Augustinian Studies 26 (1995) 129-142

Porphyry, Reincarnation and Resurrection

in De Ciuitate Dei
Lance Byron Richey
Marquette University

Introduction
For Augustine the soul not only has a continuous existence but
attains a true and personal immortality with the resurrection of the
body. Thus the importance of the body and its resurrection may be
said to offer a solution to the problem of the person which Greek
philosophy could not resolve.!

If John Mourant is correct in asserting that belief in the resurrection of

the body separates Christian philosophy from both Platonism and Neopla-
tonism,2 a greater understanding of Augustine's view of Neoplatonic be-
liefs, particularly those of Porphyry, about the soul and its relationship to
the body can only help better define the role of Augustine's thought in the
history of philosophy. This paper will examine the ambivalent attitude of
Augustine in his later years towards Porphyry's view of the body/soul rela-
tionship, particularly as expressed in De ciuitate dei. After briefly review-
ing the status quaestionis, two central and related themes in Augustine'S
treatment of Porphyry in De ciuitate dei are examined: 1) Porphyry's de-
fense of reincarnation and 2) his rejection of the Christian belief in the res-
urrection and immortality of the body. Finally, Augustine's treatment of
these specific problems in placed within the larger context of his overall
response to Porphyry's philosophy, and some thoughts on the importance of
Porphyry in understanding Augustine's thought are offered.

I. The state of the question

On the question of Porphyry's influence on Augustine'S later philoso-
phy, there is a wide spectrum of opinion, ranging from the arguments of
Willy Theiler3 and John O'Meara4 for a strong Porphyrian influence to

129
 RICHEY: PORPHYRY. REINCARNATION AND RESURRECTION

Robert 0'Connell's5 nearly complete de-emphasizing of Porphyry's role in

Augustine's intellectual formation in favor of that of Plotinus. In the middle
of these two extremes stands, among others, Johannes Van Oort, who claims
that Porphyry's influence on Augustine "is often neither demonstrable nor
refutable."6

Robert O'Connell has provided the strongest defense for a decidedly

non-Porphyrian reading of Augustine's philosophical development in favor
of one in which Plotinus has the more significant role. O'Connell claims
that assuming Plotinus to be the dominant influence over Augustine, "in
nine cases out of ten, allows for a more finely tuned reading of Augustine's
own text than Porphyry [being seen as the dominant influence] does."7
Even when admitting the presence of a conclusion similar to those of Por-
phyry in Augustine's writings, O'Connell demands that we ask "whether
that conclusion, if indeed it be Porphyrian, has not been 'reset' (as Augus-
tine so regularly does) into a frame ... which makes the total resultant at
least as 'Plotinian' as Porphyrian."8

On the other extreme, O'Meara has been the dominant voice of the last
half-century in arguing for a profound Porphyrian influence on Augustine's
thought. Arguing from the influence Porphyry exerted over Augustine's era,
he claims that "by the time Augustine came to write the City of God, "the
Porphyrian philosophy," in the words of Courcelle, "was the reigning phi-
losophy: only one philosophy remained, the Neoplatonic: the spiritual mas-
ter was Porphyry."9 Along with Theiler, 10 O'Meara particularly stresses the
influence of Porphyry in the composition of De ciuitate dei, writing that
sections of the book, i.e. XXII,27, were written in a "context dominated by
the Philosophy from Oracles [of Porphyry]."ll

Between these two positions, most scholars have searched for a compro-
mise which could accommodate the influence of both Plotinus and Por-
phyry. Peter Brown notes that Augustine re-read the works of both philoso-
phers before writing De ciuitate dei, conceding that "Augustine's final
formulations are made to grow, majestically, from a detailed critique of Por-
phyry's abortive quest for a 'universal way to set free the soul.' "12 Van
Oort writes that "Plotinus and very probably his pupil Porphyry as well
were his spiritual guides" in the composition of De ciuitate dei.'3 Callahan,
who leans towards a predominantly Plotinian influence, cites Courcelle in
admitting that Porphyry's influence is present to an undetermined extent. 14

This sampling of some important commentators indicates the breadth of

opinion found on the topic. It is my contention that Augustine's relationship

130
 RICHEY: PORPHYRY, REINCARNATION AND RESURRECTION

to Porphyry is more complex than either O'Connell or O'Meara admit.

While it is true that Augustine's arguments are focused upon a broadly Neo-
platonic problematic which cannot justly be attributed to Porphyry's writ-
ings alone, the general tone of his discussion of reincarnation and resurec-
tion reveal Augustine's awareness of and responsiveness to Porphyry's
philosophy.

II. References to Porphyry In De ciuitate dei

Augustine's references to Porphyry in De ciuitate dei fall under three
main categories. First, the references to theurgy are localized in book X and
need not concern us here.!5 The other two related categories, reincarnation
and the union of the soul and body in the resurrection, are of more signifi-
cant interest. Reincarnation in particular possessed a substantial philo-
sophical pedigree in the ancient world. Augustine refers to Porphyry repeat-
edly in his treatment of these topics, and those references reveal both
Augustine's debt to and independence from Porphyry.

(a) Reincarnation
Augustine's Christian beliefs demanded that he reject the Platonic and
Neoplatonic belief in reincarnation, which he in fact does throughout his
writings. O'Connell claims that by 417, when composing this section of De
ciuitate dei, Augustine "carne to acknowledge' Apostolic authority' as ex-
cluding any 'fall of the soul' "16 which he may have seen in Plato's philoso-
phy.!7 Nevertheless, considerable attention is given to the topic, and Augus-
tine confronts the issue with a rigor not always present in his defense of
Christian doctrine.

In De ciuitate dei, there are by my count nine passages in which Augus-

tine mentions Porphyry by name while attacking the belief in reincarnation.
These passages, which are almost exclusively in X,30, show that Augustine,
while never accepting reincarnation, is obviously pleased with Porphyry in
so far as he has modified and limited "what was most characteristic of Pla-
tonism, namely, the doctrine of metempsychosis."18 Augustine writes,

If it is considered improper to correct Plato on any point, why did

Porphyry himself offer a number of important corrections? For it
is an established fact that Plato wrote that after death the souls of
men return to earth, and even enter into the bodies of beasts. The
same belief was also held by Plotinus, the teacher of Porphyry.
Nevertheless, Porphyry refused to accept it, quite rightly. 19

131
 RICHEY: PORPHYRY, REINCARNATION AND RESURRECTION

Augustine goes on to point out that Porphyry did hold that souls return
to the bodies of men, but rejected the return of the soul into the bodies of
animals, as if he were ashamed of the possibility that a mother might return
as a mule only to be ridden by her own son.

Augustine, of course, rejects Porphyry's version of reincarnation as

well, since the Christian belief that "souls return once for all to their own
bodies is far more honourable than that they return time after time to differ-
ent bodies."2o But before doing so, he praises Porphyry for moving away
from Plato's and Plotinus' error, if only incompletely. He writes, "For all
that, Porphyry, as I have said, is right to an important extent in his opinion,
in that at least he held that it is only into men that human souls can be
thrust; and had no hesitation at all in abolishing their animal prisons."21 In
an even more forceful passage, he writes that "if Porphyry so decided [to
reject metempsychosis], how much more ought we to detest and shun this
false teaching as the enemy of the Christian faith."22

Yet despite his criticisms of even the modified belief in reincarnation

Porphyry held, Augustine shows Porphyry a gentleness on this topic that he
does not always exhibit towards him. This restraint, it would seem to me, is
evidence that Augustine respects Porphyry and, to a lesser extent, that
Augustine's own denial of reincarnation rested on a Porphyrian conception
of the soul's destiny. Since Augustine's own teaching relied upon a similar
denial of the cyclical fall and return of the soul, any attack on Porphyry's
arguments on this matter would have weighed equally against Augustine's
position.

According to Augustine, Plato and Plotinus both held that there is an

eternal cycle of fall and return that souls undergo. 23 He even argues that
Virgil (Aeneid 6,750ff.) holds this erroneous belief when he refers to the
purification of the souls in the Elysian Fields by the river of Lethe prior to
their return to mortal bodies. Augustine considers this belief in an eternal
cycle of fall and return to be totally incompatible with complete blessed-
ness, since the soul "will not be happy without a sense of security; and to
have a sense of security it must believe its happiness will be everlasting,
which is a false belief, since in time it will come to misery."24 The options,
as Augustine paints them, consist in the soul being either happy through
ignorance, which is not true happiness, or unhappy through knowledge of
its fate. Augustine writes that "Porphyry was entirely justified in rejecting
this teaching,"25 saying that "we are clearly bound to prefer the opinion of
Porphyry to that of thinkers who have imagined a circular movement of
souls, in which they alternate forever between bliss and misery."26

132
 RICHEY; PORPHYRY, REINCARNATION AND RESURRECTION
- ------------------------------

Augustine's reasons for preferring Porphyry's account of the soul's fate

to that of the Platonists unite his attack on reincarnation with his defense of
the resurrection against Porphyry:

Porphyry holds that the soul must escape from any kind of mate-
rial body to achieve purification, and agrees with Plato and other
Platonists that those who have lived undisciplined and dishonour-
able lives return to mortal bodies as a punishment - though Por-
phyry limits this return to the bodies of men, while Plato includes
those of animals,27

Augustine's belief that human souls have an intimate connection to hu-

man bodies will become more pronounced in his defense of the resurrec-
tion; it plays an important role even in his denunciation of reincarnation. He
supports Porphyry for his account of the purposiveness of the soul's entry
into a body, while making some important corrections. Porphyry held that
the soul was placed in a body so that it might come to realize the evils of
this world and, as a result of this realization, "hurry back to the Father, and
never again be held back by the polluting contacts of such evils".28 While
return to the Father is the soul's ultimate goal, Porphyry's "theory on this
subject is to some degree inconsistent with the facts. The soul is given to
the body in order to do good, for it would not recognize evil if it did not do
the good."29

Despite this relatively major point of disagreement, Augustine believes

Porphyry was approaching the correct opinion on the soul's destiny,
namely, its ultimate escape from the evils of this world. For Augustine,
however, this escape will occur in the resurrected body. Augustine, unlike
Porphyry, denies the return of the soul into any other person's body, but
concerning the ultimate fate of the soul Porphyry

did correct the opinion of other Platonists on this point, and he

did so on an important question. For he admitted that when the
soul has been purified from all evil and established with the Fa-
ther it will never afterwards suffer the evils of this world. 3o

On this question, Porphyry rightly disagreed with Plato, and he did so

"because he preferred the truth to the man."3! For Augustine, this is high
praise indeed.

Augustine makes clear the complete incompatibility of reincarnation

and the resurrection, since reincarnation entails the cyclical recurrence of
bodily death and reentry of the soul into a body. Indeed, "Greek philosophy,

133
 RICHEY: PORPHYRY, REINCARNATION AND RESURRECTION

as represented in Porphyry, ... was absolutely to be rejected because it re-

fused to accept the possibility of an eternal body."32 Augustine goes so far
as to claim that many proponents of reincarnation, and particularly Por-
phyry, purposely attempt to undermine Christian belief in the resurrection
of the body:

The reason for their inquiry [into the problems involved in the be-
lief in resurrection] is to throw scorn on the belief in the resurrec-
tion; and what they themselves offer to the human soul is either the
promise of an alternation of genuine unhappiness and false felicity
- the prospect offered by Plato - or, with Porphyry, the assur-
ance of an eventual end to misery, with no return state, after pass-
ing through repeated changes of body; but this end does not come
with the possession of an immortal body, but by the escape from
any kind of body.33

Despite his praise for Porphyry's position on reincarnation, Augustine

harshly criticizes him for denying the resurrection of the body. Neverthe-
less, Augustine is forced to adopt a broadly Porphyrian view of the soul's
destiny, namely, the ultimate escape from this world's evils, to justify his
own belief in the ultimate and eternal union of the soul with a purified body.

(b) Resurrection
Augustine offers an extended defense of the Christian belief in the res-
urrection of the body in De ciuitate dei, particularly books X and XXII. In
doing so, he comes into a more direct conflict with Porphyry, indeed with
the entire Platonic and Neoplatonic tradition, than perhaps anywhere else.
An examination of his defense of the resurrection of the body will help
make clear the extent of Augustine's independence, at least in his later
years, from the doctrines of either Porphyry or Plotinus.

In defending the resurrection against Porphyry, Augustine writes, "That

the body is united with the soul, so that man may be entire and complete
[my emphasis], is a fact we recognize on the evidence of our own nature."34
This statement, while an important move in overcoming the impasse over the
relationship between body and soul in Greek philosophy, is a marked break
from the Neoplatonic tradition. If Brown and others are correct in seeing De
ciuitate dei as an attempt to establish the universal path of salvation which
Porphyry failed to find, Augustine, while playing the role of Christian cate-
chist, makes it clear to his readers that this salvation will involve the union
of the soul with the body. He writes, "Porphyry so often lays it down that one
must escape from any kind of body in order that the soul may dwell with God

134
 RICHEY: PORPHYRY, REINCARNATION AND RESURRECTION

in blessedness. It is in fact Porphyry himself who needs correction in respect

of this opinion."35 In writing this, Augustine makes clear that Christian doc-
trine is to given priority over the opinions of the philosophers.3 6

Augustine makes explicit his commitment to the Christian belief in the

resurrection of the body and describes the nature of that resurrected body:
"Of this we have no doubt: the resurrected body will be eternal, and its
nature will be like that example which Christ showed us in his resurrec-
tion."37 Then he goes a step further, claiming not only that embodiment will
not be an obstacle to blessedness, but even that the Platonists are bound to
accept it:

But whatever may be its nature, the fact is that while the Chris-
tian teaching is that this body will be incorruptible and immortal
and will present no obstacle to that contemplation by which the
soul is fixed on God, you [Platonists] also say that in the celestial
sphere there are immortal bodies of beings whose blessedness is
immortaP8

Given this purported agreement between Plato and Christian doctrine,

he asks those who reject Christianity, "Then what basis is there for your
notion that escape from any kind of body is an essential condition for our
happiness, a notion that makes you feel that you have rational justification
for your rejection of Christianity?"39 He concludes that it is pride, in the
form of their rejection of the Incarnation, which has prevented these phi-
losophers, particularly Porphyry, from accepting Christianity.

Porphyry, Augustine claims, failed to see that Christianity is the univer-

sal path of salvation for the soul which he had sought and despaired of find-
ing. Porphyry, swayed by the persecutions of the church, believed it would
soon disappear and therefore could not be the universal way. The truth is,
Augustine claims, that the Christian faith "is the universal way for the
soul's liberation; universal because it is granted to all nations by the divine
compassion."40 And most obviously contrary to Porphyry, Augustine main-
tains that Christ's resurrection is central to all this, since by that act "he has
shown us the pattern which is to be reproduced in those who will rise again
at the last day."41

In XXII,2S-28, Augustine rebukes Porphyry for denying the union of the

soul and body in blessedness, and in sharp contrast to his condemnation of
Plato's views in favor of Porphyry's in book X he cites Plato in support of
his position, a citation which reveals the adaptation in which Augustine par-
ticipated while arguing the Christian cause. Augustine's self-confidence in

135
 RICHEY: PORPHYRY, REINCARNATION AND RESURRECTION

representing (and transforming) the views of these philosophers hardly

paints a picture of the defensive thinker found in O'Meara's writings.

In XXII,2S, Augustine offers the reader a critique of "the well-known

philosophers" (philosophi nobiles), presumably Porphyry and Plotinus,
who would "quarrel with us about the resurrection of the body."42 Without
naming names at this point, Augustine argues that the resurrection promised
by God must be a fact and that as divinely promised it cannot be an evil
thing. Citing Porphyry's recognition of God's power and sovereignty, and
without any specifics as to its nature, Augustine assures the reader that the
resurrected body will be far different from the present body, since "there
will be no corruption [in the resurrection], and corruption is the evil of the
body."43

Since Porphyry denied the resurrection because this present body is one
of the evils of this world which contaminate the soul, Augustine's doctrine
of a purified body in the resurrection allows him to agree with Plato against
Porphyry in chapter 26. Starting with Porphyry's claim that "if the soul is
to be in bliss it must be free of all contact with a body,"44 Augustine con-
cludes that for Porphyry "it is of no use for us to say that the body is to be
incorruptible, seeing that the soul will not be blessed unless it escapes alto-
gether from anything material."45 Basing his argument on Plato's Timaeus
41A ff., Augustine assures the reader that God,

who, in Plato, promised to perform this impossibility, will raise

up the flesh so that it will be incorruptible, immortal, and spiri-
tual. Why do these objectors still cry out that what God has prom-
ised is impossible, when ... God does impossible things, as even
Plato himself declares. 46

By Augustine's account, Plato saw that souls would not long to return to
a mortal body "when they will possess a body to which they desire to return,
and possess it in such a way as to never relinquish that possession, never to
be parted from that body by any death even for a brief moment."47 While
this is hardly an acceptable reading of Plato by current models of interpre-
tation, it does reveal the confidence and independence with which Augus-
tine read other philosophers, and it reveals no trace of deference to Plato or
his followers such as Augustine gave to Scripture.

Finally, in XXII,27 -28, Augustine is able to call to mind the similarity

and affinity between the Christian faith and greek philosophy, even while
distancing himself from Porphyry's conclusions, writing that "Plato and
Porphyry, or rather their admirers now living, agree with us in believing

136
 RICHEY: PORPHYRY, REINCARNATION AND RESURRECTION
---------------------------------------------------

that even holy souls will return to bodies (as Plato says), but that they will
not return to any evils (as Porphyry says),"48 Despite his sympathy for both
Plato and Porphyry, Augustine was compelled by his Christian faith to
move beyond their philosophical systems and into his own, Augustine's
"Christian philosophy" cut the Gordian knot of the greeks over the fate of
the soul and its relationship to the body by concluding that "the soul will
receive the kind of body in which it can live for ever in felicity, without aI1Y
evil; and this is the teaching of the Christian faith."49 But while Augustine's
philosophy clearly stands apart from the greek tradition, the next section
will show that greek influences abound, and Porphyry seems to be a major
one in Augustine's development.

ill. Mapping Porphyry's influence

In books X and XXII of De ciuitate dei, Augustine engages the Platonic
and Neoplatonic tradition on the question of the destiny of the soul, and in
doing so reveals both his great respect and admiration for their accomplish-
ments and his ultimate independence from their conclusions. This inde-
pendence from them, and in particular Porphyry, in his conclusions, how-
ever, should not be confused with unfamiliarity or an absence of influence
in presuppositions and method, as O'Connell would have it.

There are more than enough references to Porphyry by name in De ciui-

tate dei (43 by my count), as well as numerous allusions to him, to justify
the claim that he had a much stronger influence over Augustine than O'Con-
nell admits. Certainly, Augustine's familiarity and preoccupation with Por-
phyry's philosophy grew markedly in his later years. Out of approximately
55 references to Porphyry by name in Augustine's writings, all but 8 of
them occur after 414, and all but 12 occur in De ciuitate dei. 5o Given such
a pronounced presence in De ciuitate dei, O'Connell's denial of Porphyry's
influence in favor of that of Plotinus becomes less defensible. 51 It is clear
that Augustine read Porphyry closely and intentionally dealt with and ac-
cepted parts of his theory of the soul's destiny.

O'Meara's argument for the influence of Porphyrx's Philosophy from Oracles on

sections of books X and XXII of De ciuitate dei 52 , where the discussion of rein-
carnation and resurrection largely occurs. seems correct, although he tends in gen-
eral to overstate Porphyry's influence. 53 He writes that the many references
Augustine makes to Porphyry, particularly in connection with the resurrection of
the body, "show how Augustine thinks of the relations of Christianity and Plato-
nism: the Platonist of immediate importance is Porphyry, and the point of immedi-
ate importance with him is the resurrection and immortality of a purified body.,,54
This statement, while not entirely incorrect, seems too strong, since the problems
involved in both reincarnation and in resurrection of the body, as well as their gen-

137
 RICHEY: PORPHYRY, REINCARNATION AND RESURRECTION

erally, though by no means universally, acknowledged incompatibility, were topics

of wide discussion in Augustine's era. Augustine, as I have shown, did engage Por-
phyry in some detail over the issues of reincarnation and resurrection, and Por-
phyry's writings dominate Augustine's own arguments. However, even O'Meara
admits that both Yarro and Plato are drawn into Au~ustine's defense of the resur-
rection of the body in terms of Platonic philosophy. 5 In any case, considering the
omnipresence of Plato and Plotinus in that day, O'Meara seems a bit extreme in his
representation of Augustine as almost solely dependent upon and reactive to Por-
phyry.56
Moreover, the Christian setting of De ciuitate dei's composition is just
as important as the extent of Porphyrian influence for a correct under-
standing of Augustine's teaching on reincarnation and resurrection. There
are many references to Porphyry in the work, to be sure, but these refer-
ences always involve· matters of Christian belief which Augustine holds in-
dependently on theological grounds. Furthermore, the structure and style of
De ciuitate dei is such that it is unlikely Augustine was responding entirely
to anyone thinker or work in its composition. The confidence and the at
times painfully tedious attention to Scriptural details indicate that Augus-
tine's purposes in writing were not limited to the conclusions of greek phi-
losophy but to a larger defense of the reasonableness of the Christian faith
and Scriptures. This emphasis on Scripture and Christian doctrine produces
a far more theologically centered work than either O'Meara or O'Connell
admit.

Conclusion
In De ciuitate dei, Augustine offers a denial of reincarnation which goes
beyond Porphyry's writings while explicitly acknowledging his advances
over Plato. At the same time, he affirms the Christian belief in the resurrec-
tion and immortality of the body which was repugnant to Porphyry, and then
publicly admonishes him for his prideful denial of it. These two issues, rein-
carnation and the resurrection of the body, mark Augustine's strongest break
from the greek philosophical tradition, and reveal the complexity and origi-
nality of Augustine'S thought. A close reading of De ciuitate dei reveals that
Augustine was impressed and influenced by Porphyry's thoughts on these
matters, while retaining his philosophical and theological independence
from Porphyry and the entire greek philosophical tradition. As a result, read-
ers of De ciuitate dei should neither overestimate Porphyry's role in its con-
ception, nor see it as just another example of a fundamentally Plotinian prob-
lematic. Rather, Porphyry should be seen as one of several decisive
influences on Augustine'S intellectual development, and as particularly im-
portant for Augustine's solution to the question ofthe soul's destiny.57

138
 RICHEY: PORPHYRY, REINCARNATION AND RESURRECTION

Notes
1. John A. Mourant, Augustine on Immortality (Villanova, PA: Villanova Press,
1968), p. 24.
2. Ibid., p. 24.
3. Willy Theiler, Porphyrius und Augustin (Halle: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 1933).
4. John J. O'Meara, Charter of Christendom: The Significance of The City of God
(New York: Macmillan Press, 1961); see also O'Meara, Porphyry's Philosophy from
Oracles in Augustine (Paris: Etudes Augustinienne, 1959).
5. Robert J. O'Connell, The Origin of the Soul in Augustine's Later Works (New
York: Fordham University Press, 1987).
6. Johannes Van Oort, Jerusalem and Babylon: A Study into Augustine's City of
God and the Sources of his Doctrine of the Two Cities (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1991),
p. 237. Van Oort, while occasionally timid in his conclusions, offers an exhaustive
bibliography on this topic.
7. Robert J. O'Connell, S.J., Saint Augustine's Platonism (Villanova, PA: Vil-
lanova University Press, 1984), p. 25.
8. O'Connell (1987), p. 101.
9. O'Meara (1961), p. 74.
10. Theiler, p. 2.
11. O'Meara (1959), p. 82.
12. Peter Brown, Augustine of Hippo (Berkeley: University of California Press),
1967,p.305.
13. Van Oort, p. 52.
14. John F. Callahan, Augustine and the Greek Philosophers (Villanova, PA: Vil-
lanova University Press), 1964, p. 107.
15. The condemnation of theurgy, I would argue, carries more of a pastoral than
philosophical interest for Augustine. By this I mean that Augustine probably con-
sidered it more threatening to morals than to faith, and more of a hazard for the less
educated than the well educated christians of his time. Unlike reincarnation and
resurrection, theurgy lacked the weighty philosophical credentials necessary to
make it a serious threat to Augustine's readers. For this paper, it is enough to say
that Augustine is highly critical of both the practice of theurgy and Porphyry's de-
fense of it. See Hugh Pope, O.P., Saint Augustine of Hippo (Westminster, MD: The
Newman Press, 1949), pp. 30-32.
16. O'Connell (1987), p. 325.
17. Plato's theory of recollection as represented in the Phaedo is certainly open to
just such an interpretation as Augustine's.
18. O'Meara (1961), p. 83.
19. X,30: "Si post Platonem aliquid emend are existimatur indignum, cur ipse Por-
phyrius nonnulla et non parua emendauit? Nam Platonem animas hominum post
mortem reuolui usque ad corpora bestiarum scripsisse certissimum est. Hanc sen-

139
 RICHEY: PORPHYRY, REINCARNATION AND RESURRECTION

tentiam Porphyrii doctor tenuit et Plotinus; Porphyrio tamen iure displicuit." All
latin texts are drawn from CCL, XLVII-XLVIII. All translations, unless otherwise
noted, are from: Saint Augustine, The City of God, tr. Henry Bettenson (London:
Penguin Classics), 1984.
2D. X,3D: " ... quanto, inquam, honestius creditur reuerti animas semel ad corpora
propria quam reuerti totiens ad diuersa!" It should be remembered that Origen may
not have found the same incompatibility between Christian doctrine and Platonic
theories of reincarnation. See A. H. Armstrong, An Introduction to Ancient Phi-
losophy (Boston: Beacon Press), 1959, p. 174.
21. X,3D: "Verum tamen, ut dixi, ex magna parte correctus est in hac opinione Por-
phyrius, ut saltern in solos homines human as animas praecipitari posse sentiret,
beluinos autem carceres euertere minime dubitaret."
22. XII,21: " ... quanto magis nos istam inimicam Christianae fidei falsitatem
detestari ac deuitari debemus!"
23. Two main sources for their respective beliefs on reincarnation are Plato's
Phaedrus 81E and Plotinus' Ennead 3,4,2.
24. X,3D: "Non enim beata erit nisi secura; ut autem secura sit, falso putabit sem-
per se beatam fore, quoniam aliquando erit et misera."
25. X,3D: "Merito displicuit hoc Porphyrio."
26. X,30: "Porphyrii profecto est praeferenda sententia his, qui animarum circulos
alternate semper beatitate et miseria suspicati sunt."
27. XII,27: "Unde quoniam Porphyrius propter animae purgationem dicit corpus
omne fugiendum simulque cum suo Platone aliisque Platonicis sentit eos, qui im-
moderate atque inhoneste uixerint, propter luendas poenas ad corpora redire mor-
talia, Plato quidem etiam bestiarum."
28. X,3D: "Dicit etiam ad hoc Deum animam mundo dedisse, ut materiae cog-
noscens mala ad Patrem recurret nec aliquando iam talium polluta contagione ten-
eretur." In this respect, Augustine's denial of Platonic reincarnation reverses the
whole order of existence, since "in contrast with the Greek position in which man
first enjoys eternity and then receives a mortal existence, for Augustine eternity
follows upon mortality" (Mourant, p. 18). Such a reversal is yet another mark of
Augustine's willingness to revise and even abandon Neoplatonic doctrine when
called to do so by Scripture.
29. X,3D: "Ubi etsi aliquid inconuenienter sapit (magis enim data est corpori, ut
bona faceret; non enim mala disceret, si non faceret)".
30. X,3D: " ... in eo tamen aliorum Platonicorum opinionem et non in re parua
emendauit, quod mundatum ab omnibus malis animam et cum Patre constituam
nunquam iam mala mundi huius passuram esse confessus est."
31. X,3D: " ... sed homini praeposuit ueritatem". Bettenson traces this quote to
Cicero, Tusculan Disputations 1,17,19: "Amicus Plato, sed magis arnica veritas."
32. O'Meara (1961), p. 111.
33. XXII,12: " ... ad hoc percontantur, ut fidem resurrectionis inludant ac sic
animae humanae aut alternates, sic Plato, ueras infelicitates falsasque promittant

140
 RICHEY: PORPHYRY, REINCARNATION AND RESURRECTION

beatitudines aut post multas itidem per diuersa corpora reuolutiones ali quando
tamen earn, sicut Porphyrious, finire miserias et ad eas numquam redire fateantur;
non tamen corpus habendo immortale, sed corpus omne fugiendo."
34. X,29: "Corpus uero ani mae coharere, ut homo totus et plenus sit, natura ipsa
nostra teste cognoscimus."
35. X,29: "An uero quod ipsum corpus morte depositum et in melius resurrectione
mutatum iam incorruptibile neque mortale in superna subuexit, hoc fortasse credere
recusatis intuentes Porphyrium in his ipsis libris, ex quibus multa posui, quos de
regressu animae scripsit, tam crebro praecipere omne corpus esse fugiendum, ut
anima possit beata permanere cum Deo? Sed ipse potius ista sentiens corrigendus
fuit".
36. This rejection of reincarnation, theological considerations aside, is an impor-
tant advance in Augustine's philosophy of person since "the Greek philosophers
never satisfactorily explained the union of soul and body, or how the soul in its
successive transmigrations makes new bodies" (Mourant, p. l34).
37. X,29: " ... futura tamen sempiterna minime dubitamus, et tali a futura, quale
sua resurrectione Christus demonstrauit exemplum."
38. X,29: "Sed qualiacumque sint, cum incorruptibilia prorsus et inmortalia nihilo-
que animae contemplationem, qua in Deo figitur, inpedientia praedicentur uosque
etiam dieatis esse in caelestibus inmortalia corpora inmortaliter beatorum".
39. X,29: " ... quid est quod, ut beati simus, omne corpus figiendum esse opi-
namini, ut fidem Christianum quasi rationabiliter fugere uideamini, nisi quia illud
est, quod iterum dieo: Christus est humilis, uos superbi?""
40. X,30: "Haec est igitur animae liberandae uniuersalis uia, id est uniuersis gen-
tibus diuina miseratione concessa".
41. X,32: ..... in altero autem etiam eorum, qui in fine resurrecturi sunt, demon-
strauit exemplum."
42. XXII,25: " ... de carnis resurrectione contendunt, hanc quantum possunt
negant."
43. XXII,25: "Non erit illic ulla corruptio, quod est corporis malum."
44. XXII,26: "Sed Porphyrius ait, inquiunt, ut beata sit anima, corpus esse omne
fugiendum."
45. XXII,26: "Nihil ergo prode est, quia incorruptibile diximus omne futurm cor-
pus, si anima beata non erit, nisi omne corpus effugerit."
46. XXII,26: "Ille igitur carnem incorruptibilem, inmortalem, spiritalem resusci-
tibat, qui juxta Platonem id quod impossibile est se facturum esse promisit. Quid
adhuc, quod promisit Deus, quod Deo promittenti credidit mundus, qui etiam ipse
promissus est crediturus, esse impossibile clamant, quando quidem nos Deum, qui
etiam secundum Platonem facit inpossibilia, id facturum esse clamamus?"
47. XXII,27 " ... cum corpora, in quae reuerti cupiunt, secum habebunt et sic
habebunt, ut numquam non habeant, numquam ea prorsus uel ad exiguum quam-
libet tempus ulla morte deponant."

141
 RICHEY: PORPHYRY, REINCARNATION AND RESURRECTION

48. XXII,28: "Quapropter Plato et Porphyrius, uel porius quicumque illos diligunt
et adhuc uiuunt, si nobis consentiunt etiam sanctas animas ad corpora redituras,
sicut ait Plato, nec tamen ad mala ulla redituras, sicut ait Porphyrius".
49. XXII,28: " ... ut ex his fiat consequens, quod fides praedicat Christiana, tali a
corpora recepturas, in quibus sine ullo malo in aeternum feliciter uiuant".
50. These figures are derived from a text search done on the CETEDOC system.
5!. I should point out that O'Connell occasionally draws back from his Plotinian
emphasis, and admits that a sharp separation of the views of Plotinus and Porphyry
is not always possible or wise (1987, p. 101).
52. O'Meara (1959), p. 145 and p. 123, respectively.
53. His stronger claims seem extreme, such as when he says, "It is as an answer to
the Philosophy from Oracles that the City of God in the context of its own times
can be understood" (1961, p. 75). The fact that Porphyry, one of the best known
antagonists of Christians, appears several times in an apologetically oriented book
should not be surprising. In general, to claim that Porphyry was the major stimulus
for the composition and content of the entire De ciuitate dei overstates the case,
especially since large sections of De ciuitate dei reveal a theological preoccupa-
tion totally removed from Porphyry's philosophy.
54. O'Meara (1961), p. 83.
55. O'Meara (1961), p. 84.
56. Van Oort (p.235) speaks of the "(Neo)Platonic" influences on Augustine,
pointing the need to separate our current divisions of philosophical schools from
that which Augustine would have had. It is unclear whether Augustine ever would
have distinguished Platonism proper from Neoplatonism.
57. I would like to thank Fr. Roland 1. Teske, S.l., for his comments and criticisms
during the preparation of this article.

142