Remarkable. It seems that much of Christian theology and philosophy is echoed in Augustine’s work. I thoroughly enjoyed how he dismantles the faulty reasoning of writers like Varro and Apuleius. An interesting feature is how he explored numerology in several parts. I suspect this was a common practice at that time. Indeed, he adopts some allegorical interpretations, though with caution, but his dive into numbers and their meanings often left me puzzled. On a positive note, I don't believe there's any doctrine that the church holds today that Augustine didn’t address. His philosophical mind is impressive. However, I appreciated him even more when he elaborated on scripture to support his reasoning. The book also contains a wonderful exposition of Hannah’s song.

Reading this along with a Facebook group. Just through book One now and really enjoying the book and the experience with the reading circle. The group's organizer posts a reading schedule and regular comments with the readings, and other commenters have been so valuable to read. I'm getting so much out of it because of the group. If you're reading it now or want to read it, check out the Reading the City of God group on Facebook.

All we see is a prefiguration of that which we believe.

This is my first time reading this mammoth work. Just finished it and don’t even know how to review such a thing. Some quick initial thoughts: Idols are bad. Really bad. Never thought I’d spend so much time thinking about Roman paganism, and yet was edified by reflecting on how Christ triumphed over the demons.

Was helpful to see that Augustine is at his best when he is focused on the big differences and the core truths. Some of his weakest arguments come when he is getting excessively detailed with very specific critics long forgotten. There’s a lesson in that for Christian speakers and writers today.

There are some unfortunate things of course, his views on women, slaves, and sex, for example. For instance, his belabored and detailed defense of Abraham’s “exemplary use” of Hagar takes great pains to deal with so many of Augustine’s hang ups about sex, but never once considers the agency of Hagar as a person. For him, she is a female body to be used as Abraham and Sarah see fit.

I really appreciated seeing how Augustine thought then about so many things we think we are discussing now for the first time and how he addressed analogs of arguments that are still being made to day. All of this means there is a lot of wisdom for how to handle our version of those things. We fight many of the same demons and their followers.

Some examples are how he deals with the criticism that people were naive and apt to believe fanciful stories about Jesus. We hear this argument now. He shows how the Roman worship of Romulus was thought remarkable in its day precisely because even at that time people knew better than to fall for lies of that magnitude. He then shows how that faith is explainable in all the ways Christianity isn’t (Romans and those who fear them worship Romulus, but no one else does). So, ancients weren’t that naive, and yet all nations still believed this remarkable claim about Jesus against all odds.

Also found it helpful when he dealt with the sort of once-saved-always-saved, easy-believism that took sacramental form and others in his day. His answers were much the same as answers made to new versions in our day, drawn from the basics of the faith. He made some great arguments against universalism I’d never heard before.

His discussion of eschatology is outstanding and wonderful. He combines the hope of the New Heavens and New Earth, bodily resurrection, and the beatific vision all into one great and rich hope.

I definitely look forward to re-reading some sections more closely in the future.

St. Augustine is considered to be one of the greatest Christian thinkers of all time. So it is with hesitation I write this review the way I am doing --- understanding that. But I got to call the shots as I see them.

Definitely a keen intellect and a very learned man. However, as I found to be the case from reading similar tomes from Augustine's contemporaries, Sts. Athanasius and Ambrose -- they tend to be verbose --- with paragraphs that can run on for as much as a page and a half. Also in common, they tend to intellectualize a great deal. Not content to successfully make a great point, but to go at the issue they're arguing against --- or for their own points --- from a dozen different angles. Augustine doesn't just double tap an opponent's errors or inconsistencies --- it seems to be that he'll beat it to death, long after the point's been more than made.

As I'll say again, these are just my impressions -- nothing more. If you're a theologian or philosophy major and you feel differently about them and that I've got this wrong, that's fine.

In the first part of this book, Augustine does battle primarily with polytheism and its adherent Greco-Roman philosophers. These, seeing the now unmistakable signs of the collapse of the Roman Empire, were blaming Christianity for this. So Augustine proceeds from defending Christianity to attacking their own premises, particularly with respect to the even more grotesque contradictions and inconsistencies within the Greco-Roman polytheistic religion. So many of its gods, for example, had absurdly mutually conflicting areas of jurisdiction. For example, he points out the door --- the Romans had a good of entrances, a god of doors --- and even a god of hinges. Then he points out the absurdity of their beliefs in goddesses of luck and of victory --- alongside those of a god of war, Mars, and a supreme god, Jupiter. If the goddess of luck determines our fortunes --- then what need have we of Jupiter --- what's his job then? And of war --- if the goddess of victory determines winners and losers in battle, then what's Mars' job? And he goes on from there to take a wrecking ball to the whole Greco-Roman religio-philosophical construct.

Augustine also goes into history --- showing the many times, long before Christianity, where prominent Romans and Greeks blasphemed the gods --- and got away with it. Or other times when even Rome itself fell, long in the past, to barbarians, notwithstanding their devotion to their various gods and goddesses. By the end of it, he eviscerates polytheism so much so that one's left with an impression that only 2 logically consistent, yet diametrically opposed belief systems remain -- that of a monotheistic belief in a Supreme Being -- or philosophical systems, presumably Greco-Roman, fallen into an abyss of various alternative, contradictory, oft mutually exclusive, explanations for a godless cosmos.

In intellectual rigor, Augustine excels, but, as I'd said, he tends to belabor points greatly --- taking chapters or even books to say what I've read contemporary monastics from his time express in an essay or even an aphorism. Perhaps, with papyrus being extremely costly, they had not the paper to use, but, clearly, this posed no problem for Augustine.

The second half of the book, Augustine then gets to the theme of this book --- that the human race is essentially divided into 2 great cities: the city of the world --- with those who are of the world --- the City of God, those who in this life have chosen to serve God.

He starts from Creation and builds a timeline --- going through the Biblical timeline and, alongside, goes over the development of the great human civilizations contemporary with it: those of Egypt, then Assyria and Babylon, then Rome.

It's a fascinating idea --- but, unfortunately, from my point of view as the reader, he gets bogged down into details --- getting off into long tangents about various things from each timeline, going into things from some event in ancient Roman history, then analyzing it at length. The effect is to weaken the point that he trying to make by watering it down the impact---- and the point he's trying to make is that these are 2 great civilizations --- contrasted with each other, having no commerce with each other --- and as time continues, inevitably in contest with each other for the hearts and souls of mankind.

In the very last part, he addresses heresies or misunderstandings by both pagans and even some supposed Christians about the nature of salvation and of the afterlife. For Evangelicals: let's just say, Augustine was no fan of "Once saved, always saved" --- a belief that evidently was being taught also in the 4th Century during his time, fell out of view, and comparatively only recently gained favor again in some circles.

Here with these issues, Augustine tends to get sidetracked into addressing issues --- brought up by unbelievers from his time --- for which a definite answer cannot definitely known for sure, but which, nevertheless, he proceeds to do anyway. Like, in Heaven, will we be the same height there, we were here --- or will be babies that die show up in Heaven as babies there, or as adults, for example? Here, with Augustine, I think we see what may be a very first divergence of Western Christianity from the Eastern that will eventually lead to what would become the Roman Catholic Church's development of things like "Purgatory", "Limbo", and other rulings of intricate canon law --- the belief that the Church absolutely must have an answer for every question. Whereas, in the Eastern --- which eventually would become known as the "Orthodox", there's more a willingness to admit, "It's a mystery" --- or we don't know --- but simply trust in God that He will do what is just and merciful --- without trying to use the limited human intellect to grasp the eternal and the infinite and unknowable.

St. Augustine had broadened my horizons, and given much to think about. But this book was a real plod to get through. It does deserve its place as one of the great works of Christian writing, but --- forgive me for saying this --- if they'd had editors back then, Augustine might have benefited from one.

Man, that took FOREVER.

Basically ditto Amy's review: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

For the average layman, I would not recommend reading the entire thing. It's long swaths of boring rambling punctuated by moments of brilliance. As I read, I marked the sections that I felt were worth discussion, and I'll list them below. It's a work you can easily jump into and out of to pull out greater ideas. I can sense how much Luther pulled from this!

My completely arbitrary list of what struck me as most interesting...
Book One: Preface, points 8, 9, 10, 11, 36
Book Two: Points 2, 13, 23
Book Three: Points 1, 20, 31
Book Four: Point 23
Book Five: Points 9, 10, 19
Book Six: Points 1, 5
Book Seven: Points 27, 30
Book Eight: Points 6, 8, 23, 24
Book Nine: Point 15
Book Ten: Points 5, 24, 25, 29
Book Eleven: Points 21, 23, 25
Book Twelve: Point 6
Book Thirteen: Points 4, 5,
Book Fourteen: Points 2, 3, 13, 17,
Book Fifteen: Points 1, 7, 14
Book Sixteen: Points 37, 43
Book Seventeen:
Book Eighteen: Points 35, 41, 50
Book Nineteen: Points 12, 17, 21,
Book Twenty: Point 30
Book Twenty-One: Points 15, 25, 26
Book Twenty-Two: Points 2, 17, 22, 24

I read this in an abridged version with a foreword by Vernon J. Bourke with my book club. I found it quite intriguing and excellent. Augustine is an author whom I enjoy reading his thorough arguments, not that I fully grasped all his philosophical arguments, nor could articulate many of them but I found myself underlining many passages and contemplating them while going about other tasks.

Similar to how a pastor preaches a message to the cultural heart of the church and the same with Paul in his epistles confronting the idolatries of the different churches. Augustine eloquently contrasts the city of Rome to the “city of God.” Rebuking Roman philosophy and it’s society for thinking becoming Christian was the downfall of Roman society.
Augustine talks about many different sins in the life of a a Christ follower in the context of this time within this masterpiece. This book demonstrates Christ in a way where it is not just a moving lecture.
Knowing the context is REQUISITE to understanding this book.

I read The City of God over six months last year in a translation by Henry Bettenson which runs to 1091 pages in my Penguin Classics edition. As Joe Morecraft says, this is a book on everything. I am not going to review it; all I feel that I can do is gesture helplessly in its general direction.

Read the rest at my blog, In Which I Read Vintage Novels.

Uh...

I only had to read half of this for school. But it was still really long.

Imagine you're in a math class. And the teacher says, "Now we're going to learn about numbers: one plus one is two, two plus two is four, etc." And you think, "Yeah. Okay. I get that." Then all of a sudden, while your mind wanders around, the teacher says, "So now that you've got that, let's talk about calculus." And then your brain explodes from the jump that it just made.

This is sort of how City of God treated me. Augustine would say, "So God created angels, the world, Adam and Eve..." and I think, "Yeah. Okay. I get that." And then all of a sudden, Augustine says, "So God made us out of nothing, which is why our souls are mutable, but evil cannot exist outside of goodness, so nothing is not the same as non-existence" or something confusing like that. And then my brain explodes from trying to comprehend eternity.

Also, it does not help when Augustine goes on one of his many tangents. Like, "So about God's will. Some people think it's like fate. It's not. Hey, speaking of fate, you know why astrology is wrong? Because twins are born under the same stars and they don't live identical lives! Ha! So there! But back to God's will." Except with 5 million times more words. And you spend all this time reading about astrology and twins before coming back to the main point.

I did appreciate all the thought that Augustine put into his writing. It sounds like he very much loved the Bible. Which is really cool. And he goes through a lot of really exciting concepts.

It's just...so long...

Read this back in the 1990's but now I want to reread it. I know I would get a lot more out of it.

Huh, this is a lot shorter than I thought it was - it appears to be a lot longer in iBooks. I'll go ahead and finish it, and then I'd like to get one of the longer-but-abridged editions (around 500 p). But I can't buy books right now, so maybe I'll be stuck with the unabridged version...

Finished! I'll have a review up in a few days (after I've reviewed March: Book One). I'll start the unabridged version, but I'm thinking I might stop after I finish vol. 1.

**update**

The editor of this abridged edition, FR Montgomery, provides a quote from the 2nd book of another work by Augustine, Retractations, that outlines Augustine’s purpose in writing the city of God:
"After the storming and the sack of Rome by the Goths under their king, Alaric, the worshippers of false gods or heathen, as we call them, tried to prove that this calamity was due to the Christian religion, and began more fiercely and bitterly than ever to blaspheme the true God. This it was that kindled my zeal for the House of God, and induced me to defend the City of God against the calumny and misrepresentations of her foes. After many serious interruptions this great undertaking, which was extended over many years, was at length finished in twenty-two books. The first five are written in answer to those who believe that worldly prosperity is insured by the old polytheistic religion of Rome, and that calamities have followed by reason of its neglect. The next five are addressed to those who admit that the human race is always exposed to such misfortunes, and yet believe that the old religion is a good preparation for the life to come; …while the last twelve books of this extensive work are devoted to a comparison of the different origins, histories, and destinies of the City of God and the City of the World."

Some of the most important ideas:

- Augustine sets out to refute the charge that Christianity led to the fall of Rome by depriving Rome of the protection of the gods. He describes some of the disasters that befell Rome before the spread of Christianity, such as the civil wars that led to the fall of the Republic. He argues that Rome suffered from a moral decline long before Christ was even born, alluding to passages from pagan writers like Cicero & Sallust to this effect.

- Augustine points out that the instances of mercy seen during the attack on Rome are due to the influence of Christianity: "...the strange clemency of those savage barbarians in setting apart & selecting the most spacious churches, where the people might find refuge, where no one should receive hurt or injury, where many through the compassion of their captors might be brought to freedom, whence no one through the cruelty of his foes might be led to slavery — that has been solely due to the name of Christ and the Christian age. Whoever thinks otherwise is blind…"

- Augustine rejects the criticism that the concept of the Incarnation demeans the idea of a powerful God: "such a master is despised by those proud ones, because ‘the Word became flesh and dwelt among us’ Such are not merely sick, they rejoice in their sickness, and are ashamed of the remedy; and their end will not be a higher rise, but a greater fall."

Augustine addresses the problem of evil in Book XII. He argues that allowing evil in some aspects of the world is necessary for good, although from the human perspective we can't have a complete understanding of how this works: "We can but see parts of God’s plan, and we cannot judge of the effect of the whole; what may seem defects to us may, all the while, be contributing to the beauty of the all."

- He then introduces what has been called the Augustinian view of evil (Ch. IX "On the Creation of Angels"). This is the view that evil doesn’t really exist; it’s the absence of good, in the same way that darkness is the absence of light. The enemies of God are so through voluntary sin, and not by nature: "For the true light which illumines every man that comes into the world, also lighteth the whole angelic host, so that it is not the light as in itself, but as in God ; from which if an angel turns aside, he becomes unclean, like the unclean spirits, who are no longer light in God, but darkness in themselves, being deprived of the participation in the eternal light. For there is no nature of evil, but the loss of the good is called evil."

I've started on vol. 1 of the unabridged edition.