As I’ve mentioned recently, I’ve finally taken up Augustine’s City of God in my reading and after the first seven books (of twenty-two) have been finding it immensely enjoyable and intellectually stimulating. I’d been exposed to small sections in my undergraduate courses, but now I’m finally taking in the full sweep of the argument and it’s quite a different experience. For those of you who don’t know, most of the first ten books (roughly 4oo pages), is caught up with Augustine’s polemic against the pagans. They had charged Christianity and Christ with the sack of Rome by the Goths, so Augustine launches a sweeping counterattack against the official theology of Rome as well as its most “enlightened” interpretations via Varro and some of the philosophers such as the Neo-Platonists.
Though not quite through the polemics, I thought it might be worth highlighting a few observations worth reflecting on briefly.
Augustine Against the Gods
First, on the material critique of the gods, it’s fairly amusing to read Augustine pick apart the official state religion and the popular iterations presented in Homer and the poets on its own terms. Augustine takes the time to comb through the writings of the poets and point out the various internal inconsistencies and between common Roman morality and the lecherous, shameful gods that are celebrated as ‘select’ among the pantheon. And then he goes on to document in detail the licentiousness that’s passed off as the proper worship of the gods: prostitution, castration, drunkenness, and countless other abominations. The gods weren’t simply non-existent for Augustine–whether figments of the human imagination or demons masquerading as gods–they were positively dehumanizing.
Looking at the practice and reality of idolatry, one Augustine’s main lines of attack is that it’s all rather untidy. Why the multiplication of so many gods to various functions? Why one god for the planting of seeds and another for their growth? If Jupiter is both father and mother of all, why the profusion of feminine and masculine deities? At one point he quite humorously points that there were about six different gods supposed to be invoked at weddings in order to ensure the consummation of the marriage, making things a bit too crowded for the Bride and Groom to get any of the work done themselves. The spirit of Elisha against the Baals on Mt. Carmel stalks Augustine’s work.
Beyond this, it’s not just that polytheism is metaphysically untidy. Augustine points out that the idolatrous spirit, once it begins down the road of multiplying deities, has no natural way of stopping. The logic of polytheism takes over and gods and goddesses begin to pop in the places that you’d least expect them. Indeed, that’s one of the problems with it. As soon as you lose the one God who creates, redeems, directs, and orders all things, you begin to need more and more gods to keep the system going. It’s not as if idolaters simply switch out the True God for another main deity. This creates the perpetual duty to please and propitiate all of them, or the anxiety that comes in making sure you pick the right one for your needs. There is no rest in polytheism.
Augustine’s polemical vision is broader still, though. He takes aim not only at popular piety, but even the more sophisticated and academic attempts to save or reinterpret the worship of the gods by Varro or even Cicero. Poet or philosopher, it didn’t matter. Augustine aimed both high and law. Actually, one of the more interesting features of his polemic is to show the way that even the more sophisticated constructions of Varro and others eventually fall prey to the same faulty metaphysical assumptions, or else fall prey to others that, while possibly less crass, are no more plausible. Idolatry is idolatry is idolatry. Of course, in order to demonstrate that, Augustine had to be familiar with both popular piety and it’s more academic variations.
In modern polemics, if it’s engaged in at all, theologians and pastors tend to stick to one level of discourse. Some love to get into the thick of more street-level apologetics, whether it be Mormons, skeptical Dawkinsians, or your run of the mill “spiritual-not-religious” critic. Others enjoy the high-level “apologetic” conducted in academies–the kind of apologetic that doesn’t like being called an apologetic–with conversations centered around “modernity”, deconstruction, critical theory, and abstruse ruminations about the hope of a Christian theo-ontology. Usually, the two modes of discourse don’t mix. For Augustine that wasn’t an option. Chapters skewering the lewdities of the Bacchanalia or the foolishness of multiplying principles of being, give way to an examination of the metaphysical shortcomings of the Neo-Platonists.
One of the other features of note is that Augustine’s critique is conducted at the historical level as well. Indeed, after an initial defense of Christian providence against the pagans, Augustine’s critique of the gods begins there. If Christ and the worship of Christ is allegedly responsible for historical evils, for the loss of the blessings of the gods, Augustine will go to history to answer them. If the gods were such great protectors, why had the Romans suffered such great military losses in the ages when there was unquestioned Roman devotion? What of the horrendous civil wars that cause tumult and death? Or how about the various “natural” tragedies and plagues that this pantheon was responsible to deflect? Had not every god they ever worshiped failed them? Indeed, if Virgil’s press and spin-doctoring of history was to be believed and Rome was supported by the old gods of Troy, why did they have any hope in them? Why should the gods that failed Troy be expected to be the salvation of Rome?
Finally, in terms of material content, Augustine’s critique always contains an appreciation of the true desires contained in Roman values and attempts to show their ultimate fulfillment in Christ. Though his judgment is almost unrelentingly negative in terms of the actual worship or philosophical positions of those whom he engages, he has a knack for recognizing those noble elements in Varro, Seneca, or some of the heroes of Rome such as Regulus. Some of them are clearly groping towards the truth, but they are unfortunately weighed down by tradition or a lack of courage to recognize the truth. In some cases, he looks at the gods they worship and points out that what they really ought to worship is a different one like Felicity, who offers all that the Romans seek. Of course, that’s merely a set-up to point out that true felicity comes from the one God in Jesus Christ who is the source of all good in this world and the next.
A Modern City of God?
As I have read and reviewed Augustine’s work, I’ve been wondering what it would take to write a contemporary City of God for the current age. As the West enters (and in Europe has been in) a post-Christian era that increasingly resembles an earlier, more pluralistic and pagan age, what would a full-dress assault on the “gods” look like? Does it already exist? There are a number of good apologetics works out there, but I’m not sure I know of something engaging in as far-reaching, or exhaustive examination of the philosophies, popular spiritualities, and secularized idols (ideologies) that compares to the City of God. Possibly the David Bentley Hart duo of Atheist Delusions when paired with his more recent The Experience of God could be thought of as a contender in that way.
One of the challenges to reproducing Augustine’s work in the contemporary period is that there is no recognizable “religious” system on par with the Roman cult in contemporary Western culture. Thinking about the systems of worship we tend to call religions in the West, the pluralism involved seems to be of a somewhat different sort than the variegated worship of the pantheon in ancient Rome. To take on the “gods” of positive religions like Hinduism, Islam, and so forth, would be a massive undertaking, and in the West, is probably largely beside the point. No, the only comparable reality would likely be the sort of secularized idolatry of the deification of the goods of modern culture. In other words, the sort of “hyper-goods” Charles Taylor talks about like freedom as autonomy, unfettered choice, or more obvious candidates such as money, sex, power, celebrity. In that sense, something like Timothy Keller’s Counterfeit Gods might just do the trick, only on a bit of a grander scale (and I say that loving that book).
I suppose, then, that the elements are probably all there in works that are out on the market, simply chopped up into smaller works and spread out, devoted to tackling more specific, niche issues. Perhaps City of God simply isn’t meant to be rewritten and the age calls for another kind of work altogether. A more impatient age can’t take the time to work through a thousand page onslaught on idols of the age.
I wonder, though. Maybe there’s space yet, for another Augustine to meet the current challenges.
And I suppose that’s where I’ll end this ramble. If you have any thoughts, opinions, ruminations, or recommendations, feel free to weigh in through the comments.
Soli Deo Gloria
‘In modern polemics, if it’s engaged in at all, theologians and pastors tend to stick to one level of discourse. Some love to get into the thick of’
Occurs twice. Also, what translation are you reading?
Yes, I just fixed that. It’s a bizarre feature of an editing software I have. If I press enter to push part a paragraph down, it doubles the sentence.
I am using the Penguin classics by Henry Bettenson.
Great thoughts, Derek. In a few weeks, I will be walking my 11th-graders through City of God as a transition between our units on missiology/cultural engagement and on eschatology. Unfortunately, I don’t have the time right now to wade through the entire book, but I’m using Gerard O’Daly’s reader’s guide: http://www.amazon.com/Augustines-City-God-Readers-Guide/dp/0199270813/
One area which I think deserves further elaboration is how Augustine’s doctrine of the “Two Cities” impacts our understanding of cultural engagement today. What would a distinctively Augustinian view of mission look like?
Kyle, that’s a great question, which I’m not sure I’ve got anything original to say anything about. I know Keller likes the Two Cities paradigm and tries to integrate it in his work, but he’s also got a lot more going on. All of this makes me want to go revisit an article by Jamie Smith, though, on the Two Cities v. the Two Kingdoms. I think I’d come at it with new eyes now.
I’m just starting to dabble in Christopher Lasch, and he identifies (or rather cites others who do so) “progress” as a secular religion in this book: http://www.amazon.com/True-Only-Heaven-Progress-Critics/dp/0393307956/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1426011223&sr=8-1&keywords=the+true+and+only+heaven. Having been keyed into “progress” and especially its intricate connections to capitalism (http://www.amazon.com/Capitalism-Progress-Diagnosis-Biblical-Theological/dp/0853647704/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1426011414&sr=8-1&keywords=capitalism+and+progress) , I wonder if it is the closest thing to a religious system out there at the moment.
Thanks for the tip. I’ve been meaning to put Lasch on my list of to-read books. I’ll check it out.
“A more impatient age can’t take the time to work through a thousand page onslaught on idols of the age.”
I think this thought is key, from both the perspective of potential readers and writers. I think it’s clear that our most popular channels of communication today, by their very nature, militate against the sort of comprehensive, systematic, lengthy approach that you find in Augustine (and many of the great Christian minds of centuries past). And from the writer’s perspective, the push to publish seems to make it very difficult to spend the years it would take to create something as comprehensive as Augustine’s work. Add to that the numerous challenges of keeping up in the information age, and I think you’ve got a very powerful mix of factors working against the production of such a modern day equivalent.
I think the question that needs to be asked next (and which you begin to ask) is whether that’s actually good. Is it ok that our age seems to call for a different sort of work all together, and if so, what kind of work would that be? Or, if it’s not ok, and there is good reason to seek a single, comprehensive work for our present age, how do we combat the forces working against the production and consumption of such a work?
Great piece, by the way. I look forward to seeing where you go with these thoughts.
Thanks for the post Derek. I’ve found this masterpiece as paramount in my own theological discipline and understanding. Augustine embodies the spirit of Paul’s mission, preaching to both high and low in order to save a few.
One of my favorite sections is how the pagans of Augustine’s age weren’t even interesting sinners anymore. Back in the day, Romans, out of the love of fame, lust for honor, and fear of man, would practice incredible feats of chastity, heroism, sacrifice, and boldness. His pagans were only selfish and their crudity revealed a decayed age. It made me think of America’s Founders and their generation when compared to the “leaders” of today. It’s a hearty laugh and cry, and gives space to appreciate the Gospel in a rich way, for our city is elsewhere.
PS. As far as rants go, Augustine is too reserved for my tastes. Tertullian is excellent in his Apology. I wish commentaries would translate more of his crassness in how he insults the gods of Rome! We may need another CoG for our time, but we really need a Tertullian to lay waste, with Christian hope and conviction, to the idolatries of this present age.
I’ll have to go digging into more Tertullian. That’s great.
And the point you make about the interesting sinners is so true. Old vice at least led to social order and human glory, but later it was only debauchery. Again, the Rome/American parallels are frightening.
“We may need another CoG for our time, but we really need a Tertullian to lay waste, with Christian hope and conviction, to the idolatries of this present age.”
St. Paul does a fine job of that in his letters…if we would only take them seriously, and echo those admonitions against idolatry.
Derek, thanks for posting on City of God! This is something I’ve wanted to read for a while, so I appreciate someone going before 🙂
As for a contender for a modern “Against the Gods,” I wonder if Chesterton’s “Heretics” comes close in scope. It’s more personal than City of God sounds, but it does identify and oppose modern ideas and movements that Chesterton finds troubling. One might do the same thing with the ideologies of Rob Bell, RHE, daytime talk shows, etc.
Maybe someone could do the same thing with a blog series/blook, detestable as that word is…
This blog is really a closing plus it clarifies
a lot of issues. Great to learn, many thanks. https://goo.gl/lpJvLP