To Gottschalk, a ninth-century monk condemned for his (what came to
be known as) double-predestinarian views, Augustine apparently seemed so
natural a supporter that rarely did he quote Augustine's texts. Just
naming Augustine, at times, or listing the titles of Augustine's
anti-Pelagian writings, at most other times, was fitting enough for
Gottschalk. Yet, one of Gottschalk's principal supporters recognized the
inadequacy of this position. Ratramnus of Corbie, perhaps the
ninth-century's leading student of Augustine, documented Augustine's
predestinarian leanings with extensive quotes from most of the texts
available to him. Ratramnus' wide acquaintance with Augustine's writings
are similarly prominent in another of his treatises, one he wrote in
support of the addition of ‘filioque' to the Nicene Creed. It seems on a
first reading of both treatises that Ratramnus has appropriately
expressed his own views on both controversies through the words of
Augustine; yet, Ratramnus treats Augustine differently in each text, and
these differences suggest his desire to either screen or to illuminate
his own view. In the predestination treatise, Augustine quotes are
strung together with little to no interpretation or comment. Ratramnus
seeks to avoid being caught into the same troublesome net as Gottschalk.
In the filioque treatise, the quotes are interspersed with commentary
and interpretation. Consequently, the paper argues the manner in which
Augustine is cited in the ninth century had more to say about the reader
of Augustine than it did about Augustine himself.
No comments:
Post a Comment