1.
querela de me apud te litteris tuis indita tanto est mihi gratior quanto plenior caritatis. si ergo, quod tacui, purgare coner, quid conabor aliud quam ostendere te non habuisse causam, qua mihi suscensere deberes? sed cum id in te magis diligam, quod de mea reticentia es dignatus offendi, quam inter tuas curas nihil momenti habere credideram, causam meam deseram, si me purgare contendero. si enim indignari non debuisti, quia non ad te scripserim, nihili me pendis, qui, loquarne an taceam, indifferenter feras. porro quia me tacuisse moleste tulisti, indignatio ista dignatio est. non itaque tam doleo me non praebuisse, quam gaudeo te nostrum desiderasse sermonem. nam ueterem amicum et, quod abs te taceri sed a nobis oportet agnosci, talem ac tantum uirum in peregrinis positum curisque publicis laborantem quod nullo fuerim consolatus alloquio, hinc argui meruisse honori mihi est, non maerori. ignosce igitur agenti gratias, quod me indignum non putasti, cui suscenseres tacenti. nunc enim inter tot et tanta negotia non tua sed publica, id est omnium non solum posse esse non onerosas, immo non solum onerosas esse non posse, uerum etiam gratas esse posse litteras meas credidi beniuolentiae tuae, qua excellentiam uincis.2.
cum enim accepissem mihi a fratribus epistulam missam sancti et praecipuis meritis uenerandi papae Innocentii, quam per tuam praestantiam ad me datam certis declaretur indiciis, ideo nullam tuam paginam simul aduectam esse putaueram, quod scribendi et rescribendi cura nolueris grauioribus rebus occupatus obstringi. nam utique consentaneum uidebatur, ut qui mihi tam sancti uiri et tam sancta scripta perferre dignatus es, ea sumere adiunctis tuis. hinc ergo statueram non esse oneri litteris meis animo tuo, nisi esset necesse commendandi alicuius gratia, cui hoc negare non possem intercessionis officio, quae solet nostra esse omnibus concedendi consuetudo et quaedam etiam importuna non tamen inprobanda professio. itaque feci; nam amicum meum commendaui benignitati tuae, a quo etiam tua rescripta iam sumpsi agente gratias, quas et ipse ago.3.
si quid autem de te mali existimarem praesertim in ea causa, quam etiam non expressam tamen mihi tua epistula redolebat, absit, ut ad te tale aliquid scriberem, ubi ullum uel mihi uel cuiquam beneficium postularem. aut enim conticescerem obseruans tempus, ubi te possem habere praesentem, aut, si litteris agendum putarem, illud potius agerem et sic agerem, ut dolorem meum ferre uix posses. nam ideo post illius impiam crudelemque perfidiam, cui etiam per tuam nobiscum participatam sollicitudinem frustra uehementer institimus, ne illo cor nostrum dolore percelleret, suam uero conscientiam tanto scelere trucidaret, continuo sum a Carthagine profectus occultato abscessu meo, ne tot ac tanti, qui eius et intra ecclesiam gladium formidabant, uiolentis fletibus et gemitibus me tenerent putantes meam sibi aliquid posse prodesse praesentiam, ut, quem satis digne pro eius anima obiurgare non possem, pro illorum corporibus etiam rogare compellerer, quam tamen eorum corporalem salutem satis parietes ecclesiae muniebant. ego autem duris coartabar angustiis, quod neque ille me pateretur, qualem oporteret, et insuper facere cogerer, quod non deceret. dolebam etiam grauiter uicem uenerabilis coepiscopi mei, tantae rectoris ecclesiae, ad cuius pertinere dicebatur officium post hominis tam nefariam fallaciam adhuc se praebere humilem, quo ceteris parceretur. fateor: cum tantum malum nullo pectoris robore potuissem tolerare, discessi.4. haec esset et nunc silentii
mei causa apud te, quae fuit
tunc discessionis meae, si te apud illum egisse crederem, ut tam nefarie tuas ulcisceretur
iniurias. credunt ista, qui nesciunt, quo modo
et quotiens et quae nobis dixeris, cum anxia cura perageremus,
ut, quanto tibi familiarius inhaerebat, quanto ad eum crebrius
uentitabas, quanto saepius cum solo conloquebaris, tanto magis
curaret existimationem tuam, ne his, qui tui dicebantur inimici,
talem exitum daret, ut nihil cum illo aliud egisse putareris.
quod quidem nec ego credo nec hi fratres mei,
qui et in loquelis audierunt et in auditu atque omni motu
uiderunt signa benigni pectoris tui. sed, obsecro te, ignosce credentibus; homines enim sunt et in animis hominum
tantae latebrae sunt et tanti recessus, ut omnes suspiciosi cum
merito culpentur, etiam laudari arbitrentur se debere, quod cauti
sint. causae stabant; ab uno eorum, quos teneri ille repente
praeceperat, grauissimam te passum fuisse iniuriam noueramus.
frater quoque eius, in quo ecclesiam maxime persecutus est,
nescio quid duriter quasi pro fratre tibi respondisse dicebatur.
putabantur tibi ambo esse suspecti. postulati cum abissent, te
illic remanente et cum illo secretius, ut ferebatur, loquente
subito iussi sunt adtineri. amicitiam uestram non recentem sed
ueterem homines loquebantur. famam confirmabat tanta coniunctio
et tam assidua solius cum solo sermocinatio. potestas illius
magna tunc erat; calumniae facilitas adiacebat. non erat grande
negotium procurari aliquem, qui diceret, quod salute promissa
dicendum ille mandasset. omnia in tempore ista suffragabantur, ut
etiam uno teste tamquam inuidioso et credibili
crimine sine iubentis discrimine quilibet de medio tolleretur.
5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14.
Return to introduction.
dignissimo: The first paragraph of this
letter is a set of variations on the theme of "worthiness" and as
such defines the epistolary encounter as a confrontation of
personal "dignities". It is necessary to see this as a text to
be read aloud (it would take 15-20 minutes), in the quasi-public
privacy of the magistrate's residence. (The audience would be
discreet and loyal to the magistrate's face, but instantaneously
alert to any sign of weakness.) It offers formal démarche
from a distinguished churchman, at every point polite and
respectful, but with a very clear subtext of reproach and
challenge. Both Augustine and Caecilian have good reason to
think that their own "worthiness" is in some way diminished by
the affair they have gone through; Augustine's intent in this
letter is to assert his own and question Caecilian's. M. Moreau,
Le Dossier Marcellinus, 101, "Tout se passe comme si, au
fond de lui-mème, Augustin avait le sentiment que
Caecilianus avait, plus ou moins activement, trempé dans
l'exécution de Marcellinus: son insistance à
affirmer le contraire, à renouveler l'assurance de sa
parfaite confiance et de son estime au magistrat ne
s'expliquerait guère autrement."
querela de me apud te litteris tuis indita:
The text begins by instancing the pre-text of Caecilian's letter
to A. But note that this phrase could be turned around exactly
to describe this letter: Augustine's querela about
Caecilian. Caecilian reading these words aloud would be in the
ambiguous position of impersonating his correspondent while
uttering words equally true if spoken by himself to describe the
text in his hand.
epistulam: There are in fact either three or
four texts prior to the present one invoked in this paragraph.
(1) The letter of pope Innocentius (Innocent I,
pope 410-417) to Augustine. (Not discussed in O. Wermelinger,
Rom und Pelagius, as far as I can see.) The date is just
possible for the letter to bear on Augustine's growing concern
with Pelagianism, but we cannot be certain. This letter came
from Rome via Caecilian, and was delivered by "brethren" without
any note from C. (2) Augustine's one earlier piece of
correspondence with C., an intercessio or
commendatio for an unnamed friend. A. here implies that
this letter would have struck Caecilian as purely formal and
impersonal, merely an act of pious duty. (There is one other
letter of A. to C., ep. 86, very much in that formal tone.
Traditional chronology (Goldbacher, following the Maurists) dates
that letter to 405, but Mandouze, Prosopographie
chrétienne s.v. Caecilianus, thinks it may come
after 151. (3) Caecilian's reply to Augustine's
commendatio (tua rescripta here),
which came to A. by hand of the friend who had benefitted from
the intercession. (4) Apparently different from that
letter, the letter of querela to which Augustine is
replying here.
si quid autem de te mali existimarem: The
web of conditional expressions impugning Caecilianus' virtue is
worth pursuing: si te apud illum egisse crederem
(par,5), si illa post haec omnia sequeretur (also
5), si de te aliquid mali credam (also 5), si te crederem tanti huius mali et tam consceleratae
crudelitatis auctorem (7), si etiam posthac in ea
familiaritate estis (7), and si crederem te
laudibus eius offendi (10). Six posings of the possibility
that A. might believe C. complicit in the murders is
surely too many if A. did not at least wonder, or want C. to
think he wondered, about that very point. Connected to the
pattern of belief in C.'s innocence that
also runs through this text it is enough to make clear that no
reader would go away from this text assured.
illius: It is noteworthy that no party to
the affair is named in this letter -- not Marinus, not
Marcellinus, not Apringius, not Aurelius of Carthage -- though
other persons, e.g., the deacon Quintianus, can be named. The
discretion is palpable and accusatory.
continuo sum a Carthagine profectus: The
text says that A. left Carthage immediately to avoid being
held there as a protector (hostage and shield?) by "tot ac tanti"
who feared that even ecclesiastical sanctuary would be violated.
They would, he assumes, have asked him to go to Marinus to plead
for their lives, though they were in fact no danger owing to
their status in sanctuary. The indignity of going to
Marinus to grovel revolted him, and he pities his colleague and
long-time friend Aurelius, bishop of Carthage, who had to do just
what A. left town to avoid. In itself, this admission is
embarrassing enough (as A.'s final statement of it makes clear:
fateor), but two further points suggest
themselves. (1) Augustine here admits that he was in contact in
Carthage with a substantial number of people who had good reason
to fear the repression of Marinus. Given that he everywhere
implies but nowhere states that Marcellinus was innocent of all
involvement with Heraclian, this is striking at least. (2) If
those who huddled in churches feared that ecclesiastical
sanctuary would be violated, then it is reasonable to expect that
some would have imputed hasty flight from Carthage not to
Augustine's aversion from indignity but to a baser fear for his
own neck. Jerome (adv. Pel.
3.19) depends on Augustine for his claim that Marcellinus was
done in by haeretici, and Augustine, as Marcellinus'
closest ecclesiastical friend and collaborator, would not
necessarily have been immune from harm. (A.'s first surviving
personal letters to Marcellinus and his brother, epp. 133-
34, address them pleading for clemency for Donatists convicted of
murder and mayhem directed against orthodox clergy, a plea that
may be assigned to A.'s strategic wish not to inflame the level
of violence. In September 413, he would not unreasonably have
thought that anti-orthodox violence was not securely in check.)
In sum, confession of pride may be here a screen, conscious or
unconscious, for a confession of pusillanimity. coepiscopi: Aurelius of Carthage, bishop
there from no later than 395 until his death in about 430. He
and Augustine were long-time collaborators on ecclesiastical
affairs, particularly the long struggle with Donatism.
crederem: Observe the frequency with which
belief is the touchstone of C.'s guilt/innocence with
others/A.: in this paragraph here and credunt, credo, credentibus, credibili, credam, creditur, credimus, credentibus, crederem, credere, credam, credo,
credat, crederem, credo, credo, and credere. A. himself always professes to believe
C.'s innocence, but he is at pains to emphasize (he says it once and says it again) that
others do not and that they deserve forgiveness, for the error,
if error it is, is easily made.
episcopus: the outcome of this mission to
Italy is reported below: the court ordered
Marcellinus and Apringius held immune from punishment without
prejudice to the case against them.
iurasti: The two dramatic high points of
the letter's narrative are the sudden and heartfelt oath-takings
of Caecilianus (here) and Marcellinus, in this
case swearing by the place where the sacraments of the altar were
celebrated, in Marcellinus' case by the hands (Augustine's) that
celebrate them.
si etiam posthac . . .: The success of the
mission of Quintianus makes Orosius' report of
Marinus' fall from favor credible, but for the moment it is clear
that Marinus is still a man of standing, and this deliberately
ambiguous passage suggests that Caecilianus is still widely
thought to be engaging in normal social relations with him.
Augustine surrounds this report with a cloud of his refusals to
believe ill, a sure sign that the temptation is strong.
Marcellinus' virtues: The touching narrative of
paragraphs eight and nine makes it as clear as Augustine knows
how to make it that Marcellinus was a virtuous and upright man,
chaste in marriage, and impeded only by marriage from a yet
higher life. But it is remarkable that there is nowhere in this
text any discussion of the facts of the case against him, nor any
circumstantial denial of his involvement in the affairs of
Heraclian. We know almost nothing of the state of affairs under
that rebel in Africa, but it would not have taken much for the
proconsul (Apringius), and his brother the imperial commissioner
(Marcellinus), to behave in ways that would compromise them, even
if they fell short of any overt support of Heraclian.
posteris: A full study of "Augustine the
Writer" (none has ever been attempted) would catalogue the places
where he makes explicit reference, such as this, to readers who
would come after him . . .
unum est: Note that Marinus has
already been baptized, as had been Marcellinus and almost
certainly Apringius. On this point Augustine is not
afraid of direct reproach. Indeed, on one reading of this text,
this paragraph is the political point of the whole text. (I owe
this reading to my student Emily Elliot.) Having suggested that
C. is guilty of collusion, but then politely withheld the actual
accusation, A. now offers C. a public gesture that would make
reparation -- if C. will take baptism (presumably at the hands
of Aurelius of Carthage), it would be a public sign of submission
to the very bishops and church that had taken offense at the
treatment of Marcellinus. No admission of guilt is sought,
only a mark of humility.
Jerome, adv. Pel. 3.19:
scripsit dudum vir sanctus et eloquens episcopus Augustinus ad
Marcellinum, qui postea sub invidia tyrannidis Heracliani ab
haereticis innocens caesus est, duos libros de infantibus
baptizandis contra haeresim vestram, per quam vultis asserere
baptizari infantes non in remissionem peccatorum, sed in regnum
caelorum, iuxta illud quod scriptum est in Evangelio: 'nisi quis
renatus fuerit ex aqua et spiritu sancto, non potest intrare in
regnum caelorum'; tertium quoque ad eundem Marcellinum contra eos
qui dicunt idem
--Though
Augustine had come to Carthage nearly every year for over a
decade on church business, when he returned home in 413, he did
not return to Carthage for fully three years, arriving just
during the same week of September (for the feast of the martyrdom
of Cyprian) as that in which Marcellinus and Apringius were
executed.