, ..

Augustine and the Acaden1ics

In the many accounts of the con ve rsio n of Augustine to Christianity as set forth in the Confessions most commentators have noted wi,th considerable detail the various stages in the intellectual, moral, and religious clevelopment of Augustine which led to his ultimate embrace oí Christianity. The pattern e:s:emplified by these stages begins with the reading of the Hortensius, the conversion to Manícheísm, the rejec­t ion of lHanicheism, the adherence to the philosophy of the Academ.ics1,

the acceptance of sorne form of Neo-Platonism, ancl culrninates in the conversion to Christianity in the famous garden scene in the year 386. Other writers, notably Harnack2 and Thimme3, have questioned the t----- ­

() sincerity of the Confessions and the conversíon to Christianity, main­taining that Augustine was prirnari1y a philosopher in the period at Cassiciacum while awaiting his baptism and that his real conversion to Christianity did not come untillater. A more significant and influential variant on this account of Augustine's spiritual clevelopment is the thesis put forth with considerable skill by Alfaric who maintained :

IVhen he (Augustine) was baptized, he attached such little importance to trus rite that in ruS writings of that time, where he speaks often of himself and of all that interests him, he never makes the faintest allusion to it. jVIoraUy as well as intellectually he was converted to Neo-Platonism mther than the Gospel... If he had died after he had .

Z -« Z ¡;;.: ( / ";

O C; <r

O (J li-J -, --'

< ( ")

--- o UJ I ¡ .. ~~

() i

m written the Soliloquies, we would not have regarded him as anything . "', hut a convinced Neo-Platonist, with a tincture, more or less, of Chris- .t.-- - _ _ ~

o n"": U ~;;

tianity. ", ..

A1though Alfaric's thesis is better clocumented and more ab!y argued than similar views which preceded his, the refutation ancl rejection of Alfaric's thesis has been sufficient attestecl by such scholars as Boyer,

I. By the Acadelllics (or Acaderuicians) will he llleallt tlle lllelllbers of the New Academy and lllore p articularly Arcesilas and Carneades.

'2. See h is A"gustins Conjessionen (2nd ed. Giessen I895) I7 . 3. 'V. THDIME, Augu.sttns geüt'ige E-ntwichlu#g ü'¿ den ersten Jahreu. nach Se"in8r

Bekehrung (3S6-39I ) (Berlin I908) I I. + As statec1 by John J. Q':MEARA, TIt.e }'·ou.ng Altgu.sti·ne, Loudan, Longlualls,

I95-1, p. I32 .

68 JOHN A. MOURA N T

Gilson, Marrou, Pellegrino, O'Meara, et. al. We shall accept their verdict as sound and limit our study to the thesis that in Augustine's conversion the persistence of his Manicheism is greater than has been allowed and that there was no real or substantial acceptance by him of the Academic phi1osophy. His Neo-Platonisl1l is significant but may be regarded more as an instrument for the understanding of faith than as an object of his conversíon. This last point, however, will not be considered withín the limitations set in the present study.

Our procedure will be to examine and evaluate the relevant passages from the Confessions and the prulosophical dialogues of Cassiciacul1l, more notably of course, the Contra Academicos.

Augustine's first explicitly noted contad with the Academics apparent­ly occurred during rus twenty ninth year. In all probability he read about them earlier in Cícero, for at theage of 19 he had read and was greatly ímpressed with the Hortensius of Cícero. However that may be, the Acadernics are mentíoned for the first time in the Confessions Book V. 10 .

19 where Augustine describes the disi1lusíonment he experienced with the Manicheans following his fruitless conversation with Faustus S Au­gustine remarks :

Etenim suborta est etiam mihi cogitatio, prudentiores illos ceteris fuisse phi1osophos, quos Academicos appellant, quod de omnibus dubitandum esse censuerant nec aliquid ueri ab homine conprehendi posse decreuerant. ita enim et mihi liquido sensisse uidebantur, ut uulgo habentur, etiam illorum intentionem nondum intellegenti.·

Can one say more of this statement than that Augustine's limited knowledge of the Academics may have influenced his decision to rejed the Manicheans ? Considering the final remark in rus statement that " etiam illorum intentionem nondum intellegentí ", ít would be diffícult to ínfer much more than that he had become ínterested in the Academics, but certaínly not that he had embraced theír cause. The indecisiveness of Augustine relative to the Academics is evident again at the close of Book V. 14. 25 of the Confessions when he declares:

itaque Academicorum more, sicut existimantur, dubitans de omnibus atque inter omnia fluctuans manichaeos quidem relinquendos esse decreui, non arbitrans eo ipso tempore dubitationis meae in illa secta mihi pe=anendum esse, cui iam nonnullos philosophos praeponebam : quibus tamen phi1osophis, quod sine salutari nomine Christi essent, curationem languoris animae meae conmittere omnino recusabam' .

5. The staternent in the Confessious " multa philosophorullllegeram lllemoriaeque mandata retinebam .. (V. 3. 3) refers to the matheniat-ici according to R . P. A. Solignac, S. J. See his note in the CEuvres de saint A >tgust-in. Les Conjess ions. Vol. "3., Col!. B i bl-iotheq>te A ·¡¡g·"st·in-ienne. Paris, Desdée De Brou",er, "962, p. 82 (This collection will be abbreviated hereafter as B.A.)

6. B.A., "3, p. 498. 7. Ibid., pp. 5II-j12.

AUGUSTINE AND THE ACADEMICS 69

This passage deserves so me comment. First, the phrase " that time of my doubt " may be taken to mean his increasing doubts of the Maru­cheans and all that they believed, rather than a position of phi1osophical doubt like that oí the Academics8 Second, it may be observed that Augustine says quite explicitly that he ' refused a!together to commit the cure of (his) sickly soul to those philosophers who were without the health-giving name of Christ9 ". Taking this statement in conjunction with the concluding sentence of this chapter in which he declares his resolution to be a catechumen in the Catholic Church would seem to indicate at least a nominal tie with Christianity rather thal1 any conver­sion or adherence to the cause of the Academics10

"Ve would contend that at this stage in his development Augustine is still fundamentalIy a religious rather than a philosophical thinker. True, he had been strong!y influenced severa! years earlier by the reading of Cicero's Hortensius but the extent of this influence is difficult to deter­mine. We believe that the more reasonable conjecture is that this early philosophical interest was soon replaced by the strength of his Manichean couversiou and was not effectively revived again until his reading of the "" libri Platoniconmt" Finally, the strength of this rejection of the Academics shou!d be noted in the phrase " conmittere omnino recusabam "11

In the Confessions VI. I. 1 Augustine notes that his mother found him in despair of discovering the truth and that he informed his mother that although he was no longer a Manichean he was not yet a Catholic Christian12. There is no indication here that he had embraced any particular philosophica! position. That he had despaired of finding the truth does not imply that he had accepted the Academic phi!osophy. The mood of a sceptic is usually not one of despair. Furthermore, Augustine's comment that although his conversion had not yet been accomplished, it had already come about to such an extent that he was freed from error éven though he had not yet attained the truth13, would hardly have been made if he had embraced the cause of the Academics. For the Academics in his eyes were equally in error. The reference to truth in his comment is a reíerence to Christian truth. The whole sta­tement represents a definite stage in the progress of Augustine's conver­sion to Christianity. The mood of despair is struck again in the closiug sentence of the Confessions VI. 2.2 but the reference in the statement " qui dubitabam de illis omnibus et inueniri posse uiam uitae minime

S. ¡bid .. p. 512. 9. ¡bid. 10. Statui ergo tauldiu esseo catechUluenus in catholica ecc1esia lnihi a parentihns

cOll111endata, donec aliquid certi eluceret, quo cursum c1irigerem (lb·id.) . 1 r. Ibid. 12 . ¡bid., p. 516, 13. ¡bid.

70 JOHN A. MO U RA N T

putabam " 14 again is not an expression of philosophicaI or intellectuaI doubt but refers rather c1ear1y to the religious praetises of Moniea and to the difficulty Augustine experienced in accepting Christianity as a way of life even though sorne of his intellectual doubts eoneerning it hac1 been removed. Finally, if Augustine was in " doubt about all things ", this wouId entail a doubt of the Academic position as weI!.

Later in the Confessions VI. II. rB Augustine refers again to this period in his life in a resume of his intellectual development. He cites the Academics quite explicitIy : " O magni uiri Academici ! nihil ad agendam uitam certi conprehendi potest "15. The irony oí the attack is followed by his conviction that we must not despair but rather seek [the truth] more persistently16. The statement and the context in which it is ex­pressed reflects Augustine's difficulty in accepting Christianity as a way of life, rather than the acceptance of a principIe of doubt.

The evidence to the close of Book VI of the Confessions shows no real acceptance by Augustine of the Academic philosophy. Instead there is a greater indication that sorne of his intellectual and religious doubts of Christianity had been removed and that he had gradually come to accept certain Christian truths. What deserves emphasis at this point is that the intellectual, moral; and religious development of Augustine cannot be reduced to any simple logical order or pattern. To maintain that at the age of twenty nine he abandoned Manicheism, that for the next three years he was a follower of the Academics, and that this stage in turn was succeeded by the acceptance of Neo-Platonism and his con­version to Christiauity in his thirty second year is far too simple an expla- ' nation of a complex mind and personality.

For one thing such an explanation does not give adequate recognition to the persisten ce of Augustine's Manichean belief and the very strong hold that this sect exercised upon him. Although Augustine does state that he rejected the Manicheans in his twenty ninth year; it is necessary to remember that this was not a sudden break nor a completedisasso­ciation. The ties with Manicheism were undoubtedly being weakened before the initiaI break. What Augustine gave up in Manicheism when he first broke away frem it was a conviction of its truth and the adequacy of its doctrine as a way of life. What he did not yield so readily were his associations with the Manicheans and his contillued acceptance of some of their doctrines, e. g. the material nature of God and the human sou!.

Furthermore, it is important to recognize the complexity of a religious conversion. The factors involved generally lie deep beneath the surface. Psychologically the conversion process is one that extends over some

I4. ¡bid., p . 5'20. r 5. ¡bid., p. 556. 16. (1 il111nO quaerrllnns c1i1igentius et non rlesperelllus. ¡) (Loc. cit .)

I~

I

AUGUSTINE AND THE ACADENIICS 7 I

period of time. Although the final act of the conversion process may appear climacticalIy, it is only the end result of a protracted process of religious development. Also it is necessary to emphasize that in the religious conversion the wholebeing of the individual is caught np in a manner that is not found as a rule in the changes that may develop in our philosophical or other convictions. In the case of Augustine, we would argue, the transition psychologicalIy and religiously was effected primari1y from lVIanicheism to Christianity. Philosophy played only a secondary and subordinate role in his conversion. Initially with the Academics what philosophy supplied was a means of escaping from Mani­cheism. Neo-Platonism contributed the more positive function offering precisely that intellectual explanation that would make Christianity more intelligible. The real conversion embodying the whole person of Augustine was from one religious sect to another. The key to that conversion was the grace of God, not the Academy Old or New.

Hence, it is necessary to consider in more detail the actual causes at work leading Augustine away from Manicheism as well as toward Christia­nity. The arguments of the Academics certainly may have played an important role, but there were other factors presento Testard notes the importance of the role of Cicero and observes that a knowledge of Cicero would have given Augustine a picture of the physical world as aesthetic, orderly, rational and religious, such as Cicero presented in the De N at~tra Deont1n17 This is quite possible but in the absence of any evidence that AugUlitine had ever read this work it must remain uncertain. Also, the notion of the rational and orderIy nature of the universe was to be found in other philosophers , notably the Stoics with whom Augustine was acquainted .

* * * To obtain a more aclequate picture of Augustine's conversion from

JliIanicheism and also of the influence of the Academics upon him, it is necessary to consider more fully at this stage of our inquiry the basic attractions that lVIanicheism had for Augustine, the motivations that led him to an acceptance of Manicheism1 S The conversion to Manicheism like the conversion to Christianity was gradual rather than sudden. Au­gustine seems to have been attracted first to the method, then to the philosophy, and finally to the religion and mythology of the Manicheans19.

For onr purposes we mal' indicate the following basic motivations that led Augustine to accept their doctrine.

17. TESl'ARD 1\:I. Sa .. inl AugHM'¿n et Cicé-ron, (Paris : Études Augustiniennes, 1938 .) IS . 'Ve luay speo.k of a conyerSiOll te :i\:Ianicheislll e"en thongh i t in 110 wo.y

reseulbled in fervor, illtensity, alld influence that conversiol1 to Christianity. It should also be noted that _<\.ugustine ne,·er became olle of the elect of the J\1anichealls hut as an auditor was always more or less UpOI1 the periphery of this sect.

I<). An extensi,~e account of Augnstine's i\1anicheisDl is to be found in ALFARIC. P. L' i:t'olution intellectu,elle de sa.int Auguslin (1)aris 1<)18). F or a Stllnnlury nccount see the ar ticle by Dr. Alltoll Pr-;r.rs, TJ¡ f Al i"d o/ SI. Auguslinc. in Afedin'al S'udirs , 6 ( r04-\). PP ,¡ _ ·~,

72 JOHN A, MOURANT

First there was the ec1ecticisro in the doctrines oí the Manicheans, They professed to accept only what was best froro the various religious sects and philosophies, Also, for one who was still professedly a Catholic, there was a certain attraction in their c1aim that they iollowed Christ and accepted the teachings of the New Testament even though they contended that theteachings oi Christ were falsified by his clisciples, The rejection oi the Old Testament by the Manicheans as the work oi the devil probably satisfied some of the misgivings Augustine had of the Old Testament.

Furthermore, the c1aim oi the Manicheans that they had a knowledge of all the sciences and could answer any and ail questions regarcling man and the universe must have made a strong appea! to the youthful inquirer recently caught up with the enthusiasm of the H ortensius and the desire to learn the truth. For Augustine, the materialism and dualism of the Manicheans must have seemed far more comprehensible than some of the mysteries and abstractions of Christian truth. And undoubted1y their proselytizing fervor and the austerity of their ethics were equally impressive. Above all other considerations was the strength of their rationalistic appeal, the c1aim that in their teachings they relied upon reason and scientific demonstration rather than upon faith ancl authority. In the De utilitate credendi Augustine specifically informs us that the Manicheans appeal to reason rather than authority and that they c1aimed that Christianity was a superstition and based its appea! solely on faith ancl not on reason20 . Yet Augustine clid not wholly embrace their doctrine and remained in the rank of the auditors for no other reason than " quod ipsos quoque animadvertebam plus in refellendis aliis diser­tos et copiosos esse, quam in sllÍs probandis firmos et certos manere ,,21,

Holte observes that Augustine's acceptance of Manicheism was a reaction to the ear1y view he held of Christianity as a superstition and not the forro of Christian gnosticism which he had been seeking22 . Cour­celle notes that the fundamental motive for Augustine's acceptance oi Manicheism was its rationalistic attraction which he did not find as a youth. More particularly he observes:

TI a longuement écouté les Manichéens se gausser des erreurs des ignorants, et s'est convaincu par la. de leur supériorité, non seulement sur le probléme des généalogies de Jésus, mais sur quantité d'autres qu'ils luí proposaient."

At this point we would like to conjecture that any real sceptical periad in Augustine's intellectual developroent would have occurred during

20. B. A" S, p. 2ro. 21. ¡bid., p, 2ro. 22. HOLTE Ragnar, B ¿atit-ude et Sagesse, (Paris: Étuc1es Augustilliennes, 196z).

p, r SS. 23· COURCEI,I,E Pierre, R eche1'c,,"s SU,r les Con(essions de saint A 'I,tgtostin, (Paris :

De Boceard, r950), p. 65 .

, "1

AUGUSTINE AND THE ACADEMICS 73

the early years at Carthage. This was the period when he may have looked upon Christianity as a superstition and at least its influence upon him appears to have declined. The later alleged scepticism of Augustine might be regarded more as the strategy of the rhetorician turning the tables of doubt upon the lVIanicheans and using their own tactics to refute them. Just as earlier Augustine had been persuaded' of Manicheism by their rhetorical ability to refute the beliefs of others and more notably Christian beliefs.

Next, we shoulcl like to point out that in the very period in which Augustine was supposed to have been caught up in the doubts of the Academics certain doubts which he felt about Christianity were removed. Sorne of these doubts were removed as he heard Ambrose preach,, " et magis magisque mihi confirmabatur omnes uersutarum calumniarum nodos, quos illi deceptores [Manicheans] nostri aduersus diuinos libros innectebant, posse dissolui "24. He confesses his embarrassment at having misunderstood the meaning of the statement " for men to be made by Thee to Thy Image " and to have thought of it in materialistic terms25.

It may be argued that the failure of philosophy to have taken a strong hold upon him is revealed in the easy and unquestioned acceptance of the Manichean accusations against Christianity, of their false interpre­tations of Christian doctrines. Consequent upon the preaching of Ambrose there is initiated a gradual intellectual conversion to Christianity :

itaque confundebar et conuertebar et gauclebam, deus meus, quod ecclesia unica, corpus unid tui, in qua mihi nomen Christi infanti est inditum, non saperet infantiles nugas neque hoc habe­ret in doctrina sua sana, quod te creatorem onullum in spatium loci quanluis summum et amplum, tamen undique tenninatum membro­runl lU111lanon111l figura contruderet. '"

It was through Ambrose that he learned to interpret correctly the Old Testament and to follow the rule that " litteraocciclit, spiritus autem uiuificat "27 He no longer founcl anything offensive in Christian doctrine when it was interpretecl in a spiritual sense even though he did not compre­hend its meaning.

Boyer's Comment on Confessions VI, 4. 5-6, that :

Les argcmlents des académiciens, enflés par l'éloquence de Cicéron, l' enveloppent et le parai ysent, a la fa90n des narcotiques qui, sans supprinler toute activité, rendent incapables de décision. A quelle certitude est-il parvenu sinon a celle de l'illusion de ses anciennes certi-

24 . n. A., p. 514. 25. ¡bid. 26. lbid., p . 526. 27. lbid., p. 528.

74 .lOHN A. NIOURA N T

tudes ? _-\.clhérer a une l1.ouyelle doctrille ne serait-ce pas de nouveau etre clupe ? _-iussi se retient-il, connne au bord d'un précipice, pour ne pas danner s on acUlésion aux ense ignernents de saint iunbroise~ &

is inaccurate or at best an exaggeration. In the context of this chapter of the Confessions as well as in the previous chapter the reference to the image of God and his own deception is clearly to the lVlanicheans. He doubts the Manicheans because he wanted to believe in Christ, not because he believed in the Academics. And he is still a Manichean and not an Academic.

Furthermore, the appeal of rationalism reasserts itself ; the old Mani­chean claim to teach certitude seems to have Ieft its mark, for Augustine declares that he wanted to be as certain of the tmths of Scripture as he was that " seven and three are ten "29. The conviction that there is certitude is hardly the position of an Academic. The suspension of judgment that he refers to in this same context do es not imply an adhe­rence to the cause of the Academics but a re1uctance to be t wice cleceived. The suspension of assent is emotional as well as intellectual - " tenebam cor meum ab omlli assentione timens praecipitium ". - Augustine desires certitude but is still ullable to comprehend spiritual thillgS except in material form o

The assertion that the heaIth of his soul could not be cured except by believing30 is not a reference to the neec1 for a cure from the cloubts of the Academics. Rather it points to the necessity of faith if he was to be cured of the few remaining convictions of his Manichean beliefs, viz. the representation of spiritual things, God and the soul, as corporeal in nature. The certitude of faith hac1 to succeed the certituc1e of reason rather than the sceptical doubt ; for, as we shall endeavor to maintain later, Augustine was simply incapable of holding for any protracted period of time the kinel of scepticism taught by the Academics. Even while waiting for t he cure of faith Augustine is still a rationalist of sorts. What he requires is a different type of rationalism than that which had led him to the Manicheans. For that r ationalism hac1 turned out to be largely negative ; it was as much a protest against the Christian faith as a defense of Manichean principIes. The real neeel of Augustine at trus point was the gift of faith which conlel then lead him to an nnc1er­standing of Christian trnths .

Also, it would appear that what the Manicheans had requirecl of Augus- . tine - to rely upon reason rather than faith - had Ied him to just those clifficulties that unelermined his faith in lYIanicheism, i . e. the .belief in the fabulons anel the absurd, for how could snch beliefs meet the test

:!S. BOYER Charles, S. J., Cltrist·ianisnu ('t S'io-Platon.üme da?1, s la. formation de sai11! AlIgustill, (Rom a"e. Officinm Libri Catltolici. 1953 ). p. 5'l.

09. ll. "-l. .• p" 52S. 30. lbid .

.. 1

AUGUSTIN E AND THE ACADElvIICS 75

of reason already laid down ? Augustine seems to be approaching here his own famous account of the relationship between faith and reason, the " credo ut intelligam ". But the Manicheans have given priority to reason yet they contradict their own position by asking their followers to believe the absurdo This seems to be the conc1usion of Augustine in the following passage from the COl1fessions :

Ex hoc tamen quoque iaro praeponens doctrinalU catholicam Illodestius ibi minimeque fallaciter sentiebam iuberi, ut crederetur quod non demonstrabatur siue esset quid, sed ClU forte non esset, siue nec quid esset qUalll illic temeraria pollicitatione scientiae creduli­tatem inrideri et postea taln multa fabulosissima et absurdissirna, quía demonstrari 110n poterant, credenda imperari".

For Augustine, of course, faith is prior and Ieads to understanding reason gives understanding to faith . Augustine discerned that the lVIanicheans were unabIe to grasp the true nature of faith. And perhaps he hac1 also discernec1 at this time that the Academics distrustec1 both reason and faith. The rejection of both reason and faith - the" acceptance of a suspension of al! juc1gement. - Augustine may have felt woulc1 onIy lead to another deception32 .

Now aIthough the way of reason as taught by the Manicheans was founc1 wanting, reason was not to be abandonec1. Augustine is no miso­logist. He continues to accept the certainty of mathematical truths. Furthermore, as he infonns us, no matter how much he had read oI a contradictory nature in the writings of the philosophers, he could not disbelieve in the existence of GOd33. Anc1 although his belief in God's e:s:istence anc1 His provic1ence was unshaken, yet he did not know His nature nor how to attain Him34 .

Augustine's c1ifficulty at this juncture is twofolc1 : First, he lacks the necessity of a faith in Christian principIes which on the grounds of reason he is preparec1 to accept. Second, he lacks an adequate intellectual understanding of those beliefs about God which he had never abandoned - the existence of Goc1 anc1 the Diville Providence. Reason will help him to understand the first, faith will enlighten him on the second. Con­cerning the nature of God - stil! a great stumbling block - an e:s:plana­tion will come largely through faith, a1though his reading of the Platonists will contribute to the intellectual preparation for his faith .

31. {bid ., p. 530. 32. It is interestiu[.{ to obsen"e that in the later Augustinian attnck UpOll scepti­

cism he emphasizes the fact that in being deceived he at least kllOWS that he exists :\S one who is decei"ed. 'Vhether, we mig-ht add, stlch a deceptioll occurs at the hands of the Marucheans or the Academics.

33· Ibid., pp. 530-531. 34- [bid., p. 53'. - 1 fiud "it clifficult to accept the statemellt of R . Joli"et

that " _-\.ugu~tin . a CnssicincU111, :n·ait renoncé na scepticislne acarlémiciell, qui

10HN A. MOURANT

However, even before the reading of the Platonists, the intellectual preparation of Augustine for faith has shown marked progress. He comments upon his realization of the need and the importance of faith in the natural order, in history, in every day life, and of the divine guidance he was receiving in the direction of his faith3S Thus his advance toward Christianity was restrained not so much by intellectual considerations, these were gradually being overcome, as by a lack of faith. In turn this lack of faith was made more difficult for him by the materialism of every day life. " Inhiabam honoribus, lueris, coniugio, et tu inridebas "36.

The extent of his materialism finds further expression in the influence upon him at this time of the Epicurean philosophy. In conversations and arguments with his friends he notes the attraction of Epicureanism except for its position on immortality. Despite all the persuasiveness at this time of Epicureanism the belief in immortality remained a firm conviction with Augustine37 •

Continuing with the analysis of the Confessions, we find no explicit references to the Academics in Book VII. The ear1y chapters of this book are concerned with certain doubts and difficulties which he had beco me aware of in Manicheism. He observes that the materialism of the Manicheans kept him from an adequate conception of the self and of God3S . Despite his efforts to avoid a materialistic outlook, he continued to think of God and the self in terms of corporeal entities. He conc1uded that whatever could not be defined spatial1y was nothing39 .

l'avait reten u pendant quelque teulps. Les Con/ession,s en téruoignent netteIl1eut (VI, v, 8, V II, XVII) et ave e beaueoup de préeision, VIII, v, 11 : ' J ene pouvais meme alléguer (ponr retarder la conversion des lUceurS) l'excuse qui naguere me permettait de supposer que, si je ne méprisais pas eneore le monde pour m'attaeher a vous, e'est que la connaissance de la yérité était en lnoí incertaille ; non, la vérité était déja pour moi, elle aussi, objet de eertitude. ' " E. A. 4, pp. 2II-2I2. The first two refereIlces cited by Fr. J oli,'et lacl;: any precisioll that would justify his conteIltion. Of the last reference (VIII, v, II) the statement eited appears within the eontext of a passage on the conflict of the t..-o ,,,ilIs, a doctrine ofthe Manieheans that Augustine \Vas to llloclify. Furthermore, the statement that rus " perception of truth was uncertain (incerta miru esset perceptio ueritatis) could refer to a doubt as. to whether the Manichean teácrung or Christian truth was to be preferred. At any rate there is no speeific reference to the Academies.

35 . E. A., '3, p. 530. 36. Ibid., p. 534. 37. ¡bid. , pp. 570, 572 . ~ 38 .. ' .et te incorruptil)i1elll et inuiolabilenl et illconnlutabilell1 totis lllec1ullis

credehaul, quia nesc:iens, un de et qU01noc1o. plane talnen uidebam. et certus ermn id, quo corrumpi potest, deterius esse quam id quorl non potest, ... " [bid., p. 576.

39· [bid ., p. 579·

AUGUSTIN E AND THE ACADEMICS 77

Augustine is also certain at this time40 that the Manichean solution to the problem of evil is inadequate. He recognizes that corruption anc1 change cannot be allowed to faU back on that which is immutable and incorruptible41 He rejects with contempt the lVIanichean explanation of the origin of moral evil, but confesses that he is unable to understand how our own free will is the cause of evil42 . He continues his inquiry into the source of evil alld weighs different possibilities for explaining the origin of evil43 . The solution to the problem eludes him and he is concerned over his failure to discover the truth. Yet he remain, as he says, withill the Church although there was much that he did not under­stand44.

In the meantime he frees himself from the superstitiolls of astrology45. The problem of evil continues to baffle him46 . However, such difficulties did 110t disturb his belief in God's existence, His immutability, His providence, nor in the salvation that can be achieved in the life to come through Christ. Yet with ali these convictions firmIy held he still sought allxiously for a solutioll to the problem of evil47 The real conver­sion of Augustine to Christianity must wait upon the solution to the problem of evil alld particularly as it affected his own moral life. For his conversion to be complete it must be both moral and inteUectual. Furthermore, the intellectual conversion at this stage is still incomplete, many difficulties and doubts remain. His further progress away from Manicheism to Christianity awaits the influence and the contributions of the Neo-Platonists. They will supply Augustine with an immaterialist philosophy, a spiritual conception of God and the soul, and especialiy with an ontological solution to the problem of evil4S. The moral con­version and the total embrace of Christianity awaits the grace of God. But this is another chapter in the conversion of Augustine.

To the point of his conversion in Book VIII of the Confessions there seems to be then insufficient evidence to substantiate the notion that Augustine was ever an Academic. Instead the evidence points to the greater persistence of the Manichean influence upon the mind of Augustine. The doubts that Augustine experienced in this period of his life are not the doubts of a phi1osopher but those of a re1igious mano His doubts are directed to those Manichean principIes that stand as anobstacleto

40. It is 110W the y e ar 385 anc1 Augustine is thirty years alel. 41. l bid., p. 584-42. lb·id., pp. 584, 586. 43· Ibid., pp. 590, 592. 44 .. .. stabiliter tamen haerebat in corde meo in catholica ecclesia fieles Christi

tui, domini et saluatoris nostri, in multis quidem adhuc informis et praeter doctrinae norma m fluitans, sed tamen non eam relinquebat nnhnus. ilnnlO in clies luagis 1l1agisque inbibebat. (lbid., p. 594).

45. Ibid., p. 600. 46. lbid., p. 602. 47. lbid. , p. 604. 48. Ibid. , pp. 618-626, 634-636.

7tl JOHiV .4. NIOURANT

the acceptance of Christianity. The illtellectual, moral, ancl religious clevelopment of Augustine is essential1y from Manicheism to Christianity, rather than from jUanicheism to the Academics, thence to Neo-Platonislll and finalIy to Christianity. The Academics provided Augustine witl~ the necessary means to cha1lenge the J\1anichean position, but despite their attraction they (lid not lead him to adopt a positioll of philosophical eloubt. The reading of the Platonists, -it might be saiel, diel not convert him to Platonism but rather provided reasons for the intellectual acceptan­ce of Christianity.

'Ve woulcl also argue at this poínt that there are exístelltial clepths to a religious conversion that escape any easy surface analysis. In Augus­tíne's case it would be ínaccurate to contend that the work of grace was somethíng of a sudden ancl instantaneous nature. The conversion in the garden was the climax and the consummatioll of a process of conversion that had begun much earlier. Thís seems evidellt enough from Augus­tine's own account. It ís reflecteel particularIy in the very strong convic­tion that Augustine possessed in the rea1ity anel the efficacy of the divine providence. Such a conviction stanels out in such instances as the impression the wrítings of Cícero maele upon him, the strength of his mother's faith, the eleath of a close friend, the journey from Carthage to Rome, the v'¡sit to Milan to hear Ambrose, and the reaelíngs of the " books of the Platonists ". AH of these ínstances ancl more maI1ifestec1 for Augustíne the foreshadowíngs of the divíne províclence ancl the work of the divíne grace that was to lead eventually to the ecstatic embrace of the elivine truth.

The graclualness of the slow retum to Christianity can be correlated to the gradual decline in the effectiveness of the JYIanichean influence. It ís a1so a testimony to the strength of Augustine's Manichean convictions ancl the long holcl that this cloctrine exercisecl upon him 49. It is JYIani­cheism and the problems it raises thaf are the dominant concern of Au­gustine up to the conversion ín the garelen and not the philosophical íssues raiseel by the Acaelemícs.

The persístence of the lVlanichean influence contínueel right elown to the point of his conversíon. At the very onset of the famous garelen scene, Augustine comments viviclly upon his inwarel tensions, the apparellt disíntegration of the seU as he c1eliberated UpOll the choice of God. Contrary to the JYIanicheans who helel to the doctrine of two wills, the one gooel anel the other evil, Augustíne eleclares :

49 . It way be suggested that the strength DI l\Iarucheislll is olso edd~llt in the severity of Augustine's recrimillatiuns against this sect in cOluparison with his cOllsic1eratioll of the philosophers. 'fhe treatment of the Acac1elllics, as \ye shall note later, is somewhat ambi\·alent. 'fhe treatment of the Neo-Platonists is generally fayorable.

AUG U STINE AND THE ACAlJENIICS 79

ego CUlll ddiberabaul, u t ianl seruirelll clOllUllO deo lueo. sicut diu disposueram, ego eram, qui uolebam, ego, qui noIebam ; ego eranl. Nec plene uoleball'l. nec plene nolebaul, ideo lnecmn contencle­bal11 et clissipalJar a me ipso, et ipsa dissipatio me inuito quidem fielJat, nec tal1len ostendebat natural1l mentis alienae, sed poenal1l meae. Et ideo non iam ego operabar illam, sed quod habitabat in me peccatulll de supplicio liberioris peccati, quia eral1l filius Adam."

'rhe entire chapter shows that the Manichean heresy was vividly befo re hi111. The final act of grace not ooly converts him to Christianity but libera tes him fram one of the more pernicious moral doctrines of the lV[anicheans that had long stood in his way.

After his conversion and during the beginning of rus stay at Cassicia­cum, Augustine writes very movingly of his reading of the Psalms of David 51 He expresses strongly his indignation with the Manicheans as well as his pity for them. The whole account in th.is chapter shows clearly that he was preoccupied with the Manicheans and not the Acade­mics. The references to the Manicheans are quite explicit 52 . This is true also in the statement : " o si uiderent internum aeternum., quod ego quia gustaueraum 53... The " they " in this case does not refer to both the Academics and the Manicheans as Sciacca maintains 54 . The context is the commentary on Psalm 4 and the reference in the preceding paragraph has been to the Manicheans. AIso the reference to the eternal light is fram Eph. 5. 8. and this would seem to rule out any implication of a connection with the Academics or the Plotinian notion of light.

Furthermore, in a letter to Secundinus Augustine notes that he left the Manicheans through fear :

Ego el1Í.m fateor, timore Manichaeos deserui, sed timore illorum verborum quae per apostolum Paulum prolata sunt : Spi-ritus, inquit, manifeste dieit, quia in noviss·imis temporibus reeedent q"idam a fide, attendentes sp'iritib'lttS sedttctol'ib'LtS et doctrinis dae1'Jwniortt'm, -in, hypocrisi mendaciloqttoyum, cauteriatam habentes conscientiam suam, prohibentes n'lLbere, abstinentes a e'ibis q1.tOS Deus creavit ad pe·Ycip'iend1.t1'l~ CU1n

gmtiarunt elctione fidelibus, et iis qui cognovel'u'I2t veritatem. Omn-is eni", creat'U-ra Dei bona est, el nihil ab.¿ic,iendu111, quod CU1n gratia.1''1.l,'ln actione pe-rcipitw'. [1 T im. , IV, 1-4] . "

50. ll. _'l.., t.j, p. 54-SI. Conjcss'ion,s IX. 4'" 8-12. .iVIuch 01 this chapter is a COllllllt:utar)- 011 Psatlll. .~. 5:2 .. .. qU:llU ueheUlenti et acri dolare indignabar lUUllic1tacis et nlist:raLar eos

rursus, quoc1 illa sacramenta, ¡Ua llledicaluellta nescirent et insani essent aducrsus autic1otlllll, quo sani esse potuissent! (B. A. 14. p. 84).

", et merito irasci, quin. non alin. natura gentis tenebrarulll de lile peccabat. sicut dicunt qui sibi non irascuntur et thesauriznnt sibi iram in elie irae et reuelationis iusti iutlicii tui! [RolI/. l. 5i (Ibid., p. 8S).

53 . Ibid., p. 90. 5+ SCL-\.CCA M. T'., S"int .-lu.guslin el le ·"<'oplalo,,i.,,/.(>, (Louyain, 1956) p. 0-1. 55· B. _'l.., '7, p. 540.

So JOHN A. MOURANT

May we not assume that with the renewecl interest of Augustine in Scripture the words of Sto Paul seemec1 to be direded against just those Manichean doctrines that were giving him particular difficultyat the time of rus conversion? The exhortations of the first three verses were to be quickly consummateel, but the Iast couId apparentIy take place only with some intellectual explanation such as he was to find in Neo-Platouism of the metaphysics and gooel and evil. Since this letter was in all probability written around 397 alld at the approximate time of the composition of the Confessions, its correlation with the thought of that work and the evellts of the conversion would be fairly well esta­blished.

Finally, the intensity and the vehemence of his oppositioll to the Manicheans may again be noted. He states :

legebam et ardebam nec inueniebam, quid facerem surdis mortuis, ex quibus fueram, pestis, latrator amarus et caecus acluersus litteras ele melle caeli melleas et de lumine tuo luminosas, et super inimicis scripturae huius tabescebam."

These are the words of a religious man, of one who has recent1y found the true faith and shaken off the falseo They are not the words of a phi1osopher concerned principally to refute ,other phi1osophers. The Manicheans are the true enemy ; they are very much with Augustine right down to the point of his conversion and they remain with him down to the completion of the treatises directed against them. Compared to their influence that of the Academics is minima!.

:1:

* * Such we finel to be the evidence of the Confessions. 1s it possible,

however, to maintaill this interpretation without serious modification in the light of the evidence of the dialogues of Cassiciacum ? Even though we rejed the thesis of Alfaric that these dialogues demonstrated that Augustille was first con verted to philosophy and then to Christianity, is there not sufficiellt evidence to show ullequivocally that Augustine was converted to the Acadernics prior to his conversion to Christianity in 386 ? We trunk noto The dialogues of Cassiciacum may be expected to cause more elifficulty because their composition antedates that of the Confessions. They are c10ser to the events of the critical years than are the Confessions wruch were written so me ten years later and in retrospect. On the other hand, it can be argueel that for this very reason the Con fes­sions may be said to present a greater objectivity anel to represent a more mature judgment on the part of the author. However that may be, the evaluation of the evidence of the dialogues will be lirnited.,.principally

56. B. A., 14, p. 92 .

AUGUSTINE AND THE ACADEMICS SI

to a consideration of the De beata uita, the De Ordine, and the Contra Academicos. In addition we shall look briefly to the evidence from the Letter to Hermogenianus and the Retractationes.

One other preliminary consideration needs to be noted. In some respects our interpretation of the dialogues has been influenced by Boyer with whom we are in general agreement S? That is, we are in complete accord with Boyer's point that Augustine was not a sceptic during bis sojourn at Cassiciacum and that his conversion to Christianity in 386 was both real and sincere. However; Boyer like others contends that Augustine prior to bis conversion to Christianity did adhere fOI a brief period to the position of the Academics. Tbis we reject. As we have already noted we grant that Augustine was influenced by the Academics and that it was their sceptical outlook that intensified his own developing distrust of the Manicheans in the period immediately preceding bis conversion. In other words, we hope to show that the evidence of the dialogues is in cooformity with that of the Conjessions.

Turning first to the De beata uita we find the evidence here somewhat inconc1usive and presenting certain difficulties of interpretation. In the first chapter, which is largely autobiographical, Augustine first resorts to a metaphor to explain bis intellectual development and his progress toward phi1osophy and the attainment of the happy life. He observes that there are three c1asses of seafarers who would journey to the port of phi1osophy58. Interpreting the metaphor; it may be argued that the reference to the first c1ass of individuals to be embraced by phi1osophy is to the Academics. If so, the Academics Augustine has in mind are probably some contemporary imitators of the Academics who lacked the persistence and the ability to be true philosophers. Such men lack the profundity and the secret wisdom of philosophers like Carneades 59 . The second c1ass probably refers to such materialists as the Stoics and Epicureans60 The tbird class evidently refers to those who like Augustine have found the true phi1osophy in Christianity. Of the members of tbis c1ass there are those who with but little delay attain the goal of the happy life and those whose progress toward such a goal is delayed for various reasons61 This interpretation is verified for the most part in the explanation given in 1. 4. Noting that his love for phi1osophy came with bis reading of the Hortensius of Cícero, Augustine

57 . Op. Cit ., cf. especially pp. 135 ff. SS. B . A ., 4, pp. 222, 224. 59. Cf. The Le/ter to Herl1zogeniam,s, W'riti-ngs 01 Saint AHgustine, (New York:

Fathers of the Church, 195 r), Volume 9, pp . 3-4-60. Perhaps also to the Manicheans. The language of the entire paragraph

lacks any explicit allusions or references. 6r. The al1usions to the " fog ", the " sinking stars ", and " alluring charm ",

the " unfavorable tempest "; may refer to Manicheism, the love of the classical \vritings, the worldly life and laves, and August:ille's illness which conlpellecl him to rest temporarily fronl a more active life.

JOHN A. NfOURANT

observes that this was followed by his acceptance oi Mal1icheismG2 •

Abal1donil1g lVIanicheísm he reports : " At ubí ruscussos eos evasi, maxime traiecto isto mari , diu gubernacula mea repugnantia omnibus ventis in mec1iis fli.tctibus Academici tel1uerUl1t "63 .

Trus statemel1t contrasts sharply with what we conjectured was a possible reference to the Acaclemics or their followers in 1.2 . The present statement seems quite explicit al1d an obvious il1terpretatiol1 of it would be that Augustine was a follower of the Academics for a period of sorne three years64 . However, this would contraclict the rather clecisive passage from the Confessions V. I4. 24. in which Augustine merely says that " in the manner of the Academics, as they are interpretecl,I was in eloubt about all things, " ancl he aclds, as we have previously observed, that he " refused altogether to commit the cure of (his) sickly soul to those phi1osophers who were without the hea1th-giving name of Christ "65. To our earlier observations on trus passage we would add that the phrase " in the manner of " is rugh1y ambiguous and can hardly be said to show any explicit aclherence to the Acaclemic cause.

The assertion of Augustine that " for a long time the Academics steerecl rus course6 6 " could mean simply that like the Academics he doubted. but for bis part he diel not accept doubt as a principIe of philosophy or as a way of life. It was only " after their ma=er " or in " imitatioll " of them that he looked upon some of the problems and perplexities that confronted him. That the Academics guided rum " for a long period of time " may be regarded as a necessary construction of language if the metaphor of the sea alld the long journey to Rome is to be maintained. Again, the lellgth of time may represent merely a psychological state of

6:.!. COllceruing Augustille's intellectual developlllent cluring the period of hís membership iu tlle l1auiche::m seet, it is very likely that his iuterests iu Cieero aud the Latin culture continuecl and that he clevotecl much of his time to the perfection of his kuowledge aud skill of rhetoric. It wouldalso seelll quite likely that he lllust ha ve spent él good part of his time in the further study uncl practise of l\:Ia,nicheis ln. He uncloubtedly perfectecl his kno\Yleclge of the basie principies ane! practises of ldanicheislll only gradllally fallillg away from thrLt sect with his cliscovery of :l

kind of Christian gnosticisru aided and supplementee! by his acquaintance with the Neo-Platowsts. "lVith his moral and religious conversion to Christiawt)' the break with 1.1anicheism finally becomes complete. \Ve shoule! be cautious iu au)' nllllimizing of Augustine's jUullicheislu because of t\ll excessh·e conceru to dwell UpOll his conyersion to Christianity. This can easily le ad to a distortiou of the true picture oI Augustine's religious developlllent.

63. B . A., 4, p. 228. 64. This is the interpretation given hy Sehopp \Vho dcclarcs that " Augustinc

hacl heen a follower of this philosophieal gronp frolll his twenty-eighth year up t o his conyersian." Saint Angustine, T ite Happy Lije, translated by Lne!wig Sehopp, (New York, The F athers of t he Chureh, "948), p . 47. ~

65. ita que Aca.denlicorunl 1110re, sicut existimalltur, cluhitans ele OlllUibus ... quibus tamen philosophis, quod sine salut ari nomine Christi essent, curationem lallgUOriS aniiu.ae meae eoumittere omnino recusahalll. (B.A., t3, pp. 5to, 5t2).

66 . B. A. 4, p. 228.

AUGUSTINE AND THE ACADEMICS

mind which in retrospect seemed to have existed for a long period oí time. AIso, the oft repeated phrase " in the manner oí the Academics " can just as easily refer to the manner in whieh Augustine doubts of the iHanicheans and their materialism, just as the Aeademies had doubted of the Stoics and the Epicureans and their materialismo Nowhere c10es Augustine specifiea1ly assert that he aeceptec1 the position oí the Acade­mies. Furtherrnore, 1'rygetius, speaking we rnay assurne for Augustine67,

declares of the Academics :

Quare gaucleo iamdiu curo illis me inimicitias suscepisse. Nam nescio qua impellente natura, vel, ut verius dicam, Deo, etiam nesciens quomodo refellendi essent, tamen eió nimis adversabar".

1'his statement evidentIy contradicts the oue previously cited69• For Trygetius states quite explicitIy that he has been opposed to the Acade­mies for sorne time, even though he did not know how they were to be refuted. Assuming that he represents the attitude of Augustine, it is difficult to see mueh more than an ambivalenee in the attitude of Augus­tine towards the Academies. Certainly, it cannot be said unequivoealIy that Augustine ever became an Academic. 1'estard observes that Augustine hac1 a confic1ence in the human understanding that Cicero c1id not know.

Saint Augustin COID1tlt toujours une grande confiance dans l 'illtel­ligence humaine. Cette confiance subit a diverses reprises l'épreuve du doute, la tentation du scepticisme, mais elle en triompha toujours."

Two points neecl to be made with respect to the record of the dialogue itself. First the references to the Academies are eoncerned principalIy with Augustine's contention that since the Aeademics cannot find truth or wisdom, the happy lile is not possible for them71 . 1'his eontention is a reflection oí Augustine's judgment of the Aeademics rather than an historie al statement of their position. For the Academics he1d that the proper end oí the philosopher is that of quietude or tranquillity (ataraxy), a state of mental rest that follows the suspension of judgment and the acceptance of the probable 72. 1'his also seems to be Augustine's inter-

67. In this dialogue as well as in the Co¡¿tra Academicos, Trygetius eriticizes the Acac1eulics nnd :lssists _'\.ugustine iu the argnments usecl against theUl. The De be«tCt v;ta ,,"as eompleted shortl)' after Augustine's thirty seeond birthday. It "'as ,,"ritten during the eOlllposition of the Contra .1eademieos aud is the first of his works to be completed "nd transmitted to posterity. Tlle De p¡-,Ze/¡ro el apto is lost.

68. lbid., p. 04~. 69. lb-id., p. 208.

70. TESTARD M ., Saint Aug"stin et Cie¿-ron, p. 341. 71. 13 .A. 4, pp. 246, 248. 72 . Gooc1 statements of the positiou helc1 by tlle Aeademies are to be fouud iu

Scxtus Empiricus, O"tlines oi P :vrrhonis1I/., The Loeb Classieal Library, Translatec1 hy R. G. Bury, (Lonc1on and Cambridge: I955, Heinelllann aud Harvard Uui ,"ersity Press), pp. 9, I9, 2I.

JOHN A. MOURANT

pretation oí their position ií we interpret the statement in the prologue conceming the first class of those seafarers embraced by phi1osophy as applying to the Academics. The passage may be interpreted as meaning that those who go but a little way in phi1osophy and are content to suspend judgment and follow the easy path of the probable will achieve tranquill­ity 73. Thus Augustine's conc1usions that the Academics are miserable is more a reflection of his own state of mind in the period just prior to his conversion. And since the whole testimony of the Confessions is to the effect that he was unhappy because he was unable to attain truth and wisdom, it would appear most unlikely that he had ever embraced the Academic cause.

Second, the dialogue is strictly a religious disputation as Augustine himself notes74. Its religious character is revealed in its dedication to Theodorus 75 and in its purpose, namely, to formulate the principIes of the happy life in terms of Christianity. Thus there can be no question of Augustine's Christianity during this periodo

Finally, the prologue of the dialogue is autobiographical but presents us only with a very abbreviated account of Augustine's intellectual development. It correlates c10sely with the Confessions but is much less significant for its account of the AcadeIDÍcs than the Confessions76 .

Actually, there is on1y one explicit reference to the Academics in the prologue. The dialogue as a whole shows Augustine's opposition to the Academics butnot that he ever accepted their position. In rus limited knowledge of philosophy he saw them as an obstac1e to Christianity, a sect that must be rejected because it offered nothing to Christian truth.

Considering next the De ordine, Augustine informs us that the two books of this dialogue were written during the composition of the Cont,'a Academicosn Thus the De ordine touches significantly upon the pro­blem of the relation of Augustine to the Academics. The purpose of the dialogue is the consideration of the problem of evil and the divine provi­dence78. Augustine's analysis of trus problem shows that he had moved beyond lVIanicheism and Scepticism to a Christian solution. Like the De beatavita the dialogue is essentially religious. The prulosophy expressed is a Christian philosophy79. As FI. Russell puts it :

73. R. A. 4, p. 222f.

74- Ibid., p. 23L 75. ~1anlius Theodorus, a contenlporary of Augustine and n.n outstanding convert

to Christianity. 76. Por a comparative evaluatian oi the Confessions and the D-ialog-u,es see BOY.lUt,

Christianisme et Néo-Platon-is1ne . . " pp. 20-26.

77 . Retractationes, R. A. 12, p. 285. 78. Ibid. ~ 79. The references of Augustine to philosophy in this dialogue as in many of his

writings are not always precise and free from ambiguity. Sometimes he appears to mean by the term "philosophy ", tlle traditional or Platonic sense. Rut at otller times the term can be equatecl to Christian wisdom and truth.

l !

.J

,~

I ~ . j . h! ,

.-'1 UG U STIN E A N D THE ACADEMICS 85

Por, notwithstanding the presence of elements thatsuggest a Platon­ic or neo·Platoruc origin, thoughts distinctly and exclusively Christian are not on1y clearly discenrible, but predominate throughout the entire dialogue".

The references to the Academics in this dialogue are few and may be dealt with briefly. In chapter four during the opening of the discussion on the problem of order, Licentius remarks that poetry cannot divert him from philosophy as much as a doubt of discovering the truth81. Trygetius then observes that now Licentius is not an Academic, although he had former1y be en accustomed to defend them zealously82.

This passage could be interpreted to imply a reflection of a position held by Augustine some years earlier. For Licentius is much too young at the time of this remark to be regarded as ever having defended the sceptics so zealously. It is more likely, however, that the statement reflects the position of Romanianus, the father of Licentius. Romanianus, the close friend of Augustine, had been converted to Manicheism by Augustine. Following Augustine's rejection of Manicheism, Romanianus hesitated to follow his friend 's example and embrace Christianity. Ins­tead he adopted the position of the Academics. Our conjecture would be that it was Romanianus who zealously defended the Academics in his conversations with Augustine and that he probably found their doctrines useful in resisting the efforts of Augustine to convert him to Christiaruty. The stubborness of Romanianus and the fact that he did not beco me a Christian until much later testifies to the strength of Augustine's earlier convictions for the truth of Manicheism and his ability to communicate such convictions to his friends. The persistence of Romanianus in resist­ing conversion to Christianity and in using the Academic philosophy to this purpose may also be said to be reflected in the fact that the Contra Academicos is addressed to Romanianus. The refutation of the Academics is directed primarily to him and the clesire of Augustine to convert him to Christianity.

A similar purpose is not evident in any role that could be assigned to Licentius. Licentius was apparently never converted to Christiaruty despite the appeals of Augustine and RomanianusS3. This would rule out any consideration that he was meant to represent Augustine, although his enthusiasm, his love of poetry, his concern with the problem of order and evil, are representative of similar interests on the part of Augustine. In both this dialogue and in the Contra Academicos Licentius and Tryge-

80. Fat"e1's 01 tite Ch,ach, ¡'Vri tings 01 Sto An!;"s!'i"e, Vohulle I , translated b y Robert P. Russell, O . S. A ., (New York : '948). p. 231.

8r. B .A. 4, p. 3I 8. 82. TUln Trygetius gaudentibus ver bis Habenlus, inquit, ialn, quod plus est,

Licentium non Academicum ; eos enün ille studiosissime defendere solebat. (¡bid .) 83. ef. Letter 32 written in 396 by P aulinus and Therasia and addressed to

Romanianus . Wri tings 01 Sto A " gustine , Fathers 01 the el",rch, translated by Sister Wilfrid P an;ons , (Ne\Y York : I951), Volume 9, p . I I 9.

86 JOHN A. l'v[OURANT

tius are treated as students with the need oí students for discipline and phi1osophy. Their representation of the position or character of Augustine himself must always be carefully restricted.

Our analysis oí the Contra Academicos will be eoneemed with what light the dialogue throws upon the relations of Augustine to the Aeademies rather than with any detailed study of Augustine's statements and refu­tations of their arguments. "Ve hope to show that the evidenee of the dialogue supports the eonc1usions we have already argued for eoneeming Augustine's relation to the Academics.

The Contra Academicos was written while Augustine was aIread}' a Christian. The dialogue itself reveals this sufficientl}'. In addition there is the fact that the De ordine, a strongly religious dialogue was eomposed at the same time. Finally, the De beata ¡¡ita was written before the Contra Academicos and it is equally a religious dialogue . All this leaves little to be said ior Alfaric's thesis that Augustine was not a Chris­tian at the time. The purpose, then, of Augustine in the Contra Acade­micos is not the refutation of the Academics as a condition for his own aeceptance oi Christianity, but rather the refutation oi the Academie doctrine as an obstac1e to the aeeeptanee of Christianity by others, ancl notably by Romanianus his friendo

Although the thesis of Alfarie is no longer aeeeptecl, it has left its mark upon the interpretation of Augustine's intellectual clevelopment. As we have seen this interpretation takes the form oi assigning certain fixed stages to Augustine's intellectual development. A reeent example oE this type of interpretation is found in Fr. Kavanagh's introduction to his translation of the Contra Academicos. Fr. Kavanagh writes :

After an interval of thirty-five years, Augustine tells in retrospeet that rus cruef need at that time was the removal oí al! doubt of the possibility oi finding truth : ' Therefore at the beginning of my con­version 1 wrote three books so that those things whieh blockecl my way at the threshold, might not prove an obstacle to me '. ' The three ·books against the Academics' were, then, Augustine's farewellletter to the philosophy wruch he hacl followed last, a philosophy that hac1 the aim to justify doubt as to one's ultimate attituc1e. ""

We have aIread}' argued that Augustine did not wholl}' aeeept the Aeademic position for any period of time and that there is no real evidence to show explieitly that he was actually eonverted to their posi­tion. It inay be signifieant to observe that in this quoted statement from Augustine he refers to the " begi:iming of my conversion " and not " before " his eonversionss The use of " before " wouId have indieatecl

S+ Fa/hers Di lite Chu.rch, ¡V"itings 01 SI. Auguslille, Volume r , trallsIatcc1 by Denis J. Kavanagh, O. S. A. (New York: 1948), p. 89. <>

85. The original statenlent reads Uncle tria confeci vohl1l1ina in iuitio COl1\-er­sionis 111eae, ne impedi1uento l10bis essent, qune talllquanl in ostio contradicebant. Et utique fuerat removenda inveniendae desperatio ,-eritatis, quae iIIorl1m I'jrletnr argumentationibus robornri. (TI . A. 9, p. Lfo).

AUGUSTIlVE AND THE ACADENlICS

a period prior to his acceptance of Christianity in which he had followed the Academic philosophy. But for Augustine doubting was real ancl not methoclic. Instead of being limited to a brief and precise stage in his intellectual development it embodiecl a long ancl restless quest for the truth. Any' period ' of doubt for Augustine would have to be traced back to his initial doubts of Manicheism, probably to some time prior to his meeting with Faustus

Furthennore, when Augustine states that " at the beginning of my conversion " he means quite specifically the period immediately prior to his baptismo However, his conversion may also be understood as a continuing and viable religious experience extending over a much longer period of time. For Augustine regarded his progress toward Christianity as providential and marked by God's continuing grace. It may be con­jecturec1 that the precise point of the beginning of his conversion arose with his first doubts of Manicheism. And that such doubts were increased and intensified by those events that he regarded as providential. These doubts were a natural part of his religious development. They should not be interpreted as representing a position of philosophical doubt.

Finally, at the time of the writing of the dialogue Augustine is under­going a period of preparation for his baptismo As a catechumen it was necessary that he be instructed in the faith . His instruction seems to have been largely self instruction and to have consisted in the reading of Scripture and also no doubt of the Neo-Platonic phi1osophy. This readillg is refledec1 in both the philosophical interests evoked at Cassi­ciacum as well as in the strong religious tone and interests that all the dialogues of Cassiciacum seem to exhibit. That he read both phi1osophy and Scripture must be considered as the context in which to interpret his attitude toward the Academics and the problem of truth. Such a context does much to explain his sometimes ambivalent attitude and the difficulty of interpreting his position.

Turning next to a few specific points in the first book oi the dialogue, it is important to note that the dialogue is dedicated to Romanianus who is exhorted to the study of phi1osophy. The dedication to Roma­nianus would indicate that Augustine's interest in refuting the Academics is motivated in good part by a desire to bring about the conversion of his ·friend Romanianus . The meaning of " philosophy " in the exhor­tation is somewhat ambiguous. Augustine states :

Ouam sententiam uherrinlanUll doctrinarum oraculis editam, remo­tmñque longissime ab inte1lectu profanonun, se c1emonstraturam veris amatorihus suis, ad quam te invito, philosophia pollicetur. "

vVithin the context of this entire section, anc1 in particular in substituting " Providence " for " Fortune ", this passage could be interpreted as an

86, n, A., 4. p, 16.

88 JOHN A. MOURA NT

exhortation to Christian philosophy. On the other hand, as O'MearaS ?

points out, this passage may be interpreted as an invitation to a synthesis of Christian truth and the philosophy of Neo-Platonism.

A few paragraphs later in a statement reflecting his own intellectual development, the exhortation to phi1osophy is quite explicitly to Neo­Platonism 88

The position of Licentius in the comment that foilows is somewhat ambiguous. He is pictured as devoted to philosophy89. Later in the dialogue his position is aligned with that of the Academics for whom he is the spokesman. Augustine's intention may be conjectured as fo1l6ws. Since his objective is the conversion of Romanlanus what better appeal could he use than to cite the position of Licentius . That Licentius is devoted to philosophy will please Romanianus and so wiil the apparent ability of his son as a philosopher and as a defender of the Academic position. However, the failure of Licentius to persuade Augustine to the Academic position as well as Augustine 's own skillful refutation of scepticism may move Romanianus to abandon the Academics and to turn at least to Neo-Platonism if not immediately to Christianity.

This conjecture finds some confirmation toward the close of Book r. in which Augustine sums up the development of the argument between Trygetius and Licentius. The debate turns upon the problem of hap­piness and its relation to the pursuit or the possession of truth. Licentius accepts the typically Greek notion that the pursuit of truth or wisdom brings happiness. This view is representative of the Academics and Licentius is defending them. It is Augustine's desire to win over Licentiu$ (and rus father) to the Christian view of happiness as consisting in the possession and not just the pursuit of wisdom. Augustine points out that a record of the debate will be sent to Romanianus: .

Quamobrem iam istam, ut dixi, disputationem terminemus, et relatam in litteras mittamus, Licenti, potissimum patri tuo, cuius erga phi1osophiam iam prorsus animum teneo. Sed adhuc quae admit­tat, quaero fortunam. Incendi autem in haecstudia vehementius poterit, CUIn teipsum iam [intentum] mecum sic vivere, non audiendo s01um, verum etiam 1egenc10 ista cognoverit. "

87. J ohn J. O'ThíEARA, Sto Au.gu.stine A gainst the Academ.ics, Ancient Christian · Writers, Vol. J 2 (vVestminster, Md., I950), p. J70, 11. 3. O'MEARA observes that this is substantiated in In. 43 and Augustine's statemellt : " Apud Platonicos me interim quod sacris nostris non repugnet reperturum esse conficlo. "

88 . Cf. B. A., 4, pp. IS, 20 where he recounts how, after he had given up the pro­fession of rhetoric, he retired to Cassiciacum "ud devoted himself to philosophy. The whole passage is more clearly relevant to Neo-Platonism, particularly in the reference to Utis philosophy freeing him from the materialism '" of the Manichean superstition. Cf. also the Conjessions, 7. 20ff.

89. Although tb-e conte~t might indicate Neo·Platonislll , the word Augustine uses is " sturuosissime " which might best be rendered as " a devotion to learning ".

90. B . A . 4, p. 60.

• . ~i·

i ,

! !

AUGUSTINE A N D THE ACADEMICS 89

The implication here would appear to be that the philosophizing skill of Licentius may intensify his father's interest in philosophy and that Augustine's ability to refute the Academic position presented by Licentius will ultimateIy win over Romanianus to Christianity. In effect, Augus­tine would accomplish two objectives : the refutation of the Academics and the conversion of Romanianus. And Iest we underestimate the Iatter, it should be observed that the value and the place of friendship was a factor of much importance in the life .of Augustine91 •

The opening of Book n . of the dialogue is marked by a continuation of this appeal of Augustine to his friend Romanianus to abandon the Academics with their " deceitful pretence " and " obstinate persistence ". In this opening chapter Augustine observes that the Academics seem to be invincibIe only because of our own Iack of diligence and our aversion to learning. He counsels that in such a struggle we must appeal. for divine aid if we are to attain the " port of wisdom " 92. The allusion to the " port of wisdom " may be interpreted as Christian wisdom or philosophy, for Augustine prays for the liberation of the mind of Romanianus from the Academics. Since Augustine himself is a Christian at this time, his prayer for Romanianus would be more logically directed to the hope for his acceptance of Christianity rather than Neo-Platonism, The attain­ment of the latter would only continue the quest for wisdom and faíl to yield the desired finality of the possession of wisdom in Christian truth. In this instance the metaphor of the port might be interpreted as the final port of cal!.

Augustine's own position at this time is revealed rather precisely in chapter two when, after appealing to Romanianus once more to embrace philosophy and recounting his indebtedness to him93, he observes : " Cuius autem minister fueris, plus adhuc fide concepi, quam ratione comprehendi "94. This statement reflects we11 the fact that at the time of the writing of the dialogue Augustine had accepted Christianity upon faith but still sought a better understanding of his faith. The statement further testifies to the predilection of Augustine for a providential inter­pretation of the eveuts leading up to his acceptauce of Christianity.

After a brief digression on philocaly Augustine returns again to the question of philosophy and points out to Romanianus that " " Restant duo vitia et impedimenta inveniendae veritatis "95 Fr. Kavanagh observes of Augustine that :

91. On the subject 01 friendship and its importance and influence in the life of Augustine, see Sister i\lI.A. McNAMARA, Friends amd Friendship 101' Sainl A "gus­line. (New York: Alba House, T964).

92 . B . A. 4, pp. 60, 62. 93. See also the Conjessions 2. 3, 3. I T, and 4·7 · 94. B . A. 4, p. 66. 95. [ bid. , p . ]2. The t\,·o defeds a re lVIanicheisIll anrl Academicism.

<)0 .10HH A. MOURAHT

I-Ie fears that R011lanianus nlav llave returned to the ~1anicheall Su­perstition, although he was an aclherent to the New Academy, 'seekino­and doubting " when he departecl frolll J\1ilan. This disputation w~ to clisabuse him of Skepticism. Approximately four years later, Augustine composecl the treatise, TJ¡e T"1W ReNgion, and declicated it to Romanianl1s. He c1evotes aH of the 11i11t11 chapter to a refutation of lYfanicheism. ""

This concurs with our own judgment on the purpose oi the dialogue, It also gives added confirmation to our contention oi the strength oi the Manichean heresy and the great hold it must have exercised upon Augus­tine,

The statement of the rage of Romanianus at the Academics 97, may just as well be a reflection of Augustine's own attitucle towarcl the Acacle­mics, As such it coulcl then be argued that Augustine was enraged at them because he had been cleceivecl into accepting their doctrine. On the other hancl, it might be argued that he was simply enraged with their attempted cleception but that he hacl not accepted their doctrine. Of greater significaJ;lce, however, is the further comment of Augustine that the rage of Romanianus was the more spontaneous because ofhis great love of the truth. Undoubteclly this also reflects Augustine's own passion for the truth. This great love of Augustine for the truth makes it clifficult to reconcile his position with any aclherence at an)' time to the position taken by the Academics.

At the conc1usion of this exhortation to Romanianus to embrace phil­osophy, Augustine cautions hi111 not to accept as certain anything which cannot be known as truly as mathematical propositions 98 . Similarly he is cal1tioned not to despair of discoveringthetruth, and he is admonished that such knowledge will be even more manifest than that oi numbers. The Scriptural injunction in this context seems to imply that by philo­sophy and truth Augustine means here Christian truth and philosophy. The conc1usion of this exhortation as well as the dialogue as a whole seems to reilect then a proselytizing note on the part oi Augustine. It shows a concern not merely to refute scepticism to his own satisfaction and to make his own position c1ear but to win over one of his c10sest friends.

After a further summar}' discl1ssion of the arguments of the Academics, Augustine appears to indicate that he had accepted rather explicitly the Academic doctrine 99 . Fr. Kavanagh translates this passage :

And do you not know tho.t as yet 1 have nothing which 1 Can rego.rcl as certain, but tho.t, on account of t11e o.rguments o.nd clisputo.tions of t11e _4..co.clemics, 1 am hinderecl from searching for it ? ... ' ""

96. Op. Cit., p. q2, note 2. .. 97 . n. A. 4, p. 74-98. [bid. 99. Tune ergo nescis. nihil lue certtull adhuc habere quod sentia111, sed ab ea

quaerendo _'1.CadenlicorU111 :lrgulllentis atqt1e c1isputationibus impec1iri ? (lln:d .. , p. 9R). IDO . Op. cil., p. r57.

· l·,

, ,. ,

AUGUSTINE AND THE ACAD EMICS 9I

Fr. Kavanagh correctly observes that the phrase " as yet " lllay mean " up to the present moment in m}' life, or it may mean up to the present moment in the debate ", And he argues that the donbt e:s:pressed is methoclieal rather than real whieh woulcl be in eonforrnity with the generally acceptecl opil1ion that Augustine was a Christian at this time and not an Aeademie101 ,

The c10sing sentenee of this ehapter " Nam ignoratio veri, aut mihi, sil illi fingebant, peeuliaris est, aut certe utrisque eornmunis " 102, raises a point that is pursued by Augustine more fully in Book IIIl03, The point is that the Aeademies were not sincere in their pretenclecl seepticism ancl that they ehose such names as " truth-likeness " (" verisimile ") ancl" probable" (" probabile ") to coneeal the truth from others104 , As Augustine states the issue :

Itaque reponde, quaeso, utrulll tibi videantur Acndemici habuisse certam de veritate sententialll, et ealll temere ignotis vel non purgatis anilllis prodere noluisse ; an vero ita senserint, ut eorum dispntationes se habent, "' ,'

No clefinite answer is given to this question in Book II" but in Book III, Augustine presents a more cletailecl account of this problem, the analysis of whieh has an important bearing upon his relations with the Acaclemics,

=1:

* *

Turning to Book III. of the Contra Academicos our major concern will be the attitucle of Augustil1e towarcl the Academics rather than any extensive analysis of the arguments he uses in refuting their position. Augustine's attitucle seems to be c1early ambivalent, At times he is sharply derisive ancl derogative of the Academics. He observes that they have achieved only a second rate standing in relation to all other phi1osophers, and that their so-eallecl wiscloll1 is little better than ignorance for they are never able to take a clefinite position on any issue anc1 are ineapable of learl1ing anything106 ,

Of the arguments used in the refutatiol1 of the Acaclemics, one of the more significant is that based 011 the e:ristence of clialectical truths. In particular Augustine appeals to the truths of clisjunetive propositions anc1 their eertitucle107 . Sueh certitucle is similar to that which can be

ro r. ¡bid., note 5, T02. R. A. 4, p . roo. T03. l bid. , pp. 19°-198, 10-+. ¡bid., p. 10-+ . See [11S0 CrCERo, .-leudeNl . 2 . 10.32.

ros· R, A. 4, p. rlO, 106. /b id., pp. L¡0-q4- Cf. CICERO, Acad. r. fr. 20 (:IIüller), r07 , lb'id" p. 170, TlJe sonrce for tlJese nrgnl1lellts is tú be f()und in CrcERo

De Aen,elem. 2,94f,

9 2 JOHN A. MOURANT

discovered in mathematical propositions and which Augustine had re­marked upon earlier108

The rejection of the Academic position reaches its highest pitch in chapter fifteen in which Augustine develops the consequences of the doctrine of the " probable" as it is applied to the field oi moral judgments. The very intensity of Augustine 's attack upon the Academics at this point can only be accounted for on the assumption that he has accepted Christianity and that his criticism is directed from this position. Even so his emotions seem to be somewhat mixed :

Ttml yero tamo multa mihi et tam capitalia LTl istos venerunt in mentem, ut iam non riderem, sed partim stomacharer, partim dolerem homines doctissimos et acutissimos in tanta scelera sententiartum et flagitia devolutos. lOO

A little later the attack upon the Academics mounts in its intensity . The doctrines of the Academics are ridiculous yet entail the most serious consequences :

111ud est capitale, illud formidolosum, illud optimo cuique metuen­dum, quod nefas omne, si haec ratio probabilis erit, cum probabile cuiquam visum fuerit esse faciendum, tantum nulli quasi yero assen­tiatur, non solum sine sceleris, sedetiam sine erroris vituperatione com­mitat . Quid ergo ? H aec illi non viderunt ? Tmo solertissime prudentissimeque viderunt n.

Considering the significance and the centrality of the moral problem for Augustine, and also his own guilt feelings in this respect, is it not strange that had he ever embraced their doctrine he would not have said so in very explicit terms? Certaínly he showed no hesitancy in setting down the absurdities and evils of the Manichean doctrine that he had held for sorne nine years. Why then should he not have been consistent and stated c1early his guilt in accepting the Academic doctrine ? The answer can only be that he never adually adhered to the Academic cause and was never converted to their position as he was to Manicheism and to Christianity.

Furthermore, it would appear very likely that his own ambivalent attitude toward the Academics kept him from embracing their doctrine. In part this ambivalence stenuned from a certain loyalty he felt to Cicero coupled with his OWll instinctive distrust oí the Academic doctrine. More significantly Augustine's attitude was no doubt dictated by his difficulty in assessing the true position and motives of the Academics.

Quid igitur placuit tantis viris perpetuis et pertinacibus conten­tionibus agere, ne in quemquam cadere ved scient 4J. videretur ? Audite

roS. [bid_, p_ ,62_ 109_ ¡bid:, pp. ISO, ISO.

TIO. ¡bid., p. 186.

AUGUSTINE AND THE ACADEMICS 93

iaxn paulo attentius non quid sciam, sed quid existimem : hoc enim ad ultimum reservabam, ut explicarem, si possem, quale n:tihi videatur esse totum Academicorum consilium. 1ll

Augustine's answer is that the Academics were crypto-Platonists. That they possessed a secret doctrine and did not seriously believe that which they taught public1y.

This notion of a secret doctrine imputed to Arcesilas does not seem to be substantially founded . It was apparently based upon certain statements by Dioc1es of Cnidus which were adopted an d popularized by Cicero and then by Sextus Empiricus. It was variously held that Arcesilas merely assumed the position of a Skeptic to escape the criticisms oi Zeno and the Stoics, to maintain the purity oi the P latonic teaching, or that according to Sextus Empiricus " The Academics ' scepticism was merely a means of testing the fitness oi their pupils ior admittance to their mysteries "112.

Whatever may be the validity of the historical sources and the expla­nations of this secret doctrine of the Academics, its importance for our consideration hes in the fact that Augustine, whether he fully accepted it or not, did take the time and the trouble to set it down in some detail. This would seem to reflect either his acceptance of the doctrine or his ambivalent attitude toward the Academics. Certain points can be singled out in hisaccount of the development of this doctrine that will justify our contention.

In his brief history of the Platonic Academy he observes particular1y the relation of Zeno the founder of the Stoic school to the Platonic Aca­demy. He expresses his belief that Zeno was held suspect by the .P1ato­nists for the pernicious doctrine he taught :

Quamobrem cum Zeno sua quadam de mundo, etma.-'<ime de anima, propter quam vera philosophia vigilat, sententia delectaretur, clicens eam esse mortalem, nec quidquam esse praeter hunc sensibilem mundum, nihilque in eo agi, nisi corpore (nam et Deum ipsum ignem putabat) ... a3

His statement that Arcesilas wisely and deverIy concealed the doctrine of the Academy and developed his own mode of disputation in order to refute those who had too readi1y accepted such false doctrines1l4, undoub­tedIy reflects his own fear of the danger of such teachingslls . He also observes that the teachings of the New Academy originated in the need to combat the views of Zeno, whereas the earlier Academics had no need

IIr. I bid., pp. 186, 18S. II2. Quoted Iroln KAVANAGH, Op. Cit., p. 21411. II3. [bid ., p. 190. CI. Conf. 4. 15. 24 for Augustine's acceptance 01 a similar

view. 114· E. A., 4, p. 190. lIS. Even in the periad il1lluecliately after his conversion Augustine was \vrestling

with philosophical solutions to the problems 01 the nature 01 the sonl and 01 God.

94 jOHN A. MO URAN T

of such teachillgS. Similarly, we have argued, that Augustine needed and usecl the teachings of the Academics to combat the views of the l\:Ianicheans on the nature of the soul and oi Gocl.

Pursing further his historical account Augustine notes that Chrysippus continuecl the work of Zeno but that the spread of this doctrine met with the opposition oi Carne acles who reiuted it so Illasterfully that Augustine was surprised that it could have any further acceptance. Ancl he adds that Carneades avoided the disrepute that had fallen upon Arcesilas becanse of rus method of disputation.

Namque Carneades primo illam velut calunmialldi irupudel1tiam, qua videbat Archesilam non mecliocriter infamatulll, deposuit, ne contra Olnnia velle dicere quasi ostentationis causa videretur, sed ipsos proprie sibi Stoicos, atque Chrysippum cOllyellendos everten­dosque proposuit. '"

So far the importance of this account of the Academics by Augustine lies in the fact that it appears to establish at the very least his ambivalent attitude toward the Academics and thus goes far to justify our thesis that Augnstine was not con verted to the Academic canse. For this account reveals a very fundamental and clifferent motive for Augustine's willingness to accept the Acaclemic position. He may be said to agree with the Academics, not because he is a sceptic or has been converted to the principIes of scepticism, but rather becanse the Acaclemics are not truly sceptics themselves. Instead the Academics use the sceptical method to attack and refute a doctrine of materialism wruch Augustine rumself had come to despise with his break from the Manicheans. If this is one acceptable version of the Academic phi1osophy, or at least a version in which Augustine believed for a time, then it would account for his ready acceptance of it as a means of liberating himself from tlie Manicheans. On trus interpretation it is easy to understand the admira­tion he seems to express for Carneadesll 7 .

The Academics, thel1, constitute a formidable ally in the reiutation oi materialismllS and with it of the Manicheans. Actually, the Academics contributed to Augustine's ultimate conyersion to Christianity rather than standing in the way of his conyersion.

In addition a paralle1 may be suggested regarding the relation of Augns­tine to the Manicheans and the alleged esotericism of the AcadeIllÍcs. It can be argued that Augustine's ultimate rejection of the Manicheans lay in their refusal or inability to answer rus questions, to reyeal to him those truths they daimecl were held in secret b y the electo And Augustine

II6. lbid., p. "92. .. II7. lb·id., pp. 192, 19-+. See also t h e letter to H .rmo¡;ollú"""s (386) f.or furtllcr

references to the genills :.lutl the lenrllil1g of Cnrne:ules. IIS. _·U the close of chapter "7 _-\.llgllstiue observes tl",t the r""l purpose of C"r­

neades was to o,-erthrow and destro)' the S toics aud Chrysi ppus (" sed ipsos proprie sibi Stoicos, ·atqlle Chrysipp"lU cOllvellendos evertelldosque propos)lit ").

AUGUSTINE AND TrIE ACAlJElllICS ')5

soon founcl himself in a similar position vis a vis the Acaclemics. For supposing that the Academics held a secret doctrine, it was not revealed to Augustine . Once more his position is that of an auditor rather than one of the electo However, the deception in each case (if it was a clecep­tion by the Academics) was soon discerned by Augustine and does much to acconnt for the vigor and even rancor at time of his criticism of both sects. On the other hand, assuming that the Academics did not holcl a secret doctrine and that Augustine knew this, then their scepticism contributecl to that intellectual despair Augustine felt of ever attaining the truth at that time when he realizecl he could no longer accept the alleged truths of Manicheism.

* * *

After weighing all these alternative interpretations of Augustine's attitucle towarc1 the Acac1emics, 1 think his statement toward the close óf the dialogue sufficiently re-affirms the ambivalence of his attituc1e and also his conviction that the truth can be foundllB

Thus to the extent that the Academics acceptecl 01' claimecl a knowledge of the truth (Platonism) they tendec1 to escape Augustine's direct criticismo On the assumptioll that they helcl no secret doctrine they are subject to his bitterest criticismo In any event his basic difference with them is that although they might claim to know truth, they resort to dialectic to show that it cannot be attained. Such a sceptical position, we have argued, could not have been maintainec1 by Augustine. Although he was disturbed at times by their arguments and detened from the pursuit of human wisdom, now, in the year of his conversion he feels that in the present disputation he has sufficiently protected himself against the reasouillgs of the Academics . The . conclusioll of the long debate with the Academics reveals quite clear1y that this dialogue has been cOllductec1 within the context of Augustine's Christian faith.

Nulli autem dubiwn est gemino pondere 110S impelJi ad cliscendulll. auctoritatis atque rationis. Mihi autem certum est nusc¡uam prorsus a Christi auctoritate disceclere : non enim reperio yalentiorem. ''''

Since this was the state of mind and the position of Augustine in his thirty third year, it is clear that at this time he was neither an Acaclemic nor a Platonist, although phi1osophically he might be best c1escribec1 as a Neo-Platonic Christian. In view of our contention that his lVIanicheisl1l was far more persistent than is usually acceptec1, the major cloubts of

IIg. Ibid ., pp. Ig8, 200. Note that this ambivalellce 01 Augustine toward the Acadelllics is expressecl in the different titles he gave to this dialogue. Iu the Retractationes he refers to it as " con¿'ra Ac(ulcJlúcos " or" de ... i.ca.demicis 1> (R. A. t:2.

P·274)· I20. 1 bid., p. 200.

96 JOHN A. NIO URANT

Augustine were directed against their doctrine, and especially their materialism, rather than to any acceptance oí the Academic position. The attraction oí the Academics lay in their disputed " secret doctrine" or Platonism, their opposition to philosoprucal materialism, their presen­tation by Cicero and the influence of Cicero upon Augustine, and their dialectical skill which undoubtedly had a strong appeal for Augustine. To be attracted, however, is not to be convinced or persua­dedo Augustine we believe was never convinced of the tmth of the Aca­demic position. Not merely for the various reasons we have outlined, but also because of his own difficulty in assessing and determining the true position of the Academics.

John A. lVIOURANT.

Pennsylvania State University