What's your take: Accdg. to St Augustine, it is faith that lead us to things of God; as we could misuse reason...?

I'd have to see the entire treatise. But what I think he means is that while reason can lead us to God, it is faith that leads us to the "things" of God (virtues, graces, sacraments). By trying to get to virtues, graces and sacraments by reason alone, we will fall off the mark.

I think that is relevant to today with how certain people think that reason through humanism can lead us to the same place as religion. It can't. It will go awry that way.

He's right. Faith is one of God's primary gifts, engendered by his divine grace. Grace never fails. Reason often does.

I don't follow Roman Catholic church fathers, they mix a grain of truth with a gallon of lies. St. Augustine supported and endorsed persecutions against those who didn't bow to Rome, and Scriptural adherent believers fell into that category. The Roman Catholic church fathers held to heresies.

Augustine taught that infants that were not baptized will receive the mildest condemnation. Augustine didn't believe that unbaptized infants could enter into heaven or have eternal life. He called all who rejected infant baptism “infidels” and “cursed.”

He taught that Mary did not commit sin and promoted her worship. He believed Mary played a vital role in salvation (Augustine, Sermon 289, cited in Durant, The Story of Civilization, 1950, IV, p. 69). Even before the Council of Ephesus, he defended the ever Virgin Mary as the Mother of God, who, because of her virginity, is full of grace. Likewise, he affirmed that the Virgin Mary "conceived as virgin, gave birth as virgin and stayed virgin forever".

He was the father of a-millennialism, which means "no" millennialism, thereby rejecting the Biblical teaching of the millennial reign of Jesus in the book of Revelation chapter 20. Note that any one who adds or takes away from that book of prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city ... read Revelation 22:18-19 for entirety.

The historian Neander observed that Augustine’s teaching “contains the germ of the whole system of spiritual despotism, intolerance, and persecution, even to the court of the Inquisition.” Augustine's vision of the heavenly city has influenced the secular projects and traditions of the Enlightenment, Marxism, Freudianism and Eco-fundamentalism. Post-Marxist philosophers Antonio Negri and Michael Hardt rely heavily on Augustine's thought, particularly The City of God, in their book of political-philosophy "Empire."

John Calvin was a follower of St. Augustine's teachings. He also agreed with him on persecuting the unbelievers.

Spurgeon wrote: “Perhaps Calvin himself derived it [Calvinism] mainly from the writings of Augustine.” Calvin himself wrote: “Augustine is so wholly with me, that if I wished to write a confession of my faith, I could do so with all fullness and satisfaction to myself out of his writings.” Another quote says, "Calvin said: “If I were inclined to compile a whole volume from Augustine, I could easily show my readers, that I need no words but his” (Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book III, chap. 22)."

Happy horseshit

He has a point, but I think I would need to read more in order to truly "get it". Context is enlightening.

I generally agree. I don't take it to mean, to accept faith and abandon reason. I think one comes with the other. One might dominate another in individuals, but don't believe there is any conflict between them that isn't imposed by our lack of understanding. The idea of "faith and reason", without the other is limiting and flawed. I think what St. Augustine is trying to say is that the 'Ultimate Realization' is predicated on faith, by default, which can reason support, but reason on it's own, can be misleading.

Ideally, there would be no need for faith and reason, and we would know the 'truth', as it is, without them. The human mind and intellect cannot know all there is to possibly know. To explain the 'why?' behind anything would require knowing the entire history of existence, up to the present moment, thus human have to accept that there are things that must be taken on faith. "Blind faith", alone, without a credible means of verification, is impractical, and is just as misleading as, rigid thinking.

Because "faith and reasoning" are too often conflated with "religion and science", people assume that they're exclusive of each other. All scientific pursuits begin on the 'faith' that a hypothesis is worthy of further investigation. All religions are founded on a 'spiritual system' that requires a method of practice and repetition, that yields expected results. Fundamentally, God is a subjective awareness we accept, or not, out of the faith that our conviction is correct.

Sounds to me like a justification for ignorance. He appears to be suggesting that we eschew critical thinking skills in exchange for blind acceptance of what we're being told by the people who stand to profit from by our blind acceptance. He's essentially saying "Just believe what we tell you to believe, and stop thinking about it too closely". The implication being that if we think about it too closely we're going to see through the charade and all the priests, pastors, ministers and other mouthpieces of 'god' will lose all their power.

Apparently "faith" leads many to many gods not just one.

`Both reason and faith without not only a good set of knowledge and a good grasp of where your knowledge is limited, lead you to incorrect conclusions.