political theology, Vol. 16 No. 5, September, 2015, 421–441 Pilgrim’s Progress in Society: Augustine’s Political Thought in The City of God B. HOON WOO Kosin University, Busan, South Korea This essay attempts to study Augustine’s political thought in The City of God (De Civitate Dei). It will demonstrate that the notion of pilgrimage is essential for understanding the political thought that Augustine develops in The City of God. To support the thesis, I will explore what role the theme of pilgrimage plays in Augustine’s formulation of anthropology, ecclesiology, and political thought in The City of God. Augustine’s ideas of pilgrimage stem from his ‘‘pilgrim eschatology,’’ which regulates the entire political aspect of the Christian’s life. Augustine does not lay any neutral realm between the city of God and the earthly city. The political work of pilgrims of the city of God for the citizens of the earthly city is associated with evangelism (persuasion to love God), peace (the mutual aim of the two cities), justice (which starts from true worship), and prayer (which is intending toward the final perfection). keywords Augustine, The City of God (De Civitate Dei), pilgrim Augustine’s City of God has a central place for understanding his social and political thought. There have been heated discussions as to what Augustine has in mind regarding Christians’ political relationships in this work. R.H. Barrow argues that in The City of God, Augustine ‘‘is concerned with historical criticism and not with developing a theory of the state.’’1 Ernest L. Fortin, along a similar line, contends that Christianity expressed in Augustine’s works ‘‘remains nonpolitical or, better still, transpolitical.’’2 Gerard O’Daly is also convinced that 1 Barrow RH. Introduction to St. Augustine. The City of God, being selections from the De Civitate Dei, including most of the XIXth book, with text (London: Faber and Faber; 1950), p. 249. Except when noted otherwise, all English translations of The City of God are from Philip Schaff, editor. The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers [hereafter NPNF], first series, vol. II. St. Augustin’s City of God and Christian doctrine (Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems; 1997). The Latin edition of The City of God is Sancti Aurelii Augustini, De Civitate Dei libri I-XXII, Dombart B, Kalb A, editors (Turnholti: Brepols; 1955). 2 Fortin EL. Introduction. In Augustine, political writings. Translated by: Tkacz MW, Kries D (Indianapolis: Hackett; 1994), p. xxvi. ß W. S. Maney & Son Ltd 2015 DOI 10.1179/1462317X14Z.000000000113 422 B. HOON WOO Augustine’s City of God is not propounding his political views, and that this work is ‘‘not a discussion of the relations between church and state […] no details of constitutional practice or theory […] no programme for the Christianization of Roman political institutions.’’3 As is commonly known, Augustine wrote no political writings. Among approximately five million words of books, treatises, sermons, and letters, he never once wrote an explicitly political treatise.4 The main concerns of his writings are pastoral, theological, exegetical, and controversial. Augustine was not a politician, but a pastor and theologian for his contemporary churches. Even his City of God is not in any ordinary sense a political treatise. The purpose of this book is broadly moral, rather than narrowly political.5 It is hardly possible, however, to overestimate Augustine’s significance as an important thinker in the history of Western political thought. Augustine’s political thought based on his anthropological insight of fallen humanity, as Dyson stresses, ‘‘has been immensely important in terms of its influence on the development of various ideological currents in Western thought.’’6 Thus, Robert Dodaro’s claim is worthy of notice. He writes, ‘‘Augustine wrote no political treatise. […] However, concern for context ought not to limit the range of Augustine’s writings that are considered ‘political’.’’7 Augustine’s City of God, among all of his works, shows his most developed political thought.8 But the issue of Augustine’s political idea in this work is a much-debated topic within scholarship. This essay means to investigate which interpretation is best suited for understanding Augustine’s political idea in this work by measuring with the images of pilgrim (peregrinus) and pilgrimage (peregrinatio). Augustine uses the image of pilgrimage almost one hundred times in this work. Many scholars have long noted that the term is a very important theme both in The City of God and his other works. However, as Claussen points out, ‘‘there has been no systematic study of Augustine’s use of this term.’’9 Claussen’s article is noteworthy for the study of the image of pilgrimage. It investigates why Augustine chose the term over similar words, and what its implications are for the understanding of The City of God as a whole. But his research is basically philological and is not concerned with Augustine’s political ideas proper.10 3 O’Daly G. Augustine’s ‘‘City of God’’: a reader’s guide (Oxford: Clarendon; 1999), pp. 209–10. Hollingworth M. Pilgrim City: St. Augustine of Hippo and his innovation in political thought (London: T & T Clark; 2010), p. 2. 5 O’Donovan O. The political thought of City of God 19. In: O’Donovan O, Lockwood O’Donovan J. Bonds of imperfection: Christian politics, past and present (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans; 2004), p. 50. 6 Dyson RW. Foreword. In: Hollingworth, Pilgrim City, vii. 7 Dodaro R. Church and State. In: Fitzgerald A, editor. Augustine through the ages: an encyclopedia (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; 1999), pp. 181–2. 8 O’Donovan O, Lockwood O’Donovan J, editors. From Irenaeus to Grotius: a sourcebook in Christian political thought, 100-1625 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; 1999), p. 105. 9 Claussen MA. ‘‘Peregrinatio’’ and ‘‘Peregrini’’ in Augustine’s ‘‘City of God.’’ Traditio. 1991;46:33–4. Claussen notes that the two best expositions of the role and meaning of peregrinatio in The City of God are by P. Borgomeo, L’Églis de ce temps dans la prédication de saint Augustin (Paris; 1972), pp. 117–85, especially pp. 137–50, and Guy J-C. Unité et structure logique de la ‘Cité de Dieu’ de saint Augusfin (Paris; 1961), pp. 112–4. 10 Claussen writes, ‘‘I remain unsure of how ‘historically important’ Augustine’s peregrinatio has been.’’ Claussen, ‘‘Peregrinatio’’ and ‘‘Peregrini’’ in Augustine’s ‘‘City of God,’’ p. 74 n. 210. 4 PILGRIM’S PROGRESS IN SOCIETY 423 In this essay, I will argue that the pilgrim image is the key concept for the study of Augustine’s political thought in The City of God. My argument will unfold in the following way. In the first section, I will introduce various interpretations of Augustine’s political thought for the help of comprehending the entire scheme of the essay. In the second and third sections, I will explore what role the theme of pilgrimage plays in Augustine’s formulation of anthropology and ecclesiology. These two sections will be a foundation to understand the fourth part, which deals with Augustine’s political thought in The City of God. In each section, it will be argued that the pilgrimage image well explains Augustine’s eschatological realism regarding human beings, Christians, the Church, society, and the state. Different interpretations of Augustine’s political thought Herbert A. Deane points to two problems that have been most acutely felt by those who study Augustine’s political thought. First, unlike Plato, Aristotle, Hobbes, and Hegel, no single work by Augustine is written to show ‘‘his leading ideas about man, society, and the state.’’ Second, there is not any work ‘‘where Augustine expounds his entire philosophy, including his teachings on these subjects.’’ Augustine, unlike Thomas Aquinas, never produced a synthetic work ‘‘which contains orderly, systematic treatments of such topics as law, justice, and obedience.’’11 It is precisely because of these two features that Augustine’s references to political thought are so intriguing and conducive to various interpretations. Western political thinkers have made an extremely complicated tradition of the transmission and reception of Augustine’s political ideas. The full assessment of this issue exceeds the scope of this essay and needs further research. This essay will focus on three main traditions formulated by Hollingworth and four major perspectives in modern thought categorized by Joanna V. Scott.12 Seen from a historical perspective, there are three main aspects: first, political Augustinianism; second, Augustinian political theology; and third, Augustinian political theory. These three aspects, as Hollingworth appropriately points out, follow a rather loose chronological order.13 In reality they are overlapping in time and mode. Nevertheless, it is worth dividing the aspect thus to bring clarity to such a complicated tradition. Political Augustinianism The term augustinisme politique, or ‘‘political Augustinianism,’’ was coined by Henri Xavier Arquillière.14 It refers to the medieval erosion of the distinction 11 Deane HA. The political and social ideas of St. Augustine (New York: Columbia University Press; 1963), p. vii. Hollingworth, The reception and interpretation of Augustine’s political ideas in history. In: Hollingworth, Pilgrim City, pp. 79–146; Scott JV. Political thought, contemporary influence of Augustine’s. In: Fitzgerald, Augustine through the ages, pp. 658–61. See also Banner H. Augustinianism. In: Bevir M, editor. Encyclopedia of political theory (London: Sage, 2010), pp. 92–9. 13 Hollingworth, Pilgrim City, p. 3. 14 Arquillière HX. L’augustinisme politique: Essai sur la formation des théories politiques du moyen-age, 2nd edn. (Paris: J. Vrin; 1955), p. 19. 12 424 B. HOON WOO between the church and the state in Christendom.15 Arquillière distances Augustine and medieval Augustinians and argues that the medieval interpretations of Augustine do not necessarily coincide with the actual thought of Augustine. Even where later Augustinians have cited directly from Augustine’s major political work The City of God, the medieval Augustinians oversimplified Augustine’s concepts, particularly with regard to the relations of church and state.16 Arquillière seems to follow upon the conclusions of Mandonnet and Gilson, who suggest that Augustine’s thought lacked a careful distinction between the natural and the supernatural realms.17 Political Augustinianism articulated Augustine’s obfuscation of the boundary between the natural and the supernatural, and collapsed natural law into supernatural law and the law of the state into that of the church.18 In this theory, the medieval church became the most meaningful expression of the Roman imperial ideal. Arquillière indicates two Christian figures as being particularly implicated in this growth of medieval political Augustinianism: Gregory the Great (540–604) and Isidore of Seville (560– 636). Arquillière opposes the political Augustinianism of the medieval church. He admits that Augustine did not subscribe to political Augustinianism. He is convinced that Augustine followed the New Testament and the general patristic tradition and granted that Pagan rulers should be obeyed.19 Political Augustinianism is strongly criticized by the modern theologian Henri de Lubac.20 He argues that medieval thinkers, who ascribed absolute temporal power to the papacy, were influenced by the Andalusian Muslim philosopher Averroes (1126–98) rather than by Augustine. De Lubac suggests that Augustine sees the church’s power as tutelary without direct authority over civil government. Medieval thinkers misinterpreted Augustine’s political ideas. The papacy should have found it extremely difficult to enlist Augustine for its ambitious political program.21 Augustinian political theology Augustinian political theology, according to Hollingworth’s formulation, denotes the political ideas of thinkers of the Reformation.22 It has been particularly 15 Kries D. Political Augustinianism. In: Fitzgerald, Augustine through the ages, pp. 657–8; Hollingworth, Pilgrim City, pp. 79–108; Banner, Augustinianism, pp. 92–3. Banner, Augustinianism, p. 93. 17 Kries, Political Augustinianism, p. 657. See Mandonnet P. Siger de Brabant et l’averroı̈sme latin au XIIIme siècle, 2nd edn. (Louvain: Institut supérieur de philosophie de l’Université; 1908); Gilson E. Introduction à l’étude de saint Augustin, 2nd edn. (Paris: J. Vrin; 1943). The English translation of this book is Gilson E. The Christian philosophy of Saint Augustine (New York: Random House; 1960). 18 Banner, Augustinianism, p. 93. 19 Kries, Political Augustinianism, p. 658. 20 de Lubac H. Théologies d’occasion (Paris: Desclée de Brouwer; 1984), pp. 255–308. 21 Hollingworth, Pilgrim City, pp. 7, 99. 22 Hollingworth, The reception and interpretation of Augustine’s political ideas in history, pp. 108–27; Banner, Augustinianism, pp. 96–7; Wright WJ. Martin Luther’s understanding of God’s two kingdoms: a response to the challenge of skepticism (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic; 2010). 16 PILGRIM’S PROGRESS IN SOCIETY 425 relevant to the discussion of the role of human nature and sinfulness in the relationship of church and state. Luther is the most important figure who has both similarity with and difference from Augustine.23 It is well known that Luther read Augustine’s works directly and found in him many insightful ideas. He tried to find authority to support his claims from Augustine.24 Augustine’s City of God was one of several books that Luther repeatedly cited as an authoritative source.25 Luther describes a political model of two kingdoms following the theme of The City of God. He writes that ‘‘we must divide the children of Adam and all mankind into two classes, the first belonging to the kingdom of God, the second to the kingdom of the world.’’26 Luther, like Augustine, refuses the medieval hierarchical idea of Christian society. He does not acknowledge the superiority of institutional church over the secular government. Arguably Luther seems to borrow more from Augustine than from the medieval theorists in his political thought.27 In this sense, his political theology is basically Augustinian. The way of Luther’s political theology, however, diverges from that of Augustine in several points. First, Luther argues that every Christian exists both in the realm of Christ’s royal priesthood and in the realm of secular society. The dual membership structures the inward dispositions and outward actions of Christians.28 Luther articulates this idea best in The Sermon on the Mount.29 In his comment on Matthew 5:42, Luther argues that ‘‘we [Christians] must distinguish between secular law and the teaching of Christ.’’ He writes, ‘‘According to secular law you [Christians] may use your possessions […]. But Christ teaches you in addition that you should still be willing to let everything be taken away from you […] for the sake of the Lord Christ, if you are threatened on account of the Gospel.’’30 Luther also assumes that the membership as a Christian should have priority over the membership as a citizen of secular government. In Luther’s political theology, however, there is strong tension in the dual membership of a Christian. This tension is not found in Augustine’s political thought. Second, Luther elaborates on the role of civil magistrates further than Augustine does. From the late 1520s, he began to endorse the central role of civil government in evangelical reform and supervision of churches in their jurisdictions.31 From 1530, the Christian’s participation in the civil institutions became an intrinsic necessity in Luther’s political theology. 23 Banner, Augustinianism, p. 97; Krey PD. Luther, Martin. In: Fitzgerald, Augustine through the ages, pp. 516–8; O’Donovan and O’Donovan, From Irenaeus to Grotius, pp. 581–4; Hollingworth, The reception and interpretation of Augustine’s political ideas in history, pp. 111–27; Wright WJ. Martin Luther’s understanding of God’s two kingdoms: a response to the challenge of skepticism (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic; 2010). 24 Reventlow HG. Die Rolle der Kirchenväter im Streit zwischen Erasmus und Luther. In: Steinmetz D, editor. Patristik in der Bibelexegese des 16. Jahrhunderts (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz; 1999), p. 60; Junghans H, Der Einfluß des Humanismus auf Luthers Entwicklung bis 1518. Lutherjahrbuch. 1970;37:37–101, at 109. 25 Wright, Martin Luther’s understanding of God’s two kingdoms, p. 109. 26 Luther M. Temporal authority. In: O’Donovan and O’Donovan, From Irenaeus to Grotius, p. 586. 27 Wright, Martin Luther’s understanding of God’s two kingdoms, pp. 110, 112. 28 O’Donovan and O’Donovan, From Irenaeus to Grotius, pp. 582–3. 29 On the following quotations from Luther’s sermons on The Sermon on the Mount, see Pelikan J, editor. Luther’s work, vol. 21 (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House; 1956). 30 Pelikan, Luther’s work, p. 395. 31 O’Donovan and O’Donovan, From Irenaeus to Grotius, p. 583. 426 B. HOON WOO However, as Hollingworth rightly points out, Luther’s vision of two kingdoms lacks the distinct epistemological basis of Augustine’s vision of two cities.32 Luther was not able to form a clear political theology, and his political theory was traced directly to the ambiguity of his theological concepts. J. W. Allen criticizes Luther’s political theology that only ‘‘[v]aguely there floated before his mind a vision of a state ruled by the word of God and by love and reason and natural law.’’33 Thus, in Luther, we encounter the ‘‘characteristic figure of the modern West, the selfreflecting soul who, burdened with a sense of inward space, stands at a quizzical distance from the roles assigned him in society.’’34 Augustinian political theory The term ‘‘Augustinian political theory’’ is used to categorize the modern application of Augustine’s political ideas in Hollingworth’s formulation. Two modern interpreters of Augustine’s political ideas contrast well with each other: Reinhold Niebuhr and Richard Niebuhr.35 In the middle twentieth century, H. Richard Niebuhr regarded Augustine as ‘‘the theologian of cultural transformation by Christ.’’36 He argues that his interpretation of Augustine is in accord with Augustine’s fundamental theory of creation, fall, and regeneration. ‘‘Augustine becomes one of the leaders of that great historical movement,’’ contends Richard Niebuhr, ‘‘whereby the society of the Roman empire is converted from a Caesar-centered community into medieval Christendom.’’37 In this paradigm Augustine is ‘‘an example of what conversion of culture means.’’38 O’Donovan argues that Richard Niebuhr’s theory is a thesis which will garner very little support today.39 In his City of God, Augustine does not suggest any program for changing society. Augustine should be distinguished from medieval Augustinians as Arquillière argues above. The medieval Christendom — whatever it means to Richard Niebuhr — is not directly attributable to Augustine’s political idea. Rather, it can be explained by medieval thinkers who misunderstood Augustine’s political thought and mixed it with the political ideas of Averroes.40 32 Hollingworth, Pilgrim City, pp. 118–9. Allen JW. A history of political thought in the sixteenth century (London: Methuen; 1957), pp. 18–30, at 28. 34 O’Donovan O. The desire of the nations: rediscovering the roots of political theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1996), p. 209. 35 Miles Hollingworth deals only with the Augustinian political theory of Jean Bethke Elshtain. Hollingworth, The reception and interpretation of Augustine’s political ideas in history, pp. 130–4; Elshtain JB. Augustine and the limits of politics (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press; 1995). Joanna Scott surveys the Augustinian political theories of Reinhold Niebuhr, Herbert Deane, Carry Wills, Martin Luther King, Jr., Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., Elaine Pagels, William Connolly, Julia Kristeva, Ron Rosenbaum, Hannah Arendt, Jean Elshtain, and her own. Scott, Political thought, contemporary influence of Augustine’s, pp. 659–61. Helen Banner introduces the Augustinian political theories of Reinhold Niebuhr, Morgenthau, Hannah Arendt, and Julia Kristeva. Banner, Augustinianism, pp. 98–9. Oliver O’Donovan criticizes the Augustinian political theory of Richard Niebuhr. O’Donovan, The political thought of City of God 19, p. 65. 36 Niebuhr HR. Christ and culture (New York: Harper & Row; 1951), p. 208. 37 Ibid., p. 209. 38 Ibid. 39 O’Donovan O. The political thought of City of God 19. In: O’Donovan O, Lockwood O’Donovan J, editors. Bonds of imperfection: Christian politics, past and present (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; 2004), p. 65. 40 For the political thought of Averroes, see Black A. The history of Islamic political thought: from the prophet to the present (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press; 2001), pp. 119–25. 33 PILGRIM’S PROGRESS IN SOCIETY 427 In counterpoint to the interpretation of Richard Niebuhr, Reinhold Niebuhr identifies Augustine as the first great realist in the history of Western political ideas.41 He gives attention to Augustine’s placing of evil within human selfhood. He thinks highly of Augustine’s understanding of the essence of power and the persistence of individual and collective egotism. The political ideas of Augustine allow us to seek the establishment of peace and justice under the conditions set by inherent human sinfulness. They are also applicable to modern international relationships in that a tentative Augustinian peace is achieved by the recognition of mutual responsibilities.42 To summarize the three main historical interpretations of Augustine’s political ideas, both the political Augustinianism of medieval thinkers and the Augustinian political theology of Luther seem to deviate from Augustine’s own thought. It is worthy of remembering Adolf von Harnack, who remarks, ‘‘The history of Church doctrine in the West is a much disguised struggle against Augustinianism.’’43 Among modern Augustinian political theories, Reinhold Niebuhr’s realistic interpretation is more preferable to Richard Niebuhr’s transformational theory. The study about the pilgrimage image of Augustine’s City of God will elucidate this judgment. It is notable, prior to delving into the study of pilgrim ideas, that there are various interpretations about the political thought shown in Augustine’s City of God. Modern interpretations of Augustine’s political thought Joanna V. Scott presents contemporary applications of Augustine’s political thought, which are derived primarily from The City of God and the Confessions.44 There are four main approaches. In the first approach, which is called ‘‘hard realism,’’ the state and good citizenship are sanctioned by God. However, they are empowered to use coercive law to maintain public order and political consensus because the earthly city (civitas terrena) is corrupt. Reinhold Niebuhr’s claim is close to hard realism, and Martin Luther King Jr.’s political actions are well interpreted along the lines of hard realism. The second approach is called ‘‘soft realism,’’ where the state and good citizenship are also God-sanctioned. Yet, they are regarded as limited in their ability to achieve moral ends and necessarily tolerant of diverse customs. Joanna Scott classifies the German thinker Theodor E. Mommsen’s Augustinianism as a soft realism, which stresses the limits of state power. She also assesses Jonathan Edwards’s political thought as depicted by Arthur Schlesinger, and the Bulgarian-French structuralist philosopher Julia Kristeva’s ideas to be soft realism.45 41 Niebuhr R. Augustine’s political realism. In: Niebuhr R. The essential Reinhold Niebuhr: Selected essays and addresses, McAfee Brown R, editor (New Haven: Yale University Press; 1986). 42 For the summary of Reinhold Niebuhr’s interpretation of Augustine’s political ideas, see Banner, Augustinianism, pp. 98–9. 43 Cited from Barker E. Introduction. In: The City of God. Translated by: Healey J (London: J. M. Dent & Sons; 1931), p. iv. 44 Scott, Political thought, contemporary influence of Augustine’s, pp. 658–61. 45 Kristeva J. Strangers to ourselves. Translated by: Roudiez LS (New York: Columbia University Press; 1991). 428 B. HOON WOO In the third approach, designated as ‘‘authoritarianism,’’ both faithful individual citizens and political leaders are God-sanctioned legislators of universal moral law. This moral law can be translated directly into coercive public policy in order to repudiate the evils of society. According to Joanna Scott, the Augustinian political thought of Elaine Pagels and William Connolly is a mixture of hard realism and authoritarianism.46 The fourth ‘‘confessional’’ approach gives attention to the sinfulness of humanity. Faithful citizens should focus on overcoming the ‘‘monstrosity’’ of their own divided will and not on the moral reformation of the state. The state is just reflecting the mixed nature of the two loves of its citizens. Joanna Scott holds that Garry Wills derives a minimalist politics of soft realism and confessionalism from Augustine.47 She views Ron Rosenbaum’s political position as close to the confessional approach.48 Hannah Arendt, according to Joanna Scott, prefers an existentialist soft realist and confessional reading of Augustine.49 Arendt argues that the Augustinian concept of love (caritas) calls forth an active engagement with one’s neighbor. This love stems from the understanding gained by self-reflection. She presents a non-theological Augustine.50 Jean Elshtain and Joanna Scott endorse Arendt’s interpretation in order to develop their own political ideas. Hollingworth criticizes Elshtain’s view and argues that Augustine’s pilgrimage ‘‘was not an earnest intellectual exploration of what it should mean to be a man living between two cities. It was something that Elshtain might find difficult to like: a perfect subjection and obedience to the Will of God — the Perfect Law of Liberty.’’51 To recapitulate briefly, the first two of these four approaches are state-centered, and the other two approaches underscore the roots of political institutions in personal morality. I tentatively conclude that Hannah Arendt’s soft realist and confessional interpretation is the most nuanced approach to Augustine’s City of God. Her interpretation, however, fails to understand the important role of the theological aspect in Augustine’s political thought. Augustine’s political ideas are thoroughly theological, and without due consideration of this aspect, which resonates deeply with the pilgrimage image, one cannot appropriately interpret his political thought. 46 Connolly WE. The Augustinian imperative: a reflection on the politics of morality (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield; 2002); LeMoine F, Kleinhenz C, editors. Saint Augustine the Bishop: a book of essays (New York: Garland Pub; 1994). Wills G. Confessions of a Conservative (Garden City: Doubleday; 1979); Wills G. Augustine’s confessions: a biography (Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2011). 48 Rosenbaum R. Staring into the heart of darkness. New York Times Magazine. July 4, 1995. 49 See the interpretive essay by Joanna V. Scott and Judith C. Stark in Hannah Arendt, Love and Saint Augustine, Scott JV, Stark JC, editors (Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1996); Arendt H. Der Liebesbegriff bei Augustin: Versuch einer philosophischen Interpretation (Berlin: J. Springer; 1929). This is Arendt’s doctoral dissertation, which was written under the direction of Martin Heidegger and Karl Jaspers. 50 At this point, the influence of Heidegger is clearly perceived. For Heidegger’s non-theological and phenomenological reading of Augustine’s Confessions, see Heidegger M. The phenomenology of religious life. Translated by: Fritsch M, Gosetti-Ferencei JA (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press; 2004). 51 Hollingworth, Pilgrim City, p. 133. 47 PILGRIM’S PROGRESS IN SOCIETY 429 Christian as pilgrim Augustine begins The City of God with the characterization of a Christian as a pilgrim among the ungodly.52 In his other writings, Augustine calls Christians peregrini (pilgrims) or viatores (travelers).53 Although earlier Christian literature already implicitly employed it, a complete theological exposition of pilgrimage (peregrinatio) as a metaphor for the Christian life appears only in The City of God.54 Augustine holds that only Christians are pilgrims. They are the city of God (civ. Dei 16.41). Augustine clearly asserts that ‘‘the city of God, which sojourns in this world, is conducted by regeneration to the world to come’’ (civ. Dei 15.20). For him ‘‘the wicked people […] are not pilgrims in this earth, and do not seek the country above’’ (civ. Dei 18.32). Unbelievers are the descendents of Cain, who built the earthly city (civ. Dei 15.15; 15.20). Following Cain, they are self-lovers and evil-doers (civ. Dei 14.14) and will be punished in everlasting fire (civ. Dei 21.23).55 By contrast, Christians are those who know that they are pilgrims even in their own homes (civ. Dei 1.15). They use the good things of earth as pilgrims (civ. Dei 1.29; 19.17). They choose ‘‘voluntary poverty’’ (voluntaria paupertas) so that during the pilgrimage of this life they may walk with more springy steps on the way which leads to the country where the true riches are even God himself (civ. Dei 5.18). Augustine repudiates both the irresponsible rich and the radical rejecters of wealth. He knows that wealth is directly related to God’s blessings, and that poverty surely guarantees the virtue of faith.56 He stresses that both the rich and the poor are equal in the sight of God (sermo 123.5). Augustine, however, does not deny the superiority of observing voluntary poverty (epistulae 157.25). He argues that Christians should follow the example of Lucius Valerius and Quintius Cincinnatus, who were Roman officers and practiced voluntary poverty (civ. Dei 5.18).57 He holds that the role of the rich is to come to the aid of the poor (sermo 85). Thus the pilgrim image has a major role to regulate the economic life of a Christian. Augustine does not fail to recognize the spiritual aspect and sphere of pilgrim life. The pilgrimage of the Christian is very toilsome. Pilgrims can enjoy perfect facility of knowledge and felicity of rest only in their eternal home (civ. Dei 11.31). Augustine points out that on the way of pilgrimage two angelic communities will influence the pilgrims. The one angelic community is both by nature good and by will upright, and the other also good by nature but by will depraved (civ. Dei 11.33). The former angelic community will help the pilgrims (civ. Dei 11.31). That 52 At the Preface of The City of God. Hereafter, The City of God and its abbreviation civ. Dei will be used interchangeably. 53 See, for example, his Enarrationes in Psalmos (Commentaries on the Psalms), pp. 149, 5. 54 Claussen, ‘‘Peregrinatio’’ and ‘‘Peregrini’’ in Augustine’s ‘‘City of God,’’ p. 33. 55 Augustine is never a universalist. See civ. Dei 21.1; 21.9; 21.17–27; 22.3. 56 See his sermo (Sermon) 85; De divitiis (On wealth); Ramsey B. Wealth. In: Fitzgerald, Augustine through the ages, pp. 876–81. 57 In civ. Dei 5.16, Augustine suggests that ‘‘the citizens of that eternal city, during their pilgrimage here, might diligently and soberly contemplate the examples of Romans, and see what a love they owe to the supernal country on account of life eternal, if the terrestrial country was so much beloved by its citizens on account of human glory.’’ He does not totally deny the possibility of pagans doing virtuous deeds. 430 B. HOON WOO is why Christians, in their pilgrimage, venerate and love the angels as their most blessed fellow-citizens (civ. Dei 19.23). To the contrary, devils stir up their vessels against the city of God, which sojourns in this world (civ. Dei 18.51). Yet, they are not permitted to do the pilgrims harm. In this pilgrimage the citizens of the city of God must live after the spirit, not after the flesh (civ. Dei 14.9.6). The internal work of the Holy Spirit heals the citizens of the city of God while they sojourn in this earth and sigh for the peace of their heavenly country (civ. Dei 15.6). They control their affections according to God and have all these affections right (civ. Dei 14.9.1; 14.9.5). Humility is specially recommended to the city of God as it sojourns in this world (civ. Dei 14.13). Thus Augustine’s viewpoint on virtue presupposes the pilgrim reality of this world. Even beautiful women should not be proud of their beauty. God dispenses it even to the wicked because beautiful women may not think the beauty a great good (civ. Dei 15.22). Augustine relativizes earthly things, in the context of pilgrimage, although they are good. The main virtues of pilgrims are faith, hope, and love. If pilgrims desire the reward which is given to the people of God, they should lead their lives through faith in this miserable pilgrimage (civ. Dei 17.13). Pilgrims live in the hope of the resurrection (civ. Dei 15.18). In the pilgrimage on earth they may learn not to put confidence in the liberty of their own will, but may hope to call on the name of the Lord God (civ. Dei 15.21). In the family of pilgrims journeying on to the celestial city, even those who rule serve in love those whom they seem to command. They rule not from a love of power, but from a sense of the duty they owe to others—not because they are proud of authority, but because they love mercy (civ. Dei 19.14). Love is the unifying thread running throughout all of Augustine’s works. Human history is the story of human loves. There are two loves: one is misdirected; the other is rightly ordered. Disordered love is covetous love (amor sui). The wellordered love is called caritas. It is love of what one should love. History is the story of these two contrasting loves. They constitute two different cities (civ. Dei 11.1): the earthly city (civitas terrena) and the city of God (civitas Dei).58 Augustine’s anthropology is intrinsically related to pilgrimage.59 He views the life of a human being as a journey home. For him, to recover the image of God means to be more like God (De Trinitate, 7.6.12) and to return home from this ‘‘place of unlikeness’’ (Confessiones, 7.10.16).60 Christians are regarded as fellow pilgrim members of the city of God, not as fellow citizens of a particular political institution.61 In this sense, Augustine calls Christians ‘‘the whole family of God’’ (civ. Dei 1.29). Augustine emphasizes the right order of love (ordo amoris). One should love God the most, and should love other things for God’s sake. Augustine’s anthropology is theocentric in that he arranges all aspects of human life with the standard of loving God. His anthropology is closely combined with his 58 Duffy SJ. Anthropology. In: Fitzgerald, Augustine through the ages, pp. 28–9. Ibid., pp. 24–31; Babcock WS, editor. The ethics of St. Augustine (Atlanta: Scholars Press; 1991). 60 Duffy, Anthropology, p. 28. 61 Dougherty RJ. Citizen. In: Fitzgerald, Augustine through the ages, p. 195. 59 PILGRIM’S PROGRESS IN SOCIETY 431 eschatological viewpoint. The reason why Christians should have the theocentric order of love is that they are on the way home.62 They are all pilgrims. Augustine sees human beings through the lens of ‘‘pilgrim eschatology.’’63 Human beings are pilgrims through time toward eternity. They are intrinsically temporal (homo temporalis; civ. Dei 12.15.8). Their ultimate perfection and satisfaction lie only in the future.64 The end of this pilgrimage is the future perfect subjection and obedience to the will of God. Both the private and public life of a pilgrim is tested by this rule. Church as pilgrim community Augustine argues that the terrestrial church is the pilgrim church.65 He identifies the redeemed family of the Lord Christ with the pilgrim city of king Christ (civ. Dei 1.35). Christ is the king of pilgrims because he is the way (via) which leads pilgrims to the city of God (Enarrationes in Psalmos 90.2.1).66 The way to God leads, for the human being, through the human God, who is Christ Jesus. ‘‘By this he is mediator: that he is a man; and by this, too, he is the way. If there is a way between the one walking and the point towards which one is walking, one has a hope of reaching one’s goal’’ (civ. Dei 11.2).67 The body of Christ (i.e., the church) can confidently acquire a limited virtue by imitating Christ during its pilgrimage through the earthly city.68 It is stressed again, even though stated above, that only the Christian can be a pilgrim (civ. Dei 16.41; 17.3). The city of God, the community of pilgrims, is identified with the church (civ. Dei 15.1.1–2; Cf. 8.24.2, 10.6, 13.16.1, 16.2.3). Augustine declares, ‘‘We [5Christians] are his [5God’s] own city’’ (civ. Dei 19.23.5). Some scholars misunderstand Augustine’s intent when he writes in civ. Dei 1.35: These men you may today see thronging the churches with us, tomorrow crowding the theatres with the godless. But we have the less reason to despair of the reclamation even of such persons, if among our most declared enemies there are now some, unknown to themselves, who are destined to become our friends. Therefore, in this world (saeculum) the two cities are intermingled and interwoven, until they are separated at the last judgment.69 Fortin, for example, contends that in The City of God, ‘‘[a]lthough Augustine occasionally equates the city of God with the church (8.24.2; 13.16.1; 16.2.3), it is 62 Along these similar lines James Smith criticizes M. Hardt and A. Negri for their departure from Augustine on the point of teleology. Smith JKA. The gospel of freedom, or another gospel? Augustinian reflections on empire and American foreign policy. Political Theology. 2009;10:534. 63 I coined the term. ‘‘Pilgrim eschatology’’ means an eschatology (1) where Christians are sharply aware of the reality of the eschaton; (2) where they know that God will judge between the good and bad; and (3) where they first prepare for judgment and live this life according to the word of God. See The City of God, Books 20–22. 64 Scanlon MJ. Theology, Modern. In: Fitzgerald, Augustine through the ages, p. 825. 65 Van Bavel TJ. Church. In: Fitzgerald, Augustine through the ages, p. 173. 66 Dodaro R. Christ and the just society in the thought of Augustine (New York: Cambridge University Press; 2004), p. 72 n.1. 67 The translation is from Brian E. Daley, Christology. In: Fitzgerald, Augustine through the ages, p. 168. 68 Dodaro, Christ and the just society in the thought of Augustine, pp. 4, 113. 69 Emphasis added. I read the last sentence differently from the translation of NPNF, City of God, 1.35. 432 B. HOON WOO clear from other statements that not everyone who is officially a member of the church belongs to it, and that many who do not profess the Christian faith are, without their being aware of it, members of the same holy city.’’70 Augustine, as Fortin rightly points out, believes that there are some enemies in the church. It should be noted, however, that the church that Augustine supposes in The City of God is the true church. Augustine does not assume the idea of a false church. Moreover, it is quite obvious that only Christians are pilgrims. Augustine claims that unbelievers are not pilgrims (civ. Dei 18.32). He holds that regeneration leads pilgrims from this world to the world to come (civ. Dei 15.20). Augustine does not support the Montanist-Donatist view of the church. He admits that a church cannot be perfectly pure in this world. The church in the present age is the mixture of good and evil. Augustine, however, does not have a dualistic concept of church. According to Van Bavel, he opposes two different ecclesiologies: ‘‘an empirical, hierarchical church and a spiritual community of saints; an institutional church and the reign of Christ or the heavenly kingdom; a visible church and the soul of the church; the earthly church and the city of God.’’71 Such a dualistic concept of church does not fit in with the content of The City of God. If there is a dualistic concept regarding the people of God, it consists only between the city of God on earth and the city of God in heaven (civ. Dei 10.7, 11.28, 12.9). The heavenly city and the earthly city are absolutely antithetical. There is no intermediate place between them. Augustine writes, however, ‘‘in this saeculum the two cities are intermingled and interwoven, until they are separated at the last judgment’’ (civ. Dei 1.35). From this idea, some scholars deduced the notion of a third city in The City of God. Charles Journet, for example, argues that there is a third city, which is ethically good, but has a temporal aim.72 He assumes that ‘‘beneath the [two] cities there is a place for something third (tertium quid), which constantly emerges in the surface of the work of The City of God.’’ He acknowledges that the third city is ‘‘not the object of Augustine’s direct preoccupation, nor does Augustine give the precise name of it.’’73 But Journet supposes the notion of the third city is useful to understand Augustine’s ideas in The City of God. Robert Markus refutes the notion of the third city. He suggests another idea that explains the state of the present age in The City of God. He emphasizes the concept of saeculum. For him, saeculum means not a concrete land between the two cities, but the ‘‘temporal life in their interwoven, perplexed and only eschatologically separable reality.’’74 However, it should be noted that, as Johannes van Oort puts it, ‘‘there is no neutral area between the two 70 Fortin EL. CIVITATE DEI, DE. In: Fitzgerald, Augustine through the ages: an encyclopedia, p. 199. Van Bavel, Church, p. 173. 72 Journet C. Les trios cités: celle de Dieu, celle de l’homme, celle du diable. Nova et Vetera. 1958;33:25–48. 73 ‘‘[…] en dessous des cités […] il y a place pour un tertium quid, qui aflleure constamment au cours de l’ouvrage sur la Cité de Dieu, qui n’est pas l’objet de la préoccupation directe d’Augustin, auquel il ne donne pas de nom précis.’’ Journet, Les trios cités: celle de Dieu, celle de l’homme, celle du diable, p. 29. 74 Markus RA. Saeculum, history and society in the theology of St. Augustine (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1970), pp. 71, 133. 71 PILGRIM’S PROGRESS IN SOCIETY 433 cities.’’75 Markus goes too far beyond Augustine’s intention when he contends that saeculum and therefore ultimately Rome itself could be seen as neutral in The City of God.76 The word saeculum usually has a negative connotation in this work (civ. Dei 14.9, 15.26, 18.37, 18.49, 18.51, 22.15, 22.22).77 What Augustine is concerned with is the antithesis between the city of God and the earthly city. He does not ignore the intermediate state of the city of God in the present age. It is one of the characteristics of his thought to hold that the predestinated and the eternally damned are intermingled on earth, in the church.78 Augustine, however, does not give room to a third place between the two cities. The word of God and the Holy Spirit are indispensible on the way of pilgrimage. God is caring for those who are sojourning here below. He gave Holy Scripture, which descended to pilgrims from that heavenly city where God’s will is the intelligible and unchangeable law (civ. Dei 10.7). God also sends the Holy Spirit who is working within them and applying the medicine externally to them (civ. Dei 15.6).79 With these aids of God, pilgrims can encourage each other (civ. Dei 15.6). Augustine stresses the importance of prayer for the life of pilgrims. They obtain what they need by prayer (civ. Dei 4.20). The Lord’s Prayer, especially, takes a central place. For Augustine, the Lord’s Prayer is the prayer for pilgrims (civ. Dei 21.27.4). Those who make the petitions of the Lord’s Prayer are joined in pilgrimage toward God (cf. Epistulae 130). In the first three petitions of the Lord’s Prayer the pilgrim is asking that they might be acceptable to God; in the last four petitions of the Lord’s Prayer the pilgrim is asking for what is needed for the proper conduct of the journey; and in all petitions the pilgrim prays to attain eternal life (sermo 58.10.12; De sermone Domini in monte [The Lord’s Sermon on the Mount] 2.10.36–37).80 Augustine is convinced that the righteousness of pilgrims—though true in so far as it has respect to the true good—is yet in this life of such a kind that it consists rather in the remission of sins than in the perfecting of virtues (civ. Dei 19.27).81 Thus the whole city of God in its pilgrim state cries to God by the mouth of all its members, ‘‘Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors.’’ The pilgrim is able to 75 Van Oort J. Jerusalem and Babylon: a study into Augustine’s city of God and the sources of his doctrine of the two cities (New York: E.J. Brill; 1991), p. 152 (emphasis added). W.T. Cavanaugh also criticizes the view of Markus. Cavanaugh WT. From one city to two: Christian reimagining of political space. Political Theology. 2006;7:310. 76 Markus, Saeculum, history and society in the theology of St. Augustine, pp. 55–8. 77 Van Oort J. Jerusalem and Babylon, pp. 152–3. 78 Hollingworth, Pilgrim City, p. 126. Augustine argues, ‘‘In that ineffable foreknowledge of God, many who seem to be without are in reality within, and many who seem to be within yet really are without’’ (De baptismo 5.27.38 (Hollingworth’s translation). Cf. De baptismo 5.28.39; Epistulae 208.2; Enarrationes in Psalmos 39.10; Contra Faustum 13.16; De cathechizandis rudibus libri I 19.31; Confessiones 13.14.15. 79 It is worthy of remembering that John Calvin argues that the word of God and the Holy Spirit are inseparable (Institutes, I.ix.3). 80 Weaver RH. Prayer. In: Fitzgerald, Augustine through the ages, p. 672; Corcoran G. Prayer and solidarity in St. Augustine. Downside Review. 1990;108:157–74; Daly G. Heart in pilgrimage, and Hackett B. Augustine and prayer: theory and practice. In: Second annual course on Augustinian spirituality (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute Press; 1976), pp. 191–210 and 173–89. 81 In the same vein, see the Heidelberg Catechism, Question 114. ‘‘But can those who are converted to God perfectly keep these commandments? Answer: No: but even the holiest men, while in this life, have only a small beginning of this obedience; yet so, that with a sincere resolution they begin to live, not only according to some, but all the commandments of God.’’ Available from www.reformed.org/documents/heidelberg.html. (accessed June 1, 2014). 434 B. HOON WOO achieve true justice to the extent to ask this fourth petition of the Lord’s Prayer.82 A pilgrim is not a perfect person. Augustine believes that even Noah, who is described in Scripture as a man perfect in his generation, was not perfect like the citizens of the city of God in that immortal condition, but perfect so far as he could be in his sojourn in this world (civ. Dei 15.26.1). Augustine holds that a pilgrim in the church accepts and loves other pilgrims only through prayer. Noah’s ark, for Augustine, is certainly a figure of the city of God sojourning in this world (civ. Dei 15.26.1).83 Pilgrims are those who are waiting for the salvation of God in this wicked world. From the time of Abel to the end of this world, the church has gone forward on pilgrimage amid the persecutions of the world and the consolations of God (civ. Dei 18.51). Christ is the king and founder of the city of God or the church. Hannah’s prophecy would be fulfilled in Christ in this earthly pilgrimage (civ. Dei 17.4). The image of Noah’s ark is important for understanding Augustine’s eschatological vision for the church. The sack of Rome in 410, which was the historical background of The City of God, rendered the triumphalist imperial theology for Augustine fundamentally implausible.84 God’s promise for pilgrims does not include an intrahistorical victory of the city of God in this earthly pilgrimage. Eschatological hope does not guarantee any necessary progress in human history. All the ultimate hope of pilgrims consists in their future perfection as Brian Daley rightly concludes: More important for the West, perhaps, is the question of how far the present, historical order can actually be seen to anticipate the Kingdom of God in its social progress and in the external life of the Church. Some more optimistic voices, like that of Augustine’s friend Orosius, could speak of the Christian Church and Empire in Eusebian terms, as embodying in a visible way the ‘‘first-fruits’’ of the Kingdom. But it was the Augustinian picture of a heavenly city, making its way as a pilgrim through time and living in only a provisional peace with the earthly city of creaturely self-seeking, that was to become the paradigm, in Latin theology, for conceiving the tension between present and future […] the City of God now lives, in Augustine’s view, a life of hope and longing, rather than one of realization […] Even more than their Greek contemporaries, Augustine and his Latin followers saw the realization of the gospel’s promise as a state literally beyond time, as a share in God’s eternity.85 Thus, the first and principal task for the pilgrim is not to be assimilated to those belonging to the earthly city. The pilgrim is in the world but not of the world. In this world the earthly city and the city of God are intermingled. Both alike either enjoy temporal good things, or are afflicted with temporal evils here and now. Nevertheless, they have diverse faith, diverse hope, and diverse love, and they must 82 Dodaro, Christ and the just society in the thought of Augustine, p. 4. The image of the church as Noah’s ark appears repeatedly in medieval writings. See, for example, Hugh of SaintVictor, Noah’s Ark, on the vanity of the world. In: Selected spiritual writings (New York: Harper & Row; 1962), pp. 157–82. 84 Scanlon MJ. Eschatology. In: Fitzgerald, Augustine through the ages, p. 317. 85 Daley B. The hope of the early church: a handbook of patristic eschatology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1991), p. 219. 83 PILGRIM’S PROGRESS IN SOCIETY 435 be separated by the last judgment, and each must receive its own end, of which there is no end (civ. Dei 18.54). Augustine’s political theology is fittingly explained by the pilgrim and eschatological characteristic of his ecclesiology. Pilgrim perspective toward society For the observation of Augustine’s political theology, it should be stressed, most of all, that Augustine completely rejects the narratives of human progress and development.86 Only the city of God is eternal (civ. Dei 5.16). The citizens of the earthly city, by contrast, are guided by self-love. They live according to the flesh, namely, the way of life of natural human beings (civ. Dei 14.2.1–2, 14.9.6). The earthly city is characterized by arrogance, independence, and self-sufficiency (civ. Dei 14.27; 19.15; 19.27). The earthly city is reserved to the judgment of the last day and will be punished in the eternal fire (civ. Dei 21.23). Thus Hollingworth fails to understand Augustine’s intent when he writes, ‘‘the state is always a neutral concept for Augustine. Unlike Cicero, St Ambrose and the Fathers, his definition of the state does not include justice and law in their normal configurations.’’87 Augustine clearly argues that ‘‘where there is no justice there is no law; certainly it is concluded without doubt that where there is no justice there can be no republic’’ (civ. Dei 19.21).88 For Augustine, the earthly city is not a neutral meeting space, a ‘‘naked public square.’’89 In the earthly city there is no final good which gives real value to eternity. In this context, for Augustine, Rome is never a republic (civ. Dei 2.21.4; 19.21). Without justice, the earthly kingdom is nothing but a ‘‘gigantic larcener’’ (civ. Dei 4.4, 4.6). Later Augustine writes that ‘‘the Roman people is a people (populus), and its weal is without doubt a republic’’ (civ. Dei 19.24). It should be remembered, however, that this concession is attained only when he revises his former explanation of the definition of the republic into a far less strict one.90 In the former explanation Augustine argues that if a people is not righteous, it is not a people at all (civ. Dei 19.21; 19.23). In the latter explanation Augustine concedes that there are inferior people as well as superior people. A people will be a superior people in proportion as they are bound together by higher interests, inferior in proportion as they are bound together by lower ones (civ. Dei 19.24). Moreover, directly following the above concession, Augustine does not fail to recollect how corrupt and unjust Rome was. Thus, according to the overall ideas of Augustine, it is sure that the state of Rome is not a true republic. Although there is relative justice in Augustine’s thought, it does not extend far enough to embrace the idea that there is a neutral state.91 Rome is not physically identified with the earthly city, but Rome is a nation which is full of the citizens of the earthly city. 86 Hollingworth, Pilgrim City, p. 2. Ibid., p. 82. 88 The translation is mine. The parallelism of Augustine’s Latin sentences definitely emphasizes the close relationship among the law, justice, and republic: ‘‘non est autem ius, ubi nulla iustitia est: procul dubio colligitur, ubi iustitia non est, non esse rem publucam.’’ 89 O’Donovan, The political thought of City of God 19, p. 58. 90 Compare two explanations of the definition of ‘‘res publica’’ in civ. Dei 19.21 and 19.24. 91 O’Donovan, The political thought of City of God 19, p. 60. 87 436 B. HOON WOO Then what is the task of pilgrims who live in a nation where the city of God and the earthly city are intermingled? Augustine does not present a social transformation program for the change of the Roman Empire. He is not interested in making a political agenda. Augustine is convinced, as Dyson appropriately points out, that it is individuals who are redeemed, not societies.92 However, one should not miss some very important features of the social aspect of The City of God. They are related to love, peace, justice, and the prayer of the pilgrim. In the first place, it can be hardly unnoticeable that Augustine emphasizes the pilgrim’s duty of love toward one’s neighbor. Augustine argues that the essence of Christian religion lies in the Christian’s love of God and the neighbor (civ. Dei 10.3.2). In Book XIX, where one can examine Augustine’s social ideas best, he extends moral philosophy to social philosophy.93 Augustine argues in The City of God 19.14: But as this divine Master inculcates two precepts—the love of God and the love of our neighbor—and as in these precepts a man finds three things he has to love—God, himself, and his neighbor—and that he who loves God loves himself thereby, it follows that he must endeavor to get his neighbor to love God, since he is ordered to love his neighbor as himself. He ought to make this endeavor in behalf of his wife, his children, his household, all within his reach, even as he would wish his neighbor to do the same for him if he needed it; and consequently he will be at peace, or in well-ordered concord, with all men, as far as in him lies. In the precepts of Matthew 22:37–40,94 Augustine finds three things to love and suggests them in order — God, the self, and the neighbor. Christians who love God love themselves without error (ille in se diligendo non errat). They could love themselves according to the will of God. Then it follows that they must endeavor to get their neighbor to love God, since they are commanded to love their neighbor as themselves. Here one can find a very important element in Augustine’s political theology. Augustine views the pilgrim’s duty of love toward neighbors as evangelism. Evangelism, in this context, signifies to persuade their neighbor to love God (proximo ad diligendum Deum consulat). Now again Augustine determines the order of love. Christians should make this endeavor from their family, and then they should expand it as far as they can. Notably Augustine expects that Christians, as a result of this endeavor of evangelism, will be at peace, or in well-ordered concord, with all people, as far as in them lies. Augustine maintains that the peace of a society is obtained not by political action, but by evangelism or persuasion to love God.95 Secondly, it is easily findable that peace is the central concept in Augustine’s political theology in The City of God. For him peace is both the foundation of 92 Dyson RW. St. Augustine of Hippo: the Christian transformation of political philosophy (London: Continuum; 2005), p. 185. 93 O’Donovan, The political thought of City of God 19, p. 52. 94 Matthew 22:37–40. [37] Jesus replied: ‘‘‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ [38] This is the first and greatest commandment. [39] And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ [40] All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.’’ For the importance of Matthew 22:37–40 in Augustine’s hermeneutics of the Scriptures, see Woo BH. Augustine’s hermeneutics and homiletics in De Doctrina Christianae. Journal of Christian Philosophy. 2013;17:101–2. 95 For the problem of a diminished interest in personal evangelism in Reformed circles and the criticism on it, see Van Reken CP. Christians in this world: pilgrims or settlers? Calvin Theological Journal. 2008;43:247–50. PILGRIM’S PROGRESS IN SOCIETY 437 human existence and the ultimate goal of humanity (civ. Dei 19.13.1; 19.17; 19.20). The City of God presents the most nuanced definitions of peace among ancient Greco-Roman literatures (civ. Dei 19.13.1): (1) The peace of the body then consists in the duly proportioned arrangement of its parts. (2) The peace of the irrational soul is the harmonious repose of the appetites. (3) The peace of the rational soul is the harmony of knowledge and action. (4) The peace of body and soul is the well-ordered and harmonious life and health of the living creature. (5) Peace between man and God is the well-ordered obedience of faith to eternal law. (6) Peace between man and man is well-ordered concord. (7) Domestic peace is the well-ordered concord between those of the family who rule and those who obey. (8) Civil peace is a similar concord among the citizens. (9) The peace of the celestial city is the perfectly ordered and harmonious enjoyment of God, and of one another in God. (10) The peace of all things is the tranquility of order. Order is the distribution which allots things equal and unequal, each to its own place.96 Augustine holds that there is nobody who does not wish to have peace (civ. Dei 19.12.1). He gives attention to the reality that both the city of God and the earthly city need and desire peace (civ. Dei 19.17). In this very point there is room for the cooperation of these two cities. All nations, however various they are in manners, laws, and institutions, hope one and the same end of earthly peace (civ. Dei 19.17). The heavenly city, which calls citizens out of all nations, and gathers together a society of pilgrims, makes use of this peace only because it must, until this mortal condition which necessitates it shall pass away (civ. Dei 19.17; 19.19). While sojourning through the nations and living by faith, pilgrims should endeavor to make and expand peace in all aspects of their lives. They know that the peace of heaven alone can be truly called and esteemed the peace of reasonable creatures. It consists of the perfectly ordered and harmonious enjoyment of God and of one another in God (ordinatissima […] et concordissima societas fruendi Deo et invicem in Deo; civ. Dei 19.17). Even the heavenly city, however, while in its state of pilgrimage, avails itself of the peace of earth, and, so far as it can without injuring faith and godliness, desires and maintains a common agreement among people regarding the acquisition of the necessaries of life and makes this earthly peace bear upon the peace of heaven (civ. Dei 19.17). Pilgrims enjoy two kinds of peace in earthly nations (civ. Dei 19.27): one is the peace which is peculiar to themselves and is enjoyed now with God by faith; the other is the peace which they share with the citizens of the earthly city.97 Augustine calls the latter peace the earthly peace (pax terrena, civ. Dei 19.17), the peace of Babylon, or the temporal peace (pax Babylonis and pax temporalis, civ. Dei 19.26). The good and the wicked together enjoy the temporal peace. Pilgrims do not rescind or abolish it (civ. Dei 19.17; 19.26).98 Rather, the prophet Jeremiah 96 Numbering mine. I divided the second sentence in the translation, which is from NPNF, City of God; 19.13. Augustine deals with the first seven definitions of peace in civ. Dei 19.14 and explains the definitions (8) and (9) in 19.17. The last definition seems to be expounded in 19.20. 97 Each peace belongs to number 5 and 6 in the above classification in The City of God 19.13.1. 98 For a view of political limitism in this regard, see McIlroy DH. Idols and grace: re-envisioning political liberalism as political limitism. Political Theology. 2010;11:205–25. 438 B. HOON WOO and the Apostle Paul commanded that pilgrims should pray for the peace of Babylonia and Rome (Jer. 29:7, 1 Tim. 2:2). For Augustine, peace functions as the most important element of social welfare.99 But Augustine repeatedly stresses that the earthly peace is imperfect (civ. Dei 19.27), and that the supreme good of the city of God is perfect and eternal peace (civ. Dei 19.20). In heaven, God shall be all and all in a secure eternity and perfect peace (civ. Dei 19.15; 19.20). Thirdly, it should be noted that justice is closely related to peace in Augustine’s political theology. All the justice of pilgrims refers to the final peace, and for the sake of this peace it is maintained (civ. Dei 19.27). As the final peace is guaranteed only by God, so is true justice closely associated with him. Augustine argues in The City of God 19.21: Further, justice is that virtue which gives every one his due. Where, then, is the justice of man, when he deserts the true God and yields himself to impure demons? Is this to give every one his due? […] And it is when the soul serves God that it exercises a right control over the body; and in the soul itself the reason must be subject to God if it is to govern as it ought the passions and other vices. Hence, when a man does not serve God, what justice can we ascribe to him, since in this case his soul cannot exercise a just control over the body, nor his reason over his vices? And if there is no justice in such an individual, certainly there can be none in a community composed of such persons. Augustine, following the tradition of Plato, Aristotle, and Cicero, defines justice as the virtue which gives every one his or her due (virtus quae sua cuique distribuit). However, he adds the religious implication of justice. Those who are righteous, most of all, should give due honor to God. Augustine asserts that without true worship of God there is no justice. He tries to redefine the meaning of justice from the perspective of eternity. Subsequently, Augustine argues that those who do not serve God cannot do justice. In order to do justice, his assertion being put reversely, one should serve God first. That is why Augustine repeatedly criticizes the idolatry of Rome in The City of God 19.22–19.23.4. Where there is faith working through love, there is true justice (civ. Dei 19.23.5). The city of the ungodly, to the contrary, is void of true justice (civ. Dei 19.24). Augustine’s strategy to influence the Roman society is not to suggest social movements and political practice, but to change the religious environment of the society. Fourthly, in this context, it is no surprise that Augustine stresses the importance of prayer. Augustine knows that earthly justice and peace both are imperfect (civ. Dei 19.27): Our very righteousness, too, though true in so far as it has respect to the true good, is yet in this life of such a kind that it consists rather in the remission of sins than in the perfecting of virtues […]. For however well one maintains the conflict, and however thoroughly he has subdued these enemies, there steals in some evil thing, which, if it does not find ready expression in act, slips out by the lips, or insinuates itself into the thought; and therefore his peace is not full so long as he is at war with his vices. 99 O’Donovan, The political thought of City of God 19, p. 51. PILGRIM’S PROGRESS IN SOCIETY 439 True justice for pilgrim members of the city of God consists in sharing with others the forgiveness of sins, rather than in the achievement of a perfected virtue. Augustine concludes that prayer characterizes the entire city of God on pilgrimage in the world.100 Justice and peace embrace only in heaven. The city of God in earthly pilgrimage may well be called even now blessed, though not in reality so much as in hope for the future perfect peace and justice. The actual possession of the happiness of this life, without the hope of what is beyond, is but a false happiness and profound misery (civ. Dei 19.20). Pilgrims are those who pray in hope for the future perfect peace and justice. All their prayer for their neighbor refers to the attainment of that peace and that justice because the life of the city is a social life (civ. Dei 19.17). Thus, for Augustine, prayer is a social and political action. Conclusions In his City of God, Augustine’s political thought does not attempt to redeem a nation or society. Its main focus lies in religion, not in politics. Augustine’s thought is characterized as eschatological. He sees humanity, the church, and the state from the viewpoint of eternity. He points out that all Christians are pilgrims who everyday take a step forward toward the city of God in heaven. They consist of the city of God in earthly nations. As the people of God, they should live their lives differently from those of the citizens of the earthly city. They need to arrange all aspects of life in the perspective of the pilgrim eschatology. Pilgrims know the limitation of the justice and peace which the earthly state can give (soft realism). They determine the order of love according to their faith in God (theocentric reading). Their social practice is composed of love, peace, justice, and prayer (confessional politics). Pilgrims love God and show their love to their family and neighbors by evangelism, that is, persuasion to love God. They cooperate with the earthly city in order to seek the temporal peace that should ultimately head for the perfect peace in heaven. Justice is instrumental to attain peace. Pilgrims try to realize social justice first by eliminating idols and proclaiming the true religion. Justice without true worship, to Augustine’s eschatological idea, is not true justice at all. The pilgrim’s work for love, peace, and justice requires constant prayer. In Augustine’s political theology, prayer is not only a humble confession about the imperfection of the earthly politics and its product, but it is also a political praxis to anticipate the future perfection of justice and peace. The radicality of Augustine’s political thought emerges from the pilgrim eschatology, which is a continual reminder of the ultimate and spiritual reality of the world. References Allen JW. A history of political thought in the sixteenth century. London: Methuen; 1957. Arendt H. Der Liebesbegriff bei Augustin: Versuch einer philosophischen Interpretation. Berlin: J. Springer; 1929. English Translation: Arendt, Hannah. Love and Saint Augustine. Joanna VS, Judith CS, editors. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1996. 100 Dodaro, Christ and the just society in the thought of Augustine, p. 111. 440 B. HOON WOO Arquillière HX. L’augustinisme politique: Essai sur la formation des théories politiques du moyen-age. 2nd edn. Paris: J. Vrin; 1955. Augustine. Concerning the city of God against the Pagans. Bettenson HS, Evans GR, editors. Penguin classics. London, England: Penguin Books; 2003. Augustine. The city of God against the Pagans. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 72. Augustine. The city of God against the Pagans. Dysonm RW, editor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1998. Augustine. The retractations. Translated by: Bogan MI. Washington: Catholic University of America Press; 1968. Augustine. The pilgrim city: social and political ideas in the writings of St. Augustine of Hippo. Dyson RW, editor. Rochester: Boydell Press; 2001. Augustini SA. De Civitate Dei libri I-XXII. Dombart B, Kalb A, editors. Turnholti: Brepols; 1955. Banner H. Augustinianism. In: Bevir M, editor. Encyclopedia of political theory. London: Sage; 2010. p. 92–99. Bathory PD. Political theory as public confession: the social and political thought of St. Augustine of Hippo. New Brunswick: Transaction Books; 1981. Betz HD, Browning DS, Janowski B, Jüngel E, editors. Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, Vol. 1. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck; 1998. Black A. The history of Islamic political thought: from the prophet to the present. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press; 2001. Brown P. Augustine of Hippo: a biography. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press; 2000. Cavanaugh WT. From one city to two: Christian reimagining of political space. Polit Theol. 2006;7(3):299– 321. Claussen MA. ‘‘Peregrinatio’’ and ‘‘Peregrini’’ in Augustine’s ‘‘City of God.’’ Traditio. 1991;46:33–75. Connolly WE. The Augustinian imperative: a reflection on the politics of morality. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield; 2002. Corcoran G. Prayer and solidarity in St. Augustine. Downside Rev. 1990;108:157–74. Daley BE. The hope of the early Church: a handbook of patristic eschatology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1991. Deane HA. The political and social ideas of St. Augustine. New York: Columbia University Press; 1963. Dodaro R. Christ and the just society in the thought of Augustine. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2004. Donnelly DF. The city of God: a collection of critical essays. New York: P. Lang; 1995. Dougherty J. Exiles in the earthly city: the heritage of St Augustine. In: Civitas, 105–121. Atlanta: Scholars Pr; 1986. Dyson RW. St. Augustine of Hippo: the Christian transformation of political philosophy. London: Continuum; 2005. Elshtain JB. Augustine and the limits of politics. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press; 1995. Fitzgerald AD, Cavadini JC, editors. Augustine through the ages: An encyclopedia. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; 1999. Gilson E. Introduction à l’étude de saint Augustin. 2nd edn. Paris: J. Vrin; 1943. English Translation: Gilson, Etienne. The Christian philosophy of Saint Augustine. New York: Random House; 1960. Heidegger M. The phenomenology of religious life. Translated by: Fritsch M, Gosetti-Ferencei AJ. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press; 2004. Hollingworth M. Pilgrim City: St. Augustine of Hippo and his innovation in political thought. London: T & T Clark; 2010. Johannes VO. Jerusalem and Babylon: a study of Augustine’s City of God and the sources of his doctrine of two cities. Leiden: Brill; 1991. Junghans H. Der Einfluß des Humanismus auf Luthers Entwicklung bis 1518. Lutherjahrbuch. 1970;37:37–101. Kristeva J. Strangers to ourselves. Translated by: Roudiez LS. New York: Columbia University Press; 1991. LeMoine F, Kleinhenz C, editors. Saint Augustine the Bishop: a book of essays. New York: Garland Pub.; 1994. PILGRIM’S PROGRESS IN SOCIETY 441 Mandonnet P. Siger de Brabant et l’averroı̈sme latin au XIIIme siècle. 2nd edn. Louvain: Institut supérieur de philosophie de l’Université; 1908. Markus RA. Saeculum, history and society in the theology of St. Augustine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1970. McIlroy DH. Idols and grace: Re-envisioning political liberalism as political limitism. Polit Theol. 2010;11(2):205–25. Migne JP, editor. Patrologia Latina, vols. 32–47 (Augustinus). p. 1844–55. Niebuhr R. Augustine’s political realism. In: Reinhold Niebuhr, The essential Reinhold Niebuhr: selected essays and addresses. Brown RM, editor. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 1986. Niebuhr HR. Christ and culture. New York: Harper & Row; 1951. O’Daly G. Augustine’s City of God: a reader’s guide. Oxford: Clarendon Press; 1999. O’Donovan O. The problem of self-love in St. Augustine. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 1980. O’Donovan O. The desire of the nations: rediscovering the roots of political theology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1996. O’Donovan O. The political thought of City of God 19. In: O’Donovan O, Lockwood O’Donovan J, editors. Bonds of imperfection: Christian politics, past and present. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans; 2004. O’Donovan O, Lockwood O’Donovan J. Bonds of imperfection: Christian politics, past and present. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; 2004. Reece RD. Augustine’s social ethics: churchly or sectarian? Foundations. 1975;18(1):75–87. Reventlow HG. Die Rolle der Kirchenväter im Streit zwischen Erasmus und Luther. In: Steinmetz D, editor. Patristik in der Bibelexegese des 16. Jahrhunderts. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz; 1999. p. 49–70. Roberts A, James D, Cleveland CA, Bernhard P, Richardson EC, editors. The Ante-Nicene Fathers: translations of the writings of the fathers down to A.D. 325. American reprint of the Edinburgh. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; 1951. Ruokanen M. Theology of social life in Augustine’s de Civitate Dei. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht; 1993. Schaff P, editor. The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, vol. II. St. Augustin’s City of God and Christian Doctrine. Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems; 1997. Smith JKA. The Gospel of Freedom, or Another Gospel? Augustinian reflections on empire and American foreign policy. Polit Theol. 2009;10(3):513–36. Stump E, editor. The Cambridge companion to Augustine. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press; 2001. Van Reken CP. Christians in this world: pilgrims or settlers? Calvin Theol J. 2008;43(2):234–56. von Heyking J. Augustine and politics as longing in the world. Columbia: University of Missouri Press; 2001. Weaver RH. Reading the signs: guidance for the pilgrim community. Interpretation. 2004;58(1):28–41. Wills G. Confessions of a conservative. Garden City: Doubleday; 1979. Wills G. Augustine’s confessions: a biography. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 2011. Wilson EL. ‘The City of God’ and the emergence of Christendom. Covenant Q. 1984;42(3):15–26. Woo BH. Augustine’s hermeneutics and homiletics in De Doctrina Christianae. Journal of Christian Philosophy. 2013;17:97–117. Wright WJ. Martin Luther’s understanding of God’s two kingdoms: a response to the challenge of skepticism. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic; 2010. Notes on contributor B. Hoon Woo (Ph.D., Calvin Theological Seminary) is an assistant professor at Kosin University, Busan, South Korea. Correspondence to: B. Hoon Woo. Webpage: https://calvinseminary.academia. edu/BHoonWoo