This article examines the place of literature in the ensemble of Merleau-Ponty’s research, comparing the function it fills in the economy of his thought to the role other practices and other disciplines such as biology and psychology play in his philosophy. Each of these “discourses” offered Merleau-Ponty access to something comparable to a common phantasmatic substance, a common metaphorical stability of Being, that the biologist, the writer, and the psychoanalyst work on, each in their own writings and categories. But here emerges also a major question. To what extent does the language of Proust reveal itself up to the task of writing the phantasm, to what extent does it respond to this challenge? In what manner are the limits of his language, which are perhaps the limits of language itself, an obstacle to his project? And what is it that permits, at times, the sciences to obtain greater success in engaging in this way? Was it precisely the structure of metaphor that hindered Proust in truly writing encroachment, and the dimension of metonymy was, on the contrary, that in which a certain scientific discourse succeeded at setting itself up on the first try? If, finally and especially, metonymy was the very heart of metaphor, with more or less success touched by one or the other of the “regional” writings of the phantasm?

The purpose of this paper is to study the role of language in the philosophy of Merleau-Ponty. In particular, our analysis will concentrate mainly on The Prose of the World and, following that, on the notes about the novels of Claude Simon. Thus, we will attempt to discern the specific nature of such language, analyzing its sources, exploring its limits, and examining in detail its potentialities.

In the text of his lecture on “Film and the new psychology,” Merleau-Ponty introduces a singular and decisive reading of filmic art, approaching the notion of “rhythm.” This notion engages in a reflection on image and on the relation between the image and the gaze of the spectator at the cinema. In this article, Merleau-Ponty’s actual usage of this notion and the meaning of this operation will be read starting from the reflection of Émile Benveniste on rhythm as well as certain notes presented in Merleau-Ponty’s courses at the Collège de France on The sensible world and the world of expression and Research on the literary usages of language, that follow some years after the lecture.

The Commentary on the Psalms is a monumental work which for more than thirty years consumed the energies of Augustine as exegete. The extraordinary quantity of this work as well as the exceptional number of manuscript traditions which it has spawned has delayed until now the production of a critical edition carried out according to the exacting criteria of modern textual criticism. The part of the editorial project which the Vienna Academy entrusted to the Patristic Institute, the «Augustinianum» (en. Ps. 101-150) has now been completed in five volumes published in the CSEL series (voll. 95, 1-5). The editor’s intention was to incorporate the progress made in modern textual criticism to the specific case of Augustine’s treatment of the Psalms, giving due attention to the peculiar characteristics both of the text and of the manuscript tradition.

Severian of Gabala’s homilies and Pseudo-Theodoret’s Quaestiones et responsiones ad Orthodoxos (CPG 6285; = QRO) exhibit some notable parallels. Such links show that a marginal current of the Antiochene school was still thriving by the end of the 5th century, i.e. the most probable date of QRO.

Gregory of Nyssa’s Laudatio altera S. Stephani Protomartyris (CPG 3187) has been critically published by Lendle from the two extant copies of the long recension, mostly disregarding the unique Greek witness of a short form which is attributed to John Chrysostom. Following the unveiling of an Armenian translation of the short recension, also attributed to Chrysostom, the paper examines its critical role, its links with the short Greek form and proposes a revision of Lendle’s text.

Contrary to the position sustained in recent German- and English-language studies, the Author of this note rejects the suitability of using the modern and generic term “Homoianism” to describe the different subordinationist doctrinal positions circulating during the second half of the fourth century. In the case of Eudoxius, Valens, Urascius and Ulfila, among others, it is more appropriate to continue to speak in terms of “Arianism”, as their Nicene opponents had already realized, not without reason.

This contribution focuses attention on the lexical and syntactic features of the Latin version of the Letters to Cledonius: In the passages examined it highlights the differences between the translation and the Greek text, recreates the practices and the strategies of the translator, with particular reference to the two Letters and in some cases to other of Gregory of Nazianzen's texts as reported in Laur. San Marco 584. Lastly the article evaluates the genuineness of the Latin text that was handed down and the possible supply to the constitution of the Greek text.

In a recent book (Il Commento a Isaia di Basilo di Cesarea, Roma 2014 [SEA 139]) Cattaneo argued without hesitation for the authenticity of that Basilian work (PG 30, 117-668). Prof. Manlio Simonetti in his review of this book – Augustinianum 54 (2014), 561-567 – expressed an opinion totally opposed, believing inconclusive the arguments presented by the Author. With this reply, the Author tries to answer the objections of Simonetti, and concludes by confirming his original position.

Following some methodological remarks, the article first demonstrates the possibility of determining indirectly Augustine’s patristic sources in De Trinitate, while it also takes into account the author’s indications of his sources in other of his writings. The presence of Marius Victorinus in Books 5-7 is also underscored. The second half of the article, while acknowledging a certain Neoplatonic philosophical influence behind similitudo mentis, nevertheless attributes Augustine’s first awareness of this concept to Victorinus. In addition, the psychological analyses found in Books 9-10 are traceable principally to the theory of oikeiosis present in Latin authors, in primis, Cicero.

The study intends to treat the merits of the phrase καταβολὴ κόσμου as it is interpreted and applied by Clement of Alexandria and Origen. It also aims to determine whether within these two authors, who share the same philosophical and theological background, there are convergent or divergent viewpoints concerning an expression which assumes significant importance especially in protological reflection.

With regard to the interpretation of the conversation between Jesus and the Samaritan woman examined by Origen in Book 13 of the Commentary on John, in this study the Author analyzes certain terms (e.g. φρέαρ, πηγή, άνήρ, νόμος) or expressions (e.g. “you spoke the truth there”, Io. 4, 18) on which Origen’s analysis focuses, and he concludes that the great Alexandrian exegete does not seem to show his best skills in these explanations.

The article aims at investigating in depth the idea of revelation expressed in the works of Clement of Alexandria. In particular, it focuses on the biblical-philosophical foundations; namely, how Clement, starting from an openness to the Greek cultural world, incorporates Greek philosophy into Christian revelation, albeit with some variations, thus making it part and parcel of his way of under-standing the relationship between Holy Scripture and Tradition.

John of Scythopolis, the first scholiast of the Corpus Dionysiacum, played a role in the debates that took place after the Council of Chalcedon in 451 and contributed in an original way to the development of Christological dogma in preparation for the Council of Constantinople II in 553. In particular, he uses the theopaschite formula both in its so-called “Alexandrian” version as well as in that attributed to the Scythian monks. Several instances of the formula occur in three of his Scholia on Dionysius’s De divinis nominibus and show both his concentration upon the hypostasis of the Word as well as his identification of Christ with the Lovgoç. In this way, he looks for a new via media within Christological doctrine that truly can be called “Neo-chalcedonian.”

In the mystagogical catecheses of the fourth century (Cyril of Jerusalem, Ambrose, John Chrysostom), the term “faith” defines significantly the condition both of the catechumens and of the initiates at the end of their itinerary. The believer reaches the condition of “faithful” thanks to the support of the community, through an experience involving several ascetical aspects. For both eastern and western preachers, contact with the mystery during the liturgy leads to a particular expression of faith: through an existential break in the catechumen’s experience, baptism determines the full adhesion of every believer to the profession of the faith of the community.