Part II

CR: Yes he was. Now let's start at the beginning. He was born in 354 A.D. He had a Christian mother and a pagan father. From what I have read, his mother held both Christian and pagan beliefs, so I would not call her a true Christian, by any stretch of the imagination. She was probably the typical Roman "convert" after the time of Constantine, when Christianity became the state religion. Anyway, as you can imagine, his mixed religious upbringing caused him a lot of confusion. At first, he gave up on religion altogether, but after he read Cicero's "Hortensius" he decided to go on a quest for truth.

ACCIC: Cicero?

CR: Yes, Cicero was an influential politician and was influential in popularizing Platonic philosophy with the general public. In fact, the center for this philosophy was the very "Academy" that Tertullian referred to in that quote I just gave you. Cicero invented some words when he was translating some of the Greek philosophy texts to Latin--words like "morals," "property," "individual," "science" and so on. 

ACCIC: Huh! Didn't know that!

CR: After reading Cicero, he ran across the Manichees, which was a very popular--as we would call it today--cult. He ended up joining them and stayed with them for almost ten years.

ACCIC: Manichees... Can't say I am familiar with them.

CR: Well, this religion was started by a man called Mani in about 242 A.D. He was a Persian hermit who blended bits and pieces of different religions together, not unlike the Bahai's of today. The core of his religion appears to be Gnostic dualism, that is, that matter is inherently evil and the spirit is inherently good; the idea that we have divine souls trapped in our corrupt, material bodies. He took the idea of incarnation from Buddhism, some ideas from Zoroastrianism, Taoism, Christianity and the Marcionite Christian heresy.

ACCIC: Another Christian heresy. Can you explain the Marcionite heresy?

CR: Marcion was a precursor to Luther in many ways. He despised anything that smacked of Judaism, even to the point where he deleted the entire Old Testament from the Bible his church used. And he also deleted New Testament books and passages that sounded too Jewish too him as well! This was one of the earliest heresies that the church faced after the Apostolic period.

ACCIC: Interesting. So tell us more about this cult that Augustine joined.

CR: Well, they saw God as "light" and author of spiritual things; and Satan as "darkness" and the world of material things. To them, evil was not a matter of morality, but a purely physical thing. Because they could blame evil on the material world (including their own bodies), they did not see themselves as responsible for any evil actions on their part--it was the fault of the material world! There was a lot of astrology mixed up in their religion. And like Marcion, they threw out the Old Testament and favored the writings of the Apostle Paul--it would appear that the book of Romans was one of their favorites. Now there were two classes of people in this religion. There were the "elect" who would go straight to their heavenly reward after death. To be one of the "elect," one had to live a life of celibacy, teaching, preaching and severe austerity---no physical comforts for these guys! Those who could not cut the mustard were called the "auditors"--they could marry, but still had to abide by the rules as best they could. Their only hope of a heavenly reward would be if they could be incarnated, after they die, into one of the "elect;" only then could they could get to their reward. Those who were not either auditors or the elect would go straight to hell when they died.²

ACCIC: Man, I can already see a lot of similarities with Augustine's doctrines! It's all there! I even see a hint of Augustine's purgatory there, in the auditors, I mean!

CR: Yes, the idea of the second chance after death is certainly in Manicheeism. Now Augustine based a lot of his theology on a rather imaginative interpretation of the book of Romans and it is certainly reasonable to believe that his experience as a Manicheean and their teachings on this book had a great deal of influence on the way he interpreted it, whether he realized it or not. The Manicheean idea of the "elect" certainly has some parallels with Augustine's ideas on who were the "elect" mentioned in the book of Romans. And the fact that the Manicheeans excused themselves from any responsibility for their inherently "evil" bodies³--certainly has some echoes in Augustine's ideas about the so-called "total depravity of man." We know Augustine had a very poor opinion of the human body and thought all sex was inherently evil and that he was a big proponent of celibacy, especially in the priesthood. Now, celibacy was not something new in the Christian world, after all, the Apostle Paul said that a great advantage of living single was that you could devote all of your attention to Christ. However, the reason that Augustine used to justify celibacy was something new, that is, that all sex was evil!⁴

ACCIC: So that's where Catholics got those ideas!

CR: Yes, now you know where it came from! And not only the Catholic church, but we are getting ahead of ourselves! By the way, the Manicheeans had a lot to do with Augustine's ideas about original sin. Most of us have probably heard the term, but don't understand what is meant by it. Augustine was convinced that the sin Adam and Eve committed in the garden of Eden was not biting the apple, but having sex! That was the "original sin." Every time anyone of us has sex with our wives, we are committing sin in Augustine's eyes! And through this sin, or the act of procreation, we literally pass down sin to our children. It is almost a genetic thing. In other words, infants are totally depraved (to use his words) from the moment of conception! Augustine tried to use some verses from Paul regarding the fall of Adam and Eve to back up this nutty idea--but he twisted those Scriptures into something they clearly did not mean. But we can see where this doctrine really came from--it was from the Manicheeans. And Augustine's ideas about sex were part of the justification for celibate clergy in the Catholic church--and we know how well that turned out--just look at all of the sex scandals in the Catholic Church--it has been going on for centuries! Augustine was also the source of the Roman Catholic doctrine of the "perpetual virginity of Mary"--the idea that Mary never had any other children other than Jesus--even though the Bible mentions James, the brother of Jesus and the early church fathers talked about him as the brother of Jesus. A lot of Catholic Mariology comes straight from Augustine's warped ideas about sex.

ACCIC: You know, I had a vague idea what original sin was, but had no idea it was that ludicrous! He created a whole can of worms with this doctrine! I can better understand some of the old Catholic attitudes towards sex now.

CR: Yes, it explains a lot. He went on to use this doctrine to justify infant baptism--he thought that infant baptism literally "washed away" the "original sin" babies were supposedly born with. If the baby was not baptized, it would literally burn for all eternity in hell according to his doctrine!

ACCIC: That's insane!

CR: Yes, but has been a tenet of Catholic--and Lutheran and nearly all Calvinistic-Reformed denominations from the beginning--they all believe in "original sin!"

ACCIC: I must say that is shocking!

CR: Now getting back to Augustine's involvement in the Manicheean cult--he did eventually leave it, that is, after he found that he still had a lot of unanswered questions--and when he saw the hypocrisy among the members of this religion. One day, according to his testimony, he heard some children singing the words "Take up and read." He took this as a divine sign, so he looked around and what do you know, he found a New Testament that someone had left there, so he took it and it opened up to the book of--

ACCIC: Let me guess--was it the book of Romans?

CR: Why, yes, that was it--how did you know! However, he did not turn to Romans 8 or 9, (as you might expect) but chapter 13. So this experience led him back to Christianity. Unfortunately, he looked to the bishop of Milan to guide him in his spiritual journey.

ACCIC: You're talking about Ambrose?

CR: Yes, we mentioned him earlier. He was a Neoplatonist, he was one of those that attempted to merge pagan philosophy and Christianity together. The core tenet of Neoplatonism is dualism again, the idea of the great divide between the spiritual and the physical world; the spiritual world was good, the physical, evil. Augustine acknowledged in his writings that he had read some Neoplatonist books.³

ACCIC: With Manicheeist dualism and Neoplatonist dualism so much alike, I imagine he felt quite comfortable with this mix of pagan philosophy and Christianity.

CR: Yes, he did. Now I don't want to give you the impression that he had a completely pagan outlook, he did not. Even with this horrible mix of paganism and Christianity, he did get some wholesome Christian teaching. And he even wrote some books railing against the Manichees, mostly pointing to their hypocrisy, their faulty astrological system and their twisted views of Christ. But it is clear that there were many of their ideas he did not reject. But this may not have been seen as a great fault in his day--Christians were getting all too comfortable merging pagan philosophies and Christianity in those days---it appears that Tertullian was the only one who saw the danger in it.

ACCIC: It is not unlike Christians today trying to incorporate ideas from our own culture--not just philosophy, but pop psychology, the world's attitudes about marriage and sexuality, music, entertainment--you name it--they see nothing wrong with trying to mix these things with the church and Christianity--as if the two could coincide.

CR: No, this thing is not something new. Some of the early church fathers caved into this kind of stuff and we ended up with the Roman Catholic Church. The Protestant churches today are caving in to this stuff and who knows what we'll end up with. We can already see the trends--polls show that there is little difference between Evangelicals and the rest of the world when it comes to immoral behavior like premarital sex and divorce and so on. And we can also see religious education trends like those fostered by Ambrose in nearly all of the seminaries--most of them incorporate the "wisdom" of this world into their curriculum so much that it is very difficult to see where the secular philosophies and teachings end and where the Biblical teaching begins--that is, if there is any teaching from the Bible at all...

ACCIC: One sometimes wonders how long it can go on like this before true Christians find themselves very much outnumbered in a pagan, godless world. Even being persecuted...

CR: I think it has already started.

ACCIC: Yep, I think you're right. Well, let's get back to Augustine. How do we get from Augustine being taught heresy to Augustine teaching heresy?

CR: Well, Augustine was made the bishop of Hippo in 395.

ACCIC: Let me interject to say for those who may be wondering: "Hippo" is not referring the animal, but a city in what is now modern-day Algeria.

CR: Yes, the name can bring snickers to those unfamiliar with ancient geography. Anyway, this position gave him some authority. Augustine was a prolific writer--which is one of the reasons why he became so influential on church doctrine. He was not terribly influential while he was alive, but his writings lived on after him and have continued to influence Christian thinkers right up to the present day! Now, it was actually a couple of so-called heresies that brought Augustine out of the woodwork-

ACCIC: Heresies and more heresies!

CR: Yes, but these were not--well, you'll see what I mean. The first heresy in which Augustine voiced his opinion, or should we say, his pen, was the Donatist heresy. This so-called heresy started with one of the last waves of state-sponsored persecution against the Christians. The Roman Emperor Diocletian, who reigned from 284 to 313 A.D., declared in 303 A.D. that all Christian churches had to be razed or burned to the ground, that all Christian Scriptures had to be turned over to the state to be burned and all teachers of Christian doctrine were to be thrown into prison. Now remember, this is a time when all Scriptures were laboriously handwritten, you couldn't go to your neighborhood bookstore and buy another Bible! Now some so-called Christians handed over their buildings and all of the books or scrolls in their libraries to the state, to be destroyed, but many did not. The bishop of Carthage was one of those who did, because he did not want to be thrown into prison. Remember that name, bishop of Carthage...

ACCIC: It makes us appreciate our religious freedom.

CR: Yes, it does. Now a year later, in 304, Diocletian got very sick. Now he was the head of a group of four co-emperors, a very unusual governing arrangement for Roman empire. Anyway, Galerius was on of the four co-emperors and appears to have taken advantage of Diocletian's illness to increase the persecution of the Christians; Diocletian had always stressed that he did not want any bloodshed, he did not want Christians to be killed over this. However, Galerius wanted blood. He issued an edict which stated that all Roman citizens had to offer a sacrifice to the Roman gods or face death. This caused a lot of bloodshed, some entire Christian communities were wiped out in Africa, Egypt and Palestine where this edict had been rigidly enforced. Many faced death instead of denying their faith. The persecution did not stop until 311 A.D. when Galerius rescinded it. His persecution had caused a big backlash in Roman society. And he saw that the persecution did not wipe out the Christians, as he had expected. In the end, he issued his "Protocol of Toleration" which gave Christians back all of their rights to meet and worship--and he even asked the Christians to pray for the Roman empire!

ACCIC: Wow, that is quite a turn-around!

CR: Yes, it was. Now a  controversy started after the persecution ended. What was the status in the church of those who denied their faith? What was the status of those who turned over Scripture and church buildings to be burned? Well, as it turns out, there was a bishop Felix of Aptunga who had turned over Scriptures to be burned. He was still at his post after the persecution had ended. In 311, this bishop had ordained another bishop, Caecilian, to be the bishop of Carthage in 311. Carthage is in modern-day Algeria and it had a very large and influential church at the time.

ACCIC: Algeria--same country that Augustine was from.

CR: One and the same. Well, the churches in North Africa were outraged by this ordination; 500 North African bishops refused to recognize Caecilian as a bishop because his ordination was performed by Felix, someone who had willingly turned over priceless Scripture to the Romans, to be burned--and he was supposed to be a leader of his flock! In their eyes (and I agree with them), the church should be pure and spotless. So they ignored the ordination of Caecilian and ordained someone else, a highly respected man by the name of Donatus. In desperation, the bishops appealed to Constantine, who was emperor by then, to see if he could force out Caecilian, because he still claimed that he was the legitimate bishop of Carthage. Here's where Augustine comes in. He used all of his power to sway Constantine to support Caecilian!

ACCIC: What? Why would he do that?

CR: We'll get to that in a minute. First let me say, the real ruckus did not get started until after Constantine ruled in the favor of Caecilian. Then the African church really got upset! There is a common slogan then which went, "What does the [Roman] emperor have to do with the church?" We have to remember that at this time, there was no strict control of the church by the pope, as there was in later times; the churches across the land still had some independence, though that was starting to evaporate, especially after Constantine got the state involved in church politics. The African church clearly resented this. Furthermore, there was a development which would raise its head again during the Reformation over a thousand years later: Donatus declared that the church services should be given in the language of the church congregation, not in Latin, as had been common earlier. The churches loved it. And there began to be talk of pulling away from the churches in Rome and the east.

ACCIC: So Augustine was just trying to avoid a split?

CR: I am sure that was a motivation, second to his insistence that the African church had to recognize the authority of Rome. Now Augustine tried to reason with the Donatists, to no avail. One of the reasons he gave for accepting Caecilian was that a fallen bishop did not necessarily taint the church ordinances or "sacraments" as they were later called. For instance, if you were baptised by someone, who it later turned out, was an adulterer, that did not invalidate your baptism, as long as you were faithful and truly fit for baptism at that time.

ACCIC: I guess that makes sense, assuming that Caecilian was qualified, but I would think it would have been better if Augustine just let the African church keep their own bishop!

CR: I agree, but that would mean denying the power of the state and the headship of Rome in the church.

ACCIC: You can see the concept of the state-church already.

CR: Exactly. Now this argument of Augustine's, I agree with. But then he got crazy. He went on further to say that there can be no such thing as a pure and spotless church and we should not even try to have one--

ACCIC: What?! Scriptures clearly say that the church should be pure and spotless! And Paul talks numerous times about excommunicating those who are involved in sin and heresy!

CR: You are right, of course! But Augustine said that the church should be a "mixed body," with both "saints"--that is, true followers of Christ and "sinners"--those who clearly are not. He said those who have serious moral lapses should remain within the church--even if they are clergymen!

ACCIC: Where on earth does he get such crazy ideas?

CR: He justified this mainly by pointing to the parable of the wheat and the tares (Matthew 13:24-31). You know, where Jesus talked about a man sowing wheat and leaving the weeds grow until harvest, at which time the weeds were separated out and burned. He claimed that this field represented the church, so that means that we should accept the sinners or "weeds" in the church.

ACCIC: That's crazy! First of all, there was no such thing as the church when Jesus gave that parable. Clearly, he was talking about the world, not the church!

CR: I agree. In fact, Jesus said that the field represented the world (Matthew 13:38), yet Augustine has the gall to insist on using his own allegorical interpretation of the parable instead of Jesus's! I think we can all see what was happening here. Augustine was throwing everything at the Donatists but the kitchen sink, hoping that something he threw at them would do the trick, but it didn't. He gave no thought to the effect his arguments would have on history.

ACCIC: Well, I can see why they weren't convinced! What utter nonsense!

CR: But here we have part of Augustine's legacy. This idea of the "mixed" church has survived to our very day! Luther used this argument of Augustine's to support the same thing in his own state church, he said that sinful people will be in the church, "just as mouse dung is found among the peppercorns, or tares among the grain."⁵ So today, you have a lot of churches that make no attempt at church discipline and do not deal with sin among their ranks and do not exercise the Biblical practice of closed communion because of this heresy of Augustine's.

ACCIC: I am beginning to see what you are saying about the legacy of Augustine. But there's more, I suppose?

CR: Oh yes! He argued that a schism in the church was more devastating than accepting the fact that sinners and traitors of the faith were in the church, even in positions of leadership.

ACCIC: Crazy!

CR: Here again, you see an idea which has endured to this very day. In fact, just recently I read a news article about a bishop of the Episcopal church, you know, the church that is in turmoil because they ordained an openly gay bishop? The more conservative Episcopal churches are abandoning the denomination. Anyway, he said boldly said that accepting schism in the church was worse than if the church openly endorsed heresy! Of course, he is one of those who does not believe endorsing homosexuality is heresy...

ACCIC: I see what you mean--in their eyes, nothing is worse than schism. I don't agree.

CR: Neither do I. But let's get back to Augustine. When Augustine found that the African church was not convinced by his lame arguments, he urged the Emperor take action. On Augustine's advice, the Emperor issued an edict stating that anyone found assembling in a Donatist church would be killed! This is how Augustine "solved" the so-called Donatist controversy!

ACCIC: That is incredible! Just a few short years from when all Christians were persecuted by Rome, you have this Augustine encouraging the government to persecute and even kill his fellow Christians! And over such a minor matter!

CR: Yes, the true Augustine is revealed! But wait, it gets better--he had a verse to back this up! He said that Luke 14:23 gave him Scriptural support for this action. Let me read that verse to you: "And the lord said unto the servant, Go out into the highways and hedges and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled." He pointed to that word "compel."

ACCIC: I recognize that verse. It is a parable talking about how the Jews rejected Jesus as Messiah. I don't think that Jesus was advocating violence here!

CR: Again, we see someone who misuses the Scriptures, depending on what he is trying to accomplish. However, believe it or not, this set a precedent for the church. The Catholics used this to justify the Inquisition and other persecutions; Luther and Zwingli and Calvin used Augustine's theology to justify killing thousands of Anabaptists.

ACCIC: Thousands killed over such a flimsy---I can't find words for it, it is so ridiculous!

(Continued in Part III)

References:

1 Beyond Calvinism And Arminianism, 2002, C. Gordon Olson, pages 165-167

2 Augustine And African Manichaeism, 1998, Ligon Duncan

3 Augustine's Poisoned Chalice, 200?, Peter Nathan.

4 Adam, Eve And The Serpent, 1988, Elaine Pagels; cited in Pagel's Augustine: The Dark Prophet Of Grace, Christian Century Magazine, November 2, 1988, page 985.

5 Quoted in Historical Theology: An Introduction To The History Of Christian Thought, 1998, Alister E. McGrath, page 205.

6 Ibid, page 146.

7 The Dictionary Of Historical Theology, 2000, Trevor A. Hart, General Editor, page 15.

8 From the introduction to Tyndale's New Testament: A Modern-Spelling Edition Of The 1534 Translation With An Introduction By David Daniel, 1989, David Daniel, page xvi.