Jump to content

Augustinianism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Telikalive (talk | contribs) at 10:42, 12 October 2024 (link). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Part of a series on
Augustinianism
Saint Augustine
Thoughts
Phrases
Biblical criticism
Influences and precursors
Augustinian thinkers
Other similar developments
Contrary positions
Related
icon Christianity portal

Augustinianism is the philosophical and theological system of Augustine of Hippo and its subsequent development by other thinkers, notably Boethius, Anselm of Canterbury and Bonaventure.[1][2][3] Among Augustine's most important works are The City of God, De doctrina Christiana, and Confessions.

Originally, Augustinianism developed in opposition to Pelagianism;[4] it was widespread in medieval western philosophy until the arrival of Thomism and Aristotelianism.[5]

Plato and Plotinus influenced Augustine in many ways, and he is considered a Neoplatonic philosopher.[6][7]The Augustinian theodicy and other Augustinian doctrines such as the divine illumination and the invisible church show a strong Platonic influence.[8][9][10]

Pope Benedict XVI cautioned that all of the Western Church teaching leads to him:

St Augustine. This man of passion and faith, of the highest intelligence and tireless in his pastoral care, a great Saint and Doctor of the Church is often known, at least by hearsay, even by those who ignore Christianity or who are not familiar with it, because he left a very deep mark on the cultural life of the West and on the whole world. Because of his special importance St Augustine's influence was widespread. It could be said on the one hand that all the roads of Latin Christian literature led to Hippo (today Annaba, on the coast of Algeria), the place where he was Bishop from 395 to his death in 430, and, on the other, that from this city of Roman Africa, many other roads of later Christianity and of Western culture itself branched out.[11]

View of humanity

Part of a series on
Catholic philosophy
  
Aquinas, Scotus, and Ockham
Ethics
Metaphysics
Schools
Philosophers
Ancient
Medieval
Modern
Contemporary

"Augustine considered the human race as a compact mass, a collective body, responsible in its unity and solidarity. Carrying out his system in all its logical consequences, he laid down the following rigid proposition as his doctrine: 'As all men have sinned in Adam; they are subject to the condemnation of God on account of this hereditary sin and the guilt thereof'"[12][13]

According to Augustine, even the world and corporeal entities, being fruits of divine love, have their value and meaning, while the some Platonists tended instead to devalue them.[14] This attempt to place history and earthly existence within a heavenly perspective, where even evil finds explanation in some way, always remained at the center of its philosophical concerns.

Ethics

These are the most important values for an Augustinian.[15]

  1. Love
  2. Interiority
  3. Humility
  4. Devotion to Study and the pursuit of Wisdom
  5. Freedom
  6. Community
  7. Common good
  8. Humble and generous service
  9. Friendship
  10. Prayer

Meta-ethics

Main article: Divine command theory

Augustine offered the Divine command theory, a theory which proposes that an action's status as morally good is equivalent to whether it is commanded by God.[16][17] Augustine's theory began by casting ethics as the pursuit of the supreme good, which delivers human happiness, Augustine argued that to achieve this happiness, humans must love objects that are worthy of human love in the correct manner; this requires humans to love God, which then allows them to correctly love that which is worthy of being loved. Augustine's ethics proposed that the act of loving God enables humans to properly orient their loves, leading to human happiness and fulfilment.[18]

Just war

The Just war theory is a doctrine that ensure war is morally justifiable through a series of criteria, all of which must be met for a war to be considered just. In Romans 13:4 Augustine claims that, while individuals should not resort immediately to violence, God has given the sword to government for good reason. Augustine argues that Christians, as part of a government, need not be ashamed of protecting peace and punishing wickedness when forced to do so by a government. Augustine asserted that this was a personal, philosophical stance: "What is here required is not a bodily action, but an inward disposition. The sacred seat of virtue is the heart."[19][20]

Happiness

Augustine's ethics is that of ancient eudaimonism,[21] but he defers happiness to the afterlife and blames the ancient ethicists saying that their arrogant conviction resulting from their ignorance of the fallen condition of humanity that they could reach happiness in this life by philosophical endeavor,[22][23] Augustine takes it as axiomatic that happiness is the ultimate goal pursued by all human beings.[24][25][26] For Augustine Happiness or the good life is brought about by the possession of the greatest good in nature that humans can attain and that one cannot lose against one's will.[7]

Epistemology

Main article: Divine illumination

Augustine emphasised the role of divine illumination in our thought, saying that "The mind needs to be enlightened by light from outside itself, so that it can participate in truth, because it is not itself the nature of truth. You will light my lamp, Lord,"[27]

For Augustine, God does not give us certain information, but rather gives us insight into the truth of the information we received for ourselves.

If we both see that what you say is true, and we both see that what I say is true, then where do we see that? Not I in you, nor you in me, but both of us in that unalterable truth that is above our minds.[28]

Thomas Aquinas criticizes the divine illumination, denying that in this life we have divine ideas as an object of thought, and that divine illumination is sufficient on its own, without the senses. Aquinas also denied that there is a special continuing divine influence on human thought. People have sufficient capacity for thought on their own, without needing "new illumination added onto their natural illumination".[29]

Anthropology

Soul

See also: Mind–body dualism

Saint Augustine was one of the first Christian ancient Latin authors with very clear anthropological vision. Augustine saw the human being as a perfect unity of two substances: soul and body.[30] He was much closer in this anthropological view to Aristotle than to Plato.[31][32] In his late treatise On Care to Be Had for the Dead sec. 5 (420 AD) he insisted that the body pertains to the essence of the human person:

In no wise are the bodies themselves to be spurned. (...) For these pertain not to ornament or aid which is applied from without, but to the very nature of man.[33]

Augustine's favourite figure to describe body-soul unity is marriage: caro tua, coniunx tua – your body is your wife.[34][35][36] According to N. Blasquez, Saint Augustine's dualism of substances of the body and soul doesn't stop him from seeing the unity of body and soul as a substance itself.[32][37] Following ancient philosophers he defined man as a rational mortal animal – animal rationale mortale.[38][39]

Original sin

Main article: Original sin
Michelangelo's painting of the sin of Adam and Eve from the Sistine Chapel ceiling

Augustine wrote that original sin is transmitted by concupiscence and enfeebles freedom of the will without destroying it.[40] For Augustine, Adam's sin[41] is transmitted by concupiscence, or "hurtful desire",[42][43] resulting in humanity becoming a massa damnata (mass of perdition, condemned crowd), with much enfeebled, though not destroyed, freedom of will. When Adam sinned, human nature was thenceforth transformed. Adam and Eve, via sexual reproduction, recreated human nature. Their descendants now live in sin, in the form of concupiscence, a term Augustine used in a metaphysical, not a psychological sense.[44] Augustine insisted that concupiscence was not a being but a bad quality, the privation of good or a wound.[45] He admitted that sexual concupiscence (libido) might have been present in the perfect human nature in paradise, and that only later it became disobedient to human will as a result of the first couple's disobedience to God's will in the* original sin.[46] In Augustine's view (termed "Realism"), all of humanity was really present in Adam when he sinned, and therefore all have sinned. Original sin, according to Augustine, consists of the guilt of Adam which all humans inherit. Justo Gonzalez interprets Augustine's teaching that humans are utterly depraved in nature and grace is irresistible, results in conversion, and leads to perseverance.[47]

Augustine's understanding of the consequences of original sin and the necessity of redeeming grace was developed in the struggle against Pelagius and his Pelagian disciples, Caelestius and Julian of Eclanum,[47] who had been inspired by Rufinus of Syria, a disciple of Theodore of Mopsuestia.[48] They refused to agree that original sin wounded human will and mind, insisting that human nature was given the power to act, to speak, and to think when God created it. Human nature cannot lose its moral capacity for doing good, but a person is free to act or not to act in a righteous way. Pelagius gave an example of eyes: they have capacity for seeing, but a person can make either good or bad use of it.[49]

The Catholic Church accepts the doctrine of original sin as Augustine taught.[50]

Predestination

Part of a series on
Augustine of Hippo
Augustine in The Four Doctors
of the Western Church
Augustinianism
Works
Influences and followers
Related topics
Related categories
Augustine of Hippo
This box:
Main article: Augustinian soteriology
See also: Predestination

For Augustine God orders all things while preserving human freedom.[51] Prior to 396, Augustine believed that predestination was based on God's foreknowledge of whether individuals would believe, that God's grace was "a reward for human assent".[51] Later, in response to Pelagius, Augustine said that the sin of pride consists in assuming that "we are the ones who choose God or that God chooses us (in his foreknowledge) because of something worthy in us", and argued that it is God's grace that causes the individual act of faith.[51]

Some Catholics dispute that Augustine believed predestination in the latter way, and claim that Augustine affirmed free will in the choice of being saved or not.[52]

Theodicy and Free will

Main article: Augustinian theodicy

The problem of evil is the question of how to reconcile the existence of evil with an omnipotent, omnibenevolent, and omniscient God.[53][54]

Augustine develops key ideas regarding his response to suffering. In Confessions, Augustine wrote that his previous work was dominated by materialism and that reading the works of Plato enabled him to consider the existence of a non-physical substance. This helped him develop a response to the problem of evil from a theological (and non-Manichean) perspective,[10]

Augustine rejected the notion that evil exists in itself, proposing instead that it is a privation of (or falling away from) good, and a corruption of nature.[55] He wrote that "evil has no positive nature; but the loss of good has received the name 'evil.'"[56] Both moral and natural evil occurs, Augustine argued, owing to an evil use of free will,[57] which could be traced back to the original sin of Adam and Eve.[58] He believed that this evil will, present in the human soul, was a corruption of the will given to humans by God, making suffering a just punishment for the sin of humans.[59] Because Augustine believed that all of humanity was "seminally present in the loins of Adam", he argued that all of humanity inherited Adam's sin and his just punishment.[60] However, in spite of his belief that free will can be turned to evil, Augustine maintained that it is vital for humans to have free will, because they could not live well without it. He argued that evil could come from humans because, although humans contained no evil, they were also not perfectly good and hence could be corrupted.[61]

Comparison

See also: Augustinianism

Pelagius' teachings on human nature, divine grace, and sin were opposed to those of Augustine, who declared Pelagius "the enemy of the grace of God".[62][63][a] Augustine distilled what he called Pelagianism into three heretical tenets: "to think that God redeems according to some scale of human merit; to imagine that some human beings are actually capable of a sinless life; to suppose that the descendants of the first human beings to sin are themselves born innocent".[65][b] In Augustine's writings, Pelagius is a symbol of humanism who excluded God from human salvation.[63] Pelagianism shaped Augustine's ideas in opposition to his own on free will, grace, and original sin,[67][68][69] and much of The City of God is devoted to countering Pelagian arguments.[70] Another major difference in the two thinkers was that Pelagius emphasized obedience to God for fear of hell, which Augustine considered servile. In contrast, Augustine argued that Christians should be motivated by the delight and blessings of the Holy Spirit and believed that it was treason "to do the right deed for the wrong reason".[71] According to Augustine, credit for all virtue and good works is due to God alone,[72] and to say otherwise caused arrogance, which is the foundation of sin.[73]

According to Peter Brown, "For a sensitive man of the fifth century, Manichaeism, Pelagianism, and the views of Augustine were not as widely separated as we would now see them: they would have appeared to him as points along the great circle of problems raised by the Christian religion".[74] John Cassian argued for a middle way between Pelagianism and Augustinianism, in which the human will is not negated but presented as intermittent, sick, and weak,[75] and Jerome held a middle position on sinlessness.[76] In Gaul, the so-called "semi-Pelagians" disagreed with Augustine on predestination (but recognized the three Pelagian doctrines as heretical) and were accused by Augustine of being seduced by Pelagian ideas.[77] According to Ali Bonner, the crusade against Pelagianism and other heresies narrowed the range of acceptable opinions and reduced the intellectual freedom of classical Rome.[78] When it came to grace and especially predestination, it was Augustine's ideas, not Pelagius', which were novel.[79][80][81]

Belief Pelagianism Augustinianism
Fall of man Sets a bad example, but does not affect human nature[82][83] Every human's nature is corrupted by original sin, and they also inherit moral guilt[82][83]
Free will Absolute freedom of choice[62][84] Original sin renders men unable to choose good[85]
Status of infants Blameless[86] Corrupted by original sin and consigned to hell if unbaptized[87][82][83]
Sin Comes about by free choice[82] Inevitable result of fallen human nature[82]
Forgiveness for sin Given to those who sincerely repent and merit it[c] Part of God's grace, disbursed according to His will[89]
Sinlessness Theoretically possible, although unusual[62][90] Impossible due to the corruption of human nature[87]
Salvation Humans will be judged for their choices[62] Salvation is bestowed by God's grace[91]
Predestination Rejected[92] God decides who is saved and prevents them from falling away.[93] Though the explicit teaching of double predestination by Augustine is debated,[94][95] it is at least implied.[96]

According to Nelson, Pelagianism is a solution to the problem of evil that invokes libertarian free will as both the cause of human suffering and a sufficient good to justify it.[97] By positing that man could choose between good and evil without divine intercession, Pelagianism brought into question Christianity's core doctrine of Jesus' act of substitutionary atonement to expiate the sins of mankind.[98] For this reason, Pelagianism became associated with nontrinitarian interpretations of Christianity which rejected the divinity of Jesus,[99] as well as other heresies such as Arianism, Socinianism, and mortalism (which rejected the existence of hell).[100] Augustine argued that if man "could have become just by the law of nature and free will . . . amounts to rendering the cross of Christ void".[97] He argued that no suffering was truly undeserved, and that grace was equally undeserved but bestowed by God's benevolence.[101] Augustine's solution, while it was faithful to orthodox Christology, worsened the problem of evil because according to Augustinian interpretations, God punishes sinners who by their very nature are unable not to sin.[100] The Augustinian defense of God's grace against accusations of arbitrariness is that God's ways are incomprehensible to mere mortals.[100][102] Yet, as later critics such as Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz asserted, asking "it is good and just because God wills it or whether God wills it because it is good and just?", this defense (although accepted by many Catholic and Reformed theologians) creates a God-centered morality, which, in Leibniz' view "would destroy the justice of God" and make him into a tyrant.[103]

Augustinian philosophers

See also

Notes

  1. ^ The phrase (inimici gratiae) was repeated more than fifty times in Augustine's anti-Pelagian writings after Diospolis.[64]
  2. ^ Robert Dodaro has a similar list: "(1) that human beings can be sinless; (2) that they can act virtuously without grace; (3) that virtue can be perfected in this life; and (4) that fear of death can be completely overcome".[66]
  3. ^ Pelagius wrote: "pardon is given to those who repent, not according to the grace and mercy of God, but according to their own merit and effort, who through repentance will have been worthy of mercy".[88]

References

  1. ^ Rogers, Katherine. The Neoplatonic Metaphysics and Epistemology of Anselm of Canterbury (Lewiston, New York: Edwin Mellen Press. 1997).
  2. ^ Saint Bonaventure
  3. ^ Prayer after Augustine: A study in the development of the Latin tradition
  4. ^ Augustinism in McClintock and Strong Biblical Cyclopedia]
  5. ^ Augustinianism Encyclopedia.com
  6. ^ The Significance of Neoplatonism
  7. ^ a b Saint Augustine
  8. ^ Wallace M. Alston, The Church of the Living God: A Reformed Perspective (Westminster John Knox Press, 2002 ISBN 978-0-664-22553-7), p. 53
  9. ^ De deo Socratis, XVII–XIX)
  10. ^ a b Mendelson, Michael (12 November 2010) [24 March 2000]. "Saint Augustine". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 9 October 2011.
  11. ^ BENEDICT XVI GENERAL AUDIENCE Paul VI Audience Hall Wednesday, 9 January 2008
  12. ^ Smith's Hagenbach, History of Doctrines, 1, 299
  13. ^ Wiggers Augustinisnm and Pelagianism, p. 268
  14. ^ Tina Manferdini, Comunicazione ed estetica in Sant'Agostino, p. 249, Bologna, ESD, 1995
  15. ^ Fr. Alberto Esmeralda, OSA. "Augustinian Values" (PDF). www.merrimack.edu. Archived from the original (PDF) on 1 September 2006. Retrieved 23 November 2006.
  16. ^ Helm, Paul (1981). Divine Commands and Morality. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-875049-8.
  17. ^ Chandler, Hugh (2007). Platonistic And Disenchanting Theories of Ethics. Peter Lang. ISBN 978-0-8204-8858-5.
  18. ^ Austin, Michael W. (21 August 2006). "Divine Command Theory". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 15 August 2012.
  19. ^ Robert L. Holmes (September 2001). "A Time For War?". ChristianityToday.com. Retrieved 25 April 2015.
  20. ^ Contra Faustum Manichaeum book 22 sections 69–76
  21. ^ Holte 1962
  22. ^ De civitate dei 19.4
  23. ^ Wolterstorff 2012
  24. ^ De beata vita 10
  25. ^ De civitate dei 10.1
  26. ^ De trinitate 13.7
  27. ^ Confessions IV.xv.25
  28. ^ Confessions XII.xxv.35
  29. ^ Summa theologiae 1a2ae 109.1c
  30. ^ Cf. A. Gianni, pp.148–149
  31. ^ Hendrics, E., p. 291.
  32. ^ a b Massuti, E., p.98.
  33. ^ De cura pro mortuis gerenda CSEL 41, 627[13–22]; PL 40, 595: Nullo modo ipsa spernenda sunt corpora. (...)Haec enim non-ad ornamentum vel adiutorium, quod adhibetur extrinsecus, sed ad ipsam naturam hominis pertinent; Contra Faustum, 22.27; PL 44,418.
  34. ^ Augustine of Hippo, Enarrationes in psalmos, 143, 6.
  35. ^ CCL 40, 2077 [46] – 2078 [74]; 46, 234–35.
  36. ^ Augustine of Hippo, De utilitate ieiunii, 4, 4–5.
  37. ^ El concepto del substantia segun san Agustin, pp. 305–350.
  38. ^ De ordine, II, 11.31; CCL 29, 124 [18]; PL 32,1009; De quantitate animae, 25,4ХнНЧ 7–49; CSEL 89, 190–194; PL 32, 1062–1063
  39. ^ Cf. Ch. Couturier SJ, p. 543
  40. ^ Cross, Frank Leslie; Livingstone, Elizabeth A., eds. (2005). "Original sin". The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (3rd rev. ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-280290-3.
  41. ^ Augustine taught that Adam's sin was both an act of foolishness (insipientia) and of pride and disobedience to God of Adam and Eve. He thought it was a most subtle job to discern what came first: self-centeredness or failure in seeing truth. Augustine wrote to Julian of Eclanum: Sed si disputatione subtilissima et elimatissima opus est, ut sciamus utrum primos homines insipientia superbos, an insipientes superbia fecerit (Contra Julianum, V, 4.18; PL 44, 795). This particular sin would not have taken place if Satan had not sown into their senses "the root of evil" (radix Mali): Nisi radicem mali humanus tunc reciperet sensus (Contra Julianum, I, 9.42; PL 44, 670)
  42. ^ "Original Sin". Biblical Apologetic Studies. Retrieved 17 May 2014. Augustine of Hippo (354–430) taught that Adam's sin is transmitted by concupiscence, or "hurtful desire", sexual desire and all sensual feelings resulting in humanity becoming a massa damnata (mass of perdition, condemned crowd), with much enfeebled, though not destroyed, freedom of will.
  43. ^ William Nicholson. A Plain But Full Exposition of the Catechism of the Church of England, page 118. Retrieved 17 May 2014.
  44. ^ Thomas Aquinas explained Augustine's doctrine pointing out that the libido (concupiscence), which makes the original sin pass from parents to children, is not a libido actualis, i.e. sexual lust, but libido habitualis, i.e. a wound of the whole of human nature: Libido quae transmittit peccatum originale in prolem, non est libido actualis, quia dato quod virtute divina concederetur alicui quod nullam inordinatam libidinem in actu generationis sentiret, adhuc transmitteret in prolem originale peccatum. Sed libido illa est intelligenda habitualiter, secundum quod appetitus sensitivus non continetur sub ratione vinculo originalis iustitiae. Et talis libido in omnibus est aequalis (STh Iª–IIae q. 82 a. 4 ad 3).
  45. ^ Non substantialiter manere concupiscentiam, sicut corpus aliquod aut spiritum; sed esse affectionem quamdam malae qualitatis, sicut est languor. (De nuptiis et concupiscentia, I, 25. 28; PL 44, 430; cf. Contra Julianum, VI, 18.53; PL 44, 854; ibid. VI, 19.58; PL 44, 857; ibid., II, 10.33; PL 44, 697; Contra Secundinum Manichaeum, 15; PL 42, 590.
  46. ^ Augustine wrote to Julian of Eclanum: Quis enim negat futurum fuisse concubitum, etiamsi peccatum non-praecessisset? Sed futur-us fuerat, sicut aliis membris, ita etiam genitalibus voluntate motis, non-libidine concitatis; aut certe etiam ipsa libidine – ut non-vos de illa nimium contristemus – non-qualis nunc est, sed ad nutum voluntarium serviente (Contra Julianum, IV. 11. 57; PL 44, 766). See also his late work: Contra secundam Iuliani responsionem imperfectum opus, II, 42; PL 45,1160; ibid. II, 45; PL 45,1161; ibid., VI, 22; PL 45, 1550–1551. Cf.Schmitt, É. (1983). Le mariage chrétien dans l'oeuvre de Saint Augustin. Une théologie baptismale de la vie conjugale. Études Augustiniennes. Paris. p. 104.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  47. ^ a b Justo L. Gonzalez (1970–1975). A History of Christian Thought: Volume 2 (From Augustine to the eve of the Reformation). Abingdon Press.
  48. ^ Marius Mercator Lib. subnot.in verb. Iul. Praef.,2,3; PL 48,111 /v.5-13/; Bonner, Gerald (1987). "Rufinus of Syria and African Pelagianism". God's Decree and Man's Destiny. London: Variorum Reprints. pp. 31–47. ISBN 978-0-86078-203-2.
  49. ^ Augustine of Hippo, De gratia Christi et de peccato originali, I, 15.16; CSEL 42, 138 [v. 24–29]; Ibid., I,4.5; CSEL 42, 128 [v.15–23].
  50. ^ Original sin
  51. ^ a b c Levering, Matthew (2011). Predestination: Biblical and Theological Paths. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-960452-4.
  52. ^ Augustine Had It Right; Calvin Did Not
  53. ^ The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, "The Problem of Evil", Michael Tooley
  54. ^ The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, "The Evidential Problem of Evil", Nick Trakakis
  55. ^ Menn 2002, p. 170
  56. ^ The City of God, Augustine of Hippo, Book XI, Chapter 9
  57. ^ Bennett, Peters, Hewlett & Russell 2008, p. 126
  58. ^ Svendsen & Pierce 2010, p. 49
  59. ^ Menn 2002, p. 174
  60. ^ Bennett, Peters, Hewlett & Russell 2008, p. 127
  61. ^ Menn 2002, p. 176
  62. ^ a b c d Puchniak 2008, p. 123.
  63. ^ a b Scheck 2012, p. 79.
  64. ^ Rackett 2002, p. 234.
  65. ^ Wetzel 2001, p. 52.
  66. ^ Dodaro 2004, p. 186.
  67. ^ Visotzky 2009, p. 43.
  68. ^ Keech 2012, p. 15.
  69. ^ Stump 2001, p. 130.
  70. ^ Dodaro 2004, p. 80.
  71. ^ Harrison 2016, p. 80.
  72. ^ Dodaro 2004, pp. 187–188.
  73. ^ Dodaro 2004, p. 191.
  74. ^ Visotzky 2009, p. 53.
  75. ^ Harrison 2016, p. 82.
  76. ^ Squires 2016, p. 706.
  77. ^ Wetzel 2001, pp. 52, 55.
  78. ^ Bonner 2018, pp. 303–304.
  79. ^ Bonner 2018, p. 305.
  80. ^ Dodaro 2004, p. 86.
  81. ^ Weaver 2014, p. xix.
  82. ^ a b c d e Visotzky 2009, p. 44.
  83. ^ a b c Harrison 2016, p. 81.
  84. ^ Harrison 2016, p. 79.
  85. ^ Puchniak 2008, pp. 123–124.
  86. ^ Kirwan 1998, Grace and free will.
  87. ^ a b Puchniak 2008, p. 124.
  88. ^ Visotzky 2009, p. 49.
  89. ^ Chadwick 2001, pp. 30–31.
  90. ^ Visotzky 2009, p. 48.
  91. ^ Stump 2001, pp. 139–140.
  92. ^ Elliott 2011, p. 378.
  93. ^ Chadwick 2001, pp. 123–124.
  94. ^ Levering 2011, p. 47–48.
  95. ^ James 1998, p. 102.
  96. ^ James 1998, p. 103. "If one asks, whether double predestination is a logical implication or development of Augustine's doctrine, the answer must be in the affirmative."
  97. ^ a b Nelson 2019, p. 3.
  98. ^ Nelson 2019, pp. 3, 51.
  99. ^ Nelson 2019, p. 51.
  100. ^ a b c Nelson 2019, p. 4.
  101. ^ Chadwick 2001, pp. 117–118.
  102. ^ Stump 2001, p. 139.
  103. ^ Nelson 2019, pp. 5–6.
  104. ^ John Henry Newman: Reason, Rhetoric, and Romanticism pg. 167
  105. ^ Benedict XVI, The Great Augustinian
  106. ^ Gutting, Gary (13 February 1999). Pragmatic Liberalism and the Critique of Modernity. Cambridge University Press. p. 116. ISBN 978-0-521-64973-5. Modernity begins with Descartes' mutation of Augustinianism. Taylor emphasizes that "Descartes is in many ways profoundly Augustinian".

Sources

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Augustinianism&oldid=1250760356"