St Augustine is a guide to what it means to be human

And a round of applause for St Monica too.

I’m sorry Father but I haven’t got a clue what you’re talking about.

I love St Augustine and his writings; but his being the prime apologist of the human condition is no justification for grounding a moral theology on his writings.

One does not appeal to Anna Karenina or Madame Bovary when composing divorce legislation.

I will agree completely that Augustine’s reconciliation of his anti-Donatism and anti-Pelagianism are crucial for an holistic understanding of pastoral theology and spirituality – without Augustine there would have been no St Francis de Sales

But it is not fundamental moral theology – nor was it ever intended to be such – For Augustine such fundamentals were axiomatic and unwritten – an inherent Divine Law written upon the heart whispered on the wind…the fall being mourned by every birdsong and swaying tree – our redemption being reflected in the starlight and sung in the music of the spheres.

Therefore by having such a close affinity and overwhelming understanding of it – he’s the supreme ‘executive officer’ of Moral Theology – reminding the Captain of the due concerns of reality and the nature of Creation – ergo he’s the shadow, the mirror, the measure, the counter of Thomistic Morality.

It’s little wonder Bonaventure implied Aquinas was to be the father of all atheists, for to him he was as Keats opined ‘unweaving the rainbow’…but Augustine is the man describing the rainbow to a blind man or stirring the memories of rainbows for those living under stormclouds or in caves.

Aquinas is the main theme: Augustine is the alto parts

The blossom cannot produce its beautiful fruit without sturdy stock and healthy roots. Augustine, as you so rightly point out – although often forgotten – is, with Paul, the core of Catholic theology and philosophy – even if cannot help but start properly with its sweetest flowering, Aquinas. After all Aquinas, as is obvious from his writings, is steeped in the sturdy and abounding grace rising from almost every word, concept or meaning in Augustine’s so very human love for God – possessing a passion so far beyond any fleshly passion that it sings out not only with a passing earthly joy it almost wants to cry out and shout aloud even as it hymns Augustine’s own rather self-reflective chant of heavenly praise (heard from Aquinas only in brief, fleeting, almost stunning bursts).

It is the very complexity in Augustine’s poetry of heartfelt truth that seems to make many shrink from him, if they want to give an analytical precision to the love of wisdom let alone a study of God. Here, I suspect, if my opinion is worth anything, Bonaventure and moreso Luther – as perceived by the awesome Benedict XVI – may be more appealing to the mystical or the emotional vision of Christ (so popular today, among those trying to make the science of revealed faith more humane) than has been treated in their inspiration, Augustine. Yet I pray for more power to your arm, purpose and effort in showing Augustine to us all as a graced human being – for all his irritating little human faults or failings (which we must all possess in some shape, the saint and sinner alike) – because it is, perhaps, his failings – and his humility before these – that make him so important to understanding what it means to be a sinner called to be a saint in Christ .. not by dint of one’s own unaided effort, in opposition to Christ’s body: the church catholic, or by wandering among the brackish pools of self, flesh, and desire rather than by the all too often humiliating correction of others in one body with one Spirit (just as one must be ready to correct others also by the same standard of sound doctrine).

God bless, Nat.

Because most of the time when you’re wrong you’re wrong for the right reasons – so that affords the respect of being read…and commented on. But come on…Augustine as a basis for fundamental moral theology? I love Mahler’s 8th but I wouldn’t have it for a ringtone. If Aquinas is the map of the moral journey – Augustine [being the exemplar of the tension within moral existence] is the backpack – it’s going to help you wherever you are at present – but it isn’t intended to help you get anywhere – it’s directed towards preventing you going back to from whence you came and towards giving you the strength to carry on – it provides a compass for which direction to continue – but the next step is always where God will guide you

It’s weird how you refer to the necessity of an ‘existentialist’ reformation of moral theology because there’s the paradox – Augustine is the Man obsessed with our ‘being’ and doing is merely a natural consequence of it – the anguished restless spirit entombed in human flesh struggling towards becoming – we can’t do anything without the grace we’re able to receive. Augustine’s morality is basically “If you want to do this you have to be this” – that’s the direct opposite of existentialism isn’t it?

Whereas Aquinas is “You are this form of being – if you want to be that form of being you must do this in order to get there. The supreme essentialist uses an existential journey – utilise your ill-formed being to ultimately achieve perfection by subsuming into perfection.

It’s like Augustine is saying empty yourself for more ‘soul’ to enter
Aquinas is saying empty yourself to gain more room for one’s soul.

So which one is more Existential?
You’re the expert – but I don’t ‘get’ the existential part of your argument.

If you mean the Augustine route is more ‘alive’ I’ll agree
Aquinas is like learning French in a University – Augustine is like learning French by being dumped in the middle of France.
But Aquinas is safer, more reassuring, neater, more readily available to everyone no matter what their condition.
Aquinas is like climbing a staircase – Augustine’s like climbing a tree..

Augustine’s fine for those among us who are experts or possess a natural raw talent/grace
But most of us are beginners and intermediates…so we need the regular firm footing of an Aquinas to get there.

Such a narrow rambling approach surely misses the point and dishonours Augustine’s clear moral insights and astounding impact on our understanding and benefit?  A critique laden with unwelcome mockery and abuse!  Surely embedded self righteousness, not charity is at work!

“he is the great enlightener…..” Father, was is enlightened about Augustine’s teaching on the damnation of the unbaptised?

It would be nice to read your doctorate thesis.
“Of course, Aquinas has got the papal seal of approval”. So does Augustine: Leo XIII: “Aeterni patris”, 
On the restoration of Christian
philosophy. Pius XI – encyclical “Ad salutem” (1930); John Paul II – apostolic letter “Augustinum Hipponensem” (1986); Pope Benedict XVI quotes him 8 times in his “Sacramentum Caritatis” (2007) encyclical and in apostolic exohort. “Verbum Domini” (2010) at least ten times, not mentionning the series of his Wednesday catecheses.
I agree and disagree with Pualpriest. Augustine’s doctrine shouldn’t be based and indeed is not based on experience, but rather the other way round: for the bishop of Hippo experience should be enlightened by the doctrine drawn from the Revelation. Leo XIII testifies to that in his encyclical “Aeterni patris” 7: “since, as Augustine
testifies, “if reason is turned against the authority of sacred
Scripture, no matter how specious it may seem, it errs in the likeness of
truth; for true it cannot be. (Epistola 147, ad Marcellinum, 7; PL 33, 589)”

And in this sense Augustine REMAINS the greatest authority in theology, in spite of Peter Brown’s – who certainly must have read a lot about Augustine but not much of his works – pseudo-psychological analyses of his views on human sinfulness. I would recommend reading A. Trappe “Saint Augustine : man, pastor, mystic” London : Augustinian Press, 1985 as well as, E. TeSelle (1970). Augustine the Theologian. London: 2002 (2nd edition).

Unfortunately, your critiques continue to offer little, if any, of didactic relevance, of sweet charity
and of good will to the learned Father.  HOW
you say, WHAT you say, really matters! 

St. Augustine indeed was, and still remains, one of the most important doctors of moral theology. It was by his arguments and words that, at least until the 12th century, that the Church in the West guided itself in matters of accepting or condemning practices.

It was not always the best approach though. Consider how he thought any passion to be sinful, and every act of intercourse (between the married) to include at least venial sin (not because of its essence, but because of the incidental passion and loss of reason). Also, it had to be done with an express and conscious desire to conceive in each and every relation. Sex with a pregnant woman, therefore, sinful. In his conception, man in his original state would have sexual relations as a purely rational decision to procreate, and the sexual members would obey a cold decree of reason to initiate the act. Speaking as a layman who believes it is possible to attain sanctity in this world, I must say my sympathies lie with Aquinas and the tradition of thought he originated (not to be confused with the blind allegiance to anything the “Angelic Doctor” ever said, transforming his living thought into a dead catechism).

That said, the Confessions remain as one of the most important readings of my life. Which goes to show how much it is possible for people united in faith to disagree even about important things and yet see a huge value in each other’s work.