Today is the Feast of St. Augustine, and although I've suddenly become extremely busy (and probably will be so for the next few days, so expect lighter blogging), I would be remiss if I didn't note the day.
One especially worthwhile link (which I had seen before, but of which I was reminded by this post) is an Orthodox take on Augustine. Augustine, of course, is not theologically popular among the Orthodox at all; and because of a noisy group of Augustine-haters in some Orthodox circles, it's easy to get the impression that it's the standard Orthodox view that Augustine was a heretic, plain and simple. In fact, the matter is more complex, and the websited to which I've linked gives the reasons. Saints, of course, are fallible, and it is a sign of a healthy sense of sainthood to be able to recognize that someone you think was very wrong on some very important issues. Sainthood is not a matter of never saying the wrong thing, nor is it a matter of never explaining things the wrong way; it's a matter of fidelity to the mind of Christ.
I find myself in an interesting position of all this. While I don't quite fit standard labels (crazy people rarely do), someone could reasonably call me a Thomist, which always involves a hefty dose of Augustine, even if in a modified and organized form. I can also, however, be called a Palamist, since I think Palamas's development of the Patristic doctrine of divine energies is reasonable and well-founded. The combination is a rare one, because they are usually considered to be inconsistent with each other, at least on any major point (obviously I don't think so; but I am in a very, very small minority, both East and West).
I find it worth noting that the overwhelming majority of criticisms of Augustine, on whatever position, can easily be shown to rest on misreadings or to be based on assumptions that need not be accepted. He's the saint people love to misrepresent.
For a correction on common views about what Augustine says about sex and sin (and by someone who disagrees with Augustine's views on both), see this essay by David Hunter.
For a correction on common views about Augustine's misogyny (namely, that he was a misogynist), see this essay by Edmund Hill. I always find this calumny completely mystifying. Augustine does have aspects that can be considered sexist in a general way, but he's still one of the least sexist men of his time. The charge of misogyny, which I've occasionally heard, is flabbergasting, given that it's pinned on a man who adored his mother, who explicitly recognizes that many women are better than most men, and more than once argues vehemently for the conclusion that women and men are equal in the eyes of God. One wishes that he had had more influence on Western perceptions of gender than he did.
By no means is Augustine flawless; but he is of overwhelming importance, and no one who reads him fairly and carefully can come away without being the better for it.
