BMCR 2009.02.46, David G. Hunter, Marriage, Celibacy, and Heresy

David G. Hunter, Marriage, Celibacy, and Heresy in Ancient
Christianity: The Jovinianist Controversy. Oxford Early Christian
Studies.  Oxford/New York:  Oxford University Press, 2007.  Pp. xix,
316.  ISBN 9780199279784.  $99.00.

Reviewed by Shawn W.J. Keough, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
([email protected])
Word count:  1927 words
-------------------------------
To read a print-formatted version of this review, see
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/2009/2009-02-46.html
To comment on this review, see
http://www.bmcreview.org/2009/02/20090246.html
-------------------------------

In the latter half of the fourth century the monk Jovinian became the
center of a bitter ecclesiastical controversy regarding the relative
value of asceticism, particularly sexual renunciation. Jovinian's
principal opponents were Pope Siricius, Ambrose, and Jerome, the latter
publishing a particularly vicious attack against Jovinian in two books.
Although condemned as a heretic for his views at synods in Rome and
Milan in 393, the controversy surrounding Jovinian and his views
continued, drawing Pelagius, Augustine and other writers into its
orbit, writers who would seek to temper Jerome's harsh critique of the
condemned 'heretic'. David Hunter's monograph is the only full-scale
treatment of Jovinian in English, providing a comprehensive
investigation and analysis of Jovinian and his opponents, the
background to their debates, and the late Roman social context in which
rival versions of orthodoxy and heresy clashed.

Hunter divides his book into three parts: the first part, 'Jovinian and
his World', comprises two chapters. The first chapter is an exercise in
'Reconstructing Jovinian': as Jovinian's own writings have perished
(the lamentable result of his condemnation as a heretic), it is
necessary to sift through the writings of his opponents in an attempt
to piece together Jovinian's authentic views. Although the most
important source for this critical enterprise is Jerome's extensive
refutation of Jovinian, Hunter begins with an examination of Pope
Siricius and Ambrose on chronological grounds: the earliest mention of
Jovinian is found in Siricius' letter reporting the condemnation of
Jovinian by a Roman synod, while Ambrose writes that Jovinian had fled
to Milan following his condemnation in Rome, thereby indicating that
the synod in Milan followed the synod in Rome. However, when Jerome
published his attack on Jovinian in the spring of 393 he did not
mention either synod, although he did refer to Jovinian's condemnation
in Rome in a letter regarding the reception of his work the following
year. That Jerome does not mention Jovinian's condemnation by the Roman
and Milanese clergy indicates to Hunter that the synods took place at
roughly the same time as Jerome was writing, that is, the spring of 393
(earlier scholarship had suggested a date of 390 for Jovinian's
condemnation). Having established the chronology of the controversy,
Hunter moves on to an exposition and analysis of the central 'four
propositions' of Jovinian as reported by Jerome, whose refutation of
Jovinian provides many direct quotations from his opponent. The four
propositions are as follows (p. 26):


1. Virgins, widows, and married women, once they have been washed in
Christ, are of the same merit, if they do not differ in other works.
2. Those who have been born again in baptism with full faith cannot be
overthrown by the devil.
3. There is no difference between abstinence from food and receiving it
with thanksgiving.
4. There is one reward in the kingdom of heaven for all who have
preserved their baptism.

Hunter's discussion of these four propositions underlines the
'sacramental and ecclesial foundation' of Jovinian's criticism of
contemporary asceticism and sexual renunciation. In these four
propositions ascetic merit is displaced by the common gift of salvation
to which all Christians have access through the sacrament of baptism. A
common baptism, rather than degrees of ascetic performance, therefore
exerted decisive influence on Jovinian's conception of salvation. It
was this emphasis on the equality of all the baptized, and its
concomitant rejection of an ascetically-determined hierarchy, that
Jovinian's opponents found so objectionable.

Hunter's second chapter, 'Jovinian and Christian Rome', examines the
more public and social aspects of Jovinian's critique of asceticism
within the context of late-fourth century Rome. This chapter begins
with a survey of fourth-century criticisms of asceticism and
monasticism, noting that as the fourth century neared its close the
monastic rejection of marriage posed problems to pagans and Christians
alike. Hunter describes the manner in which sexual renunciation
necessarily entailed a rejection of the aristocratic elite's social
values; even aristocratic Christians would look askance on the celibate
as a threat to 'the continued vitality of civic life'. Hunter
demonstrates the way this 'novelty' of asceticism, however, was adopted
by the Roman aristocratic elite in a process of 'assimilation and
accommodation' that would allow ascetic behaviour and ascetic piety to
serve specifically Roman principles and values, resulting in a
situation in which asceticism and aristocratic culture each shaped the
other (e.g., the well-known wealthy 'ascetics' who had renounced
marriage or embraced virginity while continuing to live as only those
who owned extensive properties and numerous servants could).

The second part of the book, 'Jovinian, Heresy and Asceticism', begins
with a chapter devoted to the background of the Jovinianist
controversy, surveying Christian traditions of asceticism and heresy in
the first three centuries, beginning with Jesus and Paul, and
continuing with the Pastoral Epistles, Irenaeus, Tatian, and Clement of
Alexandria. Noteworthy is the manner in which Hunter demonstrates that
by the end of the second century, largely as a result of the influence
of writers like Irenaeus and Clement, Christian 'orthodoxy' was
inseparable from a rejection of radical encratite ideals (encratite
theology taught that sexuality originated as a result of the
introduction of sin into the world and was never a part of God's
original creation: the rejection of sex thus supported the quest to
regain 'the pristine purity of paradise') and the acceptance of
marriage. And yet Hunter traces the manner in which this second-century
settlement would be largely overthrown by the third-century writers
Tertullian, Cyprian and Origen, who introduced key features of
encratite theology into their own treatments of marriage and sexuality,
and who exerted significant influence on figures such as Ambrose and
Jerome. The result was three streams of tradition: radical encratism
completely rejected sexual activity, while moderate encratism allowed
marriage and sexual intercourse even as their value was severely
limited, and those following in the tradition of the Pastoral Epistles,
Irenaeus and Clement of Alexandria rejected radical encratism as a
heresy, maintaining that sex and marriage were both fundamental to a
Christian understanding of creation and redemption. The second chapter
of this section examines the relationship between encratite theology
and heresiology in the fourth century, paying particular attention to
the actual spread of Manichaean Christianity and the manner in which
'Manichaean' had become a stock accusation in the heresy-hunter's
arsenal, as well as the works of the prominent heresiologists
Epiphanius of Salamis and Filastrius of Brescia. The chapter concludes
with an examination of Ambrosiaster's treatise 'On the Sin of Adam and
Eve', which, along with the writings of Epiphanius and Filastrius,
served to indicate the extent to which questions of the body, sex,
marriage and original sin were still disputed in the fourth century,
while also figuring prominently in accusations of heresy against the
promoters of ascetic piety. In this regard Hunter makes it plain that
Jovinian would have been promoting his own critique of ascetic piety
within an established and recognizable heresiological tradition, a
tradition which rejected the radical encratite assertion 'that sex was
a symptom of original sin'. The final chapter takes up the question of
'Mary Ever-Virgin': Jovinian had called Ambrose a Manichaean for
defending Mary's virginitas in partu (the doctrine that Mary's
virginity remained physically intact even in the act of giving birth to
Jesus), indicating again to Hunter something of Jovinian's
anti-heretical concerns in disputing questions of ascetic piety. Hunter
traces the development of this doctrine, demonstrating the extent to
which biblical apocrypha, such as the Odes of Solomon and the Ascension
of Isaiah, but above all the Protevangelium of James, provided the
basis for subsequent doctrine regarding Mary's perpetual virginity.
Hunter also nicely connects the themes in these texts to classic
radical encratism, so that Mary becomes the perfect fulfillment and
model of the encratite ideal. And while the doctrine of Mary's
virginitas in partu did not have widespread support in the first three
centuries of Christian tradition (appearing mainly in the apocryphal
works mentioned above and being criticized by Tertullian and Origen,
who wished to emphasize the fully human character of Jesus' birth), it
had certainly begun to feature prominently in Ambrose. Hunter's
analysis shows that Ambrose had made Mary's virginity a pervasive
feature of his soteriology and ecclesiology, so that virginity became
the model for humanity's redemption from sin and stood atop a hierarchy
of ascetic merit. This hierarchy of ascetic merit, with virginity at
the top, was sure to conflict with Jovinian's claim that by baptism all
Christians share a common ecclesial holiness.

The final section of Hunter's book, 'Jovinian and his Opponents',
begins with a chapter examining the critiques that Siricius, Ambrose
and Jerome leveled against Jovinian. From Hunter's investigation it
emerges that each of these three writers had their own unique reasons
for rejecting Jovinian's four propositions: Siricius was mainly
interested in bolstering clerical authority and enforcing the
discipline of clerical celibacy, and while Ambrose shared this concern
he also demonstrated a particular interest in female virginity, and
Hunter suggests that Jovinian's views may have threatened the prominent
authority of a bishop active 'in the recruitment, veiling, and
supervision of consecrated virgins'. Finally, Jerome, unlike Siricius
or Ambrose, was interested not simply in the sexual renunciation of
clergy following their ordination, but rather in promoting the prestige
of the monk-priest: Siricius was reluctant to accept monks immediately
to the episcopate (preferring instead the usual progression through the
clerical cursus honorum), while Jerome felt that the bishop's easy
acceptance of many married men into the clergy already demonstrated a
level of laxity unbefitting the ordained ministry. As a result,
Jerome's ruthless attack on Jovinian was interpreted by many as of its
first readers as a scandalous treatment of marriage, if not
quasi-heretical. The response to Jerome's repudiation of Jovinian forms
the subject of Hunter's final chapter, in which he traces the
development of a mediating position between Jovinian and Jerome in the
following decade. Figuring prominently here are Pelagius and Augustine.
Interestingly, while Pelagius departs from Jerome by rejecting the
radical encratite notion that sex is somehow bound up with sin and the
Fall, he nevertheless explicitly opposes Jovinian on the matter of an
ascetic hierarchy, promoting the view that virginity, sexual continence
and marriage all merit different rewards in heaven. Augustine, on the
other hand, in his two small treatises De bono coniugali and De sancta
virginitate (Hunter follows Hombert in dating both to 404 rather than
401) introduced a new element into the discussion of a hierarchy of
ascetic merits. While agreeing that celibacy was superior to marriage
(against Jovinian), and yet insisting that marriage was indeed
something good (against Jerome), Augustine destabilized the utility of
a sexually focused ascetic hierarchy by positing the existence of
virtues superior to sexual renunciation, such as readiness for
martyrdom.

Hunter's study of the Jovinianist controversy is an admirable
contribution to the study of late antique Roman society. Contemporary
scholarship has developed quite an elaborate literature on asceticism
and sexual renunciation in late antiquity, as well as on the
development of orthodoxy and heresy. Hunter's monograph provides
invaluable--indeed, required--reading on both counts. While past
scholarship on Jovinian tended to wear its prejudices on its sleeves,
Hunter's treatment moves beyond the partisan readings that
characterized previous treatments by Protestant and Roman Catholic
scholars and provides a nuanced, balanced and comprehensive treatment
of Jovinian's background, opponents, and legacy, while also providing
the definitive exposition and analysis of Jovinian's own theological
and heresiological aims. In doing so Hunter has not only advanced our
understanding of 'Marriage, Celibacy and Heresy in Ancient
Christianity'; he has also provided us with a wonderful example of what
the best scholarship in late antique Christianity ought to look like.