The Politics of Usufruct

One of Augustine’s most controversial ideas is his “order of love,” which he explicates using a distinction between “use” (usus) and “enjoyment” (fruitio). Critics complain that, by encouraging us to “use” each other and the world to “enjoy” God, Augustine instrumentalizes human beings and temporal goods in ways that deny their intrinsic value. In recent years, influential scholars have challenged this critique by offering alternative accounts of Augustine’s order of love and his distinction between use and enjoyment. Often overlooked is an essential aspect of this distinction, namely, its Roman legal context, where rights of “usufruct” and “use” not only authorize others to “use” property owned by others but also prescribe duties of stewardship and sustainability that govern such use. In what follows, I explain the Roman laws of usufruct and use and show how Augustine, as a bishop managing church property and adjudicating cases on the episcopal court, would have likely been familiar with such laws. I then show how recovering these Roman legal concepts supports alternative accounts of Augustine’s order of love. In particular, when properly situated in their Roman legal and linguistic contexts, these concepts furnish a new interpretation of Augustine’s ethics of “use” and cast new light on what it means to “use” and “enjoy” the commonwealth and creation. In addition to offering a new interpretative lens, I show how elevating the concept of usufruct can supply constructive resources for contemporary accounts of political and ecological ethics.