In recent years, the concept of Western civilization has been challenged. Of note is the 2016 article by Kwame Anthony Appiah, entitled “There is No Such Thing as Western Civilization”. In its Appiah surveys the history of concepts of civilizational borders in the European and Mediterranean world. He begins with Herodotus’s division of the world into three parts and ends with the Cold War’s division of the world into the Western world of capitalism and liberalism compared to the Eastern world dominated by despotic communism. By pointing to the evolution of concepts regarding the nature of Western civilization, as well as the novelty of the usage of terms like Western culture, Appiah attempts to argue that Western civilization does not exist.
While it is noteworthy that the last 2000 years of history in European and Mediterranean history have seen various notions of what constitutes western civilization, it is a mistake to dismiss a coherent conception of western civilization. By looking at intellectual history in the context of world history, we can isolate a specific civilization centered on a coherent worldview that arose amongst the nations of Western Europe. The core worldview that shaped Western civilization is represented by Augustine’s Christianity and the intellectual tradition that it gave birth to in Western Europe. This worldview was then instantiated into a coherent civilization by the Germanic people groups that migrated into the territories of western Europe and created a society that incorporated the wider worldview represented by Augustine’s Christianity into its fabric. We thus arrive at the claim that Western civilization can be understood as the Christian society that resulted from the instantiation of Augustinian Christianity amongst the Germanic nations that occupied Western Europe following the collapse of the Roman Empire.
The Nature of Civilization in General
Prior to stating the particularities surrounding Western civilization, we should establish the properties that underlie what constitutes a civilization. The defining factor of a civilization is its worldview, which is a set of propositions that detail a view of reality (a view of what the world is). Included in this view is going to be a view of the Good, as a view of what constitutes the fundamental principles of reality entails a view about the moral universe that this view entails. Yet a civilization cannot be said to simply be a view of the world, as civilization is not just something that one believes but it is something that an individual lives in. So, this view of the world is made the formal principle of a civilization as far as this worldview is taken up by a particular people in a particular set of locations and is embedded in their society. We can therefore think of the people, place, and temporality as one part of the material cause of civilization. The society formed by said people under the defining view of the world, including political institutions, economic institutions, cultural habits, artistic traditions, and the work of intellectuals, would include the second material cause of a civilization.
The condition for a civilization ceasing to exist is that the defining view of the world is no longer the organizing principle instantiated by its people in its society. However, this should not be taken to mean that the material causes that underlie a civilization are not important when considering the continuity of civilizations. There exist necessary accidents, which can be thought of as preconditions for a form to exist in a thing that is necessitated by the form but are not equal to it. For instance, a human being is not defined by the fact that he has flesh, bones, and a heart. The defining property of a human being is a statement about his soul, namely that he is a rational animal. However, for a rational animal’s soul to be instantiated in a person, he will need flesh, bones, and a heart. This is a necessary material accident, as the form of a human being demands that matter like flesh, bones, and a heart be present in a person for him to exist. In like manner, the material that makes up a civilization does not define it, yet the defining worldview of a civilization makes demands of the material causes that must be present within it, for it to continue to exist.
These definitions assert that a civilization exists in the world independent of any spectator’s subjective assessment. Therefore, disagreement existing between individuals regarding what constitutes a civilization is no more effective in destroying the existence of a civilization than perceptive disagreements regarding the qualities of an ice cube destroy the fact that the ice cube exists.
Augustinian Christianity
A key to understanding the foundations of Western thought is understanding some of the key developments brought about by the work of the 5th-century bishop, Augustine of Hippo. In citing Augustinian Christianity as foundational to Western Civilization, I do not intend to argue that Western civilization was a product of one man’s work. Augustinian Christianity is significant only as far as it is a collection of ideas elucidated by Augustine, not as far as he is a great man. Nor is it the case that I intend to leave aside the development of Christian dogma prior to Augustine. The ecumenical councils (Nicaea 1 and Constantinople 1) and the centuries of theological work prior to Augustine were, in fact, foundational to the development of Christian doctrine as we know it today. It is also important to acknowledge that Christian dogma would continue to develop in the years after Augustine’s death, with the later Christological councils (Ephesus, Chalcedon, Constantinople 2, and 3) being necessary developments of orthodox Christology. Finally, it is important to note that the traditions that Augustinian Christianity gave rise to would lead to further developments of his system and provide a more elaborate and formal presentation of its contents. The significance of Augustine’s work is that it provides several distinctive theological developments that are unique and foundational to Western
Christianity, and therefore to the West simply, could serve as the foundation of its intellectual and, therefore, its cultural and societal framework. In what follows, we attempt to briefly elucidate some of the key theological developments present in Augustine’s work.
Augustine’s Account of Evil and Soteriology
Augustine’s account of evil and his related soteriology are the result of a synthesis around his response to two prevalent heresies in his day. The first heresy that Augustine encountered was that of the Manicheans, who believed that the universe was the result of a cosmic dualism between a cosmic power of good and a cosmic power of evil. Augustine found this view to be flawed, as it limited the significance of human agency (evil is the result of a cosmic choice, not of free will), while simultaneously denying divine sovereignty. In response to this view, Augustine developed a conception of evil as a privation. Rather than being the result of an active force, evil was instead regarded as a disorder or a lack preventing a thing from being fully actualized. Yet, Augustine was confronted with a second heresy during his theological career, that of Pelagianism, which argued that mankind could earn salvation by way of one’s own works. It is in response to this idea that Augustine (working from the Pauline epistles) derived one of the most important ideas in Western theology, that of original sin. Augustine believed that due to the Fall, mankind inherited a private state that meant all his actions would be stained with sin. As a result of this, mankind could not hope to attain salvation by way of his own effort and requires an act of unmerited favor by God to be saved. Salvation thus became a result of grace alone. One of the most controversial elements of Augustine’s theology was his account of predestination. Over the course of his theological career, Augustine increasingly intensified his account of divine sovereignty. In the anti-Manichean phase of his career, Augustine had a more libertarian account of free will. Yet when he reached his anti-Pelagian career, Augustine repented of his overly strong account of free will and instead argued for a compatibilist view of free will – a view that saw complete divine predetermination compatible with a human will with moral agency. This view becomes controversial as it posits that God, prior to the creation of the world, predetermined who would be saved, and consequently who would not be (though Augustine gives a different account of how one is made elect as opposed to reprobate). Both views provide excellent foreshadowing of the later debates that would occur within both Protestantism and Catholicism between the Calvinists and Armenians and the Thomists and Molinists, respectively. One note that is important to make is that, unlike later Calvinists, Augustine never subscribed to the view that one could be certain regarding which category he stood in. This would in fact, bear significant consequences for his ecclesiology and the sociological consequences it would bear.
Augustine’s Ecclesiology, Philosophy of History, and Just War Theory
One of Augustine’s most important works, The City of God, explores the nature of the Church, considering its origins and its destiny. In exploring this, Augustine can develop an ecclesiology around the destiny of the elect and the reprobate. One of the key concepts that Augustine develops to describe the dynamics of the city of God is the concept of the invisible and the visible church. The idea here builds off the principle that the elect cannot discern whether they or others are elected. This means that those who will persevere unto salvation are not visible on earth and therefore form an invisible community. It is these individuals who make up the City of God. However, the institution that is the visible Church serves as the medium through which one gains entrance to the City of God, through sacraments that dispense saving grace to individuals. The two communities are thus inexorably connected, as entrance to the invisible Church requires entrance to the visible. Yet, the invisibility of election means that one cannot discern whether they or their fellow parishioner is elect, though you have received the sacraments, and does not allow one to determine if a wicked statesman is reprobate. The visible Church, as a result, is an imperfect participation in the invisible Church, and is not, as a result, a second Church but the visible presence of the one Church.
Augustine can then use his ecclesiology to build an eschatological framework that centers on it. Throughout all of time, there has only been one community of God’s people who have been made part of that community through faith in Christ officiated through grace. While Augustine believes that ceremonial laws given in the Old Testament were divinely commanded and, as a result, were authoritative during the time that they existed, Augustine follows Paul in maintaining that they were never salvifically efficacious. Moreover, Old Testament ceremonial law, as well as the nature of an ethnically centered visible community, have a place in salvation history as signs of the coming of Christ, which with his coming are fulfilled in history.
The end of the City of God is, of course, eternal life in God’s presence. Yet the City only achieves its end at the end of history. A common theme throughout The City of God is that the City of God is on pilgrimage while in this world. Augustine recognizes that while on Earth, the City of God does not have dominion over the Earth and is instead in a world containing members of the other City, the Earthly City. It is also important to note that Augustine would deny a millenarian eschatology that would anticipate a period of history prior to the final judgement in which the elect would have dominion over the world. His position of eschatology can therefore be defined as an amillennial position, and he reads sections of the Book of Revelation relating to the thousand-year millennium as being a reference to the period of Church history following Christ’s resurrection. Therefore, until the second comes, the Church will be forced to exist alongside a population of unbelievers.
This view has an important consequence for Augustine’s conception of how Christians should relate to state power. On the one hand, Augustine believes that Christian rulers should use power to create a context of natural peace and to forward the cause of Christianity. On the other hand,
Augustine admits that state power cannot be used to bring about a society in which all its members are righteous Christians. There is, in other words, an admission that a society, even a Christian one, will always have to coexist with corruption and sin. This conception generates a political philosophy that differs from both modern and ancient political philosophy. Unlike the former, Augustine sees state power being informed by the state’s role in maintaining virtue in society, yet unlike the latter, Augustine would need to see the state presiding over the architectonic good, with that role belonging to the Church. Of the two, however, it should be noted that Augustine and his followers are situated in a framework closer to the latter than the former.
The last significant note about Augustine’s social thought is his conception of the circumstances under which Christians could justly engage in war. Augustine distinguished between just cause to engage in a military conflict and just conditions under which a war must be fought. To justly enter a military conflict, one must have a just cause, the right intention, and legitimate authority to declare the conflict. There must be a reasonable chance of securing the aim of the war, and he implies that it must be a last resort. During war, one must properly discriminate between military combatants and civilians, and the war must maintain proportion: there must be a balance between the good done and the harm caused.
Augustinian Trinitarian Theology
The final element of Augustine’s worldview that is worth noting is his conception of the Trinity that would come to dominate Western theology. In De Trinitate (On the Trinity), Augustine develops a language for the Trinity that centers on identifying structures in the human mind and soul that mirror what occurs in the Trinity. These analogies include mind, knowledge, and love, memory, understanding, and will, as well as lover, beloved, and love. Although Augustine maintains that the Trinity is an issue that lies beyond the realm of natural rational derivation, his use of these metaphors and his attempt at arguments for the plausibility of the Trinity form the backbone of Western trinitarian metaphysics. These arguments are indeed the basis for Aquinas’s treatment of the issue. Importantly, part of Augustine’s account of the Trinity includes an argument that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, which would go on to form the basis of one of the paradigmatic disagreements between Eastern and Western theology.
Augustine’s theological exploration of the Trinity and his broader incorporation of philosophy into his theology are foundational for the later scholastic tradition’s reliance on formal philosophy in theological speculation. In comparison to the Eastern traditions’ stronger reliance on apophaticism, the West developed a theological tradition that readily took advantage of metaphysically rigorous definitions from philosophers like Aristotle. It is important to note that theologians like Aquinas understood that there were issues in theology for which natural reason could not supply a derivation (the Trinity being a key instance), and Aquinas relies on the work of Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite in placing limits on the knowledge humans are capable of grasping of the divine nature. Nonetheless, even in these areas, Aquinas regards theology as a scientific study, subject to the same requirement of logical and philosophical rigor as any other scientific discipline.
The Matter of Western Civilization: The Germanic Tribes
Having briefly elucidated the particularities of Augustinian Christianity, we now turn to a brief discussion of the matter of Western Civilization. During the 5th century, the western portion of the Roman Empire finished its extended period of descent that began in the 3rd century. Augustine was in fact a witness to this period of decline, with the City of God written in the aftermath of Alaric’s sacking of Rome to defend the continuation of Christian civilization. In its wake, the territories of Western Europe were conquered by a set of tribal peoples living beyond the Rhine, who spoke Germanic languages. These groups consisted of primitive and warlike individuals whose societies centered around the importance of courage and military success. Their society was structured around clans defined by kinship, i.e., groups of around fifty or so households consisting of extended families that would treat their members as though they were part of their family. These clans then united into tribal units defined by a sense of fictive kinship, i.e., an extension of local kinship into a broader form of familial identification across clans. Contact with the Augustinian Christianity would see these structures slowly transform into the foundations of the feudal system that characterized medieval society.
The theology that these groups had can be broadly outlined by the theology and mythology contained in Old Norse Sources (with local differences leading to diversity of theological and mythological traditions across various tribes). This theology is positioned within the broader outline of theological traditions inherited from the Indo-European tradition writ large. A notable feature of this tradition centers on the tradition of epic poetry, detailing the lives and deeds of epic heroes of the past, whose stories would often feature contact with divinity, and that would bestow on their main character a status of unending fame. When these traditions were then folded into a society characterized by Augustinian Christianity, they resulted in a poetic tradition that was unique. Epic poems detailing the lives of epic heroes would continue to be sung, yet in place of the glorification of pride characteristic of pre-Christian tradition was the glorification of humility, so heavily emphasized in Augustine’s Christianity.
Perhaps the most important of these tribes were the Angles, Saxons, and the Franks. The Angles and Saxons were two tribes from the northern part of Germany who migrated to the British allies in the early part of the 5th century following the withdrawal of Roman administration from Great Britain, and together with the remaining populations formed the population basis of medieval Britain. Over the course of the 7th centuries they converted to Christianity, in large part because of a missionary sent from Rome named Augustine of Canterbury. As the name suggests, the Christianity that the British Isles absorbed was precisely that of Augustine, detailed above.
Yet it was the Franks who would have the most consequential impact on early medieval history. The Franks were a confederation of Western Germanic tribes residing along the Rhine who gradually took control of what was formerly the Roman province of Gaul (what is today France). Under the leadership of Clovis 1, the Franks united under a single kingdom and converted to Nicaean Christianity, unlike many of their neighbors, like the Gauls, who converted to Arian Christianity. Under the military leadership of the Merovingian dynasty, as well as strategic marriages, the Franks were able to consolidate territory belonging to the Burgundians, Visigoths, and Thuringians, allowing the Franks to rule over much of Western Gaul. By adopting Latin Christianity, the Merovingians were able to absorb Augustine’s theological influence, which was subsequently preserved through the Latin monastic tradition. One of the notable theologians of the period was St. Gregory of Tours, who compiled a comprehensive thesis of the Merovingian period, called Historia Francorum (The History of the Franks). In this work, Gregory borrows the Augustinian method of looking at history theologically in telling the story of how a set of Germanic tribes converted to Christianity and spread it, while also documenting the brutal struggles accompanying the Merovingian dynasty. The Merovingians’ accomplishments would prime the West for one of its most important defining figures: Charlemagne.
Charlemagne
It was the achievements of Charlemagne that would cement the Franks as a foundational contributor to Western civilization. Charlemagne was the grandson of the great Charles Martel, who led the Franks to victory over the Umayyad caliphate during their invasion of Gaul. It was Charlemagne’s father, Pepin the Short, who overthrew the Merovingian dynasty and created a new dynasty, that of the Carolingians. In the year 800, Charlemagne was crowned Roman emperor by Pope Leo III in Rome (much to the chagrin of the Byzantine Empire in the West). Under Charlemagne, Frankish holdings were significantly expanded, with Charlemagne gaining control of Saxony, Lombardy, and territory held by the Avars. The justification for quite a few of these conquests (particularly that of the Saxons) was the Christianization of pagan nations.
The most significant achievement of Charlemagne’s reign was the reforms that brought about the Carolingian Renaissance. Charlemagne was concerned with the lack of literacy amongst priests in the Frankish kingdom. He figured a lack of literacy implied religious leaders would fail to properly understand Scripture and key religious ideas in the patristics. To combat this, Charlemagne issued the creation of schools across the Frankish kingdom and even created a school directly associated with his kingdom, the Palace School. This project quickly became a conservation project of key texts, since for clergymen to be well informed in important texts, they must continue to exist. To bring about these reforms, Charlemagne enlisted the assistance of international scholars.
The most famous of these scholars was Alcuin of York, an Anglo-Latin scholar and clergyman from York. Much of Alcuin’s theological work is aimed largely at conservation as opposed to original composition, though one interesting note is that Alcuin published two moral treaties, De Virtutibus et Vitiis and De Animae Ratione, both of which were abridgements on the writings of Augustine on virtue and vice as well as the nature of the rational soul. The successful reforms of the Carolingian renaissance were a key moment in the revitalization of the intellectual tradition following the collapse of the Western Roman Empire and were an important precondition for the rise of the Western university system. It was the longest enduring accomplishment of Charlamagne’s empire, an empire which collapsed a few generations following his death, with the remnants of his empire forming much of the territory of contemporary Germany, France, and Northern Italy.
Symbolically, Charlemagne is significant as he represents the broader spirit that animated Western civilization. That spirit is one of a rugged and uncivilized people who met civilization, or rather the ruins of a previous civilization, and that was able to recognize both that it was great, and what had made it great. Specifically, it was the spirit of the Germanic peoples who over the course of the centuries following the collapse of the Western Roman Empire were able to appreciate that the empire had accomplished great things, and that the greatest things that it accomplished resided in the intellectual tradition of its greatest thinkers. In recognizing this greatness, they were able to begin the prolonged process of creating a civilization that would reach even greater heights than the one that preceded it.
The Crusades
Thus far, we have investigated the foundations of what would become the societies of medieval and, therefore, modern Western civilization. We have done so by taking broad strokes look at the various groups that settled in the territories of Western Europe and by elucidating the theological tradition that they would take up. Yet if we were to isolate our attention to a single set of historical phenomena that shows that there existed a coherent worldview across these societies that served as the first principles of their civilization, I do not believe that one could find a better example than the Crusades.
Over the course of the crusades, most of the people of Western Europe took up arms to engage in a common military struggle against a common enemy. The determinant of enemy and ally in this conflict was determined solely by religious identification, with the population of Christendom being identified as allies in a common enterprise against the enemy religion of Islam. Despite most of the nations of Western Europe being involved in the conflict, it was the descendants of the Franks who were called upon primarily to lead the movement.
The First Crusade was the result of a combination of a variety of historical factors. The most important historical context point was the centuries of Islamic conquest that preceded the First Crusade. Starting shortly after the death of the Prophet Muhammad, several Islamic caliphates had managed to create empires stretching from Spain in the west across Northern Africa to present-day India in the east. For centuries, the Byzantine Empire had struggled to maintain sovereignty in the face of multiple Islamic conquests. In 1071, the Byzantines suffered a decisive defeat at the hands of the Seljuk Empire, resulting in a loss of control of significant portions of Anatolia. As a result, the Byzantine Empire was vulnerable. The second crucial point of context was that in 1054, the Eastern and Western churches were in an official position of schism (which they remain today). Finally, the Western papacy was attempting to bring significant reform to Christendom, as it had struggled with significant warfare between the rising European warrior class. So in 1095, when Emperor Alexios 1 Komnenos requested the assistance of a small western mercenary contingent, Pope Urban II found a great opportunity to reduce internal violence amongst the European warrior class, whilst also exerting a saving influence on the Byzantines and ultimately pushing back the influence of an invading un-Christian force that had plagued both Western and Eastern Europe for centuries.
There were several important theological concepts invoked over the course of the multiple crusades following that at the end of the 11th century. The first important idea invoked in defense of crusading was Augustine’s doctrine of just war. The immediate justification that served as the jus belli of the conflict was the abuse of pilgrims in the Holy Land, as well as the threat that the Islamic caliphates posed to Christians in the east. Many of these claims of abuse to pilgrims were exaggerated, though it is worth noting that in 1009, the Fatimid caliph Al-Hakim ordered the destruction of the Holy Sepulchre, for Christians, the most holy site in the world. Another important theological development was the granting of indulgences to crusaders. In other words, the Church granted the remission of temporal punishment because of sin for those who took up the cross and went on crusade.
It is in the Council of Claremont and its reception that we can see the encapsulation of the self-conception that the Franks had developed:
“Oh, race of Franks, race from across the mountains, race chosen and beloved by God as shines forth in very many of your works set apart from all nations by the situation of your country, as well as by your catholic faith and the honor of the holy church! To you, our discourse is addressed, and for you our exhortation is intended. We wish you to know what a grievous cause has led us to Your country, what peril threatening you and all the faithful has brought us.
Let the deeds of your ancestors move you and incite your minds to manly achievements; the glory and greatness of King Charles the Great, and of his son Louis, and of your other kings, who have destroyed the kingdoms of the pagans, and have extended in these lands the territory of the
holy church. Let the holy sepulchre of the Lord our Savior, which is possessed by unclean nations, especially incite you, and the holy places which are now treated with ignominy and irreverently polluted with their filthiness. Oh, most valiant soldiers and descendants of invincible ancestors, not degenerate, but recall the valor of your progenitors.
She seeks, therefore, and desires to be liberated and does not cease to implore you to come to her aid. From you especially, she asks succor, because, as we have already said, God has conferred upon you above all nations great glory in arms. Accordingly, undertake this journey for the remission of your sins, with the assurance of the imperishable glory of the kingdom of heaven.
When Pope Urban had said these and very many similar things in his urbane discourse, he so influenced to one purpose the desires of all who were present, that they cried out, “It is the will of God! It is the will of God!”” – Robert the Monk’s Account of the Speech of Urban II at Claremont
There are a couple of interesting elements of this speech. The first is the notion that the Franks are a race chosen by God to carry out his purpose of fighting un-Christian empires. This is intriguing as it demonstrates that the Franks have situated themselves as an integral part of God’s providential plan to work his will out in history. In other words, this conception is grounded within a broader theologically driven view of history in which God must raise up representatives to fight in his name. We also see a promise of penitential reward for engaging in the military conflict. Unlike the hero tradition that praised heroes who fought to secure their own glory, it is the glory of God and the remission of one’s sins that serves as the primary focus of a man who would take up the cross. Lastly, the speech is important precisely because it highlights that there are those who are chosen by God to fight in His cause and that there are those who stand against Him.
Over the course of the crusades, every major nation from Western Europe would make major contributions to the various efforts to recapture the Holy Land or to weaken Islamic caliphates, from the Franks who fought in the First Crusade, to Richard the Lionheart’s famed victories in the Third Crusade. Thus, all of the nations converted to Latin Christianity in the half millennium following the collapse of the Western Roman Empire found themselves in a prolonged set of military campaigns initiated by the Pope himself against a worldview that was regarded as foreign and hostile to the fundamental views shared by all of these people. There was, in other words, a universal cause against a foe that was universally recognized as standing against the most basic worldview shared by the inhabitants of Western Europe. The fact that such a worldview could mobilize such a total, unified, and resolute effort on the part of said groups is the best testament to the existence of a civilizational order defined by Latin Augustinian Christianity.
The Development of the Western Intellectual Tradition
Having provided evidence to raise the credence of the existence of a civilization centered around Augustinian Latinized Christianity existing amongst the Germanic peoples that settled Western Europe beginning in the early medieval period, it is now necessary to briefly elucidate the temporal and ideological extent of this civilization. In other words, to inquire as to what ideas and time periods are included within its context. To do so, it is easiest to start by looking at intellectual history to see which ideas are either situated in the same conceptual tradition or which ideas, if they ran counter to the defining conceptual tradition of Western civilization, arose in a context defined by it.
The easiest intellectual tradition that we can recognize as being firmly grounded in the tradition of Augustinian Christianity is that of the Catholic scholastic period. This period includes a variety of thinkers and intellectual movements. Some notable figures include Saint Anselm of Canterbury, Peter Lombard, Duns Scotus, William of Ockham, and Saint Thomas Aquinas. The period was notable for the introduction of the works of the philosopher Aristotle, as well as the introduction of syllogistic logic into the Western world. These philosophers had significant disagreements with one another, with Duns Scotus popularizing a voluntaristic theological perspective, and William of Ockham forwarding the nominalist metaphysics that would become popular in late scholasticism. Both positions knowingly contradicted the theological intellectualism and moderate metaphysical realism forwarded by St. Thomas Aquinas. Additionally, the era saw the development of important new concepts, like the satisfaction theory of atonement, first formulated by Anselm of Canterbury and further systematized by Aquinas.
In spite of these factors, the authors of the era were firmly grounded within the theological and philosophical framework of Latin Christianity, as formulated by St. Augustine, and many were simply claiming to systematize and make more philosophically rigorous the work of the Church Fathers, with Augustine serving as the preeminent authority amongst them. We can see this influence displayed prominently in the work of the era’s greatest intellectual, St. Thomas Aquinas. In Aquinas’s treatment of the Trinity, he uses the rigor of Aristotelian logic and metaphysics to further develop Augustine’s treatment of the Trinity using psychological analogy (ST P 1 Q. 27- 29). He follows Augustine’s identification of evil as nonbeing, even quoting him to do so (ST P 1 Q. 49), and follows Augustine in defending the doctrine of divine simplicity, quoting him as an authority in the matter as well (ST P 1 Q. 3). Finally, in treating the nature of grace and justification, it is Augustine who serves as Aquinas’s preeminent authority, in developing the doctrine that would become the basis of Catholic soteriology contra the protestant reformation (ST 1-2 Q 109-114). All the major theologians of the scholastic era operate within a
Christian context in which soteriology is a matter of unmerited divine favor by an omniscient trinitarian God, with grace is officiated through the sacramental life of the Church. The fundamentals of the Augustinian tradition thus not only remain intact but receive a greater depth of philosophical and logical clarification.
It is with Protestantism that we face the first real question regarding the consistency of the intellectual tradition in Western Europe and the Augustinian tradition. However, when we investigate the key soteriological issue animating the reformation, we find that it is a continuation of the Augustinian tradition. That issue, in fact, is the debate between Protestants and Catholics over justification. This is the question of how an individual transitions from being a sinner to being regarded as righteous by God. The central question is not as to whether this transition is officiated by an act of divine favor alone: on that matter, there is in fact agreement. For the initial generation of reformers, including figures like Luther and Calvin, the issue became a question of how this transition could occur by an act of divine favor alone while depending in any way on properties inherent in the individual being justified. For Catholic scholastics like St. Thomas Aquinas (nicknamed sophists by the likes of Luther and Calvin) mentioned above, there is no contradiction between a justification that is the result of unmerited favor and one that still respects the notion that the righteousness of an individual must reside within them. The key commonality is that both sides accept a soteriology centered on grace’s role in human existence. In fact, the harshness of the dispute only registers in a theological context in which grace has this centrality. The dispute would fail to even register in a soteriological context that saw salvation as a project to be worked out by natural human effort.
One can view reformation as an internal debate in Western society, as to the proper interpretation of Augustinian soteriology. It is important to note that Augustine himself would side with the Catholic position elucidated by Aquinas (Calvin himself even partially admits to this), yet this is not significant to the question of whether the reformers remain within the broader tradition that results from his work. When we speak of the Augustinian tradition, we are not strictly speaking of the efforts and words of a single 5th-century theologian, but instead we are speaking of an extensive theological tradition extending across thousands of years that builds on and extrapolates from the basis of the theological ideas contained within the work of Augustine. As a result, the project of the reformers is aimed at correcting what is perceived as the incorrect understanding of a grace-centric soteriology that was totally corrupted because of the scholastic era.
It is also important to note that the reformers were highly fond of other elements of Augustinian Christianity. The most prominent, and simultaneously controversial, example of this fondness can be seen in the early reformers’ treatment of the relationship between predestination and freewill. John Calvin and the ensuing Reformed tradition cited Augustine heavily in defense of their views of a strong role of God in predestination, as mentioned earlier. In fact, many Reformed Protestants will casually refer to themselves as Augustinians. Lastly, Augustine’s distinction between the visible and invisible church would be quite influential for Calvin and the
later reformed tradition, giving the tradition a framework to distinguish between visible institutions that may become corrupted and the body of the elect that would remain pure. Though in ecclesiology, there are some key areas of departure between the two traditions, as one might expect. The theologian BB Warfield said it best:
“The reformation, inwardly considered, was just the ultimate triumph of Augustine’s doctrine of grace over Augustine’s doctrine of the Church.”
It is with the Enlightenment and the succeeding era of idealism that we encounter a set of ideas more difficult to square with the foundational ideas discussed previously. To be more specific, all the major figures of enlightenment and post-Kantian idealism rejected key elements of Augustinian Christianity, with many simply falling outside of orthodox Nicene Christianity itself. A popular theological view during the Enlightenment was that of deism, which exerted the existence of a supreme being who created the universe, often without establishing a personal relationship with human beings and who was discernible entirely and sufficiently through natural reason. Deistic enlightenment philosophers include Voltaire, Thomas Paine, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. David Hume was identified as an irreligious naturalistic skeptic, and Baron d’Holbach was an atheist materialist. The religious views of Thomas Hobbes are debated, though many of his philosophical arguments rest on a materialistic conception of the world, and he was accused by his contemporaries of being an atheist; John Locke was an Arian Christian. Immanuel Kant’s critical stance on human epistemic capabilities to know things in and of themselves meant that God was effectively relegated to a moral postulate, while Hegel reduced God to the Absolute reality that is immanentized and developed through the medium of history itself. All these figures would deny the doctrine of original sin as formulated by Augustine and the later Christian tradition.
Yet, it is still possible to maintain that these figures maintain a relationship to Western civilization, as the context in which they wrote was one of a civilization defined by Augustinian Christianity. Looking at the beliefs of these men from a modern perspective, we may feel quite at home with many of these figures, yet it is important to note that they lived in a significantly different historical context than we do. Indeed, they lived in the society that resulted from the instantiation of Christianity, while we live in one that resulted from the instantiation of their ideas and those of their more radical successors. When one reads their works, one will find references to scriptural stories. One finds references to the early chapters of Genesis in John Locke’s account of original sin, and Hobbes makes references to the Mosaic covenant when discussing the nature of political covenants. Moreover, the basic moral and eschatological framework of Christianity finds its way into these works. The concept of Christ as a moral exemplar for human behavior is found throughout the work of Enlightenment philosophers. Some have suggested that Kant’s moral philosophy ought to be read as an attempt to put New
Testament ethics on a rational philosophical basis. In the work of Friedrich Hegel, one finds the core of Christian eschatology removed from its origination point in the story of Christ’s saving relationship with mankind and abstracted to a rational dialectic unfolding over the course of human history, culminating in the full flowering of what he calls the West. Through Hegel, Christian influence can penetrate philosophical systems where it would seem least expected. The work of the philosopher Karl Marx would lose its substance were it not for its central conception of history as a materialistic dialectic, driven by forces of conflict residing in systems of material production. The societal context of Christianity is necessary to understand the development of the thought of this period in the form that it took. These thinkers were writing in reaction to the dominant institutions and ideologies that defined their societies, and their often-conscious rejection of the ideas that define that society reflects their participation in said society. As a result of this, we can place the results of enlightenment and idealistic thought within the boundaries of Western civilization.
Conclusion
After a brief discussion, we have provided enough information to ground credence in the existence of a civilization centered around a particular worldview amongst a particular group of people making up the societies of medieval and modern European society. Unfortunately, a fully systematic study of the topic would require a much more detailed study both of Augustinian Christianity and of the medieval and early modern periods of European history. Yet I believe that the picture we have painted provides enough data to make plausible the notion that we can, at least with respect to the foundational societies of modern European history, speak about a coherent civilization existing in the region (and by consequence of the time periods and ideas involved, would include the Anglo-American colonies as well as the United States that clearly lay within its ideological range).
Yet the descriptive question of Western civilization’s existence is resolved; we have three other questions. The first is as to its connection with other civilizations, the second as to whether it still exists, and the third as to whether we should view it positively. Each of these questions warrants a separate investigation and requires additional conceptual clarification. I will only briefly comment on the third question, though admittedly without the thorough treatment required to establish it concretely.
When we view the intellectual, cultural, territorial, technological, and economic achievements of Western civilization, it becomes clear that while Western civilization has, like any other civilization, its moments of weakness, it in fact is home to far more gold than dust. Intellectually, Western civilization’s emphasis on the application of rational dialectic to the investigation of foundational metaphysical and theological problems created a society that could produce thinkers as diverse as Thomas Aquinas, Immanuel Kant, Karl Marx, and Friedrich
Nietzsche. Scientifically, the West gave rise to the major areas of modern empirical natural science and the plethora of technologies that resulted from them. Western civilization can claim great musicians like Bach, Beethoven, and Mozart, as well as painters like Raphael, Da Vinci, Jacques-Louis David, Goya, and Van Gogh as part of its canon. It was the first civilization to achieve a truly global level of influence, with no corner of the world left uninfluenced by it in any way. At its height, the West was a civilization so grand that it could only be effectively challenged by one enemy: itself.
