a personal search/quest

[Ruth]

For what it's worth, I think I am going to take a different approach with this book.

I have been listening to the audio course, and notice that this does very much address some of my deepest questions, and I want to explore these further, but slowly reading through the whole book isn't really working.

Here's a quote from the course to show what I mean:
"Once we've seen that our childhood confidence in the surface meaning of the fables that our elders taught us has been misplaced, that confidence has been misplaced, what do we do now?"

Now I wonder very much if Augustine actually addresses this question, and if so, what is his answer?

So far, I see that he has been bashing pagan religion, and philosophy, with arguments that seem to me equally applicable to Christian religion. I don't want to read this book with the attitude of "haha those pagans were really superstitious and ignorant, thankfully we know much better", when in reality we have just replaced the superstition with a more modern variant.

I want to see if Augustine proposes something that is really different, and plan to look through the whole book to see if I can find quotes that explain what's so new and better about Christianity.

If anyone is interested in joining me in this search, we might start a topic for it. I'm not sure if it is a feasible plan, but I want to address the real question and not just fill my mind with lots of details about Roman gods and philosophies.

[Nemo]

Ruth wrote: "So far, I see that he has been bashing pagan religion, and philosophy, with arguments that seem to me equally applicable to Christian religion.."

I'm a little dumbfounded by your comment...

For starters, I don't think Augustine is bashing pagan religion and philosophy. Critiquing, yes, but not bashing, because he doesn't neglect to mention the merits of paganism. In fact, when I first read City of God, Augustine's description of Roman history and Greek philosophy so fascinated me that I developed an abiding interest in Greco-Roman classics.

If Augustine's painstaking discussion of the differences between paganism and Christianity couldn't convince you that they are "really different". I'm not sure anybody else could.

Augustine, like other Church Fathers we've read, would argue that the Judeo-Christian religion is older than the pagan religions. If you're looking for something "new and better", you might be disappointed. But then again, new is not necessarily better, and vice versa.

[Ruth]

O thanks for replying anyway, even if dumbfounded!

Very interesting to see this from your perspective. Perhaps I've completely misunderstood the intentions of Augustine. I have to admit I already thought he took rather a lot of words to dismiss something.

His descriptions of Roman culture do seem to me like an introduction to his later dismissing of them. Sometimes I feel he is deliberately ridiculing things where there is much more to say about them. I completely missed that he may also feel appreciation for them, and I think this began to irritate me more and more.

But well, anyway, I still think I need to take some time to reflect what is really his point. I think there is very much in this book, but I cannot get it through this overload of details.

[Ruth]

Nemo wrote: "If you're looking for something "new and better", you might be disappointed. But then again, new is not necessarily better, and vice versa."

That's also something to keep in mind. Thanks.

[Nemo]

Ruth wrote: "Sometimes I feel he is deliberately ridiculing things where there is much more to say about them. I completely missed that he may also feel appreciation for them,"

It's partly my fault, because I noticed, and should have commented on, Augustine's appreciation of paganism and especially respect for the writers he engaged with.

"There is much more to say" about paganism, but then, you "cannot get it through this overload of details". What is a writer supposed to do with these conflicting criticisms?

If I understand you correctly, you're looking for some practical guidance on how to deal with a traumatic experience of some version of Christianity.

I can't address your question from personal experience, because we come from different background. But, what Augustine does here is indeed relevant to your question: What do we do when the culture we grew up in has collapsed?

Augustine doesn't simply bash paganism, and throw out the baby with the bathwater, so to speak. Instead, he examines Roman history and culture in detail, and endeavours to separate the wheat from the chaff. To do this, he needs a set of criteria, a standard of "good" to measure against, which his audience can agree with. In this way, the faults and merits of Christianity and paganism can be thought through and reasoned out.

This is how we learn from past experience and grow in grace and knowledge, I think.

[Ruth]

Nemo wrote: "If I understand you correctly, you're looking for some practical guidance on how to deal with a traumatic experience of some version of Christianity. (...) What do we do when the culture we grew up in has collapsed? "

Yes, that's it exactly.
And it's good to remember that Augustine was indeed speaking from this experience, that he grew up with all these pagan gods and stories and a culture that collapsed. I find it a helpful thought that he is here dealing with his own past just as well. It explains the need to use their own arguments against them. It is what you need to do if you want to get out of your own system of thoughts.

Nemo wrote: "There is much more to say" about paganism, but then, you "cannot get it through this overload of details". What is a writer supposed to do with these conflicting criticisms?
What I meant is: there is much more to say for paganism, not just about. And I do not mean "let us all start believing in lots of gods" but I think the stories do help us chart the territory of our inner life.

I have been flipping through the book yesterday, to see if I could find quotes to help explain my questions, or find answers to my own questions. In book II I first noticed how extraordinary negative he was about the poets and all the stories. You say that you see how Augustine appreciates his history, but I think he is a bit partial in there. He appreciates courage, a limited amount of wishing for glory, and virtuous living, but not any using of your imagination. See for example chapters 13 and 14 in book II. At the end of chapter 13 he praises the Roman spirit that denied any actors civic honor, and in the beginning of chapter 14 he praises Plato who said that the poets should be banned from the city.

[Nemo]

Ruth wrote: "It explains the need to use their own arguments against them. It is what you need to do if you want to get out of your own system of thoughts.."

One can turn people's arguments against them only if their beliefs are self-contradictory. You say that Augustine's criticisms of paganism are also applicable to Christianity. I disagree.

First, Christian beliefs are not self-contradictory, at least as Augustine expounds and as I understand them. I would be more than happy to discuss them with anyone interested...

Second, it is true that Christians don't always practice what they preach, but we know we fall short precisely because a high moral standard is revealed to us through the Gospels, and is consistent with our own conscience. Augustine's criticism of pagan religions is that they don't teach any moral standard, but are blatantly immoral. In fact, the ancient Greeks and Romans who sought to live a moral life would turn to philosophy instead.

Augustine refutes paganism in a (systematic) way that would be familiar to the philosophers. There are three divisions of ancient Greek philosophy, natural philosophy, logic and ethics. He uses reason and logic for the first argument, and applies natural philosophy when discussing the nature of the gods, and he appeals to conscience and ethics for the second argument.

He appreciates courage, a limited amount of wishing for glory, and virtuous living, but not any using of your imagination.

What both Plato and Augustine have against "poets" is that the immoral behaviour (of the pagan gods) the poets praise and exalt in their plays, which are typically celebrated in public festivals dedicated to pagan deities. Nowhere do they argue against the use of imagination. On the contrary, they demonstrate great power of imagination in their own works.

[Nemo]

Ruth wrote: "What I meant is: there is much more to say for paganism, not just about..."

But remember Augustine's purpose in writing City of God. as he clearly stated in the beginning, is not to speak "for" paganism, but for Christianity against pagans. You're criticizing a writer for not doing something against his stated purpose. I don't think that is a fair criticism, for a writer certainly can write as much or as little on a subject as he sees fit.

If Augustine makes any argument that is factually incorrect, or logically inconsistent, or if he misrepresents paganism in any way, either due to ignorance or bias, it would be fair to correct or criticize him. From what I've learned about Augustine, he would welcome such constructive criticisms with open arms.

As I said earlier, I have a greater appreciation for Greco-Roman history and culture because of Augustine than I would have otherwise. I've read quite a few classical works since I first read City of God, and now reading it the second time, I haven't found any misrepresentations on his part.