Thesis--Catholic University of America. / Original text has been ascribed to St. Prosper, St. Leo the Great, and St. Ambrose. Bibliography: p. xvii-xxxiii.

The editor's Thesis--Catholic University of America. / Latin and English on opposite pages. Includes bibliographical references (p. xv-xix) and index.

Nos séculos IV e V ocorreram contínuos esforços por uma unificação e homogenização do credo cristão, algo que provocou o embate e o confronto entre as diversas vertentes, cada qual arrogava para si o título de verdadeiros cristãos e imputando aos seus adversários a alcunha de falsos cristãos. O ethos retórico cristão é constituído a partir da premissa de que haveria uma única Verdade, assim sendo, na medida em que ser cristão é, por definição, empreender a imitatio Christi, tentava-se determinar aquele que advoga por Cristo do dito herege. Em meio a estas intensas disputas retóricas, Agostinho de Hipona foi um dos autores de maior destaque, participando dos principais debates de sua época. O donatismo, o arianismo e o pelagianismo foram três dos seus principais adversários. Cada qual representando um diferente desafio, Agostinho necessitava responder e enfrentar estas vertentes na defesa do que ele acreditava ser a verdadeira via salvífica cristã. O donatismo foi considerado como um desdobramento das perseguições perpetradas por Diocleciano; estas teriam causado um cisma político e doutrinário, cindindo a Igreja cristã na África romana. O arianismo, uma dissidência trinitária e protagonista inconteste do século IV, defendia uma hierarquia dentro da Trindade e contestava sua própria definição. O pelagianismo, uma frequente preocupação de Agostinho nos seus últimos 20 anos, negava o conceito do pecado original e questionava papel da Graça divina na salvação. A partir da premissa de que o que estava realmente em jogo era a definição de qual das vertentes era verdadeiramente a portadora do legado de Cristo, a presente pesquisa procura comparar o processo de construção do ethos retórico destas três vertentes. Almeja-se, portanto, investigar o ethos retórico imputado por Agostinho aos seus adversários, cotejando os tratados polêmicos feitos pelo bispo de Hipona contra donatista, arianos e pelagianos. / There were continuous efforts in the 4th and 5th centuries aiming to unify and homogeneity of the Christian faith, causing clashes between different doctrines each one claiming to be the true Christians and calling the adversaries as false Christians. The Christian rhetorical ethos is constituted by the fundament that there is only one Truth: to be Christian is, by definition, undertaking the imitatio Christi. Then it would be possible to distinguish the one who preached for Christ and the one so -called heretical. Among those intense rhetorical disputes, Augustine of Hippo was one the most prominent authors, contributing to the greatest discussions from his time. Donatism, Arianism, and Pelagianism were his main enemies. Each one of them representing a different challenge, Augustine needed to answer and defy those three branches in defence of his own belief as the Christian redemption. The Donatism was seen as a development from the persecutions made by Emperor Diocletian, causing a political and doctrinal breaking causing the Christian Roman African Church division. The Arianism, a Trinitarian schism and without any doubt protagonist of the 4th century doctrinal debate, defending a hierarchy among the people of the Trinity, challenging its own concept. Pelagianism, a recurrent Augustines preoccupation in his last twenty years of life, denied the idea of original sin and defied the role of divine grace in the redemption. Based on the starting point the was actually in dispute was which one of these three branches were the true bearer of Christ legacy, this research aims to compare the construction process of the rhetoric ethos from those tree branches. In order to do that, this thesis investigates the rhetoric ethos ascribed for Augustine of Hippo to his adversaries, focusing on the polemic tracts made by Augustine of Hippo against the Donatists, Arians, and, Pelagians.

Augustine has had a large influence on the development of western theology, and nowhere is this more obvious that in Martin Luther's understanding of God, humankind and grace. Yet at the same time there are also significant differences in the two churchmen's thought. Sometimes these differences are subtle, such as their views of the state; other times they are not so subtle, such as their positions on free will or their praise of philosophy and its usefulness in sounding the depth of Christianity. In order to best explain these varying views, one must look at Augustine's and Luther's diverging opinions of man's nature where one will see that the dissimilarities are best understood in light of Luther's pessimistic view of humanity.

Le Contra Iulianum, écrit entre 421 et 422, appartient à la seconde phase de la controverse pélagienne, qui opposa Augustin à Julien, évêque d’Eclane. Cette thèse comporte trois parties. Tout d’abord, dans une introduction à l’ensemble du Contra Iulianum, sont étudiés les différents aspects de l’œuvre, dont ses enjeux théologiques (le péché originel et le mariage), son genre littéraire, les modes d’argumentation, l’hérésiologie augustinienne, la postérité du traité et sa tradition manuscrite. Puis est proposée une édition critique du livre III, qui vient corriger la dernière édition en date (établie par les Mauristes au XVIIème siècle), ainsi qu’une traduction française annotée (la première depuis le XIXème siècle). Enfin, dans une dernière partie, le commentaire du livre III vise à expliciter les passages les plus difficiles et à montrer les divers intérêts, philologiques, historiques, littéraires ou philosophiques, du texte. / The Contra Iulianum, written between 421 and 422, belongs to the second phase of the pelagian controversy, which opposed Augustine and Julian, bishop of Aeclanum. This thesis is divided into three parts. First of all, in a general introduction to the whole Contra Iulianum, we study the main interests of this text : its theological stakes (the original sin and the marriage), his literary genre, the ways of argumentation, the augustinian heresiology, the posterity of the text and its manuscript tradition. Then, we give a new critical edition of the book III, which emends the Maurists’one (XVIIth), with a french translation with notes. In the last part, the commentary of the book III, we explain the most difficult passages and study the text’s different interests (philological, historical, literary or philosophical).

This dissertation investigates how two fifth-century bishops of Rome, Leo I (440-461) and Gelasius (492-496) understood and opposed heresy. More specifically, by stressing the contested character of heresy and the at times optative nature of the bishop of Rome’s opposition to it, this dissertation hopes to provide a new perspective on how Leo and Gelasius imagined and justified the authority of the Apostolic See in an uncertain world. To accomplish this task, this dissertation considers Leo and Gelasius’ opposition to various different heresies and details the methods by which they were opposed. This will be done through an examination of the records of synods, Roman law, other contemporary narrative sources, but especially through the letters and tractates of Leo and Gelasius themselves, carefully read and considered in their fifth-century context. Furthermore, it is argued that the history of the development of the ideas of heresy and orthodoxy were profoundly connected with Rome’s emerging importance as a locus of authentic Christian teachings; the history of the bishops of Rome cannot be told without examining the history of heresy and orthodoxy and vice versa. Because orthodoxy and heresy were not tangible historical phenomena but rather were malleable categories that emerged as part of a wider discourse of Christian identity construction, the bishops of Rome were not in every case the unqualified enemies of heresy. Instead, their definition of heterodox belief and their opposition to religious deviance were complex, often qualified and always historically contingent. This study seeks to investigate the way in which Leo and Gelasius mobilized the language of heresiology in order to convince Christians in the Latin west and the Greek east, as well as the imperial authorities, that Rome’s interpretations were legitimate and binding.

Le De gratia noui Testamenti (= epistula 140), lettre-traité composée par l’évêque d’Hippone au début de l’année 412, présente la pensée d’Augustin sur les rapports entre grâce divine et liberté humaine d’une manière remarquablement synthétique – en raison de ses circonstances de rédaction tout d’abord, qui le placent à la croisée de polémiques très diverses, et de son originalité littéraire, qui le rattache simultanément à plusieurs genres. Cette thèse comporte trois parties. Nous proposons tout d’abord une introduction au traité, afin d’en présenter les principaux aspects – dont les problèmes historiques qu’il pose, les questions littéraires qu’il soulève et les aperçus qu’il offre sur la pensée d’Augustin. Nous en avons ensuite, à partir d’une étude de sa tradition manuscrite, établi l’édition (qui corrige celle du CSEL, datant du début du XXe siècle) et la traduction. Enfin, notre commentaire s’attache à éclairer les passages problématiques de la lettre, pour en dégager les principaux intérêts historiques, littéraires et théologiques. / The De gratia noui Testamenti (= epistula 140), which is both a treatise and a letter composed by the Bishop of Hippo Regius at the beginning of year 412, presents Augustine’s thoughts on the connections between divine grace and human freedom in a remarkably synthetic way, first because of the circumstances in which it was written, which place it at the junction of very different debates, and secondly because of its originality on a literary point of view, which links it to several genres. This thesis comprises three parts. First, we propose an introduction to the treatise, which presents its main aspects – among which, the historical problems it poses, the literary questions it raises and the insight it offers into Augustine’s way of thinking. Then we have established the edition (which corrects that of the CSEL, which dates from the beginning of the 20th century) and the translation from a study of its manuscript tradition. Finally, our commentary strives to enlighten the debatable passages of the epistle in order to highlight its main historical, literary and philosophical interests.

Le Liber contra collatorem est un traité composé par Prosper d’Aquitaine en 432-433, qui réfute les positions d’un certain « conférencier », c’est-à-dire l’auteur des Conférences, Jean Cassien. C’est dans cette œuvre que Prosper, défenseur de saint Augustin et de sa doctrine de la grâce, a pu fournir la critique la plus complète des théories propagées par les adversaires provençaux de l’évêque d’Hippone, en s’appuyant exclusivement sur des extraits tirés de la Conl. XIII « Sur la protection de Dieu ».En abordant, dans une première partie, les aspects les plus importants de l’œuvre (finalité du traité, modus operandi, genre littéraire, pratiques polémiques, enjeux théologiques), la présente thèse cherche à défendre l’hypothèse qu’en composant son Liber, Prosper a voulu constituer un dossier à charge suffisamment argumenté pour obtenir de l’évêque de Rome une condamnation officielle de ce que l’on a nommé le « semipélagianisme » et, par là, la reconnaissance de l’autorité de la doctrine augustinienne en matière de grâce. La seconde partie consiste en l’étude de l’ensemble de la tradition manuscrite du traité et des témoignages médiévaux le concernant, qui permet de mettre en évidence une histoire du texte aussi riche que complexe, qui justifie pleinement l’établissement d’une nouvelle édition – la première qui soit critique – de nature à corriger un textus receptus, datant de 1711, qui ne laisse pas d’être par endroits problématique. Cette édition est assortie d’une traduction française et d’une annotation destinée à éclairer les passages les plus importants ou les moins facilement compréhensibles du texte. / The Liber contra collatorem is a treatise written in 432-433 by Prosper of Aquitaine, who refutes the positions taken by a certain “lecturer”, by which John Cassian is meant, author of the Conferences. As an advocate of Augustine and of his doctrine of grace, Prosper has provided in this work most fully his criticism of the theories expressed by the bishop of Hippo’s Southern-French opponents. In order to do this, Prosper built only on excerpts from Conference nr. 13, “On the protection of God”. The first part of this thesis addresses the principal aspects of the work: the purpose of the treatise, the modus operandi, the literary genre, polemical practices, and theological issues. In doing so, this thesis defends the hypothesis that Prosper wrote his treatise in order to assemble a sufficiently argued file to obtain an official condemnation by the bishop of Rome of what has been called “Semipelagianism” and thus the recognition of the authority of the Augustinian doctrine of grace. The second part presents a study of the manuscript tradition of the treatise and of its medieval testimonies, which allows unraveling a rich and complex textual history. Hence, a new edition is justified, the first critical one, correcting and replacing the textus receptus dating from 1711, which is problematic at various points. The edition here presented is provided with a French translation and annotated in order to cast light on the most important or les easily comprehensible passages of the text.