Augustine on human nature

Question 1

augustine account on fall and original sin, point 1

Answer 1

• Pre-lapsarian: perfect harmony between will body and reason, human relations dominated by cupiditas and caritas manifested through Adam and Eve’s friendship, obedience to God’s will, Amor Dei
• Post-lapsarian: akrasia (weakened will) now dominated by selfishness and concupiscence – our uncontrolled desires and appetites for bodily pleasure. Selfishness and lust corrupts human relationships and society.
• Double death of human-God relationship and literal mortality, transmission of sin through sexual intercourse
• Whereas other theologians took the phrase from St Paul “sin came into the world through one man” (Romans 5) to describe the inadequacies that all humans are prone to, Augustine made this sin an ontological condition of human existence – to live, inevitably, is also to sin. No aspect of the person or of human relationships escapes sin’s taint.

Question 2

dawkins counter on augustine view of fall

Answer 2

• The very notion of a “sin contracted and not committed” (Catechism) seems to highlight the absurdity of “condemn(ing) every child, before it is born, to inherit the sins of a remote ancestor” (Dawkins)
• Entirely contrary to evolutionary biology but also irrational and dangerous
• Furthermore Pelagius highlighted that it would illogical for God to ask us to be holy if we were incapable of reaching the image of God – why would an omnibenevolent God punish his creation and allow them to be imperfection?

Question 3

god undeserved grace response to dawkins

Answer 3

R: God’s generous and undeserved grace manifested through the inexpressibly greater blessing of Jesus and his atonement for the sins of the elect.
• Humans corrupted the perfection through free will; however they can be SAVED through Grace of God
• Overcomes sin and the rebellious will in order to achieve the Summum Bonum

Question 4

notion of grace problematic conclusive response to undeserved grace

Answer 4

• After the Pelagian Crisis Augustine radically revised his book ‘On Free Will’, coming to reject Platonist ideas which rendered reason sufficient to live a good life
• The idea that only God’s grace can allow us to reach the Summum Bonum restricts human free will as we are not voluntarily choosing to sin, but are inevitably prone to whether we will it or not leaves human helpless and reliant upon the divine
• Moreover, the fact the grace is undeserved and only given to the elect undermines the Christian belief in a God of love and the sacrifice of Christ for all the “sins of the world”, as some will be condemned to eternal damnation!

Question 5

fall is a spiritual journey, point 2

Answer 5

P2 – SYMBOLIC READING OF GENESIS 3: Spiritual journey, collective moral responsibility
A: The Fall interpreted as a spiritual journey:
• For many the Fall is a positive symbol of the spiritual and psychological life – seen as a story about humans relationship with the world and specifically the moment when each of us loses our innocence and engages with the harsh realities of life, begin the spiritual journey and end in the wholeness of Christ; not an easy journey
• Value of Augustine is that he highlights the spiritual dimension

Question 6

materialist view of self counter spiritual journey

Answer 6

CA: Many take a materialist view of the self – no room for spirituality; value of Augustine’s theory lost for atheists…

Question 7

reinhold niebuhr collective responsibility response to materialist self

Answer 7

R: Reinhold Niebhur’s understanding of collective moral responsibility:
• The thesis of his early work ‘Moral Man and Immoral Society’ how Enlightenment philosophy and its emphasis on the power of the individual has made talk about sin unfashionable. It is this “purely individualist ethic” and human limited capacities for self-reflection and self-criticism, that is, acknowledgement of our sins, which in fact restrict our moral behaviour.
• This theologically-framed picture of “not-very moral man and his even less moral societies” fuels Niebuhr’s critiques of Christian social agendas that under-estimate the impact of sin – the inner spiritual will is defeated by egoism and self-interest
• Yet Niebuhr is no fatalist; the solution is for the human ego to understand its own nature by coming into a proper relationship with God (in line with Protestant understanding, reconnection through baptism, do not believe we have nothing left of the divine image)
• His challenge to moral and political philosophy can be seen as a practical use of Augustine’s notion of Original Sin

Question 8

niebuhr doesn’t understand capability of mankind

Answer 8

CR: Such a viewpoint underestimates the capabilities of mankind and the individual. Reinforces a negative outlook; aim of his theory is desirable (solidarity and moral development), but his premise is flawed as humanity cannot be rendered objectively sinful (gives way to debasement and guilt outlined by Dawkins and others).

Question 9

freud, point 3

Answer 9

A: Sigmund Freud and the repressive impacts of obsession with guilt and sin:

• Whereas Augustine seems obsessed with the sexual lusts of the body led by concupiscence and their negative impacts upon human relationships, Freud’s psychoanalysis of human nature saw the libido as a natural and vital element of human development
• Freud saw religious obsession with sin, and repressed sexual desires, as a major cause of neurosis and guilt – where Augustine saw the cure for the human condition laying in God’s grace, Freud argued the cause of the condition was religion. The answer is psychoanalysis; perhaps if psychoanalysis was performed on Augustine, forcing him to recall his past feelings of sexual desire and obsession, perhaps his degrading outlook of humanity may be resolved…

Question 10

steven pinker humanitarian principle response to freud

Answer 10

• Instead of focusing on negative, dogmatic religious theories that seem to render human beings utterly incapable and helpless to their sinful sexual desires, we must acknowledge the power of humanity and our capacity for moral goodness – Pinker rightly highlights how religion, and Christianity in particular, has been responsible for violence, suffering and the debasement of humanity until Post-Enlightenment when irrational superstitions were replaced by the Humanitarian Principle.
• In ‘The Better Angels of Our Nature’ he explains that by adopting the simple but significant proposal that humans get on better when each person takes into account the interests of other, we will be able to work towards a more functional moral society.
• We do not need God’s grace, but rational co-operation of which many are capable of; Pinker argues that for the past two hundred years since the humanitarian principle has become established as self-evidently right, there has been a rapid decline in everyday use of torture, abuse of women, tyrants and despotic leaders.
• Certainly, there are still numerous evils and wrongs in the world which may lead one to quickly accuse the humanitarian principle as naïve Western optimism, but by adopting a viewpoint which sees humans as intrinsically flawed, how can we hope to improve such issues.