P
Philomena
Guest
Why do Presbyterians claim St Augustine as a Presbyterian? Didn’t he write on the Eucharist, Mary and the authority of the Catholic Church???
- Status
H
Hegesippus
Guest
He sure did, not only those but also wrote on purgatory, necessity of baptism, and the primacy of Rome. He was a bishop. A bishop in the Catholic Church!!! They claim he is theirs becasue of some of his writings on predestination. But if you take his writings as a whole you can clearly see that Augustine is ours.
E
estesbob
Guest
Since the Presbyterian Church was founded in the late 1500s, about 1,000 years after augutsine died, to claim he was a member of their church is nonsense. Likewise Since Augustine was about as far divorced from the Saved by Faith alone doctrine expoused by the Presbyterians it would seem their only reason for claiming him as a member is to try and make up for their coming 1,5000 years late to the table.
P
Philthy
Guest
Because it makes them feel better and because they arbitrarily have defined what a member of the Presbyterian Church is based on their interpretation of his theology. Everybody wants a piece of St Augustine, but the reality is that he was Catholic with a capital C.
Did Augustine believe in Sola Scriptura? He actually said that the ONLY reason he believes in Scripture is because the Catholic Church revealed it as such. His mother was a Saint also, you know - St Monica.
And just for the record, the only forbidden elements of Catholic predestination are:
- That God causes evil
- That God predestines some to hell
- Man lacks free will
Phil
M
Melchior
Guest
Because Augustine’s views on Predestination were far closer (though still significantly different) to Presbyterians than to most modern Catholics who tend to choose Molinism over Augustinianism or Thomism on this issue.
P
Philomena
Guest
Can anyone point me to some 'pro Catholic ’ Augustinian zingers?
J
JaneFrances
Guest
In what context? Predestination, Eucharist, the Pope, Mary. . .??? The Catholic Answers Church Fathers sections often uses Augustine for apologetic purposes, so you may want to check them out.
For any other Augustinian zingers. . .New Advent has his works and The Faith of the Early Fathers Volume 3 by Jurgens is a wonderful source for pro-Catholic Augustine quotations.
Were you looking for something specific?
S
StCsDavid
Guest
I have a very dear Presbyterian friend who asked me how Catholics explain the Calvanist teachings of Augustine? I simply stated that while Augustine had many very good things to say, he wasn’t perfect. Neither was Aquinas, or Jerome, or any number of early Church fathers. As good as they were, the Chruch wasn’t formed based on their opinion…whereas the Presbyterian faith seems to be grounded nearly entirely on the opinions of Calvin and Knox. I then asked him to show me in the Bible the justification for sola scriptura. He said he would get back to me. I’m still waiting.
R
RobNY
Guest
That’s assuming that Augustine actually had the Calvinistic understanding of such things. I posted a topic on this a little while back and no one answered. I wish someone who knew what they were talking about would come and set us straight.
M
mark_a
Guest
I don’t know. It’s like saying Terrell Owens invented football.
P
Philomena
Guest
Well, any and all of them, I guess. I have loads of Cath Answer tracts. I’ll pour over them and see what I can find. I don’t know exactly what part of Augustine they claim. Haven’t actually been told or read the Presbyterian view. The woman I know just keeps mentioning Augustine as a Presbyterian! So I thought I’d better find out more, so the next time she says this, I’ll be more prepared to ask her the right questions.
P
Philomena
Guest
Oh! I like this as a start!
J
JaneFrances
Guest
Okay, I’ll stab at it. . .
Though Augustine’s idea of predesination is CLOSE to the Presbyterian/Calvinistic doctrine of TULIP, it is not identical. There are some very fundamental differences including Augustine’s view that God does not damn human beings unless they deserve to be damned. That is, the predestination of the reprobate (the damned) is, at least in part, determined by their own act of free will. Free will, in fact, is one of the most fundamental doctrines which separate the traditional Catholic understanding of predestination and that of traditional Calvinists.
To illustrate Augustine’s view:
“When we shall come into His sight, we shall behold the equity of God’s justice.” (Augustine, Sermons 27, 6, AD 391-430) In this passage, we read about how man will be judged according to the perfect justice of God. This emphasizes man’s participatory free will in faith and action which is often rejected by traditional Calvinisim.
“God, however, ‘wills all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth,’ but not in such a way that He would take away their free choice, for the good or evil use of which it is most just that they be judged.” (Augustine, The Spirit and the Letter, 33, 58, AD 412) In this passage, Augustine emphasizes the initiating and all powerful will of God which “wills all men to be saved” but which mysteriously does not infringe on man’s free will.
“[It] is the work of God’s grace, which assists men’s wills, to make known that which was hidden and to make agreeable that which was unpleasant. That men are not so assisted has likewise it cause in themselves and not in God, whether they are predestined to be damned on account of the wickedness of their pride or whether, if they are children of mercy, they are to be judged and disciplined for that same pride.” (Augustine, Forgiveness of Sins, 2, 17, 26, AD 412). This passage can be controversial in that Augustine clearly states that some are “predestined to be damned”–seemingly in concert with the Calvinist theology of predestination. HOWEVER, a close reading of this passage (along with the exhaustive context of Augustine’s
writings) is actually closer to the Catholic understanding of God’s Almighty power and initiative. In essence, no man will be damned apart from his own free choice towards wickedness. Man ALWAYS has free will to recieve the grace of God in vain (per St. Paul). However, once man has chosen a path of wickedness, God’s mercy is his own discretion. He may choose (for any reason) to allow a fallen soul to wallow in his wickedness or He may choose to discipline that same soul and have mercy on him. While Augustine, here, is silent on the issue, it is incomprehensible that our loving and merciful Lord would “predestine” a fallen soul who has sincerely repented and sought after the grace of the God through prayer and conversion of heart.
These three examples are the “tip of the iceberg” with regards to Augustine’s theology of predestination. There is more, if needed.
As for other topics that divide Presbyterians and Catholics (Mary, the Eucharist, the Pope), I haven’t read ANY Augustine works that would put him on the side of Presbyterianism/Calvinism. Augustine is quite resoundingly Catholic on all of these doctrinal divides.
From an aplogetic standpoint, I would require my Presbyterian friend to supply whatever evidence he/she may have with regards to claiming Augustine’s Presbyterian slant. And once those sources have been revealed, I would read them very carefully in their entirity for the full context of what Augustine is actually saying.
From a personal perspective, I once had a conversation with someone who thought Augustine refuted the primacy of St. Peter. A quotation was supplied to me that SEEMED to support the claim. However, once I located the whole source–thanks to New Advent–and read it, I found that only two senteces previous to the supplied quotation provided unequivocable evidence that Augustine was indeed very certain of St. Peter’s primacy and position in the Church.
It’s all about context. Don’t take my word for it. . .Look 'em up!
Though Augustine’s idea of predesination is CLOSE to the Presbyterian/Calvinistic doctrine of TULIP, it is not identical. There are some very fundamental differences including Augustine’s view that God does not damn human beings unless they deserve to be damned. That is, the predestination of the reprobate (the damned) is, at least in part, determined by their own act of free will. Free will, in fact, is one of the most fundamental doctrines which separate the traditional Catholic understanding of predestination and that of traditional Calvinists.
To illustrate Augustine’s view:
“When we shall come into His sight, we shall behold the equity of God’s justice.” (Augustine, Sermons 27, 6, AD 391-430) In this passage, we read about how man will be judged according to the perfect justice of God. This emphasizes man’s participatory free will in faith and action which is often rejected by traditional Calvinisim.
“God, however, ‘wills all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth,’ but not in such a way that He would take away their free choice, for the good or evil use of which it is most just that they be judged.” (Augustine, The Spirit and the Letter, 33, 58, AD 412) In this passage, Augustine emphasizes the initiating and all powerful will of God which “wills all men to be saved” but which mysteriously does not infringe on man’s free will.
“[It] is the work of God’s grace, which assists men’s wills, to make known that which was hidden and to make agreeable that which was unpleasant. That men are not so assisted has likewise it cause in themselves and not in God, whether they are predestined to be damned on account of the wickedness of their pride or whether, if they are children of mercy, they are to be judged and disciplined for that same pride.” (Augustine, Forgiveness of Sins, 2, 17, 26, AD 412). This passage can be controversial in that Augustine clearly states that some are “predestined to be damned”–seemingly in concert with the Calvinist theology of predestination. HOWEVER, a close reading of this passage (along with the exhaustive context of Augustine’s
writings) is actually closer to the Catholic understanding of God’s Almighty power and initiative. In essence, no man will be damned apart from his own free choice towards wickedness. Man ALWAYS has free will to recieve the grace of God in vain (per St. Paul). However, once man has chosen a path of wickedness, God’s mercy is his own discretion. He may choose (for any reason) to allow a fallen soul to wallow in his wickedness or He may choose to discipline that same soul and have mercy on him. While Augustine, here, is silent on the issue, it is incomprehensible that our loving and merciful Lord would “predestine” a fallen soul who has sincerely repented and sought after the grace of the God through prayer and conversion of heart.
These three examples are the “tip of the iceberg” with regards to Augustine’s theology of predestination. There is more, if needed.
As for other topics that divide Presbyterians and Catholics (Mary, the Eucharist, the Pope), I haven’t read ANY Augustine works that would put him on the side of Presbyterianism/Calvinism. Augustine is quite resoundingly Catholic on all of these doctrinal divides.
From an aplogetic standpoint, I would require my Presbyterian friend to supply whatever evidence he/she may have with regards to claiming Augustine’s Presbyterian slant. And once those sources have been revealed, I would read them very carefully in their entirity for the full context of what Augustine is actually saying.
From a personal perspective, I once had a conversation with someone who thought Augustine refuted the primacy of St. Peter. A quotation was supplied to me that SEEMED to support the claim. However, once I located the whole source–thanks to New Advent–and read it, I found that only two senteces previous to the supplied quotation provided unequivocable evidence that Augustine was indeed very certain of St. Peter’s primacy and position in the Church.
It’s all about context. Don’t take my word for it. . .Look 'em up!
K
Kurt_G
Guest
I think Phil hit on an important point, that on some issues like predestination, the subject can get so foggy that Catholics and Presbyterians do agree at some level. BUT…
WHAT ABOUT THE PURE CATHOLIC CONCEPTS ESPOUSED OVER AND OVER BY OUR BELOVED ST. AUGUSTINE?
Philomena, you might ask your Presbyterian friend to comment on the following (from a quick 25 minutes of perusal through my “Augustine” library) Here is a quick summary of what’s below:
St. Augustine taught:
A. Bishops refusing Eucharist to unrepentant sinners.
B. Fasting before receiving communion.
C. Following Apostolic Tradition, in the absence of writings.
D. Bishops of Rome had special protection against Heresy.
E. Mary had no more children after Jesus.
A. Here’s St. Augustine telling us that a person in serious unrepented sin should be refused the Eucharist by the Bishop:
LETTER LIV. Styled also Book I. of Replies to Questions of Januarius. (A.D. 400.)
CHAP. III. –
4. Some one may say, “The Eucharist ought not to be taken every day.” You ask, “On what grounds?”
Another answers, "Certainly; if the wound inflicted by sin and the violence of the soul’s distemper be such that the use of these remedies must be put off for a time, every man in this case should be, by the authority of the bishop, forbidden to approach the altar, and appointed to do penance,(2) and should be afterwards restored to privileges by the same authority; for this would be partaking unworthily, if one should partake of it at a time when he ought to be doing penance;
B. Here’s St. Augustine telling us that, even though the Apostles didn’t fast before that first Eucharist, God is pleased that the Church has adopted the universal custom of fasting before communion:
LETTER LIV. Styled also Book I. of Replies to Questions of Januarius. (A.D. 400.)
CHAP. VI. –
As to the question whether upon that day it is right to partake of food before either offering or partaking of the Eucharist:… it is clear that when the disciples first received the body and blood of the Lord, they had not been fasting.
- Must we therefore censure the universal Church because the sacrament is everywhere partaken of by persons fasting? Nay, verily, for from that time it pleased the Holy Spirit to appoint, for the honour of so great a sacrament, that the body of the Lord should take the precedence of all other food entering the mouth of a Christian; and it is for this reason that the custom referred to is universally observed.
K
Kurt_G
Guest
(continued from previous post):
C. Here’s St. Augustine supporting apostolic tradition, commenting about the “baptism by heretics” argument of the past, between St. Cyprian and Pope Stephen (who leans on apostolic tradition):
BOOK V.
HE EXAMINES THE LAST PART OF THE EPISTLE OF CYPRIAN TO JUBAIANUS, TOGETHER WITH HIS EPISTLE TO QUINTUS, THE LETTER OF THE AFRICAN SYNOD TO THE NUMIDIAN BISHOPS, AND CYPRIAN’S EPISTLE TO POMPEIUS.
The apostles," indeed, “gave no injunctions on the point;”(1) but the custom, which is opposed to Cyprian, may be supposed to have had its origin in apostolic tradition, just as there are many things which are observed by the whole Church, and therefore are fairly held to have been enjoined by the apostles, which yet are not mentioned in their writings.
D. Here’s St. Augustine informing us that, even though the Donatist schism has spread through the Church, it has not infected the Bishop of Rome:
LETTER LIII. (A.D. 400.)
TO GENEROSUS, OUR MOST LOVED AND HONOURABLE BROTHER, FORTUNATUS ALYPIUS AND AUGUSTIN SEND GREETING IN THE LORD.
CHAP. I. –
The Lord said: “Upon this rock will I build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it !”(6) The successor of Peter was Linus, and his successors in unbroken continuity were these: – Clement, Anacletus, Evaristus, Alexander, Sixtus, Telesphorus, Iginus, Anicetus, Pius, Soter, Eleutherius, Victor, Zephirinus, Calixtus, Urbanus, Pontianus, Antherus, Fabianus, Cornelius, Lucius, Stephanus, Xystus, Dionysius, Felix, Eutychianus, Gaius, Marcellinus, Marcellus, Eusebius, Miltiades, Sylvester, Marcus, Julius, Liberius, Damasus, and Siricius, whose successor is the present Bishop Anastasius. In this order of succession no Donatist bishop is found.
E. Here’s St. Augustine telling us Mary had no other children:
BOOK XXII: AUGUSTIN SEEKS BY THE APPLICATION OF THE TYPE AND THE ALLEGORY TO EXPLAIN AWAY THE MORAL DIFFICULTIES OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Paragraph 35:
This could go on and on and on, but it’s late… amazing that folks try to make St. Augustine into anything but Catholic, when you start reading what he wrote at length. I’d hate to have to prove he wasn’t Catholic! That would be a job.
C. Here’s St. Augustine supporting apostolic tradition, commenting about the “baptism by heretics” argument of the past, between St. Cyprian and Pope Stephen (who leans on apostolic tradition):
BOOK V.
HE EXAMINES THE LAST PART OF THE EPISTLE OF CYPRIAN TO JUBAIANUS, TOGETHER WITH HIS EPISTLE TO QUINTUS, THE LETTER OF THE AFRICAN SYNOD TO THE NUMIDIAN BISHOPS, AND CYPRIAN’S EPISTLE TO POMPEIUS.
The apostles," indeed, “gave no injunctions on the point;”(1) but the custom, which is opposed to Cyprian, may be supposed to have had its origin in apostolic tradition, just as there are many things which are observed by the whole Church, and therefore are fairly held to have been enjoined by the apostles, which yet are not mentioned in their writings.
D. Here’s St. Augustine informing us that, even though the Donatist schism has spread through the Church, it has not infected the Bishop of Rome:
LETTER LIII. (A.D. 400.)
TO GENEROSUS, OUR MOST LOVED AND HONOURABLE BROTHER, FORTUNATUS ALYPIUS AND AUGUSTIN SEND GREETING IN THE LORD.
CHAP. I. –
The Lord said: “Upon this rock will I build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it !”(6) The successor of Peter was Linus, and his successors in unbroken continuity were these: – Clement, Anacletus, Evaristus, Alexander, Sixtus, Telesphorus, Iginus, Anicetus, Pius, Soter, Eleutherius, Victor, Zephirinus, Calixtus, Urbanus, Pontianus, Antherus, Fabianus, Cornelius, Lucius, Stephanus, Xystus, Dionysius, Felix, Eutychianus, Gaius, Marcellinus, Marcellus, Eusebius, Miltiades, Sylvester, Marcus, Julius, Liberius, Damasus, and Siricius, whose successor is the present Bishop Anastasius. In this order of succession no Donatist bishop is found.
E. Here’s St. Augustine telling us Mary had no other children:
BOOK XXII: AUGUSTIN SEEKS BY THE APPLICATION OF THE TYPE AND THE ALLEGORY TO EXPLAIN AWAY THE MORAL DIFFICULTIES OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Paragraph 35:
- And, by the same use of the word, those called in the Gospel the Lord’s brothers are certainly not children of the Virgin Mary, but all the blood relations of the Lord.
This could go on and on and on, but it’s late… amazing that folks try to make St. Augustine into anything but Catholic, when you start reading what he wrote at length. I’d hate to have to prove he wasn’t Catholic! That would be a job.
M
mercygate
Guest
Philthy – I tried to answer your PM but your message folder is full. Can you clean it out, please.
Sorry to interrupt this thread for a personal message.
Sorry to interrupt this thread for a personal message.
- Status