I recently had the opportunity to talk with a Protestant (Baptist) friend who told me that several Fathers of the Church, including Saint Augustine, had “Protestant” positions, especially in their interpretation of Matthew 16,18, which, according to him, implied a rejection of the current Catholic interpretation of the primacy of Peter and the Papacy.

Who was Saint Augustine?

Saint Augustine is considered one of the greatest Fathers of the Church. His influence on posterity has been notable. The Bishop of Hippo was theologian, philosopher, mystic, poet, orator, apologist and writer. Born in 354 AD, he received a Christian education from a young age thanks to his mother, and ended up abandoning the Catholic faith at the age of nineteen. He studied Hornensius, Cicero and even listened to the Manichaeans, ending up being a convinced anti-Catholic. After a long internal struggle he ends up understanding that faith is necessary to achieve wisdom, and that the authority on which faith is based is Scripture, endorsed and read by the Church. After having opposed Christ to the Church, he discovered that the path to go to Christ was precisely the Church. He is ordained priest in 391 and bishop in 395 (or 396). He intervened in the controversies against the Manichaeans, Donatists, Pelagians, Arians and pagans. He died in 430, leaving behind a large number of works, part of a legacy that lasts to this day.

How important are Saint Augustine’s writings?

The writings of Saint Augustine(as well as the writings of the Church fathers and other ecclesiastical writers) are important not only for students of patristics and patrology but for every Christian who is interested in knowing in depth the thinking of the Church in its first centuries and its way of interpreting the Scriptures. Under these circumstances I wanted to study the writings of Saint Augustine, not only in terms of the points on which Protestants usually quote him, but in their entirety, in order to make a fair comparison of his thought.

Saint Augustine and the primacy of Peter

The testimonies of Saint Augustineabout the Primate of Peterare quite numerous, however, some texts of Saint Augustinehave frequently been taken out of context by Protestants to imply the opposite. We will examine some of these texts and the saint’s global vision on the subject.
Saint Augustine. Serm. 295; PL 38,1348-1352.
“Saint Peter, the first of the apostles, who ardently loved Christ, and who heard from him these words: Now I say to you: You are Peter. He had said before: You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God. And Christ replied: «Now I say to you: You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church. On this rock I will build this same faith that you profess. On this statement that you have made: You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God, I will build my Church. Because you are Peter. “Peter”is a word that is derived from “stone”, and not the other way around. “Peter” comes from “stone,” just as “Christian” comes from “Christ.” The Lord Jesus, before his passion, as you know, chose his disciples, whom he gave the name of apostles. Among them, Peter was the only one who represented the entire Church almost everywhere. Therefore, since he alone represented in his person the entire Church, he was able to hear these words: I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Because these keys were received not by a single man, but by the single Church.. Hence the excellence of the person of Peter, insofar as he represented the universality and unity of the Church, when it was said to him: I deliver to you, in the case of something that has been delivered to everyone. Well, so that you may know that the Church has received the keys of the kingdom of heaven, listen to what the Lord says in another place to all his apostles: Receive the Holy Spirit. And then: Those whose sins you forgive are forgiven; Those who are retained by you are retained. In this same sense, the Lord, after his resurrection, also entrusted Peter with his sheep to feed them. It is not that he was the only one of the disciples who had the charge of feeding the Lord’s sheep; It is that Christ, by referring to only one, wanted to signify the unity of the Church; and, if he addresses Peterin preference to the others, it is because Peter is the first among the apostles. Do not be sad, apostle; Answer once, answer twice, answer three. May your profession of love conquer three times, since fear defeated your presumption three times. What you had bound three times must be loosed three times. Unleash through love what you had bound through fear. Despite his weakness, for the first, second and third time the Lord entrusted his sheep to Peter”
Saint Augustinealso wrote: “Christ, you see, built his Church not on a man but on the confession of Peter. What is Peter’s confession? ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ Here is the rock for you, here is the foundation, here is where the Church has been built, which the gates of the underworld cannot conquer.”
When a Protestant reads Saint Augustinesaying that the rock on which the Church will be built is faith (confession of Peter), he automatically assumes that said text implies a rejection of Roman primacy. As we will see below, the Catholic Catechism makes similar clarifications and that does not mean that it denies it. Let’s hope that in 500 years Protestants will not be quoting the catechism to try to prove that 21st century Catholics did not believe in the Papacy.
Now, why do you think that Saint Augustine’s interpretation lends support to his rejection of the Papacy? The reason is that since faith is “the Stone”on which Christ built his Church, they try to affirm that anyone who confesses Christ as the son of God by divine revelation is already the Stone on which the Church is built, and therefore, the authority of the Pope would not be greater than that of any believing Christian.
The Catholic Churchcatechism explains the Catholic position as follows:
CIC 552 In the school of twelve Simón Peteroccupies first place (cf. Mc 3, 16; 9, 2; Luke 24, 34; 1 Cor 15, 5). Jesus entrusts him with a unique mission. Thanks to a revelation from the Father, Peterhad confessed: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”Then Our Lord declared to him: “You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it”(Mt 16, 18). Christ, “Living Stone”(1 Pet 2, 4), assures his Church, built on Peter, victory over the powers of death. Peter, because of the faith confessed by him, will be the unbreakable rock of the Church. He will have the mission of guarding this faith in the face of every weakness and of confirming his brothers in it. (cf. Luke 22, 32).
CIC 553 Jesus has entrusted Peter with specific authority: “I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven”(Mt 16:19). The power of the keys designates the authority to govern the house of God, which is the Church. Jesus, “the Good Shepherd”(Jn 10:11) confirmed this charge after his resurrection: “Feed my sheep”(Jn 21:15-17). The power to “bind and loose”means the authority to absolve sins, pronounce doctrinal sentences, and make disciplinary decisions in the Church. Jesus He entrusted this authority to the Church through the ministry of the apostles (cf. Mt 18, 18) and particularly through that of Peter, the only one to whom he explicitly entrusted the keys of the Kingdom.
CIC 881 The Lord made Simon, to whom he gave the name Peter, and him alone, the stone of his Church. He gave him her keys (cf. Mt 16, 18-19); He established him as shepherd of the entire flock (cf. Jn 21, 15-17). “It is clear that also the College of Apostles, united with its Head, received the function of binding and loosing given to Peter”(LG 22). This pastoral office of Peter and the other apostles belongs to the foundations of the Church. It is continued by the bishops under the primacy of the Pope.
A detailed analysis of Saint Augustine’s texts shows that his position, rather than approaching the Protestant position, coincides perfectly with the Catholic position. He recognizes Peterby virtue of the faith confessed by him as the first of the apostles, as representative of the entire Church, and bearer of the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Bishops in communion with him can also bind and loose (Note that the saint also relates, unlike Protestants, the power to bind and loose, with the authority to forgive sins).
Let’s now look at some additional texts from Saint Augustinethat, compared to the others, can give us a real perspective of the saint’s opinion:
Saint Augustine. C. ep. Man. 4,5.
“Even disregarding sincere and genuine wisdom…, which in your opinion is not in the Catholic Church, many other reasons keep me in your bosom: the consent of the people and people; authority, built with miracles, nourished with hope, increased with charity, confirmed by antiquity; the succession of bishops from the very seat of the apostle Peter, to whom the Lord entrusted, after the resurrection, to feed his sheep, to the episcopate of today; and finally, the very appellation of Catholic, which without reason only the Church has achieved….These bonds of the Christian name – so many, so great and so sweet – keep the believer in the bosom of the Church católica, despite the fact that the truth, due to the clumsiness of our mind and the unworthiness of our life, has not yet shown itself.
In the previous text Saint Augustinedemonstrates the difference between the confession of faith and the ministry of the episcopate. Not all, simply by confessing their faith, are bishops, nor are all successors of the apostle Peterin terms of their ministry.
Saint Augustine. Ep. 53.2 
“If the succession of bishops is taken into account, the more certain and beneficial the Church that we recognize reaches Peterhimself, the one who carried the figure of the entire Church, the Lord said to him: “On this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it!” Peter’s successor was Linus, and his successors in order of unbroken succession were these: Clement, Anacletus, Everisto, Alexander, Sixtus, Telesphorus, Hyginius, Anicetus, Pius, Sotero, Eleuterio, Victor, Ceferinus, Callistus, Urbanus, Pontianus, Antero, Fabian, Cornelius, Licio, Stephen, Sixtus, Dionysius, Felix, Eutychianus, Gaius, Marcelino, Marcellus, Eusebius, Miltiades, Silvestre, Mark, Julius, Liberius, Damasus, and Siricius, whose successor is the present bishop Anastasius. In this order of succession, no Donatist bishop is found.”
Here again you see the same thing. For the holy bishop of Hippo the ministry granted to Peter was specifically carried out by the bishops of Romain uninterrupted succession. After showing this text to a Protestant friend, he stubbornly commented to me: “I don’t see any Papacy there.” Singularly obstinate attitude, for those who read a text where they see talking about the apostolic succession, of the bishops of Roma, their succession in the ministry of the apostle Peter, and if that were not enough, the list of the Popes up to Anastasius (The Pope of the time). What more can you ask for? What does he grant them with the title of “Pope”? Well, he also does that on countless occasions, which would be very laborious to count, let’s settle for taking one of them: About original sin (13 times, in chapters 2,7,8,9). There it is expressed with great reverence about the pontiffs and expressions are read such as “the most blessed Pope Zosimus in Roma” (Chapter2), “the venerable Pope Zosimus” (Chapters 8 and 9), “the most blessed Pope Innocent” (Chapters 8,10), “the most blessed Pope Zosimus”, “The holy Pope Innocent” (Chapter9), “The holy Pope Zosimus” (Chapters 10,19) and Pope Innocent of blessed memory (Chapter19).
There is sufficient additional evidence to be sure of going against the trend that proposes the denial of primacy following these phrases in the saint’s sermons. Those who think like this would have to explain if they share with Saint Augustinewho said that the Donatist church cannot be the true one because it is not Catholic, one, holy and apostolic, that whoever separates from the Church sacrifices his salvation (Bapt 4,17.24). According to this, is the confession of faith sufficient as a foundation for the edification of the Church?
Unlike the Protestant position, for Saint Augustinethere is no just reason to carry out the separation of the Church and prepare one’s own (sect), separate from it (E. Cp Parm 2,11,25).  Saint Augustinego to the Church of Romathat one “in qua semper apostolic cathedrae viguit principatus” [that in which the principality of the apostolic chair has always been in force (Ep 43,7)], statement that is a clear recognition of the primacy of the Church of Roma. He even attributes maximum importance to Roma’s rulings on matters of faith, such as when he combats Pelagianism. Thus, when Saint Augustinesays that the keys were received not only by Peter, but by the entire Church, he is defending the primacy not only of himself, but of his successors. “Sicut enim quaedam dicuntur quae ad apostolum petrum propriae pertinere videoantur, nec tamen habent illustrem intellectum, nisi cum referuntur ad Ecclesiam, cuius ille agnoscitur in figura gestasse person, propter primatum burn in disciples habit” (In Ps CVIII, t. XXXVII, col 1431) [Some things, it is said, seem to properly belong to the apostle Peter, but (those who think this way) do not have an enlightened understanding, since they must be referred to the Church, of which it is confessed that I represent the figure in his person because of the primacy he had among the disciples].
For Saint Augustine, through communion with the apostolic see one has adhesion to the apostles, and thus one is in the true Church. It is to be understood then that for him, the testimony of the Church of the West is only decisive, since the seat of the prince of the apostles is found in the West: “fucking tibi eam partem orbis sufficiere I will owe, in qua primum apostolorum voluit Dominus glorious martyrio I will conorare. Cui Ecclesiae praesidentem beatum Innocentium yes I will listen voluisses, iam tum periculosam iuventutem tuam pelagianis laqueis exuisses”. Against Iulianum pelagianum, I, IV, 13 t. XLIV, col 648 [I consider that that part of the world in which the Lord wanted to crown the first of the apostles with a most glorious martyrdom should be enough for you. If you wanted to listen to blessed Innocent who presides over this Church, you would free your dangerous youth from the Pelagian snares.].
Additionally, we see the bishop of Hippo submitting his works to Pope Boniface, not to instruct him, but to request his approval and censure if necessary: ​​“Haec ergo quae…respondo, ad tua potissimum I will direct sanctitatem, not too descend quam examining, et ubi forsite aliquid displicuerit amendment, constituted” (Contra duas epist. Pelag. I, 1 t. XLIV, col 549-551) [These things that… I answer, I have decided to direct in a special way to your holiness not to instruct but so that they may be examined, and where perhaps there is something that contradicts, it may be amended.]. It is understandable then why Saint Augustinealso refers to the bishop of Romaas “The Bishop of the Apostolic See”.

It has become common to hear allegations among Protestants that Saint Augustinethreatened to excommunicate those who appealed to Roma. After investigating we found the origin of this argument in a article from the website Christianity-primitivo.org which does nothing more than literally transcribe a portion of Bishop Strossmayer’s fraudulent speech at Vatican I that says “…being secretary of the council of Melive, he wrote, among the decrees of this venerable assembly: “Any faithful or bishop who appeals to those from the other side of the sea will not be admitted to communion by anyone in the Churches of Africa”.

It is important to clarify that the Catholic priest JohnSack after an investigation demonstrated that said speech is a falsification, and most Protestant apologetics sites removed it due to the evidence, however articles based on it continue to circulate. Details here: Some reflections on Bishop Strossmayer’s famous speech. With such a “primary”source, it is most likely that Augustine’s quote is either false or taken out of context. The article on early Christianity did not bother to verify the source and even copied verbatim the spelling errors of the fraudulent speech (Mélive writes for Milevi). What really happened after the councils of Carthage and Milevi was that Saint Augustinehimself wrote to the Pope to confirm the decisions of the aforementioned councils (411, 412 and 416) condemning Pelagianism. This was where Pope Innocent confirmed the decisions of the councils, reserving the duty to cite Pelagius and Celestius, and to reform, if necessary, the sentence of Diospolis, where he condemned the incriminated doctrine in a letter known as “In requirendis”addressed to the bishops who met in Carthage and Milevi. In this letter the Pope is glad that Pelagianism has been unmasked and that the headquarters of Romahave been resorted to to solve or confirm the resolutions, since the headquarters of Peterenjoys the binding authority. The best of all is that when Saint Augustinemade Roma’s decisions known to the people, he uttered this famous phrase:

“Iam de hac causa duo concilia missa sunt ad sedem apostolicam: inde etiam rescripta venerunt. Causa finita est, utinam aliquando finiatur error”

Which could be translated as:

“For this reason, two letters have already been sent to the apostolic see and two rescripts have also come from there. The case has ended so that the error can finally end.”Sermo 131,10,10; Ep 1507.

Impossible under common sense to imagine a Saint Augustinerejecting the Papacy but appealing to its authority and declaring a dispute concluded based on its rescripts. Another frequently heard argument we have to an event that happened later when after Pope Zosimus succeeded Pope Innocent (who died in 417). It happened that Pelagius and Celestius sent appeals to the Roman See (surprisingly even the heretics recognized the authority of the apostolic see evidenced in these appeals). The decisions of Pope Innocent I had been forceful but Zosimus wanted to check if Pelagius and Celestius had really taught the doctrines condemned as heretical. They accuse here then Pope Zosimus of having approved of Pelagianism and being magnanimous towards the heretics and Saint Augustineof resisting him. I share a very detailed explanation that the Catholic encyclopedia gives about the events:

Catholic Encyclopedia. Pelagianism

“Zosimus’s sense of justice prevented him from punishing anyone with excommunication, who was dubiously convicted of his error. And, if the steps recently taken by the two defending themselves had been considered, the doubts that must have arisen on this point were not entirely unfounded. In 416 Pelagius published a new work, now lost, “De libero arbitrio libri IV”which, in its phraseology seems to lean towards the conception Augustinian of grace and the baptism of infants, although in principle it is not separated from the previous point of view of the same author… Pelagius sent this work together with a confession of faith that is still preserved. In it he testifies to his obedience like that of a child, humbly in need and, at the same time, he recognizes fortuitous inaccuracies that can be corrected by him who “holds the same faith and opinion as Peter.”All this was addressed to Innocent I, of whose death Pelagius had not yet learned. Celestius who, meanwhile, had changed his residence from Ephesus to Constantinople, but had since been outlawed by the anti-Pelagian bishop Atticus, actively took steps toward his rehabilitation. In 417 he went to Romain person and left a detailed confession of faith at the feet of Zosimus (Fragments, P. L., XLV, 1718), in this he affirms his belief in all doctrines, “from the time that there is a Triune God until the resurrection of the dead” (cf. S. Augustine, “De peccato orig.”, xxiii). Very pleased with this Catholic faith and obedience, Zosimus sent two different letters (P. L., XLV, 1719 sqq.) to the African bishops, saying that, in the case of Celestius, the bishops Heros and Lazarus had proceeded without due circumspection and that, Pelagius too, as had been proven by his recent confession of faith, had not deviated from the Catholic truth. As in the case of Celestio, who was then in Roma, the Pope commissioned the Africans to review the previous sentence or accuse him of heresy before the Pope himself within two months. The papal mandate hit Africa like a bomb. With great haste a synod was convened at Carthage in November 417, and a letter was written to Zosimus asking him not to rescind the sentence which his predecessor, Innocent I, had pronounced against Pelagius and Celestius, until both had confessed the necessity of inward grace for all salutary thoughts, words, and acts. At last Zosimo stopped. By a rescript of March 21, 418, he assured them that he had not made a definitive statement, but rather that he had sent to Africa all the documents on Pelagianism to pave the way for a new joint investigation. In accordance with papal mandate, the famous Council of Carthage was held on May 1, 418, in the presence of 200 bishops, which again typified Pelagianism as a heresy in eight (or nine) canons (Denzinger, “Enchir.”, 10th ed., 1908, 101-8).”

In short, the most that could be demonstrated by this event, other than the fact that even heretics appealed to Roma, is that Pope Zosimus was complacent, excessively lenient or simply hasty and that Saint Augustine was fully aware that there was already a decisive resolution by Zosimus’s predecessor (Pope Innocent I) condemning Pelagianism and hence his resistance. However, not even Saint Augustinehimself interpreted that Pope Zosimus had departed from orthodoxy, as stated in the libro6 of his reply to Julian, where he claims his slander against Pope Zosimo:
Saint Augustine, Contra Iulianum pelagianum, VI, XII, 37
“Why, to persist in your perverse error, do you accuse to the bishop of the Apostolic See Zosimo, of holy memory? Well, he did not deviate even one iota from the doctrine of his predecessor, Innocent I., whom you are afraid to name. You prefer to quote Zosimus, because at first he acted with a certain benevolence toward Celestius…”

Therefore, any accusation against Zosimo’s orthodoxy is rejected by Saint Augustinehimself.

Another detail worthy of mention was that in the year 422, Pope Boniface I sent 3 letters respectively to the bishops of Thessaly, Illyria, and Rufus, vicar of the Pontiff and metropolitan of Thessaly (the reason for the letters consisted of the deposition or rejection of the bishop Patros Perigenius, baptized and educated in Corinth: the faithful of Patros did not want him, the Corinthians demanded him and the bishops of Thessaly for their part had chosen Maximus as pastor of the city). In the three letters the conscience or security of the Vicar of Christ as judge or final instance for the problems of the Church is appreciated.
There are even Protestant theologians who have accepted Saint Augustine’s position in favor of the Roman Primate. Dr. Cesar Vidal Manzanares in his patristics dictionary explains:
Cesar Vidal. Dictionary of Patristics. Augustinefrom Hippo:
“…Ecclesiologically, Augustine is not univocal in the use of the term “church” referring both to the community of the faithful, built on the apostolic foundation, and to the group of predestined ones who live in blessed immortality. He considers a heretic not to be the one who errs in the faith (Ep. XLIII, I) but to the one who “resists the Catholic doctrine that is manifest to him” (De Bapt. XVI, 23), which is expressed in the baptismal symbol, in the councils (Ep. XLIV, I) and in the seat of Peter, which always enjoyed the primacy (Ep. XLIII, 7).”
Anecdote: Discussing the topic in the Catholic forum, my Protestant friend was asked by a forum member: “But… Have you read the writings of Saint Augustine?” to which he replied: “….well no.” I had to stop myself from replying: “So what the hell are you doing trying to give a lecture on Augustinian thought???”

Saint Augustine, the Church and Tradition

Saint Augustineshows full adherence to the authority of faith, which is the authority of Christ (C. academic 3,20,43) manifested in Scripture, in tradition and the Church. (No Sola Scriptura and free private interpretation in the Protestant style). He even goes so far as to reply bluntly to the Manichaeans:
Saint Augustine. C. ep. Man. 5,6; cf. C. Faustum 28.2
“I would not believe in the Gospel if the authority of the Church católicadid not move me to do so”
For Saint Augustine, it is the church that establishes the canon of Scripture (From doc. Chr. 2,7,12), transmits the tradition and interprets one or the other (From Gen. litt. EITHER. Yo. l. 1), settles controversies (De bapt. 2,4,5) and prescribes the rule of faith (From doc. Chr. 3,2,2). Saint Augustinestates “I will remain safe in the Church whatever the difficulty that arises” (From bapt. 3,2,2), for “God has established the doctrine of truth in the seat of unity” (Ep. 105,16).
He comes to answer the Pelagians that everything that tradition has transmitted to us must be considered true, even if it cannot be explained (C.Iul. 6,5,11), since the Fathers “have taught in the Church what they learned in the Church” (C. Iul. either. Yo. 1,117; cf. C. Iul. 2,10,34). Thus, for Saint Augustinethe authority of the church and the councils are indisputable, and what is part of Tradition must be maintained even if it has not been written:
Saint Augustineof Hippo, Letter to Jenaro (Ep 54,1-2)
“…Everything we observe by tradition, although it is not written; everything that the Church observes throughout the world, It is understood that it is kept by recommendation or precept of the apostles or of the plenary councils, whose authority is indisputable in the Church. For example, the passion of the Lord, his resurrection, ascension to heaven and the coming of the Holy Spirit from heaven are celebrated every year. We will say the same of any other similar practice that is observed throughout the universal Church.
Saint Augustineof Hippo, Letter to Dioscorus (Ep 118,32)
“Those who are not in the Catholic communion and nevertheless boast of the Christian name, are forced to oppose the believers; they dare to deceive the unlearned as if they were using reason, even though the Lord came precisely to bring this medicine of faith imposed on the people. But the heretics are forced to do this, as I have said, because they feel that they would be repudiated with disdain if they compared their authority with that of the Catholic Church.
They try, therefore, to overcome the authority of the unshakable Church with the name and promise of reason. This recklessness is normal in all heretics. But that most merciful emperor of faith also endowed us with the magnificent apparatus of undefeated reason, using select, pious, learned and truly spiritual men. And at the same time he fortified the Church with the citadel of authority, using famous councils of all peoples. and people and from the same apostolic sees.”

Saint Augustine and the Virgin Mary

Saint Augustine is another firm defender of the perpetual Virginity of Mary, He states:
Saint Augustine. Serm. 51.18
“Virgin conceived, virgin gave birth and virgin remained”
To Volusiano, when he interposed the difficulties of reason, he replied:
Saint Augustine. Ep. 137,2,8
 “Let us grant that God can work something that we must confess not being able to investigate. In such things, the entire reason for the fact is the power of the one who puts it into work.”
It also explains that Mary issued her resolution of virginity before the annunciation, beginning the Christian ideal of virginity (Serm. 51,26) and that although she always remained a virgin, the marriage and conjugal affection that united her to Joseph was true. (From nupt. Et conc. 1,11,12).
He is also an exponent of divine motherhood, and does not hesitate to affirm that “God was born of a woman” (De Trin. 8,4,7).
Saint Augustine. Serm. 186.2
“How is it possible to confess in the rule of faith that we believe in the Son of God, born of the Virgin Mary, if born of Mary were not the Son of God, but the Son of man? Who among Christians denies that the Son of Man was born from that woman? But, God made man, and, therefore, man made God.”
An episode in his conflict with Pelagianism gave rise to Saint Augustineto express his position regarding the immaculate state of the Virgin Mary. Julian (disciple of Pelagius), writes to Saint Augustine: “”You consign Mary to the devil by reason of birth”, that is, if you affirm that original sin is transmitted by natural generation, Mary was a subject of the devil, because in this way she descended and in this way she was conceived by her parents”, to this I reply Saint Augustine: “We do not consign Mary to the devil because of the condition of her birth – this was the accusation-, but – this was the answer – the condition of birth was eliminated by the grace of regeneration”(C. Iul. I heard. 4,122). He also declares in this regard, speaking of sin:
Saint Augustine. Of nat. et. gr. 36.42
“With the exception of the Holy Virgin Mary, of whom, out of the honor due to the Lord, I absolutely do not tolerate mention being made when talking about sin.…”
Thus, in the conception of the saint, Mary is a model of the church, for the splendor of her virtues and for the grace of being bodily what the Church must be spiritually, that is, virgin and mother; virgin for the integrity of faith, mother for the fervor of charity (Serm. 188.4; 191.4; 192.2). It is clear that Protestants do not agree with the saint’s thoughts on any of the above points.

Saint Augustine, original sin and the need for baptism

Saint Augustine is one of the greatest defenders of the doctrine of original sin and the need for baptism. For him, everyone, even those born from a marriage of believers, must be regenerated by baptism, which he calls “regeneration bath“, since unlike personal sins, original sin is contracted from the parents”…I declared according to the Catholic faith, that, regardless of their birth, they are innocent when it comes to personal sins; guilty, because of original sin” (Against Iulianum Pelagianum III, XXIII, 52). For the saint, the Pelagian heresy is extremely serious because it denies children putting on Christ.
Saint Augustine. Contra Iulianum Pelagianum II, XVIII, 33
“This our adversary, departing with the Pelagians from the apostolic and Catholic faith, does not want those who are born to be under the dominion of the devil, so that the infants (children) are not brought to Christ, torn from the power of darkness and transferred to his kingdom. And he especially accuses the Church spread throughout the entire world, where all infants at baptism everywhere receive the rite of insufflation for no other reason than to cast out of them the prince of the world, under whose dominion the vessels of wrath necessarily are since they are born from Adam if they are not reborn in Christ and are transferred to his kingdom once they have been made vessels of mercy by grace.
Immersed in the thinking of the time, Saint Augustinefinds it difficult to glimpse what the state of children born without baptism will be, and he even declares himself ignorant of the nature of the pain that this state can cause them.
Saint Augustine. Against Iulianum Pelagianum III, XI, 44
“…I do not say that children who die without the baptism of Christ are punished with such a great penalty that it would be better for them not to have been born; because the Lord did not speak these words of any sinner, but of the very criminal and impious. If the sentence that he pronounced on Sodom is not to be understood only of the Sodomites, since on the day of judgment some are to be punished more seriously than others, who can doubt that unbaptized children, who die without personal sin Should anyone, with only the original, suffer the lightest penalty of all? I do not know what the nature of this penalty will be.…but you consider them free from all guilt, you do not want to think about the kind of penalties to which you condemn them by depriving so many of their images of life and the kingdom of God and separating them from their pious parents, whom you so clearly exhort them to beget. It is unfair for children to suffer punishment if they do not have sin; But, if their punishment is just, it is necessary to recognize the existence of original sin in them.“
In his letter to Saint Jerome he writes “I am prey to great anguish, believe me, when this point of punishing children is brought up and I do not know at all what to respond. (Ep. 166,6,16: PL 33,727). The Church today recognizes the need for baptism for salvation but also recognizes that there can be salvation for unbaptized children by “paths not known to her.”
Before comparing the position of Saint Augustinewith the Protestant world, we have to clarify that there are two dissonant positions between them. The Anabaptists (today the majority), who deny the existence of original sin and the need for infant baptism, and those of the Lutheran and Calvinist tendency, who confess to believing in the doctrine of original sin. In their confessions of faith, such as that of Augsburg in 1530, they read condemnations of the Anabaptist position and profess the need to baptize children to be saved. The Westminster Confession admits that it recognizes the need for baptism and considers neglect and contempt for the sacrament a serious sin (however, it admits that someone can be saved without being baptized). It could be said then that Saint Augustine’s position is radically opposed to the majority Anabaptist tendency among Protestants, and I would dare to affirm that he would fight it with the same fervor and effectiveness as Pelagianism.
It is curious that it was the Protestant denominations that have resurrected the heresy of the denial of original sin, since it implies devaluation of the necessity of the redemptive work of Christ, clearly explained by the apostle Saint Paulin capítulo5 of the epistle to the Romans.

Conclusion

Did Saint Augustinethink like a Protestant? Just answer these questions:

1) Do Protestants believe that the bishops of Romaare the successors of the apostle Peter and the apostolic see is the Church of Roma? Do they recognize the Pope’s rulings on matters of faith and submit to his authority?

2) Do Protestants believe that he who errs in the faith is not a heretic, but rather he who resists the Catholic doctrine that is manifested to him?

3) Do Protestants think that they would not believe in the gospel if they were not moved by the authority of the Catholic Church?

4) Do Protestants believe that it is the Catholic Churchwho transmits tradition and interprets it, settles controversies and prescribes the rule of faith?
5) Do Protestants believe that we must remain safe in the Church whatever the difficulty that arises?
6) Do Protestants believe that God has established the doctrine of truth in the chair of unity?
7) Do Protestants believe that Mary is always Virgin?
8) Do Protestants believe that God was born of a woman?
9) Do Protestants believe that speaking of sin is intolerable regarding Mary?
10) Do Protestants believe that baptism is necessary for salvation, cleanses original sin and other sins?
11) Do Protestants believe that it is immoral to deny baptism to children since they are prevented from putting on Christ and being born again?

If you can answer yes to all of those answers, then Saint Augustinehe was Protestant. (And if so, I wish we had more Protestants like him!)

Author: José Miguel Arraiz

 

Bibliography

BAC 422. Patrology III, Augustinianum Patriotic Institute

BAC 457. Complete Works of Saint Augustine, XXXV

Official Catechism of the Catholic Church

Dictionary of patristics, Cesar Vidal Manzanares

Mariology, José C. R. García Paredes

Early Church Fathers

Catholic Encyclopedia