The filioque, Church Mothers, and Augustine

[reen12]

As to Augustine bringing his son and the mother of his son
into the Church, he was hardly a father to his son.
As I noted, earlier in the thread, when it was stated that
Augustine had not ‘abandoned’ them, I replied as follows:

quote: reen12

I rather doubt that this lady had a lot of choice, given the times.
Not giving an inch of ground on this one. Augustine had a child by her,
and he did not marry her and provide his son with a family life.
Too bad for you. Daddy’s gone into the clergy, mommy’s taken the veil,
and this is your best bet. Let’s make the best of a sorry situation.

This kind of stuff is seen for what it is, given the increased understanding of the critical importance of early relationships, and no account of how the mother and the son were brought into the Church can cushion a hurtful reality for the son. He wasn’t important enough to his father for his father to provide homelife and paternal care. Abandonment takes many forms.
“Fatherhood,’” at one remove.

I did the best that I could by them, thought this Father of the Church?
Did you, Augustine? I leave it to others to make their own assessment

This was the very same Augustine who shared his tender, ‘fatherly’ thoughts on the fate and destination of unbaptized infants, who passed away.

quote: reen12

Augustine? What of his ‘view?’

Augustine held that such an infant would be subject to the ‘positive misery of the damned’ - relenting, after a time, him then saying that this ‘punishment’ would be so mild that the infant would not choose non-existence, as ‘preferable’ to such a state.

You’re in luck, sweetheart. Not the full-flame effect of the damned.
No. You can’t be with Mommy and Daddy and God, but you’ll
adjust to all of this ‘natural happiness,’ in time.

Far from any given point of doctrine, one might do well to
consider the characteristics of mind and heart possessed by
this highly elevated prelate - in having - at one point - consigned these infants to the ‘positive misery of the damned.’

The oft heard reply, is that this was opinion, only, and never the
official teaching of the Church. A very official ‘unoffical’ teaching,
one advanced… for 700 years.

How many hearts were broken, for the rest of a lifetime - because
this wretched ‘non-official’ teaching was taught? What kind of
hearts and minds were at work, to speculate on this horror to
begin with?

Augustine of Hippo - Father of the Church…and his ‘fatherly’ thoughts…
about the ‘positive misery of the damned,’ and this - as relates to
the fate of those infants who never could do a charitable deed, ‘meriting’ anything,
nor could they express ‘baptism of desire.’ They couldn’t even talk yet.

newadvent.org/cathen/09256a.htm

What kind of a mindset could create such a thing? - in the face of a God Who said:

“Let the little children come unto Me.”

These ecclesial worthies marred the face of Christ more than the Roman soldiers did.
They made Him unrecognizable, as the God Who *is *Mercy itself.

reen12

 

[Peter_J]

As to Augustine bringing his son and the mother of his son
into the Church, he was hardly a father to his son.
As I noted, earlier in the thread, when it was stated that
Augustine had not ‘abandoned’ them, I replied as follows:

quote: reen12

This was the very same Augustine who shared his tender, ‘fatherly’ thoughts on the fate and destination of unbaptized infants, who passed away.

quote: reen12

reen12

Thanks, reen, but I’m still not at all clear on what you mean. Are you talking about prior to his baptism? Or do you mean the brief period in between his baptism and the death of his son? (I’m not being facetious; I really don’t know which one you’re talking about.)

 

[reen12]

The point in time of his ‘baptism’ is immaterial, to the matters
at hand. Augustine was a throughly repugnant human being
…whatere the date of his destiny…vis a vis the baptismal font,

…and whatere flowed from that, not to make a pun.

I invite others to consider the the material presented,
in my posts, and to make their own assessment -
as to the clarity, thereof. :harp:

reen

 

[reen12]

If one wishes to be uplifted, in considering a good, true heart, there is St. Martin de Porres,
the Dominican brother, of Lima, Peru, born in 1579.

intermix.org.uk/images/all/icons/Martin%20De%20Porres.jpg

Abandoned by his grandee father [a nobleman - ain’t that a misnomer] -
who later acknowledged Martin as his son, when Martin was 8 years old -
Martin spent the better part of a lifetime, relieving both the physical and the
spiritual problems, of those who came to him for healing. Even the animals
knew that Martin would help them.

At the age of 12, Martin had become an apprentice, to a barber-surgeon.
He would use the skills, that he learned in his apprenticeship, to help treat injuries,
and to prepare the medicines of the day, when he became a Dominican.

A beautiful soul, who did not let his early years make him bitter.
Instead, Martin had an exquisite sensitivity to those who also
suffered in any way.

Martin de Porres, a saint of the Catholic Church.

reen12

 

[Peter_J]

Peter J;3985294:

Are you talking about prior to his baptism?

The point in time of his ‘baptism’ is immaterial, to the matters
at hand. Augustine was a throughly repugnant human being
…whatere the date of his destiny…vis a vis the baptismal font,

I think you should read this parable: Matthew 20:1-16.

Maybe also read in Acts about the conversion of Saul of Tarsus, and what he was like prior to it.

 

[reen12]

quote: Peter J

I think you should read this parable: Matthew 20:1-16.

Maybe also read in Acts about the conversion of Saul of Tarsus, and what he was like prior to it.

Augustine’s repentence and turn to God, moves me not.
Even if I could manage to stifle the thought that Augustine
used Floria Aemilia for 15 years - it was always ‘all about’ Augustine, and not others.
At any point, in that 15 year period, he could have married
the mother of his son. He did not do this, either before or
after his baptism. [In terms of this baptism, it’s still ‘all about’ him.]

That Augustine could wrap his mind around the thought that the
God He served would treat unbaptized infants to the
‘positive misery of the damned’ bespeaks a heartless human being.Period.

quote: reen12

…consider the characteristics of mind and heart possessed by

this highly elevated prelate - in having - at one point - consigned these infants to the ‘positive misery of the damned.’

Augustine was a self-centered individual, and perhaps that’s
why he could consign infants, who had died, to the
flames of hell, before he changed his ‘position.’ And this
was after the waters of baptism - not before.

The early 20th c. Catholic Encyclopedia describes Augustine’s
15 year live-in, with Floria Aemilia, as his ‘thralldom.’

Not buying that line. He used her, plain and simple.

The mercy of God is unfathomable. And that His mercy was extended to Augustine,
I have no doubt.

Best,

reen12