W
Wesrock
Guest
I expect he did given his history with them. Though “negative emotions” are not always a bad thing.fhansen:
Okay, I’m still trying to bring some focus here. Is it accurate to say that he looked upon the Manicheans, and himself as a Manichean, with some negative emotion?He certainly wasn’t happy…He disdained their ignorance…
However, I think you’re overanalyzing these two quotes out of context, either not understanding the first example of what he means when he writes all things are good insofar as they exist or insisting on reading the two statements univocally when he was referring to different things in different contexts. He was not contradicting himself.Yes, it is not theologically precise. Specifically, it is not anthropologically precise; his own emotion was influencing his statements. This is an example of a “roadblock”. We all do this: we see goodness in people except this, this, and this, etc. These are all roadblocks to seeing “through eyes of the Spirit” as Augustine describes.And while the language was strong-and probably not theologically precise-he also said, "they shall become good only when they come to hold the truth and consent to the truth that thy apostle may say to them: “You were formerly in darkness, but now are you in the light in the Lord.”
We see bad behaviors, and our negative emotion is triggered. While we may adhere to “love the sinner, hate the sin” or something like that, we can honestly admit that our gut reaction is to initially feel some negative affect toward both the sin and the sinner, this is a very normal activity of the human conscience. Augustine was not immune, but he went a long way toward reconciling with his own natural drives/motives.
Last edited: