Thank you both for the journey through Augustine’s Confessions! I very much enjoyed listening to your dialogue. Junius, my heart is heavy at the news of your loss. I pray the Lord gives you comfort in your grief.
I have a few questions, but should preface them by stating that, despite having voted for this particular read, I didn’t get to the text this month. As a result, my questions are directly related to the recorded conversation - hopefully I understood what was being communicated despite not having the personal engagement with the text.
I am curious about this “confessional mode”. The idea of confession is familiar to me, having grown up in a professing Christian home. While we were not part of any denominations that engage a priest for such work, we practiced personal confession in prayer and we had family confession (which was a horrible experience that I will never replicate in my own family). But if the point of confession is to speak the sin in its fullness, without allowing for the possibility of explanations or excuses - I’m curious as to what point this serves? Obviously we need to acknowledge wrongdoing, I’m certainly not suggesting we bypass or excuse errors in ourselves, whether in personal contemplation or in reference to others, but I’m trying to understand the value of confession that doesn’t allow for looking into the context that wrong was committed in. Perhaps it’s simply a step in a larger process? I think that giving room to acknowledge root issues is a significant part of the ability to change and make better decisions in the future. For example, if Augustine acknowledged that his decision to follow his friends into folly was rooted in the need for acceptance or companionship, perhaps he would have been better equipped to look for appropriate ways to meet that need and would have been less vulnerable to his own impulses and less vulnerable to the group pressure. And I can’t help but think that if Augustine applied that same interrogative/curious consideration to his issues with lust - maybe he would have uncovered areas of need, lack or even ways that the foundation of his relationship to sex was laid wrong. Anyways, that’s a lot of words to ask the question: does this posture of confession exist within a larger framework that allows for context consideration? I admit that if it does not, the very nature of it feels destructive to me. Because by simply condemning myself without also loving myself (which is kind of a crucial posture considering that we are instructed to love our neighbors as we love ourselves - an expression of love that I think has to be learned, some people love themselves over much, and some of us hate ourselves and deprive and harm ourselves and need to learn love for self. Especially in the context of wrongdoing), I rob myself of the strength I need to make lasting change.
I confess, I’ve never really liked Monica. I have no solid reason for this as I’ve never actually read anything about her, but I heard something along the lines of her pressuring Augustine to give up his mistress (is this true?) when I was in my mid teens and I just decided I could never respect her for that. So here I am, seventeen years later, still wary of the woman. But I guess if her own son held her in high regard I probably ought to reconsider and reevaluate.
As always, gentleman, thank you so much for the time and the effort you put into the monthly reads and presenting everything to us in the podcast.
In terms of the confessional mode, I can't divorce what I'm about to say as a Priest who both goes to and hears confessions regularly so I'm definitely coming to it from a particular point of view.
There are a few reasons we go to confession: we want our relationship with God restored by receiving his forgiveness and we want the grace to amend our lives and make progress towards the ultimate goal of becoming fully human through the imitation of Christ.
As human beings, I think we have a tendency to create a number of excuses, self-justifications, and explanations for our behavior that are often rooted in our attempt to grasp the good, but ultimately distract from or unhelpfully minimize the way we warp or pervert the good.
Before we go to confession, we prepare through hopefully rigorous self-examination. We are vulnerable and honest about our sins. But we do this not from a position of insecurity; quite the opposite: it's because we have such confidence in God's love and grace that we know his "property is always to have mercy." After we speak our sins, the priest gives some advice and counsel that is tailored to the confession, then provides a penance for the person to perform as an act of thanksgiving for the great gift of forgiveness they receive, absolves them, and sends them forth in peace.
Once one leaves the confessional, there should be no doubt that God does forgive them. They have been given the absolution from a priest with the authority to do so. To continue to dwell on the guilt or doubt one's forgiveness would be a form of sacrilege. In other words, once one has received forgiveness (a form of purgation), there is freedom to now pursue the good.
I think your diagnosis of examination/confession as lacking a healthy sense of self-love would be correct (and probably is correct in some cases) if that part of the process were disconnected from the whole thing. We could draw a parallel with our bodily health: if I start showing symptoms of a serious sickness that could be cured, but I tell myself "It's probably not a big deal" and don't go to the doctor, is that a way of handling it that's self-love *or* would it be more self-loving to go to the doctor and tell them everything that's wrong so they can prescribe you a course of treatment that will bring healing? Similarly, when we go to confession it is so that we can be healed.
I should also caveat, that the priest may point out some of the contextual things you should consider. Soren Kierkegaard has a great homily about confession where he says that in the confessional, only the penitent is there to condemn themselves, the priest and God are not condemning.
Hopefully that makes sense!
In terms of Monica, I can understand. I think his love for her and the role she plays in the story is such that she really does deserve to be a saint. Can you explain a little better: what about her wanting him to get rid of his mistress was problematic? The fact that she didn't want him to be with the woman he loved?
Okay, I was just making up a list of observations as I reread your comment and have a question:
what is the emphasis/goal of confession outside of a religious context? Outside of religious specific confession I can think of judicial application and interpersonal relationships.
Can Augustine’s posture of confession be explored outside of his religious context for confession? Or does that do violence to the text and distort his intention?
Religious is a tricky word here, but what immediately comes to my mind is Plato's Gorgias. There, he says that rhetoric should be used by a guilty person to confess and ask the judge to punish just like a sick person may communicate their sickness to ask a doctor for medicine. So there is a religious application in the context of confession, but there can be application outside of it. Not only for the good of social justice or familial peace, but also for the positive development of one's soul and acquisition of virtue, which isn't purely the realm of religion, even though religion offers what in my opinion is a more complete framework by which we can understand that development.
For a non-Christian exploration of St. Augustine, I would highly recommend Roosevelt Montas' book Rescuing Socrates: How the Great Books Changed My Life and Why They Matter for a New Generation (https://www.amazon.com/Rescuing-Socrates-Changed-Matter-Generation/dp/0691200394). Montas was raised in a religious context but no longer practices and can find much good in Augustine's autobiographical confession.
From my perspective, attempts to appropriate the benefits of confession sans religion may accomplish some very real goods but will always be somewhat incomplete. This doesn't mean I think it's fruitless; Dante spends a great deal of time in Limbo with the souls of the virtuous pagans and seems rather entranced by their beauty! Virtue is good, whether it's a Christian or a non-Christian who possesses it. But just like faith, hope, and love can elevate the other virtues, the same is true about the practice of confession: it's good when a person who has done wrong confesses what they did; how much better is it in when that confession is saturated in the theological virtues?
Thank you for your insight on confession - there’s a lot here for me to sit with and ponder. I appreciate you taking the time to share.
Okay, I’m a lot more emotionally tangled up in this Monica thing than I expected. I’ll do my best to explain myself with something more than, “it makes me mad” reasoning 😅
I think my beef with Monica has more to do with breaking up an established family unit - and for what reason? I mean, I suppose one could make the argument that their relationship was established outside an expressed and recognized covenant (such as marriage, witnessed by the church and the state), but they’d built some sort of life together, they’d brought a child into the world together, and without sufficient information to accurately assume much of their relationship, there is no reason I’m aware of to assume their union was a harm to themselves or others. Why not just encourage them to marry? Why do we have to arrange a marriage to a child and wait for her to grow up? Perhaps one could argue cultural/historical normative marriage expectations would say he shouldn’t marry the class of woman who would be a mistress, an argument that feels so stupid to an American in the 21st century, but I recognize it could be pertinent, although it’s also not like people throughout history haven’t challenged the established expectations of their societies. And Monica was already part of a group of people known for operating outside of social expectations where those expectations were in conflict with their religious instruction (Christians), despite the fact that I think many probably had no desire to deal with the consequences of challenging ideas, expectations and status quo. I just kind of hate any kind of marital/sexual practice that doesn’t allow for a *lot* of personal agency for both partners. And I strongly dislike heavy parental involvement in the life of an adult child - been there, done that. No thanks. Counsel? Sure. Rebuke? Humbling, but absolutely. Dictation? Hard no.
Anyway, it’s all personal. I’ll admit flat out, I don’t like the posture *as I interpret it*. I’m solidly biased, which is probably super immature but for today it’s where I sit.
Ah yes, that's fair. The breaking up of a family is a big deal, and perhaps there was a way for Augustine to regularize his situation rather than breaking it off completely. I definitely understand your reasoning here. I was recently reading a book called True Humanism by Catholic theologian Jacques Martin and he offers an important reminder that when we look at the past, we can apply what we see analogously rather than equivocally. So I think there's good in Monica--though even Augustine would have told you she wasn't perfect--but we have to understand and follow the example of her goodness in a way that accounts for all those cultural differences you're citing. I too would rather live in a world where my marriage isn't arranged and where parents don't dictate to adult children what they should or shouldn't do!
Thank you both for the journey through Augustine’s Confessions! I very much enjoyed listening to your dialogue. Junius, my heart is heavy at the news of your loss. I pray the Lord gives you comfort in your grief.
I have a few questions, but should preface them by stating that, despite having voted for this particular read, I didn’t get to the text this month. As a result, my questions are directly related to the recorded conversation - hopefully I understood what was being communicated despite not having the personal engagement with the text.
I am curious about this “confessional mode”. The idea of confession is familiar to me, having grown up in a professing Christian home. While we were not part of any denominations that engage a priest for such work, we practiced personal confession in prayer and we had family confession (which was a horrible experience that I will never replicate in my own family). But if the point of confession is to speak the sin in its fullness, without allowing for the possibility of explanations or excuses - I’m curious as to what point this serves? Obviously we need to acknowledge wrongdoing, I’m certainly not suggesting we bypass or excuse errors in ourselves, whether in personal contemplation or in reference to others, but I’m trying to understand the value of confession that doesn’t allow for looking into the context that wrong was committed in. Perhaps it’s simply a step in a larger process? I think that giving room to acknowledge root issues is a significant part of the ability to change and make better decisions in the future. For example, if Augustine acknowledged that his decision to follow his friends into folly was rooted in the need for acceptance or companionship, perhaps he would have been better equipped to look for appropriate ways to meet that need and would have been less vulnerable to his own impulses and less vulnerable to the group pressure. And I can’t help but think that if Augustine applied that same interrogative/curious consideration to his issues with lust - maybe he would have uncovered areas of need, lack or even ways that the foundation of his relationship to sex was laid wrong. Anyways, that’s a lot of words to ask the question: does this posture of confession exist within a larger framework that allows for context consideration? I admit that if it does not, the very nature of it feels destructive to me. Because by simply condemning myself without also loving myself (which is kind of a crucial posture considering that we are instructed to love our neighbors as we love ourselves - an expression of love that I think has to be learned, some people love themselves over much, and some of us hate ourselves and deprive and harm ourselves and need to learn love for self. Especially in the context of wrongdoing), I rob myself of the strength I need to make lasting change.
I confess, I’ve never really liked Monica. I have no solid reason for this as I’ve never actually read anything about her, but I heard something along the lines of her pressuring Augustine to give up his mistress (is this true?) when I was in my mid teens and I just decided I could never respect her for that. So here I am, seventeen years later, still wary of the woman. But I guess if her own son held her in high regard I probably ought to reconsider and reevaluate.
As always, gentleman, thank you so much for the time and the effort you put into the monthly reads and presenting everything to us in the podcast.
Hey Monique,
These are excellent questions.
In terms of the confessional mode, I can't divorce what I'm about to say as a Priest who both goes to and hears confessions regularly so I'm definitely coming to it from a particular point of view.
There are a few reasons we go to confession: we want our relationship with God restored by receiving his forgiveness and we want the grace to amend our lives and make progress towards the ultimate goal of becoming fully human through the imitation of Christ.
As human beings, I think we have a tendency to create a number of excuses, self-justifications, and explanations for our behavior that are often rooted in our attempt to grasp the good, but ultimately distract from or unhelpfully minimize the way we warp or pervert the good.
Before we go to confession, we prepare through hopefully rigorous self-examination. We are vulnerable and honest about our sins. But we do this not from a position of insecurity; quite the opposite: it's because we have such confidence in God's love and grace that we know his "property is always to have mercy." After we speak our sins, the priest gives some advice and counsel that is tailored to the confession, then provides a penance for the person to perform as an act of thanksgiving for the great gift of forgiveness they receive, absolves them, and sends them forth in peace.
Once one leaves the confessional, there should be no doubt that God does forgive them. They have been given the absolution from a priest with the authority to do so. To continue to dwell on the guilt or doubt one's forgiveness would be a form of sacrilege. In other words, once one has received forgiveness (a form of purgation), there is freedom to now pursue the good.
I think your diagnosis of examination/confession as lacking a healthy sense of self-love would be correct (and probably is correct in some cases) if that part of the process were disconnected from the whole thing. We could draw a parallel with our bodily health: if I start showing symptoms of a serious sickness that could be cured, but I tell myself "It's probably not a big deal" and don't go to the doctor, is that a way of handling it that's self-love *or* would it be more self-loving to go to the doctor and tell them everything that's wrong so they can prescribe you a course of treatment that will bring healing? Similarly, when we go to confession it is so that we can be healed.
I should also caveat, that the priest may point out some of the contextual things you should consider. Soren Kierkegaard has a great homily about confession where he says that in the confessional, only the penitent is there to condemn themselves, the priest and God are not condemning.
Hopefully that makes sense!
In terms of Monica, I can understand. I think his love for her and the role she plays in the story is such that she really does deserve to be a saint. Can you explain a little better: what about her wanting him to get rid of his mistress was problematic? The fact that she didn't want him to be with the woman he loved?
Okay, I was just making up a list of observations as I reread your comment and have a question:
what is the emphasis/goal of confession outside of a religious context? Outside of religious specific confession I can think of judicial application and interpersonal relationships.
Can Augustine’s posture of confession be explored outside of his religious context for confession? Or does that do violence to the text and distort his intention?
Religious is a tricky word here, but what immediately comes to my mind is Plato's Gorgias. There, he says that rhetoric should be used by a guilty person to confess and ask the judge to punish just like a sick person may communicate their sickness to ask a doctor for medicine. So there is a religious application in the context of confession, but there can be application outside of it. Not only for the good of social justice or familial peace, but also for the positive development of one's soul and acquisition of virtue, which isn't purely the realm of religion, even though religion offers what in my opinion is a more complete framework by which we can understand that development.
For a non-Christian exploration of St. Augustine, I would highly recommend Roosevelt Montas' book Rescuing Socrates: How the Great Books Changed My Life and Why They Matter for a New Generation (https://www.amazon.com/Rescuing-Socrates-Changed-Matter-Generation/dp/0691200394). Montas was raised in a religious context but no longer practices and can find much good in Augustine's autobiographical confession.
From my perspective, attempts to appropriate the benefits of confession sans religion may accomplish some very real goods but will always be somewhat incomplete. This doesn't mean I think it's fruitless; Dante spends a great deal of time in Limbo with the souls of the virtuous pagans and seems rather entranced by their beauty! Virtue is good, whether it's a Christian or a non-Christian who possesses it. But just like faith, hope, and love can elevate the other virtues, the same is true about the practice of confession: it's good when a person who has done wrong confesses what they did; how much better is it in when that confession is saturated in the theological virtues?
Wesley,
Thank you for your insight on confession - there’s a lot here for me to sit with and ponder. I appreciate you taking the time to share.
Okay, I’m a lot more emotionally tangled up in this Monica thing than I expected. I’ll do my best to explain myself with something more than, “it makes me mad” reasoning 😅
I think my beef with Monica has more to do with breaking up an established family unit - and for what reason? I mean, I suppose one could make the argument that their relationship was established outside an expressed and recognized covenant (such as marriage, witnessed by the church and the state), but they’d built some sort of life together, they’d brought a child into the world together, and without sufficient information to accurately assume much of their relationship, there is no reason I’m aware of to assume their union was a harm to themselves or others. Why not just encourage them to marry? Why do we have to arrange a marriage to a child and wait for her to grow up? Perhaps one could argue cultural/historical normative marriage expectations would say he shouldn’t marry the class of woman who would be a mistress, an argument that feels so stupid to an American in the 21st century, but I recognize it could be pertinent, although it’s also not like people throughout history haven’t challenged the established expectations of their societies. And Monica was already part of a group of people known for operating outside of social expectations where those expectations were in conflict with their religious instruction (Christians), despite the fact that I think many probably had no desire to deal with the consequences of challenging ideas, expectations and status quo. I just kind of hate any kind of marital/sexual practice that doesn’t allow for a *lot* of personal agency for both partners. And I strongly dislike heavy parental involvement in the life of an adult child - been there, done that. No thanks. Counsel? Sure. Rebuke? Humbling, but absolutely. Dictation? Hard no.
Anyway, it’s all personal. I’ll admit flat out, I don’t like the posture *as I interpret it*. I’m solidly biased, which is probably super immature but for today it’s where I sit.
Ah yes, that's fair. The breaking up of a family is a big deal, and perhaps there was a way for Augustine to regularize his situation rather than breaking it off completely. I definitely understand your reasoning here. I was recently reading a book called True Humanism by Catholic theologian Jacques Martin and he offers an important reminder that when we look at the past, we can apply what we see analogously rather than equivocally. So I think there's good in Monica--though even Augustine would have told you she wasn't perfect--but we have to understand and follow the example of her goodness in a way that accounts for all those cultural differences you're citing. I too would rather live in a world where my marriage isn't arranged and where parents don't dictate to adult children what they should or shouldn't do!