Book Review: The City of God - Book 2

Ch. 1
Augustine seems to refuse to make the text simpler then it is due to the fact that this is as simple as he can make it.

Ch. 2
A reiteration/summary of Book 1.

Ch. 3
Augustine argues that the suffering of the Roman pagans are due to idolitry, not the presence of Christians.

Ch. 4
Augustine hilights the flaws of the pagans where not amended by their false gods. He argues the Romans were decieved by spirits of evil to believe those devils were gods.

Ch. 5
Augustine argues the virtious of the pagans would not want to riblad and/or obscene behaviours used in obesayance to the pagan gods to be used to honor their own mothers. Augustines ays the rites of the mother of the pagan gods are a good example of this. He proceeds to show how this goddess abased good men and her sacrifices were such to offend good men in any other setting.

Ch. 6
Augustine argues the capricious nature of the pagan gods is a proof of their disregard of their worshippers.

Ch. 7
the vices of the pagan gods are a stronger example of the society's accepcted behavior rather then the wisdom of philosophers. The works of the philosophers lack the "divine" authority of the examples given and Christ's teachings. Augustines notes many pagans use the examples of the pagan gods as an excuse for their misbehaviors.

Ch. 8
In this as well as many other chapter I've read thus far, Augustine argues how the practices of the sacred and the secular plays were hot beds of impropriety. Augustine notes particularly in this chapter that the celebration of the flaws of the pagan gods were a source of approval. Augustine says that if these gods were examples of proper behavior, they'd have been offended by the improprieties and culumnities associated with themselves. He then says that these gods obviously are not offended because they hadn't punished their followers.

Ch. 9
Augustine notes the Greeks allowed the comedians to mock any and everybody. The Romans didn't allow such a liberal toung, placing prohibitions on slander. Augustine seems to be presenting this as a double standard.

Ch. 10 - 15
This is a continuation of an argument against the glorification of unwholesome deeds. Augustine appears to also be saying that the actors and comedians who were the driving force of the plays (sacred and secular) are people of questionable character. The Greeks assumed that because the Gods required the acts for the sake of respectable worship, then the parties associated with them are respectable individuals. The romans acknowledged the apparent necessity of the actions, they found the actions objectionable and the parties associated.

Augustine then proceeds to state that if the actions are to be objected to, then the Gods requiring them must be as well. He argues these objectionable gods are false. Proceeding to state that some are mearly glorification of vanity, elevating men to the status of gods complete with the flaws.

Ch. 16 - 20
The earlier discussion leads into a recounting of the ignoble history of Rome, in brief. Augustine states this proves that the tempestious problems of Rome are rooted in their own actions and are a long standing problem from before even teh conception of Christ. This is a rebuttal to what apparently is a common proverb of the time: "It won't rain because of the Christian."

Augustine states in the midst of recounting this history that an acclaimed historian stated that Romans were honest and virtuous by naturea s well as habit. He proceeds to show the "virtue" of the Romans throught this recounted history. Augustine sets this in relation to the example of their Gods and demi-gods. He says the laws of Rome and the expectations for virtue are not a result of good guidance from the gods. if they were, then they'd be good gods giving good examples and honored by honorable conduct. He upholds Christ's example and the expectation for worship and behavior by God's followers. Augustine then says the foolish will remain foolish and cling to their ways. He expresses contempt for them and their ways.

Ch. 21 - 25
It is possible to say that Augustine's argument is that the Roman Gods permitted, assisted and encouraged the impropriety of various individuals.

Ch. 26 - 29
Augustine exhorts the Romans to reject impropriety, extravagance and avariceness. He also calls them to reject paganism, saying it is a doorway of evil. Augustine notes a trend of keeping wholesome and good things as secrets and hidden. He suggests some sense of shame for good things. Augustine notes a welath of headonism and ribaldry, even a public celebration of the amoral. Augustine seems to point at paganism as the root of this behavior.

Summary:
Book one is a discussion of Rome's fall from an apologistic Christan standpoint. It also is a discussion of war and it's effects. Book two argues the fall of Rome was due to amoral behavior and life style. Augustine places the blame on Roman paganism, stating that the Roman gods are not truly gods but devils. Augustine's logic is that gods provide good examples for their people to provide for their well being and attend to their people during times of need.

Originally published: 8/24/06