Opinion of Augustine of Hippo

[falling apart like the ashes of American flags]

He was a Horrible Horrible Person and one of the worst Christian philosophers. Some of his disgusting views:

-He not only believed that anyone who died without being baptized went to hell, including babies, he wrote something sort of gleefully about them being tortured in the presence of Jesus. Mind you he was also talking about babies here.
-He held that all sexual pleasure was inherently sinful, and since sex was needed for procreation, if one was having sex for procreation they should take additional precautions to make it uncomfortable and unpleasurable.
-His views on women were horrendous even for the time, and had the gall to write things about rape that put Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock to shame such as saying something along the lines of "If a woman is raped it's only not a sin for her if she didn't enjoy it."
-He effectively advocated a totalitarian dictatorship as the ideal form of government.

I can't believe this asshole is held in such high regard.

One thing I can say in his favor is that he probably would support marijuana legalization in the modern day, even if he'd still hold actual marijuana use in incredibly low regard.

[Beet]

Do you have sources for all of these incendiary claims?

[falling apart like the ashes of American flags]

Do you have sources for all of these incendiary claims?

It's been awhile since my Ancient and Medieval Political Philosophy class.

Though the first bit is here: http://www.religioustolerance.org/limbo2.htm

[Tokugawa Sexgod Ieyasu]

-He not only believed that anyone who died without being baptized went to hell, including babies, he wrote something sort of gleefully about them being tortured in the presence of Jesus. Mind you he was also talking about babies here.

Extrapolation of Revelation 14.10. Augustine is hardly 'gleeful' about much of anything in On the Merits and Remission of Sins. This is obviously one of the low points of Augustine's thought.

If anything, the history of the idea of limbo reflects very positively on Aquinas, but we're not talking about Aquinas right now.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Augustine's antisexualism is commonly exaggerated and in the context of his biography largely an artifact of his Manichean background. (It's also an entirely justified reaction against what sexuality in his culture entailed and his own experience with it.) Unfinished Literal Commentary on Genesis describes Adam and Eve as sexually active prior to the Fall, which was hardly a universally held or accepted opinion.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, this is another subject on which Augustine is horrible, but he was not 'horrendous even for the time'. He is horrendous for our time. He was very much within the mainstream of early fifth-century thought, if not slightly more inclined to be charitable than the norm.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

When does Augustine talk about any form of civil government in positive terms?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

He's held in high regard, at least in the circles in which I move, mostly for his thoughts on subjects unrelated to sexuality.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

...what on Earth...?

[Free Speech Enjoyer]

Doing a quick skim of him on Wikipedia...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Doesn't sound like the kind of person I'd have a cup of coffee with.

Nathan has a good point, though.  His views were perfectly acceptable for his time, even though nowadays he would be considered another Pat Robertson.  Or worse.

[falling apart like the ashes of American flags]

From what I gathered, he wrote some things that sort of implied "Even if something is bad, banning it and trying to enforce that might be even more bad.", basically as to why despite his rather messed up views on sexuality, he didn't believe the law should reflect them. I have a tough time seeing someone with that sort of philosophy holding that marijuana prohibition is a net positive.

[Tokugawa Sexgod Ieyasu]

From what I gathered, he wrote some things that sort of implied "Even if something is bad, banning it and trying to enforce that might be even more bad.", basically as to why despite his rather messed up views on sexuality, he didn't believe the law should reflect them. I have a tough time seeing someone with that sort of philosophy holding that marijuana prohibition is a net positive.

Fair enough. You do, however, understand that this could be held to make him a significantly less-than-usually-totalitarian philosopher of the Christian Dominate? (Which is an historical period, not a grammatically weird way of saying Dominionism, by the way.)

Let me ask you another question, BRTD: Are there any Church Fathers/Doctors of the Church of whom you approve?

[falling apart like the ashes of American flags]

Most are rather Catholic-centric and responsible for establishing things like views on the sacraments I most certainly don't agree with, after all it was the Catholic Church that gave them such titles. I'd like someone like Donatus Magnus, but he was a "herectic" and certainly not one of those. I suppose Francis of Assisi is a bit too late? Would someone like Saint Nino count? (Obviously not a church "father" there)

[useful idiot]

One of my least favorite of the Fathers, and certainly the most overrated today, but I wouldn't call him a 'Horrible Person'. Confessions is a worthwhile read for any Christian. I'd reserve the FF title for actual FFs like his contemporaries or near contemporaries Athanasius, Chrysostom, Ambrose, and of course the earlier martyrs, etc etc...

[Tokugawa Sexgod Ieyasu]

Most are rather Catholic-centric and responsible for establishing things like views on the sacraments I most certainly don't agree with, after all it was the Catholic Church that gave them such titles. I'd like someone like Donatus Magnus, but he was a "herectic" and certainly not one of those. I suppose Francis of Assisi is a bit too late? Would someone like Saint Nino count? (Obviously not a church "father" there)

The Church Fathers and Doctors of the Church are specific, enumerated sets of actual people, so you really don't have to ask whether or not people 'count'. Francis of Assisi isn't a Doctor of the Church but wouldn't be too late, since the most recent died in 1897. Would I err in saying that it doesn't seem like you're actually all that familiar with most of them?

If you like Donatus Magnus you might like St Cyprian of Carthage, whose theology was similar but not actually heretical.

St Nino is obviously not a 'Father', as you said, but she is given the title Equal to the Apostles in Eastern Orthodoxy.