The freewill defense (St. Augustine of Hippo): Part 1

Information: Part 1 of a review of St. Augustine of Hippo's freewill defense. Before reading this article you may find it useful to read The problem of evil and suffering: An introduction. A version of this article was originally published on the website www.faithnet.org.uk.

Introduction

In formulating a response to the problem of evil and suffering, it is generally recognised in Christian theology that St. Augustine of Hippo (354 - 430 CE) set the benchmark, and that most (if not all) theologians have been either affirming or refuting his ideas ever since.

St. Augustine lived quite a sensuous lifestyle, before he became devoted to the Christian faith. It might be said that having experienced the excesses of drinking and sex, that his theodicy was an inevitable response to what he felt was an unsatisfying way to live. You can read more about Augustine's early life and conversion in his own words, in The Confessions.

Ying and yangTo begin understanding Augustine's theodicy, one first needs to examine his ideas in light of two major influences in his life. The first is Manichaeism (established by Mani 216-76 CE), which Augustine was associated with for some time. Manichaeism was a Gnostic faith, which emphasised the duality (separation) of darkness and light. This duality was expressed in two eternal principles - matter and God - and both were opposed to each other. Escape from the bonds of the physical world (matter), was said to be the aim (or purpose) of humanity. Augustine eventually became disillusioned with Manichaeism, and as a result began to reject the notion that evil is an independent and corrupt substance. The other key factor influencing him was the teaching of Plotinus (204-70 CE). Plotinus was a Neo-Platonist, who taught the goodness of creation, and the chaotic nature of evil.

'And God saw that it (really) was good'

For Augustine, God is source of everything. He also believed the world had been created literally out of nothing (ex nihilo), according to the Divine Will. This meant that as far as Augustine was concerned, everything in the world was created good, or perfect. He also believed that although there is an abundance of variety in the world, that this is in fact ordered in varying degrees, according to the fullness of a creature's nature. This means that there is no totally evil thing in the world. In fact, it is impossible for there to be such as a thing, as God only created 'good' things ('God saw all that [God] had made, and it was very good' (Genesis 1:31 [Bracket mine])).

Augustine's account of the way creation is ordered is somewhat different to that of Mani, who believed that all matter is essentially evil, and also Plotinus, who following Plato taught that the further one descends from goodness (or the Divine source), the more evil something becomes.

So as far as Augustine was concerned, all creation is good (despite the appearance that things are otherwise), and expresses the perfection of God's creativity and goodness. This also means that there is no independent substance, which resists the Divine Will (as it did with Plato's Demiurge - see Process theodicy - Creation out of chaos and the problem of evil (David Ray Griffin)). However, as something created, the world is also a contingent thing (not eternally set as it is), and as such things in it can become 'corrupted' (or become less-than what they should be). This is because the world was not created out of anything already existing (i.e. God), such that it would inherit its (eternal) characteristics.

Something to think about: How would our understanding of the nature of the world change, if it was said to have emanated from God?

Evil: A (re)-definition

So having said that matter is something essentially good, but also something able to deviate from what it should be, what does the notion of 'evil' mean? Well, evil must now be understood as the privatio boni ('privation of good'), or that which occurs when a being renounces its proper role in the order and structure of creation. In other words, something becomes 'evil' when it ceases to be what it is meant to be, or stops doing what it is meant to be doing.

For Augustine evil is not a separate entity, but a deviation from good. As God only created good things, it is impossible for a totally evil being to exist. This means that all evil things must have at least some good in them, even Satan.

What, after all, is anything we call evil except the privation of good? In animal bodies, for instance, sickness and wounds are nothing but the privation of health. When a cure is effected, the evils which were present (i.e. the sickness and the wounds) do not retreat and go elsewhere. Rather they simply do not exist any more. For such evil is not a substance; the wound or the disease is a defect of the bodily substance which, as a substance, is good (Hick, quoting Augustine p.48)

Something to discuss: How far do you agree with Augustine's re-definition of evil (the privatio boni)? Does it work for all natural and moral evils? Can it be said that cancerous cells and earthquakes, are doing things they were not intended to?

So according to Augustine, to exist is to partake of goodness (Being), and where there is a lack of goodness there is also a lack of being. In other words, only good things exist; evil things do not!

The idea that God only created good things, raises interesting philosophical questions. If a good person has more Being (or existence) than an evil one, did Mother Teresa exist more than Adolf Hitler did?

Advertisements

The problem with having freewill is...

Road sign with choices on itAugustine's belief that 'sickness and wounds are nothing but the privation of health', seems logical when it comes to illness, and may work on a number of levels elsewhere. However, if this is the case, where did evil (or the ability for things to become corrupted), first begin? Well as far as Augustine is concerned, evil entered the world as a result of the wrong choices of free beings (free in the sense that there was no external force necessitating them to do wrong). In other words, corruption occurred as a result of freewill.

The freewill defense finds support from the first book of the Bible. In Genesis chapter 3 we read that when Adam took and ate the fruit from the tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. However, this was not because Satan tempted him, but because he already had a corrupted heart:

When the will abandons what is above itself, and turns to what is lower, it becomes evil - not because that is evil to which it turns, but because the turning itself is wicked (Hick, quoting Augustine p.60)

Within (Augustine's) Divine order of things, the angels in heaven partake of the highest degrees of goodness. However, some of these were said to have revolted against God, before the creation of humanity. Thus there exists two rival camps in the heavens and the earth. One seeking to follow the ways of God (the City of God), and one seeking to follow their own desires (the City of the World).

So taking all this into account, we have the foundations for Augustine's theodicy set in place. God, although omnipotent, omniscient and all-good, and despite creating the world and everything in it to be good, is innocent when it comes to the presence of sin and evil in the heavens and the earth, as this occurred as the result of the freedom for both humanity and the angels, to make their own decisions.

Augustine believed that despite our corrupted natures, God still shows that God loves us, because God will still save people if they want to be saved (despite the fact that no-one deserves this 'act of grace').

The freewill defense (St. Augustine of Hippo): Part 2

Selected bibliography

Further reading