James Leo Garrett Jr. and the Southwestern Theological Tradition
Southwestern Journal of Theology
Volume 65, No. 1 - Fall 2022
Editor: David S. Dockery
By Veronica Roberts Ogle. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021, x+201 pp., $99.00
In Politics and the Earthly City in Augustine’s City of God, Veronica Roberts Ogle, assistant professor of philosophy at Assumption University in Worcester, Massachusetts, argues that Augustine’s conception of the earthly city points to a reality beyond itself. Specifically, Augustine’s “sacramental grammar” is intended to demonstrate a dual understanding of civitatas terrena (p. 4). This understanding of the city is directly related to Augustine’s semiotics, namely the idea that earthly things serve as signs pointing to God—a view that lies “at the center of Augustine’s whole worldview” (p. 4). In this way, Ogle argues against a literalistic reading of Augustine’s rendering of the earthly city, approaching the issue as one of rhetorical device under- stood best in a sacramental ontology. This sacramental perspective relates to Augustine’s “Christianized notion of Platonic participation” (p. 4). Augustine’s use of civitas terrena is not a capitulation to earthly devices and politics; it is intentional for the purpose of symbolizing the tyrannical nature of the earthly city. Thus, Ogle provides a fresh and convincing argument towards understanding Augustine’s rhetorical goals in City of God.
Chapter one establishes the foundation by explicating Augustine’s view of the earthly city as dominated by amor sui (love of self). The logic of the earthly city inevitably leads to evil and ruin. For those who do not love neighbor for the sake of God, disaster is bound to follow. Consequently, for those who dismiss the authority and love of God, their priorities must be oriented towards themselves. The earthly city “is primarily defined by its members’ shared attempt to shield themselves from God’s love” (p. 28). Pride is the ultimate barrier to understanding true happiness in God, a story recast throughout history beginning with Satan’s rejection of God’s sovereignty (p. 33). Augustine consistently “[deflates] all of the earthly city’s claims” and thereby demonstrates the inglorious nature of the world and its forfeiture of true power found in God alone. Ogle moves into chapter 2 with a focus on Augustine’s rendering of pride as the primary cause of Rome’s fall. Augustine must “convince [his readers] that there is a facet of reality beyond the imperial sights of Rome” (p. 44). Augustine, as Ogle indicates, does not unnecessarily disparage Rome but takes pains to “highlight the gap between Rome and the truly Just City” for the sake of instruction (p. 48). Augustine reinterprets the history of Rome with Christ as “the unabashed protagonist” who is at work towards renewal and transformation (p. 51). While Rome lauds mercy and justice, their history indicates otherwise. Thus, Christ is extoled as the truly just and merciful one. A culture of heroism and competition can only breed pride and love of self; a culture of sacrifice and deference breeds love of God and love of neighbor.
In chapter three, Ogle advances the psychagogic element of his rhetoric, seeking to provide a way towards healing by exposing faulty worldviews. Hence, Augustine creates a cognitive dissonance according to Ogle by leaving his readers “no way to solve the problem of amor sui on their own” (p. 69). Here the way of happiness according to the world is exposed and the way of politics by Rome’s standards left wanting. Only Christianity can fulfill the promises made by philosophy and politics. Chapter four builds further upon the argument by exposing Augustine’s political pessimism by positing the need for humility as the way forward. Roman history was replete with examples of those who feigned desire for justice, whether King Tarquin of Rome or those who overthrew him. Ogle notes that for Augustine, “the patterns of behavior in which Rome was trapped could only really have been reversed by its members’ willingness to give up their desire for preeminence” (p. 113). Hence, for those seeking the flourishing of the early city and the promotion of virtues, Christianity was the “better religion for the ciuitas” (p. 115)
Chapters five and six bring Augustine’s sacramental worldview to bear on the question. Ogle highlights Augustine’s word-centered view of the world, with Scripture as the primary revelation of knowledge and all creation pointing as signs to the divine reality. Hence, the theory of signs presented in Augustine’s De Doctrina Christiana serves as the “sacramental worldview of the City of God, only viewed from another angle” (p. 128). Only through meditating upon Scripture with the eyes of faith can one see the fallacy of amor sui. The love of God (amor Dei) was “the original meaning of the creation” and demonstrates that the “cosmos is governed by an economy of gift” (p. 135). Politics per se are not the issue; it is politics governed by love of self. Hence, Augustine asserts that the earthly city “points us toward the Church as the community in which humility’s font, amor Dei, is best nurtured” (p. 181).
Ogle gives readers a well-argued and readable text. While resting on the shoulders of previous work and current conversations, Ogle’s work stands on its own. It should be read by those working in Augustine’s political theology, as well as those who are concerned with the latest research on City of God. Students and scholars alike will find much in Ogle’s text to enhance their reading of City of God and their appreciation of Augustine’s theology contained therein.
