Augustine still draws a line

I enjoy Augustine's "whole perspective" on the bible. It's neat to think of the New testament as the answer key and the Old testament as a problem solving exercise that can always be answered (in numerous ways) as long as it "consult[s] the rule of faith, as it is perceived through the plainer passages of scriptures (ex.Old testament) and the authority of the church (Bk.3/3)."

It's also interesting that Augustine doesn't discriminate on where this knowledge is coming from. "Any statements, by those who are called philosophers, which happen to be true and consistent with our faith should not cause alarm, but be claimed for our own use, as it were from owners who have no right to them (Bk.2/144). This method of sticking parts into a whole and having faith/love as the constant, leads to many correct answers that solve any misconceptions one may have about the bible.

But just because I genuinely love something, does that make everything I choose to love moral and "correct" in God's eyes (from Augustine's perspective)? This question helped me understand how far Augustine could take his constant of faith/love and apply it to life outside the bible. "Life outside the bible" being things that were not openly struggled about in the bible and probably were unfathomable to Augustine, but are current questions of morality now, like homosexuality and polygamy. In book 3, #50 Augustine explains that religion does become subjective to the social practices and norms of that specific culture. There is not one truth, but instead the expectation that your practice centers around justice and love.

In class someone asked what Augustine would think about polygamy; during his social norms, the purpose of sex was to procreate. This idea follows suit with polygamists beliefs; but since times have changed (since Augustine's time), this behavior is not accepted in the current day. Another interesting topic someone brought up was the difference between the intention behind murder and the intention behind capitol punishment. Someone suggested that murder would clearly not follow the "just and loving rule", but I don't think Augustine would agree with capitol punishment either (which may be a norm in certain states, but is still a controversial topic). Although people who use capitol punishment believe that that person is "getting what he deserves" so therefore it's just, this action does not follow Augustine's other constant, which is love. I cannot picture someone using capitol punishment to take away someone's life and their intention for this action is to show the person who's dying love.

It's interesting using current day issues and applying them to what we think Augustine would do. I enjoy his subjective view on religion with its solid constants.