Alt. of Augustinian
Word of the Day: Catachrestical
Augustine
Encyclopedia Britannica
AUGUSTINE (AureliusAugustinus), one of the four great fathers of the Latin Church, and admittedly the greatest of the four, more profound than Ambrose, his spiritual father, more original and systematic than Jerome, his contemporary and correspondent, and intellectually far more distinguished than Gregory the Great, the last of the series. The theological position and influence of Augustine may be said to be unrivalled. No single name has ever exercised such power over the Christian church, and no one mind ever made such an impression upon Christian thought....
Aurelius Augustinus was born at Tagaste (Tajelt), a town of Numidia, on the 13th of November 354 a.d. His father, Patricius, was a burgess of this town, and was still a pagan at the time of his son’s birth. His mother, Monica, was not only a Christian, but a woman of the most elevated, tender, and devoted piety, whose patient prayerfulness for both her husband and son (at length crowned with success in both cases), and whose affectionate and beautiful enthusiasm, have passed into a touching type of womanly saintliness for all ages. She early instructed her son in the faith and love of Jesus Christ, and for a time her instruction seems to have impressed his youthful mind. Falling ill he wished to be baptised; but when the danger was past, the rite was deferred, and, notwithstanding all his mother’s admonitions and prayers, he grew up without any profession of Christian piety, or any devotion to Christian principles. Inheriting from his father a vehement and sensual disposition, he early gave way to the unbridled impulses of passion, and while still a mere youth, formed a connection, common enough at the time, but at variance with the principles of Christian morality. As the result of the connection he became the father of a son, whom he named Adeodatus in a fit of pious emotion, and to whom he was passionately attached.
In the midst of all his youthful pleasures Augustine was an earnest student. His father, observing the early development of his talents, formed the ambition of training him to the brilliant and lucrative career of a rhetorician, and he seems to have spared no expense to equip him for this career. The youth studied not only at his native town, but at Madaura and Carthage, and especially devoted himself to the Latin poets—many traces of his love for which are to be found in his writings. His acquaintance with Greek literature was much more limited, and, indeed, it has been doubted whether he could use, in the original, either the Hebrew or Greek Scriptures. Apparently, he was in the habit of using translations of Flato (Confess., viii. 2), but, on the other hand, Greek words frequently occur in his writings correctly rendered and discriminated; and he speaks in one of his epistles to Marcellinus (LIX. tom. ii. 294) of referring to the Greek Psalter and finding, in reference to certain difficulties, that it agreed with the Vulgate. Clausen, who has particularly investigated the point, sums up the evidence to the effect that Augustine was “fairly instructed in Greek grammar, and a subtle distinguisher of words,” but that beyond this his knowledge was insufficient for a thorough comprehension of Greek books, and especially for those in the Hellenistic dialect.
While a student at Carthage he was particularly attracted by the theatre, the spectacles at which were of unusual magnificence. To his enthusiastic and sensuous spirit they were irresistible, and the extent to which he seems to have yielded to the fascination is sufficient proof of his active alienation from Christianity at this period. The Christian church, as it has been said, “abhorred the pagan theatre. The idolatrous rites, the lascivious attitudes, the gladiatorial shows, which were its inseparable accompaniments, were equally opposed to the dogmatic monotheism, to the piety, and to the mercy of the gospel.” One of the most significant signs of a man having become a Christian was his habitual absence from the theatre. No one was more emphatic on this point afterwards than Augustine himself, and as the result of his own experience, he seems to have doubted, apart from the gross immoralities of the pagan stage, whether the indulgence in fictitious joys and woes is a warrantable excitement (Confess., iii. 2).
Cicero’s Hortensius, which he read in his nineteenth year, first awakened in Augustine’s mind the spirit of speculation. He engaged restlessly in philosophical studies, and passed from one phase of thought to another, unable to find satisfaction in any. Manichaeism first enthralled him. Its doctrine of two principles, one of good and one of evil, seemed to answer to the wild confusion of his own heart, and the conflict of higher and lower impulses which raged within him. It seemed to solve the mysteries which perplexed him in his own experience and in the world. He became a member of the sect, and entered into the class of auditors. His ambition was to be received among the number of the Elect, and so get to the heart of what he believed to be their higher knowledge. But falling in with Faustus, a distinguished Manichaean bishop and disputant, and entering into discussion with him, he was greatly disappointed. The system lost its attraction for him; he gradually became disgusted, and abandoned it. But before this he had left Carthage, shocked with the licence of the students, and had betaken himself for a time to Rome in the pursuit of his profession. There he also soon became dissatisfied, and accepted an invitation to proceed to Milan, where the people were in search of a teacher of rhetoric. He travelled thither at the public expense, and was welcomed by friends who already seem to have recognised his distinction (Confess., i. 16).
At Milan the conflict of his mind in search of truth still continued. He was now in his thirtieth year, and for eleven years he had been seeking for mental rest, unable to find it. “To-morrow,” he said to himself, “I shall find it: it will appear manifestly, and I shall grasp it” (Confess., vi. 18). But it still eluded his grasp, and he sunk back again into despondency. The way, however, was being prepared for his conversion. Ambrose was bishop of Milan, and, although he had a weak voice, was noted for his eloquence. Augustine was attracted by his reputation, and went to hear the famous Christian preacher in order, as he himself relates (Confess., v. 23), “to see whether his eloquence answ ered what was reported of it. I hung on his words attentively,” he adds, “but of the matter I was but an unconcerned and contemptuous hearer.” He confesses his delight so far: “The bishop’s eloquence was more full of knowledge, yet in manner less pleasurable and soothing, than that of Faustus.” He wished an opportunity of conversation with him, but this was not easily found. Ambrose had no leisure for philosophic discussion. He was accessible to all who sought him, but never for a moment free from study or the cares of duty. “Augustine used to enter, as all persons might, without being announced; but after staying for a while, afraid of interrupting him, he departed again.” He continued, however, to hear Ambrose preach, and gradually the gospel of divine truth and grace was received into his heart. First Plato and then St Paul opened his mind to higher thoughts, and at length certain words of the latter were driven home with irresistible force to his conscience. He was busy with his friend Alypius in studying the Pauline epiBtles. His struggle of mind became intolerable; the thought of divine purity fighting in his heart with the love of the world and of the flesh. He burst into an incon-trollable flood of tears and rushed out into his garden, flinging himself under a fig tree that he might allow his tears to have full vent, and pour out his heart to God. Suddenly he seemed to hear a voice calling upon him to consult the divine oracle, “Take up and read, take up and read.” He left off weeping, rose up, and sought the volume where Alypius was sitting, and opening it read in silence the following passage: “Not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying. But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh to fulfil the lusts thereof” (Rom. xiii. 13, 14). He adds, “I had neither desire nor need to read farther. As I finished the sentence, as though the light of peace had been poured into my heart, all the shadows of doubt dispersed. Thus hast Thou converted me to Thee, so as no longer to seek either for wife or other hope of the world, standing fast in that rule of faith in which Thou so many years before hadst revealed me to my mother” (Confess., viii. 30).
After his conversion, which is supposed to have occurred in the summer of 386, Augustine gave up his profession as a teacher of rhetoric, and retired to a friend’s house in the country, in order to prepare himself for baptism. His religious opinions were still to some extent unformed, and even his habits by no means altogether such as his great change demanded. He mentions, for example, that during this time he broke himself off a habit of profane swearing, and in other ways sought to discipline his character and conduct for the reception of the sacred rite. He received baptism in Easter following, in his thirty-third year; and along with him his son Adeodatus and his friend Alypius were admitted to the Christian church. Monica, his mother, had rejoined him, and at length rejoiced in the fulfilment of her prayers. Dying before his return to his native country, her last hours were gladdened by his Christian sympathy. She implored him to lay her body anywhere, but wherever he might be to remember her “at the altar of the Lord,” a devout duty which he invites others to share with him, so that her last request may, “through the prayers of many,” receive a more abundant fulfilment.
Augustine went back to Rome for a short period and then returned to his native city, where he took up his aboda in retirement, forming, with some friends who joined him in devotion, a small religious community, which looked to him as its head. They had all things in common, as in the early church, and fasting and prayer, Scripture reading and almsgiving, formed their regular occupations. Their mode of life was not formally monastic according to any special rule, but the experience of this time of seclusion was, no doubt, the basis of that monastic system which Augustine afterwards sketched, and which derived from him its name. Solitary monasticism had sprang up in the Egyptian deserts before this. The life of St Anthony by Athanasius had widely diffused the fervour for religious solitariness, and greatly touched Augustine at this period of his profession. It did not remain for him, therefore, to originate the monastic idea; but the association of monks in communities under a definite order and head received a special impulse both from Ambrose and his illustrious convert. As may be imagined, the fame of such a convert in such a position soon spread, and invitations to a more active ecclesiastical life came to him from many quarters. He shrank from the responsibility, but his destiny was not to be avoided. After three years spent in retirement he took a journey to Hippo, to see a Christian friend, who desired to converse with him as to his design of. quitting the world and devoting himself to a religious life. He was the less reluctant to make this journey, because there being already a bishop at Hippo he hoped to escape all solicitation. But although the Christian community there had a bishop, they w*anted a presbyter; and Augustine being present at the meeting called to choose a presbyter, the people unanimously chose him. He burst into tears, and would fain have escaped; but the church could not spare his services. He was ordained to the presbyterate, and in a few years afterwards he was made coadjutor to the bishop, and finally became sole bishop of the see.
Henceforth Augustine’s life is filled up with his ecclesiastical labours, and is more marked by the series of his numerous writings and the great controversies in which they engaged him than by anything else. Already he had distinguished himself as an author. He had written several philosophical treatises; he had combated the scepticism of the New Academy (Contra Academicos libià très, 386 a.d.); he had treated of the “Blessed Life” (De vita beata, 386) and of the “Immortality of the Soul” (De Immortalitate Anirnoe, 387); he had defended the church against the Manichaeans, whose doctrines he had formerly professed. “When I was at Rome,” he says (Retract., i. 7), “after my baptism, and could not hear in silence the vaunting of the Manichaeans over true Christians, to whom they are not to be compared, I wrote two books, one on The Morals of the Catholic Church, and the other on The Morals of the Mani- choeans." These tract3 or pamphlets, for they are little more, were written in the year 388, about two years after his conversion. Later, in 395, and again in 400, he pursued the controversy with the Manichaeans, making an elaborate reply, in the latter year, to his old associate and friend Faustus. The reply was provoked by an attack made by Faustus on the Catholic faith, which the “brethren” invited Augustine to answer. This he did characteristically and energetically by giving in succession “the opinions of Faustus, as if stated by himself,” and his own in response. It was natural that the Manichaean heresy, which had so long enslaved his own mind, should have first exercised Augustine’s great powers a3 a theological thinker and disputant. He was able from his own experience to give force to his arguments for the unity of creation and of spiritual life, and to strengthen the mind of the Christian church in its last struggle with that dualistic spirit which had animated and moulded in succession so many forms of thought at variance with Christianity.
But the time was one of almost universal ecclesiastical and intellectual excitement; and so powerful a mental activity as his was naturally drawn forth in all directions. Following his writings against the Manichaeans come those against the Donatists. This controversy was one which strongly interested him, involving as it did the whole question of the constitution of the church and the idea of catholic order, to which the circumstances of the age gave special prominence. The Donatist schism sprang out of the Diocletian persecutions in the beginning of the century. A party in the Church of Carthage, fired with fanatical zeal on behalf of those who had distinguished themselves by resistance to the imperial mandates and courted martyrdom, resented deeply the appointment of a bishop of moderate opinions, whose consecration had been performed, they alleged, by a traditor. They set up, in consequence, a bishop of their own, of the name of Majorinus, succeeded in 315 by Donatus. The party made great pretensions to purity of discipline, and rapidly rose in popular favour, notwithstanding a decision given against them both by the bishop of Rome and by the Emperor Con-tantine, to whom they personally appealed. Augustine was strongly moved by the lawlessness of the party, and launched forth a series of writings against them, the most important of which survive, though some are lost. Amongst these are Seven Books on Baptism, and a lengthened answer, in three books, to Petilian, bishop of Cirta, who was the most eminent theologian amongst the Donatist divines. At a somewhat later period, about 417, he wrote a treatise concerning the correction of the Donatists (De Correctione Donatistarum), “for the sake of those,” he says in his Retractations, ii. c. 48, “who were not willing that the Donatists should be subjected to the correction of the imperial laws.” In these writings, while vigorously maintaining the validity of the Catholic Church as it then stood in the Roman world, and the necessity for moderation in the exercise of church discipline, Augustine yet gave currency, in his zeal against the Donatists, to certain maxima as to the duty of the civil power to control schism, which were of evil omen, and have been productive of much disaster in the history of Christianity.
The third controversy in which Augustine engaged was the most important, and the most intimately associated with his distinctive greatness as a theologian. As may be supposed, from the conflicts through which he had passed, the bishop of Hippo was intensely interested in what may be called the anthropological aspects of the great Christian idea of redemption. He had himself been brought out of darkness into “marvellous light,” only by entering into the depths of his own soul, and finding, after many struggles, that there was no power but divine grace, as revealed in the life and death of the Son of God, which could bring rest to human weariness, or pardon and peace for human guilt. He had found human nature in his own case too weak and sinful to find any good for itself. In God alone he had found good. This deep sense of human sinfulness coloured, all his theology, and gave to it at once its depth —its profound and sympathetic adaptation to all who feel the reality of sin—and that tinge of darkness and exaggeration which as surely have repelled others. When the expression Augustinianism is used, it points especially to those opinions of the great teacher which were evoked in the Pelagian controversy, to which he devoted the most mature and powerful period of his life. His opponents in this controversy were Pelagius, from whom it derives its name, and Coelestius and Julianu3, pupils of the former. Pelagius was a British monk. Augustine calls him Brito; and Jerome points to his Scottish descent, in such terms, however, as to leave it uncertain whether he was a native of Scotland or Ireland (habet progeniem Scotice gentis de Britannorum vicinia). He was a man of blameless character, devoted to the reformation of society, full of enthusiasm, and that confidence in the natural impulses of humanity which often accompanies philanthropic enthusiasm. Travelling to Rome about the beginning of the 5th century, he took up his abode for a time there, and soon made himself conspicuous by his activity and opinions. His pupil Coelestius carried out the views of his master with a more outspoken logic, and was at length arraigned before the bishop of Carthage for the following, amongst other, heretical opinions :—(1.) That Adam’s sin was purely personal, and affected none but himself; (2.) That each man, consequently, is born with powers as incorrupt as those of Adam, and only falls into sin under the force of temptation and evil example; (3.) That children who die in infancy, being untainted by sin, are saved without baptism. Views such as these were obviously in conflict with the whole course of Augustine’s experience, as well as with his interpretation of the catholic doctrine of the church. And when his attention was drawn to them by the trial and excommunication of Coelestius, he undertook their refutation, first of all, in three books on Forgiveness of Sins and Baptism, addressed to his friend Marcellinus, in which he vindicated the necessity of the baptism of infants because of original sin and the grace of God by which we are justified (Retract., ii. c. 23). This was in 412. In the same year he addressed a further treatise to the same person, “My beloved son Marcellinus,” on The Spirit and the Letter. Three years later he composed two further treatises on Nature and Grace, and the relation of the Human to the Divine Righteousness. The controversy was continued during many years in no fewer than fifteen treatises. Upon no subject did Augustine bestow more of his intellectual strength, and in relation to no other have his views so deeply and permanently affected the course of Christian thought. Even those who most usually agree with his theological stand-point will hardly deny that, while he did much in these writings to vindicate divine truth and to expound the true relations of the divine and human, he also, here as elsewhere, was hurried into extreme expressions as to the absoluteness of divine grace and the extent of human corruption. Like his great disciple in a later age—Luther—Augustine was prone to emphasise the side of truth which he had most realised in his own experience, and, in contradistinction to the Pelagian exaltation of human nature, to depreciate its capabilities beyond measure. There are few thoughtful minds who would not concede the deeper truthfulness of Augustine’s spiritual and theological analysis, in comparison with that...
9th ed. Encyclopædia Britannica, vol. 3, p. 75 — signed J. T.
[4,396 words — estimated reading time: 30 minutes]
[4,396 words — estimated reading time: 30 minutes]
Augustine
Watson's Biblical & Theological Dictionary
or, as he is sometimes called in the court style of the middle ages, ST. AUSTIN, one of the ancient fathers of the church, whose writings for many centuries had almost as potent an influence on the religious opinions of Christendom as those of Aristotle exercised over philosophy. Indeed, it has often been mentioned as a fact, with expressions of regret, that the writings of no man, those of the Stagirite excepted, contributed more than those of St. Augustine to encourage that spirit of subtle disquisition which subsequently distinguished the era of the Schoolmen. He was born, November 13th, A. D. 354, at Tagasta, an episcopal city of Numidia in Africa. His parents, Patricius and Monica, were Christians of respectable rank in life, who afforded their son all the means of instruction which his excellent genius and wonderful aptitude for learning seemed to require. He studied grammar and rhetoric at Madura, until he was sixteen years old; and afterward removed to Carthage, to complete his studies. In both these cities, in all the fervour of unregenerate youth, he entered eagerly into the seducing scenes of dissipation and folly with which he was surrounded, and became not only depraved but infamous in his conduct. In this respect he was not improved by his subsequent connection with the Manichees, whose unhallowed principles afforded an excuse for his immorality, and threw a veil over the vilest of his actions. The simplicity and minuteness with which he has narrated the numerous incidents of his childhood, youth, and mature age, in his celebrated book of “Confessions,” have afforded abundant matter of ridicule to the profane and infidel wits of this and the last age. The reflections, however, which accompany his narrative, are generally important and judicious, and ...furnish to the moral philosopher copious materials for a history of the varieties of the human heart, and are of superior value to the humble Christian for the investigation and better knowledge of his own. With a strange though not uncommon inconsistency, few books have been more frequently quoted as authority on matters relating to general literature and philosophy by infidels themselves, than St. Augustine’s otherwise despised “Confessions,” and his “City of God.” But, whatever else is taught in this remarkable piece of autobiography, every pious reader will be delighted with the additional proofs which it contains of the ultimate prevalence of faithful prayer, especially on the part of Christian parents. Monica’s importunate prayers to heaven followed the aberrations of her graceless son,--when he settled at Carthage as a teacher of rhetoric; when he removed to Rome, and lodged with a Manichee;--and when he finally settled at Milan as professor of rhetoric. St. Ambrose was at that time, A. D. 384, bishop of Milan, and to his public discourses Augustine began to pay much attention. His heart became gradually prepared for the reception of divine truth, and for that important change of heart and principles which constitutes “conversion.” The circumstances attending this change, though often related, are not unworthy of being repeated, if only to show that the mode of the Holy Spirit’s operations was in substance the same in those early days as they are now; and time was when some of the soundest divines and most worthy dignitaries of the church of England were in the habit of referring with approbation to this well attested instance of change of heart. One of his Christian countrymen, Pontinius, who held a high situation at court, having perceived a copy of St. Paul’s Epistles lying on the table, entered one day into conversation with him and his friend Alipius about the nature of faith and the happiness of those who lived in the enjoyment of religion. Augustine was deeply affected at the close of this visit; and when Pontinius had retired, giving vent to his feelings he addressed Alipius in a most animated strain: “How is this? What shall we do? Ignorant people come, and seize upon heaven; and we, with our learning, (senseless wretches that we are!) behold we are immersed in flesh and blood! Are we ashamed to follow them? Yet is it not a still greater shame, not even to be able to follow them?” Full of remorse and contrition Augustine left the house and retired to a secret part of the garden, followed by his friend, who seemed on this occasion to be a partaker of his grief only because he saw him grieved in spirit. Unwilling to unman himself, as he accounted it, before Alipius, he left him; and throwing himself down under the branches of a large fig tree he poured out a torrent of tears which he was unable any longer to restrain, and exclaimed in bitterness of soul, “When, O Lord, when will thy anger cease? Why tomorrow? Why not at this time?” He instantly heard what he considered to be the voice of a child, saying _Tolle, lege_, “Take and read.” These two Latin words were repeated several times; Augustine reflected upon them, checked his tears, received them as the voice of God, and running into the house, opened, according to the divine direction, the Epistles of St. Paul which he had left on the table, and attentively read the first passage which he found. It was Romans xiii, 13, 14; a passage peculiarly applicable to him, in reference to his former habits and present state of mind: “Not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying: but put ye on THE LORD JESUS CHRIST, and make not provision for the flesh to fulfil the lusts thereof.” He shut up the book, and was amazed that all his doubts and fears had vanished. Alipius was speedily informed of this wonderful change in his feelings and views; and after having desired to see the two verses, in the spirit of a true seeker he pointed out to Augustine the passage which immediately follows, and which he considered as peculiarly adapted to his own case: “Him that is weak in the faith receive ye,” &c, Rom. xiv, 1. The two friends then ran to acquaint Monica with these circumstances, the knowledge of which transported her with joy. In a frame of mind not unfamiliar to those who have themselves had “much forgiven,” Augustine wished to retire at once from so wicked a world as that in which he had passed the first thirty-two years of his dissolute life. His secession, however, was only a temporary one; for he and Alipius were, a few months afterward, received by baptism into the Christian church. After having composed several religious treatises in his retreat near Tagasta, especially against the errors of the Manichees, from which he had been so recently reclaimed, he was, in the year 392, ordained priest by Valerius, bishop of Hippo, now a part of the Barbary States on the coast of Africa. He there held a public disputation with Fortunatus, a celebrated priest among the Manichees, and acquitted himself with great spirit and success, he also wrote and preached largely and to great effect against the Donatists and Manichees. His reputation as a divine increased; and he was, at the close of the year 395, ordained bishop of Hippo, in which high station he continued with great advantage to wage war against various orders of heretics. Augustine had hitherto directed his theological artillery principally against the predestinarian errors of the Manichees; but he was soon called upon to change his weapons and his mode of warfare, in attacking a new and not less dangerous class of heretics. In the year 412 he began to write against the injurious doctrines of Pelagias, a native of Britain, who had resided for a considerable time at Rome, and acquired universal esteem by the purity of his manners, his piety, and his erudition. Alarmed at the consequences which seemed to him obviously to result from allowing that Adam’s sin is transmitted to all his posterity, and fortified in his sentiments on this subject by those of Origen and Ruffinus, with the latter of whom he had associated, he boldly denied tenets which he did not believe. In the defence of his opinions, Pelagius, was seconded by Celestius, a man equally eminent for his talents and his virtues. Their principles were propagated at first rather by hints and intimations, than by open avowal and plain declarations; but this reserve was laid aside when they perceived the ready reception which their doctrines obtained; and Celestius began zealously to disseminate them in Africa, while Pelagius sowed the same tares in Palestine, whence they were speedily transplanted to almost every corner of Christendom. If the brief notices, which have come down to us respecting their tenets, in the writings of their adversaries, be correct, they affirmed, “It is not _free_ will if it requires the aid of God; because every one has it within the power of his own will to do any thing, or not to do it. Our victory over sin and Satan proceeds not from the help which God affords, but is owing to our own free will. The prayers which the church offers up either for the conversion of unbelievers and other sinners, or for the perseverance of believers, are poured forth in vain. The unrestricted capability of men’s own free will is amply sufficient for all these things, and therefore no necessity exists for asking of God those things which we are able of ourselves to obtain; the gifts of grace being only necessary to enable men to do that more easily and completely which yet they could do themselves though more slowly and with greater difficulty; and that they are perfectly free creatures,” in opposition to all the current notions of predestination and reprobation. These novel opinions were refuted by St. Augustine and St. Jerom, as well as by Orosius a Spanish presbyter, and they were condemned as heresies in the council of Carthage and in that of Milevum. The discussions which then arose have been warmly agitated in various subsequent periods of the Christian church, though little new light has been thrown upon them from that age to the present. In his eagerness to confute these opponents St. Augustine employed language so strong as made it susceptible of an interpretation wholly at variance with the accountability of man. This led to farther explanations and modifications of his sentiments, which were multiplied when the Semi-Pelagians arose, who thought that the truth lay between his doctrines and those of the Pelagians. Concerning original sin, he maintained that it was derived from our first parents; and he believed he had ascertained in what the original sin conveyed by Adam to his posterity consisted. In his sentiments, however, upon the latter point he was rather inconsistent, at one time asserting that the essence of original sin was concupiscence, and at another expressing doubts respecting his own position. This subject was bequeathed as a legacy to the schoolmen of a subsequent age, who exercised their subtle wits upon all its ramifications down to the period of the council of Trent. On the consequences of the fall of our first parents, St. Augustine taught that by it human nature was totally corrupted, and deprived of all inclination and ability to do good. Before the age in which he lived, the early fathers held what, in the language of systematic theology, is termed the synergestic system, or the needfulness of human coöperation in the works of holiness; but though the freedom of the will was not considered by them as excluding or rendering unnecessary the grace of God, yet much vagueness is perceptible in the manner in which they express themselves, because they had not examined the subject with the same attention as the theologians by whom they were succeeded. Those early divines generally used the language of Scripture, the fertile invention of controversial writers, not having as yet displayed itself, except on the divine nature of Jesus Christ, and subsidiary terms and learned distinctions not being then required by any great differences of opinion. But as soon as Pelagius broached his errors, the attention of Christians was naturally turned to the investigation of the doctrine of grace. The opinions of St. Augustine on this subject, which soon became those of the great body of the Christian church, admitted the necessity of divine grace, or the influence of the Holy Spirit, for our obedience to the law of God. He ascribed the renovation of our moral constitution wholly to this grace, denied all coöperation of man with it for answering the end to be accomplished, and represented it as irresistible. He farther affirmed that it was given only to a certain portion of the human race, to those who showed the fruits of it in their sanctification, and that it secured the perseverance of all upon whom it was bestowed. Plaifere in his “_Appello Evangelium_” has given the following as the substance of that opinion of the order of predestination of which “many do say that St. Austin was the first author: 1. That God from all eternity decreed to create mankind holy and good. 2. That he foresaw man, being tempted by Satan, would fall into sin, if God did not hinder it; he decreed not to hinder. 3. That out of mankind, seen fallen into sin and misery, he chose a certain number to raise to righteousness and to eternal life, and rejected the rest, leaving them in their sins. 4. That for these his chosen he decreed to send his Son to redeem them, and his Spirit to call them and sanctify them; the rest he decreed to forsake, leaving them to Satan and themselves, and to punish them for their sins.” After St. Augustine had thus in a great degree new moulded the science of theology, and had combined with it as an essential part of divine truth, that the fate of mankind was determined by the divine decree independently of their own efforts and conduct, and that they were thus divided into the elect and reprobate, it became necessary, in order to preserve consistency, to introduce into his system a limitation with respect to baptism, and to prevent the opinions concerning it from interfering with those which flowed from the doctrine of predestination. He accordingly taught, that baptism brings with it the forgiveness of sins; that it is so essential, that the omission of it will expose us to condemnation; and that it is attended with regeneration. He also affirmed that the virtue of baptism is not in the water; that the ministers of Christ perform the external ceremony, but that Christ accompanies it with invisible grace; that baptism is common to all, whilst, grace is not so; and that the same external rite may be death to some, and life to others. By this distinction he rids himself of the difficulty which would have pressed upon his scheme of theology, had pardon, regeneration, and salvation been _necessarily_ connected with the outward ordinance of baptism; and limits its proper efficacy to those who are comprehended, as the heirs of eternal life, in the decree of the Almighty. Many, however, of those who strictly adhere to him in other parts of his doctrinal system, desert him at this point. Bishop Bedell speaks thus in disparagement of his baptismal views, in a letter to Dr. Ward: “This I do yield to my Lord of Sarum most willingly, that the justification, sanctification, and adoption which children have in baptism, is not _univocè_ [univocally] the same with that which _adulti_ [adults] have. I think the emphatical speeches of Augustine against the Pelagians, and of Prosper, are not so much to be regarded (who say the like of the eucharist also) touching the necessity and efficacy in the case of infants; and they are very like the speeches of Lanfranc and Guitmund of Christ’s presence in the sacrament, opposing _veracitér_, [truly] and _veré_ [truly] to _sacramentalitér_; [sacramentally;] which is a false and absurd contraposition. The opinion of the Franciscans out of Scotus and Bernard, mentioned in the council of Trent, seems to be the true opinion; for they make the sacraments to be effectual, ‘because God gives them _effectus regularitér concomitantes_,’ [regularly accompanying effects,] and to contain grace no otherwise than as an effectual sign; and that grace is received by them as an investiture by a ring or staff, which is _obsignando_, [by signation.] Consider that if you will aver, that baptism washes away otherwise than sacramentally, that is, obsignatorily, original sin; yet you must allow that manner of washing for future actual sins; and you must make two sorts of justification, one for children, another for _adulti_; [adults;] and (which passes all the rest) you must find some promise in God’s covenant wherein he binds himself to wash away sin without faith or repentance. By this doctrine, you must also maintain that children do spiritually eat the flesh of Christ and drink his blood, if they receive the eucharist, as for ages they did, and by the analogy of the passover they may; and sith [if] the use of this sacrament _toties quoties_ [as often as it is used] must needs confer grace, it seems it were necessary to let them communicate, and the oftener the better, to the intent they might be stronger in grace: which opinion, though St. Austin and many more of the ancients do maintain, I believe you will not easily condescend unto, or that children dying without baptism are damned.” These remarks are important, as proceeding from the pen of the personal friend of Father Paul, who wrote the History of the council of Trent. In the various discussions which have arisen concerning predestination and the doctrines with which it is connected, some modern divines have quoted the arguments of St. Augustine against the Manichees, and others those which he employed against the Pelagians, according to the discordant views which the combatants severally entertain on these controverted points. One of them has thus expressed himself, in his endeavour to reconcile St Augustine with himself:--“The heresy of Pelagius being suppressed, the catholic doctrine in that point became more settled and confirmed by the opposition; such freedom being left to the will of man, as was subservient unto grace, coöperating in some measure with those heavenly influences. And so much is confessed by St. Augustine himself, where he asks this question, ‘Doth any man affirm that free will is perished utterly from man by the fall of Adam?’ And thereunto he makes this answer: ‘Freedom is perished by sin; but it is that freedom only which we had in paradise, of having perfect righteousness with immortality.’ For, otherwise, it appears to be his opinion, that man was not merely passive in all the acts of grace which conduced to glory, according to the memorable saying of his, so common in the mouths of all men, ‘He who first made us without our help will not vouchsafe to save us at last without our concurrence.’ If any harsher expressions have escaped his pen, (as commonly it happeneth in the heats of a disputation,) they are to be qualified by this last rule, and by that before, in which it was affirmed, that ‘God could not with justice judge and condemn the world, if all men’s sins proceeded not from their own free will, but from some overruling providence which inforced them to it.‘” Another admirer of this father offers the following as an attempt at reconciliation: “St. Augustine denied that the coöperation of man is at all exerted to produce the renewal of our nature; but, when the renewal had been produced, he admitted that there was an exercise of the will combined with the workings of grace. In the tenth chapter of his work against the Manichæans, the bishop of Hippo thus expresses himself: ‘Who is it that will not exclaim, _How foolish it is to deliver precepts to that man who is not at liberty to perform what is commanded! And how unjust it is to condemn him who had not power to fulfil the commands!_ Yet these unhappy persons [the Manichees] do not perceive that they are ascribing such injustice and want of equity to God. But what greater truth is there than this, that God has delivered precepts, and that human spirits have freedom of will?‘ Elsewhere he says, ‘Nothing is more within our power than our own will. The will is that by which we commit sin, and by which we live righteously.’ Nothing can be plainer than that the writer of these passages admitted the liberty of the human will, and the necessity of our own exertions in conjunction with divine grace. How this is to be reconciled with his general doctrine, is perhaps indicated in the following passage from his book _De Gratiâ et lib. Arbitrio, c. 17_. Speaking of grace he says, ‘That we may _will_ God _works_ without us; but...
Watson's Biblical & Theological Dictionary
[4,711 words — estimated reading time: 30 minutes]
[4,711 words — estimated reading time: 30 minutes]
No thesaurus entries found for "Augustine".
No Bible verses found for "Augustine".