, it appears some 22 times. It is a rich word, and Augustine employs

it to bring out a range of ideas - sometimes at the prompting of the biblical text itself.77 It is not

just the staid ecclesial-juridical term that appears,78 but he speaks of "postea correcti et

cognoscentes ad justos convertentur,79 of our hearts turning toward Him,80 and of "turning from

dark things."81 Sometimes it conveys the sense of a return.82 It can even mean 'turning to one's

friends.'83 He also speaks of the despair that is the inability to escape judgment.84

73
See Augustine Encylcopedia, "Correction" for a thorough account of their variable meaning.
74
3.24/25, 34.32, and 37.21.
75
9.17., 11.6., 19.13. (2Xs), 27.16., 38.40., and 39.24.
76
5.17., 7.16., 10.21. (2Xs), 26.2., 30.2., 30.24., 30.28., 35.15., and 37.16.
77
See 10.19., and 23.8.
78
Though it does at times, as in 17.15. and 28.1.
79
27.16.
80
28.20.
81
15.22.
82
See 10.21.
83
As in 20.2.
 There are other words employed to convey the sort of relationship with the divine in

which we are interested. Coerceo85 is one such word, which possesses a range of meaning,

including, to curb, restrain, limit, preserve, and to punish. It is unclear which Augustine has in

mind when he employs it in 26.2, for instance, but it is likely that he had either 'to punish' or 'to

restrain' in mind - and it is no small matter to decide which it should be!86 Why it is important

may not be immediately evident. It was commonplace for Augustine (and some others as well) to

insist upon the fact that God does not punish out of wrath or pride, but only for sake of

correction.87 Nevertheless, he did not want this to suggest that His correction was not also

potentially tragic. Strictly speaking, 'justice' was the opposite of salvation. 88 But in

Adnotationes, especially, punishment appears as both the dreadful unmaking of the wicked and as

the sweet salve of the just. Things were not always as they appeared to be, though. We can see

him working out some of the implications of a higher rationality in Adnotationes. That he falls

short of making many definite conclusions is a sign of his regard for the great mystery at hand,

and of the harm of drawing false conclusions. Yet it is certain that arriving at some conclusions

about this was one of the primary goals of the exercise itself. And this holds true whether he was

thinking about these things with Manichaeism specifically in mind, or was simply furthering his

personal 'revolt' against Hellenism, which he had formally initiated in 396 with Ad

Simplicianum.

When we examine his use of 'punishment' (punire), we see that it is used with both the

remedial and condemnatory senses in mind. However, his discussions of these things is much too

84
Non itaque homo de venia desperando, addat peccata peccatis, tanquam addictus jam damnationi,
quia certus est de justitia Dei, sub qua non potest esse impunitus.
5
The form coercendos appears once (26.2), coercere once as well (30.14).
86
putaret eos a Deo puniendos... ne aut adesse Deo videatur, aut adjuvare eum velle, quasi
invalidum, ad coercendos vel corrigendos homines. How is coercendos to be understood in relation to
puniendos - as a theological modification of it, which is pretty standard for Augustine, and so mean
'restrain', or simply in elaboration of a synonym, and so 'punish'?
87
For instance, 38.2.: Nemo est ergo qui se immeritum pati aliquid asperum dicat... et quoniam
Deum non latent, nemo flagellatus dicat indigne se accipere disciplinam, quasi ultra non sit, quo per illam
proficiat.
88
See Correptione et Gratia, 3.5-6.9, for instance.
rudimentary to speak of it as a work 'on grace.' But we see that the assertions he does make are

consistent with his mature position, vis a vis Pelagianism.

2.2. Ecclesiology

It might be rightly assumed that a certain soteriology depends upon a certain

ecclesiology. It would be unusual to think that the developments in Augustine's understanding of

the Church, and particularly of its means of salvation, had little to do with the developments in

his theology of grace. If Adnotationes reflects a mature ecclesiology, does it thereby reflect a

mature doctrine of grace?

Adnotationes is in most matters reflective of Augustine's mid life. This is evident in his

account of the Church. The work, as it predates the crucial phase of his involvement in the

Donatist controversy, never makes overt reference to those points that would later prove pivotal.

This is not to say that they were not 'present' by force of logical implication. And so we might

claim they were 'present' in his retrospective conviction that he based everything he ever said

against the Donatists on Cyprian's and Ambrose's teachings, and on the practice of the

mainstream Church. So we do not find articulated the distinction between the Church institutional

and the Church predestined.

The term ecclesia and its cognates appear about 63 times in Adnotationes. Again,

following our accustomed mode of comparison, this constitutes a word-to-character ratio of

2303.6 compared to an average in the other early works of 3937.6. The difference that this

represents, i.e. that Adnotationes mentions the Church nearly twice as often as the 'contemporary'

works should be considered fairly significant in this case. But if we compare Adnotationes and

Confessiones we see that it is not just a matter of Augustine becoming more and more

ecclesiastically-minded with time. Confessiones is a record of interior development, and yet it

does make important references to the Church.89 But it is a record of interior change, and not

integration into an institution. Adnotationes makes more room for the Church. Does something in

the text of Job explain this? Adnotationes mentions 'church' once in every 2303.6 characters,

Confessiones, on the other hand, once every 11,177.6! Confessiones refers to the Church only 42

times, and is about three times longer than Adnotationes. Of course, these are different types of

literature.90 In the 'note' type of work we should expect substantive nouns to appear with a

frequency greater than in a poetic narrative like Confessiones, where adjectival and adverbial

structures are more prominent. As a point of reference, in Confessiones are the following words

with their frequencies of appearance: Aenea-, 5 Xs; graec-, 18 Xs, minist-, 20 Xs; manus, 19 Xs;

aqua-, 92 Xs; Carthag-, 20 Xs; roma, 27 Xs. But what can be determined from such a

comparison? By the fact that Augustine refers to the Church so much more frequently in

Adnotationes than in Confessiones, we can say that the former is an ecclesiological meditation to

a degree that the latter is not. Yet this is not to say that there is present anything like a 'theology

of the Church.' What this might imply for its doctrine of grace we will discuss below.

2.3. Christology

The person of Christ was a key element of Augustine's mature doctrine of grace. It is

evident from his last works that the dignity that Christ enjoyed was His and His alone. He was

adamant that the virtue enjoyed by mere human beings was nothing like that enjoyed by God's

Son. At the very beginning of this thesis we had raised the point that Augustine's view of the

saint was to change over time. What does Adnotationes' treatment of the Person of Christ reveal

of his mind at that point?

Verbum appears there sixteen times. Nine of these take the proper noun, of which three

89
For the relevance of Donatism during this period see Thomas F. Martin, "Book Twelve: Exegesis
and Confessio," A Reader's Companion to Augustine's Confessions, pp. 191-197.
90
See O'Donnell, Commentary, 9.7.15, for 'a colore spiritus tui'.
 37

are from a single quote of John 1:1.91 Another is elliptically referential to Deus erat Verbum,92

while two other times the generic formula, 'the Word made flesh,' appears.93 Of the other seven

common nouns, two are from the text of Job itself. The first: "cum verbum Domini inspiceret

domum meam."94 Upon this he comments simply, 'ad diligentiam custodiendi conversationem,'

without reference to Christ. Of the second: "et vir sapiens audiet verbum meum," Augustine

writes: 'Deum omnia curare', 95 bridging in a way we would expect, the undeclared 'word' as in

the previous reference from 29.4., with John's Verbum erat Deum. Indeed, so typical is this move

that the omission in 29.4. is a point of curiosity. A key reference to verbum occurs in 39.28., "ut

impii qui pro mortuis habentur, justificati per verbum, hoc est, quasi ore devorati convertantur in

corpus Ecclesiae." Just what he means by 'justificati per verbum' is pivotal for gauging not only

the sense of this passage, but for determining where this work sits in the evolution of his thought

on Christology and soteriology. The conflation of verbum and Verbum developed in Augustine. If

we were to read the passage according to the 'philosopher's sense' we would discover that it is a

mildly Christianized wisdom that works salvation - and is what we would expect to find in the

Cassiciacum dialogues.96 To determine the meaning of 39.28, we need to set it against the

remainder of the Christological evidence of Adnotationes. The logic of the phrase seems to hang

on the link between 'word', 'mouth' and what the mouth devours. In other words, the reference is

to word as articulation, and, thus, it is hard to relate this to a 'higher' Christology of the word as

personal force. This is a problem of some significance, that is, in light of the exception Augustine

would take to such turns of phrase in Retractationes, of the word of knowledge as itself sufficient

yi
Ibid., 26.14.
92
38.33.
93
28.10. and 38.38.
94
29.4.
95
34.34.
96
Confessiones, 9.3.6.: "While not yet a Christian he [Nebridius], like us, had fallen into a pit of
very dangerous error, believing that the flesh of your Son, who is the Truth, was mere make-believe; but he
was beginning to emerge from this error, and was in the position of one who, though not yet initiated into
any of the rites of your Church, was a most ardent seeker of the truth."
 38

for happiness. What did he think of this in 399?97

'Christ' is used 32 times, 'Jesus' just twice.98 The significance of this preference has

sometimes occasioned comment.99 From these many references we can see that Augustine is

conscious that Job is 'about' Christ. In all of its important points it is Christological to him, and

we see this: moral lessons, such as humility in the face of unjust treatment are always referred to

His example;100 Christ is the eschatological end of all travail;101 history is under His direction;102

He is the motive force of good men;103 and, of course, the very wisdom that governs Job's

conversations with his persecutors.104

As for the question we raised above, that is, concerning the ambiguous phrase, justificati

per verbum, in 39.28., judged in the light of the 25 passages given above where 'Christ' appears,

what can we conclude? Is the text 'logocentric,' rather than 'christocentric,' with all the moral

optimism that a decision for the former seems to imply? Based upon numbers alone, the answer is

no. And this seems to be verified by an examination of what'verbum' (in the context of verbum

Dei, not verbum Job, or verbum Eliphas, etc.) does in its other appearances, and what'Christus'

does. In one use, verbum gives joy.105 In another place it is stated: "Verbo enim alit, etfacit

91
Eg., Retr. 1.1.2, 1.1.4.
98
O'Donnell, Commentary, 9.1.1., for 'Christe Iesu': ""Here only in the Confessions is Christ
directly addressed. Three times prayer is addressed to God through Christ': 11.2.4,11.22.28; distinguished
from the many places where God is addressed with epithets that make clear the appeal to the second person
of the trinity..." Also, ibid., 9.4.7., for quod... litteris nostris.
99
See, for instance, Basil Studer, The Grace of Christ and the Grace of God in Augustine of Hippo:
Christocentrism or Theocentrism? trans., Matthew J. O'Connell (Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press,
1997). Studer's study is valuable for setting the context for the present 'quantitative' type of investigation
we are conducting here, who employs a similar methodology in that work. An excellent summary of recent
interpretations of Augustine's Christology: Joanne McWilliam, "The Study of Augustine's Christology in
the Twentieth Century," in Joanne McWilliam, ed., Augustine: From Rhetor to Theologian (Waterloo:
Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1992), pp. 183-205; see also her "Augustine at Ephesus?" in One Lord,
One Faith, One Baptism (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 2006), pp. 56-67. See also, Brian E. Daley,
"A Humble Mediator: The Distinctive Elements in St Augustine's Christology," in Word and Spirit
(Petersham, Mass: St Bede's Pubs., 1987), pp. 100-117.
100
30.10, 36.13.
101
16.23., 30.13., 36.8.
102
37.12., 38.4., 39.9.
103
38.5.
104
38.21.
105 3.14.
 39

flrmum ad tentationes."106 And similarly in 39.2.: "'Solvuntur autem isti dolores cumfueritpartus

editus, id est, Veritas persuasa eis pro quibus ita ingemiscitur, id agente in interioribus

conscientiae verbo Dei."107 Augustine is ever conscious of the importance of the 'word's'

proximity, as for instance at 29.3: "Cwm lucebat lucerna ejus super caput meum: vel carnem

Domini visibiliter praesentem, vel verbum ex ore praesentis corporaliter." This passage presents

both alternatives: the word is both the presence of Christ and the knowledge of wisdom that is

from Him. It is a matter of how closely does this word of wisdom depend upon Christ: by means

of mere analogy of personification, or something more. No solution appears in the next passage

(29.4.), but rather more ambiguity: "Cum verbum Domini inspiceret domum meam: ad

diligentiam custodiendi conversationem."108 And yet again in the following verse does appear the

phrase, "Aut est sapor in sermonibus vanis?: Vanos sermones hominum dicit; quia panis verba

Dei sunt, sed panis coelestis." At 6.10. we find this: 'Won parcam. Non enim mentitus sum: verba

sunt sancta Dei mei: Quia non alia dixit quam audivit a Deo. Id est de homine generaliter

prophetantis, quia auxilio indiget in confessione." In this case, although the 'holy words of God'

are given their rightful place, they are not, in fact, designated as the power by which one is helped

to confess. In other words, it is not the words that give strength to forebear and not lie - that is to

say, the mere fact that they are holy. It is God who gives it. It appears from the text of Job as if

the words give forbearance, but Augustine, by the fact that he does not mention 'words' at all, but

'prophesying,' significantly locates the power in God, not by name, but by the fact of the absence

of any other specified source of help. As much is said in 6.12.: "Numquid virtus lapidum virtus

106
5.20. Consider also, 38.19.
107
The question is, what is the ablative verbo meant to denote here?
108
And, to the contrary, what is the power that has destroyed our relationship with God, word or
something other, consider 38.21.: cum easdem semitas inierunt primi omnium hominum parentes, qui
praevaricatione impii manibus et verbis accersierunt mortem, ut omnes in Adam morerentur? And further,
the simple, seemingly innocuous phrase, "Cum enim, verbi gratia, natus est Abraham, tunc omnes in illo
Hebraei nati sunt." And the negative power of words again, "Ventis vero tentatur, quem perflant inanes
suasiones hominum superborum, id est, ex propria auctoritate verba vana jactantium." (38.25.) Against
this, and in the same place, Augustine contrasts the power of the Divine word: "Qui ergo judicio Dei
praeparatur ad perditionem, non obtemperando verbis ejus, quod est super arenam aedificare, non resistit
ventis talibus, et cadendofit via vocibus tempestatis." (38.25.)
 40

mea?: Duros et impenetrabiles jaculis verborum Dei, qui non moventur ad confitendum."

Augustine does not say that Christ fails to move, but the words of God. To "possess" a word,

according to the logo-centric view, is to enjoy its power per se, but that, as we see, is not the case

here. This anti-logo-centrist interpretation is also confirmed by 19.20: "Et ossa mea in dentibus

meis sunt: Firmitas et fortitudo mea in verbis est, non in factis." Once again this implies that

there is a difference between "having the word" and having the power to act, which is the good

per se, Augustine indicates. The word as knowledge is limited, the Word as Christ is not.

That Augustine had by 399 transformed his thinking from the optimistic days following

his discovery of Hortensius is being suggested. As much appears from the general course of his

writings, but the particularities with respect to his doctrine of moral knowledge can be charted to

some extent in his doctrine of the 'word.' But 399 need not be conceived as the end-point of a

progression from one logical extreme to the other.109 Augustine was initially impressed by

philosophy inasmuch as it propounded that there was power in words. He never lost that belief. It

would follow him to the very end of his life. To determine what exactly he had in mind in 399, a

valuable passage is 24.18., which I present in full:

'Levis est super faciem aquae: ad comparationem terrae, splendidiores accipiendi

sunt, quos lux penetrat et imago levitatis; et ideo levis est super eos umbra mortis.
Nam et ipsi portant earn per conditionem carnis. Vel, Levis est super faciem aquae
dixit, super eos qui in Baptismo confitentur. Maledicatur pars eorum super terram.
Sterile sit quod delegerunt. De sinu enim pupillorum rapuerunt: de corde infirmorum
verbum, per malam suasionem.

The relevance here consists is the juxtaposition of 'word,' 'bodily condition,' 'confession] of

baptism,' and the choice that is 'sterile'. We will note that in this case there is no sense in which it

is the 'word' that is the operative force for good, but rather the 'confession' and the 'water' of

baptism, and perhaps most of all, the light that penetrates. We note that it is not the confession

109
"[I]t is not eccentric to see in the Confessions the beginning of a Christological synthesis. By this I
mean that insofar as he contrasts here the Word of God which, according to him, the Platonists had
discovered, with the incarnate Word of John as understood in the ecclesial tradition, he already gives the
main lines of his antithetical Christology." Studer, Grace of Christ, p.38.
 41

itself that is paramount, but the water. This statement comes along at a notable moment. Indeed,

the Donatist affair was just beginning to reflect itself in Augustine's writings.110 Of course, one of

the most notable elements of his response to that heresy was his doctrine of the sacraments. At

38.7 we read, "Quando facta sunt sidera simul: simul baptizata tot millia verbo vitae, inter

peccatores tanquam in tenebris fulgentia." Here in the inevitably passive voice (for one does not

baptize oneself) priority is given to the power of the sacrament over that of the word. And,

furthermore, in this quote, as well as in 24.18 cited above, lies an important implication for us in

the substitution of the analogy of light for that of wisdom. The phenomenology suggested by this

switch is precisely that from the 'synergy' sense of Christian philosophy to the monergism of

Augustinian sacramentality in its most mature form. 'Word' (in 38.7.) appears helpless in the face

of what is borne in the bodily condition; only light and water can act as the requisite salve. A

word can do something, but it cannot alleviate the body's plight. A 'confession of baptism' is

what is required, of course, but it is not the voluntary word - a thing that cannot ultimately be

distinguished from that which we see also 'persuades to wickedness' - that effects the end that is

desired.

Nevertheless, the preaching of the Word is important in this text, but it pertains by

definition to another phenomenon, and not that self-perfecting of Hellenistic philosophy.

Preaching is not its equivalent - for one does not, nay, cannot, preach to oneself! This is a

spiritual work done in and for others. This 'ecclesiological work' rehabilitates neither the

vocabulary nor the effects of pagan philosophy in the life of men. The 'giving to others' that is

the pastoral work of the Church in the sacraments does not match up with anything in philosophy.

28.10 also draws upon this conception of the work of the Church, which we give in full:

Et ripas fluminum disrupit: ut totum irrigaret. Flumina enim dicit praedicatores

verbi. Voluerunt quippe ripis suis contineri, ut tantum circumcisioni praedicarent.
Omne vero pretiosum vidit oculus meus: humanus, per Verbum carnem factum.

For 'Christ' in the Donatist and the Pelagian controversies, see Studer, op. cit., pp.34-7.
 42

It is 'He' who has 'opened a route,' not the 'preachers of the Word' - they are but the medium,

the river. Nor is it the word itself that is important (and how this conceptual shift affects his

Christology is not obvious, but nevertheless definitely worth consideration) but what in the heart

happens to govern it, as in 30.6.: "Et plerisque locis pro manifestis peccatis clamorem ponit

Scriptura: ut verbum sit quidquid corde concipitur; clamor, cum procedit in factum."111

Preaching is not the Christianization of Greek philosophy otherwise left intact. 'Preaching' here is

a phenomenon based upon a novel sense of the grace of God.

Augustine's position may be understood partly in terms of certain notable lacunae.

Unlike what would likely be characteristic of this work had it been composed fifteen years earlier,

here Augustine displays very little concern with Job's 'logo-therapeutic' attachment to wisdom.

Consider, for instance, 35.16: "Et Job vane aperuit os suum; in ignorantia sua verba multiplicat."

Augustine offers no comment upon this, although for some unknown reason the text is still

included in Adnotationes.112 He refers again to the externalisation of the word in 36.24:

"Memento quia magna sunt opera ejus, quae laudaverunt viri: Evangelistae atque omnes

praedicatores verbi, ministerio suo vita congruentes." It is notable that he does not link the Word

with their lives' holiness. The external word is never conceived of in terms of its power working

in the one who employs it for others. The external, preached word has a power for others; what

power it might have for the preacher is not disclosed. 37.12 depicts preachers as those by whom

God directs and commands the churches.113 And 38.7 simply celebrates their service.114 In both

This thought is echoed in 33.3.: Mundum est cor meum in verbis: non duplex. And in 38.2.: Quis
est qui celat me consilium, continens sermones in corde, et me putat dare? Nemo est ergo qui se
immeritum pati aliquid asperum dicat; quia si non factis, saltern verbis peccatur; et si non verbis, saltern
temeraria praesumptione intus in corde, vel sermonibus cogitationum...
112
And the two passages that follow Sustine me pusillum, ut te doceam: adhuc enim in me sunt
sermones: 36.2.: suscipiens scientiam meam de longe. Quoniam quamdiu sumus in hoc corpore,
peregrinamur a Domino. Add to these the innumerable references ignored to the pain caused by evil words,
and the good caused by kind words and words of wisdom. The Septuagint includes about 22 uses of the
word 'wisdom' and 13 of 'wise', while in Adnotationes they appear 43 and 15 times consecutively.
However, since Adnotationes is the longer document, it nevertheless yields a lower word/character ratio of
1 to 3456.4 compared to Septuagint Job's 1 to 2471.9.
113
In gubernaculis ad operandum omnia quae mandaverit eis. Gubernacula in quibus ilia nubes per
circuitum vertitur, praedicatores sunt verbi, per quos Ecclesiae gubernantur ad operanda omnia mandata
cases, there is no conceptualization of the word's power, residing in the act of sharing itself. So

here we clearly have Augustine on the other side of that shift depicted in Retractationes in regard

to the power of the word in the philosophic sense. After all, the 'philosophic' sense was

punctuated in Augustine's earliest works as a preoccupation with himself, or with the wise man or

philosopher in splendid isolation. Still, we see him not yet willing to part with the central role he

has grown accustomed to affording 'the preachers of the Word." In time he would concentrate on

other things as dynamic embodiments of the grace working in history.

2.4. Persecution

If we were to consider Job as an historical narrative, why someone like Augustine would

comment so frequently upon the persecution of the Church, by the Jews, by the kings of the

world, etc. would be surprising indeed. It is clear to see that Augustine is doing nothing other

here than satisfying himself that he can find a meaning for each passage, so as to provide

something of substance for his disciples and flock. His history with Genesis indicates this same

pattern of moving from the easy 'possible' meaning to the difficult 'certain' meaning, which has

something to do with moving toward the literal.

The references to ecclesiastical persecution that appear in Adnotationes are tributary of

the past (especially violent in Africa, we would recall), but also anticipatory of some near future.

Because of his conviction that there is no fundamental difference between exterior and interior

persecution, his emphasis on the latter seems to create an expectations of the former. Let us note

his comment in 29.2:

Quisnam me restituet in menses priorum die rum? Haec ex persona dici videntur
Ecclesiae simul cum capite Christo, tanquam totus ipse homo loquatur tempore

Dei.
114
Laudaverunt me voce magna omnes Angeli mei: Evangelistae.
 44

abundantiae tribulationum et tentationum, tanquam his diebus, de quibus Dominus

dicit: Venient dies quando optabitis videre unum de diebus istis, et non videbitis. Eo
enim tempore quo Dominus erat in terra, nulla erat sollicitudo, quamvis adhuc
populo parvo christiano, qui constabat ex his qui in eum crediderant, ex quibus
erant plus quam quingenti fratres, quibus etiam post resurrectionem apparere
dignatus est, sicut Apostolus dicit. Nulla ergo tunc erat sollicitudo, ne aut a malis
male gubernaretur Ecclesia, aut haeresum vel schismatum laniaretur insidiis. Nam
nec ipsas corporales persecutiones passa est; non aliquas pertulit vel intrinsecus vel
extrinsecus adversitates...

He distinguishes here between the extrinsicus and the intrinsicus, but does not separate them. And

if they are inseparable, then the future - which will obviously hold interior trials - will not

distinguish itself from Christian origins in that other regard. One gets the sense that it is not

simply the weight of the New Testament evidence that is preponderating. What is? Job occasions

this expression of Augustine's sense of this historical moment in which he finds himself. It is not,

moreover, the end-point of the Church's persecution, but a hiatus. It is foreign to his way of

thinking to imagine that persecution can end, not simply because the New Testament does not

anticipate this eventuality, but because his principles render any entente with the 'world'

impossible. The triumph of the Church, in other words, is not absolute, and if politically his form

of Christianity comes to holds greater authority in Rome than the pagan religions or Judaism,

Augustine was under no illusion - not even in later life115 - that this would be the same thing, as

the ushering-in of the Kingdom. In a way Job encourages belief in the ultimate triumph of the

good in the world. Yet Augustine was certain that persecution was to be in some way or other an

enduring reality. In this way his neglect of Job's epilogue makes sense. But it is unwarranted to

go so far as to say that for this reason he found the epilogue uninteresting. We do note that, as we

will see in chapter 4, Augustine never actually quotes the extended LXX epilogue anywhere in his

See Peter Brown, "Political Society," in Augustine: A Colleciton of Critical Essays, ed., R. A.
Markus (New York: Doubleday and Co., Inc., 1972), pp.311-35. The reference is to Augustine's final view,
but the evidence of Adnotationes, though preceding so many important events, is not thematically
inconsistent with his final view. Compare this with with F. E. Cranz, Cranz, F. E., "De Civitate Dei, XV, 2
and Augustine's Ideas of the Christian Society," Augustine: A Colleciton of Critical Essays, ed., R. A.
Markus (New York: Doubleday and Co., Inc., 1972), pp.404-21, and "The Development of Augustine's
ideas on Society Before the Donatist Controversy," Augustine: A Colleciton of Critical Essays, ed., R. A.
Markus (New York: Doubleday and Co., Inc., 1972), pp. 336-403.
 45
\

corpus. Job represented to him the plight of man, not because of some psychological defect in

Augustine, not only because of the New Testament prophecies, but because of the general

incommensurability of God and the world in his mind. Thus, when we find him commenting

upon the persecution of the Church to a degree that appears to be disproportionate with his own

time it is to be understood that this is but an extension of that basic incommensurability.

The plight of the individual and that of the supra-personal Church are interchangeable.

Augustine, we suspect, would be hard pressed to explain why a given passage refers to one rather

than the other. Keeping in mind that for Augustine the essential elements of persecution is

nothing other than unjust suffering, the links between Job and the Church, Job and the individual

Christian are broad. This is why the lexicon by which Augustine designates persecution in

Adnotationes is especially rich. Included among these are, of course, the forms of 'persecution'

and 'persecutor,'116 etc., cognates of 'afflict', 117 and various 'contact' terms, such as insistere,118,

penetraret,119 percussit,120 and flagellatus.121 Persuadere is employed as well. It is an ambivalent

term, as one can be 'drawn' both to good and evil, but is several times employed to describe what

we are after.122 The general term 'tribulation' appears frequently.123 Even terms not necessarily

related to persecution do in this context convey that basic sense, such as doluerunt124 and phrases

116
4.11. persequitur (2x); 9.24. persecutori (2x), persequuntur; 12.5. persecutoribus; 12.24.
persequebantur; 17.8. persecutionibus; 17.9. persecutione; 19.22. persequimini; 20.13. persequetur, 24.4.
persecution 24.5. persecutori, persecutionem, persecutor, 24.6. persecutionum, persecutionibus', 26.12.
persecutionem, persecutions', 27.5. persequamini', 28.11. persecutiones, persecutions; 29.2. persecutions;
30.12. persequendo; 31.29. persecutors', 36.16. persecutoribus', 37.16. persequentes; 38.8.
persecutionibus, persecutiones', 38.9. persecutione; 38.11. persequeretur; 38.22. persequendo; 38.33.
persequeris; 38.35. persecutores; 39.18. persecutors; 39.22. persequendum; 39.23. persecutor, 39.25.
persequentibus, persequentium, persequantur, persecutionem.
117
30.11. afflixit; 30.18. affligendo; 30.27. qfflicta; 35.8. affligendos; 35.8. affliguntur, affligendos;
35.11. qfflictionibus; 35.12. afflictione; 35.13. afflictione; 38.10. affligat; 38.11. affligeret.
118
21.27.
119
4.11.
120
4.19.
121
39.32.
122
Compare 10.12. persuadeatur; 16.14. persuasiones; 19.17. persuadens; 21.19. persuasit; 21.22.
persuaserint; 24.17. persuasorem; 24.18. suasionem.
123
About 40 times in total, including, for instance: 9.17. tribulationes; 34.29. tribulationibus; 36.15.
tribulaverint; 38.1. tribulationem.
124
14.22. The term is employed about 40 times.
 46

like ab ore falsi testis.125

It is important to note that the theme of persecution is one of the most important in the

text. Although Augustine treats of many of the emotional themes featured in the Biblical book,

this is by far the most prominent one. Here we are at the heart of Augustine's Job. In his

functioning as a type of Christ, as a personification of the Church, and as the individual Christian,

Job the individual nearly disappears.126 It is Augustine's relative lack of interest in Job's

personality that characterizes this early period more than anything else. It is reasonable to

conclude that, because this increase of interest in the personality of Job was wrought by an

extrinsic cause, Augustine was in 399 not all that 'intrigued' by him in the biographical sense,

and that Adnotationes was much more about subjecting Job to exegetical and canonical rules than

it was about 'getting to know him' in a personal sense. Of course, we are not surprised when

Augustine fails to write about the devil's personality in his discussion of chapters 1 and 2. We

are, however, startled when he neglects this in Job. Unlike some other writers, Augustine never

endows a character with personality when the text does not. And he usually dismisses the ones he

finds there.127

The objects of the verb persequor, persequi, persecutus sum, and of the noun persecutor,

persecutoris, are: the individual Christian, 17 times128; the Church, 7 times129; Christ, 5 times130;

36.16. It is by words, especially false ones that the good man is so frequently made to suffer. It is
important to be discriminating as to the precise sense an 'affliction' term possesses. For instance, tristes
appears a few times in 29.25., but Augustine does not in this case make any specific reference to
persecution in that he fails to indicate its source.
126
For the Old Testament terms that prompt Augustine to think of Christ, see Studer, The Grace of
Christ, pp. 22-23.
127
Did his text of Jerome's LXX translation somehow omit the extended version of Jb 2:9? - it is
amazing after all that he never comments upon the expanded LXX version. Patrologia Latina has: Et dixit
illi uxor sua: Quousque sustinebis dicens Ecce exspecto parvo sustinens spem salutis? Ecce enim
exterminata est memoria tua a terra filii et filiae, mei ventris dolores et gemitus quos frustra portavi cum
labore Tuque in putredine vermium sedes pernoctans sub divo et ego oberrans, et deprecans de loco in
locum, et de domo in domum, exspectans quando sol occidat, et requiem agam laborum: et gemituum, qui
me nunc agunt sed die aliquod verbum in Dominum, et morere. At ille intuens dixit ad earn: Tamquam una
de stultis mulieribus locuta es. Si bona suscepimus de manu Domini, mala quare non sustineamus? In
omnibus his quae acciderunt illi nihil peccavit Job labiis suis ante Dominum.
128
4.11, 9.24, 17.8, 17.9, 24.4, 24.5, 26.12, 28.11, 30.12, 37.16, 38.8, 38.9, 38.22, 39.18, 39.22,
39.23, and 39.25.
 47

Job himself, 5 times131. The fact that Job is the principle subject only about five times, and that

two of these times it is a shared reference (i.e. 28.11. with the individual Christian and 38.11 with

the Church) indicates, at least, that Augustine did not really conceive of Job's plight in itself as a

'persecution.' This is not surprising. Yet, considering how prevalent a theme persecution is in

Adnotationes, this has implications.

It is noteworthy, as we have said, that the basis upon which Augustine was able to

distinguish between the individual and the Church in any given case as the intended subject of

persecution itself constitutes a hermeneutical mystery. Only once (38.11.) out of 7 times when the

Church is the subject, the 'individual' is indicated to be as well. Since it is the individual man Job

who is the literal subject of the majority of the persecution references (16-20), how this singular

signum could become a pluralized unity as res (such as the Church, or the righteous men of the

world, etc.) requires some explanation. Many of those passages that I have considered to be about

the 'Church,' the corresponding literal subject is often singular: in 12.5. it is 'his house', in 24.6.

'afield',in 29.2. simply 'me', in 31.29. 'my enemy', 38.11. 'that far.' Only once is the literal

correspondent plural: in 38.35., 'mighty rivers.'

Augustine's rationale might not be so arbitrary as initially assumed. For indeed, two of

the singular subjects, 'house' and 'field' might legitimately be considered 'unified pluralities.'

Augustine has a precedent for considering them so: the Gospels employ the field as a metaphor

for all of history or mankind (see Mt 9:38, 13:3-8, 19-30), and heaven as a house (Jn 14:2. There

are really only two peculiar associations in the above list: 'me' and 'my enemy.' 132

Conclusion to Chapter 2

1. The Spiritual Mode of Exegesis and the Reality of Salvation

129
12.5,12.24, 24.6, 29.2, 31.29, 38.11, and 38.35.
130
9.24, 19.22, 36.16, 38.22, and 38.33.
131
20.13, 27.5, 28.11, 38.11, and 39.25.
132
The 'that far' of 38.11. is too vague to be peculiar for the reason that the other two are.
 48

What about Augustine's exegetical approach in Adnotationes aids us in determining

Augustine's teaching on grace at that time; what complicates it?

In the subject headings we have considered in this chapter the passive mode of moral

agency has predominated. If this has not been solely a consequence of my subconscious

presumptions, this may hint to a significant dimension in Augustine's thought. We have seen how

important the themes of persecution and conversion/correction have been. Did Augustine tend to

think of the spiritual life as endurance of obstacles rather than as exertion of action? There was

certainly a precedent in various Classical authors for imagining it as primarily a matter of

endurance, not to mention the particularly strong influence that the Book of Job itself would have

had in this matter. Now, it is evident that passivity in a way lay at the heart of Augustine's mature

soteriology. And of course, it is quite natural to think of Job as one subject to forces outside of his

control. In this way this book had some affinity with his way of thinking. However, one of the

problems with this equation lies in the sort of hypothetical existence Job had for Augustine. How

can allegories exemplify the phenomenon of grace? It is clear that he does not understand the

characters in the book to embody some sort of pageant of virtues or of other abstract qualities,

along the lines of Consolation of Philosophy or of Piers the Ploughman. Nor is he simply

interested in describing 'vice,' but he is, in fact, interested in saying something more about the

'person who loves this life.' Nor is it the case that because Augustine treats of Job to such an

extent as a type of Christ he spends the majority of his time simply accounting for the historical

details of Christ's life as a way of justifying the allegory. No, he does tell us something about the

'human context' in general.

Let us attend to what type of exegesis Augustine is primarily interested in here by examining

the prologue. As we have seen in 1.4., the feasts of Job's children are considered as a 'sign of

charity.' Augustine fails to attach any definite meaning to verses 6 and 7, which contributes to the
 49

vagueness of the whole section (see 1.12. as well). It is with 1.15. that the general theme of the

commentary is given. The passage, 'Et venerunt hostes et ceperunt eos' is explained: "Secundum

illud, Qui nunc operatur in filiis diffidentiae, etiam istos excitavit. Notandum autem quomodo in

hominibus habuerit potestatem, et in elementis, sed tamen datam a Deo." Occasionally we find

glimpses of a real flesh-and-blood Job, as in 1.21: "'Nudus exii de utero matris meae.' Notandum

quam consolatorie loquatur, quamvis secundum consuetudinem luctum fecerit." But it is not in

the particular that this commentary is interested. 1.15 reveals that the story of Job is a metaphor

for the struggle between good and evil. In this sense is Adnotationes distinguishable from many

of Augustine's commentaries, which concentrate more heavily on tropology.133 But it is, as we

have said, not without parallel, and in any case, for Adnotationes, as for all the works of that

period especially, allegory assumes an important position. In the end what this implies for the

question of grace in Adnotationes is in one sense easy to see, and we have alluded to it already

(see 2.2.6): wills, like all temporalities, are subject to God. Augustine was always interested in

indicating that all things lead back to the sensible plan of God, but was loath to draw out these

details.134 That this was a characteristic of his thought can be seen in his frequent use of that

Platonic form of thought, the reditus, in these early works, which we find presented in classic

form at the end of the earlier Unfinished Literal Commentary on Genesis. When we set this

approach against his later works, which tend to avoid it, we cannot help but conclude that it

functions as an answer when he feels he can avail himself to no other.

So, if Adnotationes' interpretation of the pivotal prologue of Job amounts to nothing

more than the assertion that life is a struggle between good and evil and that God somehow reigns

sovereign over all of this, how can it be suggested that we might extract anything resembling a

133
For instance, DDQ considers each in turn over its various questions.
134
"I, however, must confess that I have not the slightest idea why mice and frogs were created, and
flies and worms; yet I can still see that they are beautiful in their own specific kind, although because of our
sins many of them seem to be against our interest. There is not a single living creature, after all, in whose
body I will not find, when I reflect upon it, that its measures and numbers and order are geared to a greater
harmony." GCM, 1.16.26. A notable exception to his avoidance of details would be DCE.
doctrine of grace from this work? If the characters are not 'real' but rather 'types', then how can

its doctrine be precise enough to argue from? The doctrine is there, it is just slow in revealing

itself. Thus, it is possible to piece together enough to enable us to speak of its 'doctrine of grace.'

In this sense is it on a par with most of the works of this period.

The contents of Job eventually force Augustine to move beyond easy solutions. Slowly

he comes to describe for us just how 'consolingly' Job was able to speak. And it was an answer

he would give more than once: inasmuch as Job was Christ, inasmuch as he was the 'righteous

persecuted', and inasmuch as he was Job. Let us examine this presently.

2. An Objective Measure: Adnotationes and the Proceedings ofPelagius

What has been determined so far on the question of grace in Adnotationes?

It is no easy matter to quantify change when we have the entire field of an author's

outlook as our subject. Indeed, even though we are only focusing on one aspect of his thought, it

is something that so many other aspects of his thought effect. A standard of reference can reveal

certain characteristics of change or of stability. A useful one is provided in the c. 417 work, On

the Proceedings of Pelagius, wherein is catalogued the matters over which the council of Eastern

bishops investigated the suspect teachings of Pelagius and Caelestius, a record put together by

Augustine himself. According to Augustine, the suspect teaching of the two was considered under

twelve separate headings, which can be summarized135 accordingly:

1. No man can be without sin unless he has acquired knowledge of the law.136

2. All men are ruled by their own will, as if God rules no man.137

3. In the day of judgment no forbearance will be shown to the ungodly and the sinners.138

135
The Proceedings ofPelagius (henceforth, PP), NPNF,
http ://www. newadvent.org/fathers/1505.htm.
136
Ibid., 1.2.
137
Ibid., 3.5.
138
Ibid., 3.9.
 51

4. Evil does not enter into the thoughts of the just.139

5. The kingdom of heaven was promised even in the Old Testament.140

6. A man is able, if he likes, to be without sin.141

7. Adam was created mortal, and would have died whether he had sinned or not sinned; that
Adam's sin injured only himself and not the human race; that the law no less than the gospel leads
us to the kingdom; that there were sinless men previous to the coming of Christ; that new-born
infants are in the same condition as Adam was before the fall; that the whole human race does
not, on the one hand, die through Adam's death or transgression, nor, on the other hand, does the
whole human race rise again through the resurrection of Christ.142

8. That the Church here is without spot or wrinkle.143

9. One may do more than is commanded in the law and the gospel.144

10. God's grace and assistance is not given for single actions, but is imparted in the freedom of
the will, or in the law and in doctrine. God's grace is given in proportion to our deserts; because,
were He to give it to sinful persons, He would seem to be unrighteous.145

11. Every individual has the ability to possess all powers and graces.146

12. Men cannot be called sons of God, unless they have become entirely free from all sin.147

Since some of these deal with similar subjects under slightly different perspectives, this list can

be simplified further into matters which concern: a) possibility of living sinless in this world, or

the efficacy of the unaided will (1, 2,4, 6, 8,10, 11, 12); b) the external grace that is the law (1,5,

9, 10); c) reward in the next life, that is to say, merit (5, 10, 12); d) the Church (8).

It now falls to us to reflect upon these subjects in light of what we have developed of

Adnotationes in this chapter, that is, according to the topics we have investigated here: what do

these topics imply about his 'doctrine of grace' in 399? Prima facie it is doubtful that this

preliminary investigation can resolve our ultimate question; however, it is logical to assume that

Ibid., 4.12.
Ibid., 5.13.
Ibid., 6.16.
Ibid., 11.23.
Ibid., 12.27.
Ibid., 13.29.
Ibid., 14.30.
Ibid., 14.31.
Ibid., 18.42.
something of Augustine's conceptual horizon shall appear. It stands to reason that even though

Augustine was not thinking about the matters considered in the Proceedings in a systematic way

in 399, he had assumptions that would in some way impact upon their future consideration. In

fact, the first time he considered questions relevant to this discussion in a formal manner was in

Ad Simplicianum, of course. It is to be wondered how systematic, how much of a reflection of the

thinking of Ad Simplicianum, in other words, was Confessiones. Confessiones was, in terms of its

doctrine of grace, a polemic waged against an invisible opponent. On the other hand, it is possible

to see in it a pacifism aimed against the self-assured epistemological positivism of the

Manichaeans.148 But we know that they were not the only people Augustine accused of this most

dangerous vice.149 It is likely that Augustine's formal awareness of grace was first of all a

reaction against the Hellenism he had imbibed in his youth. This is the direction Retractationes150

would seem to point us, as would Confessiones.151 Yet it may be a mistake to ignore another

possibility, or at least another factor within this picture. What if the examination of the Pauline

epistles of the early 390s led to his musings on grace? This would make better sense of the lack of

a visible antagonist in the pivotal sections of Ad Simplicianum. And, even more so, this would

remove the possibility that a formal meditation on the Letter to the Romans like the one

Augustine undertook in the early 390s, could have actually been without consequence for his

thinking, which seems to be the case on the surface of things. If his mid-390s study of Romans

was what, in fact, set off his thinking, what set him down a path that produced, first of all, Ad

Simplicianum, and then Confessiones, this would make better sense of the centrality Romans was

to have for him in the Pelagian controversy. Otherwise we are left with mere coincidence: that the

study of Romans almost two decades earlier had nothing directly to do with the controversy that

would find Augustine quoting it more than any other book of Scripture. Despite the fact that he

148
Conf. 3.6.10, 6.5.7, and 9.4.8.
149
See Ibid., 7.9.13.
150
Retr. 1.2.1,1.3.2,1.3.3, 1.4.3,1.7.2, etc.
151
For instance, Conf 8.2.3: "deinde, ut me exhortaretur ad humilitatem Christ, sapientibus
absconditam et revelatam parvulis, Victorinum ipsum recordatus est..."
 53

failed to complete one of these commentaries, his formal encounter with the teaching of Romans

must have constituted a crucial moment in his development.152

Whatever the precise case may be, it is clear that, of the four categories by which we

have summarized the Proceedings ofPelagius, in his earliest works Augustine was in some

respects of a mind unlike that which he would adopt once the controversy exploded in the 410s.

Let us see this in detail.

a) The Possibility of Living Sinless in this World. The Will.

Paul is numbered among the days of the year, the days upon which the light more fully

shines. Those to whom he cannot speak 'as to spiritual men' are the days of the month, upon

which the moon casts its light.153 Nevertheless, "Non enim justus tantum, sicut Job, sicut Paulus,

sicut Ecclesia; sed etiam justificans tanquam unigenitus a Patre, plenus gratia et veritate. Ad

insinuandam ergo differentiam divinae humanitatis ejus, in quo princeps hujus mundi nihil

invenit."154

The matter of living without sin was, of course, an important theme in Confessiones, as it

was in many of the early writings, although for very different reasons, which Retractationes does

well in recording. We understand that by the time he wrote Confessiones, Augustine had

abandoned his earlier belief in the possibility of living sinless in the world. Confessiones reflects

a moment of spiritual reflection long past it, when that optimism had faded into a mature hope for

re-birth.155 Now, if that work accurately reflects history in this regard, we have a reason to believe

that Augustine had realized this impossibility in 386. But this seems unlikely. It is more likely

Paula Fredriksen Landes, trans., Augustine on Romans: Propositions from the Epistle to the
Romans, Unfinished Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (Chico, California: Scholars Press, 1982),
intro. p.xii.
153
Adn. 3.6.
154
Ibid., 38.4.
155
Conf. 10.3.4., "quo itaque fructu, domine meus, cui cotidie confitetur conscientia mea, spe
misericordiae tuae securior quam innocentia sua..." Interestingly, Augustine rarely had recourse to John
3:3, and never, apparently to 3:7, both of which spoke of a second birth.
 54

that at that early date Augustine's 'awareness of grace' consisted in essence in a realization that

God's gift was specific to him, a gift that enabled him to live chastely. This interpretation is

forced by Retractationes 1.22.1 and 2.27, which together indicate that the change in question

occurred in the mid 390s.156 If the change in his outlook on the type of holiness that the saints

enjoyed did not occur until the writing of Ad Simplicianum, which seems most likely, what does

this imply for the doctrine of Confessiones on this matter? Or, even more poignantly, what does it

reveal about the historical root of the narrative? Yet, since Adnotationes was written in 399, and

Confessiones started in 397, does it matter? It matters inasmuch as the evidence is spotty as to the

precise shape of the development of Augustine's ideas even after Confessiones.

It is, of course, well known that Augustine's attitude toward the possibility of living 'the

good life' underwent fundamental changes, and that this subject was key to his entire intellectual

and spiritual development. Contrasting his earliest and his final positions on this matter is not the

more difficult task. Defining the shades of gray in the middle is quite another matter. As for the

subjects with which this chapter has been concerned, the question of sinlessness can be related at

least in a broad way with a few of them: correction-conversion-denial, ecclesiology and

christology. How do we find the question of impeccability orienting itself within these horizons?

It is interesting to note that this list can be clearly divided between subjects which characterize his

earlier interest, and those which characterize his later interest. Into the latter group would be

included correction-conversion-denial and christology. How these fit into the anti-Pelagian

corpus is evident.157 Into the former group would be included conversion. This is not to say that

any of these subjects ceased to have interest for him. Of course, though, ecclesiology did not

become a great issue in his writing until he entered the Donatist controversy. It is hard to see how

156
See my chapter 4.1.4.
157
The first begins with Confessiones, of course, the conversion work par excellence, but which
includes of course, by name, Rebuke and Grace, for one. How Christ fit into the Pelagian controversy is
seen in fascinating passages from the OICI (4.45-84), among other places. On this subject see as well the
instructive articles: Robert Dodaro, O.S.A., "Augustine's Revision of the Heroic Ideal," Augustinian
Studies 36 (2005), pp. 141-158; Mathijs Lamberigts, "Competing Christologies: Julian and Augustine on
Jesus Christ," Augustinian Studies 36 (2005), pp.159-194.
 55

this controversy is reflected in Adnotationes, but we will discuss that further below.

b. The External Grace of the Law

We have seen how Augustine occupied himself to a great extent in Adnotationes with the

concept of the 'Word.' We have also seen how he considered the distinction between 'letter and

spirit,' in his reading of the Old Testament. Clearly it contributed to the anti-law dimension in

Augustinianism.158 The Pelagians had a different view of the 'Word'. In Augustine's hands the

commandments of the written law were rendered so remote by his 'spiritual sense' 159 as to cease

to be considered by him as of any relevance at all. Pelagius, on the other hand, thought the whole

point lay in purifying the intention with which the external law was performed.160 For Augustine,

the Old Testament Law itself was a poor articulation161 of the thing it has been intended to

signify, and thus inefficacious in itself.162 For Pelagius, on the other hand, the external command

was intrinsically powerful. It has been rightly pointed out how in someone like Theodore of

Mopsuestia a certain type of exegesis went hand-in-hand with a certain type of soteriology, and,

thus, we can say that for someone like Augustine, on the contrary, his spiritual exegesis

contributed to the formation of his doctrine of grace. To Augustine the Law was equated with the

antiquated 'letter,' and the Law was about 'doing.' It was logical that as a part of his rejection of

the 'letter' for the 'spirit', Augustine would look to a different dynamic to explain Christian life,

See Adn.36.33. This is not to discountenance as naive the Pelagian reading of Paul, and more
particularly of Romans. See Pelagius's Commentary on St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans, trans., Theodore
de Bruyn (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998).
159
See Adn. 30.3-4.
160
Commentary on Romans, 3.20 (De Bruyn, p.80-81.)
161
See Polman, The Word of God, p.62: "Some things are narrated which have no significance, but
are, as it were, the framework to which the significant things are attached."
162
As in the contemporaneous Commentary on Galatians, 7, where the fault lies with the interpreter,
although it is easy enough to see that the vagueness of the teaching is at least partly to blame. The mentality
that the Old Testament naturally produces is the central problem which Augustine considers Paul to be
dealing with in this epistle. See proem.
that is, not with doing, but with receiving, receiving God's grace.

It is noteworthy that Adnotationes never employs the term 'light' in relation to the written

law, but reserved it for the interior inspiration of those whose carnal longings have been

pacified.163 Such appetites could not be subdued by the written law. The agency singled out in

this work as 'light' was more often than not the 'Word.' 164 It was this that was set against the

carnality of the wicked or of the lost.165 There is a significant difference detectable even in this

relatively early text from what would be found in Pelagius, for instance. The degree to which

Augustine even in this work identified the word of Scripture with the power of Christ is not

present in Pelagius. The two looked at the matter from reverse perspectives. Augustine saw in the

word of Scripture the power of Christ, and it was powerful because Christ granted it power.166

Pelagius put things in the reverse order: the power of Christ was the word of Scripture, which was

to say that an individual was perfect to the degree that he was in conformity with the objectively

articulated divine law, a conformity which was available in principle to one and all. But when

Augustine saw 'word' in the text of Job he thought of the Word - He who was Himself the

motive force of good men,167 Him through and by Whom men are justified.168 The letter of

Scripture's command does not make good, only the power of God does this, a power which is not

in the written word.

c. Reward in the Next Life - Merit

163
Adn. 3.6-7, 36.33, 37.18, 37.22 & 38.7: "baptizata... verbo vitae."
164
As in 39.26: "a quo ipse charitatis ardor inspiratur."
165
The carnal are always self-reliant (see 6.7.) And, naturally, 'the blind': see 17.4, 30.8, 36.16.
166
39.2, 6.4, 6.10, 6.12 (moventurad confitendum) 34.20 (excluderentur ab ea visione) & 37.18. 5.20
can have either meaning, it is not clear from the context.
167
Adn. 38.5.
168
Ibid., 39.28. Of course, the concept of 'imitation' is not absent from Adnotationes, but can be seen
within the broader picture to be, a) in the case of the good, the result of God's help, and b) for the evil the
result of imitating the devil. See 30.8.
 'Merit' is spoken of eighteen times in this work.169 In almost every instance Augustine

introduces it to condemn the idea that one can have merit before God.170 To speak of merit is to

speak with pride,171 and it is the opposite of having hope in God.172 Belief in one's merit was

man's presumptuous error before the advent of the Gospel of Christ, before the advent of the

grace of Christ. 173 It is not just enough not to rely on one's merit rather than on the grace of

Christ, it is necessary also to deny that it is a personal attribute at all. Precisely insofar as it is a

grace it is a gift.174 Though this work falls far short of the technical specificity of Ad

Simplicianum, we see that he had not forgotten the claims he had made in that work.

All of this is elementary to the teaching we find there. The question is how Job's unique

story weighs in on this. Augustine's dispute with the Pelagians was about whether or not one

merited heaven, not whether suffering in this life was a justified, disseminated punishment from

God.175 Augustine took it for granted that Job was not being punished for his sins. But to deny

this need say nothing at all about whether or not as a consequence he deserved heaven, and

Augustine never thought it had anything to say about it. Obviously, Augustine never thought that

justice was sufficiently meted out in this world. The Pelagians thought that Job was innocent in

every sense of the word; Augustine clearly did not, and not even in 399 did he believe that this

followed from Job's literal meaning. On the contrary, the ultimate attestation of impeccability is

merit, and Augustine thought it was simply mistaken to speak of merit before God. Therefore,

impeccability was a foolish notion as well. If one could be without sin, would this mean that he

deserved a reward? Even if Adnotationes was in agreement with the position of the Pelagians that

169
9.16, 16.18, 27.9, 27.12, 28.2, 28.4, 30.5, 31.1, 36.4, 36.9, 36.14, 37.9, 37.10, 37.18, 37.19, 37.21,
37.22, & 38.2.
170
As in 27.9: in conspectu Dei.
171
27.12, 36.14 & 37.18.
172
37.9.
173
28.4, 36.9 & 37.18.
174
36.9 & 37.10.
175
Hence Steinhauser's assessment that both Pelagius and Augustine "may have missed the point of
the book of Job." Op. cit. supra., p. 307.
 58

one could be without sin in this world (which it was not), Augustine would always deny that

being without debt implied a claim to a reward.

The background of the Donatist controversy is detectable in how the Proceedings of

Pelagius deals with the subject of merit. Augustine would obviously be bothered by their claim

that "Men cannot be called sons of God, unless they have become entirely free from all sin."176

He had seen such a claim made before by the Donatists. And, as we can see from Adnotationes'

treatment of the subject of merit, it was a claim that he had a history of rejecting.

d. The Church

His doctrine of the Church, despite the fact that he mentions 'Church' so often in the text,

is imprecise, and shows how little he had been able to integrate it into his vision of Christian life

thus far. If it is correct that his mature view of ecclesiology owed so much to the career of the

Donatist controversy, it was probably not so much on account of the universalism he was required

to emphasize against their particularism, but, rather, on account of the fact that he was finally

forced to see that it was the sacraments that were the great means of grace and of salvation, and

not simply, as we have seen, the preaching of the Word. Suddenly the means of salvation were in

this sense 'corporate'; suddenly the means of salvation were concretely incompatible with the

soteriological paradigm he had always stuck to, of the individual in relative isolated relationship

with God. But despite the fact that Adnotationes testified to his growing 'ecclesiological

consciousness,' it is not with the corporate that he is preoccupied in Adnotationes and in

Confessiones. Still, what we have is an acknowledgement of the Church - just because he knows

there is a Church, even if the theoretical dressings have not kept up with this acknowledgment in

principle. And, yes, he recognizes it has an historical importance, but within the individualistic

176
PP., 18.42.
 59

soteriology of this early period it but serves the needs of the 'heroic' individual.

Does this have any implications for our interest in the development of his thought? Does

it, for instance, impact upon what would be a hallmark of his mature teaching, his doctrine of

predestination? None, as far as I can see. Whether Augustine speaks of the corporate destiny of

man (the Church), or of the individual (in which he is more interested both here and in

Confessiones), grace would always remain for him, a force beyond one's personal control. That

he came to recognize the sacraments as important instruments of grace did not mean that grace

had become for him a more 'imminent' reality, but neither did this recognition drive it any further

away. Which should have been the case? The Church is not 'one's own' - even if that 'one'

happens to be a bishop - so why should it have brought grace any closer, that is, made of it a

more certain resource? Augustine would never think of it as a resource in this sense. When he

thought of grace in terms of the individual, it was even then remote and inaccessible to the whims

of man. There might have been a more important place for the Church in his later soteriology but

this did nothing to 'domesticate' grace. It is useful to think of what, if any, differences there are to

speak of between what we have seen in terms of Adnotationes' treatment of correction, etc., and

that of the late work devoted to just this topic, De correptione et gratia (c. 426/7), for instance.

We may be disappointed with how little Augustine fleshes out the personality of Job in this work,

what psychological impact Augustine imagined chastisement had had for Job, but in terms of a

doctrine of grace it seems to matter little whether, in any given instance, Augustine is thinking of

Job as an historical personality or as a 'type' of humanity in general. This seems to carry over

into the corporate entities that make an appearance in Adnotationes: the Church, the just, the Jews

(or Israel).

His new concentration on the Church was not the cause of his revolt against the power of

reason, nor was it the principal force behind the development of his sense of grace. But this

disillusionment did put the Church in a much better light, for the individual no longer seemed as

self-sufficient as he had once hoped him to be. But this revolt was the direct cause of his
heightening awareness of grace. Of course, it is true that his growing sense of the corporate

dimension of the person and of salvation had repercussions for his doctrine of grace. We certainly

see this advancing in 399. However, we cannot ignore the fact that there is so little mention of the

sacraments in Adnotationes.177 There is a strong sense of grace, but it is not depicted primarily as

a mediation of the sacraments. It is far more directly just 'from God' as we have seen above. But

the case cannot be made that all of this was simply on account of the fact that Augustine just had

not accommodated his understanding of grace to what the Church does in the sacraments. Ad

Simplicianum makes as sophisticated a statement upon how the sacraments mediate grace in 396

as he ever would later.178

Although Augustine had neatly compartmentalized history into stages, and these stages

had implications for the character of the 'positive' moral law, when a man lived seemed to be

without consequence for how grace and free will functioned - not in principle, but in matter of

fact, since he never thought about it. It is true, however, that in various places he spoke about the

timeliness of Christ's coming. Yet in this case it was not considered 'timely' on account of some

general moral change in the people of the world, but on account of an extrinsic factor - God's

revelation. God remains the same, and that is the thing of importance. This is no trivial matter, for

the stability of his notion of God is the basic intuition that stabilizes all the rest of his thought.

Even when the grace of the sacraments became more important to him - and he had to

acknowledge at a very explicit level that the grace of baptism was necessary for salvation (and to

some extent the grace of the other sacraments) - he was quick to abandon any attempt to actually

describe the one for whom concupiscence had been 'alleviated', in contrast to the one for whom it

could not have been, like Job. If Confessiones is so useful in providing a snapshot of the crisis

that was his turning against the moral progressivism that he had adopted from the Greeks, it is no

177
He usually employs sacramentum in the broader sense, although also occasionally in reference to
the Holy Eucharist and baptism. See Adn. 36, 37 & 38. It is interesting that the specific sense is confined to
the end of the work.
178
AS., 2.2.
surprise that no trace of this progressivism is to be detected in Adnotationes either.

In beginning to expose the content of Adnotationes, we see Augustine taking a stab at the

as yet uncomfortable realm of time and space. However, his treatment of Judaism is - just as his

treatment of the Church is - cautious. His conceptualizing of providence is rudimentary. It is

almost as if he is aware of the literal sense of the Bible, but is quite unprepared either to adopt it

wholeheartedly or to completely spiritualize it away. Rather, he simply avoids it. What does this

approach have in common with certain contemporaneous writings, say Confessiones or Contra

Faustum? Its posture of avoiding dealing with the literal sense resembles neither of these, and this

is probably because he never intended it for the public. Although they usually end up

spiritualizing it away, at least it is true that both of these works recognize the letter with which

they had to contend. There were, of course, questions which, for various reasons, he did not care

to address. This is why Job hardly appears in Adnotationes as a flesh-and-blood man who lived

before salvation in Christ was possible. Yet this posture of 'avoidance', if we may so speak of it,

certainly means that future contradiction was less likely. So crudely put, in Adnotationes, we have

in Job a man who was not a Christian, not a Jew, but, indeed, not often a single man at all, but

moreover, an allegory of men in general, or, at times, of Christ in particular. To Augustine Job

was not a 'hero' as the Pelagians would have him.

What we have seen so far of Adnotationes is that it is a work very much open to

Augustine's future systematizing of grace. It does not seem to be a work that would constrict the

prerogatives of grace at all, a work that makes assertions of the type for which he would have to

apologize later in order to prove his consistency. Of course, neither does it do everything we

might like it to: it does not deal explicitly with those things that were to become so controversial.

It does, of course, say some important things about grace and merit. Just how consequential in the

end these things are is the burden of chapter 4 to prove.

 62

Chapter 3 - Job in the Fathers of the Church

Introduction

We suppose there was a 'Job' which Augustine had inherited from his forebears and from

his more renowned contemporaries. Perhaps there were many 'Jobs.' Of course, Augustine makes

no reference to the 'Job of the Fathers' in the abstract, not even at that later period when he began

to rely so heavily on the 'argument from authority' in his dispute with the Pelagians. This is not

to say that what came before him was of no relevance. Chapter 2 was devoted to roughing-in

Augustine's Job, in terms of the character of his exegesis in general, and in terms of a topical

exposition of Adnotationes' principal preoccupations. This chapter will be concerned with the

ecclesiastical precedence that we can assume must have shaped his thinking about this peculiar

Old Testament book and figure, whether he was conscious of this influence or not.

The 'commonsense' view of Job in the Fathers is of central importance to the argument

of this thesis. Did the early Church generally consider Job to have sinned? Did any early writers

believe he had? Why this is so important is by now clear. We are asking whether or not

Augustine had reason to believe Job was a liability to him, since Steinhauser has said that Job has

an 'obvious' teaching, and it is one from which Augustine dissented, one from which he

consciously dissented.179 Now this issue is part of the broader issue of what kind of ecclesiastical

precedence Augustine believed he had in his fight with the Pelagians. Augustine had depended

upon 'arguments from authority' especially in his fight with the Donatists, and earlier on in a very

different way in his battle with the Manichaeans. In the case of the latter, the 'authorities' in

question were those texts of Sacred Scripture acceptable to both parties. In the case of the former,

ecclesiastical practice and the opinions of great churchmen carried the day. This had been an

uphill battle for Augustine, with Cyprian so heavily weighted against him. By the middle of the

179
Steinhauser, "Job Exegesis," p. 305.
 63

second decade of the 5th century, though, Augustine was coming into a much more thorough

acquaintance with the universal Church, and by the time of his death he was able to quote from a

dozen different respected theologians. What did these say about the sin's ubiquity, what of the

life of perfection, what of the Old Testament Saints, what of salvation before Christ? Did

Augustine have any good reason to believe that he did not share 'the mind of the Church' in these

matters? The question of ecclesiastical precedence is a pivotal one if we are to accurately

understand Augustine's history with Job. If he was, or at least had a good reason to believe he

was, carrying forth the teaching of the Church in his view of Job he would have no reason

whatsoever to shrink from that book of the Bible, no reason whatsoever to be embarrassed by his

399 work on that book when it surfaced a decade or so after he wrote it. On the other hand, if it

was universally accepted that Job had never sinned, that there were, or had been, perfect people in

the world, and that it was generally believed that salvation was available before the grace of

Christ was made available through the Pascal Mystery, then Augustine would be in a very

different situation, and could not possibly have ignored the fact that his views on these matters

were not 'of the mind of the Church.' Of course, Augustine had admitted many times that he had

been wrong in the past.180 Was he ever intransigent in the face of overwhelming proof to the

contrary, that not others, but that he was wrong about the Faith? This would be another matter all

together. If there was no ecclesiastical precedence for Augustine's teaching on grace, then he

would be a liar. Let us carefully examine the testimony of the following authors and consider this

most crucial question. Let Job be a litmus test for it.

A. Pre-Pelagian Job181

1. Origen

Origen's view of Job was particularly influential, even if we should have difficulty

180
See our discussion of Retractationes in chapter 4.
181
In any case, no distinction will be made between Job the man and the Book of the Bible in such
elliptical references such as this one.
 64

indicating the precise genealogy of this influence. Origen's commentary on that book did not

survive, but its influence may have. If not, "Origen's Job" made its way into the fourth and fifth

centuries via his other writings. In his Commentary on Luke, for instance, he quotes Job a few

times. He twice quotes 14:4-5,182 a verse we will find especially popular with Augustine and

Jerome, which they drew on as a justification for infant baptism. Origen tells us that there is a

difference between sin and stain, which latter notion 14:4-5 refers to, and explains, "Every soul

that has been clothed with a human body has its own "stain." "But Jesus was stained through His

own will, because He had taken on a human body for our salvation."183 On another occasion he

quotes this passage to indicate that no one is without sin in the sense of never having sinned, but

he denies that once we have sinned we are condemned to continue in the way of sin.184 In

'Fragment 101' of Origen "on Luke" he again employs Job in expounding upon his somatic

theory, expanding upon the phrase of Lk 4:49, "he stood over her and rebuked the fever":

It is not surprising that there are some noxious powers in the human body, and
we shall not wholly blame the soul of the sufferers as being deluded by them.
For, after the devil had had his sport with Job, to his grievous loss, he received
the power to test him through his body. Job was free from blame in this matter,
for he did battle and nobly endure the suffering. If we are ever tried by corporeal
labors, let it only be said, "But do not touch his soul," and the Lord, too, gives a
rebuke and heals those who are ill."185

Also, in 'Fragment 222' of these homilies, Origen, in commenting upon the Scriptural phrase

The subject of this pivotal verse varies between the LXX and the Hebrew. The former says, "For
who shall be pure from uncleanness? not even one"; the latter, "Who can bring a clean thing out of an
unclean? not one." (My emphasis. For these comparisons I employ The Septuagint Version of the Old
Testament with an English Translation (Zondervan Edition, 1970) and The Holy Scriptures of the Old
Testament, Hebrew and English (London: British and Foreign Bible Society, 1919).
183
Homilies on Luke, trans. Joseph T. Lienhard, SJ, (New York: Fathers of the Church, 1996), pp. 57-
8, my emphasis. The peculiarities of Origen's conceptions will not be missed here. They will not be carried
on by Augustine, even if the change between Origen and Augustine allowed for a degree of ambiguity that
served the latter well in his polemic against the Pelagians. See J. Doignon, "Corpora Vitiorum Materies:
Une Formule-Cle du Fragment sur Job D'Hilaire de Poitiers Inspire d'Origene et Transmis par Augustin
(Contra Julianum 2, 8, 27)", Vigiliae Christianae 35 (1981), pp.207-21; and his "'Rengaines" Origeniennes
dans les Homelies sur Job d'Hilaire de Poitiers," in Le Livre de Job chez les Peres, (Strasbourg: Centre
D'Analyse et de Documentation Patristiques, 1996), pp.7-11; and also his "Versets de Job sur le Peche de
Notre Origine selon Hilaire de Potiers," in Le Livre de Job chez les Peres, (Strasbourg: Centre D'Analyse
et de Documentation Patristiques, 1996), pp.13-21.
184
On Luke, p.10 (Horn. 2.1), my emphasis.
185
Ibid., p. 169.
 65

"there was a certain man," describes Job in the following terms:

Job was also rich, but he did not pass his life in luxury and lack of compassion.
His house stood open to every needy person by his loving will. He treated no one
unjustly, but helped those who suffered unjustly; he furnished the things needed
for life to widows and orphans. For, these are the just deeds of just rich men."186

His homilies on Leviticus again reference Jb 14:4-5. The context of the 8th, for instance,

which concerns the purity of a woman after childbirth, Origen himself, by means of Jb 14:4-5,

transforms into a rule for either "male or female." 187 He adds that Job, just like Jeremiah, "did not

speak without the Holy Spirit," and that by the Holy Spirit "he predicted 'the great sea monster'

which the Lord 'would destroy,' whose type was that 'sea monster' of Jonah."188 Origen

described Job in this manner in order to establish his authority as a prophet. But he did not list Job

among "the souls of a few of the greatest saints" who "may also be assumed to have left the

supersensible world, not as a result of sin, but obeying a specific Divine command to co-operate

in the regeneration of mankind."189

In the 5th Homily on Exodus he quotes Jb 7:1, "Our life upon earth is a temptation", to

explain "what it means to have come to the [Red S]ea."190 In Homily 7 he states:

Job, that man who was so just and observant of all piety, who was filled with the
'worst sores from his head to his feet,' serves as an indication to us. Those,
therefore, who keep the commandments are not said to be free from these
infirmities, but they will not have those infirmities which the Egyptians have, for
the world is figuratively called Egypt. The Egyptian sickness, therefore, is 'to
love the world and those things which are in the world.'191

It would be interesting to contrast this passage with another from City of God, one just before Job

Ibid., p.217. The phrase, "his house stood open" is developed by the "Testimony of Job".
Lawrence Besserman, in his The Legend of Job in the Middle Ages (London: Harvard University Press,
1979) speaks about the influence that this work had on the Fathers and later.
187
Homilies on Leviticus, trans. Gary Wayne Barkley (Washington: Catholic University of America
Press, 1990), p. 156 (horn. 8.3.2).
188
Ibid., p,157(hom. 8.3.4).
189
Williams, Norman Powell, The Ideas of the Fall and of Original Sin: A Historical and Critical
Study (London: Longmans, Greed and Co. Ltd., 1927), p.217, referencing De Principius 2.6.3.
190
Homilies on Genesis and Exodus, trans. Ronald E. Heine (Washington: Catholic University of
America, 1982), p.281 (Honi. in Ex. 5.3).
191
Ibid., pp.305-6 (Horn, in Ex. 7.4).
 66

makes his first appearance in that work. Within the structure of his thought, Augustine's Job

holds a middle ground: even though Job is of high moral virtue, he is not perfect. Augustine

writes that "this seems to me to be a major reason why the good are chastised along with the

evil... Good and bad are chastened together, not because both alike live evil lives, but because

both alike, though not in the same degree, love this temporal life." In this light Augustine then

proceeds on to Job, saying, "There is a further reason for the infliction of temporal suffering on

the good, as is seen in the case of Job - that the spirit of man may be tested, that he may learn for

himself what is the degree of disinterested devotion that he offers to God."192 Origen, as we saw

in the passage from Horn, in Ex. 7 above, even while praising his character more unreservedly

than Augustine does, is in agreement with him that Job was not completely without flaw. The 8th

homily from the same work confirms this point. There he likewise regards the suffering of the

"good" as a chastisement, but one that serves to prevent the future perdition, and that opens to

them the "rest in the future". 193

In the Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, Origen again describes the singularity

of Job's virtue: "there are few like Job who are so truthful and above reproach, who indeed are

such just worshipers of God, that by doing all these things they keep themselves from every evil

thing."194 It is important, though, to clarify exactly what Origen meant by Job kept from every evil

thing. There is reason to doubt this "perfection" interpretation of Job and to preserve the view

which the Fifth Homily on Exodus suggests. He was yet no Christ:

[h]e committed absolutely no sin whatsoever nor was deceit found in his mouth.
It is not possible for this to be found at all in any other man... However it is
possible for us to possess the likeness so that, by imitating him and following in
his footsteps, we may keep ourselves from sin. This is something, therefore,
which human nature is capable of receiving: It may become in the likeness of his
death, when by imitating him it does not sin. But to be absolutely and entirely
unacquainted with sin belongs to Christ alone.195

192
City of God, I, 9. See also 1.10.
193
Homilies on Genesis and Exodus, p.332 (Horn, in Ex. 8.6).
194
Origen, Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, 2 vv trans . Thomas P. Scheck (Washington:
Catholic University of America, 2001), v. 1, p. 142 (2.13.3).
195
Commentary on Romans, v.l, p.362 (5.9.4).
 67

This conception of the matter allowed him, on the one hand to quote Jb 1:1, "And Job was a

truthful man without fault, a just worshiper of God who refrained from every evil thing",196 and

yet to say, reflecting on Jb 14:4-5 - in sins my mother conceived me - "in everyone was sin's

innate defilement, which needed to be washed away through water and the Spirit."197

Origen believed Job to have lived before the Law and that the strength of his virtue lay in

his heart. Even though he acknowledges the possibility of sinning unintentionally,198 yet his view

of the vessels of mercy and vessels of wrath (Rm 9:22-6) was very different from Augustine's:

'for vessels of mercy,' i.e. those who have cleansed themselves from every
defilement of sin from which 'no one is pure, even if his life should be one day
long,' he makes known the riches of his glory. He has prepared these vessels for
glory not through some arbitrary or fortuitous grace, but because they have
purged themselves from the aforementioned defilements.199

Origen certainly thought a lot about Job, and has employed both the book and the man to

exemplify several of his key doctrines. Even though he had his preferred verses, his works exhibit

a thorough mastery of the book, referencing both the LXX and the Hebrew versions, both directly

and from memory.

2. Gregory of Nyssa

Nyssa references Job but once in his Sermons on the Lord's Prayer. It is to 14:4 (LXX),

"who is clear from filth?"

Filth on the purity of the soul is sensual pleasure, which is mixed up with human

Ibid., p. 142 (2.12.3); Job 14:4-5 is by contrast quoted seven times in this commentary (according
to the LXX). Another key passage in this controversy is Jb 25:5, "But the stars are not pure before him,"
quoted in ibid., v.l, p.207 (3.6.8). This was a favourite passage of both Augustine and Jerome, for obvious
reasons.
197
Commentary on Romans., v.l, p.367 (5.9.11). See again, Williams, The Idea of the Fall and
Original Sin, pp.219-31. Williams sees Origen's encounter with the Caesarean practice of infant baptism as
a key moment in his developing understanding of the Fall.
198
Jb 31:33-4, in ibid., v.l, p. 203 (3.6.1).
199
Ibid., v.2,p,122 (7.18.3).
 68

life in manifold ways, through soul and body, through thoughts and senses,
through deliberate movements and bodily actions.
Whose soul, then, is pure from this stain? How has anyone not been
struck by vanity or been trodden down by the foot of pride? Who has never been
shaken by the sinning hand, or whose feet have never run to evil? Who has not
been polluted by his roving eye nor been defiled by an undisciplined ear? Whose
taste has never been preoccupied by its enjoyment, whose heart had remained
unmoved by vain emotions?
Now it is true that the things before us are much more grievous in more
barbarous people and more moderated in those who are more cultivated; yet all
those who share a nature most certainly also have a share in the faults of this
nature.200

Like Origen, Gregory seems to believe that it is the fact of sin's near-inevitability that reveals the

virtue of Job. Choosing the good is hard, but it was something Job was able to do, as the reference

to Job he makes in his Life of St. Macrina indicates:

[JJust as we hear in the story of Job, that when the man was wasting away and his
whole body was covered with erupting and putrefying sores, he did not direct
attention to his pain but kept the pain inside his body, neither blessing his own
activity not cutting off the conversation when it embarked upon higher matters.
Such a thing as this I was seeing in the case of this Superior [Macrina] also;
although the fever was burning up all her energy and leading her to death, she
was refreshing her body as if by a kind of dew, she kept her mind free in the
contemplation of higher things and unimpeded by the disease.201

3. Eusebius

Eusebius reiterates Origen's idea of Job's prophetic knowledge:

Job certainly afterwards bears witness that he has seen with his own
eyes, as the fathers did the Lord Who spoke to him through the whirlwind and the
clouds... He naturally gave this answer to Job after the great trial and contest
through which He had gone, teaching him that though he has struggled more than
his share, a greater and sterner battle and contest is reserved for the Lord Himself
against the time of His Coming to the earth to die.202

St. Gregory of Nyssa, The Lord's Prayer and the Beatitudes, trans. Hilda C. Graeff (New York:
Newman Press, 1954), pp.79-80.
201
St. Gregory of Nyssa, The Life of Saint Macrina in Ascetical Works, trans. Virginia Woods
Callahan (Washington: Catholic University of America, 1967), pp. 175-6
202
Eusebius, The Proof of the Gospel, trans. W. J. Ferrar (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House: 1981),
pp.264-5. Passages from Job quoted are 38:1,4, 7, 8, 14-17; 42:4-6. (My italics and slightly modified by
me.)
 69

This 'direct relationship' with God was something that Jerome and Augustine would both point to

as the foundation of Job's virtue."What is to be said of Job the thrice-blessed, the true, the

blameless, the just, the holy, what was the cause of his holiness and justice, was it Moses'

commandments? Certainly not."203 Elsewhere he tells us that Job anticipated the Gospel

teaching.204 It is in this that the chief significance of Eusebius' interpretation lies. Many of the

Fathers dwelled on Job's exemplary virtues, of course. The difference here is that whereas others

simply highlight one or two of these, like patience, Eusebius makes Job's life into a veritable

manifestation of the Gospel. Indeed, even when Augustine accords Job a special revelation he

would not describe this in the same was Eusebius had: the Word's revelation of the ancient form

of the ancestors' religion which did not differ in form of holiness from that of the Gospel.205

Augustine imagined a special revelation to Job alone, but he would not go so far as to say that it

did not differ in form of holiness from that of the Gospel.

4. John Chrysostom

Chrysostom was a robust moralist, and so primarily understood Job in this light. He was

interested in the historical setting of Job, insofar as it could aid in plumbing the depths of what a

Christian's actual commitment to Christ really looks like. We are fortunate to have his

Commentary on Job, although its authenticity has been often questioned.206 Job was one of

Chrysostom's favorite books of the Bible. He quoted it more than three hundred times, which put

Eusebius, The History of the Church, trans., G. A. Williamson (Harmondsworth, Middlesex:

Dorset Press, 1983), pp.30-1 (slightly modified by me).
204
Eusebius, Proof, p.32.
205
Ibid., p.32.
206
J. N. D. Kelly does not even mention this commentary or series of homilies, nor does he even
employ the word 'Job' in his Golden Mouth: The Story of John Chrysostom - Ascetic, Preacher, Bishop
(Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1995). Nor does Baur mention a commentary, yet he does
refer to it elliptically under the list of his treatises and homilies. (Chrysostomus Baur, O.S.B., John
Chrysostom and His Time, 2vv. (London: Sands and Co., Ltd., 1959), v.l, p.316.
 70

it fifth for him among the Old Testament books.207 His commentary exemplifies the values of his

school: "We are not unaware that many commentators, taking it in a spiritual sense, think that this

[i.e. 40:15] refers to the devil, but we ought firstly give attention to the factual sense, and then, if

there is some benefit for the listener no neglect the spiritual sense as well." One is hard-pressed to

find instances of Chrysostom doing the latter in this commentary.

Like Eusebius, Chrysostom asks "How could such greatness appear independently of the

Law?" Job lived before the Law, 208 but yet was "taught in good things" because "God has always

sent teachers out throughout the world." 209 Job himself was one of these teachers. In an original

take on the history of God's revelation he claims that the life of Job was given as a model to the

Jews in captivity in Egypt before they had the Law.210 As was Eusebius, he was inspired by 1 Tm

1:9, that "Christ Himself came to teach nothing new or isolated."211

Augustine would have found a lot to appreciate in this Commentary. Particularly would

he have appreciated Chrysostom's pedagogical explanation of suffering, even if he would come

to understand the nature of Job's 'perseverance' somewhat differently. According to Chrysostom,

Job's suffering was so dramatic, strenuous and prolonged for no other reason than the effect that

it was meant to have on Job and his witnesses. Unlike Augustine and the Pelagians, Chrysostom

maintained that Job's trial was most of all meant "to show his patience and to accredit the wonder

of his transformation." The transformation in this case was that from poverty to wealth, and his

accreditation was his vindication. The falling into poverty and desperation was not the point of

the story, he noted. The point was the rising again into splendor, which fact alone could confute

the premature judgments cast against him. He compared this to Lazurus' prolongation in death for

207
It is difficult to determine, but it appears that this 300 must have included what we are calling his
Commentary on Job, but which Baur may have been simply regarding as different homilies. See Baur,
p.316. Baur's ranking of Old Testament books are Psalms, Genesis, Isaiah, Exodus, Job.
208
St. John Chrysostom, Commentaire sur Job 2vv., trans. Henri Sorlin and Louis Neyrand (Paris:
Editions du cerf, 1988), p.81 (Pr.2). (All translations from this work are mine.)
209
Ibid., p.80 (Pr.l).
210
Ibid., p.83 (Pr.4).
211
Ibid., p.83 (Pr.4).
four days, a length of time such that no witness would be able to doubt his resurrection.212

Chrysostom emphasized Job's virtue, but was careful to refrain from imputing to him the

contrary curse of self-righteousness. "He does not accuse the events of being unjust... he does not

say, 'I am just, and I have no awareness of any fault at all.'" 213 Yet, Chrysostom tells us, "he did

not even sin in his thoughts."214 How could he have maintained that both of these things were

true?215 He would have agreed with Origen. Recall that, according to Origen, no one but Christ

was completely free from sin. Job, though, along with a few others, had not sinned for some time.

In Chrysostom's opinion, certainly, but perhaps in Origen's as well, that the story tells us that Job

never sinned at all meant only that he had not sinned within the context of these trials.216

5. Hilary

The writings of the pre-Pelagian Controversy Latin Fathers offer us the chance to

discover what, if any, literary sources had influenced Augustine's view of Job. In order to

investigate this we will concentrate solely upon the writings of Hilary and Ambrose in this epoch

and upon those of Jerome in the Pelagian period itself. One author has claimed, "That Augustine

had read Hilary is of course certain; he had codices of Hilary in his library, and possibly one of

the lost works of Hilary, for instance the Tractatus in Iob."2il This seems to be stated on the basis

of Augustine having made but one reference to this work. Of course, there are other means of

determining influence. We ought not to rule out the possibility that similar patterns of use for Job

could link Augustine to Hilary and /or Ambrose.218

212
Ibid., p.82-3 (Pr.3).
213
Ibid., p. 153 (1.26).
214
Ibid., p.152 (1.26). Also, ch. 42, "So it was Job who spoke the truth in speaking of his good
works..."
215
See also the summary in chapter 42: "to succeed in gaining the good things promised to those who
love God, through the grace and loving-kindness of Our Lord Jesus Christ."
216
Although: ibid., p.151 (1.26).
217
Leeming, Bernard, "Augustine, Ambrosiaster, and the Massa Perditionis," Gregorianum 11
(1930), p.65.
218
Dossey has attempted to do this with respect to the Pseudo-Origen's commentary (see "The Last
 Hilary wrote a commentary on Job. We are without this, though, and in its absence we

are left with but the few allusions he makes to Job in his On the Trinity and Tracts on the Psalms.

With regard to this latter work, on Ps 119 (118) Hilary mentions Job several times. Job is there

considered a model for the hidden, but profound and incomprehensible, workings of Providence.

Hilary grouped Job with the Patriarchs.219 Each one underwent unusual experiences. Yet in every

case God never acted unjustly in their lives.220 Only man has a hard time holding on to justice.221

Hilary refers to Job as the blameless.222 His tribulations were great, and Hilary saw in them a

warning for all Christians about God's terrible judgments: if Job could be so stricken when

blameless, what might happen to us?223

Because Augustine uses Hilary in his late anti-Pelagian works, his view of sin and grace

are important to us. This is a fertile ground for Augustine's purposes. Hilary's own views on the

nature and origin of the soul are not clear, and this fact makes it easy to understand the use

Augustine was able to make of his writings against the Pelagians.224 If the text we cite here is

Days", pp.93-104 for the textual patterns evidenced by the Latin Bibles). Yet even her very good work is
helplessly undermined by some bad judgments. She states, for instance, that the textual basis of
Augustine's Adnotationes in lob is wholly Jerome's (Ibid., p.91). This conclusion, LaBonnardiere rejects in
its precise form. She accepts the thesis that the Adnotationes is in general so dependent, but not by any
means wholly. Others, such as O'Donnell reject this altogether, and instead assert that Augustine actually
employed a Vetus Latina. I have argued elsewhere that O'Donnell must be right, since by his own
admission Augustine had lost Jerome's LXX of Job by that time. It is clear how such approximation with
respect to Augustine's text cannot help but lead Dossey into cruder and cruder judgments about textual
relations.
219
St. Hilary, Tractates super psalmos 52.9 (Patrologia Latina Database, Chadwick-Healey), "Et
quaeretur post haec, quomodo Abel placuerit, Seth probatus sit, Isaac haeres sit, Enoch translatus sit, Noe
reservatus sit, Melchisedech sanctificatus sit, Abraham electus sit, Jacob Israel sit, Job inculpabilis sit,
Moyses amicus sit, Aaron christus sit, David secundum cor Dei sit, Prophetae spiritales sint, Apostoli
coelorum claves sortiti sint, si excepto uno tantum, bonus nemo sit?"
220
Ibid., 118.14.7. Also, commenting on Ps 120:7, "Dominus custodiet te ab omni malo. Et a quibus
malis custodiet Dominus? Non opinor ab his quae putantur: haec enim sunt infirmitati nostrae et corpori
debita, mori, infirmari, egere: quae si mala essent, nec Abel mortuus, nec Job cruciatus esset, nec Petrus
pecunia quam in eleemosynam poscebatur eguisset. Ergo fidelem animam ab omni malo Dominus custodit,
id est, ne earn diaboli tinea corrumpat, ne fur obrepat, ne canis oblatret, ne lupus laceret, ne ursus
desaeviat, ne pardus insiliat, ne tigris advolet, ne leo vastet."
221
Ibid., 52.9, "Gravis Dei professio est, et indissolubile super humana vitia judicium, cum bonitatem
usque ad unum nemo facit."
222
Ibid., 52.9. "Job inculpabilis sit'.
223
Ibid., 118.3.12.
224
Ex tractatibus in Job, Fragment 1, "Memores igitur et conscii ilia ipsa corpora nostra omnium
vitiorum esse materiem, per quam polluti et sordidi, nihil in nobis mundum, nihil innocens obtinemus;
accurate, Hilary was one of the only Fathers to have considered Job to have lived under the Law:

"This Job had so effectively read these Scriptures, and this because he worshipped God purely

with a mind unmixed with offences." 225

Although Augustine did not pick up on Hilary's integration of Job into the Old Covenant,

nor did he ever speak of him as "unmixed with offenses," Augustine would nevertheless have

liked the role he afforded the hidden designs of providence. It was just the sort of thing that made

plausible the deus ex machina that is DCD 18.47. Yet what is most interesting is that Augustine

chose rather to deal with Hilary by ignoring him as best he could, it seems. The one reference he

makes to Hilary in the anti-Pelagian polemic is defensive. This posture is revealing. It brings us

back to one of the essential questions underlying this study: did Augustine believe he was

revolting against the Fathers on the subject of Job? If we were to take the case of Hilary's Job by

itself, it would seem that an affirmative answer would be the case. Yet if it is unwarranted to go

this far, is it possible, nevertheless, to maintain that Augustine was aware that Hilary's doctrine of

Job contradicted his own? This is one possible and attractive solution to the problem of why he

only quotes Hilary's commentary once, and that time defensively. That he quotes it seems to

nullify the possibility that he had no access to the work and that was why he never borrowed from

it. Another possibility remains, though, and that is that he had employed it, but in ways that we

cannot today detect. If this were the case, which only the discovery of Hilary's commentary

would make possible to answer, we would likely discover a selective sort of use, the kind that

characterized Augustine's borrowing from him as a whole. In sum, it is clear that Hilary's

origenism was a fertile field for someone like Augustine to use to his own advantage, but it was

gaudeamus nobis esse hostem, in cujus concertatione quodam concertationis nostrae bello dimicemus."
225
Fragment 1 from Tract, in Job, in Augustine's De natura et gratia 62.72-3. (c. spring 415). The
New City Press translation is significantly different with respect to the question of Hilary's impression of
Job and the Scriptures: "So too, he mentions that Hilary asked, "What books had Job read that he refrained
from everything evil? For he reveres God with the mind alone that is free from vices, but to worship God is
the proper function of righteousness." Hilary mentions what Job did; he does not say that he attained
perfection in this world or that he acted well or attained perfection without the grace of the savior whom he
foretold. After all, even persons who have sin but do not allow it to reign over them refrain from everything
evil, and if a bad thought takes them by surprise, they do not allow it to lead to action. In any case, it is one
thing not to have sin and quite another not to obey its desires."
 74

probably one that was best left alone, since it probably would have proved just as effective a

resource in the hands of his opponents.

6. Ambrose

The Bishop of Milan had a considerable interest in Job. He referenced the Book of Job

more than 400 times. The title of his 'commentary' on Job, The Prayer of David and Job, reveals

an assimilation of characters not unique to Ambrose. He tells us that "many have complained

over human weakness and frailty," however, only "the holy Job and holy David have done so in a

fashion superior to the rest. The former is straightforward, forceful, sharp, and displays loftier

style, as one who has been provoked by severe afflictions," while the other is "ingratiating and

calm and mild, of a gentler disposition".226 Job prays with "greater vehemence," but in the

writings of both of them is "the nature of human life portrayed."227

Job does not deny what comes from the human condition; he rejects what comes
from unholiness and confesses what comes from weakness. To have sinned is
part of the human condition because no one is immune from falling; to act in an
unholy way is not part of the human condition but is the poison of an unbelieving
and thoroughly wicked heart. The just man does not have to do with this, but the
pardon of man lies in the mercy of God and not in the power of man.228

In a passage that could have been Augustine's Ambrose writes:

[Job] is forced to give an account of his sin and yet cannot avoid sin. He is
compelled to go into the sight of the Lord almighty to declare the reasons for his
actions; yet these have taken place over the entire span of his life, when no one
could be clean of sin. For guilt steals in from the very beginning of infancy,
before there can be any perception of wrongdoing. And what a wretched
situation, that his life is short, allurement is sweet, distress manifold, and wrath a
matter of daily occurrence229

226
The Prayer of Job and David in Seven Exegetical Works, trans. Michael P. McHugh
(Washington: Catholic University of America, 1972), p.389 (4.1).
227
Ibid., p.330 (1.1.3).
228
Ibid., p.341 (1.6.17).
229
Ibid., p.344 (1.7.22).
 Ambrose also seems to anticipate Augustine's and Jerome's thought in the matter of

Job's greater knowledge. Job "knew through the Holy Spirit that the Son of God not only would

come to earth but was going to descend also into hell to raise up the dead - as indeed was done at

that time as a testimony of present things and a model of future ones."230 Further, "Job is

understood to be prophesying that he was going to be raised up in the passion of the Lord, as is

clearly shown in the conclusion of that book."231

Ambrose enters into a meditation upon the inner man, similar to what we have seen in

Chrysostom, but draws out the two sides of Job's character: his virtue and his humanity. For even

though he has the prophetic knowledge described above, Job is torn, and "does not cease to

lament, and the more he understands that a resurrection awaits him, the greater [is] his desire to

flee from this life. For he sees that he has been given over into the hands of his adversaries and

cast down into the power of the unholy."232 Yet he has a "clear conscience and unblemished

prayer."233 And "he was not moved in his affliction, nor did he totter in the morass of his own

speech... Rather he found strength in his affliction, through which he was strengthened in

Christ."234 And in this way can Ambrose say that "he does not detract from God's judgment at

any point, for he knows that the depth of the wisdom and of the knowledge of God is profound

and that His judgments are incomprehensible and His ways unsearchable."235 But he can see that

all of these trials are in order that "he might be fashioned by the temptations and attain to the

crown of greater glory."236 His opponents could not see this, and were thus "afraid that they might

appear to be accusing God of injustice in permitting punishments to be inflicted on a guiltless

man."

Again, like Augustine, Ambrose maintains that, though of great virtue, Job is not Christ.

230
Ibid., p.346 (1.8.26).
231
Ibid., p.346 (1.8.27).
232
Ibid., p.346 (1.8.27).
233
Ibid., p.347 (1.2.27).
234
Ibid., p.374 (3.3.8).
235
Ibid., p.347 (1.9.28).
236
Ibid., p.353 (2.1.2).
"Christ was alone at a higher level. Job could laugh at evil, but Christ (and Christians) are one

step higher, for they pray for those who curse them."237

Ambrose died in 397, a full decade-and-a-half before the beginning of the Pelagian

controversy. Yet, unlike for the case of Hilary, there is no question upon which side he would

have come down: Ambrose's considerably high opinion of Job was predicated upon a sober

evaluation of human nature. Job was a testimony to the greatness of attainment, yes, but the

foundation upon which he conceived this holiness to be based was clearly not that envisioned by

Pelagius. His view, then, constitutes an argument against, (a) the supposed "reasonableness" of a

Pelagian interpretation of Job,238 and (b) the supposed natural Pelagianism of pre-Augustinian

Christianity, especially of the Eastern vein, considering how steeped Ambrose was in Eastern

thought. For Ambrose sin is a fact of human life no matter how stoically he expected one to bear

its consequences.

B. Job in the Pelagian Controversy

7. Jerome

Of his final translation on Job, Jerome wrote: "the blessed Job, who, as far as the Latins

are concerned, was till now lying amidst filth and swarming with the worms of error, is now

whole and free from stain."239 But in this preface Jerome tells us nothing at all about his particular

view of the Book or the man himself.

Jerome quotes Job a disproportionate number of times in his Dialogue Against the

Pelagians. Yet Jerome was not only interested in the Book because of this campaign. He had

some other enduring concerns that he found addressed by Job. These related to what we might

refer to as the specifically 'Christian' ideas found in Job. Foremost among these was the

237
Ibid., p.356 (2.2.5).
238
For this, see my discussion of Steinhauser's opinion in chapter 4.
239
Jerome, ANFC, v. 29, p.478.
'Resurrection Passage,' Jb 19:23-27. This passage was a key one for Jerome, and he was on his

guard, lest the judaising heretics (Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion) "conceal many mysteries

of salvation" "by their deceitful translations".240 He is not content with any other wording than

surrecturus sim for the raising action mentioned in the Greek version (but not in the Hebrew).

This was the phrasing he chose for both his 397 Commentary on Jonah and for the Vulgate.241

But as I have said, the bulk of Jerome's references to Job occur as a result of the Pelagian

controversy. Jerome's use of Job in this context is both perceptive and effective in undermining

the Pelagian argument from the "Ancient Saints." He was obviously fully aware of to what use

his enemies were putting Job, and brings to bear his considerable learning against them. He

notably rejects the claims for the indefectibility of Job, Elizabeth and Zacharia by the weight of

the Scriptures themselves.

Jerome's technical skills are indicated in his terminological distinction between those

who are without fault, kakia, and those who are anamartetos (according to him, those who are

sine peccato). The Saints fit into the former category, but not into the latter, which "is a virtue

that befits God alone; and every creature is subject to sin and stands in need of the mercy of

God". It is worth noting that he does not think that those who are privileged to be in the first

group are just guilty of little faults "into which they slipped through error".242

Jerome's Dialogue indicates his awareness of the matters under dispute, and also that he

had studied Augustine's thought. In this case we are referring to 'Augustine's' doctrine of

involuntary sin, which we saw Jerome bringing in just above. Jerome points to Job's offerings of

holocausts for his children as proof that there are such unwitting sins. But just like Augustine, he

cannot 'explain' God's justice, how it is that he must pay the penalty for an act of which we are

not conscious. Instead he does what Augustine would do, he turns to Romans 11, which refers to

the vessels of the potter.

240
Jerome, Prefaces to Job, p.483.
241
In fact, absent from Adnotationes.
242
Ibid., p.298 (2.4).
 78

Jerome is further proof that Job ought not to be considered a feather in the Pelagian cap. A

great deal of Jerome's argument against the sinlessness of the Ancient Saints actually comes from

Job. In other words, in his hands the Book appears not as a burden, but as a resource. 243 Let us

watch him directly respond to an interpretation of Pelagius:

And I pass over without comment that ridiculous interpretation of your

Demosthenes [i.e. Pelagius], that Job did not say, 'Who will be clean of sin,' but
rather, 'Who will be clean of sordidness.' He tries to prove in his exposition that
it is the sordidness of swaddling clothes in infancy that is here referred to, and
not the faults of sins.244

Conclusion to Chapter 3

We know that Augustine learned his method of exegesis from Ambrose and that it was

probably due to him alone that Augustine was able to deal with what were to him in his youth the

scandalous pages of the Old Testament. Thus it is logical to assume that Augustine was also in

some more direct sense influenced by Ambrose's interpretation of the Book of Job, although we

have no indisputable proof of this. Understandably, we have not been able to determine the

degree of this influence with a cursory glance at Ambrose's numerous references. Augustine

made one explicit acknowledgement with regards to Hilary, as we have seen. In general

Augustine was not one to reference a debt. He only did so when some real reason for this

presented itself, like proving the legitimacy of his doctrine during the Pelagian controversy.

Therefore, in the case of someone like him, we need to look for other signs that he was reiterating

another's idea. Yet it would hardly be surprising if were we to discover that Augustine was not so

much directly influenced by any previous writer's particular comment about Job as he was by the

faith that certain figures had originally helped to form in him. So, when it came to the Pelagian

controversy, Augustine was not so much looking in their works for the truth about Job, as he was

Jerome quotes the Book twelve times in two pages (see ibid., pp.297-8 (2.4).
Ibid., p.300 (2.4).
for a blanket authority to back up the views he had already formed.245 This fact in itself

determines a great deal of the Biblical textual relationship of which we have been speaking.

In looking back on the centuries from Origen to Augustine, does Augustine's view appear

as a synthesis of prior positions? We have seen some ways in which Augustine borrowed from his

predecessors - or at the very least held ideas in common with them. We have seen so many ways

in which he deviated from their positions as well. In the ancient world in general we have seen

how great Origen's influence was, but with respect to his view of Job influencing Augustine it

seems that this was in every case mediated through one of our other authors, most notably

Ambrose and Hilary.

Of course, there is more to be written on this question of influence, much more to be said

about the differences among these authors' conceptions of providence, for instance, and which

one of these Augustine would have, or actually did, adopt. Yet regardless of the particular

influences that would eventually be uncovered, we should bear in mind that Augustine's De

civitate Dei 'solution' to Job is a kind of proof that Augustine was in the end not ultimately

convinced by any previous approach. Those who sought to account for Job's virtue as a

consequence of the grace of the Old Testament revelation were bordering too closely upon

Pelagianism to be to Augustine's liking.246 The more ambiguous phrasing of Chrysostom that Job

was "taught in good things" because "God has always sent teachers out throughout the world"

would have been rather more pleasing to him, since in this case the force of the written law seems

to permit the more interior type of action of grace which he endorsed, as we saw in chapter 2.

Even in the period that pre-dated the Pelagian controversy, that is, when he was working on

Adnotationes, Augustine would not have greatly appreciated any view that would look to the Old

Testament Law as the reason for Job's goodness. Augustine never looked upon the Old

245
Augustine makes a great number of such references. To limit ourselves to his final work alone,
OICI we find dozens of them, to Ambrose especially, but to Basil, Cyprian, Nazianzen, Hilary, and even
one to Jerome. This subject is discussed in firic Rebillard, "A New Style of Argument in Christian Polemic:
Augustine and the Use of Patristic Citations," Journal of Early Christian Studies 8 (2000), pp. 559-78.
246
See chapter two conclusions for this.
Testament as much of a device for heroic sanctity. If there is one more thing we can say about the

differences between exegetes in this period, it is that those of that certain persuasion that valued

the Old Testament as a 'sufficient' ground for sanctity were of the more literal, and, we ought to

say, the 'Antiochene' type. This approach had a great deal more to offer the Pelagians. Julian of

Eclanum's commentary - it is no surprise to say - was both literal and, obviously, Pelagian. We

must remember that Augustine and his mentors were not of this ilk. The Old Testament had never

impressed Augustine on a literal level, and it is no surprise that even in Adnotationes the literal

meaning should be of little interest to him. 247

All of this being the case, we should assume that Augustine would have been influenced

by, or at least coincidentally held views more in common with, the 'Alexandrians,' like Ambrose

and Hilary. But what about the Cappodocians? We have considered but one of them in this

chapter. Nevertheless, in terms of influence, although their type of approach would have been

appreciated by Augustine, because of the language barrier we would have to conclude that this

was negligible. Yet going back to our two above-named Latins, we have seen that Augustine was

probably aware of Hilary's commentary - though probably only by a later date, that is, after

having written Adnotationes - and that he had to consciously distanced himself from it, at least in

part.

This leaves Ambrose. Now stylistically Augustine's exegesis at this period resembles no

one's more closely than it does Ambrose's. However, one would be hard pressed to find any

particular passages where their comments are so similar that they establish that Augustine

borrowed from him. Of course, just like Augustine, Ambrose considered sin to be a basically

inescapable part of life - a fact that holds right back into childhood. And, like Augustine,

Ambrose believed that Job was somehow specifically, miraculously and mystically connected to

Christ. We have seen that Jerome also believed this. In each of their cases Job 19:25-7 was

247
Passages in the anti-Manichaean polemic where he argues for 'the New in the Old,' do not
undermine this. As in MEC, 16.26-24.44, in presenting the Old Testament Augustine does not limit himself
to the plain sense of the text.
decisive of their views on Job. It is astonishing by contrast that Chrysostom does not even

mention the name of Christ when commenting on this passage! Julian of Eclanum likewise misses

it, although Ephrem asserts it.248 Again, both Ambrose and Augustine agreed that the Book of Job

was not about Job never having sinned. Yet in this case it is to be wondered whether their

reasoning is quite the same. There has been much debate over Augustine's earlier view on the

origin of the soul. It would not be all that surprising that Augustine would have at one time

agreed with Origen that "to be in the flesh was to be in sin," in that to be in the flesh was the

result of a sin, and that this view would have flavored his view of Job having sinned in a manner

resembling Nyssa's and Ambrose's views. Of course, in the context of the interests of the

Pelagians it mattered little how one derived a doctrine of 'original sin'; it just mattered that one

had such a doctrine. The doctrine of the soul's fall is important for another reason. Was it the

basis for Augustine's failing interest in the historical Job? Of course, one would think that belief

in this doctrine would set someone apart from those who thought that Job's virtue was the result

of having known and having put to good use the teaching of the Old Testament. Augustine was

one who believed that the Old Testament revelation had little if anything to do with Job's virtue,

but is this proof that he believed in the soul's fall? Why was Augustine uninterested in the

historical details of Job's life? Were all the 'Alexandrians' so disinterested; was Ambrose? Of

course, the supernatural or metaphysical preoccupations of this group are in a way precisely that -

a lack of preoccupation with history. Yet 'history' is not exactly a cut-and-dry concept, given the

exegetical principles involved here. Yes, in the case of Julian of Eclanum, the absence of a

doctrine of original sin is not incidental to his literal approach. Yet, Gregory the Great, possibly

the most elaborate of all spiritualizers, cannot be said to have been uninterested in the historical

dimensions of Job.

How does the matter sit with Ambrose and Augustine, then? When we compare The

Prayer of David and Job with Adnotationes, we see that the former treats of Job 'as a person,'

248
ACCS: Job, p. 105.
whereas the latter treats of him almost exclusively as a type. Of course, Augustine's anti-Pelagian

works would consider Job 'as a person', but this earlier difference does say something for the

independence of Adnotationes from Ambrose's influence. In a world where people freely

plagiarized, where it was a virtue to soak up the thoughts of others, as we have seen Nyssa and

others doing to Origen, Adnotationes stands out as a relatively independent work, as does so

much of Augustine's corpus. Yet Ambrose was the most relevant of the sources operative in this

case. Whatever the precise contours of Ambrose's influence on Augustine, we can certainly see

that it was significant in a certain sense. Augustine knew of and built upon Ambrose's theology.

Indirectly - we do not think directly - this included his view of Job. Had Augustine ever read The

Prayer of David and Job? Even maintaining what we have said about the indirect nature of

Ambrose's influence on Augustine's view of Job, we need not conclude that he had never read it.

We would need to maintain that, had he read it, he had done so sometime in the past, and that by

399 he had forgotten its details.

Augustine's history with Job is as much an indictment of Origen (for the tradition up to

c.400 if anything is origenian) as it is an endorsement. Origen's successors seemed to have

fastened upon one part of his thought rather than on another, and it was this other neglected side

that was really of interest to Augustine. Origen was quite prepared to speak of Job as a flesh-and-

blood man, and to go into a good amount of detail about his everyday life as a good man. This

was the part that more interested the Fathers, especially Chrysostom and Ambrose. Yet Origen

was conscious that there was another important dimension of this great figure. And this was the

man who was inspired by the Holy Spirit, was endowed with the gift of prophecy, and who had

"left the supersensible world, not as a result of sin, but obeying a specific Divine command to co-

operate in the regeneration of mankind." Now, depending on how this "co-operation in the

regeneration of mankind" is to be understood, this was the side of Origen's interpretation of Job

that could hold lasting appeal for Augustine, the mystical dimension of one's godly life.

We had one over-arching goal governing our investigation of the Patristic background of
 83

Job: to determine whether Augustine's doctrine of Job was reactionary purely and simply, as

Steinhauser has claimed, or if his was a legitimate reading of the text, according to the standards

of the time. These two are mutually exclusive in how they relate to the 'common sense' of the

age. We are not speaking in terms of an absolute right or wrong. We are asking about Augustine's

mindset over the 30 years between the writing of Adnotationes and his death and how this fit into

the pattern of his 'peers.' Now, it is possible and tempting to consider the matter too simply: what

was the teaching of the Fathers - did Job sin or not? It is possible to consider this too simply for

the reason that several of the writers examined in this chapter answered this question both 'yes'

and 'no' in the very same writings! Of course, some of these were aware that they were

seemingly giving two contradictory answers (although some seemed not to realize this!), and so

they endeavored to make some further specification about how it was that Job could be both

'blameless' in his conduct and yet 'not free from sin.' This tension is a good sign, of course, since

it is a tension borne by the text of Job itself. The question is, how did Augustine deal with this

tension, and was his approach legitimate, or a strong one, according to the standards of these

writers? For Augustine to state something in 399 and to later contradict it and attempt to conceal

the fact that he had ever said it would not be a sign of a strong position. Discovering whether or

not Augustine did this is the final burden of chapter 4. Yet if his view that Job had sinned and that

his greatness was the result of the gift of God were fairly standard for the time, why would we

even need to imagine that he was on such insecure footing, the sort of insecurity that would find

him tempted to rewrite his own history with Job? The truth is, more than one Father agreed with

Augustine that Job had sinned in his lifetime and that his greatness was nothing other than the

result of God's gift. Now, if others had thought that Job had sinned, there is no reason to suppose

that Augustine had not thought this in 399, especially since we know he thought this way in the

420s. Of course, had none of the writers examined in this chapter agreed that Job had sinned and

that his greatness was the result of God's gift, this still does not mean that Augustine must have

been inconsistent. On the other hand, had he been on his own in maintaining these things about
 84

Job he would have had every reason to be defensive about his view. Yet this was not the case, and

therefore there exists no prima facie reason for concluding that he attempted to conceal what he

had said about Job in Adnotationes in his fight with the Pelagians.

So many times had Augustine claimed that he was simply teaching what the Church had

always believed. In the matter of grace and universal sinfulness he usually pointed to the

Church's practice of infant baptism. As we have seen, there was no reason why he could not have

pointed to the teachings of some of the writers considered in this chapter as well.
 85

Chapter 4

Adnotationes and the Grace Controversy

1. Augustine's 'Fear' of Job?

It is right to wonder about Augustine's consistency throughout his career. Certain things

that we can call 'coincidences' suggest that Augustine tended to conceal his true opinion on Job.

Let us note Julian's use of Job as proof of his doctrine. Let us note as well the fact that the only

place where he offers a description of Adnotationes is in Retractationes, which was itself quite

obviously an elaborate defense of his doctrinal consistency against the accusations of the

Pelagians. Retractationes is dismissive of Adnotationes, of course, as we have seen. But does this

mean that Job was an obstacle to Augustine's teaching on grace? His opponents were convinced

that he had not always taught the same thing with respect to the will. He admitted as much, but

the real point concerns precisely how his position developed. Whether Augustine was correct or

Julian - and it is a far more complex issue than either side was willing to acknowledge - 1 would

maintain that Augustine's attitude to Job is not accurately described as contradictory or evasive.

If we are not convinced by Augustine's view of his own doctrinal development as he gives it in

Retractationes, we can yet be reassured in our hesitancy before the opposite interpretation, the

one that has him concealing, prevaricating and doubting biblical consistency. Retractationes is

certainly dismissive of Adnotationes - of that there is no question - but we should seek to

understand the precise nature of this dismissiveness. Nothing but close attention to the details will

make this possible.

Before we attempt this, let us illuminate some of the additional elements that render the

simplistic equation of 'dismissiveness' and 'fear' problematic. For one, the Pelagians were not

willing to admit that Augustine could be consistent in one respect but adaptive in another. I would

suggest that even as his doctrine of free will changed, his doctrine of grace did not. I am
 86

suggesting that even as the two influenced each other, they were not completely interdependent.

In fact, for him, grace was ultimately the more important doctrine, and it functioned as that

consistent force for bringing about a change in the secondary matter of free will. In other words,

no external force (i.e., Pelagianism) intruded upon what was a purely internal matter for

Augustine, that is, something that he was attempting to work out for himself despite others'

concerns. Something of this is hinted at in his famous declaration, "In the solution to this

question, I, indeed, labored in defense of the free choice of the human will; but the grace of God

conquered."249 Augustine's terse interpretation as much obscures as it reveals. It is my conviction

that the problem lay (and still lies for historians) in the tendency to consider grace and free will as

antinomial. Augustine ultimately realized they were not. The parallel dynamisms that these

conceptions embodied in his mind confused all those around him, but it was a paradox that

Augustine would feel it was necessary to maintain. What we state, then, about his doctrine of

grace not changing, we mean to be understood of the basic theology that inspired it. It is not easy

to keep this in mind amidst the circumlocutions of the later debates with Julian. That Augustine

was unwilling to waiver was, in fact, the force that kept the controversy running.

1.1. The Meaning of the 'Unfinished' Work

Another inauspicious piece of evidence that deepens the belief that Job was a problem for

Augustine lies in the fact that Adnotationes was one of the few works that he never completed. Of

course, there is hardly anything unusual in the fact that an author of so vast a corpus did not bring

all of his inspirations to fruition. Augustine was no ordinary ambitious writer, though. He

customarily returned to works after having let them sit for quite some time, and in one case, for

decades. This most exaggerated case was De doctrina Christiana, whose first half he penned in

the mid 390s, but to which he was not to return until the mid 420s. But even if the case of DDC

249
Describing his work Ad Simplicianus in Retractationes 2.1.1.
 87

was not normative, it is true that he commonly wrote in a piecemeal fashion. While smaller

treatises he could dash off rather quickly and easily, his mind was certainly capable of holding

vast enterprises together over significant lengths of time. This was the case with De civitate Dei,

which stretched from 413 to 427, and with the Enarrationes in Psalmos, which he composed over

26 years, from 392 to 418. These were massive productions, and they indicate his ability to

remain attentive to a single idea or project for great lengths of time, and, even more significantly,

to hold several great ideas together in his mind at once. Indeed, it was more often the case than

not that at any given point in time he was working on more than one work. This characterized his

episcopacy more so than the period before it. De doctrina Christiana indicates his fidelity to good

ideas. This is the case for another of his projects that was not actually limited to any one effort, a

project that covered nearly the entirety of his episcopacy. This was, of course, his work on the

Creation Narrative of Genesis. A full five distinct efforts composed his meditation on those

Biblical chapters. It began with Genesis against the Manichaeans, and ending around 420 with

the second work he entitled Literal Interpretation of Genesis.

His career testifies to an amazing fidelity to ideas. However, Retractationes records three

exceptions to this: the Commentary on Romans, that on the Epistle of James, and, of course,

Adnotationes in lob. Steinhauser is suspicious of this list, especially in light of the apologetic

preoccupation of the Retractationes.250 Augustine, he claims, almost always finished his works,

why then did he not complete these? Yet how do we know that he did not compose several other

likewise 'incomplete' annotations? It seems improbable that all the notations he had made

survived, and what does this consideration do to this suspicion? But of this list of three, one

stands out from the other two - Romans.251

There are significant problems with the argument that since Augustine never 'finished'

Adnotationes he must have wished to disown it. Let us recall for a moment the drafting of De

Steinhauser, "Job Exegesis," pp.299-311, p.305.

See ibid., p.305: "distracted by other concerns, he finished just seven verses."
 88

Trinitate. We know that Augustine did not bring the work to the level of polish that he desired.252

Indeed, judging by the excellence of the work, especially in terms of its foundational insights, we

can begin to appreciate what must have been an annoyance at not having been able to do with it

as he would have originally liked. Yet, even though he could have, he took no steps to provide a

better version. Does this mean that he repudiated it? Of course not. Does it suggest that within its

core was some kind of doctrinal error? No. However, it is clear that he would have liked to have

improved it. On the other hand, he never indicates that he wished to go back to Adnotationes.

Indeed, we have reason to believe he was finished with this 'scribbling.' It is a big leap, however,

to conclude that because of this he thought Adnotationes was without value, or somehow

doctrinally problematic. Nor, on the other hand, does it mean that it was without value for the

future. Every little exercise, among whose number we would be forced to include Adnotationes,

would certainly have provided him with a few insights to carry forth into the future. This was

certainly the case with the earlier forays into Genesis and Romans.

How Augustine appreciated 'development' is a matter relevant to our current inquiry.

Something of his attitude to the enduring, and yet relative, merit of works can be gauged, for

instance, from his discussion of the two treatises he directed toward the subject of lying in

Retractationes. In his discussion of the earlier work, De mendacio, he has us to understand that he

had originally ordered it "removed" (auferre) from his works, and indeed, after having composed

the later Contra mendacium, he was "determined that this earlier work was not to survive" and he

"gave orders to this effect." 253 These orders were not carried out, fortunately, and even he must

have been pleased by its survival, for when reviewing the works for Retractationes he discovered

that "in it there are some important things that are not in the second work."254 There are a few

lessons for us in this. The first is that Augustine did not like to have imperfect works lying about.

This impression is made in the passages on both Adnotationes and the commentary on James. But

252
Retr., 2.15.1.
253
Ibid., 1.27.
254
Ibid., 1.27.
 89

this was not all that was on his mind. A great many of his works were rendered obsolete by later

productions. Consider the Genesis works again, and not only these, but the anti-Pelagian works as

well. In fact, we might better ask which works were not rendered obsolete by De civitate Dei!

Secondly, even though it is surprising, as we have seen, Augustine would actually have had some

of his works destroyed! In the passive sense this just means that he wished merely to 'exclude,'

that is to say, to not include said work or works in any list of his works, and to not have it or them

copied. This seems to be his intention with De mendacio in light of it being "vague, complicated

and entirely irksome."255 It is more than a case of simple redundancy. Yet something more than

'death by attrition' is suggested by auferre.256 It was only on account of the expressed desire of

the brethren that he kept it, that he chose rather to "edit"257 it, which at the very least means that

he claimed it as his own by listing it in Retractationes. Augustine did not consider his works

solely in light of whether or not they constituted the best statement on a matter, otherwise he

would have destroyed a great many of them. A countervailing concern was availability. In the

case of anti-Pelagianism, if the Unfinished Work Against Julian constituted the last and most

sophisticated assault on Pelagianism, the fact that the earlier works could also effect appreciable

blows against error more than justified their existence. The point for Augustine was that the truth

contained in his works reach as many people as could possibly draw this profit from them. Were

not the many more likely to be reached by five treatises than by just one? Again, for

Adnotationes, Augustine takes the time to tell us that even though the work is nearly 'intolerably

obscure,' some of his brethren were yet profiting from it. Yet why does he not direct the reader of

Retractationes toward some of his later musings on the Book of Job elsewhere in his writings?258

The reason is simply that these could hardly be easily pointed out, and their context was usually

quite specialized.

255
Ibid., 1.26.
256
Auferre is common enough in Augustine, and, indeed, in the Latin texts of the Scriptures.
257
See next section below for appearances.
258
Or even one of the better known commentaries on Job by Chrysostom and Origen.
 90

Of course, the assertion that Adnotationes was not in fact "finished" may not actually be

correct. Even as he only commented up to the 39th of the 42 chapters of Job, Adnotationes

terminates with a telling phrase, "Nunc autem manum imponens ori, ne ultra progrediatur,

promittit se non adjicere iterum, ne recedat a Deo. Amen."259 Doubtlessly this lamen' is meant to

convey a parallel between the doctrine of Job 39:35 and Augustine's intentional termination.

Were this not the case, and the 'amen' had no thematic parallel in the immediately preceding text,

then we would be left to wonder who actually put it there - Augustine, the original transcriber, or

a subsequent, early copyist. For whatever reason he had for stopping his commentary at that

point, we cannot say. Nothing of the subject matter seems to provide an obvious explanation -

that, for instance, this is the point when commenting any further would make redundancy

unavoidable. But that it was a conscious decision to stop is clear enough from what cannot be

merely a coincidence in the text of Job, the putting "his hands to his mouth to go no further

forward, and he promises to add nothing further." Augustine does nothing to confirm this hunch

in Retractationes, though. But, of course, by then he had had thirty years to forget the

significance of this ending. Even had he not forgotten it, what reason had he to mention it in so

brief a passage like Retractationes 2.39? Augustine never refers to it there as unfinished.

This means that when he tells us that he "discovered that this work is defective in our

copies," he was not referring to its failure to go all the way up to chapter 42. However, was 427

the first time he had ever laid his eyes upon these notes - copied as they were into a separate

place, out of the margins where he had left them so long ago? If it was, we can understand the

distance he places between himself and this text as an effect of his having never seen it like this

before: "[I] would not want it said that it was edited by me if I did not know that some of my

brethren had it..." 260 After all, it had not been 'edited' by him at all. When it was that Augustine

lost track of the work, is a question worth considering, but this 'losing track of did not cause the

259
Steinhauser agrees with my opinion here. See "Adnotationes in Job," in the Augustine
Encyclopedia.
260
For full text, see section immediately below.
termination at 39.38. The 'amen' appearing where it does tells us that Augustine too 'put his

hands to his mouth to go no further forward, and he promises to add nothing further.' He never

mentions Adnotationes in any extant work until 427. We will see, however, how these notes

continued to live on as the fruit of an earlier meditation. After all, this was why he composed

them. Is there any surprise that Augustine did not ever explicitly refer back to them? Not at all. In

fact, it would have been rather strange were he to happen to tell Jerome, for instance, that he had

written on the copy Jerome had sent him from Bethlehem. No one ever discussed the actual

manner of his Scripture study outside of the private sphere of the 'school.' Let us take DDC as

our proof of this: no where in it does Augustine tell his reader how to learn the text (what it

actually meant 'to commit to memory', as he says in DDC 2.9.14,261 or by what means one was to

pass on to others one's determinations of meaning).

1.2. Steinhauser's View of Augustine's Job

Steinhauser, whose thought is considered throughout this thesis, has the particular

distinction of having written the only study we have been able to discover on Adnotationes and

the grace controversy. And although this is the case, his views on this subject can be considered

in some important ways to fit into the category of those who would highlight the 'change' that

Augustine's thought underwent over time. This has, of course, been for a century now an

important topic in Augustine scholarship, with broad lines of disagreement separating those who

would emphasize this change and those who would either deny it or want to significantly

downplay it. Now in the most exaggerated terms this would be a question of whether 386 saw

Augustine converting to Platonism or whether he was converting to Catholicism. Of course, there

are a number of other ways to categorize 'change' in Augustine. It is becoming more common to

assert that elements of Manichaeism continued to linger in his outlook, although denied in

261
See also 2.14.21, and 3.37.55.
 92

principle.

Steinhauser does not concentrate on lingering Manichaeism, although he refers to Julian's

accusations to this end.262 Yet the fact that Julian can label him a 'Manichaean' while certain

modern scholars label him a 'philosopher' for the first several years of his post-baptismal life

highlights the sort of messiness that has beset this debate, and why it has not been resolved after a

full century. This is another reason why this present study of Augustine's unexamined

commentary on Job is so important. New evidence is always useful.

Steinhauser sees a great deal of change in Augustine between his earlier and his more

mature writings. He suggests that whatever was going on his head when he composed

Adnotationes in 399 was no longer there during the Pelagian controversy. Why else would he

begin to do something and then later decide not to? Steinhauser tells us that "He had nothing to

gain. The figure of Job served only to weaken his position against Pelagius and the Pelagians."263

Therefore, he suggests, Augustine's ideas must have changed between the years 399 and 412 or

so. At the very least this meant that he came to realize that Job did not serve his purposes, a fact

which he had not realized while writing Adnotationes. We have already pointed out some of the

reasons why it is not a groundless thought to suppose that Augustine had changed his mind in

many important ways over time. We will continue to argue for the reasonableness of this

assumption below in our further discussion of Retractationes. Although this present writer does

not agree with Steinhauser's findings in particular or with the position of those who would

highlight the significance of change in Augustine in general, I do think it is a position that

deserves deliberate consideration.

It is unfortunate that this has been a debate conducted with exaggeration on both sides.

Part of the problem in sorting out the issue is that what is meant by 'Augustine was a philosopher

in 386' is hopelessly indefinably vague. Another problem lies in establishing and keeping to an

Steinhauser, "Job Exegesis," p.301.

Ibid., p.305.
 93

exact timetable for plotting the precise details of 'change'. This was the principle defect in Carol

Harrison's recent and overall very good study of this question. She incorporated into her

argument for 'proof of stability' in Augustine's thought, for instance, Eighty-Three Different

Questions, a work written in piecemeal fashion, a work for which no certain date can be

assigned.264 We must be absolutely certain of the dates of the works from which we are drawing

proof. Another problem underlying this debate lies in the fact that it revolves around so many

specific issues, not all of which necessarily evolved synchronously in Augustine's mind, although

in retrospect we feel that they ought to have evolved together, since they are all crucial elements

of his anti-Pelagianism. We have tried to keep this in mind in the conclusion to chapter 2.

How much of Steinhauser's argument about Augustine's history with Job depends upon

this more general position that emphasizes change in Augustine? In fact, a great deal. He argues

that Augustine began to steer clear of Job because he perceived him to be of limited help. He

argues, in other words, for a 'before' and an 'after' view of Job. He suggests that the commentary

that he was 'beginning' in 399 was abandoned and never resumed because he came to realize

something about Job that he was unaware of before. Now, if there was no significant change in

Augustine in general, or more specifically in terms of soteriology and his theology of grace, then

the idea that Augustine abandoned the Job commentary for polemical reasons falls apart.

But, of course, it is by no means certain that his thought did evolve in the ways that have

been suggested. So, in this thesis we are arguing for two things simultaneously: 1) that

Augustine's thought did not radically evolve between the years 386 and 399, and 2) that his view

of Job did not radically change in ways that would serve the Pelagian critique of him. At the very

beginning of this thesis we said that Augustine would in time abandon a view he had in his youth

of the sort of perfection that people could enjoy here on earth. This would seem to have

264
It is also notable that she has argued for a more conservative position that the one I am presently
advocating. She thinks everything crucial to Augustine's mature thought vis-a-vis the Pelagians was in
place since 386.1 do not. I look to 396 as the latest point for this evolution, but consider the earlier 390s to
have really been key in this development. And yet I consider that the conversion of 386 was to a large
extent an awakening to grace. Yet the systematization of this insight took several years to come out.
significant implications for Steinhasuer's argument. Yet, we must attend to exactly when it was

that this change occured that we are admitting to. It did not occur, as Steinhauser requires it to

have occured, between the years 399 (i.e. the writing of Adnotationes) and the eruption of the

Pelagian controversy in c. 412. If it had occured at this late stage then everything Steinhauser has

claimed about Augustine's attitude to Job would be really quite plausible. But even if I am

incorrect to think that Confessiones is giving an accurate protrayal of his state of mind in 386, and

that the 'discovery of grace' did not happen till later, that 'discovery' in no way occured after 396

- which is essential to Steinhauser's position. So much of Augustine's development is debatable.

Yet when it comes to his idea of the prefection attainable in this life and the role of grace in this

perfectionism - at least insofar as these issues would render the figure of Job an icon of

Pelagianism - this is something we can deny outright with the most casual glance at Ad

Simplicianum.

Steinhauser emphasizes 'change' in Augustine. This is of consequence because it

influences his reading of Adnotationes. He considers Augustine's use of Job as 'defensive,' and

as generally not serving his polemical purposes. For instance, Steinhauser writes: "Augustine was

obviously uncomfortable dealing with the book of Job and was clearly on the defensive. Perhaps

for this reason he never finished his Adnotationes in lob."265 He considers Adnotationes as a

whole with Augustine's other unfinished works. He observes that in Retractationes Augustine

mentions three types of incompleteness: those referred to as Adnotationes, those referred to by the

term opus inchoatum, and those referred to by the term opus imperfectum.266 Of course, since he

includes there only one work in the category of 'adnotationes,' he is unable to say anything about

it as a group. Rather, he immediately abandons this discussion of types, and simply groups

Adnotationes in lob with other works he considers to have been left unfinished because of some

significant defect, as he writes,

Ibid., p.305.
Ibid., p.305.
 95

More likely [than that his notes were of a poor quality], however, is a conscious
decision on the part of Augustine not to revise a given work for a specific reason.
Although he does admit that his notes are spotty, he probably did not expand
Adnotationes in lob into a genuine commentary simply because he did not wish to do
so. And why not? He had nothing to gain. The figure of Job served only to weaken
his position against Pelagius and the Pelagians. One suspects the same could be said
of his commentary on the letter of James, which is notorious for its glorification of
works."267

As we shall see, Augustine's use of Job cannot be accurately understood without careful attention

to time: how his thought developed, and how it did not, how his use of Job changed, and how it

did not. But more than ten years separates the writing of Adnotationes and the beginning of the

Pelagian controversy. If Augustine had not developed the notes into a formal commentary by then

what need have we to look to that later polemic as an explanation for this? Steinhauser, as have so

many other scholars on numerous occasions, has relied upon the ambiguous evidence of the

Retractationes to too great a degree. Coupled with the cryptic nature of Adnotationes itself it is no

surprise that difficulties have surfaced in the discovery of Adnotationes' meaning. As we have

seen, Retractationes 2.39 is peculiar. Yes, it seems positively hostile in its dismissiveness of that

'work'. But, as we have said, it was not a 'work' at all, and that is primarily to what Augustine

was reacting in that passage. Yet the most important thing in all of this is that there is no reason

why we should rely upon this passage for an understanding of the text: we have the text its.elf.

There is, moreover, no reason to guess about the shifting use Augustine has made of Job: we can

read and compare Adnotationes with the hundreds of references that he made to Job in his later
\

writings. At the very least, there should be little disagreement over the fact that Retractationes

2.39 was meant as an introduction to the reading of Adnotationes, and not as an alternative to it.

Is it not revealing that Augustine does not retract anything he had written in Adnotationes in

Retractationes?

Steinhauser argues that just as Augustine had the upper hand in his exegesis of the

Ibid., p.305.
 96

Pauline Epistles, especially the Letter to the Romans, so did the Pelagian Julian of Eclanum hold

the upper hand in the exegesis of Job: "The book of Job provides a more benign environment for

the development of Pelagian thought and a more effective vehicle for its expression."268 He says,

"Both Pelagius... and Julian of Eclanum... praised Job as a man in whose heart the law had been

written..." He echoes this thought about Scripture in another place:

Living before the Law of Moses and the gospel of Jesus Christ, Job provided
concrete evidence that human nature is naturally holy and self-sufficient in doing
good... Because of this line of thought, Augustine showed little interest in the
person of Job and dealt with him only when others raised the topic.269

Of course, the last point is simply not accurate since he referred to Job a number of times in

homilies. Steinhauser sees developed in that Old Testament book a "very positive picture of Job,"

indeed, in a way, the very one "which Pelagius paints as a paradigm of human nature," and it is

for this reason that his use of Job "has put Augustine on the defensive.. ."27 Augustine, however,

did not break off his work on Adnotationes and later 'belittle' the work in the Retractationes out

of fear of the text. Augustine and Jerome, both of whom wrote works against the Pelagians,

repeatedly turned to the Book to explicate its truth; they leaned on it as a source for their own

anti-Pelagian convictions. The suggestion is that because the Book is naturally Pelagian

Augustine should have feared it. This is to under-appreciate Augustine's convictions and talents,

though. Could he not draw upon numerous texts to confirm that Job had at some point sinned? He

did do so, and, again, so too did Jerome, and, in one way or another, most Ancient Christian

writers. Steinhauser admits that there are passages where "Job humbly confesses his personal

sinfulness."271 Yet it is to be wondered how such an admission is not imperative. Is not the fact

that such passages exist sufficient to show that it was not fear but, rather, conviction in the

biblical messages that motivated Augustine?

268
Ibid., p.300.
269
Steinhauser, "Adnotationes in Job" in the Augustinian Encyclopedia, p.8, my emphasis.
270
"Job Exegesis", p.304.
271
"Adnotationes in Job" Augustine Encyclopedia, p.8.
 To account for whether or not Steinhauser is correct about what he takes to be the Book

of Job's obvious teaching, let us look back upon our progress thus far. Only in Eusebius have we

not seen an account of Job's sinning, but not even there do we see any basis for precluding it.

Whatever idea of 'natural law' emerges in Eusebius or in Origen is not really that at all. In fact,

their idea of natural law has much more to do with Augustine's idea of God's election272 than

with rationalistic universalism. Furthermore, Origen, Hilary, Chrysostom, and Ambrose (and,

indeed, even the semi-Pelagian Cassian) all admitted that even to Job did the words of Jb 14:4-5

apply: "For who shall be pure from uncleanness? not even one; if even his life should be but one

day upon the earth..."213' And, what additional weight had they behind them for assuming this

than such other texts as 15:14-16: "For who, being a mortal, is such that he shall be blameless?

or, who that is born of a woman, that he should be just? Forasmuch as he trusts not his saints;

and the heaven is not pure before him. Alas then, abominable and unclean is man, drinking

unrighteousness as a draught." and, 25:4-6, "For how shall a mortal be just before the Lord? or

who that is born of a woman shall purify himself? If he gives an order to the moon, then it shines

not; and the stars are not pure before him. But alas! man is corruption, and the son of man a

worm."214,

Steinhauser claims that Augustine stopped working on and never returned to

Adnotationes because he knew Job was detrimental to his doctrine. After rendering an account for

why Augustine had given up other projects, Steinhauser considers Augustine's failure to

complete only this work and the Commentary on James as instructive. Then he makes the point

See again my pp. 10-11 for this view from DCD.

273
The Talmud likewise assumed so. See http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=
330&letter=J.
274
Even if the two latter texts are from Job's opponents, 14:4-5 are the words of Job, and consonant
with his disposition throughout the Book. The Fathers do not seem to have distinguished between the words
of Job and the words of his friends on the specific level. Although it likely goes without saying that the
words of the friends are to be treated with caution as 'positive doctrine' in light of their final rebuke, here
we have them being quoted as positive doctrine.
 98

that James is "notorious for its glorification of works."275 Yet, as far as I can tell, this work's

notoriety began only with Luther in the 16th century! Further, in what sense can this be claimed

about the Epistle of James that cannot simultaneously be said about other New Testament texts

that he commented on, like Galatians and Romans, which works Augustine certainly never

ignored? If Job were a hard text for Augustine to explain, why was this not so for his

predecessors, who, all arguments aside, certainly cannot be considered to share every aspect of

Pelagian anthropology, even if they shared some? As chapter 3 makes clear, Augustine shared

with several of his predecessors the belief that the human seed was vitiated. Of course, each

Father seemed to have a different specific take on this. The Pelagians were outstanding in their

abstention. Of course, none of the Fathers had articulated a doctrine of transmission per se - for

when it is said 'to be in the body is to be in sin' - this is not a doctrine of inheritance. Yet

Augustine had not satisfactorily resolved the issue for himself either.276 For our purposes, the

question was not whether Job had sinned within the course of the book's narrative: they all knew

that half of the point of the book was to display Job's relative degree of innocence. Each one,

however, did consider him to have sinned some time throughout his life. It was for them a basic

fact of human nature that this would be so. But they did not translate the fact that he sinned into a

justification for his extraordinary punishment. The reason why Job was suffering was not the

point of the controversy. Pelagians and Augustinians agreed upon that one. The point was

whether Job had ever sinned. In this context Augustine's view that we have seen in City of God,

that God's exceptional grace had exempted Job from the usual lot of pagan sinfulness, is not the

275
Steinhauser, "Job Exegesis," p.305.
276
Insofar as this relates to the question of the soul's origin Augustine could make no final
determination. See, for instance, Ep. 166, De Genesi adLitteram, and DCD 13.14. "[W]hen Augustine
writes of the soul's origin in the Retractationes near the end of his life, he still asserts the obscurity and
difficulty of the issue, and he is clearly reluctant to take a decisive stand on it. Although he sometimes
downplays the seriousness of this uncertainty... there is no getting around the fact that it leaves a
significant lacuna at the heart of his philosophical anthropology, one which leaves unanswered crucial
questions about how we are to understand the embodied status of the human soul." (Standford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/augustine/)). He knew that it came form
concupiscence, but this seems more of the beginning of an answer than an answer in itself. On his doctrine
of original sin at this time see Paul Rigby, Original Sin in Augustine's 'Confessions' (Ottawa: University of
Ottawa Press, 1987).
 99

one stark alternative to some universal view of the sufficiency of free will and natural law

represented by the Pelagians. The 'Augustinian features' I have pointed to in Augustine's

predecessors' accounts of Job do not, however, exclude various points to the contrary, various

antitheses, that bolster the enemy's position, but yet neither do these antitheses undermine these

elements of native Augustinianism. The pre-Augustinians assumed a great deal for the will, but

this is not Pelagianism; there are important differences, as we have noted: (1) The original shape

of humanity was spoiled, (2) This corruption appears in the interior struggle of every man,

especially Job (but not Christ, they say). We have taken care to remark upon our Fathers'

sophisticated musings on the interior struggle of Job (recall Chrysostom), a psychology, upon

which Augustine never managed to comment. But the fact of struggle neither confirms nor

invalidates Augustine's version or that of the Pelagians; it just means that many of the Fathers

gave the character of Job a greater dimensionality than either of these parties were interested in

according him.

It is a fault, however, that Steinhauser never considers the views of the other Fathers

when he formulates his assumptions about what the Book of Job 'obviously' teaches. This is

especially problematic in the relevant matter of the teaching of the Fathers on salvation before

Christ, which, as we have seen, cannot really be said to be what Steinhauser needs them to be if

his Pelagian views of Job are to be considered representative of this era: that salvation was

(typically) open to Moses' disciples. Not many would ever go this far. But were the Fathers closer

to Augustine's view in De civitate Dei, 18.47,277 that salvation was only possible before Christ by

an unusual intervention by God, or to the Pelagian view that the era did not matter, only the mode

of life practiced by the individual person? I think the majority would have been closer to

Augustine's position.278 Yet, even if only a few were closer to Augustine's position, Steinhauser's

277
See conclusion for further remark upon this passage.
278
In addition to the case of Origen who would later be condemned not least of all for imagining too
broad a scope for salvation, we might add the disfavor into which Justin Martyr's ideas on this matter fell.
See Aloys Grillmeier, Christ in Christian Tradition, vol. 1, trans., John Bowden (Atlanta: John Knox Press,
 100

view about what the Book of Job obviously teaches would have to be amended.

One of the most important issues I take with Steinhauser's presentation of Job in the

conflict between Julian and Augustine relates to an assumption he makes about the types of

exegesis he sees in these authors. In setting up the dichotomy between Paul in Augustine, on the

one hand, and Job in Julian, on the other, what he fails to note is that whenever Augustine dealt

with any one author - Paul in this case - he was dealing with all the biblical authors, so to speak.

Now, of course, Steinhauser speaks in the general sense of Job and of Paul constituting more or

less 'friendly' or 'hostile' environments, and he is mainly concerned to note Julian's sagacity in

skipping Paul and focusing on Job (a wise choice Pelagius failed to make), and Augustine's

cleverness in doing the opposite. But this observation in itself fails to note that Augustine never

dealt with biblical subjects without reference to the whole of Scripture. Even when he considered

exegetical issues in Paul he clarified them in light of other books of the Bible. This was the case

with Adnotationes, which probably quotes Paul's letters most of all. This was the case with the

commentary on Galatians, the two unfinished commentaries on Romans, Genesis, the Johannine

writings, in fact, with every bit of exegesis he ever undertook. With good reason does Steinhauser

acknowledge the role that different types of exegesis (i.e. the Alexandrian and the Antiochene279,

and Platonism vs. Aristoteleanism280) played in this debate. Yet the meaning this difference of

approach had in Augustine in this case is important. Unlike an Antiochene like Julian, Augustine

never thought to confine himself to the book at hand. The difference between the two approaches

is really quite significant. It would be a mistake, ultimately, to judge Augustine by a criterion he

just would not endorse, like the text at hand can and should speak for itself What this means in

the case of Job is that Augustine could never look at, for instance, 1:1, 1:22 and 2:10 without

reference to those passages that we had mentioned just above which stated that Job had in fact

sinned, and, a fortiori, the relevant passages from the New Testament that declared that all men

1975), p.89-94.
279
Steinhauser, "Job Exegesis," pp. 300, 307.
280
Ibid., p. 300.
 101

sin, such as 1 John 1:10, Mark 10:18 and, of course, Romans 3:23 and 5:12. The exegetical

approach of other authors might lead them into the error - according to Augustine - of ignoring

this wider context. Augustine would say in a case like this that someone like Julian failed to

account for all of the Scriptures and that is why he got Job wrong. Steinhauser brings up an

interesting point when he states that "Job's sinlessness tangibly illustrates Paul's statement in

Romans 2:15 that gentiles are a law unto themselves."281 This is the sort of inter-textual

coordination I have been urging is at the basis of Augustine's exegesis, and why it is impossible

to paint a picture of Augustine as if he had divergent attitudes towards the books of the canon.

Yes, he had his favorite books, but the only "canon inside a canon" that he recognized was that of

the New Testament 'over' the Old, and this just in terms of the clarity offered in the New, as in

Paul's simile of shadows and reality in Colossians 2:16-17. Augustine's hermeneutic made a

"retreat"282 away from one biblical book into another as theoretically inconceivable in his case as

it would be for any 'Alexandrian,' if not more so.

Now, we are only interested in Steinhauser's presentation insofar as it characterizes

Augustine's long-term attitude toward Job. His article was not meant as a complete treatment of

Augustine's history with Job. Yet the impression he gives of this history is misleading in some

important ways, and that is why it was important to respond to it at length. Secondary is the

matter of Job. More important are the generalities a mistaken view of this history of Job can give

rise to, and we have discussed some of these. What kind of scholar was Augustine? Was he

honest, forthcoming, self-conscious? Did he always bear in mind the axioms of his own

exegetical principles and of his ecclesiastical consciousness? Or, was he too much the polemicist

for these things to preponderate? Some great minds have thought this later picture to be a possible

one.283 Our lengthy consideration of the Patristic background of Job, however, favors a view of

281
Ibid., p. 308. It appears that Steinhauser is stating that Julian himself made this connection.
282
Ibid., p. 308, as opposed to Julian's 'advance.' Augustine is likewise characterized as "reluctant"
to deal with Job.
283
Again, we refer to O'Donnell's Augustine: A New Biography, esp. pp.87-112.
 102

Augustine as a man of integrity first and foremost - although we ought never to utterly deny that

rhetoric and 'being clever' played their parts in his career. Added to that significant investigation

we will now add this final chapter, which will focus on Augustine's internal consistency over

time.

1.3. Another Look at Retractationes 2.39

So far our examination of the attitude portrayed in 2.39 has had to rely upon the general

impression it makes. It would be useful to account for the significance of certain words by

examining their place in Augustine's vocabulary in general. We have in mind the technically-

specific publishing terms, like 'edit,' and 'emend'. Here, again, is the text with the English

translation we have been employing:

Whether the book whose title is Notes on Job is to be considered mine or rather the work
of those who, according to their own capacity or desire, collected into a single book the
notes which were written on the margins of the manuscript, I could not easily say. For
they have an appeal for the very few who understand them, who, nevertheless of
necessity are displeased through not understanding many things; for, in many places, the
very words which are used in explanation have not been written in such a way that what
is being explained is made clear. Secondly, so great an obscurity is caused by the brevity
of the explanation that the reader can scarcely tolerate this obscurity, for he is compelled
to pass over a great many things which are not comprehensible. Finally, I also
discovered that this work is defective in our copies with the result that I could not
amend it, and would not want it said that it was edited by me if I did not know that
some of my brethren had it; for this reason I could not disregard their desire. This book
begins thus: and his works were great over the land-

Both of the words in which we are especially interested appear in this passage (in bold). But, as

we have seen, to make sense out of this passage, it is necessary to consult Retractationes as a

whole. There certain other words, like 'publish' appear, even if they are not to be found in 2.39.

Their absence is as much a clue to Augustine's mind as is the presence of those that are actually

to be found here.
 103

1.1.1. Emendare. This term appears 6 times in Retractationes'284 and 119 times in the

sample of contemporaneous works we have been employing as our point of comparison in these

matters throughout this thesis. Notably, it first appears in Retractationes itself in the prologue.285

1.1.2. Editum. Augustine hardly ever used this word. This fact makes its appearance in

Retractationes 2.39 especially noteworthy. It is also used in 1.14.6. (re. De utilitate credendi) and

1.10.1 (re. De Genesi adversi Manichaeos). There are several other Latin terms related to this

one, including edico, edicere; edissero, ediserere; edo, edere. The ambiguity that lingers between

the more ancient sense of to speak out and the technical sense we would like it to have in this case

is preserved in Augustine's use.

1.1.3. Retractare. This term, which stands at the heart of the Retractationes project, is not

employed in 2.39. This absence is not determinative. It is sparingly employed in the text as a

whole. Yet its absence is noteworthy in one sense. It illustrates the fact that Augustine was not

entertaining the thought of revising (which is what he meant by retractare, not, as in the modern

English, to take back) Adnotationes. It is possible to draw an erroneous conclusion from this fact,

as we have discussed above, if it is supposed that because he did not wish to revise it he must

have considered it totally without merit.

Now, whether Augustine was embarrassed by these works of the Scriptural canon, Job

and James, as Steinhauser claims, we can at least point out a few of the fallacies in the argument

that asserts he was. To begin with, let us focus on Adnotationes itself. Why should we not take

Augustine's expression, "is it mine!" in the most uncontroversial sense. We must not treat it as if

it were actually a treatise written by him. Clearly it was not. It was simply his marginal notations

on his codex, a codex that happened to remain in his library from 399 to 427. That Augustine

must have had a prior idea about Job before he began to write these notes, we may assume. This

284
Prologus 3., 1.2. - twice (De beata vita), 2.39 (Adnotationes, of course), and 2.15.1 - twice (De
Trinitate).
285
Prologus, 3.: "Scribere autem ista mihi placuit, ut haec emittam in manus hominum, a quibus ea
quae jam edidi, revocare emendanda non possum."
 104

was not the first time he read it, or at least had heard it read. Yet, to say that there was originally

something more behind Adnotationes than inventio would be incorrect. In other words, a 'prior

conception' about Job did not govern his progression through the text. Let us employ the

argumentum ex negativa - what, after all, is its thesis? Was Augustine throughout this study of

Job seeking to justify his idea of grace, an idea which we have said already existed? While he was

composing these notes he was not under any pressure to find anything in the text that was in

accord with his conception of grace. The critic we are responding to in this work operates under

the assumption that grace was the only thing Augustine ever had to worry about; does he assert

that he was worrying about it as early as 399? But in contending as he does that Augustine was

embarrassed by Job, and, therefore, that this bore with it implications for Adnotationes, would be

to assert that he remembered 'it,' and thought 'it' best left under a stack of books in his library so

as to cause him none of the embarrassment De libero arbitrium was causing him - if, that is, this

latter work were actually an embarrassment - a question too complex and to important to be

haphazardly guessed at here. Yet if this is the contention, it would have to be the case that

Augustine never forgot about it, a point which we disproved in the first chapter of this work.

Embarrassment implies memory, and a certain degree of clarity of memory, moreover, and we

have seen from our first chapter that this clearly was not the case. It is likely, of course, that while

composing the passages in the works entitled 'Against Julian' in the 410s and 20s that dealt with

Job, Augustine did then remember that he had once studied the book and had written marginalia

about it. But did the recollection mean much to him? Why would it? In his homilies and in his

'quodlibets' he dealt with every matter of exegesis under the sun. But his lack of regard in

Retractationes for Adnotationes was not on account of the fact that in his mind his early

interpretation of Job was flawed. The evidence indicates that Augustine's memory was not clear:

after all, he failed to recall that it was written on the 'lost' manuscript of Jerome's LXX

translation.

We should not be unduly influenced by the fact that this work has a title. Augustine
 105

indicated as much when he asked, is it mine? - not that he did not contribute every word to it,

which he certainly did, but that it was not made a discreet entity by his own action. Thus, we

should understand that, as far as Augustine was concerned, the words Adnotationes in lob was a

generic name: thus, "some notes on Job", rather than "The Notes on Job." In this way does it

differ from his commentary on James, which has a proper title, given, doubtlessly by Augustine

himself (Expositio epistulae Iacobi ad duodecim tribus).

All of his Biblical codices did not always stay in his possession. Because we do not today

possess his original codices286 we simply do not know whether he had annotated other books of

the Bible. If he had, they either disappeared from his library by the time he wrote Retractationes,

or they were not mentioned there because none of his disciples had ever cared to copy them out in

a separate place - because of their brevity, perhaps. It is in keeping with Augustine's form of

modesty that he liked only to refer to works he considered worth mentioning, not just to any mere

jottings. It may be that he annotated all or at least a great deal of his biblical codices. Perhaps Job

was the most annotated, and for that reason, the most valuable in the eyes of his disciples? What

would this indicate, then, an aversion for, or a deep interest in, the Book of Job? In this case the

latter would be the more probable interpretation, and so then what comes of Steinhauser's

critique? It seems that, since he annotated one book of the Bible, this was his habit of study. If

this was so then Adnotationes should not be looked to as a failed or forsaken project at all. But

why does he not tell us this in Retractationes? Perhaps because it was common knowledge or

because it was so trivial in his mind. ^

Since Augustine was so interested in Job in and around 399, can we suppose that he was

no longer so afterwards? I think these suspicions are altogether unsupportable.287 The fact is that

even though he did not want to accord too much importance to Adnotationes in Retractationes,

286
It may be that a codex of De diversis quaestionibus ad Simplicianum, Contra epistulam Manichaei
quam vocant fundamenti, De agone Christiano, and De doctrina Christiana (the earlier, pre-427 version) is
actually 5th century (see 'Manuscripts' in the Augustine Through the Ages: An Encyclopedia). But even if
this is so, these are not Biblical manuscripts of Augustine, and so reveal little for our purposes.
287
See below, section 2.b.ii for my theory of his readings of Job.
 106

after 399, and indeed, throughout his dispute with the Pelagians, he continued to refer to the book

of Job. La Bonnardifere, for instance, states that there were a number of reasons why Augustine

drew on this book. She considered that the character of this use was predominantly pastoral.288

Accordingly, Job was drawn on to illustrate the existential ubiquity of sin and temptation, the

good use that must be made of wealth, and Job was himself pointed to specifically as a model of

the Christian husband. It is worth adding that Job was also drawn into the disputes with the

Manichaeans and the Donatists, and not only in his dispute with the Pelagians.

Therefore, if Adnotationes itself lends nothing to the supposition of his 'dread' of the

doctrinal implications of the Book of Job, does the broader setting? Far too much has been based

upon the mere fact that Julian wrote a commentary on Job.289 Augustine (as well as Jerome) dwelt

at considerable length on Job and upon those few other 'Old Testament saints' so fondly referred

to by the Pelagians, and this long before that controversy erupted, and certainly with continued

pastoral focus thereafter. Should Augustine have written more about Job, and how much would

have been enough to allay suspicion? The doctrine of the Book simply does not provide an

unambiguous foundation to support Pelagianism rather than Augustinianism.290 We have seen this

in our examination of Job in the hands of other Church Fathers.

It is a fact that Augustine's career amounted to nothing other than a concerted, prolonged

effort to interpret Scripture. Thus, his corpus may be viewed programmatically. Even the

'occasional' works, i.e. those which were responses to others' assertions and questions, maybe

intelligently fit into his effort to understand Scripture and, in turn, to understand the world

biblically. If this was not always by means of a specific commentary, at least by means of an

extensive chain of quotation does he cover veritably all of the Holy Texts. This is especially

evident in the decade in which we are chiefly interested - the 390s. Augustine's requests to his

288
La Bonnardtere, Job, pp. 119-21.
289
Really the foundation of Steinhauser's whole argument. See op. cit. supra., p.300.
290
Compare my chapter 2 to Steinhauser, ibid., p.300: "It is no accident, therefore, that Augustine
chose Paul while Julian chose Job."
 107

bishop, Valerius, in 391 might just have had the sort of exercise exampled in Adnotationes in

mind when he asked for time to study the Scriptures before his ordination. He was always

learning as he was teaching, and especially in this period when his reputation as a teacher was not

wholly proven.291 Augustine had attempted another program of systemization something like this

in regard to the secular disciplines in the time leading up to his conversion. Augustine composed

treatises on music, rhetoric, grammar, dialectic, philosophy, geometry and arithmetic.292 That he

would be inclined to do this for the Bible should not surprise us. In fact, Augustine was a far

more systematic thinker than for which he is usually given credit. Were not the Enarrationes in

Psalmos and the De civitate Dei systems of their own accord? Would we be inaccurate to

consider the Genesis commentaries as stages in the drive toward 'system,' recognizing that this

was considered the foundational text for 'Christian philosophy' - for theology, physics and

anthropology? Let us also remember the few catechisms he wrote, which indicate, again, his drive

to organize and to arrange - that is to say - to systematize. The corpus as a whole treats of nearly

every topic worthwhile for an educated Christian of his time to consider, but it had not been

planned out from the beginning with this goal in mind. It might not have been planned out this

way, but at some time along the line Augustine must have seen the value in 'presenting' the Bible

as a whole. DDC is an effort toward providing a 'Biblical consciousness' in general; the works

taken as a whole provide this. As we know, Augustine did not bring about a systematics of

Christian theology. Perhaps the best approximation exists in De civitate Dei. The manner in

which he referred questioners back to his previous writings indicates that he views his work as a

sort of unity.

Recalling what we have said about Augustine's divisions of the Bible,293 we see from the

time of the conversion on (386+) an effort to treat of all Biblical genres. Of the Pentateuch and

'Histories', we have the Genesis commentaries, stretching nearly the whole of his episcopal

291
We just need to recall Jerome's words in epistle 101.2.
292
Only half of these are extant.
293
See our chapter l.A.
 108

ministry, as well as the later and somewhat obscure Quaestiones in Heptateuchum,294 and, if the

authorship is genuine, the De octo quaestionibus ex Veteri Testamento. On the surface, the

'Wisdom' writings appear to be a neglected lot, Adnotationes being the single title to appear in

Retractationes. Yet, as La Bonnardi&re has noted, this was one of Augustine's most referenced

group of writings.295 Of course, this does little to prove our point about Augustine's program of

commentary, unless, that is, we view his great number of references to the Wisdom books as

themselves constituting the first (and, indeed, substantial) step toward comprehensiveness;

otherwise we must fall back upon the sole work on Job as his sapiential foray. Of 'Poetry' there

is Augustine's largest enterprise, the Enarrationes, of course. He never wrote a commentary on

any one of the Prophets. Of the New Testament genres, all but Revelations (unless, that is, we

consider the last Books of De civitate Dei to be such an exposition) are covered. In terms of the

Gospels, John was commented upon specifically; Matthew was treated of in the 'The Lord's

Sermon on the Mount,' (chapters 5-7) and in Quaestiones XVII in Mattheaum. The Gospels were

also dealt with by De consensu Evangelistarum and Quaestiones in Evangeliorum. (The Book of

Acts is considered tersely in DCE.) Of the epistles, Galatians, Romans, James, and 1 John were

examined in more detail. Over all, we must not fail to recognize Augustine's plan to make sense

of the whole canon.

What this fact reveals about his attitude toward Job is that it was a part of a general

attempt to understand the books given by God. If we reject that he annotated all his codices, then

we must conclude that Job stands out as one of the very first books of the Bible he undertook to

comprehend. This fact would outweigh the supposition that he failed to bring it to completion.

Again, if this were his only annotation, then next to Genesis and Psalms Job was third Old

Testament book that he worked on, at least chronologically speaking.296

294
Not to forget as well Ep. 167: 'De sententia Jacobi' c.415
295
LaBonnardiere, Anne-Marie, Livre de la Sagesse in Biblia Augustiniana, (Paris: Etudes
Augustiniennes, 1970), esp. pp.11-13.
296
See James W. Wiles, A Scripture Index to the Works of St. Augustine in English Translation
 109

Augustine's foray into the Scriptures was not haphazard, but was fuelled by two things:

one, the lectionary, the other, his private interest. These two worked together, and over time we

find that for any given question Augustine gradually spiraled more and more deeply to plunge its

depths. Job scores high in terms of the personal interest Augustine obviously had in it.

1.4. 'Rhetoric' and Retractationes

It would be accurate to say that the disparity between my interpretation of the meaning of

Job in Augustine's thought and that of Steinhauser is due in great part to our reading of

Retractations 2.39. My reading supposes that all is not as it seems there. In other words, I see

much more posturing than what we might refer to as properly 'substantive.' To speak of a

'rhetorical' element in this passage is to appeal to a level of discourse that transcends the basic

syntactic category of 'consistency' around which so much of the debate has heretofore revolved.

But to be able to argue fairly that there exists a rhetorical implication in any given text one must

be able to point to either a formal rule that an author is known to have employed in this regard, or,

failing this, to the impossibility of taking the author's words at face value. Augustine tells his

readers that they must do this when reading Scripture especially, but other texts as well. What

value Augustine continued to ascribe to rhetoric after his conversion has certainly been

debated.297 It is fair to say, however, that his 'new' position on its value - whatever that was -

existed more as a theory than as something to which he sought to strictly adhere in all his post-

386 writings. What length he did go to restrain his native inclination toward 'synthetic'

(Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America, Inc., 1995).

297
The literature on rhetoric in Augustine is substantial. A good beginning can be made in Nello
Cypriani, OSA,"Rhetoric," Augustine Encyclopedia, pp.724-726. Literature on Retractationes itself is
unfortunately not as expansive, but the standard references include: J. Burnaby, "The 'Retractationes' of
Saint Augustine: Self-Criticism or Apologia?," in Augustine Magister I (Paris, 1954); Gustave Bardy's
introduction to Les Revisions, (Euvres de Saint Augustin 12 (Paris: Declee, de Brouwer et Cie, 1950); B.
Altaner, "Augustine's Preservation of His Own Writings," Theological Studies 9 (1948) 600-3; L. F. Van
der Lof, "Augustin a-t-il change d'intention pendant la composition des 'Retractationes'?" Augustiniana 16
(1966), pp.5-10; M.F. Eller, "The Retractationes of Saint Augustine," Church History 18 (1949), pp.172-
83; and G. Madec, Introduction aux 'Revisions' et & la Lecture des Oeuvres de Saint Augustin, Collections
des Etudes Augustiniennes: Serie Antiquite 150 (Paris: Institut d'Etudes Augustiniennes, 1996).
 110

eloquence298 is certainly worth consideration at another time and place - we suspect it always

played a significant role in the formation of his writings - but this restraint was not determinative

in every case. Now, in Adnotationes itself the role of speechifying is understandably minimal, but

not non-existent. Exactly the opposite is the case with Retractationes; perhaps of all Augustine's

works the devices of his eloquence are most powerfully present there, at least insofar as these are

engaged in an apologetic function. We can say this without implying anything about the end the

rhetoric was meant to serve.

But, of course, the 'end' is key for this present thesis. Our interpretation of Retractationes

diverges widely from some.299 Indeed, while recognizing the fundamental apologetic function of

the work, we nevertheless consider that - despite its belabored tenor - Augustine is providing

there a genuine and important representation of his development as a thinker in the matter of

grace and free will. We believe that Augustine was confident in his doctrine - that he was able to

defend it - and was truthful with regard to representing his own history with regard to it. We

should, of course, attempt to identify the rhetorical elements in the work. One of the most

important of these is the framing of the context. Why Augustine chooses to mention the Pelagians

when he does and not at other times, why the pivotal account of De libero arbitrio300 took the

shape it did, these are the effects of careful packaging. However, packaging is not duplicitous per

se. At all times Augustine is employing his skill to convince, even if what he is after is but to

convince his reader that what he offers is mere probability.301 It is easy to see that, despite all else,

Retractationes is meant to convince about his mature view of grace and free will. His personal

298
Nomeclature possible in light of DDC 4.1.1-4.7.21.
299
In light of Augustine's apologia against the Pelagians, Burnaby, op. cit. supra, accuses Augustine
of "forcing the natural sense of what he had written." (p.90). Similarly does O'Donnell say that Augustine
"is unlikely to convince the most careful readers of his works" as to his view of his own doctrinal
consistency. (Commentary, Bk 1.7.11) This is a view not shared, for instance, by Bardy, op. cit. supra.
300
Retr. 1.8.
301
As in 1.1.3: "but it would be safer to say..."; at 1.6.4.: "it would have been better to say..."; at
1.9.3.: " my statement that... does not seem to have been stated aptly enough..."; .1.12.9.: "more
satisfactory to me..."; at 1.13.1: "in a much more appropriate way..."; at 1.18.3.: "one may justly ask
whether this... can be so understood..."; at 1.18.4.: "in a much better more appropriate way..."; at 1.18.9.:
"it is far better to refer to..."; at 1.20.1.: "let the reader decide which of these two opinions is the more
probable."; at 1.20.3.: "more probably...", etc.
 Ill

history with respect to this doctrine is, in this sense, secondary. However, the two are not

unrelated. It is likely that his efforts to show a greater degree of consistency in this history than

some - like the Pelagians - might think warranted was directed at circumventing criticism, a

criticism that was in the end effective in that it served to show that Augustine's late doctrine was

not self-evidently the teaching of Scripture. Both he and the Pelagians in turn attempted to show

that Scripture and tradition evidently supported their positions.

Alongside of this, interestingly enough as a part of rhetorical packaging, we can detect an

appeal to the grace of inspiration, a grace which, although he was careful not to draw upon it too

heavily, was nevertheless drawn upon more heavily in developing this personal history than

perhaps anywhere else.302 We have to recall that Confessiones, which gave birth to the whole

controversy in the first place,303 created this autobiographical directionality, one that his

subsequent writings can be seen to support. And while it cannot be said that outside of that work

Augustine continued to highlight so heavily the function of grace in his personal life, we do find

echoes of it, and when it does appear is precisely the matter of importance. The famous

declaration of Retractationes 2.27, "but the grace of God conquered," reveals this important

dimension of this autobiography. The few places in this work where he refers to God's role in

instructing him in his writing all appear in relation to Pelagianism. What appears as a harmless

flourish in the first sentences of 1.8.1., when viewed in the context of the project as a whole

cannot but be judged a matter of perfect timing. This is, of course, the chapter devoted to De

libero arbitrio, really the centre-piece of the apologia that was Retractations. There we find the

non-descript, "with God's help" thrown in. And so? But where else in this work do we find such a

phrase? Only in two other places.304 The first appears at 2.48.1: "it was still necessary to oppose

302
Polman, Word of God, p. 45.
303
See Gerald Bonner, St. Augustine of Hippo: Life and Controversies (Norwich: Canterbury Press,
2002), pp. 317-18.
304
The closest equivalencies not appearing in this list of three include: at 2.49, "Insofar as I was
able..."; at 2.69. "And so, 'burning with seal for the house of God' I decided to write the books..."; at
2.83.: "to the best of my ability..."
 112

the secretly spreading poisons with all the power which the Lord gave me..." in regard to the

anti-Pelagian 'On the Good of Marriage' The second likewise appears in this anti-Pelagian

context at 2.63 (re. 'On the Spirit and the Letter'): "In this book, to the extent that God helped

me, I argued sharply against the enemies of the grace of God." We find a similar type of

statement occurring in a roughly synchronous account, and this again in an anti-Pelagian work.305

There will be no surprise in the fact that to underscore his teaching upon the power of grace he

should point out that it was grace that revealed this truth to him. And it is a wonderful testimony

to his skill in playing both sides,306 which might have seemed contradictory if carefully analyzed:

the self-evident teaching of Scripture and tradition that God had to specially reveal to him. The

contradiction lies only in the dramatic formulation, of course. There is nothing strictly

contradictory in the fact of God specially revealing to an individual what is taught in Scripture -

even its 'plain' meaning. DDC begins with a consideration of the interrelation of these dynamics

of cause.307 He was aware, in other words, of the problem that drawing upon these competing

methodologies could imply.308 The problem lies in their strict contrast, and this was a mistake that

he was quick enough to point out in others, as in the hypothetical opponent of the prologue to

DDC, but which he did not himself always avoid. There is nothing out of the ordinary in his

calling upon "God's assistance," as he does in the prologue to Retractationes,309 nor in the

conditional, "if God wills...", which he does all over the place. Rather, the significance lies in the

reference to the gift of grace as an established fact, as the source of his insight. It is an essential

part of the rhetorical packaging of the work. But, yet again, we ought not find here anything like

dishonesty. As we have said, it would be a lie only if it were the case that God could not reveal to

305
On the Predestination of the Saints, 4.8, quoted in Portali6, A Guide to the Thought of St.
Augustine (Chicago: Henry Regnery Company, 1960), p.183.
306
If we compare two of the accounts of 'change' in Retractationes, that which appears in 1.21. and
at 2.27, we find that in the former Augustine credits "certain commentators on the Sacred Scriptures,"
whereas in the latter, "the grace of God conquered," although, we note, that Cyprian is brought in shortly
thereafter.
307
Proem, 1-9.
308
Something that would continue to vex him when the shoe was on the other foot as it was in DDC,
ibid., and in the late exchange with Firmus (see Ep. 2*).
309
Retr. Proem.l.
 113

a person the obvious content of Scripture. The eloquence of Retractationes consists in the

subtlety by which he can draw upon both of these sides simultaneously. Was he aware that this

problematic lay at the heart of Retractationes? We have no basis to suppose he was so aware, that

is, if we fail to consider the sheer delicacy of the timing by which the 'authority' of divine

inspiration is drawn upon. Whatever the case may be, his tendency to assimilate the appeal to

divine illumination and his doctrine of grace was a powerful bit of rhetoric.310

Since, as we have said, the correct interpretation of Retractationes 2.39 is important to

this thesis, careful attention to Retractationes' presentation of his 'history of grace' in it is

therefore justified.

2. The Development of Augustine's Doctrine of Job

The examination of Retractationes is not sufficient in itself to provide a timeline for the

development of Augustine's doctrine of grace. Why this is the case is simply because it was not

directly the intention of the author to provide one in detail. Thus, he simply does not provide

enough information on all the relevant points. Yet, as we have seen, the broad patterns of its

development are hinted at there, and yet, perhaps even more importantly, there we have his sense

of what was important in this development. A lot of research has gone in to attempting to piece

together this history, but still a great deal of disagreement remains,311 with new studies coming

out all the time, some suggesting rather sweeping reconsiderations of the view that considers 396

as the decisive moment.312

310
See AS., 2.1.
311
A detailed study of the chronology at work here can be found in J. Patout Burns, Development of
Augustine's Doctrine of Operative Grace. TeSelle writes, "The reversal in Augustine's understanding of
election is not hard to pinpoint, for it occurs between the first and the second replies to some questions of
Simplicianus, written in 396 or 397..." (Augustine the Theologian (New York: Herder and Herder, 1970),
p. 178. Portalie wisely reminds us that his famous 396 reply "has not been sufficiently studied or
understood," and would distinguish between the definitiveness of the position in itself, but not its
sufficiency, that is to say, that Augustine never abandoned this position later in life, but did develop his
thinking in important ways. (Op. cit. supra, pp. 182-3.)
312
For instance, Aviad M. Kleinberg, "De agone christiano: The Preacher and His Audience,"
 114

If Augustine was conscious of how troubling Job was to his position, it is necessary to

keep in mind that this came about only after his view became controversial. To maintain that

Augustine was always aware of the novelty of his view of grace is unsupportable. First of all, this

is to imply that his own thoughts never deepened in any appreciable manner.313 To suppose that

Augustine had been aware that Job was a threat to his views before the Pelagian controversy is to

suppose that he had already considered every aspect of the doctrine he was to teach in his old age.

There is an important difference to be noted between the development of a set of tenets in

leisurely academic isolation and the maintenance of them within the fire of polemic. There was

no such fire in 399. Even if he was consciously aware of and convinced of all the themes that

were to characterize his mature position by 399 (which he was not) he certainly would have been

unaware of their controversial nature, and thus their symbolic quality was radically different. We

need to consider Augustine's autobiographical record of these events. When, for instance, was he

marvelously surprised by his answer to Simplicianus of 396? Was it in 396?314 What proof does

Confessiones offer - is it a testimonial to grace, proof of a sudden apprehension that not he, but

God in him? When was he moved by the doctrine of Paul's Letter to the Romans?

Not only is the view that Augustine always knew that the Book of Job was problematic to

him unsupportable, it is also in itself hardly advantageous to the position against which we are

Journal of Theological Studies, 38 (1987), pp. 16-33, where its author sees in DAC a reversion to the pre-
Ad Simplicianum position. If he is correct this would have substantial implications for this current thesis.
Of course, the subject of Augustine's history of grace is a facet of his development in general, even if one
of the more important facets, which itself continues to be re-envisioned.
313
Here I take the neutral "deepen" rather than another more leading term such as "changed" or even
"developed," to avoid issues that are inessential to the present undertaking. O'Donnell provides a good
summary of this subject in his Commentary on Confessions: "A[ugustine]'s mature doctrine of original sin
was far from inevitable in 397. From the vast literature, most pertinent and interesting here is A. Sage's
study at REAug 13(1967), 212-248, though many would differ with some details of his reconstruction; the
case for greater continuity and less development is made by P. Rigby, Original Sin in Augustine's
"Confessions' (Ottawa, 1987). More venturesome is the attempt of P. F. Beatrice, Tradux peccati (Milan,
1978), to affiliate A[ugustine]'s doctrine in second century Encratite teachings; such a context helps explain
the intensity of the reaction A[ugustine] stirred up. The shifts over time are perhaps more clearly visible
when looked at in a less theological way: see W. Eborowicz, Studia Patristica 14(1976), 410-416.
A[ugustine] himself speaks in defense of the consistency of his position, but he is unlikely to convince the
most careful readers of his own works..." see ibid., 'nemo mundus', 1.7.11.
314
Retr., 2.27.
disputing, such as that maintained by Steinhauser. If Job had always been counterintuitive for him

(like Isaiah was in his early years) why then did he produce Adnotationes in the first place? In

either case, then, whether Augustine was 'afraid' of Job or not, it is clear that this was not always

the case. If this was not always the case, then the change must have occurred at some notable

point during the development of his ideas on grace. The terminus post quern is 399. If we suppose

that his 'aversion' to Job actually occurred immediately upon formulating his response to

Simplicianus in 396, the thesis that Augustine 'abandoned' Adnotationes, of course, falls apart.

To have abandoned this work implies that it was recognized to be deficient after it was composed,

or during the process of composition, not, naturally, three years before he even began to work on

it. Of course, it may have been the case that this aversion developed rather late, well after

Adnotationes, well after Confessiones, perhaps even into what we will discuss below as the 'Third

Stage' of his development, that is, around 420. In the case that it was only after 399 that

Augustine came to see Job as problematic, then Adnotationes can function as our mark of

comparison with the changed doctrine of Job - how Job appears in the 420s, for instance.

a) The Testimony in General

But let us clear away all tendentious views, and consider the evolution of Augustine's

view of Job on its own merits. For this we will employ J. Patout Burns' stages in the development

of Augustine's ideas on grace.315 We should add that the inherent instability of any analytical

frameworks such as Burns' does not suggest a fatal flaw in my own methodology. Indeed, his

presuppositions will do little to undermine my analysis of Augustine's texts. Of course, we do not

anticipate that Augustine's references to Job can possibly encapsulate all of the significant

features and permutations of his position. Nevertheless, we do expect that, since the subject of

Job was actually disputed between Augustine and Julian, the broad outlines of Augustine's idea

315
Burns, Development, see footnote 2, chapter 1. No criticism of this work presents itself in the
literature.
 116

of Job will be detectable in these references, and, ultimately, we will be able to determine from

these whether Job helped or hindered his position. The object of my analysis is this: that the

progression of Augustine's thought from 399 to his death in 430 did not impose upon him any

new, negative attitude to the book of Job itself, as has been suggested. The basis for this

hypothesis is that even though Augustine's thought developed, his fundamental intuitions did not.

It was his deepening reflection upon his basic intuitions that forced him to abandon two vestiges

of Greek philosophy to which he had been clinging since about 17 years of age: the doctrine of

knowledge as beatitude, which he had begun to formally abandon by 386,316 and the c.396

'discovery of grace,' which caused him to abandon his earlier view of the sufficiency of free will.

To suppose that Augustine was hiding the fact that he was aware of how monumental were his

advances is to make a liar of the author of Retractationes. Augustine's unsettledness when

defending his consistency in Retractationes, for instance, is not that of being caught red-handed,

it is, rather, at least partially, due to doubt about his ability to persuasively explain his personal

history. Supposing that his root beliefs did not change dramatically since 396, and yet that he

nevertheless continued to grow in his awareness of their implications, we may proceed toward an

analysis of his comments on Job with due regard for the more significant of the milestones

proposed by Burns.

Particularly problematic to charting Augustine's development is determining when

Augustine is speaking according to everyday forms of speech and when he is speaking

technically. Such regular verbs as I choose..., or I was made to... might suddenly indicate a

doctrine rather than a customary form of speech. Augustine was certainly aware of this problem
11 "7 "ii o <>tQ
in evaluating his own earlier comments, Scripture itself, and the texts of the Fathers.

316
See Retr. 1.1.4., and 1.4.2. Of course, this was the formal switch. The pivotal point lies not in that
Augustine no longer believed that knowledge was related to beatitude, he never changed his mind about
this. The point is that he realized that the sort of knowledge that gives joy was not available really in this
life.
317
In the case of the Pelagian critique of his earlier writings the Retractationes is the best source. For
instance, 1.6.5., 1.8.3-6., 1.9.2-3., 1.14.2., 1.22.1., 2.48.2., all refer to the Pelagians but were themselves
 117

Context was everything, and sometimes not even that was sufficient for removing ambiguity.

Nevertheless, even though he was aware that common use and technical use often differed, this

awareness did not always actually translate into meticulous technical consistency in his writings.

If he had been perfectly consistent, the task of dating his works would be simpler. Consider the

following excerpt from Sermon 81. Now in this case the homily can be dated approximately

because of the extent of its preoccupation with grace and free will. Nevertheless, there is nothing

in the following passage that indicates whether is mid or late anti-Pelagian:

But in order to teach us that this very believing is a matter of gift, not of desert, He
says, "As I have said to you, no man comes to Me, unless it were given to you by
My Father." Now as to where the Lord said this, if we call to mind the foregoing
words of the Gospel, we shall find that He had said, "No man comes to Me, unless
the Father who sent me draw him." He did not say lead, but draw. This violence is
done to the heart, not the body. Why then do you marvel? Believe, and you come;
love, and you are drawn. Do not suppose here any rough and uneasy violence; it is
gentle, it is sweet; it is the very sweetness that draws you. Is not a sheep drawn,
when fresh grass is shown to it in its hunger? Yet I imagine that it is not bodily
driven on, but fast bound by desire. In such a way do you too come to Christ; do not
conceive of long journeyings; where you believe, there you come. For to Him, who
is everywhere we come by love, not by sailing. But forasmuch as even in this kind of
voyage, waves and tempests abound; believe in the Crucified; that your faith may be
able to ascend the Wood. You shall not sink, but shall be borne upon the Wood.
Thus, even thus, amid the waves of this world did he sail, who said, "But God forbid
that I should glory, save in the Cross of Our Lord Jesus Christ."320

Now the experts date this homily to Sept. 23rd 410-11.321 The day is easier to affix in this case

than the year since we know by the subject matter that it was in Augustine's lectionary for the 9th

of the Calends of October (i.e. Sept. 23rd).322 However, what it teaches about grace might fit into

two of Burns' four stages we shall be.considering below. It concentrates upon the 'motivation

theory' in its discussion of 'leading,' which indicates that the means of this - termed a

passages about works composed before the controversy erupted.

In many places, but particularly in DDC, and also in the sermons.
319
Especially, the two works 'against Julian.'
320
Sermo LXXXI, in Augustine: Sermon on the Mount, Harmony of the Gospels, Homilies on the
Gospels, vol. 6, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, ed. Philip Schaff, (Peabody, Mass.: Hendricksen
Publishers, Inc., 1995), p.501, with modifications.
321
There is yet some discrepancy on this point. The Augustine Encyclopedia (1999) strangely
considers its date simply uncertain.
322
Ibid., p.501; see also Geoffrey Grimshaw Willis, St. Augustine's Lectionary (London: SPCK,
1962).
 118

'movement of the heart' - is delectation. The earlier doctrine does not preclude that the

motivation for one's movement toward the good might be worked on the interior of the person,

even if the later doctrine prefers that it be so. Indeed, according to the scheme we shall be

employing, this 'external' type of motivation characterizes both the earliest and the latest periods,

although not the time between. To reinforce our point, it is easy to see that most of the above

passage could be found in any non-technical hortatory. It is the paradox that is the exhortation to

faith in grace that discloses its technical nature. The same work might disclose two ostensibly

contradictory types of passages. We will see instances of this in Adnotationes. We can point out

how it is a mistake to make fast and easy conclusions. In On Genesis against the Manichaeans (c.

388-9) we find the following statement: "Who though had made the faith in them if not the one

who observed it with wonder [i.e. Christ]?"323 This is a clear instance of an important element in

his mature doctrine. How can this not be taken as clear proof of the stability of his thinking in this

matter? Yet just a few pages earlier in the same work we find a passage to which he was to take

exception in Retractationes:

That other light, however, does not feed the eyes of birds, but the pure hearts of
people who trust and believe God and turn from a love of visible and time-bound
things to the fulfillment of his commands, which is something all people can do
if they wish, because that light enlightens every person who comes into this
world.324

In light of such apparent inconsistency of expression it is to be wondered if any Augustinian

history of grace can be pieced together at all.

With due precaution in light of the inability of scholars to date some of Augustine's

works, Burns develops the following broad chronology of the development of his doctrine of

De Genesi contra manichaeaos (GCM), 1.8.14, trans., Edmund Hill, O.P., in On Genesis (Hyde
Park, NY: New City Press, 2006), p.48.
324
Ibid., 1.3.6. (p.43).
325
396: divine control over the initiation in faith (also termed: operation of faith)
- God moves one to faith by providing motives for the latent desire for good.
c. 416: epistula 194 (ad Sixtus) - conversion as reversal of evil tendencies by an inward grace (annulling
 119

396-416: initiation theory + motivation theory

416-418: initiation theory + interior grace theory

418-426/7: (initiation theory + end theory) + interior grace theory

426/7-430: (initiation theory + end theory) + (interior grace theory + motivation theory)

Let us compare these with Augustine's record of his history in Retractationes. He mentions the

Pelagians ten times in that work. They are the obvious primary 'target' of that work:

1. From 1.6.5, on The Immortality of the Soul:

In another place where I said: 'then, in truth, when this human love has nourished
and strengthened the soul clinging to its breasts, it has become capable of following
God. When its divine majesty has begun to reveal itself to as much of the soul as
suffices while it is an inhabitant of this earth, so great a fire of charity is born and so
great a flame of divine love rises that, after all vices are burned out in a man
sanctified and purified, it becomes quite clear how divinely the following was said,
'I am a consuming fire,' the Pelagians may think that I meant that such perfection
can be attained in this mortal life. But they should not think this, for the fire of
charity which has become capable of following God and so great that it consumes all
vices, can surely be born and increase in this life...

2. From 1.8.3, on The Free Choice of the Will:

Hence, the new Pelagian heretics who treat free choice of the will in such a way as
not to leave a place for the grace of God, for they assert that it is given according to
our merits, should not boast as though I have pleaded their cause, because in these
books, I have said many things in defense of free choice which the purpose of this
disputation required... And a little later, I said: 'Who sins in that which he cannot
avoid in any way? Yet sin is committed; therefore, it can be avoided.' In a certain
book of his, Pelagius used this testimony of mine. When I answered this book, I
chose that the title of my book be On Nature and Grace.

396 exterior motive theory)

418: beatitude also gratuitous (also termed causing of perseverance, hence, 'operative grace')
426/7: (Correptione et gratia). Combines motivation theory and reversal of evil by inward grace theories
(note: LaBonnardiere gives 426 as date of this work; Burns put it at 427)
Burns refers to initiation/end as God's sovereignty; motivation and interior grace he terms the
'how God works' side.
It must be kept in mind that these developments were not harmonious - aspects of the former
theories, while retained in the end as a generalized whole, were modified in some significant ways (see his
Development, p.8). It should be obvious that the end theory dramatically reconstitutes the initiation theory,
since the latter originally asserted the absence of the former (although they do not completely annul each
other). Clearly 418 is the key moment to Burns. It is not a mistake to divide our Job texts around this date.
And around 399, because here it is that the claim of scholars is felt, that is against this work. So we have (1)
quotes up to 399, (2) those 400-416/7, (3) those 418-430.
 120

3. From 1.8.4, on the same work as above:

In these and similar statement of mine, because there was no mention of the grace of
God, which was not the subject under discussion at the time, the Pelagians think or
may think that we held their opinion. But they are mistaken in thinking this. For it is
precisely the will by which one sins and lives rightly, a subject we discussed here.
Unless this will, then, in freed by the grace of God from the servitude by which it
has been made 'a servant of sin,' and unless it is aided to overcome its vices, mortal
men cannot live rightly and devoutly. And if this divine beneficence by which the
will is freed had not preceded it, it would be given according to its merits and would
not be grace, which is certainly given gratuitously... In other works of mine... I
have dealt adequately with this matter, although in these books... we were not
entirely silent about this grace of God which they, with unspeakable impiety, attempt
to deny...

4. From 1.8.5, on the same work as above:

And in the third book, after I had mentioned the passage Pelagius had put to his use
from my works: 'For who, then, sins through something he, by no means, can avoid?
Yet sin is committed; it can, therefore, be avoided,' immediately I proceeded to add:
'And yet, indeed, certain acts done through ignorance are considered wrong and
judged in need of correction, as we read in the Sacred documents, for the Apostle
says... and the Prophet says... Acts done of necessity, when a man wills to do right
and cannot, must, indeed, be considered wrong...' But all these things apply to men
who come after the condemnation to death; for if this is not the punishment of man
but nature, there are no sins. In truth, if there is no departure from that state in which
man was so made by nature that he cannot become better, he does what he ought
when he does these things. If, however, man were good, he would be otherwise; but
because he is as he is now, he is not good and he does not have the power to do
good, either because he does not see what kind of man he ought to be, or he sees and
does not have the strength to be what he sees ought to be done. Who doubts that this
is a punishment?

5. From 1.8.5-6, on the same work as above:

And in another place, I said, 'To approve the false instead of the true so that
one errs against his will, and to be unable to refrain from carnal acts because of the
resisting and tormenting pain of the bond of the flesh, are not the nature of man as
created but the punishment of man condemned. When we speak, then, of a will to act
rightly, we are speaking, to be sure, of that will with which man was created.
Observe how long before the Pelagian heresy had come into existence we
spoke as though we were already speaking against them...
The Pelagians who deny original sin, refuse to believe that this misery
comes from a just condemnation. However, even if ignorance and difficulty
belonged to man's primordial state, in that event God should not be blamed but
praised, as we argued in the same third book.
This disputation is to be considered as directed against the Manichaeans,
 121

who do not accept the Scripture of the Old Testament... Against the Pelagians, on
the other hand, we must defend what the two Testaments teach...

6. From 1.9.2, on Genesis Against the Manichaeans:

But the new Pelagian heretics are not to think that what I said was said in agreement
with them, namely: 'This light, however, does not nourish the eyes of irrational birds
but the pure hearts of those who believe in God and turn from the love of visible and
temporal things to the fulfillment of His precepts; all have this in their power if they
will.' Indeed, it is entirely true that all men have this in their power if they will, but,
'the will is made ready by God' and is strengthened by the gift of charity to such a
degree that they have it in their power. This was not said here, then, because it was
not pertinent to the question under discussion...

7. From 1.9.3, on the same work as above:

Moreover, I said: 'Sin harms only the nature of him who commits them.' I said this
because he who harms a just man does not really harm him since he increases his
'reward' in heaven'; by sinning, however, he really harms himself, since, because of
the very will to harm, he will receive the harm he has done. The Pelagians, of course,
can ascribe this opinion to their belief and, accordingly, can say that the sins of
another have not harmed infants on the ground that I said" 'Sins harm only the
nature of him who commits them.' Hence, they do not realize that infants, who
assuredly possess human nature, inherit original sin because in the first men human
nature has sinned, and for this reason, 'Sins harm only the nature of him who
commits them.' Indeed, 'by one man' in whom all have sinned, 'sin entered into the
world.' For I did not say, 'only them man,' but I said: 'Sins harm only the nature of
him who commits them.'
Likewise, they can seek a like subterfuge in a statement I made shortly afterwards:
'There is no natural evil,' if this statement is not applied to nature as it was created in
the beginning without sin. For this is truly and properly called the nature of man.
However, we used the word in a transferred sense just as we, indeed, designate the
nature of man at birth, according to the meaning of the Apostle when he said: 'For
once we were by nature children of wrath even as the rest.'

8. From 1.14.2, on The Two Souls:

Likewise, the Pelagians can think that my statement: 'Sin is indeed nowhere but in
the will,' was made to their advantage because of little children whom they deny
have original sin... How, then, is there never sin but in the will? But this sin about
which the Apostle spoke in this was is called sin because, by sin, it was committed
and is the penalty of sin...

9. From 1.22.1, on Passages from Romans:

I said: 'However, what he says, 'We know that the Law is spiritual; but I am carnal,'
adequately shows that the Law can be fulfilled only by spiritual men, the kind that
 122

the grace of God transforms,' I certainly did not want this applied personally to the
Apostle who was already spiritual, but to the man living 'under the Law', but not yet
'under grace.' For prior to this time, in this way I understood these words which, at a
later time... I reflected more deeply and I saw that his own words can also be
understood about the Apostle himself... To the best of my ability, I have carefully
showed this in those books which I recently wrote about the Pelagians... Hence,
then, the Pelagian heresy is now overthrown...

10. From 2.48.2, on The Good of Marriage:

I also said in a certain place: 'For what food is to the health of the body, coition is to
the health of the race, and both are not without carnal pleasure which, however,
when curbed and brought to its natural function by a restraining temperance, cannot
be passion.' This was said because the good and right use of passion is not passion.
For just as it is evil to use good things in the wrong way, so it is good to use evil
things in the right way. At another time, I argued more carefully, on this subject,
especially against the new Pelagian heretics.

Augustine addresses several of the principal issues that were in dispute in this controversy:

the possibility of perfection in this life, how he could have mentioned free will without reference

to the grace of God, and original sin. Only once in these ten passages does he relate his changing

understanding of the mystery of grace to the controversy itself, and this is in the ninth passage

above. Interestingly, while the first passage deals with the same issue, he does not refer to his

changing understanding there. Would we be taking his words out of context to say that he was

unwilling to coordinate too precisely his personal development and the issues at stake with the

Pelagians? A negative answer is possible because only a few times in the entire work does he

refer to his evolution, and not then with a view to settling the matter with a clear account. In

Retractationes he admits that he once thought perfection was possible in this life, and this alone

does he admit in reference to the Pelagians. Of course, he did admit that he did not realize how

far-reaching were the effects of grace (2.27) and, in so many words, did he confess there that he

had once thought that knowledge brings happiness, but he does not, in fact, come right out and

say that he had changed his mind on this subject.326 On this latter subject he only said that he did

not state things well. And, as the above passages indicate, he was of the mind that in his defense

See, for instance, Retr. 1.1.4 and 1.4.3.

 123

of his earlier works it was a matter of clarifying his true meaning, not correcting it: "the new

Pelagian heretics are not to think that what I said was said in agreement with them."327

Thus, if we were to construct a timeline out of the overt statements made in correction of

himself there would basically be just one break, that which coincides with Ad Simplicianum.

What would this imply for Adnotationes? If that change (about perfectibility in this life) had

implications for his doctrine of grace in general then we might need look no further than there to

account for any change in his doctrine of Job. Ad Simplicianum was written before Adnotationes.

This would mean that that later work would reflect, and certainly not contradict, his mature anti-

Pelagian stance. There would be little sense in speaking about Job as a source of embarrassment

to him in that case. Whatever the truth, we know that this admission about perfectibility in this

life is the key issue where Job is involved in the Pelagian controversy, and it is clear that other

issues hang on it. If perfection were impossible in this life, then sin is a part of every life. If this is

so, then a certain darkness in the intellect and in the will is likewise maintained. This suggests

that there is a cause for this; this suggests, in other words, the doctrine of original sin. Further, on

the positive side, if man remains in a continual state of perfectibility (Augustine says, "can surely

be born and increase in this life..." 328 ), this suggests that there is an instrument that can do this,

an instrument that outstrips one's natural reach, i.e., grace.

These are all fair extrapolations, but do they account for all the issues in question

between him and the Pelagians? In other words, is what is being admitted to in Retractationes

1.22.1 (and 2.27) equivalent to what he says about Job in De civitate Dei 18.47? There is

certainly one aspect that is not accounted for - at least not directly, and that is the aspect of

election (his 'end theory', according to Burns). Is this omission determinative? The

considerations of perfectibility that Augustine makes in Retractationes 1.22.1 and 2.27 focus on

virtue in this life, and, accordingly, depend upon the same idea of the instrumentality of grace that

Retr. 1.9.2.
Retr. 1.6.5.
 124

DCD 18.47 does. In this sense, the fact that Augustine does not have 'final perseverance' in mind

seems not to matter greatly. But again, Retractationes 1.22.1. and 2.27 were not written in 396, as

was Ad Simplicianum. Do these passages constitute an accurate portrayal of his earlier position?

All that Augustine is admitting to changing his mind about there was whether man can be perfect

in this life. He has no reason to misrepresent that in 426. Does his denial that man can be perfect

in this life imply that one must be predestined to grace? In itself it does not, but it seems silly to

suppose it was ever meant to deny it. The next question to ask would be - does Ad Simplicianum

affirm this anywhere else? The answer is, of course, in the affirmative, but it does not provide a

coherent theory on this; it is, however, implied in the discussion of God's will to save, which

Augustine speaks of there as the point of God's call.329

What does it mean that Augustine does not expressly tell us in Retractationes that at the

time of writing Ad Simplicianum he believed that God's call was the efficient cause of salvation?

In part it means that he wishes his reader to believe that 396 was not a watershed moment because

it was only then that he realized that man was saved by grace. He wanted his reader to believe it

was a watershed moment for another reason. The implication here is that he realized the truth

about God's call in 386. He wants us to believe that Confessiones is to be trusted as an historical

record. Can one have a doctrine of 'predestination,' so to speak, without simultaneously

maintaining what he only came to maintain in 396 about man's perfectibility? Certainly: this is

simply a question of when deliberation attains coherence. Many scenarios are possible. It is, of

course, possible to maintain that God allows the imperfect into heaven with but a flimsy claim to

dessert. However, Augustine was not conceiving of things in this way in 396. We know that by

then he was not thinking about merit in the customary sense at all. As for the matter of final

perseverance, for Augustine to come to the conclusion that no one is perfected in this life means

that he had concluded that all the power for goodness was on God's side. Augustine does not tell

us at Retractationes 1.22.1, that is, when he addresses his changing understanding of

329
See, for instance, his discussion of call, election, and reprobation in AS, 17 and 18.
 125

perfectibility in light of Pelagianism, what he thought about 'election', or 'predestination', or

'final perseverance'. He comes closer to this in 2.27 when he, just as in 1.22.1, addresses the

issue of man's perfectibility. They were related topics in his mind, in other words. Thus the

omission of some reference to predestination in 1.22.1 is not highly significant. So, then, over

what aspects touching on grace had he still to develop his thinking after 396 and 399? To answer

this let us examine Augustine's comments on Job throughout the remainder of his career.

What does a closer examination of the history presented in Retractationes reveal about

his mindset when writing 2.39? He clearly had an agenda with Retractationes, but how did that

impact upon the crafting of 2.39? We cannot forget, of course, that Augustine had other purposes

with Retractationes than just to respond to the Pelagians. Yet we are certain that he meant every

part of his response to be amenable to that purpose. This was a literary history too, of course.

Does 2.39 show him occupied with literary-historical matters or with polemic and with doctrine?

Without knowing anything else about the context, clearly his concerns are of the first kind. We

need some other bit of information if we are to know what it is the work was meant to teach, that

is, what Augustine says this work does not do very well on account of its obscurity. We would be

safe to say that this work was meant to teach about the meaning of the Book of Job, a meaning

that in some way lay concealed from someone who would just read Job itself without aid of a

commentary. So there is something about its teaching that he is concerned about. Is he concerned

that rather than clarifying Job's meaning it further obscures it? If so, does he have any other

reason than the fact that it is so brief and, in fact, "defective in our copies,"330 to suppose that it

obscures rather than reveals? And yet he is almost surprised to admit that some have a desire to

possess this work. What he means in this case is not clear. He says, "they have appeal for the very

few who understand them," and that he had to say that it was "edited by me" because he "could

not disregard" the desire of some of the breathren. It is interesting that he gives way to their

desire. He was always giving way to the desires of his readers and questioners. It is clear, though,

330
Retr. 2.39.
 126

that if he had said something heterodox in it he either would not have acceded to their desire

(whatever this intolerably obscure passage actually means by 'desire'!), or, he would have

explained (i.e., retracted) such a passage or passages. Yet he does neither of these things; rather,

he gives the work some kind of right to exist. We think that this meant listing it in Retractationes.

Perhaps to list it there meant putting it in the hands of the library's copyists? What other point

might this list have had than to perpetuate the authentic and valuable works of Bishop Augustine?

Have we overstated the polemical dimension of Retractationes, that is, if it was simply meant as

an aid to the episcopal library staff? And yet this dimension is very hard to miss. Yet we should

not allow this aspect to obscure its other dimensions. Had Augustine actually re-read

Adnotationes just before writing 2.39? He re-read at least a part of it. We have every reason to

believe that he only did this much for many of the 93 works listed there. Some, like De libero

arbitrio he did closely re-read. This seems not to have been the case for Adnotationes. All of his

comments on it in 2.39 could have been made after just the most casual of glances at its pages. If

this is the case, then, could 2.39 have been objecting to anything substantive in Adnotationes? I

think probably not. This is why he does not object to any specific statement he makes in it. If he

had actually re-read it he would have found at least something to comment upon. After all, a

number of mature works, including Confessiones, do not escape criticism - even though

Confessiones itself seems to have been treated in Retractationes from memory, just as had

Adnotationes, but with a clearer memory than that shown of Adnotationes in 2.39.

So Adnotationes was glanced at in 426/7. And therefore nothing whatever doctrinally

substantive came into play in the composition of 2.39. If Steinhauser wants to discover a negative

association in Augustine for the Book of Job, he would have to look somewhere other than 2.39

for it.

Furthermore, if we look at the list of the ten references made to the Pelagians in

Retractationes above, which ones might we say could possibly be applied to Adnotationes? In

Retractationes Augustine addresses the Pelagian critiques respecting the perfection possible in
 127

this life (references 1, 6 and 9), the priority between grace and merit (2, 3), the notion of

involuntary sin (4), original sin (7 and 8), and the question of whether or not certain human acts

could be free of sin (10). Now Adnotationes proposes the 'Pelagian' version of none of these

things. As for the first matter, human perfection, Adnotationes places Job and Paul below Christ,

and never omits to refer to Job's sins. As we have seen in chapter 2, merit is always spoken of in

this work in the negative sense, that is, the one cannot have merit before God. Although

Adnotationes does not elaborate on the notion of involuntary sin this work does recognize its

existence.331 Adnotationes does not mention original sin, of course, but in light of this work's

teaching on the impossibility of merit before God and the inevitability of sin in this life, it does

not deny it in essence. Finally, in the case of any single human act being free from sin,

Adnotationes does not directly address the matter. It simply assumes that Job is not suffering on

account of his specific sins; nevertheless, the doctrine of providence that underlies it does assume

that this Job is being benefitted by this persecution, and this fact suggests that there is always

room to speak of flaws in otherwise sound acts. In the end it is hard to know to what exactly

Augustine should have been reacting against in 2.39, according to Steinhauser.

b) The Testimony of Job in the Corpus: 399 Job vs. Job in the Pelagian Controversy

i. The Sample in General

Disregarding texts whose dates cannot be fixed, and other conditions, such as references

that Augustine makes to Job too obliquely to be detected, the following general pattern emerges

in his use of Job. In the years up to and including 399 (excluding Adnotationes) Augustine

referenced the book of Job some 40 times. Some of the primary sources of these references are

Confessiones, Contra Faustum, the sermons, the commentaries on the Psalms, the Ways of the

Adn., 14.17. See below.

 128

Catholic Church and the Ways of the Manichaeans, the On the Lord's Sermon on the Mount, and

the Nature of the Good, among a few others. From 400, up to and including 417, Augustine

referenced Job about 230 times. This seems like a dramatic increase, but really it is not. Two

things have to be considered. One, I am not including that single source from which a whole one-

third of all Augustine's reference to Job come from, Adnotationes. Secondly, we must remember

that Augustine's literary output in the 18 years of this second period was much greater than the

previous years (the first section could be considered to span 13 or 14 years, that is, from his first

extant work, Contra Academicos, composed in 386, to 399). In our last period, from 418 to 430,

Augustine makes about 90 references to Job. This is, of course, much less than the previous

period, but it is also a shorter length of time, 12 years, compared to 18 years. If we divide the

number of references by the number of years in these two periods we discover a ratio of about

12.9 per year from 400-417 to about 7.5 per year from 418 to 430. Again, excluding

Adnotationes, the mere 40 references between 386 to 400 gives a ratio (admittedly more artificial

than those of the two other periods) of about 2.9 per year.

What do these ratios indicate? In themselves, very little. They cannot, I do not believe,

confirm what is suggested by the weight of numbers alone, that Augustine began to 'steer clear'

of Job when he discovered that it confuted his doctrine. For one, the first period witnesses the

fewest references to Job (other than in the commentary devoted to it, but never intended for

publication, we remark). It is not surprising that this period would make the fewest references,

since his knowledge of the Scriptures was relatively much smaller at that time. Because the data

does not support our adversaries' claim about his late aversion to Job, we must move on to

examine the 'quality' of the references. How many were from stock passages he had

memorized?332 Or, was he acquainted with the book as a whole? We will attempt to answer this

question momentarily. First though, it is necessary to outline what other factors may have been at

play in Augustine's use of Job. We have said that Augustine's literary output was greater in the

332
A task specified for the exegete: DDC 2.9.14., 2.14.21, 3.37.56., 4.5.7. and 4.21.45.
 129

second period than in the first. Even though I have not seen any estimates to the effect, I am

assuming that if anything, the output in our third period was even greater than in the second. For,

even though Augustine had then entered old age, many of the monumental works were written in

this last period: De civitate Dei, the two great works against Julian, as well as many other

significant anti-Pelagian works, such as On the Gift of Perseverance and On Predestination. We

recall that in 426 Augustine had finally managed to pass some of the administrative work of

Hippo onto his intended successor, Eraclius, in order, as he wrote, to free up his time for

writing.333 It is, however, crucially important to note that in polemic a single author does not set

the pace. Another reason why we are not surprised to see the rate of literary output undiminished

as the 420s progressed, is that Augustine had only then begun to engage his most worthy and

formidable foe, a young, brilliant and motivated foe. How could Augustine be silent in the face of

original and strong arguments?

A quick glance indicates that so very often Augustine was simply drawing on Job in

order to respond to the positions of his foes. But this does not mean that his use of Job was

merely 'defensive.' This would necessarily lead us to conclude that his mention of the 'Old

Testament' or 'evil' was merely defensive in his dispute with the Manichaeans, and that his

mention of 'baptism' or 'Cyprian' was merely defensive in his controversy with the Donatists. Of

course, defense is not necessarily carried out with 'defensiveness'.

J
ii) References by Year

Let us consider the references now from outside of these broad parameters.

Augustine's first reference to Job was made in 388, in the De moribus ecclesiae. The next did not

appear until 394, but then it was five times. 10 were made in 395; four in 396; ten also in 397;

333
http://www.augnet.org/AugustineSECTION3/AugustinesTimes/AugustineLife/Senior
Augustine/0990-Successor.htm.
 130

excluding those from Adnotationes, 5 were made in 399; 2 in 400; three in 401 - all from De

sanctitate virginitate; 1 was made the next year from the Contra Petallian; 8 in 403. Even though

there were apparently no references made between the years 403 to 407, we must keep in mind

that because the date of some of the works is unclear, and that the majority of his homilies are not

extant, he may have yet quoted Job during these five years. These numbers are always to be

considered relative measurements. In 408 he returned to the book again with 6 references. None

were made in 409; but 11 in 410; 34 in 411; 22 in 412; 12 in 413; 29 in 414; 39 in 415; 14 in 416;

6 in 417; 24 in 418 - the primary source in this case being De patientia\ 13 were made in 419; 4

in 420, two of these from De civitate Dei', in 421 all but one of the 7 references were made in

Contra Julianum\ 4 in 422, three being from the Enchiridion', none were made in 423 and 424;

two were made in 425; 2 in 426; none in 427; 17 were made in 428 - all of these from the

Inchoata contra Julianunr, 4 were made in 429, and one was made in 430 - likewise from the

Libri inchoata.

When we examine these references by year it clearly strengthens the link that has been

supposed between Job and the grace controversy. The most intense illumination of the text

occurred during 414-5, when he made a total of 68 references in two years. The next four years

add 14, 6, 24, and 13 references consecutively. A relative lull passed over the next ten years,

which ended with the composition of the Libri inchoata, in which we find 22 references (c.428-

mid 430). In other words, the two years 414-5 represents the pinnacle of his interest in Job, after

the year 399, that is. Yet these later references were themselves spread out over several diverse

works. Of course, the anti-Pelagian De perfectione justitiae hominis is one of the sources.

However, a large number of the references also come from the Psalms commentaries, the

homilies, and the Ad Orosium. It is clear that the number of references made in the two years

414/5 is a clue that Augustine undertook a conceited study of the Book of Job, something he had

not done since 399. But the study did not occur in 414 or 415, of course. It took place a few years

earlier, likely in 410, with an earlier reading - certainly a less intense study - having taken place
 131

in 408 as well. In the decade after 399, Augustine quotes Job an average of twice a year. In

contrast, the following decade (c.410 to 419) has an average of about 20.4 references per year -

ten times the frequency! Over this decade were written the anti-Pelagian works, De peccatorum

meritis et remissione, De perfectione justitiae hominis, and De natura et gratia, of course, but

surprisingly a significant number of references actually come from 'generic' works such as the

Psalm commentaries, sermons, and even from De Trinitate. We will need to actually investigate

the nature of the references to decide whether this 410-19 interest in Job was sparked solely by

the concerns of this polemic. We can summarily judge that this was the case for Augustine's

renewed interest in 428-430, since almost all of these come from the Libri Inchoata.

iii) How much of Job was Quoted at these Stages.

Now to describe the dispersion of the samples in each of the three periods. The 40 references in

the first period represent 18 different verses or verse groups. This is an 'originality' ratio of

45%.334 In the second period (400-17), the 230 references represent about 62 verses or verse

groups. This is an originality ratio of about 27%. Of these, 46 are altogether 'new', that is, were

never before referenced by Augustine. This constitutes a 'strict' originality score of 20%. Of the

18 references from the first period, 4 did not reappear in the second period. In the third period

(418-30), its approximately 90 references represent about 25 individual verses or verse groups an

'originality score' of 28%. Of these 25 excerpts, 11 had not been referenced in either of the first

or the second periods. This constitutes a 'strict' originality ratio of about 8.2%. On the surface, it

appears that because the relative repetitiousness of Augustine's use of Job in the second and third

phases he had a rather narrow interest in the book. In other words, it was governed by polemic.

The 'strict' originality ratio does, nevertheless, indicate that his 'knowledge' of the text continued

to increase over time. Even the relatively low 'strict originality' score of 8.2% in the final phase

334
In other words, 22 references are repetitions.
 132

is objectively speaking rather high. That, after having used the Book of Job for at least 42 years, a

full 8.2% of his references to it were original is rather high. This indicates that however much his

employment of the text revolved around the use of stock phrases, he was yet continually reading

and taking interest in the Book of Job up to the point of his death.

There is, of course, no truly objective or decisive means to measure an author's "interest"

in a Scriptural Book. There are several relative means, though, and we have and are continuing to

explore these. We cannot forget that at no point in Christian history were all the books of the

Bible equal in their effective authority. To discover the peculiarities of an individual author's

preferences, we would need to compare works within a single genre. For instance, Augustine's

interest in Luke, for example, would have to be measured against his use of Matthew, not against

Romans, or Isaiah, or even John for that matter. And as a further, but relative, standard of

measurement, we might further delineate this interest by comparing Augustine's interest in Luke

to Matthew, relative to Ambrose's interest in Luke relative to Matthew. The real goal of such

comparisons, however, does not lie in this broad quantification, but rather this must serve as a

mere preliminary to the more specific subjective fact of what it is about Luke that explains this

interest in our single author. We can summarily limit possibilities, of course, by suggesting that

the New Testament will always be more "popular" to Christians than the Old, longer Books than

shorter, Genesis than the other Old Testament Books, the Gospels than the other New Testament

writings, St. Paul's writings next to these. These general preferences highlight the prevailing

conception not only of salvation history, but of the importance of certain Biblical books and

authors. For, although Paul writes that "all Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for

teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness" (2 Tm 3:16) -this is just a

statement of the whole canon's validity as divinely inspired, not a set of instructions on how to

interpret it.

Can the uniqueness of Augustine's interpretation of Job be demonstrated by the data of

use? Certainly it is justifiable to begin to treat of it there. Some aspects of Augustine's doctrine of
grace is explainable in these terms. Yet there is a real possibility that the Pelagian controversy

intersects with the history of Job in Augustine in a way that is quite incidental. If this is the case,

then the data will merely pick up on the timing of Job's discussion, but reveal nothing of the

matters at stake.

The number of references to the Book of Job peaked at a particularly intense moment in

the Pelagian Controversy, and these references are concentrated in the Anti-Pelagian works

themselves. Nevertheless, a significant number of these references come from the Ennarationes

in Psalmos and the homilies, as we have said, and so we will need to investigate what possible

meaning this might have. It is possible to speak of an "anti-Pelagian chronology" of Job, one that

might be quite distinct from and not at all exhaustive of, Augustine's history with that book.

Although we have considered the 'external measurement' (i.e. in relation to other

contemporary authors) in chapter 3 in some detail, we did not investigate what proportion of Job

Augustine quoted compared to these authors. Although we discussed several authors in that

chapter, only a few of these have corpuses large enough to make a comparison with Augustine

meaningful. Only four possibilities present themselves: Origen, Chrysostom, Ambrose, and

Jerome. Chrysostom quoted Job more than 300 times and Ambrose more than 400 times. We may

add here that Jerome quoted Job about 1151 times. For Origen, the matter is more complicated.

Hardly any of his writings remain, and those that do suffer the fact of Rufinus' loose hand in

translation. But how many times these authors quoted Job is not as important as the internal

variations amongst them. This is to say, of Jerome's vast number of references, we are interested

in what proportion of the Book of Job he quotes. And, further, we are interested in how this is to

be evaluated in light of Ambrose's objectively high but comparatively few references. Indeed, I

am hesitant to draw any more conclusions about these authors than I already have in chapter 3.

The fact is that to attain any picture at all of an author's interest in a book like Job we must play

redundancy against breadth: a larger corpus would be expected to be both more repetitive in its

references and yet incorporate more of the text. The kind of ratio that would emerge in this case
 134

would not be one worth consideration: percentage of new quotes per quote of Job, since the fact

is that no matter how vast an author's corpus the Book of Job is still finite. In this case,

Augustine's 'originality score' would tend to suffer on account of the vastness of his corpus,

while Jerome's would suffer on account of the elimination of a portion of his writing - his two

translations of Job. We would find, moreover, a strange paradox at work in Origen, wherein the

eradication of his works by the tyrant Justinian actually increased Origen's 'originality profile'

with respect to Job! In the end, such a comparison of originality does not work very well, at least

when the comparison is made among authors of this calibre.

iv) The History of some Key Verses

It is not sufficient as an evaluation of Augustine's use of Job to merely account, as we

have in section (iii), for what proportion of Job is represented in the different periods. We might

compose a specific history for every verse he quotes from the book. Of course, to do so would be

unnecessary and irksome both to the writer and to the reader. Yet, we ought to devote some

attention to those passages that were important to the Pelagian controversy. Were these

considered one way by Augustine before the controversy, but another way thereafter? We might

want to exclude the first 2 chapters of Job and the epilogue, for the simple reason that these

sections were particularly well known and could be drawn on quite readily and unreflectively.

Precisely where we should draw this line in the 'epilogue' is by no means clear. The speeches

cease to be 'oratorical' and become 'historical' really at 42:7, when God addresses his displeasure

with Job's friends, beginning with Eliphaz. Even though God first comes in at 38:1, His earlier

words to Job at 38:1-40:2 have the same character as the previous 36 chapters. Of course, God's

'oratorical' speech continues until 41:26 in the Hebrew (with additional verses in the Greek up to

41:34), with one brief interjection from Job at 40:3-5. But it is fair to say that the 'historical'

mode does not finally recommence until God's words to Job's friends at 42:7. Because we are
 135

interested in probing the particular character of Augustine's interest in Job, and do not consider

this character to indicate itself through generalized references to the narrative, it is reasonable to

exclude from our more detailed analysis references to Job before 3:1 and after 42:6.

When, then, did certain verses enter into Augustine's writings? In section (iii) we

emphasized the breadth of Augustine's acquaintance with the Book of Job. We considered the

8.2% of new quotes in the final period to be notably high. At present though, the opposite

consideration comes into play: we must consider his use of Job in light of the repetition of certain

key verses. First we want to identify these. A 'key verse' is one that plays an important role, and

importance is an effect of its frequency of appearance. Even though 'breadth of reference' is a

better measure of an author's unique interpretation than frequency, since, as we have said, the

popularity of certain verses was often determined by the broader social context (the Church's

liturgy, polemic, genre, etc.) - unless of course an author radically departs from these standards -

we must nevertheless begin our analysis somewhere. How does an author read a text? - this is our

present occupation. We suppose that this has something to do with the verses the author chooses

to represent it. Indeed, that the Book of Genesis somehow 'represented' the Old Testament as a

whole to the Church Fathers is intuitive to that Book's preeminence. That verse 8:22-3 was

somehow representative of Proverbs to the Church Fathers is likewise intuitive from its exceeding

popularity, regardless of the reasons behind its citation. Yet, even though we will begin our

analysis of Augustine's approach to Job in light of what verses he most frequently cites, we

certainly will not end there. ^

Augustine might draw on certain passages more than on others for two general reasons:

a) the context thrust upon him; b) reasons particular to himself. To absolutely distinguish between

these two is impossible, since (b) is more an author's response toward (a) than to the actual text

itself. We are more interested in (b), yet we recognize the impossibility of answering it without

simultaneously treating (a).

 136

Therefore, when treating of these key verses we will need to determine (a)-type factors

and (b)-type factors. As we saw in chapter 3, certain popular verses tended to be popular across

the board. And even if some or all of these appear in the grace controversy we would need to be

careful about too easily assigning them a certain theological value (meaning). Some of the

passages that emerged in chapter 2 were:

fig. 1: Popular Verses in the Fathers

Is not the life of man upon earth a state of trial? and his existence as that of a hireling
7:1 by the day!

for thou hast written evil things against me, and thou hast compassed me with the sins of
13:26 my youth;
For who shall be pure from uncleanness? not even one; if even his life should be but one
day upon the earth: and his months are numbered by him: thou hast appointed him for a
14:4-5 time, and he shall by no means exceed it;

For who, being a mortal, is such that he shall be blameless? or, who that is born of a
woman, that he should be just? Forasmuch as he trusts not his saints; and the heaven is
not pure before him. Alas then, abominable and unclean is man, drinking
15:14-16 unrighteousness as a draught;
For oh that my words were written, and that they were recorded in a book forever, with
an iron pen and lead, or graven in the rocks! For I know that he is eternal who is about
to deliver me, and to raise up upon the earth my skin that endures these sufferings: for
these things have been accomplished to me of the Lord; which I am conscious of in
myself, which mine eye has seen, and not another, but all have beenfulfdled to me in my
19:23-7 bosom;
For how shall a mortal be just before the Lord? or who that is born of a woman shall
purify himself? If he gives an order to the moon, then it shines not; and the stars are not
25:4-6 pure before him. But alas! man is corruption, and the son of man a worm;
For 1 saved the poor out of the hand of the oppressor, and helped the fatherless who had
29:12 no helper,
But if I had gone with scorners, and if too my foot has hasted to deceit: (for I am
31:5-6 weighed in a just balance, and the Lord knows my innocence);

31:09 If my heart has gone forth after another man's wife, and if I laid wait at her doors;

For the rage of anger is not to be controlled, in the case of defiling another man's wife.
31:11-12 For it is a fire burning on every side, and whomsoever it attacks, it utterly destroys;
The Divine Spirit is that which formed me, and the breath of the Almighty that which
33:04 teaches me;
40:19
(LXX 14) This is the chief of the creation of the Lord; made to be played with by his angels.
 137

Now the majority of these are 'anthropological,' and for that reason appealed to the authors we

considered in chapter 3. The most poignant exception is 40:19.335 In regard to the

'anthropological', it will be noted, as we saw in chapter 3, that the preoccupation with sin's

ubiquity was not Augustine's creation - precisely his point after all.336 But some of the verses

with an anthropological content do not all focus on sin. Some are generally hortatory (such as

29:12), and were especially prominent in Eusebius, Chrysostom and Ambrose. Others combine

the two elements of sin and 'counsel' (31:5-6, 31:9, 31:11-12), and it is this that is

quintessentially 'Job' to the Fathers - they loved to reflect upon the gloom of sin in ordinary life

and looked to Job as one who could yet dignify it by the excellence of his life.

According to La Bonnardiere, the most popular verses in Augustine (of the sections being

considered here) are 7:1 (forty-seven times), 14:4-5 (forty-six times), and 28:28 (eighteen times).

The first two of these feature in our appraisal of the Fathers in chapter 3. In fact, all three of these

verses were quoted extensively by these Fathers. This indicates a general similarity of interest,

and for this reason we cannot disregard the influence earlier Latin writers must have had on

Augustine. Yet in themselves, these three most popular excerpts hardly explicate particularities of

Augustine's interest in Job. Indeed, to a great extent these verses were not drawn upon for

polemical, but for pastoral purposes. As such they indicate Augustine's perception of the needs of

his flock more than anything else. For instance, with respect to 7:1, even in the heat of the

Pelagian crisis of the second decade of the fifth century, the majority of citations of this verse are

from sermons. We have discussed 14:4-5 at length in chapter 3, and we said there that its

interpretations are many and varied. As for 28:28, it has no obvious applicability to the Pelagian

controversy, and was drawn on in those treatises but once. There is good reason to suspect it was

the Church in her lectionary that drew Augustine's attention to that verse. All in all, these three

335
40:14 in the Hebrew.
336
As in the OICJ, 1.52.1.
 138

popular verses have contributed little toward our understanding of Augustine's unique view of

Job, unless to suggest that there was little uniqueness in it.

If we were to step outside of our parameters, that is, from the confines of that middle

section of Job stretching from 3:1 up to 42:6 we would need to include v. 1:21, which is his most

quoted verse. Yet even here little is revealed. This was also extremely popular with the other

Fathers (underscoring why we have chosen to ignore the Prologue from our present

consideration). Augustine incorporated it into every facet of his ministry. Indeed, of the thirty-

four references to it in the middle period, thirty are made within sermons (twenty-three of these in

the Ennarationes). They appear there simply as instances of the general call to faithfulness.

Did Augustine employ any of the LXX interpolations? Surprisingly, while it is

universally acknowledged that Augustine employed the Greek derivatives of Job and not the

Hebrew, nowhere does Augustine ever cite the Greek elaborations of the Hebrew. These would

include primarily 2:9-10, the speech of Job's wife, which is substantially longer in the LXX,

41:27-34 (the Hebrew stops at v.26, up to which verse, but not beyond which, Augustine quotes

in Ennarationes in Psalmos, 103 in 412), and, of course, the LXX extension of 42:17, the

'Epilogue'. We can offer a reasonable guess as to why Augustine failed to reference the extended

Epilogue of the LXX. Like many of the Fathers, he may have been skeptical about its

authenticity. In regard to 41:27-34, there is probably no more significant explanation for his

having missed it than that it stands out from the rest of the text not at all. Yet that he never drew

on the LXX extension of the words of Job's wife in 2:9-10 is mysterious. Augustine cited these

verses some twenty-four times, and yet none of these offer conclusive proof that he was even

aware of the extended version. For instance, De patientia has but the general, "she... went on

blaspheming God",337 while the Tractates on the First Epistle of John, 4 just refers to her

'persuasiveness.'338 More often than not, though, Augustine merely quotes the succinct formula,

De paenitentia, 9.
In Epistulam Johannis ad Pathos tractatus, 4.3.
 139

as if from the Hebrew, and as if from memory, Then said his wife unto him: 'Dost thou still hold

fast thine integrity? blaspheme God, and die.' But he said unto her: 'Thou speakest as one of the

impious women speaketh. What? shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not

receive evil?' Since we can find no evidence that Augustine ever quoted these extended elements

of the Greek, in order to preserve La Bonnardiere's thesis that Augustine worked from the LXX,

we must lay special emphasis on her addendum, that Adnotationes must have employed a

truncated version of it. Yet if Augustine had consciously chosen the shorter version out of

something resembling the modern regard for the lectio brevior, he certainly had no aversion for

his own poetic embellishments:

But in all these things that this holy soul was enduring, his patience was being
exercised, his faith proved, his wife put to shame, the devil defeated. But, "If you
blaspheme," said the mindless, witless woman, "you will die, and by dying you will
be done with your torments." As though eternal pain would not be waiting for one
who died blaspheming! The silly woman shrank in horror from the distress of the
man rotting away there in her presence, and gave not a thought to the eternal flames.
He for his part bore with his present pains in order not to fall into those of the world
to come. He kept his heart from evil thoughts, his tongue from cursing; he preserved
his soul's integrity in the rottenness of his body. He could see what he was avoiding
for the future; and that is why he bore with his troubles patiently.339

It is curious, though, that not once in the 30 years after Adnotationes' composition did he

ever quote the LXX interpolations.340 Yet neither did Ambrose ever seem to do so. The

Homily 397.3-4 (my emphasis).

340
The text that comes closest to proving that Augustine had at some point laid eyes on the extension
is New Testament Sermon 81.3-4. It is a matter of suggestion, not of actual text incorporation: the fact the
expostulates at such length upon Job's wife's scandal is certainly curious: "She exaggerated his miseries,
and her own too that she had to endure with him, and set about persuading him to blaspheme. He however,
being meek because God had taught him from his law and made him meek in the face of evil days, had
much peace in his heart, loving the law of God, and for him there was no scandal. She was a scandal, but
not for him. But here comes your wife, suggesting heaven knows what piece of wickedness to you. You
love her, as a wife ought to be loved; she's part of you. But, if your eye scandalizes you, if your hand
scandalizes you, if your foot scandalizes you, you heard the gospel just now, cut it off, throw it away from
you (Mt 18:8-9). Anybody who's dear to you, anybody you value highly, let such persons be great in your
eyes, let them be your beloved better half, just as long as they don't start scandalizing you, that is,
suggesting some piece of wickedness to you. Listen to a proof that that's what scandal is. I've given you the
instance of Job and his wife; but the word "scandal" wasn't mentioned there. So listen to the gospel: when
the Lord was foretelling his passion, Peter started to suggest that he shouldn't suffer. Get behind me, Satan,
you are a scandal to me. The Lord who was giving you an example of how to live taught you there very
precisely both what scandal is, and how scandal should be dodged. A moment earlier he had said to him,
 140

explanation that this is not a sign of these two authors' textual choices but of a prevailing

insistence of the Middle Ages that no other version of Job persist but the textus receptus - a

thousand years of monks refusing to pass on any other version than that one, rewriting variations

from the Vulgate whenever they appeared - even out of the texts of two great authorities such as

these - is inadequate for one reason alone: that if it were actually the case that either Augustine or

Ambrose actually occasionally quoted the LXX elaborations, why do we never find them

commenting on this material in the body of their works?

Since the passages most quoted by Augustine (which five represent 50% of all of the

Book of Job Augustine quotes outside of Adnotationes) do not reveal anything conclusive about

Augustine's theology of Job, we must look to other means to discover this. Let us propose to

analyze all those passages quoted more than once by Augustine, excluding any that have shown

up in our examination of the other Fathers in chapter 3, and, of course, excluding the ones

discussed immediately above, the pro- and epilogues, and Adnotationes. This would include: 7:2;

7:15:9:24; 14:1; 14:2; 14:3; 14:16; 15:26; 25:4; 25:6; 31:18; 34:30; and 40:14. What does this list

indicate?

First of all, it is short. When we take into consideration, as we said above, that 50% of his

references to Job in his whole career came from five passages only, and that only thirteen others

were quoted more than once by him, does this indicate that Augustine had a rather vast

knowledge of the text, since he tended to sample so widely? That is debatable. Although we were

positively impressed by the continuing growth of his knowledge of the text over the years,341 all

in all, can it be said that Augustine widely sampled the text? Other than the less than twenty texts

that Augustine quoted more than once, and excluding Adnotationes, there are perhaps about forty

Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona (Mt 16:23.17), and had thus shown that he was one of his parts or
members. But as soon as he began to be a scandal, he cut off the part; he refashioned the part, he replaced
the part... So anyone will be a scandal to you, who undertakes to persuade you to do something bad.
341
See section b, iii for his 'originality scores.'
 141

others he ever quoted.342 Compared to the average scholar or preacher today this is actually a

large number. Were these memorized verses? No, clearly not: that is why they were only quoted

once over this long career. What explains their appearance is 'occasion': private perusal, rebuttal,

and the lectionary.

But let us return to our list of thirteen verses, those quoted more than once outside of

Adnotationes, but less than the five most popular. It is a short list, as we have said, and, what is

more, nearly half of these are actually clusters of well-known verses, in other words, they are

parts of well-known sections. This concerns especially those three from the beginning of verse

14, as well as 25:4 and 25:6, which were, obviously, related to 25:5 which we have already seen.

Of course, 7:2 is distinguished from 7:1 only in our minds, and was not in Augustine's, who

never utilized our, or any other, standard versification. But, just as we have with the five most

popular verses, let us examine these against the popular verses from the Fathers (see fig. 1

above). In this case, these lists only coincide once, and that is for 25:4/6: 'For how shall a mortal

be just before the Lord? or who that is born of a woman shall purify himself? If he gives an order

to the moon, then it shines not; and the stars are not pure before him. But alas! man is

corruption, and the son of man a worm...' It is not all that surprising that this passage should

have gained the attention of these ancient writers.

If we could argue that this list of thirteen represents verses favored by Augustine, but not

by the other Fathers, shall we then have discovered a basis from which to argue for Augustine's

distinctness? I think this is more than is justified, since, after all, these verses also appear in the

Fathers, and to begin to count how many from 'the second-most popular group' of Job verses in

Augustine appear in the Fathers and how many and which do not would be tendentious in the

extreme. It is better just to have these thirteen examined on their own merit as a reflection of the

342
Again, excluding pro- and epilogue, this includes 3:3,4:19, 5:14, 5:19, 6:18, 9:2, 9:3, 9:17, 9:19,
9:20, 9:28,9:29,9:30,9:31,9:33,10:11-12, 12:4, 13:18,15:13 (quoted in De civitate Dei, and not
Adnotationes), 16:2, 16:17 (in De perf. just hom, and not Adn.), 19:26 {De Civ Dei, not in Adn.), 23:11,
27:6, 28:12-13 (De gen adlitt., not Adn.), 28:22-26, 30:19, 30:24, 31:33, 32:7-8 (De nat. etorig. animae,
not in Adn.), 37:7 (Council of Cathage, 418), 37:22, 38:7, 39:33,41:25-6 Ens in Ps, 103, not in Adn.)
 142

thought of Augustine in itself, than as a means for making a strict comparison.

Fig. 2: Verses that Appear More than Once, Outside of the Five Most Popular

Or as a servant that fears his master, and one who has grasped a shadow? or as a hireling waiting
7:2 for his pay?

7:15 Thou wilt separate life from my spirit; and yet [keep] my bones from death.

For they are delivered into the hands of the unrighteous [man]: he covers the faces of the judges
9:24 [of the earth]: but if it be not he, who is it?

14:1 For a mortal born of a woman [is] short lived, and full of wrath.

14:2 Or he falls like a flower that has bloomed; and he departs like a shadow, and cannot continue.

14:3 Hast thou not taken account even of him, and caused him to enter into judgment before thee?

14:16 But thou hast numbered my devices: and not one of my sins shall escape thee?

15:26 And he has run against him with insolence, on the thickness of the back of his shield.

For how shall a mortal be just before the Lord? or who that is born of a woman shall purify
25:4 himself?

25:6 But alas! man is corruption, and the son of man a worm.

31:18 (for I nourished [them] as a father from my youth and guided [them] from my mother's womb.)

34:30 causing a hypocrite to be king, because of the waywardness of the people.

40:14 [Then] will I confess that thy right hand can save [thee].

All but one of these verses can be divided into two categories: those that speak of man's end, his

judgment, and those that speak of the misery and foolishness of this present life of man. Both of

these groups are relatable to the Pelagian issue, but might just as easily have found citation in

other contexts. There is one text that does not fit into either one of these groups is 34:30. It was,

incidentally, quoted three times outside of Adnotationes.343 Despite this exception, though, this

list shows an undeniable interest in the final judgment of man.

343
See LaBonnardiere, Job, p. 162.
 143

Here are the corresponding comments from Adnotationes on these thirteen passages:

7:2- Aut tanquam servus metuens dominum suum, et consecutus umbram. Quod significat
absconditio Adae a facie Domini, et tectio foliorum de quibus umbra fit, quam relicto Deo
consecutus est homo. Aut tanquam mercenarius qui exspectat mercedem operis sui. Iste a
superiori hoc dijfert, quod superior habuit, hie autem habere desiderat ipsa temporalia.

7:15- "Et a morte ossa mea repuli. Nam ierant in mortem ossa mea, nisi his exterritus fortior
essem et patiens, quod est ossiumfirmitas.

9:24- Terra tradita est in manus impii: aut corpus justorum, non anima, cum eos persequuntur,
aut quando impius dominari permittitur. Potest et accipi homo peccator in manus diaboli
secundum mortalitatem suam. Faciens judicium ejus operit: aut ipsius impii judicium, aut justi;
in hoc enim tempore opertum est. Aut certe hoc ipso facit judicium ejus, id est, eo ilium punit, quo
occultat ei providentiam suam: ut est, Prae magnitudine irae suae non requiret. Vel eo justum
vindicat, quo occultat persecutori ejus judicium suum, id est providentiam suam, ut arctius
peccatorum laqueis per impunitatem capiatur. Quod si non est, quis ergo est? Potest hoc de
Domino intelligi, qui et derisus est, et cujus terra, hoc est, corpus traditum est in manus
Judaeorum, et cujus judicium faciens occultavit majestatem ipsius. Quod si ipse non est, quis
ergo est, qui majora faciat, quam fecit ipse? Vel sic, Quod si non facit Deus judicium justi vel
impii, quis potest facere ?

14:1- Homo enim natus ex muliere, brevis vitae, etplenus iracundiae: poenae.

14:3- Et huncfecisti venire in judicium coram te. Quamvis ita mortalis sit, et ipse habet tamen
unde rationem reddat: exigitur enim de illo quod potest, quamvis perparum possit.

15:26- In crassa cervice scuti sui: praesumens de protectione sua.

31:18- "Et de ventre matris meae dux eisfui. Ab initio enim sui haec operatur Ecclesia.

34:30- "Qui regnare facit hominem hypocritam propter perversitatem populi: cui dicitur, Qui
ergo doces alium, teipsum non doces.

The most interesting of these from our perspective is 14:3, which we shall consider further below.

v) Why Augustine Quotes the Verses he does

This question lies at the heart of our enquiry. We must look in detail at the references to

Job, especially in order to conceptualize Augustine's great interest in him during the second

decade of the 5th century. It is reasonable to date the beginning of the Pelagian Controversy to

about 412. This was the moment of De peccatorum meritis et remissione's appearance, a work

begun in 411, but finished in 412. We might assume that there was a shift in Augustine's
 144

attention to Scripture around that time (depending upon how seriously he initially conceived the

situation to be), but to speak of this we must first address some auxiliary considerations. The

present author considers the 'Augustine of the Confessiones' to have been born by 396, the time

by which the "languid piety"344 that would so annoy Pelagius was brought into reflective

consciousness. Considering Burns' thesis that it was the Donatist controversy, and not the

Pelagian controversy, that was fundamental in re-constituting Augustine's moral framework, and

that this controversy was all but over by that same moment in time (410-12), whatever shift there

might have been in Augustine's attention to Scripture at that time, it is important that the cause

and nature of this shift not be explained away too simplistically. To chart such a potentially

complex rearrangement of his focus on Scripture as he moved his attention from one heresy to

another, it might be better to consider Burns' second stage as actually two. The first would cover

the anti-Donatist phase (400-10) and the other the incipient anti-Pelagian (410-418). Both of these

periods are governed by Augustine's post-396, pre-418 theology of grace, but as regards his use

of Scripture to articulate his view on 'grace' we might expect a difference between these two

periods. Is the first characterized by non-technical spontaneity, and the second by reaction? Is

there any difference between the references to Job made between 400 and 410 and those made

between 410 and 418? We have seen the answer to this already: there was a great increase in the

number of references, and this was precisely at the moment when the Pelagian controversy

erupted. As I have said, there must have been a re-reading of Job in 410.345 Strangely, it may be

that this re-reading occurred just before the beginning of that controversy. Doubtlessly he would

have gone back to it again in the years that followed, but I doubt that this would have involved

the same degree of scrutiny that he gave to it in 399.

344
Peter Brown, Augustine of Hippo, p.343.
345
My sec. b.ii.
 145

3. Comparing Passages from Adnotationes with References made in the Later Works

Statistics can only go so far to develop an appreciation of Augustine's understanding of

Job. Interest and opportunity are not the same thing. That Augustine had cause to examine and

expound the Book of Job at certain times rather than others does not evidence his private interest

and native inclinations with respect to that Book and that figure. That Job was 'thrust upon him'

in the Pelagian controversy does not imply that his use of Job was defensive, and thus, unnatural,

unoriginal or uninspired. Our present detailed examination will help to decide what qualities are

to be ascribed to this use.

When the references to Job are divided up into such narrow parameters, i.e. by groups of

ten-year periods, they become quite small in number, especially when we eliminate those

references for which we can supply no probable date. It is important to note that in this section,

unlike in the preceding, we are including material from the prologue and epilogue, since these can

be compared within Augustine's corpus.

Passages Referring to Specific Verses of Job

I. On 1:21-

from Sermons, Old Testament 21.9 (c.416):

Here is what it means to take pleasure in the Lord. The Lord has givennotice him
taking pleasureThe Lord has taken away (Jb 1:21). Did he take himself away?
What he gave he took away, he who gave offered himself. So he takes pleasure in
the Lord. The Lord has given, the Lord has taken away: as it pleased the Lord so it
has come to pass; blessed be the name of the Lord. Why should the slave be
displeased with what has pleased the Lord? "I've lost my gold," he says, "I've lost
my family, I've lost my herds, I've lost everything I owned. The one I am owned by I
have not lost. I have lost my belongings, I have not lost the one I belong to. He is my
delight, he is my riches." Why? because he isn't perverse, he isn't upside down, he
hasn't thought lightly of the one who is above him and highly of the things that are
 146

below him. That, you see, is the perversity of using created things badly.346

Adnotationes:

"Nudus exii de utero matris meae. Notandum quam consolatorie loquatur, quamvis
secundum consuetudinem luctum fecerit."

Comments:

The passage from Sermon 21.7 could have been written at virtually any point, rather than

as it actually was in 416. Too many cases where this is so tend to confute Steinhauser. If

Augustine made ready use of Job for non-anti-Pelagian purposes then, logically, the 'difficulty'

of the text for him vanishes. The theme of the 21.7 is ubiquitous in Augustine, the "up and down"

motif. It is present in the famous phrase of Confessiones (13.9.10): my love is my weight, and is

featured in many other important texts such as De Trinitate. In fact, although it does not appear in

this passage from Adnotationes, it is ubiquitous there as well. It is faithfully Christian Platonic.

Highlighting Job's powers is characteristic of Adnotationes, but Augustine never does

this to the degree of the other Fathers' eulogies of Job. Neither does he say here in Adnotationes

1.21 that outright contradicts what he would later maintain about Job. Yet, of course, there is no

reference to the fact that God gave Job the grace to mourn fittingly.

n. On 2:9-

from Sermon 15.7A (c. 410,1 or 403-4)

He [Satan] asked leave to take away as well his [Job's] health of body. That too he
was allowed to take away, so that even when riddled with disease Job might praise
God in uprightness of heart, altering not a whit from being a man for whom praise
was proper. That woman, who had been left to him for this very purpose, came up
and persuaded him, or rather tried to do so, to blaspheme. "What dreadful

'Sermons', 'Old Testaments', Works of Augustine, Past Masters English Database (New York:
New City Press, 1992).
 147

misfortunes we are suffering!" she said. "Say something against God and die"

Adnotationes:

None.

Comments:

It is necessary to include here passages which do not find any corresponding treatment in

Adnotationes, simply because the fact that he chose not to treat of it may be important in itself.

We note the introduction of the phrase 'dreadful misfortunes.' We have spoken above about

Augustine's willingness to elaborate on this scene, but without any solid indication that he was

aware of the LXX elaboration.347 'Praise is proper' to Job, we see, but what is the overall

implication of such a comment? It is moderated praise. It is important that Augustine here neither

says too much nor too little about Job's capacity for virtue. This homily is not dated precisely, but

giving it a date preceding the Pelagian controversy seems wise.

m . On 9:17-

From De perfectione iustitiae hominis 11.26 (c. 415):

Job said of the Lord, After all, he made my sufferings many without a reason. He
did not say, "He made none of them with a reason," but many without a reason. For
his sufferings were made many, not because of his many sins, but in order to test his
patience. Because of the sins which he had, as he elsewhere admits, he judges that he
ought to have undergone fewer sufferings.348

Adnotationes:

See my section b.iv.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1504.htm.
 148

Ne forte in turbine me conterat. Propterea quaero judicium ejus, ne in turbine me

conterat. Multas enim tribulationes meas fecit sine causa: quorum causa me latuit.
Aut certe confitentis vox est, flagellis Dei confitentis non se esse correctum, et
idcirco posse turbine conteri, quasi majori supplicio.

Comments:

A fascinating point of comparison: actually Job is in better shape in the later rather than

in the earlier text! Quite antithetical to Steinhauser's interpretation, who says unequivocally,

"Julian of Eclanum accentuates reason as the distinctive faculty which enables Job to do good.

Augustine responds by emphasizing Job's sinfulness, which Job shares with all human beings for

no man is sinless before God."349 But if De perfectione was a response, it was not one that

emphasized a sinfulness that was not acknowledged before, that is, as early as 399. In the 415

work Job is suffering not because of many sins, but in order to test his patience, yes, he has sins,

although not many; in the 399 work the cause is hidden within him, and, if he confesses that he is

not in need of reform, this is all the more reason that he should be 'ground'. In 415 Augustine

needed to assure his reader that Job had sins. He even tells him that Job had already admitted

this.350 This admission was taken as a sign of humility to Augustine. In 399, however, humility is

absent. The lesson here is that despite the fact that Augustine's analysis of sin had become far

more sophisticated over the years, this did not translate into the sort of apologia that Steinhauser

believes it to be. If we were to judge solely by the comparison of these two texts, then, Job

actually became less sinful in Augustine's treatment with time.

Steinhauser, "Job Exegesis," p.308.

Augustine is probably referring here to Jb 14:17. See section Y. below.
 149

IV. On 9:19-20-

De peccatorum meritis et remissione et de baptismo parvulorum, bk 2.10.14-15 (c.411/2):

Job also says, Who will oppose his judgment? Even if I am righteous, my mouth will
speak wickedness (Jb 9:19-20). That means: If I shall declare myself righteous
contrary to his judgment in which that perfect rule of righteousness proves me
unrighteous, my mouth will certainly speak wickedness, because it will speak against
God's truth...
Did he not make it quite clear by this that one is justly held accountable even for
those sins which are not committed out of the enticement of pleasure, but for the
sake of avoiding some trouble, pain, or even death? For we say that these sins are
committed out of some necessity, although they should all be overcome by the love
for and delight in righteousness.351

Adnotationes:

Etenim quia potest, obtinet. Vincit, ut voluntatem ejusfaciam, non meam. Quod etsi
fuero justus, os meum impia loquetur: si me justum putavero.

Comments:

Of course the passage from de baptismo parvulorum is more elaborate, but it is not so

simply because of its length. Its consideration of sin and of the will is much more sophisticated.

Yet there is nothing contradictory between the two works. This is important. Si me justum

putavero - this is the kernel of all that follows in later years. De baptismo parvulorum really

marks the beginning of Augustine's willingness to speak of kinds of sin in a technical sense,

although he does not differentiate in this case between what we would call 'voluntary' and

'involuntary' sin,352 for that is not exactly what he has in mind, but rather he is working on a

potential solution to that vexing problem of which Job is so great a case, of sinning, yes, but not

http://www.newadvent.Org/fathers/l 5012.htm
352
Malcolm E. Alflatt, "The Development of the Idea of Involuntary Sin in St. Augustine," REAug
20(1974), 133-34, and his "The Responsibility for Involuntary Sin in Saint Augustine," RA 10(1975), 172-
86; and James Wetzel, Augustine and the Limits of Virtue (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992),
pp.88-97.
 150

overtly. 2.14 is an example of what Burns refers to as the 'motivation theory,' which he retained

until 416. It would only be a matter of time before Augustine would see that it was an incomplete

exploration: either the will is the efficient cause of the good act or not; in time he would realize

that not was the only correct answer. The problem here is that although the will is drawn along by

God's enticements, God seems to remain outside of the person's good deliberations. What is most

important when we compare these two passages is that both reject the idea of Job's impeccability.

We have seen that this was widely held by the Fathers in one form or another. The important

matter here is that there is some kind of disequilibrium proposed between the doing of justice and

being just, at least insofar as the former would lead to the claim that one is just. What is behind

this? Augustine is telling us in so many words that one can do justice, but not of himself. Of what

part of this doing of justice he is not responsible, Augustine does not tell us.

V. On 14:17

a. From Homily 397.4:

Christians, when they are suffering from some bodily or material difficulty, should
think about hell, and consider how light in comparison is what they are suffering.
They shouldn't grumble against God, shouldn't say, "God, what have I done to you,
why am I suffering these things?" On the contrary, they should say what Job said,
even though he was a saint: You have sought out all my sins, and sealed them up as
in a bag. He didn't dare to say that he was without sin, though he was suffering, not
as a punishment, but as a test. Let anyone who suffers say the same.

b. from De peccatorum meritis et remissione etde baptismo parvulorum 2.10.15-11.16

(c.412):

One can also view his words, And you have noticed if I have done anything
unwillingly as pertinent to the statement which says, For I do not do what I want;
rather, I do what I hate (Rm. 7:15).
Scripture, that is, the Spirit of the Lord, said that in all the things that happened to
him Job did not sin with his lips before the Lord. Why is it that the Lord, who gave
such testimony to him, afterward rebuked him, when he spoke to him? Now no man
is justly rebuked unless there be in him something which deserves rebuke.

Adnotationes:
 151

Signasti in sacculo iniquitates meas: ut redderes mihi. Annotasti si quid invitus

erravi: etiam hoc annotasti. Invitum autem errare poena peccati est.

Comments:

Although we have included here two references to Jb 14:17, they deal with the two

different clauses of that verse. Each one is dealt with in Adnotationes, though briefly.

Unfortunately Homily 397 does not attempt an interpretation of the 'bag' or 'sack,' yet more

importantly from our perspective is that it is in agreement with the Adnotationes' passage which

affirms the fact of Job having sinned. Interestingly enough, their difference lies in the fact that the

homily considers it necessary to assert this point, whereas Adnotationes takes it for granted. This

is not insignificant, especially seeing that the homily is undated. Is consciousness of Job's moral

status an indication that it is post-399, and what is more, post-411?353

The phrase in the Adnotationes passage, "Invitum autem errare poena peccati est," is

important. Does it reveal a full-blown doctrine of original sin? At the very least it suggests that

one has not yet learned what suffering was intended to teach. This might be somewhat antithetical

to his doctrine of concupiscence, although, of course, not contradictory of it. It is antithetical

because his mature doctrine of concupiscence focuses not upon 'remediality,' but upon the

spiritually infectious nature of bad habit, a sort of infection that destroys the will itself. The

remedial view, on the other hand, does not directly address the question of whether or not the will

is intact. Adnotationes' explanation for Job's suffering was to focus on its remedial nature. It is

not a concentration upon the dessert of sin, as in the later writings, but upon the usefulness of

suffering, which was not emphasized by Augustine, for obvious reasons, against the Pelagians. Of

course, Augustine employs the phrases erret invitus,354 invitus ignoras,355 invitus commisi,356

353
14:17 appears to be the very last reference Augustine makes to the Book of Job in his life. See
OICI, 6.17.
354
Contra Petilam, 67.81.
355
Ibid., 67.81.
 152

^cn org TCQ

invitus transgressus sum, nobisque moveatur invitis, and audiamus inviti, but these are

meant to indicate the unconsciousness of sin along the lines of the exemplary passage from Rm

7:15. This is not its sense in Adnotationes 14.17., as is clear from our chapter 2.2. Furthermore, it

is noteworthy that nowhere does Adnotationes refer to that verse from Romans.

All of this has been said, of course, by way of negation: but the sin of Job is not the

opposite of the virtue of Job in every sense.360 We have a hint of the positive doctrine, though, in

the second part above quoted from De peccatorum meritis, which we shall have the opportunity

to consider below in section VIII. It is, nevertheless, interesting to find yet again: (1) that the sin

of Job is not in question in Adnotationes, and (2) it is actually in the later, anti-Pelagian text,

rather than in Adnotationes, that we find Augustine speaking of the 'positive' side of Job's

character. In any case, the differences between Augustine's 'earlier' and 'later' views on grace

and sin are subtler than perhaps might be assumed.

VI. 16:17-

from De perfectione iustitiae hominis 11.25 (c.415):

There is also Job's statement, There was no injustice in my hands; rather, my

prayer was pure. His prayer was pure, precisely because he justly begged pardon of
God who truly granted it.

Adnotationes:

See below.

Comments'.

Did Augustine fail to comment upon this verse in Adnotationes? In fact, he touched on a part of it

in his consideration of 16:18:

356
De peccatorum meritis, 2.10.14.
357
DePerf. iust. 11.28.
358
Ibid., 21.44.
359
Contra Petilam, 47.55.
345
Something Augustine had realized some time previous. See DP, 13-14.
 153

Terra ne operiat super sanguinem carnis meae: id est, ne si immundafuerit oratio

mea optando terrena, accedat cumulus terrae super vinculum mortalitatis meae;
quod significavit nomine sanguinis: id est, ne cupiditate terrena majoribus
calamitatibus voluntarii peccati operiar, quod est illud naturale peccatum de
conditione mortali, Nec sit locus clamori meo. Intercludatur meritum orationis
meae.

This passage is a little more sophisticated - and ambiguous - than the one from De perfectione.

There is no essential disparity between these comments, yet a difference in focus of attention.

Certainly the matter of the purity of Job's prayer did not stand out in 399, but was read

unremarkably alongside of the preceding verses, which are themselves powerful expressions of

Job's anxiety - as in 16.13, "perpeccata mea me adversum me divisit." and in 16.14, where Job

has thrust himself upon carnal longings "propter desideria carnalia, quae sibi impacta dicit, per

malas persuasiones ab angelis malis." Thus is 16:17 a good example of what happens when the

atmosphere of discourse is changed. This is what happened to Augustine when he was forced to

respond: he was forced to examine aspects of a text that had never caught his attention before.

The clarity of De perfectione 11.25 alongside the opacity of the passage from Adnotationes is a

clear indication of the progression that had taken place in Augustine's thought and of the changed

atmosphere of his study. This passage is too vague in itself for us to ascertain everything of what

Augustine intended of it here. What is the overall meaning of the use of the conditional and of the

subjunctive modes? 'si immunda fuerit oratio mea" - was it or was it not? The use of the word

'naturale' is important in this context. It implies a kind of inevitability, one that translates in this

case into an actual fact. Thus, the emphasis here is not on merit, but on mercy. The prayer must

not have been pure at some previous point; it must have been a prayer for earthly goods. Whose

prayer is it? In De perfection it is unquestionably Job's. Adnotationes is not so clear about this.

Whether it is Job's or 'everyman's' in this case, this passage does highlight the ubiquity of sin

and impurity. In either case, the passage in Adnotationes is itself a prayer, a prayer meant to make

up for previous evil desires. It is good - we are justified in supposing - because in this case, it is,

as in the latter passage from De petfectione, a prayer for mercy, a prayer that recognizes
 154

powerlessness. It is a confusing way to say what is said in De perfectione quite clearly.

VII. 29:14-

From De perfectione iustitiae hominis 11.27 (c.415):

.. .still persevere in their fight against them until they arrive at that point where no
struggle with death will remain. For this reason it also says, I was clothed with
righteousness, and I donned judgment as a soldier's cloak (Jb 29:14). That is, after
all, a garment for war rather than for peace, for the time when we still do battle
against concupiscence, and not for the time when righteousness will be complete and
no enemy remains, after the last enemy, namely, death, has been destroyed.

Adnotationes:

Et vestiebar judicio sicut chlamyde: in praeferendis spiritualibus, carnalibus,

nesciat sinistra quidfaciat dextera tua (Mt. VI, 3), id est, qua intentione operetur:
operta enim sinistra, dextra exserta est in vestitu chlamydis; quod facit, qui recte
judicat quo sit referendum quod operatur.

Comments:

Of course, this preoccupation with 'referring actions' is certainly a valid Christian

preoccupation. Burns' schema indicates that the ability to initiate action fell into suspicion only

after he began to question man's ability to bring righteous actions to completion. This is what we

see here in this comparison. The earlier text concentrates on the individual's responsibility in

action, the later sees the cloak of righteousness likely as a gift that enables one to carry on the

fight against evil throughout one's whole life. If anything, this comparison favors the position that

accentuates change in Augustine, yet it is notable that Augustine is not even thinking about Job in

the passage from Adnotationes, but of the generic person who must learn how to direct his

actions. This shows that Augustine naturally read this passage as if it meant that the speaker (in

this case Job) had sinned.

VIII. on 39:33-

from De peccatorum meritis et remissione et de baptismo parvulorum 10.16-11.16:

 155

Job himself bears witness to this, when he says, Why, after having been admonished,
do I still face judgment and hear the Lord's rebukes? But no one is justly rebuked
unless there is something in that person that deserves a rebuke.
What sort of a rebuke is this? It is correctly understood as spoken in the person of
Christ the Lord. He spells out for him the divine actions stemming from his power.
He rebukes him with the intention that it might be clear that he is saying: Can you do
these great deeds which I can? What is the point but that Job should understand?
After all, we believe that God inspired him so that he foreknew that Christ would
come in order to suffer. Hence, the point was that he should understand how he
ought to endure his sufferings with equanimity, if Christ did not refuse to be
obedient in suffering, for Christ had absolutely no sin, though he became man on our
account, and as God he had such great power.

Adnotationes:

Respondens autem Job dixit: Quid ergo judicer commonitus et increpatus a Domino,
audiens talia, cum nihil sim? id est, quid ergo mihi judicium comparo, cum me
commonet et arguit Dominus, si ei contradicam; audiens talia, id est, intelligens
quanta justitia et misericordia mecum sic agatur, cum per meipsum utique nihil sim?

Comments:

The Adnotationes passage does not overtly consider whether or not Job sinned. Neither

does that from De peccatorum, since by this point in the work that question had been dealt with.

Here we find Augustine moving beyond this matter to treat of what had for him become the real

point of Job in the Scriptures: Job indicates that beyond the mere forensic matter of guilt is the

more important matter of perfection. This is also the preoccupation of the passage we will

consider immediately below. Adnotationes takes it for granted that what one is is the result of

God's mercy, but Augustine does not connect the two for us here. De peccatorum concentrates on

the nature of the rebuke, that it was based on a former sin, it seems, perhaps even on Job's

hesistancy to suffer patiently like Christ will in time suffer. What is the essence of this passage's

meaning to Augustine in Adnotationes? As we have suggested, Adnotationes does not directly

link any specific sin with Job's nothingness, as he does in De peccatorum, but there is really no

other way to imagine this nothingness, if it does not in some way include an actual sin. Of course,

the important thing is to recognize that to speak against God, or even to defend oneself against
 156

God, is itself a sin, but this sin seems to presuppose a previous sin.

IX. on 42:5-6-

From De peccatorum meritis et remissione etde baptismo parvulorum 11.16-12.17:

Job understood that with a purer intention of the heart and added to his response,
Before I heard you with the hearing of the ear, and now, behold, my eye sees you.
Hence, I have reproached myself, wasted away, and regarded myself as dust and
ashes. Why was he so displeased with himself in this great insight? After all, God's
work which made him a man could not rightly displease him, since scripture also
says to God, Do not look down upon the works of your hands (Ps 138:8). Rather, it
was precisely in terms of that righteousness, by which he knew that he was
righteous, that he reproached himself and wasted away and regarded himself as dust
and ashes. For with his mind he saw the righteousness of Christ; there could not be
any sin, not only not in his divinity, but also not in his soul and not in his flesh. In
comparison to this righteousness which comes from God, the apostle Paul regarded
his own righteousness, which was beyond reproach in terms of the righteousness
which comes from the law, not only as loss, but even as rubbish.
Hence, that splendid testimony by which God praised Job does not stand in
contradiction to the testimony which says, No living person will be found righteous
in your sight (Ps 143:2).

Adnotationes:

None: Adnotationes ends at 39:35.

Comments:

We might ask in light of this best explication of the mature doctrine of Job in Augustine:

would he have written it in Adnotationes just as he had here in De peccatorum had he actually

proceeded past 39:35? Of course not. An important new dimension was his realization that Christ

was the only suitable point of comparison for holiness. If, as the accusation runs from the

Proceedings of Pelagians, there was a certain type of person - the saint - who excelled in

holiness the standard Christian, how could one still speak of the pull of the fallen nature?

Augustine's answer was, of course, to compare this type of perfection against Christ's. In 399

Augustine had done this, but without, of course, thinking about the precise nature of Christ's

moral superiority to the saints. So, in De peccatorum Job has a righteousness that accounts for the
 157

fact that he did not deserve his plight, but it was unequal to Christ's.

Conclusion

The preceding thesis has endeavored to challenge just one small error about Augustine's

teaching. If Augustine's view of life is true and valuable, then the confutation of erroneous

interpretations of it is likewise valuable. The error that we have attended to was that because

Augustine's doctrine of grace was such as it was, he was unable to accept the doctrine of Job. Let

us sum-up our findings against this:

a) Although Augustine's use of Job did alter over time, this was not on account of a

fundamental change in his theology. His use suited the occasion. His treatment was both pastoral

and polemical, and the latter never replaced all occasions of the former. It is necessary to recall

from our treatment of his theory of Sacred Scripture in chapter 2 that he did not allow the

possibility for heterodoxy in the sacred writings, and always operated from that premise. More

than just about any Patristic writer, he left almost no wiggle room for this possibility.

Steinhauser's position on Job in Augustine, against which we have defined our own

position in several fundamental ways, includes some assumptions that are unsupportable in light

of Augustine's view of Biblical exegesis. These are to be found in the article to which I have had

cause to refer several times, "Job Exegesis: the Pelagian Controversy." Fundamentally he views

Augustine's use of Scripture (and t a ^ lesser extent even Pelagius' and Julian's) as opportunistic

rather than as the result of a comprehensive hermeneutic. Of course, it is true that why an author

references a passage will always depend to some extent upon the purposes for which he feels the

need to turn to it, but this does not constitute 'opportunism.' Steinhauser writes that "If Pelagius,

Augustine and Julian have one thing in common, it is their obligatory kudos to Paul even when
 158

the reference seems somewhat forced"361 adding that,

Equally important... the selection of a specific biblical book to provide the

exegetical basis of the particular theological position. For Augustine Paul
provides the theological grounds of justification by faith through the grace of
Jesus Christ. For Julian Job epitomizes the just man, who feared God and with no
extraneous help avoided evil. It is no accident, therefore, that Augustine chose
Paul while Julian chose Job.362

Now, there is nothing amiss in the suggestion that a writer would look to the texts that more

obviously illustrate his point rather than to other passages. Yet it is quite another thing to suggest

that he did this for reasons for which he did not. At the heart of Augustine's exegesis, as we have

seen in our second chapter, lies his belief in the legitimacy of what has been called 'canonical

criticism' or the sensus plenior. That Steinhauser believes that Augustine's motivation was of an

altogether different nature is evident in what follows: "Romans was Augustine's biblical book of

choice. Augustine was very much at home with Paul."363 And, "Augustine was obviously

uncomfortable dealing with the book of Job and was clearly on the defensive."364

What number of misapprehensions this interpretation involves has been indicated, again,

by our second chapter. Let us refer again to DDC 2.6.8:

Accordingly the Holy Spirit has, with admirable wisdom and care for our
welfare, so arranged the Holy Scriptures as by the plainer passages to satisfy our
hunger, and by the more obscure to stimulate our appetite. For almost nothing is
dug out of those obscure passages which may not be found set forth in the
plainest language elsewhere.

and 2.9.14.,

[W]hen we have made ourselves to a certain extent familiar with the language of
Scripture, we may proceed to open up and investigate the obscure passages, and
in doing so draw examples from the plainer expressions to throw light upon the
more obscure, and use the evidence of passages about which there is no doubt to
remove all hesitation in regard to the doubtful passages.

Steinhauser, "Job Exegesis," pp.299-311, p.306.

Ibid., p.300.
Ibid., p.301.
Ibid., p.305. Similarly p.304.
 159

At the very heart of Augustine's method is the principle that the New Testament clarifies the Old.

This is, consequently, a theory that precludes 'being uncomfortable' with a Biblical text as

Steinhauser asserts. And, although he may be correct when he says that "Julian skillfully used

Augustine's predilection for Paul as evidence that he was crypto-Manichean,"365 this says nothing

about Augustine's actual modus operandi. DCE shows just how far he was willing to go in

working out his biblical conviction that no text contradicts another.

What do my observations concerning Augustine's biblical hermeneutic imply for

Steinhauser's view of Augustine's Job? If Augustine did not think it possible for Job and Paul to

be in opposition, then he would have looked to Paul as a means to clarify the boggling phrases of

Job. Furthermore, he would also believe that Job was just one other source by which he would be

able to prove his position. I have indicated in chapter 4.2.B. that it is mistaken to suppose that

Augustine began to marginalize Job when he realized that its doctrine disagreed with his own.

There is no evidence of this. Steinhauser states, "Adnotationes in lob can be of only limited help

["for establishing the teaching of Augustine"].366 We disagree. It is inconsistent to say this and yet

at the same time argue that its incompleteness is a proof of something. How can a text be of little

help, yet prove something crucial like the reason why it was never completed? As I have shown,

again, in section 4.2.B., when examined along with the anti-Pelagian texts, despite its innate

ambiguities, Adnotationes indicates a great deal about his evolving teaching on Job - both how it

remained consistent and how it changed. In Confessiones and elsewhere Augustine tells us about

passages from the Scriptures that he had found especially troubling in his youth, passages that had

actually impeded his conversion. It is important to point out here that no passage from Job was

included among these.

Our examination of Augustine's use of Job chronologically (4.2.B) supports our

conclusions. Not only have we found Augustine driving home homiletic exhortations typical of

Ibid., p.301.
Steinhauser, op cit., pp.301-2.
 160

his time (which fact proves that he looked to Job as a pastoral resource), we have, moreover,

found him over time actually deepening his knowledge of the text. If we could make an absolute

comparison of his sampling with his contemporaries, which, for the various reasons that we have

already indicate is impossible or at least problematic, I believe we would find his sampling of the

text to be at least as a wide as, but probably even wider than, that of the majority of his peers.

That he was making both polemic and pastoral use of the text and that he did not just cite a few

carefully-chosen proof-texts, serve to indicate that Augustine was not further marginalizing Job.

b) Augustine's Job was unlike that of the other Fathers in a few key ways. Part of this

was on account of the uniqueness of his exegesis. Part of this follows as a consequence of the

theological edifice he had built up in reaction to two things that of all the Fathers really only

affected him: the Donatist controversy and that with the Pelagians. But of course it is one thing to

distinguish one 'Job' from another - Augustine's from the other Fathers' - it is another thing to

pin-point the exact causes of this in Augustine: what parts were on account of his anti-Donatism,

what because of anti-Pelagianism, what for some other reason? Error can easily arise here. It is

incorrect to maintain in every case that it is heresy that creates doctrine, and not, as it was in this

case, that one's response to heresy can lie in perfect consistency with one's antecedent

inclination. In the case of Job we can then come to view the Pelagian heresy not as having formed

(or even reformed as in Steinhauser's view) his view of the Edomite, but rather that his response

to the doctrine of Pelagius was in perfect accord with every other one of his doctrines, including

that of Job. This allows the possibility of consistency, a possibility which should not be

eliminated a priori.

c) The two above observations prompt us to make the following assertions about

Augustine's Job. (a) provided for the priority of his doctrine of Scripture over what particularities
 161

of his grace doctrine might have been at stake with Job, and (b) leaves open the possibility for the

priority of other doctrines as well - such as the Christological and the anthropological. It now

falls to us to describe what these might be, following upon our conclusions from chapter 4.3.

Might Job present the doctrine of grace writ small? No. Only Christ can function as that

universal man from which the mystery of grace and providence may be derived. It may have been

the case for Pelagius and Julian that a single man might, so to speak, become a universal instance

of anthropology and indeed of providence, but it was not the case for Augustine, at least by the

early 390s at the latest. This is clear in Augustine's late works; he was moving toward articulating

this even as early as Ad Simplicianum. Augustine's doctrine of Job presents some facets of the

universal 'humanity', but never without reference to Christ does his doctrine of man attain full

form. It fails to attain a high degree of elaboration in Adnotationes, not, of course, because of a

failure to refer to Christ there - which he certainly does abundantly - but on account of the

rudimentary level of his meditation on Christ at that point, particularly with respect to how all

grace is a communion with the Person of Christ. From a certain perspective the great definition of

Job we find in De civitate Dei is disappointing.367 It is so from a Pelagian perspective. Yet this is

Wherefore if we read of any foreigner that is, one neither born of Israel nor received by that
people into the canon of the sacred books having prophesied something about Christ, if it has come or
shall come to our knowledge, we can refer to it over and above; not that this is necessary, even if wanting,
but because it is not incongruous to believe that even in other nations there may have been men to whom
this mystery was revealed, and who were also impelled to proclaim it, whether they were partakers of the
same grace or had no experience of it, but were taught by bad angels, who, as we know, even confessed the
present Christ, whom the Jews did not acknowledge. Nor do I think the Jews themselves dare contend that
no one has belonged to God except the Israelites, since the increase of Israel began on the rejection of his
elder brother. For in very deed there was no other people who were specially called the people of God; but
they cannot deny that there have been certain men even of other nations who belonged, not by earthly but
heavenly fellowship, to the true Israelites, the citizens of the country that is above. Because, if they deny
this, they can be most easily confuted by the case of the holy and wonderful man Job, who was neither a
native nor a proselyte, that is, a stranger joining the people of Israel, but, being bred of the Idumean race,
arose there and died there too, and who is so praised by the divine oracle, that no man of his times is put on
a level with him as regards justice and piety. And although we do not find his date in the chronicles, yet
from his book, which for its merit the Israelites have received as of canonical authority, we gather that he
was in the third generation after Israel. And I doubt not it was divinely provided, that from this one case we
might know that among other nations also there might be men pertaining to the spiritual Jerusalem who
have lived according to God and have pleased Him. And it is not to be supposed that this was granted to
any one, unless the one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, was divinely revealed to
him; who was pre-announced to the saints of old as yet to come in the flesh, even as He is announced to us
as having come, that the self-same faith through Him may lead all to God who are predestinated to be the
Augustinianism in essence: the mystery of man lies in God. If he could only understand Job by

means of his 'supernatural' dimension, it is his conviction that it is only in this way that the data

makes sense. Some have complained that Augustine errs when he separates grace from creation

and localizes grace in the isolated inner being of humans, something which "in no way

corresponds to biblical teaching."368 Augustine does the latter abundantly; to the former, it is true,

he would not reduce what is for him a 'theology in time' into something like natural theology.369

As such, Job is in DCD 18.47 the recipient of a supernatural, indeed, an uncommon bestowal of

grace, and this means that we have no basis upon which to speak of a non-theological

anthropology anywhere in relation to Job. Such a thing made no sense to Augustine, and that is

why we cannot find one in Adnotationes or anywhere else. The notion of humility in this text

draws out this theme. And here it is as but the early working out of a basic intuition, one not well

articulated until later.

It is easy to see how the one developed into the other with respect to Job. What I have

called 'the humility ethic' is dominant in Adnotationes. Here Augustine speaks of the actions of

the just man as 'incomplete' or 'insufficient' in that they lack the finishing touches possible only

to grace. Job exemplifies for Augustine the man for whom something 'is yet still lacking.' He is

the good man, but that is not the end of the story for Augustine, as it would be for the Stoics and

the Pelagians. The story of Job is by its very nature question-begging. If Job exemplifies the

perfect or complete life, what more need be said? By 399 Job is becoming very much like the one

we find in DCD 18.47. The difference between Adnotationes and DCD is that DCD is an

admission that once one has referred to grace one has said everything that is necessary to say. He

is still working towards this conclusion in 399. In DCD we find Job as the recipient of that grace

not granted to everyone, but only those to whom "Christ was divinely revealed." In other words,

the revelation of Christ was itself the foundation of the fact that Job was a "holy and wonderful

city of God, the house of God, and the temple of God. (DCD, 18.47, my emphasis) See as well DP, 18.
368
Ibid., p.301, referencing both Greshake and Rees. See Steinhauser's footnote 7.
369
Ratio in Julian, ibid., pp.306-7.
 163

man." Similarly in 399 we have Augustine telling us time and again that, as in 39.33, "audiens

talia, id est, intelligens quanta justitia et misericordia mecum sic agatur, cum per meipsum utique

nihil sim?" Likewise in 9.19-20, he tells us that God "Vincit, ut voluntatem ejus faciam, non

meam." This is the sort of relationship with God that our discussion of 'light' brought out

above,370 as in 39.2: "veritas persuasa eis pro quibus ita ingemiscitur, id agente in interioribus

conscientiae verbo Dei." This is the 'God-doing' side of things that one would think would be the

benchmark of the late Augustine. Yet we can see that this was present in Adnotationes, alongside

of the 'humility' accent, the accent on how man - every man - comes up short in his relationship

with God. This side of things we have seen just above in relation to 14.17, 16.17, and 29.14. It is

clear how a focus on one's insufficiency would naturally lead one to eventually focus on the sole-

sufficiency of grace.371 One could hardly debate that this process was at work in Augustine

especially in the 380s. Yet it would be a mistake to consider that, for sake of consistency, one

would have to come to replace the other. They are both operative in Adnotationes, and neither of

them disappeared by the time of DCD 18.47, even if it is true that Augustine focused his defense

in the Pelagian controversy on the second facet, rather than on the first.

It is not, moreover, the question of whose power saves - my free will or God's grace -

that is the measure of progress in Augustine's thinking on soteriology, at least as this impacts

upon his idea of Job. Rather, this progress is measured by how centrally Christ was placed within

his anthropology. There is no 'history of Job' in Augustine after 396, if it remains but a question

of what saves - grace or free will. He had put the finishing touches on this matter in Ad

Simplicianum. Yet he was still to make great strides in how he conceived of human perfection. He

realized soon enough that if one was to speak of the individual person as incapable of his own

salvation, his whole conception of human righteousness needed to be reworked, reworked into a

sort of scale of greatness that made sense of this impossibility. The perfect man was not just the

370
See Chapter 2, Conclusions, 2.b.
371
On the relationship between Augustine's doctrine of humility and that of grace see, for instance,
Studer, The Grace of Christ, pp.50-55.
 164

one who did not sin sexually. I am perfectly willing to grant that Augustine had at one time

considered mere lack of sin to be synonymous with the good life, the sort of life that entitled one

to the vision of God that he had expected in his youth. As the Pelagian Controversy moved into

its final stages we find Augustine so immersed in this new scale of values so as to be in a

completely different universe from Julian. Julian had remained in the world of his experience,

while Augustine was by then working with a model wherein God's original intention for man

could only be explained in the utterly unfamiliar terrain of Christ's unique humanity. Augustine

was not there by 399, of course, but the essential seed of 'insufficiency' had been planted and was

just beginning to grow as he moved his thinking more and more toward a model that could only

find instantiation in Christ. If integrating Job into his mature theology remained problematic for

Augustine, as Steinhauser has claimed, it was not for the reason he has suggested. It was not

because in Job a mere man was apparently exhibiting a degree of perfection Augustine denied

was possible to him and he did not know how to argue around this. It was, rather, on account of

the fact that his view of human righteousness employed parameters wholly unfamiliar to the Stoic

milieu of Late Antiquity. Yes, Augustine had done something remarkable to anthropology, but in

light of the concerns of the Pelagian debate, this was an enterprise he had begun not long into the

390s.

d) Something must be said regarding the genre of Adnotationes. Was it the preparation

for a commentary? Did Augustine, for example, ever state that he had intended to write a

commentary on Job? No, he did not. It may have been a first reading for something he had once

imagined might ultimately serve as a guide for others. Yet we should make no mistake and fail to

ascribe a level of resolution to its author that he may never have had. For, to guide is first and

foremost a matter of coming to know. Adnotationes only proves that Augustine had wished to

know. It was a study, and in this sense Augustine finished what he set out to do. Thus, in this

sense, it is not an unfinished work.

 165

This is an important point when we consider just how much of Steinhauser's arguments

depend upon his particular conception of its genre. As it is, Adnotationes is nothing other than

marginal notes that might most accurately be compared to what work he did on his copies of the

secular works of philosophy he had studied for sake of composing De civitate Dei. What about

Augustine's method of composition indicates that he only annotated works upon which he wished

to write a commentary? Had he written a commentary upon Hortensius - his most commented

upon philosophical text?372

Had he ever thought of doing so? Without going so far as to say that by 426/7 Augustine

had come to consider these notes distasteful, one could at least say that they were by then

considered by him to be without much value. Why did he not just point out a few problems with

Adnotationes and leave it at that - in other words, leave 2.39 looking much like any other chapter

of Retractationes? He tells us why: it is choppy and ambiguous. To 'complete' the commentary

would have meant almost completely discarding it - again, for reasons of form as well as for

certain hermeneutical reasons, but not because his 'new' doctrine of grace made it completely

untenable. Augustine would not have objected to the content of Adnotationes, but would question

its importance, centrality, utility, as well as its elegance. He would have probably even found

Adnotationes' spiritualizing excessive, and, for all that, quite boring. But if there is one thing that

distinguishes his early from his late exegesis, it is not that he switched from spiritual to literal

exegesis, it is just that he was more and more giving the 'letter' greater consideration, that he was

putting forth greater labor before transforming it into 'spirit.' In the end, Retractationes 2.39 only

questions Adnotationes' utility.

So it is a study. Its tentativeness supports this view, as we have shown in chapter 2.2.

Augustine had not liked to draw conclusions in it. He did not like to tell us too much about Job. It

was a work in which he was testing out his ability to resolve the crudities of anthropomorphism.

See James J. O'Donnell, "Augustine's Classical Readings," Recherches Augustiniennes 15 (1980),

pp. 144-175.
 166

In that he succeeded, at least according to the standards he was employing in 399. We know that

Job sinned, for Augustine tells us so. It was not an important point in 399, but it became so later.

Adnotationes' value lies in the assumptions that govern it, and this is why we cannot completely

agree with Steinhauser when he says that this work is only of limited value for establishing

Augustine's teaching. Augustine assumes a great deal in the work about providence, theodicy,

and dessert - matters of great interest to us. But these need to be teased out in light of its

unpolished short-hand form. No complete biography of Job can be constructed from its scattered

elements. Yet we can draw enough out of it to establish that its view of grace was consistent with

his later teaching.

If Steinhauser is mistaken about it being an abandoned commentary what happens to his

argument? He would need to point to some other proof for Augustine's marginalization of Job,

and as our statistical analysis proves, it is impossible to do this. The fact that Steinhauser fails to

consider any other explanation for Adnotationes not having been turned into a polished

commentary leads to a host of problems.

e) Finally, did Job influence Augustine? It would be most likely that such influence

would indicate itself in his conception of the economy of salvation. This seems to be suggested

by the passage we have had occasion to reference more than once from De civitate Dei, 18.47:

"There is no doubt in my mind that Divine Providence gave us Job as an example to make us

understand that there may have been other men among the pagan nations who lived according to

God's law, pleased Him, and so belonged to the spiritual Jerusalem."373 Yet this passage does not

exhibit a plan minutely worked out. Job is not a case from which he argues a great theme, upon

which some of the Greek thinkers we have investigated came much closer to expounding - like

Eusebius - whether for good or ill. For Augustine, Job exemplifies a rule: "Nevertheless, we must

believe that no man received such graces save one to whom the one Mediator between God and

373
DCD 18.47, pp. 166-7.
 167

man, the man Jesus Christ, was made known by heavenly revelation."374 All who are saved are

saved by grace, but he does not care to tell us who these are - Christians, Jews or pagans. "His

Incarnation was made known to those ancient saints before the event, as it has been announced to

us after the event, so that one and the same faith may bring all the predestined through Him into

the City of God, into the house and temple of God, to God Himself."375 Job was, theologically

speaking, an exception, but not in the sense one might expect him to be. All are saved by grace,

the only difference in Job's case was that grace is usually accompanied by baptism. La

Bonnardikre was wise to speak of Job as a topic in relation to which Augustine treated of various

themes,376 but this is not to say that he was the reason why Augustine needed to treat of them. Yet

it is hard for modern people to accept that Job did not force Augustine to think a great deal about

the salvation of non-Christians, or of non-Jews. This has something to do with one of the most

interesting characteristics of Adnotationes: its tendency to jumble together diverse subject

matter.377 Job is sometimes Christ, sometimes Job, sometimes us. His friends are sometimes Jews,

poor pastors, the 'carnally minded,' sometimes humanity in general. The devil makes his

appearance, kings show up, and 'the rulers of the earth.' But if Augustine is indecisive in

Adnotationes in many ways, he is not in what concerns us. He never fails to inform us about the

limits of human virtue.

If Augustine was influenced in the long run by his encounter with Job, whether in the

Adnotationes or elsewhere, it was quite to the contrary of Steinhauser's thesis. This encounter

actually served to build-up his confidence in dealing with the Old Testament, even if the criticism

that his exegesis in Adnotationes is excessively spiritualized is a valid one. Adnotationes seems to

indicate he enjoyed thinking about Job. His comments became longer and more involved as he

went on. Something occurred to bring this to an end at 39:35 - perhaps something as innocuous

See her BA: Job.

See especially chapter 2, sec. 2.1.
 168

as a trip outside of Hippo. And, again, the final passage from this work proves that he was aware

that he was writing its last line when he wrote it - 'he put his hand to his mouth' there, and said

not more. He was not uncomfortable, and there simply is no justification for considering this as

the reason why he never went back to it. We simply do not have the details about the how, the

when, and the why of his reading and thinking about much of the Old Testament. The history of

his reading of Kings or of Joshua, etc., all deserve to be written. We think that when they finally

are there shall be exhibited the same patterns of encounter we have noted in 4.2.b. of this thesis.

The overall result will be a greater knowledge of Augustine's life as a student of the Scriptures.

This could not but have implications for the study of Augustine's reading of extra-biblical sources

as well. The history of Augustine's encounter with Job is more properly considered as a part of

the history of his encounter with the Old Testament in general, and not as a part of the history of

his battle with Pelagianism. The Pelagians thought they had a good point here, but Augustine

remained unimpressed. There was nothing in that work that gave him much of a problem in the

410s and 20s. And when he took the time to study it at length in 399 he was inspired enough to

work in several of its passages into the seamless garment of his prototypical 'anti-Pelagian'

Confessiones.

We had occasion to quote Augustine's very first reference to Job at the beginning of this

thesis, part of which we recall here: "This man... kept his mind so unshaken and fixed upon God,

as to manifest that these things were not great in his view, but that he was great in relation to

them, and God to him."378 Forty years after he had written this, Augustine still referred to him as

"saintly Job,"379 "the servant of God"380 and "that holy man."381 On the surface little had changed.

Yet if one were to dig a little deeper one would see that with time Augustine would realize that he

could never leave a remark like the one he had made in On the Morals of the Catholic Church

378
MEC, 23.42
379
OICI, 2.77.
380
Ibid., 1.105.
381
Ibid., 4.91.
 169

without qualification. Explaining the Old Testament saints to the Pelagians was a very different

task from explaining them to the Manichaeans. God was 'great to Job' both in the 380s and in the

420s. He never changed what he had first said about the degree of this greatness. He did not end

up by down-playing the greatness of Job to the Pelagians; he needed to point out just how high

the standard he had in mind was: God's "perfect rule of righteousness"382; and, he simply needed

to emphasize how this greatness was the result of God's gift. Augustine did not respond to the

Pelagians by vilifying Job, rather, in his mind, yes, Job had sins - a fact which we never see him

denying - but the point was that God wanted Job to understand "with a purer intensity of

heart."383 He would never have denied that virtue was God's gift in the 380s; he just needed to do

a lot of thinking about how it is that grace makes one good. And at that time if he did not have

coherent doctrines of original sin and 'initiation in grace' to lay out the parameters whereby he

could speak more astutely of human righteousness, he nevertheless always possessed that basic

intuition that all good is from God. This basic intuition governed his whole history with Job, and

gave it remarkable consistency. It is the basis for that not yet negligible thread of plausibility that

strings Retractationes together in the face of remarkably powerful accusations of inconsistency

made against him by the Pelagians.

382
De peccatorum meritis et remissione et de baptismo parvulorum, 2.10.14.
(http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/! 5012.htm).
383
Ibid., 2.10.16
 170

Bibliography

Primary Sources

Works of Saint Augustine:

Latin Texts: PL 34:825-886

CSEL 28.2

Translations:

* I have employed the Past Masters English Database (Works of Saint Augustine series) (New
York: New City Press, 1992) for many of the works of Augustine, in addition to other translations
from the Fathers of the Church series, Ancient Christian Writers series, and the Nicene-Post
Nicene Fathers series.

Against Julian trans. Matthew A. Schumacher, C.S.C. (New York: Fathers of the Church,
Inc., 1957).

Answer to an Enemy of the Law and the Prophets in Reply to Heresies (New York, New
City Press, 2000), pp. 357-449.

In Answer to the Jews, trans., Sr. Marie Liguori, in Saint Augustine: Treatises on
Marriage and Other Subjects, ed. Roy Deferrari (New York: Fathers of the Church, Inc., 1955),
pp. 387-414.

Augustine: Sermon on the Mount, Harmony of the Gospels, Homilies on the Gospels, vol.
6, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, ed. Philip Schaff, (Peabody, Mass.: Hendricksen Publishers,
Inc., 1995).

Augustine's Commentary on Galatians, intro., text, trans., notes Eric Plummer (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2003).

The Care to be Taken for the Dead, trans., John A. Lacy, in Saint Augustine: Treatises on
Marriage and Other Subjects, ed. Roy Deferrari (New York: Fathers of the Church, Inc., 1955),
pp. 349-84.

City of God, trans., Henry Bettenson (London: Penguin Books, 1984).

 171

Christian Instruction in The Writings of Saint Augustine, v.4, trans. John J. Gavigan,
O.S.A., (New York: Cima Publishing Co., 1947), pp. 3-241.

Confessions, trans. Sr. Maria Boulding (Hyde Park, NY: New City Press, 1997).

Contra Faustum, (www.newadvent.org/fathers/140604.htm).

De haeresibus, trans., Liguori Muller, OFM (Washington: Catholic University of

America Press, 1956).

The Divination to Demons, trans., Ruth Wentworth Brown, in Saint Augustine: Treatises
on Marriage and Other Subjects, ed. Roy Deferrari (New York: Fathers of the Church, Inc.,
1955), pp. 417-40.

Eighty-Three Different Questions, trans., David L. Mosher (Washington : Catholic

University of America, 2002).

Epistles, http://www.newadvent.org /fathers/1102.htm).

Exposition of the Psalms, (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1801080.htm).

On Genesis: A Refutation of the Manichees, trans., Edmund Hill, O.P. (Hyde Park, New
York: New City Press, 2006), pp.23-102.

The Literal Meaning of Genesis, 2vv. trans., John Hammond Taylor, S.J. (New York:
Paulist Press, 1982).

On the Morals of the Catholic Church (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1401.htm).

Miscellany of Questions in Response to Simplician in Responses to Miscellaneous

Questions, trans., Boniface Ramsey (Hyde Park, New York: New City Press, 2008), pp. 159-231.

Tractates on the Gospel of John, Tractates on the First Epistle of John, trans., John W.
Rettig, in Fathers of the Church, v.92 (Washington: Catholic University of America Press, 1995).

De Patientia (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1315.htm).

Augustine on Romans: Propositions from the Epistle to the Romans, Unfinished

Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, trans., Paula Fredriksen Landes, (Chico, California:
Scholars Press, 1982).

The Unfinished Literal Commentary on Genesis, trans., Edmund Hill, O.P. (Hyde Park,
New York: New City Press, 2006), pp. 103-51.

Unfinished Work against Julian, trans. Roland J. Teske (Hyde Park, New York: New
City Press, 1999.)

Retractations, trans., Sr. Mary Inez Bogan, in The Fathers of the Church, v.60
(Washington: Catholic University of America Press, 1968).
 172

Other Primary Sources

Ambrose, St., The Prayer of Job and David in Seven Exegetical Works, trans. Michael P.
McHugh (Washington: Catholic University of America, 1972).

, On the Patriarchs in Seven Exegetical Works, trans. Michael P. McHugh

(Washington: Catholic University of America, 1972).

Aristotle, Metaphysics, trans., W. D. Ross, in The Basic Works of Aristotle, ed., Richard
McKeon (NewYork: Random House, 1941), pp. 681-926.

Caesarius of Aries, St., Homilies, 3 vv., trans., Sr. Mary Magdeleine Mueller, O.S.F.
(Washington: Catholic University of America, 1973).

Cassian, The Conferences, trans. Boniface Ramsey, O.P. (New York: Newman Press,
1997).

Diogenes Laertius, Lives of the Philosophers, 2 vv., trans, and ed., Caponigri, A. Robert
(Chicago: Regnery, 1969).

Eusebius, The History of the Church, trans., G. A. Williamson (Harmondsworth,

Middlesex: Dorset Press, 1983).

, The Proof of the Gospel, trans., W. J. Ferrar (Grand Rapids: Baker Book
House: 1981).

Gregory of Nyssa, St., Ascetical Works, trans., Virginia Woods Callahan (Washington:
Catholic University of America, 1967).

, The Lord's Prayer and the Beatitudes, trans., Hilda C. Graeff (New York:
Newman Press, 1954).

, Select Writings and Letters of Gregory, Bishop of Nyssa, trans., William

Moore and Henry Austin Wilson (New York: The Christian Literature Company, 1893).

Hilary, St., Tractates superpsalmos (Patrologia Latina Database, Chadwick-Healey).

Hippolytus, Canons: Canon 14 (Ethiopian) (http://www.jeramyt.org/papers/ peace.html).

Jerome, St., Dialogue Against the Pelagians in Saint Jerome: Dogmatic and Polemical
Works, trans. John N. Hritzu (Washington: Catholic University of America Press, 1965).

, Hebrew Questions of Genesis, trans., Robert Hayward, C.T.R. Hayward

(Oxford: Oxford University Press: 1995).

John Chrysostom, St., Commentaire surJob 2 vv., trans., Henri Sorlin and Louis
 173

Neyrand (Paris: Editions du cerf, 1988).

Origen, Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, 2 vv., trans., Thomas P. Scheck
(Washington: Catholic University of America, 2001).

, Commentary on the Gospel According to John, 2 vv., trans., Ronald E. Heine

(Washington: Catholic University of America, 1993).

, Contra Celsum, trans., Henry Chadwick (Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press, 1980).

, Homilies on Genesis and Exodus, trans., Ronald E. Heine (Washington:

Catholic University of America, 1982).

, Homilies on Leviticus, trans., Gary Wayne Barkley (Washington: Catholic

University of America Press, 1990).

, Homilies on Luke, trans., Joseph T. Lienhard, SJ, (Washington: Catholic

University of America Press, 1996).

, On First Principles (Gloucester, Mass.: Peter Smith, 1973).

Pelagius, Pelagius's Commentary on St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans, trans., Theodore
de Bruyn (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998).

Possidius, The Life of Saint Augustine, The Augustinian Series, Vol. 1 (Villanova, PA:
Augustinian Press, 1988).

Simonetti, Manlio and Conti, Marco, eds., Ancient Christian Commentary of Scripture:
Job (Downers Grove, 111., Intervarsity Press, 2006).

Secondary Sources

Alflatt, Malcolm E., "The Development of the Idea of Involuntary Sin in St. Augustine,"
RE Aug 20(1974), 133-34.

, "The Responsibility for Involuntary Sin in Saint Augustine," RA 10 (1975),

172-86.

Altaner, B., "Augustine's Preservation of His Own Writings," Theological Studies 9

(1948), pp. 600-3.

Annas, Julia and Barnes, Jonathan, The Modes of Scepticism: Ancient Texts and Modern
Interpretations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985).

Armstrong, A. Hilary, "Plotinus's Doctrine of the Infinite and Christian Thought," in

Plotinian and Christian Studies (London: Variorum reprints, 1979), pp. 47-58.
 174

, St Augustine and Christian Platonism (New York: Anchor Books, 1972).

, "Salvation, Plotinian and Christian," in Plotinian and Christian Studies

(London: Variorum Reprints, 1979), pp. 126-39.

, "Spiritual or Intelligible Matter in Plotinus and Augustine," in Plotinian and

Christian Studies (London: Variorum reprints, 1979), pp. 277-83.

, "Platonic Eros and Christian Agape," in Plotinian and Christian Studies

(London: Variorum reprints, 1979), pp. 105-21.

, "Platonic Love: A Reply to Professor Verdenius," in Plotinian and Christian

Studies (London: Variorum reprints, 1979), pp. 199-208.

, "St. Augustine and Christian Platonism," in Plotinian and Christian Studies

(London: Variorum reprints, 1979), pp. 1-66.

Ayres, Lewis, "Augustine, Christology, and God as Love: An Introduction to the

Homilies on 1 John," in Nothing Greater, Nothing Better (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001), pp.
67-93.

Babcok, William S., Tyconius: The Book of Rules (Society of Biblical Literature, 1989).

Bardy, Gustave., ed. & trans., Les Revisions, CEuvres de Saint Augustin 12 (Paris: Declee,
de Brouwer et Cie, 1950).

Barnes, Michel, "Metaphysics and Morals in Marius Victorinus' Commentary on the

Letter to the Ephesians: A Contribution to the History of Neoplatonism and Christianity," Journal
of Early Christian Studies 6 (1998), pp. 678-679.

Barth, Markus, "St Paul: A Good Jew," Horizons in Biblical Theology, 1 (1980), pp. 7-
45.

Baskin, Judith R., "Job as Moral Exemplar in Ambrose," in Vigiliae Christianae 35

(1981), pp. 222-31.

, "Rabbinic Interpretations of Job," in The Voice from the Whirlwind: Interpreting the
Book of Job eds. Leo G. Perdue and W. Clark Gilpin (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1992), pp. 101-
110.

Baur, Chrysostomus, O.S.B., John Chrysostom and His Time, 2 vv. (London: Sands and
Co., Ltd., 1959).

Beatrice, P. F., "Quosdam Platonicorum libros. The Platonic Readings of Augustine in

Milan," Vigiliae Christianae 43 (1989), pp. 248-81.

Besserman, Lawrence L., The Legend of Job in the Middle Ages (London: Harvard
University Press, 1979).

Blumenthal, H. J., "Plotinus in Later Platonism," in Neoplatonism and Early Christian

Thought, Essays in Honour of A.H. Armstrong, ed. H.J Blumenthal and R. A. Markus (London:
 175

Variorum Publications, 1981), pp. 212-222.

Bonner, Gerald, St. Augustine: His Life and Controversies (Norwich: Canterbury Press,
2002).

Bourke, Vernon J., "Saint Augustine and Situationism," Augustinus, 12 (1967) pp. 117-
123.

Bowlin, John R. "Augustine on Justifying Coercion," Annual of the Society of Christian

Ethics, 17 (1997), pp. 49-70.

Brabant, Qvila, "Contrainte et charite selon Saint Augustin," Science et esprit, 22 (1970),
pp. 5-17.

Bright, Pamela, The Book of Rules ofTyconius: Its Purpose and Inner Logic (Notre
Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1988).

Broc, Catherine, "La femme de Job dans la predication de Jean Chrysostome," Studia
Patristica 37 (2001), pp. 396-403.

Brottier, Laurence, "L'Actualisation de la figure de Job chez Jean Chrysostome" in Le

livre de Job chez les Peres (Strasbourg: Centre D'Analyse et de Documentation Patristiques,
1996), pp.63-110.

Brown, Peter, Augustine of Hippo: A Biography (Berkeley: University of California

Press, 2000).

, "Political Society," in Augustine: A Colleciton of Critical Essays, ed., R. A. Markus

(New York: Doubleday and Co., Inc., 1972), pp. 311-35.

Bruggisser, P., "City of the Outcast and City of the Elect: The Romulean Asylum in
Augustine's City of God and Servius's Commentaries on Virgil," in History, Apocalypse, and the
Secular Imagination: New Essays on Augustine's City of God, eds., Mark Vessey, Karla
Pollmann, and Allan D. Fitzgerald (Bowling Green, Oh.: Philosophy Documentation Center,
Bowling Green State University, 1999), pp. 75-104.

Burnaby, J., Amor Dei (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1938).

, "The 'Retractationes' of Saint Augustine: Self-Criticism or Apologia?," in

Augustine Magister I (Paris, 1954)."

Burns, J. Patout, "Augustine's Role in the Imperial Action against Pelagius," Journal of
Theological Studies, 30 (1979), pp. 67-83.

, The Development of Augustine's Doctrine of Operative Grace (Paris: Etudes

Augustiennes, 1980).

Burtt, E. A., The Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Physical Science (Atlantic

Highlands, N.J., Humanities Press, 1967).

, "Augustine's use of Sallust in the City of God: The Role of the Grammatical
 176

Tradition," in History, Apocalypse, and the Secular Imagination: New Essays on Augustine's City
of God, eds., Mark Vessey, Karla Pollmann, and Allan D. Fitzgerald (Bowling Green, Oh.:
Philosophy Documentation Center, Bowling Green State University, 1999), pp. 105-14.

Butler, E. C., Western Mysticism: The Teachings of Augustine, Gregory, and Bernard on
Contemplation and the Contemplative Life (London: Constable, 1967).

Cary, Phillip, Inner Grace: Augustine in the Tradition of Plato and Paul (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2008).

Casidy, Augustine Michael "Apatheia and Sexuality in the Thought of Augsutine and
Cassian," St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly 45:4 (2001), pp.359-94.

Cassidy, Eoin, "Augustine's Exegesis on the First Epistle of John," in Scriptural

Interpretation in the Fathers (Dublin: Four Courts Pr., 1995), pp. 201-20.

, "Per Christum Hominem ad Christum Deum: Augustine's Homilies on John's

Gospel," in Studies in Patristic Christology, eds., Thomas Finan and Vincent Twomey (Dublin:
Four Courts Press, 1998).

Chadwick, Henry, Augustine (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1986).

, "Christian Platonism in Origen and Augustine," Originiana Tertia (Rome:

Edizioni dell'Ateneo, 1985), pp. 217-30.

Christopher, Kirwan, "Avoiding Sin: Augustine Against Consequentialism," Augustinian

Tradition, (Berkeley: Univ. of California Pr., 1999), pp. 183-194.

Clark, Mary T., "Marius Victorinus Afer, Porphyry, and the History of Philosophy," in
Significance of Neoplatonism (Norfolk, Va.: Old Dominion University, 1976), pp. 265-273.

, "The Neoplatonism of Marius Victorinus the Christian," Neoplatonism and

Early Christian Thought (London: Variorum Publications, 1981) pp. 153-159.

Colish, Marcia L., "The Neoplatonic Tradition: The Contribution of Marius Victorinus,"
in Neoplatonic Tradition (Cologne: Dinter, 1991), pp. 57-74.

, "The Stoic Tradition from Antiquity to the Early Middle Ages: II, Stoicism in
Christian Latin Thought through the Sixth Century," in Studies in the History of Christian
Thought 35 (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1985).

Collingwood, R. G., The Idea of History (New York: Oxford University Press, 1956).

Catherine Conybeare, The Irrational Augustine (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006).

, "Terrarum orbi documentum: Augustine, Camillus, and Learning from

History,''' in History, Apocalypse, and the Secular Imagination: New Essays on Augustine's City
of God, eds., Mark Vessey, Karla Pollmann, and Allan D. Fitzgerald (Bowling Green, Oh.:
Philosophy Documentation Center, Bowling Green State University, 1999), pp. 59-74.

Courcells, Pierre, Late Latin Writers and Their Greek Sources, trans., by Harry E.
 177

Wedeck (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1969).

Coyle, Kevin, "Early Monks, Prayer, and the Devil," Prayer and Spirituality in the Early
Church (Everton Park, Queensland, Australia: Australian Catholic University Press, 1998), pp.
229-249.

, "Saint Augustine's Manichaean Legacy," Augustinian Studies 34-1 (2003),

pp. 1-22.

Cranz, F. E., "De Civitate Dei, XV, 2 and Augustine's Ideas of the Christian Society,"
Augustine: A Colleciton of Critical Essays, ed., R. A. Markus (New York: Doubleday and Co.,
Inc., 1972), pp. 404-21.

, "The Development of Augustine's ideas on Society Before the Donatist

Controversy," Augustine: A Colleciton of Critical Essays, ed., R. A. Markus (New York:
Doubleday and Co., Inc., 1972), pp. 336-403.

Crouse, R. D., "'Recurrens in te unum': The Pattern of St. Augustine's 'Confessions,'"

Studia Patristica 14 (TuU 117) (1976), pp. 389-392.

, "7n Aenigmate Trinitas' (Confessions, XIII,5,6). The Conversion of

Philosophy in St. Augustine's Confessions," Dionysius 11(1987), pp. 53-62.

Cunningham, Agnes, "The Redemption of Time: A Patristic View," Covenant Quarterly,

58 (2000), pp. 3-17.

Currie, H. M., "Saint Augustine and Virgil," Proceedings of the Virgil Society 14(1975-
76), pp. 6-16.

Daley, Brian E., "A Humble Mediator: The Distinctive Elements in St Augustine's
Christology," in Word and Spirit (Petersham, Mass: St Bede's Pubs., 1987), pp. 100-117.

Danielou, Jean, The Lord of History (London: Longmans, 1958).

, The Origins of Latin Christianity, trans., David Smith and John Baker

(London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1977).

, Holy Pagans of the Old Testament (London: Longmans, 1957).

The Theology of Jewish Christianity (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1977.

De Lubac, Henri, Medieval Exegesis: The Four Senses of Scripture, 2 vols., (trans.,
Sebanc, Marc, vol.1; Macierowski, E. M., vol.2) (Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1998, 2000).

de Margerie, B., An Introduction to the History of Exegesis: Saint Augustine, vol.3

(Petersham, Mass.: Saint Bede's Pulications, 1993).

Desmond, William, "Augustine's 'Confessions': On Desire, Conversion and Reflection,"

The Irish Theological Quarterly 47(1980), pp. 24-33.
 178

Dhorme, E., A Commentary on the Book of Job, trans. Harold Knight (London: Thomas
Nelson and Sons, Ltd., 1967).

Dideberg, Dany, Saint Augustin et la premiere epitre de Saint Jean (Paris: Beauchesne,
1975).

Dodaro, Robert, O.S.A.: "Augustine's Revision of the Heroic Ideal," Augustinian Studies
36 (2005), pp.141-158.

, "Sacramentum Christi: Augustine on the Christology of Pelagius," Studia

Patristica 27 (Louvain: Peeters, 1993), pp. 274-280.

Doignon, J., "Corpora Vitiorum Materies: Une Formule-Cle du Fragment sur Job
D'Hilaire de Poitiers Inspire d'Origene et Transmis par Augustin (Contra Julianum 2, 8, 27)",
Vigiliae Christianae 35 (1981), pp. 207-21.

, "Rengaines" Origeniennes dans les homelies sur Job d'Hilaire de Poitiers," in

Le livre de Job chez les Peres, (Strasbourg: Centre d'analyse et de documentation patristiques,
1996), pp. 7-11.

, "Versets de Job sur le peche de notre origine selon Hilaire de Potiers," in Le

livre de Job chez les Peres, (Strasbourg: Centre d'analyse et de documentation patristiques,
1996), pp. 13-21.

Dossey, Lesslie, "The Last Days of Vandal Africa: An Arian Commentary on Job and its
Historical Context," Journal of Theological Studies 54 (2003), pp. 60-123.

Doucet, Dominique, "Job: L'Eglise et la tribulation: Augustin, Adnotationes in Job 29-

31," in Le livre de Job chez les Peres, (Strasbourg: Centre d'analyse et de documentation
patristiques, 1996), pp. 31-48.

, 'L'Mrs memoriae" dans les "Confessions'" Revue des Etudes Augustiniennes

33(1987) 49-69.

Dudden, F. Hommes, Gregory the Great: His Place in History and Thought (New York:
Russell & Russell, 1967).

Duval, Yves-Marie, "Saint Augustin et les persecutions de la deuxieme moitie du ive

siecle (Cite de Dieu, XVIII, 52)," Melanges de science religieuse, 23 (1966), pp. 175-191.

Evans, G. R., The Thought of Gregory the Great (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1987).

Falls-Corbitt, Margaret, "Plato and Augustine on Doing Wrong Knowingly," in Human

and Divine Agency (Lanham, Md: Univ. Pr. of America, 1999) pp. 253-265.

Ferguson, Everett, Backgrounds of Early Christianity (Grand Rapids: William B.

Eerdmans, 2003).

Ferrari, Leo, "Isaiah and the Early Augustine," Collectaneana Augustiniana (Louvain:
Leuven University Press, 1990), pp. 739-56.
 179

, "Monica on the Wooden Ruler (Conf. 3.11.19)," Augustinian Studies 6

(1975), 193-205.
, "The Boyhood Beatings of Augustine," Augustinian Studies 5 (1974), pp.l-
14.

, '"Christus Via' in Augustine's Confessions" Augustinian Studies 7 (1976), 47-

58.

, "The Theme of the Prodigal Son in Augustine's Confessions," Recherches

Augustiniennes 12 (1977), pp. 105-18.

Fitzgerald, Allan, Gen. Ed., Augustine Through the Ages: An Encyclopedia (Grand
Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1999).

Folliet, Georges, "Le fragment d'Hilaire 'Quas Job Litteras...': Son interpretation d'apres
Hilaire, Pelage et Augustin," in Hilaire et son temps: Actes du colloque de poitiers (Paris: Etudes
augustiniennes, 1969), pp. 149-58.

Foster, Michael B., "Christian Theology and Modern Science of Nature," 2 parts: Mind
44, 45 (1935,1936), pp. 439-466, 1-27.

Fredriksen, Paula, "Augustine and Israel: Interpretatio ad litteram, Jews, and Judaism in
Augustine's Theology of History," Studia Patristica XXXVIII, (Leuven: Peeters, 2001), pp. 119-
35.

Frend, W. H. C., "Augustine and State Authority: The Example of the Donatists,"
Agostino d'Ippona "quaestiones disputatae" (Palermo: Edizioni Augustinus, 1989), pp. 49-73.

, The Donatist Church: A Movement of Protest in Roman North Africa (Oxford:

Clarendon Press, 1952).

, "The Family of Augustine: A Microcosm of Religious Change in North

Africa," Congresso internazionale su s. Agostino nel XVI centenario della conversione, (Roma:
Atti, 1987), pp. 1.135-52.

Gailey, James Herbert, Jr., Jerome's Latin Version of Job from the Greek, Chapters 1-26:
Its Text, Character and Provenance (Diss., Princeton Theological Seminary, 1945).

Gambero, Luigi, Mary and the Fathers of the Church: The Blessed Virgin Mary in
Patristic Thought, trans., Thomas Buffer (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1999).

Gilson, Etienne, The Christian Philosophy of Saint Augustine (New York, Random
House 1967).

, The Spirit of Medieval Philosophy, (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame

Press, 1991).

Gorman, Michael M., "The Early Manuscript Tradition of St. Augustine's Confessiones,"
Journal of Theological Studies 34 (1983), pp. 114-45.
 180

Gounelle, Remi, "Le fremissement des Portiers de l'enfer a la vue du Christ: Jb 38, 17b et
trois symboles de foi des annees 359-360," in Le livre de Job chez les Peres, (Strasbourg: Centre
d'analyse et de documentation patristiques, 1996), pp. 177-214.

Green, William S., Approaches to Ancient Judaism, vol 5. (Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press,
1985).

Grillmeier, Aloys, Christ in Christian Tradition, vol. 1, trans., John Bowden (Atlanta:
John Knox Press, 1975).

Guillaumin, Marie-Louise, "Recherches sur l'exegese patristique de Job," Studia

Patristica 12, 1 (1975)., pp. 304-8.

Guinot, Jean-Noel, "Regard sur 1'utilisation du livre de Job dans l'oeuvre de Theodoret
de Cyr," in Le livre de Job chez les Peres (Strasbourg: Centre d'analyse et de documentation
patristiques, 1996), pp. 111-140.

Hadot, P., "L'image de la Trinite; dans l'ame chez Victorinus et chez saint Augustine,"
Studia Patristica 6 (1962), pp. 409-42.

Harnack, Adolf, History of Dogma, 1 vv., trans., Neil Buchanan (New York: Dover
Publications, 1961).

Harrison, Carol, "The Most Intimate Feeling of My Mind": The Permanence of Grace in
Augustine's Early Theological Practice," Augustinian Studies 36-1 (2005), pp. 51-58.

, Rethinking Augustine's Early Theology: An Argument for Continuity (Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 2008).

Harvey, P., Jr., "Approaching the Apocalypse: Augustine, Tyconius, and John's
Revelation," History, Apocalypse, and the Secular Imagination: New Essays on Augustine's City
of God, eds., Mark Vessey, Karla Pollmann, and Allan D. Fitzgerald (Bowling Green, Oh.:
Philosophy Documentation Center, Bowling Green State University, 1999), pp. 133-51.

Heintz, Michael, "The Immateriality and Eternity of the Word in St Augustine's Sermons
on the Prologue of John's Gospel "Augustine (New York: Peter Lang, 1993), pp. 395-402.

Herrera, Robert A., "Augustine's Manichaean Turn: The Physical World in the New
Creation," in Of Scholars, Savants, and their Texts (New York: Peter Lang, 1989), pp. 113-121.

House, Dennis, "St. Augustine's Account of the Relation of Platonism to Christianity in

De Civitate Dei," Dionysius 7 (1983), pp. 43-48.

Jackson, M. G. St. A., "Confessions V,4,7 and Its Classical Background," Congresso
internazionale su s. Agostino nel XVI centenario della conversione (Rome: Atti, 1987), pp. 1.413-
8.
, "Formica Dei: Augustine's Ennaratio in Psalmum 66.3," Vigiliae Christianae 40
(1986), pp. 153-68.

Jacobs, Louis, "Jewish Cosmology," in Ancient Cosmologies, eds., Carmen Blacker and
Michael Loewe (London: George Allen & Unwin, Ltd., 1975), pp. 66-84.
 181

Kelly, J. N. D., Golden Mouth: The Story of John Chrysostom - Ascetic, Preacher,
Bishop (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1995).

, Jerome: His life, Writings and Controversies (Peabody, MA: Hedrickson

Pub., 2000).

Kent, Bonnie, "Augustine's Ethics," in Cambridge Companion to Augustine (Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 2001), pp. 205-233.

Kleinberg, Aviad M., "De agone christiano: The Preacher and His Audience," Journal of
Theological Studies, 38 (1987), pp. 16-33.

Kirkland, Alastair, "Liturgical Time in Tertullian," Acta Patristica et Byzantina, 6

(1995), pp. 69-85.

LaBonnardiere, Anne-Marie, Biblia augustiniana, (Paris: Etudes augustiniennes, 1960),

"Job", pp. 109-72 in Livres historiques; also: 1964: Epitre aux Thessaloniciens, a Tite et a
Philemon', 1964: Douze petits prophetes\ 1967: Deuteronome\ 1970: Livre de la sagesse\ 1972:
Livre de Jeremie; 1975: Livre des proverbes.

, "Did Augustine Use Jerome's Vulgate?" Augustine and the Bible, ed. and
trans., Pamela Bright (Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press, 1999), pp. 42-51.

, "Le cantique des cantiques dans l'oeuvre de saint Augustin," Revue des etudes
augustiniennes 1(1955), pp. 225-37.

, "L'epitre aux Hebreux dans l'oeuvre de saint Augustin," Revue des etudes
augustiniennes 3(1957), pp. 137-62.

Lamberigts, Mathijs, "Competing Christologies: Julian and Augustine on Jesus Christ,"

Augustinian Studies 36 (2005), pp. 159-194.

Lambert, D., "The Uses of Decay: History in Salvian's De gubernatione Dei," History,
Apocalypse, and the Secular Imagination: New Essays on Augustine's City of God, eds., Mark
Vessey, Karla Pollmann, and Allan D. Fitzgerald (Bowling Green, Oh.: Philosophy
Documentation Center, Bowling Green State University, 1999) pp. 115-30.

Lamirande, E., Church, State., and Toleration: An Intriguing Change of Mind in

Augustine (Villanova: Augustinian Institute, 1975).

Lardone, P., "Roman Law in the Works of St. Augustine," Georgetown Law Journal 21
(1933), pp. 435-51.

Lawless, George, "Interior Peace in the "Confessiones" of St. Augustine," Revue des
Etudes Augustiniennes 26(1980), pp. 45-61.

Leeming, Bernard, "Augustine, Ambrosiaster, and the Massa Perditionis," Gregorianum

11 (1930), pp. 58-91.

Lods, Marc, "La personne du Christ dans la "conversion" de saint Augustin," Recherches
 182

augustiniennes 11(1976), pp. 3-34.

Lossel, Josef, "A Shift in Patristic Exegesis: Hebrew Clarity and Historical Verity in
Augustine, Jerome, Julian of Aeclanum and Theodore of Mopsuestia," Augustinian Studies 32:2
(2001), 157-75.

Maier, H "The End of the City and the City without End: The City of God as
Revelation," History, Apocalypse, and the Secular Imagination: New Essays on Augustine's City
of God, eds., Mark Vessey, Karla Pollmann, and Allan D. Fitzgerald (Bowling Green, Oh.:
Philosophy Documentation Center, Bowling Green State University, 1999), pp. 153-64.

Manchester, Peter, "The Noetic Triad in Plotinus, Marius Victorinus, and Augustine," in
Neoplatonism and Gnosticism (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1992), pp. 207-222.

Maraval, Pierre, "Job dans l'oeuvre de Zenon de Verone," in Le livre de Job chez les
Peres, (Strasbourg: Centre d'analyse et de documentation patristiques, 1996), pp. 23-30.

Markus, R. A., Gregory the Great and His World (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1997).

, "Marius Victorinus and Augustine," Cambridge History of Later Greek and Early
Medieval Philosophy, ed. A. H. Armstrong (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967), pp.
329-419.

, "The Ecplipse of a Neoplatonic Theme: Augustine and Gregory the Great on

Visions and Prophecies," in Neoplatonism and Early Christian Thought, Essays in Honour of
A.H. Armstrong, ed. H.J Blumenthal and R. A. Markus (London: Variorum Publications, 1981),
pp. 204-211.

Marrou, H.-I. Saint Augustin et la fin de la culture antique (Paris: E. de Boccard, 1958).

Mathewes, Charles T., "Augustinian Anthropology: Interior Intimo Meo," Journal of

Religious Ethics, 27 (1999), pp. 195-221.

Matthews, G., "Knowledge and Illumination," in The Cambridge Companion to

Augustine, eds. Eleonore Stump and Norman Kretzmann (New York: Cambridge University
Press, 2001), pp. 171-185.

McGuckin, John A., "Did Augustine's Christology Depend on Theodore of Mopsuestia,"

Heythrop Journal, 31 (1990), pp. 39-52.

McLynn, N., "Augustine's Roman Empire," in History, Apocalypse, and the Secular
Imagination: New Essays on Augustine's City of God, eds., Mark Vessey, Karla Pollmann,
and Allan D. Fitzgerald (Bowling Green, Oh.: Philosophy Documentation Center, Bowling Green
State University, 1999), pp.29-44.

McWilliam, Joanne, "Augustine at Ephesus?" in One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism
(Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 2006), pp. 56-67.

, "The Christology of the Pelagian Controversy," Studia Patristica 17 (1982),

pp. 1221-44.
 183

, "The Study of Augustine's Christology in the Twentieth Century," in

Augustine: From Rhetor to Theologian (Waterloo, Ont: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1992),
pp. 183-205.

Meeks, Wayne, The Origins of Christian Morality: The First Two Centuries (New
Haven: Yale University Press, cl993).

Misch, Georg, A History of Autobiography in Antiquity, vv.2 (London: Routledge &

Kegan Paul Limited, 1950).

Momigliano, Arnoldo, "Pagan and Christian Historiography in the Fourth Century," in

The Conflict between Paganism and Christianity in the Fourth Century, ed., Mogliano (Oxford:
University of Oxford Press, 1963), pp. 79-99.

Neusner, Jacob, Christianity, Judaism and Other Greco-Roman Cults: Studies for Morton
Smith at Sixty, pt 2: Early Christianity (Leiden: Brill, 1975).

Nock, A. D., Conversion (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1933).

Nygren, Anders, Agape and Eros: A Study of the Christian Idea of Love (London: The
Macmillan Company, 1932).

O'Brien, William J., "The Liturgical Form of Augustine's Conversion Narrative and Its
Theological Significance," Augustinian Studies 9 (1978), pp. 43-58.

O'Connell, Robert J., "The Plotinian Fall of the Soul in St. Augustine," Traditio
19(1963), pp. 1-35.

, St. Augustine's Early Theory of Man, AD 386-391 (Cambridge, Mass.:

Harvard University Press, 1968).

, "Isaiah's Mothering God in St. Augustine's 'Confessions'," Thought 58(1983),

pp. 188-206.

, "The Riddle of Augustine's "Confessions": A Plotinian Key," International

Philosophical Quarterly 4(1964), pp. 327-72.
 184

, Art and the Christian Intelligence in Saint Augustine (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Press, 1979).

, The Origin of the Soul in St. Augustine's Later Works (New York: Fordham
University Press, 1987).

O'Daly, Gerard, "Predestination and Freedom in Augustine's Ethics, Philosophy in

Christianity (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ Pr, 1989), pp. 85-97.

, "Thinking through History: Augustine's Method in the City of God and its
Ciceronian Dimension," in History, Apocalypse, and the Secular Imagination: New Essays on
Augustine's City of God, eds., Mark Vessey, Karla Pollmann, and Allan D. Fitzgerald (Bowling
Green, Oh.: Philosophy Documentation Center, Bowling Green State University, 1999), pp. 45-
57.

, "The Response to Skepticism and the Mechanisms of Cognition," in The

Cambridge Companion to Augustine, eds., Eleonore Stump and Norman Kretzmann (New York:
Cambridge University Press, 2001), pp. 159-170.

O'Donnell, James J., Commentary on the Confessions, electronic version:

http://www.stoa.org/hippo/comm 1 .html.

, "Augustine's Classical Readings," Recherches Augustiniennes 15 (1980), pp.

144-175.

O'Donovan, Oliver, Problem of Self-Love in Saint Augustine (New Haven and

London: Yale University Press, 1980).

O'Ferrall, Margaret More, "Monica, the Mother of Augustine: A Reconsideration,"

Recherches Augustiniennes 10 (1975), pp. 23-43.

O'Meara, J. J., , "Augustine the Artist and the Aeneid," Melanges offerts a
mademoiselle Christine Mohrmann (Utrecht-Antwerp, 1963), pp. 252-261.

, "Parting from Porphyry," Congresso internazionale su s. Agostino nel XVI

centenario della conversione, (Rome: Atti, 1987), pp. 357-69.

, Porphyry's Philosophy from Oracles in Augustine (Paris: Etudes

Augustiniennes, 1959).

, "The Historicity of the Early Dialogues of Saint Augustine," Vigiliae

Christianae 5(1951), pp. 150-178.

, The Young Augustine: The Growth of St. Augustine's Mind up to His

Conversion, (Staten Island, NY: Alba House, 2001).

, "Vergil and Saint Augustine: The Roman Background to Christian Sexuality,"

Augustinus 13(1968), pp. 307-26.

Outler, Albert C., "The Idea of 'Development' in the History of Christian Doctrine: A
 185

Comment," in Schools of Thought in the Christian Tradition, ed., Partick Henry, (Philadelphia:
Fortress Press, 1984), pp. 7-14.

Paffenroth, Kim and Westminster, Kennedy, eds., A Reader's Companion to Augustine's

Confessions, (Louisville: John Knox Press, 2003).

Pang-White, Ann, "The Fall of Humanity: Weakness of the Will and Moral
Responsibility in the Later Augustine," Medieval Philosophy and Theology, 9 (2000), pp. 51-67.

Pelikan, Jaroslav, "An Augustinian Dilemma: Augustine's Doctrine of Grace versus

Augustine's Doctrine of the Church?" Augustinian Studies 18 (1987), pp. 1-29.

, The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine, 5vv.

(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971, 1975, 1980, 1984,1989).

, Christianity and Classical Culture: Metamorphosis of Natural Theology in the

Christian Encounter with Hellenism (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1993).

, Divine Rhetoric Divine Rhetoric: The Sermon on the Mount as Message and
as Model in Augustine, Chrysostom, and Luther (Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press,
2001).

, The Finality of Jesus Christ in an Age of Universal History: A Dilemma of the

Third Century, eds., A. M. Allchin, Martin E. Marty and T. H. L. Parker (London: Lutterworth
Press, 1965).

, The Light of the World: A Basic Image in Easrly Christian Thought (New
York: Harper and Brothers, 1962).

, The Mystery of Continuity: Time and History, Memory and Eternity in the
Thought of St. Augustine (Charlottesville, University Press of Virginia, 1987).

, "The Predicament of the Christian Historian: A Case Study," Reformed

Review, 52 (1999), pp. 196-211.

, What has Athens to do with Jerusalem? (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan

Press, 1997).

, Whose Bible is It? A History of the Scriptures through the Ages (New York:
Viking, 2005).

Plass, Paul, "The Concept of Eternity in Patristic Theology," Studia Theologica, 36

(1982), pp. 11-25.

Plumer, Eric, "The Influence of Marius Victorinus on Augustine's Commentary on

Galatians," Studia Patristica, 33 (Louvain: Peeters, 1997), pp. 221-228.

Pollmann, K., "Moulding the Present: Apocalyptic as Hermeneutics in City of God 21-
22," History, Apocalypse, and the Secular Imagination: New Essays on Augustine's City of God,
eds., Mark Vessey, Karla Pollmann, and Allan D. Fitzgerald (Bowling Green, Oh.: Philosophy
Documentation Center, Bowling Green State University, 1999), pp. 165-81.
 186

Polman, A. D. R., The Word of God According to St. Augustine (Grand Rapids, Mich.:
Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1961).

Portalie, E., A Guide to the Thought of Saint Augustine, trans., R. J. Bastian (Chicago:
Henry Regnery, 1960).

Prendiville, John G., "The Development of the Idea of Habit in the Thought of Saint
Augustine," Traditio 28(1972), pp. 29-99.

Principe, Walter H., "Some Examples of Augustine's Influence on Medieval

Christology," Collectanea Augustiniana (Louvain: Leuven University Press, 1990), pp. 955-974.

Procope, J. F., "Augustine, Plotinus and Saint John's Three "Concupiscences"", Studia
Patristica, 17 (Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Pr, 1982), pp. 1300-1305.

Quasten, Johannes, Patrology, 4 vv., (Utrecht: Spectrum Publishers, 1966-).

Raikas, K. K., "St. Augustine on Juridical Duties: Some Aspects of the Episcopal Office
in Late Antiquity," in Collectanea Augustiniana, v.l: Augustine: Second Founder of the Faith,
ed. J. Schnaubelt and F. Van Fleteren (New York: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc., 1990), pp. 467-83.

Rambaux, Claude, "Conquete et fuite du temps dans l'enseignement spirituel de

Tertullien,"in Temps Chretien de la fin de lantiquite au moyen age, 3e - 13e siecles, (Paris:
Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1984), pp. 297-326.

Ratzinger, Joseph Cardinal, Eschatology: Death and Eternal Life, trans., Michael
Waldstein (Washington: Catholic University of America Press, 1988).

, Introduction to Christianity (New York: Herder, 1970).

Rebillard, Eric, "A New Style of Argument in Christian Polemic: Augustine and the Use
of Patristic Citations," Journal of Early Christian Studies 8 (2000), pp. 559-78.

Renoux, Charles, "La chaine arm6nienne sur le livre de Job," in Le livre de Job chez les
Peres, (Strasbourg: Centre d'analyse et de documentation patristiques, 1996), pp. 141-161.

Rees, B., Pelagius: A Reluctant Heretic (Woodbridge: Boydell & Brewer, 1991).

Ricoeur, Paul, Time and Narrative, 3 vv., trans., Kathleen McLaughlin and David
Pellauer (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984).

Rigby, Paul, Original Sin in Augustine's "Confessions' (Ottawa: University of Ottawa

Press, 1987).

Rist, John, Augustine: Ancient Thought Baptized (New York: Cambridge University
Press, 1994).

Rohan-Chabot, Claude de, "Exegese de Job 2:6 dans une homelie inedite de Basile de
S61eucie," Studia Pastristica 18,2 (1989), pp. 197-201.
 187

Rowley, H. H., ed., The Century Bible: Job (London: Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1970).

Russel, R., "The Role of Neoplatonism in St. Augustine's De Civitate Dei," in

Neoplatonism and Early Christian Thought, Essays in Honour ofA.H. Armstrong, ed., H.J
Blumenthal and R. A. Markus (London: Variorum Publications, 1981), pp. 153-59.

Ryan, E. A., "The Problem of Persecution in the Early Church," Theological Studies 5
(1944), pp. 310-339.

Santayana, George, Platonism and the Spiritual Life (London: Constable and Co. Ltd.,
1934).

Scalise, Charles J., "Exegetical Warrants for Religious Persecution: Augustine vs. the
Donatists," Review & Expositor 93 (1996), pp. 497-506.

Schmaus, Michael, God and His Christ, Dogma, v.3 (New York: Sheed and Ward, 1972).

Shaw, Brent, "The Family in Late Antiquity: The Experience of Augustine,"

Past and Present 115 (May 1987), pp. 3-51.

Shemaryahu, Talmon, Jewish Civilization in the Hellenistic-Roman Period., (Sheffield,

England: JSOTPr., 1991).

Slingerland, H. Dixon, Claudian Policymaking and the Early Imperial Repression of

Judaism at Rome (Atlanta: Scholars Pr., 1997).

Smalley, Beryl, The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages (Notre Dame: University of
Notre Dame Press, 1970).

Sorlin, Henri, Introduction to Commentaire sur Job, 2 vv. (Paris: Editions du Cerfs,
1988), v. 1, pp. 32-69.

, "Un commentaire inedit sur Job, attribue & St. Jean Chrysostome," Studia
Patristica 1, 1 (1966), pp. 543-8.

Spanneut, Michel, "Saint Augustin et la Violence," Historia (Rome: Editiones

Academiae Alphonsianae, 1991), pp. 83-117.

Steinhauser, Kenneth B., "Job Exegesis: The Pelagian Controversy," Augustine: Biblical
Exegete, ed. Frederick Van Fleteren (Villanova: Peter Lang, 2001), pp. 299-311.

Stock, Brian, Augustine the Reader: Meditation, Self-knowledge, and the Ethics of
Interpretation (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1996).

Studer, Basil, The Grace of Christ and the Grace of God in Augustine of Hippo:
Christocentrism or Theocentrism? trans., Matthew J. O'Connell (Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical
Press, 1997).

Eugene TeSelle, Augustine the Theologian (New York: Herder, 1970).

 188

Teske, Roland J., "Augustine's Philosophy of Memory," in The Cambridge Companion to

Augustine, eds. Eleonore Stump and Norman Kretzmann (New York: Cambridge University
Press, 2001), pp. 148-158.

, "Criteria for Figurative Exegesis," in De Doctrina Christiana: A Classic of

Western Culture, eds., Arnold and Bright (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1995),
pp. 109-22.

, "Platonic Reminiscence and Memory of the Present in St. Augustine," The

New Scholasticism 58 (1984), pp. 220-235.

, "Review: Tractates on the Gospel of John, Tractates on the First Epistle of John," in
Journal of Early Christian Studies 5 (1997), pp. 131-2.

Tkacz, Catherine Brown, "Labor Tam Utilis: The Creation of the Vulgate," Vigiliae
Christianae 50 (1996), pp.42-72.

Torchia, Natale Joseph, "The Commune/Proprium Distinction in St Augustine's Early

Moral Theology, Studia Patristica, 22 (Louvain: Peeters, 1989), pp. 356-363.

, Creatio ex nihilo and the Theology of St. Augustine: The Anti-Manichaean

Polemic and Beyond (New York: Peter Lang, 1999).

Tov, Emanuel, "Theologically Motivated Exegesis Embedded in the Septuagint," in The

Greek and Hebrew Bible: Collected Essays on the Septuagint (Leiden: Brill, 1999), pp. 257-269.

Van Bavel, T., "The Double Face of Love in Augustine," Augustinian Studies 17 (86),
pp. 169-82.

, "L'humanite du Christ comme lac parvulorum et comme via dans le

spirituality de saint Augustin," Augustiana 7(1957), pp. 245-81.

, "The Christus Totus Idea: A Forgotten Aspect of Augustine's Spirituality,"

Studies in Patristic Christology (Dublin : Four Courts Pr, 1998), pp. 84-94.

Van Dam, Raymond, "'Sheep in Wolves' Clothing": The Letters of Consentius to

Augustine," Journal of Ecclesiastical History 37 (1986), pp. 515-35.

Vanderjagt, Arjo, "Mysterium magnum: Marius Victorinus on Man's Corporeal

Relationship with God," Studia Patristica 28 (Louvain: Peeters, 1993), pp. 130-134.

Vannier, Marie-Anne, "L'interpretation augustinienne de la creation et l'emanatisme

manicheen," Augustine and Manichaeism in the Latin West (Leiden; Boston; Koln: Brill, 2001),
pp. 287-297.

Vinel, Frangoise, "Job 38: Le Commentaire de Julien l'Arien et les Interpretations

Cappadociennes" in Le livre de Job chez les Peres, (Strasbourg: Centre D'Analyse et de
Documentation Patristiques, 1996), pp. 163-75.

Vogelstein, Hermann, Rome: A History of the Jews in Rome, trans., Moses Hadas,
(Philadelphia: The Jewish Pub. Soc. of America, 1940).
 189

Wetzel, James, Augustine and the Limits of Virtue (New York: Cambridge University
Press, 1992).

Wiles, James W., A Scripture Index to the Works of St. Augustine in English Translation
(Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America, Inc., 1995).

White, I. Michael, Richardson, Peter, and Donfried, Karl P., eds., Judaism and
Christianity in First-Century Rome, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998).

Williams, Norman Powell, The Ideas of the Fall and of Original Sin: A Historical and
Critical Study (London: Longmans, Greed and Co. Ltd., 1927).

Willis, Geoffrey Grimshaw, St. Augustine's Lectionary (London: SPCK, 1962).

Yaffe, Martin D., "Providence in Medieval Aristoteleanism: Moses Maimonides and

Thomas Aquinas on the Book of Job," in The Voice from the Whirlwind: Interpreting the Book of
Job eds., Leo G. Perdue and W. Clark Gilpin (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1992), pp. 111-28.

Yates, Jonathan, "The Presence and Use of the Letter of James in the Work of Augustine
of Hippo (354-430)," http://www.theo.kuleuven.ac.be/php/doctoraatsfiche.php37ProjectID
=144.).