Enchiridion - St. Augustine

As Ellie mentioned, it is easy to get bogged down with this text.  I confess that this rings very true for me.  I try to keep an open mind but as a non-believer, it was really hard to stay focus on this text. My mind would wander.  Augustine argues that faith, hope and love are to be defended with reason (4) and my initial thoughts were 'say whaaaaaat?!' As I have said, I tried to keep an open mind and to stay focused but got bogged down by reasoning that really seem to have no basis in reason in my opinion (e.g. the explanation of the constitution of the Holy Trinity or when God intervenes in evil, it is because he has mercy and when he doesn't, it is because of justice (112) (whaaaat??!!)).  I will try to read the text in a non-literal sense (it is the only way I can keep reading this book...) and to pull strengths/goodness from it.


Good vs. evil
Augustine's concept of good and evil (16) reminds me of Mencius' conception of morality (human nature is originally good but morality must be cultivated).  Evil cannot exist without good but good can evil without evil (11). Rational creatures have free will to choose to do good or evil.  In the same vein as Mencius, Augustine argues that good must be cultivated and practised in action.  Abstraction alone will not suffice.  The heart/will must be in the "good" actions.  Thus, while obedience to God is necessary, it is up to the individual to do this.  The human determines her fate in afterlife by her actions on earth.  The point of doing good and avoiding evil is to bring maximum happiness in our lives (reaching nirvana?) (17-18).

Faith, hope and love
Faith, hope and love are intertwined.  Of them all, love is most important (reminds me of 'heart' in Mencius).  Love is in faith and hope.  Love is all encompassing.  If one has hope or faith without love for God, then hope/faith is moot.

Duty
Failure (or ignorance) to do our duty to God will result in harmful error/sin.  Again, similar to the domino effect in Mencius in which we are to do our duties at the family level which will then populate at the state level and so on.  Duty in Augustine's sense is duty to God, duty to self, duty to others (do onto yourself as you'd like to be treated) - a similar domino effect of goodness all around!  Not doing our duty will lead to sin (97).

The main gist of the text as with most others deal with suffering/evil (disease, death, lack of love, etc.) and how do we live in a world that is not perfect.  Like Sarah, it is difficult to detach myself from Christianity as we know it today.  Also, I was raised an atheist and remained one in adulthood and thus do not have the background knowledge of the bible, Christian history to really ground myself in Enchiridion.  I understand that Augustine wrote this piece as a guide on how to live a good life.  I understand that all (or most) religions are good in their intentions, Christianity included but the didactic nature of the text leaves me feeling no love, hope or faith for the God or religion of Augustine.  Much like Rob, I see the God in this text as a dictator.  Rule by fear.  Love God or suffer in eternal hell.  This is  wrathful God.  Getting back to Mencius, rule by admiration would seem to make more sense.  The God in this text does not persuade me to admire Him.  I do recognize that Augustine does put the cord in our hands as Teresa notes - we determine our eternal fates by living a good life (and believing in God) but it is still a religion that seems so wrathful despite its good intentions.