| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 907.54 KB | Adobe PDF |
Authors
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
Já os seus contemporâneos, mormente Juliano de Eclana, acusaram Agostinho de ter “inventado” o pecado original. Nos tempos mais recentes esta acusação ganhou novos adeptos. No presente artigo pretendemos mostrar até que ponto tal acusação é justa, analisando a resposta dada pelo próprio Agostinho. Este, sempre que visado pela tese segundo a qual, ao falar do “pecado original” estava a inovar não só na terminologia, mas também na teologia, respondeu sempre argumentando que expunha e defendia a antiga doutrina unânime e universalmente professada pela tradição da Igreja. Para o provar, socorreu-se da autoridade dos Padres da Igreja, tanto latinos como gregos. O presente estudo centra-se precisamente na avaliação da “argumentação patrística” agostiniana para, deste modo, averiguarmos se o bispo de Hipona é ou não e em que medida “inovador” na forma como formula e defende a doutrina do pecado original.
Even his contemporaries, especially Julian of Eclanum, accused Augustine of ‘inventing’ original sin. The present article seeks to show how far this accusation is just, by analysing Augustine’s own response. The latter, whenever confronted with the thesis according to which, in speaking of ‘original sin’ he was innovating in terms not only of terminology but also theology, always responded by arguing that he was setting out and defending the old unanimous doctrine universally professed by the tradition of the Church. To prove it he turned to the authority of the Church Fathers, both Latin and Greek. The present study focuses precisely on assessing Augustine’s ‘patristic argumentation’ so that we can thereby evaluate whether or not and how far the Bishop of Hippo was ‘innovative’ in the way he formulated and defended the doctrine of original sin.
Even his contemporaries, especially Julian of Eclanum, accused Augustine of ‘inventing’ original sin. The present article seeks to show how far this accusation is just, by analysing Augustine’s own response. The latter, whenever confronted with the thesis according to which, in speaking of ‘original sin’ he was innovating in terms not only of terminology but also theology, always responded by arguing that he was setting out and defending the old unanimous doctrine universally professed by the tradition of the Church. To prove it he turned to the authority of the Church Fathers, both Latin and Greek. The present study focuses precisely on assessing Augustine’s ‘patristic argumentation’ so that we can thereby evaluate whether or not and how far the Bishop of Hippo was ‘innovative’ in the way he formulated and defended the doctrine of original sin.
Description
Keywords
pecado original Agostinho Juliano de Eclana argumentação patrística Adão original sin Augustine Julian of Eclanum patristic argumentation Adam
Pedagogical Context
Citation
LAMELAS, Isidro Pereira - A "invenção" do pecado original segundo Agostinho. Didaskalia. Lisboa. ISSN 0253-1674. 42:1 (2012) 55-134
Publisher
Faculdade de Teologia da Universidade Católica Portuguesa