No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 January 2024
Augustine and Aquinas are points of reference in the so-called “culture wars” about how Christianity should think of its relation to modern liberal culture. “Postmodern Augustinian Thomists” (PATs) appeal to Augustine for their choice of a dialectical relation to liberalism, and those nicknamed “Whig Thomists” are more ready to see an alignment between liberal democratic capitalism and Aquinas’ view of politics. In this paper, some points relating to how Augustine thinks of “the City of God” form the basis of a consideration of the way PATs argue for their position.
1 McLuhan, Marshall, in Essential McLuhan, ed. by McLuhan, E. & Zingrone, F. (Routledge, 1995), p. 298.Google Scholar
2 Milan Kundera, The Book of Laughter or Forgetting.
3 Kolakowski, L., God Owes Us Nothing (University of Chicago Press, 1995), pp. 183–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
4 Pascal, Pensées, S.243–4; L 210–1; cf. also S. 150; L. 118). Augustine “took the sinful will so seriously, and because its improvement through its own or other creaturely resources seemed impossible, Augustine had difficulty envisaging any basic change in the human condition” (TeSelle, E., ‘Toward an Augustinian Politics,’ Journal of Religious Ethics 16 (1988), pp. 87–108; p. 93)Google Scholar.
5 Burnell, P. J., “The Status of Politics in St Augustine's City of God”, History of Political Thought 13 (1992), pp. 13–29Google Scholar; p. 14. Cf. Heyking, J. Von, “Decorating and Deforming the Universe with Man's Moral Beauty: Recent Interpretations of Augustine's Political Thought”, The Review of Politics 69 (2007), pp.668–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar; p. 669).
6 Hollenbach, D., “The Common Good Revisited”, Theological Studies 50 (1989), pp. 70–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar; p. 79. I draw upon his excellent presentation in what follows.
7 Hollenbach, op.cit., p. 81.
8 ST, 1a2ae, q.19. Art. 10, resp.
9 Martin, R., “The Two Cities in Augustine's Political Thought”, Journal of the History of Ideas 33(1972), pp. 195–217; p. 203CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
10 Markus, R. A., Saeculum: History and Society in the Theology of St Augustine (CUP, 1989), p. 70fCrossRefGoogle Scholar.
11 “Ratzinger argues that an overtheologized approach to politics is a sort of false messianism and quickly leads to fanaticism and tyranny. It is rooted in an inability to come to terms with the imperfection and imperfectability of worldly existence”. (Hollenbach, op.cit., p. 82).
12 Hollenbach, p. 83.
13 Hollenbach, p. 85.
14 Rowland, T., Culture and the Thomist Tradition: After Vatican II (Routledge, 2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
15 Quoted in Rowland, op.cit. p. 30.
16 Rowland, op.cit., p. 28.
17 Rowland, T., Culture and the Thomist Tradition: After Vatican II (Routledge, 2003), p. 143CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
18 Fortin, E.L., “Augustine's City of God and Modern Historical Consciousness”, Review of Politics 41 (1979), pp. 323–43; p. 430CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
19 T.Rowland, ‘Benedict XVI, Thomism and Liberal Culture Part 2,’ Zenit (July 25, 2005).
20 Rowland, Culture, p. 165.
21 Rowland, Culture, p. 40.
22 Rowland, Culture, p. 41.
23 Taylor, C., A Catholic Modernity? ed. by Heft, J. L. (OUP, 1999), p. 16Google Scholar.
24 Ibid. The work of Eisenstadt, S. N. on “multiple modernities” is relevant here: “Multiple Modernities”, Daedalus 129 (2000), pp. 1–29Google Scholar; “Multiple Modernities in an Age of Globalization”, Canadian Journal of Sociology 24 (1999), pp. 283–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Cf. Thomassen, B., “Anthropology and its Many Modernities: When Concepts Matter”, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 18 (2012), pp. 160–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Thomassen, B., “Anthropology, Multiple Modernities and the Axial Age Debate”, Anthropological Theory 10 (2010), pp. 321–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
25 Taylor, op.cit, pp. 16–7.