All the 20 articles of the impressive volume The Augustinian Tradition witness the influence and challenge of Augustine in the history of Western thought. The volume is the eighth in the series Philosophical Traditions edited by Amélie Oksenberg Rorty. It fits well into this series as it predominantly focuses on philosophical questions in Augustine's works. However, philosophical considerations in Augustine cannot be separated from the theological thought of the bishop of Hippo. This collection of studies belongs to the history of theology as well.
Thus, Augustine's theory of original sin on the basis of Paul is the object of the article "Disputing the Augustinian Legacy: John Locke and Jonathan Edwards on Romans 5:12-19" by Philip L. Quinn, University of Notre Dame. The author deals among other things with the criticism by Elaine Pagels ( Adam, Eve, and the Serpent, New York 1988) that Augustine simply built his theory of the transmission of original sin on the wrong Latin translation of the Greek text of Romans 5:12--in quo. The author points rightly at the following context of this verse and concludes that "if one wants to undercut the harsh Augustinian doctrine by deconstructing its scriptural support, one will have to do more exegetical work than Pagels has done" (p. 238). However, the author does not want to defend Augustine's theory; he states:
I am powerfully attracted to the Arminian assumption [i.e., that predestination is conditional] on moral grounds independent of my theological beliefs. So I hope there is a solution to the problem of reconciling the teaching of Romans 5:12-19 with that assumption.
p. 247
Augustine's understanding of original sin is of course a crux if it is not considered along with Augustine's teaching about free will. If not, it ends up with determinism and a negation of the individual's responsibility.
Other articles emphasize this important point in Augustine's theological anthropology. Especially the article, "Do We Have a Will? Augustine's Way in to the Will," by Simon Harrison, St. John's College, Cambridge University. The author proves how Augustine perceives human will as existential in the Confessiones and concludes: "Augustine uses 'voluntas' to reveal and mark the individual's responsibility" (p. 202). The radical responsibility for sin even in its most initial stage is proven in the article "The Emergence of the Logic of Will in Medieval Thought" by Simo Knuuttila, University of Helsinki. The author points to Peter Abelard, among others, as a follower of Augustine's theory, even though "Abelard associated the notion of what is willed with what is wished or desired more systematically than Augustine" (p. 215).
That it is the inner attitude that counts and not the outward action is also pointed out by Robert L. Holmes, University of Rochester, in his investigation "St. Augustine and the Just War Theory". He proves here that Augustine is not the progenitor of the just war theory, but his thoughts are of "essentially pacifistic character" and "Augustine was almost certainly a personal pacifist" (p. 324). Radical moral responsibility in Augustine is stressed also by Ishtayaque Haji, University of Minnesota, in his article "On Being Morally Responsible in a Dream". When dealing with primal sin, Scott MacDonald, Cornell University, in his article, "Primal Sin," shows that according to Augustine the first humans sinned by their own free choice alone. There is no cause behind that. Therefore, there is nowhere else to place responsibility than on the first humans. The natural endowment of free choice is a good thing, but humans can use it badly: "They failed to pay attention to the reason they had for loving God above all things, namely, their knowledge that God is the highest good" (p. 120). They could have avoided this, and "Augustine's insistence on the connection between sin's culpability and its avoidability, for example, is something for which he is justly famous" (p. 134).
Regarding understanding, Augustine maintains similarly that any understanding is one's own personal responsibility. This point is stressed by Myles F. Burnyeat, All Souls College, Oxford University, in his "Wittgenstein and Augustine De Magistro" where he states: "No one can achieve my understanding for me" eventhough divine help is needed (p. 300). Augustine's consciousness about his personal integrity, so to speak, is also to be seen in his cogito-like argument for his being, as shown by Gareth B. Matthews, University of Massachusetts, "Augustine and Descartes on Minds and Bodies." Thus, God's providence and help does not at all make the human person into a puppit. But it is a strong feature in Augustine's world of thought and belief that his history and his person is a working out of God's design for him. This is shown in an article by Ann Hartle, Emory University, "Augustine and Rousseau. Narrative and Self-Knowledge in the Two Confessions" where the author contrasts Augustine and Rousseau. Likewise, the importance of grace for any good human activity is central to Augustine as shown by John E. Hare, Calvin College, in his article "Augustine, Kant, and the Moral Gap". The works of grace are necessary "even for the asking of assistance" (p. 259), and eventhough Kant thought quite differently than Augustine about human possibilities of knowledge, he is also rooted in the Christian tradition where there is room for divine grace in our belief (p. 255), though not in our theoretical and practical reason.
Also Christopher Kirwan, Exeter College, Oxford University, stresses human responsibility in his article "Avoiding Sin: Augustine against Consequentialism". Since all sin is voluntary, the human person is responsible. Regarding the sin of lying, the author proves that Augustine is even rigoristic. It is always a sin and should never be preferred where it would be possible to keep silent. Augustine has here, according to the author, a "doctrine of senseless rigor, a doctrine that scarcely anyone will live by all the time and scarcely anyone will think it right to live by in all possible situations" (p. 193). As is well known, Augustine wants to convince all people that they are sinners by themselves. The same point is made by William E. Mann, University of Vermont, in his "Inner-Life Ethics" where he concludes that "It takes a Solomon to walk and dream in the ways of the Lord. It is Augustine's belief that no one can do that without divine assistance" (p. 162).
Augustine's writings reflect his development and the challenges he met. Augustine's thoughts do not form any 'system'. But certain main features are clearly to be seen, and among these are not least Augustine's pessimistic theological anthropology, his understanding of humanity as radically sinful and in constant need of grace. It is difficult to write about Augustine without writing about sin, as already seen above. Three articles, however, emphasize the fact that Augustine basically understands sin as pride. Thus, Paul J. Weithman, University of Notre Dame, shows in his article "Toward an Augustinian Liberalism" what is Augustine's whole intent in his pessimistic view of humanity, namely to attack pride and develop humility (p. 307). Also Robert L. Holmes' "St. Augustine and the Just War Theory" stresses Augustine's analysis of the "unrelenting power of pride in human nature" (p. 338), and finally Rüdiger Bittner, University of Bielefeldt, points out in his "Augustine's Philosophy of History" that Augustine sees pride as the reason why philosophers want to go alone and not listen to the concrete historia of God.
The last article of the volume, "Plights of Embodied Soul. Dramas of Sin and Salvation in Augustine and Updike" by Richard Eldridge, Swarthmore College, stresses the human need for grace according to Augustine. "This is the thought that our lives stand in need of transfiguration, radical reversal of orientation, if we are to achieve integrity of the soul, that Augustine expresses as our need for grace" (p. 376). The author concludes that just as John Updike sees a "fallen world, where sins lie intermixted with the seeds of being", Augustine finds the same. Eventhough Augustine in his Confessiones finds his conversion complete, Eldridge does not find Augustine's statement convincing. Actually, we might add, this is also Augustine's point in his later fight against the Pelagians. Grace is always necessary.
Finally, the articles dealing with Augustine and classical philosophy should be mentioned, first of all the original article "Structure and Meaning in St. Augustine's Confessions" by Frederick J. Crosson, University of Notre Dame, arguing for the coherent composition of the Confessions, but also Genevieve Lloyd, University of New South Wales in Sydney, about "Augustine and the 'Problem' of Time" in Aristotle and Plotinus, as well as the article of Martha Nussbaum, University of Chicago, "Augustine and Dante on the Ascent of Love" contrasting Augustine and the Platonic optimism. Also the article by Marylin McCord Adams, Yale University, "Romancing the Good. God and the Self According to St. Anselm of Canterbury" belongs to this group. However, she sees Anselm as an Augustinian Platonist (p. 92) and argues against Anders Nygren's division between Platonic eros and Christian agape. The volume is introduced by an essay by Alvin Plantinga, "Augustinian Christian Philosophy".
The Augustinian Tradition is a highly recommendable collection of articles for anyone who wants to study Augustine and his strong impact on Western thought.