St. Thomas, it was simply from a certain horror at philosophical innovations and at the neglect of Au- gustinism. The doctrinal revolution brought about by Albert the Great and Thomas Aquinas in favour of Aristotle startled the old School of Augustinism among the Dominicans as well as among the Francis- cans, but especially among the latter, who were the disciples of the eminent Augustinian doctor, St. Bonaventure. This will explain the condemnations, hitherto little understood, of many propositions of St. Thomas Aquinas tliree years after his death, on the 7th of March, 1277, by "the Bishop of Paris, and on the ISth of March, 1277, by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Robert Kilwardby, a Dominican. The Augustinian school represented tradition; Thomism, progress. The censure of 1277 was the last victorj- of a too rigid Augustinism. The happy fusion of the two methods in the two orders of Franciscans and Dominicans little by little brought about an agree- ment on certain points without excluding differences on others which were yet obscure (as, for instance, the unity or the multiplicity of forms), at the same time that it made for progress in all the schools. We know that the canonization of St. Thomas caused the withdrawal of the condemnations of Paris (14 Februarj-, 1325). Moreover, the ^\■isdom or the moderation of the new school contributed power- fully to its trimnph. Albert the Great and St. Thomas, far from being adversaries of St. Augustine, as they were reported to be, placed themselves in his school, and while modifying certain theories, took over into their system the doctrine of the African bishop. How many articles in the "Summa" of St. Thomas ha\e no other object than to incorporate in theology this or the other theory which was cherished by St. Augustine (to take only one example, that of exemplar ideas in God). Hence, there was no longer any school strictly Augustinian, because even,- school was such. They all eliminated certain special points and retained the same veneration for the master.
From the tliird period of the fifteenth centurj' to our days we see less of the special progress of phil- osophical Augustinism than certain tendencies of an exaggerated revival of Platonism. In the fifteenth century Bessarion (1472) and Marsilio Ficino (1499) used Augustine's name for the purpose of enthroning Plato in the Church and excluding Aristotle. In the seventeenth centurj-, it is impossible to deny certain resemblances between Cartesianism and the philosophy of St. Augustine. Malebranche was wTOng in ascribing liis own ontologism to the great Doctor, as were also many of liis successors in the nineteenth century.
(2) Theological Augustinism. — The history of Au- gustine's system of grace seems to blend almost in- distinguishably with the progressive developments of this dogma. Here it must suffice, first, to enmnerate the principal phases; secondly, to trace the general laws of development which mitigated Augustinism in the Church.
After the death of Augustine, a whole century of fierce contests (430-529) ended in the triumph of moderate Augustinism. In vain had Pope St. Ce- lestine (431) sanctioned the teachings of the Doctor of Hippo. The Semipelagians of the south of France could not understand the predilection of God for the elect, and in order to attack the works of St. Au- gustine they made >ise of the occasionally exaggerated formula; of St. Fulgentius, or of the real errors of certain isolated predestinationists, as, for example, Lucidus, who was condemned in the Council of Aries (475). Happily, Prosper of Aquitaine, by his modera- tion, and also the imknown author of "De Vocatione omnium gentium", by his con.soling thesis on the appeal addressed to all, opened the way to an agree- ment. And finally, St. Cipsarius of Aries obtained from Pope Felix 1\' a series of Capitida which were solemnly promulgated at Orange, and gave their consecration to the triumph of Augustinism (.529 1. In the ninth century, a new victory was gained o\or the predestinationism of Gottschalk in the assem- blies of Savonnieres and Toucy (8.59-860). The doctrine of the Divine will to save all men and the universality of redemption was thus consecrated by the public teaching of the Church. In the Middle Ages these two truths are developed by the great Doctors of the Church. Faithful to the principles of Augustinism, they place in especial relief liis theory on Divine Providence, which prepares at its pleasure the determinations of the will by exterior events and interior inspirations.
In the fourteenth centiuy a strong current of predestinationism is evident. To-day it is admitted that the origin of this tendency goes back to Thomai Bradwardin, a celebrated professor of Oxford, who died Archbishop of Canterbury (1349), and whoni the best critics, along with Loots and Harnack, recognize to ha\ e been the inspirer of Wyclif himself. His book "De causa Dei contra Pelagium" gave rise in Paris to disputes on Augustinian "predetermina- tion", a word which, it had been thought, was in- vented by Banes in the sixteenth centurj-. In spite of the opposition of theologians, the idea of absolute determinism in the name of St. Augustine was adopted bj- Wyclif (1324-87), who formulated hi.s universal fatalism, the necessitj- of good for the elcit and of evil for the rest. He fancied that he found in the Augustinian doctrine the strange conception which became for him a central doctrine that o\ir- threw all morality and all ecclesiastical, and even civil, government. According as one is predestimd or not, everything changes its nature. The same sins are mortal in the non-elect which are venial in the predestined. The same acts of virtue are meritorio\is: in the predestined, even if he be actuallj- a wicked man which are of no value in the non-elect. Tin- sacraments administered bj one who is not pre- destined are alwaj-s invalid; more than that, no juris- diction exists in a prelate, even a pope, if he be nut predestined. In the same waj-, there is no power, even civil or political, in a prince who is not one of the elect, and no right of propertj' in the sinner or the non-elect. Such is the basis on which Wj-clif established the communism which aroused the so- cialist mobs in England. It is incontestable that he was fond of quoting Augustine as his authority; and his disciples, as we are assured bj' Thomas Netter Waldensis (Doctrinale, I, xxxiv, § 5), were con- tinuallj- boasting of the profound knowledge of their great Doctor, whom thej- called with emphasis "John of Augustine". Shirlej-, in his introduction to "Zizaniorum Fasciculi", has even pretended that the theories of Wj-clif on God, on the Incarnation, and even on propertj-, were the purest Augustinian inspiration, but even a superficial comparison, if this were the place to make it, would show how base- less such an assertion is. In the sixteenth century the heritage of Wj-clif and Hus, his disciple, was always accepted in the name of Augustinism by the leaders of the Reformation. Divine predestination from all eternitj' separating the elect, who were to be snatched out of the mass of perdition, from the reprobate who were destined to hell, as well as the irresistible impulse of God drawing some to salvation and others to sin — such was the fundamental doctrine of the Reformation. Calvinism even adopted a sj'stem which was "logically more consistent, but practically more revolting", as Schaff puts it (St. Augustine, p. 104), bj' which the decree of reprobation of the non-elect would be independent of the fall of Adam and of original sin (Supralapsarianism). It was certain that these harsh doctrines would bring their reaction, and in spite of the severities of the Synod of Dordrecht, which it would be interesting
