Augustine, Secularist?

O’Donovan makes the point, against Markus, that Augustine does not describe the earthly city as a combination of private ends and public or common utility. This would be a secular system, which leaves ends to individual citizens as they make use of common goods.

O’Donovan says Augustine does something like the opposite: There is a common end for all men in the earthly city, and no proper utilitas at all, since utilitas has to do with referring the use of goods of this world to the supreme good of eternal life. There is no diversity of ends in the earthly city, but a tragically, demonically unified end of self-service. This is why Augustine removes utilitas from his definition of the commonwealth.

Next
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE

The Dreadful Christ of Pär Lagerkvist

Peter J. Leithart

It’s dangerous to meet a god,” says the disgraced Pythia in Pär Lagerkvist’s The Sibyl. Her observation…

The Possibility of Possibility

Midge Goldberg

"Might could” is a Southern expression meaning “maybe I could” or “I might be able to,” conveying…

The False Promise of No Contact

Noelle Mering

Around the time nineteen-year-old Alice began cutting ties with her family, she announced on social media that…