Was Julian right? A re-evaluation of Augustine’s and Mani’s doctrines of sexual concupiscence and the transmission of sin : Part 1

dc.contributor.authorVan Oort, Johannes (Hans)
dc.date.accessioned2019-05-09T11:16:20Z
dc.date.available2019-05-09T11:16:20Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.description.abstractThe article focuses on the question: Was Julian of Eclanum (c. 380–454) right in accusing Augustine (354–430) of still being a Manichaean, based on his view of sexual concupiscence and the transmission of (original) sin? In order to find an answer to this (still hotly debated) question, a sketch of Augustine’s acquaintance with Manichaeism is first provided. Thereafter follows the (first ever) overview of the Manichaean doctrines of the origin of sexual concupiscence, its distinctive features, and its role in the transmission of sin. The third part of the article focuses on the essentials of Augustine’s views of sexual concupiscence and the transmission of original sin, in particular as they were expounded (and further developed) in his controversy with the ‘Pelagian’ bishop, Julian of Eclanum. It is concluded that, in particular, Augustine’s stress on the ‘random motion’ (motus inordinatus) as typical of the sinfulness of sexual concupiscence, is strikingly similar to Manichaean views on the subject. In this respect, then, Julian seems to be right. Finally, some preliminary remarks are made on early Jewish and Jewish-Christian views of sexual concupiscence and (original) sin which may have influenced not only Mani and his followers, but also Augustine and his precursors in the tradition of Roman North Africa. The current article is the first in a series of two essays on the topic.en_ZA
dc.description.departmentChurch History and Church Policyen_ZA
dc.description.librarianhj2019en_ZA
dc.description.sponsorshipThe National Research Foundation (NRF) in South Africa.en_ZA
dc.description.urihttps://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rech20en_ZA
dc.identifier.citationJohannes van Oort (2016) Was Julian Right? A Re-Evaluation of Augustine’s and Mani’s Doctrines of Sexual Concupiscence and the Transmission of Sin: Part 1, Journal of Early Christian History, 6:3, 111-125, DOI: 10.1080/2222582X.2016.1284974.en_ZA
dc.identifier.issn2222-582X (print)
dc.identifier.issn2471-4054 (online)
dc.identifier.other10.1080/2222582X.2016.1284974
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2263/69075
dc.language.isoenen_ZA
dc.publisherRoutledgeen_ZA
dc.rights© Unisa Press. This is an electronic version of an article published in Journal of Early Christian History, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 111-125, 2016. doi : 10.1080/2222582X.2016.1284974. Journal of Early Christian History is available online at : http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/rech20.en_ZA
dc.subjectAugustineen_ZA
dc.subjectJulian of Eclanumen_ZA
dc.subjectManien_ZA
dc.subjectOriginal sinen_ZA
dc.subjectRandom motionen_ZA
dc.subjectSexual concupiscenceen_ZA
dc.titleWas Julian right? A re-evaluation of Augustine’s and Mani’s doctrines of sexual concupiscence and the transmission of sin : Part 1en_ZA
dc.typePostprint Articleen_ZA

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
VanOort_Was_2016.pdf
Size:
462.96 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Postprint Article

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.75 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: