Augustine vs. Catholicism

Since I have a bit of free time today, I thought I'd make a post sharing a few of the ways Augustine differs with Roman Catholicism. This is by no means the only ways Augustine differs with the Catholic church, but does represent at least part of the more eye opening divergences. This is important, as Roman Catholicism tends to promote an image of having an unbroken succession of doctrine, as if what they say stands on the "universal consent" of the church fathers:

"I also admit the holy Scriptures, according to that sense which our holy mother Church has held and does hold, to which it belongs to judge the true sense and interpretation of the Scriptures: neither will I ever take and interpret them otherwise than according to the unanimous consent of The Fathers." Pope Pius IV, Profession of the Tridentine Faith, Article 3

836 "All men are called to this catholic unity of the People of God. . . . And to it, in different ways, belong or are ordered: the Catholic faithful, others who believe in Christ, and finally all mankind, called by God's grace to salvation."320

Pope John Paul II: "The universality of salvation means that it is granted not only to those who explicitly believe in Christ and have entered the Church. Since salvation is offered to all, it must be made concretely available to all. But it is clear that today, as in the past, many people do not have an opportunity to come to know or accept the gospel revelation or to enter the Church. The social and cultural conditions in which they live do not permit this, and frequently they have been brought up in other religious traditions. For such people salvation in Christ is accessible by virtue of a grace which, while having a mysterious relationship to the Church, does not make them formally part of the Church but enlightens them in a way which is accommodated to their spiritual and material situation. This grace comes from Christ; it is the result of his Sacrifice and is communicated by the Holy Spirit. It enables each person to attain salvation through his or her free cooperation." (Redemptoris Missio, n. 10).

Salvation is universal in that it is offered to all human persons. But this offer is not merely theoretical. Salvation is concretely available to all persons. The grace of Christ in the Spirit enables each person to obtain eternal life by free cooperation with grace. For "Christ died for all men," not only for some (Gaudium et Spes, n. 22).

"In the New Testament, the universal salvific will of God is closely connected to the sole mediation of Christ: '[God] desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God; there is also one mediator between God and men, the man Jesus Christ, who gave himself as a ransom for all' (1 Tim 2:4-6)." (Cardinal Ratzinger, Dominus Jesus, n. 13) God predestines no one to go to hell; for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end.(Catechism of the Catholic Church # 1037)

“And, moreover, who will be so foolish and blasphemous as to say that God cannot change the evil wills of men, whichever, whenever, and wheresoever He chooses, and direct them to what is good? But when He does this He does it of mercy; when He does it not, it is of justice that He does it not for “He has mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardens.” And when the apostle said this, he was illustrating the grace of God, in connection with which he had just spoken of the twins in the womb of Rebecca, who “being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of Him that calls, it was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.” And in reference to this matter he quotes another prophetic testimony: “Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.” But perceiving how what he had said might affect those who could not penetrate by their understanding the depth of this grace: “What shall we say then?” he says: “Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.” For it seems unjust that, in the absence of any merit or demerit, from good or evil works, God should love the one and hate the other. Now, if the apostle had wished us to understand that there were future good works of the one, and evil works of the other, which of course God foreknew, he would never have said, not of works, but, of future works, and in that way would have solved the difficulty, or rather there would then have been no difficulty to solve. As it is, however, after answering, God forbid; that is, God forbid that there should be unrighteousness with God; he goes on to prove that there is no unrighteousness in God’s doing this, and says: “For He says to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.” “ (Augustine, The Enchiridion on Faith, Hope and Love, Chapter 98. Predestination to Eternal Life is Wholly of God’s Free Grace.)

"We know that God's grace is not given to all men . To those to whom it is given it is given neither according to the merits of works, nor according to the merits of the will, but by free grace. To those to whom it is not given we know that it is because of God's righteous judgment that it is not given." (Augustine, Treatise On Rebuke and Grace)

“But that world which God is in Christ reconciling unto Himself, which is saved by Christ, and has all its sins freely pardoned by Christ, has been chosen out of the world that is hostile, condemned, and defiled. For out of that mass, which has all perished in Adam, are formed the vessels of mercy, whereof that world of reconciliation is composed, that is hated by the world which belongeth to the vessels of wrath that are formed out of the same mass and fitted to destruction. Finally, after saying, “If ye were of the world, the world would love its own,” He immediately added, “But because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.” And so these men were themselves also of that world, and, that they might no longer be of it, were chosen out of it, through no merit of their own, for no good works of theirs had preceded; and not by nature, which through free-will had become totally corrupted at its source: but gratuitously, that is, of actual grace. For He who chose the world out of the world, effected for Himself, instead of finding, what He should choose: for “there is a remnant saved according to the election of grace. And if by grace,” he adds, “then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace.”” (Tractates on the Gospel of John, 15:17-19)

“Or, it is said, “Who will have all men to be saved;” not that there is no man whose salvation He does not will (for how, then, explain the fact that He was unwilling to work miracles in the presence of some who, He said, would have repented if He had worked them?), but that we are to understand by “all men,” the human race in all its varieties of rank and circumstances,—kings, subjects; noble, plebeian, high, low, learned, and unlearned; the sound in body, the feeble, the clever, the dull, the foolish, the rich, the poor, and those of middling circumstances; males, females, infants, boys, youths; young, middle-aged, and old men; of every tongue, of every fashion, of all arts, of all professions, with all the innumerable differences of will and conscience, and whatever else there is that makes a distinction among men. For which of all these classes is there out of which God does not will that men should be saved in all nations through His only-begotten Son, our Lord, and therefore does save them; for the Omnipotent cannot will in vain, whatsoever He may will? Now the apostle had enjoined that prayers should be made for all men, and had especially added, “For kings, and for all that are in authority,” who might be supposed, in the pride and pomp of worldly station, to shrink from the humility of the Christian faith. Then saying, “For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour,” that is, that prayers should be made for such as these, he immediately adds, as if to remove any ground of despair, “Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth” [I Tim. 2:1-4]. God, then, in His great condescension has judged it good to grant to the prayers of the humble the salvation of the exalted; and assuredly we have many examples of this. Our Lord, too, makes use of the same mode of speech in the Gospel, when He says to the Pharisees: “Ye tithe mint, and rue, and every herb” [Luke 11:42]. For the Pharisees did not tithe what belonged to others, nor all the herbs of all the inhabitants of other lands. As, then, in this place we must understand by “every herb,” every kind of herbs, so in the former passage we may understand by “all men,” every sort of men. And we may interpret it in any other way we please, so long as we are not compelled to believe that the omnipotent God has willed anything to be done which was not done: for setting aside all ambiguities, if “He hath done all that He pleased in heaven and in earth” [Ps. 115:3]. as the psalmist sings of Him, He certainly did not will to do anything that He hath not done.” (Augustine, Enchiridion on Faith, Hope and Love, Ch. 103. Interpretation of the Expression in I Tim. 2:4: “Who Will Have All Men to Be Saved”.)

“Wherefore, the Lord, about to give the Holy Spirit, said that Himself was the bread that came down from heaven, exhorting us to believe in Him. For to believe in Him is to eat the living bread. He that believes eats; he is sated invisibly, because invisibly is he born again. A babe within, a new man within. Where he is made new, there he is satisfied with food. (12) What then did the Lord answer to such murmurers? Murmur not among yourselves. As if He said, I know why you are not hungry, and do not understand nor seek after this bread. Murmur not among yourselves: no man can come unto me, except the Father that sent me draw him. Noble excellence of grace! No man comes unless drawn. There is whom He draws, and there is whom He draws not; why He draws one and draws not another, do not desire to judge, if you desire not to err.” (Augustine, Tractate 26)

On the Power of Grace-- whether we must cooperate to receive salvation or whether grace works in us both a new will and good works irresistibly

Roman Catholicism "The Synod furthermore declares, that in adults, the beginning of the said Justification is to be derived from the prevenient grace of God, through Jesus Christ, that is to say, from His vocation, whereby, without any merits existing on their parts, they are called; that so they, who by sins were alienated from God, may be disposed through His quickening and assisting grace, to convert themselves to their own justification, by freely assenting to and co-operating with that said grace: in such sort that, while God touches the heart of man by the illumination of the Holy Ghost, neither is man himself utterly without doing anything while he receives that inspiration, forasmuch as he is also able to reject it; yet is he not able, by his own free will, without the grace of God, to move himself unto justice in His sight. Whence, when it is said in the sacred writings: 'Turn ye to me, and I will turn to you,' we are admonished of our liberty; and when we answer; 'Convert us, O Lord, to thee, and we shall be converted,' we confess that we are prevented by the grace of God." (Council of Trent)

"... the human will does not obtain grace by freedom, but obtains freedom by grace; when the feeling of delight has been imparted through. the same grace, the human will is formed to endure; it is strengthened with unconquerable fortitude; controlled by grace, it never will perish, but, if grace forsake it, it will straightway fall; by the Lord's free mercy it is converted to good, and once converted it perseveres in good; the direction of the human will toward good, and after direction its continuation in good, depend solely upon God's will, not upon any merit of man. Thus there is left to man such free will, if we please so to call it, as he elsewhere describes: that except through grace the will can neither be converted to God nor abide in God; and whatever it can do it is able to do only through grace. "(Augustine, Aurelius. Augustine's Writings on Grace and Free WIll (Kindle Locations 45-46). Monergism Books. Kindle Edition.)

“And further, should any one be inclined to boast, not indeed of his works, but of the freedom of his will, as if the first merit belonged to him, this very liberty of good action being given to him as a reward he had earned, let him listen to this same preacher of grace, when he says: “For it is God which works in you, both to will and to do of His own good pleasure;” (Php 2:13) and in another place: “So, then, it is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy.” (Rom 9:16) Now as, undoubtedly, if a man is of the age to use his reason, he cannot believe, hope, love, unless he will to do so, nor obtain the prize of the high calling of God unless he voluntarily run for it; in what sense is it not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy, except that, as it is written, “the preparation of the heart is from the Lord?” Otherwise, if it is said, “It is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy, because it is of both,” that is, both of the will of man and of the mercy of God, so that we are to understand the saying, “It is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy,” as if it meant the will of man alone is not sufficient, if the mercy of God go not with it—then it will follow that the mercy of God alone is not sufficient, if the will of man go not with it; and therefore, if we may rightly say, it is not of man that wills, but of God that shows mercy, because the will of man by itself is not enough, why may we not also rightly put it in the converse way: “It is not of God that shows mercy, but of man that wills,” because the mercy of God by itself does not suffice? Surely, if no Christian will dare to say this, “It is not of God that shows mercy, but of man that wills,” lest he should openly contradict the apostle, it follows that the true interpretation of the saying, “It is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy,” is that the whole work belongs to God, who both makes the will of man righteous, and thus prepares it for assistance, and assists it when it is prepared.” (Augustine, The Enchiridion on Faith, Hope and Love, Ch. 32)

"Can you say, 'We will first walk in His righteousness, and will observe His judgments, and will act in a worthy way, so that He will give His grace to us'? But what good would you evil people do? And how would you do those good things, unless you were yourselves good? But Who causes people to be good? Only He Who said, 'And I will visit them to make them good,' and, 'I will put my Spirit within you, and will cause you to walk in my righteousness, and to observe my judgments, and do them'(Ezek.36:27). Are you asleep? Can't you hear Him saying, 'I will cause you to walk, I will make you to observe,' lastly,'I will make you to do'? Really, are you still puffing yourselves up? We walk, true enough, and we observe, and we do; but it is God Who He makes us to walk, to observe, to do. This is the grace of God making us good; this is His mercy going before us." (Augustine - Against Two Letters of the Pelagians, 4:15)

When we commit sin, we get no help from God; but we are not able to act justly, and to fulfil the law of righteousness in every part, unless we are helped by God. Light does not help our physical eyes to shut out light; rather, light helps our eyes to see, and the eye cannot see at all unless light helps it. Likewise God, Who is the light of the inner self, helps our mental sight, in order that we may do some good, not according to our own righteousness, but according to His. But if we turn away from God , it is our own act; then we are wise according to the flesh, then we consent to the lust of the flesh for unlawful deeds . When we turn to God, therefore, He helps us; when we turn away from Him, He forsakes us. But God even helps us to turn to Him; and this, certainly, is something that light does not do for the eyes of the body. When, therefore, He commands us in the words, ‘Turn to Me, and I will turn to you’ (Zech. 1: 3), and we say to Him, ‘Turn us , O God of our salvation’ (Ps. 85: 4), and again, ‘Turn us, O God of hosts’ (Ps. 80: 3) — what else do we say but, ‘Give what You command’? When He commands us, saying, ‘Understand now, O simple among the people’ (Ps. 94: 8), and we say to Him, ‘Give me understanding, that I may learn Thy commandments’ (Ps. 119: 73) — what else do we say but, ‘Give what You command’? When He commands us, saying, ‘Do not go after your lusts’ (Ecclesiasticus 18: 30), and we say to Him, ‘We know that no-one can be chaste, unless God gives it to him’ (Wisdom 8: 21) — what else do we say but, ‘Give what You command’? When He commands us, saying, ‘Do justice’ (Isa. 56: 1 ), and we say, ‘Teach me Your judgments, O Lord’ (Ps. 119: 108) — what else do we say but, ‘Give what You command’? Likewise, when He says: ‘Blessed are those who hunger and thirst after righteousness; for they shall be filled’ ( Matt. 5: 6), from whom should we seek the meat and drink of righteousness, but from Him Who promises His fullness to those who hunger and thirst after it? (Augustine, On the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, 2: 5)

Except for the ones taken from books, you should be able to find the majority of these on

In fact, I see at least one quote from that document which says the very opposite:

In fact, you probably did not get the quote from reading the document, but from googling, as the text is quite clear what Augustine is saying here. He says quite clearly in a number of writings that Grace is not given according to merit-- that is, human merit. Rather, Augustine's position is that Grace is given for Grace, which is what he affirms a few sentences lower from this quotation. "[G]race is not rendered to works, but is given freely, it must be confessed without any doubt, that eternal life is called grace for the reason that it is rendered to those merits which grace has conferred upon man. Because that saying is rightly understood which in the gospel is read, "grace for grace,"[ 1]--that is, for those merits which grace has conferred."

In other words, the Christian is he who "shows mercy" because God moves him to be merciful, and then crowns his own gifts. The grace that is given to Christians to make them merciful is given without regard to human merit, whether forseen or otherwise, or without foresight of the human will. Rather, this grace works to give men a good will and mercy.

As for the location of the quote in question.... after reading through the whole book again I realized it was not there, and upon further searching I realize now I have put the wrong citation. It is, in fact, from a letter, and the correct citation is: August. ad Bonifac. Ep. 106.

Thou art Cephas (Rock)and on this Rock I will build my Church and the gates of Hell will not prevail against it.

Mistranslation perpetrated continuously by Rome. Sorry, but this is what it says:

15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

The this Jesus was referring to is found in the preceding verse... the confession that Jesus was the Son of God... Christ is THE Rock.. THE foundation.

Bold is mine.

Peter and rock sound the same but Christ didn't build Christ's Church on anyone other than Christ. I'm not a "PETERian" - Catholics may want to claim that dubiousness... but not me -- I am a CHRISTian.

Hoss

Yes, She (the Church) does. Predestination of the Elect has been formally recognized as infallible dogma by the Church since the Second Council of Orange (529 A.D.). The Church has NEVER, however, accepted the false doctrine of "Predestination of the Damned"--i.e. the Calvinist idea that God created certain souls for the express end of having them damned for all eternity... which is as ridiculous and obscene as it is unbiblical (cf. 1 Timothy 2:4, and many other places).

Notice your use of 1 Tim 2:4. Can you look and see, up above, how Augustine directly interprets that verse? One of the paragraphs above is dedicated to explaining just that one verse. Also note Augustine's words on the vessels of mercy and the vessels of wrath, and how Grace is given to some, but not all.

You may disagree with Augustine, but you cannot claim Augustine does not teach what he teaches-- and that is the important part for the purposes of this thread.

All that energy you put into that post could have been put elswhere if you had remembered that no saint and no theologian is authoritative. The Magisterium of the Church is the final arbiter of faith and morals, although any saint or theologian may say the same..

How do you square what is clearly a constructed theology as seen within the Magisterium verses a theology actually taught within the church historically-- as seen within various Church fathers? Doesn't that put you up against Tradition, if your teachings are, in fact, not traditional?

Augustine also held, however, that scripture was the arbiter of disputes:

“The question has been proposed: Is the Church of Christ among the Catholics or among the Donatists? This needs to be determined from specific and clear citations in Holy Scripture. First, evidence is brought forth from the Old Testament and then from the New Testament.” (Augustine, Introduction, On the Unity of the Church)

"But, as I had begun to say, let us not listen to “you say this, I say that” but let us listen to “the Lord says this.” Certainly, there are the Lord’s books, on whose authority we both agree, to which we concede, and which we serve; there we seek the Church, there we argue our case" (Chapter 5)

More here: http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2014/12/augustines-unity-of-church-finally.html

In fact, you probably did not get the quote from reading the document, but from googling, as the text is quite clear what Augustine is saying here.

...followed by:

As for the location of the quote in question.... after reading through the whole book again I realized it was not there, and upon further searching I realize now I have put the wrong citation. It is, in fact, from a letter, and the correct citation is: August. ad Bonifac. Ep. 106.

So... is the latter comment your version of saying, "Oops, my bad... maybe you actually HAVE the document in your library after all (instead of "probably" Googling it), and my apologies for giving the wrong citation"?

I need to dash, for now; I'll address your other points when I have a free moment, but re: your assertion that St. Augustine thought that Scripture "was the arbiter of disputes" (without any qualifiers to your view), have you read the quote from St. Augustine that I gave in Comment #2?

12 “I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. 13 But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. 14 He will glorify me because it is from me that he will receive what he will make known to you. 15 All that belongs to the Father is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will receive from me what he will make known to you.”

This was the promise of Pentecost.. the first time that the Holy Spirit indwelled men... Does that mean that the apostles and the saved are infallible... nope.. It means we have the direction of the Holy Spirit in determining truth ...

See how John understood it
1 John 4: We are of God: he that knows God hears us; he that is not of God hears not us. By this we know the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error. .He did not see it as infallibility, but rather as discernment ..

Now lets look at the "popes" infallibility

Was Peter becoming a judaizer an infallible decision???

My understanding of the infallibility of the Apostles is that, when they spoke of the things that Jesus taught them, they spoke the truth through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Not that they never goofed up, which Peter certainly did. But that what they said was free from doctrinal error.

“The quote in question is not speaking of salvation ...”

That is your personal (and wrong) interpretation.

The quote from St. Paul to the Philippians used by St. Augustine to make his point here is that it is not enough to believe or have the true faith, but that we must strive and labour to the end in the way of perfection; secondly that St. Paul did not look upon himself as absolutely certain of his perfection, how much greater would this presumption be of us?

Notice it is not works instead of belief, it is BOTH that are required for perfection.

This is St. John Chrysostom’s exegesis and his position carries far more weight than the interpretation of some late date reformer.

St. Paul expected works along with belief: Colossians 3:25; Romans 2:6

“If Abraham was not justified by works, how was he justified? The apostle goes on to tell us how: What does scripture say? (that is, about how Abraham was justified). Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness (Rom. 4:3; Gen. 15:6). Abraham, then, was justified by faith. Paul and James do not contradict each other: good works follow justification.” (Augustine, Exposition 2 of Psalm 31, 2-4.)

“For who makes thee to differ, and what has thou that thou hast not received?” (1 Cor. iv. 7). Our merits therefore do not cause us to differ, but grace. For if it be merit, it is a debt; and if it be a debt, it is not gratuitous; and if it be not gratuitous, it is not grace. (Augustine, Sermon 293)

just one man’s opinion.

This is exactly the point that I was making. Why is the non catholic position correct when different from the catholic position? Who decides? The idea that the Catholic position is not based on scripture is simply a myth and plain wrong. These early Church Doctors spent their LIVES in scripture study and concluded the Catholic positions.

There is some overlap in the positions (that Catholics agree upon, by the way, the earliest Bishops weren’t in lock step then and aren’t now unless a doctrine is pronounced ex cathedra, which is rare). This idea that Augustine preached sola fide is ridiculous. Catholics understand that faith is required for salvation and Augustine reiterates the position - there is no split between Augustine and Catholicism other than a made up one.

These men preached the sacraments, understood a laying on of hands hierarchy, passed on oral Tradition (sacred Tradition, not the Mosaic law “t”radition of men condemned by Scripture) and studied scripture.

The issue is not the divergence of opinion, but which to believe - this is a false concept of infallibilty that has been set up.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.