St. Augustine is a Saint in the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, so that would be absurd. The other day, they quoted St. Augustine during homily in my Orthodox church. What the Catholic and the Orthodox Churches do with St. Augustine is that not all of his writing is necessarily concensus patrum, which is the only "security measure" that guards against private, individualistic or relativistic corruptions.
But, speaking of discarding and distortions, it is really the Protestants who throw out all the other Saints as "bogus" and embraced only one, St. Augustine, and generally only Apostle Paul, and predominately the Old Testament.
Wikipedia even says that Tertullian questioned that Mary was a perpetual virgin, but I don't quote that source as gospel. :) How do you know which of the works of these heralded Saints is true and which is bogus
Tertullian is a perfect example of someone who used to be orthodox and then later on in life left the Church through heresy because he placed his personal beliefs and interpretations above the concensus patrum, which is another way of saying that he thought himself smarter than the rest of the bishops.
So, when I see a verse that says "For it is by grace you are saved, through faith ...", and I interpret it to mean that we are saved by grace through faith, you would say that I am coming up with my own private (crazy) interpretation, because the Church strongly disagrees with this
No, I would say that only because the Church does not say that. We read the same verse the same way as you do, except that your definition of being "saved" is something form the left field.
You also read Scripture that is not the Scripture of the Church but of man called Luther, and men called Calvinists. Your Scripture is not identical to ours, nor does it say the same thing and is not the same canon.
I think this is an excellent example of how God works in His Church. First, Tertullian was without doubt the brightest mind in the Latin Church during his era. IF the Church's beliefs were based on "brainpower" of man, then Tertullian certainly could have successfully argued his own personal beliefs that differed from the Church's. HOWEVER, the Church is led by the Spirit. So when a Father writes something that CAN be taken out of context and read differently then the Church's orthodox beliefs, the Church, duly appointed by Christ, judges on the issue on the side of its handed-down Tradition.
Thus, St. Augustine and St. John Cassian have written what SOME people would consider out of order of the consensus patrum - and have been misinterpreted. The Church was not fooled. Despite Augustine's incredible influence, the Church did not fall for his version of mass damnatia. Even his follower, St. Prosper of Aquitaine, did not teach it, realizing that Augustine was writing polemically vs. the Pelagians. Later readers of John Cassian also need to understand the Saint's point of view - being he was a monk - and not trying to work out a precise theological relationship, but rather, was concerned with practical application. Thus, we shouldn't consider him a heretical Semi-Pelagian. In either case, the Church did not change their opinions based on the popularity of these giants' opinions.
I consider that the above examples are further proof of God working within His Church.
Regards
That's what I meant. I don't think you kicked Augustine to the curb, just that you threw out some of his writings. This is also what I mean when I talk of the truth being determined by popular vote.
But, speaking of discarding and distortions, it is really the Protestants who throw out all the other Saints as "bogus" and embraced only one, St. Augustine, and generally only Apostle Paul, and predominately the Old Testament.
I don't disagree with them because they are Saints, it's just the theology. I'm not sure how it is that I only supposedly embrace Paul and the OT. :) To me, all scripture is Holy and true. Sure, some books are more difficult, like James, but I don't throw them out. It's still scripture, which means I have to deal with it. That's fine with me.
Tertullian is a perfect example of someone who used to be orthodox and then later on in life left the Church through heresy ...
I didn't know he left the Church. I know I've heard him quoted before, so his earlier works are still OK?
You also read Scripture that is not the Scripture of the Church but of man called Luther, and men called Calvinists. Your Scripture is not identical to ours, nor does it say the same thing and is not the same canon.
I agree that our interpretations are vastly different, but I'm not sure how we read different scripture. I can understand that a Catholic or Orthodox might not read my NIV, but from what I understand, some on your side do read the KJV. So do some on my side. So what's different? Do you mean the extra books in the "Catholic Bible"? Were those ever Canonized?