Full text of "A Select library of the Nicene and post-Nicene fathers of the Christian church"

See other formats

'--■ \'*i^-'./«,>tr-.-t*i-*,V ^

:LO
:LO

■CD

;,!•'

JIUIUI UMriULJ I JllJjIl.

i^©V

/A>

A SELECT LIBRARY

OF THE

NICENE AND POST-NICENE FATHERS

THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

EDITED BY

PHILIP SCHAFF, D.D., LLD.,

PROFESSOR IN THE UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, NEW YORK.

IN CONNECTION WITH A NUMBER OF PATRISTIC SCHOLARS OF EUROPE

AND AMERICA.

VOLUME IV.

ST. AUGUSTIN:
THE WRITINGS AGAINST THE MANICHyEANS,

AND

AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

BUFFALO

THE CHRISTIAN LITERATURE COMPANY

1887

974f)5«

Electrotyped and Printed by
The Publishers' Book Composition and Electrotyping Co.,

157 & 159 William St., New York.

EDITOR'S PREFACE.

This fourth volume of St. Augustin's Works contains his polemical writings in vindica-
tion of the Catholic Church against the heresy of the Manichdeans, and the schism of the
Donatists. The former are contained in Tom. II. and VIII., the latter in Tom. IX., of the
Benedictine edition.

Like the preceding volumes, this also is more than a reprint of older translations, and
contains important additions not previously published.

I. — Seven Writings against the Manich^an Heresy. Four of these were trans-
lated by the Rev. Richard Stothert, of Bombay, for Dr. Dods' edition, published by
T. & T. Clark, Edinburgh, 1872, and revised by Dr. Albert H. Newman, of Toronto, for
the American edition. The other three treatises are translated, I believe for the first time,
by Dr. Newman for this edition. (See Contents.)

The Edinburgh translation, especially of the first two treatises, is sufficiently faithful and
idiomatic, and needed very little alteration by the American editor, who compared it sentence
by sentence with the Latin original, and made changes only where they seemed necessary.

This part of the volume is also enriched by an introductory essay of Dr. Newman, which
embodies the literature and the results of the most recent as well as the earlier researches
concerning that anti-Christian heresy.

II.— The Writings against the Donatists. These were well translated by the Rev.
J. R. King, of Oxford, and are slightly revised by Dr. Hartranft, of Hartford, after a
careful comparison with the Latin.

The literary introduction of Dr. Hartranft, in connection with the translator's historical
preface, will place the reader in the situation of the controversy between the Catholic Church
and the Donatists at the time of St. Augustin.

In both sections the treatises are arranged in chronological order.

The fifth volume will contain the writings of St. Augustin against the Pelagians and
Semi-Pelagians. It is in the hands of the printer and will be published in October.

PHILIP SCHAFF.

New York, June, 1887.

COMENTS.

xi\.il>r^L^xi'.* ■ • • • • • • • • • • •

I. THE ANTI-MANICH^AN WRITINGS.

Translated by the Rev. Richard Stothert, M.A., Bombay, and Prof, Albert
H. Newman, D.D., LL.D., Toronto.

Introductory Essay on the ManichjEan Heresy

By Dr. Newman.

On the Morals of the Catholtc Church
{De Moi-ibiis Ecclesice Cat/ioiicce),
A.D. 388 , . . .

Translated by the REV^ Richard Stothert.

On THE Morals OF the Manich^ans
{De Aloribus ManichcBoniiii),

A.D. 388

Translated by the Rev. R. Stothert.

On Two Souls, against the Manich^ans
{^De Dualms Animabus, co/itra Manichceos),
A.D. 391

Translated by Dr. Newman.

Acts or Disputation against Fortunatus the Manich^an
i^Acta seu Dispiitatio contra Fortunatiivi Manic hceuni),
A.D. 392

Translated by Dr. Newman.

Against the Epistle of Manich^us called Fundamental
{Contra Epistolam Manic hcBi quam vacant Fundamcnii),
A.D 397

Translated by the Rev. R. STo-i'iiKin'.

PAGE

iii

3-29

41-63

69-89

95-107

113-124

129-150

CONTENTS.

Reply to Faustus the MANiCHiEAN

{Contra Faiistiim ManichcBum, Libri XXXIII.),

A.I). 400. 155-345

Translated by the Rev. R. Stothert.

Concerning the Nature of Good, against the Manich/Eans
{^De Naima Boiii contra JManichcEos),

A.D. 404 . . 351-365

Translated by Dr. Newman.

II. THE ANTI-DONATIST WRITINGS.

Translated by the Rev. J. R. King, M.A., Vicar of St. Peter's in the East,

Oxford, and late Fellow and Tutor of Merton College, Oxford.
The Translation revised, with additional annotations, by the Rev. Chester D.

Hartkanft, D.D., Professor of Biblical and Ecclesiastical History in the

Theological Seminary it Hartford, Connecticut.

Introduction to the Anti-Donatist Writings 369-404

By Dr. Hartranft.

On Baptism, against the Donatists

{^De Baptismo, contra Donatistas, Libri VII.),

Circa, A. D. 400. . 411-514

Answer to Letters of Petilian, Bishop of Cirta

{Contra Litter as Petiliani Donatista Cirtcnsis Episcopi^ Libri III.),

A.D. 400 .. 519-628

The Correction of the Donatists.

{De Correction Donatistaruin Liber seu Epistola CLXXXV.),

Circa, A.D. 417. ........ . 633-651

Index to the Anti-Manich^an Writings 653-666

Index to the Anti-Donatist Writings 667-675

WRITI NGS

IN CONNECTION WITH THE

MANICH^AN CONTROVERSY.

TRANSLATED BY THE

REV. RICHARD STOTHERT, M.A.,

BOMBAY;

AND

ALBERT H. NEWMAN, D.D., L.L.D.

PROFESSOR OF CHURCH HISTORY AND COMPARATIVE RELIGION, IN TORONTO
BAPTIST ^theological) COLLEGE, TORONTO, CANADA.

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY ON

THE MANICH^EAN HERESY,

By Albert H. Newman, D.D., LL.D.

CHAPTER I.— LITERATURE.

I. Sources,
The following bibliography of Manichseism is taken from Schaff's History of the Chris-
iian Church, vol. II. pp. 498-500 (new edition). Additions are indicated by brackets.

1. Oriental Sources : The most important, though of comparatively late date.

(a) Mohammedan (Arabic): Kitdb al Fihrist. A history of Arabic literature to 987, by
an Arab of Bagdad, usually called Ibn Abi Jakub an-Nadim; brought to light by Flugel,
and published after his death by Rodiger and Muller, in 2 vols. Leipz. i87i-'72. Book IX.
section first, treats of Manichasism. Flugel's translation, see below. Kessler calls the Fihrist
2i ^' FUiidstdtte allerersten Ranges." Next to it comes the relation of the Mohammedan
philosopher, Al-Shahrastani (d. 1153), in his History of Religious Parties and Philosophi-
cal Sects, Ed. Cureton, Lond. 1842, 2 vols. (I. 188-192); German translation by Haar-
briicker, Halle, 1851. On other Mohammedan sources, see Kessler in Herzog,- IX., 225 sq.

(b) Persian Sources: relating to the life of Mani, the Shahnameh {the King's Book) of
FiRDAUSi; ed. by Jul. Mohl, Paris, 1866 (V. 472-475). See Kessler, ibid. 225.

[Albiruni's Chronology of Ancient Nations, tr. by E. Sachau, and published by the
Oriental Translation Fund, Lond. 1879. Albiruni lived 973-1048, and is said to have pos-
sessed vast literary resources no longer available to us. His work seems to be based on
early Manichsean sources, and strikingly confirms the narrative preserved by the Fihrist.
See also articles by West and Thomas in Journal of the Asiatic Society, 1868, 1870, 187 1.]

(c) Christian Sources: In Arabic, the Alexandrian Patriarch Eutychius (d. 916).
Amiales, ed. Pococke, Oxon. 1628; Barhebr^eus (d. 1286), in \\\% Historia Dynastiannn, ed.
Pococke. In Syriac: Ephraem Syrus (d. 393), in various writings. Esnig or Esnik, an
Armenian bishop of the 5th Century, who wrote against Marcion and Mani (German trans-
lation from the Armenian by C. Fr. Neumann, in Illgen's Zeitschrift fiir die Hist. Theologie,

1834, pp. 7 7-78)-

2. Greek Sources: [Alexander of Lycopolis: The Tenets of the Manichcrans (f\r?X^\xh-
lished by Combefis, with a Latin version, in the Auctararium No7issininm, Bibl. S. S. Patnnn;
again by Gallandi, in his Bibl. Patnnn, vol. IV. p. 73 sq. An English translation by Rev.
James B. H. Hawkins, M.A., appeared in Clark's Ante-Nicene Library, Vol. XIV. p.
236 sq. ; Am. ed. vol. VI. p. 237 sq. Alexander represents himself as a convert from Pagan-
ism to Manichaeism, and from Manichaeism to Orthodoxy. He claims to have learned Man-

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

ichreism from those who were intimately associated with Mani himself, and is, therefore, one
of the earliest witnesses.'] Eusebius(Z!'. E. VII. 31, a brief account). Epiphanius [Haer.
66). Cyril of Jerusalem {Catech. VI. 20 sq.). Titus of Bostra {jzpba MwH^aiouG, ed
P. de Lagarde, 1859). Photius: Adv. Manichceos {Cod. 179, BibliotJi.). John of Damas-
cus: De Haeri's. and Z>/<?/. [Pf.trus SrcuLus, Hist. Manic/iceorii!n.'\

3. Latin Sources: Archelaus (Bishop of Cascar in Mesopotamia, d. about 278): Acta
Dispuiatioiiis cum Manete Hceresiarcha j first written in Syriac, and so far belonging to the
Oriental Christian Sources (Comp. Jerome, ^/<' Vir. III. 12), but extant only in a Latin trans-
lation, which seems to have been made from the (ireek, edited by Zacagni (Rome, 1698),
and RouTH (in Reliquice Saa-(C, vol. V. 3-206); Eng. transl. in Clark's Ante-Nicene
Library {yo\. XX. 272-419). [Am. ed. vol. VI. p. 173 sq.]. These Acts purport to con-
tain the report of a disputation between Archelaus and Mani before a large assembly, which
was in full sympathy with the orthodox bishop, but (as Beausobre first proved), they are in form
a fiction from the first quarter of the fourth century (about 320), by a Syrian ecclesiastic
(probably of Edessa), yet based upon Manichjean documents, and containing much informa-
tion about Manichaean doctrines. They consist of various pieces, and were the chief source of
information to the West. Mani is represented (ch. 12), as appearing in a many-colored
cloak and trousers, with a sturdy staff of ebony, a Babylonian book under his left arm, and
with a mien of an old Persian master. In his defense he quotes freely from the N. T. At
the end, he makes his escape to Persia (ch. 55). Comp. H. v. Zittwitz: Die Acta Arclielai
et Mauetis untersucht, in Kahnis' Zeitschrift fiir d. Hist. TheoL 1873, No. IV. Oblasin-
SKi: Acta Disptct. Arch., etc. Lips. 1874 (inaugural dissert.). Ad. Harnack: Die Acta
Archelai iind das Diatessaron latians, in Texte und Untei-sxichuiigen zur Gesch. der alt-
chrisil. Lit. vol. I. Heft 3 (1883), p. 137-153. Harnack tries to prove that the Gospel vari-
ations of Archelaus are taken from Tatian's Diatessaron.

St. Augustin (d. 430, the chief Latin authority next to the translation of Archelaus).
[Besides the treatises published in Clark's series. Contra Fortuiiatuiiiqucndam Manichceoriun
Presbyteruni Disput. J. et II., Contra Adimantura Maniclicei discipuluni. Contra Seciindinuin
Alanichceum, De Natiira Boni, De duabiis Animabus, De Utilitatc Credendi, De Haeres.
XLVI. Of these, De diiabus Animabus, Contra Fortunatiim, and De Natura Boni are added
in the present edition, and De Utilitate Credendi has been included among Augustin's
shorter theological treatises in vol III. of the present series. \x) l\i^ Confessions z.\\<d the
Letters, moreover, the Manichasans figure prominently. The treatises included in the
present series may be said to fairly represent Augustin's manner of dealing with Mani-
chaeism. The Anti-Manichsean writings are found chiefly in vol. VIII. of the Benedictine
edition, and in volumes I. and XL of the Migne reprint. Augustin's personal connection
with the sect extending over a period of nine years, and his consummate ability in dealing
with this form of error, together with the fact that he quotes largely from Manichtean
literature, render his works the highest authority for Manichaeism as it existed in the West
at the close of the fifth century.] Comp. also the Acts of Councils against the Manicha^ans
from the fourth century onwards, in Mansi and Hefele [and Hardouin].

II. Modern Vvorks.

Isaac de Beausobre (b. 1659 in France, pastor of the French church in Berlin, d. 1738):

Histoire Crit. de Maniche'e et du Maniclie'isrtie, Amst. 1634 and '39, 2 vols. 4to. Part of the

first volume is historical, the second doctrinal. Very full and scholarly. He intended to

write a third volume on the later Manichseans. F. Chr. Baur: Das JSIanichdische Relio-ions-

system nach den Quellen neu untersucht und entwickelt, Tiib. 1831 (500 pages). A compre-

I Baur discredits tlriis claim on internal grounds {Das Manick. Religionssystem, p. 7).

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.

hensive, philosophical and critical view. He calls the Manich. system a '' gliihend prdchti<res
Natur-und lVeltj;ediL/it." [An able critique of Baur's work by Schneckenburger appeared
in the "Theol. Siudienu. Kritiken," 1833, p. 875 sq. Schneckenburger strives to make it
appear that Baur unduly minifies the Christian element in Manichceism. Later researclies
have tended to confirm Baur's main position. The Oriental sources employed by Fliigcl
and Kessler have thrown much light upon the character of primitive Manichaeism, and have
enabled us to determine more precisely than Beausobre and Baur were able to do the
constituent elements of Mani's system. A. v. Wegnern: Manichceonim Iiuiulgentics, Lips.
1827. Wegnern points out the resemblance between the Manichaean system, in accordance
with which the " hearers " participate in the merits of the " elect " without subjecting them-
selves to the rigorous asceticism practiced by the latter, and the later doctrine and practice of
indulgences in the Roman Catholic church ] Trechsel: Ucher Kaiion, Kiitikund Exegese
der Manichder, Bern, 1832. D. Chwolson: Die Ssabier tind der Ssabismus, Petersb. 1856,
2 vols. G. Flugel: Ma7ii, seine LeJire uiui seine Sci'iften. A us dem Fihrist des AM Jakicb
an-N'adim (987), Leipz. 1862. Text, translation and commentary, 440 pages. [Of the high-
est value, the principal document on which the work is based being, probably, the most
authentic exposition of primitive Manichtiean doctrine.] K. Kessler: Untersuchungen zur
Genesis des Manich. Rel. Systems, Leipz. 1876. By the same: Mdni oder Beitrdge zur Ken7it-
niss der Religionsniischung im Semitisnius,'L.€\YL. 1887. See also his thorough article, J/<f///
uud die Manichcer^ in " Herzog," new ed. vol. IX. 223-259 (abridged in Schaff' s " Encyclop."
11. 1396-1398). [Kessler has done more than any other writer to establish the relation
between the Manichaeans and the earlier Oriental sects, and between these and the old
Babylonian religion. The author of this introduction wishes to express his deep obligation
to Kessler. The article on the " Mandder " in " Herzog," by the same author, is valuable
in this connection, though his attempt to exclude all historical connection between this Baby-
lonian Gnostic sect and Palestine can hardly be pronounced a success. J. B. Mozley:
Ruling Ideas in Early Ages ; lecture on "The Manichgeans and the Jewish Fathers," with
special reference to Augustin's method of dealing with the cavils of the Manichaeans.] G. T.
Stokes: Manes 3.x\6. Majiichceatis, in "Smith and Wace," III. 792-801. A. Harnack: Man-
ichceism, in 9th ed. of the " Encycl. Britannica," vol. XV. (1883), 481-487. [Also in Ger-
man, as a Beigabe to his LehrbucJi d. DogmengescJiicJite, vol. I. p. 681 sq. Harnack follows
Kessler in all essential particulars. Of Kessler's article in " Herzog" he says: " This arti-
cle contains the best that we possess on Manichaeism." In this we concur. W. Cunning-
ham: ^. Austin and Jiis Place in the History of Christian 77?^//^//'/, Hulsean Lectures, 1885,
p. 45-72, and passim, Lond. 1886. This treatise is of considerable value, especially as it
regards the philosophical attitude of Augustin towards Manichaeism.] The accounts of Mos-
henn, Lardner, Schrockh, Walch, Neander, Gieseler [and A\'olf].

CHAPTER II.— PHILOSOPHICAL BASIS, AND ANTECEDENTS OF MANICH/EISM.

"About 500 years before the commencement of the Christian era," writes Professor
Monier Williams,' " a great stir seems to have taken plac;p in Indo-Aryan, as in Grecian
minds, and indeed in thinking minds everywhere throughout the then civilized world. Thus
when Buddha arose in India, Greece had her thinkers in Pythagoras, Persia in Zoroaster,
and China in Confucius. Men began to ask themselves earnestly such questions as —What
am I ? Whence have I come ? Whither am I going? How can I explain my consciousness
of personal existence' What is the relationship between my material and immaterial
nature? What is the world in which I find myself? did a wise, good and all-powerful Being
create it out of nothing? or did it evolve out of an eternal germ ? or did it come togetlicr by

' Inciiaii Wisdom, 3rd ed. (1876), p. 4g.

8 THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

the combination of eternal atoms ? If created by a Being of infinite wisdom, how can I ac-
count for the inequaUty of condition in it— good and evil, happiness and misery. Has the
Creator form or is he formless ? Has he any qualities or none ?"

It is true that such questions pressed themselves with special importunity upon the
thinkers of the age mentioned, but we should be far astray if we should think for a moment
that now for the first time they suggested themselves and demanded solution. The fact is
that the earliest literary records of the human race bear evidence of high thinking on the
fundamental problems of God, man, and the world, and the relations of these to each other.
Recent scholars have brought to light facts of the utmost interest with reference to the pre-
Baby Ionian (Accadian) religion. A rude nature-worship, with a pantheistic basis, but as-
suming a polytheistic form, seems to have prevailed in Mesopotamia from a very early
period. "Spirit everywhere dispersed produced all the phenomena of nature, and directed
and animated all created beings. They caused evil and good, guided the movements of the
celestial bodies, brought back the seasons in their order, made the wind to blow and the
rain to fall, and produced by their influence atmospheric phenomena both beneficial and
destructive; they also rendered .,the earth fertile, and caused plants to germinate and to
bear fruit, presided over the births and preserved the lives of living beings, and yet at the
same time sent death and disease. There were spirits of this kind everywhere, in the starry
heavens, in the earth, and in the intermediate region of the atmosphere; each element was
full of them, earth, air, fire and water; and nothing could exist without them ... As
evil is everywhere present in nature side by side with good, plagues with favorable influences,
death with life, destruction with fruitfulness; an idea of dualism as decided as in the religion
of Zoroaster pervaded the conceptions of the supernatural world formed by the Accadian
magicians, the evil beings of which they feared more than they valued the powers of good.
There were essentially good spirits, and others equally bad. These opposing troops con-
stituted a vast dualism, which embraced the whole universe and kept up a perpetual struggle
in all parts of the creation." ' This primitive Turanian quasi-dualism (it was not dualism
in the strictest sense of the term) was not entirely obliterated by the Cushite and Semitic
civilizations and cults that successively overlaid it. So firmly rooted had this early mode
of viewing the world become that it materially influenced the religions of the invaders rather
than sufi'ered extermination. In the Babylonian religion of the Semitic period the dualistic
element was manifest chiefly in the magical rites of the ChaJdean priests'who long continued
to use Accadian as their sacred language. " Upon this dualistic conception rested the whole
edifice of sacred magic, of magic regarded as a holy and legitimate intercourse established
by rites of divine origin, between man and the supernatural beings surrounding him on all
sides. Placed unhappily in the midst of this perpetual struggle between the good and bad
spirits, man felt himself attacked by them at every moment; his fate depended upon them.
. . . He needed then some aid against the attacks of the bad spirits, against the plagues
and diseases which they sent upon him. This help he hoped to find in incantations, in
mysterious and powerful words, the secret of which was known only to the priests of magic,
in their prescribed rites and thejr talismans. . . . The Chaldeans had such a great
idea of the power and efficacy of their formulas, rites and amulets, that they came to regard
them as required to fortify the good spirits themselves in their combat with the demons,
and as able to give them help by providing them with invincible weapons which should
ensure success." ' A large number of magical texts have been preserved and deciphered, and
among them " the 'favorable Alad,' the ' favorable Z«:?«;;za,' and the 'favorable Uheq,' are very
frequently opposed . . to the 'evil Alad,' the 'evil Lamjiia,' the 'evil Uiuqr'^ It
would be interesting to give in detail the results of the researches of George Smith, Lenor-

I Lenormant, Chaldean Magic (1877), P- i44-i45- = Ibid. p. 146-147. 3 Ibid. p. 148.

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.

mant, A. H. Sayce, E. Schrader, Friedrich Delitzsch and others, with reference to the
elaborate mythological and cosmological systems of the Babylonians. Some of the features
thereof will be brought out further on byway of comparison with the Manichjean mythology
and cosmology. Suffice it to say that the dualistic element is everywhere manifest, thout>-h
not in so consistent and definite a form as in Zoroastrianism, to say nothing of Manichsism.
The Medo-Persian invasion brought into Babylonia the Zoroastrian system, already
modified, no doubt, by the Elamitic (Cushite) cult. Yet the old Babylonian religion was too
firmly rooted to be supplanted, even by the religion of such conquerors as Darius and
Cyrus, Modifications, however, it undoubtedly underwent. The duqlism inherent in the
system became more definite. The influence of the Jews in Mesopotamia upon the ancient
population cannot have been inconsiderable, especially as many of the former, including pro-
bably most of the captives of the Northern tribes, were absorbed by the latter. As a result
of this blending of old Babylonian, Persian, and Hebrew blood, traditions, and religious
ideas, there was developed in Mesopotomia a type of religious thought that furnished a
philosophical basis and a mythological and cosmological garnishing for the Manichaean
system. Dualism, therefore, arising from efforts of the unaided human mind to account for
the natural phenomena that appear beneficent and malignant, partly of old Babylonian origin
and partly of Persian, but essentially modified by Hebrew influence more or less pure,
furnished to Mani the foundation of his system. We shall attempt at a later stage of the dis-
cussion to determine more accurately the relations of Manichaeism to the various systems
with which correctly or incorrectly it has been associated. Suffice it to say, at present, that
no new problem presented itself to Mani, and that he furnished no essentially new solution
of the problems that had occupied the attention of his countrymen for more than 2500 )'ears.
Before proceeding to institute a comparison between Manichseism and the various systems
of religious thought to which it stands related, it will be advantageous to have before us an
exposition of the Manichsean system itself, based upon the most authentic sources.

CHAPTER III.— THE MANICH^AN SYSTEM.
Earlier writers on Manichaeism have, for the most part, made the Acta Disp. Archelai
et Manetis and the anti-Manichaean writings of Augustin the basis of their representations.
For later Manichaeism in the West, Augustin is beyond question the highest authority, and
the various polemical treatises which he put forth exhibit the system under almost every
imaginable aspect. The "Acts of the Disputation of Archelaus and Manes," while it
certainly rests upon a somewhat extensive and accurative knowledge of early Manichaeism,
is partially discredited by its generally admitted spuriousness — spuriousness in the sense that
it is not a genuine record of a real debate. It is highly probable that debates of this kind
occurred between Mani and various Christian leaders in the East, and so Mani may at one
time or other have given utterance to most of the statements that are attributed to him in
this writing; or these statements may have been derived, for substance, from his numerous
treatises, and have been artfully adapted to the purposes of the writer of the "Acts.'' It is
certain that most of the representations are correct. But we can no longer rel}' upon it as
an authentic first-hand authority. Since Fliigel ])ublished the treatise from the Fihrist
entitled " The Doctrines of the Manichaeans, by Muhammad ben Ishak,'' with a German
translation and learned annotations, it has been admitted that this treatise must be made
the basis for all future representations of Manichaeism. Kessler, while he has had access
to many other Oriental documents bearing upon the subject, agrees with Fliigel in giving
the first place to this writing. On this exposition of the doctrines of the Manichaeans, there-
fore, as expounded by Fliigel and Kessler, we must chiefly rely. The highly poetical
mythological form which Mani gave to his speculations renders it exceedingly difficult to

lO THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

arrive at assured results with reference to fundamental principles. If we attempt to state
in a plain matter-of-fact way just what Mani taught we are in constant danger of misrepre-
senting him. In fact one of the favorite methods employed against Mani's doctrines by
the writer of the " Acts of the Disputation," etc., as well as by Augustin and others, was
to reduce Mani's poetical fancies to plain language and thus to show their absurdity. The
considerations which have led experts like Flugel and Kessler to put so high an estimate
upon this document, and the discussions as to the original language in which the sources of
the document were written, are beyond the scope of this essay. Suffice it to say, that so far
as we are able to forpi a judgment on the matter, the reasons for ascribing antiquity and
authenticity to the representation of Manichseism contained in the document are decisive.

I. Mani's Life. According to the Fihrist, Mani's father, a Persian by race, resided at
Coche on the Tigris, about forty miles north of Babylon. Afterwards he removed into
Babylonia and settled at Modein, where he frequented an idol-temple like the rest of the
people. He next became associated with a party named Mugtasila (Baptizers), probably
identical with or closely related to the Mandseans and Sabeans, both of which parties made
much of ceremonial bathings. Mani, who was born after the removal to Babylonia, is re-
lated to have been the recipient of angelic visitations at the age of twelve. Even at this
time he was forewarned that he must leave the religion of his father at the age of twenty-
four. At the appointed time the angel At-Taum appeared again and announced to him his
mission. " Hail, Mani, from me and the Lord, who has sent me to thee and chosen thee for
his mission. But he commands thee to invite men to thy doctrine and to proclaim the glad
tidings of truth that comes from him, and to bestow thereon all thy zeal." Mani entered
upon his work, according to Fliigel's careful computation, April i, 238, or, according to
calculations based on another statement, in 252. Mani maintained that he was the Paraclete
promised by Jesus. He is said, in this document, to have derived his teaching from the
Magi and the Christians, and the characters in which he wrote his books, from the Syriac and
the Persian. After travelling in many lands for forty years and disseminating his doctrines
in India, China, and Turkestan, he succeeded in impressing his views upon Firuz, brother
of King Sapor, who had intended to put him to death. Sapor became warmly attached to
Mani and granted toleration to his followers. Afterwards, according to some accounts, Mani
was imprisoned by Sapor and liberated by his successor Hormizd. He is said to have been
crucified by order of King Bahraim I. (276-'7), and his skin stuffed with straw is said to
have been suspended at the city gate. Eusebius (H. E. VII. 31) describes Mani as "a
barbarian in life, both in speech and conduct, who attempted to form himself into a Christ,
and then also proclaimed himself to be the very Paraclete and the Holy Spirit. Then, as if
he had been Christ, he selected twelve disciples, the partners of his new religion, and after
patching together false and ungodly doctrines collected from a thousand heresies long since
extinct, he swept them off like a deadly poison from Persia, upon this part of the world."
The account given in the Acta Arcliel. (written probably about 330-40), is far more detailed
than that of the Fihrist and differs widely therefrom. It contains much that is highly im-
probable. Mani is represented as having for his predecessors one Scythianus, an Egyptian
heretic of Aposto'.ic times, and Terebinthus, who went with him to Palestine and after the
death of Scythianus removed to Babylonia. The writings of Terebinthus or Scythianus
came into the possession of a certain widow, who purchased Mani when seven years of age
(then named Cubricus) and made him heir of her property and books. He changed his name
to Mani (Manes), and, having become imbued with the teachings of the books, began at about
sixty years of age to promulgate their teachings, choosing three disciples, Thomas, Addas
and Hermas, to whom he entrusted the writings mentioned above, along with some of his
own. Up to this time he knew little of Christianity, but having been impjisoned by the king

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. i i

for failure in a promised cure of the king's son, he studied the Christian Scriptures and de-
rived therefrom the idea of the Paraclete, which he henceforth appHed to himself. After his
escape the famous dialogue with Archelaus and that with Diodorus occurred. Returning to
Arabion he was arrested, carried to Persia, flayed alive, and his skin stuffed and suspended
as above. Some additional facts from an Oriental source used by Beansobre have more or
less verisimilitude. According to this, Mani was born of Magian parents about 240 a.d.
He became skilled in music, mathematics, geography, astronomy, painting, medicine, and
in the Scriptures. The account of his ascendancy over Sapor and his subsequent martyrdom
is substantially the same as that of the Filirist. Albiruni's work (see bibliography preceding)
confirms the account given by the Fihrist. The converbion of Sapor to Manichccism (in
A.D. 261) is said to be confirmed by Sassanian inscriptions (see Journal of A siat. Soc. 1868,
p. 3io-'4i, and ibid. p. 376, and 1871 p. 416).

The Fihrisfs account contains a long list of the works of Mani, which is supplemented
by other Oriental and Western notices. The list is interesting as showing the wide range of
Mani's literary activity, or at least of the literature that was afterwards connected with his
name.

2. Mani's Syston. As the life of Mani has been the subject of diversified and con-
tradictory representations, so also have his doctrines. Here, too, we must make the account
given by the Fihrist fundamental. It will be convenient to treat the subject under the fol-
lowing heads: Theology, Cosmogony, Anthropology, Soteriology, Cultus, Eschatology,
and Ethics.

(i.) Theology. Mani taught dualism in the most unqualified sense. Zoroastrianism is
commonly characterized as dualistic, yet it is so in no such sense as is Manicheeism. Ac-
cording to the Fihrist, " Mani teaches: Two subsistences form the beginning of the world,
the one light the other darkness; the two are separated from each other. The light is the
first most glorious being, limited by no number, God himself, the King of the Paradise of
Light. He has five members: meekness, knowledge, understanding, mystery, insight; and
five other spiritual members: love, faith, truth, nobleness, and wisdom. He maintained
furthermore that the God of light, with these his attributes, is without beginning, but with
him two equally eternal things likewise exist, the one the atmosphere, the other the earth.
Mani adds: and the members of the atmosphere are five [the first series of divine attributes
mentioned above are enumerated]; and the members of the earth are five [the second series].
The other being is the darkness, and his members are five: cloud, burning, hot wind, poison,
and darkness. Mani teaches: that the light subsistence borders immediately on the dark sub-
sistence, without a dividing wall between them; the light touches with its (lowest) side the
darkness, while upwards to the right and left it is unbounded. Even so the darkness is
endless downwards and to the right and left."

This represents Mani's view of the eternally existent status quo, before the conflict began,
and the endless state after the conflict ceases. What does Mani mean, when he enumerates
two series of five attributes each as members of God, and straightway postulates the co-
eternity of atmosphere and earth and divides these self-same attributes between the latter ?
Doubtless Mani's theology was fundamentally pantheistic, i.e., pantheistic within the limits
of each member of the dualism. The God of Light himself is apparently conceived of as
transcending thought. Atmosphere and Earth (not the atmosphere and earth that we know,
but ideal atmosphere and earth) are the sons derived immediately from the Ineffable One
and coeternal with him. The ten attributes are aeons which all belong primarily to the
Supreme Being and secondarily to the two great aeons, half to each. The question may
arise, and has been often discussed, whether Mani meant to identify God (the Prince of
Light) with the Kingdom of Light? His language, in this treatise, is wavering. He seems
to struggle against such a representation, yet without complete success.

12 THE WORK^ OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

Wliat do the other sources teach with reference to the absoluteness of the dualism and
with reference to the identification of the Prince of Light with the Kingdom of Light ?
According to \\\& Acts of the Disputation of Archclaus and Ma?ies,^ Manes "worships two
deities, unoriginated, self-existent, eternal, opposed the one to the other. Of them he
represents the one as good, and the other as evil, and assigned the name of Light to the
former, and that of Darhicss to the latter." Again, Manes is represented as saying: "I
hold that there are two natures, one good and another evil; and that the one which is good
dwells in a certain part proper to it, but that the evil one is this world as well as all things
in it, which are placed there like objects imprisoned in the portion of the wicked one " (i
John 5, 19). According to Alexander of Lycopolis,^ Mani laid down two principles, God
. and matter (Hyle). God he called good, and matter he affirmed to be evil. But God ex-
celled more in good than matter in evil." Alexander goes on to show how Mani used the
word IIylc\ comparing the Manichaean with the Platonic teaching. Statements of substan-
tially the same purport might be multiplied. As regards the identification of God (the
King of Light) with the Kingdom of Light, and of Satan (the King of Darkness) with the
Kingdom of Darkness, the sensuous poetical way in which Mani expressed his doctrines may
leave us in doubt. The probability is, however, that he did pantheistically identify each
element of the dualism with his Kingdom. He personifies the Kingdom of Light and the
Kingdom of Darkness, and peoples these Kingdoms with fanciful beings, which are to be
regarded as personified attributes of the principles of darkness and light.

A word on the Manichsean conception of matter or Hyle may not be out of place in this
connection. It would seem that the Manichseans practically identified Hyle or matter with
the Kingdom of Darkness. At any rate Jlyle is unoriginated and belongs wholly to this
Kingdom.

(2.) Cosmogony. So much for the Manichaean idea of the Kingdom of Light and the
Kingdom of Darkness before the great conflict that resulted in the present order of things.
Why did not they remain separate? Let us learn from the Fihrisf s narrative: "Mani
teaches further: Out of this dark earth [the Kingdom of Darkness] arose Satan, not that he
was in himself eternal from the beginning, yet were his substances in his elements unorig-
inated. These substances now united themselves out of his elements and went for^i as
Satan, his head as the head of a lion, his body as the body of a dragon, his wings as the
wings of a bird, his tail as the tail of a great fish, and his four feet as the feet of creeping
animals. When this Satan under the name Iblis, the (temporally considered) eternal (prime-
val), had arisen out of the darkness, he devoured and consume^l everything, spread destruction
right and left, and plunged into the deep, in all these movements bringing down from
above desolation and annihilation. Then he strove for the height, and descried the beams
of light; but they were opposed to him. When he saw later how exalted these were, he
was terrified, shrivelled up, and merged himself in his elements. Hereupon he strove ane\v
with such violence after the height, that the land of light descried the doings of Satan and
how he was bent upon murder and destruction. After they had been apprised thereof,
the world of Insight learned of it, then the world of Knowledge, then the world of Mystery,
then the world of Understanding, then the world of Meekness. When at last, he further
teaches, the King of the Paradise of Light had also learned of it, he thought how he might
suppress Satan, and, Mani adds, those hosts of his would have been mighty enough to over-
power Satan. Yet he desired to do this by means of his own might. Accordingly, he pro-
duced by means of the spirit of his right hand {i.e., the Gentle Breeze], his five worlds,
and his twelve elements, a creature, and this is the (temporally considered) Eternal Man

I Ante-Nicene Library, Am. ed. vol. vi. pp. 182 and 188. ■'Ibid. p. 241.

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 13

[Primordial Man], and summoned him to do battle with the Darkness. But Primordial Man,
Mani adds, armed himself with the five races [natures], and these are the five gods, the
Gentle Breeze, the Wind, the Light, the Water and the Fire. Of them he made his armor,
and the first that he put on was the Gentle Breeze. He then covered the Gentle Breeze
with the burning Light as with a mantle. He drew over the Light Water filled with atoms,
and covered himself with the blowing Wind. Hereupon he took the Fire as a shield and
as a lance in his hand, and precipitated himself suddenly out of Paradise until he reached
the border of the region that is contiguous to the battle-field. The Primordial Devil also
took his five races [natures]: Smoke, Burning, Darkness, Hot Wind and Cloud; armed
himself with tiiem; made of them a shield for himself; and went to meet Primordial Man.
After they had fought for a long time the Primordial Devil vanquished the Primordial
Man, devoured some of his light, and surrounded him at the same time with his races and
elements. Then the King of the Paradise of Light sent other gods, freed him, and van-
quished the Darkness. But he who was sent by the King of Light to rescue Prnnordial
Man is called the Friend of the Light. This one made a precipitate descent, and Primordial
Man was freed from the hellish substances, along with that which he had snatched from the
spirit of Darkness and wiiich had adhered to him. When, therefore, Mani proceeds, Joyfulness
and the Spirit of Life drew near to the border, they looked down into the abyss of this deep
hell and saw Primordial Man and the angels \i.e,, the races or natures with which he was
armed], how Iblis, the Proud Oppressors, and the Dark Life surrounded them. And the
Spirit of Life, says Mani, called Primordial Man with a loud voice as quick as lightning and
Primordial Man became another god. When the Primordial Devil had ensnared Primordial
Man in the battle, Mani further teaches, the five parts of the Light were mingled with the
five parts of the Darkness. ' '

Let us see if we can get at the meaning of this great cosmological poem as far as we
have gone. The thing to be accounted for is the mixture of good and evil. The complete
separation of the eternally existent Kingdoms of Light and Darkness has been posited.
How now are we to account for the mixture of light and darkness, of good and evil, in the
present order of things ? Mani would account for it by supposing that a conflict had oc-
curred between an insufficiently equipped representative of the King of Light and the
fully equipped ruler of the Kingdom of Darkness. His view of the vastly superior power
of the King of Light would not allow him to suppose that the King of Light fully
equipped had personally contended with the King of Darkness, and suffered the loss and
contamination of his elements. Yet he only clumsily obviates this difficulty; for Primordial
Man is produced and equipped by the King of Light for the very purpose of combating
the King of Darkness, and Mani saves the King of Light from personal contamination only
by impugning his judgment.

We have now reached the point where, as a result of the conflict, good and evil are
blended. We must beware of supposing that Mani meant to ascribe any kind of materiality
to the members of the Kingdom of Light. The Kingdom of Light, on the contrary, he
regarded as purely spiritual; the Kingdom of Darkness as material. We iiave now the condi-
tions for the creation of the present order of things, including man. How does Mani picture
the process and the results of this mixing of tlie elements ?

" The smoke (or vapor) was mingled with the gentle breeze (zephyr), and the present
atmosphere resulted. So that whatever of agreeableness and power to quicken the soul and
animal life is found in it [resultant air], is from the zephyr, and whatever of destructiveness
and noisomeness is found in it, proceeds from the smoke. The burning was mingled with
the fire; therefore whatever of conflagration, destruction and ruin is found, is from the
burning, but whatever of brightness and illumination is in it [the resultant fire], springs

14 THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

from the fire. The hght mingled itself with the darkness; therefore in dense bodies as
gold, silver and the like, whatever of brightness, beauty, purity and other useful qualities
occurs, is from the light, and whatever of tarnish, impurity, density and hardness occurs,
springs from the darkness. The hot wind was mingled with the wind; whatever now is
useful and agreeable in this [resultant wind] springs from the wind, and whatever of uneasi-
ness, hurtfulness and deleterious property is found in it [resultant wind] is from the hot
wind. Finally, the mist was mingled with the water, so that what is found in this [resultant
water] of clearness, sweetness, and soul-satisfying property, is from the water; whatever, on
the contrary, of overwhelming, suffocating, and destroying power, of heaviness, and cor-
ruption, is found in it, springs from the mist."

But we must from this point abbreviate the somewhat prolix account. Primordial Man,
after the blending of the elements, ascended on high accompanied by "one of the angels of
this intermingling;" in other words, snatching away a part of the imprisoned elements of the
Kingdom of Light.

The next step is the creation of the present world, which Mani ascribes to the King
of the World of Light, the object being to provide for the escajfe of the imprisoned elements
of Light. Through an angel he constructed ten heavens and eight earths, an angel being
appointed to hold heavens and earths in their places. A description of the stairways, doors,
and halls of the heavens is given in the Fihrisfs narrative. The stairways lead to the " height
of heaven." The air was used as a medium for connecting heaven and earth. A pit
was formed to be the receptacle of darkness from which the light should be liberated. The
sun and the moon were created to be the receptacles of the light that should be liberated
from the darkness, the sun for light that has been mingled with " hot devils,'' the moon
for that which had been mingled with *' cold devils." The moon is represented as collect-
ing light during the first half-month, and during the second pouring it into the sun. When
the sun and moon have liberated all the light they are able, there will be a fire kindled on
the earth which will burn for 1468 years, when there will be no light left. The King of
Darkness and his hosts will thereupon withdraw into the pit prepared for them.

(3.) Afitliropology. So much for the liberation of the imprisoned light, which, according
to Mani, was the sole object of creation. As yet we have heard nothing of the creation of
living creatures. What place do man, the lower animals, and plants sustain in the Mani-
chsean economy? We are to keep constantly in mind that Primordial Man was not Adam,
but a divine seon, and that he ascended into the heights immediately after the blending of parts
of his armor with darkness. The creation of earthly man was an altogether different affair.
We must give the account of man's creation in Mani's own words, as preserved by the Fihrist:
" Hereupon one of those Arch-fiends and [one] of the Stars, and Overmastering Violence,
Avarice, Lust, and Sin, copulated, and from their copulation sprang the first man, who is
Adam, two Arch-fiends, a male and a female, directing the process. A second copulation
followed and from this sprang the beautiful woman who is Eve."

Man, therefore, unlike the world, is the creature of demons, the aim of the demons
being to imprison in man, through the propagation of the race, as much as possible of the
light, and so to hinder the separating process by the sun and the moon. Avarice is re-
presented as having secretly seized some of the divine light and imprisoned it in man.
The part played by the Star in the production of man is somewhat obscure in the narrative,
yet the Star could hardly have been regarded as wholly evil. Probably the Star was
thought of as a detached portion of the light that had not entered into the sun or the moon.
" When, therefore, the five Angels saw what had taken place, they besought the Messenger of
Joyful Knowledge, the Mother of Life, Primordial Man and the Spirit of Life, to send some
one to liberate and save man, to reveal to him knowledge and righteousness, and to free

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.

him from the power of the devils. They sent, accordingly, Jesus, whom a god accompanied.
These seized the two Arch-fiends, imprisoned them and freed the two creatures (Adam and

Eve.)"

Jesus warned Adam of Eve's violent importunity, and Adam obeyed his injunction
not to go near her. One of the Arch-fiends, however, begat with her a son named Cain,
who in turn begat Abel of his mother, and afterwards two maidens Worldly-wise and
Daughter-of-Avarice. Cain took the first to wife and gave the other to Abel. An angel
having begotten of Worldly-wise two beautiful daughters (Raufarjad and Barfarjad),
Abel accused Cain of the act. Cain enraged by the false accusation slew Abel and took
Worldly-wise to wife. So far Adam had kept himself pure, but Eve was instructed by a
demon in the art of enchanting, and she was enabled to excite his lust and to entrap him.
By Adam she bore a beautiful son, whom the demon urged Eve to destroy. Adam stole
the child away and brought it up on cow's milk and fruit. This son was named Seth
{^Schatil). Adam once more yielded to Eve's fascinations, but through Seth's exhortations
was induced to flee " eastward to the light and the wisdom of God." Adam, Seth, Raufar-
jad, Barfarjad, and Worldly-wise died and went to Paradise; while Eve, Cain, and
Daughter-of-Avarice went into Hell. This fantastic perversion of the Biblical narrative of
the creation and fall of man has many parallels in Rabbinic literature, and doubtless Mani
first became acquainted with the narrative in a corrupted form. The teaching, however, of
this mythologizing evidently is that the indulgence of the flesh and the begetting of children
furnish the chief obstacle to the separation of light from darkness. Adam is represented
as striving to escape from the allurements of Eve, but Eve is aided by demonic craft in
overcoming him. Yet Adam does not become enslaved to lust, and so at last is saved.
Eve, lustful from the beginning, is lost along with those of like disposition.

(4.) Soteriology. Such was, apparently, Mani's conception of the creation of man, and
of the attempts to liberate the light that was in him. What were his practical teachings to
men of his time as to the means of escape from the Kingdom of Darkness into the Kingdom
of Light ? What view did Mani take of the historical Jesus ? The Jesus who warned Adam
against the seductions of Eve was evidently not the Jesus of the New Testament. Accord-
ing to the narrative of the Fihrist, Mani "maintained that Tesus is a devil." Such a state-
ment occurs nowhere else, so far as we are aware, in the literature of Manichaeism.
The sources, however, are unanimous in ascribing to Mani a completely docetical view of
the person of Christ. In using this blasphemous language, he probably referred to the re-
presentations of Jesus as God manifest in the flesh, which he regarded as Jewish and
abominable. The New Testament narratives Mani [or at least his followers] regarded as
interpolated in the interest of Judaism. Later Manichaeans, under the influence of Mar-
cionism (and orthodoxy) gave to Jesus a far more prominent place in the economy of man's
salvation than did mani himself.

How then is man to be saved according to Mani ? It is by rigorous asceticism, and by
the practice of certain ceremonial observances. Mani does not rise above the plane of
ordinary heathenism in his plan of salvation. "It is incumbent upon him who will enter into
the religion that he prove himself, and that if he sees that he is able to subdue lust and
avarice, to leave off the eating of all kinds of flesh, the drinking of wine, and connubial in-
tercourse, and to withhold himself from what is injurious in water, fire, magic and hypocrisy,
he may enter into the religion; but if not let him abstain from entering. But if he loves
religion, yet is not able to repress sensuality and avarice, yet he may make himself service-
able for the maintenance of religion and of the Truthful \i.e. the ' Elect'], and may meet
(ofl^set) his corrupt deeds through the use of opportunities where he wholly gives himself up
to activity, righteousness, zealous watchfulness, prayer and pious humiliation; for this suf-

1 6 THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

fices him in this transitory world and in the future eternal world, and his form in the last
day will be the second form, of which," God wiUing, we shall treat further below.-"

The doctrine of indulgences of which the germs appeared in the Catholic church even
before the time of Mani, is here seen fully developed. What the Greek and Latin sources
call the Elect or Perfect and the Hearers, are undoubtedly indicated here by those who are
able to devote themselves to rigidly ascetical living, and those who, without such qualifica-
tions, are willing to exert themselves fully on behalf of the cause. These latter evidently
become partakers of the merits of those who carry out the ascetical regulations. That this
is primitive Manichaean doctrine is abundantly proved by the general agreement of ancient
writers of all classes. It is noteworthy that nothing Christian appears among the conditions
of Manichaean discipleship. It is not faith in Christ, but the ability to follow a particular
kind of outward life that confers standing in the Manichsean society.

(5.) Ciiltus. Let us next look at the precepts of Mani to the initiated: " Mani imposed
upon his disciples commandments, namely, ten commandments, and to these are attached
three seals, and fasts of seven days in each month. The commandments are: Faith in the
four most glorious essences: God, his Light, his Power, and his Wisdom. But God, whose
name is glorious, is the King of the Paradise of Light; his Light is the sun and the moon,
his Power the five angels: Gentle Breeze, Wind, Light, Water and Fire; and his Wisdom
the Sacred Religion. This embraces five ideas: that of teachers, the sons of Meekness;
that of those enlightened by the Sun, sons of Knowledge; that of the presbyters, sons of
Reason; that of the Truthful, sons of Mystery; that of Hearers, sons of Insight. The ten
commandments are: Abandoning of prayer to idols, of lies, avarice, murder, adultery, theft,
of the teaching of jugglery and magic, of duplicity of mind, which betrays doubt on religion,
of drowsiness and inertness in business; and the commandment of four or seven prayers. In
prayer one is to stand upright, rub himself with flowing water or with something else, and
turn while standing to the great light (the Sun), then prostrate himself and in this position
pray: Blessed be our Leader, the Paraclete, the Ambassador of the Light, blessed be his
angels, the Guardians, and highly praised be his resplendent hosts. ... In the
second prostration let him say: Thou highly praised, O thou enlightening one, Mani, our
Leader, thou root of enlightenment, stem of honorableness, thou great tree who art
altogether the means of salvation. In the third prostration let him say: I fall down and
praise with pure heart and upright tongue the great God, the Father of Light, and their ele-
ment, highly praised. Blessed One, thou and thy whole glory and thy blessed world, which
thou hast called into being. For he praises thee who praises thy Host, thy Righteous Ones,
thy Word, thy Glory, and thy Good Pleasure, because thou art the God who is wholly truth,
life and righteousness. In the fourth prostration let him say: I praise and fall down before
all the gods, all the enlightening angels, before all Light and all Hosts, who are from the
great God. In the fifth prostration let him say: I fall down and praise the great Host and
the enlightening Gods, who with their wisdom assail the Darkness, drive it out and triumph
over it. In the sixth prostration let him say: I fall down and praise the Father of Glory,
the Exalted One, the Enlightening One, who has come forth from the two sciences (see note
in Flugel p. 310), and so on to the twelfth prostration. * * The first prayer is accom-
plished at mid-day, the second between this hour and sunset; then follows the prayer at even-
tide, after sunset, and hereupon the prayer in the first quarter of the night, three hours after
sunset.

"As regards fasting, when the sun is in Sagittarius, and the moon has its full light,
fasting is to take place for two days without interruption, also when the new moon begins
to appear; likewise when the moon first becomes visible again after the sun has entered into
the sign of Capricorn; then when the new moon begins to appear, the sun stands in Aquarius

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. I 7

and from the moon eight days have flowed, a fast of thirty days occurs, broken, however,
daily at sunset. The common Manichaeans celebrate Sunday, the consecrated ones (the
'Elect') Monday."

Here we have a somewhat detailed account of the cultus of the early Manichaeans. The
forms of invocation do not differ materially from those of the Zoroastrians, of the early
Indians, of the Babylonians, and of the Egyptians. There is not the slightest evidence of
Christian influence. The times of worship and of fasting are determined by the sun and the
moon, and practically these are the principal objects of worship. Ipis certain that Mani
himself was regarded by his followers as the most perfect revealef of God that had ever
appeared among men, and, according to this account, he taught his followers to worship
him. We cannot fail to see in this Manichaean cult the old Oriental pantheism modified
by a dualism, of which the most fully developed form was the Persian, but which, as we have
seen, was by no means confined to Zoroastrianism.

(6.) Eschatology. We must conclude our exposition of the doctrines of the Manichaeans
by quoting from the Fihrist Mani's teachings on eschatology.

"When death approaches a Truthful One ('Elect'), teaches Mani, Primordial Man
sends a Light-God in the form of a guiding Wise One, and with him three gods, and along
with these the water-vessel, clothing, head-gear, crown, and garland of light. With them
comes the maiden, like the soul of this Truthful One. There appears to him also the devil
of avarice and lust, along with other devils. As soon as the Truthful Man sees these he
calls the goddess who has assumed the form of the Wise One and the three other gods to
his help, and they draw near him. As soon as the devils are aware of their presence they
turn and flee. The former, however, take this Truthful One, clothe him with the crown,
the garland and the robe, put the water-vessel in his hand and mount with him upon the
pillars of promise to the sphere of the moon, to Primordial Man, and to Nahnaha, the Mother
of the Living, to the position in which he was at first in the Paradise of Light. But his
body remains lying as before in order that the sun, the moon, and the gods of Light may
withdraw from it the powers, i.e., the water, the fire and the gentle breeze, and he rises to the
sun and becomes a god. But the rest of his body, which is wholly darkness, is cast into
hell."

In the case of Manichaeans of the lower order, described above, the same divine
personages appear at his summons. " They free him also from devils, but he ceases not
to be like a man in the world, who in his dreams sees frightful forms and sinks into filth and
mire. In this condition he remains, until his light and his spirit are liberated and he has
attained to the place of union with the Truthful, and after a long period of wandering to
and fro puts on their garments."

To the sinful man, on the other hand, the divine personages appear, not to free him
from the devils that are tormenting him, but rather to " overwhelm him with reproaches, to
remind him of his deeds, and strikingly to convince him that he has renounced help for
himself, from the side of the Truthful. Then wanders he round about in the world, unceas-
ingly chased by torments, until this order of things ceases, and along with the world he is
cast into hell."

There is nothing original about the eschatology of Mani, and scarcely anything
Christian. We see in it a fully developed doctrine of purgatory, somewhat like the Platonic,
and still more like that of the later Catholic church. Salvation consists simply in the
liberation of the light from the darkness. In the case of the Elect this takes place im-
mediately after death; in the case of adherents who have not practiced the prescribed forms
of asceticism, it takes place only after considerable torment. In the case of the ordinary
sensual man, there is no deliverance. Doubtless Mani would have held that in his case, too,

l8 THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

whatever particles of light may have been involved in his animal structure are liberated from
the dead body.

(7.) Ethics. As regards ceremonies we find little that enlightens us in the Fihrist's
account. Water (that is, water apart from the deleterious elements that have become
blended with it} was regarded by Mani as one of the divine elements. The ablutions in
running water mentioned above in connection with the prayers may have sustained some rela-
tion to baptism, but can hardly be ascribed to Christian influence. The connection of the
Manichaeans with the Mandasans, who made much of ceremonial bathing, will be considered
below. It is certain that Mani's father was connected with a baptizing party, viz., the
Mugtasilah. According to the Fihrist Mani was the author of an Epistle on Baptism.
The question whether Mani and his followers practised water-baptism or not is by no means
an easy one to solve. The passage cited by Giesseler from Augustin to prove that the
" Elect" were initiated by baptism is inconclusive. Augustin acknowledges that God and
the Manichasans themselves alone know what takes place in the secret meetings of the
"Elect." Whatever ceremonies they performed, whether baptism or the Lord^s supper,
or some other, were matters of profound secrecy, and so we need not wonder at the lack
of definite information. From a passage quoted by Augustin in his report of a discussion
with Felix the Manichsean, we should certainly infer that both ordinances were practised in
some form by the Manichseans of the West. But Augustin himself says that Manichgeans
deny the saving efficacy of baptism, maintain that it is superfluous, do not require it of those
whom they win to their views, etc. It is certain, therefore, that if they practised baptism
and the Lord's supper at all, they attached to it a meaning radically different from that of
Augustin. It is possible that a ceremonial anointing with oil took the place of baptism.
(Baur, p. 277 sq.). Augustin mentions a disgusting ceremony in which human semen
was partaken of by the Elect in order to deliver the imprisoned light contained therein
{^De Haeres. 46), and he calls this ceremony a sort of Eucharist. But his confessed
ignorance of the doings of the " Elect " discredits in some measure this accusation.

The Filu'ist givQS us no definite information about the three signacula. The seals (not
signs) of the mouth, the hand (or hands), and of the bosom. In these are contained
symbolically the Manichsean moral system. In tlie book Sadder (Hyde, p. 492) we read:
" It is taught [by the Manichseans] to abstain from every sin, to eliminate every sin from
hand, and tongue and thought." Augustin explains the signacula more fully and re-
presents the Manichaeans as attaching great importance to them: "When I name the mouth,
I mean all the senses that are in the head; when I name the hand I mean every operation;
when I name the bosom I mean every seminal lust."

It is confidently believed that the foregoing account of the Manichaean system, based
upon the Arabic narratives preserved by the Fihrist, supplemented by the principal Eastern
and Western sources, contains the essential facts with reference to this strange system of
religious thought. Our next task will to be to ascertain, as j)recisely as possible, the re-
lations that Manichaeism sustained to the various religious systems with which it has com-
monly been associated.

CHAPTER IV.— RELATION OF MANICH^ISM TO ZOROASTRIANISM.

The very close connection of these two systems has commonly been presupposed, and
is undeniable. In fact Manichaeism has frequently been represented as Zoroastrian dualism,
slightly modified by contact with Christianity and other systems. No one could possibly
gain even a superficial view of the two systems without being strongly impressed with their
points of resemblance. A closer examination, however, will reveal points of antagonism
just as striking, and will enable us to account for the fact that Mani was put to death by a

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 19

zealous Zoroastrian ruler on account of his recognized hostility to the state religion. The
leading features of the Manichaean system are already before us. Instead of quoting at
length from the Zend-Avesta, which is now happily accessible in an excellent English transla-
tion, we may for the sake of brevity quote Tide's description of Zoroastrian dualism as
a basis of comparison:'

" Parsism is decidedly duanstic, not in the sense of accepting two hostile deities, for it
recognizes no worship of evil beings, and teaches the adoration only of Ahura Mazda and
the spirits subject to him; but in the sense of placing in hostility to each other two sharply
divided kingdoms, that of light, of truth, and of purity, and that of darkness, of falsehood,
and of impurity. This division is carried through the whole creation, organic and inor-
ganic, material and spiritual. Above, in the highest sphere, is the domain of the undis-
puted sovereignty of the All-wise God; beneath, in the lowest abyss, the kingdom of his
mighty adversary; midway between the two lies this world, the theatre of the contest. .
. . This dualism further dominates the cosmogony, the cultus, and the entire view of the
moral order of the world held by the Mazda worshippers. Not only does Anro-Mainyus
(Ahriman) spoil by his counter-creations all the good creations of Ahura-Mazda (Ormuzd),
but by slaying the protoplasts of man and beast, he brings death into the world, seduces the
first pair to sin, and also brings forth noxious animals and plants. Man finds himself, in
consequence, surrounded on all sides by the works of the spirits of darkness and by his
hosts. It is the object of worship to secure the pious against their influence."

Let us bring in review some of the points of resemblance between the two systems.
Both are in a sense dualistic. In both the kingdoms of Light and Darkness are set over
against each other in the sharpest antagonism. In both we have similar emanations from
these kingdoms (or kings). Yet, while in the Manichaean system the dualism is absolute
and eternal, in the later Zoroastrian system (as in the Jewish and Christian doctrine of
Satan), Ahriman (Satan) if not merely a fallen creature'' of Ormuzd (the good and supreme
God) was at least an immeasurably inferior being. The supreme control of the universe, to
which it owes its perfect order, was ascribed by Zoroastrianism to Ormuzd. The struggle
between good and evil, beneficent and malevolent, was due to the opposition of the mighty,
luit not almighty, Ahriman. Whatever form of Mazdeism (Zoroastrianism) we take for
purposes of comparison, we are safe in saying that the Manichaean dualism was by far the
more absolute.

In both systems each side of the dualism is represented by a series (or rather several
^tx\t%) oi per sotiified principles. These agree in the two systems in some particulars. Yet
the variations are quite as noticeable as the agreements. There is much in common between
the Manichaean and the Zoroastrian delineations of the fearful conflict between the Kingdom
of Light and the Kingdom of Darkness, yet the beginning of the conflict is quite differently
conceived of in the two systems. In Manichaeism the creation is accounted for by the
conflict in which Primordial Man was beaten by the powers of Darkness and suffered the
mixing of his elements with the elements of darkness. The actual world was made by the
good God, or rather by his subordinates, as a means of liberating the imprisoned light.

' Outlines p/ the If isi. 0/ Religion (xZjj), p. \Ti. Cf. J. Dkrkstkt^ji., Introduciion to the Zend-Avesta, p. xliii., xliv., Ivi., Ixxii.,
Ixxiv. sq . ; and his article in the Contejiiporary Reviexu (Oct. 1879), on " The Supreme God in the Indo-European Mythology."

2 This is confidently asserted by Kessler (Art. Mani in Herzog's RE. 2d ed.vol. IX. p. 258), and after him by Harnack, Encyclope-
dia Hritannica. art. Manichseism. On the other hand, Lenormant {^Anc. Hist. II. p. 30), says : "Ahriman had been eternal in the
past, he had no beKinning, and proceeded from no former being * * * ^ This being who had no beginning would come to an
end. * * * Pyjl then should be finally conquered and destroyed, the creation should become as pure as on its first day, and

Ahriman should disappear forever."' Such, doubtless, was the original doctrme, but the form probably in vogue in the time of Mani
was more pantheistic or monotheistic, both Ormuzd and Ahriman pnjceedinp from boundless time (Z.rvan aharanii). See on this
matter, Darmstetek : Introd. to the Zend-Avesta., p. Ixxii, etc., and his art. in Contcmp. Kcvieiu; and Lenormant : Anc, Hist, as
above.

20 THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

The creation of man is ascribed, on the other hand, to the King of Darkness (or his sub-
ordinates), with a view to hindering the escape of the mingled light by diffusion thereof
through propagation. Mazdeism derives the creation solely from Ormuzd, from whose
hand it issued "as pure and perfect as himself" (Lenormant, Anc. Hist. II. p. 30). It
was the work of Ahriman to " spoil it by his evil influence." The appellation " Maker of
the material world" is constantly applied to Ormuzd in the Vendiddd and other sacred
books. The most instructive Mazdean account of the creation that has come down to us is
that contained in the Vendiddd, Fargard I. Ahura Mazda (Ormuzd) is represented here as
naming one by one the sixteen good lands that he had created, Angra Mainyu (Ahriman)
is represented as coming to each, one by one, and creating in it noxious things. Examples
of these counter-creations are, the serpents, winter, venomous flies, sinful lusts, musquitos,
pride, unnatural sin, burying the dead, witchcraft, the sin of unbeHef, the burning of corpses,
abnormal issues in women, oppression of foreign rulers, excessive heat, etc. This jumble
of physical evils and sins is characteristic of Mazdeism,

According to Mani matter is inherently evil, and it only ceases to be absolutely evil by
the mixture with it of the elements of the Kingdom of Light. Creation is a process forced
upon the King of Light by the ravages of the King of Darkness, and is at best only par-
tially good. Zoroastrianism looked upon earth, fire, water, as sacred elements, to defile
which was sin of the most heinous kind. Manichaeism regarded actual fire and water as
made up of a mixture of elements of light and darkness, and so, as by no means wholly
pure. Manichaeans regarded earth, so far as it consisted of dead matter, with the utmost
contempt. The life-giving light in it was alone thought of with respect. Zoroastrianism
somewhat arbitrarily divided animals and plants between the kingdoms of Ormuzd and
Ahriman; "but the idea that all material things, so far as they are material, are evil, seems
never to have occurred to the early Mazdeists. Manichaeans agreed with Mazdeists in their
veneration for the sun, but the principles underlying this veneration seem to have been
widely different in the two cases. The most radical opposition of the two systems is seen
in their views of human propagation. Mani regarded the procreation of children as minis-
tering directly to the designs of the King of Darkness to imprison the light, and so abso-
lutely condemned it. The Zend-Avesta says: [Ve?ididdd, Fargard IV.): " Verily I say unto
thee, O Spitama Zarathustra; the man who has a wife is far above him who begets no sons;
he who keeps a house is far above him who has none; he who has children is far above a
childless man." Mani made great merit of voluntary poverty. The Zend-Avesta {ibid.)
says: " He who has riches is far above him who has none." Mani forbade the use of ani-
mal food as preventing the escape of the light contained in the bodies of animals. The
Zend-Avesta [ibid.): " And of two men, he who fills himself with meat is filled with the good
spirit much more than he who does not do so; the latter is all but dead; the former is above
him by the worth of an Asperena, by the worth of a sheep, by the worth of an ox, by the
worth of a man." '

The eschatology of the two systems might be shown to present just as striking con-
trasts, and just as marked resemblances. In both systems the consummation of the age
is effected by means of a conflagration, the aim of the conflagration in Mazdeism being the
punishm^ent and the purging of wicked men, the destruction of wicked spirits, the renova-
tion of the earth, and the inauguration of the sole sovereignty of Ormuzd, while in Mani-
chaeism the aim of the conflagration is to liberate the portions of light which the processes
of animal and vegetable growth, with the aid of sun and the moon have proved unable to
liberate.

I That meat is used in the sense of flesh may be inferred from Darmsteter's comment on this passage, which he suggests may be
a bit of religious polemics against Manichaeism. See his Introd. to the Zend-A vesta, p. xl. sq.

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 21

But enough has been said to make it evident that Manichaeism was by no means a
slightly altered edition of Zoroastrianism. The points of similarity between the two are
certainly more apparent than real, though the historical relationship can by no means be
denied.

CHAPTER v.— THE RELATION OF MANICH^ISM TO THE OLD BABYLONIAN RELIGION

AS SEEN IN MAND^ISM AND SABEANISM.

It would have been strange indeed if the old Babylonian religion, after dominating the
minds of the inhabitants of Mesopotamia for so many centuries, had given place completely
to the religion of the Medo-Persian conquerors of the country. Magism itself was a mix-
ture of old Babylonian, Medic and Persian elements. But there is mucli reason for believing
that the primitive Babylonian faith, in a more or less pure form, persisted until long after
the time of Mani, nay, that it has maintained its ground even till the present day. The
researches of Chwolson, Noldeke, Kessler and others, in the literature and history of the
]Mandaeans and the Sabeans, combined in the last case at least with accurate knowledge of
old Babylonian literature and religion, have rendered it highly probable that representatives
of the old Babylonian faith were numerous in Mesopotomia and the adjoining regions at
•the time of Mani, and that Mani himself was more or less closely connected with it. The
Mandaeans were a Gnostic sect of the Ophitic type, without Christian elements. It is the
opinion of Kessler, who has devoted much attention to this sect and to the relations of occult
religious matters in general in Mesopotomia, that "the source of all Gnosis, and especially
the immediate source of Ophitic Gnosis, is not the doctrine of the Persian Zoroaster, not
Phoenicean heathenism, not the theory and practise of Greek mysteries, but the old Baby-
lonian-Chaldaic national religion, which maintained itself in Mesopotomia and Babylonia,
the abode of the Ophites, Berates, Mandseans, until the post-Christian centuries, and was
now opposed by the Gentiles in a mystical-ascetical form to Christianity." The close con-
nection of the Mand^ans with the Ophites, and of both with the old Babylonian religion,
would seem to be established beyond question. The relation of Manichaeism to Mandaeism
has been by no means so clearly shown. Let us look at some of the supposed points of
contact. Mani's connection with the Mugtasilah sect (or Baptizers) has already been men-
tioned. Kessler seeks to identify this party with the Mandaeans, or at least to establish a
community of origin and of fundamental principles in the two parties. He would connect
with the old Babylonian sect, of which ceremonial baptism seems to have been a common
characteristic, the Palestinian Hemero-baptists, Elkesaites, Nazareans, Ebionites, etc.
There is nothing improbable about this supposition. Certainly we find elements in Pales-
tinian heresy during the early Christian centuries, which we can hardly suppose to have
been indigenous. And there is no more likely source of occult religious influence than
Babylonia, unless it be Egypt, and there is much reason for supposing that even in Alex-
andria Babylonian influences were active before and after the beginning of the Christian
, era. Besides, a large number of Gnostic elements different from these can be traced to
I Egypt. How far the Mandaeans of modern times, and as they are described in extant
i literature, correspond with representatives of the old Babylonian religion in the third cen-
tury, cannot be determined with complete certainty. Yet there is much about this party
j that has a primitive appearance, and the tenacity with which it has held aloof from Judaism,
; Manichaeism, Mohammedanism, and Oriental Christianity, during centuries of conflict and
: oppression, says much for its conservatism. It would extend this chapter unduly to
I describe the elaborate cosmogony, mythology, hierarchy, ceremonial, etc., of this interesting
party. For the illustration of Christian Gnosticism the facts that have been brought out
are of the utmost value. As compared with Manichaeism, there is a remarkable parallelism

2 2 THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

between the two kingdoms and their subordinates or aeons; the conflict between Primordial
Man and the King of Darkness has its counterpart in Mandaeism. The close connection of
the Mandajan and the Manichsean cosmogony, together with similar views about water in the
two parties, would make it highly probable that the Manich^eans, like the Mandaeans, prac-
tised some kind of ceremonial ablutions.

What now, are the frrounds on which the connection of these systems with the old
Babylonian religion is based ? The dualistic element in the old Babylonian system was
pointed out above. Kessler seeks to establish an almost complete parallelism between the
Mandsean and Manichaean cosmological and mythological systems on the one hand, and the
old Babylonian on the other. That there are points of striking resemblance it is certain.
There is ground to suspect, however, that he has been led by partiality for a theory of his
own to minimize unduly the Zoroastrian and Buddhist influence and to magnify unduly the
old Babylonian. Be that as it may, there remains an important residuum of solid fact
which must be taken account of by all future students of Manichaeism. There is reason to
hope that future work along the lines of Kessler's researches will bring to light much addi-
tional material.

CHAPTER VI.— THE RELATION OF MANICH/EISM TO BUDDHISM. •

The extent of Mani's dependence on Buddhism is a matter that has been much disputed.
The attention of scholars was first directed to this possible source of Manichaeism by the
discovery of important features that are radically opposed to Zoroastrianism, Judaism and
Christianity, and by the traditional historical connection of Mani with India and Turkestan.
The antagonism of spirit and matter, of light and darkness, the mixture of spirit and light
with matter and darkness in the formation of the world, the final catastrophe in which
complete simplicity shall be re-established, only inert matter and darkness remaining to
represent the Kingdom of Darkness, abstinence from bloody sacrifices, from marriage,
from killing or eating animals — points in which Manichaeism differs widely from the other
systems with which it stands historically related — find their counterpart in Buddhism. It
is certain, moreover, that they were fully developed in Buddhism centuries before the time
of Mani. Baur,' though not the first to suggest a connection of the two systems, was the
first to show by a somewhat detailed comparison the close parallelism that exists between
Manichaeism and Buddhism. Baur's reasonings were still further elaborated and confirmed
by Neander.= External grounds in favor of Mani's dependence on Buddhism are the tradi-
tions of Mani's journey to India and China, and of his prolonged stay in Turkestan, where
Buddhism flourished at that time. But it is on internal grounds that we chiefly rely.

If space permitted we could illustrate the close parallelism that undoubtedly exists
between Manichaeism and Buddhism, from Buddhist documents which have been made ac-
cessible through Professor Max Miiller and his collaborators in The Sacred Book of the
East, far more completely than was possible to Baur and Neander. It is certain that
parallels can be found in Buddhism for almost every feature of Manichaeism that is sharply
antagonistic to Zoroastrianism. The Buddhist view of matter as antagonistic to spirit is
fundamental. It is the world of matter that deludes. It is the body and its passions that
prevent the longed-for Nirvana. Buddhist asceticism is the direct outgrowth of the
doctrine of the evil and delusive nature of matter. The Buddhist doctrine of metempsy-
chosis has its precise counterpart in Manichaeism, but it should be said that this doctrine was
widely dift'used in the West, through Pythagoreanism, before the time of Mani. The
Buddhist tenderness for animal and plant life is paralleled by the Manichfean. But there is

I Das Manichdische Religionssysteiii, p. 433 sq. - Church Hist , vol. I.

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 23

considerable difference between the views on which this tenderness is based. The Buddhist
feehng was based, in part at least, upon the doctrine of metempsychosis, animals and plants
being regarded as the abodes of human spirits awaiting their release into Nirvana. The
Manichajan looked upon the elements of light (life) contained in animals and plants as
particles of God, and any injury done to them as a hindrance to the escape of these
elements, to be conveyed away into the Kingdom of Light. Both looked upon sexual inter-
course as among the greatest of evils, though the theory in the two cases was slightly differ-
ent. So of the drinking of wine, the eating of animal food, etc. The final state was
conceived of in substantially the same way in the two systems. Nirvana, the blowing out
of man's life as an individual entity, is quite paralleled by the Manichaean view of the
gradual escape of the imprisoned particles of light into the Kingdom of Light. In both
cases the divine plerovia is to be restored in such a way as to destroy individual conscious-
ness.

The Buddhist BhikkJius (or ascetical monks) correspond very closely with the Mani-
chasan Truthful Ones (Elect), and the relations of these to ordinary adherents of the parties
was much the same in the two cases. Both systems (like Christianity) had the proselyting
spirit fully developed. The position of Mani as a preacher or prophet corresponds with
the Buddhist idea of the manifestations of Buddha. The statement is attributed to Mani
that " as Buddha came in the land of India, Zoroaster in the land of Persia, and Jesus in
the land of the West, so at last in the epoch of the present this preaching came through me
[Mani] in the land of Babylonia." In the interest of his theory, which makes the old
Babylonian religion the chief source of Manichseism, Kessler has attempted to detract from
the significance of the Buddhist influence. Yet he grants that the morality of the Mani-
chaeans (including many of the features mentioned above) was Buddhist. The close con-
nection of the two systems cannot, it would seem, be successfully gainsaid.'

CHAPTER VII.— THE RELATION OF MANICH^ISM TO JUDAISM.

So far as a relation existed it was one of the intensest hostility. Like the Gnostics in
general, Manichaeism Jooked upon the God of the Old Testament as an evil, or at least im-
perfect being. On this matter we do not learn so much from the Oriental as from the
Western sources, bi:t even from the former the radical antagonism is manifest.

The statement in the Fihrisfs narrative, that " Mani treated all the prophets disparag-
ingly in his books, degraded them, accused them of lying, and maintained that devils had
possessed them and that these spoke out of their mouths; nay, he goes so far as expressly
to assert in some passages of his books that the prophets were themselves devils," is pre-
cisely in the line of the later Manichaean polemics against the Judaistic element in Chris-
tianity.

The Manichaean account of the creation shows some acquaintance with the Jewish
Scriptures or with Jewish tradition, yet the complete perversion of the Biblical account is

I Cunningham, St. Austin and his Place in the History of Christian Thought (1886), has these remarks on the relation of
Mani to Buddhism : "Mani was indeed a religious reformer: deeply impregnated with the belief and practice which Buddhist
monks were spreading in the East, he tried with some success to reform the religion of Zoroaster in Persia [/. c. the Persian Empire],
his native land, \\hile his fundamental doctrine, the root of his system, was of Persian origin, and he figured the universe to himself
as if it were given over to the unending conflict between the Powers of Light and Darkness, in regard to discipline his system very closely
resembles that founded by Buddha ; the elect of the Manichaeans correspond to the Buddhist monks ; the precepts about abstinence
from meat and things of sense are, if not borrowed from the rules Gotama gave for the conduct of his followers, the outcome of the
same principles about the nature of man." Harnack, art. Manich;eism in Ency. Britannica,lo\\avisV.css\cr in attaching slight
importance to the Buddhist influence on Manichasism, preferring, with him, to derive nearly all of the features ascribed by Baur, Ncan-
der and others to Buddhist influence, to the old Babylonian religion, the precise character of which, in the time of Mani, is imper-
fectly understood. Harnack's {and Kessler's) statements must therefore be taken with .some allowance. There is no objection, how-
ever, to supposing that Mani derived from the old Babylonian party or parties with which he came in contact religious principles which
were wrought out in detail under the influence of Buddhism. This is in fact what probably occurred.

24 THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

one of the clearest indications of hostility. It may be said in general that it is impossible
to conceive of two systems of religion that have less in common, or more that is sharply
antagonistic. One of the principal points of controversy between Manichseans and Chris-
tians was the defense of the Jewish Scriptures and religion by the latter. The Manichaeans
demanded the elimination from the current Christianity, and from the New Testament
itself, of every vestige of Judaism. Their objections to the Old Testament Scriptures and
religion were in general substantially the same as those made by other Gnostics, especially
by the Marcionites. The Old Testament anthropomorphic representations seem to have
been offensive to them, notwithstanding their own crude conceptions of the conflict between
light and darkness, of the creation, etc. The relation of God to the conquest of Canaan is a
point that those inclined to cavil have never failed to make the most of. The Old Testa-
ment encouragement of race propagation, the narratives of polygamy as practised by those
that enjoyed the favor of the God of the Old Testament, the seeming approval of prevarica-
tion in several well-known cases, the institution of animal sacrifices, the allowing of the use
of animal food, were among the standard objections that they raised against Judaism and
against Christians who accepted the Old Testament. Judaism had, since the captivity, had
many representatives in Mesopotamia, and Mani was doubtless brought up to abominate the
Jews. Some of his extreme positions may have been primarily due to his radical anti-
Judaistic tendencies. We shall see hereafter how Augustin met the Manichaean objections
to the Old Testament.

CHAPTER VIIL— THE RELATION OF MANICH^ISM TO CHRISTIANITY.

Far more superficial are the relations of Manichaeism to Christianity than to any of the
heathen systems to which we have adverted. In fact no Christian idea has been introduced
into the system without being completely perverted. If Christian language is used, it is
utterly emptied of its meaning. If Christian practices are introduced, a completely differ-
ent motive lies at the basis. Indeed the wildest of the Christian Gnostic systems kept
immeasurably nearer to historical Christianity than did the Manichaeans. While he blas-
phemed against the historical Jesus, Mani claimed to believe in Christ, a purely spiritual and
divine manifestation, whose teachings had been sadly perverted by the Jews. It is scarcely
possible to determine with any certainty what view Mani actually took of New Testament
history. That he claimed to be a follower of Christ, and the Paraciete whom Christ had
promised to send, or at least the organ of the Paraclete, Eastern and Western authorities
agree. Mani is said, by Augustin, to have begun his Fundamental Epistle as follows:
" Manichaeus, an Apostle of Jesus Christ, by the providence of God the Father. These are
wholesome words from the perennial and living fountain." So also in \h& Act. Archel., Mani
is represented as introducing a letter: " Manichaeus, an Apostle of Jesus Christ, and all the
saints who are with me, and the virgins, to Marcellus, my beloved son: Grace, mercy, and
peace be with you from God the Father, and from our Ford Jesus Christ." There can be
no doubt but that Mani and his followers, whether from designed imposture or from less
sinister motives, attempted to palm themselves off as Christians, nay, as the only true
Christians. It is certain, moreover, that in this guise they gained many proselytes from
the Christian ranks. As previously remarked, Mani and his followers professed to accept
the New Testament Scriptures, yet they treated them in a purely subjective manner,
eliminating as Judaistic interpolation whatever they could not reconcile with their own
tenets. Their adherence to the New Testament, as well as their adherence to Christ, was,
therefore, virtually a mere pretence. In common with Christianity, Manichccism laid much
stress on redemption, yet there was nothing in common between the Christian idea of
redemption through the atoning suffering of Jesus Christ and the Manichcean notion of

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 25

redemption through the escape of imprisoned light. Manichaeans and Christians were at
one in advocating self-denial and the due subordination of the flesh. It need not be pointed
out how radically different the Christian view was from the Manichgean view, already ex-
pounded. Yet pagan ascetical ideas had already invaded the Church long before the time of
Mani, and many Christians were in a position to be attracted strongly by the Manichaean
theory and practice. The later asceticism as it appeared in the hermit life of the fourth and
following centuries was essentially pagan and had much in common with the Manichaean.
Still more manifest is the anatagonism between Manichaeism and Christianity on the great
fundamental principles of religion. The Manichsean and Christian ideas of God are mutually
contradictory. Christianity holds fast at the same time to the unity, the omnipotence, the
omniscience, the perfect wisdom, the holiness and the goodness of God. If He permits
sin to exist in the world it is not because He looks upon it with complacency, nor because
He lacked wisdom to provide against its rise or power to annihilate it at once when it
appeared, nor because He did not foresee its rise and its ravages, but because the permis-
sion of sin forms part of His all-wise plan for the education of moral and spiritual beings. If
the forces of nature are under certain circumstances hurtful or destructive to man, Chris-
tianity does not regard them as the operations of a malevolent power thwarting God's
purposes, but it sees underneath the destructive violence purposes of goodness and of
grace; or if it fails to see them in any given instance it yet believes that God doeth all things
well. Christianity admits the existence of evil in men and in demons, yet of evil that
ministers to the purposes of the Most High. Christianity is the only religion that has been
able to arrive at a perfectly satisfactory theology, cosmology, anthropology, and eschatology,
and this is because Christianity alone has a true and satisfying soteriology. It is God
manifest in the flesh that meets all the conditions for the solution of the problem of human
existence. Manichaeism openly antagonized Christianity in its adherence to Old Testament
revelation, including the Jewish and Christian monotheism. The good God could not, they
maintained, be the creator of this world and of the universe of being. That God should be
looked upon as in any sense the creator of the devil and his angels, and of the material
world, was in their view an absurdity — a monstrosity. The unchristian character of the
Manichaean view of matter, leading to unchristian asceticism, has already been sufficiently
indicated. The reader will only need to compare the principles and practices of Mani-
chaeism, as delineated above, with those of Christianity as they are delineated in the New
Testament and in the evangelical churches of to-day, to be impressed with the completely
anti- Christian character of the former.

How then, it may well be asked, could Manichseism succeed as it did in fascinating so
many intelligent members of the Catholic Church during the third, fourth and fifth cen-
turies ? In attempting to answer this question it should be premised that the later Western
Manichaeism took far more account of historical Christianity than did Mani and his im-
mediate followers. In the West, at least, Manichaeism set itself up as the only genuine
exponent of Christianity. The Jewish-Alexandrian philosophy, and Gnosticism its product,
had done much towards discrediting the Old Testament Scriptures, and the moral and
religious teachings therein contained. Devout Jewish and Christian thinkers who had adopted
this mode of thought, had attempted by means of the allegorical method of interpretation
to reconcile the seeming antagonism between Judaism and philosophy. But the process
was so forced that its results could not be expected to satisfy those that felt no special
interest in the removal of the difficulties. Marcionism represents a stern refusal to apply the
allegory, and a determination to exhibit the antagonism between Judaism and current
thought, and especially the seeming antagonism between Judaism and Christianity, in the
harshest manner. Marcionism was still vigorous in the East when Manichaeism arose, and

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

through this party unfavorable views of the Old Testament were widely disseminated. Many
Christians doubtless felt that the Old Testament and its religion were burdensome and
trammelling to Christianity. The very fact that Mani set aside so summarily every element
of Judaism that he encountered in the current Christianity, doubtless commended his views
to a laree and influential element in the East and the West alike. Mani claimed to set forth
a spiritual religion as o])posed to a carnal. The asceticism of Manichaeism was in the
line of a wide-spread popular ascetical movement that was already in progress, and so com-
mended it to many. The question as to the origin of evil, and as to the relation of the
good, wise and powerful God to the evil that appears in the world, in man and in demons,
was never asked with more interest than during the early Christian centuries, and any party
that should advance a moderately plausible theory was sure to receive its share of public at-
tention. Mani professed to have a solution and the only possible solution of questions of
this class, and however fantastic may have been the forms in which his speculations were set
forth, the)^ were doubtless all the more acceptable on this account in that semi-pagan age
to many intelligent people. The fact that these forms satisfied so able a thinker
as Mani undoubtedly was, would guarantee their acceptance by a large number both East
and West. There was in the West at this time, and had been for centuries, a hankering
after Oriental theosophy, the more extravagant the better. The wide-spread worship of
Mithra was an excellent preparation for the more complete system of Mani. Manichaeism
and Neo-Platonism antagonized the Christianity of the fourth and fifth centuries from opposite
sides, and those minds for whom Platonism had no charms were almost sure to be attracted
by the theosophy of Mani. " How are we to explain," asks Harnack,' " the rapid spread of
Manichaeism, and the fact that it really became one of the great religions ? Our answer is,
that Manichaeism was the most complete Gnosis, the richest, most consequent and most
artistic system formed on the basis of the ancient Babylonian religion. . , What gave
strength to Manichaeism was . . that it united its ancient mythology and a thorough-
going materialistic dualism with an exceedingly simple spiritual worship and a strict morality.
On comparing it with the Semitic religions of nature, we perceive that it retained their
mythologies, after transforming them into doctrines, but abolished all their sensuous cultus,
substituting instead a spiritual worship as well as a strict morality. Manichaeism was thus
able to satisfy the new wants of an old world. It offered revelation, redemption, moral
virtue, and immortality [this last is very doubtful, if conscious immortality be meant],
spiritual benefits on the basis of the religion of nature. A further source of strength lay
in the simple, yet firm social organization which was given by Mani himself to his new
institution. The wise man and the ignorant, the enthusiast and the man of the world,
could all find acceptance here, and there was laid on no one more than he was able and
willing to bear."

The question as to the secret of the fascination that Manichaeism was able to exercise
even over the most intelligent Western minds, may receive a more concrete answer from
the autobiographical account of Augustin's own relations to the party. What was it that
attracted and enthralled, for nine years, him who was to become the greatest theologian of
the age? In his Confessions (Book III. ch. 6) he gives this impassioned account of his first
connection with Manichaeism: "Therefore I fell among men proudly railing, very carnal
and voluble, in whose mouth were the snares of the devil — the bird lime being composed
of a mixture of the syllables of Thy Name, and of our Lord Jesus Christ, and of the Para-
clete, the Holy Ghost, the Comforter. These names departed not out of their mouths, but
so far forth as the sound and clatter of the tongue; for the heart was empty of truth. Still

I Eticyclopeedia Britannica^zxX.. Manichaeism.

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 2-1

they cried ' Truth, Truth,' and spoke much about it to me, yet it was not in them, but they
spake falsely not of Thee only — who, verily art the Truth — but also of the elements of this
world, Thy creatures . . . O Truth, Truth ! how inwardly even then did the marrow
of my soul pant after Thee, when they frequently and in a multiplicity of ways, and in
numerous and huge books, sounded out Thy Name to me, though it was but a voice. And
these were the dishes in which to me, hungering for Thee, they, instead of Thee, served
up the sun and the moon, Thy beauteous works — but yet Thy works, not Thyself, nay, nor
Thy first works . . . Woe, woe, by what steps was I dragged down to the depths of
hell! — toiling and turmoiling through want of Truth, when I sought after Thee, my God, —
to Thee I confess it, who hadst mercy on me when I had not yet confessed, sought after
Thee not according to the understanding of the mind in which Thou desiredst that I should
excel the beasts, but according to the sense of the flesh."

CHAPTER IX.— AUGUSTIN AND THE MANICH.EANS.

In the preceding Chapter we have given in Augustin's own words some account of the
process by which he became ensnared in Manichsean error. In reading Augustin's account
of his experience among the Manichjeans, we can not escape the conviction that he was never
wholly a Manichsean, that he never surrendered himself absolutely to the system. He held
it rather as a matter of opinion than as a matter of heart-attachment. Doubtless the fact
that he continued to occupy himself with rhetorical and philosophical studies prevented his
complete enthrallment. His mind was not naturally of an Oriental cast, and the study of
the hard, common-sense philosophy of Aristotle, and of the Eclecticism of Cicero, could
hardly have failed to make him more or less conscious of the absurdity of Manichaeism.
The influence of scientific studies on his mind is very manifest from Co?ifessions, Book V. ch.
3, where he compares the accurate astronomical knowledge with which he had become
acquainted, with the absurd cosmological fancies of Faustus, the great Manichgean teacher
who appeared at Carthage in Augustin's twenty-ninth year. " Many truths, however, con-
cerning the creation did I retain from these men [the philosophers], and the cause appeared
to confirm calculations, the succession of seasons, and the visible manifestations of the stars;
and I compared them with the sayings of Manichaeus, who in his frenzy has written most
extensively on these subjects, but discovered not any account either of the solstices, or the
equinoxes, the eclipses of the luminaries, or anything of the kind I had learned in the books
of secular philosophy. But therein I was ordered to believe, and yet it corresponded not
with those rules acknowledged by calculation and by our light, but was far different."

From this time Augustin's faith was shaken, and he was soon able to throw off com-
pletely the yoke that had become too grievous to be borne. But to reject Manichseism
was not necessarily to become an orthodox Christian. Augustin finds himself still greatly
perplexed about the nature of God and the origin of evil, problems the somewhat plausible
Manichgean solutions of which had ensnared him. It was through Platonism, or rather
Neo-Platonism, that he was led to more just and satisfying views, and through Platonism,
along with other influences, he was enabled at last to find peace in the bosom of the
Catholic church. "And Thou, willing to show me how Thou ' resistest the proud, but
givest grace unto the humble,' and by how great an act of mercy Thou hadst pointed out
to men the path of humility, in that ' Thy Word was made flesh and dwelt among men,' —
Thou procuredst for me, by the instrumentality of one inflated with monstrous pride, certain
books of the Platonists, translated from Greek into Latin. And therein I read, not indeed
in the same words but to the self-same effect, enforced by many and divers reasons, that
' In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the AVord was God. The
same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him; and without Him was

28 THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

not anything made that was made.' "' In other words, Augustin thought that he discerned
complete harmony between the prologue of John's gospel and the teachings of the Platonists,
and in this teaching, thus corroborated, he found the solution of the problem that had caused
him such anguish of soul. In this connection Augustin points out in some detail the fea-
tures that riatonism and Christianity have in common. Thus Neo-Platonism, not blindly
followed, but adapted to his Christian purpose, became not only a means of deliverance to
Augustin himself, but a mighty weapon for the combating of iManichsan error.

Neo-Platonism enters so largely and influentially into Augustin's polemics against Mani-
chceism that it will be apposite here to inquire into the extent and the nature of Augustin's
dependence on this system of thought. Much has been written on this subject, especially
by German and French scholars. A brief statement of some of the more important points
of contact is all that is allowable in an essay like this. Premising, therefore, that Platonism
essentially influenced the entire circle of Augustin's theological and philosophical thinking,
let us first examine the Neo-Platonic and Augustinian conceptions of God. With Augustin
God is absolutely simple and immutable, incomprehensible by men in their present state of
existence, exalted above all human powers of thought or expression. All things may be
said of God, and yet nothing worthily; God is honored more by reverential silence than by
any human voice. He is better known by not being known; it is easier to say what He is
not, than what He is. God is wanting in qualities; has no variety and multitude of pro-
perties and attributes; is absolutely simple. By no means is God to be called substance,
for the word substance pertains to a certain accident; nor is it allowable to think of Him
as composed of substance and of accidents. Divine qualities are therefore purely subjec-
tive. There is no discrimination in God of substance and accidents, of potency and act,
of matter and form, of universal and singular, of superior and inferior. To know, to will,
to do, to be, are in God equivalent and identical. Eternity itself is the substance of God,
which has nothing mutable, nothing past, nothing future. God makes new things, without
being Himself new, unchangeable He makes changeable things. He always works and
always rests. The changes that take place in the world do not fall in the will of God, but
solely in the things moved by God. God changes them out of His unchangeable counsel.
For nearly every one of these statements an almost exact parallel can be pointed out in the
writings of Plotinus, the Neo-Platonic writer with whom Augustin was most conversant.'' It
would be eas}' to point out that Augustin here goes to a dangerous extreme, and narrowly es-
capes fatalism on the one hand, and denial of the true personality of God on the other. But
the effectiveness of this type of teaching against Manichoeism is what chiefly interests us in this
connection. Readers of the following treatises will have no difficulty in seeing for themselves
how confidently and with what telling effect Augustin employs this view of God against the
crudities of Manichaeism, which thought of God as mutable, as capable of being successfully
assailed by evil, as rent asunder, as suffering miserable contamination and imprisonment by
mixture with matter, as painfully struggling for freedom, as suffering with the suffering of
plants and animals, as liberated by their decay and by the digestive operations of the
faithful, etc., etc.

Again, while still a Manichaean Augustin had thought and written much about beauty.
On this point also, the throwing off of Manichaeism and the adoption of a Platonizing Chris-
tianity brought about a revolution in his conceptions. The exactness with which he has
follo'wed Plotinus in hi's ideas of the beauty of God and of his creatures is remarkable.
This we could fully illustrate by the citation of parallel passages. But we must content our-

1 Confessions, Book. VII. ch. 9, vol. I. p. 108, of the present series.

2 See C;. hoK-^QWi- De AiigHsthio Fiotinizante in Doctrina de Deo Disserenda^ Jenac, iSSo. Also, Dorner : Augusthius,
Zeller, Ueberweg, RrrTER,and Erumann : Histories 0/ Philosophy, sections on Augustin and Neo-Platonism.

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY

selves with remarking that Augustin himself acknowledged his indebtedness, and that his
idea of beauty was an important factor in his polemics against JNIanichaeism. According to
Augustin (and Plotinus) God is the most beautiful and splendid of all beings. He is the
beauty of all beauties; all the beautiful things that are the objects of our vision and love
He Himself made. If these are beautiful what is He? All beauty is from the highest
beauty, which is God. Augustin follows Plato and Plotinus even in neglecting the dis-
tinction between the good and the beautiful. The idea of Divine beauty Augustin applies
to Christ also. He speaks of Him as beautiful God, beautiful Word with God, beautiful on
earth, beautiful in the womb, beautiful in the hands of his parents, beautiful in miracles,
beautiful in being scourged, beautiful when inciting to life, beautiful when not caring for
death, beautiful when laying down his life, beautiful when taking it up again, beautiful in the
sepulchre, beautiful in Heaven. The beauty of the creation, which is simply a reflection of
the beauty of God, is not even disturbed by evil or sin. Beauty is with Augustin (and the '
Platonists) a comprehensive term, and is almost equivalent to perfect harmonv or symmetry
of parts, perfect adaptation of beings to the ends for which they exist.

It is patent that this view of the beauty of God and His creation is diametrically opposed
to the crude conceptions of Mani, with reference to the disorder of the universe, a disorder
not confined even to the Kingdom of Darkness, but invading the Realm of Light itself. So
also Augustin's Platonizing views of the creation must be taken into consideration in judg-
ing of his attitude towards Manichseism. It goes without saying that from Augustin's
theological point of view, to account for creation is a matter of grave difficulty. How can
there be a relation between the infinite and the finite ? Any substantial connection is un-
thinkable. The only thing left is a relation of causality. The finite, according to Plotinus,
is an accident, an image and shadow of God. It is constituted, established, sustained, and
nourished by the Divine potency, and is therefore absolutely dependent upon God, The
power that flows from God permeates each and every finite thing. God as one, whole, and
indivisible, is perpetually present with his eternal process, to everything, everywhere. When
Augustin teaches that God of his own free will, subject to no necessity, by His own Word
created the world out of nothing, this statement might be taken in connection with his view of
the absolute simplicity of God and the consequent denial of distinction between being,willing,
doing, etc. The easiest way to get over the difficulty involved in creation was to maintain
the simultaneous creation of all things. The six days of creation in Genesis are an accom-
modation to human modes of thinking. In some expressions Augustin approaches the
Platonic doctrine of the ideal or archetypal world. Finite things, so far as they exist, are
essence, i.e., God; so far as they are not essence they do not exist at all. Thus the distinc-
tion between God and the world is almost obliterated. Again, whatever is finite and deriva-
tive is subject to negation or nothingness. Thus he goes along with Plato and Plotinus
to the verge of denying the reality of derived existence, and so narrowly escapes pantheism.
It is easy to see how effectively this conception of creation might be employed against
the Manichsean notion of the creation as something forced upon God by the powers of evil,
and as a mere expedient for the gradual liberation of his imprisoned elements. The Mani-
chaean limitation of God and his domain by the bordering Kingdom of Darkness, was in
sheer opposition to Augustin's view of the indivisibility of God and his presence as a whole
everywhere and always. Augustin's theory that nature or essence, as far as it has exist-
ence is God, is quite the antithesis of Mani's dualism, especially of .his supposition that the
Kingdom of Darkness is essentially and wholly evil. Augustin argued that even the in-
habitants of the Kingdom of Darkness, and the King of Darkness himself, according to
iviani's own representations, are good so far as they have essence or nature, and evil only
so far as they are non-existent.

30 THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

With Augustin's Platonizing view of creation is closely connected his theory of
evil and his doctrine of divine providence. Evil with him, as with the Platonists, has no
substantial existence. It is only privation of good. It is wanting in essence, substance,
trutli — is in short mere negation, and so cannot have God for its efficient cause or author,
or be referred to God. God would not have permitted evil unless by His own supreme
power he had been able to make good use of it. He attempts, with some success, to show
the advantages of the permission of evil in the world. God made all things good from the
angels of heaven to the lowest beasts and herbs of the earth. Augustin delighted, with the
Platonists, in dwelling upon the goodness of nature as shown in the animal and vegetable
worlds, as well as in the great cosmical phenomena. Each creature of God has its place,
some a higher, some a lower, but all so far as they conform to the idea of their creation, or
to their nature, are good. So far as they fall short of this idea they are evil.

This principle Augustin applied with great force to the confutation of the Manichsean
view of the substantiality and permanence of evil. This may be regarded as the central
point in Augustin's controversies with the Manichseans. He evidently felt that the Mani-
chsean view of evil was the citadel of their system, and he never wearied of assailing it. It
would be beyond the scope of the present essay to inquire whether and how far Augustin
himself became involved in error, in his efforts to dislodge the Manichaeans. Far less satis-
factory than his confutation of the fundamental principles of the Manichsean system were
his answers to the Manich^an cavils against the Old Testament. If we may judge from the
prominence given in the extant literature to the Old Testament question, this must have
been the favorite point of attack with the Manichasans. The importance of the questions
raised afid the necessity of answering them was fully recognized by Augustin. His principal
reliance is the allegorical or typological method of interpretation. It would be hard to find
examples of more perverse allegorizing than Augustin's Anti-Manichaean treatises furnish.
It will not be needful to adduce instances here, as readers of the treatises will discover them
in abundance. Nothing more wearisome and disgusting in Biblical interpretation can well
be conceived of than certain sections of The Reply io Faustus, the Manichcean. Yet
Augustin did not fail entirely to recognize the distinction between Old Testament times
and New, and he even suggests the theory "that God could in a former age and to a
people of a lower moral standard, give commands to do actions, which we should think it
wrong to do now. . . . There was a certain inward want, an unenlightenment, a rude-
ness of moral conception, in those to whom such commands were given; otherwise they
would not have been given. God would not have given a command to slaughter a whole
nation to an enlightened people. '''

Yet with all the defects of Augustin's polemics against the Manichsans, they seem to
have been adapted to the needs of the time. Well does Canon Mozley declare Augustin
to have been " the most marvellous controversial phenomenon which the whole history of the
Church from first to last presents. . . . Armed with superabundant facility of ex-
pression,— so that he himself observes that one who had written so much must have a good
deal to answer for, — he was able to hammer any point of view which he wanted, and which
was desirable as a counteracting one to a pervading heresy, with endless repetition upon the
ear of the Church; at the same time varying the forms of speech sufficiently to please and
enliven.'' Certainly he was one of the greatest debaters of any age. He doubtless deserves
the credit of completely checking the progress of Manichieism in the West, and of causing
its gradual but almost complete overthrow. His arguments were probably more effective
in guarding Christians against perversion by Manichsean proselytizers, than in converting

I See J. R. Mozley's Ruling Ideas ifi Early Ages, art. The Manichseans and the Jewish Fathers. The sentence quoted above is
Mozley 's.

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.

those that were already ensnared by Manichaean error. Other controversies of a com-
pletely different character, especially the Pelagian, caused Augustin to look to other aspects
of truth and so led to certain modifications in his own statements, nay led him on some
occasions to the verge of Manichsean error itself. But we are chiefly interested at present
in knowing that his earnest efforts against the Manichaeans from a.d. 388, the year of his
baptism, to a.d. 405, were not in vain.'

CHAPTER X.— OUTLINE OF MANICHAEAN HISTORY.^

In the East Mani's followers were involved in the persecution that resulted in his death,
and many of them fled to Transoxiania. Their headquarters and the residence of the chief
of the sect continued to be Babylon. They returned to Persia in 661, but were driven
back, 908-32. They seem to have become very numerous in the Transoxiania. Albirun?,
973-1048, speaks of the Manichaeans as still existing in large numbers throughout all
Mohammedan lands, and especially in the region of Samarkand, where they were known as
Sabeans. He also relates that they were prevalent among the Eastern Turks, in China,
Thibet and India. In Armenia and Cappadocia they gained many followers, and thence
made their way into Europe. The Paulicians are commonly represented as a Manicliaean
party, but the descriptions that have come down to us would seem to indicate Marcionitic
rather than Manichaean elements. Yet contemporary Catholic writers such as Peter Siculus
and Photius constantly assail them as Manichaeans.

In the JJ^es/we have traces of their existence from 287 onwards. Diocletian, according
to a somewhat doubtful tradition, condemned its leaders to the stake, and its adherents to
decapitation with confiscation of goods. The edict is supposed to have been directed to
the pro-consul of Africa where Manichaeans were making great progress. According to an
early account, Mani sent a special envoy to Africa. Valentinian (372) and Theodosius (381)
issued bloody edicts against them, yet we find them still aggressive in the time of Augustin.
From Africa Manichaeism spread into Spain, Gaul and Aquitaine. Leo the Great and
Valentinian III. took measures against them in Italy (440 sq.) They appear, however, to
have continued their work, for Gregory the Great mentions them (590 sq.). From this time
onwards their influence is to be traced in such parties as the Euchites, Enthusiasts, Bogo-
miles, Catharists, Beghards, etc. But it is not safe to attach too much importance to the
mere fact that these parties were stigmatized as Manichaeans by their enemies. Even in the
Reformation time and since, individuals and small parties have appeared which in some
features strongly resembled the ancient Manichaeans. Manichaeism was a product of the
East, and in the East it met with most acceptance. To the spirit of the West it was altogether
foreign, and only in a greatly modified form could it ever have flourished there. It might
persist for centuries as a secret society, but it could not endure the light.

I For an account of the controversies in which Augustin was engaged with the Manichjeans, and for the chronological order of
the Anti-.Manichsean treatises, see the Preface of the Edinburgh editor. Cf. Bindemann, on the various controversies, in his Der
h. Atii;iistinus, passim. See also, a good chronological list of St. Auguslin's works in Cunningham; St. Austin, p. 277 sq.

- Compare Professor George T. Stokes' excellent article MuKicAeeaits, in Smith and Wale : Vict, of Liu . ijwgraphy, vol. III.
p. 798 sq.

PREFACE TO THE ANTI-MANICH.MN WRITIXGS.

No reader of the accompanying volume can be expected to take a very lively interest in its contents, unless
he has before his mind some facts regarding the extraordinary genius to whom the heresy of Manichseism owes
its origin and its name. His history is involved in considerable obscurity, owing to the suspicious nature of the
documents from which it is derived, and the difiiculty of constructing a consistent and probable account out of
the contradictory statements of the Asiatics and the Greeks. The ascertained facts, therefore, are few, and
may be briefly stated.'

According to the Chronicle of Edessa, Mani was born a.d. 240.^ From his original name, Corbicius or
Carcubius, Beausobre conjectures that he was born in Carcub, a town of Chaldrea. He belonged to a Magian
family, and while still a youth won a distinguished place among the sages of Persia. He was master of all the
lore peculiar to his class, and was, besides, so proficient a mathematician and geographer, that he was able to
construct a globe. He was a skilled musician, and had some knowledge of the Greek language, — an accom-
plishment rare among his countrymen. But his fame, and even his ultimate success as a teacher, was due in
great measure to his skill in painting, which was so considerable as to earn for him among the Persians the
distinctive title, Mani the painter. His disposition was ardent and lively but patient and self-restrained. His
appearance was striking, as he wore the usual dress of a Persian sage: the high-soled shoes, the one red, the other
green ; the mantle of azure blue, that changed color as he moved ; the ebony staff in his right hand, and the
Babylonish book under his left arm.

The meaning of his name, Mani, Manes, or Manichceus, has been the subject of endless conjectures.
Epiphanius supposes that he was providentially so named, that men might be warned against the mania of his
heresy.3 Hyde, whose opinion on any Oriental subject must have weight, tells us that in Persian viani means
painter, and that he was so called from his profession. Archbishop Usher conjectured that it was a form of
Manaein or Menahcm^ which means Paraclete or Comforter ; founding this conjecture on the fact that Sulpicius
Severus calls the Israelitish king Menahem,"* Mane. Gataker supplements this idea by the conjecture that
Mani took this name at his own instance, and in pursuance of his claim to be the Paraclete. It is more probable
that, if his name was really given on account of this meaning, he received it from the wiilow who seems to have
adopted him when a boy, and may have called him her Consolation. But it is also possible that Mani was not
an uncommon Persian name, and that he adopted it for some reason too trifling to discover.s

While still a young man he was ordained as a Christian priest, and distinguished himself in that capacity
by his knowledge of Scripture, and the zeal with which he discharged his sacred functions.^ His heretical
tendencies, however, were very soon manifested, stimulated, we may suppose, by his anxiety to make the Chris-
tian religion more acceptable to those who adhered to the Eastern systems. Excommunicated from the Chris-
tian Church, Mani found asylum with Sapor, and won his confidence by presenting only the Magian side of his
system. But no sooner did he permit the Christian element to appear, and call himself the apostle of the Lord,
and show a desire to reform Magianism, than his sovereign determined to put him to death as a revolutionist.
Forced to flee, he took refuge in Turkestan, and gained influence there, partly by decorating the temples with
paintings. To lend his doctrines the appearance of divine authority, he adopted the same device as Zoroaster

' Beausobre (Histoire Critique de Manichec et du Manicheisme^ Amst. 1734, 2 vols.) has collected everything that is known of
Mani. The original sources are here sifted with unusual acuteness, and with great and solid learning, though the author's strong
' bias in favor of a heretic " frequently leads him to make unwarranted statements. Burton's estimate of this entertaining and indis-
pensable work (Heresies of Apostol. Age, p. xxi.), is much fairer than Pusey's (Aug. Con/, p. 314). A brief account of Mani and
his doctrines is given by Milman with his usual accuracy, impartiality and lucidity {Hist. 0/ Christianity, \\. 2$c), ed. 1867). For
any one who wishes to investigate the subject further, ample references are there given. A specimen of the confusion that involves
the history of Mani will be found in the account given by Socrates (///\r/. i. 22).

- [For the Oriental accounts of Mani's parentage and youth, see the Introductory Essay, and the works there referred to.— A.H.N. ] .

3 See also Eusebius: Hist. Eccl. vii. 31, with Heinichen's note.

4 Kings XV. 14.

5 ^'■Pcut-etre cherchons nous du mystere, ou il n'y en a /o/«/."— Beausobre, i. 79. •
* [This is in the highest degree improbable.— A.H.N. ]

34 THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

and Mohammed. Having discovered a cave through which there ran a rill of water, he laid up in it a store of
provisions, and retired there for a year, giving out that he was on a visit to heaven. In this retirement he pro-
duced his Gospel,^ — a work illustrated with symbolical drawings the ingenuity of which has been greatly praised.
This book Mani presented to Hormizdas, the son and successor of Sapor, who professed himself favorable to
his doctrine, and even built him a castle as a place of shelter and retirement. Unfortunately for Mani, Hormiz-
das died in the second year of his reign ; and though his successor, Varanes, was at first willing to shield him
from persecution, yet, finding that the Magians were alarmed for their religion, he appointed a disputation to
be held between the opposing parties. Such trials of dialectic in Eastern courts have not unfrequently resulted
in very serious consequences to the parties engaged in them. In this instance the result was fatal to Mani.
Worsted in argument, he was condemned to die, and thus perished in some sense as a martyr. The mode of
his death is uncertain, = but it seems that his skin was stuffed with chaff, and hung up in public in terroreni. This
occurred in the year 277, and the anniversary was commemorated as the great religious festival of the Manichjeans.

This is not the place to attempt any account or criticism of the strange eclecticism of Mani. 3 An adequate
idea of the system may be gathered from the accompanying treatises. It may, however, be desirable to give
some account of the original sources of information regarding it.

We study the systems of heresiarchs at a disadvantage when our only means of ascertaining their opinions
is from the fragmentary quotations and hostile criticism which occur in the writings of their adversaries. Such,
however, is our only source of information regarding the'teaching of Mani. Originally, indeed, this heresy was
specially active in a literary direction, assailing the Christian Scriptures with an ingenuity of unbelief worthy of
a later age, and apparently ambitious of promulgating a rival canon. Certainly the writings of its early sup-
porters were numerous;* and from the care and elegance with which they were transcribed, the sumptuous
character of the manuscripts, and the mysterious emblems with which they were adorned, we should fancy it
was intended to inspire the people with respect for an authoritative though as yet undefined code. It is, indeed,
nowhere said or implied that the sacred books of the Manichceans were reserved for the eye only of the initiated
or elect ; and their reception of the New Testament Scriptures (subject to their own revision and emendation)
would make it difficult for them to establish any secret code apart from these writing;?. They were certainly,
however, doctrines of an esoteric kind, which were not divulged to the catechumens or hearers ; and many of
their books, being written in Persian, Syriac, or Greek, were practically unavailable for the instruction of the
Latin speaking population. It was not always easy, therefore, to obtain an accurate knowledge of their opinions.
Commentaries on the whole of the Old and New Testaments were written by Hierax ;S a Theosophy by Aristo-
critus ; a book of memoirs, or rather Memorabilia^ of Mani, and other works, by Heraclides, Aphthonius, Adas,
and Agapius. Unfortunately all of these books have perished, whether in the flames to which the Christian
authorities commanded that all Manichsean books should be consigned, or by the slower if not more critical and
impartial processes of time.

Mani himself was the author of several works : a Gospel, the Treasury ofLife{a.r\6. probably an abridgment
of the same), the Mysteries, the Foundation Epistle^ a book of Articles or heads of doctrine, one or two works
on astronomy or astrology, and a collection of letters so dangerous, that Manichceans who sought restoration to
the Church were required to anathematize them.

Probably the most important of these writings was the Foundation Epistle^ so called because it contained the
leading articles of doctrine on which the new system was built. This letter was written in Greek or Syriac ; but
a Tatin version of it was current in Africa, and came into the hands of Augustin, who undertook its refutation.
To accomplish this with the greater precision and effect, he quotes the entire text of each passage of the Epistle
before proceeding to criticise it. Had Augustin accomplished the whole of his task, we should accordingly have
been in possession of the whole of this important document. Unfortunately, for reasons unknown, Augustin
stops short at an early point in the Epistle; and though he tells us he had notes on the remainder, and would
some day expand and publish them, this promise lay unredeemed for thirty years till the day of his death.
Extracts from the same Epistle and from the Freastuy are also given by Augustin in the treatise De iVatura
Boni.^

' Called Erteng or Arzeng, i. e., according to Renaudot, an illustrated book.

2 Bohringer adopts the more horrible tradition. '^ Sein Schicksal war, dass er von den Christen, von den Magiern ver/olgt,
nach inajtnig/achcin Wechsel unter Bahratn lebendig geschunden wurde''' (p. 386).

3 Eohringer characterizes it briefly in the words: "Es ist der alte heidnische Dualisiiius mit seiner Naturtheologie, der in
Ma7ii s Systeme seine Ictzten Kriifte satninelt vnd unter der gleissenden Hiilte christticher Worte und Formen an den reinen
Monotheismus des Chrisletithums und dessen reine Ethik sick heran-Magt."

4 Aug. c. Faustum, ,\iii. 6 and 18. [See full list of Mani's writings in Kessler's art. in Herzog, R. E. — A.H.N.]

5 Lardner, however, seems to prove that Hierax was not a IManichaean, though some of his opinions approximated to this heresy.
The whole subject of the Manichse*» literature is treated by Lardner {Works, iii. p. 374), with the learning of Beausobre and more
than Beausobre's impartiality.

6 The De Natura Boni, written in the year 405, is necessarily very much a reproduction of what is elsewhere affirmed, that all
natures are good, and created by God, who alone is immutable and incorruptible. It presents concisely the leading positions of Augus- j

PREFACE TO THE ANTI-MANICH.>EAX WRITINGS. 35

Next, we have in the Optis l7nperfectitm of Angustin some extracts from a letter of Mani to Menoch, which
Julian had unearthed and republished to convict Augustin of being still tainted with Manichjean sentiments.
Th«se extracts give us some insight into the heresiarch's opinions regarding the corruption of nature and the
evils of sexual love.

Again, we have Mani's letter to Marcel, preserved by Epiphanius, and given in full by Beausobre ;' which,
however, merely reiterates two of the doctrines most certainly identified with Mani, — the assertion of two prin-
ciples, and the tenet that the Son of (iod was man only in appearance.

Finally, Fabricius has inserted in the fifth volume of his Bibliotkeca Grccca the fragments, such as they are,
collected by Grabe.

Such is the fragmentary character of the literary remains of Mani : for fuller information regarding his
opinions we must depend on Theodoret, Epiphanius, Alexander of Lycopolis, Titus of Bostra, and Augustin.
Beausobre is of opinion that the Fathers derived all that they knew of Manichreus from the Acts of Archelaus.'^
This professes to be a report of a disputation held between Manes and Archelaus, bishop of Caschar in INIesopota-
mia. Grave doubts have been cast on the authenticity of this document, and Burton and IMilman seem inclined
to consider it an imaginary dialogue, and use it on the understanding that while some of its statements are
manifestly untrustworthy, a discriminating reader may gather from it some reliable material. ^

In the works of Augustin there are some other pieces which may well be reckoned among the orifTinal
sources. In the reply to Faustus, which is translated in this volume, the book of Faustus ia not indeed repro-
duced ; but there is no reason for doubting that his arguments are fairly represented, and we think there is evi-
dence that even the original expression of them is preserved.'* Augustin had been acquainted with Faustus for
many years. He first met him at Carthage in 383, and found him nothing more than a clever and agreeable
talker, making no pretension to science or philosophy, and with only slender reading. 5 His cleverness is suffi-
ciently apparent in his debate with Augustin ; the objections he leads are plausible, and put with acuteness,
but at the same time with a flippancy which betrays a want of earnestness and real interest in the questions. In
his reply to Faustus. Augustin is very much on the defensive, and his statements are apologetic rather than
systematic.^

But in an age when the ability to read was by no means commensurate with the interest taken in theological
questions, written discussions were necessarily supplemented by public disputations. These theological contests
seem to have been a popular entertainment in North Africa ; the people attending in immense crowds, while
reporters took down what was said on either side for the sake of appeal as well as for the information of the
absent. In tw such disputations Augustin engaged in connection with Manichaeism.^ The first was held on
the 28th and 29th of August, 392, with a Manichrean priest, Fortunatus. To this encounter Augustin was invited
I by a deputation of Donatists and Catholics,^ who were alike alarmed at the progress which this heresy was
iking in the district of Hippo. Fortunatus at first showed some reluctance to meet so formidable an antago-

■ .-t, but was prevailed upon by his own sectaries, and shows no nervousness during the debate. His incompe-
tence, however, was manifest to the Manicha^ans themselves ; and so hopeless was it to think of any further
proselytizing in Hippo, that he left that city, and was too much ashamed of himself ever to return. The char-
acter of his reasoning is shifty ; he evades Augustin's questions and starts fresh ones. Augustin pushes his
ii-ual and fundamental objection to the Manichcean system. If God is impassable and incorruptible, how could
lie be injured by the assaults of the kinirdom of darkness ? In opposition to the statement of Fortunatus, that
liie Almighty produces no evil, he explains that God made no nature evil, but made man free, and that voluntary

lin in this controversy, and concludes with an eloquent prayer that his efforts may be blessed to the conversion of the heretics, — not
the only passage which demonstrates that he wrote not for the glory of victory so much as for the deliverance of men from fatal error.
' Hisioire, i. 91.

2 Published by Zaccagni in his Collectanea Momiiiientorum Veterittn, Romse, 1698 ; and by Routhin his Reliquia Sacm, vol.

■ , in which all the material for forming an opinion regarding it is collected.

3 Any one vvhoconsults Beausobre on this point will find that historical criticism is not of so recent an origin as some persons seem
: hink. It is worth transcribing his own account of the spirit in which he means to do his work : ^'Je traiterai iiton sv.jet en Critique,
-ant la Regie de S. Paul, Examinez t antes c/ioses, et 7ie rctencz gue ce qui est ban. L^Histoire en general, et l' Histoire Ecclesi-
•qtie en particulier, 7i^est bien souvent qiiun vic'lange con/iis de _faux et de vrai, cntasse par des Ecrivaiiis nial instruits,
i/utes on passionez. Cela convient surtout a r Histoire des Herctiqucs et des Heresies. C'est au Lecteur attenti/ et judicieujc
n /aire le discernement, a I' aide d^ line critique, qui ne soit trop tiinide, ni teiiieraire. Sans le secours de cet art, on erre dans

I / I listoirecomine un Pilate sur les iners. lorsqu'il n^a ni boussole, ni carte marine^' (i. 7).

4 Beausobre and Cave suppose that we have the whole of Faustus' book embodied in Augustin's review of it. Lardner is of opin-
1 II that the commencement, and perhaps the greater part, of the work is given, but not the whole.

I 5 See the interesting account of Faustus in the Confessions, v. 10.

I ^ [This estimate of Faustus is somewhat too disparaging. For fuller bibliography, see Introductory Essay. — A. H. N.]
I 7 His willingness to do so, and the success with which he encountered the most renowned champions of this heresy, should have
i()revented Beausobre from charging hiiu with misunderstanding or misrepresenting the Manichacan doctrine. The retractation of
I- i-lix tells strongly against this view of Augustin's incompetence to deal with Manicha;ism.
8 Possidius, I'ita A ug. vi.

6 THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

sin is the grand original evil. The most remarkable circumstance in the discussion is the desire of Fortunatus
to direct the conversation to the conduct of tlie Manichasans, and the refusal of Augustin to make good the
charges which had been made against them, or to discuss anything but the doctrine.'

Twelve years after this, a similar disputation was held between Augustin and one of the elect among the
Manichceans, who had come to Hippo to propagate his religion. This man, Felix, is described by Augustin = as
being ill-educated, but more adroit and subtle than Fortunatus. After a keen discussion, which occupied two
days, the proceedings terminated by Felix signing a recantation of his errors in the form of an anathema ou
Mani, his doctrines, and the seducing spirit that possessed him. These two disputations are valuable, as exhib-
iting the points of the Manichoean system to which its own adherents were accustomed to direct attention, and
the arguments on which they specially relied for their support.

The works given in the accompanying volume comprehend by no means the whole of Augustin's writings
against this heresy. Before his ordination he wrote five anti-Manichaean books, entitled, De Libera Arbitriu,
De Gene si contra AlanichcEos^ De Moribtis Ecclesia Caiholicce, De Moribus ManichcBoruin, and De Vera Religi-
one. These Paulinus called his anti-Manichsean Pentateuch. After his ordination he was equally diligent,
publishing a little treatise in the year 391, under the title De Utilitate Credendi,^ which was immediately fol-
lowed by a small work, De Duabiis Aniinabtts. In the following year the report of the Dispuiatio contra Fo}--
tiinaium was published ; and after this, at short intervals, there appeared the books Contra Aditnanttmi, Con-
tra Epistolam Matiichiri qztam vocant Fundamenti^ Contra Faiistum, Disptitatio contra Felicem, De A'atura
Boni, and Contra Secnndinum.

Besides these writings, which are exclusively occupied with Manichaeism. there are others in which the
Manichasan doctrines are handled with more or less directness. These are the Confessions^ the 79th and 236th
Letters, the Lecture on Psalm 140, Sermons i, 2, 12, 50, 153, 182, 237, the Liber de Agone Christiano, and
the De Continentia.

Of these writings, Augustin himself professed a preference for the reply to the letter of Secundinus.'* It is
a pleasing feature of the times, that a heretic whom he did not know even by sight should write to Augustin
entreating him to abstain from writing against the Manichoeans, and reconsider his position, and ally himself
with those whom he had till now fancied to be in error. His language is respectful, and illustrates the esteem
in which Augustin was held by his contemporaries ; though he does not scruple to insinuate that his conversion
from Manichaeism was due to motives not of the highest kind. We have not given this letter and its reply,
because the preference of Augustin has not been ratified by the judgment of his readers.

The present volume gives a fair sample of Augustin's controversial powers. His nine years' personal
experience of the vanity of Manichoeism made him thoroughly earnest and sympathetic in his efforts to disen-
tangle other men from its snares, and also equipped him with the knowledge requisite for this task. No doubt
the Pelagian controversy was more congenial to his mind. His logical acuteness and knowledge of Scripture
availed him more in combating men who fought with the same weapons, than in dealing with a system which
threw around its positions the mist of Gnostic speculation, or veiled its doctrine under a grotesque mythology,
or based itself on a cosmogony too fantastic for a Western mind to tolerate.5 But however Augustin may have
misconceived the strange forms in which this system was presented, there is no doubt that he comprehended
and demolished its fundamental principles; * that he did so as a necessary part of his own personal search for
the truth ; and that in doing so he gained possession, vitally and permanently of ideas and principles which
subsequently entered into all he thought and wrote. In finding his way through the mazes of the obscure region
into which Mani had led him, he once for all ascertained the true relation subsisting between God and His crea-
tures, formed his opinion regarding the respective provinces of reason and faith, and the connection of the Old
and New Testaments, and found the root of all evil in the created will. THE EDITOR.

Some knowledge of the Magianism of the time of Mani may be obtained from the sacred books of the Par-
sis, especially from the Vendidad Sade, an account of which is given by Dr. Wilson, of Bombay, in his book
on the Parsi Religion. — Tr.

1 This cannot but make us cautious in receiving the statements of the tract. On the Morals 0/ the Manichtsans. There can be
httle doubt that many of the Manichaeans practiced the ascetic virtues, and were recognizable by the gauntness and pallor of their
looks, so that Manichasan became a by-word for any one who did not appreciate the felicity of good living. Thus Jerome says of a
certain class of women, "y«'!:'« viderint pallentem aique tristein, Miseratn, J\Io>iacham,et Manichcean vocant '' {De Ctistod.
Virg. Ep. t8). Lardner throws light on the practices of the Manichaeans, and effectually disposes of some of the calumnies uttered
regarding them. Pusey's appendix to his translation of the Confessions may also be referred to with advantage.

2 Retract, ii. 8. 3 Epist. A ugust. xxv,

4 Retract, ii. 10 : " quod, mea senteiitia, omnibus guas adversus illavi pestem scribere potui, facile prceponoy The reason of
this preference is explained by Bindemann, Der heilige Augustinus, iii. 168.

5 '■'■Wo Entwickelungen, dialektische Begriffe sein solltejt, stellt sich ein Bitd, ein Mythus e/«."— Bohringer, p. 390.

6 Some have thought Augustin more successful here than elsewhere. Cassiodorus may have thought so when he said ; " diligen-
tius atque vivacius adversus eos quam contra hxreses alias disseruit" {Instit. i. quoted by Lardner).

ST. AUGUSTIN

ON THE

MORALS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

[DE MORIBUS ECCLESI^ CATHOLIC^E].

A.D. 388.

TRANSLATED BY

REV. RICHARD STOTHERT, M.A.,

BOMBAY

CONTENTS OF THE MORALS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

PAGE

Chap. I. — How the pretensions of the Manichzeans are to be refuted. Two Manichsean falsehoods. . . 41

Chap. II. — He begins with arguments, in compliance with the mistaken method of the Manichaans. . 42
Chap. III. — Happiness is in the enjoyment of man's chief good. Two conditions of the chief good : ist,

nothing is better than it ; 2d, it cannot be lost against the will 42

Chap. IV.— Man— what ? 42

Chap. V. — Man's chief good is not the chief good of the body only, but the chief good of the soul. . . 43
Chap. VI. — Virtue gives perfection to the soul ; the soul obtains virtue by following God ; following God

is the happy life 43

CriAP. VII. — The knowledge of God to be obtained from the Scripture. The plan and principal mys-
teries of the divine scheme of redemption 44

Thap. VIII. — God is the chief good, whom we are to seek after with supreme affection 44

J HAP. IX. — Harmony of the Old and New Testament on the precepts of charity 45

Jhap. X. — What the church teaches about God. The two gods of the Manichseans 46

Jhap. XI. — God is the one object of love ; therefore He is man's chief good. Nothing is better than

God. God cannot be lost against our will 46

2h\?. XII.^\Ve are united to God by love, in subjection to Him 47

^HAP. XIII. — We are joined inseparably to God by Christ and His Spirit 48

Chap. XIV. — We cleave to the Trinity, our chief good, by love 48

'hap. XV. — The Christian definition of the four virtues 48

HAP. XVI. — Harmony of the Old and New Testaments 49

HAP. XVII. — Appeal to the Manichceans, calling oil them to repent 50

Chap. XVIII. — Only in the Catholic church is perfect truth established on the harmony of both Testaments. 50

HAP. XIX. — Description of the duties of temperance, according to the sacred Scriptures 51

Chap. XX. — We are required to despise all sensible things, and to love God alone 52

HAP. XXI. — Popular renown and inquisitiveness are condemned in the sacred Scriptures 52

"hap. XXII. — Fortitude comes from the love of God 53

hap. XXIII. — Scripture precepts and examples of fortitude 53

Hap. XXIV. — Of justice and prudence 54

it.^p. XXV.— Four moral duties regarding the love of God, of which love the reward is eternal life and

the knowledge of the truth 54

hap. XXVI. — Love of ourselves and of our neighbor 55

^KAP. XXVII. — On doing good to the body of our neighbor 55

Chap. XXVIII. — On doing good to the soul of our neighbor. Two parts of discipline, restraint and in-
struction. Through good conduct we arrive at the knowledge of the truth 56

40 CONTENTS OF- THE MORALS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

PAGE

Chap. XXIX. — Of the authority of the Scriptures 57

Chap. XXX. — The Church apostrophized as teacher of all wisdom. Doctrine of the Catholic Church. . 58

Chap. XXXI. — The life of the Anachoretes and Coenobites set against the continence of the ^lanichceans. 59

Chap. XXXII. — Praise of the clergy 60

Chap. XXXIII. — Another kind of men living together in cities. Fasts of three days 60

Chap. XXXIV. — The Church is not to be blamed for the conduct of bad Christians, worshippers of

tombs and pictures .....,„ 61

Chap. XXXV. — Marriage and property allowed to be baptized by the apostles, o ,,,„.. . 62

OF THE

MORALS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH/

[DE MORIBUS ECCLESI/E CATHOLICyE]. A.D. 388.

IT IS LAID DOWN AT THE OUTSET THAT THE CUSTOMS OF THE HOLY LIFE OF THE CHURCH SHOULD
BE REFERRED TO THE CHIEF GOOD OF MAN, THAT IS, GOD. WE MUST SEEK AFTER
GOD WITH SUPREME AFFECTION; AND THIS DOCTRINE IS SUPPORTED IN THE CATHOLIC
CHURCH BY THE AUTHORITY OF BOTH TESTAMENTS. THE FOUR VIRTUES GET THEIR NAMES
FROM DIFFERENT FORMS OF THIS LOVE. THEN FOLLOW THE DUTIES OF LOVE TO OUR NEIGH-
BOR. IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH WE FIND EXAMPLES OF CONTINENCE AND OF TRUE
CHRISTIAN CONDUCT.

CHAP. I.- -HOW THE PRETENSIONS OF THE MAN-
ICH^ANS ARE TO BE REFUTED. TWO MANI-
CHvEAN FALSEHOODS.

I. Enough, probably, has been done in our
other books "" in the way of answering the ig-
norant and profane attacks which the Mani-
chjeans make on the law, which is called the
Old Testament, in a spirit of vainglorious
boasting, and with the approval of the unin-
structed. Here, too, I may shortly touch
upon the sul)ject. For every one with aver-
age intelligence can easily see that the ex-
planation of the Scriptures should be sought
for from those who are the professed teachers
of the Scriptures; and that it may happen,
and indeed always happens, that many things
seem absurd to the ignorant, which, when they
are explained by the learned, appear all the
more excellent, and are received in the ex-
planation with the greater pleasure on account

' Written in the year 388. In his Retractations (i. 7) Augfustin
says- " When I was at Rome after my baptism, and could not
bear in silence the vaunting of the Manichajans about their pre-
tended and misleading continence or abstinence, in which, to de-
ceive the inexperienced, they claim superiority over true Chris-
tians, to whom they are not to be compared, I wrote two books,
one on the morals of the Catholic Church, the other on the morals
of the ^^anicha:ans."

- [This is commonly supposed to have been the first work of
any importance written by the Author atrainst Manicha;ism.
What he here refers to it is not easy to conjecture. — A. H. N.J

of the obstructions which made it difficult to
reach the meaning. This commonly happens
as regards the holy books of the Old Testa-
ment, if only the man who meets with diffi-
culties applies to a pious teacher, and not to
a profane critic, and if he begins his inquiries
from a desire to find truth, and not in rash
opposition. And should the inquirer meet
with some, whether bishops or presbyters, or
any officials or ministers of the Catholic
Church, who either avoid in all cases opening
up mysteries, or, content with simple faith,
have no desire for more recondite knowledge,
he must not despair of finding the knowledge
of the truth in a case where neither are all
able to teach to whom the inquiry is ad-
dressed, nor are all inquirers worthy of learn-
ing the truth. Diligence and piety are both
necessary: on the one hand, we must have
knowledge to find truth, and, on the other
hand, we must deserve to get the knowledge.
2. But as the Manichaeans have two tricks
for catching the unwary, so as to make them
take them as teachers, — one, that of finding
fault with the Scriptures, which they either
misunderstand or wish to be misunderstood,
the other, tliat of making a sliow of chastity
and of notable abstinence, — this book shall

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. IV.

contain our doctrine of life and morals ac-
cording to Catholic teaching, and will perhaps
make it appear how easy it is to pretend to
virtue, and how difficult to possess virtue. I
will refrain, if I can, from attacking their
weak points, which I know well, with the vio-
lence with which they attack what they know
nothing of; for T wish them, if possible, to be
cured rather than conquered. And I will
quote such testimonies from the Scriptures as
they are bound to believe, for they shall be
from the New Testament; and even from this
I will take none of the passages which the
Manich^eans when hard pressed are accus-
tomed to call spurious, but passages which
they are obliged to acknowledge and approve.
And for every testimony from apostolic teach-
ing I will bring a similar statement from the
Old Testament, that if they ever become
willing to wake up from their persistent
dreams, and to rise towards the light of Chris-
tian faith, they may discover both how far
from being Christian is the life which they
profess, and how truly Christian is the Script-
ure which they cavil at.

HE BEGINS WITH ARGUMENTS, IN

CHAP. 2.

COMPLIANCE WITH THE MISTAKEN METHOD
OF THE MANICH^ANS.

3. Where, then, shall I begin ? With au-
thority, or with reasoning ? In the order of
nature, when we learn anything, authority
precedes reasoning. For a reason may seem
weak, when, after it is given, it requires au-
thority to confirm it. But because the minds
of men are obscured by familiarity with dark-
ness, which covers them in the night of sins
and evil habits, and cannot perceive in a way
suitable to the clearness and purity of reason,
there is most wholesome provision for bring-
ing the dazzled eye into the light of truth
under the congenial shade of authority. But
since we have to do with people who are per-
verse in all their thoughts and words and
actions, and who insist on nothing more than
on beginning with argument, I will, as a con-
cession to them, take what I think a wrong
method in discussion. For I like to imitate,
as far as I can, the gentleness of my Lord
Jesus Christ, who took on Himself the evil of
death itself, wishing to free us from it.

CHAP. 3. HAPPINESS IS IN THE ENJOYMENT

OF man's chief good. two CONDITIONS OF
THE CHIEF GOOD : 1ST, NOTHING IS BETTER
THAN IT ; 2D, IT CANNOT BE LOST AGAINST
THE WILL.

4. How then, according to reason, ought
man to live ? We all certainly desire to live

happily; and there is no human being but as-
sents to this statement almost before it is
made. But the title happy cannot, in my
opinion, belong either to him who has not
what he loves, whatever it may be, or to him
who has what he loves if it is hurtful, or to
him who does not love what he has. althoutjh
it IS good in perfection. For one who seeks
what he cannot obtain suffers torture, and one
who has got what is not desirable is cheated,
and one who does not seek for what is worth
seeking for is diseased. Now in all these
cases the mind cannot but be unhappy, and
happiness and unhappiness cannot reside at
the same time in one man; so in none of these
cases can the man be happ)^ I find, then, a
fourth case, where the happy life exists, —
when that which is man's chief good is both
loved and possessed. For what do we call
enjoyment but having at hand the objects of
love ? And no one can be happy who does
not enjoy what is man's chief good, nor is
there any one who enjoys this who is not
happy. We must then have at hand our chief
good, if we think of living happily.

5. We must now inquire what is man's chief
good, which of course cannot be anything in-
ferior to man himself. For whoever follows
after what is inferior to himself, becomes
himself inferior. But every man is bound to
follow what is best. Wherefore man's chief
good is not inferior to man. Is it then some-
thing similar to man himself? It must be so,
if there is nothing above man which he is
capable of enjoying. But if we find some-
thing which is both superior to man. and can
be possessed by the man who loves it, who
can doubt that in seeking for happiness man
should endeavor to reach that which is more
excellent than the being who makes the en-
deavor. For if happiness consists in the
enjoyment of a good than which there is
nothing better, which we call the chief good,
hov/ can a man be properly called happy who
has not yet attained to his chief good ? or how
can that be the chief good beyond which some-
thing better remains for us to arrive at?
Such, then, being the chief good, it must be
something which cannot be lost against the
will. For no one can feel confident regard-
ing a irood which he knows can be taken
from him, although he wishes to keep and
cherish it. But if a man feels no confidence
regarding the good which he enjoys, how can
he be happy while in such fear of losing it ?

CHAP. 4.- — MAN — WHAT ?

6. Let us then see what is better than man.
This must necessarily be hard to find, unless

CHAr. VI.]

OF THE MORALS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

we first ask and examine what man is. I am
not now called upon to give a definition of
man. The question here seems to me to be,
— since almost all agree, or at least, which is
enough, those I have now to do with are of
the same opinion with me, that we are made
up of soul and bod}', — What is man ? Is he
* both of these ? or is he the body only, or the
soul only? For although the things are two,
soul and body, and although neither without
the other could be called man (for the body
would not be man without the soul, nor again
would the soul be man if there were not a
body animated by it), still it is possible that
one of these may be held to be man, and may
be called so. What then do we call man ?
Is he soul and body, as in a double harness,
or like a centaur? Or do we mean the body
only, as being in the service of the soul which
rules it, as the word lamp denotes not the
light and the case together, but only the case,
yet it is on account of the light that it is so
called ? Or do we mean only the mind, and
that on account of the body which it rules,
as horseman means not the man and the
horse, but the man only, and that as em-
ployed in ruling the horse? This dispute is
not easy to settle; or, if the proof is plain, the
statement requires time. This is an ex-
penditure of time and strength which we
need not incur. For whether the name man
belongs to both, or only to the soul, the chief
good of man is not the chief good of the
body; but what is the chief good either of
both soul and body, or of the soul only, that
is man's chief good.

CHAP. 5. — man's CHIEF GOOD IS NOT THE CHIEF
GOOD OF THE BODY ONLY, BUT THE CHIEF
GOOD OF THE SOUL,

7, Now if we ask what is the chief good of
the body, reason obliges us to admit that it is
that by means of which the body comes to be
I in its best state. But of all the things which
invigorate the body, there is nothing better
or greater than the soul. The chief good of
the body, then, is not bodily pleasure, not
absence of pain, not strength, not beauty, not
swiftness, or whatever eJse is usually reck-
oned among the goods of the body, but sim-
ply the soul. For all the things mentioned
the soul supplies to the body by its presence,
and, what is above them all, life. Hence I
conclude that the soul is not tlie chief good
of m,an, whether we give the name of man to
soul and body together, or to the soul alone.
For as, according to reason, the chief good of
the body is that which is better than the body,
and from which the body receives vigor and
life, so whether the soul itself is man, or soul i

and body both, we must discover whether
there is anything which goes before the soul
itself, in following which the soul comes to
the perfection of good of which it is capable
in its own kind. If such a thing can be found,
all uncertainty must be at an end, and we
must pronounce this to be really and truly
the chief good of man.

8, If, again, the body is man, it must be
admitted that the soul is the chief good of
man. But clearly, when we treat of morals,
— when we inquire what manner of life must
be held in order to obtain happiness, — it is
not the body to which the precepts are ad-
dressed, it is not bodily discipline which we
discuss. In short, the observance of good
customs belongs to that part of us which in-
quires and learns, which are the prerogatives
of the soul; so, when we speak of attaining
to virtue, the question does not regard the
body. But if it follows, as it does, that the
body which is ruled over by a soul possessed
of virtue is ruled both better and more hon-
orably, and is in its greatest perfection in
consequence of the perfection of the soul
which rightfully governs it, that which gives
perfection to the soul will be man's chief
good, though we call the body man. For if
my coachman, in obedience to me, feeds and
drives the horses he has charge of in the
most satisfactory manner, himself enjoying
the more of my bounty in proportion to his
good conduct, can any one deny that the
good condition of the horses, as well as that
of the coachman, is due to me ? So the ques-
tion seems to me to be not. whether soul and
body is man, or the soul only, or the body
only, but what gives perfection to tlie soul;
for when this is obtained, a man cannot but
be either perfect, or at least much better than
in the absence of this one thing.

CHAP. 6. — VIRTUE GIVES PERFECTION TO THE
SOUL ; THE SOUL OBTAINS VIRTUE BY FOL-
LOWING GOD ; FOLLOWING GOD IS THE HAPPY

LIFE.

9. No one will question that virtue gives
perfection to the soul. But it is a very pro-
per subject of inquiry whether this virtue can
exist by itself or only in the soul. Here
again arises a profound discussion, needing
lengthy treatment; but perhaps my summary
will serve the purpose. God will, I trust, as-
sist me, so that, notwithstanding our feeble-
ness, we may give instruction on these great
matters briefly as well as intelligibly. In
either case, whether virtue can exist by itself
without the soul, or can exist only in the soul,
undoubtedly in tlie pursuit of virtue the soul
follows after something, and this must be

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. VIII.

either the soul itself, or virtue, or something
else. But if the soul follows after itself in
the pursuit of virtue, it follows after a foolish
thing; for before obtaining virtue it is foolish.
Now the height of a follower's desire is to
reach that which he follows after. So the
soul must either not wish to reach what it fol-
lows after, which is utterly absurd and unrea-
sonable, or, in following after itself while
foolish, it reaches the folly which it flees
from. But if it follows after virtue in the
desire to reach it, how can it follow what does
not exist ? or how can it desire to reach what
it already possesses ? Either, therefore, vir-
tue exists beyond the soul, or if we are not al-
lowed to give the name of virtue except to
the habit and disposition of the wise soul,
which can exist only in the soul, we must al-
low that the soul follows after something else
in order that virtue may be produced in it-
self; for neither by following after nothing,
nor by following after folly, can the soul, ac-
cording to my reasoning, attain to wisdom,

10. This something else then, by following
after which the soul becomes possessed of vir-
tue and wisdom, is either a wise man or God.
But we have said already that it must be some-
thing that we cannot lose against our will.
No one can think it necessary to ask whether
a wise man, supposing we are content to fol-
low after him, can be taken from us in spite
of our unwillingness or our persistence. God
then remains, in following after whom we live
well, and in reaching whom we live both well
and happily. If any deny God's existence,
why should I consider the method of dealing
with them, when it is doubtful whether they
ought to be dealt with at all ? At any rate,
it would require a different starting-point, a
different plan, a different investigation from
what we are now engaged in. I am now ad-
dressing those who do not deny the existence
of God, and who, moreover, allow that human
affairs are not disregarded by Him. For
there is no one, I suppose, who makes any
profession of religion but will hold that divine
Providence cares at least for our souls.

CHAP. 7. — THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD TO BE
OBTAINED FROM THE SCRIPTURE. THE PLAN
AND PRINCIPAL MYSTERIES OF THE DIVINE
SCHEME OF REDEMPTION.

11. But how can we follow after Him whom
we do not see ? or how can we see Him, we
who are not only men, but also men of weak
understanding? For though God is seen not
with the eyes but with the mind, where can
such a mind be found as shall, while obscured
by foolishness, succeed or even attempt to
drink in that light ? We must therefore have

recourse to the instructions of those whom we
have reason to think wise. Thus far argu-
ment brings us. For in human things reason-
ing is employed, not as of greater certainty,
but as easier from use. But when we come
to divine things, this faculty turns away; it
cannot behold; it pants, and gasps, and burns
with desire; it falls back from the light of
truth, and turns again to its wonted obscurity,
not from choice, but from exhaustion. What
a dreadful catastrophe is this, that the soul
should be reduced to greater helplessness
when it is seeking rest from its toil ! So, •
when we are hasting to retire into darkness, it
will be well that by the appointment of ador-
able Wisdom we should be met by the friendly
shade of authority, and should be attracted
by the wonderful character of its contents,
and by the utterances of its pages, which,
like shadows, typify and attemper the truth.

12. What more could have been done for
our salvation ? Wnat can be more gracious
and bountiful than divine providence, which,
when man had fallen from its laws, and, in
just retribution for his coveting mortal things,
had brought forth a mortal offspring, still did
not wholly abandon him ? For in this most
righteous government, whose ways are strange
and inscrutable, there is, by means of unknown
connections established in the creatures sub-
ject to it, both a severity of punishment and
a mercifulness of salvation. How beautiful
this is, how great, how worthy of God, in fine,
how true, which is all we are seeking for, we
shall never be able to perceive, unless, begin-
ning with things human and at hand, and
holding by the faith and the precepts of true
religion, we continue without turning from it
in the way which God has secured for us by
the separation of the patriarchs, by the bond
of the law, by the foresight of the prophets,
by the witness of the apostles, by the blood
of the martyrs, and by the subjugation of the
Gentiles. From this point, then, let no one
ask me for my opinion, but let us rather hear
the oracles, and submit our weak inferences
to the announcements of Heaven.'

CHAP. 8. — GOD IS THE CHIEF GOOD, WHOM WE
ARE TO SEEK AFTER WITH SUPREME AFFEC-
TION.

13. Let US see how the Lord Himself in
the gospel has taught us to live: how, too,
Paul the apostle, — for the Manichseans dare
not reject these Scriptures. Let us hear, O
Christ, what chief end Thou dost prescribe
to us; and that is evidently the chief end

I [Augiistin's transition from his fine Platonizing discussion of
virtue, the chief .i;ood. etc., to the patriarchs, the law, and the
prophets is very fine rhetorically and apologetically.— A. H. N.J

Chap. IX.]

OF THE MORALS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

after which we are told to strive with supreme
affection. "Thou slialt love," He says,
" the Lord th)- God." Tell me also, I pray
Thee, what must be the measure of love; for
I fear lest the desire enkindled in my heart
should either exceed or come short in fervor.
" With all thy heart," He says. Nor is that
enough. "With all thy soul." Nor is it
enough yet. " With all thy mind." ' What
do you wish more ? I might, perhaps, wish
more if I could see the possibility of more.
What does Paul say on this ? " We know,''
he says, " that all things issue in good to them
that love God." Let him, too, say what is
the measure of love. " Who then," he says,
"shall separate us from the love of Christ?
shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution,
or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or the
sword?"- We have heard, then, what and
how much we must love; this we must strive
after, and to this we must refer all our plans.
The perfection of all our good things and our
perfect good is God. We must neither come
short of this nor go beyond it: the one is dan-
gerous, the other impossible.

CHAP. 9. HARMONY OF THE OLD AND NEW

TESTAMENT ON THE PRECEPTS OF CHARITY. ^

14. Come now, let us examine, or rather
let us take notice, — for it is obvious and can
be seen, at once, — whether the authority of
the Old Testament too agrees with those state-
ments taken from the gospel and the apostle.
What need to speak of the first statement,
when it is clear to all that it is a quotation
from the law given by Moses ? For it is there
written, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God
with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and
with all thy mind."'* And not to go farther
for a passage of the Old Testament to com-
pare with that of the apostle, he has himself
added one. For after saying that no tribula-
tion, no distress, no persecution; no pressure
of bodily want, no peril, no sword, separates
us from the love of Christ, he immediately
adds, "As it is written. For Thy sake we are
in suffering all the day long; we are accounted
as sheep for the slaughter. '^s The Mani-
chseans are in the habit of saying that this is
an interpolation, — so unable are they to reply,
that they are forced in their extremity to say
this. But every one can see that this is all
that is left for men to say when it is proved
that they are wrong.

I Matt. xxii. 37. - Rom. viii. 28, 35.

3 ['I'he most satisfactory feature of Augiistin's apoIoRy for
the. ( )ld Testament Scriptures is his demonstration of the substan-
tial asireement of the Old Testament with undisputed portions of
the New Testament. — A. H.N.|

4 Deut. vi. 5. S Rom. \ iii. 36; cf. Ps. xliv. 22.

15. And yet I ask them if they deny that
this is said in the Old Testament, or if they
hold that the passage in the Old Testament
does not agree with that of the apostle. For
the first, the books will prove it; and as for
the second, those prevaricators who fly off at
a tangent will be brought to agree with me,
if they will only reflect a little and consider
what is said, or else I will press upon them
the opinion of those who judge impartially.
For what could agree more harmoniously than
these passages ? For tribulation, distress,
persecution, famine, nakedness, peril, cause
great suffering to man while in this life. So
all these words are implied in the single quo-
tation from the law, where it is said, " For
Thy sake we are in suffering."^ The only
other thing is the sword, which does not in-
flict a painful life, but removes whatever life
it meets with. Answering to this are the
words, " We are accounted as sheep for the
slaughter." And love could not have been
more plainly expressed than by the words,
" For Thy sake." Suppose, then, that this
testimony is not found in the Apostle Paul,
but is quoted by me, must you not prove,
you heretic, either that this is not written in
the old law, or that it does not harmonize
with the apostle ? And if you dare not say
either of these things (for you are shut up by
the reading of the manuscript, which will show
that it is written, and by common sense, which
sees that nothing could agree better with what
is said by the apostle), why do you imagine
that there is any force in accusing the Script-
ures of being corrupted ? And once more,
what will you reply to a man who says to you.
This is what I understand, this is my view,
this is my belief, and I read these books only
because 1 see that everything in them agrees
with the Christian faith ? Or tell me at once
if you will venture deliberately to tell me to
the face that we are not to believe that the
apostles and martyrs are spoken of as having
endured great sufferings for Christ's sake,
and as having been accounted by their per-
secutors as sheep for the slaughter? If you
cannot say this, why should you bring a charge
against the book in which I find what you ac-
knowledge I ought to believe ?

6 Retract, i. 7, § 2:—" In the book on the morals of the Cath-
olic Church, where I have quoted the words, ' For Thy sake we
are in suffering all day long, we are accounted as sheep for the
slaughter,' the inaccuracy of my manuscript misled me; for my
recollection of the Scriptures was defective from my not being at
that time familiar with them. For the reading of the other manu-
scripts has a different meaning: not, we suffer, but we suffer death,
or, in one word, we are killed. That this is tlie true reading is
shown by the Greek text of the Septuagint, from which the Old
Testament ivas translated into I.atin. I have indeed made a good
many remarkson the words,' For thy sake wc suffer," and the things
said are not wrong in themselves; but, as regards the harmony of
the Oid and New Testaments, thiscase certainly does not prove it.
'I'he error originated in the way mentioned above, and this har-
mony is afterwards abundantly proved from other passages."

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

rcHAP. XI.

CHAP. lO. WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES ABOUT

GOD. THE TWO GODS OF THE MANICH^ANS.

1 6. Will you say that you grant that we are
bound to love God, but not the God wor-
shipped by those who acknowledge the au-
thority of the Old Testament? In that case
you refuse to worship the God who made
heaven and earth, for this is the God set forth
all through these books. And you admit
that the whole of the world, which is called
heaven and earth, had God and a good God
for its author and maker. For in speaking
to you about God we must make a distinction.
For you hold that there are two gods, one
good and the other bad.

But if you say that you worship and ap-
prove of worshipping the God who made
heaven and earth, but not the God supported
by the authority of the Old Testament, you
act impertinently in trying, though vainly, to
attribute to us views and opinions altogether
unlike the wholesome and profitable doctrine
we really hold. Nor can your silly and pro-
fane discourses be at all compared with the
expositions in which learned and pious men
of the Catholic Church open up those Script-
ures to the willing and worthy. Our under-
standing of the law and the prophets is quite
different from what you suppose. Mistake
»us no longer. We do not worship a God who
repents, or is envious, or needy, or cruel, or
who takes pleasure in the blood of men or
beasts, or is pleased with guilt and crime, or
whose possession of the earth is limited to a
little corner of it. These and such like are
the silly notions you are in the habit of de-
nouncing at great length. Your denuncia-
tion does not touch us. The fancies of old
women or of children you attack with a
vehemence that is only ridiculous. Any one
whom you persuade in this way to join you
shows no fault in the teaching of the Church,
but only proves his own ignorance of it.

17. If, then, you have any human feeling,
— if you have any regard for your own wel-
fare,— you should rather examine with dili-
gence and piety the meaning of these pas-
sages of Scripture. You should examine, un-
happy beings that you are; for we condemn
with no less severity and copiousness any
faith which attributes to God what is unbe-
coming Him, and in those by whom these
passages are literally understood we correct
the mistake of ignorance, and look upon per-
sistence in it as absurd. And in many other
things which you cannot understand there is
in the Catholic teaching a check on the belief
of those who have, got beyond mental child-
ishness, not in years, but in knowledge and

understanding — old in the progress towards
wisdom. For we learn the folly of believing
that God is bounded by any amount of space,
even though infinite; and it is held unlawful
to think of God, or any part of Him, as mov-
ing from one place to another. And should
any one suppose that anything in God's sub-
stance or nature can suffer change or conver-
sion, he will be held guilty of wild profanity.
There are thus among us children who think
of God as having a human form, which they
suppose He really has, which is a most de-
grading idea; and there are many of full age
to whose mind the majesty of God appears
in its inviolableness and unchangeableness as
not only above the human body, but above
their own mind itself. These ages, as we
said, are distinguished not by time, but by
virtue and discretion. Among you, again,
there is no one who will picture God in a
human form; but neither is there one who
sets God apart from the contamination of
human error. As regards those who are fed
like crying babies at the breast of the Catholic
Church, if they are not carried off by heretics,
they are nourished according to the vigor and
capacity of each, and arrive at last, one in one
way and another in another, first to a perfect
man, and then to the maturity and hoary
hairs of wisdom, when they may get life as
they desire, and life in perfect happiness.

CHAP. II. GOD IS THE ONE OBJECT OF LOVE;

THEREFORE HE IS MAN's CHIEF GOOD. NOTH-
ING IS BETTER THAN GOD. GOD CANNOT BE
LOST AGAINST OUR WILL.

18. Following after God is the desire of hap-
piness; to reach God is happiness itself. We
follow after God by loving Him; we reach
Him, not by becoming entirely what He is,
but in nearness to Him, and in wonderful
and immaterial contact with Him, and in be-
ing inwardly illuminated and occupied by His
truth and holiness. He is light itself; we
get enlightenment from Him. The greatest
commandment, therefore, which leads to
happy life, and the first, is this: " Thou shalt
love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and
soul, and mind.^' For to those who love the
Lord all things issue in good. Hence Paul
adds shortly after, " I am persuaded that
neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor virtue,
nor things present, nor things future, nor
height, nor depth, nor any other creature,

' [Ausfiistin's virtus takes the place of the Greek Suva/iet?
and the Vuljrate vtrtntes. It is not quite certain what meanin.i; he
attached to the expression. He seems to waver between the idea
o{ pomer and that of virtue in the ethical sense, and finally settles
down to the use of the term in the latter sense. That this does not
accord with the meaning of the Apostle is evident.— A. H. N.]

Chap. XII. J OF THE MORALS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

shall be able to separate us from the love of
God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord."'
If, then, to those who love God all things is-
sue in good, and if, as no one doubts, the
chief or perfect good is not only to be loved,
but to be loved so that nothing shall be loved
better, as is expressed in the words, "With
all thy soul, with all thy heart, and with all
thy mind,'' who, I ask, will not at once con-
clude, when these things are all settled and
most surely believed, that our chief good
which we must hasten to arrive at in prefer-
ence to all other things is nothing else than
God ? And then, if nothing can separate us
from His love, must not this be surer as well
as better than any other good ?

19. But let us consider the points separ-
ately. No one separates us from this by
threatening death. For that with which we
love God cannot die, except in not loving
God; for death is not to love God, and that
is when we prefer anything to Him in affec-
tion and pursuit. No one separates us from
this in promising life; for no one separates us
from the fountain in promising water. Angels

CHAP. 12. WE ARE UNITED TO GOD hV LOVK,

IN SUBJECTION TO HIM.

do not separate us; for the mind cleaving to
God is not inferior in strength to an angel.
Virtue does not separate us; for if what is
here called virtue is that which has power in
this world, the mind cleaving to God is far
above the whole world. Or if this virtue is
perfect rectitude of our mind itself, this in the
case of another will favor our union with God,
and in ourselves will itself unite us with God.
Present troubles do not separate us; for we
feel their burden less the closer we cling to
Him from whom they try to separate us.
The promise of future things does not separ-
ate us; for both future good of every kind is
surest in the promise of God, and nothing is
better than God Himself, who undoubtedly
is already present to those who truly cleave
to Him. Height and depth do not separate
us; for if the height and depth of knowledge
are what is meant, I will rather not be inquis-
itive than be separated from God; nor can
any instruction by which error is removed
separate me from Him, by separation from
whom it is that any one is in error. Or if
what is meant are the higher and lower parts
of this world, how can the promise of heaven
separate me from Him who made heaven ?
Or who from beneath can frighten me into
forsaking God, when I should not have known
"f things beneath but by forsaking Him ? In
fine, what place can remove me from His love,
when He coul^ not be all in every place un-
less He were contained in none ?

' Rom. viii. 38, 39.

20. "No Other creature," he says, separ- •
ates us. O man of profound mysteries ! He
thought it not enough to say, no creature: but
he says no other creature; teaching that that
with which we love God and by which we cleave
to God, our mind, namely, and understanding,
is itself a creature. Thus the body is another
creature; and if the mind is an object of intel-
lectual perception, and is known only by this
means,the other creature is all that is an object
of sense, which as it were makes itself known
through the eyes, or ears, or smell, or taste,
or touch, and this must be inferior to what
is perceived by the intellect alone. Now, as •
God also can be known by the worthy, only
intellectually, => exalted though He is above the
intelligent mind as being its Creator and Au-
thor, there was danger lest the human mind, •
ftom being reckoned among invisible and im-
material things, should be thought to be of //le
same nature with Him who created it, and so
should fall away by pride from Him to whom
it should be united by love. For the mind
becomes like God, to the extent vouchsafed
by its subjection of itself to Him for informa-
tion and enlightenment. And if it obtains the
greatest nearness by that subjection which
produces likeness, it must be far removed from
Him by that presumption which would make
the likeness greater. It is this presumption
which leads the mind to refuse obedience to
the laws of God, in the desire to be sovereign,
as God is.

21. The farther, then, the mind departs
from God, not in space, but in affection and
lust after things below Him, the more it is
filled with folly and wretchedness. So by
love it returns to God, — a love which places
it not along with God, but under Him. And
the more ardor and eagerness there is in
this, the happier and more elevated will the
mind be, and with God as sole governor it
will be in perfect liberty. Hence it must
know that it is a creature. It must believe
what is the truth, — that its Creator remains
ever possessed of the inviolable and immut-
able nature of truth and wisdom, and must
confess, even in view of the errors from which
it desires deliverance, that it is liable to folly
and falsehood. But then again, it must take ^
care that it be not separated by the love of
the other creature, that is, of this visible
world, from the love of God Himself, which
sanctifies it in order to lasting happiness. No

' [/. e. only by the use of the mcnt.il f.qciilty of which God
Himself is the Creator and Author; not by any independently ex-
isting: power " of the Siinie nature with Him who created it.''— A.
H. N.]

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XV.

Other creature, then, — for we are our.selves a
creature, — separates us from the love of God
which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

CHAP. 13. WE ARE JOINED INSEPArKbLY TO

GOD BY CHRIST AND HIS SPIRIT.

22. Let this same Paul tell us who is this
Christ Jesus our Lord. "To them that are
called," he says, "we preach Christ the vir-
tue of God, and the wisdom of God." ' And
does not Christ Himself say, " I am the
truth?" If, then, we ask what it is to live
well,— that is, to strive after happiness by

» living well, — it must assuredly be to love vir-
tue, to love wisdom, to love truth, and to love
with all the heart, with all the soul, and with
all the mind; virtue which is inviolable and
immutable, wisdom which never gives place
to folly, truth which knows no change or va-
riation from its uniform character. Through
this the Father Himself is seen; for it is said,
"No man cometh unto the Father but t^y
me." To this we cleave by sanctification.
For when sanctified we burn with full and
perfect love, which is the only security for
our not turning away from God, and for our
being conformed to Him rather than to this
world; for "He has predestinated ns," says
the same apostle, "that we should be con-
formed to the image of His Son.^'^

23. It is through love, then, that we be-
come conformed to God; and by this con-
formation, and configuration, and circumcis-
ion from this world we are not confounded
with the things which are properly subject to
us. And this is done by tlie Holy Spirit.
"For hope," he says, "does not confound
us; for the love of God is shed abroad in our
hearts by the Holy Spirit, which is given unto
us." '* But we could not possibly be restored
to perfection by the Holy Spirit, unless He
Himself continued always perfect and immut-
able. And this plainly could not be unless
He were of the nature and of the very sub-
stance of God, who alone is always possessed
of immutability and invariableness. " The
creature," it is affirmed, not by me but by
Paul, "has been made subject to vanity." s
And what is subject to vanity is unable to
separate us from vanity, and to unite us to
the truth. But the Holy Spirit does this for
us. He is therefore no creature. For what-
ever is, must be either God or the creature.

CHAP. 14. — WE CLEAVE TO THE TRINITY, OUR
CHIEF GOOD, BY LOVE.

24. We ought then to love God, the Trinity

I I Cor. i. 23, 24.
4 Rom. V. 5.

- John xiv. 6.
5 Rom. viii. 20.

3 Rom. viii. 29.

in unity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; for
this must be said to be God Himself, for it is
said of God, truly and in the most exalted
sense, " Of whom are all things, by whom are
all things, in whom are all things." Those
are Paul's words. And what does he add ?
" To Him be glory." * All this is exactly true.
He does not say. To them; for God is one.
And what is meant by. To Him be glory, but
to Him be chief and perfect and wide-spread
praise ? For as the praise improves and ex-
tends, so the love and affection increases in
fervor. And when this is the case, mankind
cannot but advance with sure and firm step
to a life of perfection and bliss. This, I sup-
pose, is all we wish to find when we speak of
the chief good of man, to which all must be
referred in life and conduct. For the good
plainly exists; and we have shown by reason-
ing, as far as we were able, and by the divine
authority which goes beyond our reasoning,
that it is nothing else but God Himself. For
how can any thing be man's chief good but
that in cleaving to which he is blessed ? Now
this is nothing but God, to whom we can
cleave only by affection, desire, and love.

CHAP. 15. THE CHRISTIAN DEFINITION OF THE

FOUR VIRTUES.

25. As to virtue leading us to a happy life,
I hold virtue to be nothing else than perfect
love of God. For the fourfold division of vir-
tue I regard as taken from four forms of love.
For tliese four virtues (would that all felt
their influence in their minds as they have
their names in their mouths !), I should have
no hesitation in defining them: that temper-
ance is love giving itself entirely to that which
is loved; fortitude is love readily bearing all
things for the sake of the loved object; jus-
tice is love serving only the loved object, and
therefore ruling rightly; prudence is love dis-
tinguishing with sagacity between what hin-
ders it and what helps it. The object of this
love is not anything, but only God, the chief
good, the highest wisdom, the perfect har-
mony. So we may express the definition thus:
that temperance is love keeping itself entire
and incorrupt for God; fortitude is love bear-
ing everything readily for the sake of God;
justice is love serving God only, and there-
fore ruling well all else, as subject to man;
prudence is love making a right distinction
between what helps it towards God and what
might hinder it.'

6 Rom. xi. 36.

7 [It would be difficult to find in Christian literature a more
beautiful and satisfactory exposition of love to God. The Neo-
Platonic influence is manifest, but it is Neo-Platonism thoroughly
Christianized. — A. H. N.]

Chap. XVI.] OF THE MORALS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

CHAP, l6. — HARMOXY OF THE OLD AXD NEW
TESTAMENTS.

26. I will briefly set forth the manner of
life according to these virtues, one by one,
after I have brought forward, as I promised,
passages fi;om the Old Testament parallel to
those I have been quoting from the New Tes-
tament. For is Paul alone in saying that we
should be joined to God so that there should
be nothing between to separate us ? Does not
the prophet say the same most aptly and con-
cisely in the words, "It is good for me to
cleave to God?"' Does not this one word
cleave express all that the apostle says at length
about love ? And do not the words, It is
good, point to the apostle's statement, "All
things issue in good to them that love God ?"
Thus in one clause and in two words the pro-
phet sets forth the power and the fruit of
love.

27. And as the apostle says that the Son
of God is the virtue of God and the wisdom
of God, — virtue being understood to refer to
action, and wisdom to teaching (as in the
-ospel these two things are expressed in the
words, "All things were made by Him,"
which belongs to action and virtue; and then,
referring to teaching and the knowledge of
the truth, he says, " The life was the light of
nien"==). — could anything agree better with
these passages than what is said in the Old
Testament 3 of wisdom, "She reaches from
end to end in strength, and orders all things
sweetly?" For reaching in strength ex-
presses virtue, while ordering sweetly ex-
presses skill and method. But if this seems
obscure, see what follows: "And of ail," he
says, "God loved her; for she teaches the
knowledge of God, and chooses His works."
Nothing more is found here about action; for
choosing works is not the same as working,
so this refers to teaching. There remains
action to correspond with the virtue, to com-
plete the truth we wish to prove. Read then
what comes next: "But if," he says, "the
possession whicli is desired in life is honor-
able, what is more honorable than wisdom,
which works all things ?" Could anything be
brought forward more striking or more dis-
tinct than this, or even more fully expressed ?
Or, if you wish more, hear another passage
of the same meaning. "Wisdom," he says,
"teaches sobriety, and justice, and virtue."''
Sobriety refers, I think, to the knowledge of
tne truth, or to teaching; justice and virtue

to work and action. And I know nothing
comparable to these two things, that is, to
efificiency in action and sobriety in contem-
plation, which the virtue of God and the wis-
dom of God, that is, the Son of God, gives to
them that love Him, when the same prophet
goes on to show their value; for it is thus
stated: "Wisdom teaches sobriety, and jus-
tice, and virtue, than which nothing is more
useful in life to man." s

28. Perhaps some may think that those
passages do not refer to the Son of God.
What, then, is taught in the following words:
" She displays the nobility of her birth, hav-
mg her d^velling with (iod ? "<^ To what does
birth refer but to parentage ? And does not
dwelling with the Father claim and assert
equality? Again, as Paul says that the Son
of God is the wisdom of God,' and as the
Lord Himself says, "No man knoweth the
Father save the only-begotten Son,"^ what
could be more concordant than those words
of the prophet: " With Thee is wisdom which
knows Thy works, which was present at t'le
time of Thy making the world, and knew
what would be pleasing in Thine e)^es ? '' '
And as Christ is called the truth, which is
also taught by His being called the brightness
of the Father ■=' (for there is nothing round
about the sun but its brightness which is pro-
duced from it), what is there in the Old Tes-
tament more plainly and obviously in accord-
ance with this than the words, "Thy truth is
round about Thee ? " " Once more. Wisdom
herself says in the gospel, " No man cometh
unto the Father but by me; " " and the pro-
phet says, "Who knoweth Thy mind, unless
Thou givest wisdom?" and a little after,
"The things pleasing to Thee men have
learned, and have been healed by wis-
dom." '3

29. Paul says, " The love of God is shed
abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit which
is given unto us;""* and the prophet says,
"The Holy Spirit of knowledge will shun
guile." '5 For where there is guile there is
no love. Paul says that we are " conformed
to the image of the Son of God;"''' and the

' Ps. Ixxiii. 28. 2 John i. 3, 4.

3 [AuKiistin seems to make no distinction between Apocryphal
and Canonical books. The book of Wisdom was evidently a favor-
ite with him, doubtless on account of its decided Platonic qual-
ity.^A. H. X.]

* Wisd. viii. I, 4. 7.
4

5 Retract. 1. 7, § 3:—" The quotation from the book of Wisdom
is from my manuscript, where the readiuR is, 'Wisdom teaches
sobriety, justice, and virtue.' From these words I have made
some remarks true in themselves, but occasioned by a false resid-
ing. It is perfectly true that wisdom teaches truth of contempla-
tion, as I have explained sobriety; and excellence of action, which
is the meaning I give to justice'and virtue. And the reading in
better nianiLscripts has the .same meaning: ' It teaches sobrietv,
and wisdom, and justice, and virtue.' TJiese are the names given
by the Latin translator to ihe four virtues which philosophers u.su-
ally speak about. Sobriety is for temperance, wisdom for prudence,
virtue for fortitude, and justice only has its own name. It wa.s
long after that we found these virtues called by their proper names
in th^' Creek text of this book of Wisdom."

6 Wisd. viii. 3. 7 i Cor. i. 24.
9 Wisd. ix. 9. "o Heb. i. 3.

'- Tohn xiv. 6. '3 Wisd. ix. 17-19.

'5 Wisd. i. 5. "6 Rom. viii. 29.

8 Matt. xi. 27.
" Ps. Ixxxix. 8.
'4 Rom. V. 5.

THE JVORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XVIII.

prophet says, " Tlie Hj^lit of Tliy counte-
ance is stamped upon us."' Paul teaches
that the Holy Spirit is God, and therefore
is no creature; and the prophet says, "Thou
sendest Thy Spirit from the highest." - For
God alone is the highest, than whom nothing
is higher. Paul shows that the Trinity is one
God, when he says, "To Him be glory;" ^
and in the Old Testament it is said, " Hear^
O Israel, the Lord thy God is one God." ■*

CHAP. 17. — APPEAL TO THE MANICH^EANS,
CALLING OX THEM TO REPENT.

30. What more do you wish ? Why do you
resist ignorantly and obstinately? Why do
you pervert untutored minds by your mischie-
vous teaching ? The God of both Testaments
is one. For as there is an agreement in the
passages quoted from both, so is there in all
the rest, if you are willing to consider them
carefully and impartially. But because many
expressions are undignified, and so far adapt-
ed to minds creeping on the earth, that they
may rise by human things to divine, ^ while
many are figurative, that the inquiring mind
may have the more profit from the exertion of
finding their meaning, and the more delight
when it is found, you pervert this admirable
arrangement of the Holy Spirit for the purpose
of deceiving and ensnaring your followers.
As to the reason why divine Providence per-
mit's you to do this, and as to the truth of
the apostle's saying, " There must needs be
many heresies, that they which are approved
may be made manifest among you," ^ it would
take long to discuss these things, and you,
with whom we have now to do, are not ca-
pable of understanding them. I know you
well. To the consideration of divine things,
which are far higher than you suppose, you
bring minds quite gross and sickly, from be-
ing fed with material .images.

31. We must therefore in your case try not
to make vou understand divine thing's, which
IS impossible, but to make you desire to un-
derstand. This is the work of the pure and
guileless love of God, which is seen chiefly in
the conduct, and of which we have already
said much. This love, inspired by the Holy
Spirit, leads to the Son, that is, to the wisdom
of God, by which the Father Himself is
known. For if wisdom and truth are 'not

I Ps. iv. 6. 2 Wisd. ix. 17.

3 Rom. xi. 36. 4 Deut. vi. 4.

5 [Here we have the key to all that is best in Augustin's defense
of the anthropomorphisms and the seemingly imperfect ethical
representations of the Old Testament. See Mozley's essay on
'.' ^ ^.^ Manichaeans and the Jewish Fathers," in his Ruling Ideas
in Early Ages. The entire volume represents an attempt to ac ■
count for the elements in the Old Testament that offend the Chris-
tian consciousness. — A. H. N.]

^ 7 Cor. xi. ig.

sought for with the whole strength of the
mind, it cannot possibly be found. But when
it is sought as it deserves to be, it cannot with-
draw or hide itself from its lovers. Hence
its words, which you too are in the habit of
repeating, "Ask, and ye shall receive; seek,
and ye shall find; knock, and ft shall be
opened unto you: "^ " Nothing is hid which
shall not be revealed." ^ It is love that asks,
love that seeks, love that knocks, love that
reveals, love, too, that gives continuance in
what is revealed. From this love of wisdom,
and this studious inquiry, we are not debarred
by the Old Testament, as you always say
most falsely, but are exhorted to this with the
greatest urgency.

32. Hear, then, at length, and consider,
I pray you, what is said by the prophet:
" Wisdom is glorious, and never fadeth away;
yea, she is easily seen of them that love her,
and found of such as seek her. She prevent-
eth them that desire her, in making herself
first known unto them. Whoso seeketh her
early shall have no great travail; for he shall
find her sitting at his doors. To think, there-
fore, upon her is perfection of wisdom; and
whoso watcheth for her shall quickly be with-
out care. For she goeth about seeking such
as are worthy of her, showeth herself favora-
bly unto them in the ways, and meeteth them
in every thought. For the very true begin-
ning of her is the desire of discipline; and
the care of discipline is love; and love is the
keeping of her laws; and the giving heed
unto her laws is the assurance of incorruption;
and incorruption maketh us near unto God.
Therefore the desire of wisdom bringeth to
a kingdom. "9 Will you still continue in
dogged hostility to these things ? Do not
things thus stated, though not yet understood,
make it evident to every one that they contain
something deep and unutterable ? Would
that you could understand the things here
said ! Forthwith you would abjure all your
silly legends and your unmeaning material
imaginations, and with great alacrity, sincere
love, and full assurance of faith, would be-
take yourselves bodily to the shelter of the
most holy bosom of the Catholic Church.

CHAP. 18. ONLY IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

IS PERFECT TRUTH ESTABLISHED ON THE HAR-
MONY OF BOTH TESTAMENTS.

33. I could, according to the little ability I
have, take up the points separately, and
could expound and prove the truths I have
learned, which are generally more excellent
and lofty than words can express; but this

Matt.

vu. 7.

8 Matt. X. 26.

9 Wisd. VI. 12-20.

Chap. XIX.] OF THE MORALS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

cannot be done while you bark at it. For not
in vain is it said, "Give not that which is
holy to dogs."' Do not be angry. I too
barked and was a dog; and then, as was right,
instead of the food of teaching, I got the rod
of correction. But were there in you that
love of which we are speaking, or should it
ever be in you as much as the greatness of
the truth to be known requires, may God
vouchsafe to show you that neither is there
among the Manichsans the Christian faith
which leads to the summit of wisdom and
truth, the attainment of which is the true hap-
py life, nor is it anywhere but in the Catholic
teaching. Is not this what the Apostle Paul
appears to desire when he says, " For this
cause I bow my knees to the Father of our
Lord Jesus Christ, from whom the whole
family in heaven and earth is named, that He
Avould grant unto you, according to the riches
of His glory, to be strengthened with might
by His Spirit in the inner man; that Christ
may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye,
being rooted and grounded in love, may be
able to comprehend with all saints what is the
height, and length, and breadth, and depth,
and to know the love of Christ, which passeth
knowledge, that ye may be filled with all the
fullness of God }'' - Could anything be more
plainly expressed ?

34. Wake up a little, I beseech you, and
see the harmony of both Testaments, making
it quite plain and certain what should be the
manner of life in our conduct, and to what all
things should be referred. To the love of
God we are incited by the gospel, when it is
said, "Ask, seek, knock; " 3 by Paul, when he
says, " That ye, being rooted and grounded
in love, may be able to comprehend;"" by
the prophet also, when he says that wisdom
can easily be known by those who love it, seek
for it, desire it, watch for it, think about it,
care for it. The salvation of the minds and
the way of happiness is pointed out by the
concord of both Scriptures; and yet you choose
rather to bark at these things than to obey
them. I will tell you in one word what I
think. Do you listen to the learned men of
the Catholic Church with as peaceable a dis-
position, and with the same zeal, that I had
when for nine years I attended on you:*
there will be no need of so long a time as that

1 ■

during which you made a fool of me. In a
much, a very much, shorter time you will see
the difference between truth and vanity.

' Matt. vii. 6. =Eph. iii. 14-19.

3 Matt. vii. 7. 4 Eph. iii. 7.

S \_Animi not mentis. — A. H. N.]
* From his 19th to his 28th year.

CHAP. 19. — DESCRIPTION OF THE DUTIES OF \
TEMPERANCE, ACCORDING TO THE SACRED
SCRIPTURES.

35. It is now time to return to the four vir-
tues, and to draw out and prescribe a way of
life in conformity with them, taking each
separately. First, then, let us consider tem-
perance, which promises us a kind of integrity
and incorruption in the love by which we are
united to God. The office of temperance is ,
in restraining and quieting the passions which '
make us pant for those things which turn us
away from the laws of God and from the en-
joj^ment of His goodness, that is, in a word,
from the happy life. For there is the abode
of truth; and in enjoying its contemplation,
and in cleaving closely to it, we are assuredly
happy; but departing from this, men become
entangled in great errors and sorrows. For,
as the apostle says, " The root of all evils is
covetousness; which some having followed,
have made shipwreck of the faith, and have
pierced themselves through with many sor-
rows."'' And this sin of the soul is quite
plainly, to those rightly understanding, set
forth in the Old Testament in the transgres-
sion of Adam in Paradise. Thus, as the
apostle says, "In Adam we all die, and in
Christ we shall all rise again. " ^ Oh, the depth
of these mysteries ! But I refrain; for I am
now engaged not in teaching you the truth,
but in making you unlearn your errors, if I
can, that is, if God aid my purpose regarding
you.

2,6. Paul then says that covetousness is the
root of all evils; and by covetousness the old
law also intimates that the first man fell.
Paul tells us to put off the old man and put
on the new.' By the old man he means Adam
who sinned, and by the new man him whom
the Son of God took to Himself in consecra-
tion for our redemption. P'or he says in an-
other place, " The first man is of the earth,
earthy; the second man is from heaven,
heavenly. As is the earthy, such are they
also that are earthy; and as is the heavenly,
such are they also that are heavenly. And
as we have borne the image of the earthy, let
us also bear the image of the heavenly,'"" —
that is, put off the old man, and i)ut on the
new. The wiiole duty of temperance, then,
is to put off the old man, and to be renewetl
in God, — that is, to scorn all bodily delights,
and the popular applause, and to turn the
whole love to things divine and unseen.
Hence that following passage which is so ad-
mirable: " Though our outward man perish.

7 I Tim.vi. 10.
9 Col. iii. 9, 10.

•* I Cor. XV. 22.
'o I Cor. XV. 47-49.

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XXI.

our inward man is renewed day by day.*'^
Hear, too, the prophet singing, "Create in
me a clean lieart, O God, and renew a right
spirit within me. " - What can be said against
such harmony except by bhnd barkers ?

CHAP. 20. WE ARE REQUIRED TO DESPISE ALL

SENSIBLE THINGS, AND TO LOVE GOD ALONE.

37. Bodily delights have their source in all
those things with which the bodily sense
comes in contact, and which are by some
called the objects of sense; and among these
the noblest is light, in the common meaning
of the word, because among our senses also,
which the mind uses in acting through the
body, there is nothing more valuable than the
eyes, and so in the Holy Scriptures all the
objects of sense are spoken of as visible
things. Thus in the New Testament we are
warned against the love of these things in the
following words: "While we look not at the
things which are seen, but at the things which
are not seen; for the things which are seen
are temporal, but the things which are not
seen are eternal. "^ This shows how far
from being Christians those are who hold that
the sun and moon are to be not only loved
but worshipped. For what is seen if the sun
and moon are not ? But we are forbidden to
regard things which are seen. The man,
therefore, who wishes to offer that incorrupt
love to God must not love these things too.
This subject I will inquire into more particu-
larly elsewhere. Here my plan is to write not
of faith, but of the life by which we become
worthy of knowing what we believe. "God
then alone is to be loved; and all this world,
that is, all sensible things, are to be despised,
— while, however, they are to be used as this
life requires,

CHAP. 21. POPULAR RENOWN AND INQUISI-

TIVENESS ARE CONDEMNED IN THE SACRED
SCRIPTURES.

38, Popular renown is thus slighted and
scorned in the New Testament: "If I
wished,'' says St. Paul, "to please men, I
should not be the servant of Christ." " Aarain,
there is another production of the soul formed
by imaginations derived from material things,
and called the knowledge of things. In refer-
ence to this we are fitly warned against in-
quisitiveness to correct which is the great
function of temperance. Thus it is said,
" Take heed lest any one seduce you by
philosophy." And because the word philo-
sophy originally means the love and pursuit

I 2 Cor. iv. 16.
3 2 Cor. iv. 18

2 Ps. li. 10.
-t Gal. i. 10.

of wisdom, a thing of great value and to be
sought with the whole mind, the apostle, with
great prudence, that he might not be thought
to deter from the love of wisdom, has added
the words, "And the elements of this world." s
For some people, neglecting virtues, and ig-
norant of what God is, and of the majesty of
the nature which remains always the same,
think that they are engaged in an important
business when searching with the greatest in-
quisitiveness and eagerness into this material
mass which we call the world. This begets
so much pride, that they look upon them-
selves as inhabitants of the heaven of which
they often discourse. The soul, then, which
purposes to keep itself chaste for God must t
refrain from the desire of vain knowledge like
this. For this desire usually produces delu-
sion, so that the soul thinks that nothinor
exists but what is material; or if, from regard
to authority, it confesses that there is an im-
material existence, it can think of it only
under material images, and has no belief re-
garding it but that imposed by the bodily
sense. We may apply to this the orecept
about fleeing from idolatry.

39. To this New Testament authority, re-
quiring us not to love anything in this world,*
especially in that passage where it is said,
" Be not conformed to this world," ? — for the
point is to show that a man is conformed to
whatever he loves, — to this authority, then,
if I seek for a parallel passage in the Old
Testament, I find several; but there is one
book of Solomon, called Ecclesiastes, which
at great length brings all earthly things into
utter contempt. The book begins thus:
" Vanity of the vain, saith the Preacher,
vanity of the vain; all is vanity. What profit
hath a man of all his labor which he taketh
under the sun?"® If all these words are
considered, weighed, and thoroughly ex-
amined, many things are found of essential
importance to those who seek to flee from the
world and to take shelter in God; but this re-
quires time and our discourse hastens on to
other topics. But, after this beginning, he
goes on to show in detail that the vain 5 are
those who are deceived by things of this sort;
and he calls this which deceives them vanity,
— not that God did not create those things,
but because men choose to subject themselves
by their sins to those things, which the divine
law has made subject to them in well-doing.
For when you consider things beneath your-

5 Coll. ii. 8. 6 I John ii. 15.

7 Rom. xii. 2. 8 Eccles. i. 2, 3.

9 Retract, i. 7, § 3 : — " I found in many manuscripts the read-
ing, ' Vanity of the vain.' But this is not in the Greek, which has
' Vanity of vanities.' I'his 1 saw afterwards. And I found that
the best Latin manuscripts had vanities and not vain. But the,
truths I have drawn from this false reading are self-evident."

Chap. XXIII.] OF THE MORALS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

self to be admirable and desirable, what is
this but to be cheated and misled by unreal
# goods? The man, then, who is temperate in
such mortal and transient things has his rule
of life confirmed by both Testaments, that
he should love none of these things, nor think
them desirable for their own sakes, but should
use them as far as is required for the purposes
and duties of life, with the moderation of an
employer instead of the ardor of a lover.
These remarks on temperance are few in pro-
portion to the greatness of the theme, but
perhaps too many in view of the task on hand.

CHAP, 22, FORTITUDE COMES FROM THE LOVE

OF GOD.

40. On fortitude we must be brief. The
love, then, of which we speak, which ought
with all sanctity to burn in desire for God, is
called temperance, in not seeking for earthly
things, and fortitude, in bearing the loss of
them. But among all things which are pos-
sessed in this life, the body is, by God's most
righteous laws, for the sin of old, man's
heaviest bond, which is well known as a fact,
but most incomprehensible in its mystery.
Lest this bond should be shaken and dis-
turbed, the soul is shaken with the fear of
toil and pain; lest it should be lost and de-
stroyed, the soul is shaken with the fear of
death. For the soul loves it from the force
of habit, not knowing that by using it well
and wisely its resurrection and reformation
will, by the divine help and decree, be with-
out any trouble made subject to its nuthority.
But when the soul turns to God wholly in this
love, it knows these things, and so will not
only disregard death, but will even desire it,

41. Then there is the great struggle with
pain. But there is nothing, though of iron
hardness, which the fire of love cannot sub-
due. And when the mind is carried up to
God in this love, it will soar above all torture
free and glorious, with wings beauteous and
unhurt, on which chaste love rises to the em-
brace of God. Otherwise God must allow the
lovers of gold, the lovers of praise, the lovers
of women, to have more fortitude than the
lovers of Himself, though love in those cases
is rather to be called passion or lust. And
yet even here we may see with what force the
mind presses on with unflagging energy, in
spite of all alarms, towards that it loves; and
we learn that we should bear all things rather
than forsake God, since those men bear so
much in order to forsake Him.

CHAP. 23, SCRIPTURE PRECEPTS AND EXAM-
PLES OF FORTITUDE.

42. Instead of quoting here authorities from

the New Testament, where it is said, " Tribu-
: lation worketh patience; and patience, experi-
I ence and experience, hope;'" and where, in
addition to these words, there is proof and con-
firmation of them from the example of those
who spoke them; I will rather summon an ex-
ample of patience from the Old Testament,
against which the Manichoeans make fierce as-
saults. Nor will I refer to the man who, in the
midst of great bodily suffering, and with a
dreadful disease in his limbs, not only bore
human evils, but discoursed of things divine.
Whoever gives considerate attention to the ut-
terances of this man, will learn from every one
of them what value is to be attached to those
things which men try to keep in their power,
and in so doing are themselves brought by
passion into bondage, so that they become
the slaves of mortal things, while seeking ig-
norantly to be their masters. This man, in
the loss of all his wealth, and on being sud-
denly reduced to the greatest poverty, kept
his mind so unshaken and fixed upon God,
as to manifest that these things were not great
in his view, but that he was great in relation
to them, and God to him.^ If this mind were
to be found in men in our day, we should not
be so strongly cautioned in the New Testa-
ment against the possession of these things in
order that we may be perfect; for to have
these things without cleaving to them is much
more admiral:)le than not to have them at all.'
43. But since we are speaking here of bear-
ing pain and bodily sufferings, I pass from
this man, great as he was, indomitable as he
was: this is the case of a man. But these
Scriptures present to me a woman of am.azing
fortitude, and I must at once go on to her
case. This woman, along with seven chil-
dren, allowed the tyrant and executioner to
extract her vitals from her body rather than
a profane word from her mouth, encouraging
her sons by her exhortations, though she
suffered in the tortures of their bodies, and
was herself to un(,lergo what she called on
them to bear.* What patience could be
greater than this ? And yet why should we
be astonished that the love of God, implanted
in her inmost heart, bore up against tyrant,
and executioner, and pain, and sex, and
natural affection ? Had she not heard,
" Precious in the sight of the Lord is the
death of His saints ?"5 Flad she not heard,
".\ patient man is better than the mightiest ? ''*
Had she not heard, "All that is appointed

' Rom. V. 3, 4. 2 Job. i. 2.

3 [It is interestiriK to observe how remote Augiistin was from at-
tachin.i.' superior merit to voluntary poverty, or to other forms of
asceticism as ends m themselves. What he prized was the ability
to use without abusin.u;, to have without cleavmg to the good things
which Cjod provides. — A. H. N.]

4 2 Mac. vii. 5 Ps, cxvi. 15. * Prov. xvi. 32.

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XXV.

thee receive; and in pain bear it; and in
abasement keep thy patience: for in fire are
gold and silver tried V' ' Had she not heard,
"The fire tries the vessels of the potter, and
for just men is the trial of tribulation?"^
These she knew, and many other precepts of
fortitude written in these l)Ooks, which alone
existed at that time, by the same divine Spirit
who writes those in the New Testament.

CHAP. 24. — OF JUSTICE AND PRUDENCE.

44. What of justice that pertains to God?
As the Lord says, " Ye cannot serve two mas-
ters," ^ and the apostle denounces those who
serve the creature rather than the Creator,-*
was it not said before in the Old Testament,
"Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and
Him only shalt thou serve ? " ^ I need say no
more on this, for these books are full of such
passages. The lover, then, whom we are
describing, will get from justice this rule of
life, that he must with perfect readiness serve
the God whom he loves, the highest good,
the highest wisdom, the highest peace;* and
as regards all other things, must either rule
them as subject to himself, or treat them with
a view to their subjection-. This rule of
life, is, as we have shown, confirmed by the
authority of both Testaments.

45. With equal brevity we must treat of
prudence, to which it belongs to discern be-
tween what is to be desired and what to be
shunned. Without this, nothing can be done
of what we have already spoken of. It is the
part of prudence to keep watch with most
anxious vigilance, lest any evil influence
should stealthily creep in upon us. Thus the
Lord often exclaims, " Watch; "^ and He
says, "Walk while ye have the light, lest
darkness come upon you."** And then it is
said, " Know ye not that a little leaven leav-
eneth the whole lump?"^ And no passage
can be quoted from the Old Testament more
expressly condemning this mental somno-
lence, which makes us ins'ensible to destruc-
tion advancing on us step by step, than those
words of the prophet, " He who despiseth
small things shall fall by degrees." '" On this
topic I might discourse at length did our
haste allow of it. And did our present task
demand it, we might perhaps prove the depth
of these mysteries, by making a mock of
which profane men in their perfect ignorance
fall, not certainly by degrees, but witli a
headlong overthrow.

I Ecclus. ii. 4, 5. = Kcclus. xxvii. 6. 3 Matt. vi. 24.

4 Rom. i. 25. 5 Deut. vi. 13.

6 A name given by Ausrus^tin to the Holy Spirit, r\ xxx.

7 Matt. xxiv. 42. .** John xii. 35. 9 i Cor. v. 6.
° Ecclus. xix. I.

CHAP. 25, FOUR MORAL DUTIES REGARDING

THE LOVE OF GOD, OF WHICH LOVE THE RE-
WARD IS ETERNAL LIFE AND THE KNOWLEDGE
OF THE TRUTH.

46. I need say no more about right con-
duct. For if God is man's chief good, whicii
you cannot deny, it clearly follows, since to
seek the chief good is to live well, that to live
well is nothing else but to love God with all
the heart, with all the soul, with all the mind;
and, as arising from this, that this love must
be preserved entire and incorrupt, which is
the part of temperance; that it give way
before no troubles, which is the part of forti-
tude; that it serve no other, which is the part
of justice; that it be watchful in its inspec-
tion of things lest craft or fraud steal in,
which is the part of prudence. This is the
one perfection of man, by which alone he can
succeed in attaining to the purity of truth.
This both Testaments enjoin in concert; this
is commended on both sides alike. Why do
you continue to cast reproaches on Scriptures
of which you are ignorant ? Do you not see
the folly of your attack upon books which
only those who do not understand them find
fault with, and which only those who find
fault fail in understanding ? For neither can
an enemy know them, nor can one who knows
them be other than a friend to them.

47. Let us then, as many as have in view
to reach eternal life, love God with all the
heart, with all the soul, with all the mind.
For eternal life contains the whole reward in
the promise of which we rejoice; nor can the
reward precede desert, nor be given to a man
before he is worthy of it. What can be more
unjust than this, and what is more just than
God ? We should not then demand the re-
ward before we deserve to get it. Here,
perhaps, it is not out of place to ask what is
eternal life; or rather let us hear the Be-
stower of it: " This," He says, " is life eter-
nal, that they should know Thee, the true
God, and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast
sent." " So eternal life is the knowledge of
the truth. See, then, how perverse and pre-
posterous is the character of those who think
that their teaching of the knowledge of God
will make us perfect, when this is the reward
of those already perfect ! What else, then,
have we to do but first to love with full affec-
tion Him whom we desire to know?'" Hence
arises that principle on which we have all

II John xvii. 3. . . ■ .

'- Retract, i. -. § 4: — "I should have seXAsincere affection rather
than full; or it mijrht be thought that the love of (;od Vk-ill be no
greater when we shall see Him face to face. Full, then, must be
here understood as meaning that it cannot be greater while we
walk by faith. T"here will be greater, yea, perfect fullness, but
only by sight."

Chap. XXVII.] OF THE MOR.\LS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

along insisted, that there is nothing more
wholesome in the Cathohc Church than using
authority ' before argument.

CHAP. 26. LOVE OF OURSELVES AND OF OUR

NEIGHBOR.

48. To proceed to what remains. It may
be thought that there is nothing here about
man himself, the lover. But to think this,
shows a want of clear perception. For it is
impossible for one who loves God not to love
himself. For he alone has a proper love for
himself who aims diligently at the attainment
of the chief and true good; and if this is
nothing else but God, as has been shown,
what is to prevent one who loves God from
loving himself ? And then, among men should
there be no bond of mutual love ? Yea, verily;
so that we can think of no surer step towards
the love of God than the love of man to man.

49. Let the Lord then supply us with the
other precept in-answer to the question about
the precepts of life; for He was not satisfied
with one as knowing that God is one thing
and man another, and that the difference is
nothing less than that between the Creator
and the thing created in the likeness of its
Creator. He says then that the second pre-
cept is, " Thou shalt love thy neighbor as
thyself.'' ^ Now you love yourself suitably
when you love God better than yourself.
What, then, you aim at in yourself you must
aim at in your neighbor, namely, that he may
love God with a perfect affection. For you
do not love him as yourself, unless you try
to draw him to that good which you are your-
self pursuing. For this is the one good which
has room for all to pursue it along with thee.
From this precept proceed the duties of
human society, in which it is hard to keep
from error. But the first thing to aim at is,
tnat we should be benevolent, that is, that we
cherish no malice and no evil design against
another. For man is the nearest neighbor of
man.

50. Hear also what Paul says: " The love
of our neighbor/' he says, " worketh no ill." ^
llie testimonies here made use of are very
short, but, if I mistake not, they are to the
point, and sufficient for the purpose. And
every one knows how many and how weighty
are the words to be found everywhere in these
l)Ooks on the love of our neighbor. But as a
man may sin against another in two ways,
either by injuring him or by not helping him

' [By authority Augustin does not mean the authority of the
Church or of Scripture, but he refers to the loving recognition of
the authority of God as the condition of true discipleship. — A.
H. X.)

' Matt. .xxii. 39. 3 Rom. xiii. 10.

when it is in his power, and as it is for these
things which no loving man would do that
men are called wicked, all that is required is,
I think, proved by these words, "The love
of our neighbor worketh no ill." And if we
cannot attain to good unless we first desist
from working evil, our love of our neighbor
is a sort of cradle of our love to God, so that,
as it is said, " the love of our neighbor work-
eth no ill," we may rise from this to these
other words, " We know that all things issue
in good to them that love God."''

51. But there is a sense in which these
either rise together to fullness and perfection,
or, while the love of God is first in beginning,
the love of our neighbor is first in coming to
perfection. For perhaps divine love takes
hold on us more rapidly at the outset, but
we reach perfection more easily in lower
things. However that may be, the main »
point is this, that no one should think that
while he despises his neighbor he will come
to happiness and to the God whom he loves.
And would that it were as easy to seek the
good of our neighbor, or to avoid hurting
him, as it is for one well trained and kind-
hearted to love his neighbor ! These things
require more than mere good-will, and can
be done only by a high degree of thoughtful-
ness and prudence, which belongs only to
those to whom it is given by God, the source
of all good. On this topic — which is one, I
think, of great difficulty — I will try to say a few
words such as my plan admits of, resting all
my hope in Him whose gifts these are.

CHAP. 27. ON DOING GOOD TO THE BODY OF

OUR NEIGHBOR.

52. Man, then, as viewed by his fellow- ,
man, is a rational soul with a mortal and
earthly body in its service. Therefore he
who loves his neighbor does good partly to
the man's body, and partly to his soul. What
benefits the body is called medicine; what
benefits the soul, discipline. Medicine here
includes everything that either preserves or
restores bodily health. It includes, there-
fore, not only what belongs to the art of
medical men, properly so called, but also
food and drink, clothing and shelter, and
every means of covering and protection to
guard our l)odies against injuries and mishaps
from without as well as from within. For
hunger and thirst, and cold and heat, and all
violence from without, produce loss of that
health which is the point to be considered.

53. Hence those who seasonably and wisely
supply all the things required for warding off

4 Rom. viii. 28.

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XXVIII.

these evils and distresses ure called compas-
sionate, although they may hav^e been so wise
that no painful feeling disturbed their mind
in the exercise of compasr:ion.' No doubt
the word compassionate implies suffering in
the heart of the man who feels for the sorrow
of another. And it is equally true that a wise
man ought to be free from all painful emo-
tion when he assists the needy, when he gives
food to the hungry and water to the thirsty,
when he clothes the naked, when he takes the
stranger into his house, when he sets free the
oppressed, when, lastly, he extends his
charity to the dead in giving them burial.
Still the epithet compassionate is a proper
one, although he acts with tranquillity of
mind, not from the stimulus of painful feel-
ing, but from motives of benevolence. There
is no harm in the word compassionate when
there is no passion in the case.

54. Fools, again, who avoid the exercise of
compassion as a vice, because they are not
sufficiently moved by a sense of duty without
feeling also distressful emotion, are frozen
into hard insensibility, which is very different
from the calm of a rational serenity. God,
on the other hand, is properly called com-
passionate; and the sense in which He is so
will be understood by those whom piety and
diligence have made fit to understand.
There is a danger lest, in using the words of
the learned, we harden the souls of the un-
learned by leading them away from compas-
sion instead of softening them with the desire
of a charitable disposition. As compassion,
then, requires us to ward off these distresses
from others, so harmlessness forbids the in-
fliction of them.

CHAP. 28. ON DOING GOOD TO THE SOUL OF

OUR NEIGHBOR. TWO PARTS OF DISCIPLINE,
RESTRAINT AND INSTRUCTION. THROUGH
GOOD CONDUCT WE ARRIVE AT THE KNOWL-
EDGE OF THE TRUTH.

55. As regards discipline, by which the
health of the mind is restored, without which
bodily health avails nothing for security
against misery, the subject is one of great
difficulty. And as in the body we said it
is one thing to cure diseases and wounds,
which few can do properly, and another thing
to meet the cravings of hunger and thirst,
and to give assistance in all the other ways in
which any man may at any time help another;
so in the mind there are some things in which

I Retract, i. 7. § 4: — " This does not mean that there are actual-
ly in this life wise men such as are here spoken of. My words are
not, 'although they are so wise,' but 'although they were so wise.' "
[Augustin's ideal wise man was evidently the " Gnostic " of Clem-
ent of Alexandria. The conception is Stoical and Neo-Platonic
— A. H. N.]

the high and rare offices of the teacher are
not much called for, — as, for instance, in ad-
vice and exhortation to give to the needy the
things already mentioned as required for the
body. To give such advice is to aid the mind
by discipline, as giving the things themselves
is aiding the body by our resources. But
there are other cases where diseases of the
mind, many and various in kind, are healed
in a way strange and indescribable. Unless
His medicine were sent from heaven to men,
so heedlessly do they go on in sin, there
would be no hope of salvation; and, indeed,
even bodily health, if you go to the root of
the matter, can have com.e to men from none
but God, who gives to all things their being
and their well-being.

56. This discipline, then, which is the
medicine of the mind, as far as we can gather
from the sacred Scriptures, includes two
things, restraint and instruction. Restraint
implies fear, and instruction love, in the
person benefited by the discipline; for in the
giver of the benefit there is the love without
the fear. In both of these God Himself, bv
whose goodness and mercy it is that we are
anything, has given us in the two Testaments
a rule of discipline. For though both are
found in both Testaments, still fear is promi-
nent in the Old, and love in the New; which
the apostle calls bondage in the one, and lib-
erty in the other. Of the marvellous order
and divine harmony of these Testaments it
would take long to speak, and many pious
and learned men have discoursed on it. The
theme demands many books to set it forth
and explain it as far as is possible for man.
He, then, who loves his neighbor endeavors
all he can to procure his safety in body and
in soul, making the health of the mind the
standard in his treatment of the body. And
as regards the mind, his endeavors are in this
order, that he should first fear and then love
God. This is true excellence of conduct, and
thus the knowledge of the truth is acquired
which we are ever in the pursuit of.

57. The Manichseans agree with me as re-
gards the duty of loving God and our neigh-
bor, but they deny that this is,.taught in th'e
Old Testament. How greatly they err in this
is, I think, clearly shown by the passages
quoted above on both these duties. But, in
a single word, and one which only stark mad-
ness can oppose, do they not see the unrea-
sonableness of denying that these very two
precepts which they commend are quoted by
the Lord in the Gospel from the Old Testa-
ment, " Thou shalt love the Lord thy God
with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and
with all thy mind;" and the other, "Thou

Chap. XXIX.] OF THE MORALS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

shalt love thy neighbor as thyself?" ' Or if
they dare not deny this, from the light of truth
being too strong tor them, let tliem deny that
these precepts are salutary; let them deny, if
they can, that they teach the best morality;
let them assert that it is not a duty to love
God, or to love our neighbor; that all things
do not issue in good to them that love God;
that it is not true that the love of our neigh-
bor worketh no ill (a two-fold regulation of
human life which is most salutary and excel-
lent). By such assertions they cut themselves
off not only from Christians, but from man-
kind. But if they dare not speak thus, but
must confess the divinity of the precepts, why
do they not desist from assailing and malign-
ing with horrible profanity _^the books from
which they are quoted ?

58. Will they say, as they often do, that
although we find these precepts in the
books, it does not follow that all is good that
is found there ? How to meet and refute this
quibble I do not well see. Shall I discuss
the words of the Old Testament one by one,
to prove to stubborn and ignorant men their
perfect agreement with the New Testament ?
But when will this be done ? When shall I
have time, or they patience ? What, then, is
to be done? Shall I desert the cause, and
leave them to escape detection in an opinion
which, though false and impious, is hard to
disprove? I will not. God will Himself be
at hand to aid me; nor will He suffer me in
those straits to remain helpless or forsaken.

CHAP. 29. OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE SCRIPT-

I URES.

59. Attend, then, ye Manichaeans, if per-
ijhance there are some of you of whom your
superstition has hold so as to allow you yet to

I escape. Attend, I say, without obstinacy,

' without the desire to oppose, otherwise your

decision will be fatal to yourselves. No one

can doubt, and you are not so lost to the

truth as not to understand that if it is good,

as all allow, to love God and our neighbor,

whatever hangs on these two precepts cannot

rightly be pronounced bad. What it is that

langs on them it would be absurd to think of

'earning from me. Hear Christ Himself;

lear Christ, I say; hear the Wisdom of God:

■'On these two commandments," He says,

■ iiang all the law and the prophets.""

60. What can the most shameless obstinacy
I say to this? That these are not Christ's

words ? But they are written in the Gospel
s His words. That the writing is false? Is

' Dent. vi. 5; I,ev. xix. iS; Matt. xxii. 37, 39.
' .Matt. xxii. 40.

not this most profane blasphemy ? Is it not
most presumptuous to speak thus? Is it not
m.ost foolhardy? Is it not most criminal?
The worshippers of idols, who hate even the
name of Christ, never dared to speak thus
against these Scriptures. For the utter over-
throw of all literature will follow, and there
will be an end to all books handed down from
the past, if what is supported by such a strong
popular belief and established by the uniform
testimony of so many men and so many times,
is brought into such suspicion, that it is not
allowed to have the credit and the authority
of common history. In fine, what can you
quote from any writings of which I may not
speak in this way, if it is quoted against m)'
opinion and my purpose ? ^

61. And is it not intolerable that they forbid
us to believe a book widely known and placed
now in the hands of all, wliile they insist on
our believing the book which they quote ? If
any writing is to be suspected, what should
be more so than one which has not merited
notoriety, or which may be throug*hout a for-
gery, bearing a false name ? If you force
such a writing on me against my will, and
make a display of authority to drive me into
belief, shall I, when I have a writing which I
see spread far and wide for a length of time,
and sanctioned by the concordant testimony
of churches scattered over all the world, de-
grade myself by doubting, and, worse degra-
dation, by doubting at your suggestion ?
Even if you brought forward other readings,
I should not receive them unless supported
by general .agreement; and this being the
case, do you think that now, when you bring
forward nothing to compare with the text ex-
cept your own silly and inconsiderate state-
ment, mankind are so unreasonable and so
forsaken by divine Providence as to prefer to
those Scriptures not others quoted by you in^
refutation, but merely your own words ? You
ought to bring forward another manuscript
with the same contents, but incorrupt and
more correct, with only the passage wanting
which you charge with being spurious. For
example, if you hold that the Epistle of Paul
to the Romans is spurious, you must bring
forward another incorrupt, or rather another
manuscript with the same epistle of the same
apostle, free from error and corruption. You
say you will not, lest you be suspected of
corrupting it. This is your usual reply, and
a true one. Were you to do this, we should
assuredly have this very suspicion; and all
men of any sense would have it too. See then

3 [The stroHR testimony borne by Aucfustin asiainst the perver.se
subjective criticism of the Manicha:ans has an important applica-
tion to the present time. — A. H. N.]

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XXX.

what you nre to think of your own authority;
and consider whetiier it is right to believe
your words against these Scriptures, when the
simple fact that a manuscript is brought for-
ward by you makes it dangerous to put faith
in it.

CHAP. 30. THE CHURCH APOSTROPHISED AS

TEACHER OF ALL WISDOM. DOCTRINE OF THE
CATHOLIC CHURCH.

62. But why say more on this? For who
but sees that men who dare to speak thus
against the Christian Scriptures, though they
may not be what they are suspected of bemg,
are at least no Christian^ ? For to Christians
this rule of life is given, that we should love
the Lord our God with all the heart, with all
the soul, and with all the mind, and our
neighbor as ourselves; for on these two com-
mandments hang all the law and the prophets.
Rightly, then, Catholic Church, most true
mother of Christians, dost thou not only
teach that God alone, to find whom is the
happiest life, must be worshipped in perfect
purit}^ and chastity, bringing in no creature
as an object of adoration whom we should be
required to serve; and from that incorrupt and
inviolable eternity to which alone man should
be made subject, in cleaving to which alone
the rational soul escapes misery, excluding
everything made, everything liable to change,
everything under the power of time; without
confounding what eternity, and truth, and
peace itself keeps separate, or separating
what a common majesty unites: but thou dost
also contain love and charity to our neighbor
in such a way, that for all kinds of diseases
with which souls are for their sins afflicted,
there is found with thee a medicine of prevail-
ing efficacy.

63. Thy training and teaching are child-
like for children, forcible for youths, peace-
ful for the aged, taking into account the age
of the mind as well as of the body. Thou
subjectest women to their husbands in chaste
and faithful obedience, not to gratify passion,
but for the propagation of offspring,' and for
domestic society. Thou givest to men au-
thority over their wives, not to mock the
weaker sex, but in the laws of unfeigned love.
Thou dost subordinate children to their
parents in a kind of free bondage, and dost
set parents over their children in a godly rule.
Thou bindest brothers to brothers in a re-
ligious tie stronger and closer than that of

I [This view of the marriage relation seems to have been almost
universal in the ancient Church. TertuUian and Clement of
Alexandria are fond of dwelling upon it. For Augustin's views
more fully stated see his De Bono Conjug-ali, 6. See also an in-
teresting excursus on " Continence in Married Life" in Cunning-
ham's St. Austin, p. 168. sq. — A. H. N.]

blood. Without violation of the connections
of nature and of choice, thou bringest within
the bond of mutual love every relationship of
kindred, and every alliance of affinity. Tnou
teachest servants to cleave to their masters
from delight in their task rather than from
the necessity of their position. Thou render-
est masters forbearing to their servants, from
a regard to God their common Master, and
more disposed to advise than to compel. Thou
unitest citizen to citizen, nation to nation, yea,
man to man, from the recollection of their
first parents, not only in society but in fra-
ternity. Thou teachest kings to seek the
good of their peoples; thou counsellest
peoples to be subject to their kings. Thou
teachest carefully to whom honor is due, to
whom regard, to whom reverence, to whom
fear, to wnom consolation, to whom admoni-
tion, to whom encouragement, to whom disci-
pline, to whom rebuke, to whom punishment;
showing both how all are not due to all, and
how to all love is due, and how injury is due
to none.^

64. Then, after this human love has nour-
ished and invigorated the mind cleaving to
thy breast, and fitted it for following God,
when the divine majesty has begun to disclose
itself as far as suffices for man while a dweller
on the earth, such fervent charity is produced,
and such a flame of divine love is kindled,
that by the burning out of all vices, and by
the purification and sanctification of the man,
it becomes plain how divine are these words,
"I am a consuming fire," ^ and, "I have
come to send fire on the earth.'' "• These two
utterances of one God stamped on both
Testaments, exhibit with harmonious testi-
mony the sanctification of the soul, pointing
forward to the accomplishment of tnat which

2 [If this apostrophe had been addressed to " Christianity "
rather than to the " Catholic Church," no Christian could fail to
see in it one of the noblest tributes ever bestowed on the religion of
Christ. Augustin identified Christianity with the organized body
which was far from realizing the ideal that he here sets forth. As
an apostrophe to ideal Christianity nothing could be finer. — A.
H. N.]

3Deut.iv. 24. Retract, i. 7, §5: — "The Pelagians may think
that I have spoken of perfection as attainable in this life. Kut
they must not think so. For the fervor of charity which is fitted for
following God, and of force enough to consume all vices, can have
its origin and growth in this life; but it does not follow that it can
here accomplish the purpose of its origin, so that no vice shall
remain in the man; although this great effect is produced by
this same fervor of charity, when and where this is possible, that
as the laver of regeneration purifies from the guilt of all the sins
which attach to man's birth, or come from his evil conduct, so this
perfection may purify him from all stain from the vices which
necessarily attend human infirmity in this world. So we must
understand the words of the apostle : 'Christ loved the Church,
and gave himself for it; cleansing it with the washing of water by
the word, that He might present it to Himself a glorious Chureh,
not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing ' (Eph. v. 25-27).
For in this world there is the washing of water by the word which
purifies the Church. But as the whole Church, as long as it is
here, says, ' Forgive us our debts,' it certainly is not while here
without spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but from that which
it here receives, it is led on to the glory which is not here, and to
perfection.

4 Luke xii. 49.

CHAP. XXXI.] OF THE MORALS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

is also quoted in the New Testament from the
Old: " Death is swallowed up in victory. O
death, where is thy sting? Where. O death,
is thy contest ?" ' Could these heretics un-
derstand this one saying, no longer proud but
quite reconciled, they would worship God
nowhere but with thee and in thy bosom. In
thee, as is fit, divine precepts are kept by
widely-scattered multitudes. In thee, as is
fit, it is well understood how much more
heinous sin is when the law is known than
when it is unknown. For "the sting of
death is sin, and the strength of sin is the
law," ^ which adds to the force with which the
consciousness of disregard of the precept
strikes and slays. In thee it is seen, as is fit,
how vain is effort under the law, when lust lays
waste the mind, and is held in check by fear
of punishment, instead of being overborne by
the love of virtue. Thine, as is fit, are the
man}' hospitable, the many friendly, the
many compassionate, the many learned, the
many chsste, the many saints, the many so
ardent in their love to God, that in perfect
continence and amazing indifference to this
world they find happiness even in solitude.

CHAP. 31. THE LIFE OF THE ANACHORETES

AND CCENOBITES SET AGAINST THE CONTI-
NENCE OF THE MANICH^ANS.

65. What must we think is seen by those
who can live without seeing their fellow-
creatures, though not without loving them?
It must be something transcending human
things in contemplating which man can live
without seeing his fellow-man. Hear now,
ye Manichsans, the customs and notable
continence of perfect Christians, who have
thought it right not only to praise but also to
practise the height of chastity, that you may
be restrained, if there is any shame in you,
from vaunting your abstinence before unin-
structed minds as if it were the hardest of all
things. I will speak of tilings of which you
are not ignorant, though you hide them from
us. For who does not know that there is a
daily increasing multitude of Christian men
of absolute continence spread all over the
world, especially in the East and in Egypt,
as you cannot help knowing ?

66. I will sny nothing of those to whom I
just now alluded, who, in complete seclusion
from the view of men, inhabit regions utterly
barren, content with simple bread, which is
brought to them periodically, and with water,
enjoying communion with God, to whom in
purity of mind they cleave, and most blessed
in contemplating His beauty, which can be

' Hos. xiii. 14; I Cor. xv. 54, 55.

2 I Cor. XV. 56

seen only by the understanding of saints. I
will say nothing of tliem, because some people
think them to have abandoned human things
more than they ought, not considering how
much those may benefit us in their minds by
prayer, and in their lives by example, whose
bodies we are not permitted to see. But to
discuss this point would take long, and would
be fruitless; for if a man does not of his own
accord regard this high pitch of sanctity as
admirable and honorable, how can our speak-
ing lead him to do so? Only the Mani-
chsans, who make a boast of nothing, should
be reminded that the abstinence and con-
tinence of the great saints of the Catholic
Church has gone so far, that some think it
should be checked and recalled within the
limits of humanity, — so far above men, even
in the judgment of those who disapprove,
have their minds soared.

67. But if this is beyond our tolerance, who
can but admire and commend those who,
slighting and discarding the pleasures of this
world, living together in a most chaste and holy
society, unite in passing their time in prayers,
in readings,, in discussions, without any swell-
ing of pride, or noise of contention, or sullen-
ness of envy; hut quiet, modest, peaceful,
their life is one of perfect harmony and devo-
tion to God, an offering rnost acceptable to
Him from whom the power to do those things
is obtained ? No one possesses anything of
his own; no one is a burden to another. They
work with their hands in such occupations as
may feed their bodies without distracting their
minds from God. The product of their toil
they give to the decans or tithesmen, — so
called from being set over the tithes, — so that
no one is occupied with the care of his body,
either in food or clothes, or in anything else
required for daily use or for tlie common ail-
ments. These decans, again, arranging
everything with great care, and meeting
promptly the demands made by that life on
account of bodily infirmities, have one called
" father,'' to whom they give in their ac-
counts. These fathers are not only more
saintly in their conduct, but also distin-
guished for divine learning, and of high char-
acter in every way; and without priile they
supermtend those whom they call their chil-
dren, having themselves great authority in
giving orders, and meeting with willing obe-
dience from those under their charge. At
the close of the day they assemble from their
separate dwellings before their meal to hear
their father, assembling to the number of
three tliousand at least for one father; for
one may have even a much larger number
than this. Thev listen with astonishing

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XXXIII.

eagerness in perfect silence, and give ex-
pression to the feelings of their minds
as moved by the words of the preacher, in
groans, or tears, or signs of joy without noise
or shouting. Then there is refreshment for
the body, as much as health and a sound con-
dition of the body requires, every one check-
ing unlawful appetite, so as not to go to ex-
cess even in the poor, inexpensive fare pro-
vided. So they not only abstain from flesh
and wine, in order to gain the mastery over
their passions, but also from those things
which are only the more likely to whet the
appetite of the palate and of the stomach,
from what some call their greater cleanness,
which often serves as a ridiculous and dis-
graceful excuse for an unseemly taste for ex-
quisite viands, as distant from animal food.
Whatever they possess in addition to what is
required for their support (and much is ob-
tained, owing to their industry and frugality),
they distribute to the needy with greater care
than they took in procuring it for themselves.
For while they make no effort to obtain abun-
dance, they make every effort to prevent their
abundance remaining with them, — so much
so, that they send shiploads to places in-
habited by poor people. I need say no more
on a matter known to all.'

68. Such, too, is the life of the women, who
serve God assiduously and chastely, living
apart and removed as far as propriety demands
from the men, to whom they are united only
in pious affection and in imitation of virtue.
No young men are allowed access to them,
nor even old men, however respectable and
approved, except to the porch, in order to
furnish necessary supplies. For the women
occupy and maintain themselves by working
in wool, and hand over the cloth to the
brethren, from whom, in return, they get
what they need for food. Such customs,
such a life, such arrangements, such a system,
I could not commend as it deserves, if I wished
to commend it; besides, I am afraid that it
would seem as if 1 thought it unlikely to gain
acceptance from the mere description of it,
if I considered myself obliged to add an
ornamental eulogium to the simple narrative.
Ye Manichasans, find fault here if you can.
Do not bring into prominence our tares before
men too blind to discriminate.

CHAP. 32. PRAISE OF THE CLERGY.

69. There is not, however, such narrow-
ness in the moral excellence of the Catholic

I [This picture of coenobitic life, even in its purest form, is
doubtless idealized. It is certain that the monasteries very soon
became hot-beds of vice, and the refuge of the scum of society. —
A. H. N.]

Church as that I should limit my praise of it
to the life of those here mentioned. For how
many bishops have I known most excellent
and holy men, how many presbyters, how
many deacons, and ministers of all kinds of
the divine sacraments, whose virtue seems to
me more admirable and more worthy of
commendation on account of the greater
difficulty of preserving it amidst the manifold
varieties of men, and in this life of turmoil !
For they preside over men needing cure as
much as over those already cured. The vices
of the crowd must be borne with in order that
they may be cured, and the plague must be
endured before it is subdued. To keep here
the best way of life and a mind calm and
peaceful is very hard. Here, in a word, we
are among people who are learning to live.
There they live.

CHAP. 33. ANOTHER KIND OF MEN LIVING TO-
GETHER IN CITIES. FASTS OF THREE DAYS.

70. Still I would not on this account cast a
slight upon a praiseworthy class of Christians,
— those, namely, who live together in cities,
quite apart from common life. I saw at
Milan a lodging-house of saints, in number
not a. few, presided over by one presbyter, a
man of great excellence and learning. At
Rome I knew several places where there was
in each one eminent for weight of character,
and prudence, and divine knowledge, presid-
ing over all the rest who lived with him, in
Christian charity, and sanctity, and liberty.
These, too, are not burdensome to any one;
but, in the Eastern fashion, and on the au-
thority of the Apostle Paul, they maintain
themselves with their own hands. I was told
that many practised fasts of quite amazing
severity, not merely taking only one meal
daily towards night, which is everywhere quite
common, but very often continuing for three
days or more in succession without food or
drink. And this among not men only, but
women, who also live together in great num-
bers as widows or virgins, gaining a livelihood
by spinning and weaving, and presided over
in each case by a woman of the greatest judg-
ment and experience, skilled and accom-
plished not only in directing and forming
moral conduct, but also in instructing the
understanding. =

71. With all this, no one is pressed to en-
dure hardships for which he is unfit; nothing
is imposed on any one against his will; nor is
he condemned by the rest because he con-

2 [Augustin ascribes a broadmindedness and charitableness tn
the ascetics of his time which was doubtless quite subjective. The
ascetics of that aire with whose history we are acquainted were nut
of this type. Jerome is an exa.nple. — A. H. N.]

Chap. XXXIV.] OF THE MORALS OF THP: CATHOLIC CHURCH.

fesses himself too feeble to imitate them: for
they bear in mind how strongly Scripture
enjoins charity on all; they bear in mind,
" To the pure all things are pure," ' and " Not
that which entereth into your mouth defileth
you, but that which cometh out of it." ^ Ac-
cordingly, all their endeavors are concerned
not about the rejection of kinds of food as
polluted, but about the subjugation of inor-
dinate desire and the maintenance of brotherly
love. They remember, " Meats for the belly,
and the belly for meats; but God shall destroy
both it and them;"^ and again, " Neither if
we eat shall we abound, nor if we refrain from
eating shall we be in want; " * and, above all,
this: "It is good, my brethren, not to eat
flesh, nor drink wine, nor anything whereby
thy brother is offended;" for this passage
shows that love is the end to be aimed at in
all these things. " For one man," he says,
" believes that he can eat all things: another,
who is weak, eateth herbs. He that eateth,
let him not despise him that eateth not; and
let not him that eateth not judge him that
eateth: for God hath approved him. Who
art thou that thou shouldest judge another
man's servant? To his own master he stands
or falls; but he shall stand: for God is able
to make him to stand." And a little after:
" He that eateth, to the Lord he eateth, and
giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to
the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God
thanks." And also in what follows: "So
every one of us shall give account of himself
to God. Let us not, then, any more judge
one another: but judge this rather, that ye
place no stumbling-block, or cause of offence,
in the way of a brother. I know, and am
confident in the Lord Jesus, that there is
nothing common in itself: but to him that
thinketh anything to be common, to him it is
common." Could he have shown better that
it is not in the things we eat, but in the mind,
that there is a power able to pollute it, and
therefore that even those who are fit to think
lightly of these things, and know perfectly
that they are not polluted if they take any
food in mental superiority, without being
gluttons, should still have regard to charity ?
See what he adds: " For if thy brother be
grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not
charitably." 5

72. Read the rest: it is too long to quote
all. You will find that those able to think
lightly of such things,- — that is, those of
greater strength and stability,— are told that
they must nevertheless abstain, lest those
should be offended who from their weakness

I Tit. i. 15.
4 I Cor. viii. 1

- Matt. XV. II.'
5 Rom. .\iv. 2-21.

3 I Cor. VI. 13.

are still in need of such abstinence. Tiie
people I was describing know and observe
these things; for they are Christians, not
heretics. They understand Scripture accord-

ing

to the apostolic teaching, not according

to the presumptuous and fictitious name of
apostle/ Him that eats not no one despises;
him that eats no one judges; he who is weak
eats herbs. Many who are strong, however,
do this for the sake of the weak; with many
the reason for so doing is not this, but that
they may have a cheaper diet, and may lead a
life of the greatest tranquillity, with the least
expensive provision for the support of the
body. "For all things are lawful forme,"
he says; " but I will not be brought under the
power of any." 7 Thus many do not eat flesh,
and yet do not superstitiously regard it as
unclean. And so the same people who abstain
when in health take it when unwell without
any fear, if it is required as a cure. Many
drink no wine; but they do not think that
wine defiles them; for they cause it to be
given with the greatest propriety and modera-
tion to people of languid temperament, and,
in short, to all who cannot have bodily health
without it. When some foolishly refuse it,
they counsel them as brothers not to let a
silly superstition make them weaker instead
of making them holier. They read to them
the apostle's precept to his disciple to
'' take a little wine for his many infirmities." *
Then they diligently exercise piety; bodily
exercise, they know, profiteth for a short
time, as the same apostle says.^

73. Those, then who are able, and they
are without number, abstain both from flesh
and from wine for two reasons: either for the
iv'eakness of their brethren, or for their own
liberty. Charity is principally attended to.
There is charity in their choice of diet, charity
in their speech, charity in their dress, charity
in their looks. Charity is the point where
they meet, and the plan by which they act.
To transgress against charity is thought
criminal, like transgressing against God.
Whatever opposes this is attacked and ex-
pelled; whatever injures it is not allowed to
continue for a single day. They know that
it has been so enjoined l)y Christ and the
apostles; that without it all things are empty,
with it all are fulfilled.

CHAP. 34. — THE CHURCH IS NOT TO RK BLAMED
FOR THE CONDUCT OF BAD CHRISTIANS,
WORSHIPPERS OF TOMBS AND PICTURES.

74. Make objections against these, ye

6 See title of the Epistle of Manichxus, Centra Faust, xiii. 4.

7 I Cor. vi. 12. 8 I Tim. v. 23. 9 i Tim. iv. 8.

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[CiiAP. XXXV.

]\Ianichieans, if you can. Look at these
people, and speak of them reproachfully, if
you dare, without falsehood. Compare their
fasts with your fasts, their chastity with yours;
compare them to yourselves in dress, food,
self-restraint, and, lastly, in charity. Com-
pare, which is most to the point, their pre-
cepts with yours. Then you will see the
difference between show and sincerity, between
the right way and the wrong, between faith
and imposture, between strength and inflated-
ness, between happiness and wretchedness,
between unity and disunion; in short, between
the sirens of superstition and the harbor of
religion.

75. Do not summon against me professors
of the Christian name, who neither know nor
give evidence of the power of their profes-
sion/ Do not hunt up the numbers of ignor-
ant people, who even in the true religion are
superstitious, or are so given up to evil pas-
sions as to forget what they have promised
to God. I know that there are many wor-
shippers of tombs and pictures. I know that
there are many who drink to great excess
over the dead, and who, in the feasts which
they make for corpses, bury themselves over
the buried, and give to their gluttony and
drunkenness the name of religion. I know
that there are many who in words have re-
nounced this world, and }^et desire to be bur-
dened with all the weight of worldly things,
and rejoice in such burdens. Nor is it sur-
prising that among so many multitudes you
should find some by condemning whose life
you may deceive the unwary and seduce
them from Catholic safety; for in your small
numbers you are at a loss when called on to
show even one out of those whom you call thai
elect who keeps the precepts, which in your
indefensible superstition you profess. How
silly those are, how impious, how mischievous,
and to what extent they are neglected by
most, nearly all of you, I have shown in
another volume.

76. My advice to you now is this: that you
should at least desist from slandering the
Catholic Church, by declaiming against the
conduct of men whom the Church herself
condemns, seeking daily to correct them as
wicked children. Then, if any of them by
good will and by the help of God are cor-
rected, they regain by repentance what they
had lost by sin. Those, again, who with
wicked will persist in their old vices, or even

I [Augustin says nothing of the encouragement given to such
pagan practices by men regarded in that age as possessed of almost
superhuman sanctity, such as Sulpicius Severus, PauUnus of Nola,
etc. He speaks of corruptions as if they were exceptional, whereas
thev seem to have been the rule. Yet there is force in his con-
tention that Christianity be judged bv its best products rather than
by the worst elements associated with it.— A. H. N.]

add to them others still worse, are indeed
allowed to remain in the field of the Lord,
and to grow along with the good seed; but
the time for separating the tares will come.=
Or if, from their having at least the Christian
name, they are to be placed among the chaff
rather than among thistles, there will also
come One to purge the floor and to separate
the chaff from the wheat, and to assign to
each part (according to its desert) the due
re ward. 3

CHAP. 35. MARRIAGE AND PROPERTY ALLOWED

TO THE BAPTIZED BY THE APOSTLES.

77. Meanwhile, why do you rage? why
does party spirit blind your eyes? Why do
you entangle yourselves in a long defence of
such great error? Seek for fruit in the field,
seek for wheat in the floor: they will be found
easily, and will present themselves to the in-
quirer. Why do you look so exclusively at
the dross ? Why do you use the roughness of
the hedge to scare away the inexperienced
from the fatness of the garden ? There is a
proper entrance, though known to but a few;
and by it men come in, though you dis-
believe it, or do not wish to find it. In the
Catholic Church there are believers without
number who do not use the world, and there
are those who "use it," in the words of the
apostle, " as not using it," •* as was proved in
those times when Christians were forced to
worship idols. For then, how many wealthy
men, how many peasant householders, how
many merchants, how many military men,
how many leading men in their own cities,
and how many senators, people of both sexes,
giving up all these empty and transitory
things, though while they used them they
were not bound down by them, endured death
for the salutary faith and religion, and proved
to unbelievers that instead of being pos-
sessed by all these things they really possessed
them ?

78. Why do you reproach us by saying
that men renewed in baptism ought no longer
to beget children, or to possess fields, and
houses, and money ? Paul allows it. For,
as cannot be denied, he wrote to believers,
after recounting many kinds of evil-doers who
shall not possess the kingdom of God: " And
such were you," he says: " but ye are washed,
but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in

2 [Augustin's ideal representation of Christianity and his iden-
tification of the organized Catholic Church with Christianity is
quite inconsistent with the practice of the Church which he here
seeks to justify. No duty is more distinctly enjoined upon be-
lievers in the New Testament than separation from unbelievers
and evil doers. But such separation is impracticable in an estab-
lished Church such as that to which Augustin rejoiced to belong. —
A. H. N.]

3 Matt. iii. 13, and .\iii. 24-43. * ' Cor. vii. 31.

Chap. XXXV.] OF THE MORALS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by
the Spirit of our God." By the washed and
sanctified, no one, assuredly, will venture to
think any are meant but believers, and those
who have renounced this world. But, after
showing to whom he writes, let us see whether
he allows these things to them. He goes on:
"All things are lawful for me, but all things
are not expedient: all things are lawful lor
me, but I will not be brought under the
power of any. INIeat for the belly, and the
belly for meats: but God will destroy both
it and them. Now the body is not for forni-
cation, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the
body. But God raised up the Lord, and will
raise us up also by His own power. Know ye
not that your bodies are the members of
Christ? shall I then take the members of
Christ, and make them the members of an
harlot? God forbid. Know ye not that he
which is joined to an harlot is made one
body? for the twain, saith He, shall be one
llesh. But he that is joined to the Lord is
one spirit. Flee fornication. Whatever sin
a man doeth is without the body: but he that
committeth fornication sinneth against his
o.vn body. Know ye not tha); your members
are the temple of the Holy Spirit which is in
you, which ye have of God, and ye are not
your own ? For ye are bought with a great
price: glorify God, and carry Him in your
i)ody." ' " But of the things concerning
which ye wrote to me: it is good for a man
not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, to avoid
fornication, let every man have his own wife,
and let every woman have her own husband.
Let the husband render unto the wife due
benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto
the husband. The wife hath not power of
her own body, but the husband: and likewise
also the husband hath not power of his own
body, but the wife. Defraud ye not one the
other, except it be with consent for a time,
that ye may have leisure for prayer; and
come together again, that Satan tempt you
not for your incontinency. But I speak this
by permission, and not of commandment.
For I would that all men were even as I my-
self: but every man hath his proper gift of
God, one after this manner, and another after
that." =

79. Has the apostle, think you, both shown
sufficiently to the strong what is highest, and
permitted to the weaker what is next best ?

' I Cor. vi. II-20.

= I Cor. vii. 1-7.

Not to touch a woman he shows is highest
when he says, " I would that all men were
even as I myself." But next to this highest
is conjugal chastity, that man may not be the
prey of fornication. Did he say that these
people were not yet believers because they
were married ? Indeed, by this conjugal
chastity he says that those who are united are
sanctified by one another, if one of them is
an unbeliever, and that their children also
are sanctified. " The unbelieving husband,''
he says, " is sanctified by the believing wife,
and the unbelieving woman by the believing
husband: otherwise your children would be
unclean; but now are they holy."^ Why do
you persist in opposition to such plain truth ?
Why do you try to darken the light of Script-
ure by vain shadows ?

80. Do not say that catechumens are al-
lowed to have wives, but not believers; that
catechumens may have money, but not
believers. For there are many who use as
not using. And in that sacred washing the
renewal of the new man is begun so as grad-
ually to reach perfection, in some more
quickly, in others more slowly. The pro-
gress, however, to a new life is made in the
case of many, if we view the matter without
hostility, but attentively. As the apostle
says of himself, "Though the outward man
perish, the inward man is renewed day by
day."'' The apostle says that the inward
man is renewed day by day that it may reach
perfection; and you wish it to begin with
perfection ! And it were well if you did wish
it. In reality, you aim not at raising the
weak, but at misleading the unwary. You
ought not to have spoken so arrogantly, even
if it were known that you are perfect in your
childish precepts. But when your conscience
knows that those whom you bring into your
sect, when they come to a more intimate ac-
quaintance with you, will find many things in
you which nobody hearing you accuse others
would suspect, is it not great impertinence to
demand perfection in the weaker Catholics,
to turn away the inexperienced from the
Catholic Church, while you show nothing of
the kind in yourself to those thus turned
away? But not to seem to inveigh against
you without reason, I will now close this
volume, and will proceed at last to set forth
the precepts of your life and your notable
customs.

3 I Cor. vii. 14.

4 2 Cor. iv. 16.

ST. AUGUSTIN:

ON THE

MORALS OF THE MANICH.EANS.

[DE MORIBUS MANICH.*:ORUM].

A.D. 388.

TRANSLATED BY

REV. RICHARD STOTHERT, M.A.,

BOMBAY.

COXTENTS OF THE MORALS OF THE MANICH.EANS.

PAGE

Chap. I. — The supreme good is that which is possessed of supreme existence 69

Chai'. II. — What evil is. That evil is that which is against nature. In allowing this, the Manichreans

refute themselves 69

CTiAP. in. — If evil is defined as that which is hurtful, this implies another refutation of the Manichaeans. 70

Ch.\I'. IV. — The difference between what is good in itself and what is good by participation 70

Chap. V. — If evil is defined to be corruption, this completely refutes the Manichnean heresy 71

Cn.\P. VI. — What corruption affects, and what it is 71

Chap. VII. — The goodness of God prevents corruption from bringing anvthing to non-existence. The ^

difference between creating and forming 71

< HAP. VIII. — Evil is not a substance, but a disagreement hostile to substance 72

Chap. IX. — The Manichaean fictions about things good and evil are not consistent with themselves. . . 73

Chap. X. — Three moral symbols devised by the Manichseans for no good 74

Chap. XI. — The value of the symbol of the mouth among the Manichxans, who are found guilty of

blaspheming God 75

Chap. XII. — Manichoean subterfuge 76

Chap. XIII. — -Actions to be judged of from their motive, not from externals, Manichzean abstinence to

be tried by this principle 76

Chap. XIV. — Three good reasons for abstaining from certain kinds of food 77

Chap. XV. — Why the Manichseans prohibit the use of flesh 79

Chap. X\T. — Disclosure of the monstrous tenets of the Manichreans 79

Chap. .WII. — Description of the symbol of the hands among the Manichteans S3

Chap. XVIII. — Of the symbol of the breast, and of the shameful mysteries of the Manichx'ans. ... S6

Chap. XIX. — Crimes of the Manichseans S7

Chap. XX. — Disgraceful conduct discovered at Rome 89

ON THE

MORALS OF THE MANICH^ANS.

[DE MORIBUS MANICHyEORUM.] A. D. 388.

CONTAINING A PARTICULAR REFUTATION OF THE DOCTRINE OF THESE HERETICS REGARDING
THE ORIGIN AND NATURE OF EVIL ; AN EXPOSURE OF THEIR PRETENDED SYMBOLICAL
CUSTOMS OF THE MOUTH, OF THE HANDS, AND OF THE BREAST ; AND A CONDEMNATION
OF THEIR SUPERSTITIOUS ABSTINENCE AND UNHOLY MYSTERIES. LASTLY, SOME CRIMES
BROUGHT TO LIGHT AMONG THE MANICH^ANS ARE MENTIONED.

CHAP. I. THE SUPREME GOOD IS THAT WHICH

IS POSSESSED OF SUPREME EXISTENCE.

I. Every one, I suppose, will allow that
the question of things good and evil belongs
to moral science, in which such terms are in
common use. It is therefore to be wished
that men would bring to these inquiries such
a clear intellectual perfection as might enable
them to see the chief good, than which noth-
j ing is better or higher, next in order to which
comes a rational soul in a state of purity and
perfection.' If this were clearly understood,
it would also become evident that the chief
good is that which is properly described as
having supreme and original existence. For
that exists in the highest sense of the word
which continues always the same, which is
throughout like itself, which cannot in any
jxirt be corrupted or changed, which is not
riubject to time, which admits of no variation
in its present as compared with its former
condition. This is existence in its true sense.
For in this signification of the word existence
there is implied a nature which is self-
contained, and which continues immutably.
Such things can be said only of God, to whom
there is nothing contrary in the strict sense
of the word. For the contrary of existence is
non-existence. There is therefore no nature
contrary to God. But since the minds with
which we approach the study of these snb-

' [This statement has a complete parallel in Clement of Alex-
andria, and along with what follows, is Neo-Platonic. — A. H. N.J

jects have their vision damaged and dulled
by silly notions, and by perversity of will, let
us try as we can to gain some little knowl-
edge of this great matter by degrees and with
caution, making our inquiries not like men
able to see, but like men groping the dark.

CHAP. 2. WHAT EVIL IS. THAT EVIL IS THAT

WHICH IS AGAINST NATURE. IN ALLOWING
THIS, THE MANICHiEANS REFUTE THEMSELVES.

2. You Manichaeans often, if not in every
case, ask those whom you try to bring over
to your heresy. Whence is evil ? Suppose I
had now met you for the first time, I would
ask you, if you please, to follow my example
in putting aside for a little the explanation
you suppose yourselves to have got of these
subjects, and to commence this great inquiry
with me as if for the first time. You ask me,
Whence is evil ? I ask you in return, Wliat
is evil? Which is the more reasonable ques-
tion ? Are those right who ask whence a
thing is, when they do not know what it is;
or he who thinks it necessary to inquire first
what it is, in order to avoid the gross absurd-
ity of searching for the origin of a thing un-
known ? Your answer is quite correct, when
you say that evil is that which is contrary to
nature; for no one is so mentally blind as not
to see that, in every kind, evil is that which
is contrary to the nature of the kind. But
the establishment of this doctrine is the over-
throw of your heresy. For evil is no nature,

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. IV.

if it is contrary to nature. Now, according
to you, evil is a certain nature and substance.
Moreover, whatever is contrary to nature
must oppose nature and seek its destruction.
For nature means nothing else than that which
anything is conceived of as being in its own
kind. Hence is the new word which we now
use derived from the word for being, — essence
namely, or, as we usually say, substance, —
while before these words were in use, the
word nature was used instead. Here, then,
if you will consider the matter without stub-
bornness, we see that evil is that which falls
away from essence and tends to non-exis-
tence.

3. Accordingly, when the Catholic Church
declares that God is the author of all natures
and substances, those who understand this
understand at the same time that God is not
the author of evil. For how can He who is
the cause of the being of all things be at the
same time the cause of their not being, — that
is, of their falling off from essence and tend-
ing to non-existence ? For this is what reason
plainly declares to be the definition of evil.
Now, how can that race of evil of yours, which
you make the supreme evil, be against na-
ture, that is, against substance, when it, ac-
cording to you, is itself a nature and sub-
stance ? For if it acts against itself, it des-
troys its own existence; and when that is
completely done, it will come at last to be
the supreme evil. But this cannot be done,
because you will have it not only to be, but
to be everlasting. That cannot then be the
chief evil which is spoken of as a substance. ^

4. But what am I to do ? I know that many
of you can understand nothing of all this. ^
know, too, that there are some who have a
good understanding and can see these things,
and yet are so stubborn in their choice of evil,
— a choice that will ruin their understanding
as well, — that they try rather to find what re-
ply they can make in order to impose upon
inactive and feeble minds, instead of giving
their assent to the truth. Still I shall not re-
gret having written either what one of you
may come some day to consider impartially,
and be led to abandon your error, or what
men of understanding and in allegiance to
God, and who are still untainted with your
errors, may read and so be kept from being
led astray by your addresses.

CHAP. 3. — IF EVIL IS DEFINED AS THAT WHICH
IS HURTFUL, THIS IMPLIES ANOTHER REFUTA-
TION OF THE MANICH.EANS.

5. Let US then inquire more carefully, and.

I [On Augustin's view of negativity of evil and on the relation
of this view to Neo-Platonism, see Introduction, chapter IX. Au-

if possible, more plainly. I ask you again,
What is evil ? If you say it is that which is
hurtful, here, too, you will not answer amiss.
But consider, I pray you; be on your guard,
I beg of you; be so good as to lay aside party
spirit, and make the inquiry for the sake of
finding the truth, not of getting the better of
it. Whatever is hurtful takes away some
good from that to which it is hurtful; for
without the loss of good there can be no hurt.
What, I appeal to you, can be plainer than
this ? what more intelligible ? What else is
required for complete demonstration to one
of average understanding, if he is not per-
verse ? But, if this is granted, the conse-
quence seems plain. In that race which you
take for the chief evil, nothing can be liable
to be hurt, since there is no good in it. But
if, as you assert, there are two natures,— the
kingdom of light and the kingdom of dark-
ness; since you make the kingdom of light to
be God, attributing to it an uncompounded
nature,^ so that it has no part inferior to an-
other, you must grant, however decidedly in
opposition to yourselves, you must grant,
nevertheless, that this nature, which you not
only do not deny to be the chief good, but
spend all your strength in trying to show that
it is so, is immutable, incorruptible, impene-
trable, inviolable, for otherwise it would not
be the chief good; for the chief good is that
than which there is nothing better, and for
such a nature to be hurt is impossible.
Again, if, as has been shown, to hurt is to
deprive of good, there can be no hurt to the
kingdom of darkness, for there is no good in
it. And as the kingdom of light cannot be
hurt, as it is inviolable, what can the evil you
speak of be hurtful to ?

CHAP. 4. — THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT IS
GOOD IN ITSELF AND WHAT IS GOOD BY PAR-
TICIPATION.

6. Now, compare with this perplexity, from
which you cannot escape, the consistency of
the statements in the teaching of the Catholic
Church, according to which there is one good
which is good supremely and in itself, and not
by the participation of any good, but by its
own nature and essence; and another good
which is good by participation, and by having
something bestowed. Thus it has its being
as good from the supreme good, which, how-
ever, is still self-contained, and loses nothing.

gustin's view seems to exclude the permanence of evil in the world,
and so everlasting punishment and everlasting rebellion against
God.— A. H. N.]

= [It is probable that Mani thought of the Kingdom of Light pan-
theistically, and that the principles personified in his mythological
system were the result of efforts on his part to connect the in-
finite with the finite.— A. H. N.]

Chap. VII.]

ON THE MORALS OF THE MANICH^ANS.

This second kind of good is called a creature,
which is liable to hurt through falling away.
But of this falling away God is not the author,
for He is author of existence and of being.
Here we see the proper use of the word evil;
for it is correctly applied not to essence, but
to negation or loss. We see, too, what na-
ture it is which is liable to hurt. This nature
is not the chief evil, for when it is hurt it
loses good; nor is it the chief good, for its
falling away from good is because it is good
not intrinsically, but by possessing the good.
And a thing cannot be good by nature when
it is spoken of as being made, which shows
that the goodness was bestowed. Thus, on
the one hand, God is the good, and all things
which He has made are good, though not so
good as He who made them. For what mad-
man would venture to require that the works
should equal the workman, the creatures the
Creator ? What more do you want ? Could
you wish for anything plainer than this ?

CHAP. 5. IF EVIL IS DEFINED TO BE CORRUP-
TION, THIS COMPLETELY REFUTES THE MANI-
CH.EAN HERESY.

7. I ask a third time. What is evil? Per-
haps you will reply, Corruption. Undeniably
this is a general definition of evil; for cor-
ruption implies opposition to nature, and also
hurt. But corruption exists not by itself,
but in some substance which it corrupts; for
corruption itself is not a substance. So the
thing which it corrupts is not corruption, is
not evil; for what is corrupted suffers the
loss of integrity and purity. So that which
has no purity to lose cannot be corrupted;
and what has, is necessarily good by the
participation of purity. Again, what is cor-
rupted is perverted; and what is perverted
suffers the loss of order, and order is good.
To be corrupted, then, does not imply the
absence of good; for in corruption it can be

I deprived of good, which could not be if there

was the absence of good. Therefore that

race of darkness, if it was destitute of all good,

IS you say it was, could not be corrupted,

lor it had nothing which corruption could

I take from it; and if corruption takes nothing

I away, it does not corrupt. Say now, if you

tiare, that God and the kingdom of God can

j be corrupted, when you cannot show how the

' kingdom of the devil, such as you make it,

can be corrupted.

'CHAP. 6. — WHAT CORRUPTION AFFECTS AND
WHAT IT IS.

8. What further does the Catholic light
say? What do you suppose, but what is the

actual truth, that it is the created substance
which can be corrupted, for the uncreated,
which is the chief good, is incorruptible; and
corruption, which is the chief evil, cannot be
corrupted; besides, that it is not a substance ?
But if you ask what corruption is, consider to
what it seeks to bring the things which it
corrupts; for it affects those things according
to its own nature. Now all things by cor-
ruption fall away from what they were, and
are brought to non-continuance, to non-exist-
ence; for existence implies continuance.
Thus the supreme and chief existence is so
called because it continues in itself, or is self-
contained. In the case of a thing changing
for the better, the change is not from contin-
uance, but from perversion to the worse, that
is, from falling away from essence; the au-
thor of which falling away is not He who
is the author of the essence. So in some
things there is change for the better, and so
a tendency towards existence. And this
change is not called a perversion, but rever-
sion or conversion; for perversion is opposed
to orderly arrangement. Now things which
tend towards existence tend towards order,
and, attaining order they attain existence, as
far as that is possible to a creature. For or-
der reduces to a certain uniformity that which
it arranges; and existence is nothing else
than being one. Thus, so far as anything
acquires unity, so far it exists. For uniform-
ity and harmony are the effects of unity, and
by these compound things exist as far as
they have existence. For simple things exist
by themselves, for they are one. But things
not simple imitate unity by the agreement of
their parts; and so far as they attain this, so
far they exist. This arrangement is the cause
of existence, disorder of non-existence; and
perversion or corruption are the other names
for disorder. So whatever is corrupted tends
to non-existence. You may now be left to re-
flect upon the effect of corruption, that you
may discover what is the chief evil; for it is
that which corruption aims at accomplishing.

CHAP. 7. — THE GOODNESS OF GOD PREVENTS
CORRUPTION FROM BRINGING ANYTHING TO
NON-EXISTENCE. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
CREATING AND FORMING.

9. But the goodness of God does not per-
mit the accomplishment of this end, but so
orders all things that fall away that they may
exist where their existence is most suitable,
till in the order of their movements they
return to that from which they fell away.'

' In Retract, i. 7, S r, it Is s.iid: " This must not be understood
to mean that all things return to that from which they fell away,

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. VIII.

Thus, when rational souls fall away from
Gotl. although they possess the greatest
amount of free-will. He ranks them in the
lower grades of creation, where their proper
place is. So they suffer misery by the divine
judgment, while they are ranked suitably to
their deserts. Hence we see the excellence
of that saying which you are always inveigh-
[ ing against so strongly, " I make good things,
land create evil things.'" To create is to
!, form and arrange. So in some copies it is
written, "I make good things and form evil
! things." To make is used of things pre-
viously not in existence; but to form is to
arrange what had some kind of existence, so
as to improve and enlarge it. Such are the
things which God arranges when He says,
" I form evil things,'^ meaning things which
are falling off, and so tending to non-exist-
ence,— not things which have reached that
to which they tend. For it has been said,
, Nothing is allowed in the providence of God
i to go the length of non-existence.^

10. These things might be discussed more
fully and at greater length, but enough has
been said for our purpose in dealing with you.
We have only to show you the gate which
you despair of finding, and make the unin-
structed despair of it too. You can be made
to enter only by good-will, on which the
divine mercy bestows peace, as the song in
the Gospel says, "Glory to God in the highest,
and on earth peace to men of good-will. "^
It is enough, I say, to have shown you that
there is no way of solving the religious ques-
tion of good and evil, unless whatever is, as
far as it is, is from God; while as far as it
falls away from being it is not of God, and
yet is always ordered by Divine Providence in
agreement with the whole system. If you do
not yet see this, I know nothing else that I
can do but to discuss the things already said
with greater particularity. For nothing save
piety and purity can lead the mind to greater
things.

CHAP. 8. — EVIL IS NOT A SUBSTANCE, BUT A
DISAGREEMENT HOSTILE TO SUBSTANCE.

11. For what other answer will you give
to the question. What is evil ? but either that
it is against nature, or that it is hurtful, or
that it is corruption, or something similar ?

as Origen believed, but only those which do return. Those who
shall be punished in everlasting fire do not return to God, from
whom they fell away. Still they are in order as existintr in pun-
ishment where their existence is most suitable." [This does not
really meet the difficulty suggested on a preceding page.— A. H.

I Isa. xlv. 7.
_ 2 [That is to say nothing is absolutely evil, and conversely what
IS absolutely evil is ipso facto non-existent. — A. H. N.]

3 Luke ii. 14.

But I have shown that in these replies you
make shipwreck of your cause, unless, in-
deed, you will answer in the- childish way in
which you generally speak to children, that
evil is iire, poison, a wild beast, and so on.
For one of the leaders of this heresy, whose
instructions we attended with great familiarity
and frequency, used to say with reference to
a person who held that evil was not a sub-
stance, "I should like to put a scorpion in the
man's hand, and see whether he would not
withdraw his hand; and in so doing he would
get a proof, not in words but in the thing it-
self, that evil is a substance, for he would not
deny that the animal is a substance." He
said this not in the presence of the person,
but to us, when we repeated to him the re-
mark which had troubled us, giving, as I said,
a childish answer to children. For who with
the least tincture of learning or science does
not see that these things hurt by disagree-
ment with the bodily temperament, while at
other times they agree with it, so as not only
not to hurt, but to produce the best effects ?
For if this poison were evil in itself, the scor-
pion itself would suffer first and most. In
fact, if the poison were quite taken from
the animal, it would die. So for its body it is
evil to lose what it is evil for our body to re-
ceive; and it is good for it to have what it is
good for us to want. Is the same thing then
both good and evil ? By no means; but evil is
what is against nature, for this is evil both to
the animal and to us. This evil is the disa-
greement, w.iich certainly is not a substance,
but hostile to substance. Whence then is it?
See what it leads to, and you will learn, if any
inner light lives in you. It leads all that it
destroys to non-existence. Now God is the
author of existence; and there is no existence
which, as far as it is existing, leads to non-ex-
istence. Thus we learn whence disagreement
is not; as to whence it is, nothing can be said.
12. We read in history of a female crim-
inal in Athens, who succeeded in drinking the
quantity of poison allotted as a fatal draught
for the condemned with little or no injury to
her health, by taking it at intervals. So
being condemned, she took the poison in the
prescribed quantity like the rest, but rendered
it powerless by accustoming herself to it, and
did not die like the rest. And as this excited
great wonder, she was banished. If poison
is an evil, are we to think that she made it to
be no evil to her? What could be more ab-
surd than this ? But because disagreement is
an evil, what she did was to make the poison-
ous matter agree with her own body by a
process of habituation. For how could she
by any amount of cunning have brought it

Chap. IX.]

ON THE MORALS OF THE MANICH^ANS.

72>

about that disagreement should not hurt her ?
Why so ? Because what is truly and properly
an evil is hurtful both always and to all. Oil
is beneficial to our bodies, but very much the
opposite to many six-footed animals. And
is not hellebore sometimes food, sometimes
medicine, and sometimes poison. Does not
every one maintain that salt taken in excess
is poisonous? And yet the benefits to the
body from salt are innumerable and most im-
portant. Sea-water is injurious when drunk
hy land animals, but it is most suitable and
useful to many who bathe their bodies in it;
and to fish it is useful and wholesome in both
ways. Bread nourishes man, but kills hawks.
And does not mud itself, which is offensive
and noxious when swallowed or smelt, serve
as cooling to the touch in hot weather, and
as a cure for wounds from fire ? What can
be nastier than dung, or more worthless than
ashes ? And yet they are of such use to the
fields, that the Romans thought divine honors
due to the discoverer, Sterculio, from whose
name the word for dung [stercus\ is derived.

13. But why enumerate details which are
countless ? We need not go farther than the
four elements themselves, which, as every
one knows, are beneficial when there is agree-
ment, and bitterly opposed to nature when
there is disagreement in the objects acted
ui:)on. We who live in air die under earth or

nder water, while innumerable animals creep
.live in sand or loose earth, and fish die in
oiir air. Fire consumes our bodies, but,
wiien suitably applied, it both restores from
ijold, and expels diseases without number.
The sun to which you bow the knee, and
than which, indeed, there is no fairer object
!nong visible things, strengthens the eyes
f eagles, but hurts and dims our eyes when
we gaze on it; and yet we too can accustom
< 'urselves to look upon it without injury. Will
\ ou, then, ziWosv the sun to be compared to
lie poison which the Athenian woman made
harmless by habituating herself to it? Re-
ilect for once, and consider that if a substance
is an evil because it hurts some one, the light
which you worship cannot be acquitted of this
' iiarge. See the preferableness of making
(nil in general to consist in this disagreement,
Trom which the sun's ray produces dimness
in the eyes, though nothing is pleasanter to
the eyes than light."

CHAP. 9. — THE MANICH.EAN FICTIONS AHOUT
THINGS GOOD AND EVIL ARE NOT CONSISTKNT
WITH THEMSELVES.

14. I have said these things to make vou

' [The reasoning here is admirably adapted to Auyustin's pur-
-.^e, which is to refute the Manichajan notion of the evil nature of
iterial substances. — A. H. N.]

cease, if that is possible, giving the name of
evil to a region boundless in depth and length;
to a mind wandering through the region; to
the five caverns of the elements, — one full of
darkness, another of waters, another of winds,
another of fire, another of smoke; to the ani-
mals born in each of these elements, — ser-
pents in the darkness, swimming creatures in
the waters, flying creatures in the winds,
quadrupeds in the fire, bipeds in the smoke.
For these things, as you describe them, can-
not be called evil; for all such things, as far
as they exist, must have their existence from
the most high God, for as far as they exist
they are good. If pain and weakness is an
evil, the animals you speak of were of such
physical strength that their abortive offspring,
after, as your sect believes, the world was
formed of them, fell from heaven to earth,
according to you, and could not die. If
blindness is an evil, they could see; if deaf-
ness, they could hear. If to be nearly or al-
together dumb is an evil, their speech was so
clear and intelligible, that, as you assert, they
decided to make war against God in compli-
ance with an address delivered in their as-
sembly. If sterility is an evil, they were
prolific in children. If exile is an evil, they
were in their own country, and occupied their
own territories. If servitude is an evil, some
of them were rulers. If death is an evil, they
were alive, and the life was such that, by your
statement, even after God was victorious, it
was impossible for the mind ever to die.

15. Can you tell me how it is that in the
chief evil so many good things are to be
found, the opposites of the evils above men-
tioned ? and if these are not evils, can an}^
substance be an evil, as far as it is a sub-
stance ? If weakness is not an evil, can a
weak body be an evil? If blindness is not
an evil, can darkness be an evil ? If deafness
is not an evil, can a deaf man be an evil ? If
dumbness is not an evil, can a fish be an evil ?
If sterility is not an evil, how can we call a
barren animal an evil ? If exile is not an
evil, how can we give that name to an animal
in exile, or to an animal sending some one into
exile ? If servitude is not an evil, in what
sense is a subject animal an evil, or one en-
forcing subjection? If death is not an evil,
in what sense is a mortal animal an evil, or
one causing death ? Or if these are evils,
must we not give the name of good things to
bodily strength, sight, hearing, persuasive
speech, fertility, native land, liberty, life, all
which you hold to exist in that kingdom of
evil, and yet venture to call it the perfection
of evil ?

16. Once more, if, as has never been de-

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. X.

nied, unsuitahleness is an evil, what can be
more suitable than those elements to their
respective animals, — the darkness to serpents,
the waters to swimming creatures, the winds
to flying creatures, the fire to voracious ani-
mals, the smoke to soaring animals? Such is
the harmony which you describe as existing
in the race of strife; such the order in the
seat of confusion. If what is hurtful is an
evil, I do not repeat the strong objection al-
ready stated, that no hurt can be . suffered
where no good exists; but if that is not so
clear, one thing at least is easily seen and
understood as following from the acknowl-
edged truth, that what is hurtful is an evil.
The smoke in that region did not hurt bipeds:
it produced them, and nourished and sus-
tained them without injury in their birth,
their growth, and their rule. But now, when
the evil has some good mixed with it, the
smoke has become more hurtful, so that we,
who certainly are bipeds, instead of being
sustained by it, are blinded, and suffocated,
and killed by it. Could the mixture of good
have given such destructiveness to evil ele-
ments ? Could there be such confusion in
the divine government ?

17. In the other cases, at least, how is it
that we find that congruity which misled your
author and induced him to fabricate false-
hoods ? Why does darkness agree with ser-
pents, and waters with swimming creatures,
and winds with flying creatures, though the
fire burns up quadrupeds, and smoke chokes
us? Then, again, have not serpents very
sharp sight, and do they not love the sun-
shine, and abound most where the calmness
of the air prevents the clouds from gathering
much or often ? How very absurd that the
natives and lovers of darkness should live
most comfortably and agreeably where the
clearest light is enjoyed ! Or if you say that
it is the heat rather than the light that they
enjoy, it would be more reasonable to assign
to fire serpents, which are naturally of rapid
motion, than the slow-going asp.' Besides,
all must admit that light is agreeable to the
eyes of the asp, for they are compared to an
eagle's eyes. But enough of the lower ani-
mals. Let us, I pray, attend to what is true
of ourselves without persisting in error, and
so our minds shall be disentangled from silly
and mischievous falsehoods. For is it not
intolerable perversity to say that in the race
of darkness, where there was no mixture of
light, the biped animals had so sound and
strong, so incredible force of eyesight, that
even in their darkness they could see the per-

' [The text has asinuin in this sentence but asf>ide»i in the
next. The former is evidently a mistake. — A. H. N.]

fectly pure light (as you represent it) of the
kingdom of God ? for, according to you, even
these beings could see this light, and could
gaze at it, and study it, and delight in it, and
desire it; whereas our eyes, after mixture
with light, with the chief good, yea, with God,
have become so tender and weak, that we can
neither see anything in the dark, nor bear to
look at the sun, but, after looking, lose sight
of what we could see before.

18. The same remarks are applicable if we
take corruption to be an evil, which no one
doubts. The smoke did not corrupt that
race of animals, though it corrupts animals
now. Not to go over all the particulars,
which would be tedious, and is not necessary,
the living creatures of your imaginary de-
scription were so much less liable to corrup-
tion than animals are now, that their abortive
and premature offspring, cast headlong from
heaven to earth, both lived and were produc-
tive, and could band together again, having,
forsooth, their original vigor, because they
were conceived before good was mixed with
the evil; for, after this mixture, the animals
born are, according to you, those which we
now see to be very feeble and easily giving
way to corruption. Can any one persist in
the belief of error like this, unless he fails to
see these things, or is affected by your habit
and association in such an amazing way as to
be proof against all the force of reasoning?

CHAP. IC- — THREE MORAL SYMBOLS DEVISED BY
THE MANICH.EANS FOR NO GOOD.

19. Now that I have shown, as I think, how
much darkness and error is in your opinions
about good and evil things in general, let us
examine now those three symbols which you
extol so highly, and boast of as excellent ob-
servances. What then are those three sym-
bols ? That of the mouth, that of the hands,
and that of the breast. What does this mean ?
That man, we are told, should be pure and
innocent in mouth, in hands, and in breast.
But what if he sins with eyes, ears, or nose ?
What if he hurts some one with his heels, or
perhaps kills him ? How can he be reckoned
criminal when he has not sinned with mouth,
hands, or breast? But, it is replied, by the
mouth we are to understand all the organs of
sense in the head; by the hands, all bodily
actions; by the breast, all lustful tendencies.
To what, then, do you assign blasphemies ?
To the mouth or to the hand? For blas-
phemy is an action of the tongue. And if all
actions are to be classed under one head, why
should you join together the actions of the
hands and the feet, and not those of the
tongue. Do you wish to separate the action

Chap. XI. J

OX THE MORALS OF THE MANICH.4<:aNS.

of the tongue, as being for the purpose of
expressing something, from actions which are
not for this purpose, so that tlie symbol of
the hands should mean abstinence from all
evil actions which are not for the purpose of
expressing something? But then, what if
some one sins by expressing something with
his hands, as is done in writing or in some
significant gesture ? This cannot be assigned
to the tongue and the mouth, for it is done
by the hands. When you have three symbols
of the mouth, the hands, and the breast, it
is quite inadmissible to charge against the
mouth sins found in the hands. And if you
assign action in general to the hands, there
is no reason for including under this the action
of the feet and not that of the tongue. Do
you see how the desire of novelty, witl' its
attendant error, lands you in great difficulties ?
For you find it impossible to include purifica-
tion of all sins in these three symbols, which
you set forth as a kind of new classification.

CHAP. 1 1 . THE VALUE OF THE SYMBOL OF THE

MOUTH AMONG THE MANICH.tANS, WHO ARE
FOUND GUILTY OF BLASPHEMING GOD.

20. Classify as you please, omit what you
please, we must discuss the doctrines you in-
sist upon most. You say that the symbol of
the mouth implies refraining from all blas-
phemy. But blasphemy is speaking evil of
good things. So usually the word blasphemy
is applied only to speaking evil of God; for as
regards man there is uncertainty, but God is
without controversy good. If, then, you are
proved guilty of saying worse things of God
than any one else says, what becomes of your
famous symbol of the mouth ? The evidence
is not obscure, but clear and obvious to every
understanding, and irresistible, the more so
that no one can remain in ignorance of it,
that God is incorruptible, immutable, liable
to no injury, to no want, to no weakness, to
no misery. All this the common sense of
rational beings perceives, and even you assent
when you hear it.

21. But when you begin to relate your
fables, that God is corruptible, and mutable,
and subject to injury, and exposed to want
and weakness, and not secure from misery,
this is what you are blind enough to teach,
and what some are blind enough to believe.
And this is not all; for, according to you,
God is not only corruptible, but corrupted;
not only changeable, but changed; not only
subject to injury, but injured; not only liable
to want, but in want; not only possibly, Init
actually weak; not only exposed to misery,
but miserable. You say that the soul is God,
or a part of God. I do not see how it can be

part of God without being God. A part cf
gold is gold; of silver silver; of stone stone;
and, to come to greater things, part of earth
is earth, part of water is water, and of air
air; and if you take part from fire, you will
not deny it to be fire; and part of light can
be nothing but light. Why then should part
of God not be. God? Has God a jointed
body, like man and the lower animals ? For
part of man is not man.

22. I will deal with each of these opinions
separately. If you view God as resembling
light, you must admit that part of God is
God. Hence, when you make the soul part
of God, though you allow it to be corrupted
as being foolish, and changed as having once
been wise, and in want as needmg health,
and feeble as needing medicine, and mis-
erable as desiring happiness, all these
things you profanely attril)ute to God. Or if
you deny these things of the mind, it follows
that the Spirit is not required to lead the soul
into truth, since it is not in folly; nor is the
soul renewed by true religion, since it does
not need renewal; nor is it perfected by your
symbols, since it is already perfect; nor does
God give it assistance, since it does not need
it; nor is Christ its physician, since it is in
health; nor does it require the promise of
happiness in another life. Way then is Jesus
called the deliverer, according to His own
words in the Gospel, " If the Son shall make
you free, ye shall be free indeed ? " ' And
the Apostle Paul says, "Ye have been called
to liberty."^ The soul, then, which has not
attained this liberty is in bondage. There-
fore, according to you, God, since part of
God is God, is both corrupted by folly, and
is changed by falling, and is injured by the
loss of perfection, and is in need of help, and
is weakened by disease, and bowed down with
misery, and subject to disgraceful bondage.

23. Again, if part of God is not God, still
He is not incorrupt when His part is cor-
rupted, nor unchanged when there is change
in any part, nor uninjured when He is not
perfect in every part, nor free from want when
He is busily endeavoring to recover part of
Himself, nor quite whole when He has a weak
part, nor perfectly happy when any part is suf-
fering misery, nor entirely free when any part
is under bondage. These are conclusions to
which you are driven, because you say that
the soul, which you see to be in such a calam-
itous condition, is part of God. If you can
succeed in making your sect abandon these
and many similar opinions, then you may
speak of your moutii being free from blas-

John viii. 36.

= Gal. V. 13

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XIII.

phemies. Better still, leave the sect; for if
you cease to believe and to repeat what
Manichceus has written, you will be no longer
Manlchseans.

24. That God is the supreme good, and
that than which nothing can be or can be con-
ceived better, we must either understand or
believe, if we wish to keep clear of blasphemy.
There is a relation of numbers which cannot
possibly be impaired or altered, nor can any
nature by any amount of violence prevent
the number which comes after one from being
the double of one. This can in no way be
changed; and yet you represent God as
changeable ! This relation preserves its in-
tegrity inviolable; and you will not allow God
an equality even in this ! Let some race of
darkness take in the abstract the number
three, consisting of indivisible units, and di-
vide it into two equal parts. Your mind per-
ceives that no hostility could effect this. And
can that which is unable to injure a numerical
relation injure God? If it could not, what
possible necessity could there be for a part
of him to be mixed with evil, and driven into
such miseries ?

CHAP. 12. MANICH^AN SUBTERFUGE.

25. For this gives rise to the question,
which used to throw us into great perplexity
even when we were your zealous disciples,
nor could we find any answer, — what the race
of darkness would have done to God, suppos-
ing He had refused to fight with it at the cost
of such calamity to part of Himself. For if
God would not have suffered any loss by re-
maining quiet, we thought it hard that we had
been sent to endure so much. Again, if He
would have suffered. His nature cannot have
been incorruptible, as it behoves the nature
of God to be. Sometimes the answer was,
that it was not for the sake of escaping evil
or avoiding injurj^, but that God in His
natural goodness wished to bestow the bless-
ing of order on a disturbed and disordered
nature. This is not what we find in the
Manichasan books: there it is constantly im-
plied and constantly asserted that God guarded
against an invasion of His enemies. But sup-
posing tliis answer, which was given from want
of a better, to represent the opinion of the
Manichaeans, is God, in their view, vindicated
from the charge of cruelty or weakness ? For
this goodness of His to the hostile race proved
most pernicious to His own subjects. Be-
sides, if God's nature could not be corrupted
nor changed, neither could any destructive
influence corrupt or change us; and the order
to be bestowed on the race of strangers might
have been bestowed without robbing us of it.

26. Since those times, however, another
answer has appeared which I heard recently
at Carthage. For one, whom I wish much to
see brought out of this error, when reduced
to this same dilemma, ventured to say that
the kingdom had its own limits, which miglit
be invaded by a hostile race, though God
Himself could not be injured. But this is a
reply which your founder would never con-
sent to give; for he would be likely to see
that such an opinion would lead to a still
speedier demolition of his heresy. And in
fact any one of average intellect, who hears
that in this nature part is subject to injury
and part not, will at once perceive that this
makes not two but three natures, — one viola-
ble, a second inviolable, and a third violating.

CHAT', i^. ACTIONS TO BE JUDGED OF FROM

THEIR MOTIVE, NOT FROM EXTERNALS. MAN-
ICH^AN ABSTINENCE TO BE TRIED BY THIS
PRINCIPLE.

27. Having every day in your mouth these
blasphemies which come from your heart, you
ought not to continue holding up the symbol
of the mouth as something wonderful, to en-
snare the ignorant. But perhaps you think
the symbol of the mouth excellent and ad-
mirable because you do not eat flesh or drink
wine. But what is your end in this? For
according as the end we have in view in our
actions, on account of which we do whatever
we do, is not only not culpable but also
praiseworthy, so only can our actions merit any
praise. If the end we have regard to in any
performance is unlawful and blameworthy,
the performance itself will be unhesitatingly
condemned as improper.

28. We are told of Catiline that he could
bear cold, thirst, and hunger.' This the
vile miscreant had in common with our
apostles. What then distinguishes the parri-
cide from our apostles but the precisely
opposite end which he followed ? He bore
these things in order to gratify his fierce
and ungoverned passions; they, on the other
hand, in order to restrain these passions and
subdue them to reason. You often say, when
you are told of the great number of Catholic
virgins, a she-mule is a virgin. This, indeed,
is said in ignorance of the Catholic system,
and is not applicable. Still, what you mean
is that this continence is worthless unless it
leads, on right principles, to an end of high
excellence. Catholic Christians might also
compare your abstinence from wine and flesh
to that of cattle and many small birds, as like-
wise of countless sorts of worms. But, not

' Sallust, inprolog. Catilin. § 3.

Chap. XIV.]

OX THE MORALS OF THE MANICH.'^:ANS.

/ /

to be impertinent like you, I will not make j
this comparison prematurely, but will first j
examine your end in wliat you do. For I
suppose I may safely take it as agreed on,
that in such customs the end is the thing to
look to. Therefore, if your end is to be
frugal and to restrain the appetite which finds
gratification in eating and drinking, I assent
and approve. But this is not the case.

29. Suppose, what is quite possible, that
there is one so frugal and sparing in his diet,
that, instead of gratifying his appetite or his
palate, he refrains from eating twice in one
day, and at supper takes a little cabbage
moistened and seasoned with lard, just
enough to keep down hunger; and quenches
his thirst, from regard to his health, with two
or three draughts of pure wine; and this is
his regular diet: whereas another of different
habits never takes flesh or wine, but makes
an agreeable repast at two o'clock on rare
and foreign vegetables, varied with a number
of courses, and well sprinkled with pepper,
and sups in the same style towards night;
and drinks honey-vinegar, mead, raisin-wme,
and the juices of various fruits, no bad imi-
tation of wine, and even surpassing it in
sweetness; and drinks not for thirst but for
pleasure; and makes this provision for him-
self daily, and feasts in this sumptuous style,
not because he requires it, but only gratify-
ing his taste; — which of these two do you re-
gard as living most abstemiously in food and
drink ? You cannot surely be so blind as not
to put the man of the little lard and wine
above this glutton !

30. This is the true view; but your doc-
trine sounds very differently. For one of
your elect distinguished by the three symbols
may live like the second person in this de-
scription, and though he may be reproved by
one or two of the more sedate, he cannot be
condemned as abusing the symbols. But
should he sup with the other person, and
moisten his lips with a morsel of rancid bacon,
or refresh them with a drink of spoilt wine,
he is pronounced a transgressor of the sym-
bol, and by the judgment of your founder is
consigned to hell, while you, though wonder-
ing, must assent. Will you not discard these
errors ? Will you not listen to reason ? Will
you not offer some little resistance to the force
of habit? Is not such doctrine most unrea-
sonable? Is it not insanity? Is it not the
greatest absurdity that one, who stuffs and
loads his stomach every day to gratify his ap-
petite with mushrooms, rice, truffles, cake,
mead, pepper, and assafoetida, and who fares
thus every day, cannot be convicted of trans-
gressing the three symbols, that is, the rule

of sanctity; whereas another, who seasons his
dish of the commonest herbs with some
smoky morsel of meat, and takes only so
much of this as is needed for the refreshment
of his body, and drinks three cups of wine for
the sake of keeping in health, should, for ex-
changing the former diet for this, be doomed
to certain punishment?

CHAP. 14. THREE GOOD REASONS FOR Ali-

STAINING FROM CERTAIN KINDS OF FOOD.

31. But, you reply, the apostle says, "It is
good, brethren, neither to eat flesh, nor to
drink wine."' No one denies that this is
good, provided that it is for the end already
mentioned, of which it is said, " Make not
provision for the flesh to fulfill the lusts
thereof;"^ or for the ends pointed out by
the apostle, namely, either to check the appe-
tite, which is apt to go to a more wild and
uncontrollable excess in these things than in
others, or lest a brother should be offended,
or lest the weak should hold fellowship with
an idol. For at the time when the apostle
wrote, the flesh of sacrifices was often sold
in the market. And because wine, too, was
used in libations to the gods of the Gentiles,
many weaker lirethren, accustomed to pur-
chase such things, preferred to abstain en-
tirely from flesh and wine rather than run the
risk of having fellowship, as they considered
it, with idols, even ignorantly. And, for
their sakes, even those who were stronger,
and had faith enough to see the insignificance
of these things, knowing that nothing is un-
clean except from an evil conscience, and
holding by the saying of the Lord, " Not that
which entereth into your mouth defiletii you,
but that which cometh out of it," ^ still, lest
these weaker brethren should stumble, were
bound to al)stain from these things. And this
is not a mere theory, but is clearly taught in
the epistles of the apostle himself. For you
jfre in the habit of quoting only the words,
" It is good, brethren, neither to eat flesh,
nor to drink wine," without adding what fol-
lows, " nor anything whereby thy brother
stumbleth, oris offended or is made weak.''
These words show the intention of the apostle
in giving the admonition.

32. This is evident from the preceding and
succeeding context. The passage is a long
one to quote, but, for the sake of those who
are indolent in reading and searching the
sacred Scriptures, we must give the whole of
it. " Him that is weak in the faith," says the
apostle, " receive ye, but not to doubtful dis-
putations. For one believeth that he may eat

' Rom. xiv. 2t.

2 Rom. xiii. 14.

3 Matt. XV. 2.

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XIV.

all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.
Let not him that eateth despise him that eat-
eth not; and let not him that eateth not
judge him that eateth, for God hath received
him. Who art thou that judgest another
man's servant? to his own master he standeth
or falleth; yea, he shall be holden up: for
God is able to make him stand. One man
esteemeth one day above another; another
esteemeth every d'ay alike. Let every man
be fully persuaded in his own mind. He
that regardeth the day, regardeth it 'to the
Lord. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord,
for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth
not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth
God thanks. For none of us liveth to him-
self, and no man dieth to himself. For
whether we live, we live unto the Lord ; and
whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether
we live, therefore, or die, we are the Lord's.
For to this end Christ both lived, and died,
and rose again, that He might be Lord both
of the dead and living. But why dost thou
judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at
nought thy brother? for we shall all stand
before the judgment-seat of God. For it is
written, As 1 live, saith the Lord, every knee
shall bow to me, and every tongue shall con-
fess to God.' So then every one of us shall
give account of himself to God. Let us not,
therefore, judge one another any more: but
judge this rather, that no man put a stumbling-
block, or occasion to fall, in his brother's way.
I know, and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus,
that there is nothing common of itself: but
to him that esteemeth anything to be common,
to him it is common. But if thy brother be
grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not
charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat,
for whom Christ died. Let not then our good
be evil spoken of. For the kingdom of God
is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and
peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. For he
who in this serveth Christ is acceptable to
God, and approved of men. Let us there-
fore follow after the things which make for
peace, and things whereby one may edify an-
other. For meat destroys not the work of
God. All things indeed are pure; but it is
evil for that man who eateth with offense. It
is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine,
nor anything whereby thy brother stumbleth,
or is offended, or is made weak. Hast thou
faith ? have it to thyself before God. Happy
is he who condemneth not himself in that
thing which he allow«th. And he that dis-
tinguishes is damned if he eats, because he
eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of

I Isa. xlv. 23, 24.

faith is sin. We then that are strong ought
to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to
please ourselves. Let every one of us please
his neighbor for his good to edification. For
even Christ pleased not Himself." "^

33. Is it not clear that what the apostle re-
quired was, that the stronger should not eat
flesh nor drink wine, because they gave offense
to the weak by not going along with them,
and made them think that those who in faith
judged all things to be pure, did homage to
idols in not abstaining from that kind of food
and drink ? This is also set forth in the fol-
lowing passage of the Epistle to the Corinthi-
ans: "As concerning, therefore, the eating
of those things that are offered in sacrifice
unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in
the world, and that there is none other God
but one. For though there be that are called
gods, whether in heaven or in earth, but to us
there is but one God, the Father, of whom
are all things, and we in Him; and one Lord
Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we
by Him. Howbeit there is not in every man
that knowledge: for som^e, with conscience of
the idol unto this hour, eat it as a thing offered
to an idol; and their conscience being weak
is defiled. But meat commendeth us not to
God: for neither, if we eat, shall we abound;
neither, if we eat not, shall we suffer want.
But take heed, lest by any means this liberty
of yours become a stumbling-block to them
that are weak. For if any man see one who
has knowledge sit at meat in the idol's tem-
ple, shall not his conscience being weak be
emboldened to eat those things which are
offered to idols; and through thy knowledge
shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ
died ? But when ye sin so against the
brethren, and wound their weak conscience,
ye sin against Christ. Wherefore, if meat
make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh
forever, lest I make my brother to offend." ^

34. Again, in another place: "What say I
then ? that the idol is anything ? or that which
is offered in sacrifice to idols is anything?
But the things which the Gentiles sacrifice
they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and
I would not that ye should have fellowship
with devils. Ye cannot drink the cup of the
Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be
partakers of the Lord's table and of the table
of devils. Do we provoke the Lord to jeal-
ousy? are we stronger than He? All things
are lawful for me, but all things are not ex-
pedient: all things are lawful for me, but all
things edify not. Let no man seek his own,
but every man what is another's. Whatso-

2 Rom. xiv. and x-

3 1 Cor. viii. 4, etc.

Chap. XVI.]

ON THE MORALS OF THE MANICHy^.ANS.

ever is sold in the shambles, that oat, asking
no question for conscience sake. But if any
man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice
unto idols, eat not for his sake that shows it,
and for conscience sake: conscience, I say,
not thine own, but another's: for wiiy is my
liberty judged of another man's conscience ?
For if I be a partaker with thanksgiving, why
am I evil spoken of for that for which I give
thanks ? Whether, therefore, ye eat or drink,
or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of
God. Give none offence, neither to the Jews,
nor to the Greeks, nor to the Chuich of God:
even as I please all men in all things not seek-
ing mine own profit, but the profit of many
that they may be saved. Be ye followers of
me, even as I also am of Christ." '

35. It is clear, then, 1 think, for what end
we should abstain from flesh and wine. The
end is threefold: to check indulgence, which
is mostly practised in this sort of food, and
in this kind of drink goes the length of in-
toxication; to protect weakness, on account
of the things which are sacrificed and offered
m libation; and, what is most praiseworthy of
;!ll, from love, not to offend the weakness of
those more feeble than ourselves, who abstain

rom these things. You, again, consider a
lorsel of meat unclean; whereas the apostle
ays that all things are clean, but that it is
Lvil to him that eateth with offence. And no
loubt you are defiled by such food, simply
•icause you think it unclean. For the apos-
le says, " I know, and am persuaded by the
ord Jesus, that there is nothing common of
/Lself: but to him that esteemeth anything
common, to him it is common." And every
one can see that by common he means un-
'^lean and defiled. But it is folly to discuss
assages of Scripture with you; for you both
mislead people by promising to prove your
doctrines, and those books which possess au-
thority to demand our homage you affirm to
1)6 corrupted by spurious interpolations.
Prove then to me your doctrine that flesh de-
nies the eater, when it is taken without of-
fending any one, without any weak notions,
and without any excess. -

HAP. 15. WHY THE MANICH^ANS PROHIBIT

THE USE OF FLESH.

36. It is worth while to take note of the
'hole reason for their superstitious absti-
nence, which is given as follows: —Since, we
are told, the member of God has been mixed
with the substance of evil, to repress it and to
keep it from excessive ferocity, — for that is

• I Cor. .X. iq-25 and 28, xi. 1.

2 [Augustin s comparison of Manichasan with Christian ascet-
icism IS thoroughly just and admirable.— .A. H. N."|

what you say,— the world is made up of botn
natures, of good and evil, mixed together.
But this part of God is daily being set free
in all parts of the world, and restored to its
own domain. But in its passage upwards as
vapor from earth to heaven, it enters plants,
because their roots are fixed in the earth, and
so gives fertility and strength to all herbs and
shrubs. From these animals get their food,
and, where there is sexual intercourse, fetter
in the flesh tiie member of God, and, turning
it from its proper course, they come in the
way and entangle it in errors and troubles.
So then, if food consisting of vegetables and
fruits comes to the saints, that is, to the
Manichaeans by means of their chastity, and
prayers, and psalms, whatever in it is excel-
lent and divine is purified, and so is entirely
perfected, in order to restoration, free from
all hindrance, to its own domain. Hence you
forbid people to give bread or vegetables, or
even water, which would cost nobody any-
thing, to a beggar, if he is not a Manich^ean,
lest he should defile the member of God by
his sins, and obstruct its return.

37. Flesh, you say, is made up of pollu-
tion itself. For, according to you, some por-
tion of that divine part escapes in the eating
of vegetables and fruits: it escapes while they
undergo the infliction of rubbing, grinding,
or cooking, as also of biting or chewing. It
escapes, too, in all motions of animals, in the
carriage of burdens, in exercise, in toil, or in
any sort of action. It escapes, too, in our
rest, when digestion is going on in the body
by means of internal heat. And as the di-
vine nature escapes in all these ways, some
very unclean dregs remain, from which, in
sexual intercourse, flesh is formed. These
dregs, however, fly off, in the motions above
mentioned, along with what is good in the
soul; for though it is mostly, it is not entirely
good. So, when the soul has left the flesh,
the dregs are utterly filthy, and the soul of
those who eat flesh is defiled.

CHAP. 1 6. ^DISCLOSURE OF THE MONSTROUS
TENETS OF THE MANICH/EANS.

38. O the obscurity of the nature of things !
How hard to expose falsehood ! Who that
hears these things, if he is one who has not
learned the causes of things, and who, not
yet illuminated by any ray of truth, is de-
ceived by material images, would not think
them true, precisely because the things spoken
of are invisible, and are presented to the mind
under the form of visible things, and can lie
eloquently expressed ? Men of this descrip-
tion exist in numbers and in droves, who are
kept from being led away into these errors

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XVI.

more by a fear grounded on religious feeling
than by reason, I will therefore endeavor,
as God may please to enable me, so to refute
these errors, as that their falsehood and ab-
surdity will be manifest not only in the judg-
ment of the wise, who reject them on hearing
them, but also to the intelligence of the mul-
titude.

39. Tell me then, first, where you get the
doctrine that part of God, as you call it, exists
in corn, beans, cabbage, and flowers and
fruits. From the beauty of the color, say
they, and the sweetness of the taste ; this is
evident; and as these are not found in rotten
substances, we learn that their good has been
taken from them. Are they not ashamed to
attribute the finding of God to the nose and
the palate ? But I pass from this. For I will
speak, using words in their proper sense; and,
as the saying is, this is not so easy in speak-
ing to you. Let us see rather what sort of
mind is required to understand this; how, if
the presence of good in bodies is shown by
their color, the dung of animals, the refuse of
flesh itself, has all kinds of bright colors,
sometimes white, often golden, and so on,
though these are what you take in fruits and
flowers as proofs of the presence and indwell-
ing of God. Why is it that in a rose 3^ou hold
the red color to be an indication of an abun-
dance of good, while the same color in blood
you condemn ? Why do you regard with
pleasure in a violet the same color which you
turn away from in cases of cholera, or of
people with jaundice, or in the excrement of
infants ? Why do you believe the light, shin-
ing appearance of oil to be a sign of a plenti-
ful admixture of good, which you readily set
about purifying by taking the oil into your
throats and stomachs, while you are afraid to
touch your lips with a drop of fat, though it
has the same shining appearance as oil ? Why
do you look upon a yellow melon as part of
the treasures of God, and not rancid bacon
fat or the yolk of an egg ? Why do you think
that whiteness in a lettuce proclaims God,
and not in milk ? So much for colors, as re-
gards which (to mention nothing else) you
cannot compare any flower-clad meadow with
the wings and feathers of a single peacock,
though these are of flesh and of fleshly origin.
40. Again, if this good is discovered also
by smell, perfumes of excellent smell are
made from the flesh of some animals. And
the smell of food, when cooked along with
flesh of delicate flavor, is better than if cooked
without it. Once more, if you think that the
things that have a better smell than others
are therefore cleaner, there is a kind of mud
which you ought to take to your meals instead

of water from the cistern; for dry earth
moistened with rain has an odor most agree-
able to the sense, and this sort of mud has a
better smell than rain-water taken by itself.
But if we must have the authority of taste to
prove the presence in any object of part of
God, he must dwell in dates and honey more
than in pork, but more in pork than in beans.
I grant that He dwells more in a fig than in
a liver; but then you must allow that He is
more in liver than in beet. And, on this
principle, must you not confess that some
plants, which none of you can doubt to be
cleaner than flesh, receive God from t-iis very
flesh, if we are to think of God as mixed with
the flavor? For both cabbages taste better
when cooked along with flesh; and, while we
cannot relish the plants on which cattle feed,
when these are turned into milk we think
them improved in color, and find them very
agreeable to the taste.

41. Or must we think that good is to be
found in greater quantity where the three
good qualities — a good color, and smell, and
taste — are found together ? Then you must
not admire and praise flowers so much, as
you cannot admit them to be tried at the
tribunal of the palate. At least you must
not prefer purslain to flesh, since flesh when
cooked is superior in color, smell, and taste.
A young pig roasted (for your ideas on thisi
subject force us to discuss good and evil with,
you as if you were cooks and confectioners,
instead of men of reading or literary taste) is'
bright in color, and agreeable in smell, and':
pleasant in taste. Here is a perfect evidence ■
of the presence of the divine substance. You
are invited by this threefold testimony, and
called on to purify this substance by your
sanctity. Make the attack. Why do you
hold back? What objection have you to
make. In color alone the excrement of an
infant surpasses lentils; in smell alone a roast
morsel surpasses a soft green fig; in taste
alone a kid when slaughtered surpasses the
plant which it fed on when alive: and we have
found a kind of flesh in flavor of which all
three give evidence. What more do you re-
quire ? What reply will you make? Why
should eating meat make you unclean, if using
such monstrosities in discussion does not ?
And, above all, the rays of the sun, which
you surely think more of than all animal or
vegetable food, have no smell or taste, and
are remarkable among other substances only
by their eminently bright color; which is a
loud call to you, and an obligation, in spite of
yourselves, to place nothing higher than a '
bright color among the evidences of an ad- ,
mixture of good.

Chap. XVI.]

ON THE MORALS OF THE MANICH.-EANS.

42. Thus you are forced into this dififi-
culty, that you must acknowledge the part
of God as dwelling more in blood, and in the
filthy but bright-colored animal refuse which
is thrown out in the streets, than in the pale
leaves of the olive. If you reply, as you
actually do, that olive leaves when burnt give
out a flame, which proves the presence of
light, while flesh when burnt does not, what
will you say of oil, which lights nearly all the
lamps in Italy? What of cow dung (which
surely is more unclean than the flesh), which
peasants use when dry as fuel, so that the fire
is always at hand, and the liberation of the
smoke is always going on ? And if brightness
and lustre prove a greater presence of the
divine part, why do you yourselves not purify
it, why not appropriate it, why not liberate it ?
For it is found chiefly in flowers, not to speak
of blood and countless things almost the same
as blood in flesh or coming from it, and yet
you cannot feed on flowers. And even if you
were to eat flesh, you would certainly not
take with your gruel the scales of fish, or
some worms and flies, though these all shine
with a light of their own in the dark.

43. What then remains, but that you
should cease saying that you have in your
eyes, nose, and palate sufficient means of
testing the presence of the divine part in
material objects ? And, without these means,
iiow can you tell not only that there is a
greater part of God in plants than in flesh,
but that there is any part in plants at all ?
Are you led to think this by their beauty —
not the beauty of agreeable color, but that of
agreement of parts ? An excellent reason, in
my opinion. For you will never be so bold
as to compare twisted pieces of wood with
the bodies of animals, which are formed of
members answering to one another. But if
you choose the testimony of the senses, as
those must do who cannot see with their mind
'iie full force of exi'>tence, how do you prove

iiat the substance of good escapes from
bodies in course of time, and by some kind
of attrition, but because God has gone out
of it, according to your view, and has left
one place for another? The whole is absurd.
But, as far as I can judge, there are no marks
or appearances to give rise to this opinion.
For many things plucked from trees, or pulled
out of the ground, are the better of some in-
terval of time before we use them for food,
as leeks and endive, lettuce, grapes, apples,
tigs, and some pears; and there are many
other things which get a better color when
they are not used immediately after being
plucked, besides being more wholesome for
the body, and having a finer flavor to the

palate. But these things should not possess
all these excellent and agreeable qualities, if,
as you say, they become more destitute of
good the longer they are kept after separa-
tion from their mother earth. Animal food
itself is better and more fit for use the day
after the animal is killed; but this should not
be, if, as you hold, it possessed more good
immediately after the slaughter than next day,
when more of the divine substance had
escaped.

44. Who does not know that wine becomes
purer and better by age ? Nor is it, as you
think, more tempting to the destruction of
the senses, but more useful for invigorating
the body, — only let there be moderation,
which ought to control everything. The
senses are sooner destroyed by new wine.
When the must has been only a short time in
the vat, and has begun to ferment, it makes
those who look down into it fall headlong,
affecting their brain, so that without assist-
ance they would perish. And as regards
health, every one knows that bodies are
swollen up and injuriously distended by new
wine? Has it these bad properties because
there is more good in it? Are they not found
in wine when old because a good deal of the
divine substance has gone ? An absurd thing
to say, especially for you, who prove the
divine presence by the pleasing effect pro-
duced on your eyes, nose, and palate ! And
what a contradiction it is to make wine the
poison of the princes of darkness, and yet to
eat grapes ! Has it more of the poison when
in the cup than when in the cluster? Or if
the evil remains unmixed after the good is
gone, and that by the process of time, how is
it that the same grapes, when hung up for
awhile, become milder, sweeter, and mpre
wholesome ? or how does the wine itself, as
already mentioned, become purer and brighter
when the light has gone, and more whole-
some by the loss of the beneficial sub-
stance ?

45. What are we to say of wood and leaves,
which in course of time become dry, but
cannot be the worse on that account in your
estimation ? For while they lose that which
produces smoke, they retain that from whicli
a bright flame arises; and, to judge by the
clearness, which you think so much of, there
is more good in the dry than in the green.
Hence you must either deny that there is
more of God in the i')ure light tlian in the
smoky one, which will upset all your evi-
dences; or you must allow it to be jiossible
that, when plants are plucked up, or branches
jilucked off, and kept for a time, more of
the nature of evil may escape from them than

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XVI.

of the nature of good. And, on the strength
of this, we shall "hold that more evil may go
off from plucked fruits; and so more good
may remain in animal food. So much on the
subject of time.

46. As for motion, and tossing, and rub-
bing, if these give the divine nature the op-
portunity of escaping from these substances,
many things of the same kind are against you,
whicli are improved by motion. In some
grains the juice resembles wine, and is ex-
cellent when moved about. Indeed, as must
not be overlooked, this kind of drink pro-
duces intoxication rapidly; and yet you never
called the juice of grain the poison of the
princes of darkness. There is a preparation
of water, thickened with a little meal, which
is the better of being shaken, and, strange to
say, is lighter in color when the light is gone.
The pastrycook stirs honey for a long time
to give it this light color, and to make its
sweetness milder and less unwholesome: you
must explain how this can come from the loss
of good. Again, if you prefer to test the
presence of God by the agreeable effects on
the hearing, and not sight, or smell, or taste,
harps get their strings and pipes their bones
from animals; and these become musical by
being dried, and rubbed, and twisted. So
the pleasures of music, which you hold to
have come from the divine kingdom, are ob-
tained from the refuse of dead animals, and
that, too, when they are dried by time, and
lessened by rubbing, and stretched by twist-
ing. Such rough treatiricnt, according to you,
drives the divine substance from living
objects; even cooking them, you say, does
this. Why then are boiled thistles not un-
wholesome ? Is it because God, or part of
God, leaves them when they are cooked ?

47. Why mention all the particulars, when
it is difificult to enumerate them ? Nor is it
necessary; for every one knows how many
things are sweeter and more wholesome when
cooked. This ought not to be, if, as you
suppose, things lose the good by being thus
moved about. I do not suppose that you
will find any proof from your bodily senses
that flesh is unclean, and defiles the souls of
those who eat it, because fruits, when plucked
and shaken about in various ways, become
flesh; especiall}^ as you hold that vinegar, in
its age and fermentation, is cleaner than wine,
and the mead you drink is nothing else than
cooked wine, which ought to be more impure
than wine, if material things lose the divine
members by being moved about and cooked.
But if not, you have no reason to think that
fruits, when plucked, kept, handled, cooked,
and digested, are forsaken by the good, and

therefore supply most unclean matter for tae
formation of bodies.

48. But if it is not from their color and ap-
pearance, and smell and taste, that you think
the good to be in these things, what else can
you bring forward ? Do you prove it from
the strength and vigor which those things
seem to lose when they are separated from
the earth and put to use ? If this is your
reason (though its erroneousness is seen at
once, from the fact that the strength of some
things is increased after their separation from
the earth, as in the case already mentioned
of wine, which becomes stronger from age),
— if the strength, then, is your reason, it
would follow that the part of God is to be
found in no food more abundantly than in
flesh. For athletes, who especially require
vigor and energy, are not in the habit of feed-
ing on cabbage and fruit without animal food.

49. Is your reason for thinking the bodies
of trees better than our bodies, that flesh is
nourished by trees and not trees by flesh.
You forget the obvious fact that plants, when
manured with dung, become richer and more
fertile and crops heavier, though you think it
your gravest charge against flesh that it is the
abode of dung. This then gives nourishment
to things you consider clean, though it is,
according to )^ou, the most unclean part of
what you consider unclean. But if you dis-
like flesh because it springs from sexual
intercourse, you should be pleased with the
flesh of worms, which are bred in such num-
bers, and of such a size, in fruits, in wood,
and in the earth itself, without any sexual
intercourse. But there is some insincerity in
this. For if you were displeased with flesh
because it is formed from the cohabitation of
father and mother, you would not say that
those princes of darkness were born from the
fruits of their own trees; for no doubt you
think worse of these princes than of flesh,
which you refuse to eat.

50. Your idea that all the souls of animals
come from the food of their parents, from
which confinement you pretend to liberate the
divine substance which is held bound in your
viands, is quite inconsistent with your absti-
nence from flesh, and makes it a pressing duty
for you to eat animal food. For if souis are
bound in the body by those who eat animal
food, why do you not secure their liberation
by being beforehand in eating the food ?
You reply, it is not from the animal food that
the good part comes which those people bring
into bondage, but from the vegetables which
they take with their meat. What will you
say then of the souls of lions, who feed only
on flesh? They drink, is the reply, and so

Chap. XVII.]

ON THE MORALS OF THE MANICHtEANS.

the soul is drawn in from the water and con-
fined in flesh. But what of birds without num-
ber ? What of eagles, which eat only flesh, and
need no drink ? Here you are at a loss, and
can find no answer. For if the soul comes
from food, and there are animals which neither
drink anything nor have any food but flesh, and
yet bring forth young, there must be some soul
in flesh; and you are bound to try your plan of
purifying it by eating the flesh. Or will you
say that a pig has a soul of light, because it
eats vegetables, and drinks water; and that the
eagle, because it eats only flesh, has a soul of
darkness, though it is so fond of the sun?'

51. What a confusion of ideas! What
amazing fatuity! All this you would have
escaped, if you had rejected idle fictions, and
had followed what truth sanctions in absti-
nence from food, which would have taught
you that sumptuous eating is to be avoided,
not to escape pollution, as there is nothing
of the kind, but to subdue the sensual appe-
tite. For should any one, from inattention to
the nature of things, and the properties of the
soul and body, allow that the soul is polluted
by animal food, you will admit that it is much
much more defiled by sensuality. Is it
reasonable, then, or rather, is it not most un-
reasonable, to expel from the number of the
elect a man who, perhaps for his health's sake,
takes some animal food without sensual appe-
tite; while, if a man eagerly devours peppered
truffles, you can only reprove him for excess,
but cannot condemn him as abusing your
symbol ? So one who has been induced, not
by sensuality, but for health, to eat part of a
fowl, cannot remain among your elect;
though one may remain who has yielded
voluntarily to an excessive appetite for comfits
and cakes without animal matter. You retain
the man plunged in the defilements of sen-
suality, and dismiss the man polluted, as you
think, by the mere food; though you allow
that the defilement of sensuality is far greater
than that of meat. You keep hold of one
who gloats with delight over highly -seasoned
vegetables, unable to keep possession of him-
self; while you shut out one who, to satisfy
hunger, takes whatever comes, if suitable for
nourishment, ready either to use the food, or
to let it go. Admirable customs ! Excellent
morals ! Notable temperance !

52. Again, the notion that it is unlawful
for any one but the elect to touch as food
what is brought to your meals for what you
call purification, leads to shameful and some-

' [Much of the foregoing, as well as of what follows, seems to
the modirn reader hke mere trifling, but Augustin's aim v as by
mtrodLicitig many familiar illustrations to show the utterabsurdity
of the Alanichaean distinctions between clean and unclean. It
must be confessed that he does this very effectrely. — A. H. N.]

times to criminal practices. For sometimes
so much is brought that it cannot easily be
eaten up by a few; and as it is considered
sacrilege to give what is left to others, or, at
least, to throw it away, you are obliged to
eat to excess, from the desire to purify, as
you call it, all that is given. Then, when
you are full almost to bursting, you cruelly
use force in making the boys of your sect eat
the rest. So it was charged against some one
at Rome that he killed some poor children,
by compelling them to eat for this supersti-
tious reason. This I should not believe, did
I not know how sinful you consider it to give
this food to those who are not elect, or, at
any rate, to throw it away. So the only way
is to eat it; and this leads every day to glut-
tony, and may sometimes lead to murder.

53. For the same reason you forbid giving
bread to beggars. By way of showing com-
passion, or rather of avoiding reproach, you
advise to give money. The cruelty of this is
equalled by its stupidity. For suppose a
place where food cannot be purchased: the
beggar will die of starvation, while you, in
your wisdom and benevolence, have more
mercy on a cucumber than on a human being !
This is in truth (for how could it be better
designated) pretended compassion, and real
cruelty. Then observe the stupidity. What
if the beggar buys bread for himself with the
money you give him ? Will the divine part,
as you call it, not suffer the same in him when
he buys the food as it would have suffered if
he had taken it as a gift from you ? So this
sinful beggar plunges in corruption part of
God eager to escape, and is aided in this
crime by your money ! But you in yo.ur
great sagacity think it enough that you do
not give to one about to commit murder a
man to kill, though you knowingly give him
money to procure somebody to be killed.
Can any madness go beyond this ? The result
is, that either the man dies if he cannot get
food for his money, or the food itself dies if
he gets it. The one is true murder; the other
what you call murder: though in both cases
you incur the guilt of real murder. Again,
there is the greatest folly and absurdity in
allowing your followers to eat animal food,
while you forbid them to kill animals. If
this food does not defile, take it yourselves.
If it defiles, what can be more unreasonable
than to think it more sinful to separate the
soul of a pig from its body than to defile the
soul of a man with the pig's flesh.

CHAP. 17. — DESCRIPTION OF THE SYMBOL OF
IHK HANDS AMONG THE MANICH/EANS.

54. We must now notice and discuss the

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XVII.

sj'mbol of the hands. And, in the first place,
your abstauiing from the slaughter of animals
and from injurmg plants is shown by Christ
to be mere superstition; for, on the ground
that there is no community of rights between
us and brutes and trees, He both sent the
devils into an herd of swine/ and withered
by His curse a tree in which He had found
no fruit.'' The swine assuredly had not
sinned, nor had the tree. We are not so
insane as to think that a tree is fruitful or
barren by its own choice. Nor is it any reply
to say that our Lord wished in these actions
to teach some other truths; for every one
knows that. But assuredly the Son of God
would not commit murder to illustrate truth, —
if you call the destruction of a tree or of an
animal murder. The signs which Christ
wrought in the case of men, with whom we
certainly have a community of rights, were
in healing, not in killing them. And it
would have been the same in the case of
beasts and trees, if we had that community
with them which you imagine.

55. I think it right to refer here to the
authority of Scripture, because we cannot here
enter on a profound discussion about the soul
of animals, or the kind of life in trees. But
as you preserve the right to call the Scriptures
corrupted, in case you should find them too
strongly opposed to you, — although you have
never affirmed the passages about the tree
and the herd of swine to be spurious, — still,
lest some day you should wish to say this of
them too, when you find how much they are
against you, I will adhere to my plan, and
will ask you, who are so liberal in your pro-
mises of evidence and truth, to tell me first
what harm is done to a tree, I say not by
plucking a leaf or an apple, — for which, how-
ever, one of you would be condemned at
once as having abused the symbol, if he did
it intentionally, and not accidentally, — but if
you tear it up by the root. For the soul in
trees, which, according to you, is a rational
soul, is, in your theory, freed from bondage
when the tree is cut down, — a bondage, too,
where it suffered great misery and ' got no
profit. For it is well known that you, in the
words of your founder, threaten as a great,
though not the greatest punishment, the
change from a man to a tree; and it is not
probable that the soul in a tree can grow in
wisdom as it does in a man. There is the
best reason for not killing a man, in case you
should kill one whose wisdom or virtue
might be of use to many, or one who might
have attained to wisdom, whether by the

I Matt. viii. 32.

2 Matt. xxi. 19.

advice of another without himself, or by
divine illumination in his own mind. And
the more wisdom the soul has when it leaves
the body, the more profitable is its departure,
as we know both from well-grounded reason-
ing and from wide-spread belief. Thus to
cut down a tree is to set free the soul from
a body in which it makes no progress in
wisdom. You — the holy men, I mean — ought
to be mainly occupied in cutting down trees,
and in leading the souls thus emancipated to
better things by prayers and psalms. Or
can this be done only with the' souls which
you take into your belly, instead of aiding
them by your understanding ?

56. And you cannot escape the admission
that the souls in trees make no progress in
wisdom while they are there, when you are
asked why no apostle was sent to teach trees
as well as men, or why the apostle sent to
men did not preach the truth to trees also.
Your reply must be, that the souls while in
such bodies cannot understand the divine
precepts. But this reply lands you in great
difiiculties; for you declare that these souls
can hear your voices and understand what you
say, and see bodies and their motions, and
even discern thoughts. If this is true, why .
could they learn nothing from the apostle of :i
light ? Why could they not learn even much
better than we, since they can see into the
mind ? Your master, who, as you say, has
difficulty in teaching you by speech, might 'I
have taught these souls by thought; for they
could see his ideas in his mind before he ex-
pressed them. But if this is untrue, consider
into what errors you have fallen.

57. As for your not plucking fruits or pull-
ing up vegetables yourselves, while you get
your followers to pluck and pull and bring
them to you, that you may confer benefits not
only on those who bring the food but on the
food which is brought, what thoughtful person
can bear to hear this ? For, first, it matters
not whether you commit a crime yourself, or
wish another to commit it for you. You deny
that you wish this ! How then can relief be
given to the divine part contained in lettuce
and leeks, unless some one pull them and
bring them to the saints to be purified. And
again, if you were passing through a field
where the right of friendship permitted you
to pluck anything you wished, what would
you do if you saw a crow on the point of
eating a fig ? Does not, according to your
ideas, the fig itself seem to address you and
to beg of you piteously to pluck it yourself
and give it burial in a holy belly, where it
may be purified and restored, rather than
that the crow should swallow it and make it

Chap. XVII. ]

ON THE MORALS OF THE MANICH^ANS.

part of his cursed body, and then hand it
over to bondage and torture in other forms ?
If this is true, how cruel you are ! If not,
how silly ! What can be more contrary to
your opinions than to break the symbol ?
What can be more unkind to the member of
God than to keep it ?

58. This supposes the truth of your false
and vain ideas. But you can be shown guilty
of plain and positive cruelty flowing from the
same error. For were any one lying on the
road, his body wasted with disease, weary
with journeying, and half-dead from his
sufferings, and able only to utter some broken
words, and if eating a pear would do him good
as an astringent, and were he to beg you to
help him as you passed by, and were he to
implore you to bring the fruit from a neigh-
boring tree, with no divine or human prohibi-
tion to prevent your doing so, while the man
is sure to die for the want of it, you, a Chris-
tian man and a saint, will rather pass on and
abandon a man thus suffering and entreatinir,
lest the tree should lament the loss of its
fruit, and you should be doomed to the
punishment threatened by Manichfeus for
breaking the symbol. Strange customs, and
strange harmlessness !

59. Now, as regards killing animals, and
the reasons for your opinion, much that has
been said will apply also to this. For what
harm will be done to the soul of a wolf by
killing the wolf, since the wolf, as long as it
lives, will be a wolf, and will not listen to
any preacher, or give up, in the least, shed-
ding the blood of sheep; and, by killing it,
the rational soul, as you think, will be set
free from its confinement in the body ? But
you make this slaughter unlawful even for
your followers; for you think it worse than
that of trees. And in this there is not much
fault to be found with your senses, — that is,
your bodily senses. For we see and hear
by their cries that animals die with pain,
although man disregards this in a beast, with
which, as not having a rational soul, we have
no community of rights. But as to your
senses in the observation of trees, you must
be entirely blind. For not to mention that
there are no movements in the wood expres-
sive of pain, what is clearer than that a tree
is never better than when it is green and
flourishing, gay with flowers, and rich in fruit?
And this comes generally and chiefly from
pruning. But if it felt the iron, as you sup-
pose, it ought to die of wounds so many, so
severe, instead of sprouting at the places, and
reviving with such nxmifest delight.

60. But why do you think it a greater
crime to destroy animals than plants, although

you hold that plants have a purer soul than
animals? There is a compensation, we are
told, when part of what is taken from the
fields is given to the elect and the saints to
be purified. This has already been refuted;
and it has, I think, been proved sufficiently
that there is no reason for saying that more
of the good part is found in vegetables than
in flesh. But should any one support himself
by selling butcher-meat, and spend the whole
profit of his business in purchasing food for
your elect, and bring larger supplies for those
saints than any peasant or farmer, will he not
plead this compensation as a warrant for his
killing animals? But there is, we are told,
some other mysterious reason; for a cunning
man can always find some resource in the
secrets of nature when addressing unlearned
people. The story, then, is that the heavenly
princes who were taken from the race of
darkness and bound, and have a place as-
signed them in this region by the Creator of
the world, have animals on the earth spec-
ially belonging to them, each having those
coming from his own stock and class; and
they hold the slaughterers of those animals
guilty, and do not allow them to leave the
earth, but harass them as much as they can
with pains and torments. What simple man
will not be frightened by this, and, seeing
nothing in the darkness shrouding these
things, will not think that the fact is as
described ? But I will hold to my purpose,
with God's help, to rebut mysterious false-
hood by the plainest truth.

61. Tell me, then, if animals on land and
in water come in regular succession by
ordinary generation from this race of princes,
since the origin of animal life is traced to the
abortive births in that race; — tell me, I say,
whether bees and frogs, and many other
creatures not sprung from se.xual intercourse,'
may be killed with impunity. We are told
they cannot. So it is not on account of their
relation to certain princes that you forbid
your followers to kill animals. Or if you
make a general relationship to all bodies, the
princes would be equally concerned about
trees, which you do not require your followers
to spare. You are brought back to the weak
reply, that the injuries done in the case of
plants are atoned for by the fruits which your
followers bring to your church. For this
implies that those who slaughter animals, and
sell their flesh in the market, if they are your
followers, and if they bring to you vegetables
bought with their gains, may think nothing

■ [This is, of course, a physiological bUindcr, hut Auijustin
doubtless states what was the common view at the time.- -A.
H. N.]

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XVIII.

of the daily slaughter, and are cleared of any
sin that may be in it by your repasts.

62. But if you say that, in order to expiate
the slaughter, the thing must be given as food,
as in the case of fruits and vegetables, — which
cannot be done, because the elect do not eat
flesh, and so your followers must not slaughter
animals, — what reply will you give in the case
of thorns and weeds, which farmers destroy
in clearing their fields, while they cannot
bring any food to you from them ? How can
there be pardon for such destruction, which
gives no nourishment to the saints ? Perhaps
you also put away any sin committed, for the
benefit of the fruits and vegetables, by eating
some of these. What then if the fields are
plundered by locusts, mice, or rats, as we see
often happen ? Can your rustic follower kill
these with impunity, because he sins for the
good of his crops? Here you are at a loss;
for you either allow your followers to kill
animals, which your founder prohibited, or
you forbid them to be cultivators, which he
made lawful. Indeed, you sometimes go so
far as to say that an usurer is more harmless
than a cultivator, — you feel so much more for
melons than for men. Rather than hurt the
melons, you would have a man ruined as a
debtor. Is this desirable and praiseworthy
justice, or not rather atrocious and damnable
error? Is this commendable compassion,
or not rather detestable barbarity ?

63. What, again, of your not abstaining
yourselves from the slaughter of lice, bugs,
and fleas ? You think it a sufficient excuse
for this to say that these are the dirt of our
bodies. But this is clearly untrue of fleas
and bugs; for every one knows that these
animals do not come from our bodies.
Besides, if you abhor sexual intercourse as
much as you pretend to do, you should think
those animals all the cleaner which come
from our bodies without any other genera-
tion; for although they produce offspring of
their own, they are not produced in ordinary
generation from us. Again, if we must con-
sider as most filthy the production of living
bodies, still worse must be the production of
dead bodies. There must be less harm, there-
fore, in killing a rat, a snake, or a scorpion,
which you constantly say come from our dead
bodies. But to pass over what is less plain
and certain, it is a common opinion regard-
ing bees that thej^ come from the carcases of
oxen; so there is no harm in killing them.
Or if this too is doubted, every one allows that
beetles, at least, are bred in the ball of mud
which they make and bury.^ You ought

I V. Retract, i. 7, § 6, where Augustin allows that this is doubt-
ful, and that many have not even heard of it.

therefore to consider these animals, and
others that it would be tedious to specify,
more unclean than your lice; and yet you
think it sinful to kill them, though it would
be foolish not to kill the lice. Perhaps you
hold the lice cheap because they are small.
But if an animal is to be valued by its size,
you must prefer a camel to a man.

64. Here we may use the gradation which
often perplexed us when we were your fol-
lowers. For if a flea may be killed on ac-
count of its small size, so may the fly which
is bred in beans. And if this, so also may
one of a little larger size, for its size at birth
is even less. Then again, a bee may be
killed, for its young is no larger than a fly.
So on to the young of a locust, and to a
locust; and then to the young of a mouse,
and to a mouse. And, to cut short, it is
clear we may come at last to an elephant; so
that one who thinks it no sin to kill a flea,
because of its small size, must allow that it
would be no sin in him to kill this huge
creature. But I think enough has been said
of these absurdities.

CHAP. 18. OF THE SYMBOL OF THE BREAST,

AND OF THE SHAMEFUL MYSTERIES OF THE
MANICH^ANS.

65. Lastly, there is the symbol of the
breast, in which your very questionable
chastity consists. For though you do not
forbid sexual intercourse, you, as the apostle
long ago said, forbid marriage in the proper
sense, although this is the only good excuse
for such intercourse. No doubt you will ex-
claim against this, and will make it a reproach
against us that you highly esteem and approve
perfect chastity, but do not forbid marriage,
because your followers — that is, those in the
second grade among you — are allowed to
have wives. After you have said this with
great noise and heat, I will quietly ask. Is
it not you who hold that begetting children,
by which souls are confined in flesh, is a
greater sin than cohabitation ? Is it not you
who used to counsel us to observe as much
as possible the time when a woman, after her
purification, is most likely to conceive, and
to abstain from cohabitation at that time, lest
the soul should be entangled in flesh? This
proves that you approve of having a wife, not
for the procreation of children, but for the
gratification of passion. In marriage, as the
marriage law declares, the man and woman
come together for the procreation of children.
Therefore whoever makes the procreation of
children a greater sin tha« copulation, forbids
marriage, and makes the woman not a wife,
but a mistress, who for some gifts presented

Chap. XIX.]

ON THE MORALS OF THE MANICH.'EANS.

to her is joined to the man to gratify his
passion. Where there is a wife there must
be marriage. But there is no marriage where
motherhood is not in view; therefore neither
is there a wife. In this way you forbid
marriage. Nor can you defend yourselves
successfully from this charge, long ago brought
against you prophetically by the Holy Spirit.

66. Moreover, when you are so eager in
your desire to prevent the soul from being
confined in flesh by conjugal intercourse, and
so eager in asserting that the soul is set free
from seed by the food of the saints, do you
not sanction, unhappy beings, the suspicion
entertained about you? For why should it
be true regarding corn and beans and lentils
and other seeds, that when you eat them you
wish to set free the soul, and not true of the
seeds of animals ? For what you say of the
flesh of a dead animal, that it is unclean
because there is no soul in it, cannot be said
of the seed of the animal; for you hold that
it keeps confined the soul which will appear
in the offspring, and you avow that the soul
of Manichasus himself is thus confined. And
as your followers cannot bring these seeds to
you for purification, who will not suspect that
you make this purification secretly among
yourselves, and hide it from your followers,
incase they should leave you ? ' If you do
not these things, as it is to be hoped you do
not, still you see how open to suspicion your
superstition is, and how impossible it is to
blame men for thinking what your own pro-
fession suggests, when you maintain that
you set free souls from bodies and from senses
by eating and drinking. I wish to say no
more about this: you see yourselves what
room there is here for denunciation. But as
the matter is one rather to repress than to
invite remark, and also as throughout my dis-
course my purpose appears of exaggerating
nothing, and of keeping to bare facts and
arguments, we shall pass on to other matters.

CHAP. 19. — CRIMES OF THE MANICH^ANS.

67. We see then, now, the nature of your
three symbols. These are your customs.
This is the end of your notable precepts, in
which there is nothing sure, nothing steadfast,
nothing consistent, nothing irreproachable,
but all doubtful, or rather undoubtedly and
entirely false, all contradictory, abominable,
absurd. In a word, evil practices are de-
tected in your customs so many and so
serious, that one wishing to denounce them

I [Compare what is said about the disffusting ceremonial of
Ischas by Cyril of Jerusalem {Cni. vi.), Augustin (f/iu'r,s. xlvi.),
Pope I.eo X. (.?(•;-;«. / '. de Jejuniis, X. Mens:.). These charges
were probably unfounded, though they are not altogether out of
harmony with the Manicheean principles. — A. H. N.]

all, if he were at all able to enlarge, would
require at least a separate treatise for each.
Were you to observe these, and to act up to
your profession, no childishness, or folly, or
absurdity would go beyond yours; and when
you praise and teach these things without
doing them, you display craft and deceit and
malevolence equal to anything that can be
described or imagined.

68. During nine full years that I attended
you with great earnestness and assiduity, I
could not hear of one of your elect who was
not found transgressing these precepts, or at
least was not suspected of doing so. Many
were caught at wine and animal food, many
at the baths; but this we only heard by report.
Some were proved to have seduced other men's
wives, so that in this case I could not douin
the truth of the charge. But suppose this,
too, a report rather than a fact. I myself
saw, and not I only, but others who have
either escaped from that superstition, or will,
I hope, yet escape, — we saw, I say, in a
square in Carthage, on a road much fre-
quented, not one, but more than three of the
elect walking behind us, and accosting some
women with such indecent sounds and gestures
as to outdo the boldness and insolence of all
ordinary rascals. And it was clear that this
was quite habitual, and that they behaved in
this way to one another, for no one was
deterred by the presence of a companion, —
showing that most of them, if not all, were
affected with this evil tendency. For they
did not all come from one house, but lived in
quite different places, and quite accidentally
left together the place where they had met.
It was a great shock to us, and we lodged a
complaint about it. But who thought of in-
flicting punishment, — I say not by separation
from the church, but even by severe rebuke
in proportion to the heinousness of the of-
fence ?

69. All the excuse given for the impunity
of those men was that, at that time, when
their meetings were forbidden by law, it was
feared that the persons suffering punishment
might retaliate by giving information. What
then of their assertion that they will always
have persecution in this world, for which they
suppose that they will be thought the more of ?
for this is the application they make of the
words about the world hating them.'' And
they will have it that truth must be sought for
among them, because, in the promise of the
Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, it is said that the
world cannot receive Him.^ This is not the
place to discuss this question. But clearly.

= John xv. 18.

3 John xiv. 17.

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XIX.

it you are always to be persecuted, even to
the end of the world, there will be no end to
this laxity, and to the unchecked spread of
all this iinmorality, from your fear of giving
offence to men of this character.

70. This answer was also given to us, when
we reported to the very highest authorities that
a woman had complained to us that in a meet-
ing, where she was along with other women,
not doubting of the sanctity of these people,
some of the elect came in, and when one of
them had put out the lamp, one, whom she
could not distinguish, tried to embrace her,
and would have forced her into sin, had she
not escaped by crying out. How common
must we conclude the practice to have been
which led to the misdeed on this occasion!
And this was done on the night when you
keep the feast of vigils. Forsooth, besides
the fear of information being given, no one
could bring the olYender before the bishop, as
he had so well guarded against being re-
cognized. As if all who entered along with
him were not implicated in the crime; for in
their indecent merriment they all wished the
lamp to be put out.

7 1 . Then what wide doors were opened for
suspicions, when we saw them full of envy,
full of covetousness, full of greed for costly
foods, constantly at strife, easily excited about
trifles ! We concluded that they were not
competent to abstain from the things they
professed to abstain from, if they found an
opportunity in secret or in the dark. Tliere
were two of sufficiently good character, of
active minds, and leaders in their debates,
with whom we had a more particular and
intimate acquaintance than with the rest.
One of them was much associated with us,
because he was also engaged in liberal studies;
he is said to be now an elder there. These
two were very jealous of one another, and one
accused the other — not openly, but in con-
versation, as he had opportunity, and in
whispers — of having made a criminal assault
on the wife of one of the followers. He
again, in clearing himself to us, brought the
same charge against another of the elect, who
lived with this follower as his most trusted
friend. He had, going in suddenly, caught
this man with the woman, and his enemv and
rival had advised the woman and her paramour
to raise this false report about him. that he
might not be believed if he gave any informa-
tion. We were much distressed, and took it
greatly to heart, that although there was a
doubt about the assault on the woman, the
jealous feeling in those two men, than whom
we found none better in the place, showed

itself so keenly, and inevitably raised a sus-
picion of other things.'

72. Another thing was, that we very often
saw in theatres men belonging to the elect,
men of years and, it was supposed, of char-
acter, along with a hoary-headed elder We
pass over the youths, whom we used to come
upon quarrelling about the people connected
with the stage and the races; from which we
may safely conclude how they would be able
to refrain in secret, w-hen they could not
subdue the passion by which they were exposed
in the eyes of their followers, bringing on
them disgrace and flight. In the case of the
saint, whose discussions we attended in the
street of the fig-sellers, would his atrocious
crime have been discovered if he had been
able to make the- dedicated virgin his wife
without making her pregnant? The swelling
womb betrayed the secret and unthought-of
iniquity. When her brother, a young man,
heard of it from his mother, he felt keenly
the injury, but refrained, from regard to
religion, from a public accusation. He suc-
ceeded in getting the man expelled from that
church, for such conduct cannot always be
tolerated; and that the crime might not be
wholly unpunished, he arranged with some of
his friends to have the man well beaten and
kicked. When he was thus assailed, he
cried out that they should spare him, from
regard to the authority of the opinion of
Manich.neus, that Adam the first hero had
sinned, and was a greater saint after his sin.

73. This, in fact, is your notion about
Adam and Eve.- It is a long story; but I
will touch only on what concerns the present
matter. You say that Adam was produced
from his parents, the abortive princes of
darkness; that he had in his soul the most
part of light, and very little of the opposite
race. So while he lived a holy life, on ac-
count of the prevalence of good, still the
opposite part in him was stirred up, so that
he was led away into conjugal intercourse.
Thus he fell and sinned, but afterwards lived
in greater holiness. Now, my complaint is
not so much about this wicked man, who,
under the garb of an elect and holy man,
brought such shame and reproach on a family
of strangers by his shocking immorality. I
do not charge you with this. Let it be attri-
buted to the abandoned character of the man,

' and not to your habits. I blame the man
for the atrocity, and not you. Still there is

I "Doubtless Augustin exaggerates the immorality of the Mani-
checans; but ihere must have been a considerable basis of fact for
his charges. — A. H. N.]

= Compare the account from the Fi/trist, in our Tntroduction,
Chapter ] 1 1. — A. H. N.]

Chai<. XX.]

ON THE MORALS OF THE MANICH^ANS.

this in you all that cannot, as far as I can
see, be admitted or tolerated, that while you
hold the soul to be part of God, you still
maintain that the mixture of a little evil pre-
vailed over the superior force and quantity
of good. Who that believes this, when incited
by passion, will not find here an excuse,
instead of checking and controlling his
passion ?

CHAP. 20. DISGRACEFUL CONDUCT DISCOVERED

AT ROME.

74. What more shall I say of your cus-
toms ? I have mentioned what I found my-
self when I was in the city when the things
were done. To go through all that happened
at Rome in my absence would take a long
time. I will, however, give a short account
of it; for the matter became so notorious,
that even the absent could not remain in ig-
norance of it. And when I was afterwards in
Rome, I ascertained the truth of all I had
heard, although the story was told me by an
eye-witness whom I knew so well and esteemed
so highly, that I could not feel any doubt
about it. One of your followers, then, quite
equal to the elect in their far-famed absti-
nence, for he was both liberally educated, and
was in the habit of defending your sect with
L^reat zeal, took it very ill that he had cast in
:iis teeth the viie conduct of the elect, who
lived in all kinds of places, and went hither
and thither for lodging of the worst descrip-
tion. He therefore desired, if possible, to
assemble all who were willing to live accord-
ing to the precepts into his own house, and
to maintain them at his own expense; for he
was above the average in carelessness as to
-pending money, besides being above the
average in the amount he had to spend. He
complained that his efforts were hindered by
the, remissness of the bishops, whose assist-
ance he required for success. At last one of
your bishops was found, — a man, as I know,
very rude and unpolished, but somehow,
from his very moroseness, the more inclined
to strict observance of morality. The fol-
tovver eagerly lays hold of this man as the
l^erson he had long wished for and found at
last, and relates his whole plan. He approves
and assents, and agrees to be the first to take
up his abode in the house. When this was
done, all the elect who could be at Rome
were assembled there. The rule of life in
the epistle of Manichaeus was laid before
them. Many thought it intolerable, and left;
not a few felt ashamed, and stayed. They
began to live as they had agreed, and as this

high authority enjoined. The follower all
the time was zealously enforcing everything
on everybody, though never, in any case,
what he did not undertake himself. Mean-
while quarrels constantly arose among the
elect. They charged one another with crimes,
all which he lamented to hear, and managed
to make them unintentionally expose one
another in their altercations. The revela-
tions were vile beyond description. Thus
appeared the true character of those who
were unlike the rest in being willing to bend
to the yoke of the precepts. What then is
to be suspected, or rather, concluded, of the
others ? To come to a close, they gathered
together on one occasion and complained that
they could not keep the regulations. Then
came rebellion. The follower stated his case
most concisely, that either all must be kept,
or the man who had given such a sanction to
such precepts, which no one could fulfill, must
be thought a great fool. But, as was inevi-
table, the wild clamor of the mob prevailed
over the opinion of one man. The bishop
himself gave way at last, and took to flight
with great disgrace; and he was said to have
got in provisions by stealth, contrary to rule,
which were often discovered. He had a
supply of money from his private purse,
which he carefully kept concealed.

75. If you say these things are false, you
contradict what is too clear and public. But
you may say so if you like. For, as the
things are certain, and easily known by those
who wish to know them, those who deny that
they are true show what their habit of telling
the truth is. But you have other replies
with which I do not find fault. For you either
say that some do keep your precepts, and
that they should not be mixed up with the
guilty in condemning the others; or that the
whole inquiry into the character of the mem-
bers of your sect is wrong, for the question
is of the character of the profession. Should
I grant both of these (although you can
neither point out those faithful observers of
the precepts, nor clear your heresy of all
those frivolities and iniquities), still I must
insist on knowing why you heap reproaches
on Christians of the Catholic name on seeing
theTmmorai life of some, while you either
have the effrontery to repel inquiry about
your members, or the still greater effrontery
not to repel it, wishing it to be understood
that in your scanty membership there are
some unknown individuals who keep the pvc-
cepts they profess, but that among the multi-
tudes in the Catholic Church there are none.

ST. AUGUSTIN:

ON TWO SOULS,
AGAINST THE MANICH/EANS.

[DE DUABUS ANIMABUS CONTRA MANICH^OS].

A.D. 391.

TRANSLATED BY

ALBERT H. NEWMAN, D.D., LL.D.,

PROFESSOR OF CHURCH HISTORY AND COMPARATIVE RELIGION, IN TORONTO
BAPTIST (theological) COLLEGE, TORONTO, CANADA.

CONTENTS ON TWO SOULS AGAINST THE MANTCH.€ANS.

PAGE

Chap. I. — By what course of reasoning the error of the Manichaeans concerning two souls, one of
which is not from God, is refuted. Every soul, inasmuch as it is a certain life, can have its

existence only from God, the source of life 95

■Ai'. II. — If the light that is perceived by sense has God for its author, as the Manichaeans acknowl-
edge, much more the soul which is perceived by intellect alone g5

lAP. III. — How it is proved that every body also is from God. That the soul which is called evil
by the Manichaeans is better than light g6

(HAP. IV. — Even the soul of a fly is more excellent than the light 97

(HAP. V. — How vicious souls, however worthy of condemnation they may be, excel the light which

is praiseworthy in its kind 97

! i!AP. VI. — Whether even vices themselves as objects of intellectual apprehension are to be preferred
to light as an object of sense perception, and are to be attributed to God as their author. Vice of
the mind and certain defects are not rightly to be counted among intelligible things. Defects them-
selves even if they should be counted among intelligible things, should never be put before sensible
things. If light is visible by God, much more is the soul, even if vicious, which in so far as it lives
is an intelligible thing. Passages of Scripture are adduced by the Manichxans to the contrary. . 98

I iiAP. VII. — How evil men are of God, and not of God 99

' HAP. VIII. — The Manichaeans inquire whence is evil, and by this question think they have triumphed.
Let them first know, which is most easy to do, that nothing can live without God. Consummate
evil cannot be known except by the knowledge of consummate good, which is God 100

( iiAP. IX. — Augustin deceived by familiarity with the Manichaeans, and by the succession of victories
over ignorant Christians reported by them. The Manichasans are likewise easily refuted from the

knowledge of sin and the will loi

!iAP. X. — Sin is only from the will. His own life and will best known to each individual. What will is. lOl

iiAi'. XL— What sin is I03

' .'AP. XII. — From the definitions given of sin and will, he overthrows the entire heresy of the Mani-

chceans. Likewise from the just condemnation of evil souls, it follows that they are evil not by

nature but by will. That souls are good by nature, to which the pardon of sins is granted. . . . 104

fAP. XIII. — From deliberation of the evil and on the good part it results that two classes of souls are

not to be held to. A class of souls enticing to shameful deeds having been conceded, it does not

! follow that these are evil by nature, that the others are supreme good 105

'< IIAP. XIV. — .\gain it is shown from the utility of repenting that souls are not by nature evil. So sure

a demonstration is not contradicted except from the habit of erring 106

iiAP. XV. — He prays for his friends whom he has had as associates in error 107

CONCERNING

TWO SOULS, AGAINST THE MANICH.EANS.

[DE DUABUS ANIMABUS CONTRA MANICH^OS.] A.D. 391.'

ONE BOOK.

CHAP. r. — BY WHAT COURSE OF REASONING THE
ERROR OF THE MANICH^EANS CONCERNING
TWO SOULS, ONE OF WHICH IS NOT FROM
GOD, IS REFUTED. EVERY SOUL, INASMUCH
AS IT IS A CERTAIN LIFE, CAN HAVE ITS
EXISTENCE ONLY FROM GOD THE SOURCE OF
LIFE.

I. Through the assisthig mercy of God, the
snares of the Manichaeans having been broken
to pieces and left behind, naving been re-
stored at length to the bosom of the Catholic
Church, I am disposed now at least to con-
sider and to deplore my recent wretchedness.
For there were many things that I ought to
have done to prevent the seeds of the most
true religion wholesomely implanted in me
from boyhood, from being banished from
my mind, having been uprooted by the error
and fraud of false and deceitful men. For,
in the first place, if I had soberly and dili-
"intly considered, with prayerful and pious
aiind, those two kinds of souls to which they
attributed natures and properties so distinct

' Scarcely any one of hisearlier treatises was more unsatisfactory
i'> Aujjustin in his later Anti-Pelagian years than that Conceruing
Two Souls. In his Retractations. Book I., chapter ,xv., he
recognizes the rashness of some of his statements and points out
the sense in which they are tenable or the reverse. As regards
the occasion of the writing, the following may be quoted: " After
this book [Oe Utilitate Crcdcndi^ I wrote, while still a presbyter,
against the Manichaeans Concerning Two Soiiis, of which they
say that one part is of God, the other from the race of darkness,
which God did not found, and which is coeternal with God, and
they rave about both these souls, the one good, the other evil,
being in one man, saying forsooth that the evil soul on the one
hand belongs to the flesh, which flesh also they say is of the race
of darkness ; but that the good soul is from the part of Clod that
came forth, combated the race of darkness, and mingled with the
latter ; and they attribute all good things in man to that good
soul, and all evil things to that evil soul." — A. H. N.

that they wished one to be regarded as of the
very substance of God, but were not even will-
ing that God should be accepted as the author
of the other; perhaps it would have appeared
to me, intent on learning, that there is no life
whatsoever, which, by the very fact of its
being life and in so far as it is life at all, does
not pertain to the supreme source and begin-
ning of life,= which we must acknowledge to
be nothing else than the supreme and only
and true God. Wherefore there is no reason
why we should not confess, that those souls
which the Manichaeans call evil are either de-
void of life and so not souls, neither will any-
thing positively or negatively, neither follow
after nor flee from anything; or, if they live
so that they can be souls, and "act as the
Manichasans suppose, in no way do they live
unless by life, and if it be an established
fact, as it is, that Christ has said: " I am the
life," 3 that all souls seeing that they cannot
be souls except by living were created and
fashioned by Christ, that is, by the Life,

CHAP. 2. IF THE LIGHT THAT IS PERCEIVED

I5Y SENSE HAS GOD FOR ITS AUTHOR, AS THE
MANICH.EANS ACKNOWLEDGE, MUCH MORE
THE SOUL WHICH IS PERCEIVED BY INTELLECT
ALONE.

2. But if at that time ''my thought was not
able to bear and sustain tiie question concern-

= In his RcfrnciationSy Augustin explains this proposition as
follows: " I said this in the sense in which the creature is known
to pertain to the Creator, but not in the sense that it is of Him, so
as to be regarded as part of Him." — A. H. N.

3 John xiv. 6.

4 It will aid the reader in following the thread of Augustin'sargu-

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. III.

ing life and partaking of life, which is truly a
great question, and one that requires much
calm discussion among the learned, I might
perchance have had power to discover that
which to every man considering himself, with-
out a study of the individual parts, is perfectly
evident, namely, that everything we are said
to know and to understand, we comprehend
either by bodily sense or by mental opera-
tion. That the five bodily senses are com-
monly enumerated as sight, hearing, smell,
taste, touch, than all of which intellect is
immeasurably more noble and excellent, who
would have been so ungrateful and impious
as not to concede to me; which being es-
tablished and confirmed, we should have seen
how it follows, that whatsoever things are
perceived by touch or sight or in any bodily
manner at all, are by so much inferior to
those things that we comprehend intellectu-
ally as the senses are inferior to the intellect.
Wherefore, since all life, and so every soul,
can be perceived by no bodily sense, but by
the intellect alone, whereas while yonder sun
and moon and every luminary that is beheld
by these mortal eyes, the Manichseans them-
selves also say must be attributed to the true
and good God, it is the height of madness
to claim that that belongs to God which we
observe bodily; but, on the other hand, to
think that what we receive not only by the
mind, but by the highest form of mind,'
namely, reason and intellect,^ that is life, what-
soever it may be called, nevertheless life,
should be deprived and bereft of the same
God as its author. For if having invoked
God, I had asked myself what living is, how
inscrutable it is to every bodily sense, how
absolutely incorporeal it is, could not I have
answered ? Or would not the Manichaeans
also confess not only that the souls they de-
test live, but that they live also immortally?
and that Christ's saying: " Send the dead to
bury their dead," ^ was uttered not with refer-
ence to those not living at all, but with refer-
ence to sinners, which is the only death of
the immortal soul; as when Paul writes:
" The widow that giveth herself to pleasure
is dead while she liveth, ""he says that she
at the same time is dead, and alive. Where-
fore I should have directed attention not to

ment, if he will bear in mind that throughout this treatise the
writer considers the points of antagonism between Manichssism
and Catholicism from the point of view of his early entanglement
in Manicha;an error. Considering the opportunities that'he had
for knowing the truth, the helps to have been expected from God
in answer to prayer, the capacities of the unperverted intellect to
arrive at truth, he inquires how he should have guarded himself
from the insinuation of Manichaean error, how he should have
defended the truth, and how he should have been the means of
liberating others. — A. H. N.

I Suh'limitate aniini. 2 Mente atque intelligentia.

3 Matt. viii. 22. 4 i Tim. v. 6.

the great degree of contamination in which
the sinful soul lives, but only to the fact itself
that it lives. But if I cannot perceive except
by an act of intelligence, I believe it would
have come into the mind, that by as much as
any mind whatever is to be preferred to the
light which we see through these eyes, by so
much we should give to intellect the prefer-
ence over the eyestiiemselves.

CHAP, 3. HOW IT IS PROVED THAT EVERY BODY

ALSO IS FROM GOD. THAT THE SOUL WHICH
IS CALLED EVIL BY THE MANICH/EANS IS BET-
TER THAN LIGHT.

They also affirm that the light is from the
Father of Christ: should I then have doubted
that every soul is from Him ? But not even
then, as a man forsooth so inexperienced
and so youthful as I was, should I have
been in doubt as to the derivation not only of
the soul, but also of the body, nay of every-
thing whatsoever, from Him, if I had rever-
ently and cautiously reflected on what form
is, or what has been formed, what shape is
and what has been endued with shape.

3. But not to speak at present concerning
the body, I lament concerning the soul, con-
cerning spontaneous and vivid movement,
concerning action, concerning life, concern-
ing immortality; in fine, I lament that I,
miserable, should have believed that anything
could have all these properties apart from the
goodness of God, which properties, great as
they are, I sadly neglected to consider; this
I think, should be to me a matter of groaning
and of weeping. I should have inwardly
pondered these things, I should have dis-
cussed them with myself, I should have re-
ferred them to others, I should have pro-
pounded the inquiry, what the power of know-
ing is, seeing there is nothing in man that we
can compare to this excellency ? And as
men, if only they had been men, would have
granted me this, I should have inquired
whether seeing with these eyes is knowing ^
In case they had answered negatively, I
should first have concluded, that mental in-
telligence is vastly inferior to ocular sensa-
tion; then I should have added, that what we
perceive by means of a better thing must
needs be judged to be itself better. Who-
would not grant this ? I should have gone
on to inquire, whether that soul which they
call evil is an object of ocular sensation or
of mental intelligence ? They would have
acknowledged that the latter is the case. All
which things having been agreed upon and
confirmed between us, I should have shown
how it follows, that that soul forsooth which
they execrate, is better than that light which

Chap. VI.]

TWO SOULS. AGAINST THE MANICH^.ANS.

they venerate, since the former is an object
of mental knowledge, the latter an object
of corporeal sense perception. But here
perhaps they would have halted, and would
have refused to follow the lead of reason, so
great is the power of inveterate opinion and
of falsehood long defended and believed.
But I should have pressed yet more upon
them halting, not harshly, not in puerile fash-
ion, not obstinately; I should have repeated
the things that had l^een conceded, and have
shown how they must be conceded. I should
have exhorted that they consult in common,
that they may see clearly what must be de-
nied to us; whether they think it false that
intellectual perception is to be preferred to
these carnal organs of sight, or that what is
known by means of the excellency of the
mind is more excellent than what is known
bv vile corporeal sensation; whether they
would be unwilling to confess that those souls
which they think heterogenous, can be
known only by intellectual perception, that
is, by the excellency itself of the mind;
whether they would wish to deny that the sun
and the moon are made known to us only by
means of these eyes. But if they had re-
plied that no one of these things could be
denied otherwise than most absurdly and
most impudently, I should have urged that
they ought not to doubt but that the light
whose worthiness of worship they proclaim, is
viler than that soul which they admonish
men to flee.

CHAP. 4. — EVEN THE SOUL OF A FLV IS MORE
EXCELLENT THAN THE LIGHT.

4. And here, if perchance in their confusion
they had inquired of me whether I thought
that the soul even of a fly' surpasses that
light, I should have replied, yes, nor should
it have troubled me that the fly is little, but
it should have confirmed me that it is alive.
For It is inquired, what causes those members
so diminutive to grow, what leads so minute
a body here and there according to its
natural appetite, what moves its feet in nu-
merical order when it is running, what regu-
lates and gives vibration to its wings when
flying? This thing whatever it is in so small
a creature towers up so prominently to one
well considering, that it excels any lightning
flashing upon the eyes.

CHAP. 5. — HOW VICIOUS SOULS, HOWEVER
WORTHY OF CONDEMNATION THEY MAY BE,
EXCEL THE LIGHT WHICH IS PRAISEWORTHY
I IN ITS KIND.

Certainly nobody doubts that whatever is

' Neither Aiigustin nor the Manichsans seem to have recoij-

an object of intellectual perception, by virtue
of divine laws surpasses in excellence every
sensible object and consequently also this
light. For what, I ask, do we perceive by
thought, if not that it is one thing to know
with the mind, and another thing to experi-
ence bodily sensations, and "-hat the former is
incomparably more sublime than the latter,
and so that intelligible things must needs be
preferred to sensible things, since the intellect
itself is so highly exalted above the senses ?

5. Hence this also I should perchance have
known, which manifestly follows, since injus-
tice and intemperance and other vices of the
mind are not objects of sense, but of intellect,
how it comes about that these too which we
detest and consider condemnable, yet in as
much as they are objects of intellect, can out-
rank this light however praiseworthy it may
be in its kind. For it is borne in upon the
mind subjecting itself well to God, that, first
of all, not everything that we praise is to be
preferred to everything that we find fault with.
For in praising the purest lead, I do not
therefore put a higher value upon it than
upon the gold that I find fault with. For
everything must be considered in its kind. I
disapprove of a lawyer ignorant of many
statutes, yet I so prefer him to the most ap-
proved tailor, that I should think him incom-
parably superior. But I praise the tailor
because he is thoroughly skilled in his own
craft, while I rightly blame the lawyer be-
cause he imperfectly fulfills the functions of
his profession. Wherefore I should have
found out that the light which in its own kind
is perfect, is rightly to be praised; yet because
it is included in the number of sensible things,
which class must needs yield to the class of
intelligible things, it must be ranked below
unjust and intemperate souls, since these are
intelligible; although we may without injus-
tice judge these to be most worthy of con-
demnation. For in the case of these we ask
that they be reconciled to God, not that they
be preferred to that lightning. Wherefore, if
any one had contended that this luminary is
from God, I should not have opposed; but
rather I should have said, that souls, even
vicious ones, not in so far as they are vicious,
but in so far as they are souls, must be ac-
knowledged to be creatures of God.

CHAP. 6. WHETHKR EVEN VICES THEMSELVES
AS OBJECTS OF INTELLECTUAL APPREHEN-
SION ARE TO BE PREFERRED TO LIGHT AS
AN OBJECT OF SENSE PERCEPTION, AND ARE
TO VfE ATTRIBUTED TO GOD AS THEIR

nized the distinction in kind between the human soul and animal

hfe.— A. H. N.

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. VI.

AUTHOR. VICE OF THK MIND AND CERTAIN
DEFECTS ARE NOT RIGHTLY TO BE COUNTED
AMONG INTELLIGIBLE THINGS. DEFECTS

THEMSELVES EVEN IF THEY SHOULD BE
COUNTED AMONG INTELLIGIBLE THINGS
SHOULD NEVER BE PUT BEFORE SENSIBLE
THINGS. IF LIGHT IS VISIBLE BY GOD, MUCH
MORE IS THE SOUL, EVEN IF VICIOUS, WHICH
IN SO FAR AS IT LIVES IS AN INTELLIGIBLE
THING. PASSAGES OF SCRIPTURE ARE AD-
DUCED BY THE MANICHiEANS TO THE CON-
TRARY.

At this point, in case some one of them,
cautious and watchful, now also more studi-
ous than pertinacious, had admonished me
that the inquiry is not about vicious souls,
but about vices themselves, which, seeing that
they are not known by corporeal sense, and
yet are known, can only be received as ob-
jects of intellectual apprehension, which if
they excel all objects of sense, why can we
not agree in attributing light to God as its
author, but only a sacrilegious person would
sav that God is the author of vices; I should
have replied to the man, if either on the spur
of the moment, as is customary to the wor-
shippers of the good God, a solution of this
question had darted like lightning from on
high, or a solution had been previously pre-
pared. If I had not deserved ur was unable
to avail myself of either of these methods, I
should have deferred the undertaking, and
should have confessed that the thing pro-
pounded was difficult to discern and arduous.
I should have withdrawn to myself, prostrated
myself before God, groaned aloud asking Him
not to suffer me to halt in mid space, when
I should have moved forward with assured
arguments, asking Him that I might not be
compelled by a doubtful question either to
subordinate intelligible things to sensible, and
to yield, or to call Himself the author of
vices; since either of these alternatives would
have been absolutely full of falsehood and
impiety. I can by no means suppose that
He would have deserted me in such a frame
of mind. Rather, in His own ineffable way,
He would have admonished me to consider
again and again whether vices of mind con-
cerning which I was so troubled should be
reckoned among intelligible things. But that
I might find out, on account of the weakness
of my inner eye, which rightly befell me on
account of my sins, I should have devised
some sort of stage for gazing upon spiritual
things in visible things themselves, of which
we have by no means a surer knowledge, but
a more confident familiarity. Therefore I
should straightway have inquired, what prop-

erly pertains to the sensation of the eyes. I
should have found that it is the color, the
dominion of which the light holds. For these
are the things that no other sense touches,
for the motions and magnitudes and intervals
and figures of bodies, although they also can
be perceived by the eyes, yet to perceive such
is not their peculiar function, but belongs
also to touch. Whence I should have gath.
ered that by as much as yonder light excels
other corporeal and sensible things, by so
much is sight more noble than the other
senses. The light therefore having been
selected from all the things that are perceived
by bodily sense, by this [light] I should
have striven, and in this of necessity I
should have placed that stage of my inquiry.
I should have gone on to consider what might
be done in this way, and thus I should have
reasoned with myself: If yonder sun, con-
spicuous by its brightness and sufficing for
day by its light, should little by little decline
in our sight into the likeness of the moon,
would we perceive anything else with our
eyes than light however refulgent, yet seek-
ing light by reason of not seeing what had
been, and using it for seeing what was present ?
Therefore we should not see the decline, but
the light that should survive the decline.
But since we should not see, we should not
perceive; for whatever we perceive by sight
must necessarily be seen; wherefore if that
decline were perceived neither by sight nor
by any other sense, it cannot be reckoned
among objects of sense. For nothing is an
object of sense that cannot be perceived by
sense. Let us apply now the consideration
to virtue, by whose intellectual light we most
fittingly say the mind shines. Again, a cer-
tain decline from this light of virtue, not de-
stroying the soul, but obscuring it, is called
vice. Therefore also vice can by no means
be reckoned among objects of intellectual
perception, as that decline of light is rightly
excluded from the number of objects of sense
perception. Yet what remains of soul, that
is, that which lives and is soul, is just as
much an object of intellectual perception as
that is an object of sense perception which
should shine in this visible luminary after
any imaginable degree of decline. And so
the soul, in so far as it is soul and partakes
of life, without which it can in no way be soul,
is most correctly to be preferred to all objects
of sense perception. Wherefore it is most
erroneous to say that any soul is not from
God, from whom you boast that the sun and
moon have their existence.

7. But if now it should be thought fit to
designate as objects of sense perception not

Chap. VII. j

TWO SOULS, AGAINST THE MANICH^ANS.

only all those things that we perceive by the
senses, but also all those things that though
not perceiving by the senses we judge of by
means of the body, as of darkness through
the eyes, of silence through the ears, — for not
f)y seeing darkness and not by hearing silence
do we know of their existence, — and again,
in the case of objects of intellectual percep-
tion, not those things only which we see illu-
minated by the mind, as is wisdom itself, but
also those things which by the illumination
itself we avoid, such as foolishness, which I
might fittingly designate mental darkness; I
should have made no controversy about a
word, but should have dissolved the whole
question by an easy division, and straight-
way I should have proved to those giving
good attention, that by the divme law of truth
intelligible subsistences are to be preferred
to sensible subsistences, not the decline of
these subsistences, even though we should
choose to call these intelligible, those sensi-
ble. Wherefore, that those who acknowledge
that these visible luminaries and those intelli-
gible souls are subsistences, are in every way
compelled to grant and to attribute the sub-
limer part to souls; but that defects of either
kind cannot be preferred the one to the other,
1 for they are only privative and indicate non-
; existence, and therefore have precisely the
1 same force as negations themselves. For when
we say. It is not gold, and, It is not virtue,
j although there is the greatest possible differ-
lence between gold and virtue, yet there is no
j difference between the negations that we ad-
ijoin to them. But that it is worse indeed
;not to be virtue than not to be gold, no sane
'man doubts. Who does not know that the
difference lies not in the negations themselves,
jbut in the things to which they are adjoined ?
Tor by as much as virtue is more excellent
than gold, by so much is it more wretched to
be in want of virtue than of gold. Where-
|fore, since intelligible things excel sensible
(things, we rightly feel greater repugnance
[towards defect in intelligible than in sensible
things, esteeming not the defects, but the
:hings that are deficient more or less precious.
J jFrom which now it appears, that defect of
ight, which is intelligible, is far more wretched
;han defect of the sensible light, because,
brsooth, life which is known is by far more
precious than yonder light which is seen.
8. This being the case, who will dare, while
1 Attributing sun and moon, and whatever is
efulgent in the stars, nay in this fire of ours
ind in this visible earthly life, to God, to de-
line to grant that any souls whatsoever, which
re not souls except by the fact of their being
•erfectly alive, since in this fact alone life

has the precedence of light, are from God.
And since he speaks truth who says. In as far
as a thing shines it is from God, would I
speak falsely, mighty God, if I should say,
In so far as a thing lives it is from God ? Let
not, I beseech thee, blindness of intellect and
perv'ersions of mind be increased to such an
extent that men may fail to know these things.
But however great their error and pertinacity
might have been, trusting in these arguments
and armed therewith, I believe that when I
should have laid the matter before them thus
considered and canvassed, and should have
calmly conferred with them, I should have
feared lest any one of them should have
seemed to me to be of any consequence,
should he endeavor to subordinate or even to
compare to bodily sense, or to those things
that pertain to bodily sense as objects of
knowledge, either intellect or those things
that are perceived (not by w-ay of defect) by
the intellect. Which point having been set-
tled, how would he or any other have dared
to deny that such souls as he would consider
evil, yet since they are souls, are to be reck-
oned in the number of intelligible things, nor
are objects of intellectual perception by way
of defect? This is on the supposition that
souls are souls only by being alive. For if
they were intellectually perceived as vicious
through defect, being vicious by lack of vir-
tue, yet they are perceived as souls not
through defect, for they are souls by reason
of being alive. Nor can it be maintained
that presence of life is a cause of defect, for
by as much as anything is defective, by so
much is it severed from life.

9. Since therefore it would have been every
way evident that no souls can be separated
from that Author from whom yonder light is
not separated, whatever they might have now
adduced I should not have accepted, and
should rather have admonished them that
they should choose with me to follow those
who maintain that whatever is, since it is, and
in whatever degree it is, has its existence
from the one God.

CHAP. 7. — HOW EVIL MEN ARE OF GOD, AND
NOT OF GOD.

They might have cited against me those
words of the gospel: " Ye therefore do not
hear, because ye are not of God;" "Ye are
of your father the devil."" I also should
have cij;ed: "All things were made by Him
and without Him was not anything made," '
and this of the Apostle: " One God of. whom
are all things, and one Lord Jesus Christ

' John viii. 47 and 44.

2 John i. 3.

lOO

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. VIII.

through whom are all things,"' and again
from the same Apostle: "Of whom are all
things, through whom are all things, in whom
are all things, to Him be glory." ' I should
have exhorted those men (if indeed I had
found them men), that we should presume
upon nothing as if we had found it out, but
should rather inquire of the masters who
would demonstrate the agreement and har-
mony of those passages that seem to be dis-
cordant. For when in one and the same
Scriptural authority we read: "All things are
of God," 3 and elsewhere: "Ye are not of
God," since it is wrong rashly to condemn
books of Scripture, who would not have seen
that a skilled teacher should be found who
would know a solution of this problem, from
whom assuredly if endowed with good intellect-
ual powers, and a " spiritual man," as is said
by divine inspiration ■* (for he would necessarily
have favored the true arguments concerning
the intelligible and sensible nature, which, as far
as I can, I have conducted and handled, nay
he would have disclosed them far better
and more convincingly); we should have
heard nothing else concerning this problem,
except, as might happen, that there is no
class of souls but has its existence from
God, and that it is yet rightly said to sinners
and unbelievers: " Ye are not of God." For
we also, perchance, Divine aid having been
implored, should have been able easily to
see, that it is one thing to live and another
to sin, and (although life in sin may be called
death in comparison with just life,^ and
while in one man it may be found, that
he is at the same time alive and a sinner)
that so far as he is alive, he is of God, so far
as he is a sinner he is not of God. In which
division we use that alternative that suits our
sentiment; so that when we wish to insist
upon the omnipotence of God as Creator, we
may say even to sinners that they are of God.
For we are speaking to those who are con-
tained in some class, we are speaking to those
having animal life, we are speaking to rational
beings, we are speaking lastly — and this applies
especially to the matter in hand — to living
beings, all which things are essentially divine
functions. But when our purpose is to con-
vict evil men, we rightly sa)^: "Ye are not
of God." For we speak to them as averse
to truth, unbelieving, criminal, infamous,
and, to sum up all in one term — sinners, all
of which things are undoubtedly not of God.
Therefore what wonder is it, if Christ says to
sinners, convicting them of this very thing
that they were sinners and did not believe in

1 1 Cor. viii. 6.
4 I Cor. ii. 15.

2 Rom. xi. 36.
5 I Tim. V. 6,

3 I Cor. xi. 12.

Him: "Ye are not of God;" and on the
other hand, without prejudice to the former
statement: "All things were made through
Him," and "All things are of God?" For
if not to believe Christ, to repudiate Christ's
advent, not to accept Christ, was a sure maric |
of souls that are not of God; and so it was '
said: " Ye therefore hear not, because ye are
not of God;" how would that saying of the
apostle be true that occurs in the memorable
beginning of the gospel: " He came unto
his own things, and his own people did not
receive him?"^ Whence his own if they did
not receive him; or whence therefore not his
own because they did not receive him, unless
that sinners by virtue of being men belong to
God, but by virtue of being sinners belong to
the devil ? He who says: "His own people
received him not" had reference to nature;
but he who says: "Ye are not of God," had
reference to will; for the evangelist was com-
mending the works of God, Christ was cen-
suring the sins of men

CHAP. 8. THE MANICH^ANS INQUIRE WHENCE

IS EVIL AND BY THIS QUESTION THINK THEY
HAVE TRIUMPHED. LET THEM FIRST KNOW,
WHICH IS MOST EASY TO DO, THAT NOTH-
ING CAN LIVE WITHOUT GOD. CONSUM-
MATE EVIL CANNOT BE KNOWN EXCEPT BY
THE KNOWLEDGE OF CONSUMMATE GOOD,
WHICH IS GOD.

Here perchance some one may say: Whence
are sins themselves, and whence is evil in
general ? If from man, whence is man ? if
from an angel, whence is the angel ? When it
is said, however truly and rightly, that these
are from God, it nevertheless seems to those
unskillful and possessed of little power to
look into recondite matters, that evils and
sins are thereby connected, as by a sort of
chain, to God. By this question they think
themselves triumphant, as if forsooth to ask
were to know; — would it were so, for in that
case no one would be more knowing than
myself. Yet very often in controversy the
propounder of a great question, while imper-
sonating the great teacher, is himself more
ignorant in the matter concerning which he
would frighten his opponent, than he whom
he would frighten.

These therefore suppose that they are su-
perior to tlie common run, because the former
ask questions that the latter cannot answer. ;
If therefore when I most unfortunately was
associated with them, not in the position
in which I have now for some time been,
they had raised these objections when I

* John i. II.

Chap. X.]

TWO SOULS, AGAINST THE MANICH^EANS.

lOI

had brought forward this argument, I should
have said: I ask that you meanwhile agree
with me, which is most easy, that if nothing
can shine without God, much less can any-
thing live without God. Let us not persist in
such monstrous opinions as to maintain that
any souls whatsoever have life apart from
God. For perchance it may so happen that
with me you are ignorant as to this thing,
namely whence is evil, let us then learn either
simultaneously or in any order, I care not
what. For what if knowledge of the perfec-
tion of evil is impossible to man without
knowledge of the perfection of good ? For
we should not know darkness if we were
always in darkness. But the notion of light
does not allow its opposite to be unknown.
But the highest good is that than which there
is nothing higher. But God is good and than
Him nothing can be higher. God therefore
is the highest good. Let us therefore together
so recognize God, and thus what we seek too
hastily will not be hidden from us. Do
you suppose then that the knowledge of God
is a matter of small account or desert. For
what other reward is there for us than life
eternal, which is to knovv' God ? For God the
^Laster says: "But this is life eternal, that
they might know Thee the only and true
Ciod, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent." '
For the soul, although it is immortal, yet be-
cause aversion from the knowledge of God is
rightly called its death, when it is converted
to God, the reward of eternal life to be at-
tained is that knowledge; so that this is, as has
been said, eternal life. But no one can be
converted to God, except he turn himself
away from this world. This for myself I feel
to be arduous and exceedingly difficult,
whether it is easy to you, God Himself
would have seen. I should have been in-
clined to think it easy to you, had I not been
moved by the fact, that, since the world from
which we are commanded to turn away is
visible, and the apostle says: "The things
that are seen are temporal, but the things that
are unseen are eternal,"^ you ascribe more
[importance to the judgment of these eyes
liian to that of the mind, asserting and be-
ilieving as you do that there is no shining
•"^ather that does not shine from God, and
it there are living souls that do not live
Ifrom God. These and like things I should
jeither have said to them or considered with
imyself, for even then, supplicating God with
all my bowels, so to speak, and examining as
[attentively as possible the Scriptures, I should
'perchance have been able either to say such

ihn xvii. 3.

- 2 Cor.

iv. i3.

things or to think them, so far as was neces-
sary for my salvation.

CH.AP. 9. — AUGUSTIN DECEIVED BY FAMILIAR-
ITY WITH THE MANICH/EANS, AND BY THE
SUCCESSION OF VICTORIES OVER IGNORANT
CHRISTIANS REPORTED BY THEM. THE MANl-
CH^ANS ARE LIKEVl^ISE EASILY REFUTED
FROM THE KNOWLEDGE OF SIN AND THE
WILL.

But two things especially, which easily
lay hold upon that unwary age, urged me
through wonderful circuits. One of these
was familiarity, suddenly, by a certain false
semblance of goodness, wrapped many times
around my neck as a certain sinuous chain.
The other was, that I was almost always nox-
iously victorious in arguing with ignorant
Christians who yet eagerly attempted, each
as he could, to defend their faith. ^ By
which frequent success the ardor of youth
was kindled, and by its own impulse rashly
verged upon the great evil of stubbornness.
For this kind of wrangling, after I had be-
come an auditor among them, whatever I
was able to do either by my own genius, such
as it was, or by reading the works of others, I
most gladly devoted to them alone. Accord-
ingly from their speeches ardor in disputa-
tions was daily increased, from success in
disputations love for them [the Manichseans].
Whence it resulted that whatever they said,
as if affected by certain strange disorders, I
approved of as true, not because I knew it to
be true, but because I wished it to be. So it
came about that, however slowly and cau-
tiously, yet for a long time I followed men
that preferred a sleek straw to a living soul.

12. So be it, I was not able at that time
to distinguish and discern sensible from
intelligible things, carnal forsooth from spir-
itual. It did not belong to age, nor to dis-
cipline, nor even to any habit, nor, finally, to
any deserts; for it is a matter of no small joy
and felicitation: had I not thus been able at
length even to grasp that which in the judg-
ment of all men nature itself by the laws of
the most High God has established ?

CHAP. 10. — SIN IS ONLY FROM THE WILL. HIS
OWN LIFE AND WILL BEST KNOWN TO EACH
INDIVIDUAL. WHAT WILL IS.

For let any men whatever, if only no mad-
ness has broken them loose from the common

3 Nothing is more certain than that Christianity has suffered
more at thu hands of injudicious and i.^norant defenders than from
Its most astute and determined foes. Little attention would be
paid to the blatant infidels of the present day were it not for the
interest aroused and sustained by weak attempts to refute their
arguments. And as the youthful, ardent Augustin was encour-
aged and confirmed in his errors by the inability of his opponents, so

I02

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. X.

sense of the human race, bring whatever zeal
they like for judging, whatever ignorance, nay
whatever slowness of mind, I should like to
find out what they would have replied to me
had I asked, whether a man would seem to
them to have sinned by whose hand while he
was asleep another should have written some-
thing disgraceful ? Who doubts that they
would have denied that it is a sin, and liave
exclaimed against it so vehemently that they
might perchance have been enraged that I
should have thought them proper objects of
such a question ? Of whom reconciled and
restored to equanimity, as best I could do it,
I should have begged that they would not
take it amiss if 1 asked them another thing
just as manifest, just as completely withm
the knowledge of all. Then I should have
asked, if some stronger person had done some
evil thing by the hand of one not sleeping but
conscious, yet with the rest of his members
bound and in constraint, whether because he
knew it, though absolutely unwilling, he
should be held guilty of any sin ? And here
all marvelling that I should ask such ques-
tions, would reply without hesitation, that he
had absolutely not sinned at all. Why so ?
Because whoever has done anything evil by
means of one unconscious or unable to resist,
the latter can by no means be justly con-
demned. And precisely why this is so, if I
should inquire of the human nature in these
men, I should easily bring out the desired
answer, by asking in this manner: Suppose
that the sleeper already knew what the other
would do with his hand, and of purpose afore-
thought, having drunk so much as would
prevent his being awakened, should go to
sleep, in order to deceive some one with an
oath. Would any amount of sleep suffice to
prove his innocence ? What else than a guilty
man would one pronounce him ? But if he
has also willingly been bound that he may
deceive some one by this pretext, in what re-
spect then would those chains profit as a
means of relieving him of sin ? Although
bound by these he was really not able to re-
sist, as in the other case the sleeper was ab-
solutely ignorant of what he was then doing.
Is there therefore any possibility of doubting
that both should be judged to have sinned ?
Which things having been conceded, I should
have argued, that sin is indeed nowhere but
in the will,' since this consideration also

are errors confirmed at the present day. The philosophical defence
of Christianity is a matter of the utmost delicacy, and should be
undertaken with fear and trembling.— A. H. N.

' The Pelagians used this statement with considerable effect in
their polemics against its author. In his Retractations Augustin
has this to say by way of explanation : " The Pelagians may think
that this was said in their interest, or. account of young children
whose sin which is remitted to them in baptism they deny on the

would have helped me, that justice holds
guilty' those sinning by evil will alone, al-
though they may have been unable to accom-
plish what they willed.

13. For who could have said that, in ad-
ducing these considerations, I was dwelling
upon obscure and recondite things, where on
account of the fewness of those able to un-
derstand, either fraud or suspicion of ostenta-
tion is accustomed to arise ? Let that distinc-
tion between intelligible and sensible things
withdraw for a little: let me not be found
fault with for following up slow minds with
the stimuli of subtle disputations. Permit
me to know that I live, permit me to know
that I will to live. If in this the human race
agrees, as our life is known to us, so also is
our will. Nor when we become possessed of
this knowledge, is there any occasion to fear
lest any one should convince us that we may
be deceived; for no one can be deceived as
to whether he does not live, or wishes nothing.
I do not think that I have adduced anything
obscure, and my concern is rather lest some
should find fault with me for dwelling on
things that are too manifest. But let us ccn-
sider the bearing of these things.

14. Sinning therefore takes place only by
exercise of will. ]kit our will is very well
known to us; for neither should I know that
I will, if I did not know what will itself is.
Accordingly, it is thus defined: will is a
movement of mind, no one compelling, either

ground that they do not yet use the power of will. As if indeed the
sin, which we say they derive originally from Adam, that is, that
they are implicated in his guilt and on this account are held obnox-
ious to punishment, could ever be otherwise than in will, by which
will it was committed when the transgression of the divine precept
was accomplished. Our statement, that ' there is never sin but in
will,' may be thought false for the reason that the apostle says:
' If what I will not this I do, it is no longer I that do it, but sin
that dwelleth in me." For this sin is to such an extent involun-
tary, that he says : ' What I will not this I do.' How, therefore,
is there never sin but in the will? Hut this sin concerning which the
apostle has spoken is called sin, because by sin it wasdone, and it is
the penalty of sin ; since this is said concerning carnal concupi-
scence, which he discloses in what follows saying : ' I know that
in me, that is in my flesh, dwelleth no good; for to will is present to
me, but to accomplish that which is good, is not." (Rom. vii. 16-18).
Since the perfection of good is, that not even the concupiscence of
sin should be in man, to which indeed when one lives well the will
does not consent ; nevertheless man does not accomplish the good
because as'yet concupiscence is in him, to which the will is antago-
nistic, the guilt of which concupiscence is loosed by baptism, but
the infirmity remains, against which until it is healed every be-
liever who advances well most earnestly struggles. But sin, which
is never but in will, mu.st especially be knownas that which is fol-
lowed by just condemnation. For this through one man entered
into the world ; although that sin also by which consent is yielded
to concupiscence is not committed but by will. Wherefore also in
another place I have said : ' Not therefore except by will is sm
committed.' "—.\. H. N.

On this matter Augustin's still earlier treatise De Libera Ar-
hitrii\ and his interesting Ketractatioiis on the s^me, should be
compared. The reader of these earlier treatises in comparison with 1
the A nti- Pelagian treatises can hardly fail to recognize a marked
change of base on Augustin's part. liis efforts to show the con- :
sistency of his earlier with his later modes of thought are to be '
pronounced only partially successful. The fact is, that in the
Anti-Manichaean time he went too far in maintaining the absolute
freedom of the will and the impossibility of sin apart from per-
sonal will in the sinner ; while in the Anti-Pelagian time fie \'en-
tured too near to the fatalism that he so earnestly combated in the
."ilanichaeans. — A. H. N.

Chap. XI.]

TWO SOULS, AGAINST THE MANICH.EANS.

103

for not losing or for obtaining something.'
Why therefore could not I have so defined it
then ? Was it difficult to see that one unwill-
ing is contrary to one willing, just as the left
hand is contrary to the right, not as black to
white ? For the same thing cannot be at the
same time black and white. But whoever is
placed between two men is on the left hand
with reference to one, on the right with
reference to the other. One ma.i is both
on the right hand and on the left hand
at the same time, but by no means both to
the one man. So indeed one mind may be
at the same time unwilling and willing, but it
cannot be at the same time unwilling and
willing with reference to one and the same
thing. For when any one unwillingly does
anything; if you ask him whether he wished
to do it, he says that he did not. Likewise
if you ask whether he wished not to do it, he
replies that he did. So you will find him un-
willing with reference to doing, willing with
reference to not doing, that is to say, one
mind at the same time having both attitudes,
but each referring to different things. Why
do I say this ? Because if we should again
ask wherefore though unwilling he does this,
he will say that he is compelled. For every
one also who does a thing unwillingly is com-
pelled, and every one who is compelled, if he
does a thing, does it only unwillingly. It
follows that he that is willing is free from
compulsion, even if any one thinks himself
compelled. And in this manner every one
who willingly does a thing is not compelled,
and whoever is not compelled, either does it
willingly or not at all. Since nature itself
proclaim.s these things in all men whom we
can interrogate without absurdity, from the
boy even to the old man, from literary sport
even to the throne of the wise, why then

• This dictum also Augustin thought it needful to explain:
"This was said that by this definition a willing person might be
distinguished from ime not willing, and so the intention might be
referred to those who tirst in Paradise were the origin of evil to
the human race, by sinning no one compelling, that is by sinning
with free will, because also knowingly they sinned against the
iMiinand, and the tempters persuaded, did not compel, that this
lould be done. For he who ignorantly sinned may not incongru-
ously be said to have sinned unwillingly, although not knowing
what he did, yet willingly he did it. So not even the sin of such a
one could be without will, which will assuredly, as it has been de-
fined, was a ' movement of the mind, no one compelling, either
for not losing or for obtaining something.' For he was not com-
pelled to do what if he had been unwilling he would not have done.
Because he willed, therefore he did it, even if he did not sin be-
cause he willed, being ignorant that what he did is sin. So not
evin such a sin could be without will, but by will of deed not by
will ot sin, which deed was yet sin ; for this deed is what ought not
to have taken place. Hut whoever knowingly sins, if he can with-
out sin resist the one compelling him to sin, yet resists not, assuredly
sins willingly. For he who can resist is not compelled to yield.
lUit he who cannot by good will resist cogent covetousness, and
therefore does what is contrary to the precepts of righteousness,
this now is sin in the sen.se of being the penalty of sin. VVhere-
!"re it is most true that sin cannot be apart from will."

It IS needless to say that such reasoning would not have an-
swered Augustin"s purpose in writing against the Manichaeans.
A. H. N,

I should I not have seen that in the definition
of will should be put, " no one compelling,''
: which now as if with greater experience most
: cautiously I have done. But if this is every-
where manifest, and promptly occurs to all
not by instruction but by nature, what is there
left that seems obscure, unless perchance it be
concealed from some one, that when we wish
! for something, we will, and our mind is moved
' towards it, and we either have it or do not have
it, and if we have it we will to retain it, if we
have it not, to acquire it .'' Wherefore every-
one who wills, wills either not to lose something
or to obtain it. Hence if all these things are
clearer than day, as they are, nor are they
given to my conception alone, but by the
liberality of truth itself to the whole human
race, why could I not have said even at that
time: Will is a movement of the mind, no
one compelling, either for not losing or for
obtainmg something ?

CHAP. II. — WHAT SIN IS.

Some one will say: What assistance would
I this have furnished you against the Mani-
chaeans ? Wait a moment; permit me first
also to define sin, which, every mind reads
divinely written in itself, cannot exist apart
from will. Sin therefore is the will to retain
and follow after what justice forbids, and
from which it is free to abstain.'' Although
if it be not free, it is not will. But I have
preferred to define more roughly than pre-
cisely. Should I not also have carefully
examined those obscure books, whence I
might have learned that no one is worthy of
blame or punishment who either wills what
justice does not prohibit him from willing, or
does not do what he is not able to do ? Do
not shepherds on mountains, poets in theatres,
unlearned in social intercourse, learned in
libraries, masters in schools, priests in conse-
crated places, and the human race throughout
the whole world, sing out these things? But
if no one is worthy of blame and condemna-
tion, who either does not act against the pro-
hibition of justice, or who does not do what
he cannot do, yet every sin is blameworthy
and condemnable, who doubts then that it is
sin, when willing is unjust, and not willing is
free. And hence that definition is both true
and easy to understand, and not only now but
then also could have been spoken by me: Sin
is the will of retaining or of obtaining, what
justice forbids, and whence it is free to ab-
stain ?

• _ 2 Here also Augustin guards himself in his Retractations :
" The definition is true, in.ismuch as that is defined which is only
sin, and not also that which is the penalty of sin." — A. H. N.

I04

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XII.

CHAP, 12. — FROM THE DEFINITIONS GIVEN OF
SIN AND WILL, HE OVERTHROWS THE EN-
TIRE HERESY OF THE MANICH.^ANS. LIKE-
WISE FROM THE JUST CONDEMNATION OF
EVIL SOULS IT FOLLOWS THAT THEY ARE
EVIL NOT BY NATURE BUT BY WILL. THAT
SOULS ARE GOOD BY NATURE, TO WHICH
THE PARDON OF SINS IS GRANTED.

i6. Come now, let us see in what respect
these things would have aided us. Much
every way, so that I should have desired
nothing more; for they end the whole cause;
for wlioever consulting in the inner mind,
where they are more pronounced and assured,
the secrets of his own conscience, and the di-
vine laws absolutely imposed upon nature,
grants that these two definitions of will and
sin are true, condemns without any hesitation
by the fewest and the briefest, but plainly the
most invincible reasons, the vvhole heresy of
the Manichaeans. Which can be thus con-
sidered. They say that there are two kinds of
souls, the one good, which is in such a way
from God, that it is said not to have been
made by Him out of any material or out of
nothing, but to have proceeded as a certain
part from the very substance itself of God;
the other evil, which they believe and strive
to get others to believe pertains to God in no
way whatever; and so they maintain that the
one is the perfection of good, but the other
the perfection of evil, and that these two
classes were at one time distinct but are now
commingled. The character and the cause
of this commingling I had not yet heard; but
nevertheless I could have inquired whether
that evil kind of souls, before it was mingled
with the good, had any will. For if not, it
was without sin and innocent, and so by no
means evil.' But if evil in such a way, that
though without will, as fire, yet if it should
touch the good it would violate and corrupt it;
how impious it is to believe that the nature
of evil is powerful enough to change any part
of God, and that the Highest Good is cor-
ruptible and violable ! But if the will was
present, assuredly there was present, no one
compelling, a movement of the mind either
towards not losing something or obtaining
something. But this something was either
good, or was thought to be good, for not
otherwise could it be earnestly desired. But
in supreme evil, before the commingling
which they maintain, there never was any

I In his Retractations, Augiistin replies to the Pelagian denial
of the sinfulness of infants, in support of which thev had quoted
the above sentence. " 'J'hey [infants] are held guilty not by pro-
priety of will but by origin. For what is every earthly man in ori-
gin but Adam ?" The will of the whole human race was m Adam,
and when Adam sinned the whole race voluntarily sinned, seems
to be his meaning. — A. H. N.

good. Whence then could there be in it either
the knowledge or the thought of good ? Did
they wish for nothing that was in themselves,
and earnestly desire that true good which
was without? That will must truly be de-
clared worthy of distinguished and great
praise by which is earnestly desired the su-
preme and true good. Whence then in su-
preme evil was this movement of mind most
worthy of so great praise? Did they seek
it for the sake of injuring it? In the first
place, the argument comes to the satne thing.
For he who wishes to injure, wishes to de-
prive another of some good for the sake of
some good of his own. There was therefore
in them either a knowledge of good or an
opinion of good, which ought by no means to
belong to supreme evil. In the'second place,
whence had they known, that good placed
outside of themselves, which they designed
to injure, existed at all. If they had in-
tellectually perceived it, what is more excel-
lent than such a mind? Is there anything
else for which the whole energy of good men
is put forth except the knowledge of that su-
preme and sincere good ? What therefore is
now scarcely conceded to a few good and
just men, was mere evil, no good assisting,
then able to accomplish ? But if those souls
bore bodies and saw the supreme good with
their eyes, what tongues, what hearts, what
intellects suffice for lauding and proclaiming
those eyes, with which the minds of just men
can scarcely be compared ? How great good
things we find in supreme evil ! For if to
see God is evil, God is not a good; but God
is a good; therefore to see God is good; and
I know not what can be compared to this
good. Since to see anything is good, whence
can it be made out that to be able to see is
evil ? Therefore whatever in those eyes or
in those minds brought it about, that the di-
vine essence could be seen by them, brought
about a great thing and a good thing most
worthy of ineffable praise. But if it was not
brought about, but it was such in itself and
eternal, it is difficult to find anything better
than this evil.

17. Lastly, that these souls may have
nothing of these praiseworthy things which
by the reasonings of the Manichaeans they
are compelled to have, I should have asked,
whether God condemns any or no souls. If
none, there is no judgment of rewards and
punishments, no providence, and the world is
administered by chance rather than by rea-
son, or rather is not administered at all. For
the name administration must not be given
to chances. But if it is impious for all those
that are bound by any religion to believe ,

Chap. XIII.]

TWO SOULS, AGAINST THE MANICH^ANS.

105

this, it remains eitlier tliat there is condem-
nation of some souls, or that there are no
sins. But if there are no sins, neither is
there any evil. Which if the Manichaeans
should say, they would slay their heresy with
a single blow. Therefore they and I agree
that some souls are condemned by divine law
and judgment. But if these souls are good,
what is that justice? If evil, are they so by
nature, or by will? But by nature souls can
in no way be evil. Whence do we teach
this. From the above definitions of will and
sin. For to speak of souls, and that they
are evil, and that they do not sin, is full of
madness; but to say that they sin without
will, is great craziness, and to hold any one
guilty of sin for not doing what he could not
do, belongs to the height of iniquity and in-
sanity. Wherefore whatever these souls
do, if they do it by nature not by will,
that is, if they are wanting in a movement
of mind free both for doing and not doing,
if finally no power of abstaining from their
work is conceded to them; v/e cannot hold
that the sin is theirs.' But all confess both
that evil souls are justly, and souls that have
not sinned are unjustly condemned; therefore
they confess that those souls are evil that
sin. But these, as reason teaches, do not
sin. Therefore the extraneous class of evil
souls of the Manichceans, whatever it may be,
is a non-entity.

18. Let us now look at that good class of
souls, which again they exalt to such a de-
cree as to say that it is the very substance of
'"lod. But how much better it is that each
one should recognize his own rank and merit,
nor be so puffed up with sacrilegious pride as
to believe that as often as he experiences a
change in himself it is the substance of that
supreme good, which devout reason holds and
teaches to be unchangeable ! For behold !
Mnce it is manifest that souls do not sin in
not being such as they cannot be; it follows
that these supposititious souls, whatever they
may be, do not sin at all, and moreover that
they are absolutely non-existent; it remains
that since there are sins, they find none to
whom to attribute them except the good class
of souls and the substance of God. But es-
pecially are they pressed by Christian au-
tliority; for never have they denied that for-
giveness of sins is granted when any one has
heen converted to God; never have they said
(as they have said of many other passages)

' In his Reirariations, Augustin explains that by nature is to
■•<■ understood the state in which we were created without vice.
He transfers the entire argument from the actual condition of man
•" the primitive Adaniic condition. It is evident, however, that this
.as not his ineanin>; when he combated the Manichaeans. The
ijuestionof infant sinfulness arises here also, and is discussed in the
usual Anti-Pelagian way. — A. H»N.

that some corrupter has interpolated this into
the divine Scriptures. To whom then are
sins attributed ? If to those evil souls of the
alien class, these also can become good, can
possess the kingdom of God with Christ.
Which denying, they [the Manichaeans] have
no other class except those souls which they
maintain are of the substance of God. It
remains that they acknowledge that not only
these latter also, but these alone sin. But
I make no contention about their being alons
in sinning; yet they sin. But are they com-
pelled to sin by being commingled with evil ?
If so compelled that there was no power of
resisting, they do not sin. If it is in their
power to resist, and they voluntarily consent,
we are compelled to find out through their
[the Manichaean] teaching, why so great
good things in supreme evil, why this evil in
supreme good, unless it be that neither is
that which they bring into suspicion evil, nor
is that which they pervert by superstition su-
preme good ?

CHAP. 13. FROM DELIBERATION ON THE EVIL

AND ON THE GOOD PART IT RESULTS THAT
TWO CLASSES OF SOULS ARE NOT TO BE
HELD TO. A CLASS OF SOULS ENTICING TO
SHAMEFUL DEEDS HAVING BEEN CONCEDED,
IT DOES NOT FOLLOW THAT THESE ARE EVIL
BY NATURE, THAT THE OTHERS ARE SUPREME
GOOD.

19. But if I had taught, or at any rate had
myself learned, that they rave and err regard-
ing those two classes of souls, why should I
have thenceforth thought them worthy of being
heard or consulted about anything ? That
I might learn hence, that these two kinds of
souls are pointed out, which in the course
of deliberation assent puts now on the evil
side, now on the good ? Why is not this
rather the sign of one soul which by free will
can be borne here and there, swayed hither
and thither ? For it was my own experience
to feel that I am one, considering evil and
good and choosing one or the other, but for
the most part the one pleases, the other
is fitting, placed in the midst of which we
fluctuate. Nor is it to be wondered at, for
we are now so constituted that through the
flesh we can be affected by sensual pleasure,
and through the spirit by honorable consid-
erations. Am I not therefore compelled to
acknowledge two souls ? Nay, we can better
and with far less difficulty recognize two
classes of good things, of which neither is
alien from God as its autlior, one soul acted
upon from diverse directions, the lower and
the higher, or to speak more correctly, the
external and the internal. These are the two

io6

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XIV.

classes which a little while ago we considered
under the names sensible and intelligible, which
we now prefer to call more familiarly carnal
and spiritual. But it has been made difificult
for us to abstain from carnal things, since
our truest bread is spiritual. For with great
labor we now eat this bread. For neither
without punishment for the sin of trans-
gression have we been changed from immor-
tal into mortal. So it happens, that when we
strive after better things, habit formed by
connection with the flesh and our sins in some
way begin to militate against us and to put
obstacles in our way, some foolish persons with
most obtuse superstition suspect that there is
another kind of souls which is not of God.

20. However even if it be conceded to them
that we are enticed to shameful deeds by an-
other inferior kind of souls, they do not thence
make it evident that those enticing*are evil by
nature, or those enticed, supremely good.
For it may be, the former of their own will,
by striving after what was not^lawful, that is,
by sinning, from being good have become
evil; and again they may be made good, but
in such manner that for a long time they re-
main in sin, and by a certain occult suasion
traduce to themselves other souls. Then,
they may not be absolutely evil, but in
their own kind, however inferior, tney may
e.xercise their own functions without any sin.
But those superior souls to whom justice, the
directress of things, has assigned a far more
excellent activity, if they should wish to fol-
low and to imitate those inferior ones, become
evil, not because they imitate evil souls, but
because they imitate in an evil way. By the
evil souls is done what is proper to them, by
the good what is alien to them is striven after.
Hence the former remain in their own grade,
the latter are plunged into a lower. It is as
when men copy after beasts. For the four-
footed horse walks beautifully, but if a man
on all fours should imitate him, who would
think him worthy even of chaff for food?
Rightly therefore we generally disapprove of
one who imitates, while we approve of him
whom he imitates. But we disapprove not
because he has not succeeded, but for wish-
ing to succeed at all. For in the horse we
approve of that to which by as much as we
prefer man, by so much are we offended that
he copies after inferior creatures. So among
men, however well the crier may do in sending
forth his voice, would not the senator be insane,
if he should do it even more clearly and better
than the crier ? Take an illustration from the
heavenly bodies: The moon when shining is
praised, and by its course and its changes is
quite pleasing to those that pay attention to

such things. But if the sun should wish to
imitate it (for we may feign that it has desires
of this sort '), who would not be greatly and
rightly displeased. From which illustrations
I wish it to be understood, that even if there
are souls (which meanwhile is left an open
question-) devoted to bodily offices not by sin
but by nature, and even if they are related to
us, however inferior they may be, by some
inner alifinity, they should not be esteemed
evil simply because we are evil ourselves in
following them and in loving corporeal things.
For we sin by loving corporeal things, because
by justice we are required and by nature we
are able to love spiritual things, and when we
do this we are, in our kind, the best and the
happiest. 3

21. Wherefore what proof does delibera-
tion, violently urged in both directions, now
prone to sin, now borne on toward right con-
duct, furnish, that we are compelled to accept
two kinds of souls, the nature of one of which is
from God, of the other not; when we are free
to conjecture so many other causes of alter-
nating states of mind ? But that these things
are obscure and are to no purpose pried into
by blear-eyed minds, whoever is a good judge
of things sees. Wherefore those things rather
which have been said regarding the will and
sin, those things, I say, that supreme justice
permits no man using his reason to be ignorant
of, those things which if they were taken from
us, there is nothing whence the discipline of
virtue may begin, nothing whence it may rise
from the death of vices, those things I say
considered again and again with sufficient
clearness and lucidity convince us that the
heresy of the Manichaeans is false.

CHAP. 14. AGAIN IT IS SHOWN FROM THE

UTILITY OF REPENTING THAT SOULS ARE
NOT BY NATURE EVIL. SO SURE A DEMON-
STRATION IS NOT CONTRADICTED EXCEPT
FROM THE HABIT OF ERRING.

22. Like the foregoing considerations is what
I shall now say about repenting. For as among
all sane people it is agreed, and this the
Manichaeans themselves not only confess but
also teach, that to repent of sin is useful.
Why shall I now, in this matter, collect the
testimonies of the divine Scriptures, which

' Augustin's carefulness to explain that he is only indulging in
personification is doubtless due to the fact that with the.Manicha;-
ans the sun and the moon were objects of worship. — A. H. N.

2 In his Retractations, Augustin explains that he did not really
regard this as an open question, but speaks of it as such only so far
as this particular discussion is concerned. He simply declines to
enter upon a consideration of it in this connection. — A. H. N.

3 Here also the use of the word " nature " gave Augustin trouble
in his later years. He claims in the Ketractations that he uses
the word in the sense of " nature that has been healed ' and that
" cannot be vitiated," and seeks to show that he did not mean to
exclude divine grace. — A. H. N.

Chap. XIV.]

TWO SOULS, AGAINST THE MANICH^ANS.

107

are scattered throughout their pages ? It is
also the voice of nature; notice of this thing
has escaped no fool. We should be undone,
if this were not deepl)^ imbedded in our
nature. Some one may say that he does not
sin; but no barbarity will dare to say, that if
one sins he should not repent of it. This
being the case, I ask to which of the two
kinds of souls does repenting pertain ? I
know indeed that it can pertain neither to
him who does ill nor to him who cannot do
well. Wherefore, that I may use the words
of the Manichseans, if a soul of darkness re-
pent of sin, it is not of the substance of su-
preme evil, if a soul of light, it is not of the
substance of supreme good; that disposition
of repenting which is profitable testifies alike
that the penitent has done ill, and that he
could have done well. How, therefore, is
there from me nothing of evil, if I have acted
unadvisedly, or how can I rightly repent if I
have not so done ? Hear the other part.
How is there from me nothing of good, if in
me there is good will, or how do I rightly re-
pent if there is not? Wherefore, either let
them deny that there is great utility in re-
penting, so that they may be driven not only
from the Christian name, but from every even
imaginary argument for their views, or let
them cease to say and to teach that there are
two kinds of souls, one of which has nothing
of evil, the other nothing of good; for that
whole sect is propped up by this two-headed '
or rather headlong^ variety of souls.

23. And to me indeed it is sufficient thus
to know that the Manichaeans err, that I know
that sin must be repented of; and yet if now
by right of friendship I should accost some
one of my friends who still thinks that they
are worthy of being listened to, and should
say to him: Do you not know that it is useful,
when anyone has sinned, to repent? Without
hesitation he will swear that he knows. If
then I shall have convinced you that Mani-
chseism is false, will you not desire anything
more ? Let him reply what more he can de-
sire in this matter. Very well, so far. But
when I shall have begun to show the sure and

I Bicipiti.

2 Prcecipiti.

necessary arguments which, bound to it with
adamantine chains, as the saying is, follow
that proposition, and shall have conducted to
its conclusion the whole process by which that
sect is overthrown, he will deny perhaps that
he knows the utility of repenting, which no
learned man, no unlearned, is ignorant of, and
will rather contend, when we hesitate and
deliberate, that two souls in us furnish each
its own proper help to the solution of the
different parts of the question. O habit of
sin ! O accompanying penalty of sin ! Then
you turned me away from the consideration
of things so manifest, but you injured me
when I did not discern. But now, among my
most familiar acquaintances who do not dis-
cern, you wound and torment me discerning.

CHAP. 15. HE PRAYS FOR HIS FRIENDS WHOM

HE HAS HAD AS ASSOCIATES IN ERROR.

24. Give heed to these things, I beseech
you, dearly beloved. Your dispositions I have
well known. If you now concede to me the
mind and the reason of any sort of man,
these things are far more certain than the
thino^s that we seemed to learn or rather were
compelled to believe. Great God, God om-
nipotent, God of supreme goodness, whose
rio^ht it is to be believed and known to be in-
violable and unchangeable. Trinal Unity,
whom the Catholic Church worships, as one
who have experienced in myself Thy mercy, I
supplicate Thee, that Thou wilt not permit
those with whom from boyhood I have lived
most harmoniously in every relation to dis-
sent from me in Thy worship. I see how it
was especially to be expected in this place
that I should either even then have defended
the Catholic Scriptures attacked by the Mani-
chaeans, if as I say, I had been cautious; or
I should now show that they can be defended.
But in other volumes God will aid my pur-
pose, for the moderate length of this, as I
suppose, already asks to be spared. ^

3 This purpose Augustin accomplished in several works. See
especially Contra Adiinuiituni, and Contra Paustum Alani-
chceum. On Augustin's defense of the Old Testament Scriptures,
see Mozley's Ruling Ideas in Early Ages, last chapter. — A.
H. N.

ST. AUGUSTIN:
ACTS OR DISPUTATION

AGAINST

FORTUNATUS THE MANICH^AN

[ACTA SEU DISPUTATIO CONTRA FORTUNATUM MANICH^UM].

A.D. 392.

TRANSLATED BY

ALBERT H. NEWMAN, D.D., L.L.D.,

PROFESSOR OF CHURCH HISTORY AND COMPARATIVE RELIGION, IN TORONTO
BAPTIST (theological) COLLEGE, TORONTO, CANADA.

CONTENTS OF ACTS OR DISPUTATION AGAINST
FOKTUNATUS THE MANICH.4^AN.

DISPUTATION OF THE FIRST DAY p. 113.

Augustin and Fortunatus are at variance with reference to the subject for discussion, the former having proposed
to dispute about doctrine, the latter preferring to vindicate his party through the testimony of Augustin
from the slanderous accusations that are current among the Catholics.

Fortunatus makes a confession of his faith, in which he confesses to believe" that God is incorruptible, lucid,
unapproachable, intenible, impassible; and expresses his adherence to a doctrine of the Trinity somewhat
like that held by Orthodox Christians. Augustin shows that the Manichaean God is subject to necessity,
corruptible, violable, liable to suffering, etc., and presses upon Fortunatus the question. Why God sent a
portion of his substance to combat the race of darkness, and so to become involved in corruption and misery?

Fortunatus attempts, without success, to show the consistency of his confession of faith with the Manichsean
view of two eternally existing antagonistic principles, and the conflict between the two resulting in the
mingling of good and evil in the present order of things by quoting freely from the Christian Scriptures.
Knowing the deceitfulness of Fortunatus in his use of Scripture, Augustin insists that the discussion be
conducted on rational grounds. The audience take sides with Augustin. and raise a clamor that results in
the suspension of the discussion, and after they have expressed horror at Fortunatus' assertion that the
Word of God is fettered in the race of darkness, the meeting is closed.

DISPUTATION OF THE SECOND DAY p. 119.

j Fortunatus reiterates his Dualism, and yet denies that he teaches the corruptibility of God. Augustin states
the Catholic view of the relation of evil to God, insisting that sin is a matter of free will on the part of man.

Augustin continues to press the question. Why God when he can in no way suffer injury sent the soul hither?
Fortunatus at last confesses that he is at a loss what to say, and expresses an intention to re-investigate the
entire question, with the help of Augustin. Augustin expresses his thawks to God for so happy an ending
of the discussion.

ACTS OR DISPUTATION

AGAINST FORTUNATUS, THE MANICH^AN,

[ACTA SEU DISPUTATIO CONTRA FORTUNATUM MANICH.-EUM.] A.D. 392.'

DISPUTATION OF THE FIRST DAY.

ON THE FIFTH OF SEPTEMBER, THE MOST RENOWNED MEN ARCADIUS AUGUSTUS (THE SECOND
time) and RUFINUS being CONSULS, A DISPUTATION AGAINST FORTUNATUS, AN ELDER
OF THE MANICH^ANS, WAS HELD IN THE CITY OF HIPPO REGIUS, IN THE BATHS OF
SOSSIUS, IN THE PRESENCE OF THE PEOPLE.

I. AuGUSTiN said: I now regard as error
what formerly I regarded as truth. I desire
to hear from you who are present whether
my supposition is correct. First of all I re-
gard it as the height of error to believe that
Almighty God, in whom is our one hope, is
in any part either violable, or contaminable,
or corruptible. This I know your heresy
affirms, not indeed in the words that I now
use; for when you are questioned you confess
that God is incorruptible, and absolutely in-
violable, and incontaminable; but when you
begin to expound the rest of your system, we
are compelled to declare Him corruptible,
penetrable, contaminable. For you say that

' This Disputatioti seems to have occurred shortly after the
writing of the preceding treatise. It appears from the. Retracta-
tions that Fortunatus had Hved for a considerable time at Hippo,
and had secured so large a number of followers that it was a delight
to him to dwell there. The Disputation is supposed to be a ver-
liatim report of what Augustin and Fortunatus said during a two
days' discussion. The subject is the origm of evil. Augustin
maintains that evil, so far as man is concerned, has arisen from a
free e.xercise of the will on man's part ; Fortunatus, on the other
hand, maintams that the nature of evil is co-eternal with (Jod.
Fortunatus shows considerable knowledge of the New Testament,
but no remarkable dialectic powers. Heappearsat great disad-
vantage beside his great antagoni.st. In fact, he i.s far from saying
the best that can be said in favor of dualism. We may say that
he was fairly vanquished in the argument, and at the close con-
fessed himself at a loss what to say, and expressed an intention of
more carefully t.xamining the problems discu.ssed, in view of what
Augustin had .said. Augustin is more guarded in this treatise than
in tlie preceding in his statements about free will. He found Utile
occasion here, therefore, to retract or explain. Fortunatus often
expresses himself vaguely and obscurely. If some sentences are
difficult to understand in the translation, they will be found equally
so in the Latin.— A. H. N.

another race of darkness, whatever it may
be, has rebelled against the kingdom of God;
but that Almighty God, when He saw what
ruin and desolation threatened his domains,
unless he should make some opposition to
the adverse race and resist it, sent this virtue,
from whose commingling with evil and the
race of darkness the world was framed.
Hence it is that here good souls labor, serve,
err, are corrupted: that they may see the
need of a liberator, who should purge them
from error, loose them from this commingling
with evil, and liberate them from servitude.
I think it impious to believe that Almighty
God ever feared any adverse race, or was
under necessity to precipitate us into afflic-
tions.

F'oRTUNATUS said: Because I know that
you have been in our midst, that is, have
lived as an adherent among the Manicha^ans,
these are the principles of our faith. The
matter now to be considered is our mode of
living, the falsely alleged crimes for which we
are maltreated. Therefore let the good men
present hear from you whether these things
with which we are charged and which we have
thrown in our teeth are true or false. For
from your instruction, and from your exposi-
tion and explanation, they will have been able
more correct information about our

gain

114

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

mode of life, if it shall have been set forth by
you.

2. AuGUSTiN said: I was among you, but
faith and morals are different questions. I
proposed to discuss faith. But if those
present prefer to hear about morals, I do not
decline that question.

FoRTUNATUS Said: I. wish first to purge my-
self in your conscience in which we are pol-
luted, by the testimony of a competent man,
(who even now is competent for me), and in
view of the future examination of Christ, the
just judge, whether he saw in us, or himself
practiced by imitation, the things that are now
thrown in our teeth ?

3. AuGUSTiN said: You call me to some-
thing else, when I had proposed to discuss
faith, but concerning your morals only those
who are your Elect can fully know. But you
know that I was not your Elect, but an Audi-
tor. Hence though I was present at your
prayer meetings,' as you have asked (whether
separately among yourselves you have any
prayer meetings, God alone and yourselves
can know); yet in your prayer meetings
where I have been present I have seen nothing
shameful take place; but only that the faith
that I afterwards learned and approved is
denounced, and that you perform your ser-
vices facing the sun. Besides this I found
out nothing new in your meetings, but who-
ever raises any question of morals against you,
raises it against your Elect. But what you
who are Elect do among yourselves, I have
no means of knowing. For I have often
heard from you that you receive the Eucha-
rist. But since the time of receiving it was
concealed from me, how could I know what
you receive?^ So keep the question about
morals, if you please, for discussion among
your Elect, if it can be discussed. You gave
me a faith that I to-day disapprove. This I
proposed to discuss. Let a response be made
to my proposition.

FoRTUNATUS Said: And our profession is
this very thing: that God is incorruptible,
lucid, unapproachable, intenible, impassible,
that He inhabits His own eternal lights, that
nothing corruptible proceeds from Him,
neither darkness, demons, Satan, nor any-
thing adverse can be found in His kingdom.
But that He sent forth a Saviour like Him-

■ The word used is oratio^ by which is evidently meant the
rclijjious services to which Auditors were admitted, prayer {oratic)
being the prominent feature. — A. H. N.

- The allusion here is doubtless to the probably slanderous
charge that the Manichaeans were accustomed to partake of human
semen as a Eucharist. The Manichaean view of the relation of
the substance mentioned to the light, and their well-known oppo-
sitina to procreation, give a slight plausibility to the charge. Com-
pari- the Morals of the Manichtrans^ ch. xviii., where Augustin
expresses his suspicions of Manichaean shamelessness. See also
further references in the Introduction.— K. H. N.

self; that the Word born from the founda-
tion of the world, when He had formed the
world, after the formation of the world came
among men; that He has chosen souls worthy
of Himself according to His own holy will,
sanctified by celestial command, imbued with
the faith and reason of celestial things; that
under His leadership those souls will return
hence again to the kingdom of God according
to the holy promise of Him who said: " I am
the way, the truth, and the door; "^ and " No
one can come unto the Father, except through
me." These things we believe because other-
wise, that is, through another mediator, souls
cannot return to the kingdom of God, unless
they find Him as the way, the truth, and the
door. For Himself said: " He that hath seen
me, hath seen my Father also; "^ and " who-
soever shall have believed on me shall not
taste death forever, but has passed from death
unto life, and shall not come into judgment." s
These things we believe and this is the reason
of our faith, and according to the strength of
our mind we endeavor to act according to His
commandments, following after the one faith
of this Trinity, Father and Son and Holy
Spirit.^

4. Augustin said: What was the cause of
those souls being precipitated into death,
whom you confess come through Christ from
death to life ?

FoRTUNATUS Said: Hence now deign to.^
go on and to contradict, if there is nothing
besides God.

5. Augustin said: Nay, do you deign toS
answer the question put to you: What cause
has given these souls to death ?

FoRTUNATUS Said: Nay but do you deign
to say whether there is anything besides God,
or all things are in God.

6. Augustin said: This I can reply, that ■
the Lord wished me to know that God cannot
suffer any necessity, nor be violated or cor-
rupted in any part. Which, since you also
acknowledge, I ask by what necessity He sent
hither souls that you say return through
Christ ?

FoRTUNATUS said: What you have said:
that thus far God has revealed to you, that
He is incorruptible, as He has also revealed
to me; the reason must be sought, how and
wherefore souls have come into this world,
so that now of right God should liberate them

3 This is, of course, a mixture of two passages of Scripture. —
A.H.N.

4 John xiv. 8, 9. 5 John v. 24.

6 As remarked in the Introduction^ the Manichaeans of the
West, in Augustin's time, sustained a far more intimate relation
to Christianity than did Mani and his immediate followers. Far
as Fortunatus may have been from using the above language in the
ordinary Christian sense, ye.t he held, by profession at least, enough
of Christian truth to beguile the unwary.— A. H. N.

ACTS OR DISPUTATION AGAINST FORTUNATUS.

I I

from this world through his Son only begotten
and like Himself, if besides Himself there is
nothing ?

7. AuGUSTiN said: We ought not to disap-
point those present, being men of note, and
from the question proposed for discussion go
to another. So we both confess, so we con-
cede to ourselves, that God is incorruptible
and inviolable, and could have in no way suf-
fered. From which it follows, that your
heresy is false, which says that God, when
He saw desolation and ruin threaten His king-
dom, sent forth a power that should do battle
with the race of darkness, and that out of
this commingling our souls are laboring. My
argument is brief, and as I suppose, perfectly
clear to any one. If God could have suffered
nothing from the race of darkness because
He is inviolable, without cause He sent us
hither that we might here suffer distress. But
if anything can suffer, it is not inviolable, and
you deceive those to whom you say that God
is inviolable. For this your heresy denies
when you expound the rest of it.

FoRTUNATUS said: We are of that mind in
which the Apostle Paul instructs us, who says:
"Let this mind be in you that was also in
Christ Jesus, who when He had been consti-
tuted in the form of God, thought it not rob-
bery to be equal with God; but emptied Him-
self receiving the form of a servant, having
been made in the likeness of men, and having
been found in fashion as a man, He humbled
Himself, and was made obedient even unto
death." ' We have this mind therefore about
ourselves, which we have also about Christ, who
when He was constituted in the form of God,
was made obedient even unto death that He
might show the similitude of our souls. And
like as He showed in Himself the similitude
of death, and having been raised from the
midst of the dead showed that He was from
the Father, in the same manner we think it
will be with our souls, because through Him
we shall have been able to be freed from this
death, which is either alien from God, or if it
belongs to God, His mercy ceases, and the
name of liberator, and the works of Him who
liberates.^

8. AuGUSTiN said: I ask how we came into
death, and you tell how we may be liberated
from death.

FoRTUN.ATUs s^id : So the apostle said that
we ought to have that mind concerning our-
selves which Christ has shown us. If Christ
was in suffering and death, so also are we.

I Philipp. ii. 5-8.

- Fortuiiatus could not surely have used this lanj^uage with any
-proper conception of its meaning. He seems, against Mani, to
jliave identified in some sense the Jesus that suffered with Christ.
^ ■ t even in this statement his docetism is manifest.— A. H. N.

9. AuGUSTiN said: It is known to all that
the Catholic faith is to the effect that our
Lord, that is the Power and Wisdom of God,^
and the Word through whom all things have
been made and without whom was not any-
thing made,-* took upon Himself man to
liberate us. In the man whom He took
upon Himself, He demonstrated those things
that you spoke of. But we now ask concern-
ing the substance of God Himself and of Un-
speakable Majesty, whether anything can in-
jure it or not. For if anything can injure it,
He is not inviolable. If nothing can injure
the substance of God, what was the race of
darkness about to do to it, against which you
say war was waged by God before the founda-
tion of the world, in which war you assert that
we, that is souls that are now manifestly in
need of a liberator, have been commingled
with every evil and implicated in death. For
I return to that very brief statement: If He
could be injured, He is not inviolable; if He
could not. He acted cruelly in sending us
hither to suffer these things.

FoRTUNATus said: Does the soul belong to
God, or not ?

10. AuGUSTiN said: If it is just that you
should fail to respond to my questions, and
that I should be questioned, I will replv.

P^ORTUNATUS Said: Does the soul act inde-
pendently? This I ask of you.

11. AuGUSTiN said: I indeed will tell what
you have asked; only remember this, that
while you have refused to respond to my
questions, I have responded to yours. If
you ask whether the soul descended from
God, it is indeed a great question; but
whether it descends from God or not, I
make this reply concerning the soul, that it
is not God; that God is one thing, the soul
another. That God is inviolable, incorrupti-
ble, and impenetrable, and incontaminable,
who also could be corrupted in no part and
to whom no injury can be done in any part.
But we see also that the soul is sinful, and is
conversant with misery, and seeks the truth,
and is in want of a liberator. This changing
condition of the soul shows me that the soul
is not God. For if the soul is the substance
of God, the substance of God errs, the sub-
stance of God is corrupted, the substance of
God is violated, the substance of God is de-
ceived; which it is impious to say.

FoRTUNATUS Said: Therefore you have de-
nied that the soul is of God, so long as it
serves sins, and vices, and earthly things,
and is led by error, because it cannot happen
that either God or His substance should suffer

3 I Cor. i. 24.

4 John i. 3.

ii6

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

this thing. For God is incorruptible and His
substance immaculate and holy. But here it
is inquired of you whether the soul is of God,
or not? Which we confess, and show from
the advent of the Saviour, from His holy
preaching, from His election; while He pitied
souls, and the soul is said to have come ac-
cording to His will, that He might free it
from death and might bring it to eternal
glory, and restore it to the Father. But what
do you say and hope concerning the soul; is
it from God or not? Can the substance of
God, from which you deny that the soul has
it? being, be subject to no passions ?

12. AuGUSTiN said: I have denied that the
soul is the substance of God in the sense of
its being God; but yet I hold that it is from
God as its author, because it was made by
God. The Maker is one thing, the thing
made is another. He who made cannot be
corruptible at all, but what He made cannot
be at all equal to Him who made it.

FoRTUNATUs said: Nor have I said that the
soul is like God. But because you have said
that the soul is an artificial thing, and that
there is nothing besides God, I ask whence
then God invented the substance of the soul ?

13. AuGUSTiN said: Only bear in mind
that I reply to your interrogations, but that
you do not reply to mine. I say that the
soul was made by God as all other things that
were made by God; and that among the things
that God Almighty made the principal place
was given to the soul. But if you ask wnence
God made the soul, remember that you and
I agree in confessing that God is almighty.
But he is not almighty who seeks the assist-
ance of any material whence he may make
what he will. From which it follows, that
according to our faith, all things that God
made through His Word and Wisdom, He
made out of nothing. For so we read: He
ordered and they were made; He commanded
and they were created." '

FoRTUNATUS said: Do all things have their
existence from God's command?

14. AuGusTiN said: So I believe, but all
things which were made.

FoRTUNATUs said: As things made they
agree, but because they are unsuitable to
themselves, therefore on this account it fol-
lows, that there is not one substance, although
from the same order of the One they came to
the composition and fashioning of this world.
But it is plain in the things themselves that
there is no similarity between darkness and
light, truth and falsehood, death and life,
soul and body, and other similar things which

' Ps. cxlviii. 5.

differ from each other both in names and ap-
pearances. And for good reason did our Lord
say: "The tree which my heavenly Father
has not planted shall be rooted up and cast
into the fire, because it brings not forth good
fruit:" " and that the tree has been rooted up.
Hence truly it follows from the reason of
things that there are two substances in this
world wliich agree in forms and in names, of
which one belongs to corporeal natures, but
the other is the eternal substance of the om-
nipotent Father, which we believe to be God's
substance.

15. AuGUSTiN said: Those contrary things
that move you so that we think adversely,
have happened on account of our sin, that is,
on account of the sin of man. For God made
all things good, and ordered them well; but ,
He did not make sm, and our voluntary sin
is the only thing that is called evil. There
is another kind of evil, which is the penalty
of sin. Since therefore there are two kinds
of evil, sin and the penalty of sin, sin does
not pertain to God; the penalty of sin pertains
to the avenger. For as God is good who
constituted all things, so He is just in taking
vengeance on sin. Since therefore all things
are ordered in the best possible way, which
seem to us now to be adverse, it has de-
servedly happened to fallen man who was
unwilling to keep the law of God. For God ^
gave free will to the rational soul which is in i
man. For thus it would have been possible [
to have merit, if we should be good volun-
tarily and not of necessity. Since therefore
it behooves us to be good not of necessity
but voluntarily, it behooved God to give to
the soul free will. But to this soul obeying
His laws, He subjected all things without ad-
versity, so that the rest of the things that
God made should serve it, if also the soul it-
self had willed to serve God. But if it should
refuse to serve God, those things that served
it should be converted into its punishment.
Wherefore if all things are rightly ordered by
God, and are good, neither does God suffer
evil.

FoRTUNATus Said: He does not suffer, but
prevents evil.

16. AuGUSTiN said: From whom then was
He about to suffer it ?

FoRTUNATUS Said: This is my point, that
He wished to prevent it, not rashly, but by
power and prescience. But deny evil to be
apart from God, when other precepts can be
shown which are done apart from His will.
A precept is not introduced, unless where
there is contrariety. The free faculty of liv-

=^ Matt. XV. 13, and iii. 10.

ACTS OR DISPUTATION AGAINST FORTUNaTUS.

117

ing is not given except where there is a fall,
according to the argument of the apostle who
says: "And you did he quicken, when ye
were dead in your trespasses and sins, wherein
aforetime ye walked according to the ruler-
ship of this world, according to the prince of
the power of the air, of the spirit that now
worketh in the souls of disobedience; among
whom we also all once lived in the lusts of
our flesh, doing the desires of the counsels of
the flesh, and w^ere by nature children of
wrath, even as the rest: but God, who is rich
in all mercy, had mercy on us. And when we
were dead by sins, quickened us together in
Christ, by whose grace ye have been saved;
and at the same time also raised us up, and
made us to sit with Him in the heavenly places
with Christ Jesus, that in the ages to come
He might show the exceeding riches of his
grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
For by grace have ye been saved through
faith; and that not of yourselves, for it is a
gift of God; not of works, lest any one should
glory. For we are his workmanship created
in Christ Jesus in good works, which God
prepared that we should walk in them.
Wherefore remember, that aforetime ye were
Gentiles in the flesh, who are called uncir-
cumcision, by that which is called circum-
cision in flesh made by hands, because ye
were at that time without Christ, alienated
from the commonwealth of Israel, and strang-
ers of the covenant, having no hope of the
promise, and without God in this world. But
now in Christ Jesus, ye that once were far off
are made nigh in the blood of Christ. For
He is our peace, who made both one, and
breaking down the middle wall of partition,
the enmities in His flesh, making void by His
decrees the law of commandments, that in
Himself He might unite the two into one new
man, making peace, that He might reconcile
them both in one body unto God through the
cross, slaying the enmities in Himself. And
He came and preached peace unto you that
were far off, and peace to them that were
nigh. For through Him we both have our
access in one Spirit unto the Father." '

17. AuGUSTiN said: This passage from the
apostle, which you have thought fit to recite,
if I mistake not, makes very strongly for my
faith and against yours. In the first place,
because free will itself, on which I have said
that the possibility of the soul's sinning de-
pends, is here sufficiently expressed, when
sins are mentioned, and it is said that our

' F.ph. ii. i-iS. There are several somewhat important varia-
tions from the Greek text in this long extract. The attentive
reader can get a good idea of the nature of the variations by com-
pariiijj this literal translation with the revised English version. —
A. H. N.

reconciliation with God takes place through
Jesus Christ. For by sinning we were brought
into opposition to God; but by holding to the
precepts of Christ we are reconciled to God;
so that we who were dead in sins may be
made alive by keeping His precepts, and may
have peace with Him in one Spirit, from whom
we were alienated, by failure to keep His pre-
cepts; as is set forth in our faith concerning
the man who was first created. I ask of you,
therefore, according to that passage which has
been read, how can we have sins if contrary
nature compels us to do what we do? For
he who is compelled by nature to do anything,
does not sin. But he who sins, sins by free
will. Wherefore would repentance be en-
joined upon us, if we have done nothing evil,
but only the race of darkness ? Likewise, I
ask, to whom is forgiveness of sins granted,
to us or to the race of darkness ? If to the
race of darkness, their race will also reign
with Him, receiving the forgiveness of sin;
but if to us it is manifest that we have sinned
voluntarily. For it is the height of folly for
him to be pardoned who has done no evil.
But he has done no evil, who has done
nothing of his own will. Therefore the soul
that to-day promises itself forgiveness of sins
and reconciliation to God, if it should cense
to sin, and repent of past sins; if it should
answer according to your faith and should
say: In what have I sinned? In what am
I guilty ? Why hast Thou expelled me from
Thy domains, that I might do battle with some
sort of race? I have been trodden under
foot, I have been mixed up, I have been cor-
rupted, I am worn out,^ my free will has not
been preserved. Thou knowest the necessity
by which I am preserved: Why dost Thou
impute to me the wounds that I have re-
ceived ? Wherefore dost Thou compel me
to repentance when Thou art the cause of my
wounds; when Thou knowest what I have
suffered, what the race of darkness has done
against me. Thou being the author who
couldst suffer no harm and yet wishing to save
the domains which nothing could injure.
Thou didst thrust me down into these mis-
eries. If indeed I am a part of Thee, who
have proceeded from Thy bowels, if I am
from Thy kingdom and Thy mouth, I ought
not to suffer anything in this race of dark-
ness, so that I being uncorrupted that race
should be subjected, if I was a part of the
I.ord. But now since it cannot be controlled
except by my corruption, how can I either
be said to be a part of 'I'hee, or Thou remain

2 There are three readings here, " wearied out," " deceived,"
and " worn out." The latter is preferred by the Benedictine edi-
tors.—A. H. N.

ii8

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

inviolable, or not be cruel in wishing me to
suffer for those domains, that could in no
way be injured by that race of darkness?
Respond to this if you please, and deign also
to explain to me how it was said by the apos-
tle, " We were by nature children of wrath/'
who, he says, have been reconciled to God. If
therefore' they were by nature children of
wrath, how do you say that the soul is by na-
ture a daughter and portion of God ?

FoRTUNATUS said: If with regard to the
soul the apostle had said that we are by na-
ture children of wrath, the soul would have
been alienated by the mouth of the apostle
from God. From this argument you only
show that the soul does not belong to God,
because, the apostle says, " We are by nature
children of wrath." But if it is said in view
of the fact that the apostle ' was held by the
law, descending as he himself testifies, from
the seed of Abraham, it follows that he has
said corporeally, that we [i.e., Jews] were
children of wrath even as the rest of mankind.
But he shows that the substance of the soul
is of God, and that the soul cannot otherwise
be reconciled to God than through the Master,
who is Christ Jesus. For the enmity having
been slain, the soul seemed to God unworthy
to have existed. But that it was sent, this
we confess, by God yet omnipotent, both de-
rivinof its origin from Him and sent for the
sealmg of His will. In the same way we be-
lieve also that Christ the Saviour came from
heaven to fulfill the will of the Father. Which
will of the Father was this, to free our souls
from the same enmity, this enmity having
been slain, which if it had not been opposed
to God could neither be called enmity where
there was unity, nor could slaying be spoken
of or take place where there was life.

1 8. AuGUSTiN said: Remember that the
apostle said that we are alienated from God
by our manner of life.

FoRTUNATUs said: I submit, that there
were two substances. In the substance of
light, as we have above said, God is to be
held incorruptible; but that there was a con-

trary nature of darkness, that which I also
to-day confess is vanquished by the power
of God, and that Christ has been sent forth
as a Saviour for my restoration, as previously
the same apostle says.

19. AuGUSTiN said- That we should dis-
cuss on rational grounds the belief in two
natures, has been made obligatory by those
who are hearing us. But inasmuch as you
have again betaken yourself to the Scriptures,
I descend to them, and demand that nothing
be passed by, lest using certain statements
we should bring confusion into the minds of
those to whom the Scriptures are not well
known. Let us therefore consider a state-
ment that the apcstle has in his epistle to
the Romans, For on the first page is what
is strongly against you. For he says: " Paul,
a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an
apostle, separated unto the gospel of God,
which He promised aforetime by His prophets
in the Holy Scriptures, concerning his Son, who
was made unto Him of the seed of David ac-
cording to the flesh, who was predestinated
to be the Son of God with power, according
to the spirit of holiness from the resurrection
from the dead of our Lord Jesus Christ."^
We see that the apostle teaches us concern-
ing our Lord Jesus Christ that before the flesh
he was predestinated by the power of God,
and according to the flesh was made unto Him
of the seed of David. Since you have always
denied and always will deny this, how do you
so earnestly demand the Scriptures that we
should discuss rather according to them.

FoRTUNATUS Said: You assert that accord-
ing to the flesh Christ was of the seed of
David, when it should be asserted that he was
born of a virgin, ^ and should be magnified as
Son of God. For this cannot be, unless as
what is from spirit may be held to be spirit,
so also what is from flesh may be known to be
flesh." Against which is the authority of the
Gospel in which it is said, that " flesh and
blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God,
neither shall corruption inherit incorrup-
tion."5

Here a clamor was made by the audience who wished the argument to be conducted on
rational grounds, because the)'' saw that Fortunatus was not willing to receive all things
that are written in the Codex of the apostle. Then little discussions began to be held here
and there by all, until Fortunatus said that the Word of God has been fettered in the race
of darkness. At which, when those present had expressed their horror, the meeting was
closed.^

I Rom. xi. I.
3 Isa. vii. 14.
5 I Cor. XV. 50.

2 Rom. i. 1-4.
4 John iii. 6.

6 This little side remark lends reality to the discussion, and en-
ables us to form a vivid conception of what doctrinal debates were
in the age of Augustin. — A. H. N.

ACTS OR DISPUTATION AGAINST FORTUNATUS.

119

DISPUTATION OF THE SECOND DAY.

THE NEXT DAY, A NOTARY HAVING AGAIN BEEN SUMMONED, THE DISCUSSION WAS CONDUCTED

AS follows:

FoRTUNATUS said: I saj?- that God Almighty
brings forth from Himself nothing evil, and
that the things that are His remain incorrupt,
having sprung and being born from an in-
violable source; but other contrary things
which have their being in this world, do not
flow from God nor have appeared in this
world with God as their author; that is to
say, they do not derive their origin from God.
These things therefore we have received in
the belief that evil things are foreign to God.

20. AuGUSTiN said: And our faith is this,
that God is not the progenitor of evil things,
neither has He made any evil nature. But
since both of us agree that God is incorrupti-
ble and incontaminable, it is the part of the
prudent and faithful to consider, which faith
is purer and worthier of the majesty of God;
that in which it is asserted that either the
power of God, or some part of God, or the
Word of God, can be changed, violated, cor-
rupted, fettered; or that in which it is said
that Almighty God and His entire nature and
substance can never be corrupted in any part,
but that evils have their being by the volun-
tary sin of the soul, to which God gave free
will. Which free will if God had not given,
there could be no just penal judgment, nor
merit of righteous conduct, nor divine in-
struction to repent of sins, nor the forgiveness
of sins itself which God has bestowed upon
us through our Lord Jesus Christ. Because
he who sins not voluntarily, sins not at all.
This I suppose to be open and perspicuous to
all. Wherefore it ought not to trouble us if
according to our deserts we suffer some in-
conveniences in the things God has made.
For as He is good, that He should constitute
all things; so He is just, that He may not spare
sins, which sins, as I have said, unless free will
were in us, would not be sins. For if any one,
so to speak, should be bound by some one in
his other members, and with his hand some-
thing false should be written without his own
will, I ask whether if this were laid open
before a judge, he could condemn this one
for the crime of falsehood. Wherefore, if it
is manifest that there is no sin where there is
not free exercise of will,' I wish to hear what
evil the soul which you call either part, or
power, or word, or something else, of God, has

' Liber um voluntatis arbitrium.

done, that it should be punished by God, or
repent of sin, or merit forgiveness, since it
has in no way sinned ?

FoRTUNATus Said: I proposed concerning
substances, that God is to be regarded as
creator only of good things, but as the avenger
of evil things, for the reason that evil things
are not of Him. Therefore for good reason
I think this, and that God avenges evil things
because they are not of Himself. But if they
were from Him, either He would give them
license to sin, as you say that God has given
free will. He would be already found a par-
ticipator in my fault, because He would be
the author of my fault; or ignorant what I
should be, he left me whom he did not con-
stitute worthy of Himself. This therefore is
proposed by me, and what I ask now is,
whether God instituted evil or not? and
whether He Himself instituted the end 6i
evils. For it appears from these things, and
the evangelical faith teaches, that the things
which we have said were made by God Him-
self as God the Creator, as having been
created and begotten by Him, are to be
esteemed incorruptible. These things I also
proposed which belong to our belief, and
which can be confirmed by you in that pro-
fession of ours, without prejudice to the au-
thority of the Christian faith. And because
I can in no way show that I rightly believe,
unless I should confirm that belief by the au-
thority of the Scriptures, this is therefore
what I have insinuated, what I have said.
Either if evil things have appeared in the
world with God as their author, deign to say
so yourself; or if it is right to believe that
evil things are not of God, this also the con-
templation of those present ought to honor
and receive. 1 have spoken about substances,
not about sin that dwells in us. For if what
we think to make faults had no origin, we
should not be compelled to come to sin or
to fault. For because we sinned unwillingly,
and are compelled by a substance contrary
and hostile to ourselves, therefore we follow
the knowledge of things. By which knowl-
edge the soul admonished and restored to
pristine memory, recognizes the source from
wliich it derives its existence, in what evil it
dwells, by what good works emending again
that in which unwillingly it sinned, it may be
able tliroutrh the emendation of its faults, for

I20

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

the sake of good works, to secure for itself
the merit of reconciliation with God, our
Saviour being the author of it, who teaches
us also to practice good things and to flee
from evil. For you ask us to believe that not
by some contrary nature, but by his own
choice, man either serves righteousness or be-
comes involved in sins; since, no contrary
race existing, if the soul, to which as you say
God has given free will, having been consti-
tuted in the body, dwells alone, it would be
without sin, nor would it become involved in
sins.

21. AuGUSTiN said: I say it is not sin, if it
be not committed by one's own will; hence
also there is reward, because of our own will
w^e do right. Or if he who sins unwillingly
deserves punishment, he who unwillingly does
well ought to deserve reward. But who
doubts that reward is only bestowed upon
him who does something of good will ? From
which we know that punishment also is in-
flicted upon him who does something of ill
will. But since you recall me to primordial
natures and substances, my faith is that God
Almig^hty — which must especially be attended
to and fixed in the mind — that God Almighty
has made good things. But the things made
by Him cannot be such as is He who made
them. For it is unjust and foolish to believe
that works are equal to the workman, things
made to the maker. Wherefore if it is rever-
ential to believe that God made all good
things, than which nevertheless He is by far
more excellent and by far more pre-eminent;
the origin and head of evil is sin, as the
apostle said: " Covetousness is the root of
all evils; which some following after have
made shipwreck of the faith, and have pierced
themselves through with many sorrows."'
For if you seek the root of all evils, you have
the apostle saying that covetousness is the
root of all evils. But the root of a root I
cannot seek. Or if there is another evil,
whose root covetousness is not, covetousness
will not be the root of all evils. But if it is
true that covetousness is the root of all evils,
in vain do we seek some other kind of evil.
But as regards that contrary nature of yours
which you introduce, since I have responded
to your objections, I ask that you deign to
tell me whether it is wholly evil, whether there
can be no sin apart from it, whether by this
alone punishment is deserved, not by the
soul by which no sin has been committed.
But if you say that this contrary nature alone
deserves punishment, and not the soul, I ask
to which is repentance, which is commanded,

J I Tim. vi. lo.

vouchsafed. If the soul is commanded to
repent, sin is from the soul, and the soul has
sinned voluntarily. For if the soul is com-
pelled to do evil, that which it does is not evil.
Is it not foolish and most absurd to say that
the race of darkness has sinned and that I
repent of the" sins. Is it not most absurd to
say that the race of darkness has sinned and
that forgiveness of sins is vouchsafed to me,
who according to your faith may well say:
What have I done ? What have I committed ?
I was with Thee, I was in a state of integrity,
I was contaminated with no pollution. Thou
didst send me hither, Thou didst suffer neces-
sity. Thou didst protect Thy domains when
great pollution and desolation threatened
them. Since therefore Thou knowest the
necessity by which I have been here oppressed,
by reason of which I could not breathe, which
I could not resist; why dost Thou accuse me
as if sinning? or why dost Thou promise for-
giveness of sins ? Reply to this without eva-
sion, if you please, as I have replied to you.

FoRTUNATUs Said: We say this, that the
soul is compelled by contrary nature to trans-
gress, for which transgression you maintain
there is no root save the evil that dwells in
us; for it is certain that apart from our bodies
evil things dwell in the whole world. For not
those things alone that we have in our bodies,
dwell in the whole world, and are known by
their names as good; an evil root also inheres.
For )'our dignity said that this covetousness
that dwells in our bodies is the root of evils;
since therefore there is no desire of evil out
of our bodies, from that source contrary
nature dwells in the whole world. For the
apostle designated that, namely covetousness,
as the root of evils, not one evil which you
have called the root of all evils. But not in
one manner is covetousness, which you have
said is the root of all evils, understood, as if
of that which dwells in our bodies alone; for it
is certain that this evil which dwells in us de-
scends from an evil author and that this root
as you call it is a small portion of evil, so that
it is not the root itself, but is a small portion
of evil, of that evil which dwells everywhere.
Which root and tree our Lord called evil, as
never bearing good fruit, which his Father
did not plant, and which is deservedly rooted
up and cast into the fire.= For as you say,
that sin ought to be imputed to the contrary
nature, that nature belongs to evil; and that
this is sin of the soul, if after the warning of
our Saviour and his wholesome instruction,
the soul shall have segregated itself from its
contrary and hostile race, adorning itself also

2 Matt. XV. 13, and iii. 10.

ACTS OR DISPUTATION AGAINST FORTUNATUS.

I 2 I

vith purer things; that otherwise it cannot be
restored to its own substance. For it is said:
" If I had not come and spoken unto them,
they had not had sin. But now that I have
come and spoken, and they have refused to
believe me, they shall have no excuse for
their sin."' Whence it is perfectly plain,
that repentance has been given after the
Saviour's advent, and after this knowledge of
things, by which the soul can, as if washed in
a divine fountain from the filth and vices as
well of the whole world as of the bodies in
which the same soul dwells, be restored to the
kingdom of God whence it has gone forth.
For it is said by the apostle, that " the mind
of the flesh is hostile to God; is not subject
to the law of God, neither indeed can be."''
Therefore it is evident from these things that
the good soul seems to sin not voluntarily,
but by the doing of that which is not subject
to the law of God. For it likewise follows
that "the flesh lusteth against the spirit and
the spirit against the flesh; so that ye may
not do the things that ye will." 3 Again: "I

see another law in my members, warring
against the law of my mind and leading me
captive in the law of sin and of death.
Therefore I am a miserable man; who shall
'leliver me from the bodv of this death, unless
: be the grace of God through our Lord
Jesus Christ,"'* "through whom the world has
'Cen crucified to me and I to the world ?" s

22. AuGUSTiN said: I recognize and em-
brace the testimonies of the divine Scriptures,
and I will show in a few words, as God may
deign to grant, how they are consistent with
my faith. I say that there was free exercise
f will in that man who was first formed. He
was so made that absolutely nothing could
resist his will, if he had willed to keep the
precepts of God. But after he voluntarily
sinned, we who have descended from his stock
".■ere plunged into necessity. But each one
t us can by a little consideration find that
hat I say is true. For to-day in our actions
efore we are implicated by any habit, we have
ree choice of doing anytiiing or not doing it.
But when by that liberty we have done some-
thing and the pernicious sweetness and pleas-
ure of that deed has taken hold upon the
mind, by its own habit the mind is so impli-
cated that afterwards it cannot conquer what
hy sinning it has fashioned for itself. We
•ste many who do not wish to swear, but be-
' ause the tongue has already become habit-
uated, they are not able to prevent those
things from going forth from the mouth
which we cannot but ascribe to the root of

' John XV. 22.
4 Rom. vii. 23-25.

2 Rom. viii. 7.
5 Gal. V. 14.

3 Gal. V. 17.

evil. For that I may discuss with you those
words, which as they do not withdraw from
your mouth so may they be understood by
your heart: you swear by the Paraclete. If
therefore you wish to find out experimentally
whether what I say is true, determine not to
swear. You will see, that that habit is borne
along as it has become accustomed to be.
And this is what wars against the soul, habit
formed in the flesh. This is indeed the mind
of the flesh, which, as long as it cannot thus
be subject to the law of God, so long is it
the mind of the flesh; but when the soul has
been illuminated it ceases to be the mind of
the flesh. For thus it is said the mind of the
flesh cannot be subject to the law of God,
just as if it were said, that snow cannot be
warm. For so long as it is snow, it can in
no way be warm. But as the snow is melted
by heat, so that it may become warm, so the
mind of the flesh, that is, habit formed with
the flesh, when our mind has become illumi-
nated, that is, when God has subjected for
Himself the whole man to the choice of the
divine law, instead of the evil habit of the
soul, makes a good habit. Accordingly it is
most truly said by the Lord of the two trees,
the one good and the other evil, which you
have called to mind, that they have their own
fruits; that is, neither can the good tree yield
evil fruit, nor the evil tree good fruit, but so
long as it is evil. Let us take two men, a
good and a bad. As long as he is good he
cannot yield evil fruit; as long as he is bad
he cannot yield good fruit. But that you
may know that those two trees are so placed
by the Lord, that free choice may be there
signified, that these two trees are not natures
but our wills. He Himself says in the gospel:
" Either make the tree good, or make the
tree evil." * Who is it that can make nature ?
If therefore we are commanded to make a
tree either good or evil, it is ours to choose
what we will. Therefore concerning that sin
of man and concerning that habit of soul
formed with the flesh the apostle says: " Let
no one seduce you;"' "Every creature that
has been made by God is good."* The
same apostle whom you also have cited says:
" As through the disobedience of the one the
many were constituted sinners; so also
through the obedience of the one the many
are constituted righteous. "^ " Since through
man is death, through man also is resurrection
of the dead." As long therefore as we bear
the image of the earthly man,'° that is, as
long as we live according to the flesh, which
is also called the old man, we have the neces-

6 Matt. xii. 35.
9 Rom. V. 19.

7 Eph. V. 6. 81 Tim. iv. 4.

"> I Cor. XV. 21, 49.

122

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

sity of our habit, so that we may not do what
we will. But when the grace of God has
breathed the divine love into us and has made
us subject to His will, to us it is said:
"Ye are called for freedom/'' and "the
grace of God has made me free from the law
of sin and of death." ^ But the law of sin is
that whoever has sinned shall die. From this
law we are freed when we have begun to be
righteous. The law of death is tliat by which
it w?s said to man: " Earth thou art and into
earth thou shalt go."^ For from this very
fact we are all so born, because we are earth,
and from the fact that we are all so born be-
cause we are earth, we shall all go into earth
on account of the desert of the sins of the
first man. But on account of the grace of
God, which frees us from the law of sin and
of death, having been converted to righteous-
ness we are freed; so that afterwards this
same flesh tortures us with its punishment so
long as we remain in sins, is subjected to us
in resurrection, and shakes us by no adversity
from keeping the law of God and His precepts.
Whence, since I have replied to your ques-
tions, deign to reply as I desire, how it can
happen, that if nature is contrary to God,
sin should be imputed to us, who were sent
into that nature not voluntarily, but by God
Himself, whom nothing could injure?

FoRTUNATUs Said: Just as also the Lord
said to His disciples: Behold I send you as
sheep in the midst of wolves."'' Hence it
must be known that not with hostile intent
did our Saviour send forth His lambs, that is
His disciples, into the midst of wolves, unless
there had been some contrariety, which He
would indicate by the similitude of wolves,
where also He had sent His disciples; that the
souls which perchance might be deceived in
the midst of wolves might be recalled to their
proper substance. Hence also may appear
the antiquity of our times to which we return,
and of our years, that before the foundation
of the world souls were sent in this way
against the contrary nature, that subjecting
the same by their passion, victory might be re-
stored to God. For the same apostle said,
that not only there should be a struggle against
flesh and blood, but also against principalities
and powers, and the spiritual things of wicked-
ness, and the domination of darkness." ^ If
therefore in both places evils dwell and are
esteemed wickednesses, not only now is evil in
our bodies, but in the whole world, where
souls appear to dwell, which dwell beneath
yonder heaven and are fettered.

23. AuGUSTiN said: The Lord sent His

I Gal. V. 13.
4 Matt. X. 16.

- Rom. viii. 2.
5 Eph. V. 12.

3 Gen. iii. 19.

lambs into the midst of wolves, that is, just
men into the midst of sinners for the preach-
ing of the gospel received in the time of man
from the inestimable divine Wisdom, that He
might call us from sin to righteousness. But
what the apostle says, that our struggle is not
against flesh and blood, but against principal-
ities and powers, and the other things that have
been quoted, this signifies that the devil and
his angels, as also we, have fallen and lapsed
by sin, and have secured possession of earthly
things, that is, sinful men, who, as long as
we are sinners, are under their yoke, just as
when we shall be righteous, we shall be under
the yoke of righteousness; and against them
we have a struggle, that passing over to
righteousness we may be freed from their
dominion. Do you also therefore deign to
reply to the one question that I ask: Could
God suffer injury, or not ? But I ask you to
reply: He could not.

FoRTUNATus Said: He could not suffer in-
jury.

24. AuGUSTiN said: Wherefore then did
He send us hither, according to your faith ?

FoRTUNATus Said: My profession is this,
that God could not be injured, and that He
directed us hither. But since this is contrary
to your view, do you tell how you account for
the soul being here, which our God desires to
liberate both by His commandments and by
His own Son whom He has sent.

25. AuGUSTiN said: Since I see that you
cannot answer my inquiries, and wish to ask
me something, behold I satisfy you, provided
only that you bear in mind that you have not
replied to my question. Why the soul is
here in this world involved in miseries has
been explained by me not just now, but again
and again a little while ago. The soul sinned,
and therefore is miserable. It accepted free
choice, used free choice, as it willed; it fell,
was cast out from blessedness, was implicated
in miseries. As bearing upon this I recited
to you the testimony of the apostle who says:
"As through one man death, so also through
one man came the resurrection of the dead."
What more do you ask ? Hence do you re-
ply, wherefore did He, who could not suffer
injury, send us hither?

FORTUNATUS Said: The cause must be
sought, why the soul came hither, or where-
fore God desires hence to liberate the soul
that lives in the midst of evils?

26. AuGUSTiN said: This cause I ask of
you, that is, if God could not suffer injury,
wherefore He sent us hither ?

FoRTUNATUS said: It is inquired of us, if
evil cannot injure God, wherefore the soul
was sent hither, or for what reason was it

ACTS OR DISPUTATION AGAINST FORTUNATUS.

123

mingled with the world ? Which is manifest in
what the apostle says: " Shall the thing form-
ed say to him that formed it, why hast thou
formed me thus?"' If therefore this cause
must be pleaded, He must be asked, why He
sent the soul, no necessity compelling Him.
But if there was necessity for sending the
soul, of right is there also the will of liber-
ating it.

27. AuGUSTiN said: Then God is pressed
by necessity, is He ?

FoRTUNATUs said: Now this is it. Do not
seek to bring odium upon what has been said;
because we do not make God subject to neces-
sity, but to have voluntarily sent the soul.

28. AuGUSTiN said: Recall what was said
above. And it runs: "But if there was
necessity for sending the soul, of right is
there also the will of liberating it. Augustin
said: We have heard: But if there was
necessity for sending the soul, of right is
there also the will of liberating it." You,
therefore, said that there was necessity for
sending the soul. But if you only wish to
say "a will to send," I add this also: He
who could suffer no injury, had the cruel will
to send the soul to so great miseries. Be-
cause I speak for the sake of refuting this
statement, I ask pardon from the mercy of
that One in whom we have hope of liberation
from all the errors of heretics.

FoRTUNATUs Said: You asseverate that we
say that God is cruel in sending the soul, but
that God made man, breathed into him a soul
which assuredly He foreknew to be involved
in future misery, and not to be able by
reason of evils to be restored to its inheri-
tance. This belongs either to one who is
ignorant, or who gives the soul up to these
aforesaid evils. This I have cited because
you said not long since, that God adopted the
soul, not that it is from Him; for to adopt is
a different matter.

29. Augustin said: Concerning adoption I
remember that I spoke some days ago accord-
ing to the testimony of the apostle, who says
that we have been called into the adoption of

nis.^ This was not my reply, therefore, but

e apostle's, concerning which thing, that is,

tuat adoption, we may inquire, if we please,

in its own time; and concerning that I will

1 1 ply without delay, when you shall have an-

vered my objections.

FoRTUNATus Said: I say that there was a
»ing forth of the soul against a contrary na-
'ure, which nature could not injure God.

30. Augustin said: What need was there
'Or that going forth, when God whom nothing

)uld injure had nothing to protect ?

' Rom. ix. 20.

'Eph. i. 5.

FORTUNATUS said: Do you conscientiously
hold that Christ came from God ?

31. Augustin said: Again you are ques-
tioning me. Reply to my inquiries.

FoRTUNATUS Said: So I have received in
faith, that by the will of God He came hither.

32. Augustin said: And I say: Why did
God, omnipotent, inviolable, immutable,
whom nothing could injure, send hither the
soul, to miseries, to error, to those things that
we suffer ?

FORTUNATUS Said: For it has been said:
" I have power to lay down my soul and I
have power to take it again." -' Now He said
that by the will of God the soul went forth.

^^. Augustin said: I ask for the reason
why God, when He can in no way suffer in-
jur}'^, sent the soul hither?

FORTUNATUS Said: We have already said
that God can in no way suffer injury, and we
have said that the soul is in a contrary nature,
therefore that it imposes a limit on the con-
trary nature. The restraint having been im-
posed on the contrary nature, God takes the
same. For He Himself said, " I have power
to lay down my soul and power to take it."
The Father gave to me the power of laying
down my soul, and of taking it. To what
soul, therefore, did God who' spoke in the
Son refer? Evidently our soul, which is held
in these bodies, which came of His will, and of
His will is again taken up.

34. Augustin said: Why our Lord said:
" I have power to lay down my soul and power
to take it," is known to all; because He was
about to suffer and to rise again. But I ask
of you again and again. If God could in no
way suffer injury, why did he send souls
hither ?

FORTUNATUS Said: To impose a limit on
contrary nature.

35. Augustin said: And did God omnipo-
tent, merciful and supreme, that He might
impose a restraint on contrary nature, wish it
to be limited so that He might make us unre-
strained ?

Fortunatus said : But so He calls us back
to Himself.

36. Augustin said: If He recalls to Him-
self from an unrestrained state, if from sin,
from error, from misery, what need was there
for the soul to suffer so great evils through so
long a time till the world ends? since God by
whom you say it was sent could in no way
suffer injury.

Fortunatus said: What then am I to
say ?

37. Augustin said: I know that you have
nothing to say, and that I, when I was among

3 John X. 18.

124

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

you, never found anything to
question, and that I was thus

say on this
admonished
from on high to leave that error and to be
converted to the Catholic faith or rather to
recall it, by the indulgence of Him who did
not permit me to inhere forei^er in this fallacy.
But if you confess that you have nothing to
reply, I will expound the Catholic faith to all
those hearing and investigating, seeing that
they are believers, if they permit and wish.
FoRTUNATUs Said: VVithout prejudice to

my profession I might say: when I shall have
reconsidered with my superiors the things
that have been opposed by you, if they fail to
respond to this question of mine, which is
now in like manner proposed to me by you,
it will be in my contemplation (since I desire
my soul to be liberated by an assured faith)
to come to the investigation of this thing that
you have proposed to me and that you
promise you will show.

AuGUSTiN said: Thanks be to God.

ST. AUGUSTIN:

AGAINST

THE EPISTLE OF MANICH^US

CALLED FUNDAMENTAL

[CONTRA EPISTOLAM MANICH.EI QUAM VOCANT FUND AMENTUM J.

A.D. 397.

TRANSLATED BY

REV. RICHARD STOTHERT, M.A.,

BOMBAY.

." (

CONTENTS OF AGAINST THE EPISTLE OF MAXICH.^US

CALLED FUNDAMENTAL

PAGE

Chap. I. — To heal heretics is better than to destroy them I2g

Chap. II. — Why the Manichasans should be more gently dealt with 129

Chap. III. — Augnstin once a Manichsean 130

Chap. IV. — Proofs of the Catholic faith 130

Chap. V. — Against the title of the Epistle of Manichseus 130

Chap. VI. — Why Manichaeus called himself an af)ostIe of Christ 131

Chap. VII. — In what sense the followers of Manichseus believe him to be the Holy Spirit 132

Chap. VIII. — The festival of the birth-day of Manichasus 132

Chap. IX. — When the Holy Spirit was sent 133

Chap. X. — The Holy Spirit twice given 134

Chap. XI. — Manichseus promises truth, but does not make good his word 134

Chap. XII. — The wild fancies of Manichasus. The battle before the constitution of the world. . . 134
Chap. XIII. — Two opposite substances. The Kingdom of Light. Manichseus teaches uncertainties

instead of certainties , 135

Chap. XIV. — Manichseus promises the knowledge of undoubted things, and then demands faith in

doubtful things 135

Chap. XV. — The doctrine of Manichseus not only uncertain, but false. His absurd fancy of a land
and race of darkness bordering on the Holy Region and the substance of God. The error, first of
all, of giving to the nature of God limits and borders, as if God were a material substance, having

e.xtension in space 136

Chap. XVI. — The soul, though mutable, has no material form. It is all present in every part of the body. 136

Chap. XVII. — The memory contains the ideas of places of the greatest size 137

Chap. XVIII. — The understanding judges of the truth of things, and of its own action 137

Chap. XIX. — If the mind has no material extension, much less has God 13S

Ch.\p. XX. — Refutation of the absurd idea of two territories 138

Chap. XXI. — This region of light must be material if it is joined to the region of darkness. The shape

of the region of darkness joined to the region of light 138

Chap. XXII. — The form of the region of light the worst of the two 139

Chap. XXIII. — The Anthropomorphites not so bad as the Manichceans 139

Chap. X.XIV. — Of the number of natures in the Manichcean fiction 140

Chap. XXV. — Onmipotence creates good things differing in degree. In every description whatsoever

of the junction of the two regions there is either impropriety or absurdity 140

Chap. XXVI. — The Manichceans are reduced to the choice of a tortuous, or curved, or straight line of

, junction. The third kind of line would give symmetry and beauty suitable to both regions. . . 141

128 CONTENTS OF MANICH^US CALLED FUNDAMENTAL.

PAGE

Chap. XXVII. — The beauty of the straight line might be taken from the region of darkness without
taking anything from its substance. So evil neither takes from nor adds to the substance of the
soul. The straightness of its side would be so far a good bestowed on the region of darkness by

God the Creator 142

Chap. XXVIII. — Manichceus places five natures in the region of darkness 142

Chap. XXIX. — The refutation of this absurdity 143

Chap. XXX. — The number of good things in those natures which Manichaeus places in the region of

darkness 143

Chap. XXXI. — The same subject continued 144

Chap. XXXII. — Manichseus got the arrangement of his fanciful notions from visible objects. . . . 144

Chap. XXXIII. — Every nature, as nature, is good 145

Chap. XXXIV. — Nature cannot be without some good. The Manichseans dwell upon the evils. . . 146
Chap. XXXV. — Evil alone is corruption. Corruption is not nature, but contrary to nature. Corrup-
tion implies previous good 147

Chap. XXXVI. — The source of evil or of corruption of good 147

Chap. XXXVII. — God alone perfectly good 148

Chap. XXXVIII. — Nature made by God; corruption comes from nothing 148

Chap. XXXIX. — In what sense evils are from God 149

Chap. XL. — Corruption tends to non-existence 149

Chap. XLI. — Corruption is by God's permission, and comes from us 150

Chap. XLII. — Exhortation to the chief good 150 j

Chap. XLIII. — Conclusion 150

■<n

AGAINST THE EPISTLE
OF MANICH/EUS CALLED FUNDAMENTAL;

[CONTRA EPISTOLAM MANICH^I QUAM VACANT FUNDAMENT!.] A.D. 397.

CHAP. I. TO HEAL HERETICS IS BETTER THAN

TO DESTROY THEM.

I. My prayer to the one true, almighty
God, of whom, and through whom, and in
whom are all things, has been, and is now,
that in opposing and refuting the heresy of
you Manichseans, as you may after all be
heretics more from thoughtlessness than from
malice, He would give me a mind calm and
composed, and aiming at your recovery rather
than at your discomfiture. For while the
Lord, by His servants, overthrows the king-
doms of error, His will concerning erring
men, as far as they are men, is that they
should be amended rather than destroyed.
And in every case where, previous to the
final judgment, God inflicts punishment,
whether through the wicked or the righteous,
whether through the unintelligent or through
the intelligent, whether in secret or openly,
we must believe that the designed effect is
the healing of men, and not their ruin; while
there is a preparation for the final doom in
the case of those who reject the means of re-
cover}'-. Thus, as the universe contains some

'Written about the year 397. In his Retractations (ii. 2)
Augustin says: "The book against the Epistle of Manicha;iis,
called Fundamental, refutes only its commencement ; but on the
other parts of the epistle 1 have made notes, as required, refuting
the whole, and sufficient to recall the argument, had I ever had lei-
sure to write against the wh le." [The Fundamental E/>istte
seems to have been a sort of hand-book for Manicha;an catechu-
mens or Auditors. In making this.document the basis of his attack,
Augustin felt that he had selected the best-known and most gen-
erally accepted standard of the I\Ianicha;an faith. Tiie tone of
the work is conciliatory, yet some very sharp thrusts are made at
Manichaean error. The claims of Mani to be the Paraclete are
set aside, and the absurd cosmological fancies of Mani are ruth-
lessly exposed. Dualism is combated with substantially the same
.weaponsas in the treatise Concerning Two Souls. We could wish
that the author had found time to finish the treatise, and had thus
preserved fur us more of the Fundamental Epistle itself. This
work was written after the author had become Bishop of Hippo.—
*, H.N.I

things which serve for bodily punishment, as
fire, poison, disease, and the rest, and other
things, in which the mind is punished, not by
bodily distress, but by the entanglements of
its own passions, such as loss, exile, bereave-
ment, reproach, and the like; while other
things, again, without tormenting are fitted
to comfort and soothe the languishing, as,
for example, consolations, exhortations, dis-
cussions, and such things; in all these the
supreme justice of God makes use sometimes
even of wicked men, acting in ignorance, and
sometimes of good men, acting intelligently.
It is ours, accordingly, to desire in preference
the better part, that we might attain our end
in your correction, not by contention, and
strife, and persecutions, but by kindly conso-
lation, by friendly exhortation, by quiet dis-
cussion; as it is written, " The servant of the
Lord must not strive; but be gentle toward
all men, apt to teach, patient; in meekness
instructing those that oppose themselves."^
It'is ours, I say, to desire to obtain this part
in the work; it belongs to God to give what
is good to those who desire it and ask for it.

CHAP. 2. WHY THE MANICH^ANS SHOULD BE

MORE GENTLY DEALT WITH.

2. Let those rage against you who know
not with what labor the truth is to be found
and with what difificulty error is to be avoided.
Let those rage against you who know not how
rare and hard it is to overcome the fancies of
the flesh by the serenity of a pious disposition.
Let those rage against you who know not the
difficulty of curing the eye of the inner man
that he may gaze upon his Sun, — not that sun

m. II. 24,25.

130

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. V.

vvuich you worship, and which shines with the
brilliance of a heavenly body in the eyes of
carnal men and of beasts, — but that of which
it is written through the prophet, "The Sun
of righteousness has arisen upon me;"' and
of which it is said in the gospel, " That was
the true Light, which lighteth every man that
Cometh into the world. "= Let those rage
against you who know not with what sighs
and groans the least particle of the knowledge
of God is obtained. And, last of all, let
those rage against you who have never been
led astray in the same way that they see that
you are.

CHAP.

-AUGUSTIN ONCE A MANICHyEAN.

3. For my part, I, — who, after much and
long-continued bewilderment, attained at last
to the discovery of the simple truth, which is
learned without being recorded in any fanci-
ful legend; who, unhappy that I was, barely
succeeded, by God's help, m refuting the
vain imaginations of my mind, gathered from
theories and errors of various kinds; who so
late sought the cure of my mental obscura-
tion, in compliance with the call and the ten-
der persuasion of the all-merciful Physician;
who long wept that the immutable and inviol-
able Existence would vouchsafe to convince
me inwardly of Himself, in harmony with the
testimony of the sacred books; by whom, in
fine, all those fictions which have such a firm
hold on you, from your long familiarity with
them, were diligently examined, and atten-
tively heard, and too easily believed, and
commended at every opportunity to the belief
of others, and defended against opponents
with determination and boldness, — I can on
no account rage against you; for I must bear
with you now as formerly I had to bear with
myself, and I must be as patient towards you
as my associates were with me, when I went
madly and blindly astray in your beliefs.

4. On the other hand, all must allow that
you owe it to me, in return, to lay aside all
arrogance on your part too, that so you may
be the more disposed to gentleness, and may
not oppose me in a hostile spirit, to your own
hurt. Let neither of us assert that he has
found truth; let us seek it as if it were un-
known to us both. For truth can be sought
with zeal and unanimity if by no rash pre-
sumption it is believed to have been already
found and ascertained. But if I cannot in-
duce you to grant me this, at least allow me
to suppose myself a stranger now for the first
time hearing you, for the first time examining
your doctrines. I think my demand a just

I :\Ial. iv.

' John :

one. And it must be laid down as an under-
stood thing that I am not to join you in your
prayers, or in holding conventicles, or in
taking the name of Manichjeus, unless you
give me "a clear explanation, without any ob-
scurity, of all matters touching the salvation
of the soul.

CHAP. 4. PROOFS OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH.

5. For in the Catholic Church, not to speak
of the purest wisdom, to the knowledge of
which a few spiritual men attain in this life,
so as to know it, in the scantiest measure, in-
deed, because they are but men, still without
any uncertainty (since the rest of the multi-
tude derive their entire security not from
acuteness of intellect, but from simplicity of
faith,) — not to speak of this wisdom, which
you do not believe to be in the Catholic
Church, there are many other things which
most justly keep me in her bosom. The con-
sent of peoples and nations keeps me in the
Church; so does her authority, inaugurated
by miracles, nourished by hope, enlarged by
love, established by age. The succession of
priests keeps me, beginning from the very
seat of the Apostle Peter, to whom the Lord,
after His resurrection, gave it in charge to feed
His sheep, down to the present episcopate.
And so, lastly, does the name itself of Cath-
olic, which, not without reason, amid so many
heresies, the Church has thus retained; so that,
though all heretics wish to be called Catholics,
yet when a stranger asks where the Catholic
Church meets, no heretic will venture to point
to his own chapel or house. Such then in
number and importance are the precious ties
belonging to the Christian name which keep
a believer in the Catholic Church, as it is
right they should, though from the slowness
of our understanding, or the small attain-
ment of our life, the truth may not yet fully
disclose itself. But with you, where there is
none of these things to attract or keep me,
the promise of truth is the only thing that
comes into play. Now if the truth is so clearly ,
proved as to leave no possibility of doubt, it j
must be set before all the things that keepi
me in the Catholic Church; but if there is |
only a promise without any fulfillment, no one*
shall move me from the faith which binds my'
mind with ties so many and so strong to the
Christian religion.

CHAP. 5. AGAINST THE TITLE OF THE EPISTLE

OF AIANICH^US.

6. Let us see then what Manichasus teaches
me; and particularly let us examine that treat-
ise which he calls the Fundamental Epistle,

Chap. VI.]

AGAINST THE EPISTLE OF MANICHyEUS.

131

in which almost all that you believe is con-
tained. For in that unhappy time when we
read it we were in your opinion enlightened.
The epistle begins thus: — " Manichteus, an
apostle of Jesus Christ, by the providence of
God the Father. These are wholesome words,
from the perennial and living fountain."
Now, if you please, patiently give heed to my
inquiry. I do not believe Manichaeus to be an
apostle of Christ. Do not, I beg of you, be en-
raged and begin to curse. For you know that
it is my rule to believe none of your statements
without consideration. Therefore I ask, who
is this Manichceus ? You will reply, An apostle
of Christ. I do not believe it. Now you are
at a loss what to say or do; for you promised
to give knowledge of the truth, and here you
are forcing me to believe what I have no
knowledge of. Perhaps you will read the
gospel to me, and will attempt to find there a
testimony to Manichaeus. But should you
meet with a person not yet believing the gos-
pel, how would you reply to him were he to
say, I do not believe ? For my part, I should
not believe the gospel except as moved by
the authority of the Catholic Church/ So
when those on whose authority I have con-
sented to believe in the gospel tell me not to
believe in Manichccus, how can I but consent?
Take your choice. If you say. Believe the
Catholics: their advice to me is to put no
faith in you; so that, believing them, I am
precluded from believing you; — If you say.
Do not believe the Catholics: you cannot
fairly use the gospel in bringing me to faith
in Manichaeus; for it was at the command of
the Catholics that I believed the gospel; —
Again, if you say, You were right in believing
the Catholics when they praised the gospel,
but wrong in believing their vituperation of
Manichaeus: do you think me such a fool as
to believe or not to believe as you like or dis-
like, without any reason ? It is therefore fairer
and safer by far for me, having in one instance
put faith in the Catholics, not to go over to
you, till, instead of bidding me believe, you
make me understand something in the clear-
est and most open manner. To convince me,
then, you must put aside the gospel. If you
' keep to the gospel, I will keep to those who
' ommanded me to believe the gospel; and,
in obedience to them, I will not believe you
at all. But if haply you should succeed in
finding in the gospel an incontrovertible tes-
timony to the apostleship of Manichaeus, you
will weaken my regard for the autliority of
the Catholics who bid me not to believe you;
md the eifect of that will be, that I shall no

' LThis is one of the earliest distinct assertions of the depend-
' nee of the Scriptures for authority on the Church.— A. H. N.]

longer be able to believe tlie gospel either,
for it was through the Catholics that I got my
faith in it; and so, whatever you bring from
the gospel will no longer have any weight
with me. Wherefore, if no clear proof of the
apostleship of Manichaeus is found in the gos-
pel, I will believe the Catholics rather than
you. But if you read thence some passage
clearly in favor of Manichasus, I will be-
lieve neither them nor you: not them, for
they lied to me about you; nor you, for you
quote to me that Scripture which I had be-
lieved on the authority of those liars. But
far be it that I should not believe the gospel;
for believing it, I find no way of believing
you too. For the names of the apostles,
as there recorded,^ do not include the name
of Manichaeus. And who the successor of
Christ's betrayer was we read in the Acts
of the Apostles; 3 which book I must needs
believe if I believe the gospel, since both writ-
ings alike Catholic authority commends to me.
The same book contains the well-known nar-
rative of the calling and apostleship of Paul.''
Read me now, if you can, in the gospel where
Manichaeus is called an apostle, or in any
other book in which I have professed to be-
lieve. Will you read the passage where the
Ford promised the Holy Spirit as a Paraclete,
to the apostles ? Concerning which passage,
behold how many and how great are the things
that restrain and deter me from believing in
Manichaeus.

CHAP. 6. — WHY MANICH^US CALLED HIMSELF
AN APOSTLE OF CHKIST.

7. For I am at a loss to see why this epistle
begins, " Manichaeus, an apostle of Jesus
Christ," and not Paraclete, an apostle of
Jesus Christ. Or if the Paraclete sent by
Christ sent Manichaeus, why do we read,
" Manichaeus, an apostle of Jesus Christ,"
instead of Manichaeus, an apostle of the Par-
aclete ? If you say that it is Christ Himself
who is the Holy Spirit, you contradict the
very Scripture, where the Lord says, " And
I will send you another Paraclete." 5 Again,
if you justify your putting of Christ's name,
not because it is Christ Himself who is also
the Paraclete, but because they are both of
the same substance, — that is, not because
they are one person, but one existence \tion
quia unus est, sed quia unuin su/it'\, — Paul too
might have used the words, Paul, an apostle
of God the Father; for the Lord said, " I
and the Father are one. "^ Paul nowhere
uses these words; nor does any of the apos-

= Matt. X. 2-4 ; Marl< iii. 13-19 ; Luke vi. 13-18.

3 Acts i. 26. ■» .Acts i.\. 5 John xiv. id

* John x. 30.

132

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. VIII.

ties write himself an apostle of the Father.
Why then this new fashion? Does it not
savor of trickery of some kind or other?
For if he thought it made no difference, why
did he not for the sake of variety in some
epistles call himself an apostle of Christ, and
in others of the Paraclete ? But in every one
that I know of, he writes, of Christ; and not
once, of the Paraclete. What do we suppose
to be the reason of this, but that pride, the
mother of all heretics, impelled the man to de-
sire to seem to have been sent by the Paraclete,
but to have been taken into so close a rela-
tion as to get the name of Paraclete himself ?
As the man Jesus Christ was not sent by the
Son of God, that is, the power and wisdom
of God — by which all things were made, but,
according to the Catholic faith, was taken
into such a relation as to be Himself the Son
of God — that is, that in Himself the wisdom
of God was displayed in the healing of sin-
ners,— so Manichseus wished it to be thought
that he was so taken up by the Holy Spirit,
whom Christ promised, that we are hence-
forth to understand that the names Manich-
seus and Holy Spirit alike signify the apostle
of Jesus Christ, — that is, one sent by Jesus
Christ, who promised to send him. Singular
audacity this! and unutterable sacrilege!

CHAP. 7. IN WHAT SENSE THE FOLLOWERS OF

MANICH^US BELIEVE HIM TO BE THE HOLY
SPIRIT.

8. Besides, you should explain how it is
that, while the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit
are united in equality of nature, as you also
acknowledge, you are not ashamed to speak
of Manichffius, a man taken into union with
the Holy Spirit, as born of ordinary genera-
tion; and yet you shrink from believing that
the man taken into union with the only-be-
gotten Wisdom of God was born of a Virgin.
If human flesh, if generation \concuhitus viri\
if the womb of a woman could not contam-
inate the Holy Spirit, how could the Virgin's
womb contaminate the Wisdom of God ?
This Manichaeus, then, who boasts of a con-
nection with the Holy Spirit, and of being
spoken of in the gospel, must produce his
claim to either of these two things, — that he
was sent by the Spirit, or that he was taken
into union with the Spirit. If he was sent.
let him call himself the apostle of the Para-
clete; if taken into union, let him allow that
He whom the only-begotten Son took upon
Himself had a human mother, since he ad-
mits a human father as well as mother in the
case of one taken up by the Holy Spirit.
Let him believe that the Word of God was
not defiled by the virgin womb of Mary,

since he exhorts us to believe that the Holy
Spirit could not be defiled by the married life
of his parents. But if you say that Manich-
seus was united to the Spirit, not in the womb
or before conception, but after his birth, still
you must admit that he had a fleshly nature
derived from man and woman. And since
you are not afraid to speak of the blood and
the bodily substance of Manichaeus as com-
ing from ordinary generation, or of the in-
ternal impurities contained in his flesh, and
hold that the Holy Spirit, who took on Him-
self, as you believe, this human being, was
not contaminated by all those things, why
should I shrink from speaking of the Virgin's
womb and body undefiled, and not rather be-
lieve that the Wisdom of God in union with
the human being in his mother's flesh still
remained free from stain and pollution ?
Wherefore, as, whether your Manichseus pro-
fesses to be sent by or to be united with the
Paraclete, neither statement can hold good,
I am on my guard, and refuse to believe
either in his mission or in his susception.

CHAP. 8. THE FESTIVAL OF THE BIRTH-DAY .

OF MANICHAEUS.

9. In adding the words, "by the provi-
dence of God the Father, ''what else did Man-
ichseus design but that, having got the name
of Jesus Christ, whose apostle he calls him-
self, and of God the Father, by whose provi-
dence he says he was sent by the Son, we
should believe himself, as the Holy Spirit, to
be the third person ? His words are: " Man-
ichseus, an apostle of Jesus Christ, by the
providence of God the Father. '^ The Holy
Spirit is not named, though He ought speci-
ally to have been named by one who quotes
to us in favor of his apostleship the promise
of the Paraclete, that he may prevail upon
ignorant people by the authority of the gos-
pel. In reply to this, you of course say that
in the name of the Apostle Manichseus we
have the name of the Holy Spirit, the Para- ,
clete, because He condescended to come into
Manichseus. Why then, I ask again, should ;
you cry out against the doctrine of the Cath-
olic Church, that He in whom divine Wisdom
came was born of a virgin, when you do not
scruple to affirm the birth by ordinary gene-
ration of him in whom you say the Holy Spirit
came ? I cannot but suspect that this Man-
ichseus, who uses the name of Christ to gain
access to the minds of the ignorant, wished
to be worshipped instead of Christ Himself.
I will state briefly the reason of this conjec-
ture. At the time when I was a student of;
your doctrines, to my frequent inquiries why
it was that the Paschal feast of the Lord was.

Chap. IX.]

AGAINST THE EPISTLE OF MANICH.'EUS.

133

celebrated generally with no interest, tiiough
sometimes tliere were a few languid worsiiip-
pers, but no watchings, no prescription of any
unusual fast, — in a word, no special cere-
mony,— while great honor is paid to your
Bema, that is, the day on which Manichasus
was killed, when you have a platform with
fine steps, covered with precious cloth, placed
conspicuously so as to face the votaries, —
the reply was, that the day to observe was
the day of the passion of him who really suffer-
ed, and that Christ, w-ho was not born, but
appeared to human eyes in an unreal sem-
blance of flesh, only feigned suffering, with-
out really bearing it. Is it not deplorable,
that men who wish to be called Christians are
afraid of a virgin's womb as likely to defile
the truth, and yet are not afraid of falsehood ?
But to go back to the point, who that pays
attention can help suspecting that the inten-
tion of Manichseus in denying Christ's being
born of a woman, and having a human body,
was that His passion, the time of which is
now a great festival all over the world, might
not be observed by the believers in himself,
so as to lessen the devotion of the solemn
commemoration which he wished in honor of
the day of his own death ? For to us it was a
great attraction in the feast of the Bema that
it was held during Pascha, since we used
all the more earnestly to desire that festal day
[the Bema], that the other which was formerly
most sweet had been withdrawn.

CHAP. 9. — •WHEN THE HOLY SPIRIT WAS SENT.

10. Perhaps you will say to me, When,
then, did the Paraclete promised by the Lord
come? As regards this, had I nothing else
to believe on the subject, I should rather look
for the Paraclete as still to come, than allow
that He came in IManichaeus. But seeing
that the advent of the Holy Spirit is narrated
with perfect clearness in the Acts of the
Apostles, where is the necessity of my so
gratuitously running the risk of believing
heretics? For in the Acts it is written as fol-
lows: " The former treatise have we made,
0 Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both
to do and teach, in the day in which He
chose the apostles by the Holy Spirit, and
commanded them to preach the gospel. By
those to whom He showed Himself alive
after His passion by many proofs in the day-
time, He was seen forty days, teaching con-
cerning tlie kingdom of God. And how He
ponversed with them, and commanded them
that they should not depart from Jerusalem,
'Hit wait for the promise of the Father, which,
lith He, ye have heard of me. For John
iideed baptized with water, but ye shall begin

to be baptized with the Floly Spirit, whom
also ye shall receive after not many days,
that is, at Pentecost. When they had come,
they asked him, saying. Lord, wilt Thou at
this time manifest Thyself? And when will
be the kingdom of Israel ? And He said unto
them. No one can know the time which the
Father hath put in His own power. But ye
shall receive the power of the Holy Ghost
coming upon you, and ye shall be witnesses
unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea,
and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part
of the earth."' Behold you have here the
Lord reminding His disciples of the promise
of the Father, which they had heard from
His mouth, of the coming of the Holy Spirit.
Let us now see when He was sent; for shortly
after we read as follows: " And when the day
of Pentecost was fully come, they were all
with one accord in one place. And suddenly
there came a sound from heaven, as of a
rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the
house where they were sitting. And there
appeared unto them cloven tongues, like as
of fire, and it sat upon each of them. And
they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and
began to speak with other tongues, as the
Spirit gave them utterance. And there were
dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out
of every nation under heaven. And when
the sound was heard, the multitude came to-
gether, and were confounded, because every
man heard them speak in his own language.
And they were all amazed, and marvelled,
saying one to another. Are not all these which
speak Galilseans ? and how heard we every
man in our own tongue, wherein we were
born ? Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites,
and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, in Armenia,
and in Cappadocia, in Pontus, Asia, Phrygia,
and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the regions
of Africa about Cyrene, and strangers of
Rome, Jews, natives, Cretes, and Arabians,
they heard them speak in their own tongues
the wonderful works of God. And they were
all amazed, and were in doubt on account of
what had happened, saying. What meaneth
this ? But others, mocking, said. These men
are full of new wine."- You see when the
Holy Spirit came. What more do you wish ?
If the Scriptures are credible, should not I be-
lieve most readily in these Acts, which have
the strongest testimony in their support, and
which have had the advantage of becoming
generally known, and o( being handed down
and of being publicly taught along with the
gospel itself, which contains the promise of
the Holy Spirit, which also we believe ? On

I Acts i. 1-8

» Acts ii. I -13.

134

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XII.

reading, then, these Acts of the Apostles,
which stand, as regards authority, on a level
with the gospel, I find that not only was the
Holy Spirit promised to these true apostles,
but that He was also sent so manifestly, that
no room was left for errors on tliis subject.

CHAP. lO. — THE HOLY SPIRIT TWICE GIVEN.

1 1 . For the glorification of our Lord among
men is His resurrection from the dead and
His ascension 'to heaven. For it is written
in the Gospel according to Joiin: " The Holy
Ghost was not yet given, because that Jesus
was not yet glorified."' Now if the reason
why He was not given was that Jesus was not
yet glorified, He was given immediately on
the glorification of Jesus. And since that
glorification was twofold, as regards man and
as regards Ciod, twice also was the Holy
Spirit given: once, when, after His resurrec-
tion from the dead. He breathed on the face
of His disciples, saying, "Receive ye the
Holy Ghost; "=^ and again, ten days after
His ascension to heaven. This number ten
signifies perfection; for to the number seven,
which embraces all created things, is added
the trinity of the Creator. ^ On these things
there is much pious and sober discourse
among' spiritual men. But I must keep to
my point; for my business at present is not
to teach you, which you might think pre-
sumptuous, but to take the part of an in-
quirer, and learn from you, as I tried to do
for nine years without success. Now, there-
fore, I have a document to believe on the
subject of the Holy Spirit's advent; and if
you bid me not to believe this document, as
your usual advice is not to believe ignorantly,
without consideration/ much less will I be-
liev^e your documents. Away, then, with all
books, and disclose the truth with logical
clearness, so as to leave no doubt in my mind;
or bring forward books where I shall find not
an imperious demand for my belief, but a
trustworthy statement of what I may learn.
Perhaps you say this epistle is also of this
character. Let me, then, no longer stop at
the threshold: let us see the contents.

CHAP. II. MANICH^US PROMISES TRUTH, BUT

DOES NOT MAKE GOOD HIS WORD.

12. "These," he says, "are wholesome.

' John V'i- 30- ^ John xx. 22.

3 [This is, of course, fanciful ; but is quite in accordance with
the exegetical methods of the time.— A. H. N.]

4 [The Manichseans assumed the role of rationalists and
scorned the credulity of ordinary believers. Yet they required in
their followers an amount of credulity which only persons of a
peculiar turn of mind could furnish. The same thing applies to
modern rationalistic anti-Christian systems. 'I'he fact is that it
requires infinitely less credulity to believe in historical Christian-
ity than to disbelieve in it. — A. H. N.]

words from the perennial and living fountain;
and whoever shall have heard them, and shall
have first believed them, and then shall have
observed the truths they set forth, shall never
suffer death, but shall enjoy eternal life in
glory. For he is to be judged truly blessed
who has been instructed in this divine knowl-
edge, by which he is made free and shall
abide in everlasting life." And this, as you
see, is a promise of truth, but not the be-
stowal of it. And you yourselves can easily
see that any errors whatever might be dressed
up in this fashion, so as under cover of a
showy exterior to steal in unawares into the
minds of the ignorant. Were he to say,
These are pestiferous words from a poisonous
fountain; and whoever shall have heard them,
and shall have first believed them, and then
have observed what they set forth, shall never
be restored to life, but shall suffer a woful
death as a criminal: for assuredly he is to be
pronounced miserable who falls into this in-
fernal error, in which he will sink so as to
abide in everlasting torments; — were he to say
this, he would say the truth; but instead of
gaining any readers for his book, he would
excite the greatest aversion in the minds of
all into whose hands the book might come.
Let us then pass on to what follows; nor let
us be deceived by words which may be used
alike by good and bad, by learned and un-
learned. What, then, comes next?

13. " May the peace," he says, "of the in-
visible God, and the knowledge of the truth,
be with the holy and beloved brethren who
both believe and also yield obedience to the
divine precepts." Amen, say we. For the
prayer is a most amiable and commendable
one. Only we must bear in mind that these
words might be used by false teachers as well
as by good ones. So, if he said nothing more
than this, all might safely read and embrace
it. Nor should I disapprove of what follows:
"May also the right hand of light protect
you, and deliver you from every hostile as-
sault, and from the snares of the world." In
fact, I have no fault to find with the begin-
ning of this epistle, till we come to the main
subject of it. For I wish not to spend time
on minor points. Now, then, for this writer's
plain statement of what is to be expected
from him.

CHAP 12. THE AVILD FANCIES OF MANICH.EUS.

■ THE BATTLE BEFORE THE CONSTITUTION OF
THE AVORLD.

14. "Of that matter, " he says, "beloved
brother of Patticus, of which you told me,
saying that you desired to know the manner
of the birth of Adam and Eve, whether they:

Chap. XIV.]

AGAINST THE EPISTLE OF MANICH.EUS.

135

were produced by a word or sprung from nat-
ter, I will answer you as is fit. For in va-
rious writings and narratives we find different
assertions made and different descriptions
given by many authors. Now the real truth
on the subject is unknown to all peoples, even
to those wlio have long and frequently treated
of it. For had they arrived at a clear knowl-
edge of the generation of Adam and Eve,
they would not have remained liable to cor-
ruption and death. " Here, then, is a promise
to us of clear knowledge of this matter, so that
we shall not be liable to corruption and death.
And if this does not suffice, see what follows:
"Necessarily," he says, "many things have
to be said by way of preface, before a dis-
covery of this mystery free from all uncer-
tainty can be made. " This is precisely what
I asked for, to have such evidence of the truth
as to free my knowledge of it from all uncer-
tainty. And even were the promise not made
by this writer himself, it was proper for me
to demand and to insist upon this, so that no
opposition should make me ashamed of be-
coming a Manichffian from a Catholic Chris-
tian, in view of such a gain as that of per-
fectly clear and certain truth. Now, then,
let us hear what he has to state.

15. " Accordingly," he says, " hear first, if
you please, what happened before the con-
stitution of the world, and how the battle
\v:ts carried on, that you may be able to dis-
tinguish the nature of light from that of dark-
ness." Such are the utterly false and incredi-
ble statements which this writer makes. Who
can believe that any battle was fought before
the constitution of the world ? And even
supposing it credible, we wish now to get
something to know, not to believe. For to
say that the Persians and Scythians long ago
fought with one another is a credible state-
ment; but while we "believe it when we
read or hear it, we cannot know it as a fact
of experience or as a truth of the understand-
ing. So, then, as I would repudiate any such
statement on the ground that I have been
promised something, not that I must believe
on authority, but that I shall understand
without any ambiguity; still less will I receive
statements Vhich are not only uncertain, but
incredible. But what if he have some evi-
dence to make these things clear and intelli-
gible ? Let us hear, then, if we can, what
ifollows with all possible patience and forbear-
lance.

fHAV. 13. TWO OPPOSITE SUBSTANCES. THE

KINGDOM OF LIGHT. MANICH.^iUS TEACHES
, UNCERTAINTIES INSTEAD OK CERTAINTIES.

16. "In the beginning, then," he says,

" these two substances were divided. The
empire of light was held by God the Father,
who is perpetual in holy origin, magnificent
in virtue, true in His very nature, ever re-
joicing in His own eternity, possessing in
Himself wisdom and the vital senses, by
which He also includes the twelve members
of His light, which are the plentiful re-
sources of his kingdom. Also in each of His
members are stored thousands of untold and
priceless treasures. But the Father Himself,
chief in praise, incomprehensible in greatness,
has united to Himself happ}^ and glorious
worlds, incalculable in number and duration,
along with which this holy and illustrious
Father and Progenitor resides, no poverty or
infirmity being admitted in His magnificent
realms. And these matchless realms are so
founded on the region of light and bliss, that
no one can ever move or disturb them."'

17. Where is the proof of all this? And
where did Manichaeus learn it ? Do not
frighten me with the name of the Paraclete.
For, in the first place, I have come not to
put faith in unknown things, but to get the
knowledge of undoubted truths, according to
the caution enjoined on me by yourselves.
For you know how bitterly you taunt those
who believe without consideration. And
what is more, this writer, who here begms
to tell of very doubtful things, himself prom-
ised a little before to give complete and well-
grounded knowledge.

CHAP. 14. MANICH/EUS PROMISES THE KNOWL-
EDGE OF UNDOUBTED THINGS, AND THEN
DEMANDS FAITH IN DOUBTFUL THINGS.

In the next place, if faith is what is re-
quired of me, I should prefer to keep to the
Scripture, which tells me that the Holy
Spirit came and inspired the apostles, to
whom the Lord had promised to send Him.
You must therefore prove, either that what
Manichasus says is true, and so make clear
to me what I am unable to believe; or that
Manichasus is the Holy Spirit, and so lead
me to believe in what you cannot make
clear. For I profess the Catholic faith,
and by it I expect to attain certain knowl-
edge. Since, then, you try to overthrow
my faith, you must supply me with certain
knowledge, if you can, that 3'ou may convict
me of having adopted my present belief with-
out consideration. You make two distinct
propositions, — one when you say that the
speaker is the Holy Spirit, and another when
you say that what the speaker teaches is

• [Compare the fuller account from the Fihrist in the Introduc-
tion—A. H. N.]

136

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XVI.

eviclentl3arue. I might fairly ask undeniable j
proof for both propositions. But I am not
greedy and require to be convinced only
of one. Prove this person to be the Holy
Spirit, and I will believe what he says to
be true, even without understanding it; or ^
prove that what he says is true, and I will
believe him to be the Holy Spirit, even
without evidence. Could anything be fairer
or kinder than this ? But you cannot prove
either one or other of these propositions.
You can find nothing better than to praise
your own faith and ridicule mine. So, after
having in my turn praised my belief and
ridiculed yours, what result do you think
we shall arrive at as regards our judgment
and our conduct, but to part company with
those who promise the knowledge of indubi-
table tilings, and then demand from us faith
in doubtful things ? while we shall follow
those who invite us to begin with believing
what we cannot yet fully perceive, that,
strengthened by this very faith, we may come
into a position to know what we believe by
the inward illumination and confirmation of
our minds, due no longer to men, but to God
Himself.

18. And as I have asked this writer to
prove these things to me, I ask him now
where he learned them himself. If he replies
that they were revealed to him by the Holy
Spirit, and that his mind was divinel)^ enlight-
ened that he might know them to be certain
and evident, he himself points to the distinc-
tion between knowing and believing. The
knowledge is his to whom these things are
fully made known as proved; but in the case
of those who only hear his account of these
things, there is no knowledge imparted, but
only a believing acquiescence required. Who-
ever thoughtlessly yields this becomes a Man-
ichcean, not by knowing undoubted truth, but
by believing doubtful statements. Such were
we when in our inexperienced youth we were
deceived. Instead, therefore, of promising
knowledge, or clear evidence, or the settle-
ment of the question free from all uncertain-
ty, Manichaeus ought to have said that these
things were clearly proved to him, but that
those who hear his account of them must be-
lieve him without evidence. But were he to
say this, who would not reply to him. If I
must believe without knowing, why should I
not prefer to believe those thmgs which have
a wide-spread notoriety from the consent of
learned and unlearned, and which among all
nations are established by the weightiest au-
thority ? From fear of having this said to
him, Manicliteus bewilders the inexperienced
by first promising the knowledge of certain

truths, and then demanding faith in doubtful
things. And then, if he is asked to make it
plain that these things have been proved to
himself, .he fails again, and bids us believe
this too. Who can tolerate such imposture
and arrogance ?

CHAP. 15. — THE DOCTRINE OF

NOT ONLY UNCERTAIN, BUT FALSE

MANICH^US
HIS AB-
SURD FANCY OF A LAND AND RACE OF DARK-
NESS BORDERING ON THE HOLY REGION AND
THE SUBSTANCE OF GOD. THE ERROR, FIRST OF
ALL, OF GIVING TO THE NATURE OF GOD LIMITS
AND BORDERS, AS IF GOD WERE A MATERIAL
SUBSTANCE, HAVING EXTENSION IN SPACE.

19. What if I shall have shown, with the
help of God and of our Tord, that this writer's
statements are false as well as uncertain? What
more unfortunate thing can be found than that
superstition which not only fsils to impart the
knowledge and the truth which it promises,
but also teaches what is directly opposed to
knowledge and truth ? This will appear
more clearly from what follows: " In one di-
rection on the border of this bright and holy
land there was a land of darkness deep and
vast in extent, where abode fiery bodies, des-
tructive races. Here was boundless darkness,
flowing from the same source in immeasurable
abundance, with the productions properly be-
longing to it. Beyond this were muddy tur-
bid waters with their inhabitants; and inside
of them winds terrible and violent with their
prince and their progenitors. Then again a
fiery region of destruction, with its chiefs and
peoples. And similarly inside of this a race
full of smoke and gloom, where abode the
dreadful prince and chief of all, having around
him innumerable princes, himself the mind
and source of them all. Such are the five
natures of the pestiferous land."

20. To speak of God as an aerial or even
as an ethereal body is absurd in the view of
all who, with a clear mind, possessing some
measure of discernment, can perceive the na-
ture of wisdom and truth as not extended or
scattered in space, but as great, and impart-
ing ereatness without material size, nor con-
fined more or less in any direction, but
throughout co- extensive with the Father of all,
nor having one thing here and another there,
but everywhere perfect, everywhere present.'

CHAP. 16. — THE SOUL, THOUGH MUTABLE, HAS
NO MATERIAL FORM. IT IS ALL PRESENT IN
EVERY PART OF THE BODY.

But why speak of truth and wisdom wliich

I [This exalted view of God Augustin held in common with the
Neo-Platonists. — A. H. N.]

Chap. XVIII. ]

AGAINST THE EPISTLE OF MANICHyEUS.

^Z7

surpass all the powers of the soul, when the
nature of the soul itself, which is known to
be mutable, still has no kind of material ex-
tension in space .' For whatever consists of
any kind of gross matter must necessarily be
divisible into parts, having one in one place,
and another in another. Thus, the finger is
less than the whole hand, and one finger is
less than two; and there is one place for this
finger, and another for that, and another for
the rest of the hand. And this applies not to
organized bodies only, but also to the earth,
each part of which has its own place, so that
one cannot be where the other is. So in
moisture, the smaller quantity occupies a
smaller space, and the larger quantity a larger
space; and one part is at the bottom of the
cup, and another part near the mouth. So in
air, each part has its own place; and it is im-
possible for the air in this house to have along
with itself, in the same house at the same
moment, the air that the neighbors have.
And even as regards light itself, one part
pours through one window, and another
through another; and a greater through the
larger, and a smaller through the smaller.
Nor, in fact, can there be any bodily sub-
stance, whether celestial or terrestrial, whether
aerial or moist, which is not less in part than
in whole, or which can possibly have one part
in the place of another at the same time; but,
having one thing in one place and another in
another, its extension in space is a substance
which has distinct limits and parts, or, so to
speak, sections. The nature of the soul, on the
other hand, though we leave out of account its
power of perceiving truth, and consider only
its inferior power of giving unity to the body,
d of sensation in the body, does not ap-
j.car to have any material extension in space.
For it is all present in each separate part of
its body when it is all present in any sensa-
tion. There is not a smaller part in the fin-
ger, and a larger in the arm, as the bulk of
the finger is less than that of the arm; but
the quantity everywhere is the same, for the
whole is present everywhere. For when the
finger is touched, the whole mind feels, though
the sensation is not through the whole body.
No part of the mind is unconscious of the
touch, which proves the presence of the
whole. And yet it is not so present in the
finger or in the sensation as to abandon the
rest of the body, or to gather itself up into
the one place where the sensation occurs.
For when it is all present in the sensation in
a finger, if another part, say the foot, be
touched, it does not fail to be all present in
lis sensation too: so that at the same mo-
iient it is all present in different places, with-

out leaving one in order to be in the other,
and without having one part in one, and an-
other in the other; but by this power sliow-
ing itself to be all present at the same moment
in separate places. Since it is all present in
the sensations of these places, it proves that
it is not bound by the conditions of space.'

CHAP. 17. THE MEMORY CONTAINS THE IDEAS

OF PLACES OK THE GREATEST SIZE.

Again, if we consider the mind's power of
remembering not the objects of the intellect,
but material objects, such as we see brutes
also remembering (for cattle find their way
without mistake in familiar places, and ani-
mals return to their cribs, and dogfs recognize
the persons of their masters, and when asleep
they often growl, or break out into a bark,
which could not be unless their mind retained
the images of things before seen or perceived
by some bodily sense), who can conceive
rightly where these images are contained,
where they are kept, or where they are formed ?
If, indeed, these images were no larger than
the size of our body, it might be said that the
mind shapes and retains them in the bodily
space which contains itself. But while the
body occupies a small material space, the mind
revolves images of vast extent, of heaven and
earth, with no want of room, though they
come and go in crowds; so that clearly, the
mind is not diffused through space: for in-
stead of being contained in images of the
largest spaces, it rather contains them; not,
however, in any material receptacle, but by a
mysterious faculty or power, by which it can
increase or diminish them, can contract them
within narrow limits, or expand them indefi-
nitely, can arrange or disarrange them at
pleasure, can multiply them or reduce them
to a few or to one.

CHAP. 18. THE UNDERSTANDING JUDGES OF

THE TRUTH OF THINGS, AND OF ITS OWN-
ACTION.

What, then, must be said of the power of
perceiving truth, and of making a vigorous
resistance against these very images which
take their shape from impressions on the
bodily senses, when they are opposed to the
truth ? This power discerns the difference be-
tween, to take a particular example, the true
Carthage and its own imaginary one, which it
changes as it pleases with perfect ease. It

I fMncIern mental physiologists differ amonjr themselves as re-
gards the prcsrnce ot the mind throtighoiit the entire nervous sys-
tem; sonic maintaining the view here presented, and others making
the brain to be the seat of sensation, and the nerves telegraphic lines,
so to spiak, for the communication of impressions from the various
parts of the body to the brain. Compare CARrENTKK; Mental
Physiology, a.r\(X Caluerwood: Mind ami Brain. — A. H. N.j

I3S

THE WORICS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chai>. XXI.

shows that the countless worlds of Epicurus,
in which his fancy roamed without restraint,
are duo to the same power of imagination,
and, not to multiply examples, that we get
from the same source that land of light, with
its boundless extent, and the five dens of the
race of darkness, with their inmates, in which
the fancies of Manichseus have dared to usurp
for themselves the name of truth. What then
is this power wliich discerns these things?
Clearly, whatever its extent may be, it is
greater than all these things, and is conceived
of without any such material images. Find,
if you can, space for this power; give it a
material extension; provide it with a body of
huge size. Assuredly if you think well, you
cannot. For of everything of this corporeal
nature your mind forms an opinion as to its
divisibility, and you make of such things one
part greater and another less, as much as you
like; while that by which you form a judg-
ment of these things you perceive to be above
them, not in local loftiness of place, but in
dignity of power.

CHAP. 19. IF THE MIND HAS NO MATERIAL EX-
TENSION, MUCH LESS HAS GOD.

21. So then, if the mind, so liable to change,
whether from a multitude of dissimilar desires,
or from feelings varying according to the
abundance or the want of desirable things, or
from these endless sports of the fancy, or
from forgetfulness and remembrance, or from
learning and ignorance; if the mind, I say,
exposed to frequent change from these and
the like causes, is perceived to be without any
local or material extension, and to have a
vigor of action which surmounts these ma-
terial conditions, what must we think or con-
clude of God Himself, who remains superior
to all intelligent beings in His freedom from
perturbation and from change, giving to every
one what is due ? Him the mind dares to ex-
press more easily than. to see; and the clearer
the sight, the less is the power of expression.
And yet this God, if, as the Manichcean
fables are constantly asserting, He were
limited in extension in one direction and un-
limited in others, could be measured by so
many subdivisions or fractions of greater or
less size, as ever}' one might fancy; so that,
for example, a division of the extent of two
feet would be less by eight parts than one of
ten feet. For this is the property of all
natures which have extension in space, and
therefore cannot be all in one place. But
even with the mind this is not the case; and
this degrading and perverted idea of the mind
is found among people who are unfit for such
investigations.

CHAP. 20. REFUTATION OF THE ABSURD IDEA

OF TWO TERRITORIES.

22. But perhaps, instead of thus addressing
carnal minds, we should rather descend to the
views of those who either dare not or are as
yet unfit to turn frcm the consideration of
material things to the study of an immaterial
and spiritual nature, and who thus are unable
to reflect upon their own power of reflection,
so as to see how it forms a judgment of ma-
terial extension without itself possessing it.
Let us descend then to these material ideas,
and let us ask in what direction, and on what
border of the shining and sacred territory, to
use the expressions of Manichseus, was the re-
gion of darkness ? For he speaks of one direc-
tion and border, without saying which, whether
the right or the left. In any case, it is clear
that to speak of one side implies that there is
another. But where there are three or more
sides, either the figure is bounded in all direc-
tions,or if it extends infinitely in one direction,
still it must be limited in the directions where
it has sides. If,then, on one side of the region
of light there was the race of darkness, what
bounded it on the other side or sides ? The
Manich^eans say nothing in reply to this; but
when pressed, they say that on the other sides
the region of light, as they call it, is infinite,
that is, extends throughout boundless space.
They do not see, what is plain to the dullest
understanding, that in that case there could
be no sides ? For the sides are where it is
bounded. What, then, he says, though there
are no sides ? But what you said of one di-
rection or side, implied of necessity the exis-
tence of another direction and side, or other
directions and sides. For if there was only
one side, you should have said, on the
side, not on one side; as in reference to our
body we say properly. By one eye, because
there is another; or on one breast, because
there is another. But if we spoke of a thing
as being on one nose, or one navel, we should
be ridiculed by learned and unlearned, since
there is only one. But I do not insist on
words, for you may have used one in the
sense of the only one.

CHAP. 21. — THIS REGION OF LIGHT MUST BE
MATERIAL IF IT IS JOINED TO THE REGION
OF DARKNESS. THE SHAPE OF THE REGION
OF DARKNFSS JOINED TO THE REGION OF
LIGHT.

What, then, bordered on the side of tlie
region which you call shining and sacred ?
The region, you reply, of darkness. Do you
then allow this latter region to have been
material ? Of course you must, since you as-

Chap. XXIII.

AGAINST THE EPISTLE OF MANICH^US.

139

sert that all bodies derive their origin from it.
How then is it that, dull and carnal as j'ou
are, you do not see that unless both regions
were material, they could not have their sides
joined to one another? How could you ever
be so blinded in mind as to say that only the
region of darkness was material, and that
the so-called region of light was immaterial
and spiritual? My good friends, let us open
our eyes for once, and see, now that we are
told of it, what is most obvious, that two
regions cannot be joined at their sides unless
both are material.

23. Or if we are too dull and stupid to see
this, let us hear whether the region of dark-
ness too has one side, and is boundless in the
other directions, like the region of light.
They do not hold this from fear of making it
seem equal to God. Accordingly they make
it boundless in depth and in length; but up-
wards, above it, they maintain that there is
an infinity of empty space. And lest this re-
gion should appear to be a fraction equal in
amount to half of that representing the region
of light, they narrow it also on two sides. As
if, to give the simplest illustration, a piece of
bread were made into four squares, three
white and one black; then suppose the three
white pieces joined as one, and conceive
them as infinite upwards and downwards,
and backwards in all directions: this repre-
sents the Manichccan region of light. Then
conceive the black square infinite downwards
and backwards, but with infinite emptiness
above it: this is their region of darkness.
But these are secrets which they disclose to
very eager and anxious inquirers.

CH.AP. 22. THE FORM OF THE REGION OF LIGHT

THE WORSE OF THE TWO.

Well, then, if this is so, the region of dark-
ness is clearly touched on two sides by the
region of light. And if it is touched on two
sides, it must touch on two. So much for its
being on one side, as we were told before.

24. And what an unseemly appearance is
this of the region of light ! — like a cloven
arch, with a black wedge inserted below,
bounded only in the direction of the cleft,
and having a void space interposed where
the boundless emptiness stretches above the
region of darkness. Indeed, the form of the
region of darkness is better than that of the
region of light: for the former cleaves, the
latter is cloven; the former fills the gap which
is made in the latter; the former has no void
in it, while the latter is undefined in all direc-
tions, except that where it is filled up by the
wedge of darkness. In an ignorant and
greedy notion of giving more honor to a

number of parts than to a single one, so that
the region of light should have six, three
upwards and three downwards, they have
made this region be split up, instead of sun-
dering the other. For, according to this fig-
ure, though there may be no commixture of
darkness with light, there is certainl}'^ pene-
tration.

CHAP. 23. THE ANTHROPOMORPHITES NOT SO

BAD AS THE MANICH^ANS.

25. Compare, now, not spiritual men of the
Catholic faith, whose mind, as far as is pos-
sible in this life, perceives that the divine
substance and nature has no material exten-
sion, and has no shape bounded by lines, but
the carnal and weak of our faith, who, when
they hear the members of the body used fig-
uratively, as, when God's eyes or ears are
spoken of, are accustomed, in the license of
fancy, to picture God to themselves in a
human form; compare these with the Man-
ichasans, whose custom it is to make known
rheir silly stories to anxious inquirers as if
they were great m3^steries: and consider who
have the most allowable and respectable ideas
of God, — those who think of Him as having
a human form which is the most excellent of
its kind, or those who think of Him as hav-
ing boundless material extension, yet not in
all directions, but with three parts infinite and
solid, while in one part He is cloven, with an
empty void, and with undefined space above,
while the reeion of darkness is inserted
wedge-like below. Or perhaps the proper
expression is, that He is unconfined above
in His own nature, but encroached on below
by a hostile nature. I join with you in laugh-
ing at the folly of carnal men, unable as yet
to form spiritual conceptions, who think of
God as having a human form. Do you too
join me, if you can, in laughing at those
whose unhappy conceptions represent God as
having a shape cloven or cut in such an un-
seemly and unbecoming way, with such an
empty gap above, and such a dishonorable
curtailment below. Besides, there is this dif-
ference, that these carnal people, who think
of God as having a human form, if they are
content to be nourished witii milk from the
breast of the Catholic Church, and do not rush
headlong into rash opinions, but cultivate in
the Church the pious habit of inquiry, and
there ask that they may receive, and knock
that it may be opened to them, begin to
understand spiritually the figures and parables
of the Scriptures, and gradually to perceive
that the divine energies are suitably set forth
under the name, sometimes of ears, some-
times of eyes, sometimes of hands or feet, cr

r40

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XXV.

even of wings and feathers a shield too,
and sword, and helmet, and all the other in-
numerable things. And the more progress
they make in this understanding, the more
are they confirmed as Catholics. The Mani-
chajans, on the other hand, when they abandon
their material fancies,cease to be Manichaeans.
For this is the chief and special point in their
praises of Manichseus, that the divine mys-
teries which were taught figuratively in books
from ancient times were kept for Manichaius,
who was to come last, to solve and demon-
strate; and so after him no other teacher will
come from God, for he has said nothing in
figures or parables, but has explained ancient
sayings of that kind, and has himself taught in
plain, simple terms. Therefore, when tlie Man-
ichfeans hear these words of their founder,
on one side and border of the shining and
sacred region was the region of darkness, they
have no interpretations to fall back on.
Wherever they turn, the wretched bondage
of their own fancies brings them upon clefts
or sudden stoppages and joinings or sunder-
ings of the most unseemly kind, which it
would be shocking to believe as true of any
immaterial nature, even though mutable, like
the mind, not to speak of the immutable
nature of God. And yet if I were unable to
rise to higher things, and to bring my
thoughts from the entanglement of false im-
aginations which are impressed on the mem-
ory by the bodily senses, into the freedom
and purity of spiritual existence, how much
better would it be to think of God as in the
form of a man, than to fasten that wedge of
darkness to His lower edge, and, for want of
a covering for the boundless vacuity above to
leave it void and unoccupied throughout in-
finite space ! What notion could be worse
than this ? What darker error can be taught or
imagined ?

CHAP. 24.— OF THE NUMBER OF NATURES IN
THE MANICH^AN FICTION.

26. Again, I wish to know, when I read of
God the Father and His kingdoms foundfed
on the shining and happy region, whether the
Father and His kingdoms, and the region,
are all of the same nature and substance.
If they are, then it is not another nature or
sort of body of God which the wedge of the
race of darkness cleaves and penetrates, which
itself is an unspeakably revolting thing, but
it is actually the very nature of God which
undergoes this. Think of this, I beseech
you: as you are men, think of it, and flee
from it; and if by tearing open your breasts
you can cast out by the roots such profane
fancies from your faith, I pray you to do it.

Or will you say that these three are not of one
and the same nature, but that the Father is of
one, the kingdoms of another, and the region
of another, so that each has a peculiar nature
and substance, and that they are arranged
according to their degree of excellence?
If this is true, Manichseus should have taught
that there are four natures, not two; or if the
Father and the kingdoms have one nature,
and the region only one of its own, he should
have made three. Or if he made only two,
because the region of darkness does not be-
long to God, in what sense does the region of
light belong to God ? For if it has a nature
of its own, and if God neither generated nor
made it, it does not belong to Him, and the
seat of His kingdom is in what belongs to
another. Or if it belongs to Him because of
its vicinity, the region of darkness must do
so too ; for it not only borders on the region
of light, but penetrates it so as to sever it in
two. Again, if God generated it, it cannot
have a separate nature. For what is gen-
erated by God must be what God is, as the
Catholic Church believes of the only begotten
Son. So you are brought back of necessity
to that shocking and detestable profanity,
that the wedge of ciarkness sunders not a
region distinct and separate from God, but
the very nature of God. Or if God did not
generate, but make it, of what did He make
it ? Or if of Himself, what is this but to gen-
erate ? If of some other nature, was this
nature good or evil? If good, there must
have been some good nature not belonging
to God; which you will scarcely have the
boldness to assert. If evil, the race of dark-
ness cannot have been the only evil nature.
Or did God take a part of that region and
turn it into a region of light, in order to found
His kingdom upon it? If He had, He would
have taken the whole, and there would have
been no evil nature left. If God, then, did
not make the region of light of a substance
distinct from His own, He must have made
it of nothing.'

CHAP. 25. — OMNIPOTENCE CREATES COOP
THINGS DIFFERING IN DEGREE. IN EVERY
DESCRIPTION WHATSOEVER OF THE JUNCTION
OF THE TWO REGIONS THERE IS EITHER IM-
PROPRIETY OR ABSURDITY.

27. If, then, you are now convinced that
God is able to create some good thing out of
nothing, come into the Catholic Church, and
learn that all the natures which God has
created and founded in their order of excel-

I [There is sufficient reason to think that Mani identified God
with the kingdom and the region of light. See Introduction. —
A. H. N.]

Chap. XXVI. J

AGAINST THE EPISTLE OF MANICH^US.

141

lence from the highest to the lowest are good,
and some better than others; and that they
were made of nothing, though God, their
Maker, made use of His oivn wisdom as an in-
strument, so to speak, to give being to what
was not, and that as far as it had being it
might be good, and that the limitation of its
being might show that it was not begotten by-
God, but made out of nothing. If you ex-
amine the matter, you will find nothing to
keep you from agreeing to this. For you can-
not make your region of light to be wiiat God
is, without making the dark section an in-
fringement on the very nature of God. Nor can
you say that it was generated by God, with-
out being reduced to the same enormity, from
the necessity of concluding that as begotten
of God, it must be what God is. Nor can
you say that it was distinct from Him, lest
you should be forced to admit that God placed
His kingdom in what did not belong to Him,
and that there are three natures. Nor can you
say that God made it of a substance distinct
from His own, without making something
good besides God, or something evil besides
the race of darkness. It remains, therefore
that you must confess that God made the region
of light out of nothing: and you are unwilling
to believe this; because if God could make
out of nothing some great good which yet was
inferior to Himself, He could also, since He
is good, and grudges no good, make another
good inferior to the former, and again a third
inferior to the second, and so on, in order
down to the lowest good of created natures, so
that the whole aggregate, instead of extend-
ing indefinitely without number or measure,
should have a fixed and definite consistency.
Again, if you will not allow this either, that
God made the region of light out of nothing,
you will have no escape from the shocking
profanities to which your opinions lead.

28. Perhaps, since the carnal imagination
can fancy any shapes it likes, you might be
able to devise some other form for the junc-
tion of the two regions, instead of presenting
to the mind such a disagreeable and painful
description as this, that the region of God,
whether it be of the same nature as God or not,
[where at least God's kingdoms are founded,
lies through immensity in such a huge mass
[that its members stretch loosely to an infinite
[extent, and that on their lower part that wedge
of the region of darkness, itself of boundless
size encroaches upon them. But whatever other
form you contrive for the junction of these
two regions, you cannot erase what Manichceus
has written. I refer not to other treatises
where a more particular description is given, —
for perhaps, because they are in the hands

of only a few, there might not be so much dif-
ficulty with them, — but to this Fundamental
Epistle which we are now considering, with
which all of you who are called enlightened
are usually quite familiar. Here the words
are: " On one side the border of the shining
and sacred region was the region of darkness,
deep and boundless in extent."

CHAP. 26. THE MANICH.EANS ARE REDUCED

TO THE CHOICE OF A TORTUOUS, OR CURVED,
OR STRAIGHT LINE OF JUNCTION. THE THIRD
KIND OF LINE WOULD GIVE SYMMETRY AND
BEAUTY SUITABLE TO BOTH REGIONS.

What more is to be got ? we have now
heard what is on the border. Make what
shape you please, draw any kind of lines you
like, it is certain that the junction of this
boundless mass of the region of darkness to
the region of light must have been either by a
straight line, or a curved, or a tortuous one.
If the line of junction is tortuous the side of
the region of light must also be tortuous;
otherwise its straight side joined to a tortuous
one would leave gaps of infinite depth, instead
of having vacuity only above the land of dark-
ness, as we were told before. And if there
were such gaps, how much better it would
have been for the region of light to have been
still more distant, and to have had a greater
vacuity between, so that the region of darkness
might not touch it at all ! Then there might
have been such a gap of bottomless depth,
that, on the rise of any mischief in that race,
although the chiefs of darkness might have
the foolhardy wish to cross over, they would
fall headlong into the gap (for bodies cannot
fly without air to support them); and as there
is infinite space downwards, they could do no
more harm, though they might live for ever,
for they would be for ever falling. Again, if
the line of junction was a curved one, the re-
gion of light must also have had the disfigure-
ment of a curve to answer it. Or if the land
of darkness were curved inwards like a thea-
tre, there would be as much disfigurement in
the corresponding line in the region of light.
Or if the region of darkness had a curved line,
and the region of light a straight one, they
cannot have touched at all points. And cer-
tainly, as I said before, it would have been
better if they had not touched, and if there
was such a gap between that the regions might
be kept distinctly separate, and that rash evil-
doers might fall headlong so as to be harm-
less. If, then, the line of junction was a straight
one, there remain, of course, no more gaps
or grooves, but, on the contrary, so perfect a
junction as to make the greatest possible peace
and harmonv between the two regions. What

142

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XXVIII.

more beautiful or more suitable than that one
side should meet the other in a straight line,
without bends or breaks to disturb the natural
and permanent connection throughout endless
space and endless duration ? And even though
there was a separation, the straight sides of
both regions would be beautiful in themselves,
as being straight; and besides, even in spite
of an interval, their correspondence, as run-
ning parallel, though not meeting, would give
a symmetry to both. With the addition of the
junction, both regions become perfectly reg-
ular and harmonious; for nothing can be de-
vised more beautiful in description or in con-
ception than this junction of two straight lines.'

CHAP. 27. THE BEAUTY OF THE STRAIGHT

LINE MIGHT BE TAKEN FROM THE REGION OF
DARKNESS WITHOUT TAKING ANYTHING FRO;\I
ITS SUBSTANCE. SO EVIL NEITHER TAKES
FROM NOR ADDS TO THE SUBSTANCE OF THE
SOUL. THE STRAIGHTNESS OF ITS SIDE WOULD
BE SO FAR A GOOD BESTOWED ON THE REGION
OF DARKNESS BY GOD THE CREATOR.

29. What is to be done with unhappy
minds, perverse in error, and held fast by
custom? These men do not know what they
say when they say those things; for they do
not consider. Listen to me; no one forces
you, no one quarrels with )^ou, no one taunts
you with past errors, unless some one who
has not experienced the div ne mercy in de-
liverance from error: all we desire is that the
errors should some time or other be aban-
doned. Think a little without animosity or
bitterness. We are all human beings: let us
hate, not one another, but errors and lies.
Think a little, I pray you. God of mercy,
help them to think, and kindle in the minds
of inquirers the true light. If anything is
plain, is not this, that right is better than
wrong? Give me, then, a calm and quiet an-
swer to this, whether making crooked the
right line of the region of darkness which
joins on to the right line of the region of
light, would not detract from its beauty. If
you will not be dogged, you must confess
that not only is beauty taken from it by its
being made crooked, but also the beauty
which it might have had from connection with
the right line of the region of light. Is it the
case, then, that in this loss of beauty, in which
right is made crooked, and harmony becomes
discord, and agreement disagreement, there
is any loss of substance? Learn, then, from
this that substance is not evil; but as in the

I [This discussion of the lines bounding the Kingdom of Light
and the Kingdom of Darkness seems very much like trifling, biut
Augustin's aim was to bring the Manichaean representations into
ridicule. —A. H. N.]

body, by change of form for the worse, beauty
is lost, or rather lessened, and what was
called fair before is said to be ugly, and what
was pleasing becomes displeasing, so in the
mind the seemliness of a right will, which
makes a just and pious life, is injured when
the will changes for the worse; and by this
sin the mind becom.es miserable, instead of
enjoying as before the happiness which comes
from the ornament of a right will, without any
gain or loss of substance.

30. Consider, again, that though we admit
that the border of the region of darkness was
evil for other reasons, such as that it was dim
and dark, or any other reason, still it was not
evil in being straight. So, if I admit that
there was some evil in its color, you must admit
that there was some good in its straightness.
Whatever the amount of this good, it is not
allowable to attribute it to any other than
God the Maker, from whom we must believe
that all good in whatsoever nature comes, if
we are to escape deadly error. It is absurd,
then, to say that this region is perfect evil,
when in its straightness of border is found
the good of not a little beauty of a material
kind; and also to make this region to be al-
together estranged from the almighty and
good God, when this good which we find in it
can be attributed to no other but the author
of all good things. But this border, too, we
are told, was evil. Well, suppose it evil: it
would surely have been worse had it been
crooked instead of straight. And how can
that be the perfection of evil than which
something worse than itself can be thought of?
And to be worse implies that there is some
good, the want of which makes the thing
worse. Here the want of straightness would
make the line worse. Therefore its straight-
ness is something good. And you will never
answer the question whence this goodness
comes, without reference to Him from whom
we must acknowledge that all good things
come, whether small or great. But now we
shall pass on from considering this border to
something else.

CHAP. 28. — MANICH^US PLACES FIVE NATURKS
IN THE REGION OF DARKNESS.

31. "There dwelt," he says, " in that re-
gion fiery bodies, destructive races." By
speaking of dwelling, he must mean that those
bodies were animated and in life. But, not
to appear to cavil at a word, let us see how
he divides into five classes all these in-
habitants of this region. " Here," he says,
"was boundless darkness, flowing from the
same source in immeasurable abundance, with
the productions properly belonging to it.

Chap. XXX.]

AGAINST THE EPISTLE OF MANICH^US.

143

Beyond this were muddy turbid waters, with
their inhabitants; and inside of them winds
terrible and violent, with their prince and their
progenitors. Then, again, a fiery region of
destruction, with its chiefs and peoples. And,
similarly, inside of this a race full of smoke
and gloom, where abode the dreadful prince
and chief of all, having around him innu-
merable princes, himself the mind and source
of them all. Such are the five natures of the
pestiferous region," We find here five na-
tures mentioned as part of one nature, which
he calls the pestiferous region. The natures
are darkness, waters, winds, fire, smoke;
which he so arranges as to make darkness
first, beginning at the outside. Inside of
darkness he puts the waters; inside of the
waters, the winds; inside of the winds, the
fire; inside of the fire, the smoke. And each
of these natures had its peculiar kind of in-
habitants, which were likewise five in number.
For to the question, Whether there was only
one kind in all, or different kinds correspond-
ing to the different_ natures; the reply is, that
they were different: as in other books we find
it stated that the darkness had serpents; the
waters swimming creatures, such as fish; the
winds flying creatures, such as birds; the fire
quadrupeds, such as horses, lions, and the
like; the smoke bipeds, such as men.

CHAP. 29. THE REFUTATION OF THIS ABSURD-
ITY.

32. Whose arrangement, then, is this?
Who made the distinctions and the classifi-
cation ? Who gave the number, the qualities,
the forms, tne life ? For all these things are
in themselves sood, nor could each of the
natures have them except from the bestowal
of God, the author of all good things. For
this is not like the descriptions or suppositions
of poets about an imaginary chaos, as being
a shapeless mass, without form, without qual-
ity, without measurement, without weight and
number, without order and variety; a con-
fused something, absolutely destitute of qual-
ities, so that some Greek writers call it
a-o'.io. So far from being like this is the
Manichsean description of the region of
darkness, as they call it, that, in a direct-
ly contrary style, they add side to side,
and join border to border; they number
five natures; they separate, arrange, and as-
sign to each its own qualities. Nor do they
leave the natures barren or waste, but people
them with their proper inhabitants; and to
these, again, they give suitable forms, and
adapted to their place of habitation, besides
giving the chief of all endowments, life. To

recount such

good

things

as these, and to

speak of them as having no connection with
God, the author of all good things, is to lose
sight of the excellence of the order in the
things, and of the great evil of the error which
leads to such a conclusion.

CHAP. 30. THE NUMBER OF GOOD THINGS IN

THOSE NATURES WHICH MANICH^US PLACES
IN THE REGION OF DARKNESS.

^;^. "But," is the reply, "the orders of
beings inhabiting those five natures were
fierce and destructive." As if I were prais-
ing their fierceness and destructiveness. I,
you see, join with you in condemning the
evils you attribute to them; join you with
me in praising the good things which you
ascribe to them: so it will appear that
there is a mixture of good and evil in what
you call the last extremity of evil. If I
join you in condemning what is mischievous
in this region, you must join with me in prais-
ing what is beneficial. For these beings
could not have been produced, or nourished,
or have continued to inhabit that region, with-
out some salutary influence. I join with you
in condemning the darkness; join with me in
praising the productiveness. For while you
call the darkness immeasurable, you speak of
" suitable productions.'' Darkness, indeed,
is not a real substance, and means no more
than the absence of light, as nakedness means
the want of clothing, and emptiness the want
of material contents: so that darkness could
produce nothing, although a region in dark-
ness— that is, in the absence of light — might
produce something. But passing over this
for the present, it is certain that where pro-
ductions arise there must be a beneficent
adaptation of substances, as well as a sym-
metrical arrangement and construction in
unity of the members of the beings produced,
— a wise adjustment making them agree with
one another. And who will deny that all
these things are more to be praised than
darkness is to be condemned ? If I join with
you in condemning the muddiness of the
waters, you must join with me in praising the
waters as far as they possessed the form and
quality of water, and also the agreement of
the members of the inhabitants swimming in
the waters, their life sustaining and directing
their body, and every particular adaptation of
substances for the benefit of health. For
though you find fault with the waters as tur-
bid and muddy, still, in allowing them the
quality of producing and maintaining their
living inhabitants, you imply that there was
some kind of bodily form, and similarity of
parts, giving unity and congruity of character;
otherwise there could be no body at all: and,

144

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XXXII.

as a rational being, you must see that all these
things are to be praised. And however great
you make the ferocity of these inhabitants,
and their massacrings and devastations in
their assaults, you still leave them the regular
limits of form, by which the members of each
body are made to agree together, and their
beneficial adaptations, and the regulating
power of the living principle binding together
the parts of the body in a friendly and har-
monious union. And if all these are regarded
with common sense it will be seen that they
are more to be commended than the faults are
to be condemned. I join with you in con-
demning the frightfulness of the winds; join
with me in praising their nature, as giving
breath and nourishment, and their material
form in its continuousness and diffusion by
the connection of its parts: for by these
things these winds had the power of produc-
ing and nourishing, and sustaining in vigor
these inhabitants you speak of; and also in
these inhabitants — besides the other things
which have already been commended in all
animated creatures — this particular power of
going quickly and easily whence and whither
they please, and the harmonious stroke of
their wings in flight, and their regular motion.
I join with you in condemning the destructive-
ness of fire; join with me in commending the
productiveness of this fire, and the growth of
these productions, and the adaptation of the
fire to the beings produced, so that the}'^ had
coherence, and came to perfection in measure
and shape, and could live and have their
abode there: for you see that all these things
deserve admiration and praise, not only in
the fire which is thus habitable, but in the in-
habitants too. I join with you in condemn-
ing the denseness of smoke, and the savage
character of the prince who, as you say, abode
in it; join with me in praising the similarity
of all the parts in this very smoke, by which it
preserves the harmony and proportion of its
parts among themselves, according to its own
nature, and has an unity which makes it what
it is: for no one can calmly reflect on these
things without wonder and praise. Besides,
even to the smoke you give the power and
energy of production, for you say that princes
inhabited it; so that in that region the smoke
is productive, which never happens here,
and, moreover, affords a wholesome dwelling
place to its inhabitants.

CHAP. 31. — THE SAME SUBJECT CONTINUED.

34. And even in the prince of smoke him-
self, instead of mentioning only his ferocity
as a bad quality, ought you not to have taken
notice of the other things in his nature which

you must allow to be com.mendable ? For he
had a soul and a body; the soul life-giving,
and the body endowed with life. Since the
soul governed and the body obeyed, the soul
took the lead and the body followed; the soul
gave consistency, the body was not dissolved;
the soul gave harmonious motion, and the
body was constructed of a well-proportioned
framework of members. In this single prince
are you not induced to express approval of
the orderly peace or the peaceful order ?
And what applies to one applies to all the
rest. You say he was fierce and cruel to
others. This is not what I commend, but
the other important things which you will not
take notice of. Those things, when perceived
and considered, — after advice by any one who
has without consideration put faith in Mani-
chaeus, — lead him to a clear conviction that,
in speaking of those natures, he speaks of
things good in a sense, not perfect and un-
created, like God the one Trinity, nor of the
higher rank of created things, like the holy
angels and the ever-blessed powers; but of
the lowest class, and ranked according to the
small measure of their endowments. These
things are thought to be blameworthy by the
uninstructed when they compare them with
higher things; and in view of their want of
some good, the good they have gets the name
of evil, because it is defective. My reason'
also for thus discussing the natures enu-
merated by Manichaeus is that the things
named are things familiar to us in this world.
We are familiar with darkness, waters, winds,
fire, smoke; we are familiar, too, with ani-
mals, creeping, swimming, fl3'ing; with quad-
rupeds and biped. With the exception of
darkness (which, as 1 have said already, is
nothing but the absence of light, and the per-
ception of it is only the absence of sight, as
the perception of silence is the absence of
hearing; not that darkness is anything, but
that light is not, as neither that silence is
anything, but that sound is not), all the other
things are natural qualities and are familiar
to all; and the form of those natures, which
is commendable and good as far as it exists,
no wise man attributes to any other author
than God, the author of all good things.'

CHAP. 32. — MANICH.EUS GOT THE ARRANGE- ,
MENT OF HIS FANCIFUL NOTIONS FROM VISI- j
BLE OBJECTS. i

35. For in giving to these natures which.]
he has learned from visible things, an arrange-'

■ [This portion of the argument is conducted with great adroit-
ness. Augustin takes the inhabitants of the region of darkness, :
as Mani describes them, and proves that they possess so much of'
good that they can have no other author than God. — A. H. N.J

Chap. XXXIII.]

AGAINST THE EPISTLE OF MANICH.^IUS.

ment according to his fanciful ideas, to repre-
sent the race of darkness, Manichseus is
clearly in error. First of all, he makes dark-
ness productive, which is impossible. But,
he replies, this darkness was unlike what you
are familiar with. How, then, can you make
me understand about it? After so many
promises to give knowledge, will you force
me to take your word for it ? Suppose I be-
lieve you, this at least is certain, that if the
darkness had no form, as darkness usually
has not, it could produce nothing; if it had
form, it was better than ordinary darkness:
whereas, when you call it different from the
ordinary kind, you wish us to believe that it
is worse. You might as well say that silence,
which is the same to the ear as darkness to
the eyes, produced some deaf or dumb ani-
mals in that region; and then, in reply to the
ol)jection that silence is not a nature, you
might say that it was different silence from
ordinary silence; in a word, you might say
what you pleased to those whom you have
once misled into believing you. No doubt,
the obvious facts relating to the origin of
animal life led Manichseus to say that ser-
pents were produced in darkness. However,
there are serpents which have such sharp
sight, and such pleasure in light, that they
seem to give evidence of the most weighty
kind against this idea. Then the idea of
swimming things in the water might easily be
got here, and applied to the fanciful objects
in that region; and so of flying things in the
winds, for the motion of the lower air in this
world, where birds fly, is called wind. Where
he got the idea of the quadrupeds in fire, no
one can tell. Still he said this deliberately,
though without sufficient thought, and from
great misconception. The reason usually j
given is, that quadrupeds are voracious and j
salacious. But many men surpass any
quadruped in voracity, though they are bi-
peds, and are called children of the smoke,
and not of fire. Geese, too, are as voracious
as any animal; and though he might place
them in fire as bipeds, or in the water because
they love to swim, or in the winds because
they have wings and sometimes fly, they cer-
tainly have nothing to do with fire in this
classification. As regards salaciousness, I
suppose he was thinking of neighing horses,
which sometimes bite through the bridle and
rush at the mares; and writing hastilv, with
this in his mind, he forgot the common spar-
row, in comparison of which the hottest stallion
is cold. The reason they give for assigning
hipeds to the smoke is, that bipeds are con-
ceited and proud, for men are derived from
this class; and the idea, which is a plausible

one, is that smoke resembles proud people in
rising up into the air, round and swelling.
This idea might warrant a figurative descrip-
tion of proud men, or an allegorical expression
or explanation, but not the belief that bipeds
are born in smoke and of smoke. They
might with equal reason be said to be born in
dust, for it often rises up to the heaven with
a similar circling and lofty motion; or in the
clouds, for they are often drawn up from the
earth in such a way, that those looking from
a distance are uncertain whether they are
clouds or smoke. Once more, why, in the
case of the waters and the winds, does he
suit the inhabitants to the character of the
place, as we see swimming things in water,
and flying things in the wind; whereas, in the
face of fire and smoke, this bold liar is not
ashamed to assign to these places the most
unlikely inhabitants ? For fire burns quadru-
peds, and consumes them, and smoke sufi^o-
cates and kills bipeds. At least he must ac-
knowledge that he has made these natures
better in the race of darkness than they are
here, though he wishes us to think everything
to be worse. For, according to this, the fire
there produced and nourished quadrupeds,
and gave them a lodging not only harmless,
but most convenient. The smoke, too, pro-
vided room for the offspring of its own benign
bosom, and cherished them up to the rank of
prince. Thus we see that these lies, which
have added to the number of heretics, arose
from the perception by carnal sense, only
without care or discernment, of visible objects
in this world, and when thus conceived, were
brought forth by fancy, and then presumptu-
ously written and published.

CHAP. T,;^. EVERY NATURE, AS NATURE, IS

GOOD.

36. But the consideration we wish most to
urge is the truth of the Catholic doctrine, if
they can understand it, that God is the autlior
of all natures. I urged this before when I
said, I join with you in your condemnation
of destructiveness, of blindness, of dense
muddiness, of terrific violence, of perishable-
ness. of the ferocity of the princes, and so
on; join with me in commending form,
classification, arrangement, harmony, unity
of structure, symmetry and correspondence
of members, provision for vital breath and
nourishment, wholesome adaptation, regula-
tion and control by the mind, and the subjec-
tion of the bodies, and the assimilation and
agreement of parts in the natures, both those
inhabiting and those inhabited, and all the
other things of the same kind. From this, if
they would only think honestly, they would

146

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XXXIV

understand that it implies a mixture of good
and evil, even in the region where they sup-
pose evil to be alone and in perfection: so
that if the evils mentioned were taken away,
the good things will remain, without anything
to detract from the commendation given to
them; whereas, if the good things are taken
away, no nature is left. From this every one
sees, who can see, that every nature, as far
as it is nature, is good; since in one and the
same thing in which I found something to
praise, and he found something to blame, if
the good things are taken away, no nature will
remain; but if the disagreeable things are
taken away, the nature will remain unim-
paired. Take from waters their thickness and
muddiness, and pure clear water remains;
take from them the consistence of their parts,
and no water will be left. If then, after the
evil is removed, the nature remains in a purer
state, and does not remain at all when the
good is taken away, it must be the good which
makes the nature of the thing in which it is,
while the evil is not nature, but contrary to
nature. Take from the winds their terrible-
ness and excessive force, with which you find
fault, you can conceive of winds as gentle and
mild; take from them the similarity of their
parts which gives them continuity of sub-
stance, and the unity essential to material
existence, and no nature remains to be con-
ceived of. It would be tedious to go through
all the cases; but all who consider the sub-
ject free from party spirit must see that in
their list of natures the disagreeable things
mentioned are additions to the nature; and
when they are removed, the natures remain
better than before. This shows that the
natures, as far as they are natures, are good;
for when you take from them the good in-
stead of the evil, no natures remain. And
attend, you who wish to arrive at a correct
judgment, to what is said of the fierce prince
himself. If you take away his ferocity, see
how many excellent things will remain; his
material frame, the symmetry of the members
on one side with those on the other, the unity
of his form, the settled continuity of his
parts, the orderly adjustment of the mind as
ruling and animating, and the body as subject
and animated. The removal of these things,
and of others I may have omitted to mention,
will leave no nature remaining.

CHAP. 34. NATURE CANNOT BE WITHOUT SOME

GOOD. THE MANICH^ANS DWELL UPON THE
EVILS.

37. But perhaps you will say that these
evils cannot be removed from the natures, and
must therefore be considered natural. The

question at present is not what can be taken
away, and what cannot; but it certainly helps
to a clear perception that these natures, as far
as they' are natures, are good, when we see
that the good things can be thought of with-
out these evil things, while without these good
things no nature can be conceived of. I can
conceive of waters without muddy commo-
tion; but without settled continuity of parts
no material form is an object of thought or
of sensation in any way. Therefore even
these muddy waters could not exist without
the good which was the 'condition of their
material existence. As to the reply that these
evil things cannot be taken from such natures,
I rejoin that neither can the good things be
taken away. Why, then, should you call these
things natural evils, on account of the evil
things which you suppose cannot be taken
away, and yet refuse to call them natural
good things, on account of the good things
which, as has been, proved, cannot be taken
away ?

38. You may next ask, as you usually do
for a last resource, whence come these evils
which I have said that I too disapprove of.
I shall perhaps tell you, if you first tell me
whence are those good things which you too
are obliged to commend, if you would not be
altogether unreasonable. But why should I
ask this, when we both acknowledge that all !|
good things whatever, and how great soever,
are from the one God, who is supremely good ?
You must therefore yourselves oppose Mani-
chaeus who has placed all these important
good things which we have mentioned and
justly commended, — the continuity and agree-
ment of parts in each nature, the health and
vigor of the animated creatures, and the other
things which it would be wearisome to repeat,
— (in an imaginary region of darkness, so as
to separate them altogether from that God
whom he allows to be the author of all good
things.) He lost sight of those good things,
while taking notice only of what was dis-
agreeable; as if one, frightened by a lion's
roaring, and seeing him dragging away and
tearing the bodies of cattle or human beings
which he had seized, should from childish
pusillanimity be so overpowered with fear as
to see nothing but the cruelty and ferocity of
the lion; and overlooking or disregarding all
the other qualities, should exclaim against
the nature of this animal as not only evil, but
a great evil, his fear adding to his vehemence.
But were he to see a tame lion, with its fero- ■
city subdued, especially if he had never been
frightened by a lion, he would have leisure,
in the absence of danger and terror, to observe
and admire the beauty of the animal. My

Chap. XXXVI.]

AGAINST THE EPISTLE OF MANICH^US.

147

only remark on this is one closely connected
-with our subject: that any nature may be in
some case disagreeable, so as to excite hatred
towards the whole nature; though it is clear
that the form of a real living beast, even
when it excites terror in the woods, is far
better than that of the artificial imitation
which is commended in a painting on the
wall. We must not then be misled into this
error by Manich?eus, or be hindered from
observing the forms of the natures, by his
finding fault with some things in them in such
a way as to make us disapprove of them
entirely, when it is impossible to show that
they deserve entire disapproval. And when
our minds are thus composed and prepared
to form a just judgment, we may ask whence
come those evils which I have said that I
condemn. It will be easier to see this if we
class them all under one name.

CHAP. 35. EVIL ALONE IS CORRUPTION. COR-
RUPTION IS NOT NATURE, BUT CONTRARY TO
NATURE. CORRUPTION iKlPLIES PREVIOUS
GOOD.

39. For who can doubt that the whole of
that which is called evil is nothing else than
corruption? Different evils may, indeed, be
called by different names; but that which is
the evil of all things in which any evil is per-
ceptible is corruption. So the corruption of
an educated mind is ignorance; the corruption
of a prudent mind is imprudence; the corrup-
tion of a just mind, injustice; the corruption
of a brave mind, cowardice; the corruption of
a calm, peaceful mind, cupidity, fear, sorrow,
pride. Again, in a living body, the corrup-
tion of health is pain and disease; the corrup-
tion of strength is exhaustion; the corruption
of rest is toil. Again, in any corporeal thing,
the corruption of beauty is ugliness; the cor-
ruption of straightness is crookedness; the
corruption of order is confusion; the corrup-
tion of entireness is disseverance, or fracture,
or diminution. It would be long and lal^ori-
ions to mention by name all the corruptions
f'f the things here mentioned, and of count-
less other things; for in many cases the words
may apply to the mind as well as to the body,
and in innumerable cases the corruption has
ia distinct name of its own. But enough has

)een said to show that corruption does harm
|")nly as displacing the natural condition; and
n, that corruption is not nature, but against
Kiture. And if corruption is the only evil to
^»e found anywhere, and if corruption is not
nature, no nature is evil.

40. But if, perchance, you cannot follow
jhis, consider again, that whatever is cor-
Kipted is deprived of some good: for if it

were not corrupted, it would be incorrupt; or
if it could not in any way be corrupted, it
would be incorruptible. Now, if corruption
is an evil, both incorruption and incorrupti-
bility must be good things. We are not,
however, speaking at present of incorruptible
nature, but of things which admit of corrup-
tion, and which, while not corrupted, may be
called incorrupt, but not incorruptible. That
alone can be called incorruptible which not
only is not corrupted, but also cannot in any
part be corrupted. Whatever things, then,
being incorrupt, but liable to corruption, begin
to be corrupted, are deprived of the good
which they had as incorrupt. Nor is this a
slight good, for corruption is a great evil.
And the continued increase of corruption im-
plies the continued presence of good, of which
they may be deprived. Accordingly, the
natures supposed to exist in the region of
darkness must have been either corruptible
or incorruptible. If they were incorruptible,
they were in possession of a good than which
nothing is higher. If they were Corruptible,
they were either corrupted or not corrupted.
If they were not corrupted, they were incor-
rupt, to say which of anything is to give it
great praise. If they were corrupted, they
were deprived of this great good of incorrup-
tion; but the deprivation implies the previous
possession of the good they are deprived of;
and if they possessed this good, they were
not the perfection of evil, and consequently
all the Manichaean story is a falsehood.

CHAP. 36. THE SOURCE OF EVIL OR OF COR-
RUPTION OF GOOD.

41. After thus inquiring what evil is, and
learning that it is not nature, but against na-
ture, we must next inquire whence it is. If
Manichceus had done this, he might have
escaped falling into the snare of these serious
errors. Out of time and out of order, he
began with inquiring into the origin of evil,
without first asking what evil was; and so his
inquiry led him only to the reception of fool-
ish fancies, of which the mind, much fed by
the bodily senses, with difficulty rids itself.
Perhaps, then, some one, desiring no longer
argument, but delivery from error, will ask.
Whence is this corruption which we find to be
the common evil of good things which are not
incorruptible? Such an inquirer will soon
find the answer if he seeks for truth with
great earnestness, and knocks reverently with
sustained assiduity. For while man can use
words as a kind of sign for the expression of
his thoughts, teaching is the work of the m-
corruptible 'i'ruth itself, who is the one true,
the one internal I'eacher. He became ex-

148

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[CirAP. XXXVIII.

ternal also, that He might recall us from the
external to the internal; and taking on Him-
self the form of a servant, that He might
bring down His height to the knowledge of
those rising up to Him, He condescended to
appear in lowliness to the low. In His name
let us ask, and through Him let us seek mercy
of the Father while making this inquiry. For
to answer in a word the question, Whence is
corruption ? it is hence, because these natures
that are capable of corruption were not be-
gotten by God, but made by Him out of
nothing; and as we already proved that those
natures are good, no one can say with pro-
priety that they were not good as made by
God. If it is said that God made them per-
fectly good, it must be refnembered that the
only perfect good is God Himself, the maker
of those good things.

CHAP. 37. — GOD ALONE PERFECTLY GOOD.

42. Whac harm, you ask, would follow if
those things too were perfectly good ? Still,
should any one, who admits and believes the
perfect goodness of God the Father, inquire
what source we should reverently assign to
any other perfectly good thing, supposing it to
exist, our only correct reply would be, that it
is of God the Father, who is perfectly good.
And we must bear in mind that what is of
Him is born of Him, and not made by Him
out of nothing, and that it is therefore per-
fectly, that is, incorruptibly, good like God
Himself. So we see that it is unreasonable
to require that things made out of nothing
should be as perfectly good as He who was
begotten of God Himself, and who is one as
God is one, otherwise God would have be-
gotten something unlike Himself. Hence it
shows ignorance and impiety to seek for
brethren for this only-begotten Son through
whom all good things were made by the
Father out of nothing, except in this, that He
condescended to appear as man. Accord-
ingly in Scripture He is called both only-
begotten and first-begotten; only-begotten of
the Father, and first-begotten from the dead.
"And we beheld," says John, "His glory,
the glory as of the only-begotten of the Father,
full of grace and truth." ' And Paul says,
" that He might be the first-born among many
brethren."^

43. But should we say, These things made
out of nothing are not good things, but only
God's nature is good, we shall be unjust to
good things of great value. And there is im-
piety in calling it a defect in anything not to
be what God is, and in denying a thing to be

^ John i. 14.

2 Rom. viii. 29.

good because it is inferior to God, Pray
submit then, thou nature of the rational soul,
to be somewhat less than God, but only so
far less, that after Him nothing else is above
thee. Submit, I say, and yield to Him, lest
He drive thee still lower into depths where
the punishment inflicted will continually de-
tract more and more from the good which
thou hast. Thou exaltest thyself against
God, if thou art indignant at His preceding
thee; and thou art very contumacious in thy
thoughts of Him, if thou dost not rejoice un-
speakably in the possession of this good, that
He alone is above thee. This bemg settled
as certain, thou art not to say, God should
have made me the only nature: there should
be no good thing after me. It could not be
that the next good thing to God should be the
last. And in this is seen most clearly how
great dignity God conferred on thee, that He
who in the order of nature alone rules over
thee, made other good things for thee to rule
over. Nor be surprised that they are not
now in all respects subject to thee, and that
sometimes they pain thee; for thy Lord has
greater authority over the things subject to
thee than thou hast, as a master over the ser-
vants of his servants. What wonder, then,
if, when thou sinnest, that is, disobeyest thy
Lord, the things thou before ruledst over are
made instrumental in thy punishment ? For
what is so just, or what is more just than
God ? For this befell human nature in
Adam, of whom this is not the place to
speak. Suffice it to say, the righteous Ruler
acts in character both in just rewards and
in just punishments, in the happiness of
those who live rightly, and in the penalty in-
flicted on sinners. Nor yet art thou ^ left
without mercy, since by an appointed dis-
tribution of things and times thou art called
to return. Thus the righteous control of the
supreme Creator extends even to earthly good
things, which are corrupted and restored, that
thou mightest have consolations mingled with
punishments; that thou mightest botli praise
God when delighted by the order of good
things, and mightest take refuge in Him
when tried b)^ experience of evils. So, as far
as earthly things are subject to thee, they
teach thee that thou art their ruler; as far as
they distress thee, they teach thee to be sub-
ject to thy Lord.

CHAP, 38. NATURE MADE BY GOD ; CORRUP-
TION COMES FROM NOTHING.

44. In this way, though corruption is an

3 [Augustin still addresses himself to the " nature of the ra-
tional soul."— A. H. N.]

Chap. XL.]

AGAINST THE EPISTLE OF MANICH^US.

149

evil, and though it comes not from the Author
of natures, but from their being made out of
nothing, still, in God's government and con-
trol over all that He has made, even corrup-
tion is so ordered that it hurts only the lowest
natures, for the punishment of the condemned,
and for the trial and instruction of the re-
turning, that they may keep near to the in-
corruptible God, and remain incorrupt, which
is our only good; as is said by the prophet,
"But it is good for me that I keep near to
God." ' And you must not say, God did not
make corruptible natures: for, as far as they
are natures, God made them; but as far as
they are corruptible, God did not make them:
for corruption cannot come from Him who
alone is incorruptible. If you can receive
this, give thanks to God; if you cannot, be
quiet and do not condemn what you do not
yet understand, but humbly wait on Him who
j is the light of the mind that thou mayest
I know. For in the expression "corruptible
I nature'' there are two words, and not one
; only. So, in the expression, God made out
I of nothing, "God" and "nothing" are two
separate words. Render therefore to each of
these words that which belongs to each, so
that the word " nature " may go with the word
"God, "and the word "corruptible" with the
word " nothing." And yet even the corrup-
tions, though they have not their origin from
God, are to be overruled by Him in accord-
ance with the order of inanimate things and
the deserts of His intelligent creatures. Thus
we say rightly that reward and punishment are
both from God. For God's not making cor-
ruption is consistent with His giving over to
corruption the man who deserves to be cor-
rupted, that is, who has begun to corrupt
himself by sinning, that he who has wilfully
yielded to the allurements of corruption may,
against his will, suffer its pains.

CHAP. 39. — IN WHAT SENSE EVILS ARE FROM

GOD.

45. Not only is it written in the Old Testa-
ment, 'T make gnod, and create evil; "- but
more clearly in the New 'i'csuiment, where
the Lord says, " Fear not them which kill the
body, and have no more that they can do;
but fear him who, after he has killed the
body, has power to cast the soul into hell." ^
1 And that to voluntary corruption penal cor-
ruption is added in the divine judgment, is
I plainly declared by the Apostle Paul, when he
I says, "The temple of God is holy, which
1 temple ye are; whoever corrupts tlie temple
! of God, him will God corrupt." "* If this had

I Ps. Ixxiii. 28.

3 Matt. X. 23, and Luke xii. 4.

» Ps xlv. 7.
4 I Cor. ill. 17.

been said in the Old Law, how vehemently
would the Manicha^ans have denounced it as
making God a corrupter ! And from fear of
the word, many Latin translators make it,
" him shall God destroy," instead of corrupt,
avoiding the offensive word without any
change of meaning. Although these would
inveigh against any passage in the Old Law
or the prophets if God was called in it a de-
stroyer. But the Greek original here shows
that corrupt is the true word; for it is written
distinctly, " Whoever corrupts the temple of
God, him will God corrupt." If the Mani-
chaeans are asked to explain the words, they
will say, to escape making God a corrupter,
that corrupt here means to give over to cor-
ruption, or some such explanation. Did they
read the Old Law in this spirit, they would
both find many admirable things in it; and
instead of spitefully attacking passages which
they did not understand, they would rever-
ently postpone the inquiry.

CHAP. 40. — CORRUPTION TENDS TO NON-EXIST-
ENCE.

46. But if any one does not believe that
corruption comes from nothing, let him place
before himself existence and non-existence —
one, as it were, on one side, and the other on
the other (to speak so as not to outstrip the
slow to understand); then let him set some-
thing, say the body of an animal, between
them, and let him ask himself whether, while
the body is being formed and produced,
while its size is increasing, while it gains
nourishment, health, strength, beauty, stabil-
ity, it is tending, as regards its duration and
permanence, to this side or that, to existence
or non-existence. He will see without diffi-
culty, that even in the rudimentary form
there is an existence, and that the more the
body is established and built up. in form, and
figure and strength, the more does it come to
exist, and to tend to the side of existence.
Then, again, let the body begin to be cor-
rupted; let its whole condition be enfeebled,
let its vigor languish, its strength decay, its
beauty be defaced, its framework be sundered,
the consistency of its parts give way and go
to pieces; and let him ask now where the
body is tending in this corruption, whether to
existence or non-existence: he will not surely
be so blind or stupid as to doubt how to an-
swer himself, or as not to see that, in propor-
tion as anything is corrupted, in that pro-
portion it approaches decease. But whatever
tends to decease tends to non-existence.
Since, then, we must believe that God exists
immutably and incorruptibly, while what is
called nothing is clearly altogether non-

150

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XLIII.

existent; and since, after setting before
yourself existence and non-existence, you
have observed that the more a visible ob-
ject increases the more it tends towards
existence, while the more it is corrupted
the more it tends towards non-existence,
why are you at a loss to tell regarding any
nature what in it is from God, and what
from nothino;; seeing that visible form is
natural, and corruption against nature? The
increase of form leads to existence, and we
acknowledge God as supreme existence; the
increase of corruption leads to non-exist-
ence, and we know that what is non-existent
is nothing. Why then, I say, are you at a
loss to tell regarding a corruptible nature,
when you have both the words fiaturc and
corruptible, what is from God, and what from
nothing? And why do you inquire for a
nature contrary to God, since, if you confess
that He is the supreme existence, it follows
that non-existence is contrary to Him ? '

CHAP. 41. — CORRUPTION IS BY GOD^S PERMIS-
SION, AND COMES FROM US.

47. You ask, Why does corruption take
from nature what God has given to it? It
takes nothing but where God permits; and
He permits in righteous and well-ordered
judgment, according to the degrees of non-
intelligent and the deserts of intelligent crea-
tures. The word uttered passes away as an
object of sense, and perishes in silence; and
yet the coming and 'going of these passing
words make our speech, and the regular in-
tervals of silence give pleasing and appro-
priate distinction; and so it is with temporal
natures which have this lowest form of beauty,
that transition gives them being, and the
death of what they give birth to gives them
individuality. And if our sense and memory
could rightly take in the order and propor-
tions of this beauty, it would so please us,
that we should not dare to give the name of
corruptions to those imperfections which give
rise to the distinction. And when distress
comes to us through their peculiar beauty, by
the loss of beloved temporal things passing
away, we both pay the penalty of our sins,
and are exhorted to set our affection on eter-
nal things.

CHAP. 42. — EXHORTATION TO THE CHIEF GOOD.

48. Let us, then, not seek in this beauty

I [We have already encountered in the treatise Concerningtwo
.S'(;7//j, substantially the same course of argumentation here" pur-
sued. The doctrine of the negativity of evil may be said to have
been funHamenta! with Augustin, and he uses it very effectually
against Manichaean dualism. — A. H. N.]

for what has not been given to it (and from
not having what we seek for, this is the lowest
form of beauty); and in that which has been
given to it, let us praise God, because He has
bestowed this great good of visible form even
on the lowest degree of beauty. And let, us
not cleave as lovers to this beauty, but as
praisers of God let us rise above it; and from
this superior position let us pronounce judg-
ment on it, instead of so being bound up in
it as to be judged along with it. And let us
hasten on to that good which has no motion
in space or advancement in time, from which
all natures in space and time receive their
sensible being and their form. To see this
good let us purify our heart by faith in our
Lord Jesus Christ, who says, " Blessed are
the pure in heart, for they shall see God."=^
For the eyes needed in order to see this good
are not those with which we see the light
spread through space, which has part in one
place and part in another, instead of being
all in every place. The sight and tfie dis-
cernment we are to purify is that by which we
see, as far as is allowed in this life, what is-
just, what is pious, what is the beauty of wis-
dom. He who sees these things, values them far
above the fullness of all regions in space, and
finds that the vision of tiiese things requires
not the extension of his perception through
distances in space, but its invigoration by an
immaterial influence. ^

CHAP. 43. — CONCLUSION,

49. And as this vision is greatly hindered
by those fancies which are originated by the
carnal sense, and are retained and modified
by the imagination, let us abhor this heresy
which has been led by faith in its fancies to
represent the divine substance as extended
and diffused through space, even through in-
finite space, and to cut short one side so as
to make room for evil, — not being able to
perceive that evil is not nature, but against
nature; and to beautify this very evil with
such visible appearance, and forms, and con-
sistency of parts prevailing in its several
natures, not being able to conceive of any
nature without those good things, that the
evils found fault with in it are buried under a
countless abundance of good things.

Here let us close this part of the treatise.
The other absurdities of Manichaeus will be
exposed in what follows, by the permission
and help of God.-*

2 iSIatt. v. 8.

3 [The Neo-Flatonic quality of this section cannot escape the
attention of the philosophical student.— A. H. N.]

4 / ide Preface.

ST. AUGUSTIN:

REPLY TO

• FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN

[CONTRA FAUSTUM MANICHyEUM].

A.D. 400.

TRANSLATED BY

REV. RICHARD STOTHBRT, M.A.,

BOMBAY.

CONTENTS OF REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.€AN.

BOOK I.

\Vho Faustus was. Faustus polemical treatise, and Augustin's -emarks thereon 155

liOOK II.
Faustus claims to believe the gospel, yei refuses to accept the genealogies. Augustin demurs. . . 150

BOOK III.
Faustus objects to the incarnation of God on the ground that the evangelists are at variance with each

other, and that incarnation is unsuitable to Deity. Augustin attempts to remove the difficulties. 159

BOOK IV.

Faustus's reasons for rejecting the O. T., and Augustin's animadversions thereon 161

BOOK V.

Faustus seeks to show that the Manichseans and not the Catholics are consistent believers in the gospel,
by comparing Manichiean and Catholic obedience to the precepts of the gospel. Augustin exposes
the hypocrisy of the iManicha:ans and praises the asceticism of the Catholics 162

BOOK VI.

Faustus avows his disbelief in the O. T., and his neglect of its precepts, and accuses Catholics of incon-
sistency in neglecting its ordinances, while claiming to accept it. Augustin explains the relation
of the O T. to the N 167

BOOK VII.
The genealogical question is again taken up and argued on both sides 174

BOOK VIII.

Faustus maintams that to hold to the O. T. after the giving of the N., is putting new cloth on an old
garment. Augustin further explains th.e relation of the O. T. to the N., and reproaches the Mani-
chxans with carnality 175

BOOK IX.

Faustus argues mat if the apostles born under the old covenant could lawfully depart from it, much

more can he, a Gentile. Augustin explains the relation of Jews and Gentiles alike to the gospel. 175

BOOK X. -

Faustus insists tnat the O. T. promises are radically different from those of the N. Augustin admits a

difference, but maintains that the moraLl2re£epts are the same in both. . . . "I '. '. . . . 176

BOOK XI.

Faustus quct?= nassages to show that the Apostle Paul abandoned belief in the incarnation, to which he

earlier heia. Augustin shows that the apostle was consistent with himself in the utterances quoted. 177

BOOK XII.
Faustus denies tnat the prophets predicted Christ. Augustin expounds the types of Christ in the O. T. 183

BOOK XIII.

Faustus asserts that even if the O. T. could be shown to contain predictions, it would be of interest

only to the Jews. Augustin shows the value of prophesy for Gentiles and Jews alike 199

BOOK XIV.
Faustus abhors Moses for cursing Christ. Augustin expounds the doctrine of the suffering Saviour. . 207

BOOK XV.
Faustus rejects the O. T. because it leaves no room for Christ. Christ the one bridegroom suffices for

his bride, the Church. Augustin reproves the Manichoeans for claiming to be the bride of Christ. 212

BOOK XVI.

Faustus willing to believe not only that the Jewish but that all Gentile prophets wrote of Christ, if proved,
but he would none the less insist upon rejecting their superstitions. Augustin maintains that all
Aloses wrote is of Christ, and that his writings must be either accepted or rejected as a whole. . . 219

BOOK XVII.

ustus rejects Christ's declaration that he came not to destroy, but to fulfill, as found only in Matthew,
who was not present when the words purport to have been spoken. Augustin rebukes the folly of
refusing to believe Matthew, and yet believing Manichseus, and shows what the passage really means. 234

154 CONTENTS OF REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.EAN.

BOOK XVIII.

The relation of Christ to prophecy, continued 237

BOOK XIX.

Faustus is willing to admit that Christ may have said that he came not to destroy the law and the pro-
phets, but to fulfill them; but if he did, it was to pacify the Jews and in a modified sense. Augus-
tin replies, and still further elaborates the Catholic view of prophecy and its fulfillment 239

BOOK XX.

Faustus repels the charge of sun-worship, and maintains that while the Manicha?ans believe that God's
power dwells in the sun, and His wisdom in the moon, they yet worship one Deity, Father, Son,
and Holy Spirit. They are not a schism. of the Gentiles, nor a sect. Augustin emphasizes the
charge of polytheism, and goes into an elaborate comparison of Manichsean and pagan mythology. 252

BOOK XXI.

Faustus denies that Manichseans believe in two gods. Hyle no god. Augustin discusses at large the

doctrine of God and Hyle, and fixes the charge of dualism upon the Manichseans 264

BOOK XXII.

Faustus states his objections to the morality of the law and the prophets, and Augustin seeks by the

application of the type and the allegory to explain away the moral difficulties of the O. T. . . . 272

BOOK XXIII,

Faustus recurs to the, genealogical difficulty, and insists that even according to Matthew Jesus was not
Son of God until his baptism. Augustin sets forth the Catholic view of the relation of the divine
and the human in the person of Christ 313

BOOK XXIV.

Faustus explains the Manichsean denial that man was made by God as applying to the fleshly man not
to the spiritual. Augustin elucidates the apostle Paul's contrasts between flesh and spirit, so as to
. exclude the Manichaean view 3it

BOOK XXY.

Faustus ridicules the orthodox claim to believe in the infinity of God by caricaturing the anthropomor-
phic representations of the O. T. Augustin despairs of being able to induce the Manichasans to
adopt right views of the infinitude of God so long as they regard the soul and God as extended in space. 319

BOOK XXVI.

Faustus insists that Jesus might have died though not born, by the exercise of divine power, yet he re-
jects birth and death alike. Augustin maintains that there are some things that even God cannot do,
one of which is to die. He refutes the docetism of the Manichieans 320

BOOK XXVII.

Faustus warns against pressing too far the argument, that if jesus was not born he cannot have suffered.

Augustin accepts the birth and death alike on the testimony of the gospel narrative 324.

BOOK XXVIII.

Faustus recurs to the genealogy and insists upon examining it as regards its consistency with itself.
Augustin takes his stand on Scripture authority and maintains that Matthew's statements as to the
birth of Christ must be accepted as final 32^,

BOOK XXIX.

Faustus seeks to justify docetism. Augustin insists that there is nothing disgraceful in being born. . 326

BOOK XXX.

Faustus denies that Paul's prophecy about those that should forbid to marry, abstain from meats, etc..
applies to the Manichseans more than to the Catholic ascetics. Augustin justifies this application
of the prophecy, and shows the difference between Manichoean and Christian asceticism. . . . 318

BOOK XXXI.

The Scripture passage, " To the pure all things are pure, but to the impure and defiled is nothing pure;
but even their mind and conscience are defiled," is discussed from both points of view, Faustus
objecting to its application to his party and Augustin insisting on its application 33T

BOOK XXXII.

^ Faustus fails to understand why he should be required either to accept or reject the N. T. as a whole,
while the Catholics accept or reject the various parts of the O. T. at pleasure. Augustin denies
that the Catholics treat the O. T. arbitrarily, and explains their attitude towards it 33:

BOOK XXXIII.

Faustus does not think it would be an honor to sit down with the Patriarchs, whose moral characters as
set forth in the O. T. he detests. He justifies his subjective criticism of Scripture. Augustin
sums up the argument, claims the victory, and exhorts the Manichiwans to abandon their opposition
to the O. T., notwithstanding the difficulties that it presents, and to recognize the authority of the
Catholic Church 340

■J

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICHyEAN.

[CONTRA FAUSTUM MANICH^UM.] A.D. 400.

^P Written about the year 400. [Faustus was undoubtedly the acutest, most determined
and most unscrupulous opponent of orthodox Christianity in the age of Augustin. The
occasion of Augustin's great writing against him was the publication of Faustus' attack on
the Old Testament Scriptures, and on the New Testament so far as it was at variance with

I Manich^ean error. Faustus seems to have followed in the footsteps of Adimantus, against

' whom Augustin had written some years before, but to have gone considerably beyond Adi-
mantus in the recklessness of his statements. The incarnation of Christ, involving his birth
from a woman, is one of the main points of attack. He makes the variations in the gene-
alogical records of the Gospels a ground for rejecting the whole as spurious. He supposed
the Gospels, in their present form, to be not the works of the Apostles, but rather of later
Judaizing falsifiers. The entire Old Testament system he treats with the utmost contempt,
blaspheming the Patriarchs, Moses, the Prophets, etc., on the ground of their private lives
and their teachings. Most of the objections to the morality of the Old Testament that are
now current were already familiarly used in the time of Augustin. Augustin's answers are
only partially satisfactory, owing to his imperfect view of the relation of the old dispensation
to the new; but in the age in which they were written they were doubtless very effective.
The writing is interesting from the point of view of Biblical criticism, as well as from that of

I polemics against Manichaeism. — A. H. N.]

BOOK I.

WHO FAUSTUS WAS. FAUSTUS S OBJECT IN WRITING THE POLEMICAL TREATISE THAT FORMS THE
BASIS OF augustin's REPLY. AUGUSTIN's REMARKS THEREON

I. Faustus was an African by race, a citi-
zen of Mileum; he was eloquent and clever,
jbut had adopted the shocking tenets of the
|Manichcean heresy. He is mentioned in my
I Confessions,^ where there is an account of my
'acquaintance with him. This man published
a certain volume against the true Christian
I faith and the Catholic truth. A copy reached
I us, and was read by the brethren, who called
!for an answer from me, as part of the service

' Confessions^ v. 3, 6.

of love which I owe to them. Now, therefore,
in the name and with the help of our Lord
and Saviour Jesus Christ, I undertake the task,
that all my readers may know that acuteness
of mind and elegance of style are of no use to
a man unless the Lord directs his steps. ^ In
the mysterious equity of divine mercy, God
often bestows His help on the slow and the
feeble; while from the want of this help, the
most acute and eloquent run into error only

2 Ps. XXX vii. 23.

156

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

with greater rapidity and willfulness. I will
give the opinions of Faustus as if stated by
himself, and mine as if in reply to him.

2. Faustus said: As the learned Adiman-
tus, the only teacher since the sainted Mani-
chreus deserving of our attention, has plenti-
fully exposed and thoroughly refuted the
errors of Judaism and of semi-Christianity,
I think it not amiss that you should be sup-
plied in writing- with brief and pointed replies
to the captious objections of our adversaries,
that when, like children of the wily serpent,
they try to bewilder you with their quibbles,
you may be prepared to give intelligent an-
swers. In this way they will be kept to the
subject, instead of wandering from one thing
to another. And I have placed our opinions
and those of our opponent over against one
another, as plainly and briefly as possible, so
as not to perplex the reader with a long and
intricate discourse.

3. AuGUSTiN replies: You warn against
semi-Christians, which you say we are; but we
warn against pseudo-Christians, which we have
shown you to be. Semi-Christianity may be
imperfect without being false. So, then, if
the faith of those whom you try to mislead
is imperfect, would it not be better to supply
what is lacking than to rob them of what they
have ? It was to imperfect Christians that the

apostle wrote, "joying and beholding your
conversation," and "the deficiency in your
faith in Christ." ' The apostle had in view a
spiritual structure, as he says elsewhere, "Ye
are God's building;" - and in this structure he
found both a reason for joy and a reason for
exertion. He rejoiced to see part already
finished; and the necessity of bringing the
edifice to perfection called for exertion. Im-
perfect Christians as we are, you pursue us
with the desire to pervert what you call our
semi-Christianity by false doctrine; while even
those who are so deficient in faith as to be
unable to reply to all your sophisms, are wise
enough at least to know that they must not
have anything at all to do with you. You
look for semi-Christians to deceive: we wish
to prove you pseudo-Christians, that Chris-
tians may learn something from your refuta-
tion, and that the less advanced may learn to
avoid you. Do you call us children of the ;
serpent? You have surely forgotten how^
often you have found fault with the prohibitioni
in Paradise, and have praised the serpent for
opening Adam's eyes. You have the better
claim to the title which you give us. The
serpent owns you as well when you blame
him as when you praise him.

I Col. ii. 5 ; cf. I I'hess. lii. 10.

- I Cor. iii. 9.

BOOK II.

FAUSTUS CLAIMS TO BELIEVE THE GOSPEL, YET REFUSES TO ACCEPT THE GENEALOGICAL TABLES
ON VARIOUS GROUNDS WHICH AUGUSTIN SEEKS TO SET ASIDE.

I. Faustus said: Do I believe the gospel ?
Certainly. Do I therefore believe that Christ
was born ? Certainly not. It does not follow
that because I believe the gospel, as I do, I
must therefore believe that Christ was born.
This I do not believe; because Christ does
not say that He was born of men, and the
gospel, both in name and in fact, begins with
Christ's preaching. As for the genealogy,
the author himself does not venture to call it
the gospel. For what did he write? "The
book of the generation of Jesus Christ the
Son of David."' The book of the generation is
not the book of the gospel. It is more like a
birth-register, the star confirming the event.
Mark, on the other hand, who recorded the
preaching of the Son of God, without any
genealogy, begins most suitably with the

I Matt. i. I.

words, " The gospel of Jesus Christ the Son
of God." It is plain that the genealogy is
not the gospel. Matthew himself says, that
after John was put in prison, Jesus began to
preach the gospel of the kingdom; so that
what is mentioned before this is the genealogy,
and not the gospel. Why did not Matthew
begin with, "The gospel of Jesus Christ the
Son of God," but because he thought it sin-
ful to call the genealogy the gospel ? Under-
stand, then, what you have hitherto overlooked
—the distinction between the genealogy and
the gospel. Do I then admit the truth of the
gospel? Yes; understanding by the gospel
the preaching of Christ. I have plenty to say
about the generations too, if you wish. But
you seem to me now to wish to know not
whether I accept the gospel, but whether I|
accept the generations.

2. AuGUSTiN replied: Well, in answer to your j

T.OOK II.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.EAN.

own questions, you tell us first that you believe
the gospel, and next, that you do not believe
in the birth of Christ; and your reason is,
that the birth of Christ is not in the gospel.
What, then, will you answer the apostle when
lie says, " Remember that Christ Jesus rose
from the dead, of the seed of David, accord-
ing to my gospel ? " ' You surely are ignorant,
or pretend to be ignorant, what the gospel is.
Vou use the word, not as the apostle teaches,
but as suits your own errors. What the apos-
tles call the gospel you depart from; for you
do not believe that Christ was of the seed of
David. This was Paul's gospel; and it was
also the gospel of the other apostles, and of
all faithful stewards of so great a mystery.
For Paul says elsewhere, "Whether, there-
fore, I or they, so we preach, and so ye be-
lieved.'' - They did not all write the gospel,
but they all preached it. The name evange-
list is properly given to the narrators of the
birth, the actions, the words, the sufferings of
our Lord Jesus Christ. The word gospel
means good news, and might be used of any
good news, but is properly applied to the nar-
rative of the Saviour. If, then, you teach
something different, you must have departed
from the gospel. Assuredly those babes whom
you despise as semi-Christians will oppose
you, when they hear their mother Charity
declaring by the mouth of the apostle, " If
any one preach another gospel than that which
we have preached to you, let him be ac-
cursed." 3 Since, then, Paul, according to his
,L;ospel, preached that Christ was of the seed
of David, and you deny this and preach some-
thing else, may you be accursed ! And what
can you mean by saying that Christ never de-
clares Himself to have been born of men, when
on every occasion He calls Himself the Son
of man ?

3. You learned men, forsooth, dress up for
our benefit some wonderful First Man, who
came down from the race of light to war with
the race of darkness, armed with his waters
against the waters of the enemy, and with his
lire against their fire, and with his winds
against their winds. And why not with his
smoke against their smoke, and with his dark-
ness against their darkness? According to
you, he was armed against smoke with air,
and against darkness with light. So it appears
I that smoke and darkness are bad, since they
j could not belong to his goodness. The other
Ithree, again — water, wind, and fire — are good.
I How, then, could these belong to the evil of
!the enemy? You reply that the water of the
race of darkness was evil, while that which

' 2 Tim. ii, 8.

« I Cor. XV. II,

3 Gal. i. 8, 9,

the First Man brought was good; and so, too,
his good wind and fire fought against the
evil wind and fire of the adversary. But why
could he not bring good smoke against evil
smoke ? Your falsehoods seem to vanish in
smoke. Well, your First Man warred against
an opposite nature. And yet only one of the
five things he brought was the Qpposite of
what the hostile race had. The light was op-
posed to the darkness, but the four others are
not opposed to one another. Air is not the
opposite of smoke, and still less is water the op-
posite o*f water, or wind of wind, or fire of fire.
4. One is shocked at your wild fancies
about this First Man changing the elements
which he brought, that he might conquer his
enemies by pleasing them. So you make
what you call the kingdom of falsehood keep
honestly to its own nature, while truth is
changeable in order to deceive. Jesus Christ,
according to you, is the son of this First Man.
Truth springs, forsooth, from your fiction.
You praise this First Man for using change-
able and delusive forms in the contest. If
you, then, speak the truth, you do not imi-
tate him. If you imitate him, you deceive as
he did. But our Lord and Saviour Jesus
Christ, the true and truthful Son of God, the
true and truthful Son of man, both of which
He testifies of Himself, derived the eternity
of His godhead from true God, and His incar-
nation from true man. Your First Man is
not the first man of the apostle. " The first
man," he says, "was of the earth, earthy;
the second man is from heaven, heavenly.
As is the earthy, such are they also that are
earthy; as is the heavenly, such are they also
that are heavenly. As we have borne the
image of the earthy, let us also bear the im-
age of the heavenly."^ The first man of the
earth, earthy, is Adam, who was made of
dust. The second man from heaven, heaven-
ly, is the Lord Jesus Christ; for, being the
Son of God, He became flesh that He might
be a man outwardly, while He remained God
w[thin; that He might be both the true Son
of God, by whom we were made, and the true
Son of man, by whom we are made anew.
Why do you conjure up this fabulous First
Man of yours, and refuse to acknowledge the
first man of the apostle ? Is this not a fulfill-
ment of what the apostle says: " Turning
away their ears from the truth, they will give
heed to fables ?" ^ According to Paul, the
first man is of the earth, earthy; according to
Manich^eus, he is not earthy, and is equipped
with five elements of some unreal, unintelli-
gible kind. Paul sa3's: " If any one should

"t I Cor. XV. 47-49.

^ 2 Tim, iv. 4,

158

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

have announced to you differently from what
we have announced let him be accursed."
Therefore lest PauJ be a liar, let Manicheeus
be accursed.

5. Again, you find fault with the star by
which the Magi were led to worship the in-
fant Christ, which you should be ashamed
of doing, wihen you represent your fabulous
Christ, the son of your fabulous First Man,
not as announced by a star, but as bound up
in all the stars.' For you say that he mingled
with the principles of darkness in his conflict
with the race of darkness, that by capturing
these principles the world might be made out
of the mixture. So that, by your profane
fancies, Christ is not only mingled with heaven
and all the stars, but conjoined and com-
pounded with the earth and all its produc-
tions,= — a Saviour no more, but needing to be
saved by you, by your eating and disgorging
Him.

This foolish custom of making your disci-
ples bring you food, that your teeth and
stomach may be the means of relieving
Christ, who is bound up in it, is a conse-
quence of your profane fancies. You declare
that Christ is liberated in this way — not, how-
ever, entirely; for you hold that some tiny
particles of no value still remain in the excre-
ment, to be mixed up and compounded again
and again in various material forms, and to
be released and purified at any rate by the fire
in which the world will be burned up, if not
before. Nay, even then, you say, Christ is
not entirely liberated; but some extreme par-
ticles of His good and divine nature, which
have been so defiled that they cannot be
cleansed, are condemned to stay for ever in
the horrid mass of darkness. And these
people pretend to be offended with our saying
that a star announced the birth of the Son of
God, as if this were placing His birth under
the influence of a constellation; while they
subject Him not to stars only, but to such
polluting contact with all material things,
with the juices of all vegetables, and with the
decay of all flesh, and with the decomposition
of all food, in which He is bound up, that the
only way of releasing Him, at least one great
means, is that men, that is the Elect of the
Manichasans, should succeed in digesting
their dinner.

We, too, deny the influence of the stars

' [This mixture of the substance of Primordial Man, with the
kingdom of darkness, and the formation of stars out of portions
thereof, was probably a part of primitive Manichaean teaching. —
A. H. N.]

2 [Compare Book xx. 2, where Faustus states the Manichsean
doctnne of the Jesus patabilis. Beausobre, Mosheim and Baur
agree in thinking that Augustin has not distinguished accurately
in these two passages between names Christ and Jesus, as used by
the jNIanichjeans. See Baur: Das Manichiiische Religionssysteiit,
p. 72.— A. H. N.]

upon the birth of any man; for we maintain
that, by the just law of God, the free-will of
man, which chooses good or evil, is under no
constraint of necessity. How much less do
we subject to any constellation the incarna-
tion of the eternal Creator and Lord of all !
When Christ was born after the flesh, the star
which the Magi saw had no power as govern-
ing, but attended as a witness. Instead of
assuming control over Him, it acknowledged
Him by the homage it did. Besides, this
star was not one of those which from the be-
ginning of the world continue in the course
ordained by the Creator. Along with the new
birth from the Virgin appeared a new star,
which served as a guide to the Magi who were
themselves seeking for Christ; for it went be-
fore them till they reached the place where
they found the Word of God in the form of a
child. But what astrologer ever thought of
making a star leave its course, and come down
to the child that is born, as they imagine,
under it ? They think that the stars affect the
birth, not that the birth changes the course of
the stars; so, if the star in the Gospel was one
of those heavenly bodies, how could it deter-
mine Christ's action, when it was compelled
to change its own action at Christ's birth ?
But if, as is more likely, a star which did not
exist before appeared to point out Christ, it
was the effect of Christ's birth, and not the
cause of it. Christ was not born because the
star was there; but the star was there because
Christ was born. If there was any fate, it
was in the birth, and not in the star. The
word fate is derived from a word which means
to speak; and since Christ is the Word of God
by which all things were spoken before they
were, the conjunction of stars is not the fate
of Christ, but Christ is the fate of the stars.
The same will that made the heavens took
our earthly nature. The same power that
ruled the stars laid down His life and took it

again.

6. Why, then, should the narrative of the
birth not be the gospel, since it conveys such
good news as heals our malady ? Is it because
Matthew begins, not like Mark, with the
words, " The beginning of the gospel of Jesus
Christ," but, ''The book of the generation
of Jesus Christ?" In this way, John, too,
might be said not to have written the gospel,
for he has not the words. Beginning of the
gospel, or Book of the gospel, but, " In the
beginning was the Word." Perhaps the clever
word-maker Faustus will call the introduc-
tion in John a Verbtditim, as he called that
in Mattliew a Gc?icsidium. The wonder is,
that you are so impudent as to give the name
of gospel to your silly stories. What good

Book HI.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.^EAN.

159

news is there in telling us that, in the conflict
against some strange hostile nation, God could
protect His own kingdom only by sending
part of His own nature into the greedy jaws
of the former, and to be so defiled, that after
all those toils and tortures it cannot all be
purged ? Is this bad news the gospel ? Every
one who has even a slender knowledge of
Greek knows that gospel means good news.
But where is your good news, when your God

himself is said to weep as under eclipse till
the darkness and defilement are removed from
his members ? And when he ceases to weep,
it seems he becomes cruel. For what has
that part of him which is to be involved in
the mass done to deserve this Qondemnation ?
This part must go on weeping for ever. But
no; whoever examines this news will not weep
because it is bad, but will laugh because it is
not true.

BOOK III.

FAUSTUS OBJECTS TO THE INCARNATION OF GOD ON THE pROUND THAT THE EVANGELISTS ARE
AT VARIANCE WITH EACH OTHER, AND THAT INCARNATION IS UNSUITABLE TO DEITY.
AUGUSTIN ATTEMPTS TO REMOVE THE CRITICAL AND THEOLOGICAL DIFFICULTIES.

1. Faustus said: Do I believe in the in-
carnation ? For my part^ this is the very
thing I long tried to persuade myself of, that
God was born; but the discrepancy in the
genealogies of Luke and Matthew stumbled
me, as I knew not which to follow. For I
thought it might happen that, from not being
omniscient, I might take the true for false,
and the false for true. So, in despair of
settling this dispute, I betook myself to Mark
and John, two authorities still, and evangel-
ists as much as the others. I approved with
good reason of the beginning of Mark and
John, for they have nothing of David, or
Mary, or Joseph. John says, " In the begin-
ning was the Word, and the Word was with
God, and the Word was God,'' meaning Christ.
Mark says, " The gospel of Jesus Christ, the
Son of God," as if correcting Matthew, who
calls him the Son of David. Perhaps, how-
ever, the Jesus of Matthew is a different per-
son from the Jesus of Mark. This is my
reason for not believing in the birth of Christ.

Remove this difficulty, if you can, by har-
monizing the accounts, and I am ready to
yield. In any case, however, it is hardly con-
sistent to believe that God, the God of Chris-
tians, was born from the womb.

2. AuGUSTiN replied: Had you read the
Gospel with care, and inquired into those
places where you found opposition, instead of
rashly condemning them, you would have
seen that the recognition of the authority of
the evangelists by so many learned men all
over the world, in spite of this most obvious
discrepancy, proves that there is more in it
than appears at first sight. Anyone can see,
as well as you, that the ancestors of Christ in
Matthew and Luke are different; while Joseph

appears in both, at the end in Matthew and
at the beginning in Luke. Joseph, it is plain,
might be called the father of Christ, on ac-
count of his being in a certain sense the hus-
band of the mother of Christ; and so his name,
as the male representative, appears at the be-
ginning or end of the genealogies. Any one
can see as well as you that Joseph has one
father in Matthew and another in Luke, and
so with the grandfather and with all the rest
up to David. Did all the able and learned
men, not many Latin writers certainly, but
innumerable Greek, who have examined most
attentively the sacred Scriptures, overlook
this manifest difference ? Of course they saw
it. No one can help seeing it. But with a
due regard to the high authority of Scripture,
they believed that there was something here
which would be given to those that ask, and
denied to those that snarl; would be found
by those that seek, and taken away from those
that criticise; would be open to those that
knock, and shut against those that contradict.
They asked, sought, and knocked; they re-
ceived, found, and entered in.

3. The whole question is how Joseph had
two fathers. Supposing this possible, both
genealogies may be correct. With two fathers,
why not two grandfathers, and two great-
grandfathers, and so on, up to David, who
was the father both of Solomon, who is men-
tioned in Matthew's list, and of Nathan, who
occurs in Luke ? This is the difificulty with
many people who think it impossible that two
men should have one and the same son, for-
getting the very obvious fact that a man may
be called the son of the person who adopted
him as well as of the person who begot him.

Adoption, we know, was familiar to the an-

i6o

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book III.

cients, for even women adopted the children
of other women, as Sarah adopted Ishmael,
and Leah her handmaid's son, and Pharaoh's
daughter Moses. Jacob, too, adopted his
grandsons, the children of Joseph. More-
over, the word adoption is of great importance
in the s)'stem of our faith, as is seen from the
apostolic writings. For the Apostle Paul,
speaking of the advantages of the Jews, says:
" Whose are the adoption, and the glory, and
the covenants, and the giving of the law;
whose are the fathers, and of whom, accord-
ing to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all,
God blessed for ever."' And again: "We
ourselves also groan within ourselves, waiting
for the adoption of the sons of God, even the
redemption of the body." '^ Again, elsewhere:
"But in the fullness of time, God* sent His
Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
that we might receive the adoption of sons."^
These passages show clearly that adoption is
a significant symbol. God has an only Son,
whom He begot from His own substance, of
whom it is said, " Being in the form of God,
He thought it not robber)^ to be equal to
God."-* Us He begot not of His* own sub-
stance, for we belong to the creation which is
not begotten, but made; but that He might
make us the brothers of Christ, He adopted
us. That act, then, by which God, when we
were not born of Him, but created and formed,
begot us by His word and grace, is called
adoption. So John says, " He gave them
power to become the sons of God. ' ' ^

Since, therefore, the practice of adoption is
common among our fathers, and in Script-
ure, is there not irrational profanity in the
hasty condemnation of the evangelists as false
because the genealogies are different, as if
both could not be true, instead of considering
calmly the simple fact that frequently in
human life one man may have two fathers,
one of whose flesh he is born, and another of
whose will he is afterwards made a son by
adoption ? If the second is not rightly called
father, neither are we right in saying, "Our
Father which art in heaven," to Him of whose
substance we were not born, but of whose
grace and most merciful will we were adopted,
according to apostolic doctrine, and truth
most sure. For one is to us God, and Lord,
and Father: God, for by Him we are created,
though of human parents; Lord, for we are
His subjects; Father, for by His adoption we
are born again. Careful students of sacred
Scripture easily saw, from a little considera-
tion, how, in the different genealogies of the
two evangelists, Joseph had two fathers, and

' Rom. ix. 4, 5.
4 Phil. ii. 6.

2 Rom. viii. 23.
5 Johni. 12.

3 Gal. iv. 4, 5.

consequently two lists of ancestors. You
might have seen this too, if you had not been
blinded by the love of contradiction. Other
things' far beyond your understanding have
been discovered in the careful investigation of
all parts of these narratives. The familiar
occurrence of one man begetting a son and
another adopting him, so that one man has
two fathers, you might, in spite of Manichsean
error, have thought of as an explanation, if
you had not been reading in a hostile spirit.

4. But why Matthew begins with Abraham
and descends to Joseph, while Luke begins
with Joseph and ascends, not to Abraham,
but to God, who made man, and, by giving a
commandment, gave him power to become,
by believing, a son of God; and why Matthew
records the generations at the commencement
of his book, Luke after the baptism of the
Saviour by John; and what is the meaning of
the number of the generations in Matthew,
who divides them into three sections of four-
teen each, though in the whole sum there ap-
pears to be one wanting; while in Luke the
number of generations recorded after the
baptism amount to seventy-seven, which num-
ber the Lord Himself enjoins in connection
with the forgiveness of sins, saying, " Not
only seven times, but seventy-seven times; "
— these things you will never understand,
unless either you are taught by some Catholic
of superior stamp, who has studied the sacred
Scriptures, and has made all the progress
possible, or you yourselves turn from your
error, and in a Christian spirit ask that you
may receive, seek that you may find, and
knock that it may be opened to you.

5. Since, then, this double fatherhood of
nature and adoption removes the difficulty-
arising from the discrepancy of the genealo-
gies, there is no occasion for Faustus to leave
the two evangelists and betake himself to the
other two, which would be a greater affront
to those he betook himself to than to those
he left. For the sacred writers do not de-
sire to be favored at the expense of their
brethren. For their joy is in union, and they
are one in Christ; and if one says one thing,
and another another, or one in one way and
another in another, still they all speak truth,
and in no way contradict one another; only
let the reader be reverent and humble, not in
an heretical spirit seeking occasion for strife,
but with a believing heart desiring edification.
Now, in this opinion that the evangelists give
the ancestors of different fathers, as it is
quite possible for a man to have two fathers,
there is nothing inconsistent with truth. So
the evangelists are harmonized, and you, by
Faustus's promise are bound to yield at once.

Book IV.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICHtEAN.

l6l

6. You may perhaps be troubled by that
additional remark which he makes: " In any
case, however, it is hardly consistent to be-
lieve that God, the God of Christians, was
born from the womb." As if we believed
that the divine nature came from the womb
of a woman. Have I not just quoted the
testimony of the apostle, speaking of the
Jews: " Whose are the fathers, and of whom,
according to the flesh, Christ came, who is
God over all, blessed for ever?" Christ,
therefore, our Lord and Saviour, true Son of
God in His divinity, and true son of man ac-
cording to the flesh, not as He is God over
all was born of a woman, but in that feeble
nature which He took of us, that in it He
might die for us, and heal it in us: not as in
the form of God, in which He thought it not
robbery to be equal to God, was He born of
a woman, but in the form of a servant, in
taking which He emptied Himself. He is
therefore said to have emptied Himself be-
cause He took the form of a servant, not be-

cause He lost the form of God. For in the
unchangeable possession of that nature by
which in the form of God He is equal to the
Father, He took our changeable nature, by
which He might be born of a virgin. You,
while you protest against putting the flesh of
Christ in a virgin's womb, place the very di-
vinity of God in the womb not only of human
beings, but of dogs and swine. You refuse
to believe that the flesh of Christ was con-
ceived in the Virgin's womb, in which God was
not found nor even changed; while you assert
that in all men and beasts, in the seed of male
and in the womb of female, in all concep-
tions on land or in water, an actual part of
God and the divine nature is continually
bound, and shut up, and contaminated, never
to be wholly set free.'

I [It cannot be said that Augustin adequately meets the diffi-
culty that Faustus finds in the genealogies of our Lord. Cf. Her-
VEV: The Genealogies of Our Lord, and the recent commentaries,
such as Meyer's, Lange's, The International Revision, and espec-
ially Broadus on Jilattkeiu. — A. H.N. J

BOOK IV.

lAUSTUS'S REASONS FOR REJECTING THE OLD TESTAMENT, AND AUGUSTIN's ANIMADVERSIONS

THEREON.

1. Faustus said: Do I believe the Old
Testament? If it bequeaths anything to me,
I believe it; if not, I reject it. It would be
an excess of forwardness to take the docu-
ments of others which pronounce me disin-
herited. Remember that the promise of Ca-
naan in the Old Testament is made to Jews,
that is, to the circumcised, who offer sacrifice,
:ind abstain from swine's flesh, and from the
other animals which Moses pronounces un-
clean, and observe Sabbaths, and the feast of
unleavened bread, and other things of the
same kind which the author of the Testament
enjoined. Christians have not adoj)ted these
observances, and no one keeps them; so that
if we will not take the inheritance, we should
surrender the documents. This is my first
reason for rejecting the Old Testament, un-
less you teach me better. My second reason
is, that this inheritance is such a poor fleshly
thing, without any spiritual blessings, that
after the New Testament, and its glorious
promise of the kingdom of heaven and eter-
nal life, I think it not worth the taking.

2. Augustin replied: No one doubts that

promises of temporal things are contained in

Lhe Old Testament, for which reason it is
11

called the Old Testament; or that the king-
dom of heaven and the promise of eternal life
belong to the New Testament. But that in
these temporal things were figures of future
things which should be fulfilled in us upon
whom the ends of the ages are come, is not
my fancy, but the judgment of the apostle,
when he says of such things, '* These things
were our examples;" and again, "These
things happened to them for an example, and
they are written for us on whom the ends of
the ages are come."' We receive the Old
Testament, therefore, not in order to obtain
the fulfillment of these promises, but to see
in them predictions of the New Testament;
for the Old bears witness to the New. Whence
the Lord, after He rose from the dead, and
allowed His disciples not only to see but to
handle Him, still, lest they should doubt their
mortal and fleshly senses, gave them further
confirmation from the testimony of the an-
cient books, saying, " It was necessary that all
things should be fulfilled which were written
in the law of Moses, and in the Prophets and
Psalms, concerning me."- Our hope, there-
fore, rests not on the promise of temporal

' I Cor. X. 6, II.

- Luke x.\iv. 44.

l62

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book V.

things. Nor do we believe that the holy and
spiritual men of these times — the patriarchs
and prophets — were taken up with earthly
things. For they understood, by the revela-
tion of the Spirit of God, what was suitable
for that time, and how God appointed all these
sayings and actions as types and predictions
of the future. Their great desire was for the
New Testament; but they had a personal duty
to perform in those predictions, by which the
new things of the future were foretold. So
the life as well as the tongue of these men
was prophetic. The carnal people, indeed,
thought only of present blessings, though even
in connection with the people there were
prophecies of the future.

These things you do not understand, be-
cause, as the prophet said, "Unless you be-
lieve, you shall not understand."' For you
are not instructed in the kingdom of heaven,
— that is, in the true Catholic Church of
Christ. If you were, you would bring forth
from the treasure of the sacred Scriptures
things old as well as new. For the Lord Him-
self says, " Therefore every scribe instructed
in the kingdom of heaven is like an house-
holder who brings forth from his treasure
things new and old."^ And so, while you
profess to receive only the new promises of
God, you have retained the oldness of the

^ Isa. vii. 9.

2 Matt. xiii. 52.

flesh, adding only the novelty of error; of
which novelty the apostle says, " Shun pro-
fane novelties of words, for they increase unto
more ungodliness, and their speech eats like
a cancer. Of whom is Hymenseus and Phi-
letus, who concerning the faith have erred,
saying that the resurrection is past already,
and have overthrown the faith of some."^
Here you see the source of your false doc-
trine, in teaching that the resurrection is only
of souls by the preaching of the truth, and
that there will be no resurrection of the body.
But how can you understand spiritual things
of the inner man, who is renewed in the
knowledge of God, when in the oldness of the
flesh, if you do not possess temporal things,
you concoct fanciful notions about them in
those images of carnal things of which the
whole of your false doctrine consists ? You
boast of despising as worthless the land of
Canaan, which was an actual thing, and actu-
ally given to the Jews; and yet you tell of a
land of light cut asunder on one side, as by
a narrow wedge, by the land of the race of
darkness, — a thing which does not exist, and
which you believe from the delusion of your
minds; so that your life is not supported by
having it, and your mind is wasted in desiring
it.-t

3 2 Tim. ii. 16-18.

4 [A good argumcnttiin ad hominetn, a species of argument
which Augustin is fond of using. — A. H. N.]

BOOK V.

■n

FAUSTUS CLAIMS THAT THE MANICH^ANS AND NOT THE CATHOLICS ARE CONSISTENT BELIEVERS
IN THE GOSPEL, AND SEEKS TO ESTABLISH THIS CLALNI BY COMPARING MANICH^AN AND
CATHOLIC OBEDIENCE TO THE PRECEPTS OF THE GOSPEL. AUGUSTIN EXPOSES THE HYPOCRISY
OF THE MANICH^ANS AND PRAISES THE ASCETICISM OF CATHOLICS.

I. Faustus said: Do I believe the gospel?
You ask me if I believe it, though my
obedience to its commands shows that I do.
I should rather ask you if you believe it, since
you give no proof of your belief. I have left
my father, mother, wife, and children, and all
else that the gospel requires;' and do you
ask if I believe the gospel ? Perhaps you do
not know what is called the gospel. The gos-
pel is nothing else than the preaching and the
precept of Christ. I have parted with all
gold and silver, and have left off carrying
money in my purse; content with daily food;
without anxiety for to-morrow; and without
solicitude about how I shall be fed, or where-

I Matt. xix. 29.

withal I shall be clothed: and do you ask if
I believe the gospel ? You see in me the
blessings of the gospel; "^ and do you ask if I \
believe the gospel ? You see me poor, meek, ;
a peacemaker, pure in heart, mourning, hun- ,
gering, thirsting, bearing persecutions and i
enmity for righteousness' sake; and do you
doubt my belief in the gospel ? One can un-
derstand now how John the Baptist, after
seeing Jesus, and also hearing of His works,
yet asked whether He was Christ. Jesus i
properly and justly did not deign to reply
that He was; but reminded him of the works
of which he had already heard: " The blind
see, the deaf hear, the dead are raised.*' ^ i'l

' Matt. V. 3-11.

3 Matt. xi. 2-6.

Book V.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

In the same way, I might very well reply to
your question whether I believe the gospel,
by saying, I have left all, father, mother, wife,
children, gold, silver, eating, drinking, luxu-
ries, pleasures; take this as a sufficient an-
swer to your questions, and believe that you
will be blessed if you are not offended in me.'

2. But, according to you, to believe the
gospel is not only to obey its commands, but
also to believe in all that is written in it; and,
first of all, that God was born. But neither
is believing the gospel only to believe that
Jesus was born, but also to do what He com-
mands. So, if you say that I do not believe
the gospel because I disbelieve the incarna-
tion, much more do you not believe because
you disregard the commandments. At any
rate, we are on a par till these questions are
settled. If your disregard of the precepts
does not prevent you from professing faith in
the gospel, why should my rejection of the
genealogy prevent me ? And if, as you say,
to believe the gospel includes both faith in the
genealogies and obedience to the precepts,
why do you condemn me, since we both are
imperfect? What one wants the other has.
But if, as there can be no doubt, belief in the
gospel consists solely in obedience to the
commands of God, your sin is twofold. As
the proverb says, the deserter accuses the
soldier. But suppose, since you will have it
so, that there are these two parts of perfect
faith, one consisting in word, or the confes-
sion that Christ was born, the other in deed,
or the observance of the precepts; it is plain
that my part is hard and painful, yours light
and easy. It is natural that the multitude
should flock to you and away from me, for
they know not that the kingdom of God is not
in word, but in power. Why, then, do you
blame me for taking the harder part, and
leaving to you, as to a weak brother, the easy
part ? You have the idea that your part of
faith, or confessing that Christ was born, has
more power to save the soul than the other
parts.

3. Let us then ask Christ Himself, and
learn from His own mouth, what is the chief
means of our salvation. Who shall entei*, O
Christ, into Thy kingdom ? He that doeth
tlie will of my Father in heaven,- is His re-
ply; not, "He thatconfesses that I wasborn."

'.And again. He says to His disciples, "Go,
teach all nations, baptizing them in the name
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the
Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all
things which I have commanded you.''^ It is

' fThis IS a good description of ideal Manicha;an relicfioiis life.
Whether Faustus lived up to the claims here set forth is another
question. — A. H. N.]
' ^ Matt. vii. 21. 3 Matt, xxviii. 19, 20.

not, "teaching them that I was born," but,
"to observe my commandments.'^ Again,
" Ye are my friends if ye do what I command
you;" ■* not, " if you believe that I was born."
Again, " If ye keep my commandments, ye
shall abide in my love,"^ and in many other
places. Also in the sermon on the mount,
when He taught, " Blessed are the poor,
blessed are the meek, blessed are the peace-
makers, blessed are the pure in heart, blessed
are they that mourn, blessed are they that
hunger, blessed are they that are persecuted
for righteousness' sake,"* He nowliere says,
" Blessed are they that confess that I was
born.'^ And in the separation of the sheep
from the goats in the judgment. He says that
He will say to them on the right hand, " I
was hungry, and ye gave me meat; I was
thirsty, and ye gave me drink,"' and so on;
therefore " inherit the kingdom. " Not, " Be-
cause ye believe that I was born, inherit the
kingdom." Again, to the rich man seeking
for eternal life. He says, "Go, sell all that
thou hast, and follow me;"^ not, "Believe
that I was born, that you may have eternal
life." You see, the kingdom, life, happiness,
are everywhere promised to the part I have
chosen of what you call the two parts of faith,
and nowhere to your part. Show, if you can,
a place where it is written that whoso con-
fesses that Christ was born of a woman is
blessed, or shall inherit the kingdom, or have
eternal life. Even supposing, then, that there
are two parts of faith, your part has no bless-
ing. But what if we prove that your part is
not a part of faith at all ? It will follow that
you are foolish, which indeed will be proved
beyond a doubt. At present, it is enough to
have shown that our part is crowned with the
beatitudes. Besides, we have also a beatitude
for a confession in words: for we confess
that Jesus Christ is the Son of the living God;
and Jesus declares with His own lips that this
confession has a benediction, when He says
to Peter, " Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona;
for flesh and blood hath not revealed this unto
thee, but my Father which is in heaven." ^
So that we have not one, but both these parts
of faith, and in both alike are we pronounced
blessed by Christ; for in one we reduce faith
to practice, while in the other our confession
is unmixed with blasphemy.

4. AuGUSTiN replied: I have already said
that the Lord Jesus Christ repeatedly calls
Himself the Son of man, and that the Mani-
chaeans have contrived a silly story about
some fabulous First Man, who figures in their
impious heresy, not earthly, but combined

4 John XV. 14.
7 Matt. XXV. 35.

5 John XV. 10.
8 Rlatt. xix. 21.

6 Matt. V. ^-10.
9 Matt. XVI. 7.

164

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book V.

with spurious elements, in opposition to the
apostle, who says, " The first man is of the
earth, earthy;"' and that the apostle care-
fully warns us, " If any one preaches to you
differently from what we have preached, let
him be accursed. " = So that we must believe
Christ to be the Son of man according to
apostolic truth, not according to Manichaean
error. And since the evangelists assert that
Christ was born of a woman, of the seed of
David, and Paul writing to Timothy says,
" Remember that Jesus Christ, of the seed of
David, was raised from the dead, according
to my gospel," 3 it is clear in what sense we
must believe Christ to be the Son of man; for
being the Son of God by whom we were made.
He also by His incarnation became the Son
of man, that He might die for our sins, and
rise again for our justification/ Accordingly
He calls Himself both Son of God and Son
of man. To take only one instance out of
many, in the Gospel of John it is written,
" Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour
cometh, and now is, when the dead shall hear
the voice of the Son of God; and they that
hear shall live. For as the Father hath life
in Himself, so He hath given to the Son to
have life in Himself; and hath given Him
power to execute judgment also, because He
is the Son of man."s He says, " They shall
hear the voice of the Son of God;'^ and He
says, "because He is the Son of man," As
the Son of man. He has received power to ex-
ecute judgment, because He will come to
judgment in human form, that He may be
seen by the good and the wicked. In this
form He ascended into heaven, and that voice
was heard by His disciples, "He shall so
come as ye have seen Him go into heaven."*
As the Son of God, as God equal to and one
with the Father, He will not be seen by the
wicked; for "blessed are the pure in heart,
for they shall see God." Since, then. He
promises eternal life to those that believe in
Him, and since to believe in Him is to be-
lieve in the true Christ, such as He declares
Himself and His apostles declare Him to be,
true Son of God and true Son of man; you,
Manichaeans, who believe on a false and spu-
rious son of a false and spurious man, and
teach that God Himself, from fear of the as-
sault of the hostile race, gave up His own
members to be tortured, and after all not to
be wholly liberated, are plainly far from that
eternal life which Christ promises to those
who believe in Him. It is true, He said to
Peter when he confessed Him to be the Son
of God, " Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona."

' I Cor. XV. 47.
4 Rom. iv. 25.

2 Gal. i. 8, 9.
5 John V. 25-27.

3 2Tim. ii. 8.
6 Acts. i. 14.

But does He promise nothing to those who
believe Him to be the Son of man, when the
Son of God and the Son of man are the same ?
Besides, eternal life is expressly promised to
those who believe in the Son of man. "As
Moses," He says, "lifted up the serpent in
the wilderness, so must the Son of man be
lifted up, that whosoever believeth in Him
should not perish, but have eternal life."^
What more do you wish ? Believe then in
the Son of man, that 3'ou may have eternal
life; for He is also the Son of God, who can
give eternal life: for He is "the true God and
eternal life,'' as the same John says in his
epistle. John also adds, that he is antichrist
who denies that Christ has come in the flesh.®
5, There is no need, then, that you should
extol so much the perfection of Christ's com-
mands, because you obey the precepts of the
gospel. For the precepts, supposing you
really to fulfill them, would not profit you
without true faith. Do you not know that
the apostle says, " If I distribute all my goods
to the poor, and give my body to be burned,
and have not charit}^, it profiteth me noth-
ing ? " 9 Why do you boast of having Christian
poverty, when you are destitute of Christian
charity ? Robbers have a kind of charity to
one another, arismg from a mutual conscious-
ness of guilt and crime; but this is not the
charity commended by the apostle. In an-
other passage he distinguishes true charity
from all base and vicious affections, by say-
ing, " Now the end of the commandment is
charity out of a pure heart, and a good con-
science, and faith unfeig-ned." ™ How then
can you have true charity from a fictitious
faith ? " You persist in a faith corrupted by
falsehood: for your First Man, according
to you, used deceit in the conflict by chang-
ing his form, while his enemies remained in
their own nature; and, besides, you maintain
that Christ, who says, "I am the truth,"
feigned His incarnation. His death on the i
cross, the wounds of His passion, the marks
shown after His resurrection. If you speak
the truth, and your Christ speaks falsehood,
you must be better than he. But if you ;
really follow your own Christ, your truthful-
ness may be doubted, and your obedience to
the precepts you speak of may be only a
pretence. Is it true, as Faustus says, that ,
you have no money in 3'Our purses ? He i
means, probably, that your money is in boxes
and bags; nor would we blame you for this, ;
if you did not profess one thing and practise

7 John iii. 14, 15. * I John v. 20, iv. 3.

9 I Cor. xiii. 3. 1° i Tim. i. 5.

" [Augustin confounds saving faith with orthodo.x doctrine, as |
has been too commonly done since. — A. H. N.]

Book V.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.^AN.

165

another. Constantius, who is still alive, and 1 and is not ashamed to speak of God as in
is now our brother in Catholic Christianity, I bondage ? How can I see him meek, when he
once gathered many of your sect into his I affronts all the authority of the evano-elists

house at Rome, to keep tliese precepts of
Manichasus, which you think so much of,
though they are very silly and childish. The
precepts proved too much for your weakness,
and the gathering was entirely broken up.
Those who persevered separated from your
communion, and are called Mattarians, be-
cause they sleep on mats, — a very different
bed from the feathers of Faustus and his
goatskin coverlets, and all the grandeur that
made him despise not only the Mattarians,
but also the house of his poor father in Mi-
leum. Away, then, with this accursed hy-
pocrisy from your writing, if not from your
conduct; or else your language will conflict
with your life by your deceitful words, as
your First Man with the race of darkness by
his deceitful elements.

6. I am, however, addressing not merely
men who fail to do what they are commanded,
but the members of a deluded sect. For the
precepts of Manichaeus are such that, if you
do not keep them, you are deceivers; if you
do keep them, you are deceived. Christ never
taught you that you should not pluck a vege-
table for fear of committing homicide; for
when His disciples were hungry when passing
through a field of corn. Fie did not forbid
them to pluck the ears on the Sabbath-day;
which was a rebuke to the Jews of the time,
since the action was on Sabbath; and a re-
buke in the action itself to the future Mani-
chreans. The precept of Manichteus, how-
ever, only requires you to do nothing while
others commit homicide for you; though the
real homicide is that of ruining miserable
souls by such doctrines of devils,

7. 'fhe language of Faustus has the typhus
of heresy in it, and is the language of over-
weening arrogance. "You see in me," he
says, "the beatitudes of the gospel; and do
you ask if I believe the gospel ? You see me
poor, meek, a peacemaker, pure in heart,
mourning, hungering, thirsting, bearing per-
secution and enmity for righteousness' sake;
and do you doubt my belief in the gospel ? "
If to justify oneself were to be just, Faustus
would have flown to heaven while uttering
these words. I say nothing of the luxurious
habits of Faustus, known to all the followers
of the Manichajans, and especially to those
at Rome. I shall suppose aManichaean such
as Constantius sought for, when he enforced
the observance of these precepts with the sin-
cere desire to see them observed. How can
I see him to be poor in spirit, when he is so
proud as to believe that his own soul is God,

ratlier than believe ? How a peacemaker,
wlien he holds that the divine nature itself
by which God is whatever is, and is the only
true existence, could not remain in lasting
peace? How pure in heart, when his heart
is filled with so many impious notions ? How
mourning, unless it is for his God captive
and bound till he be freed and escape, with
the loss, however, of a part which is to be
united by the Father to the mass of darkness,
and is not to be mourned for ? How hunger-
ing and thirsting for righteousness, which
Faustus omits in his writings lest, no doubt,
he should be thought destitute of righteous-
ness ? But how can they hunger and thirst
after righteousness, whose perfect righteous-
ness will consist in exulting over their breth-
ren condemned to darkness, not for any fault
of their own, but for being irremediably con-
taminated by the pollution against which they
were sent by the Father to contend ?

8. How do you suffer persecution and en-
mity for righteousness' sake, when, according
to you, it is righteous to preach and teach
these impieties ? The wonder is, that the
gentleness of Christian times allows such per-
verse iniquity to pass wholly or almost un-
punished. And yet, as if we were blind or
silly, you tell us that your suffering reproach
and persecution is a great proof of your
righteousness. If people are just according
to the amount of their suffering, atrocious
criminals of all kinds suffer much more than
you. But, at any rate, if we are to grant that
suffering endured on account of any sort of
profession of Christianity proves the sufferer
to be in possession of true faith and righteous-
ness, you must admit that any case of greater
suffering that we can show proves the posses-
sion of truer faith and greater righteousness.
Of such cases you know many among our
martyrs, and chiefly Cyprian himself, whose
writings also bear witness to his belief that
Christ was born of the Virgin Mary. For
this faith, which you abhor, he suffered and
died along with many Christian believers of
that day, who suffered as much, or more.
Faustus, w-hen shown to be a Manicha;an by
evidence, or by his own confession, on the
intercession of the Christians themselves, who
brought him before the proconsul, was, along
with some others, only banished to an island,
which can hardly l^e called a punishment at
all, for it is what God's servants do of their
own accord every day when they wish to re-
tire from the tumult of the world. Besides,
earthly sovereigns often by a public decree

1 66

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book V.

give release from this banishment as an act
of mercy. And in this way all were after-
wards released at once. Confess, then, that
they were in possession of a truer faith and a
more righteous life, who were accounted
worthy to suffer for it much more than you
ever suffered. Or else, cease boasting of the
abhorrence which many feel for you, and
learn to distinguish between suffering for blas-
phemy and suffering for righteousness. What
it is you suffer for, your own books will show
in a way that deserves your most particular at-
tention.

9. Those evangelical precepts of peculiar
sublimity which you make people who know
no better believe that you obey, are really
obeyed by multitudes in our communion.
Are there not among us many of both sexes
who have entirely refrained from sexual in-
tercourse, and many formerly married who
practise continence ? Are there not many
others who give largely of their property, or
give it up altogether, and many who keep the
body in subjection by fasts, either frequent or
daily, or protracted beyond belief ? Then
there are fraternities whose members have
no property of their own, but all things com-
mon, including only things necessary for food
and clothing, living with one soul and one
heart towards God, inflamed with a common
feeling of charity. In all such professions
many turn out to be deceivers and reprobates,
while many who are so are never discovered;
many, too, who at first walk well, fall away
rapidly from willfulness. Many are found in
times of trial to have adopted this kind of
life with another intention than they professed ;
and again, manjMn humility and steadfastness
persevere in their course to the end, and are
saved. There are apparent diversities in
these societies; but one charity unites all who,
from some necessity, in obedience to the
apostle's injunction, have their wives as if they
had them not, and buy as if they bought not,
and use this world as if they used it not.
With these are joined, in the abundant riches
of God's mercy, the inferior class of those to
whom it is said, " Defraud not one another,
except it be with consent for a time, that ye
may give yourselves to prayer; and come to-
gether again, that Satan tempt you not for
your incontinency. But I speak this by per-
mission, and not of commandment. '^ ' To such
the same apostle also says, " Now therefore
there is utterly a fault among you, that ye go
to law one with another;" while, in consider-
ation of their infirmity, he adds, " If ye have
judgments of things pertaining to this life,

' I Cor. vii. 5, 6.

set them to judge who are least esteemed in
the Church. ' ' ^ For in the kingdom of heaven
there are not only those who, that they may
be perfect, sell or leave all they have and fol-
low the Lord; but others in the partnership
of charity are joined like a mercenary force to
the Christian army, to whom it will be said
at last, " I was hungry, and ye gave me
meat," and so on. Otherwise, there would
be no salvation for those to whom the apos-
tle gives so many anxious and particular di-
rections about their families, telling the wives
to be obedient to their husbands, and hus-
bands to love their wives; children to obey
their parents, and parents to bring up their
children in the instruction and admonition of
the Lord; servants to obey with fear their
masters according to the flesh, and masters
to render to their servants what is just and
equal. The apostle is far from condemning
such people as regardless of gospel precepts,
or unworthy of eternal life. For where the
Lord exhorts the strong to attain perfection,
saying, " If any man take not up his cross and
follow me, he cannot be my disciple," He im-
mediately adds, for the consolation of the
weak, "Whoso receiveth a just man in the
name of a just man shall receive a just man's
reward; and whoso receiveth a prophet in the
name of a prophet, shall receive a prophet's
reward." So that not only he who gives Tim-
othy a little wine for his stomach's sake, and
his frequent infirmities, but he who gives to a
strong man a cup of cold water only in the
name of a disciple, shall not lose his reward.'
10. If it is true that a man cannot receive
the gospel without giving up everything, why
do you delude your followers, by allowing
them to keep in your service their wives, and
children, and households, and houses, and
fields ? Indeed, you may well allow them to
disregard the precepts of the gospel: for
all you promise them is not a resurrection,
but a change to another mortal existence, in
which they shall live the silly, childish, im-
pious life of those you call the Elect, the life
you live yourself, and are so much praised
for; or if they possess greater merit, they
shall enter into melons or cucumbers, or some
eatables whicli you will masticate, that they
may be quickly purified by your digestion.
Least of all should you who teach such doc-
trines profess any regard for the gospel. For
if the faith of the gospel had any connection
with such nonsense, the Lord should have
said, not, "I was hungry, and ye gave me;
meat;" but, "Ye were hungry, and ye ate
me," or, "I was hungry, and I ate you."

= 1 c

or. VI. 7, 4.

3 Matt. X. 3S-42.

Book VI.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

167

For, by your absurdities, a man rt-ill not be
received into the kingdom of God for the ser-
vice of giving food to the saints, but, because
he has eaten them and belched them out, or
has himself been eaten and belched into
heaven. Instead of saying, " Lord, when
saw we Thee hungry, and fed Thee?" the
righteous must say, "When saw we Thee
hungry, and were eaten by Thee ? " And He
must answer, not, " When ye gave food to
one of the least of these my brethren, you
gave to me;" but, "When you were eaten
by one of the least of these my brethren, you
were eaten by me."

II. Believing and teaching such monstrosi-
ties, and living accordingly, you yet have the
boldness to say that you obey the precepts of
the gospel, and to decry the Catholic Church,
which includes many weak as well as strong,
both of whom the Lord blesses, because both

according to their measure obey the precepts
of the gospel and hope in its promises. The
blindness of hostility makes you see only the
tares in our harvest: for you might easily
see wheat too, if you were willing that there
should be any. But among you, those who
are pretendetl Manichteans are wicked, and
those who are really Manichaeans are silly.
For where the faith itself is false, he who
hypocritically professes it acts deceitfully,
while he who truly believes is deceived.
Such a faith cannot produce a good life, for
every man's life is good or bad according as
his heart is engaged. If your affections were
set upon spiritual and intellectual good, in-
stead of material forms, you would not pay
homage to the material sun as a divine sub-
stance, and as the light of wisdom, which
every one knows you do, though I now only
mention it in passing.

BOOK VI.

FAUSTUS AVOWS HIS DISBELIEF IN THE OLD TESTAMENT AND HIS DISREGARD OF ITS PRECEPTS,
AND ACCUSES CATHOLICS OF INCONSISTENCY IN NEGLECTING ITS ORDINANCES, WHILE CLAIM-
ING TO ACCEPT IT AS AUTHORITATIVE. AUGUSTIN EXPLAINS THE CATHOLIC VIEW OF THE
RELATION OF THE OLD TESTAMENT TO THE NEW.

I. Faustus said: You ask if I believe the

Old Testament. Of course not, for I do not

keep its precepts. Neither, I imagine, do

you. I reject circumcision as disgusting;

and if I mistake not, so do you. I reject the

observance of Sabbaths as superfluous: I

suppose you do the same. I reject sacrifice

as idolatry, "as doubtless you also do. Swine's

flesh is not the only flesh I abstain from; nor

is it the only flesh you eat. I think all flesh

unclean: you think none unclean. Both

jalike, in these opinions, throw over the Old

j Testament. We both look upon the weeks

iof unleavened bread and the feast of taber-

inacles as unnecessary and useless. Not to

i patch linen garments with purple; to count it

adultery to make a garment of linen and

wool; to call it sacrilege to yoke together an

lox and an ass when necessary; not to appoint

las priest a bald man, or a man with red hair,

lor any similar peculiarity, as being unclean in

jthe sight of God, are things which we both

jdespise and laugh at, and rank as of neither

jfirst nor second importance; and yet they are

all precepts and judgments of the Old Testa-

iment. You cannot blame me for rejecting

the Old Testament; for whether it is right or

wrong to do so, you do it as much as I. As

for the difference between your faith and mine,
it is this, that while you choose to act deceit-
fully, and meanly to praise in words what in
your heart you hate, I, not having learned
the art of deception, frankly declare that I hate
both these abominable precepts and their
authors.

2. AuGUSTiN replied: How and for what
purpose the Old Testament is received by the
lieirs of the New Testament has been already
explained.' But as the remarks of Faustus
were then about the promises of the Old
Testament, and now he speaks of the pre-
cepts, I reply that he displays ignorance of
the difference between moral and symbolical
precepts. For example, " Thou shalt not
covet" is a moral precept; " Thou shalt cir-
cumcise every male on the eighth da}'' " is a
symbolical precept. From not making this
distinction, the Manichasans, and all who find
fault with the writings of the Old Testament,
not seeing that whatever observance God ap-
pointed for the former dispensation was a
shadow of future things, because these ob-
servances are now discontinued, condemn
them, though no doubt what is unsuitable

■ liook iv.

i6S

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book VI.

now was perfectly suitable then as prefiguring
the things now revealed. In this they con-
tradict the apostle who says, "All these things
happened to them for an example, and they
were written for our learning, on whom the
end of the world is come."' The apostle
here explains why these writings are to be re-
ceived, and why it is no longer necessary to
continue the symbolical observances. For
when he says, "They were written for our
learning," he clearly shows ;hat we should
be very diligent in reading and in discovering
the meaning of the Old Testament Scriptures,
and that we should have great veneration for
them, since it was for us that they were
written. Again, when he says, "They are
our examples," and "these things happened
to them for an example,'^ he shows that, now
that the things themselves are clearly re-
vealed, the observance of the actions by
which these things were prefigured is no
longer binding. So he says elsewhere, "Let
no man judge you in meat, or in drink, or in
respect of an holy day, or of the new moon,
or of the sabbath-days, which are a shadow
of things to come. "^ Here also, when he
says, " Let no one judge you " in these
things, he shows that we are no longer bound
to observe them. And when he says, " which
are a shadow of things to come," he explains
how these observances were binding at the
time when the things fully disclosed to us
were symbolized by these shadows of future
things.

3. Assuredly, if the Manichasans were jus-
tified by the resurrection of the Lord, — the
day of whose resurrection, the third after His
passion, was the eighth day, coming after
the Sabbath, that is, after the seventh day, —
their carnal minds would be delivered from
the darkness of earthly passions which rests
on them; and rejoicing in the circumcision of
the heart, they would not ridicule it as pre-
figured in the Old Testament by circumcision
in the flesh, although they should not enforce
this observance under the New Testament.
But, as the apostle says, "To the pure all
things are pure. But to the impure and un-
believing nothing is pure, but both their mind
and conscience are defiled." 3 go these
people, who are so pure in their own eyes,
that they regard, or pretend to regard, as
impure these members of their bodies, are so
defiled with unbelief and error, that, while
they abhor the circum.cision of the flesh, —
which the apostle calls a seal of the righteous-
ness of faith, — the"y believe that the divine
members of their God are subjected to re-

J I Cor. X. 6.

' Col. ii. 16, 17.

3 Tit. i. 15.

straint and contamination in these very carnal
members of theirs. For they say that flesh
is unclean; and it follows that God, in the
part which is detained by the flesh, is made
unclean: for they declare that He must be
cleansed, and that till this is done, as far as
it can be done, He undergoes all the passions
to which flesh is subject, not only in suffering
pain and distress, but also in sensual gratifica-
tion. For it is for His sake, they say, that
they abstain from sexual intercourse, that He
may not be bound more closely in the bondage
of the flesh, nor suffer more defilement. The
apostle says, " To the pure all things are
pure." And if this is true of men, who may
be led into evil by a perverse will, how much
more must all things be pure to God, who re-
mains for ever immutable and immaculate !
Li those books which you defile with your
violent reproaches, it is said of the divine wis-
dom, that "no defiled thing falleth into it,
and it goeth everywhere by reason of its pure-
ness."-* It is mere prurient absurdity to find
fault with the sign of human regeneration ap- .
pointed by that God, to whom all things are
pure, to be put on the organ of human gen-
eration, while you hold that your God, to
whom nothing is pure, is in a part of his
nature subjected to taint and corruption by
the vicious actions in which impure men em-
ploy the members of their body. For if you
think there is pollution in conjugal inter-
course, what must there be in all the practices
of the licentious ? If you ask, then, as you
often do, whether God could not find some
other way of sealing the righteousness of
faith, the answer is, Why not this way, since
all things are pure to the pure, much more to
God? And we have the authority of the
apostle for saying that circumcision was the ■
seal of the righteousness of the faith of Abra-
ham. As for you, you must try not to blush
when you are asked whether your God had
nothing better to do than to entangle part of I
his nature with these members that you revile
so much. These are delicate subjects to
speak of, on account of the penal corruption,
attending the propagation of man. They are
tnings which call into exercise the modesty of
the chaste, the passions of the impure, and
the justice of God.

4. The rest of the Sabbath we consider no
longer binding as an observance, now that the;
hope of our eternal rest has been revealed.
But it is a very useful thing to read of, and!
to reflect on. In prophetic times, whenl
things now manifested were prefigured andf
predicted by actions as well as words, this!

I 4 Wisd. vii. 24, 25

Book VI.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.^:AN.

169

sign of which we read was a presage of the
reality which we possess. But I wish to know
why you observe a sort of partial rest. The
Jews, on their Sabbath, which they still keep
in a carnal manner, neither gather any fruit
in the field, nor dress and cook it at home.
But you, in your rest, wait till one of your
followers takes his knife or hook to the gar-
den, to get food for you by murdering the
vegetables, and brings back, strange to say,
living corpses. For if cutting plants is not
murder, why are you afraid to do it ? And
yet, if the plants are murdered, what becomes
of the life which is to obtain release and
restoration from 3'our mastication and diges-
tion ? Well, you take the living vegetables,
and certainly you ought, if it could be done,
to swallov.' them whole; so that after the one
wound 3'our follower has been guilty of in-
flicting in pulling them, of which you will no
doubt consent to absolve him, they may reach
without loss or injury your private laboratory,
where your God maybe healed of his wound.
[Instead of this, you not only tear them with
your teeth, but, if it pleases your taste, mince
them, in.^icting a multitude of wounds in the
most criminal manner. Plainly it would be
a most advantageous thing if you w^ould rest
at home too, and not only once a week, like
the Jews, but every day of the week. The
cucumbers suffer while you are cooking them,
without any benefit to the life that is in them;
for a boiling pot cannot be compared to a
saintly stomach. And yet you ridicule as
superfluous the rest of the Sabbath. Would
it not be better, not only to refrain from find-
}ing fault with the fathers for this observance,
in whose case it was not superfluous, but,

ven now that it is superfluous, to observe
'his rest yourselves instead of your own,
ivhich has no symbolical use, and is con-
ilemned as grounded on falsehood ? Accord-

ng to your own foolish opinions, 3'ou are
guilty of a defective observance of your own

est, though the observance itself is foolish in
'he judgment of truth. You maintain that

iie fruit suffers w'hen it is pulled from the
iree, when it is cut and scraped, and cooked,
!md eaten. So you are wrong in eating any-
Jiing that can not be swallowed raw and un-
, |uirt, so that the wound inflicted might not be
trom you, but from your follower in pulling
icm. You declare that you could not give

elease to so great a quantity of life, if you

■ere to eat only things which could be swal-

3wed without cooking or mastication. But

this release compensates for all the pains

HI inflict, why is it unlawful for you to pull

10 fruit ? Fruit may be eaten raw, as some

1 your sect make a point of eating raw vege-

tables of all kinds. But before it can be
eaten at all, it must be pulled or fall off, or
be taken in some way from the ground or
from the tree. You might well be pardoned
for pulling it, since nothing can be done with-
out that, but not for torturing the members
of your God to the extent you do in dressing
your food. One of your silly notions is that
the tree weeps when the fruit is pulled.
Doubtless the life in the tree knows all things,
and perceives who it is that comes to it. If
the elect were to come and pull the fruit,
would not the tree rejoice to escape the misery
of having its fruit plucked by others, and to
gain felicity by enduring a little momentary
pain ? And yet, while you multiply the pains
and troubles of the fruit after it is plucked,
you will not pluck it. Explain that, if you
can ! Fasting itself is a mistake in your case.
There should be no intermission in the task
of purging away the dross of the excrements
from the spiritual gold, and of releasing the
divine members from confinement. The
most merciful man among you is he who
keeps himself always in good health, takes
raw food, and eats a great deal. But you are
cruel when you eat, in making your food un-
dergo so much suffering; and you are cruel
when you fast, in desisting from the work of
liberating the divine members.'

5. With all this, you venture to denounce
the sacrifices of the Old Testament, and to
call them idolatry, and to attribute to us the
same impious notion. To answer for our-
selves in the first place, while we consider it
no longer a duty to offer sacrifices, we recog-
nize sacrifices as part of the mysteries of
Revelation, by which the things prophesied
were foreshadowed. For they were our ex-
amples, and in many and various ways they
all pointed to the one sacrifice which we now
commemorate. Now that this sacrifice has
been revealed, and has been offered in due
time, sacrifice is no longer binding as an act
of worship, while it retains its symbolical au-
thority. For these things "were written for our
learning, upon whom the end of the world is
come. '•' ^ What you object to in sacrifice is the
slaughter of animals, though the whole animal
creation is intended conditionally in some way
for the use of man. You are merciful to
beasts, believing them to contain the souls of
human beings, while you refuse a piece of
bread to a hungry beggar. The Lord Jesus,
on the other hand, was cruel to the swine
when He granted the request of the devils to

i[Tn brinKingto notice the absurdities of the Manichsean moral
system, Aiisfustin may seem to be trifiinfif, but he is 'n reahty strik-
ing at the root of the heresy.— A. H. N.]
2 I Cor. X. II.

I70

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book VI.

be allowed to enter into them.' The same
Lord Jesus, before the sacrifice of His passion,
said to a leper whom He had cured, " Go,
show thyself to the priest, and give the offer-
ing, as Moses commanded, for a testimony
unto them."^ When God, by the prophets,
repeatedly declares that He needs no offer-
ing, as indeed reason teaches us that offerings
cannot be needed by Him who stands in need
of nothing, the human mind is led to inquire
what God wished to teach us by these sacri-
fices. For, assuredly. He would not have
required offerings of which He had no need,
except to teach us something that it would
profit us to know, and which was suitably set
forth by means of these symbols. How much
better and more honorable it would be for you
to be still bound by these sacrifices, which
have an instructive meaning, though they are
not now necessary, than to require your fol-
lowers to offer to you as food what you be-
lieve to be living victims. The Apostle Paul
says most appropriately of some who preached
the gospel to gratify their appetite, that their
"god was their belly." 3 But the arrogance
of your impiety goes much beyond this; for,
instead of making your belly your god, you
do what is far worse in making your belly the
purifier of God, Surely it is great madness
to make a pretence of piety in not slaughter-
ing animals, while you hold that the souls of
animals inhabit all the food you eat, and yet
make what you call living creatures suffer
such torture from your hands and teeth.

6 If you will not eat flesh why should you
not slay animals in sacrifice to your God, in
order that their souls, which you hold to be
not only human, but so divine as to be mem-
bers of God Himself, may be released from
the confinement of flesh, and be saved from
returning by the efficacy of your prayers ?
Perhaps, however, your stomach gives more
effectual aid than your intellect, and that part
of divinity which has had the advantage of
passing through your bowels is more likely to
be saved than that which has only the benefit
of your prayers. Your objection to eating
flesh will be that you cannot eat animals alive,
and so the operation of your stomach will not
avail for the liberation of their souls. Happy
vegetables, that, torn up with the hand, cut
with knives, tortured in fire, ground by teeth,
yet reach alive the altars of your intestines !
Unhappy sheep and oxen, that are not so
tenacious of life, and therefore are refused
entrance into your bodies ! Such is the ab-
surdity of your notions. And you persist in
making out an opposition in us to the Old

I Matt.

32-

Luke

V. 14.

3 Phil. iii. iq.

Testament, because we consider no flesh un-
clean: according to the opinion of the apos-
tle, " To the pure all things are pure; " ■* and
according to the saying of our Lord Himself,
" Not that which goeth into your mouth de-
fileth you, but that which cometh out." ^ This
was not said to the crowd only, as your Adi-
mantus, whom Faustus, in his attack on the
Old Testament, praises as second only to
Manichaeus, wishes us to understand; but
when retired from the crowd, the Lord repeated
this still more plainly and pointedly to His
disciples. Adimantus quotes this saying of
our Lord in opposition to the Old Testament,
where the people are prohilMted from eating-
some animals which are pronounced unclean;
and doubtless he was afraid that he should be
asked why, since he quotes a passage from
the Gospel about man not being defiled by
what enters into his mouth and passes into his
belly, and out into the draft, he yet considers
not some only, but all flesh unclean, and ab-
stains from eating it. It is in order to escape
from this strait, when the plain truth is too
much for his error, that he makes the Lord
say this to the crowd; as if the Lord were in
the habit of speaking the truth only in small
companies, while He blurted out falsehoods in
public. To speak of the Lord in this way is
blasphemy. And all who read the passage
can see that the Lord said the same thing
more plainly to His disciples in private.
Since Faustus praises Adimantus so much at
the beginning of this book of his, placing him
next to Manichaeus, let him say in a word
whether it is true or false that a man is not
defiled by what enters into his mouth. If it
is false, why does this great teacher Adiman-
tus quote it against the Old Testament ? If
it is true, why, in spite of this, do you believe
that eating any flesh will defile you? It is
true, if you choose this explanation, that the
apostle does not say that all things are pure
to heretics, but, "to the pure all things are
pure." The apostle also goes on to explain
why All things are not pure to heretics: " To
the impure and unbelieving nothing is pure,
but both their mind and conscience are de-
filed."^ So to the Manichseans there is ab-
solutely nothing pure; for they hold that the
very substance or nature of God not only
may be, but has actually been defiled, and
so defiled that it can never be wholly restored
and purified. What do they mean when they
call animals unclean, and refrain from eating
them, when it is impossible for them to think
anything, whether food or whatever it may
be, clean ? According to them, vegetables

4 Tit. i. 15.

5 Matt. ,\vi. II.

6 Tit. i. 15.

Book VI.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

171

too, fruits, all kinds of crops, the earth and
sky, are defiled by mixture with the race of
darkness. Why do they not act up to their
opinions about other things as well as about
animals ? Why do they not abstain alto-
gether, and starve themselves to death, in-
stead of persisting in their blasphemies ? If
they will not repent and reform, this is evi-
dently the best thing that they could do.

7. The saying of the apostle, that " to the
pure all things are pure," and that "every
creature of God is good,'' is not opposed to
the prohibitions of the Old Testament; and
the explanation, if they can understand it, is
this. The apostle speaks of the natures of the
things, wliile the Old Testament calls some
animals unclean, not in their nature,, but
symbolically, on account of the prefigurative
character of that dispensation. For instance,
a pig and a lamb are both clean in their nature,
for every cieature of God is good; but sym-
bolically, a lamb is clean, and a pig unclean.
So the words wise and fool are both clean in
their nature, as words composed of letters;
hvXfool may be called symbolically unclean,
because it means an unclean thing. Perhaps
a pig is the same among symbols as a fool is
among real things. The animal, and the four
letters which compose the word, may mean
the same thing. No doubt the animal is pro-
nounced unclean by the law, because it does
not chew the cud; which is not a fault but its
nature. But the men of whom this animal is
a symbol are unclean, not by nature, but from
their own fault; because, though they gladly
hear the words of wisdom, they never reflect
on them afterwards. For to recall, in quiet
repose, some useful instruction from the
stomach of memory to the mouth of reflec-
tion, is a kind of spiritual rumination. The
animals above mentioned are a symbol of
those people who do not do this. And the
prohibition of the flesh of these animals is a
warning against this fault. Another passage
of Scripture speaks of the precious treasure
of wisdom, and describes ruminating as clean,
and not ruminating as* unclean: " A precious
treasure resteth in the mouth of a wise man;
but a foolish man swallows it up." ' Symbols
of this kind, either in words or in things, give
useful and pleasant exercise to intelligent
minds in the way of inquiry and comparison.
But formerly people were required not only
to hear, but to practise many such things.
For at that time it was necessary that, by
deeds as well as by words, those things should
be foreshadowed which were in after times to
be revealed. After the revelation by Ciirist

' Prov. xxi. 20.

and in Christ, the community of believers is
not burdened with the practice of the observ-
ances, but is admonished to give heed to the
prophecy. This is our reason for accounting
no animals unclean, in accordance with the
saying of the Lord and of the apostle, while
we are not opposed to the Old Testament,
where some animals are pronounced unclean.
Now let us hear why you consider all animal
food unclean.

8. One of your false doctrines is, that flesh
is unclean on account of mixture with the race
of darkness. But this would make not only
flesh unclean, but your God himself, in that
part which he sent to become sul)ject to ab-
sorption and contamination, in order that the
enemy might be conquered and taken captive.
Besides, on account of this mixture, all that
you eat must be unclean. But you say flesh
is especially unclean. It requires patience to
listen to all their absurd reasons for this
peculiar impurity of flesh. I will mention
only what will suffice to show the inveterate
folly of these critics of the Old Testament,
who, while they denounce flesh, savor only
fleshly things, and have no sort of spiritual
perception. And a lengthy discussion of this
question may perhaps enable us to dispense
with saying much on some other points. The
following, then, is an account of their vain
delusions in this matter: — In that battle, when
the First Man ensnared the race of darkness
by deceitful elements, princes of both sexes
belonging to this race were taken. By means
of these princes the world was constructed;
and among those used in the formation of the
heavenly bodies, were some pregnant females.
When the sky began to rotate, the rapid cir-
cular motion made these females give birth
to abortions, which, being of both sexes, fell
on the earth, and lived, and grew, and came
together, and produced offspring. Hence
sprang all animal life in earth, air, and sea.=
Now if the origin of flesh is from heaven, that
is no reason for thinking it especially unclean.
Indeed, in this construction of the world, they
hold that these principles of darkness were
arranged higher or lower, according to the
greater or less amount of good mixed with
them in the construction of the various parts
of the world. So flesh ought to be cleaner
than vegetables which come out of the earth,
for it comes from heaven. And how irra-
tional to suppose that the abortions, before
becoming animate, were so lively, though in
an abortive state, that after falling from the
sky, they could live and multiply; whereas,

after becoming

animate, they die if brought

= [Compare the Introduction, where an abstract is given of the
Fihrisfs account of the creation.— A. H. X.]

172

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book VI.

forth prematurely, and a fall from a very
moderate height is enough to kill them ! The
kingdom of life in contest with the kingdom
of death ought to have improved them, by
giving them life instead of making them more
perishable than before. If the perishableness
is a consequence of a change of nature, it is
wrong to say that there is a bad nature. The
change is tlie only cause of the perishable-
ness. Both natures are good, though one is
better than the other. Whence then comes
the peculiar impurity of flesh as it exists in
this world, sprung, as they say, from heaven?
They tell us, indeed, of the first bodies of
these principles of darkness being generated
like worms from trees of darkness; and the
trees, they say, are produced from the five
elements. But supposing that the bodies of
animals come in the first place from trees,
and afterwards from heaven, why should they
be more unclean than the fruit of trees ? Per-
haps it will be said that what remains after
death is unclean, because the life is no longer
there. For the same reason fruits and vege-
tables must be unclean, for they die when
they are pulled or cut. As we saw before,
the elect get others to bring their food to
them, that they may not be guilty of murder.
Perhaps, since they say that every living
being has two souls, one of the race of light,
and the other of the race of darkness, the
good soul leaves at death, and the bad soul
remains. But, in that case, the animal would
be as much alive as it was in the kingdom of
darkness, when it had only the soul of its own
race, with which it had rebelled against the
kingdom of God. So, since both souls leave
at death, why call the flesh unclean, as if only
the good soul had left ? Any life that remains
muse be of both kinds; for some remains of
the members of God are found, we are told,
even in filth. There is therefore no reason
for making flesh more unclean than fruits.
The truth is, they pretend to great chastity in
holding flesh unclean because it is generated.
But if the divine body is more grossly shut
in by flesh, there is all the more reason that
they should liberate it by eating. And there
are innumerable kinds of worms not produced
from sexual intercourse; some in the neigh-
borhood of Venice come from trees, which
they should eat, since there is not the same
reason for their being unclean. Besides,
there are the frogs produced by the earth after
a shower of rain.' Let them liberate the
members of their God from these. Let them
rebuke the mistake of mankind in preferring

1 [These biological blunders belong to the age, and are not
Augustin's peculiar fancies. Of course, the argumentative value
of them depends on their general acceptance.-- A. H. N.]

fowls and pigeons produced from males and
females to the pure frogs, daughters of heaven
and earth. By this theory, the first princi-
ples of darkness produced from trees must be
purer than Manichaeus, who was produced by
generation; and his followers, for the same
reason, must be less pure than the lice which
spring from the perspiration of their bodies.
But if everything that comes from flesh is
unclean, because the origin of flesh itself is
unclean, fruits and vegetables must also be
unclean, because they are manured with dung.
After this, what becomes of the notion that
fruits are cleaner than flesh? Dung is the
most unclean product of flesh, and also the
most fertilizing manure. Their doctrine is,
that the life escapes in the mastication and
digestion of the food, so that only a particle
remains in the excrement. How is it, then,
that this particle of life has such an effect on
the growth and the quality of your favorite
food? Flesh is nourished by the productions
of the earth, not by its excrements; while the
earth is nourished by the excrements of flesh,
not by its productions. Let them say which
is the cleaner. Or let them turn from being
unbelieving and impure to whom nothing is
clean, and join with us in embracing the
doctrine of the apostle, that to the pure all
things are pure; that the earth is the Lord's,
and the fullness thereof; that every creature,
of God is good. All things in nature are
good in their own order; and no one sins in
using them, unless, by disobedience to God,
he transgresses his own order, and disturbs
their order by using them amiss.

9. The elders who pleased God kept their
own order by their ol3edience, in observing,
according to God's arrangement, what was
appointed as suitable to certain times. So,
although all animals intended for food are by
nature clean, they abstained from some which
had then a symbolical uncleanness, in prepa-
ration for the future revelation of the things
signified. And so with regard to unleavened
bread and all such things, in which the apos-]
tie says there was a shadow of future things,|
neglect of their observance under the old dis-
pensation, when this observance was enjoined,!
and was employed to prefigure what was after-'
wards to be revealed, would have been as
criminal, as it would now be foolish in us,j
after the light of the New Testament has
arisen, to think that these predictive observ-|
ances could be of any use to us. On the
other hand, since the Old Testament teaches!!
us that the things now revealed were so longi
ago prefigured, that we may be firm and|:
faithful in our adherence to them, it wouldj]
be blasphemy and impiety to discard these

Book VI.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

/ o

books, simply because the Lord requires of
us now not a literal, but a spiritual and in-
telligent regard to their contents. The}^ were
written, as the apostle says, for our admoni-
tion, on whom the end of the world is come.'
" For whatsoever things were written afore-
time were written for our learning." "^ Not to
eat unleavened bread in the appointed seven
days was a sin in the time of the Old Testa-
ment; in the time of the New Testament it is
not a sin. But having the hope of a future
world through Christ,who makes us altogether
new by clothing our souls with righteousness
and our bodies with immortality, to believe that
the bondage and infirmity of our original cor-
ruption will prevail over us or over our actions,
must continue to be a sin, till the seven days
of the course of time are accomplished. In
the time of the Old Testament, this, under
the disguise of a type, was perceived by some
saints. In the time of the New Testament it
is fully declared and publicly preached. ^

What was then a precept of Scripture is
now a testimony. Formerly, not to keep the
feast of tabernacles was a sin, which is not
the case now. But not to form part of the
building of God's tabernacle, which is the
Church, is always a sin. Formerly this was
acted in a figure; now the record serves as
ti-stimony. The ancient tabernacle, indeed,
would not have been called the tabernacle of
tiie testimony, unless as an appropriate sym-
bol it had borne testimony to some truth
which was to be revealed in its own time. To
patch linen garments with purple, or to wear
a garment of woollen and linen together, is
not a sin now. But to live intemperately,
and to wish to combine opposite modes of
life, — as when a woman devoted to religion
wears the ornaments of married women, or
when one who has not abstained from mar-
riage dresses like a virgin, — is always sin.
So it is sin whenever inconsistent things are
combined in any man's life. This, which is
now a moral truth, was then symbolized in
dress. What was then a type is now revealed
truth. So the same Scripture which then re-

' I Cor. X. II. - Rom. xv. 4.

5 [It will be seen in subsequent portions of this treatise that
.\;n,'ustin carries the typological idea to an absurd extreme. —
A. H. N.]

quired symbolical actions, now testifies to the
things signified. The prefigurative observ-
ance is now a record for the confirmation of
our faith, l^'ormerly it was unlawful to plough
with an ox and an ass together; now it is law-
ful. The apostle explains this when he quotes
the text about not muzzling the ox that is
treading out the corn. He says, " Does God
care for oxen?" What, then, have we to do
with an obsolete prohibition -* The apostle
teaches us in the following words, " For our
sakes it is written." ^ It must be impiety in
us not to read what was written for our sakes;
for it is more for our sakes, to whom the
revelation belongs, than for theirs who had
only the figure. There is no harm in joining
an ox witti an ass where it is required. But
to put a wise man and a fool together, not
that one should teach and the other obey, but
that both with equal authority should declare
the word of God, cannot be done without
causing offence. So the same Scripture which
was once a command enjoining the shadow in
which future things were veiled, is now an
authoritative witness to the unveiled truth.

In what he says of the uncleanness of a
man that is bald or has red hair, Faustus is
inaccurate, or the manuscript he has used is
incorrect. 3 Would that Faustus were not
ashamed to bear on his forehead the cross of
Christ, the want of which is baldness, instead
of maintaining that Christ, who says, " I am
the truth," showed unreal marks, after His
resurrection, of unreal wounds ! Faustus says
he has not learned the art of deceiving, and
speaks what he thinks. He cannot therefore
be a disciple of his Christ, whom he madly
declares to have shown false marks of wounds
to his disciples when they doubted. Are we
to believe Faustus, not only in his other ab-
surdities, but also when he tells us that he
does not deceive us in calling Christ a de-
ceiver? Is he better than Christ? Is he
not a deceiver, while Christ is ? Or does he
prove himself to be a disciple not of the
truthful Christ, but of the deceiver Mani-
ch?eus, by this very falsehood, when he boasts
that he has not learned the art of deceiving ?

4 I Cor. ix.

5 Cf. Lev. xxi. 18.

1/4

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book VII.

BOOK VII.

THE GENEALOGICAL QUESTION IS AGAIN TAKEN UP AND ARGUED ON BOTH SIDES.

1. Faustus said: You ask why I do not
believe in tlie genealogy of Jesus. There
are many reasons; but the principal is, that
He never declares with His own lips that He
had an earthly father or descent, but on the
contrary, that he is not of this world, that He
came forth from God the Father, that He de-
scended from heaven, that He has no mother
or brethren except those who do the will of
His Father in heaven. Besides, the framers
of these genealogies do not seem to have
known Jesus before His birth or soon after
it, so as to have the credibility of eye-witnesses
of what they narrate. They became ac-
quainted with Jesus as a young man of about
thirty years of age, if it is not blasphemy to
speak of the age of a divine being. Now the
question regarding a witness is always whether
he has seen or heard what he testifies to.
But the writers of these genealogies never
assert that they heard the account from Jesus
Himself, nor even the fact of His birth; nor
did they see Him till they came to know Him
after his baptism, many years after the time
of His birth. To me, therefore, and to every
sensible man, it appears as foolish to believe
this account, as it would be to call into court
a blind and deaf witness.

2. AuGUSTiN replied: As regards what
Faustus calls his principal reason for not re-
ceiving the genealogy of Jesus Christ, a com-
plete refutation is found in the passages for-
merly quoted, where Christ declares Himself
to be the Son of man, and in what we have
said of the identity of the Son of man with
the Son of God: that in His Godhead He has
no earthly descent, while after the flesh He
is of the seed of David, as the apostle teaches.
We are to believe, therefore, that He came
forth from the Father, that He descended
from heaven, and also that the Word was
made flesh and dwelt amongst men. If the
words, " Who is my mother, and who are my
brethren?"' are quoted to show that Christ
had no earthly mother or descent, it follows
that we must believe that His disciples, whom
He here teaches by His own example to set
no value on earthly relationship, as compared
with the kingdom of heaven, had no fathers,
because Christ says to them, "Call no man
father upon earth; for one is your Father,
even God." '^ What He taught them to do

I Matt. xii. 48.

2 Matt, xxiii. 9.

with reference to their fathers. He Himself
first did in reference to His own mother and
brethren; as in many other things He conde-
scended to set us an example, and to go before
that we might follow in His footsteps. Faus-
tus' principal objection to the genealogy fails
completely; and after the defeat of this in-
vincible force, the rest is easily routed. He
says that the apostles who declared Christ to
be the Son of man as well as the Son of God
are not to be believed, because they were not
present at the birth of Christ, whom they
joined when He had reached manhood, nor
heard of it from Christ Himself. Why then
do they believe John when he says, '' In the
beginning was the Word, and the Word was
with God, and the Word was God. The same
was in the beginning with God. All things
were made by Him, and without Him was not
anything made,'^^ and such passages, which
they agree to, without understandmg them ?
Where did John see this, or did he ever hear
it from the Lord Himself? In whatever way
John learned this, those v/ho narrate the
nativity may have learned also. Again, how
do they know that the Lord said, " Who is
my mother, and who are my brethren ? " If
on the authority of the evangelist, why do
they not also believe that the mother and the
brethren of Christ were seeking for Him ?
They believe that Christ said these words,
which they misunderstand, while they deny a
fact resting on the same authority. Once
more, if Matthew could not know that Christ
was born, because he knew Him only in His
manhood, how could Manich^eus, who lived
so long after, know that He was not born ?
They will say that Manichseus knew this from
the Holy Spirit which was in him. Certainly
the Holy Spirit would make him speak the
truth. But why not rather believe what
Christ's own disciples tell us, who were per-
sonally acquainted with Him, and who not
only had the gift of inspiration to supply de-
fects in their knowledge, but in a purely
natural way obtained information of the birth
of Christ, and of His descent, when the event
was fresh in memory ? And yet he dares to
call the apostles deaf and blind. Why were
you not deaf and blind, to prevent you from
learning such profane nonsense, and dumb
too, to prevent you from uttering it ?

3 John i. 1-5.

Book IX.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

175

BOOK VIII.

FAUSTUS MAINTAINS THAT TO HOLD TO THE OLD TESTAMENT AFTER THE GIVING OF THE NEW IS
PUTTING NEW CLOTH ON AN OLD GARMENT. AUGUSTIN FURTHER EXPLAINS THE RELATION
OF THE OLD TESTAMENT TO THE NEW, AND REPROACHES THE MANICH^ANS WITH CAR-
NALITY.

1. Faustus said: Another reason for not re-
ceiving tlie Old Testament is, that I am pro-
vided with the New; and Scripture says that
old and new do not agree. For "no one
putteth a piece of new cloth unto an old gar-
ment, otherwise the rent is made worse."'
To avoid making a worse rent, as you have
done, I do not mix Christian newness v.-ith
Hebrew oldness. Every one accounts it
mean, when a man has got a new dress, not
to give the old one to his inferiors. So, even
if I were a Jew by birth, as the apostles were,
it would be proper for me, on receiving the
New Testament, to discard the Old, as the
apostles did. And having the advantage of
being born free from the yoke of bondage,
and bemg early introduced into the full lib-
erty of Christ, what a foolish and ungrateful
wretch I should be to put myself again under
the yoke ! This is what Paul blames the Ga-
latians for; because, going back to circumcis-
ion, they turned again to the weak and beggar-
ly elements, whereunto they desired again to be
in bondage.^ Why should I do what I see an-
other blamed for doing ? My going into bond-
age would be worse than their returning to it.

2. AuGUSTiN replied : We have already shown
sufficiently why and how we maintain the au-
thority of the Old Testament, not for the
imitation of Jewish bondage, but for the con-
firmation of Christian liberty. It is not I,
but the apostle, who says, "All these things
happened to them as an example, and they
were written for our admonition, on whom the
ends of the world are come."^ We do not
therefore, as bondmen, observe what was en-
joined as predictive of us; but as free, we
read what was written to confirm us. So any

;one may see that the apostle remonstrates
Iwith the Galatians not for devoutly reading

what Scripture says of circumcision, but for
superstitiously desiring to be circumcised. We
do not put a new cloth to an old garment, but
we are instructed in the kingdom of heaven,
like the householder, whom the Lord describes
as bringing out of his treasure things new and
old.'* He who puts a new cloth to an old gar-
ment is the man who attempts spiritual self-
denial before he has renounced fleshly hope.
Examine the passage, and you will see that,
when the Lord was asked about fasting, He
replied, " No man putteth a new cloth to an
old garment." The disciples had still a car-
nal affection for the Lord; for they were
afraid that, if He died, they would lose Him.
So He calls Peter Satan for dissuading Him
from suffering, because he understood not the
things of God, but the things of men.^ The
fleshly character of your hope is evident from
your fancies about the kingdom of God, and
from your paying homage and devotion to
the light of the sun, which the carnal eye per-
ceives, as if it were an image of heaven. So
your carnal mind is the old garment to which
you join your fasts. Moreover, if a new
cloth and an old garment do not agree, how do
the members of your God come to be not only
! joined or fastened, but to be united far more
intimately by mixture and coherence to the
principles of darkness ? Perhaps both are old,
because both are false, and both of the carnal
mind. Or perhaps you wish to prove that
one was new and the other old, by the rent
being made worse, in tearing away the un-
happy piece of the kingdom of light, to be
doomed to eternal imprisonment in the mass
of darkness. So this pretended artist in the
fashions of the sacred Scriptures is found
stitching together absurdities, and dressing
himself in the rags of his own invention.

' Matt. ix. 16,

2 Gal. iv. 9.

3 I Cor. X. II.

4 Matt. xiii. 52.

5 Matt. xvi. 23.

BOOK IX.

KAUSTUS ARGUES THAT IF THE APOSTLES BORN UNDER THE OLD COVENANT COULD LAWFULLY
DEPART FROM IT, MUCH MORE CAN HE HAVING BEEN BORN A GENTILE. AUGUSTIN EXPLAINS
' THE RELATION OF JEWS AND GENTILES ALIKE TO THE GOSPEL.

I. Faustus said: Another reason for not
eceiving the Old Testament is, that if it was
lUowable for the apostles, who were born un-

der it, to abandon it, much more may I, who
was not born under it, be excused for not
thrusting myself into it. We Gentiles are

176

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book X.

not born Jews, nor Christians eitlier. Out of
the same Gentile world some are induced by
the Old Testament to become Jews, and some
by the New Testament to become Christians.
It is as if two trees, a sweet and a bitter, drew
from one soil the sap which each assimilates
to its own nature. The apostle passed from
the bitter to the sweet; it would be madness
in me to change from the sweet to the bitter.
2. AuGUSTiN replied: You say that the
apostle, in leaving Judaism, passed from the
bitter to the sweet. But the apostle himself
says that the Jews, who would not believe in
Christ, were branches broken off, and that the
Gentiles, a wild olive tree, were graffed into
the good olive, that is, the holy stock of the
Hebrews, that they might partake of the fat-
ness of the olive. For, in warning the Gen-
tiles not to be proud on account of the fall of
the Jews, he says: " For I speak to you Gen-
tiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the
Gentiles, I magnify my office; if by any
means I may provoke to emulation them
which are my flesh, and might save some of
them. For if the casting away of them be
the reconciling of the world, what shall the
receiving of them be, but life from the dead ?
For if the first fruit be holy, the lump is also
holy; and if the root be holy, so are the
branches. And if some of the branches are
broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree,
were graffed in among them, and with them
partakest of the root and fatness of the olive
tree; boast not against the branches: but if
thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the
root thee. Thou \n\t say then, The branches
were broken off, that I might be graffed in.
Well; because of unbelief they were broken
off, and thou standest by faith. Be not high-
minded, but fear; for if God spared not the
natural branches, take heed lest He also spare
not thee. Behold therefore the goodness and
severity of God: on them which fell, severity;
but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue
in His goodness; otherwise thou also shalt be
cut off. And they also, if they abide not
still in unbelief, shall be graffed in; for God
is able to graff them in again. For if thou
wert cut out of the olive tree, which is wild
by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature

into a good olive tree; how much more shall
these, which be the natural branches, be
graffed into their own olive tree ? For I would
not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of
this mystery (lest ye should be wise in your
own conceits), that blindness in part is hap-
pened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gen-
tiles be come in; and so all Israel shall be
saved.'" It appears from this, that you, who
do not wish to be graffed into this root, though
you are not broken off, like the carnal unbe-
lieving Jews, remain still in the bitterness of
the wild olive. Your worship of the sun and
moon has the true Gentile flavor. You are
none the less in the wild olive of the Gentiles,
because you have added thorns of a new kind,
and worship along with the sun and moon a
false Christ, the fabrication not of your hands,
but of your perverse heart. Come, then, and
be graffed into the root of the olive tree, in
his return to which the apostle rejoices, after
by unbelief he had been among the broken
branches. He speaks of himself as set free,
when he made the happy transition from
Judaism to Christianity. For Christ was al-
ways preached in the olive tree, and those
who did not believe on Him when He came
were broken off, while those who believed
were graffed in. These are thus warned
against pride: " Be not high-minded, but fear;
for if God spared not the natural branches,
neither will He spare thee." And to prevent
despair of those broken off, he adds: "And
they also, if they abide not still in unbelief,
shall be graffed in; for God is able to graff
them in again. For if thou wert cut out of
the olive tree, which is wild by nature, and
wert graffed contrary to nature into a good
olive tree, how much more shall these, which
be the natural branches, be graffed into their i
own olive tree." The apostle rejoices in be-
ing delivered from the condition of a broken
branch, and in being restored to the fatness
of the olive tree. So you who have been
broken off by error should return and be
graffed in again. Those who are still in the;
wild olive should separate themselves from its I
barrenness, and become partakers of fertility.

2 Rom. xi. 16-26.

BOOK X.

FAUSTUS INSISTS THAT THE OLD TESTAMENT PROMISES ARE RADICALLY DIFFERENT FROM THOSE
OF THE NEW. AUGUSTIN ADMITS A DIFFERENCE, BUT MAINTAINS THAT THE MORAL PRE-'
CEPTS ARE THE SAME IN BOTH.

I. Faustus said: Another reason for not
receiving the Old Testament is, that both the
Old and the New teach us not to covet what be-

longs to others. Everything in the Old Testa-
ment is of this kind. It promises riches, andl
plenty, and children, and children's childrenJ

Book XI.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICHyEAN.

177

and long life, and withal the land of Canaan;
but only to the circumcised, the Sabbath ob-
servers,those offering sacrifices, and abstaining
from swine's flesh. Now I, like every other
Christian, pay no attention to these things, as
being trifling and useless for the salvation
of the soul. I conclude, therefore, that the
promises do not belong to me. And mindful
of the commandment, Thou shalt not covet,
I gladly leave to the Jews their own property,
and content myself with the gospel, and with
the bright inheritance of the kingdom of
heaven. If a Jew were to claim part in the
gospel, I should justly reproach him with
claiming what he had no right to, because he
does not obey its precepts. And a Jew might
say the same to me if I professed to receive
the Old Testament while I disregard its re-
quirements,

2. AuGUSTiN replied: Faustus is not
ashamed to repeat the same nonsense again
and again. But it is tiresome to repeat the
same answers, though it is to repeat truth.
What Faustus says here has already been an-
swered, ' But if a Jew asks me why I profess
to believe the Old Testament while I do not
observe its precepts, my reply is this: The
moral precepts of the law are observed by
Christians; the symbolical precepts were pro-
perly observed during the time that the things
now revealed were prefigured. Accordingly,
those observances, which I regard as no
longer binding, I still look upon as a testi-
mony, as I do also the carnal promises from
which the Old Testament derives its name.
For although the gospel teaches me to hope
for eternal blessings, I also find a confirma-
tion of the gospel in those things which " hap-
pened to them for an example, and were
written for our admonition, on whom the ends
of the world are come." So much for our
answer to the Jews, And now we have some-
thing to say to the Manich?eans.

3, By showing the way in which we regard
the authority of the Old Testament we have

' Book vi. 2.

answered the Jews, by whose question about
our not observing the precepts Faustus
thought we would be puzzled. But what an-
swer can you give to the question, why you
deceive simple-minded people by professing
to believe in the New Testament, while you
not only do not believe it, but assail it with all
your force ? It will be more difficult for you
to answer this than it was for us to answer
the Jews, We hold all that is written in the
Old Testament to be true, and enjoined by
God for suitable times. But in your inability
to find a reason for not receiving what is
written in the New Testament, you are
obliged, as a last resource, to pretend that the
passages are not genuine. This is the last
gasp of a heretic in the clutches of truth; or
rather it is the breath of corruption itself,
Faustus, however, confesses that the Old Tes-
tament as well as the New teaches him not to
covet. His own God could never have taught
him this. For if this God did not covet what
belonged to another, why did he construct
new worlds in the region of darkness ? Per-
haps the race of darkness first coveted his
kingdom. But this would be to imitate their
bad example. Perhaps the kingdom of light
was previously of small extent, and war was
desirable in order to enlarge it by conquest.
In that case, no doubt, there was covetous-
ness, though the hostile race was allowed to
begin the wars to justify the conquest. If
there had been no such desire, there was no
necessity to extend the kingdom beyond its
old limits into the region of the conquered
foe. If the Manichseans would only learn
from these Scriptures the moral precepts,
one of which is, Do not covet, instead of tak-
ing offence at the symbolical precept, they
would acknowledge in meekness and candor
that they suited the time then present. We
do not covet v\'hat belongs to another, when
we read in the Old Testament what " hap-
pened to them for examples, and was written
for our admonition, on whom the ends of the
world are come." It is surely not coveting
when a man readswhat is written for his benefit.

BOOK XI,

(•AUSTUS QUOTES PASSAGES TO SHOW THAT THE APOSTLE PAUL ABANDONED BELIEF IN THE IN
CARNATION, TO WHICH HE EARLIER HELD. AUGUSTIN SHOWS THAT THE APOSTLE WAS CON
SISTEN']' WITH HIMSELF IN THE UTTERANCES QUOTED,

I. Faustus said: Assuredly I believe the
pestle. And yet I do not believe that the
lOn of God was born of the seed of David

ccording to the flesh," because I do not be-

«Rom.

lieve that God's apostle could contradict him-
self, and have one opinion about our Lord at
one time, and another at another. But,
granting that he wrote this, — since you will
not hear of anything being spurious in his

178

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XI.

writings, — it is not against us. For this
seems to be Paul's old belief about Jesus,
when he thought, like everybody else, that
Jesus was the son of David. Afterwards,
when lie learned that this was false,, he cor-
rects himself; and in his Epistle to the Co-
rinthians he says: " We know no man after the
flesh; yea, though we have known Christ after
the flesh, yet now henceforth know we Him
no more." ' Observe the difference between
these two verses. In one he asserts that
Jesus was the son of David after the flesh;
in the other he says that now he knows no
man after the flesh. If Paul wrote both, it
can only have been in the way I have stated.
In the next verse he adds: "Therefore, if
any man be in Christ, he is a new creature;
old things are passed away; behold, all things
are become new." The belief that Jesus
was born of the seed of David according to
the flesh is of this old transitory kind; whereas
the faith which knows no man after the flesh
is new and permanent. So, he says else-
where: "When I was a child, I spoke as a
child, I understood as a child, I thought as a
child; but when I became a man, I put away
childish things."- We are thus warranted in
preferring the new and amended confession
of Paul to his old and faulty one. And if
you hold by what is said in the Epistle to the
Romans, why should not we hold by what is
said to the Corinthians? But it is only by
your insisting on the correctness of the text
that we are made to represent Paul as build
ing again the things which he destroyed, in
spite of his own repudiation of such prevarica-
tion. If the verse is Paul's, he has corrected
himself. If Paul should not be supposed to
have written anything requiring correction,
the verse is not his.

2. AuGUSTiN replied: As I said a little ago,
when these men are beset by clear testimonies
of Scripture, and cannot escape from their
grasp, they declare that the passage is spuri-
ous. The declaration only shows their aver-
sion to the truth, and their obstinacy in error.
Unable to answer these statements of Script-
ure, they deny their genuineness. But if
this answer is admitted, or allowed to have any
weight, it will be useless to quote any book
or any passage against your errors. It is one
thing to reject the books themselves, and to
profess no regard for their authority, as the
Pagans reject our Scriptures, and the Jews
the New Testament, and as v/e reject any
books peculiar to your sect, or any other
heretical sect, and also the apocryphal books,
which are so called, not because of any mys-

terious regard paid to them, but b.ecause taey
are mysterious in their origin, and in the ab-
sence of clear evidence, have only some ob-
scure presumption to rest upon; and it is an-
other thing to say. This holy man wrote only
the truth, and this is his epistle, but some
verses are his, and some are not. And then,
when you are asked for a proof, instead of
referring to more correct or more ancient
manuscripts, or to a greater ni:mber, or to
the original text, your reply is. This verse is
his, because it makes for me; and this is not
his, because it is against me. Are you, then,
the rule of truth ? Can nothing be true that
is against you ? But what answer could you
give to an opponent as insane as yourself, if
he confronts you by saying. The passage in
your favor is spurious, and that against you
is genuine ? Perhaps you will produce a
book, all of which can be explained so as to
support you. Then, instead of rejecting a
passage, he will reply by condemning the
whole book as spurious. You have no re-
source against such an opponent. For all the
testimony you can bring in favor of your book
from antiquity or tradition will avail nothing.
In this respect the testimony of the Catholic
Church is conspicuous, as supported by a
succession of bishops from the original seats
of the apostles up to the present time, and
by the consent of so many nations. Accord-
ingly, should there be a question about the
text of some passage, as there are a few pas-
sages with various readings well known to
students of the sacred Scriptures, we should
first consult the manuscripts of the countr
where the religion was first taught; and if
these still varied, we should take the text of
the greater number, or of the more ancient.
And if any uncertainty remained, we should
i consult the original text. This is the method
, employed by those who, in any question
j about the Scriptures, do not lose sight of the
regard due to their authority, and inquire
, with the view of gaining information, not of
raising disputes.^

♦ 3. As regards the passage from Paul's
epistle which teaches, in opposition to your
heresy, that the Son of God was born of the
seed of David, it is found in all manuscripts
both new and old of all Churches, and in all
languages. So the profession which Faustus
makes of believing the apostle is hypocritical
Instead of saying, "Assuredly I believe," he
should have said. Assuredly I do not believe,
as he would have said if he had not wished to
deceive people. What part of his belief does

* 2 Cor. V. 16.

2 I Cor. xiii. 11.

3 [The extremely subjective method of dealing with Scripture,
which Aujrustin ascribes to Faustus, was characteristic of Mani-
i chaiism in general.— -A. H. N.]

Book XI.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.-EAN.

179

he get from the apostle? Not the first man,
of whom the apostle says that he is of the
earth, earthy; and again, "The first man
Adam was made a living soul." Faustus'
First Man is neither of the earth, earthy, nor
made a living soul, but of the substance of
I God, and the same in essence as God; and
I this being is said to have mixed up with the
race of darkness his members, or vesture, or
weapons, that is, the five elements, which also
are part of the substance of God, so that they
became subject to confinement and pollution.
Nor does Faustus get from Paul his Second
Man, of whom Paul says that He is from
heaven, and that He is the last Adam, and a
quickening spirit; and also that He was born
of the seed of David after the flesh, that He
was made of a woman, made under the law, that
He might redeem them that were under the
law.' Of Him Paul says to Timothy: " Re-
member that Jesus Christ, of the seed of
David, was raised from the dead, according
to my gospel.'"" And this resurrection he
quotes as an example of our resurrection: " I
delivered unto you first of all that which I also
received, how that Christ died for our sins,
according to the Scriptures; and that He uas
buried, and that He rose again the third day,
according to the Scriptures." And a little
further on he draws an inference from this doc-
trine: "Now, if Christ be preached that He
rose from the dead, how say some among you
that there is no resurrection of the dead?"^
Our professed believer in Paul believes
nothing of all this. He denies that Jesus
was born of the seed of David, that He was
nade of a woman (by the word woman is not
meant a wife in the common sense of the
ivord, but merely one of the female sex, as
n the book of Genesis, where it is said that
od made a woman before she was brought
o Adam'*); he denies His death. His burial,
nd His resurrection. Fie holds that Christ
lad not a mortal body, and therefore could
lot really die; and that the marks of His
rounds which He showed to His disciples
irhen He appeared to them alive after His
esurrection, which Paul also mentions, ^
veve not real. He denies, too, that our mor-
al body will be raised again, changed into a
piritual body; as Paul teaches: " It is sown
natural body, it is raised a spiritual body."
'o illustrate this distinction between the
atural and the spiritual body, the apostle
dds what I have quoted already about the
rst and the last Adam. Then he goes on:
*But this I say, brethren, that flesh and
lood cannot inherit the kingdom of God."

• Gal. iv. 4, 5.
4 Gon. ii. 22.

2 2 Tiiji. ii. 8.
5 I Cor. xi. 5.

3 I Cor. XV. 3, 4, 12

And to explain what he means by flesh and
blood, that it is not the bodily substance, but
corruption, which will not enter into the resur-
rection of the just, he immediately says,
"Neither shall corruption inherit incorrup-
tion." And m case any one should still sup-
pose that it is not what is buried that is to
rise again, but that it is as if one garment were
laid aside and a better taken instead, he pro-
ceeds to show distinctly that the same body
will be changed for the better, as the gar-
ments of Christ on the mount were not dis-
placed, but transfigured: "Behold, I show
you a mystery; we shall not all be changed,
but we shall all rise/' ^ Then he shows who
are to be changed: "In a moment, in the
twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet: for
the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall
rise incorruptible, and we shall be changed."
And if it should be said that it is not as re-
gards our mortal and corruptible body, but
as regards our soul, that we are to be changed,
it should be observed that the apostle is not
speaking of the soul, but of the body, as is
evident from the question he starts with:
"But some one will say, How are the dead
raised, and with what body do they come ? "
So also, in the conclusion of his argument,
he leaves no doubt of what he is speaking:
"This corruptible must put on incorruption,
and this mortal must put on immortality."^
Faustus denies this; and the God whom Paul
declares to be " immortal, incorruptible, to
whom alone is glory and honor," ^ he makes
corruptible. For in this monstrous and horri-
ble fiction of theirs, the substance and nature
of God was in danger of being wholly cor-
rupted by the race of darkness, and to save
the rest part actually was corrupted. And
to crown all this, he tries to deceive the ig-
norant who are not learned in the sacred
Scriptures, by making this profession: I as-
suredly believe the Apostle Paul; when he
ought to have said, I assuredly do not believe.
4. But Faustus has a proof to show that
Paul changed his mind, and, in writing to
the Corinthians, corrected what he had written
to the Romans; or else that he never wrote
the passage which appears as his, about Jesus
Christ being born of the seed of David ac-
cording to the flesh. And what is this proof?
If the passage, he says, in the Epistle to the
Romans is true, "the Son of God, who was
made of the seed of David according to the •
flesh," what he says to the Corinthians cannot
be true, " Henceforth know we no man after
the flesh; yea, though we have known Christ
after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we

6 Vulg.

7 I Cor. XV. 35-53.

8 I Tim. i. 17.

I So

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XI.

Ilim no more." We must therefore show
that both these passages are true, and not
opposed to one another. The agreement of
the uKinuscripts proves both to be genuine.
In some Latin versions tlie word " born " ' is
used instead of " made," - which is not so
Hteral a rendering, but gives the same mean-
ing. For both these translations, as well as
the original, teach that Christ was of the seed
of David after the flesh. We must not for a
moment suppose that Paul corrected himself
on account of a change of opinion. Faustus
himself felt the impropriety and impiety of
such an explanation, and preferred to say
that the passage was spurious, instead of that
Paul was mistaken.

5. As regards our writings, which are not
a rule of faith or practice, but only a help to
edification, we may suppose that they contain
some things falling short of the truth in ob-
scure and recondite matters, and that these
mistakes may or may not be corrected in sub-
sequent treatises. For we are of those of
whom the apostle says: "And if ye be other-
wise minded, God shall reveal even this unto
you.^' 3 Such writings are read with the right
of judgment, and without any obligation to
believe. In order to leave room for such
profitable discussions of difficult questions,
there is a distinct boundary line separating
all productions subsequent to apostolic times
from the authoritative canonical books of the
Old and New Testaments. The authority of
these books has come down to us from the
apostles through the successions of bishops
and the extension of the Church, and, from a
position of lofty supremacy, claims the sub-
mission of every faithful and pious mind. If
we are perplexed by an apparent contradic-
tion in Scripture, it is not allowable to say.
The author of this book is mistaken; but
either the manuscript is faulty, or the transla-
tion is wrong, or you have not understood.
In the innumerable books that have been
written latterly we may sometimes find the
same truth as in Scripture, but there is not
the same authority. Scripture has a sacred-
ness peculiar to itself. In other books the
reader may form his own opinion, and per-
haps, from not understanding the writer, may
differ from him, and may pronounce in favor
of what pleases him, or against what he dis-
likes. In such cases, a man is at liberty to
withhold his belief, unless there is some clear
demonstration or some canonical authority to
show that the doctrine or statement either
must or may be true. But in consequence
of the distinctive peculiarity of the sacred

I Nat us.

2 Facius.

3 Phil. iii. 15.

writings, we are bound to receive as true
whatever the canon shows to have been said
by even one prophet, or apostle, or evangel-
ist. " Otherwise, not a single page will be left
for the guidance of human fallibility, if con-
tempt for the wholesome authority of the
canonical books either puts an end to that
authority altogether, or involves it in hopeless
confusion.-*

6. With regard, then, to this apparent con-
tradiction between the passage which speaks of
the Son of God being of the seed of David, to
the words, " Though we have known Christ
after the flesh, }^et now henceforth know we
Him no more," even though both quotations
were not from the writings of one apostle, —
though one were from Paul, and the other
from Peter, or Isaiah, or any other apostle or
prophet, — such is the equality of canonica
authority, that it would not be allowable to
doubt of either. For the utterances of Script-
ure, harmonious as if from the mouth of one
man, commend themselves to the belief of
the most accurate and clear-sighted piety,
and demand for their discovery and confirma-
tion the calmest intelligence and the most in-
genious research. In the case before us both
quotations are from the canonical, that is,
the genuine epistles of Paul. We cannot say
that the manuscript is faulty, for the best
Latin translations substantially agree; or that
the translations are wrong, for the best texts
have the same reading. So that, if any one
is perplexed by the apparent contradiction,
the only conclusion is that he does not under-
stand. Accordingly it remains for me to ex-
plain how both passages, instead of being
contradictory, may be harmonized by one
rule of sound faith. The pious inquirer wil
find all perplexity removed by a careful eX'
amination.

7 . That the Son of God was made man of th(
seed of David, is not only said in other place "
by Paul, but is taught elsewhere in sacrec
Scripture. As regards the words, " Thougl
we have known Christ after the flesh, yet nov
henceforth know we Him no more," the con;
text shows what is the apostle's meaningl
Here, or elsewhere, he views with an assurecT
hope, as if it were already present and iij
actual possession, our future life, whicii i|
now fulfilled in our risen Head and Mediatorl
the man Christ Jesus. This life will certainlj|
not be after the flesh, even as Christ's life ij
now not after the flesh. For by flesh thi
apostle here means not the substance of ou
bodies, in which sense the Lord used th|

4 [This is an excellent statement of the doctrine of Scripturaj
authoi-ity, that has been held to by Protestants with far more coif
sistency than by Catholics. — A. H. N.]

Book XL]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.-EAN.

l8l

word when, after His resurrection, He said,
" Handle me, and see, for a spirit hath not
flesh and bones, as ye see me have,"' but
the corruption and mortaUty of flesh, which
will then not be in us, as now it is not in
Christ. The apostle uses the word flesh in
the sense of corruption in the passage about
tlie resurrection quoted before: *' P'^lesh and
l)lood cannot inherit the kingdom of God,
neither shall corruption inherit incorruption."
So, after the event described in the next
verse, '' Behold, I show you a mystery; we
shall all rise, but we shall not all be changed.
In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at
liie last trump (for the trumpet shall sound);
and the dead shall be raised incorruptible,
and we shall be changed. For this corrupti-

c must put on incorruption, and this mortal
must put on immortality," - — then flesh, in
the sense of the substance of the body, will,
after this change, no longer have flesh, in the
sense of the corruption of mortality; and yet,
as regards its own nature, it will be the same
flesh, the same which rises and which is

langed. What the Lord said after His
resurrection is true, " Handle me, and see;
for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye
see me have; " and what the apostle says is
true, " Flesh and blood cannot inherit the
kingdom of God." The first is said of the
bodily substance, which exists as the subject
of the change: the second is said of the cor-
ruption of the flesh, which will cease to exist,
for. after its change, flesh will not be cor-
rupted. So, "we have known Christ after
• '• flesh," that is, after the mortality of flesh,
ocfore His resurrection; " now henceforth
'we know Him no more,'' because, as the same
npostle says, "Christ being risen from the
dead, dieth no more, and death hath no more
dominion over Him.''^ The words, "we
have known Christ after the flesh," strictly
speaking, imply that Christ was after the
flesh, for what never was cannot be known.
And it is not " we have supposed," but " we

ve known." But not to insist on a word,
!i case some one should say that ktiown is
!sed in the sense of supposed, it is astonish-

g, if one could be surprised at want of sight
M a blind man, that these blind people do

it perceive that if what the apostle says

-out not knowing Christ after the flesh
M'oves that Christ had not flesh, then what
le says in the same place of not knowing any
5ne henceforth after the flesh proves that all
hose here referred to had not flesh. For
vhen he speaks of not knowing any one, he
innot intend to speak only of Christ; but in

' Luke xxiv. 39.

=> I Cor. XV. 50-53.

3 Rom. vi. 9.

his realization of the future life with those
who are to be changed at the resurrection, he
says, " Henceforth we know no man after the
flesh; " that is, we have such an assured hope
of our future incorruption and immortality,
that the thought of it makes us rejoice even
now. So he says elsewhere: " If ye then be
risen with Christ, seek those things that are
above, where Christ sitteth at the right hand
of God. Set your affections upon things
above, and not on things on the earth." '^ It
is true we have not yet risen as Christ has,
but we are said to have risen with Him on
account of the hope which we have in Him.
So again he says: "According to His mercy
He saved us, by the washing of regenera-
tion. "^ Evidently what we obtain in the
washing of regeneration is not the salvation
itself, but the hope of it. And yet, loecause
this hope is certain, we are said to be saved,
as if the salvation were already bestowed.
Elsewhere it is said explicitly: "We groan
within ourselves, waiting for the adoption,
even the redemption of our body. For we are
saved by hope. But hope which is seen is not
hope; for what a man seeth, why doth he yet
hope for ? But if we hope for what we see
not, then do we with patience wait for it."^
The apostle says not, "we are to be saved,"
but, "we are now saved," that is. in hope,
though not yet in reality. And in the same
way it is in hope, though not 3'et in reality,
that we now know no man after the flesh.
This hope is in Christ, in whom what we hope
for as promised to us has already been ful-
filled. He is risen, and death has no more
dominion over Him. Though we have known
Him after the flesh, before His death, when
there was in His body that mortality which
the apostle properly calls flesh, now hence-
forth know we Him no more; for that mortal
of His has now put on immortality, and His
flesh, in the sense of mortality, no longer
exists.

8. The context of the passage containing
this clause of which our adversaries make
such a bad use, brings out its real meaning.
" The love of Christ,'' we read, " constrains
us, because we thus judge, that if one died
for all, then all died; and He died for all,
that they which live should not henceforth
live unto themselves, but to Him who died
for them, and rose again. Therefore hence-
forth know we no man after the flesh; and
though we have known Christ after the flesh,
yet now henceforth know we Him no more."
The words, " that they which live should not
henceforth live unto themselves, but unto

4 Col. ill. I, 2.

5 Tit. iii. 5.

6 Ro

m. viii. 23-25.

l82

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XI.

Him who died for them, and rose again,"
show plainly that the resurrection of Christ is
the ground of the apostle's statement. To
live not to themselves, but to Him, must
mean to live not after the flesh, in the hope
of earthly and perishable goods, but after the
spirit, in the hope of resurrection, — a resur-
rection already accomplished in Christ. Of
those, then, for whom Christ died and rose
again, and who live henceforth not to them-
selves, but to Him, the Apostle says that he
knows no one after the flesh, on account of
the hope of future immortality to which they
were looking forward, — a hope which in Christ
was already a reality. So, though he has
known Christ after the flesh, before His
death, now he knows Him no more; for he
knows that He has risen, and that death has
no more dominion over Him. And because
in Christ we all are even now in hope, though
not in reality, what Christ is, he adds:
" Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a
new creature: old things are passed away;
behold, all things are become new. And all
things are of God, who has reconciled us to
Himself by Christ.''' What the new creature
— that is, the people renewed by faith — hopes
for regarding itself, it has already in Christ;
and the hope will also hereafter be actually
realized. And, as regards this hope, old
things have passed away, because we are no
longer in the times of the Old Testament,
expecting a temporal and carnal kingdom of
God; and all things are become new, making
the promise of the kingdom of heaven, where
there shall be no death or corruption, the
ground of our confidence. But in the resur-
rection of the dead it will not be as a matter
of hope, but in reality, that old things shall
pass away, when the last enemy, death, shall
be destroyed; and all things shall become new
when this corruptible has put on incorruption,
and this mortal has put on immortality. This
has already taken place in Christ, whom Paul
accordingly, in reality, knew no longer after
the flesh. But not yet in reality, but only in
hope, did he know no one after the flesh of
those for whom Christ died and rose again.
For, as he says to the Ephesians, we are al-
ready saved by grace. The whole passage is to
the purpose: " But God, who is rich in mercy,
for His great love wherewith He loved us, even
when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us
together with Christ, by whose grace we have
been saved." The words, " hath quickened
us together with Christ," correspond to what
he said to the Corinthians, " that they which

live should no

longer

live to themselves, but

to Him that died for them and rose again."
And in the words, " by whose grace we have
been saved," he speaks of the thing hoped
for 3s already accomplished. So, in the
passage quoted above, he says explicitly,
"We have been saved by hope.'' And here
he proceeds to specify future events as if al-
ready accomplished. "And has raised us up
together," he says, "and has made us sit
together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus,"
Christ is certainly already seated in heavenly
places, but we not yet. But as in an assured
hope we already possess the future, he says
that we sit in heavenly places, not in our-
selves, but in Him, And to show that it is
still future, in case it should be thought that
what is spoken of as accomplished in hope
has been accomplished in reality, he adds,
" that He might show in the ages to come the
exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness
towards us in Christ Jesus." ^ So also we
must understand the following passage: " For
when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins,
which were by the law, did work in our mem-
bers to bring forth fruit unto death." ^ He
says, " when we were in the flesh," as if they
were no longer in the flesh. He means to
say, when we were in the hope of fleshly
things, referring to the time when the law,
which can be fulfilled only by spiritual love,
was in force, in order that by transgression
the offence might abound, that after the
revelation of the New Testament, grace and
the gift by grace might much more abound.
And to the same effect he says elsewhere,
" They which are in the flesh cannot please
God;" and then, to show that he does not
mean those not yet dead, he adds, " But ye
are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit."-* The
meaning is, those who are in the hope of
fleshly good cannot please God; but you are
not in the hope of fleshly things, but in thej
hope of spiritual things, that is, of the king-
dom of heaven, where the body itself, which!
now is natural, will, by the change in the!
resurrection, be, according to the capacity of'
ks nature, a spiritual body. For "it is sown
a natural body, it will be raised a^ spiritual:
body." If, then, the apostle knew no onei
after the flesh of those who were said to be|
not in the flesh, because they were not in the
hope of fleshly things, although they stilll
were burdened with corruptible and mortal™
flesh; how much more significantly could hC'
say of Christ that he no longer knew Him
after the flesh, seeing that in the body of|J
Christ what they hoped for had already been|
accomplished ! Surely it is better and more

I 2 Cor. V. 14- iS.

2 Eph. ii. 4-7.

3 Rom. vii. 5.

4 Rom. viii. S, 9.

Book XII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

183

I reverential to examine the passages of sacred
• Scripture so as to discover tlieir agreement
' with one another, than to accept some as true,
and condemn others as false, whenever any
difficulty occurs beyond the power of our
weak intellect to solve. As to the apostle in
his childhood understanding as a child, this
is said merely as an illustration.' And when

he was a child he was not a spiritual man, as
he was when he produced for the edification
of the'churches those writings which are not,
as other books, merely a profitable study, but
which authoritatively claim our belief as part
of the ecclesiastical canon.

' I Cor. xiii. II.

■ BOOK XII.

FAUSTUS DENIES THAT THE PROPHETS PREDICTED CHRIST, AUGUSTIN PROVES SUCH PREDICTION
FROM THE NEW TESTAMENT, AND EXPOUNDS AT LENGTH THE PRINCIPAL TYPES OF CHRIST
IN THE OLD TESTAMENT.

I. Faustus said: Why do I not believe
the prophets ? Rather why do you believe
them ? On account, you will reply, of their
prophecies about Christ. For my part, I
have read the prophets with the most eager
attention, and have found no such prophecies.
And surely it shows a weak faith not to be-
lieve in Christ without proofs and testimonies.
Indeed, you yourselves are accustomed to
teach that Christian faith is so simple and
absolute as not to admit of laborious investi-
gations. Why, then, should 3'ou destroy the
simplicity of faith by buttressing it with evi-
dences, and Jewish evidences too? Or if you
are changing your opinion about evidences,
what more trustworthy witness could you have
than God Himself testifying to His own Son
when He sent Him on earth, — not by a
prophet or an interpreter,- — by a voice im-
mediately from heaven: " This is my beloved
Son, believe Him ?" ' And again He testifies
of Himself: " I came forth from the Father,
and am come into the world; "^ and in many
similar passages. When the Jews quarrelled
with this 'testimony, saying "Thou bearest
witness of thyself, thy witness is not true,"
He replied: "Although I bear witness of my-
self, my witness is true. It is written in your
law, The witness of two men is true. I am
ae that bear witness of myself, and the
lather who sent me beareth witness of me." ^
He doe£ not mention the prophets. Again
He appeals to the testimony of His own works,
saying, " If ye believe not me, believe the
jworks; " ■* not, " If ye believe not me, believe
jthe prophets." Accordingly we require no tes-
Itimonies concerning our Saviour. All we look
I for in the prophets is prudence and virtue,
'and a good example, which, you are well
! aware, are not to be found in the Jewish
Iprophets. This, no doubt, explains your re-
jferring me at once to their predictions as a

■ Matt. iii. 17.
3 John viii. 13-18.

2 John xvi. 28.
4 John X. 38.

reason for believing them, without a word
about their actions. This may be good policy,
but it is not in harmony with the declaration
of Scripture, that it is impossible to gather
grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles.
This may serve meanwhile as a brief and suffi-
cient reply to the question, why we do not
believe the prophets. The fact that they did
not prophesy of Christ is abundantly proved
in the writings of our fathers. I shall only
add this, that if the Hebrew prophets knew
and preached Christ, and yet lived such
vicious lives, what Paul says of the wise men
among the Gentiles might be applied to them:
" Though they knew God, they glorified Him
not as God, nor were thankful; but they be-
came vain in their imaginations, and their
foolish heart was darkened." ^ You see the
knowledge of great things is worth little, un-
less the life corresponds.

2. AuGUSTiN replied: The meaning of all
this is, that the Hebrew prophets foretold no-
thing of Christ, and that, if they did, their
predictions are of no use to us, and they
themselves did not live suitably to the dignity
of such prophecies. We must therefore prove
the fact of the prophecies; and their use for
the truth and steadfastness of our faith; and
that the lives of the prophets were in har-
mony with their words. In this threefold dis-
cussion, it would take a long time under the
first head to quote from all the books the
passages in which Christ may be shown to
have been predicted. Faustus' frivolity may
be met effectually by the weight of one great
authority. Although Faustus does not be-
lieve the prophets, he professes to believe the
apostles. A.bove, as if to satisfy the doubts
of some opponent, he declares that he assur-
edly believes the Apostle Paul.^ Let us then
hear what Paul says of the prophets. His
words are: "Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ,

5 Rom. i. 21.

6 Lib.

1 84

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book Xll.

called to be an apostle, separated unto the
gospel of God, which He had promised before
by His prophets in the holy Scriptures, con-
cerning His Son, who was made of the seed
of David according to the flesh." ' What
more does Faustus wish ? Will he maintain
that the apostle is speaking of some other
prophets, and not of the Hebrew prophets > In
any case, the gospel spoken of as promised was
concerning the Son of God, who was made for
Him of the seed of David according to the
flesii; and to this gospel the apostle says that
he was separated. So that the Manichsean
heresy is opposed to faith in the gospel, which
teaches that tlie Son of God was made of the
seed of David according to the flesh. Be-
sides, there are many passages where the
apostle plainly testifies in behalf of the
Hebrew prophets, with an authority by which
the necks of these proud Manichaeans are
broken.

3. "I speak the truth in Christ/' says the
apostle, "I lie not, my conscience bearing
me witness in the Holy Ghost, that I have
great heaviness and continual sorrow of heart.
For I could wish that myself were accursed
from Christ, for my brethren, my kinsmen
according to the flesh: who are Israelites; to
whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory,
and the covenants, and the giving of the law,
and the service and the promises; whose are
the fathers, and of whom, as concerning the
flesh, Christ came, who is over all, God
blessed forever."- Here is the most abun-
dant and express testimony and the most
solemn commendation. The adoption here
spoken of is evidently through the Son of
God; as the apostle says to the Galatians:
" In the fullness of time, God sent forth His
Son, made of a woman, made under the lav/,
that He might redeem them that were under
the law, that we might receive the adoption
of sons." 3 And the glory spoken of is chiefly
that of which he says in the same Epistle to
the Romans: "What advantage hath the
Jew ? or what profit is there in circumcision ?
Much every way: chiefly > because unto them
were committed the oracles of God."'* Can
the JNIanichjEans tell us of any oracles of God
committed to the Jews besides those of the
Hebrew prophets? And why are the cov-
enants said to belong especially to the Israel-
ites, but because not only was the Old Testa-
ment given to them, but also the New was
prefigured in the Old ? Our opponents often
display much ignorant ferocity in attacking
the dispensation of the law given to the
Israelites, not understanding that God wishes

I Rom. i. 1-3.
3 Gal. iv. 4, 5.

- Rom. ix. 1-5.
4 Rom. iii. i, 2.

us to be not under the law, but under grace.
They are here answered by the apostle him-
self, who, in speaking of the advantages of
the Jfews, mentions this as one, that they had
the giving of the law. If the law had been
bad, the apostle would not have referred to
it in praise of the J ews. A nd if Christ had not
been preached by the law, the Lord Himself
would not have said, "If ye believe Moses,
yai would have believed me, for he wrote of
me; "5 nor would He have borne the testi-
mony He did after His resurrection, saying,
"All things must needs be fulfilled that
were written in the law of Moses, and in the
Prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning
me."*

4. But because the Manichseans preach
another Christ, and not Him whom the apos-
tles preached, but a false Christ of their own
false contrivance, in imitation of whose false-
hood they themselves speak lies, though they
may perhaps be believed whqn they are not
ashamed to profess to be the followers of a
deceiver, that has befallen them which the
apostle asserts of the unbelieving Jews:
"When Moses is read, a veil is upon their
heart." Neither will this veil which keeps
them from understanding Moses be taken
away from them till they turn to Christ; not
a Christ of their own making, but the Christ
of the Hebrew prophets. For, as the apostle
says, " When thou shalt turn to the Lord, the
veil shall be taken away." ^ We cannot won-
der that they do not believe in the Christ who
rose from the dead, and who said, "All
things must needs be fulfilled which were
written in the law of Moses, and in the
prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning
me;'' for this Christ has Himself told us
what Abraham said to a hard-hearted rich
man when he was in torment in -hell, and
asked Abraham to send some one to his
brothers to teach them, that they might not
come too into that place of torment. Abra-
ham's reply was: " They have Moses and the
prophets, let them hear them." And when
the rich man said that they would not believe
unless some one rose from the dead, he re-
ceived this most truthful answer: " If they
hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will
they believe even though one rose from the
dead."^ Wherefore, the Manichseans will
not hear Moses and the prophets, and so they
do not believe Christ, though He rose from
the dead. Indeed, they do not even believe
that Christ rose from the dead. For how
can they believe that He rose, when they do
not believe that He died ? For, again, how

S John V. 46.

7 2 Cor. ill. i3, 16.

6 Luke xxiv. 44.
8 Luke xvi. 27-^1

Book XII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

185

can they believe that He died, when they
deny that He had a mortal body ?

5. But we reject those false teachers whose
Christ is false, or rather, whose Christ never
existed. For we have a Christ true and truth-
ful, foretold by the prophets, preached l)y the
apostles, who in innumerable places refer to
the testimonies of the law and the prophets
in support of their preaching. Paul, in one
short sentence, gives the right view of this
subject. "Now," he says, "the righteous-
ness of God without the law is manifested,
being witnessed by the law and the prophets. ' ' '
What prophets, if not of Israel, to whom, as
he expressly says, pertain the covenants, and
the giving of the law, and the promises ? And
what promises, but about Christ ? Elsewhere,
speaking of Christ, he says concisely: "All
the promises of God are in Him yea. ' ' - Paul
tells me that the giving of the law pertained
to the Israelites. He also tells me that Christ
is the end of the law for righteousness to
every one that believeth. He also tells me
that all the promises of God are in Christ
yea. And you tell me that the prophets of
Israel foretold nothing of Christ. Shall I
believe the absurdities of Manichsus relating
a vain and long fable in opposition to Paul ?
or shall I believe Paul when he forewarns us:
"If any man preach to you another gospel
than that which we have preached, let him
be accursed ? "

6. Our opponents may perhaps ask us to
point out passages where Christ is predicted
by the prophets of Israel. One would think
they might be satisfied with the authority of
the apostles, who declare that what we read
in the writings of the Hebrew prophets was
fulfilled in Christ, or with that of Christ Him-
self, who says that these things were written
of Him. Whoever is unable to point out the
passages should lay the blame on his own ig-
norance; for the apostles and Christ and the
sacred Scriptures are not chargeable with
falsehood. However, one instance out of
many may be adduced. The apostle, in the
verses following the passage quoted above,
says: " The word of God cannot fail. For
they are not all Israel which are of Israel;
neither, because they are the seed of Abra-
ham, are they all children: but. In Isaac
shall thy seed be called: that is, they which
are the children of the flesh, these are not the
diildren of God; but the children of promise
are counted for the seed."^ What can our
opponent says against this, in view of the
declaration made to Abraham: "In thy seed
shall all the nations of the earth be blessed ?"

' Rom. iii. 21.

2 Cor. i. 20.

3 Rom. ix. 6-S,

At the time when the apostle gave the follow-
ing exposition of this promise, " To Abraham
and to his seed were the promises made. He
saith not. To seed, as of many, but as of one,
To thy seed, which is Christ,"* a doubt on
this point might then have been less inexcus-
able, for at that time all nations had not yet
believed on Christ, who is preached as of the
seed of Abraham. But now that we see the
fulfillment of what we read in the ancient pro-
phecy,— now that all nations are actually
iDlessed in the seed of Abraham, to whom it
was said thousands of years ago, "In thy
seed shall all nations be blessed," — it is mere
obstinate folly to try to bring in another
Christ, not of the seed of Abraham, or to
hold that there are no predictions of Christ
in the prophetical books of the children of
Abraham.

7, To enumerate all the passages in the
Hebrew prophets referring to our Lord and
Saviour Jesus Christ, would exceed the limits
of a volume, not to speak of the brief replies
of which this treatise consists. The whole
contents of these Scriptures are either directly
or indirectly about Christ. Often the refer-
ence is allegorical or enigmatical, perhaps in
a verbal allusion, or in a historical narrative,
requiring diligence in the student, and re-
warding him with the pleasure of discovery.
Other passages, again, are plain; for, without
the help of what is clear, we could not un-
derstand what is obscure. And even the
figurative passages, when brought together,
will be found so harmonious in their testimony
to Christ as to put to shame the obtuseness
of the sceptic.

8. In the creation God finished His works
in six days, and rested on the seventh. The
history of the world contains six periods
marked by the dealings of God with men.
The first period is from Adam to Noah; the
second, from Noah to Abraham; the third,
from Abraham to David; the fourth, from
David to the captivity in Babylon; the fifth,
from the captivity to the advent of lowliness
of our Lord Jesus Christ; the sixth is now in
progress, and will end in the coming of the
exalted Saviour to judgment. What answers
to the seventh day is the rest of the saints, —
not in this life, but in another, where the rich
man saw Lazarus at rest while he was
tormented in hell; where there is no evening,
because there is no decay. On the sixth day,
in Genesis, man is formed after the image of
God; in the sixth period of the \vorld there is
the clear discovery of our transformation in
the renewing of our mind, according to the

4 Gal. iii. 16.

1 86

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XII.

ima-je of Him who created us, as the apostle
saybV As a wife was made for Adam from
his side while he slept, the Church becomes
the property of her dying Saviour, by the
sacrament of the blood which flowed from
His side after His death. The woman made
out of her husband's side is called Eve, or
Life, and the mother of living beings; and
the Lord says in the Gospel: " Except a man
eat my flesh and drink my blood, he has no
life in him." - The whole narrative of Gene-
sis, in the most minute details, is a prophecy
of Christ and of the Church with reference
either to the good Christians or to the bad.
There is a significance in the words of the
apostle when he calls Adam " the figure of
Him that was to come; " ^ and when he says,
" A man shall leave his father and mother,
and shall cleave to his wife, and they two
shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery;
but I speak concerning Christ and the
Church. "'^ This points most obviously to
the way in which Christ left His Father; for
"though He was in the form of God, and
thought it not robbery to be equal with God,
He emptied Himself, and took upon Him the
form of a servant." ^ And so, too, He left
His mother, the synagogue of the Jews which
cleaved to the carnality of the Old Testament,
and was united to the Church His holy bride,
that in the peace of the New Testament they
two might be one flesh. For though with
the Father He was God, by whom we were
made, He became in the flesh partaker of our
nature, that we might become the body of
which He is the head.

9. As Cain's sacrifice of the fruit of the
ground is rejected, while AbeFs sacrifice of
his sheep and the fat thereof is accepted, so
the faith of the New Testament praising God
in the harmless service of grace is preferred
to the earthly observances of the Old Testa-
ment. For though the Jews were right in
practising these things, they were guilty of
unbelief in not distinguishing the time of the
New Testament when Christ came, from the
time of the Old Testament. God said to
Cain, " If thou offerest well, yet if thou di-
videst not well, thou hast sinned."^ If Cain
had obeyed God when He said, " Be content,
for to thee shall be its reference, and thou
shalt rule over it," he would have referred
his sin to himself, by taking the blame of it,
and confessing it to God; and so assisted by
supplies of grace, he would have ruled over
his sin, instead of acting as the servant of sin
in killing his innocent brother. So also the
Jews, of whom all these things are a figure.

if they had been content, instead of being
turbulent, and had acknowledged the time of
salvation through the pardon of sins by grace,
and heard Christ saying, "They that are
whole need not a physician, but they that are
sick; I came not to call the righteous, but
sinners to repentance; '' ^ and, "Every one
that committeth sin is the servant of sin;''
and, " If the Son make you free, ye shall be
free indeed,"^ — they would in confession
have referred their sin to themselves, saying
to the Physician, as it is written in the Psalm,
''I said, Lord, be merciful to me; heal my
soul, for I have sinned against Thee."^ And
being made free by the hope of grace, they

would have ruled over sin as long as it con-
But now, being

tinned in their mortal body,
ignorant of God's righteousness, and wishing
to establish a righteousness of their own,
proud of the works of the law, instead of
being humbled on account of their sins, they
have not been content; and in subjection to
sin reigning in their mortal body, so as to
make them obey it in the lusts thereof, they
have stumbled on the stone of stumbling, and
have been inflamed with hatred ao:ainst him
whose works they grieved to see accepted by
God. The man who was born blind, and had
been made to see, said to them, "We know
that God heareth not sinners; but if any man
serve Him, and do His will, him He hear-
eth;"'" as if he had said, God regardeth not
the sacrifice of Cain, but he regards the sac-
rifice of Abel. Abel, the younger brother, is
killed by the elder brother; Christ, the head
of the younger people, is killed by the elder
people of the Jews. Abel dies in the field;
Christ dies on Calvary.

10. God asks Cain where his brother is,
not as if He did not know, but as a judge asks
a guilty criminal. Cain replies that he knows
not, and that he is not his brother's keeper.
And what answer can the Jews give at this
day, when we ask them with the voice of
God, that is, of the sacred Scriptures, about
Christ, except that they do not know the
Christ that we speak of? Cain's ignorance
was pretended, and the Jews are deceived in
their refusal of Christ. Moreover, they would
have been in a sense keepers of Christ, if
they had been willing to receive and keep the
Christian faith. For the man who keeps
Christ in his heart does not ask, like Cain, Am
I my brother's keeper? Then God says to
Cain, "What hast thou done? The voice of
thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the
ground." So the voice of God in the Holy
Scriptures accuses the Jews. For the blood

' Col. iii. 10.
4 Eph. V. 31, 32.

~ Tohn vi. 53.
5 Phil. ii. 6, 7.

3 Rom. V. 14,

6 Vulg.

7 Matt. ix. 12, 1.3.
9 Ps. xli. 4.

8 John viii. 34, 36.
'° John ix. 31.

Book XII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTIJS THE MANICH^AN.

187

of Christ has a loud voice on the earth, when
the responsive Amen of those who beheve in
Him comes from all nations. This is the
voice of Christ's blood, because the clear
voice of the faithful redeemed by His blood
is the voice of the blood itself.

II. Then God says to Cain: "Thou art
cursed from the earth, which hath opened its
mouth to receive thy brother's blood at thy
hand. For thou shalt till the earth, and it
shall no longer yield unto thee its strength.
A mourner and an abject shalt thou be on the
earth." It is not, Cursed is the earth, but,
Cursed art thou from the earth, which hath
opened its mouth to receive thy brother's
blood at thy hand. So the unbelieving people
of the Jews is cursed from the earth, that is,
from the Church, which in the confession of
sins has opened its mouth to receive the blood
shed for the remission of sins by the hand of
the people that would not be under grace,
but under the law. And this murderer is
cursed by the Church; that is, the Church
admits and avows the curse pronounced by
the apostle: " Whoever are of the works of the
law are under the curse of the law.'' ' Then,
after saying, Cursed art thou from the earth,
which has opened its mouth to receive thy
brother's blood at thy hand, what follows is
not, For thou shalt till it, but. Thou shalt till
the earth, and it shall not yield to thee its
strength. The earth he is to till is not neces-
sarily the same as that which opened its mouth
to receive his brother's blood at his hand.
From this earth he is cursed, and so he tills
an earth which shall no longer yield to him
its strength. That is, the Church admits and
avows the Jewish people to be cursed, because
after killing Christ they continue to till the
ground of an earthly circumcision, an earthly
Sabbath, an earthly passover, while the hid-
den strength or virtue of making known Christ,
which this tilling contains, is not yielded to
the Jews while they continue in impiety and
unbelief, for it is revealed in the New Testa-
ment. While they will not turn to God, the
veil which is on their minds in reading the
Old Testament is not taken away. This veil
is taken away only liy Christ, who does not
do away with the reading of the Old Testa-
ment, but with the covering which hides its
virtue. So, at the crucifixion of Christ, the
veil was rent in twain, that by the passion of
Christ hidden mysteries might be revealed to
believers who turn, to Him with a mouth
opened in confession to drink His blood. In
this way the Jewish people, like Cain, con-
tinue tilling the ground, in the carnal obser-

' Gal. iii. 10.

vance of the law, which does not yield to them
its strength, because they do not perceive in
it the grace of Christ. So. too, the flesh of
Christ was the ground from which by crucify-
ing Him the Jews produced our salvation, for
He died for our offences. But this ground
did not yield to them its strength, for they
were not justified by the virtue of His resur-
rection, for He arose again for our justifica-
tion. As the apostle says: " He was crucified
in weakness, but He liveth by the power of
God.'"" This is the power of that ground
which is unknown to the ungodly and unbe-
lieving. When Christ rose. He did not ap-
pear to those who had crucified Him. So
Cain was not allowed to see the streno-th of
the ground which he tilled to sow his seed in
it; as God said, " Thou shalt till the ground,
and it shall no longer yield unto thee its
strength."

12. " Groaning and trembling shalt thou be
on the earth." Here no one can fail to see
that in every land where the Jews are scattered
they mourn for the loss of their kingdom,
and are in terrified subjection to the im-
mensely superior number of Christians. So
Cain answered, and said: " My case is worse,
if Thou drivest me out this day from the face
of the earth, and from Thy face shall I be
hid, and I shall be a mourner and an outcast
on the earth; and it shall be that every one
that findeth me shall slay me.'' Here he
groans indeed in terror, lest after losing his
earthly possession he should suffer the death
of the body. Tliis he calls a worse case
than that of the ground not yielding to him
its strength, or than- that of spiritual death.
For his mind is carnal; for he thinks little of
being hid from the face of God, that is, of
being under the anger of God, were it not
that he may be found and slain. This is the
carnal mind that tills the ground, but does
not obtain its strength. To be carnally minded
is death; but he, in ignorance of this, mourns
for the loss of his earthly possession, and is
in terror of bodily death. But what does God
reply? " Not so," He says; " but whosoever
shall kill Cain, vengeance shall be taken on
him sevenfold." That is. It is not as thou
sayest; not by bodily death shall the ungodly
race of carnal Jews perish. For whoever de-
stroys them in this way shall suffer sevenfold
vengeance, that is, shall bring upon himself
the sevenfold penalty under which the Jews
lie for the crucifixion of Christ. So to the
end of the seven days of time, the continued
preservation of the Jews will be a proof to be-
lieving Christinns of the subjection merited

* 2 Cor.

xiii. 4.

iSS

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XII.

by those who, in the pride of tiieir kingdom,
l)ut the Lord to death.

13. "And the Lord God set a mark upon
Cain, lest any one finding him should slay
him." It is a most notable fact, that all the
nations subjugated by Rome adopted the
heathenish ceremonies of the Roman worship;
while the Jewish nation, whether under Pagan
or Christian monarchs, has never lost the sign
of their law, by which they are distinguished
from all other nations and peoples. No em-
peror or monarch who finds under his govern-
ment the people with this mark kills them,
that is, makes them cease to be Jews, and as
Jews to be separate in their observances, and
unlike the rest of the world. Only when a
Jew comes over to Christ, he is no longer
Cain, nor goes out from the presence of God,
nor dwells in the land of Nod, which is said
to mean commotion. Against this evil of
commotion the Psalmist prays, " Suffer not
my feet to be moved;" ' and again, " Let not
the hands of the wicked remove me;"'' and,
" Those that trouble me will rejoice when I
am moved:" ^ and, " The Lord is at my right
hand, that I should not be moved;"'* and so
in innumerable places. This evil comes upon
those who leave the presence of God, that is,
His loving-kindness. Thus the Psalmist says,
"I said in my prosperity, I shall never be
moved." But observe what follows, "Lord,
by Thy favor Thou hast given strength to my
honor; Thou didst hide Thy face, and I was
troubled ;'"= which teaches us that not in itself,
but by participation in the light of God, can
any soul possess beauty, or honor, or strength.
The ALanichasans should think of this, to keep
them from the blasphemy of identifying
themselves with the nature and substance of
God. But they cannot think, because they
are not content. The Sabbath of the heart
they are strangers to. If they were content,
as Cain was told to be, they would refer their
sin to themselves; that is, they would lay the
blame on themselves, and not on a race of
darkness that no one ever heard of, and so by
the grace of God they would prevail over their
sin. But now the Manicha^ans, and all who
oppose the truth by their various heresies,
leave the presence of God, like Cain and the
scattered Jews, and inhabit the land of com-
motion, that is, of carnal disquietude, instead
of the enjoyment of God, that is instead of
Eden, which is interpreted Feasting, where
Paradise was planted. But not to depart too
much from the argument of this treatise I
must limit myself to a few short remarks un-
der this head.

' Ps. Ixvi. 9.
4 Ps. .\vi. 8.

- Ps. xxxvi. II.
5 Ps. XXX. 6, 7.

3Ps.

XUl. 4.

14. Omitting therefore many passages in
these Books where Cnrist may be found, but
which require longer explanation and proof,
although the most hidden meanings are the
sweetest, convincing testimony may be ob-
tained from the enumeration of such things
as the following: — That Enoch, the seventh
from Adam, pleased God, and was translated,
as there is to be a seventh day of rest into
which all will be translated who, during the
sixth day of the world's history, are created
anew by the incarnate Word. That Noah,
with his family is saved by water and wood,
as the family of Christ is saved by baptism,
as representing the suffering of the cross.
That this ark is made of beams formed in a
square, as the Church is constructed of saints
prepared unto every good work: for a square
stands firm on any side. Tliat the length is
six times the breadth, and ten times the
height, like a human body, to show that
Christ appeared in a human body. That the
breadth reaches to fifty cubits; as the apostle
says, " Our heart is enlarged,"*^ that is, with
spiritual love, of which he says again, " The
love of God is shed abroad in our heart by
the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us."'
For in the fiftieth day after His resurrection,
Christ sent His Holy Spirit to enlarge the
hearts of His disciples. That it is three hun-
dred cubits long, to make up six times fifty;
as there are six periods in tne history of the
world during which Christ has never ceased
to be preached, — in five foretold by the pro-
phets, and in the sixth proclaimed in the gos-
pel. That it is thirty cubits high, a tenth
part of the length; because Christ is our
height, who in his thirtieth j^ear gave His
sanction to the doctrine of the gospel, by
declaring that He came not to destroy the
law, but to fulfil it. Now the ten command-
ments are to be the heart of the law; and so
the lenijth of the ark is ten times thirty.
Noah himself, too, was the tenth from Adam.
That the beams of the ark are fastened within
and without with pitch, to signify by compact
union the forbearance of love, which keeps
the brotherly connection from being impaired,
and the bond of peace from being broken by
the offences which try the Church either from
without or from within. For pitch is a gluti-
nous substance, of great energy and force, to
represent the ardor of love which, with great
power of endurance, beareth all things in the
maintenance of spiritual communion.

15. That all kinds of animals are inclosed
in the ark; as the Church contains all nations,
which was also set forth in the vessel shown

62 c

or. VI. II.

7 Rom. V. 5.

Book XII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.-EAN.

189

to Peter. That clean and unclean animals
are in the ark; as good and bad take part in
the sacraments of the Church. That the
clean are in sevens, and the unclean in twos;
not because the bad are fewer than the good,
but because the good preserve the unity of
the Spirit in the bond of peace; and the Spirit
is spoken of in Scripture as having a seven-
fold operation, as being " the Holy Spirit of
wisdom and understanding, of counsel and
might, of knowledge and piety, and of the
fear of God." ' So also the number fifty,
which is connected with the advent of the
Holy Spirit, is made up of seven times seven,
and one over; whence it is said, " Endeavor-
ing to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond
of peace."- The bad, again, are in twos, as
being easily divided, from their tendency to
schism. That Noah, counting his family,
was the eighth; because the hope of our
resurrection has appeared in Christ, who rose
from the dead on the eighth day, that is, on
the day after the seventh, or Sabbath day.
This day was the third from His passion; but
in the ordinar}'- reckoning of days, it is both
the eighth and the first.

16. That the whole ark together is finished
in a cubit above; as the Church, the body of
Christ gathered into unity, is raised to per-
fection. So Christ says in the Gospel: "He
that gathereth not with me, scattereth." ^
That the entrance is on the side; as no man
enters the Church except by the sacrament
of the remission of sins which flowed from
Christ's opened side. That the lower spaces
of the ark are divided into two and three
chambers: as the multitude of all nations in
the Church is divided into two, as circumcised
and uncircumcised; or into three, as de-
scended from the three sons of Noah. And
these parts of the ark are called lower, because
in this earthly state there is a difference of
races, and above we are completed in one.
Above there is no diversity; for Christ is all
and in all, finishing us, as it were, in one
cubit above with heavenly unity.

17. That the flood came seven days after
Noah entered the ark; as we are baptized in
the hope of the future rest, which was de-
noted by the seventh day. That all flesh on
the face of the earth, outside the ark, was
destroyed by the flood; as, beyond the com-
munion of the Church, though the water of
baptism is the same, it is efificacious only for
destruction, and not for salvation. That it
rained for forty days and forty nights; as the
sacrament of heavenly baptism washes away
all the guilt of the sins against the ten com-

' I

sa. M. 2, 3.

Eph. iv. 3.

3 Matt. .\ii. 30.

mandments throughout all the four quarters
of the world (four times ten is forty), whether
that guilt has been contracted in the day of
prosperity or in the night of adversity.

18. That Noah was five hundred years old
when God told him to make the ark, and si.K
hundred when he entered the ark; which
shows that the ark was made during one hun-
dred years, which seem to correspond to the
years of an age of the world. So the si.\th
age is occupied with the construction of the
Church by the preaching of the gospel. The
man who avails himself of the offer of salva-
tion is made like a square beam, fitted for
every good work, and forms part of the sacred
fabric. Again, it was the second month of
the six hundredth year when Noah entered
the ark, and in two months there are sixty
days; so that here, as in every multiple of
six, we have the number denoting the sixth
age.

19. That mention is made of the twenty-
seventh day of the month; as we have already
seen the significance of the square in the
beams. Here especiall}'- it is significant; for
as twenty-seven is the cube of three, there
is a trinity in the means by which we are, as
it were, squared, or fitted for every good
work. By the memory we remember God;
by the understanding we know Him; by the
will we love Him. That in the seventh month
the ark rested; reminding us again of the
seventh day of rest. And here again, to de-
note the perfection of those at rest, the twenty-
seventh day of the month is mentioned for
the second time. So what is promised in hope
is realized in experience. There is here a
combination of seven and eight; for the water
rose fifteen cubits above the mountains, point-
ing to a profound mystery in baptism, — the
sacrament of our regeneration. For the
seventh day of rest is connected with the
eighth of resurrection. For when the saints
receive again their bodies after the rest of the
intermediate state, the rest will not cease;
but rather the whole man, body and soul
united, renewed in the immortal health, will
attain to the realization of his hope in the en-
joyment of eternal life. Thus the sacrament
of baptism, like the waters of Noah, rises
above all the wisdom of the proud. Seven
and eight are also combined in the number
of one hundred and fifty, made up of seventy
and eighty, which was the number of days
during which the water prevailed, pointing
out the deep import of baptism in conse-
cratintr the new man to hold the faith of rest
and resurrection.

20. That the raven sent out after forty
days did not return, being either prevented

190

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XII.

by the water or attracted by some floating
carcase; as men defiled by impure desire, and
therefore eager for things outside in the world,
are either baptized, or are led astray into the
company of those to whom, as they are out-
side the ark, that is, outside the Church,
baptism is destructive. That the dove when
sent forth found no rest, and returned; as in
the New Testament rest is not promised to
the saints in this world. The dove was sent
forth after forty days, a period denoting the
length of human life. When again sent forth
after seven days, denoting the sevenfold
operation of the Spirit, the dove brought back
a fruitful olive branch; as some even who are
I-iaptized outside of the Church, if not desti-
tute of the fatness of charity, may come after
all, as it were in the evening, and be brought
into the one communion by the mouth of the
dove in the kiss of peace. That, when again
sent forth after seven days, the dove did not
return; as, at the end of the world, the rest
of the saints shall no longer be in the sacra-
ment of hope, as now, while in the communion
of the Church, they drink what flowed from
the side of Christ, but in the perfection of
eternal safety, when the kingdom shall be de-
livered up to God and the Father, and when,
in that unclouded contemplation of un-
changeable truth, we shall no longer need
natural symbols.

21. There are many other points which we
cannot take notice of even in this cursory
manner. Why in the six hundred and first
year of Noah's life — that is, after six hundred
years were completed — the covering of the
ark is removed, and the hidden mystery, as
it were, disclosed. Why the earth is said to
have dried on the twenty-seventh day of the
second month; as if the number fifty-seven
denoted the completion of the rite of baptism.
For the twenty-seventh day of the second
month is the fifty-seventh day of the year;
and the number fifty-seven is seven times
eight, which are the numbers of the spirit and
the body, with one over, to denote the bond
of unity. Why they leave the ark together,
though they entered separately. For it is
said: " Noah went in, and his sons, and his
wife, and liis sons' wives with him, into the
ark; " the men and the women being spoken
of separately; which denotes the time when
the flesh lusteth against the spirit, and the
spirit against the flesh. But they go forth,
Nonh and his wife, and his sons and their
wives, — the men and women together. For
in the end of the world, and in the resurrec-
tion of the just, the body will be united to the
spirit in perfect harmony, undisturbed by the
wants and the passions of mortality. Why,

after leaving the ark, only clean animals are
offered in sacrifice to God, though both clean
and unclean were in the ark.

22.. Then, again, it is significant that when
God speaks to Noah, and begins anew, as it
were, in order, by repetition in various forms,
to draw attention to the figure of the Church,
the sons of Noah are blessed, and told to re-
plenish the earth, and all animals are given
to them for food; as was said to Peter of the
vessel, " Kill and eat." That they are told
to pour out the blood when they eat; that the
former life may not be kept shut up in the
conscience, but may be, as it were, poured
out in confession. That God makes the
bow, which appears in the clouds only when
the sun shines, the sign of His covenant with
men, and with every living thing, that He will
not destroy them with a flood; as those do
not perish by the flood, in separation from the
Church, who in the clouds of God — that is, in
the prophets and in all the sacred Scriptures
— discern the glory of Christ, instead of seek-
ing their own glory. The worshippers of the
sun, however, need not pride themselves on
this; for they must understand that the sun,
as also a lion, a lamb, and a stone, are used
as types of Christ because they have some
resemblance, not because they are of the same
substance.

23. Again, the sufferings of Christ from
His own nation are evidently denoted by
Noah being drunk with the wine of the vine-
yard he planted, and his being uncovered in
his tent. For the mortality of Christ's flesh
was uncovered, to the Jews a stumbling-block,
and to the Greeks foolishness; but to them
that are called, both Jews and Greeks, both
Shem and Japhet, the power of God and the
wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of
God is wiser than men, and the weakness of
God is stronger than men.^

Moreover, the two sons, the eldest and the
youngest, carrying the garment backwards,
are a figure of the two peoples, and the sacra-
ment of the past and completed passions of
the Lord. They do not see the nakedness of
their father, because they do not consent to
Christ's death; and yet they honor it with a
covering, as knowing whence they were born.
The middle son is the Jewish people, for they
neither held the first place with the apostles,
nor believed subsequently with the Gentiles.
They saw the nakedness of their father, be-
cause they consented to Christ's death; and
they told it to their brethren outside, for
what was hidden in the prophets was dis-
closed by the Jews. And thus they are the

■ I Cor. i. 2-!-2-,.

Book XII.J

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICHyEAN.

191

servants of their brethren. For what else is
this nation now but a deslc for tlie Ciiristians,
bearing the law and the prophets, and testify-
ing to the doctrine of the Churcn, so that we
honor in the sacrament what they disclose in
the letter?

24. Again, every one must be impressed,
and be either enlightened or confirmed in the
faith, by the blessing of the two sons who
honored the nakedness of their father, though
they turned away their faces, as displeased
with the evil done by the vine. " Blessed,"
he says, "be the Lord God of Shem." For
although God is the God of all nations, even
the Gentiles acknowledge Him to be in a
peculiar sense the God of Israel. And how
IS this to be explained but by the blessing of
Japhet? The occupation of all the world by
t;ie Church among the Gentiles was exactly
foretold in the words: "Let God enlarge
Japhet, and let him dwell in the tents of
Shem." That is for the Manichsean to attend
to. You see what the state of the world ac-
tuall}- is. The very thing that you are aston-
ished and grieved at in us is this, that God is
enlarging Japhet. Is He not dwelling in the
tents of Shem ? — that is, in the churches built
i>y the apostles, the sons of the prophets.
Hear what Paul says to the believing Gentiles:
''Ye were at that time without Christ, being
aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and
strangers from the covenants; having no hope
of the promise, and without God in the world. "
In these words there is a description of the
state of Japhet before he dwelt in the tents
of Shem. But observe what follows: "Now
then," he says, "ye are no more strangers
and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the
saints, and of the household of God, being
huilt upon the foundation of the apostles and
l^irophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the
chief corner-stone."' Here we have Japhet
enlarged, and dwelling in the tents of Shem.
These testimonies are taken from the epistles
<^f the apostles, which you yourselves ac-
knowledge, and read, and profess to follow.
You occupy an unhappy middle position in a
building of which Christ is not the chief
corner-stone. For you do not belong to the
wall of those who, like the apostles, being of
the circumcision, believed in Christ; nor to the
wall of those who, being of the uncircumcision,
like all the Gentiles, are joined in the unity
of faith, as in the fellowship of the corner-
stone. However, all who accept and read any
books of our canon in which Christ is spoken
of as having been born and having suffered
in the flesh, and who do not unite with us in

Eph.

U. 12, 19, 20.'

a common veiling with the sacrament of the
mortality, uncovered by the passion, but
without the knowledge of piety and charity
make known that from which we all are born,
—although they differ among themselves,
whether as Jews and heretics, or as heretics
of one kind or other,— are still all useful to
the Church, as being all alike servants, either
in bearing witness to or in proving some truth.
For of heretics it is said: "There must be
heresies, that those who are api^roved among
you may be manifested." = Go on, then, with
your objections to the Old Testament Script-
ures I Go on, ye servants of Ham ! You
have despised the flesh from which you were
born when uncovered. For you could not
have called yourselves Christians unless Christ
had come into the world, as foretold by the
prophets, and had drunk of His own vine that
cup which could not pass from Him, and had
slept in His passion, as in the drunkenness of
the folly which is wiser than men; and so, in
the hidden counsel of God, the disclosure had
been made of that infirmity of mortal flesh
which is stronger than men. For unless the
Word of God had taken on Himself this in-
firmity, the name of Christian, in which you
also glory, would not exist in the earth. Go
on, then, as I have said. Declare in mockery
what we may honor with reverence. Let the
Church use you as her servants to make
manifest those members who are approved.
So particular are the predictions of the
prophets regarding the state and the suffer-
ings of the Church, that we can find a place
even for you in what is said of the destructive
error by which the reprobate are to perish,
while the approved are to be manifested.

25. You say that Christ was not foretold
by the prophets of Israel, when, in fact, their
Scriptures teem with such predictions, if you
would only examine them carefully, instead
of treating them with levity. Who in Abra-
ham leaves his country and kindred that he
may become rich and prosperous among
strangers, but He who, leaving the land and
country of the Jews, of whom He was born
in the flesh, is now extending His power, as
we see, among the Gentiles ? Who in Isaac
carried the wood for His own sacrifice, but
Fle who carried His own cross? Who is the
ram for sacrifice, caught by the horns in a
bush, but He who was fastened to the cross
as an offering for us ?

26. Who in the angel striving with Jacob,
on the one hand is constrained to give him a
blessing, as the weaker to the stronger, the
conquered to the conqueror, and on the other

- I Cor. xi. 19.

192

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XII.

hand puts his thigh-bone out of joint, but
He who, when He suffered the people of
Israel to prevail against Him, blessed those
among them who believed, while the multi-
tude, like Jacob's thigh-bone, halted in their
carnality ? Who is the stone placed under
Jacob's head, but Christ the head of man ?
And in its anointing the very name of Christ
is expressed, for, as all know, Christ means
anointed. Christ refers to this in the Gospel,
and declares it to be a type of Himself, when
He said of Nathanael that he was an Israelite
indeed, in whom was no guile, and when
Nathanael, resting his head, as it were, on
this Stone, or on Christ, confessed Him as
the Son of God and the King of Israel,
anointing the Stone by his confession, in
which he acknowledged Jesus to be Christ.
On this occasion the Lord made appropriate
mention of what Jacob saw in his dream:
" Verily I say unto you. Ye shall see heaven
opened, and the angels of God ascending and
descending upon the Son of man."' This
Jacob saw, who in the blessing was called
Israel, when he had the stone for a pillow, and
had the vision of the ladder reaching from
earth to heaven, on which the angels of God
were ascending and descending. "= The angels
denote the evangelists, or preachers of Christ.
They ascend when they rise above the created
universe to describe the supreme majesty of
the divine nature of Christ as being in the be-
ginning God with God, by whom all things
were made. They descend to tell of His be-
ing made of a woman, made under the law,
that He might redeem them that were under
the law. Christ is the ladder reaching from
earth to heaven, or from the carnal to the
spiritual: for by His assistance the carnal as-
cend to spirituality; and the spiritual may be
said to descend to nourish the carnal with milk
when they cannot speak to them as to spiritual,
but as to carnal. 3 There is thus both an as-
cent and a descent upon the Son of man.
For the Son of man is above as our head,
being Himself the Saviour; and He is below
in His body, the Church. He is the ladder,
for He says, "I am the way." We ascend
to Him to see Him in heavenly places; we
descend to Him for the nourishment of His
weak members. And the ascent and descent
are by Him as well as to Him. Following
His example, those who preach Him not only
rise to behold Him exalted, but let themselves
down to give a plain announcement of the
truth. So the apostle ascends, " Whether we
be beside ourselves, it is to God;" and de-
scends, " V/hether we be sober, it is for vour

John i. 47-51.

- Gen. xxviii, 11-18,

3 I

Cor.

1-3-

sake." And by whom did he ascend and
descend ? " For the love of Christ constrain-
eth us: for we thus judge, that if one died for
all, then all died; and that He died for all,
that they which live should no longer live unto
themselves, but unto Him that died for them,
and rose again." ■•

27. Tlie man who does not find pleasure
in tliese views of sacred Scripture is turned
away to fables, because he cannot bear sound
doctrine. The fables have an attraction for
childish minds in people of all ages; but we
who are of the body of Christ should say with
the Psalmist; "O Lord, the wicked have
spoken to me pleasing things, but the}^ are
not after Thy law."^ In every page of these
Scriptures, while I pursue my search as a son
of Adam in the sweat of my brow, Christ
either openly or covertly meets and refreshes
me. Where the discovery is laborious my
ardor is increased, and the spoil obtained is
eagerly devoured, and is hidden in my heart
for my nourishment.

28. Christ appears to me in Joseph, who
was persecuted and sold by his brethren, and
after his troubles obtained honor in Egypt.
We have seen the troubles of Christ in the
world, of which Egypt was a figure, in the
sufferings of the martyrs. And now we see
the honor of Christ in the same world which
He subdues to Himself, in exchange for the
food which He bestows. Christ appears to
me in the rod of Moses, whicli became a ser-
pent when cast on the earth as a figure of His
death, which came from the serpent. Again,
when caught by the tail it became a rod, as a
figure of His return after the accomplishment
of His work in His resurrection to what He
was before, destroying death by His new life,
so as to leave no trace of the serpent. We,
too, who are His body, glide along in the
same mortality through the folds of time;
but when at last the tail of this course of
things is laid hold of by tlie hand of judgment
that it shall go no further, we shall be re-
newed, and rising from the destruction of
death, the last enemy, we shall be the sceptre
of government in the right hand of God.

29. Of the departure of Israel from Egypt,
let us hear what the apostle himself says: " I
would not, brethren, that ye should be ignor-
ant that all our fathers were under the cloud,
and all passed through the sea, and were all
baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the
sea, and did all eat the same spiritual meat,
and did all drink of the same spiritual drink.
For they drank of the spiritual rock which
followed them, and that rock was Christ.''*'

4 2 Cor. V. 13-15.

5 Ps. cxix. 83.

^ I Cor. X, 1-4.

Book XII. J

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.'EAN.

193

The explanation of one thing is a key to the
rest. For if the rock is Christ from its sta-
bility, is not the manna Christ, the living
bread which came down from heaven, which
gives spiritual life to those who truly feed on
it ? The Israelites died because they received
the figure only in its carnal sense. The
apostle, by calling it spiritual food, shows its !
reference to Christ, as the spiritual drink is
explained by the words, " That rock was
Christ," which explain the whole. Then is i
not the cloud and the pillar Christ, who by
His uprightness and strength supports our j
feebleness; who shines by night and not by
day, that they who see not may see, and that ■
they who see may be made blind ? In the
clouds and the Red Sea there is the baptism
consecrated by the blood of Christ. The
enemies following behind perish, as past sins .
are put away. |

30. The Israelites are led through the wil j
derness, as those who are baptized are in the j
wilderness while on the way to the promised
land, hoping and patiently waiting for that
which they see not. In the wilderness are
severe trials, lest thev should in heart return
to Egypt. Still Christ does not leave them;
the pillar does not go away. The bitter
waters are sweetened by wood, as hostile
people become friendly by learning to honor
the cross of Christ. The twelve fountains
watering the seventy palm trees are a figure
of apostolic grace watering the nations. As
seven is mutiplied by ten, so the decalogue is
fulfilled in the sevenfold operation of the
Spirit. The enemy attempting to stop them j
in their way is overcome by Moses stretching
out his hands in the figure of the cross. The ,
deadly bites of serpents are healed by the i
brazen serpent, which was lifted up that they
might look at it. The Lord Himself gives
the explanation of this: "As Moses lifted up
the serpent in the wilderness, so must the
Son of man be lifted up, that whosoever be-
lieveth in Him may not perish, but have ever-
lasting life."' So in many other things we
may find a protest against the obstinacy of
unbelieving hearts. In the passover a lamb
is killed, representing Christ, of whom it is
said in the Gospel, "Behold the Lamb of
God, who taketh away the sin of the world ! " -
In the passover the bones of the lamb were
not to be broken; and on the cross the bones
of the Lord were not broken. The evangel-
ist, in reference to this, quotes the words,
"A bone of Him shall not be broken." ^ The
X)sts were marked with blood to keep away
destruction, as people are marked on their

foreheads with the sign of the Lord's passion
for their salvation. The law was given on the
fiftieth day after the passover; so the Holy
Spirit came on the fiftieth day after the
passion of the Lord. The law is said to have
been written with the finger of God; and the
Lord says of the Holy Spirit, "With the
finger of God I cast out devils." ■• Such are
the Scriptures in which Faustus, after shut-
ting his eyes, declares that he can see no pre-
diction of Christ. But we need not wonder
that he should have eyes to read and yet no
heart to understand, since, instead of knock-
ing in devout faith at the door of the heavenly
secret, he dares to act in profane hostility.
So let it be, for so it ought to be. Let the
gate of salvation be shut to the proud. The
meek, to whom God teaches His ways, will
find all these things in the Scriptures, and
those things which he does not see he will
believe from what he sees.

31. He will see Jesus leading the people
into the land of promise; for this name was
given to the leader of Israel, not at first, or
by chance, but on account of the work to
which he was called. He will see the cluster
from the land of promise hanging from a
wooden pole. He will see in Jericho, as in
this perishing world, an harlot, one of those
of whom the Lord says that they go before
the proud into the kingdom of heaven, putting
out of her window a scarlet line symbolical of
blood, as confession is made with the mouth
for the remission of sins. He will see the
walls of Jericho, like the frail defences of the
world, fall when compassed seven times by
the ark of the covenant; as now in the course
of the seven days of time the covenant of
God compasses the w^hole globe, that in the
end, death, the last enemy, may be destroyed,
and the Church, like one single house, be
saved from the destruction of the ungodly,
purified from the defilement of fornication by
the window of confession in the blood of re-
mission.

^2. He will see the times of the judges
precede those of the kings, as the judgment
will precede the kingdom. And under both
the judges and the kings he will see Christ
and the Church repeatedly prefigured in many
and various ways. Who was in Samson, when
he killed the lion that met him as he went to

get a wife

strangers, but He who.

when going to call His Church from among
the Gentiles, said, "Be of good cheer, I have
overcome the world ?"5 What means the
hive in the mouth of the slain lion, but that,
as we see, the very laws of the earthly king-

' John iii. 14.

- John i. 29.

3 John xix. 36.

•» Luke xi. 20.

5 J<ihn xvi. 33.

194

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XII.

dom which once raged against Christ have
now lost their fierceness, and have become a
protection for the preaching of gospel sweet-
ness ? Wliat is that woman boldly piercing
the temples of the enemy with a wooden nail,
but the faith of the Church casting down the
kingdom of the devil by the cross of Christ?
What is the fleece wet while the ground was
dry, and again the fleece dry while the ground
was wet, but the Hebrew nation at first pos-
sessing alone in its typical institution Christ
the mystery of God, while the whole world
was in ignorance ? And now the whole world
has this mystery revealed, while the Jews are
destitute of it.

;^T,. To mention only a few things in the
times of the kings, at the very outset does
not the change in the priesthood when Eli
was rejected and Samuel chosen, and in the
kingdom when Saul was rejected and David
chosen, clearly predict the new priesthood
and kingdom to come in our Lord Jesus
Christ, when the old, which was a shadow of
the new, was rejected ? Did not David, when
he ate the shew-bread, which it was not law-
ful for any but the priests to eat, prefigure
the union of the kingdom and priesthood in
one person, Jesus Christ? In the separation
of the ten tribes from the temple while two
were left, is there not a figure of what the
apostle asserts of the whole nation: "A rem-
nant is saved by the election of grace."?'

34. In the time of famine, Elijah is fed by
ravens bringing bread in the morning and
flesh in the evening; but the Manichaeans
cannot in this perceive Christ, who, as it were,
hungers for our salvation, and to whom sinners
come in confession, having now the first-fruits
of the Sp'rit, while in the end, that is to say
in the evening of the age, they will have the
resurrection of their bodies also. Elijah is
sent to be fed by a widow woman of another
nation, who was going to gather two sticks
before she died, denoting the two wooden
beams of the cross. Her meal and oil are
blessed, as the fruit and cheerfulness of
charity do not diminish by expenditure, for
God loveth a cheerful giver. ^

35. The children that mocked Elisha by
calling out Baldhead, are devoured by wild
beasts, as those who ni childish folly scoff at
Christ crucified on Calvary are destroyed by
devils. Elisha sends his servants to lay his
staff on the dead body, but it does not revive;
he comes himself, and lays himself exactly
upon the dead body, and it revives: as the
Word of God sent the law by His servant,
without any profit to mankind dead in sins;

and yet it was not sent without purpose by
Him who knew the necessity of its being first
sent. Then He Himself came, conformed
Himself to us by participation in our death,
and we were revived. When they were cut-
ting down wood with axes, the iron, flying off
the wood, sank to the bottom of the river, and
came up again when the wood was thrown in
by Elisha. So, when Christ's bodily presence
was cutting down the unfruitful trees among
the unbelieving Jews, according to the saying
of John, " Behold, the axe is laid to the roots
of the tree," ^ by the death they inflicted,
Christ was separated from His body, and
descended to the depths of the infernal world;
and then, when His body was laid in the
tomb, like the wood on the water, His spirit
returned, like the iron to the handle, and He
rose. The reader will observe how many
things of this kind are omitted for the sake
of brevity.

36. As regards the departure to Babylon,
where the Spirit of God by the prophet
Jeremiah enjoins them to go, telling them to
pray for the people in whose land they dwell
as strangers, because in their peace they
would find peace, and to build houses, and
plant vineyards and gardens, — the figurative
meaning is plain, when we consider that the
true Israelites, in whom is no guile, passed
over in the ministry of the apostles with the
ordinances of the gospel into the kingdom of
the Gentiles. So the apostle, like an echo of
Jeremiah, says to us, " I will first of all that
prayer, supplications, intercessions and giving
of tnanks be made for all men, and for those
in authority, that we may live a quiet and
peaceable life in all godliness and charity; for
this is good and acceptable in the sight of
God our Saviour, who will have all men to be
saved, and to come to the knowledge of the
truth."" Accordingly the basilicas of Chris-
tian congregations have been built by believers
as abodes of peace, and vineyards of the
faithful have been renewed, and gardens
planted, where chief among the plants is
the mustard tree, in whose wide-spreading
branches the pride of the Gentiles, like the
birds of heaven, in its soaring ambition, takes
shelter. Again, in the return from captivity
after seventy years, according to Jeremiah's
prophecy, and in the restoration of the temple,
every believer in Christ must see a figure of
our return as the Church of God from the
exile of this world to the heavenly Jerusalem,
after the seven days of time have fulfilled
their course. Joshua the high priest, after
the captivity, who rebuilt the temple, was a

.lom. XI. 5.

^ 2 Cor. ix. 7.

3 Matt. iii. 10.

4 I Tim. li. 1-4.

Book XII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.^AN.

195

figure of Jesus Christ, the true High Priest
of our restoration. The prophet Zechariah
saw this Joshua in a filthy garment; and after
the devil who stood by to accuse him was
defeated, the filthy garment was taken from
him, and a dress of honor and glory given
iiim. So the body of Jesus Christ, which is
the Church, when the adversary is conquered
in the judgment at the end of the world, will
liass from the pains of exile to the glory of
' verlasting safety. This is the song of the
Psalmist at the dedication of his house:
" Thou hast turned for me my mourning into
gladness; Thou hast removed my sackcloth,
and girded me with gladness, that my glory
may sing praise unto Thee, and not be
silent." '

37. It is impossible, in a digression like
this, to refer, however briefly, to all the figura-
tive predictions of Christ which are to be found
in the law and the prophets. Will it be said
tliat these things happened in the regular
course of things, and that it is a mere in-
genious fancy to make them typical of Christ ?
Such an objection might come from Jews and
Pagans; but those who wish to be considered
Christians must yield to the authority of the
apostle when he says, "All these things hap-
pened to them for an example;" and again,
■' These things are our examples.*'- For if
'WO men, Ishmael and Isaac, are types of the
iwo covenants, can it be supposed that there
IS no significance in the vast number of par-
'iculars which have no historical or natural
V alue ? Suppose we were to see some Hebrew
characters written on the wall of a noble
building, should we be so foolish as to con-
clude that, because we cannot understand the
characters, they are not intended to be read,
and are mere painting, without any meaning?
So, whoever with a candid mind reads all
these things that are contained in the Old
Testament Scriptures, must feel constrained
to acknowledge that they have a meaning.

38. As an example of those particulars
which have no meaning at all if not a sym-
bolical one: Granting that it was necessary
that woman should be made as an help meet
for man, what natural reason can be assigned
for her being taken from his side while he
slept? Granting that an ark was required in
order to escape from the flood, why should it
have precisely these dimensions, and why
should they be recorded for the devout study
of future generations ? Granting that the ani-
mals were brought into the ark to preserve
the various races, why should there be seven
clean and two unclean ? Granting that the

' Ps. .x.xx.

II, 12.

' I Cor. X. 10, 6.

ark must have a door, w^hy should it be in the
side, and why should this fact be committed
to writing? Abraham is commanded to sac-
rifice his son: we may allow that this proof of
his obedience was required in order to make
it conspicuous in all ages; we may allow, too,
that it was a proper thing for the son to carry
the wood instead of the aged father, and that
in the end the fatal stroke was forbidden, lest
the father should be left childless. But what
had the shedding of the ram's blood to do
with Abraham's trial ? or if it was necessary
to complete the sacrifice, was the ram any the
better of being caught by the horns in a bush ?
The human mind, that is to say, a rational
mind, is led by the consideration of the way
in which these apparently superfluous things
are blended with what is necessary, first to
acknowledge their significance, and then to
try to discover it.

39. The Jews themselves, who scoff at the
crucified Saviour in whom we believe, and
who consequently will not allow that Christ is
predicted in the sayings and actions recorded
in the Old Testament, are compelled to come
to us for an explanation of those things which,
if not explained, must appear trifling and
ridiculous. This led Philo, a Jew of great
learning, whom the Greeks speak of as rival-
ling Plato in eloquence, to attempt to explain
some things without any reference to Christ,
in whom he did not believe. His attempt
only shows the inferiority of all ingenious
speculations, when made without keeping
Christ in view, to whom all the predictions
really point. So true is that saying of the
apostle: " When they shall turn to the Lord,
the veil shall be taken away." 3 For instance,
Noah's ark is, according to Philo, a type of
the human body, member by member: with
this view, he shows that the numerical pro-
portions agree perfectly. For there is no
reason why a type of Christ should not be a
type of the human body, too, since the
Saviour of mankind appeared in a human
body, though what is typical of a human body
is not necessarily typical of Christ. Philo's
explanation fails, however, as regards the
door in the side of the ark. He actually, for
the sake of saying something, makes this
door represent the lower apertures of the
body. He has the hardihood to put this in
words, and on paper. Indeed, he knew not
the door and could not understand the sym-
bol. Had he turned to Christ the veil would
have been taken awa}', and he would have
found the sacraments of the Church flowing
from the side of Christ's human body. For,

3 2 Cor. iii. 16.

196

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XII.

according to the announcement, " They two
shall be one flesh," some things in the ark,
which is a type of Christ, refer to Christ, and
some to the Church. This contrast between
the explanations which keep Christ in view,
and all other ingenious perversions, is the
same in every particular of all the figures in
Scripture.

40. The Pagans, too, cannot deny our right
to give a figurative meaning to both words
and things, especially as we can point to the
fulfillment of the types and figures. For the
Pagans themselves try to find in their own
fables figures of natural and religious truth.
Sometimes they give clear explanations,
while at other times they disguise their
meaning, and what is sacred in the temples
becomes a jest in the theatres. They unite
a disgraceful licentiousness to a degrading
superstition.

41. Besides this wonderful agreement be-
tween the types and the things typified, the
adversary may be convinced by plain prophetic
intimations, such as this: " In thy seed shall
all nations be blessed.'' This was said to
Abraham,^ and again to Isaac, ^ and again to
Jacob. 3 Hence the significance of the words,
"I am the God of Abraham, and Isaac, and
Jacob." * God fulfills His promise to their
seed in blessing all nations. With a like sig-
nificance, Abraham himself^ when he made
his servant swear, told him to put his hand
under his thigh ;s for he knew that thence
would come the flesh of Christ, in whom we
have now, not the promise of blessing to all
nations, but the promise fulfilled.

42. I should like to know, or rather, it
would be well not to know, with what blind-
ness of mind Faustus reads the passage where
Jacob calls his sons, and says, "Assemble,
that I may tell you the things that are to
happen in the last day. Assemble and hear,
ye sons of Jacob; give ear to Israel, your
father.'' Surely these are the words of a
prophet. What, then, does he say of his son
Judah, of whose tribe Christ came of the seed
of David according to the flesh, as the apostle
teaches? "Judah," he says, " thy brethren
shall praise thee: thy hand shall be upon the
backs of thine enemies; the sons of thy
father shall bow down to thee. Judah is a
lion's whelp; my son and offspring: bowing
down, thou hast gone up: thou sleepest as
a lion, and as a young lion, who will rouse
him up? A prince shall not depart from
Judah, nor a leader from his loins, till those
things come which have been laid up for him.
He also is the desire of nations: binding his

I Gen. xxii. i8.
4 Ex. iii. 6.

2 Gen. xxvi, 4.
5 Gen. xxiv. 2.

3 Gen. xxviii, 14,

foal unto the vine, and his ass's colt with
sackcloth, he shall wash his garment in wine,
and his clothes in the blood of grapes: his
eyes are bright with wine, and his teeth whiter
than milk."*^ There is no falsehood or ob-
scurity in these words when we read them in
the clear light of Christ. We see His brethren
the apostles and all His joint-heirs praising
Him, seeking, not their own glory, but His.
We see His hands on the backs of His
enemies, who are bent and bowed to the earth
by the growth of the Christian communities
in spite of their opposition. We see Him
worshipped by the sons of Jacob, the remnant
saved according to the election of grace.
Christ, who was born as an infant, is the
lion's whelp, as it is added. My son and off-
spring, to show why this whelp, in whose
praise it is said, " The lion's whelp is stronger
than the herd,"^ is even in infancy stronger
than its elders. We see Christ ascending
the cross, and bowing down when He gave
up His spirit. We see Him sleeping as a lion,
because in death itself He was not the con-
quered, but the conqueror, and as a lion's
whelp; for the reason of His birth and of His
death was the same. And He is raised from
the dead by Him whom no man hath seen or
can see; for the words, " Who will raise Him
up?" point to an unknown power. A prince
did not depart from Judah, nor a leader from
his loins, till in due time those things came
which had been laid up in the promise. For
we learn from the authentic history of the Jews
themselves, that Herod, under whom Christ
was born, was their first foreign king. So
the sceptre did not depart from the seed of
Judah till the things laid up for him came.
Then, as the promise is not only to the be-
lieving Jews, it is added: " He is the desire
of the nations." Christ bound His foal —
that is. His people — to the vine, when He
preached in sackcloth, crying, " Repent, for
the kingdom of heaven is at hand." The
Gentiles made subject to Him are represented
by the ass's colt, on which He also sat, lead-
ing it into Jerusalem, that is, the vision of
peace teaching the meek His ways. We see
Him washing His garments in wine; for He
is one with the glorious Church, which He
presents to Himself, not having spot or
wrinkle; to whom also it is said by Isaiah:
" Though your sins be as scarlet, I will make
them white as snow. "^ How is this done but
by the remission of sins ? And the wine is
none other than that of which it is said that
it is " shed for many, for the remission of

sms.

Christ is the cluster that hung on the

6 Gen. xlix. i, 2, 8-12.

7 Prov. XXX. 30.

8 Isa. i. 18.

Book XII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

197

pole. So it is added, " and His clothes in
the blood of the grape." Again, what is said
of His eyes being bright with wine, is under-
stood by those members of His body who are
enabled, in holy aberration of mind from the
current of earthly things, to gaze on the eter-
nal light of wisdom. So Paul says in a
passage quoted before: " If we be beside
ourselves, ft is to God.'^ Those are the eyes
bright with wine. But he adds: "If we be
sober, it is for your sakes." The babes
needing to be fed with milk are not forgotten,
as is denoted by the words, " His teeth are
whiter than milk."

43. What can our deluded adversaries say
to such plain examples, which leave no room
for perverse denial, or even for sceptical un-
certainty ? I call on the Manicheeans to begin
to inquire into these subjects, and to admit
the force of these evidences, on which I have
no time to dwell; nor do 1 wish to make a
selection, in case the ignorant reader should
think there are no others, while the Christian
student might blame me for the omission of
many points more striking than those which
occur to me at the moment. You will find
many passages which require no such ex-
planation as has been given here of Jacob's
prophecy. For instance, every reader can
understand the words, " He was led as a lamb
to the slaughter," and the whole of that plain
prophecy, "With His stripes we are healed "
— " He bore our sins." ' We have a poetical
g'ospel in the words: " They pierced my hands
and feet. They have told all my bones. They
look and stare upon me. They divided my
garments among them, and cast lots on my
vesture. "= The blind even may. now seethe
fulfillment of the words: "All the ends of the
earth shall remember and turn unto the Lord,
and all kingdoms of the nations shall worship
before Him." The words in the Gospel,
" My soul is sorrowful, even unto death,"
*' My soul is troubled," are a repetition of
the words in the Psalm, " I slept in trouble." 3
And who made Him sleep ? Whose voices
cried, Crucify him, crucify him ? The Psalm
tells us: " The sons of men, their teeth are
spears and arrows, and their tongue a sharp
sword."* But they could not prevent His
resurrection, or His ascension above the
heavens, or His filling the earth with the
glory of His name; for the Psalm says: " Be
Thou exalted, O God, above the heavens, and
let Thy glory be above all the earth." Every
one must apply these words to Christ: " The
Lord said unto me, Thou art my Son, this
day have I begotten Thee. Ask of me, and

I Isa. liii.

3 Ps. Ivii. 4 (Vulg.).

2 Ps. xxii.
4 Ps. Ivii. 4.

I will give Thee the heathen for Thine in-
heritance, and the uttermost parts of the
earth for Thy possession." s And what
Jeremiah says of wisdom plainly applies to
Christ: "Jacob delivered it to his son, and
Israel to his chosen one. Afterwards He ap-
peared on earth, and conversed with men.^' ^
44. The same Saviour is spoken of in
Daniel, where the Son of man appears before
the Ancient of days, and receives a kingdom
without end, that all nations may serve Him.'
In the passage quoted from Daniel by the
Lord Himself, " When ye shall see the
abomination of desolation, spoken of by
Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy
place, let him that readeth understand,'' * the
number of weeks points not only to Christ,
but to the very time of His advent. With
the Jews, who look to Christ for salvation as
we do, but deny that He has come and suf-
fered, we can argue from actual events. Be-
sides the conversion of the heathen, now so
universal, as prophesied of Christ in their
own Scriptures, there are the events in the
history of the Jews themselves. Their holy
place is thrown down, the sacrifice has ceased,
and the priest, and the ancient anointing;
which was all clearly foretold by Daniel when
he prophesied of the anointing of the Most
Holy. 5 Now, that all these things have taken
place, we ask the Jews for the anointed Most
Holy, and they have no answer to give. But
it is from the Old Testament that the Jews
derive all the knowledge they have of Christ
and His advent. Why do they ask John
whether he is Christ? Why do they say to
the Lord, ' How long dost thou make us to
doubt ? If thou art the Christ, tell us
plainly.-" Why do Peter and Andrew and
Philip say to Nathanael, "We have found
Messias, which is interpreted Christ," but be-
cause this name was known to them from the
prophecies of their Scriptures ? In no other
nation were the kings and priests anointed,
and called Anointed or Christs. Nor could
this symbolical anointing be discontinued till
the coming of Him who was thus prefigured.
For among all their anointed ones the Jews
looked ior one who was to save them. But
in the mysterious justice of God they were
blinded; and thinking only of the power of
the Messiah, they did not understand His
weakness, in which He died for us. In the
book of Wisdom it is prophesied of the Jews:
"Let us condemn him to an ignominious
death; for he will be proved in his words.
If he is truly the Son of God, He will aid
him,. and deliver him from the hand of his

5 Ps. ii. J', 0. * Haruch iii. 37, 38.

8 Matt. XXIV. 15. 9 Dan. ix. 24-37.

Dan.

vn. 13, 14.

iqS

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XII.

enemies. Thus they thought, and erred; for
their wickedness blinded them."' These
words apply also to those who, in spite of all
these evidences, in spite of such a series of
prophecies, and of their fulfillment, still deny
that Christ is foretold in the Scriptures. As
often as they repeat this denial, we can pro-
duce fresh proofs, with the help of Him who
has made such provision against human per-
versity, that proofs already given need not be
repeated.

45. Faustus has an evasive objection, which
he no doubt thinks a most ingenious way of
eluding the force of the clearest evidence of
prophecy, but of which one is unwilling to
take any notice, because answering it may
give it an appearance of importance which it
does not really possess. What could be more
irrational than to say that it is weak faith
which will not believe in Christ without evi-
dence ? Do our adversaries, then, believe in
testimony about Christ ? Faustus wishes us
to believe the voice from heaven as distin-
guished from human testimony. But did
they hear this voice ? Has not the knowledge
of it come to us through human testimony?
The apostle describes the transmission of this
knowledge, when he says: " How shall they
call on Him on whom they have not believed ?
and how shall they believe on Him of whom
they have not heard ? and how shall they hear
without a preacher ? and how shall they preach
except they be sent? As it is written, " How
beautiful are the feet of them who publish
peace, who bring good tidings ! " ^ Clearly,
in the preaching of the apostles there was
a reference to prophetic testimony. The
apostles quoted the predictions of the
prophets, to prove the truth and importance
of their doctrines. For although their
preaching was accompanied with the power
of working miracles, the miracles would have
been ascribed to magic, as some even now
venture to insinuate, unless the apostles had
shown that the authority of the prophets was
in trieir favor. The testimony of prophets
who lived so long before could not be ascribed
to magical arts. Perhaps the reason why
Faustus will not have us believe the Hebrew
prophets as witnesses of the true Christ, is
because he believes Persian heresies about a
false Christ.

46. According to the teaching of the
Catholic Church, the Christian mind must
first be nourished in simple faith, in order
that it may become capable of understanding
things heavenly and eternal. Thus it is said
by the prophet: " Unless ye believe, ye shall
not understand." 3 Sunple faith is that by

1 Wisd. ii. 18-21. 2 Rora. x. 14, 15. 3 Isa. vii. 9 (Vulg.

which, before we attain to the height of the
knowledge of the love of Christ, that we may
be filled with all the fullness of God, we believe
that not without reason was the dispensation
of Christ's humiliation, in which He was born
and suffered as man, foretold so long before
by the prophets through a prophetic race, a
prophetic people, a prophetic kingdom. This
faith teaches us, that in the foolishness which
is wiser than men, and in the weakness which
is stronger than men, is contained the hidden
means of our justification and glorification.
There are hid all the treasures of wisdom and
knowledge, which are opened to no one who
despises the nourishment transmitted through
the breast of his mother, that is, the milk of
apostolic and prophetic instruction; or who,
thinking himself too old for infantile nourish-
ment, devours heretical poison instead of the
food of wisdom, for which he rashly thought
himself prepared. To require simple faith is
quite consistent with requiring faith in the
prophets. The very use of simple faith is to
believe the prophets at the outset, while the
understanding of the person who speaks in
the prophets is attained after the mind has
been purified and strengthened.

47. But, it is said, if the prophets foretold
Christ, they did not live in a way becoming
their office. How can you tell whether they
did or not ? You are bad judges of what it
is to live well or ill, whose justice consists in
giving relief to an inanimate melon by eating
it, instead of giving food to the starving
beggar. It is enough for the babes in the
Catholic Church, who do not yet know the
perfect justice of the human soul, and the
difference between the justice aimed at and
that actually attained, to think of those men
according to the wholesome doctrine of the
apostles, that the just lives by faith. "Abra-
ham believed God, and it was counted to him
for righteousness. For the scripture, fore-
seeing that God would justify the Gentiles by
faith, preached before the gospel unto Abra-
ham, saying. In thy seed shall all nations be
blessed." ■* These are the words of the apos-
tle. If you would, at his c:ear well-known
voice, wake up from your unprofitable dreams,
you would follow in the footsteps of our father
Abraham, and would be blessed, along with
all nations, in his seed. For, as the apostle
says, " He received the sign of circumcision,
a seal of the righteousness of the faith which
he had, yet being uncircumcised, that he
might be the father of all that believe in un-
circumcision; that he might be the father of
circumcision not only to those who are of the
circumcision, but also to those who follow the

4 Gal. iii. 6, 8.

Book XIII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

199

footsteps of the faith of our father Abraham
in uncircumcision." ' Since the righteous-
ness of Abraham's faith is thus set forth as
an example to us, that we too, being justified
by faith, may have peace with God, we ought
to understand his manner of life, without
finding fault with it; lest, by a premature
separation from mother-Church, we prove
abortions, instead of being brought forth in
due time, when the conception has arrived at
completeness.

48. This is a brief reply to Faustus in be-
half of the character of the patriarchs and
prophets. It is the reply of the babes of our
faith, among whom I would reckon myself,
inasmuch as I would not find fault with the
life of the ancient saints, even if I did not
understand its mystical character. Their life

' Rom. iv. II, 12.

is proclaimed to us with approval by the apos-
tles in their Gospel, as they themselves in
their prophecy foretold the future apostles,
that the two Testaments, like the seraphim,
might cry to one another, " Holy, holy, holy
is the Lord God of hosts." ^ When Faustus,
instead of the vague general accusation which
he makes here, condemns particular actions in
the lives of the patriarchs and the prophets,
the Lord their God, and ours also, will assist
me to reply suitably and appropriately to the
separate charges. For the present, the reader
must choose whether to believe the commenda-
tion of the Apostle Paul or the accusations of
Faustus the Manichsean.^

- Isa. vi. 3.

3 [It is unnecessary to point out in detail the vicious elements
in Auijustin's allegorizing and typologizing. It should be said
that his exegetical fancies were not original, but were derived from
Philo, Ctrigen, and their followers. — A, H. N.]

BOOK XIII.

FAUSTUS ASSERTS THAT EVEN IF THE OLD TESTAMENT COULD BE SHOWN TO CONTAIN PREDIC-
TIONS, IT WOULD BE OF INTEREST ONLY TO THE JEWS, PAGAN LITERATURE SUBSERVING THE
SAME PURPOSE FOR GENTILES. AUGUSTIN SHOWS THE VALUE OF PROPHESY FOR GENTILES
AND JEWS ALIKE.

I. F.A.USTUS said: We are asked how we
worship Christ when we reject the prophets,
who declared the promise of His advent. It
is doubtful whether, on examination, it can
1)6 shown that the Hebrew prophets foretold
our Christ, that is, the Son of God. But
were it so, what does it matter to us ? If
these testimonies of the prophets that you
speak of were the means of converting any
one from Judaism to Christianity, and if he
should afterwards neglect these prophets, he
\vould certainly be in the wrong, and would
be chargeable with ingratitude. But we are
by nature Gentiles, of the uncircumcision; as
Paul says, born under another law. Those
whom the Gentiles call poets were our first
religious teachers, and from them we were
afterwards converted to Christianity. We did
not first become Jews, so as to reach Chris-
tianity through faith in their prophets; but
were attracted solely by the fame, and the
virtues, and the wisdom of our liberator Jesus
Christ. If I were still in the religion of my
fatliers, and a preacher were to come using
the prophets as evidence in favor of Chris-
tianity, I should think him mad for attempt-
ing to support what is doubtful by what is
still more doubtful to a Gentile of another re-
ligion altogether. He would require first to

persuade me to believe the prophets, and then
through the prophets to believe Christ. And
to prove the truth of the prophets, other
prophets would be necessary. For if the
prophets bear witness to Christ, who bears
witness to the prophets ? You will perhaps
say that Christ and the prophets mutually
support each other. But a Pagan, who has
nothing to do with either, would believe
neither the evidence of Christ to the prophets,
nor that of the prophets to Christ. If the
Pagan becomes a Christian, he has to thank
his own faith, and nothing else. Let us, for
the sake of illustration, suppose ourselves
conversing with a Gentile incjuirer. We tell
him to believe in Christ, because He is God.
He asks for proof. We refer him to the
prophets. He asks. What prophets ? We re-
ply, The Hebrew. He smiles, and says that
he does not believe them. We remind him
that Christ testifies to them. He replies,
laughing, that we must first make him believe
in Christ. The result of such a conversation
IS that we are silenced, and the inquirer de-
l^arts, thinking us more zealous than wise.
Again, I say, the Christian Ciiurch, which
consists more of Gentiles than of Jews, can
owe nothing to Hebrew witnesses. If, as is
said, any prophecies of Christ are to be found

200

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XIII.

in the Sibyl,' or in Hermes,^ called T'-is-
megistus, or Orpheus, or any heathen poet,
they might aid the faith of those who, like
us/ are "converts from heathenism to Chris-
tianity. But the testimony of the Hebrews
is useless to us before conversion, for then we
cannot believe them; and superfluous after,
for we believe without them.

2. AuGUSTiN replied: After the long reply
of last book, a short answer may suffice here.
To one who has read that reply, it must seem
insanity in Faustus to persist in denymg that
Christ was foretold by the Hebrew prophets,
when the Hebrew nation was the only one in
which the name Christ had a peculiar sacred-
ness as applied to kings and priests; in which
sense it continued to be applied till the com-
ing of Him whom those kings and priests
typified. Where did the Manichasan learn
the name of Christ? If from Manichseus, it
is very strange that Africans, not to speak of
others, should believe the Persian Manichaeus,
since Faustus finds fault with the Romans
and Greeks, and other Gentiles, for believing
the Hebrew prophets as belonging to another
race. Accordmg to Faustus, the predictions
of the Sibyl, or Orpheus, or any heathen poet,
are more suitable for leading Gentiles to be-
lieve in Christ. He forgets that none of
these are read in the churches, whereas the
voice of the Hebrew prophets, sounding
everywhere, draws swarms of people to Chris-
tianity. When it is so evident that men are
everywhere led to Christ by the Hebrew
prophets, it is great absurdity to say that
those prophets are not suitable for the Gen-
tiles.

3. Christ as foretold by the Hebrew
prophets does not please you; but this is the
Christ in whom the Gentile nations believe,
with whom, according to you, Hebrew
prophecy should have no weight. They re-
ceive the gospel which, as Paul says, "God

I [On the Sibylline books, see article by G. H. Schodde in the
Schaff-Hcrtzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knoiuledge^ and the
works there referred to. The Christian writers of the first three
centuries seem not to have suspected the real character of these
pseudo-prophetical writings, and to have regarded them as remark-
able testimonies from the heathen world to the Truth of the Chris-
ian religion. — A. H. N.]

= [" The IVlercurius or Hermes Trismegistus of legend was a
personage, an Egyptian sage or succession of sages, who, since the
time of Plato, has been identified with the Thoth (the name of the
month September), of that people. . . . He was considered to
be the impersonation of the religion, art, learning and sacerdotal
discipline of the Egyptian priesthood. He was by several of the
Fathers, and, in modern times, by three of his earliest editors,
supposed to have existed before the time of Moses, and to have
obtained the appellation of ' Thrice greatest,' from his threefold
learning and rank of Philosopher, Priest and King, and that of
' Hermes,' or Mercurius, as messenger and authoritative interpre-
ter of divine things." The author of the books that go under the
name of Hermes Trismegistus is thought to have lived about the
beginning of the second century, and was a Christian Neo-Platon-
ist. See J. C. Ch.^misers: The Theological and Philosophical
Works of Hemes Trismegistus^ translated from the original
Greek, ivith Preface, Notes and hidex, Edinbunrh, 1882.—
A. H. N.]

had promised before by'His prophets in the
Holy Scriptures of His Son, who was made of
the seed of David according to the flesh." ^
So we read in Isaiah: "There shall be a
Root of Jesse, which shall rise to reign in the
nations; in Him shall the Gentiles trust." '^
And again: " Behold, a virgin shall conceive
and bear a son, and they shall call His name
Emmanuel," 5 ^vhich is, being interpreted,
God with us. Nor let the Manichgean think
that Christ is foretold only as a man by the
Hebrew prophets; for this is what Faustus
seems to insinuate when he says, "Our
Christ is the Son of God," as if the Christ of
the Hebrews was not the Son of God. We
can prove Christ the virgin's son of Hebrew
prophecy to be God. For the Lord Himself
teaches the carnal Jews not to think that, be-
cause He is foretold as the son of David, He
is therefore no more than that. He asks:
"What think ye of Christ? Whose son is
He ? " They reply: " Of David." Then, to
remind them of the name Emmanuel, God
with us, He says: "How does David in the
Spirit call Him Lord, saying, The Lord said
unto my Lord, Sit Thou at my right hand,
till I make Thine enemies Thy footstoQl?"^
Here, then, Christ appears as God in Hebrew
prophecy. What prophecy can the Mani-
chaeans show with the name of Christ in it ?

4. Manichgeus indeed was not a prophet of
Christ, but calls himself an apostle, which is
a shameless falsehood; for it is well known
that this heresy began not only after Tertul-
lian, but after Cyprian. In all his letters
Manichseus begins thus: " Manichseus, an
apostle of Jesus Christ." Why do you be-
lieve what Manichaeus says of Christ? What
evidence does he give of his apostleship?
This very name of Christ is known to us only
from the Jews, who, in their application of it
to their kings and priests, were not indi-
vidually, but nationally, prophets of Christ
and Christ's kingdom. What right has he to
use this name, who forbids you to believe the
Hebrew prophets, that he may make you the
heretical disciples of a false Christ, as he
himself is a false and heretical apostle ? And
if Faustus quotes as evidence in his own sup-
port some prophets who, according to him,
foretell Christ, how will he satisfy his sup-
posed inquirer, who will not believe either the
prophets or Faustus ? Will he take our apos-
tles as witnesses ? Unless he can find some
apostles in life, he must read their writings;
and these are all against him. They teach
our doctrine that Christ was born of the Vir-
gin Mary, that He was the Son of God, of the

3 Rom. i. 2, 3.
5 Isa. vii. 14.

4 Isa. xi. 10.

* Matt. xxii. 42-44.

i;ooK XIIL]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

20I

seed of David according to the flesh. He
cannot pretend that the writings have been
tampered with, for that would be to attack
the credit of his own witnesses. Or if he
produces his own manuscripts of the apostoHc
writings, he must also obtain for them the
authority of the churches founded by the
apostles themselves, by showing that they
have been preserved and transmitted with
their sanction. It will be difficult for a man
to make me believe him on the evidence of
writings which derive all their authority from
ins own word, which I do not believe.

5. But perhaps you believe the common
report about Christ. Faustus makes a feeble
Ingestion of this kind as a last resource, to
..scape being obliged either to produce his
worthless authorities, or to come under the
power of those opposed to him. Well, if re-
port is your authority, you should consider
the consequences of trusting to such evidence.
There are many bad things reported of you
' which you do not wish people to believe. Is
; it reasonable to make the same evidence true
about Christ and false about yourselves ? In
I fact, you deny the common report about
Christ. For the report most widely spread,
' and which every one has heard repeated, is
lat which distinctly asserts that Christ was
jrn of the seed of David, according to the
romise made in the Hebrew Scriptures to
Abraham and Isaac and Jacob: " In thy
seed shall all nations be blessed." You will
-)t admit this Hebrew testimony, but you do
■A seem to have any other. The authority
I our books, which is confirmed by the
agreement of so many nations, supported by
a succession of apostles, bishops, and coun-
ils, is against you. Your books have no
authority, for it is an authority maintained
liy only a few, and these the worshippers of
an untruthful God and Christ. If they are
not following the example of the beings they
worship, their testimony must be against their
wn false doctrine. And, once more, com-
mon report gives a very bad account of you,
and invariably asserts, in opposition to you,
that Christ was of the seed of David. You
alid not hear the voice of the Father from
eaven. You did not see the works by which
Iirist bore witness to Himself. The books
. iiich tell of these things you profess to re-
eive, that you may maintain a delusive ap-
i'Carance of Christianity; but when anything
s quoted against you, you say that the books
ave been tampered with. You quote the
[passage where Christ says, " If ye believe not
ine, believe the works;'' and again, "I am
<ine that bear witness of myself, and the
Father that sent me beareth witness of me; "

but you will not let us quote in reply such
passages as these: "Search the Scriptures;
for in them ye think that ye have eternal life,
and they are they that testify of me;" "If
ye believed Moses, ye would believe me, for
he wrote of me; " " They have Moses and the
prophets, let them hear them:" "If they
hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will
they believe though one rose from the dead."
What have you to say for yourselves ? Where
is your authority ? If you reject these pas-
sages of Scripture, in spite of the weighty au-
thority in their favor, what miracles can you
show? However, if you did work miracles,
we should be on our guard against receiving
their evidence in your case; for the Lord has
forewarned us: " Many false Christs and false
prophets shall arise, and shall do many signs
and wonders, that they may deceive, if it
were possible, the very elect: behold, I have
told you before." ' This shows that the es-
tablished authority of Scripture must out-
weigh every other; for it derives new con-
firmation from the progress of events which
happen, as Scripture proves, in fulfillment of
the predictions made so long before their
occurrence.

6. Are, then, your doctrines so manifestly
true, that they require no support from mira-
cles or from any testimony ? Show us these
self-evident truths, if you have anything of
the kind to show. Your legends, as we have
already seen, are long and silly, old wives'
fables for the amusement of women and chil-
dren. The beginning is detached from the
rest, the middle is unsound, and the end is
a miserable failure. If you begin with the
immortal, invisible, incorruptible God, what
need was there of Ilis fighting with the race
of darkness ? And as for the middle of your
theory, what becomes of the incorruptibility
and unchangeableness of God, when His mem-
bers in fruits and vegetables are purified by
your mastication and digestion ? And for the
end, is it just that the wretched soul should
be punished with lasting confinement in the
mass of darkness, because its God is unable
to cleanse it of the defilement contracted from
evil external to itself in the fulfillment of His
own commission ? You are at a loss for a
reply. See the worthlessness of your boasted
manuscripts, numerous antl valuable as you
say they are ! Alas for the toils of the an-
tiquaries ! Alas for the property of the un-
happy owners ! Alas for the food of the
deluded followers ! Destitute as you are of
Scripture authority, of the power of miracles,
of moral excellence, and of sound doctrine,

I Matt. xxiv. 24, 25.

202

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XIII,

depart ashamed, and return penitent, confess-
ing that true Christ, who is the Saviour of all
who believe in Him, whose name and whose
Church are now displayed as they were of old
foretold, not by some being issuing from sub-
terranean darkness, but by a nation in a dis-
tinct kingdom established for this purpose,
that there those things might be figuratively
predicted of Christ which are now in reality
fulfilled, and the prophets might foretell in
writing what the apostles now exhibit in their
preaching.

7. Let us suppose, then, a conversation
with a heathen inquirer, in which Faustus de-
scribed us as making a poor appearance,
though his own appearance was much more
deplorable. If we say to the heathen, Believe
in Christ, for He is God, and, on his asking
for evidence, produce the authority of the
prophets, if he says that he does not believe
the prophets, because they are Hebrew and
he is a Gentile, we can prove the truth of the
prophets from the actual fulfillment of their
prophecies. He could scarcely be ignorant
of the persecutions suffered by the early
Christians from the kings of this world; or if
he was ignorant, he could be informed from
history and the records of imperial laws. But
this is what we find foretold long ago by the
prophet, saying, "Why do the heathen rage,
and the people imagine a vain thing ? The
kings of the earth set themselves, and the
princes take counsel together against the
Lord, and against His Christ.'' The rest of
the Psalm shows that this is not said of
David. For what follows might convince the
most stubborn unbeliever: " The Lord said
unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I
begotten Thee. Ask of me, and I will give
Thee the heathen for Thine inheritance, and
the ends of the earth for Thy possession." '
This never happened to the Jews, whose king
David was, but is now plainly fulfilled in the
subjection of all nations to the name of
Christ. This and many similar prophecies,
which it would take too long to quote, would
surely impress the mind of the inquirer. He
would see these very kings of the earth now
happily subdued by Christ, and all nations
serving Him; and he would hear the words
of the Psalm in which this was so long before
predicted: "All the kings of the earth shall
bow down to Him; all nations shall serve
Him. "^^ And if he were to read the whole
of that Psalm, which is figuratively applied to
Solomon, he would find that Christ is the true
King of peace, for Solomon means peaceful;
and he would find many things in the Psalm

I will cause them to
my might; and they

applicable to Christ, which have no reference
at all to the literal King Solomon. Then
there is that other Psalm where God is spoken
of as anointed by God, the very word anointed
pointing to Christ, showing that Christ is
God, for God is represented as being
anointed. 3 In reading what is said in this
Psalm of Christ and of the Church, he would
find that what is there foretold is fulfilled in
the present state of the world. He would see
the idols of the nations perishing from off the
earth, and he would find that this is predicted
by the prophets, as in Jeremiah, " Then shall
ye say unto them, The gods that have not
made the heavens and the earth shall perish
from the earth, and from under heaven;''*
and again, "O Lord, my strength, and my
fortress, and my refuge in the day of afflic-
tion, the Gentiles shall come unto Thee from
the ends of the earth, and shall say. Surely
our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and
things wherein there is no profit. Shall a man
make gods unto himself, and they are no
gods ? Therefore, behold, I will at that time
cause them to know,
know mine hand and

shall know that I am the Lord, "s Hearing
these prophecies, and seeing their actual ful-
fillment, I need not say that he would be af-
fected; for we know by experience how the
hearts of believers are confirmed by seeing
ancient predictions now receiving their ac-
complishment.

8. In the same prophet the inquirer would
find clear proof that Christ is not merely one
of the great men that have appeared in the
world. For Jeremiah goes on to say:|
"Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, 1 1
and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart
departeth from the Lord: for he shall be like
the heath in the desert, and shall not see
when good cometh; but shall inhabit the
parched places of the wilderness, in a salt
land not inhabited. Blessed is the man that
trusteth in the Lord, and whose hope the
Lord is: for he shall be as a tree beside the
water, that spreadeth out its roots by the
river: he shall not fear when heat cometh,
but his leaf shall be green; he shall not be:
careful in the year of drought, neither shalLj
cease from yielding fruit." * On hearing this |
curse pronounced in the figurative language] |
of prophecy on him that trusts in man, and
the blessing in similar style on him that trusts;
in God, the inquirer might have doubts about,
our doctrine, in which we teach not only thatj |
Christ is God, so that our trust is not in man, ' '
but also that He is man because He took our

» Ps. ii. 7,

- Ps. l.\xii. 10.

3 Ps. -fXv. 7.

5 Jer. xvi. 19-21.

4 Jer. X, II.
6 Jer. xvii. 5-

Book XIII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

20'

nature. So some err by denying Christ's
humanity, while they allow His divinity.
Others, again, assert His humanity, but deny
His divinit}'-, and so either become infidels
or incur the guilt of trusting in man. The
inquirer, then, might say that the prophet
says only that Christ is God, without any
reference to His human nature; whereas, in
our apostolic doctrine, Christ is not only God
in whom we may safely trust, but the Media-
tor between God and man — the man Jesus.
The prophet explains this in the words in
which he seems to check himself, and to sup-
ply the omission: " His heart,'' he says " is
sorrowful throughout; and He is man, and
who shall know Him?"' He is man, in
order that in the form of a servant He might
heal the hard in heart, and that they might
acknowledge as God Him who became man
for their sakes, that their trust might be not
in man, but in God-man. He is man taking
the form of a servant. And who shall know
Him ? For " He was in the form of God,
and thought it not robbery to be equal to
God."^ He is man, for "the Word was
made flesh, and dwelt among us." And who
shall know Him? For "in the beginning
was the Word, and the Word was with God,
and the Word was God."^ And truly His
heart was sorrowful throughout. For even as
regards His own disciples His heart was sor-
rowful, when He said, " Have I been so long
time with you, and yet have ye not known
me?" "Have I been so long time with
you" answers to the words "He is man,''
and "Have ye not known me?" to "Who
shall know Him?" And the person is none
other but He who says, " He that hath seen
me hath seen the Father."^ So that our
trust is not in man, to be under the curse of
the prophet, but in God-man, that is, in the
Son of God, the Saviour Jesus Christ, the
Mediator between God and man. In the
form of a servant the Father is greater than
He; in the form of God He is equal with the
Father.

9. In Isaiah we read: " The pride of man
shall be brought low; and the Lord alone
shall be exalted in that day. And they shall
ide the workmanship of their hands in the
clefts of the rocks, and in dens and caves of
the earth, from fear of the Lord, and from
the glory of His power, when He shall arise
to shake terribly the earth. For in that day
a man shall cast away his idols of gold and
silver, which they have made to worship, as
useless and hurtful. "5 Perhaps the inquirer
I himself, who, as Faustus supposes, would

" Jer. xvii. 9.
4 John xiv. 9.

2 Phil. ii. 6.
5 Isa. ii. 17-20.

i John i. I.

laugh and say that he does not believe the
Hebrew prophets, has hid idols made with
hands in some cleft, or cave, or den. Or he
may know a friend, or neighbor, or fellow-
citizen who has done this from the fear of the
Lord, who by the severe prohibition of the
kings of the earth, now serving and bowing
down to him, as the prophet predicted, shakes
the earth, that is, breaks the stubborn heart
of worldly men. The inquirer is not likely
to disbelieve the Hebrew prophets, when he
finds their predictions fulfilled, perhaps in his
own person.

10. One might rather fear that the inquirer,
in the midst of such copious evidence, would
say that the Christians composed those writ-
ings when the events described had already
begun to take place, in order that those oc-
currences might appear to be not due to a
merely human purpose, but as if divinely
foretold. One might fear this, were it not
for the widely spread and widely known
people of the Jews; that Cain, with the mark
that he should not be killed by any one; that
Ham, the servant of his brethren, carrying
as a load the books for their instruction.
From the Jewish manuscripts we prove that
these things were not written by us to suit the
event, but were long ago published and pre-
served as prophecies in the Jewish nation.
These prophecies are now explamed in their
accomplishment: for even what is obscure in
them — because these things happened to them
as an example, and were written for our
benefit, on whom the ends of the world are
come — is now made plain; and what was
hidden in the shadows of the future is now
visible in the light of actual experience.

11. The inquirer might bring forward as a
difficulty the fact that those in whose books
these prophecies are found are not united with
us in the gospel. But v/hen convinced that
this also is foretold, he would feel how strong
the evidence is. The prophecies of the un-
belief of the Jews no one can avoid seeing,
no one can pretend to be blind to them. No
one can doubt that Isaiah spoke of the Jews
when he said, " The ox knoweth his owner,
and the ass his master's crib; but Israel hath
not known, and my people hath not con-
sidered;"^ or again, in the words quoted by
the apostle, " I have stretched out my hands
all the day to a wicked and gainsaying
people;" ^ and especially where he says, " God
has given them the spirit of remorse, eyes
that they should not see, and ears that they
should not hear, and should not under-
stand,"^ and many similar passages. If the

6 Isa. i. 3.

<> Isa. vi. 10; cf. Rom. xi.

7 Isa. Ixv. 2; cf. Rom. x. 21.

204

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XIII.

inquirer objected that it was not the fault of
the Jews if God blinded them so that they
did "not know Christ, we should try in the
simplest manner possible to make him under-
stand that this blindness is the just punish-
ment of other secret sins known to God. We
should prove that the apostle recognizes this
principle when he says of some persons, " God
gave them up to the lusts of their own hearts,
and to a reprobate mind, to do things not
convenient;"' and that the prophets them-
selves speak of this. For, to revert to the
words of Jeremiah, "He is man, and who
shall know Him ? " lest it should be an excuse
for the Jews that they did not knoiv, — for if
they had known, as the apostle says, "they
would not have crucified the Lord of glory," -
— the prophet goes on to show that their ig-
norance was the result of secret criminality;
for he says: "I the Lord search the heart,
and try the reins, to give to every one ac-
cording to his ways, and according to the
fruits of his doings."

12. If the next difficulty in the mind of
the inquirer arose from the divisions and
heresies among those called Christians, he
would learn that this too is taken notice of
by the prophets. For, as if it was natural
that, after being satisfied about the blindness
of the Jews, this objection from the divisions
among Christians should occur, Jeremiah,
observing this order in his prophecy, imme-
diately adds in the passage already quoted:
" The partridge is clamorous, gathering what
it has not brought forth, making riches with-
out judgment.'' For the partridge is notori-
ously quarrelsome, and is often caught from
its eagerness in quarreling. So the heretics
discuss not to find the truth, but with a
dogged determination to gain the victory one
way or another, that they may gather, as the
prophet says, what they have not brought
forth. For those whom they lead astray are
Christians already born of the gospel, whom
the Christian profession of the heretics mis-
leads. Thus they make riches not with judg-
ment, but with inconsiderate haste. For they
do not consider that the followers whom they
gather as their riches are taken from the gen-
uine original Ciiristian society, and deprived
of its benefits; and as the apostle describes
these heretics in the words: " As Jannes and
Jambres withstood Moses, so they also resist
the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate
concerning the fajth. But they shall proceed
no further: for their folly shall be manifest
to all men, as theirs also was."^ So the pro-
phet goes on to say of the partridge, which

I Rom. i. 28.

2 I Cor. ii.

3 2 Ti

gathers what it has not brought forth: "In
the midst of his days they shall leave him,
and m the end he shall be a fool;" that is,
he who at first misled people by a promising
display of superior wisdom, shall be a fool,
that is, shall be seen to be a fool. He will
be seen when his folly is manifest to all men,
and to those to whom he was at first a wise
man he will then be a fool.

13. As if anticipating that the inquirer
would ask next by what plain mark a young
disciple, not yet able to distinguish the truth
among so many errors, might find the true
Church of Christ, since the clear fulfillment
of so many predictions compelled him to be-
lieve in Christ, the prophet answers this
question in what follows, and teaches that the
Church of Christ, which he describes pro-
phetically, is conspicuously visible. His
words are: "A glorious high throne is our
sanctuary."'' This glorious throne is the
Church of which the apostle says: "The
temple of God is holy, which temple ye are."s
The Lord also, foreseeing the conspicuous-
ness of the Church as a help to young disci-
ples who might be misled, says, "A city that
is set on an hill cannot be hid."* Since,
then, a glorious high throne is our sanctuary,
no attention is to be paid to those who would
lead us into sectarianism, saying, " Lo, here
is Christ," or ." Lo there. " Lo here, lo there,
speaks of division; but the true city is on a
mountain, and the mountain is that which, as
we read in the prophet Daniel, grew from a
little stone till it filled the whole earth.'' And
no attention should be paid to those who,
professing some hidden mystery confined to
a small number, say. Behold, He is in the
chamber; behold, in the desert: for a city set
on an hill cannot be hid, and a glorious high
throne is our sanctuary.

14. After considering these instances of the
fulfillment of prophecy about kings and people
acting as persecutors, and then becoming be-
lievers, about the destruction of idols, about
the blindness of the Jews, about their testi-
mony to the writings which they have pre-
served, about the folly of heretics, about the
dignity of the Church of true and genuine
Christians, the inquirer would most reason-
ably receive the testimony of these prophets
about the divinity of Christ. No doubt, if
we were to begin by urging him to believe
prophecies yet unfulfilled, he might justly an-
swer. What have I to do with these prophets,
of whose truth I have no evidence? But, in
view of the manifest accomplishment of so
many remarkable predictions, no candid per-

4 Jer. xvii. 12
6 Matt. V. 14.

5 I Cor. iii. 17.
7 Dan. ii. 34, 35.

Book XIII. J

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

20;

son would despise either the things which
were thought worthy of being predicted in
those early times with so much solemnity,
or those who made the predictions. To none
can we trust more safely, as regards either
events long past' or those still future, than to
men whose words are supported by the evi-
dence of so many notable predictions having
been fulfilled.

15. If any truth about God or the Son of
God is taught or predicted in the Sibyl or
Sibyls, or in Orpheus, or in Hermes, if tkere
ever was such a person, or in any other
heathen poets, or theologians, or sages, or
philosophers, it may be useful for the refuta-
tion of Pagan error, but cannot lead us to
believe in these writers. For while they
spoke, because they could not help it, of the
God whom we worship, they either taught
their fellow-countrymen to worship idols and
demons, or allowed them to do so without
daring to protest against it. But our sacred
writers, with the authority and assistance of
God, were the means of establishing and pre-
serving among their people a government un-
der which heathen customs were condemned as
sacrilege. If any among this people fell into
idolatry or demon-worship, they were either
punished by the laws, or met by the awful de-
nunciations of the prophets. They worship-
ped one God, the maker of heaven and earth.
They had rites; but these rites were prophetic,
or symbolical of things to come, and were to
cease on the appearance of the things signi-
fied. The whole state was one great prophet,
with its king and priest symbolically anointed,
which was discontinued, not by the wish of
the Jews themselves, who were in ignorance
through unbelief, but only on the coming of
Him who was God, anointed with spiritual
grace above His fellows, the holy of holies,
the true King who should govern us, the true
Priest who should offer Himself for us. In a
word, the predictions of heathen ingenuity re-
garding Christ's coming are as different from
sacred prophecy as the confession of devils
from the proclamation of angels.

16. By such arguments, which might be ex-
panded if we were discussing with one brought
up in heathenism, and might be supported by
proofs in still greater number, the inquirer
whom Faustus has brought before us would
certainly be led to believe, unless he preferred
his sins to his salvation. As a believer, he
would be taken to be cherished in the bosom
of the Catholic Church, and would be taught
in due course the conduct required of him.
He would see many who do not practise the
required duties; but this would not shake his
faith, even though these people should belong

to the same Church and partake of the same
sacraments as himself. He would understand
that few share in the inheritance of God, while
many partake in its outward signs; that few
are united in holiness of life, and in the gift
of love shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy
Spirit who is given to us, which is a hidden
spring that no stranger can approach; and
that many join in the solemnity of the sacra-
ment, which he that eats and drinks un-
worthily eats and drinks judgment to himself,
while he who neglects to eat it shall not have
life in him,' and so shall never reach eternal
life. He will understand, too, that the good
are called few as compared with the multitude
of the evil, but that as scattered over the
world there are very many growing among
the tares, and mixed with the chaff, till the
day of harvest and of purging. As this is
taught in the Gospel, so is it foretold by the
prophets. We read, "As a lily among thorns,
so is my beloved among the daughters;"^
and again, " I have dwelt in the tabernacles
of Kedar; peaceful among them that hated
peace; "3 and again, " Mark in the forehead
those who sigh and cry for the iniquities of
my people, which are done in the midst of
them."'* The inquirer would be confirmed
by such passages; and being now a fellow-
citizen with the saints and of the household
of God, no longer an alien from Israel, but
an Israelite indeed, in whom is mo guile,
would learn to utter from a guileless heart the
words which follow in the passage of Jeremiah
already quoted, "O Lord, the patience of
Israel: let all that forsake Thee be dismayed."
After speaking of the partridge that is clamor-
ous, and gathers what it has not brought forth.;
and after extolling the city set on an hill which
cannot be hid, to prevent heretics from draw-
ing men away from the Catholic Church; after
the words, "A glorious high throne is our
sanctuary," he seems to ask himself, What
do we make of all those evil men who are
found mixed with the Church, and who be-
come more numerous as the Church extends,
and as all nations are united in Christ? And
then follow the w^ords, " O Lord, the patience
of Israel." Patience is necessary to obey the
command, " Suffer both to grow together till
the harvest." 5 Impatience towards the evil
might lead to forsaking the good, who in the
strict sense are the body of Christ, and to
forsake them would be to forsake Him. So
the prophet goes on to say, " Let all that for-
sake Thee be dismayed; let those who have
departed to the earth be confounded." The
earth is man trusting in himself, and induc-

• John vi. 54.
4 Ezck. ix. I.

2 Cant. li. 2.
5 Matt. xiii. 30.

3 Ps. cxx. 7.

2o6

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XIII.

ing others to trust in him. So the prophet
adds: " Let them be overthrown, for they
have forsaken the Lord, the fountain of Ufe."
This is the cry of the partridge, that it has
got the fountain of life, and will give it; and
so men are gathered to it, and depart from
Christ, as if Christ, whose name they had
professed, had not fulfilled His promise. The
partridge gathers those whom it has not
brought forth. And in order to do this, it
declares. The salvation which Christ promises
is with me; I will give it. In opposition to
this the prophet says: " Heal me, O Lord,
and I shall be healed; save me, and I shall
be saved." So we read in the apostle, " Let
no man glory in men;" ' or in the words of
the prophet, "Thou art my praise."^ Such
is a specimen of instruction in apostolic and
prophetic doctrine, by which a man may be
built on the foundation of the apostles and
prophets.

17. Faustus has not told us how he would
prove the divinity of Christ to the heathen,
whom he makes to say: I believe neither the
prophets in support of Christ, nor Christ in
support of the prophets. It would be absurd
to suppose that such a man would believe what
Christ says of Himself, when he disbelieves
what He says of others. For if he thinks
Him unworthy of credit in one case, he must
think Him so in all, or at least more so when
speaking of Himself than when speaking of
others. Perhaps, failing this, Faustus would
read to him the Sibyls and Orpheus, and any
heathen prophecies about Christ that he could
find. But how could he do this, when he
confesses that he knows none ? His words
are: " If, as is said, any prophecies of Christ
are to be found in the Sibyl, or in Hermes,
called Trismegistus, or Orpheus, or any
heathen poet. " How could he read writings
of which he knows nothing, and which he
supposes to exist only from report, to one who
will not believe either the prophets or Christ?
What, then, would he do ? AVould he bring
forward Manichseus as a witness to Christ ?
The opposite of this is what the Manichseans
do. They take advantage of the widespread
fragrance of the name of Christ to gain ac-
ceptance for Manichaeus, that the edge of
their poisoned cup may be sweetened with this
honey. Taking hold of the promises of Christ
to His disciples that He would send the Para-
clete, that is, the Comforter or Advocate, they
3ay that this Paraclete is Manichccus, or in
Manicheeus, and so steal an entrance into the
minds of men who do not know when He who
was promised by Christ really came. Those

' I Cor. iii. 21.

2 Jer. xvii. 14,

who have read the canonical book called the
Acts of the Apostles find a reference to
Christ's promise, and an account of its fulfill-
ment. Faustus, then, has no proof to give to
the inquirer. It is not likely that any one
will be so infatuated as to take the authority
of Manichaeus when he rejects that of Christ.
Would he not reply in derision, if not in
anger. Why do you ask me to believe Persian
books, when you forbid me to believe Hebrew
books ? The Manichcean has no hold on the
inquirer, unless he is already in some way
convinced of the truth of Christianity. When
he finds him willing to believe Christ, then
he deludes him with the representation of
Christ given by Manichreus. So the partridge
gathers what it has not brought forth. When
will you whom he gathers leave him ? When
will you see him to be a fool, who tells you
that Hebrew testimony is worthless in the case
of unbelievers, and superfluous to believers ?

18. If believers are to throw away all the
books which have led them to believe, I see
no reason why they should continue reading
the Gospel itself. The Gospel, too, must be
worthless to this inquirer, who, according to
Faustus' pitiful supposition, rejects with ridi-
cule the authority of Christ. And to the be-
liever it must be superfluous, if true notices
of Christ are superfluous to believers. And
if the Gospel should be read by the believer,
that he may not forget what lie has believed,
so should the prophets, that he may not for-
get why he believed. For if he forgets this
his faith cannot be firm. By this principle,
you should throw away the books of Mani-
chaeus, on the authority of which you already
believe that light — that is, God — -fought with
darkness, and that, in order to bind darkness,
the light was first swallowed up and bound,
and polluted and mangled by darkness, to be
restored, and liberated, and purified, and
healed by your eating, for which you are re-
warded by not being condemned to the mass
of darkness for ever, along with that part of
the light which cannot be extricated. This
fiction is sufficiently published by your prac-
tice and your words. Why do you seek for
the testimony of books, and add to the embar-
rassment of your God by the consumption of
strength in the needless task of writing manu-
scripts ? Burn all your parchments, with their
finely-ornamented binding; so you will be rid
of a useless burden, and your God who suffers
confinement in the volume will be set free.
What a mercy it would be to the members of
your God, if you could boil your books and
eat them ! There might be a difiiculty,
however, from the prohibition of animal food.

Then the

writing

must share in the impurity

rsooK XIV.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

lo:

of the sheepskin. Indeed, you are to blame
for this, for, like what you say was done in
the first war between light and darkness, you
l)rought what was clean in the pen in contact
with the uncleanness of the parchment. Or
]:)erhaps, for the sake of the colors, we may
put it the other way; and so the darkness
would be yours, in the ink which you brought
against the light of the white pages. If these
remarks irritate you, you should rather be
angry with yourselves for believing doctrines
of which these are the necessary conse-
quences. As for the books of the apostles
and prophets, we read them as a record of our
faith, to encourage our hope and animate our
love. These books are in perfect harmony

with one another; and their harmony, li,<e
the music of a heavenly trumpet, wakens us
from the torpor of worldliness, and urges us
on to the prize of our high calling. The
apostle, after quoting from the prophets the
words, " The reproaches of them that re-
proached Thee fell on me," goes on to speak
of the benefit of reading the prophets: " For
whatsoever things were written beforetime
were written for our learning; that we, through
patience and comfort of the Scriptures, might
have hope.'' ' If Faustus denies this, we can
only say with Paul, " If any one shall preach
to you another doctrine than that ye have re-
ceived, let him be accursed." ^

I Rom. XV. 4.

2 Gal. i. 9.

BOOK XIV.

FAUSTUS ABHORS MOSES FOR THE AWFUL CURSE HE HAS PRONOUNCED UPON CHRIST. AUGUSTIN
EXPOUNDS THE CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE OF THE SUFFERING SAVIOUR BY COMPARING OLD AND
NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES.

I. Faustus said: If you ask why we do
not believe INIoses, it is on account of our
love and reverence for Christ. The most
reckless man cannot regard with pleasure a
[lerson who has cursed his ifather. So we
abhor Moses, not so much for his blasphemy
'jf everything human and divine, as for the
awful curse he has pronounced upon Christ
the Son of God, who for our salvation hung
on the tree. Whether Moses did this inten-
tionally or not is your concern. Either way,
he cannot be excused, or considered worthy
of belief. His words are, "Cursed is every
one that hangeth on a tree."' You tell me
to believe this man, though, if he was in-
spired, he must have cursed Christ knowingly
and intentionally; and if he did it in ignor-
ance, he cannot have been divine. Take
cither alternative. Moses was no prophet,
and while cursing in his usual manner, he
fell ignorantly into the sin of blasphemy
against God. Or he was indeed divine, and
foresaw the future; and from ill-will to our
salvation, he directs the venom of his male-
diction against Him who was to accomplish
that salvation on a tree. He who thus injures
the Son cannot surely have seen or known the
Father. He who knew nothing of the final
ascension of the Son, cannot surely have fore-
told His advent. Moreover, the extent of
the injury inflicted by this curse is to be con-
sidered. For it denounces all the righteous
men and martyrs, and sufferers of every kind,
who have died in this way, as Peter and

' Deut. xxi. 23.

Andrew, and the rest. Such a cruel denuncia-
tion could never have come from Moses if he
had been a prophet, unless he was a bitter
enemy of these sufferers. For he pronounces
them cursed not only of men but of God.
What hope, then, of blessing remains to
Christ, or his apostles, or to us if we happen
to be crucified for Christ's sake ? It indicates
great thoughtlessness in Moses, and the want
of all divine inspiration, that he overlooked
the fact that men are hung on a tree for very
different reasons, some for their crimes, and
others who suffer in the cause of God and of
righteousness. In this thoughtless way he
heaps all together without distinction under
the same curse; whereas if he had had any
sense, not to say inspiration, if he wished to
single out the punishment of the cross from
all others as specially detestable, he would
have said. Cursed is every guilty and impious
person that hangeth on a tree. This would
have made a distinction between the guilty and
the innocent. And yet even this would have
been incorrect, for Christ took the malefactor
from the cross along with himself into the
Paradise of his Father. What becomes of
the curse on every one that hangeth on a
tree ? Was Barabbas, the notorious robber,
who certainly was not hung on a tree, but was
set free from prison at the request of the
Jews, more blessed than the thief who ac-
companied Christ from the cross to heaven ?
Again, there is a curse on the man that wor-
ships the sun or the moon. Now if under a
heathen monarch I am forced to worship the
sun, and if from fear of this curse 1 refuse,

208

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XI

shall I incur this other curse by suffering the
punishment of crucifixion? Perhaps Moses
was in the habit of cursing everything good.
We think no more of his denunciation than
of an old wife's scolding. So we find him
pronouncing a curse on all youths of both
sexes, when he says: "Cursed is everyone
that raiseth not up a seed in Israel."' This
is aimed directly at Jesus, who, according to
you, was born among the Jews, and raised up
no seed to continue his family. It points too
at his disciples, some of whom he took from
the wives they had married, and some who
were unmarried he forbade to take wives.
We have good reason, you see, for expressing
our abhorrence of the daring style in which
Moses hurls his maledictions against Christ,
against light, against chastity, against every-
thing divine. You cannot make much of the
distinction between hanging on a tree and
being crucified, as you often try to do by way
of apology; for Paul repudiates such a dis-
tinction when he says, "Christ hath re-
deemed us from the curse of the law, being
made a curse for us; as it is written. Cursed
is every one that hangeth on a tree. ' ' -

2. AuGUSTiN replied: The pious Faustus
is pained because Christ is cursed by Moses.
His love for Christ makes him hate Moses.
Before explaining the sacred import and the
piety of the words, " Cursed is every one that
hangeth on a tree," I would ask these pious
people wh}^ they are angry with Moses, since
his curse does not affect their Christ. If
Christ hung on the tree. He must have been
fastened to it with nails, the marks of which
He showed to His doubting disciple after His
resurrection. Accordingly He must have
had a vulnerable and mortal body, which the
Manichaeans deny. Call the wounds and the
marks false, and it follows that His hanging
on the tree was false. This Christ is not
affected by the curse, and there is no occasion
for this indignation against the person uttering
the curse. If they pretend to be angry with
Moses for cursing what they call the false
death of Christ, what are we to think of them-
selves, who do not curse Christ, but, what is
much worse, make Him a liar ? If it is wrong
to curse mortality, it is a much more heinous
offense to sully the purity of truth. But let
us make these heretical cavils an occasion for
explaining this mystery to believers.

3. Death comes upon man as the punish-
ment of sin, and so is itself called sin; not
that a man sins in dying, but because sin is
the cause of his death. So the word tongue,
which properly means the fleshy substance

I Deut. XXV. 5-10.

2 Gal. iii. 10.

between the teeth and the palate, is applied
in a secondary sense to the result of the
tongue's action. In this sense we speak of a
Latin tongue and a Greek tongue. The word
hand, too, means both the members of the
body we use in working, and the writing whi( h
is done with the hand. In this sense we speak
of writing as being proved to be the hand of
a certain person, or of recognizing the hand
of a friend. The writing is certainly not a
member of the body, but the name hand is
given to it because it is the hand that does
it. So sin means both a bad action de-
serving punishment, and death the conse-
quence of sin. Christ has no sin in the
sense of deserving death, but He bore for
our sakes sin in the sense of death as
brought on human nature by sin. This is
what hung on the tree; this is what was cursed
by Moses. Thus was death condemned that
its reign might cease, and cursed that it might
be destroyed. By Christ's taking our sin in
this sense, its condemnation is our deliver-
ance, while to remain in subjection to sin is
to be condemned.

4. What does Faustus find strange in the
curse pronounced on sin, on death, and on
human mortality, which Christ had on account
of man's sin, though He Himself was sinless ?
Christ's body was derived from Adam., for
His mother the Virgin Mary was a child of
Adam. But God said in Paradise, " On the
day that ye eat, ye shall surely die." This
is the curse which hung on the tree. A man
may deny that Christ was cursed who denies
that He died. But the man who believes
that Christ died, and acknowledges that death,
is the fruit of sin, and is itself called sin, will
understand who it is that is cursed by Moses,
when he hears the apostle saying " For ourl
old man is crucified with Him." ^ The apos-
tle boldly says of Christ, " He was made aj
curse for us;" for he could also venture to
say, "He died for all." "He died," and'
" He was cursed," are the same. Death is
the effect of the curse; and all sin is cursed,
whether it means the action which merits
punishment, or the punishment which follows.
Christ, though guiltless, took our punishment,
that He might cancel our guilt, and do away
with our punishment.

5. These things are not my conjectures,
but are affirmed constantly by the apostle,
with an emphasis sufficient to rouse the care-
less and to silence the gainsayers. "God,"
he says, " sent His Son in the likeness of
sinful flesh, that by sin He might condemn
sin in the flesh." '• Christ's flesh was not sin-

3 Rom. vi. 6.

4 Rom. viii. 3.

Book XIV.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICHyEAN.

209

fill, because it was not born of Mary by ordi-
nary generation; but because death is tlie ef-
fect of sin, this flesh, in being mortal, had the
likeness of sinful flesh. This is called sin in
the following words, "that by sin He might
condemn sin in the flesh.'' Again he says:
" He hath made Him to be sin for us who
knew no sin, that we might be made the
righteousness of God in Him."' Wliy should
not Moses call accursed what Paul calls sin? In
this prediction the prophet claims a share with
tlie apostle in the reproach of the heretics. For
whoever finds fault with the word cursed in
the prophet, must find fault with the word sin
in the apostle; for curse and sin go together.
6. If we read, "Cursed of God is every
■ iiie that hangeth on a tree,'' the addition of
Ae words " of God " creates no difficulty. For
had not God hated sin and our death. He
would not have sent His Son to bear and to
.ibolisii it. And there is nothing strange in
Cod's cursing what He hates. For His
readiness to give us the immortality which
will be had at the coming of Christ, is in pro-
portion to the compassion with which He
hated our death when it hung on the cross at
the death of Christ. And if Moses curses
everv one that hangeth on a tree, it is cer-
tainly not because he did not foresee that
righteous men would be crucified, but rather
tiecause He foresaw that heretics would deny
:ie death of the Lord to be real, and would
try to disprove the application of this curse to
''hrist, in order that they might disprove the
reality of His death. For if Christ's death
was not real, nothing cursed hung on the cross
when He was crucified, for the crucifixion
cannot have been real. Moses cries from the
distant past to these heretics: Your evasion
in denying the reality of the death of Christ
is useless. Cursed is every one that hangeth
fin a tree; not this one or that, but absolutely
every one. What ! the Son of God ? Yes,
assuredly. This is the very thing you object
to, and that you are so anxious to evade.
Vou will not allow that He was cursed for us,
because you will not allow that He died for
us. Exemption from Adam's curse implies
I exemption from his death. But as Christ
endured death as man, and for man; so also.
Son of God as He was, ever living in His own
rigliteousness, but dying for on r oflences. He
submitted as man, and for man, to bear the
jcurse which accompanies death. And as He
'died in the flesh which He took in bearing
iiiir punishment, so also, while ever blessed
|in His own righteousness. He was cursed for
jOur offences, in the death which He suffered

' 2 Cor. V. 21.

in bearing our punishment. And these words
"everyone" are intended to check the ig-
norant officiousness which would deny the
reference of the curse to Christ, and so, be-
cause the curse goes along with death, would
lead to the denial of the true death of Christ.

7. The believer in the true doctrine of the
gospel will understand that Christ is not re-
proached by Moses when he speaks of Him
as cursed, not in His divine majesty, but as
hanging on the tree as our substitute, bearing
our punishment, any more than He is praised
by the Manichaeans when they deny that He
had a mortal body, so as to suffer real death.
In the curse of the prophet there is praise
of Christ's humility, while in the pretended
regard of the heretics there is a charge of
falsehood. If, then, you deny that Christ
was cursed, you must deny that He died;
and then you have to meet, not Moses, but the
apostles. Confess that He died, and you
may also confess that He, without taking our
sin, took its punishment. Now the punish-
ment of sin cannot be blessed, or else it would
be a thing to be desired. The curse is pro-
nounced by divine justice, and it will be well
for us if we are redeemed from it. Confess
then that Christ died, and you may confess
that He bore the curse for us; and that when
Moses said, " Cursed is every one that hang-
eth on a tree," he said in fact. To hang on a
tree is to be mortal, or actually to die. He
might have said, " Cursed is every one that
is mortal," or " Cursed is every one dying;"
but the prophet knew that Christ would suffer
on the cross, and that heretics would say that
He hung on the tree only in appearance, with- '
out really dying. So he exclaims. Cursed;
meaning that He really died. He knew that
the death of sinful man, which Christ though
sinless bore, came from that curse, " If ye
touch it, ye shall surely die." Thus also,
the serpent hung on the pole was intended to
show that Christ did not feign death, but
that the real deatli into which the serpent by
his fatal counsel cast mankind was huuir on
the cross of Christ's passion. The Mani-
chaeans turn away from the view of this real
death, and so they are not healed of the
poison of the serpent, as we read that in the
wilderness as many as looked were b.ealed.

8. It is true, some ignorantly distinguisli
between hanging on a tree and being crucified.
So some explain this passage as referring to
Judas. But how do they know whether he
hung himself from wood or from stone ?
Faustus is right in saying that the apostle
obliges us to refer tlie words to Christ, Such
ignorant Catholics are the prey of the Mani-
chieans. Such they get hold of and entangle

2IO

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XIV.

in their sopiiistry. Such were we when we
fell into this heresy, and adhered to it. Such
were we, when, not by our own strength, but
by the mercy of God, we were rescued.

9. What attacks on divine things does
Faustus speak of when he charges Moses
with sparing nothing human or divine ? He
makes the charge without stopping to prove
it. We know, on the contrary, that Moses
gave due praise to everything really divine,
and in human affairs was a just ruler, con-
sidering his times and the grace of his dis-
pensation. It will be time to prove this when
we see any proof of Faustus' charges. It
may be clever to make such charges cau-
tiously, but there is great incaution in the
cleverness which ruins its possessor. It is
good to be clever on the side of truth, but it
is a poor thing to be clever in opposition to
the truth. Faustus says that Moses spared
nothing human or divine; not that he spared
no god or man. If he said that Moses did
not spare God, it cauld easily be shown in
reply that Moses everywhere does honof to
the true God, whom he declares to be the
]\Iaker of heaven and earth. Again, if he
said that INIoses spared none of the gods, he
would betray himself to Christians as a wor-
shipper of the false gods that Moses de-
nounces; and so he would be prevented from
gathering what he has not brought forth, by
the brood taking refuge under the wings of
the Mother Church. Faustus tries to ensnare
the babes, by saying that Moses spared nothing
divine, wishing not to frighten Christians with
a profession of belief in the gods, which
would be plainly opposed to Christianity, and
at the same time appearing to take the side
of the Pagans against us; for they know that
Moses has said many plain and pointed things
against the idols and gods of the heathen,
vrhich are devils.

10. If the Manichseans disapprove of Moses
on this account, let them confess that they
are worshippers of idols and devils. This,
indeed, may be the case without their being
aware of it. The apostle tells us that " in
the last days some shall depart from the faith,
giving heed to seducing spirits, and to doc-
trines of devils, speaking lies in hypocrisy. '''
Whence but from devils, who are fond of
falsehood, could the idea have come that
Christ's sufferings and death were unreal,
and that the marks which He showed of His
wounds were unreal ? Are these not the doc-
trines of lying devils, which teach that Christ,
the Truth itself, was a deceiver? Besides,
the Manichceans openly teach the worship, if

' I Tim. iv. I, 2.

not of devils, still of created things, which the
apostle condemns in the words, " They wor-
shipped and served the creature rather than
the Creator."'

11. As there is an unconscious worship of
idols and devils in the fanciful legends of the
Manichjeans, so they knowingly serve the
creature in their worship of the sun and
moon. And in what they call their service
of the Creator they really serve their own
fancy, and not the Creator at all. For they
deny that God created those things which the
apostle plainly declares to be the creatures of
God, when he says of food, " Every creature
of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if
it is received with thanksgiving." 3 This is
sound doctrine, which you cannot bear, and
so turn to fables. The apostle praises the
creature of God, but forbids the worship of it;
and in the same way Moses gives due praise
to the sun and moon, while at the same time
he states the fact of their having been made
by God, and placed by Him in their courses,
— the sun to rule the day, and the moon to
rule the nitjht. Probably you think Moses
spared nothing divine, simply because he for-
bade the worship of the sun and moon,
whereas you turn towards them in all direc-
tions in your worship. But the sun and moon
take no pleasure in your false praises. It is
the devil, the transgressor, that delights in
false praises. The powers of heaven, who
have not fallen by sin, wish their Creator to
be praised in them; and their true praise is
that which does no wrong to their Creator.
He is wronged when they are said to be His
members, or parts of His substance. For
He is perfect and independent, underived,
not divided or scattered in space, but un-
changeably self-existent, self-sufficient, and
blessed in Himself, In the abundance of His
goodness. He by His word spoke, and they
were made; He commanded, and they were
created. And if earthly bodies are good, of
which the apostle spoke when he said that no
food is unclean, because every creature of
God is good, much more the heavenly bodies,
of which the sun and moon are the chief; for
the apostle says again, " The glory of the
terrestrial is one, and the glory of the celes-
tial is another.'' "

12. Moses, then, casts no reproach on the
sun and moon when he prohibits their wor-
ship. He praises them as heavenly bodies;
while he also praises God as the Creator of
both heavenly and earthly, and will not allow
of His being insulted by giving the worship
due to Him to those who are praised only as

<om. 1. 25.

3 I Tim. iv. 4.

4 I Cor. XV. 40.

Book XIV.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

2ir

dependent upon Him. Faustus prides him-
self on tlie ingenuity of his objection to the
curse pronounced by Moses on the worship
of the sun and moon. He says, " If under a
heathen monarch I am forced to worship the
sun, and if from fear of this curse I refuse,
shall I incur this other curse by suffering the
punishment of crucifixion?" No heathen
monarch is forcing you to worship the sun;
nor would the sun itself force you, if it were
reigning on the earth, as neither does it now
wish to be worshipped. As the Creator bears
with blasphemers till the judgment, so these
celestial bodies bear with their deluded wor-
shippers till the judgment of the Creator. It
should be obser\'ed that no Christian monarch
could enforce the worship of the sun. Faus-
tus instances a heathen monarch, for he knows
that their worship of the sun is a heathen cus-
tom. Yet, in spite of this opposition to
Christianity, the partridge takes the name of
Christ, that it may gather what it has not
brought forth. The answer to this objection
is easy, and the force of truth will soon break
the horns of this dilemma. Suppose, then, a
Christian threatened by royal authority with
being hung on a tree if he will not worship
the sun. If I avoid, you say, the curse pro-
nounced by the law on the worshipper of the
sun, I incur the curse pronounced by the
same law on him that hangs on a tree. So
you will be in a difficulty; only that you wor-
ship the sun without being forced by anybody.
But a true Christian, built on the foundation
of the apostles and prophets, distinguishes the
curses, and the reasons of them. He sees
that one refers to the mortal body which is
hung on the tree, and the other to the mind
which worships the sun. For though the body
bows in worship, — which also is a heinous
offence, — the belief or imagination of the ob-
ject worshipped is an act of the mind. The
death implied in both curses is in one case
the death of the body, and in the other the
death of the soul. It is better to have the
curse in bodily death, — which will be removed
in the resurrection, — than the curse in the
death of the soul, condemning it along with
the body to eternal fire. The Lord solves
this difficulty in the words: " Fear not them
that kill the body, but cannot kill the soul;
but fear him who has power to cast both soul
and body into hell-fire."' In other words,

' Matt. X. 28.

fear not the curse of bodily death, which in
time is removed; but fear the curse of spirit-
ual death, which leads to the eternal torment
of both soul and body. Be assured. Cursed
is every one that hangeth on a tree is no old
wife's railing, but a prophetical utterance.
Christ, by the curse, takes the curse away, as
He takes away death by death, and sin by sin.
In the words, " Cursed is every one that hang-
eth on a tree," there is no more blasphemy
than in the words of the apostle, " He died,"
or, "Our old man was crucified along with
Him," -or, " By sin He condemned sin," ^or^
" He made Him to be sin for us who knew no
sin,"'* and in many similar passages. Con-
fess, then, that when you exclaim against the
curse of Christ, you exclaim against His
death. If this is not an old wife's railing on
your part, it is devilish delusion, which makes
you deny the death of Christ because your
own souls are dead. You teach people that
Christ's death was feigned, making Christ
your leader in the falsehood with which you
use the name of Christian to mislead men.

13. If Faustus thinks Moses an enemy of
continence or virginity because he says,
" Cursed is every one that raiseth not up seed
in Israel," let them hear the words of Isaiah:
" Thus saith the Lord to all eunuchs; To
them who keep my precepts, and choose the
things that please me, and regard my cove-
nant, will I give in my house and within my
walls a place and a name better than of sons
and of daughters; I will give them an ever-
lasting name, that shall not be cut off. "^
Though our adversaries disagree with Moses,
if they agree with Isaiah it is something
gained. It is enough for us to know that the
same God spoke by both Moses and Isaiah,
and that every one is cursed who raiseth
not up seed in Israel, both then when beget-
ting children in marriage (for the continuation
of the people was a civil duty), and now be-
cause no one spiritually born should rest con-
tent without seeking spiritual increase in the
production of Christians by preaching Christ,
each one according to his ability. So that
the times of both Testaments are briefly de-
scribed in the words, " Cursed is every one
that raiseth not up seed in Israel."*^

2 Rom. vi. 6. 3 Rom. viii. 3.

4 2 Cor. V. 21. 5 Isa. Ivi. 4, 5.

6 [In scarcely any other Manichaean record do we find the
Manichajan hostility to Judaism expressed with so much ardorand
with so much precision as in the blasphemous statements of Kaustus
m this treatise. — A. H. N.]

212

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Rook XV.

BOOK XV.

FAUSTUS REJECTS THE OLD TESTAMENT BECAUSE IT LEAVES NO ROOM FOR CHRIST. CHRIST THE
ONE BRIDEGROOM SUFFICES FOR HIS BRIDE THE CHURCH. AUGUSTIN ANSWERS AS WELL AS
HE CAN, AND REPROVES THE MANICH^ANS WITH PRESUMPTION IN CLAIMING TO BE THE
BRIDE OF CHRIST.

has made us able ministers of the New Tes-
tament."' In the God of the Hebrews we
have no interest whatever; for neither can
he perform his promises, nor do we desire
that he should. The liberality of Christ has
made us indifferent to the flatteries of this
stranger. This figure of the relation of the
wife to her husband is sanctioned by Paul,
who says: " The woman that has a husband
is bound to her husband as long as he liveth:
but if her husband die, she is freed from the
law of her husband. So, then, if while her
husband liveth she be joined to another man,
she shall be called an adulteress; but if her
husband be dead, she is not an adulteress,
though she be married to another man."^
Here he shows that there is a spiritual adul-
tery in being united to Christ before repudi-
ating the author of the law, and counting him,
as it were, as dead. This applies chiefly to
the Jews who believe in Christ, and who ought
to forget their former superstition. We who
have been converted to Christ from heathen-
ism, look upon the God of the Hebrews not
merely as dead, but as never having existed,
and do not need to be told to forget him. A
Jew, when he believes, should regard Adonai
as dead; a Gentile should regard his idol as
dead; and so with everything that has been
held sacred before conversion. One who,
after giving up idolatry, worships both the
God of the Hebrews and Christ, is like an
abandoned woman, who after the death of one
husband marries two others.

2. AuGUSTiN replied: Let all who have
given their hearts to Christ say whether they
can listen patiently to these things, unless
Christ Himself enable them. Faustus, full
of the new honey, rejects the old vinegar;
and Paul, full of the old vinegar, has poured
out half that the new honey may be poured
in, not to be kept, but to be corrupted. When
the apostle calls himself a servant of Jesus
Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto
the gospel of God, this is the new honey.
But when he adds, " which He promised be-
fore by His prophets in the Holy Scriptures
of His Son, who was made of the seed of
David according to the flesh," 3 this is the old
vinegar. Who could bear to hear this, unless

I. Faustus said: Why do we not receive
the Old Testament? Because when a vessel
is full, what is poured on it is not received,
but allowed to run over; and a full stomach
rejects what it cannot hold. So the Jews,
satisfied with the Old Testament, reject the
New; and we who have received the New Tes-
tament from Christ, reject the Old. You re-
ceive both because you are only half filled
with each, and the one is not completed, but
corrupted by the other. For vessels half
filled should not be filled up with anything
of a difterent nature from what they already
contain. If it contains wine, it should be
filled up with wine, honey with honey, vinegar
with vinegar. For to pour gall on honey, or
water on wine, or alkalies on vinegar, is not
addition, but adulteration. This is why we
do not receive the Old Testament. Our
Church, the bride of Christ, the poor bride
of a rich bridegroom, is content with the pos-
session of her husband, and scorns the wealth
of inferior lovers, and despises the gifts of
the Old Testament and of its author, and from
regard to her own character, receives only the
letters of her husband. We leave the Old
Testament to your Church, that, like a bride
faithless to her spouse, delights in the letters
and gifts of another. This lover who cor-
rupts your chastity, the God of the Hebrews
in his stone tablets promises you gold and
silver, and abundance of food, and the land
of Canaan. Such low rewards have tempted
you to be unfaithful to Christ, after all the
rich dowry bestowed by him. By such attrac-
tions the God of the Hebrews gains over the
bride of Christ. You must know that you
are cheated, and that these promises are false.
This God is in poverty and beggary, and can-
not do what he promises. For if he cannot
give these things to the synagogue, his proper
wife, who obeys him in all things like a serv-
ant, how can he bestow them on you who are
strangers, and who proudly throw off his yoke
from your necks ? Go on, then, as you have
begun, join the new cloth to the old garment,
put the new wine in old bottles, serve two
masters without pleasing either, make Chris-
tianity a monster, half horse and half man;
but allow us to serve only Christ, content .vith
his immortal dower, and imitating the apostle
who says, " Our sufficiency is of God, who

I 2 Cor. iii. 5, 6.

2 Rom. vii. 2,

3 Rom. i. 1-3.

■r

Book XV.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^EAN.

213

the apostle himself consoled us b}- saying:
" There must be heresies, that they which
are approved may be made manifest among
you ? " ' Why should we repeat what we said
already ? - — that the new cloth and the old gar-
ment, the new wine and the old bottles, mean
not two Testaments, but two lives and two
hopes, — that the relation of the two Testa-
ments is figuratively described by the Lord
when He says: " Therefore every scribe in-
structed in the kingdom of God is like an
householder bringing out of his treasure things
new and old/' 3 The reader may remember
this as said before, or he may find it on look-
ing back. For if any one tries to serve God
with two hopes, one of earthly felicity, and
the other of the kingdom of heaven, the two
hopes cannot agree; and when the latter is
shaken by some affliction, the former will be
lost too. Thus it is said. No man can serve
two masters; which Christ explains thus:
"Ye cannot serve God and Mammon. " -* But
to those who rightly understand it, the Old
Testament is a prophecy of the New. Even
in that ancient people, the holy patriarchs and
prophets, who understood the part they per-
formed, or which they were instrumental in
performing, had this hope of eternal life in
the New Testament. They belonged to the
New Testament, because they understood
and loved it, though revealed only in figure.
Those belonging to the Old Testament were
the people who cared for nothing else but the
temporal promises, without understanding
them as significant of eternal things. But all
this has already been more than enough in-
sisted on.

3. It is amazingly bold in the impious and
impure sect of the Manichaeans to boast of
being the chaste bride of Christ. All the
effect of such a boast on the really chaste
members of the holy Church is to remind them
of the apostle's warning against deceivers:
" I have joined you to one husband, to pre-
sent you as a chaste virgin to Christ. But I
fear lest, as the serpent deceived Eve by his
guile, so your minds also should be cor-
rupted from the purity which is in Christ." s
What else do those preachers of another gos-
pel than that which we have received try to
do, but to corrupt us from the purity which we
preserve for Christ, when they stigmatize the
law of God as old, and praise their own false-
hoods as new, as if all that is new must be
good, and all that is old bad ? The Apostle
John, however, praises the old command-
ment, and the Apostle Paul bids us avoid
novelties in doctrine. As an unworthy son

' I Cor. xi. 19. = Lib. viii. 3 Matt. .\iii. 52.

4 Matt. vi. 24. 5 2 Cor. .\i. 2, 3.

and servant of the Catholic Church, the true
bride of the true Christ, I too, as appointed
to give out food to my fellow-servanis, would
speak to her a word of counsel. Continue
ever to shun the profane errors of the Mani-
chseans, which have been tried by the experi-
ence of thine own children, and condemned by
their recovery. By that heresy I was onc6
separated from thy fellowship, and after run'
ning into danger which ought to have been
avoided, I escaped. Restored to thy ser-
vice, my experience may perhaps be profita-
ble to thee. Unless thy true and truthful
Bridegroom, from whose side thou wert made,
had obtained the remission of sins through
His own real blood, the gulf of error would
have swallowed me up; I should have become
dust, and been devoured by the serpent. Be
not misled by the name of truth. The truth
is in thine own milk, and in thine own bread.
They have the name only, and not the thing.
Thy full-grown children, indeed, are secure;
but I speak to thy babes, my brothers, and
sons, and masters, whom thou, the virgin
mother, fertile as pure, dost cherish into life
under thine anxious wings, or dost nourish
with the milk of infancy. I call upon these,
thy tender offspring, not to be seduced by
noisy vanities, but rather to pronounce ac-
cursed any one that preaches to them another
gospel than that which they have received in
thee. I call upon these not to leave the true
and truthful Christ, in whom are hid all the
treasures of wisdom and knowledge; not to
forsake the abundance of His goodness which
He has laid up for them that fear Him, and
has wrought for them that trust in Him.^
How can they expect to find truthful words in
one who preaches an untruthful Christ ?
Scorn the reproaches cast on thee, for thou
knowest well that the gift which thou desirest
from thy Bridegroom is eternal life, for He
Himself is eternal life.

4. It is a silly falsehood that thou hast
been seduced .to another God, who promises
abundance of food and the land of Canaan,
For thou canst perceive how the saints of old,
who were also thy children, were enlightened
by these figures which were prophecies of thee.
Thou needest not regard the poor jest against
the stone tablets, for the stony heart of which
they were in old times a figure is not in thee.
For thou art an epistle of the apostles, " writ-
ten not with ink, but with the Spirit of the liv-
ing God; not on tables of stone, but on the
fleshy tables of the heart." ^ Our opponents
ignorantly think that these words are in their
favor, and that the apostle finds fault with
the dispensation of the Old Testament, where-

* Ps. xxxi. 19.

7 2 Cor. iii. 2, 3.

214

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XV.

as they are the words of the prophet. This
utterance of the apostles was a fulfiUment of
the long anterior utterances of the prophet
whom the Manichaians reject, for they believe
the apostles without understanding them.
The prophet says: "I will take away from
them the stony heart, and I will give them a
heart of flesh. "^ What is this but "Not
on tables of stone, but on the fleshy tables of
the heart" ? For by the heart of flesh and
the fleshy tables is not meant a carnal under-
standing: but as flesh feels, whereas a stone
cannot, the insensibility of stone signifies an
unintelligent heart, and the sensibility of
flesh signifies an intelligexit heart. Instead,
then, of scofifing at thee, they deserve to be
ridiculed who say that earth, and wood, and
stones have sense, and that their life is more
intelligent than animal life. So, not to speak
of the truth, even their own fiction obliges
them to confess that the law written on tables
of stone was purer than their sacred parch-
ments. Or perhaps they prefer sheepskin to
stone, because their legends make stones the
bones of princes. In any case, the ark of the
Old Testament was a cleaner covering for
the tables of stone than the goatskin of their
manuscripts. Laugh at these things, while
pitying them, to show their falsehood and ab-
surdity. With a heart no longer stony, thou
canst see in these stone tablets a suitableness
to that hard-hearted people; and at the same
time thou canst find even there the stone, thy
Bridegroom, described by Peter as " a living
stone, rejected by men. but chosen of God,
and precious." To them He was "a stone
of stumbling and a rock of offence; " but to
thee, "the stone which the builders rejected
has become the head of the corner." ^ This
is all explained by Peter, and is quoted from
the prophets, with whom these heretics have
nothing to do. Fear not, then, to read these
tablets — they are from thy Husband ; to others
the stone was a sign of insensibility, but to
thee of strength and stability. With the finger
of God these tablets were written; with the
finger of God thy Lord cast out devils; with
the finger of God drive thou away the doc-
trines of lying devils which sear the con-
science. With these tablets thou canst con-
found the seducer who calls himself the Para-
clete, that he may impose upon thee by a
sacred name. For on the fiftieth day after
the passover the tables were given; and on
the fiftieth day after the passion of thy Bride-
groom— of whom the passover was a type —
the finger of God, the Holy Spirit, the prom-
ised Paraclete, was given. Fear not the tab-

lets which convey to thee ancient writings
now made plain. Only be not under the law,
lest fear prevent thy fulfilling it; but be under
grace, that love, which is the fulfilling of the
law, may be in thee. For it was in a review
of these very tablets that the friend of thy
Bridegroom said: " For thou shalt not com-
mit adultery, Thou shalt not murder. Thou
shalt not covet, and if there be any other
commandment, it is contained in this word,
Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.
Love worketh no ill to his neighbor; there-
fore love is the fulfilling of the law." ^ One
table contains the precept of love to God, and
the other of love to man. And He who first
sent these tablets Himself came to enjoin
those precepts on which hang the law and the
prophets. '^ In the first precept is the chastity
of thy espousals; in the second is the unity
of thy members. In the one thou art united
to divinity; in the other thou dost gather a
society. And these two precepts are identi-
cal with the ten, of which three relate to God,
and seven to our neighbor. Such is the
chaste tablet in which thy Lover and thy Be-
loved of old prefigured to thee the new song
on a psaltery of ten strings; Himself to be
extended on the cross for thee, that by sin He
might condemn sin in the flesh, and that the
righteouness of the law might be fulfilled in
thee. Such is the conjugal tablet, which may
well be hated by the unfaithful wife.

5. I turn now to thee, thou deluded and
deluding congregation of iManichaeus, — ;j
wedded to so many elements, or rather pros- il
tituted to so many devils, and impregnated
with blasphemous falsehoods, — dost thou
dare to slander as unchaste the marriage of
the Catholic Church with thy Lord ? Behold
thy lovers, one balancing creation, and the
other bearing it up like Atlas. For one, by
thy account, holds the sources of the elements,
and hangs the world in space; while the other
keeps him up by kneeling down and carrying ;
the weight on his shoulders. Where are those
beings ? And if they are so occupied, how
can they come to visit thee, to spend an idle
hour in getting their shoulders or their fingers
relieved by thy soft, soothing touch ? But
thou art deceived by evil spirits which com-
mit adultery with thee, that thou mayest con-
ceive falsehoods and bring forth vanities.
Well mayest thou reject the message of the
true God, as opposed to thy parchments,
where in the vain imaginations of a wanton
mind thou hast gone after so many false
gods. The fictions of the poets are more re- |
spectable than thine, in this at least, that they

I Ezek. xi. 19.

2 I Pet. ii. 4-

3 Rom. xiii. g, 10.

4 Matt. xxii. 37-40.

Book XV.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

215

deceive no one; while the fables in thy books,
by assuming an appearance of truth, mislead
the childish, both young and old, and pervert
their minds. As the apostle says, they have
itching ears, and turn away from hearing the
truth to listen to fables.' How shouldest
thou bear the sound doctrine of these tables,
where the first commandment is, "Hear, O
Israel, the Lord thy God is one Lord,"-
when thy corrupt affections find shameful
delight in so many false deities ? Dost thou
not remember th}'- love-song, where thou de-
scribest the chief ruler in perennial majesty,
crowned with flowers, and of fiery counte-
nance ? To have even one such lover is
shameful; for a chaste wife seeks not a hus-
band crowned with flowers. And thou canst
not say that this description or representation
has a typical meaning, for thou art wont to
praise Manichceus for nothing more than for
speaking to thee the simple naked truth with-
out the disguise of figures. So the God of
thy song is a real king, bearing a sceptre and
crowned with flowers. When he wears a
crown of flowers, he ought to put aside his
sceptre; for effeminacy and majesty are in-
congruous. And then he is not thy only
lover; for the song goes on to tell of twelve
seasons clothed in flowers, and filled with
song, throwing their flowers at their father's
face. These are twelve great gods of thine,
three in each of the four regions surrounding
the first deity. How this deity can be infinite,
when he is thus circumscribed, no one can
say. Besides, there are countless principali-
ties, and hosts of gods, and troops of angels,
which thou sayest were not created by God,
but produced from His substance.

6. Thou art thus convicted of worshipping
gods without number; for thou canst not bear
the sound doctrine which teaches that there
is one Son of one God, and one Spirit of both.
And these, instead of being without number,
are not three Gods; for not only is their sub-
stance one and the same, but their operation
by means of this substance is also one and
the same, while they have a separate manifes-
tation in the material creation. These things
thou dost not understand, and canst not re-
ceive. Thou art full, as thou sayest, for thou
art steeped in blasphemous absurdities. Wilt
thou continue burying thyself under such
crudities ? Sing on, then, and open thine
eyes, if thou canst, to thine own shame. In
this doctrine of lying devils thou art invited
to fabulous dwellings of angels in a happy
clime, and to fragrant fields where nectar
flows for ever from trees and hills, in seas

I = Ti

- Deut. vi. 4.

and rivers. These are the fictions of thy
foolish heart, which revels in such idle fancies.
Such expressions are sometimes used as figu-
rative descriptions of the abundance of spirit-
ual enjoyments; and they lead the mind of
the student to inquire into their hidden
meaning. Sometimes there is a material rep-
resentation to the bodily senses, as the fire
in the bush, the rod becoming a serpent, and
the serpent a rod, the garment of the Lord
not divided by His persecutors, the anointing
of His feet or of His head by a devout woman,
the branches of the multitude preceding and
following Him when riding on the ass. Some-
times, either in sleep or in a trance, the spirit
is informed by means of figures taken from
material things, as Jacob's ladder, and the
stone in Daniel cut out without hands and
growing into a mountain, and Peter's vessel,
and all that John saw. Sometimes the figures
are only in the language; as in the Song of
Songs, and in the parable of a householder
making a marriage for his son, or that of the
prodigal son, or that of the man who planted
a vineyard and let it out to husbandmen.
Thou boastest of Manichaeus as having come
last, not to use figures, but to explain them.
His expositions throw light on ancient types,
and leave no problem unsolved. This idea
is supported by the assertion that the ancient
types, in vision or in action or in words, had
in view the coming of Manichfeus, by whom
they were all to be explained; while he, know-
ing that no one is to follow him, makes use of
a style free from all figurative expressions.
What, then, are those fields, and shady hills,
and crowns of flowers, and fragrant odors, in
which the desires of thy fleshly mind take
pleasure ? If they are not significant figures,
they are either idle fancies or delirious dreams.
If they are figures, away with the impostor
who seduces thee with the promise of naked
truth, and then mocks thee with idle tales.
His ministers and his wretched deluded fol-
lowers are wont to bait their hook with that
saying of the apostle, " Now we see through
a glass in a figure, but then face to face. '*^
As if, forsooth, the Apostle Paul knew in
part, and prophesied in part, and saw through
a glass in a figure; whereas all this is removed
at the coming of Manichceus, who brings that
which is perfect, and reveals the truth face to
face. O fallen and shameless ! still to con-
tinue uttering such folly, still feeding on the
wind, still embracing the idols of thine own
heart. Hast thou, then, seen face to face the
king with the sceptre, and the crown of flowers,
and the hosts of gods, and the great world-

3 I Cor. xiii. 9.

2l6

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XV. .

holder with six faces and radiant with hght,
and that other exalted ruler surrounded with
troops of angels, and the invincible warrior
with a spear in his right hand and a shield in
his left, and the famous sovereign who moves
the three wheels of fire, water, and wind, and
Atlas, chief of all, bearing the world on his
shoulders, and supporting himself on his
arms ? These, and a thousand other marvels,
hast thou seen face to face, or are thy songs
doctrines learned from lying devils, though
thou knowest it not ? Alas! miserable prosti-
tute to these dreams, such are the vanities
which thou drinkest up instead of the truth;
and, drunk with this deadly poison, thou
darest with this jest of the tablets to affront
the matronly purity of the spouse of the only
Son of God; because no longer under the
tutorship of the law, but under the control
of grace, neither proud in activity nor crouch-
ing in fear, she lives by faith, and hope, and
love, the Israel in whom there is no guile,
who hears what is written: "The Lord thy
God is one God." This thou hearest not,
and art gone a whoring after a multitude of
false gods.

7. Of necessity these tables are against
thee, for the second commandment is, " Thou
shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God
in vain;" whereas thou dost attribute the van-
ity of falsehood to Christ Himself, who, to
remove the vanity of the fleshly mind, rose in
a true body, visible to the bodily eye. So
also the third commandment about the rest
of the Sabbath is against thee, for thou art
tossed about by a multitude of restless fancies.
How these three commandments relate to the
love of God, thou hast neither the power nor
the will to understand. Shamefully head-
strong and turbulent, thou hast reached the
height of folly, vanity, and worthlessness; thy
beauty is spoiled, and thine order perished.
I know thee, for I was once the same. How
shall I now teach thee that these three pre-
cepts relate to the love of God, of whom, and
by whom, and in whom are all things ? How
canst thou understand this, when thy perni-
cious doctrines prevent thee from understand-
ing and from obeying the seven precepts re-
lating to the love of our neighbor, which is
the bond of human society ? The first of these
precepts is, " Honor thy father and mother;"
which Paul quotes as the first commandment
with promise, and himself repeats the injunc-
tion. But thou art taught by thy doctrine of
devils to regard thy parents as thine enemies,
because their union brought thee into the
bonds of flesh, and laid impure fetters even
on thy god. The doctrine that the produc-
tion of children is an evil, directly opposes

the next precept, "Thou shalt not commit
adultery;" for those who believe this doc-
trine, in order that their wives may not con-
ceive, are led to commit adultery even in mar-
riage. They take wives, as the law declares,
for the procreation of children; but from this
erroneous fear of polluting the sul)stance of
the deity, their intercourse with their wives is
not of a lawful character; and the production
of children, which is the proper end of mar-
riage, they seek to avoid. As the apostle
long ago predicted of thee, thou dost indeed
forbid to marry, for thou seekest to destroy
the purpose of marriage. Thy doctrine turns
marriage into an adulterous connection, and
the bed-chamber into a brothel. This false
doctrine leads in a similar way to the trans-
gression of the commandment, " Thou shalt
not kill." For thou dost not give bread to
the hungry, from fear of imprisoning in flesh
the member of thy God. From fear of fan-
cied murder, thou dost actually commit mur-
der. For if thou wast to meet a beggar starv-
ing for want of food, by the law of God to
refuse him food would be murder; while to
give food would be murder by the law of
Manichceus. Not one commandment in the
decalogue dost thou observe. If thou wert
to abstain from theft, thou wouldst be guilty
of allowing bread or food, whatever it might
be, to undergo the misery of being devoured
by a man of no merit, instead of running off
with it to the laboratory of the stomach of
thine elect; and so by theft saving thy god
from the imprisonment with which he is
threatened, and also from that from which
he already suffers. Then, if thou art caught
in the theft, wilt thou not swear by this god
that thou art not guiltv ? For what will he
do to thee when thou sayest to him, I swore
by thee falsely, but it was for thy benefit; a
regard for thine honor would have been fatal
to thee ? So the precept. Thou shalt not bear
false witness, will be broken, not only in thy
testimony, but in thine oath, for the sake of
the liberation of the members of thy god.
The commandment, " Thou shalt not covet
thy neighbor's wife," is the only one which
thy false doctrine does not oblige thee to
break. But if it is unlawful to covet our neigh-
bor's wife, what must it be to excite covetous-
ness in others ? Remember thy beautiful gods
and goddesses presenting themselves with the
purpose of exciting desire in the male and
female leaders of darkness, in order that the
gratification of this passion might effect the
liberation of this god, who is in confinement
everywhere, and who requires the assistance
of such self-degradation. The last command-
ment, " Thou shalt not covet the possessions

Book XV.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

I of thy neighbor, '" it is wholly impossible fori
! thee to obey. Does not this god of thnie
j delude thee with the promise of making new
: worlds in a region belonging to another, to be
! tiie scene of thine imaginary triumph after
I thine imaginary conquest ? In the desire for
I the accomplishment of these wild fancies,
while at the same time thou believest that this
I land of darkness is in the closest neighbor-
hood with tliine own substance, thou certainly
! covetest the possessions of thy neighbor.
Well indeed mayest thou dislike the tables
which contain such good precepts in opposi-
tion to thy false doctrine. The three relating
to the love of God thou dost entirely set
aside. The seven by which human society is
jireserved thou keepest only from a regard
1) the opinion of men, or from fear of human
iaws; or good customs make thee averse to
some crimes; or thou art restrained by the
natural principle of not doing to another what
thou wouldst not have done to thyself. But
whether thou doest what thou wouldst not have
done to thyself, or refrainest from doing what
thou wouldst not have done to thyself, thou
scest the opposition of the heresy to the law,
whether thou actest according to it or not.

8. The true bride of Christ, whom thou
hast the audacity to taunt with the stone
tablets, knows the difference between the letter
and the spirit, or in other words, between law
and grace; and serving God no longer in the
uldness of the letter, but in newness of spirit,
she is not under the law, but under grace.
She is not blinded by a spirit of controversy,
but learns meekly from the apostle what is
this law which we are not to be under; for
■' it was given, " he says, "on account of trans-
ression, till the seed should come to whom
liie promise was made.''' And again: "It
entered, that the offence might abound; but
where sin abounded, grace has much more
j abounded."- Not that the law is sin, though
I it cannot give life without grace, but rather
increases the guilt; for '" where there is no
law, there is no transgression." ^ The letter
without the spirit, the law without grace, can
')nly condemn. So the apostle explains his
meaning, in case any should not understand:
'What shall we say then ? Is the law sin .''
uod forbid. For I had not known sin but
by the law. For I had not known lust un-
less the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
But sin, taking occasion by the command-
ment, deceived me, and by it slew me. There-
lore the law is holy, and the commandment
liioly. and just, and good. Was then that
|Which is good made death unto me? God

' C.al. ill. 19

- Rom. V. 20

-m. w. 15.

forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin,
wrought death in me by that which is good."'*
She at whom thou scoffest knows what this
means; for she asks earnestly, and seeks
humbly, and knocks meekly. She sees that
no fault is found with the law, when it is said,
" The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life,"
any more than with knowledge, wnen it is
said, '* Knowledge puffeth up, but love edifi-
eth."5 The passage runs thus: " We know
that we all have knowledge. Knowledge
puffeth up, but love edifieth." The apostle
certainly had no desire to be puffed up; but
he had knowledge, because knowledge joined
with love not only does not puff up, but
strengthens. So the letter when joined with
the spirit, and the law when joined with grace,
is no longer the letter and the law in the same
sense as when by itself it kills by abounding
sin. In this sense the law is even called the
strength of sin, because its strict prohibitions
increase the fatal pleasure of sin. Even thus,
however, the la\v is not evil; but " sin, that
it may appear sin, works death by that which
is good.'' So things that are not evil may
often be hurtful to certain people. The
Manichseans, when they have sore eyes, will
shut out their god the sun. The bride of
Christ, then, is dead to the law, that is, to sin,
which abounds more from the prohibition of
the law; for the law apart from grace com-
mands, but does not enable. Being dead to
the law in this sense, that slie may be married
to another who rose from the dead, she makes
this distinction without any reproach to the
law, which would be blasphemy against its
author. This is thy crime; for though the
apostle tells thee that the law is holy, and the
commandment holy, and just, and good, thou
dost not acknowledge it as the production of
a good being. Its author thou makest to
be one of the princes of darkness. Here the
truth confronts thee. They are the words
of the Apostle Paul: " The law is holy, and
the commandment holy, and just, and good."
Such is the law given by Him who appointed
for a great symbolical use the tablets which
thou foolishly deridest. The same law whicu
was given by Moses becomes through Jesus
Christ grace and truth; for the spirit is joined
to tlie letter, that the righteousness of the law
might begin to be fulfilled, which when un-
fulfilled only added the guilt of transgression.
The law which is holy, and just, and good, is
the same law by which sin works death, and
to which we must die, that we may be mar-
ried to another who rose from the dead. Hear
what the apostle adds: " But sin, that it

4 Rom. vii. 7-13.

5 I Cor. viii. 1.

2l8

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XV.

might appear sin, wrought death in me by
that which is good, that sin by the command-
ment might become exceeding sinful." Deaf
and bUnd, dost thou not now hear and see ?
" Sin wrought death in me," he says, " by
that which is good. ' ' The law is always good :
whether it hurts those who are destitute of
grace, or benefits those who are filled with
grace, itself is always good; as the sun is
always good, for every creature of God is
good, whether it hurts weak eyes or gladdens
the sight of the healthy. Grace fits the mind
for keeping the law, as health fits the eyes
for seeing the sun. And as healthy eyes die
not to the pleasure of seeing the sun, but to
that painful effect of the rays which beat
upon the eye so as to increase the darkness;
so the mind, healed by the love of the spirit,
dies not to the justice of the law, but to the
guilt and transgression which followed on the
law in the absence of grace. So it is said,
"The law is good, if used lawfully;" and
immediately after of the same law, "Knowing
this, that the law is not made for a righteous
man." The man who delights in righteous-
ness itself, does not require the restraint of
the letter.

9. The bride of Christ rejoices in the hope
of full salvation, and desires for thee a happy
conversion from fables to truth. She desires
that the fear of Adoneus, as if he were a
strange lover, may not prevent thy escape from
the seductions of the wily serpent. Adonai
is a Hebrew word, meaning Lord, as applied
only to God. In the same way the Greek
word /atria means service, in the sense of the
service of God; and Amen means true, in a
special sacred sense. This is to be learned
only from the Hebrew Scriptures, or from a
translation. The Church of Christ under-
stands and loves these names, without regard-
ing the evils of those who scoff because they
are ignorant. What she does not yet under-
stand, she believes maybe explained, as simi-
lar things have already been explained to her.
If she is charged with loving Emmanuel, she
laughs at the ignorance of the accuser, and
holds fast by the truth of this name. If she
is charged with loving Messiah, she scorns
her powerless adversary, and clings to her
anointed Master. Her prayer for thee is,
that thou also mayest be cured of thy errors,
and be built upon the foundation of the apos-
tles and prophets. The monstrosity with
which thou ignorantly chargest the true doc-
trine, is really to be found in the world which,
according to thy fanciful stories, is made
partly of thy god and partly of the world of
darkness. Tnis world, half savage and half
divine, is worse than monstrous. The view

of such follies should make thee humble and
penitent, and should lead thee to shun the
serpent, who seduces thee into such errors.
If thou dost not bel'ieve what Moses says of
the guile of the serpent, thou mayest be
warned by Paul, who, when speaking of pre-
senting the Church as a chaste virgin to
Christ, says, "I fear lest, as the serpent be-
guiled Eve through his craftiness, your minds
also should be corrupted from the simplicity
and purity which is in Christ."' In spite of
this warning, thou hast been so misled, so
infatuated by the serpent's fatal enchant-
ments, that while he has persuaded other
heretics to believe various falsehoods, he has
persuaded thee to believe that he is Christ.
Others, though fallen into the maze of mani-
fold error, still admit the truth of the apostle's
warning. But thou art so far gone in corrup-
tion, and so lost to shame, that thou boldest
as Christ the very being by whom the apos-
tle declares that Eve was beguiled, and
against whom he thus seeks to put the virgin
bride of Christ on her guard. Thy heart is
darkened by the deceiver, who intoxicates
thee with dreams of glittering groves. What
are these promises but dreams ? What reason
is there to believe them true ? O drunken,
but not with wine !

10. Thou hast the impious audacity to
accuse the God of the prophets of not fulfill-
ing His promises even to His servants the
Jews. Thou dost not mention, however, any
promise that is unfulfilled; otherwise it might
be shown, either that the promise has been
fulfilled, and so that thou dost not under-
stand it, or that it is yet to be fulfilled, and
so that thou dost not believe it. What prom-
ise has been fulfilled to thee, to make it prob-
able that thou wilt obtain new worlds gained
from the region of darkness? If there are
prophets who predict the Manichaeans with
praise, and if it is said that the existence of
the sect is a fulfillment of this prediction, it
must first be proved that these predictions
were not forged by Manich^us in order to
gain followers. He does not consider false-
hood sinful. If he declares in praise of Christ
that He showed false marks of wounds in His
body, he can have no scruple about showing
false predictions in his sheepskin volumes.
Assuredly there are predictions of the Man-
ichgeans, less clear in the prophets, and most
explicit in the apostle. For example: "The
Spirit," he says, " speaketh expressly, that
in the last times some shall depart from the
faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and to
doctrines of devils, speaking lies in hypocrisy,

Cor.

XI. 2, 3.

Book XVI.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICHtEAN.

219

having their conscience seared, forbidding to
marry, abstaining from meats, which God has
created to be received with thanksgiving by
beUevers, and those who know the truth. For
every creature of God is good, and nothing to
be refused, if it be received with thanksgiv-
ing." ' The fulfiHment of this in the Mani-
chteans is as clear as day to all that know them,
and has already been proved as fully as time
permits.

II. She whom the apostle warns against
the guile of the serpent by which thou hast
been corrupted, that he may present her as a
chaste virgin to Christ, her only husband, ac-
knowledges the God of the prophets as the
true God, and her own God. So many of His
promises have already been fulfilled to her,
tnat she looks confidently for the fultillment
of the rest. Nor can any one say that these
prophecies have been forged to suit the pres-
ent time, for they are found in the books of
the Jews. What could be more unlikely than
that all nation^ should be blessed in Abra-
ham's seed, as it was promised ? And yet
how plainly is this promise now fulfilled !
The last promise is made in the following
short prophecy: " Blessed are they that dwell
in Thy house: they shall ever praise Thee." "
When trial is past, and death, the last enemy,
is destroyed, there will be rest in the constant
occupation of praising God, where there shall
be no arrivals and no departures. So the
prophet says elsewhere: '* Praise the Lord, O
Jerusalem; celebrate thy God, O Zion: for
He hath strengthened the bars of thy gates;
He hath blessed thy children within thee."^
The gates are shut, so that none can go in
!or out. The Bridegroom Himself says in the
(iospel, that He will not open to the foolish
virgins though they knock. This Jerusalem,
tie holy Church, the bride of Christ, is de-
scribed fully in the Revelation of John. And

L im. IV. 1-4.

2 Ps. Ixxxiv. 4.

3 Ps. cxlviii. I.

that which commends the promises of future
bliss to the belief of this chaste virgin is, that
now she is in possession of what was foretolil
of her by the same prophets. For she is thus
described: "Hearken, O daughter, and re-
gard, and incline thine ear; forget also thine
own people, and thy father's house. For the
King hath greatly desired thy beauty; and
He is thy God. The daughters of Tyre shall
worship Him with gifts; the rich among the
people shall entreat thy favor. The daughter
of tne King is all glorious within; her clothing
is of wrought gold. The virgins following
her shall be brought unto the King: her com-
panions shall be brought unto thee; with glad-
ness and rejoicing shall they be brought into
the temple of the King. Instead of thy
fathers, children shall be born to thee, whom
thou shalt make princes over all the earth.
Thy name shall be remembered to all gener-
ations: therefore shall the people praise thee
for ever and ever." ■* Unhappy victim of the
serpent's guile, the inward beauty of the
daughter of the King is not for thee even to
think of. For this purity of mind is that
which thou hast lost in opening thine eyes to
love and worship the sun and moon. And
so by the just judgment of God thou art es-
tranged from tne tree of life, which is eternal
and internal wisdom; and with thee nothino-
IS called or accounted truth or wisdom but
that light which enters the eyes opened to
evil, and which in thy impure mind expands
and shapes itself into fanciful images. These
are thy abominable whoredoms. Still the
truth calls on thee to reflect and return. Re-
turn to me, and thou shalt be cleansed and
restored, if thy shame leads thee to repent-
ance. Hear these words of the true Truth,
who neither with feigned shapes fought
against the race of darkness, nor with feigned
blood redeemed thee.

4 Ps. xlv. 10-17.

BOOK XVI.

lAUSTUS WILLING TO BELIEVE NOT ONLY THAT THK JEWISH BUT THAT ALL OF.NTTLE PROPHETS
j WROTE OF CHRIST, IF IT SHOULD BE PROVED; BUT HE WOULD NONE THE LESS INSIST UPON

I REJECTING THEIR SUPERSTITIONS. AUGUSTIN MAINTAINS THAT ALL MOSES WROTE IS OF

j CHRIST, AND THAT HIS WRITINGS MUST BE EITHER ACCEPTED OR REJECTED AS A WHOLE.

I I. FAUSTUSsaid: You ask why we do not ' no hindrance, but a help to our faith, if we

ibelieve Moses, when Christ says, " Moses
Ivvrote of me; and if ye believed Moses, ye
A'ould also believe me." I should be glad if
lot only Moses, but all prophets, Jew and
jentile, had written of Christ. It would be

could cull testimonies from all hands agreeing
in favor of our God. You could extract the
prophecies of Christ out of the superstition
which we should hate as much as ever. I am
quite willing to believe that Moses, though so

220

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XVI.

niuc'a tiie opposite of C.irist, may seem to
have written of Him. No one but would
gladly find a flower in every thorn, and food
in every plant, and honey in every insect,
although we would not feed on insects or on
grass, nor wear thorns as a crown. No one
but would wish pearls to be found in every
deep, and gems in every land, and fruit on
every tree. We may eat fish from the sea
witnout drinking the water. We may take
the useful, and reject what is hurtful. And
why may we not take the prophecies of Christ
from a religion the rites of which we condemn
as useless ? This need not make us liable to
be led into the bondage of the errors; for we
do not hate the unclean spirits less because
they confessed plainly and openly that Jesus
was the Son of God. If any similar testimony
is found in Moses, I will accept it. But I
will not on this account be brought into sub-
jection to his law, which to my mind is pure
Paganism. There is no reason whatever for
thinking that I can have any objections to re-
ceiving prophecies of Christ from every spirit.
2. Since you have proved that Christ de-
clared that Moses wrote of him, I should be
very grateful if you would show me what he
has written. I have searched the Scriptures,
as we are told to do, and have found no pro-
phecies of Christ, either because there are
none, or because I could not understand
them. The only escape from this perplexity
was in one or other of two conclusions.
Either this verse must be spurious^ or Jesus a
liar. As it is not consistent with piety to sup-
pose God a liar, I preferred to attribute false-
hood to the writers, rather than to the Author
of truth. Moreover, He Himself tells that
those who came before him were thieves and
robbers, which applies first of all to Moses.
And when, on the occasion of His speaking
of His own majesty, and calling Himself the
light of the world, the Jews angrily rejoined,
" Thou bearest witness of thyself, thy witness
is not true,'' I do not find that He appealed
to the prophecies of Moses, as might have
been expected. Instead of this, as having
no connection with the Jews, and receiving
no testimony from their fathers, He replied:
"It is written in your law, that the testimony
of two men is true. I am one who bear wit-
ness of myself, and the Father who sent me
beareth witness of me." ' He referred to the
voice from heaven which all had heard: " This
is my beloved Son, believe Him.'' I think it
likely that if Christ had said that Moses wrote
of Him, the ingenious hostility of the Jews
would have led them at once to ask what He

I John viii.- 13, 17, iS.

supposed Moses to have written. The silence
of the Jews is a proof that Jesus never made
such a statement.

3. My chief reason, however, for suspecting
the genuineness of this verse is what I said
before, that in all my search of the writings
of Moses I have found no prophecy of Christ.
But now that I have found in you a reader
of superior intelligence, I hope to learn some-
thing; and I promise to be grateful if no feel-
ing of ill-will prevents you from giving me
the benefit of your higher attainments, as your
lofty style of reproof entitles me to expect
from you. I ask for instruction in whatever
the writings of Moses contain about our God
and Lord which has escaped me in reading.
I beseech you not to use the ignorant argu-
ment that Christ affirms Moses to have written
of Him. For suppose you had not to deal with
me, as in my case there is an obligation to be-
lieve Him whom I profess to follow, but with
a Jew or a Gentile, in reply to the statement
that Moses wrote of Christ, they will ask fo:
proofs. What shall we say to them ? W'
cannot quote Christ's authority, for they do
not believe in Him. We must point out what
Moses wrote.

4. What, then, shall we point to ? Shall it
be that passage which you often quote where
the God of Moses says to him: " I will raise
up unto them from among their brethren a
prophet like unto thee?"- But the Jew can
see that this does not refer to Christ, a,nd
there is every reason against our thinki
that it does. Christ was not a prophet, nor
was He like Moses: for Moses was a man, and
Christ was God; Moses was a sinner, and
Christ sinless; Moses was born by ordinary
generation, and Christ of a virgin according
to you, or, as I hold, not born at all: Moses,
for offending his God, was put to death on the
mountain; and Christ suffered voluntarily,
and the Father was well pleased in Him. If
we were to assert that Christ was a prophet
like Moses, the Jew would either deride us
as ignorant or pronounce us untruthful.

5. Or shall we take another favorite pas-
sage of yours: " They shall see their life hang
ing, and shall not believe their life ? " ^ You
insert the words " on a tree," which are not
in the original. Nothing can be easier than
to show that this has no reference to Christ.
Moses is uttering dire threatenings in case
the people should depart from his law, and
says among other things that they would be j
taken captive by their enemies, and would
be expecting death day and night, having no
confidence in the life allowed them by their

' Deut. xviii. 15.

" Deut. xxviii. 66.

OOK XVI. J

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

221

( onquerors, so that their life would hang in
uncertainty from fear of impending danger.
This passage will not do, we must try others.
I cannot admit that the words, "Cursed is
every one that hangeth on a tree," refer to
Christ, or when it is said that the prince or
prophet must be killed who should try to turn
away the people from their God, or should
break any of the commandments." Tiiat
Christ did this I am obliged to grant. But if
you assert that these things were written of
Christ, it may be asked in reply. What spirit
dictated these prophecies in which Moses
curses Christ and orders him to be killed ?
If he had the Spirit of God, these things are
not written of Christ; if they are written of
Christ, he had not tiie Spirit of God. The
Spirit of God would not curse Christ, or order
Him to be killed. To vindicate Moses, you
must confess that these passages too have no
reference to Christ. So, if you have no others
to show, there are none. If there are none,
Christ could not have said that there were;
and if Christ did not say so, that verse is
spurious.

6. The next verse too is suspicious, " If ye
believed Moses, ye would also believe me;"
for the religion of Moses is so entirely differ-
ent from that of Christ, that if the Jews be-
lieved one. they could not believe the other.
Moses strictly forbids any work to be done on
Sabbath, and gives as a reason for this prohi-
bition that God made the world and all that
is therein in six days, and rested on the
seventh day, which is Sabbath; and therefore
blessed or sanctified it as His haven of repose
after toil, and commanded that breaking the
Sabbath should be punished with death. The
Jews, in obedience to Moses, insisted strongly
on this, and so would not even listen to Christ
when He told them that God always works,
and that no day is appointed for the inter-
mission of His pure and unwearied energy,
and that accordingly He Himself had to work
incessantly even on Sabbath. " My Father,"
he says, " worketh always, and I too must
work.'' = Again, Moses places circumcision
among the rites pleasing to God, and com-
mands every male to be circumcised in the
foreskin of his flesh, and declares that this is
a necessary sign of the covenant which God
made with Aliraham, and that every male not
circumcised would be cut off from his tribe,
and from his part in the inheritance promised
to Abraham and to his seed.^ In this obser-
vance, too, the Jews were very zealous, and
consequently could not believe in Christ, who
made light of these things, and declared that

' r)eut. xiii.

' John V. 17.

3 Gen. xvii. 9-14.

a man when circumcised became twofold a
child of hell.-* Again, Moses is very particu-
lar about the distinction in animal foods, and
discourses like an epicure on the merits of fish,
and birds, and quadrupeds, and orders some
to be eaten as clean, and others which are
unclean not to be touched. Among the un-
clean he reckons the swine and the hare, and
fish without scales, and quadrupeds that
neither divide the hoof nor chew the cud. In
this also the Jews carefully obeyed Moses,
and so could not believe in Christ, who taught
that all food is alike, and though he allowed
no animal food to his own disciples, gave full
liberty to the laity to eat whatever they
pleased, and taught that men are polluted not
by w^hat goes into the mouth, but by the evil
things which come out of it. In these and
many other things the doctrine of Jesus, as
everybody knows, contradicts that of Moses.

7. Not to enumerate all the points of dif-
ference, it is enough to mention this one fact,
that most Christian sects, and, as is well
known, the Catholics, pay no regard to what
is prescribed in the writings of Moses. If
this does not originate in some error, but in
the doctrine correctly transmitted from Christ
and His disciples, you surely must acknowl-
edge that the teaching of Jesus is opposed to
that of Moses, and that the Jews did not be-
lieve in Christ on account of their attachment
to Moses. How can it be otherwise than
false that Jesus said to the Jews, " If ye be-
lieved Moses, ye would believe me also,"
when it is perfectly clear that their belief in
Moses prevented them from believing in
Jesus, which they might have done if they
had left off believing in Moses ? Again I ask
you to show me anything that Moses wrote of
Christ.

8. Elsewhere Faustus says: When you
find no passage to point to, you use this weak
and inappropriate argument, that a Christian
is bound to believe Christ when he says that
Moses wrote of Him, and that whoever does
not believe this is not a Christian. It would
be far better to confess at once that you can-
not find Jiny passage. This argument might
be used with me, because my reverence for
Christ compels me to believe what He says.
Still it may be a question whether this is
Christ's own declaration, requiring absolute
belief, or only the writer's, to be carefully
examined. And disbelief in falsehood is no
offence to Christ, but to impostors. But of
whatever use this argument may be with
Christians, it is wholly inapplicable in the
case of the Jew or Gentile, with whom we are

4 Matt. x.\iii. I-

222

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XVI.

supposed to be discussing. And even with
Christians the argument is objectionable.
When the Apostle 'J'homas was in doubt,
Christ did not spurn him from Him. Instead
of saying, "Believe, if thou art a disciple;
whoever does not believe is not a disciple,"
Christ sought to lieal the wounds of his mind
by showing him the marks of the wounds in
His own body. Does it become you then to
tell me that I am not a Christian because I
am in doubt, not about Christ, but about the
genuineness of a remark attributed to Christ ?
But, you say, He calls those especially blessed
who have not seen, and yet have believed.
If you think that this refers to believing with-
out the use of judgment and reason, you are
welcome to this blind blessedness. I shall
be content with rational blessedness.

9. AuGUSTiN replied: Your idea of taking
any prophecies of Christ to be found in Moses,
as a fish out of the sea, while you throw away
the water from which the fish is taken, is a
clever one. But since all that Moses wrote
is of Christ, or relates to Christ, either as
predicting Him by words and actions, or as
illustrating His grace and glory, you, with
your faith in the untrue and untruthful Christ
from the writings of Manichaeus, and your un-
belief in Moses, will not even eat the fish.
Moreover, though you are sincere in your
hostility to Moses, you are hypocritical in
your praise of fish. For how can you say
that there is no harm in eating a fish taken
out of the sea, when your doctrine is that
such food is so hurtful, that you would rather
starve than make use of it ? If all flesh is
unclean, as you say it is, and if the wretched
life of your god is confined in all water or
plants, from which it is liberated by your us-
ing them for food, according to your own vile
superstition, you must throw away the fish
you have praised, and drink the water and eat
the thistles you speak of as useless. As for
your comparison of the servant of God to
devils, as if his prophecies of Christ resem-
bled their confession, the servant does not
refuse to bear the reproach of his master.
If the Master of the house was called Beelze-
bub, how much more they of His household! •
You have learned this reproach from Christ's
enemies; and you are worse than they were.
They did not believe that Jesus was Christ,
and therefore thought Him an impostor. But
the only doctrine you believe in is that which
dares to make Christ a liar.

10. What reason have you for saying that
the law of Moses is pure Paganism? Is it
because it speaks of a temple, and an altar of

I Matt. X. 25.

sacrifices, and priests ? But all these names
are found also in the New Testament. " De-
stroy," Christ says, ''this temple, and in
three days I will raise it up;'^^ and again,
" When thou offerest thy gift at the altar;" 3
and again, "Go, show thyself to the priest,
and offer for thyself a sacrifice as Moses com-
manded, for a testimony unto them." * Wliat
these tilings prefigured the Lord Himself
partly tells us, when He calls His own body
the temple; and we learn also from the
apostle, who says, "The temple of God is
holy, which temple ye are;"^ and again, "I
beseech you therefore by the mercies of God,
that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice,
holy, acceptable to God;"* and in similar
passages. As the same apostle says, in words
which cannot be too often quoted, these
things were our examples, for they were not
the work of devils, but of the one true God
who made heaven and earth, and who, though
not needing such things, yet, suiting His re-
quirements to the time, made ancient observ-
ances significant of future realities. Since
you pretend to abhor Paganism, though it is
only that you may lead astray by your decep-
tion unlearned Christians or those not estab-
lished in the faith, show us any authority in
Christian books for your worship and service
of the sun and moon. Your heresy is liker
Paganism than the law of Moses is. For you
do not worship Christ, but only something
that you call Christ, a fiction of your own
fancy; and the gods you serve are either the
bodies visible in the heavens, or hosts of
your own contrivance. If you do not build
shrines for these worthless idols, the creatures
of the imagination, you make your hearts
their temple.

II. You ask me to show what Moses wrote
of Christ. Many passages have already been
pointed out. But who could point out al! ?
Besides, when any quotation is made, you
are ready perversely to try to give the words
another meaning; or if the evidence is too
strong to be resisted, you will say that you
take the passage as a sweet fish out of the salt
water, and that you will not therefore consent
to drink all the brine of the books of Moses.
It will be enough, then, to take those passages
in the Hebrew law which Faustus has chosen
for criticism, and to show that, when rightly
understood, they apply to Christ. For if the
things which our adversary ridicules and con-
demns are made to prove that he himself is
condemned by Christian truth, it will be
evident that either the mere quotation or the
careful examination of the other passages will

- John ii. ig.
5 I Cor. iii. i?

3 Matt. V. 24.
6 Rom. xii. i.

4 Matt. viii. 4.

i;ooK XVI.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.4£AN.

1 be enough to show their agreement with

! Christian faith. Well, then, O thou full of

! all subtilty, when the Lord in the Gospel
says, "If ye believed Moses, ye would be-

! lieve me also, for he v/rote of me," ' there is
no occasion for the great perplexity you pre-
tend to be in, or for the alternative of either
pronouncing this verse spurious or calling
fesus a liar. The verse is as genuine as its
words are true. I preferred, says Faustus, to

I attribute falsehood to the writers, rather than
to the Author of truth. What sort of faith
can you have in Christ as the author of truth,
\vhen your doctrine is that His flesh and His
'Icath, His wounds and their marks, were
leigned ? And where is your authority for
saying that Christ is the author of truth, if
\ ou dare to attribute falsehood to those who
wrote of Him, whose testimony has come
down to us with the confirmation of those

I immediately succeeding them ? You have
iiot seen Christ, nor has He conversed with
you as with the apostles, nor called you from
iieaven as He did Saul. What knowledge or
■lief can we have of Christ, but on the au-
inority of Scripture ? Or if there is falsehood
Ml the Gospel which has been widely published
mong all nations, and has been held in such
High sacredness in all churches since the name
^'f Christ was first preached, where shall we
iind a trustworthy record of Christ? If the
(iospel is called in question in spite of the
-cneral consent regarding it, there can be no

i'vriting which a man may not call spurious if

I he does not wish to believe it.

12. You go on to quote Christ's words,
that all who came before Him were thieves
and robbers. How do you know that these
'vere Christ's words, but from the Gospel?
'ou profess faith in these words, as if you
id heard them from the mouth of the Lord
Himself. But if any one declares the verse
ti) be spurious, and denies that Christ said
this, you will have, in reply, to exert yourself
in vindication of the authority of the Gospel.
I'nhappy being! what you refuse to believe
is written in the same place as that which you
piote as spoken by the Lord Himself. We
■ilieve both, for we believe the sacred narra-
tive in which both are contained. We believe
' oth that Moses wrote of Christ, and that all
at came before Christ were thieves and rob-
crs. By their coming He means their not
■ >tlng sent. Those who were sent, as Moses
land the holy prophets, came not before Him,
;l>ut with Him. They did not proudly wish
ito precede Him, but were the humble bearers
pi the message which He uttered by them.

Juhn V. 46.

According to the meaning which you give to
the Lord's words, it is plain that with you
there can be no prophets. And so you have
made a Christ for yourselves who should
prophesy a Christ to come. If you have any
prophets of your own, they will have, of
course, no authority, as not being recognized
by any others; but if there are any that you
dare to quote as prophesying that Christ would
come in an unreal body, and would suffer an
unreal death, and would show to His doubting
disciples unreal marks of wounds, not to speak
of the abominable nature of such prophecies,
and of the evident untruthfulness of those
who commend falsehood in Christ, by your
own interpretation those prophets must have
been thieves and robbers, for they could not
have spoken of Christ as coming in any man-
ner unless they had come before Him. If
by those who came before Christ we under-
stand those who would not come with Him,
— that is, with the Word of God, — but without
being sent byGod brought their own falsehoods
to men, you yourselves, although you are
born in this world after the death and the
resurrection of Christ, are thieves and rob-
bers. For, without waiting for His illumina-
tion that you might preach His truth, you
have come before Him to preach up your own
deceits.

13. In the passage where we read of the
Jews saying to Christ, Thou bearest witness
of thyself, thy witness is not true, you do not
see that Christ replies by saying that Moses
wrote of Him, simply because you have not
got the eye of piety to see with. The answer
of Christ is this: " It is written in your law,
that the testimony of two men is true; I am.
one who bear witness of myself, and the
Father that sent me beareth witness of me." ^
What does this mean, if rightly understood,
but that this number of witnesses required by
the law was fixed upon and consecrated in
the spirit of prophecy, that even thus might
be prefigured the future revelation of the
Father and Son, whose spirit is the Holy Spirit
of the inseparable Trinity? So it is written:
" In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall
every word be established." ^ As a matter of
fact, one witness generally speaks the truth,
while a number tell lies. And the world, in
its conversion to Christianity, believed one
apostle preaching the gospel rather than the
mistaken multitude who persecuted him.
There was a special reason for requiring this
number of witnesses, and in His answer the
Lord implied that Moses prophesied of Him.
Do you carp at His saying your law instead

' John viii. 17, iS.

3 Dent. xix. 15.

224

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Cook XVI.

of the law of (iod ? But, as everyone knows,
this is tlie common expression in Scripture.
Your law mems the law given to you. So
the apostle speaks of his gospel, while at the
same time he declares that he received it not
from man, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
You might as well say that Christ denies God
to be His Father, when He uses the words
your Father instead of our Father. Again,
you should refuse to believe the voice which
you allude to as having come from heaven,
This is my beloved Son, believe Him, because
you did not hear it. But if you believe this
because you find it in the sacred Scriptures,
you will also find there what you deny, that
Moses wrote of Christ, besides many other
things that you do not acknowledge as true.
Do you not see that your own mischievous
argument may be used to prove that this
voice never came from heaven ? To your own
destruction, and to the detriment of the wel-
fare of mankind, you try to weaken the author-
ity of the gospel, by arguing that it cannot
be true that Christ said that Moses wrote of
Him; because if He had said this, the inge-
nious hostility of the Jews would have led
them at once to ask what He supposed Moses
to have written of Him. In the same way, it
might be impiously argued that if that voice
had really come from heaven, all the Jews
who heard it would have believed. Why are
you so unreasonable as not to consider that,
as it was possible for the Jews to remain hard-
ened in unbelief after hearing the voice from
heaven, so it was possible for them, when
Christ said that Moses wrote of Him, to re-
frain from asking what Moses wrote, because
in their ingenious hostility they were afraid
of being proved to be in the wrong ?

14. Besides that this argument is an im-
pious assault on the gospel, Faustus himself
is aware of its feebleness, and therefore insists
more on what he calls his chief difficulty, —
that in all his search of the writings of Moses
he has found no prophecies of Christ. The
obvious '"eply is, that he does not understand.
And if any one asks why he does not under-
stand, the answer is that he reads with a hos-
tile, unbelieving mind; he does not search in
order to know, but thinks he knows when he
is ignorant. This vainglorious presumption
either blinds the eye of his understanding so
as to prevent his seeing anything, or distorts
his vision, so that his remarks of approval or
disapproval are misdirected. I ask, he says,
for instruction in whatever the writings of
Moses contain about our God and Lord, which
has escaped me in reading. I reply at once
that it has all escaped him, for all is written
of Christ. As we cannot go throuofh the

wliole, I will, with the help of God, comply
witu your request, to the extent I have already
promised, by showing that the passages which
you specially criticise refer to Christ. You
tell me not to use the ignorant argument that
Christ afifirms Moses to have written of Him.
But if I use this argument, it is not because I
am ignorant, but because I am a believer. I
acknowledge that this argument will not con-
vince a Gentile or a JejM,. But, in spite of
all your evasions, you are obliged to confess
that it tells against you, who boast of possess-
ing a kind of Christianity. You say, Sup-
pose you had not to deal with me, as in my
case t'nere is an obligation to believe Him
whom I profess to follow, but with a Jew or a
Gentile. This is as much as to say that you,
at any rate, with whom I have at present to
do, are satisfied that Moses wrote of Christ;
for you are not bold enough to discard alto-
gether the well-grounded authority of the
Gospel where Christ's own declaration is re-
corded. Even when you attack this authority
indirectly, you feel that you are attacking
your own position. You are aware that if you
refuse to believe the Gospel, which is so
generally known and received, you must fail
utterly in the attempt to substitute for it any
trustworthy record of the sayings and doings
of Christ. You are afraid that the loss of the
Christian name might lead to the exposure of
your absurdities to universal scorn and con-
demnation. Accordingly you try to recover
yourself, by saying that your profession of
Christianity obliges you to believe these words
of the Gospel. So you, at any rate, which is
all that we need care for just now, are caught
and slain in this death-blow to your errors.
You are forced to confess that Moses wrote
of Christ, because the Gospel, which your
profession obliges you to believe, states that
Christ said so. As regards a discussion with
a Jew or a Gentile, I have already shown ns
well as I could how I think it should be con-
ducted.

15. I still hold that there is a reference to
Christ in the passage which you select f(ir
refutation. v;here God says to Moses, "I will
raise up unto them from among their brethren
a prophet like unto thee."' The string of
showy antitheses with which you try to orna-
ment your dull discourse does not at all affect
my belief of this truth. You attempt to
prove, by a comparison of Christ and Moses,
that the}' are unlike, and that therefore the
words, " I will raise *up a prophet like unto
thee," cannot be understood of Christ. You
specify a number of particulars in which you

I Deut. xviii. 15.

Book XVI.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

2^5

find a diversity: that the one is man, and the
ither God; that one is a sinner, the other
inless; that one is born of ordinary genera-
tion, the other, as we hold, of a virgin, and,
as you hold, not even of a virgin; the one
incurs God's anger, and is put to death on a
mountain, the other suffers voluntarily, hav-
ing throughout the approval of His Father.
r.iit surely things may be said to be like, al-
tiiough they are not like in every respect.
I'.esides the resemblance between things of the
brtme nature, as between two men, or between
parents and children, or between men in
i^eneral, or any species of animals, or in trees,
between one olive and another, or one laurel
r lid another, there is often a resemblance in
lings of a different nature, as between a wild
and a tame olive, or between wheat and bar-
Icy. These things are to some extent allied.
Hut there is the greatest possible distance be-
tween the Son of God, by whom all things
were made, and a beast or a stone. And yet
'1 the Gospel we read, " Behold the Lamb of
od," ' and in the apostle, "That rock was
t hrist." "" This could not be said except on
•Jie supposition of some resemblance. What
wonder, then, if Christ condescended to be-
ime like Moses, when He was made like
• le lamb which God by Moses commanded
liis people to eat as a type of Christ, enjoin-
ing that its blood should be used as a means
nf protection, and that it should be called the
"assover, which every one must admit to be
ilfilled in Christ ? The Scripture, I acknowl-
ledge, shows points of difference; and the
•■ ripture also, as I call on you to acknowledge,
ows points of resemblance. There are
lints of both kinds, and one can be proved
as well as the other. Christ is unlike man,
tor He is God; and it is written of Him that
He is "over all, God blessed for ever."^
< hrist is also like man, for He is man; and
" is likewise written of Him, that He is the
" Mediator between God and man, the man
iirist Jesus. "^ Christ is unlike a sinner, for
lie IS ever holy; and He is like a sinner, for
■■'God sent His Son in the likeness of sinful
^csh, that by sin He might condemn sin in
e flesh. "5 Christ is unlike a man born in
dinary generation, for He was born of a
rgin; and yet He is like, for He too was born
f a woman, to whom it was said, " That holy
ing which shall be born of thee shall be
lied the Son of God.""^ Christ is unlike a
an, who dies on account of his own sin, for
He died without sin, and of His own free- 1
iVill; and again. He is like, for He too died
1 real death of the body.

i6. You ought not to say, in disparagement
of Moses, that he was a sinner, and that he
was put to death on a mountain because his
God was angry with him. For Moses could
glory in the Lord as his Saviour, wlio is also
the Saviour of him who says, "Christ Jesus
came into the world to save sinners, of whom
I am chief. ''7 Moses, indeed, is accused by
the voice of God, because his faith showed
signs of weakness when he was commanded
to draw water out of the rock.^ In this he
may have sinned as Peter did, when from the
weakness of his faith he became afraid in the
midst of the waves. » But we cannot think
from this, that he who, as the Gospel tells us,
was counted worthy to be present with the
Lord along with holy Elias on the mount of
transfiguration, was separated from the eter-
nal fello\vship of the saints. The sacred his-
tory shows in what favor he was with Gotl
even after his sin. But since you may ask
why God speaks of this sin as deserving the
punishment of death, and as I have promised
to point out prophecies of Christ in those
passages which you select for criticism, I will
try, with the Lord's help, to show that what
you object to in the death of Moses is, when
rightly understood, prophetical of Christ.

17. We often find in the symbolical pas-
sages of Scripture, that the same person aj')-
pears in different characters on different occa-
sions. So, on this occasion, Moses represents'
and prefigures the Jewish people as placed
under the law. As, then, Moses, when he
struck the rock with his rod, doubted the
power of God, so the people who were under
the law given by Moses, when they nailed
Christ to the cross, did not believe Him to be
the power of God. And as water flowed from
the smitten rock for those that were athirst,
so life'comes to believers from the stroke of
the Lord's passion. The testimony of the
apostle is clear and decisive on this point,
when he says, " This rock was Christ." '" In
the command of God, that the death of t'le
flesh of Moses should take place on the moun-
tain, we see the divine appointment that the
carnal doubt of the divinity of Christ should
die on Christ's exaltation. As the rock is
Christ, so is the mountain. The rock is the
fortitude of His humiliation; the mountain
the height of His exaltation. For as the
apostle says. "This rock was Christ," so
Christ Himself says, ".\ city set upon an hill
cannot be hid," " showing that He is the hill,
and believers the city built upon the glory of
His name. The carnal mind lives when, like
the smitten rock, the humiliation of Christ on

' John i. 29.
■* I Tim. ii. 5

2 I Cor. X. 4.
5 Rom. viii. 3.

3 Rom. ix. 5.
6 Luke i. 35.

7 I Tim. i. 15.
"' I Cor. X. 4.

8 Num. i.\. 10-12.
" ^^att. V. 14.

9 Matt. xiv. 30.

226

Till-: WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XVI.

the cross is despised. For Christ crucified is
to the Jews a stumbling-block, and to the
Greeks foolishness. And the carnal mind dies
when, like the mountain-top, Christ is seen
in His exaltation. " For to them that are
called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ is the
power of God, and the wisdom of God/' '
Moses therefore ascended the mount, that in
the death of the flesh he might be received by
the living spirit. If Faustus had ascended,
he would not have uttered carnal objections
from a dead mind. It was the carnal mind
that made Peter dread the smiting of the rock,
when, on the occasion of the Lord's foretell-
ing His passion, he said, " Be it far from
Thee, Lord; spare Thyself." And this sin
too was severely rebuked, when the Lord re-
plied, "Get thee behind me, Satan; thou art
an offense unto me: for thou savorest not the
things which be of God, but those which be of
men."- And where did this carnal distrust
die but in the glorification of Christ, as on a
mountain height? If it was alive when Peter
timidly denied Christ, it was dead when he
fearlessly preached Him. It wa*s alive in
Saul, when, in his aversion to the offense of
the cross, he made havoc of the Christian
faith, and where but on this mountain had it
died, when Paul was able to say, " I live no
longer, but Christ liveth in me?"^

1 8. What other reason has your heretical
folly to give for thinking that there is no
prophecy of Christ in the words, " I will raise
up unto them a Prophet from among their
brethren, like unto thee ? " Your showing
Christ to be unlike Moses is no reason; for
we can show that in other respects He is I'ke.
How can you object to Christ's being called a
prophet, since He condescended to be a man,
and actually foretold many future events ?
What is a prophet, but one who predict*events
beyond human foresight ? So Christ says of
Himself: " A prophet is not without honor,
save in his own country. '^ "* But, turning from
you, since you have already acknowledged
that your profession of Christianity obliges
you to believe the Gospel, I address myself
to the Jew, who enjoys the poor privilege of
liberty from the yoke of Christ, and who there-
fore thinks it allowable to say: Your Christ
spoke falsely; Moses wrote nothing of him.

19. Let the Jews say what prophet is meant
in this promise of God to Moses: " I will raise
up unto them a Prophet from among their
brethren, like unto thee." Many prophets
appeared after Moses; but one in particular is
here pointed out. The Jews will perhaps
naturally think of the successor of Moses,

I I Cor. i. 23, 24.
3 Gal. ii. 20.

- Matt. xvi. 22, 23.
4 Matt. xiii. 57.

who led into the promised land the people
that Moses had brought out of Egypt. Hav-
ing this successor of Moses in his mind, he
may perhaps laugh at me for asking to what
prophet the words of the promise refer, since
it is recorded who followed Moses in ruling
and leading the people. When he has
laughed at my ignorance, as Faustus supposes
him to do, I will still continue my inquiries,
and will desire my laughing opponent to give
me a serious answer to the question why Moses
changed the name of this successor, who was
preferred to himself as the leader of the people
into the promised land, to show that the law
given by Moses not to save, but to convince
the sinner, cannot lead us into heaven, but
only the grace and truth which are by Jesus
Christ. This successor was called Osea, and
Moses gave him the name of Jesus. Why
then did he give him this name when he sent
him from the valley of Pharan into the land
into which he was to lead the people ?= The
true Jesus says, " If I go and prepare a place
for you, I will come again, and receive you
unto myself."* I will ask the Jew if the
prophet does not show the prophetical mean-
ing of these things when he says, " God shall
come from Africa, and the Holy One from
Pharan.'' Does this not mean that the holy
God would come with the name of him who
came from Africa by Pharan, that is, with the
name of Jesus? Then, again, it is the Word
of God Himself who speaks when He prom-
ises to provide this successor to Moses, speak-
ing of him as an angel, — a name commonly
given in Scripture to those carrying any mes-
sage. The words are: "Behold I send my
angel before thy face, to preserve thee in the
way, and to bring thee into the land which I
have sworn to give thee. Take heed unto
him, and obey, and beware of unbelief in him;
for he will not take anything from thee wrong-
fully, for my name is in him."'' Consider
these words. Let the Jew, not to speak of the
Manich?ean, say what other angel he can find
in Scripture to whom these words appl}', but
this leader who was to bring the people into
the land of promise. Then let him inquire
who it was that succeeded Moses, and brought
in the people. He will find that it was Jesus,
and that this was not his name at first, buti
after his name was changed. It follows that"
He who said, " ]\Iy name is in him," is the
true Jesus, the leader who brings His people
into the inheritance of eternal life, according
to the New Testament, of which the Old was
a figure. No event or action could have a
more distinctly prophetical character than this,
where the very name is a prediction.

S Num. xiii, 9, xiv. 6. * John xiv. 3. 7 Ex. xxiii. 20, 21.

1300K XVI.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.^AN.

20. It follows that this Jew, if he wishes to
be a Jew inwardly, in the spirit, and not in
the letter, if he wishes to be thought a true
Israelite, in whom is no guile, will recognize
in this dead Jesus, who led the people into the
land of mortality, a figure of the true living
Jesus, whom he may follow into the land of
life. In this way, he will no longer in a hos-
tile spirit resist so plain a prophecy, but, in-
fluenced by the allusion to the Jesus of the
Old Testament, he will be prepared to listen
meekl}- to Him whose name he bore, and who
leads to the true land of promise; for He
says, " Blessed are the meek, for they shall
inherit the land."' The Gentile also, if his
heart is not too stony, if he is one of those
stones from which God raises up children unto
Abraham, must allow it to be wonderful that
in the ancient books of the people of whom
Jesus was born, so plain a prophecy, includ-
ing His very name, is found recorded; and
must remark at the same time, that it is not
any man of the name of Jesus who is prophe-
sied of, but a divine person, because God said
that His name was in that man who was ap-
pointed to rule the people, and to lead them
into the kingdom, and who by a change of
name was called Jesus. In His being sent
with this new name. He brings a great and
(Hvine message, and is therefore called an
Angel, which, as every tyro in Greek knows,
means messenger. No Gentile, therefore, if
lie were not perverse and obstinate, would de-

jspise these books merely because he is not

ibject to the law of the Hebrews, to whom

.e books belong; but would think highly of

ithe books, no matter whose they were, on

finding in them prophecies of such ancient

I late, and of what he sees now taking place.

Instead of despising Christ Jesus because He
jis foretold in the Hebrew Scriptures, he would

■include that one thought worthy of being the
ibject of prophetic description, whoever the

'Titers might be, for so many ages before His
( lining into the world, — sometimes in plain

innouncements, sometimes in figure by sym-
ijlic actions and utterances, — must claim to
e regarded with profound admiration and
'verence, and to be followed with implicit

'■liance. Thus the facts of Christian history
ould prove the truth of the prophecy, and

;iie prophecy would prove the claims of Clirist.

I'all this fancy, if it is not actually the case
lat men all over the world have been led,

ifid are now led, to believe in Christ by read-

iig these books.

21. In view of the multitudes from all na-
')ns who have become zealous believers in

Matt.

V. 4.

these books, it is laughably absurd to tell us
that it is impossible to persuade a Gentile to
learn the Christian faith from Jewish books.
Indeed, it is a great confirmation of our faith
that such important testnnony is borne by
enemies. The believing Gentiles cannot sup-
pose these testimonies to Christ to be recent
forgeries; for they find them in books held
sacred for so many ages by those who cruci-
fied Christ, and still regarded with the high-
est veneration by those who every day blas-
pheme Christ. If the prophecies of Christ
were the production of the preachers of
Christ, we might suspect their genuineness.
But now the preacher expounds the text of
the blasphemer. In this way the Most High
God orders the blindness of the ungodly for
the profit of the saint, in His righteous gov-
ernment bringing good out of evil, that those
who by their own choice live wickedly may
be, in His just judgment, made the instru-
ments of His will. So, lest those that were
to preach Christ to the world should be
thought to have forged the prophecies which
speak of Christ as to be born, to work mira-
cles, to suffer unjustly, to die, to rise again, to
ascend to heaven, to publish the gospel of
eternal life among all nations, the unbelief of
the Jews has been made of signal benefit to
us; so that those who do not receive in their
heart for their own good these truths, carry in
their hatids for our benefit the writings in which
these truths are contanied. And the unbelief
of the Jews increases rather than lessens the
authority of the books, for this blindness is
itself foretold. They testify to the truth by
their not understanding it. By not under-
standing the books which predict that they
would not understand, they prove these books
to be true.

22. In the passage, "Thou shalt see thy
life hanging, and shalt not believe thy life,"-
Faustus is deceived by the ambiguity of the
words. The words rnay be differently inter-
preted; but that they cannot be understood
of Christ is not said by Faustus, nor can be
said by any one who does not deny that Christ
is life, or that He was seen by the Jews Jiang-
ing on the cross, or that they did not believe
Him. Since Christ Himself says, " I am the
life," 3 aiid since there is no doubt that He
was seen hanging by the unbelieving Jews, I
see no reason for doubting that this was writ-
ten of Christ; for, as Christ says, Moses wrote
of Him. Since we have already refuted Faus-
tus' arguments by which he tries to show that
the words, " I will raise up from among their
brethren a prophet like unto thee," do not

2 Deut. xxviii. 16.

3 John xiv. 6.

228

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XVI,

apply to Christ, because Christ is not like
Moses, we need not insist on this other proph-
ecy. Since, in the one case, his argument is
that Christ is unlike Moses, so here he ought
to argue that Christ is not the life, or that He
was not seen hanging by the unbelieving Jews.
But as he has not said this, and as no one will
now venture to say so, there should be no diffi-
culty in accepting this too as a prophecy of
our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, uttered by
His servant. These words, says Faustus,
occur in a chapter of curses. But why should
it be the less a prophecy because it occurs
in the midst of prophecies ? Or why should
it not be a prophecy of Christ, although the
context does not seem to refer to Christ ? In-
deed, among all the curses which the Jews
brought on themselves by their sinful pride,
nothing could be worse than this, that they
should see their Life — that is, the Son of God
— hanging, and should not believe their Life.
For the curses of prophecy are not hostile im-
precations, but announcements of coming
judgment. Hostile imprecations are forbid-
den, for it is said, " Bless, and curse not.'* '
But prophetic announcements are often found
in the writings of the saints, as when the
Apostle Paul says: "Alexander the copper-
smith has done me much evil; the Lord shall
reward him according to his works." ^ So it
might be thought that the apostle was prompt-
ed by angry feeling to utter this imprecation:
"I would that they were even made eunuchs
that trouble you. ' ' ^ But if we remember who
the writer is, we may see in this ambiguous
expression an ingenious style of benediction.
For there are eunuchs which have made
themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of
heaven's sake.'* If Faustus had a pious ap-
petite for Christian food, he would have found
a similar ambiguity in the words of Moses.
By the Jews the declaration, " Thou shalt see
thy life hanging, and shalt not believe thy
life,'^ may have been understood to mean
that they would see their life to be in danger
from the threats and plots of their enemies,
and would not expect to live. But the child
of the Gospel, who has heard Christ say,
" He wrote of me." distinguishes in the am-
biguity of the prophecy between what is thrown
to swine and what is addressed to man. To
his mind the thought immediately suggests
itself of Christ hanging as the life of m.an,
and of the Jews not believing in Him for this
very reason, that they saw Him hanging. As
to the objection that these words, " Thou
shalt see thy life hanging, and shalt not be-
lieve thy life," are the only words referring to

1 Rom. xii. 14.
3 Gal. V. 12.

I 2 Tim. iv. 14.
4 Matt. xix. 12.

Christ in a passage containing maledictions not
applicable to Christ, some might grant that
this is true. For this prophecy might very
A^ell occur among the curses pronounced by
the prophet upon the ungodly people, for
these curses are of different kinds. But I,
and those who with me. consider more closely
the saying of the Lord in His Gospel, which
is not, He wrote also of me, as admitting that
Moses wrote other things not referring to
Christ, but, " He wrote of me," as teaching
that in searching the Scriptures we should view
them as intended solely to illustrate the grace
of Christ, see a reference to Christ in the rest
of the passage also. But it would take too
much time to explain this here.

23. So far from these words of Faustus'
quotation being proved not to refer to Christ
by their occurring among the other curses,
these curses cannot be rightly understood ex-
cept as prophecies of the glory of Christ, in j
which lies the happiness of man. And what
is true of these curses is still more true of this
quotation. If it could be said of Moses that
his words have a different meaning from what
was in his mind, I would rather suppose him
to have prophesied without knowing it, than
allow that the words, " Thou shalt see thy life
hanging, and shalt not believe thy life," are
not applicable to Christ. So the words of
Caiaphas had a different meaning from what
he intended, when, in his hostility to Christ,
he said that it was expedient that one man j
should die for the people, and that the whole
nation should not perish, where the Evangelist
added that he said this not of himself, but,
since he was high priest, he prophesied. ^ But
Moses was not Caiaphas; and therefore when
Moses said to the Hebrew people, " Thou
shalt see thy life hanging, and shalt not be-
lieve thy life," he not only spoke of Christ,
as he certainly did, even though he spoke
without knowing the meaning ot what he said,
but he kne\v that he spoke of Christ. For he
was a most faithful steward of the prophetic
mystery, that is, of the priestly unction which
gives the knowledge of the name of Christ;
and in this mystery even Caiaphas, wicked as
he was, was able to prophesy without know-
ing it. The prophetic unction enabled him
to prophesy, though his wicked life prevented
him from knowing it. Who then can say that
there are no prophecies of Christ in Moses,
with whom began that unction to which we
owe the knowledge of Christ's name, and by!
which even Caiaphas, the persecutor of Christ,
prophesied of Christ without knowing it?

24. We have already said as much as ap

■|

5 John xi. 49-51.

Book XVI.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.^AN.

peared desirable of the curse pronounced on
every one that hangs on a tree. Enough has
been said to show that the command to kill
any prophet or prince who tried to turn away
the children of Israel from their God, or to
break any commandment, is not directed
against Christ. The more we consider the
words and actions of our Lord Jesus Christ,
the more clearly will this appear; for Christ
never tried to turn away any of the Israelites
from their God. The God whom Moses
taught the people to love and serve, is the
God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob,
whom the Lord Jesus Christ speaks of by this
name, using the name in refutation of the
Sadducees, v/ho denied the resurrection of
the dead. He says, " Of the resurrection of
the dead, have ye not read what God said
from the bush to Moses, I am the God of
Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of
Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but
of the living; forall live unto Him."' In the
same words with which Christ answered the
Sadducees we may answer the Manichasans,
for they too deny the resurrection, though in a
different way. Again, when Christ said, in
praise of the centurion's faith, " Verily I say
unto you, I have not found so great faith, no,
not in Israel," He added, " And I say unto
you, that many shall come from the east and
from the west, and shall sit down with Abra-
ham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom
of heaven; but the children of the kingdom
shall go into outer darkness."- If, then, as
Faustus must admit, the God of whom Moses
spoke was the God of Abraham, and Isaac,
and Jacob, of whom Christ also spoke, as
these passages prove, it follows that Christ did
not try to turn away the people from their
God. On the contrary, He warned them that
they would go into outer darkness, because
He saw that they were turned away from their
God, in whose kingdom He says the Gentiles
called from the whole world will sit down with
Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob; implying that
they would believe in the God of Abraham,
and of Isaac, and of Jacob. So the apostle
also says: "The Scripture, foreseeing that
God would justify the Gentiles by faith,
preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham,
saying, In thy seed shall all nations be
blessed." ^ Jt jg implied that those who are
blessed in the seed of Abraham shall imitate
the faith of Abraham. Christ, then, did not
try to turn away the Israelites from their God,
but rather charged them with being turned
away. The idea that Christ broke one of the
I commandments given by Moses is not a new

' Matt. xxii. 31, 32, and Luke xx. 37, 38.
3 Gal. iii. 8.

Matt. viii. 10-12.

one, for the Jews thought so; but it is a mis-
take, for the 3^ws were in the wrong. Let
Faustus mention the commandment which he
supposes the Lord to have broken, and we
will point out his mistake, as we have done
already, when it was required. Meanwhile it
is enough to say, that if the Lord had broken
any commandment. He could not have found
fault with the Jews for doing so. For when
the Jews blamed His disciples for eating with
unwashen hands, in which they transgressed
not a commandment of God, but the traditions
of the elders, Christ said, "Why do ye also
transgress the commandment of God, that ye
may observe your traditions?" He then
quotes a commandment of God, which we know
to have been given by Moses. " For God
said," He adds, "Honor thy father and
mother, and he that curseth father or mother
shall die the death. But ye say, Whoever
shall say to his father or mother, It is a gift,
by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by
me, is not obliged to honor his father. So
ye make the word of God of none effect by
your traditions." ■♦ From this several things
maybe learned: that Christ did not turn away
the Jews from their God; that He not only
did not Himself break God's commandments,
but found fault with those who did so; and
that it was God Himself who gave these com-
mandments by Moses.

25. In fulfillment of our promise that we
would prove the reference to Christ in those
passages selected by Faustus from the writ-
ings of Moses for adverse criticism, since we
cannot here point out the reference to Christ
which vve believe to exist in all the writings of
Moses, it becomes our duty to show that this
commandment of Moses, that every prophet
or prince should be killed who tried to turn
away the people ^om their God, or to break
any commandment, refers to the preser\^ation
of the faith which is taught in the Church of
Christ. Moses no doubt knew in the spirit
of prophecy, and from what he himself heard
from God, that many heretics would arise to
teach errors of all kinds against the doctrine
of Christ, and to preach another Christ than
the true Christ. For the true Christ is He
that was foretold in the prophecies uttered by
Moses himself, and by the other holy men of
that nation. Moses accordingly commanded
that whoever tried to teach another Christ
should be put to death. In oliedience to this
Command, the voice of tiie Catholic Church,
as with the spiritual two-edged sword of both
Testaments, puts to death all who try to turn
us away from our God, or to break any of the

4 Matt. XV. 3-6.

230

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book. XVL

commandments. And chief among these is
ManichcGUS himself; for the truth of the law
and the prophets convinces him of error as
trying to turn us away from our God, the God
of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, whom
Christ acknowledges, and as trying to break
the commandments of the law, which, even
when they are only figurative, we regard as
prophetic of Christ.

26. Faustus uses an argument which is
either very deceitful or very stupid. And as
Faustus is not stupid, it is probable that he
used the argument intentionally, with the de-
sign of misleading the careless reader. He
says: If these things are not written of Christ,
and if you cannot show any others, it follows
that there are none at all. The proposition
is true; but it remains to be proved, both that
these things are not written of Christ, and
that no other can be shown. Faustus has not
•proved this; for we have shown both how these
things are to be understood of Christ, and
that there are many other things which have
no meaning but as applied to Christ. So it
does not follow, as Faustus says, that nothing
was written by Moses of Christ. Let us re-
peat Faustus' argument: If these things are
not written of Christ, and if you cannot show
any others, it follows that there are none at
all. Perfectly so. But as both these things
and many others have been shown to be writ-
ten of Christ, or with reference to Christ, the
true conclusion is that Faustus' argument is
worthless. In the passages quoted by Faus-
tus, he has tried, though without success, to
show that they were not written of Christ.
But in order to draw the conclusion that there
are none at all, he should first have proved
that no others can be shown. Instead of this,
he takes for granted that the readers of his
book will be blind, or the. hearers deaf, so
that the omission will be overlooked, and runs
on thus: If there are none, Christ could not
have asserted that there were any. And if
Christ did not make this assertion, it follows
that this verse is spurious. Here is a man
who thinks so much of what he says himself,
that he does not consider the possibility of
another person saying the opposite. Where
is your wit ? Is this all you could say for a ,
bad cause ? But if the badness of the cause ;
made you utter folly, the bad cause was your
own choice. To prove your antecedent false,
we have only to show some other things writ-
ten of Christ. If there are some, it will not
be true that there are none. And if there
are some, Cnrist may have asserted that there
were. And if Christ may have asserted this,
it follows that this verse of the Gospel is not
spurious. Coming back, then, to Faustus'

proposition. If you cannot show any other, it
follows that there are none at all, it requires
to be proved that we cannot show any other.
We need only refer to what we showed before,
as sufficient to prove the truth of the text in
the Gospel, in which Christ says, "If ye be-
lieved Moses, ye would also believe me; for
he wrote of me.'' And even though from
dullness of mind we could find nothing written
of Christ by Moses, still, so strong is the evi-
dence in support of the authority of the Gos-
pel, that it would be incumbent on us to
believe that not only some things, but every-
thing written by Moses, refers to Christ; for
He says not, He wrote also of me, but. He
wrote of me. The truth then is this, that
even though there were doubts, which God
forbid, of the genuineness of this verse, the
doubt would be removed by the number of
testimonies to Christ which we find in Moses;
while, on the other hand, even if we could
find none, we should still be bound to believe
that these are to be found, because no doubts
can be admitted regarding any verse in the
Gospel.

27. As to your argument that the doctrine
of Moses was unlike that of Christ, and that
therefore it was improbable that if they be-
lieved Moses, they would believe Christ too;
and that it would rather follow that their be-
lief in one would imply of necessity opposi-
tion to the other, — you could not have said
this if you had turned your mind's eye for a
moment to see men all the world over, when
they are not blinded by a contentious spirit,
learned and unlearned, Greek and barbarian,
wise and unwise, to whom the apostle called
himself a debtor,* believing in both Christ
and Moses. If it was improbable that the
Jews would believe both Christ and Moses, it
is still more improbable that all the world
would do so. But as we see all nations be-
lieving both, and in a common and well-
grounded faith holding the agreement of the
prophecy of the one with the gospel of the
other, it was no impossible thing to which this
one nation was called, when Christ said to
them, "If ye believed Moses, ye would also
believe me." Rather we should be amazed
at the guilty obstinacy of the Jews, who re-
fused to do what we see the whole world has
done.

28. Regarding the Sabbath and circum- •
cision, and the distinction in foods, in which
you say the teaching of Moses differs from
what Christians are taught by Christ, we have
already shown that, as the apostle says, " all
those things were our examples." - The dif-

' Rom. i. 14.

2 I Cor. X. 6.

Book XVL]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICHyEAN.

231

ference is not in the doctrine, but in the
time. There was a time when it was proper
that these things should be figuratively pre-
dicted; and there is now a different time,
when it is proper that they should be openly
tleclared and fully accomplished. It is not
surprising that the Jews, who understood the
Sabbath in a carnal sense, should oppose
Christ, who began to open up its spiritual
meaning. Reply, if you can, to the apostle,
who declares that the rest of the Sabbath was
;i shadow of something future.' If the Jews
opposed Christ because they did not under-
stand what the true Sabbath is, there is no
reason why you should oppose Him, or refuse
to learn what true innocence is. For on that
occasion when Jesus appears especially to set
aside the Sabbath, when His disciples were
hungry, and pulled the ears of corn through
which they were passing, and ate them, Jesus,
in replying to the Jews, declared His disciples
to be innocent. "If you knew," He said,
■'what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and
not sacrifice, you would not have condemned
the innocent."^ They should rather have
itied the wants of the disciples, for hunger
.orced them to do what they did. But pull-
ing ears of corn, which is innocence in the
teaching of Christ, is murder in the teaching
j of Manichseus. Or was it an act of charity
in the apostles to pull the ears of corn, that
they might in eating set free the members of
God, as in your foolish notions ? Then it
must be cruelty in you not to do the same.
Faustus' reason for setting aside the Sabbath
is because he knows that God's power is ex-
ercised without cessation, and without weari-
ness. It is for those to say this, who believe
lat all times are the production of an eternal
ict of God's will. But you will find it difficult
to reconcile this with your doctrine, that the
rebellion of the race of darkness broke your
<od's rest, which was also disturbed by a
sudden attack of the enem}'; or perhaps God
never had rest, as he foresaw this from eter-
nity, and could not feel at ease in the pros-
pect of so dire a conflict, with such loss and
ihsaster to his members.

29. Unless Christ had considered this Sab-

ath — which in your want of knowledge and

1 piety you laugh at — one of the prophecies

ritten of Himself, He would not have borne

ich a testimony to it as He did. For when,

s you say in praise of Christ, He suffered

.oluntarily, and so could choose His own

time for suffering and for resurrection, He

I'lrought it about that His body rested from

ill its works on Sabbath in the tomb, and that

' Col. ii. 16, 17.

= Matt. .\ii. 7.

His resurrection on the third clay, which we
call the Lord's day, the day after the Sab-
bath, and therefore the eighth, proved the
circumcision of the eighth day to be also pro-

I phetical of Him. For what does circumcision
mean, but the eradication of the mortality

j which comes from our carnal generation ? So
the apostle says: " Putting off from Himself
His flesh. He made a show of principalities
and powers, triumphing over them in Him-
self. "^ The flesh here said to be put off is
that mortality of flesh on account of which
the body is properly called flesh. The flesh
is the mortality, for in the immortality of the
resurrection there will be no flesh; as it is
written, " Flesh and blood shall not inherit
the kingdom of God.'' You are accustomed
to argue from these words against our faith
in the doctrine of the resurrection of the
body, which has already taken place in the
Lord Himself. You keep out of view the
following words, in which the apostle explains
his meaning. To show what he here means
by flesh, he adds, "Neither shall corruption
inherit incorruption." For this body, which
from its mortality is properly called flesh, is
changed in the resurrection, so as to be no
longer corruptible and mortal. This is the
apostle's statement, and not a supposition of
ours, as his next words prove. "Lo," he
says, ''I show you a mystery: we shall all
rise again, but we shall not all be changed.
In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at
the last trump; for the last trumpet shall
sound, and the dead shall rise incorruptible,
and we shall be changed. For this corrupt-
ible must put on incorruption, and this mor-
tal must put on immortality."'* To put on
immortality, the body puts oft' mortality.
This is the mystery of circumcision, which
by the law took place on the eighth day; and
on the eighth day, the Lord's da)% the day
after the Sabbath, was fulfilled in its true
meaning by the Lord. Hence it is said, " Put-
ting off His flesh. He made a show of princi-
palities and powers." For by means of this
mortality the hostile powers of hell ruled over
us. Christ is said to have made a show or
example of these, because in Himself, our
Head, He gave an example which will be
fully realized in the liberation of His whole
body, the Church, from the power of the devil
at the last resurrection. This is our faith. And
according to the prophetic declaration quoted
by Paul, "The just shall live by faith."
This is our justification. s Even Pagans be-
lieve that Christ died. But only Christians
believe that Christ rose again. " If thou con-

3 Col. ii. 15. 4 1 Cor. XV. 50-59. 5 Hab. ii. 4, and Rom. i. 17.

232

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XVI.

fess with thy mouth,'' says the apostle, " that
Jesus is the Lord, and believest in thy heart
that God raised Him from the dead, thou
Shalt be saved."' Again, because we are
justified by faith in Christ's resurrection, the
apostle says, " He died for our offenses, and
rose again for our justification."- And be-
cause "this resurrection by faith in which we
are justified was prefigured by the circumcis-
ion of the eighth day, the apostle says of Abra-
ham, with whom the observance began, "He
received the sign of circumcision, a seal of
the righteousness of faith. "^ Circumcision,
then, is one of the prophecies of Christ,
written by Moses, of w4iom Christ said, " He
wrote of me." In the words of the Lord,
"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypo-
crites ! for ye compass sea and land to make
one proselyte; and when he is made, ye make
him twofold more the child of hell than your-
selves," ■* it is not the circumcision of the pro-
selyte which is meant, but his imitation of the
conduct of the scribes and Pharisees, which
the Lord forbids His disciples to imitate,
when He says: "The scribes and Pharisees
sit on Moses' seat: what they say unto you,
do; but do not after their works, for they
say, and do not." ^ These words of the Lord
teach us both the honor due to the teaching
of Moses, in whose seat even bad men were
obliged to teach good things, and the reason
of the proselyte becoming a child of hell,
which was not that he heard from the Piiari-
sees the words of the law, but that he copied
their example. Such a circumcised proselyte
mi^ht have been addressed in the words of
Paul: "Circumcision verily profiteth, if thou
keep the law." ^ His imitation of the Phari-
sees in not keeping the law made him a child
of hell. And he was twofold more than they,
probably because of his neglecting to fulfill
what he voluntarily undertook, when, not be-
ing born a Jew, he chose to become a Jew.

30. Your scoff is very inappropriate, when
you say that Moses discusses like a glutton
what should be eaten, and commands some
things to be freely used as clean, and other
things as unclean to be not even touched. A
glutton makes no distinction, except in choos-
ing the sweetest food. Perhaps you wish to
commend to the admiration of the uninitiated
the innocence of your abstemious habits, by
appearing not to know, or to have forgotten,
that swine's flesh tastes better than mutton.
But as this too w^as written by Moses of Christ
in figurative prophecy, in which the flesh of
animals signifies those who are to be united
to the body of Christ, which is the Church, or

I Rom. X. 9. ' Rom. iv. 25. 3 Rom. iv. 11.

5 Matt, xxiii. 2, 3. 6 Rom. ii. 26.

who are to be cast out, you are typified by
the unclean animals; for your disagreement
with the Catholic faith shoe's that you do not
ruminate on the word of wisdom, and that you
do not divide the hoof, in the sense of mak-
ing a correct distinction l)etween the Old Tes-
tament and the New. But you show still
more audacity in adopting the erroneous opin-
ions of your Adimantus.

31. You follow Adimantus in saying that
Christ made no distinction in food, except in
entirely prohibiting the use of animal food to
His disciples, while He allowed the laity to
eat anything that is eatable; and declared
that they were not polluted by what enters
into the mouth, but that the unseemly things
which come out of the mouth are the thinijs
which defile a man. These words of yours
are unseemly indeed, for they express noto-
rious falsehood. If Christ taught that the evil
things which come out of the mouth are the
only things that defile a man, why should they
not be the only things to defile His disciples,
so as to make it unnecessary that any food
should be forbidden or unclean? Is it only
the laity that are not polluted by what goes
into the mouth, but by what comes out of it ?
In that case, they are better protected from
impurity than the saints, who are polluted
both by wiiat goes in and by what comes out.
But as Christ, comparing Himself with John,
who came neither eating nor drinking, says
that He came eating and drinking, I should
like to know what He ate and drank. When
exposing the perversity which found fault
with both, He says: " John came neither eat-
ing nor drinking; and ye say, He hath a
devil. The Son of man cometh eating and
drinking; and ye say. Behold a glutton and a
wine-bibber, a friend of publicans and sin-
ners. "^ V/e know what John ate and drank.
For it is not said that he drank nothing, but :
that he drank no wine or strong drink; so he
must have drunk water. He did not live ;
without food, but his food was locusts and
wild honey.^ When Christ says that John
did not eat or drink. He means that he did
not use the food which the Jews used. And
because the Lord used this food. He is
spoken of, in contrast with John, as eating
and drinking. Will it be said that it wasi
bread and vegetables which the Lord ate, andl
which John did not eat ? It would be strange|
if one was said not to eat. because he used=
locusts and honey, while the other is said to
eat simply because he used bread and veget-
ables. But whatever may be thought of the
eating, certainly no one could be called a

7 Matt. xi. i8, 19.

8 Matt. iii. 4.

Book XVI.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

wine-bibber unless he u^ed wine. Why then
do you call wine unclean ? It is not in order
to subdue the body by abstinence that you
prohibit these things, but because they are
unclean, for you say that they are the poison-
-ous filth of the race of darkness; whereas the
apostle says, " To the pure all things are
pure."' Christ, according to this doctrine,
taught that all food was alike, but forbade
His disciples to use what the Manichsans
call unclean. Where do you find this prohi-
bition ? You are not afraid to deceive men
by falsehood; but in God's righteous provi-
dence, you are so blinded that you provide us
with the means of refuting you. For I can-
not resist quoting for examination the whole
of that passage of the Gospel which Faustus
uses against Moses; that we may see from it
the falsehood of what was said first by Adi-
mantus, and here by Faustus, that the Lord
Jesus forbade the use of animal food to His
disciples, and allowed it to the laity. After
Christ's reply to the accusation that His dis-
ciples ate with unwashen hands, we read in
the Gospel as follows: "And He called the
multitude, and said unto them, Hear and un-
derstand. Not that which goeth into the
mouth defileth a man: but that which cometh
out of the mouth, this defileth a man. Then
came His disciples, and said unto Him, Know-
est Thou that the Pharisees were offended after
they heard this saying?" Here, when ad-
dressed by His disciples. He ought certainly,
according to the Manichaeans, to have given
them special instructions to abstain from ani-
mal food, and to show that His words, " Not
that which goeth into the mouth defileth a
man, but that which goeth out of the mouth,"
applied to the multitude only. Let us hear,
then, what, according to the evangelist, the
Lord replied, not to the multitude, but to
His disciples: "But He answered and said.
Every jilant which my heavenly Father hath
not planted shall be rooted up. Let them
alone: they be blind leaders of the blind.
And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall
into the ditch." The reason of this was, that
in their desire to observe their own traditions,
they did not understand the commandments
of God. As yet the disciples had not asked
the Master how they were to understand what
He had said to the multitude. But now they
do so; for the evangelist adds: " Then an-
swered Peter and said unto Him, Declare
unto us this parable." This shows that Peter
thought that when the Lord said, " Not that
which goeth into the mouth defileth a man,
but that which goeth out of the mouth," He

I Tit. i. 15.

did not speak plainly and literally, but, as
usual, wished to convey some instruction
under the guise of a parable. When His dis-
ciples, then, put this question in private, does
He tell them, as the Manichaeans say, that all
animal food is unclean, and tliat they must
never touch it ? Listead of this. He rebukes
them for not understanding His plain lan-
guage, and for thinking it a parable when it
was not. We read: "And Jesus said. Are ye
also yet without understanding ? Do not ye
yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in
at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast
out into the draught ? But those things
which proceed out of the mouth come forth
from the heart, and they defile the man. For
out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, mur-
ders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false
witness, blasphemies. These are the things
which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen
hands defileth not a man."-

32. Here we have a complete exposure of
the falsehood of the Manichseans: for it is
plain that the Lord did not in this matter
teach one thing to the multitude, and another
in private to His disciples. Here is abundant
evidence that the error and deceit are in the
Manichaeans, and not in Moses, nor in Christ,
nor in the doctrine taught figuratively in one
Testament and plainly in the other, — prophe-
sied in one, and fulfilled in the other. How
can the Manichaeans say that the Catholics
regard none of the things that Moses wrote,
when in fact they observe them all, not now
in the figures, but in what the figures were
intended to foretell ? No one would say that
one who reads the Scripture subsequently to
its being written does not observe it because
he does not form the letters which he reads.
The letters are the figures of the sounds which
he utters; and though he does not form the
letters, he cannot read without examining
them. The reason why the Jews did not be-
lieve in Christ, was because they did not ob-
serve even the plain literal precepts of Moses.
So Christ says to them: "Ye pay tithe of
mint and cummin, and omit the weightier
matters of the law, mercy and judgment. Ye
strain out a gnat and swallow a camel. These
ought ye to have done, and not to leave the
other undone." ^ So also He told them that
by their traditions they made of none effect
the commandment of God to give honor to
parents. On account of this pride and per-
versity in neglecting what they understood,
they were justly blinded, so that they could
not understand the other things.

33. You see, my argument is not that if

2 Matt. .\v. 1(5-20.

3 Matt. x.\iii. 23, 24.

'■34

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XVII.

you are a Christian, you must believe Ciirist
when He says that Moses wrote of Him, and
that it you do not believe this you are no
Christian. The account you give of yourself
in asking to be dealt with as a Jew or a Gen-
tile is your own affair. My endeavor is to
leave no avenue of error open to you. I
have shut you out, too, from that precipice
to which you rush as a last resort, when you
say that these are spurious passages in the
Gospel; so that, freed from the pernicious in-
fluence of this opinion, you may be reduced to
the necessity of believing in Christ. You say
you wish to be taught like the Christian
Thomas, whom Christ did not spurn from
Him because he doubted of Him, but, in
order to heal the wounds of his mind, showed
him the marks of the wounds in His own
body. These are your own words. It is
well that you desire to be taught as Thomas
was. I feared you would make out this pas-
sage too to be spurious. Believe, then, the
marks of Christ's wounds. For if the marks
were real, the wounds must have been real.

And the wounds could not have been real,
unless His body had been capable of real
wounds; which upsets at once the whole error
of the Manichaeans. If you say that the
marks were unreal which Christ showed to
His doubting disciple, it follows that He
must be a deceitful teacher, and that you wish
to be deceived in being taught by Him. But
as no one wishes to be deceived, while many
wish to deceive, it is probable that you would
rather imitate the teaching which you ascribe
to Christ than the learning you ascribe to
Thomas. If, then, you believe that Christ
deceived a doubting inquirer by false marks
of wounds, you must yourself be regarded,
not as a safe teacher, but as a dangerous im-
postor. On the other hand, if Thomas
touched the real marks of Christ's wounds,
you must confess that Christ had a real body.
So, if you believe as Thomas did, you are
no more a Manichaean. If you do not believe
even with Thomas, you must be left to your
infidelity.

BOOK XVII.

FAUSTUS REJECTS CHRIST S DECLAR.A.TION THAT HE CAME NOT TO DESTROY THE LAW AND THE
PROPHETS BUT TO FULFILL THEM, ON THE GROUND THAT IT IS FOUND ONLY IN MATTHEW,
WHO WAS NOT PRESENT WHEN THE WORDS PURPORT TO HAVE BEEN SPOKEN. AUGUSTIN
REBUKES THE FOLLY OF REFUSING TO BELIEVE MATTHEW AND YET BELIEVING MANICH.'EUS,
AND SHOWS WHAT THE PASSAGE OF SCRIPTURE REALLY MEANS.

1. Faustus said: You ask why we do not
receive the law and the prophets, when Christ
said that he came not to destroy them, but to
fulfill them. Where do we learn that Jesus
said this ? From Matthew, who declares that
he said it on the mount. In whose presence
was it said ? In the presence of Peter, An-
drew, James, and John — only these four; for
the rest, including Matthew himself, were
not yet chosen. Is it not the case that one
of these four — John, namely — wrote a Gos-
pel ? It is. Does he mention this saying*of
Jesus ? No. How, then, does it happen that
what is not recorded by John, who was on
the mount, is recorded by Matthew, who be-
came a follower of Cnrist long after He came
down from the mount? In the first place,
then, we must doubt w^iether Jesus ever said
these words, since the proper witness is silent
on the matter, and we have only the authority
of a less trustworthy witness. But, besides
this, we shall find that it is not Matthew that
has imposed upon us, but some one else
under his same, as is evident from the indi-
rect style of the narrative. Thus we read:

" As Jesus passed by. He saw a man, named
Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom, and
called him; and he immediately rose up, and
followed Him."' No one writing of himself
would say, He saw a man, and called him,
and he followed Him, but. He saw me, and
called me, and I followed Him. Evidently
this was written not by Matthew himself, but
by some one else under his name. Since,
then, the passage already quoted would not
be true even if it had been written by Mat-
thew, since he was not present when Jesus
spoke on the mount; much more is its false-
hood evident from the fact that the writer was
not Matthew himself, but some one borrowing
the names both of Jesus and of Matthew.

2. The passage itself, in which Christ tells
the Jews not to think that He came to destroy
the law, is rather designed to show that He
did destroy it. For, had He not done some-
thing of the kind, the Jews would not have
suspected Him. His words are: " Think not
that I am come to destroy the law." Sup-

I Matt. i.\. 9.

Book XVII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH/EAN.

o:)

pose the Jews had replied, What actions of
thine might lead us to suspect this ? Is it
because thou exposest circumcision, breakest
the Sabbath, discardest sacrifices, makest no
distinction in foods ? this would be the natural
answer to the words, Think not. The Jews
iiad the best possible reason for thinking that
Jesus destroyed the law. If this was not to
destro)' the law, what is ? But, indeed, the law
and the prophets consider themselves already
-0 faultlessly perfect, that they have no desire
to be fulfilled. Their author and father con-
demns adding to them as much as taking
away anything from them; as we read in Deu-
teronomy: "These precepts which I deliver
unto thee this day, O Israel, thou shalt ob-
ser\'e to do; thou shalt not turn aside from
them to the right hand or to the left; thou
^halt not add thereto nor diminish from it,
that thy God may bless thee."' Whether,
therefore, Jesus turned aside to the right by
adding to the law and the prophets in order
to fulfill them, or to the left in taking awav
:rom them to destroy them, either way he

ifended the author of the law. So this verse
must either have some other meaning, or be
spurious.

3. AuGUSTiN replied: What amazing folly,
:o disbelieve what Matthew records of Christ,
while you believe Manichaeus ! If Matthew
is not to be believed because he was not pres-
ent when Christ said, " I came not to destroy
the law and the prophets, but to fulfill," was
Manichseus present, was he even born, when
Christ appeared among men ? According,

iien, to your rule, you should not believe any-
thing that Manichaeus says of Christ. On the
other hand, we refuse to believe what Mani-

haeus says' of Christ; not because he was not

resent as a witness of Christ's words and
-ctions, but because he contradicts Christ's
disciples, and the Gospel which rests on their
authority. The apostle, speaking in the
Holy Spirit, tells us that such teachers would
arise. With reference to such, he says to be-

evers: "If any man preaches to you an-
other gospel than that ye have received, let
him be accursed." ^ If no one can say what
is true of Christ unless he has himself seen
and heard Him, no one now can be trusted.
But if believers can now say what is true of
Christ because the truth has been handed
down in word or writing by those who saw and
heard, why might not Matthew have heard the
truth from his fellow-disciple John, if John
was present and he himself was not, as from
the writings of John both we who are born so
long afcer and those who shall be born after

» Deut. xii. 32.

2 Gal. i. 9.

us can learn the truth about Christ? In this
way, the Gospels of Luke and Mark, who
were companions of the disciples, as well as
the Gospel of Matthew, have the same
authority as that of John. Besides, the Lord
Himself might have told Matthew what those
called before him had already 'been witnesses
of. Your idea is, that John should have
recorded this saying of the Lord, as he was
present on the occasion. As if it might not
happen that, since it was impossible to write
all that he heard from the Lord, he set him-
self to write some, omitting this among
others. Does he not say at the close of his
Gospel: " And there are also many other
things which Jesus did, the which, if they
should be written every one, I suppose that
even the world itself could not contain the
books that should be written " ? ^ This proves
that he omitted many things intentionally.
But if you choose John as an authority re-
garding the law and the prophets, I ask you
only to believe his testimony to them. It is
John who writes that Isaiah saw the glory of
Christ.'' It is in his Gospel we find the text
already treated of: "If ye believed Moses,
ye would also believe me; for he wrote of
me. "5 Your evasions are met on every side.
You ought to say plainly that you do not
believe the gospel of Christ. For to believe
what you please, and not to believe what you
please, is to believe yourselves, and not the
gospel.

4. Faustus thinks himself wonderfully
clever in proving that Matthew was not the
writer of this Gospel, because, when speaking
of his own election, he says not. He saw me,
and said to me, Follow me; but. He saw him,
and said to him. Follow me. This must
have been said either in ignorance or from a
design to mislead. Faustus can hardly be so
ignorant as not to have read or heard that
narrators, when speaking of themselves, often
use a construction as if speaking of another.
It is more probable that Faustus wished to
bewilder those more ignorant than himself, in
the hope of getting hold on not a few unac-
quainted with these things. It is needless to
resort to other writings to quote examples of
this construction from profane authors for
the information of our friends, and for the
refutation of Faustus. We find examples in
passages quoted above from Moses by Faustus
himself, without any denial, or rather with
the assertion, that thev were written bv
Moses, only not written of Christ. When
Moses, then, writes of himself, does he say,
I said this, or I did that, and not rather,

3 John xxi. 25.

•* John xii. 41.

5 John V. 46.

236

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XVII.

Moses said, and Moses did ? Or does he
say, The Lord called me, The Lord said to
me, and not rather. The Lord called Moses,
The Lord said to Moses, and so on ? So
Matthew, too, speaks of himself in the third
person. And John does the same; for
towards the enfl of his book he says: " Peter,
turning, saw the disciple whom Jesus loved,
who also lay on His breast at supper, and
who said to the Lord, Who is it that shall
betray Thee ? " Does he say, Peter, turning,
saw me ? Or will you argue from this that
John did not write this Gospel ? But he adds
a little after: "This is the disciple that tes-
tifies of Jesus, and has written these things;
and we know that his testimony is true."'
Does he say, I am the disciple who testify of
Jesus, and who have written these things, and
we know that my testimony is true ? Evi-
dently this style is common in writers of
narratives. There are innumerable instances
in which the Lord Himself uses it. "When
the Son of man," He says, " cometh, shall
He find faith on the earth ? " = Not, When I
come, shall I find ? Again, " The Son of
man came eating and drinking; "^ not, I
came. Again, "The hour shall come, and
now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of
the Son of God, and they that hear shall
live;'^* not, My voice. And so in many
other places. This may suffice to satisfy in-
quirers and to refute scoffers.

5. Every one can see the weakness of the
argument that Christ could not have said,
" Think not that I am come to destroy the
law and the prophets: I came not to destroy,
but to fulfill," unless He had done something
to create a suspicion of this kind. Of course,
we grant that the unenlightened Jews may
have looked upon Christ as the destroyer of
the law and the prophets; but their very sus-
picion makes it certain that the true and
truthful One, in saying that He came not to
destroy the law and the prophets, referred to
no other law than that of the Jews. This is
proved by the words that follov.^: " Verily,
verily, I say unto you. Till heaven and earth
pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise
pass from the law till all be fulfilled. Who-
soever therefore shall break one of the least
of these commandments, and shall teach men
so, shall be called the least in the kingdom of
heaven. But whosoever shall do and teach
them, shall be called great in the kingdom of
heaven." This applied to the Pharisees,

' John xxi. 2 ;-24.
3 Matt. xi. 19.

2 Luke xviii.
4 John V. 25.

who taught the law in word, while they broke
it in deed. Christ says of the Pharisees in an-
other place, " What tiiey say, that do; but do
not after their works: for they say, and do
not. "5 So here also He adds, "For I say
unto you. Except your righteousness exceed
the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees,
ye shall not enter into the kingdom of
heaven;''^ that is. Unless ye shall both do
and teach what they teach without doing, ye
shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.
This law, therefore, which the Pharisees
taught without keeping it, Christ says He
came not to destroy, but to fulfill; for this
was the law connected with the seat of Moses
in which the Pharisees sat, who, because they
said without doing, are to be heard, but not
to be imitated.

6. Faustus does not understand, or pre- ,
tends not to understand, what it is to fulfill
the law. He supposes the expression to
mean the addition of words to the law, re-
garding which it is written that nothing is to
be added to or taken away from the Script-
ures of God. From this Faustus argues that
there can be no fulfillment of what is spoken
of as so perfect that nothing can be added to
it or taken from it. Faustus requires to be
told that the law is fulfilled by living as it en-
joins. " Love is the fulfilling of the law,"^
as the apostle says. The Lord has vouch-
safed both to manifest and to impart this
love, by sending the Holy Spirit to His be-
lieving people. So it is said by the same
apostle: " The love of God is shed abroad in
our heart by the Holy Ghost, which is given
unto us."^ And the Lord Himself says:
" By this shall all men know that ye are my
disciples, if ye have love one to another."'
The law, then, is fulfilled both by the observ-
ance of its precepts and by the accomplish-
ment of its prophecies. For " the law was
given by Moses, but grace and truth came by
Jesus Christ." '° The law itself, by being
fulfilled, becomes grace and truth. Grace is
the fulfillment of love, and truth is the. ac- i
complishment of the prophecies. And as both
grace and truth are by Christ, it follows that
He came not to destroy the law, but to fulfill
it; not by supplying any defects in the law,
but by obedience to what is written in the law. ja
Christ's own words declare this. For Hell
does not say, One jot or one tittle shall in no.
wise pass from the law till its defects are sup-i
plied, but " till all be fulfilled."

5 Matt, xxiii. 3.
8 Rom. V. 5.

6 Matt. V. 17-20.
9 John xiii. 35.

7 Rom. xiii.
w John i. 7.

Book XVIII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH/EAN.

237

BOOK XVIII.

THE RELATION OF CHRIST TO PROPHECY, CONTINUED.

1. Faustus said: " I came riot to destroy
' the law, but to fulfill it." If these are Christ's

words, unless they have some other meaning,
; they are as much against you as against me.
1 Your Christianity as well as mine is based on
; the belief that Christ came to destroy the law
and the prophets. Your actions prove this,
even though in words you deny it. It is on
this ground that you disregard the precepts
of the law and the prophets. It is on this
i^Tound that we both acknowledge Jesus as
the founder of the New Testament, in which
is implied the acknowledgment that the Old
Testament is destroyed. How, then, can we
believe that Christ said these words without
first confessing that hitherto we have been
wholly in error, and without showing our re-
pentance by entering on a course of obedi-
ence to the law and the prophets, and of care-
ful observance of their requirements, whatever
they may be ? This done, we may honestly
believe that Jesus said that he came not to
destroy the law, but to fulfill it. As it is,
you accuse me of not believing what you do
not believe yourself, and what therefore is
false.

2. But grant that we have been in the wrong
hitherto. What is to be done now? Shall
we come under the law, since Christ has not
destroyed, but fulfilled it? Shall we by cir-
cumcision add shame to shame, and believe
that God is pleased with such sacraments ?
Shall we observe the rest of the Sabbath, and
bind ourselves in the fetters of Saturn ? Shall
we glut the demon of the Jews, for he is not
God, with the slaughter of bulls, rams, and
goats, not to say of men; and adopt, only with
greater cruelty, in obedience to the law and
the prophets, the practices on account of
which we abandoned idolatry? Shall we, in
fine, call the flesh of some animals clean, and
that of others unclean, among which, accord-
ing to the law and the prophets, swine's flesh

' has a particular defilement ? C)f course you
will allow that as Christians we must not do
any of these things, for you remember that
Christ says that a man when circumcised be-

i comes twofold a child of hell.' It is plain

j also that Christ neither observed the Sabl)ath
himself, nor commanded it to be observed.
And regarding foods, he says expressly that

I man is not defiled by anything that goes into
his mouth, but rather by the things which

come out of it." Regarding sacrifices, too,
he often says that God desires'mercy, and not
sacrifice. 3 What becomes, then, of the state-
ment that he came not to destroy the law, but
to fulfill it ? If Christ said this, he must have
meant something else, or, what is not to be
thought of, he told a lie, or he never said it.
No Christian will allow that Jesus spoke
falsely; therefore he must either not have
said this, or said it with another meaning.

3. For my part, as a Manichsean, this verse
has little difficulty lor me, for at the outset I
am taught to believe that many things which
pass in Scripture under the name of the Sa-
viour are spurious, and that they must there-
fore be tested to find whether they are true,
and sound, and genuine; for the enemy v»-ho
comes by night has corrupted almost every
passage by sowing tares among the wheat.
So I am not alarmed by these words, notwith-
standing the sacred name affixed to them; for
I still claim the liberty to examine whether
this comes from the hand of the good sower,
who sows in the day-time, or of the evil one,
who sows in the night. But what escape
from this difficulty can there be for you, who
receive everything without examination, con-
demning the use of reason, which is the pre-
rogative of human nature, and thinking it
impiety to distinguish between truth and
falsehood, and as much afraid of separating
between what is good and what is not as chil-
dren are of ghosts ? For suppose a Jew or
any one acquainted with these words should
ask you why you do not keep the precepts of
the law and the prophets, since Christ says
that he came not to destroy but to fulfill
them: you will be obliged either to join in the
superstitious follies of the Jews, or to declare
this verse false, or to deny that you are a
follower of Christ.

4. AuGUSTiN replied: Since you continue
repeating what has been so often exposed and
refuted, we must be content to repeat the
refutation. The things in the law and the
prophets which Christians do not observe,
are only the types of what they do observe.
These types were figures of things to come,
and are necessarily removed when the things
themselves are fully revealed by Christ, that
in this very removal tlie law and the prophets
may be fulfilled. So it is written in the
prophets that God would give a new covenant,

Matt.

.\.\in 15.

"Matt. XV. II.

3 Matt. ix. 13.

238

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XVIII.

" not as I gave to their fathers." ' Such was
the hardness of heart of the people under the
Old Testament, that many precepts were given
to them, not so much because they were good,
as because they suited the people. Still, in
all these things the future was foretold and
prefigured, although the people did not un-
derstand the meaning of their own observ-
ances. After the manifest appearance of the
things thus signified, we are not required to
observe the types; but we read them to see
their meaning. So, again, it is foretold in
the prophets, " I will take away their stony
heart, and will give them a heart of flesh," - —
that is, a sensible heart, instead of an insensi-
ble one. To this the apostle alludes in the
words: "Not in tables of stone, but in the
fleshy tables of the heart." ^ The fleshy
tables of the heart are the same as the heart
of flesh. Since, then, the removal of these
observances is foretold, the law and the
prophets could not have been fulfilled but by
this removal. Now, however, the prediction
is accomplished, and the fulfillment of the
law and the prophets is found in what at first
sight seems the very opposite.

5. We are not afraid to meet your scoff at
the Sabbath, when you call it the fetters of
Saturn. It is a silly and unmeaning ex-
pression, which occurred to you only because
you are in the habit of worshipping the sun
on what you call Sunday. What you call
Sunday we call the Lord's day, and on it we
do not worship the sun, but the Lord's resur-
rection. And in the same way, the fathers
observed the rest of the Sabbath, not because
they worshipped Saturn, but because it was
incumbent at that time; for it was a shadow
of things to corhe, as the apostle testifies.'*
The Gentiles, of whom the apostle says that
they "worshipped and served the creature
rather than the Creator," ^ gave the names
of their gods to the days of the week. And
so far you do the same, except that you wor-
ship only the two brightest luminaries, and
notthe rest of the stars, as the Gentiles did.
Besides, the Gentiles gave the names of their
gods to the months. In honor of Romulus,
whom they believed to be the son of Mars,
they dedicated the first month to Mars, and
called it March. The next month, April, is
named not from any god, but from the word
for opening, because the buds generally open
in this month. The third month is called
May, in honor of Maia the mother of Mer-
cury. The fourth is called June, from Juno.
The rest to December used to be named ac-
cording to their number The fifth and sixth,

I Jer. xxxi. 32.

4 Col. ii. 17.

2 Ezek.
5 Rom.

XI. ig.

i. 25.

3 2 Cor. ii. 3.

however, got the names of July and August
from men to whom divine honors were de-j
creed; while the others, from September to
December, continued to be named from their
number. January, again, is named from
Janus, and February from the rites of the
Luperci called Februae. Must we say that'
you worship the god Mars in the month of
March ? But that is the month in which you :
hold the feast you call Bema with great pomp.
But if you think it allowable to observe the
month of March without thinking of Mars, ,
why do you try to bring in the name of Saturn
in connection with the rest of the seventh day
enjoined in Scripture, merely because the
Gentiles call the day Saturday ? The Script-
ure name for the day is Sabbath, which means
rest. Your scoff is as unreasonable as it is
profane.

6. As regards animal sacrifices, every
Christian knows that they were enjoined as
suitable to a perverse people, and not be-
cause God had any pleasure in them. Still, i
even in these sacrifices there were types of
what we enjoy; for we cannot obtain purifica-
tion or the propitiation of God without blood.
The fulfillment of these types is in Christ, by
whose blood we are purified and redeemed.
In these figures of the divine oracles, the bull
represents Christ, because with the horns of
His cross He scatters the wicked; the lamb,
from His matchless innocence; the goat,
from His being made in the likeness of sinful
flesh, that by sin He might condemn sin.*
Whatever kind of sacrifice you choose to
specify, I will show you a prophecy of Christ
in it. Thus we have shown regarding circum-
cision, and the Sabbath, and the distinction
of food, and the sacrifice of animals, that all
these things were our examples, and our
prophecies, which Christ came not to destroy,
but to fulfill, by fulfilling what was thus fore-
told. Your opponent is the apostle, whose
opinion I give in his own words: "All these
things were our examples." ^

7. If you have learned from Manichyeus
the willful impiety of admitting only those
parts of the Gospel which do not contradict
your errors, while you reject the rest, we have
learned from the apostle the pious caution of
looking on everyone as accursed that preaches
to us another gospel than that which we have
received. Hence Catholic Christians look
upon you as among the tares; for, in the
Lord's exposition of the meaning of the tares,
they are not falsehood mixed with truth in
the Scriptures, but children of the wicked
one, — that is, people who imitate the deceit-

6 Rom. viii. ■;.

7 I Cor. X. 6.

Book XIX.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

239

fulness of the devil. It is not true that
Catholic Christians believe everything; for
they do not believe Manichreus or any of the
heretics. Nor do they condemn the use of
1 human reason; but what you call reasoning
I they prove to be fallacious. Nor do they
think it profane to distinguish truth from
falsehood; for they distinguish between the
truth of the Catholic faith and the falsehood
of your doctrines. Nor do they fear to sep-
arate good from evil; but they contend that
evil, instead of being natural, is unnatural.
They know nothing of your race of darkness,
which, you say, is produced from a principle
of its own. and fights against the kingdom of
God, and of which your god seems really to
be more frightened than children are of
ghosts; for, according to you, he covered
himself with a veil, that he might not see his
own members taken and plundered by the
assault of the enemy. To conclude, Catholic

Christians are in no difficulty regarding the
words of Christ, though in one sense they
may be said not to observe the law and the
prophets; for by the grace of Christ they
keep the law by their love to God and man;
and on these two commandments hang all the
law and the prophets.' Besides, they see in
Christ and the Church the fulfillment of all
the prophecies of the Old Testament, whether
in the form of actions, or of symbolic rites,
or of figurative language. So we neither join
in superstitious follies, nor declare this verse
false, nor deny that we are followers of
Christ; for on those principles which I have
set forth to the best of my power, the law
and the prophets which Christ came not to
destroy, but to fulfill, are no other than
those recognized by the Church.

I Matt, .x.xii. 40.

BOOK XIX.

FAUSTUS IS WILLING TO ADMIT THAT CHRIST MAY HAVE SAID THAT HE CAME NOT TO DESTROY
THE LAW AND THE PROPHETS, BUT T ) FULFILL THEM; BUT IF HE DID, IT WAS TO PACIFY IHi;
JEWS AND IN A MODIFIED SENSE. AUGUSTIN REPLIES, AND STILL FURTHER ELABORATES THE
CATHOLIC VIEW OF PROPHECY AND ITS FULFILLMENT.

1. Faustus said: I will grant that Christ
said that he came not to destroy the law and
the prophets, but to fulfill them. But why
did Jesus say this? Was it to pacify the
Jews, who were enraged at seeing their sacred
institutions trampled upon by Christ, and re-
garded him as a wild blasphemer, not to be
listened to, much less to be followed ? Or
was it for our instruction as Gentile believers,
that we might learn meekly and patiently to
bear the yoke of commandment laid on our
necks by the law and the prophets of the
Jews? You yourself can hardly suppose that
Christ's words were intended to bring us under
the authority of the law and the prophets of
the Hebrews. So that the other explanation
which I have given of the words must be the

rue one. Every one knows that the Jews

ere always ready to attack Christ, both with

ords and with actual violence. Naturally,

hen, they would be enraged at the idea that

hrist was destroying their law and their

rophets; and, to appease them, Christ might

ery well tell them not to think that he came

o destroy the law, but that he came to fulfill

t. There was no falsehood or deceit in this,

or he used the word law in a general sense,

ot of any particular law.

2. Tliere are three laws. One is that of

the Hebrews, which the apostle calls the law
of sin and death.' The second is that of the
Gentiles, which he calls the law of nature.
"For the Gentiles," he says," do by nature
the things contained in the law; and. not hav-
ing the law, they are a law unto themselves;
who show the work of the law written on
their hearts."- The third law is the truth
of which the apostle speaks when he says,
" The law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus
hath made me free from the law of sin and
death." ' Since, then, there are three laws,
we must carefully inquire which of the three
Christ spoke of when He said that He came
not to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. In
the same way, there are prophets of the Jews,
and prophets of the Gentiles, and prophets of
truth. With the prophets of the Jews, of
course, every one is acquainted. If any one
is in doubt about the prophets of the Gentiles,
let him hear what Paul says when writing of
the Cretans to Titus: "A prophet of their
own has said, The Cretans are always liars,
evil beasts, slow bellies." •* This proves that
the Gentiles also had their prophets. The
truth also has its prophets, as we learn from
Jesus as well as from Paul. Jesus says:

' Rom. viii. 2.
3 Rom. viii. 2.

- Rom. li. 14, 15
4 Tit. I. 12.

240

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XIX.

" Behold, I send unto you wise men and
prophets, and some of them ye shall kill in
divers places." ' And Paul says: " The Lord
Himself appointed first apostles, and then
prophets." "=

3. As "the law and the prophets" may
have three different meanings, it is uncertain
in what sense the words are used by Jesus,
though we may form a conjecture from what
follows. For if Jesus had gone on to speak
of circumcision, and Sabbaths, and sacrifices,
and the observances of the Hebrews, and had
added something as a fulfillment, there could
have been no doubt that it was the law and
the prophets of the Jews of which He said that
He came not to destroy, but to fulfill them.
But Christ, without any allusion to these,
speaks only of commandments which date
from the earliest times: " Thou shalt not kill;
Thou shalt not commit adultery; Thou shalt
not bear false witness." These, it can be
proved, were of old promulgated in the world
by Enoch and Seth, and the other righteous
men, to whom the precepts were delivered by
angels of lofty rank, in order to tame the
savage nature of men. From this it appears
that Jesus spoke of the law and the prophets
of truth. And so we find him giving a fulfill-
ment of those precepts already quoted. " Ye
have heard," He says, "that it was said by
them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; but I
say unto you. Be not even angry." This is
the fulfillment. Again: " Ye have heard that
it was said. Thou shalt not commit adultery;
but I say unto you. Do not lust even." This
is the fulfillment. Again: " It has been said,
Thou shalt not bear false witness; but I say
unto you, Swear not." This too is the fulfill-
ment. He thus both confirms the old pre-
cepts and supplies their defects. Where He
seems to speak of some Jewish precepts, in-
stead of fulfilling them. He substitutes for
them precepts of an opposite tendency. He
proceeds thus: "Ye have heard that it has
been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for
a tooth; but I say unto you, Whosoever shall
smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him
the other also." This is not fulfillment, but
destruction. Again: " It has been said. Thou
shalt love thy friend, and hate thine enemy;
but I say unto you, Love your enemies, and
pray for your persecutors." This too is de-
struction. Again: "It has been said, Who-
soever shall put away his wife, let him give
her a writing of divorcement; but I say unto
you. That whosoever shall put away his wife,
saving for the cause of fornication, causeth
her to commit adultery, and is himself an

adulterer if he afterwards marries another
woman." 3 These precepts are evidently de-
stroyed because they are the precepts of
Moses; while the others are fulfilled because
they are the precepts of the righteous men of
antiquity. If you agree to this explanation,
we may allow that Jesus said that he came
not to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. If
you disapprove of this explanation, give one
of your own. Only beware of making Jesus
a liar, and of making yourself a Jew, by bind-
ing yourself to fulfill the law because Christ
did not destroy it.

4. If one of the Nazareans, or Symma-
chians, as they are sometimes called, were
arguing with me from these words of Jesus
that he came not to destroy the law, I should
find some difficult}'^ in answering him. For
it is undeniable that, at his coming, Jesus
was both in body and mind subject to the m-
fluence of the law and the prophets. Those
people, moreover, whom I allude to, practise
circumcision, and keep the Sabbath, and ab-
stain from swine's flesh and such like things,
according to the law, although they profess
to be Christians. They are evidently misled,
as well as you, by this verse in which Chribt
says that he came not to destroy the law, but
to fulfill it. It would not be easy to reply to
such opponents without first getting rid of
this troublesome verse. But with you I have
no difficulty, for you have nothing to go upon;
and instead of using arguments, you seem
disposed, in mere mischief, to induce me to
believe that Christ said what you evidently do
not yourself believe him to have said. On

the strensth of this verse

you accuse me of

I Matt, xxiii. 34.

• Eph. iv. II.

dullness and evasiveness, without yourself
giving any indication of keeping the law in-
stead of destroying it. Do you too, like a
Jew or a Nazarean, glory in the obscene dis-
tinction of being circumcised ? Do you pride
yourself in the observance of the Sabbath?
Can you congratulate yourself on being inno-
cent of swine's flesh? Or can you boast of
having gratified the appetite of the Deity by
the blood of sacrifices and the incense of
Jewish offerings ? If not, why do you con-
tend that Christ came not to destroy the law,
but to fulfill it?

5. I give unceasing thanks to my teacher,
who prevented me from falling into this error,
so that I am still a Christian. For I, like you,
from reading this verse without sufticient con-
sideration, had almost resolved to become a
Jew. And with reason; for if Christ came
not to destroy the law, but to fulfill it, and as
a vessel in order to be filled full must net be

3 ?\ratt. V. 21-44.

Book XIX.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

241

empty, but partly filled already, I concluded
that no one could become a Christian but an
Israelite, nearly filled already with the law and
the prophets, and coming to Christ to be filled
to the full extent of his capacity. I concluded,
too, that in thus coming he must not destroy
what he already possesses; otherwise it would
be a case, not of fulfilling, but of emptying.
Then it appeared that I, as a Gentile, could
get nothing by coming to Christ, for I brought
nothing that he could fill up by his additions.
This preparatory supply is found, on inquiry,
to consist of Sabbaths, circumcision, sacri-
fices, new moons, baptisms, feasts of un-
leavened bread, distinctions of foods, drink,
and clothes, and other things, too many to
specify. This, then, it appeared, was what
Christ came not to destroy, but to fulfill.
Naturally it must appear so: for what is a
law without precepts, or prophets without
predictions ? Besides, there is that terrible
curse pronounced upon those who abide not
in all things that are written in the book of
the law to do them.' With the fear of this
curse appearing to come from God on
the one side, and with Christ on the other
side, seeming, as the Son of God, to say that
he came not to destroy these things, but to
fulfill them, what was to prevent me from
becoming a Jew? The wise instruction of
Manichffius saved me from this danger.

6. But how can you venture to quote this
verse against me ? Or why should it be
against me only, when it is as much against
yourself? If Christ does not destroy the law
and the prophets, neither must Christians do
so. Why then do you destroy them ? Do
you begin to perceive that you are no Chris-
tian ? How can you profane with all kinds of
work the day pronounced sacred in the law
and in all the prophets, on which they say
that God, the maker of the world, himself
rested, without dreading the penalty of death
pronounced against Sabbath-breakers, or the
curse on the transgressor ? How can you re-
fuse to receive in your person the unseemly
mark of circumcision, which the law and all
the prophets declare to be honorable, espec-
ially in the case of Abraham, after what was
thought to be his faith; for does not the God
of the Jews proclaim that whosoever is with-
out this mark of infamy shall perish from his
people ? How can you neglect the appointed
sacrifices, which were made so much of both
by Moses and the prophets under the law, and
by Abraham in his faith ? And how can you
defile your souls by making no distinction in
foods, if you believe that Christ came not to

' Deut. xxvii. 15.
10

destroy these things, but to fulfill them ?
Why do you discard the annual feast of un-
leavened bread, and the appointed sacrifice
of the lamb, which, according to the law and
the prophets, is to be observed for ever?
Why, in a word, do you treat so lightly the
new moons, the baptisms, and the feast of
tabernacles, and all the other carnal ordi-
nances of the law and the prophets, if Christ
did not destroy them ? I have therefore good
reason for saying that, in order to justify your
neglect of tnese things, you must either aban-
don your profession of being Christ's disciple,
or acknowledge that Christ himself has al-
ready destroyed them; and from this ac-
knowledgment it must follow, either that this
text is spurious in which Christ is made to
say that he came not to destroy the law, but
to fulfill it, or that the words have an entirely
different meaning from what you suppose.

7. AuGUSTiN replied: If you allow, in con-
sideration of the authority of the Gospel,
that Christ said that He came not to destroy
the law and the prophets, but to fulfill them,
you should show the same consideration to
the authority of the apostle, when he says,
"All these things were our examples;" and
again of Christ, "He was not yea and nay,
but in Him was yea; for all the promises of
God are in Him yea; " - that is, they are set
forth and fulfilled in Him. In this way you
will see in the clearest light both what law
Christ fulfilled, and how He fulfilled it. It
is a vain attempt that you make to escape by
your three kinds of law and your three kinds
of prophets. It is quite plain, and the New
Testament leaves no doubt on the matter,
what law and what prophets Christ came not
to destroy, but to fulfill. The law given by
Moses is that which by Jesus Christ became
grace and truth. ^ The law given by Moses
is that of which Christ says, " He wrote of
me." •♦ For undoubtedly this is the law which
entered that the offence might abound ; ^ words
which you often ignorantly quote as a reproacli
to the law. Read what is there said of this
law: "The law is holy, and the command-
ment holy, and just, and good. Was then
that which is good made death unto me ?
God forbid. But sin, that it might appear
sin, wrought death in me by that which is
good."*^ The entrance of the law made the
offense abound, not because the law required
what was wrong, but because the proud and
self-confident incurred additional guilt as
transgressors after their acquaintance with the
holy, and just, and good commandments of
the law; so that, being thus humbled, they

^ 2 Cor. i. 19, 20.
5 Rom. V, 20.

3 John i. 17
6 Rom. vii. i

4 John V. 46.

13-

242

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XIX.

might learn that only by grace through faith
could they be freed from subjection to the
law as transgressors, and be reconciled to the
law as righteous. So the same apostle says:
" For before faith came, we were kept under
the law, shut up unto the faith which was
afterwards revealed. Therefore the law was
our schoolmaster in Christ Jesus; but after
faith came, we are no longer under a school-
master." ' That is, we are no longer subject
to the penalty of the law, because we are set
free by grace. Before we received in humil-
ity the grace of the Spirit, the letter was only
death to us, for it required obedience which
we could not render. Thus Paul also says:
" The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life."^
Again, he says: " For if a law had been given
which could have given life^ verily righteous-
ness should have been by the law; but the
Scripture hath concluded all under sin, that
the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be
jriven to them that believe." ^ And once
more: "What the law could not do, in that
it was weak through the flesh, God sent His
Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, that by sin
He might condemn sin in the flesh, that the
righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in
us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the
Spirit. ""* Here we see Christ coming not to
destroy the law, but to fulfill it. As the law
brought the proud under the guilt of trans-
gression, increasing their sin by command-
ments which they could not obey, so the
righteousness of the same law is fulfilled by
the grace of the Spirit in those who learn
from Christ to be meek and lowly in heart;
for Christ came not to destroy the law, but to
fulfill it. Moreover^ because even for those
who are under grace it is difficult in this
mortal life perfectly to keep what is written in
the law, Thou shalt not covet, Christ, by the
sacrifice of His flesh, as our Priest obtains
pardon for us. And in this also He fulfills
the law; for what we fail in through weakness
is supplied by His perfection, who is the
Head, while we are His members. Thus
John says: " My little children, these things
write I unto 3^ou, that ye sin not; and if any
man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father,
Jesus Christ the righteous: He is the propitia-
tion for our sins." ^

8. Christ also fulfilled the prophecies, be-
cause the promises of God were made good
in Him. As the apostle says in the verse
quoted above, " The promises of God are in
Him yea." Again, he says: "Now I say
that Jesus Christ was a minister of the cir-
cumcision for the truth of God, to confirm

the promises made unto the fathers. ' ' * What-
ever, then, was promised in the prophets,
whether expressly or in figure, whether by
words or by actions, was fulfilled in Him who
came not to destroy the law and the prophets,
but to fulfill them. You do not perceive that
if Christians were to continue in the use of
acts and observances by which things to come
were prefigured, the only meaning would be
that the things prefigured had not yet come.
Either the thing prefigured has not come, or
if it has, the figure becomes superfluous or
misleading. Therefore, if Christians do not
practise some things enjoined in the Hebrews
by the prophets, this, so far from showing, as
you think, that Christ did not fulfill the
prophets, rather shows that He did. So
completely did Christ fulfill what these types
prefigured, that it is no longer prefigured.
So the Lord Himself says: " The law and
the prophets were until John."^ For the law
which shut up transgressors in increased guilt,
and to the faith which was afterwards revealed,
became grace through Jesus Christ, by whom
grace superabounded. Thus the law, which
was not fulfilled in the requirement of the
letter, was fulfilled in the liberty of grace. In
the same way, everything in the law that was
prophetic of the Saviour's advent, whether in
' words or in typical actions, became truth in
Jesus Christ. For "the law was given by
Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus.
Christ." * At Christ's advent the kingdom ofi
God began to be preached; for the law and
the prophets were until John: the law, that
its transgressors might desire salvation; the
prophets, that tliey might foretell the Saviour.
No doubt there have been prophets in the
Church since the ascension of Christ. Of
these prophets Paul says: "God hath set
some in the Church, first apostles, secondarily
prophets, thirdly teachers," and so on.' It
is not of these prophets that it was said,
" The law and the prophets were until John,",
but of those who prophesied the first coming
of Christ, which evidently cannot be prophe-
sied now that it has taken place.

9. Accordingly, when you ask why a Chris-
tian is not circumcised if Christ came not to
destroy the law, but to fulfill it, my reply is,i
that a Christian is not circumcised precisely
for this reason, that what was prefigured by
circumcision is fulfilled in Christ. Circum-
cision was the type of the removal of our
fleshly nature, which was fulfilled in the resur-
rection of Christ, and which the sacrament of
baptism teaches us to look forward to in our
own resurrection. 'The sacrament of the new

I Gal. Hi. 23, 25.
4 Rom. viii. 3, 4.

2 2 Cor. iii. 6.
S I John ii. I, 2.

3 Gal. iii. 21, 22.

6 Rom. XV. 8
8 John i. 17.

7 Luke xvi. i6.
9 I Cor. xii. 28.

IJOOK XIX.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

243

life is not wholly discontinued, for our resur-
rection from tlie dead is still to come; but
this sacrament has been improved by the sul)-
stitution of baptism for circumcision, because
now a pattern of the eternal life which is to
come is afforded us in the resurrection of
Christ, whereas formerly there was nothing
of the kind. So, when you ask why a Chris-
tian does not keep the Sabbath, if Christ came
not to destroy the law, but to fulfill it, my
reply is, that a Christian does not keep the
Sabbath precisely because what was prefigured
in the Sabbath is fulfilled in Christ. For we
have our Sabbath in Him who said, "Come
unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy
laden, and I will give you rest. Take my
yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am
meek and lowly in heart, and ye shall find
rest unto your souls." '

10. When you ask why a Christian does
not observe the distinction in food as enjoined
in the law, if Christ came not to destroy the
law, but to fulfill it, I reply, that a Christian
does not observe this distinction precisely be-
cause what was thus prefigured is now fulfilled
in Christ, who admits into His body, which
in His saints He has predestined to eternal
life, nothing which in human conduct corres-
ponds to the characteristics of the forbidden
animals. When you ask, again, why a Chris-
tian does not offer sacrifices to God of the
flesh and blood of slain animals, if Christ
came not to destroy the law, but to fulfill it,
I reply, that it would be improper for a
Christian to offer such sacrifices, now that
what was thus prefigured has been fulfilled in
Christ's offering of His own body and blood.
When you ask why a Christian does not keep
the feast of unleavened bread as the Jews did,
if Christ came not to destroy the law, but to
fulfill it, I reply, that a Christian does not
keep this feast precisely because what was
thus prefigured is fulfilled in Christ, who leads
us to a new life by purging out the leaven of
the old life.= When. you ask why a Christian
does not keep the feast of the paschal lamb,
if Christ came not to destroy the law, but to
fulfill it, my reply is, that he does not keep it
precisely because what was thus prefigured
has been fulfilled in the sufferings of Christ,
the Lamb without spot. When you ask why
a Christian does not keep the feasts of the
new moon appointed in the law, if Christ
came not to destroy the law, but to fulfill it,
I reply, that he does not keep them precisely
because what was thus prefigured is fulfilled
in Christ. For the feast of the new moon
prefigured the new creature, of which the

■ Matt. .\i. 28, 29.

I Cor.

V. 7.

apostle says: " If therefore there is any new
creature in Christ Jesus, the old things have
passed away; behold, all things are become
new." 3 ^Vnen you ask why a Christian does
not observe the baptisms for various kinds of
uncleanness according to the law, if Christ
came not to destroy the law, but to fulfill it,
I reply, that he does not observe them pre-
cisely because they were figures of things to
come, which Christ has fulfilled. For He
came to bury us with Himself by baptism
into death, that as Christ rose again from the
dead, so we also should walk in newness of
life.'* When you ask why Christians do not
keep the feast of tabernacles, if the law is
not destroyed, but fulfilled by Christ, I reply
that believers are God's tabernacle, in whom,
as they are united and built together in love,
God condescends to dwell, so that Christians
do not keep this feast precisely because what
was thus prefigured is now fulfilled by Cnrist
in His Church.

11. I touch upon these things merely in
passing with the utmost brevity, rather than
omit them altogether. The subjects, taken
separately, have filled many large volumes,
written to prove that these observances were
typical of Christ. So it appears that all the
things in the Old Testament which you think
are not observed by Christians because Christ
destroyed the law, are in fact not observed
because Christ fulfilled the law. The very
intention of the observances was to prefigure
Christ. Now that Christ has come, instead
of its being strange or absurd that what was
done to prefigure His advent should not be
done any more, it is perfectly right and rea-
sonable. The typical observances intended
to prefigure the coming of Christ would be
observed still, had they not been fulfilled by
the coming of Christ; so far is it from being
the case that our not observing them now is
any proof of their not being fulfilled by
Christ's coming. There can be no religious
society, whether the religion be true or false,
without some sacrament or visible symbol to
serve as a bond of union. The importance
of these sacraments cannot be overstated, and
only scoffers will treat them lightly. For if
piety requires them, it must be impiety to
neglect them.

12. It is true, the ungodly may partake in
the visible sacraments of godliness, as we
read that Simon Magus received holy bap-
tism. Such are they of whom the apostle
says that " they have the form of godliness,
but deny the power of it."^ The power of
godliness is the end of the commandment,

3 2 Cor. V. 17.

4 Rom. vi. 4.

5 2 Tim. iii. $.

244

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XIX.

that is, love out of a pure heart, and of a
good conscience, and of taith unfeigned.' So
the Apostle Peter, speaking of the sacrament
of the ark, in which the family of Noah was
saved from the deluge, says, " So by a simi-
lar figure baptism also saves you." And lest
they should rest content with the visible sac-
rament, by which they had the form of godli- 1
ness, and should deny its power in their lives
by profligate conduct, he immediately adds,
"Not the putting away of the filth of the
flesh, but the answer of a good conscience." ^

13. Thus the sacraments of the Old Testa-
ment, which were celebrated in obedience to
the law, were types of Christ who was to
come; and when Christ fulfilled them by His
advent they were done away, and \vere done
away because they were fulfilled. For Christ
came not to destroy, but to fulfill. And now
that the righteousness of faith is revealed, and
the children of God are called into liberty, and
the yoke of bondage which was required for a
carnal and stiffnecked people is taken away,
other sacraments are instituted, greater in ef-
ficacy, more beneficial in their use, easier in
performance, and fewer in number.

14. And if the righteous men of old, who
saw in the sacraments of their time the prom-
ise of a future revelation of faith, which even
then their piety enabled them to discern in
the dim light of prophecy, and by which they
lived, for the just can live only by faith; ^ if,
then, these righteous men of old were ready
to suffer, as many actually did suffer, all
trials and tortures for the sake of those typ-
ical sacraments which prefigured things in
the future; if we praise the three children and
Daniel, because they refused to be defiled by
meat from the king's table, from their regard
for the sacrament of their day; if we feel the
strongest admiration for the Maccabees, who
refused to touch food which Christians law-
fully use; ■• how much more should a Christian
in our day be ready to suffer all things for
Christ's baptism, for Christ's Eucharist, for
Christ's sacred sign, since these are proofs of
the accomplishment of what the former sacra-
ments only pointed forward to in the future!
For what is still promised to the Church, the
body of Christ, is both clearly made known,
and in the Saviour Himself, the Head of the
body, the Mediator between God and men,
the man Christ Jesus, has already been ac-
complished. Is not the promise of eternal
life by resurrection from the dead ? This we
see fulfilled in the flesh of Him of whom it is
said, that the Word became flesh and dwelt
among us.^ In former days faith was dim,

' I Tim. i. 5.
4 2 Mace, vii.

2 I Pet. iii. 21.
5 John i. 14.

3 Rom. :. 17.

for the saints and righteous men of those
times all believed and hoped for the same
things, and all these sacraments and cere-
monies pointed to the future; but now we
have the revelation of the faith to which the
people were shut up under the law; ^ and what
is now promised to believers in the judgment
is already accomplished in the example of
Him who came not to destroy the law and
the prophets, but to fulfill them.

15. It is a question among the students of
the sacred Scriptures, whether the faith in
Christ before His passion and resurrection,
which the righteous men of old learned by
revelation or gathered from prophecy, had
the same efficacy as faith has now that Christ
has suffered and risen; or whether the actual
shedding of the blood of the Lamb of God,
which was, as He Himself says, for many for
the remission of sins," conferred any benefit
in the way of purifying or adding to the purity
of those who looked forward in faith to the
death of Christ, but left the world before it
took place; whether, in fact, Christ's death
reached to the dead, so as to effect their lib-
eration. To discuss this question here, or to
prove what has been ascertained on the sub-
ject, would take too long, besides being for-
eign from our present purpose.

16. Meanwhile it is sufficient to prove, in
opposition to Faustus' ignorant cavils, how
greatly they mistake who conclude, from the'
change in signs and sacraments, that there
must be a difference in the things which were
prefigured in the rites of a prophetic dispen-
sation, and which are declared to be accom-
plished in the rites of the gospel; or those,
on the other hand, who think that as the
things are the same, the sacraments which an-
nounce their accomplishment should not
differ from the sacraments which foretold that
accomplishment. For if in language the form
of the verb changes in the number of letters
and syllables according to the tense, as done
signifies the past, and to be done the future,
why should not the symbols which declare
Christ's death and resurrection to be accom-
plished, differ from those which predicted
their accomplishment, as we see a difference
in the form and sound of the words, past and
future, suffered and to suffer, risen and \.o\
rise? For material symbols are nothing elsej
than visible speech, which, though sacred, is|
changeable and transitory. For while God
is eternal, the water of baptism, and all that-
is material in the sacrament, is transitory:
the very word "God,'' which must be pro-
nounced in the consecration, is a sound which u

^ Gal. iii, 23.

7 Matt, .\xvi. 28.

Book XIX.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

245

passes in a moment. The actions and sounds
pass away, but their efificacy remains the same,
and the spiritual gift thus communicated is
eternal. To say, therefore, that if Christ
had not destroyed the law and the prophets,
the sacraments of the law and the prophets
would continue to be observed in the congre-
gations of the Christian Church, is the same
as to say that if Christ had not destroyed the
law and the prophets. He would still be pre-
dicted as about to be born, to suffer, and to
rise again; whereas, in fact, it is proved that
He did not destroy, but fulfill those things,
because the prophecies of His birth, and pas-
sion, and resurrection, which were represented
in these ancient sacraments, have ceased, and
the sacraments now observed by Christians
contain the announcement that He has been
born, has suffered, has risen. He who came
not to destroy the law and the prophets, but
to fulfill them, by this fulfillment did away
with those things wliich foretold the accom-
plishment of what is thus shown to be now
accomplished. Precisely in the same way,
he might substitute for the expressions, " He
is to be born, is to suffer, is to rise," which
were in these times appropriate, the expres-
sions, " He has been born, has suffered, has
risen," which are appropriate now that the
others are accomplished, and so done away.

17. Corresponding to this change in words
is the change which naturally took place in
the substitution of new sacraments instead of
those of the Old Testament. In the case of
the first Christians, who came to the faith as
Jews, it was by degrees that they were brought
to change their customs, and to have a clear
perception of the truth; and permission was
given them by the apostle to preserve their
hereditary worship and belief, in which they
liad been born and brought up; and those
who had to do with them were required to
make allowance for this reluctance to accept
new customs. So the apostle circumcised
Timothy, the son of a Jewish mother and a
Cireek father, when they went among people
of this kind; and he himself accommodated
his practice to theirs, not hypocritically, but
for a wise purpose. For these practices were
liarmless in the case of those born and brought
up in them, though they were no longer re-
quired to prefigure things to come. It would
have done more harm to condemn them as
hurtful in the case of those to whose time it
was intended that they should continue.
Christ, who came to fulfill all these prophe-
cies, found those people trained in their own
religion. But in the case of those who had
no such training, but were brought to Christ,
he corner-stone, from the opposite wall of

these works of the
them as a

agamst

circumcision, there was no obligation to adopt
Jewish customs. If, indeed, like Timothy,
they chose to accommodate themselves to the
views of those of the circumcision who were
still wedded to their old sacraments, they
were free to do so. But if they supposed
that their hope and salvation depended on

law, they were warned
fatal danger. So the
apostle says: " Behold, I Paul say unto you,
that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit
you nothing;"' that is, if they were circum-
cised, as they were intending to be, in com-
pliance with some corrupt teachers, who told
them that without these works of the law they
could not be saved. For when, chiefly through
the preaching of the Apostle Paul, the Gen-
tiles were coming to the faith of Christ, as it
was proper that they should come, without
being burdened with Jewish observances, —
for those who were grown up were deterred
from the faith by fear of ceremonies to which
they were not accustomed, especially of cir-
cumcision; and if they who had not been
trained from their birth to such observances
had been made proselytes in the usual way, it
would have implied tliat the coming of Christ
still required to be predicted as a future
event; — when, then, the Gentiles were ad-
mitted without these ceremonies, those of the
circumcision who believed, not understanding
why the Gentiles were not required to adopt
their customs, nor why they themselves were
still allowed to retain them, began to disturb
the Church with carnal contentions, because
the Gentiles were admitted into the people of
God without being made proselytes in the
usual way by circumcision and the other legal
observances. Some also of the converted
Gentiles were bent on these ceremonies, from
fear of the Jews among whom they lived.
Against these Gentiles the Apostle Paul often
wrote, and when Peter was carried awa)'- by
their hypocrisy, he corrected him with a
brotherly rebuke.^ Afterwards, when the
apostles met in council, decreed that these
works of the law were not obligatory in the
case of the Gentiles, ^ some Christians of the
circumcision were displeased, because they
failed to understand that these obser\\ances
were permissible only in those who had been
trained in them before the revelation of
faith, to bring to a close the prophetic life in
those who were engaged in it l)efore the
prophecy was fulfilled, lest by a compulsory
abandonment it should seem to be condemned
rather than closed; while to lay these things
on the Gentiles would imply either that they

» Gal. V. 2.

2 Gal. ii. 14.

3 Acts. .\v. 6-1 1.

246

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XIX.

were not instituted to prefigure Christ, or
triat Christ was still to be prefigured. The
ancient people of God, before Christ came
to fulfill the law and the prophets, were re-
quired to observe all these things by which
Christ was prefigured. It was freedom to
those who understood the meaning of the ob-
servance, but it was bondage to those who did
not. But the people in those latter times who
come to believe in Christ as having already-
come, and suffered, and risen, in the case of
those whom this faith found trained to those
sacraments, are neither required to observe
them, nor prohibited from doing so; while
there is a prohibition in the case of those who
were not bound by the ties of custom, or by
any necessity, to accommodate themselves to
the practice of others, so that it might become
manifest that these things were instituted to
prefigure Christ, and that after His coming
they were to cease, because the promises had
been fulfilled. Some believers of the circum-
cision who did not understand this were dis-
pleased with this tolerant arrangement which
the Holy Spirit effected through the apostles,
and stubbornly insisted on the Gentiles be-
coming Jews. These are the people of whom
Faustus speaks under the name of Sym-
machians or Nazareans. Their number is
now very small, but the sect still continues.

18. The Manichseans, therefore, have no
ground for saying, m disparagement of the
law and the prophets, that Christ came to
destroy rather than to fulfill them, because
Christians do not observe what is there en-
joined: for the only things which they do not
observe are those that prefigured Christ, and
these are not observed because their fulfill-
ment is in Christ, and what is fulfilled is no
longer prefigured; the typical observances
having properly come to a close in the time
of those who, after being trained in such
things, had come to believe in Christ as their
fulfillment. Do not Christians observe the
precept of Scripture "Hear, O Israel; the
Lord thy God is one God;" " Thou shalt not
make unto thee an image,'' and so on ? Do
Christians not observe the precept, "Thou
shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God
in vain ?'' Do Christians not observe the
Sabbath, even in the sense of a true rest?
Do Christians not honor their parents, accord-
ing to the commandment? Do Christians
not abstain from fornication, and murder,
and theft, and false witness, from coveting
their neighbor's wife, and from coveting his
property, — all of which things are written in
the law? These moral precepts are distinct
from typical sacraments: the former are ful-
filled by the aid of divine grace, the latter by

the accomplishment of what they promise.
Both are fulfilled in Christ, who has ever been
the bestower of this grace, which is also now
revealed in Him, and who now makes mani-
fest the accomplishment of what He in former
times promised; for "the law was given by
Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus
Christ." ' Again, these things which concern
the keeping of a good conscience are fulfilled
in the faith which worketh by love;^ while
types of the future pass away when they are
accomplished. But even the types are not
destroyed, but fulfilled; for Christ, in bring-
ing to light what the types signified, does not
prove them vain or illusory.

19. Faustus, therefore, is wrong in suppos-
ing that the Lord Jesus fulfilled some pre-
cepts of righteous men who lived before the
law of Moses, such as, " Thou shalt not
kill," which Christ did not oppose, but rather
confirmed by His prohibition of anger and
abuse; and that He destroyed some things
apparently peculiar to the Hebrew law, such
as, "An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a
tooth," which Christ seems rather to abolish
than to confirm, when He says, " But I say
unto you, that ye resist not evil; but if any
one smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to-
him the other also," ^ and so on. But we say
that even these things which Faustus thinks
Christ destroyed by enjoining the opposite,
were suitable to the times of the Old Testa-
ment, and were not destroyed, but fulfilled
by Christ.

20. In the first place let me ask our oppo-
nents if these ancient righteous men, Enoch
and Seth, whom Faustus mentions particu-
larly, and any others who lived before Moses,
or even, if you choose, before Abraham, were
angry with their brother without a cause, or
said to their brother. Thou fool. If not, why
may they not have taught these things as well
as preached them ? And if they taught these
things, how can Christ be said to have ful-
filled their righteousness or their teaching,
any more than that of Moses, by adding,
" But I say unto you, if any man is angry
with his brother, or if he says Racha, or if
he says. Thou fool, he shall be in danger of
the judgment, or of the council, or of hell-
fire," since these men did these very things
themselves, and enjoined them upon others?
Will it be said that they were ignorant of its
being the duty of a righteous man to restrain
his passion, and not to provoke, his brother
with angry abuse; or that, knowing this, they
were unable to act accordingly ? In that
case, they deserved the punishment of hell^

I John i. 17.

= Gal. V. 6.

3 Matt. V. 38, 39.

Book XIX.l

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MAXICH.-^:AN.

247

and could not have been righteous. But no
one will venture to say that in their righteous-
ness there was such ignorance of duty, and
such a want of self-control, as to make them
[ liable to the punishment of hell. How, then,
can Christ be said to have fulfilled the law,
]iy which these men lived by means of adding
things without which they could have had no
righteousness at all ? Will it be said that a
hasty temper and bad language are sinful
only since the time of Christ, while formerly
such qualities of the heart and speech were
allowable; as we find some institutions vary
according to the times, so that what is proper
at one time is improper at another, and vice
ii-rsa ? You will not be so foolish as to make
this assertion. But even were you to do so,
the reply will be tliat, according to this idea,
Christ came not to fulfill what was defective
in the old law, but to institute a law which
did not previously exist; if it is true that with
^he righteous men of old it was not a sin to
say to their brother, Thou fool, which Christ
pronounces so sinful, that whoever does so is
in danger of hell. So, then, you have not
succeeded in finding any law of which it can
l)e said that Christ supplied its defect by
these additions.

21. Will it be said that the law in these
early times was incomplete as regards not
committing adultery, till it was completed by
tiie Lord, who added that no one should look
on a woman to lust after her? This is what
\ou imply in the way you quote the words,
■'Ye have heard that it has been said. Thou
>Iialt not commit adultery; but I say unto
\ou. Do not lust even." "Here,'' you say,
■'is the fulfillment.^' But let us take the
words as they stand in the Gospel, without
any of your modifications, and see what char-
acter you give to those righteous men of an-
tiquity. The words are: " Ye have heard that
I it has been said, thou shalt not commit adul-
I tery; but I say unto you, that whosoever look-
„ eth on a woman to lust after her, hath com
mitted adultery with her already in his heart."'
In your opinion, then, Enoch and Seth, and
tlie rest, committed adultery in their hearts;
and either their heart was not the temple of
God, or they committed adultery in the tem-
ple of God. But if you dare not say this,
how can you say that Christ, when He came,
fulfilled the law, which was already in the
I time of those men complete?
I 22. As regards not swearing, in which also
you say that Christ completed the law given
I to these righteous men of antiquity, I cannot
I be certain that they did not swear, for we

■ Matt. V. 27, 2S.

find that Paul the apostle swore. With you,
swearing is still a common practice, for you
swear by the light, which you love as flies
do; for the light of the mind which lighteth
every man that cometh into the world, as dis-
tinct from mere natural light, you know noth-
ing of. You swear, too, by your master
Manichaeus, whose name in his own tongue
was Manes. As the name Manes seemed to
be connected with the Greek word for mad-
ness, you have changed it by adding a suffix,
which only makes matters worse, by giving
the new meaning of pouring forth madness.
One of your own sect told me that the name
Manichaeus was intended to be derived from
the Greek words for pouring forth manna;
for ■/Jet.' means to pour. But, as it is, you
only express the idea of madness with greater
emphasis. For by adding the two syllables,
while you have forgotten to insert another
letter in the beginning of the word, you make
it not Mannichffius, but Manichaeus; which
must mean that he pours forth madness in his
long unprofitable discourses. Again, you
often swear by the Paraclete, — not the Para-
clete promised and sent by Christ to His dis-
ciples, but this same madness-pourer himself.
Since, then, you are constantly swearing, I
should like to know in what sense you make
Christ to have fulfilled this part of the law,
which is one you mention as belonging to the
earliest times. And what do you make of
the oaths of the apostle ? For as to your au-
thority, it cannot weigh much with yourselves,
not to speak of me or any other person. It
is therefore evident that Christ's words, " I
am come not to destroy the law, but to fulfill
it,'' have not the meaning which you give
them. Christ makes no reference in these
words to His comments on the ancient say-
ings whicli He quotes, and of which His dis-
course was an explanation, but not a fulfill-
ment.

23. Thus, as regards murder, which was
understood to mean merely the destruction of
the body, by which a man is deprived of life,
the Lord explained that every unjust disposi-
tion to injure our brother is a kind of murder.
So John also says, "He that hateth his
brother is a murderer.''" And as it was
thought that adultery meant only the act of
unlawful intercourse with a woman, the ]Mas-
ter showed that the lust He describes is also
adultery. Again, because perjury is a hein-
ous sin, while there is no sin either in not
swearing at all or in swearing truly, the Lord
wished to secure us from departing from the
truth by not swearing at all, rather than that

- I John iij. 15.

248

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XIX.

we should be in danger of perjury by he'ing
in the habit of swearing truly. For one who
never swears is less in danger of swearing
falsely than one wlio is in the habit of swear-
ing truly. So, in the discourses of the apos-
tle which are recorded, he never used an oath,
lest he should ever fall unawares into perjury
from being in the habit of swearing. In his
writings, on the other hand, where he had
more leisure and opportunity for caution, we
find him using oaths in several places,' to
teach us that there is no sin in swearing truly,
but that, on account of the infirmity of human
nature, we are best preserved from perjury by
not swearing at all. These considerations
will also make it evident that the things which
Faustus supposes to be peculiar to Moses were
not destroyed by Christ, as he says they were.
24. To take, for instance, this saying of
the ancients, " Thou shalt love thy neighbor,
and hate thine enemy," how does Faustus
make out that this is peculiar to Moses ? Does
not the Apostle Paub speak of some men as
hateful to God ?- And, indeed, in connection
with this saying, the Lord enjoins on us that we
should imitate God. His words are: "That ye
may be the children of your Father in heaven,
who maketh the sun to rise upon the evil and
the good, and sendeth rain on the just and the
unjust." 3 In one sense we must hate our
enemies, after the example of God, to whom
Paul says some men are hateful; while, at
the same time, we must also love our enemies
after the example of God, who makes the sun
to rise on the evil and the good, and sendeth
rain on the just and the unjust. If we under-
stand this, we shall find that the Lord, in ex-
plaining to those who did not rightly under-
stand the saying, Thou shalt hate thine en-
emy, made use of it to show that they should
love their enemy, which was a new idea to
them. It would take too long to show the
consistency of the two things here. But when
the Manichseans condemn without exception
the precept. Thou shalt hate thine enemy,
they may easily be met with the question
whether their god loves the race of darkness.
Or, if we should love our enemies now, be-
cause they have a part of good, should we
not also hate them as having a part of evil ?
So even in this way it would appear that there
is no opposition between the saying of ancient
times, Thou shalt hate thine enemy, and that
of the Gospel, Love your enemies. For every
wicked man should be hated as far as he is
wicked; while he should be loved as a man.
The vice which we rightly hate in him is to
be condemned, that by its removal the human

I Rom. i. 9; Phil.
- Kom. i. 30.

i. 8, and 2 Cor. i. 23.

3 Matt. V. 45.

nature which we rightly love in him may be
amended. This is precisely the principle we
maintain, that we should hate our enemy for
what is evil in him, that is, for his wickedness;
while we also love our enemy for that which
is good in him, that is, for his nature as a
social and rational being. The difference
between us and the Manichseans is, that we
prove the man to be wicked, not by nature,
either his own or any other, but by his own
will; whereas they think that a man is evil on
account of the nature of the race of darkness,
which, according to them, was an object of
dread to God when he existed entire, and by
which also he was partly conquered, so that
he cannot be entirely set free. The intention
of the Lord, then, is to correct those who,
from knowing without understanding what
was said by them of old time. Thou shalt hate
thine enemy, haied their fellow-men instead
of only hating their wickedness; and for this
purpose He says, Love your enemies. In-
stead of destroying what is written about
hatred of enemies in the law, of which He
said, " I am come not to destroy the law, but
to fulfill it," He would have us learn, from
the duty of loving our enemies, how it is
possible in the case of one and the same per-
son, both to hate him for his sin, and to love
him for his nature. It is too much to expect
our perverse opponents to understand this.
But we can silence them, by showing that by
their irrational objection they condemn their
own god, of whom they cannot say that he
loves the race of darkness; so that in enjoin-
ing on every one to love his enemy, they can-
not quote his example. There would appear
to be more love of their enemy in the race of
darkness than in the god of the Manichaeans.
The story is, that the race of darkness coveted
the domain of light bordering on their terri-
tory, and, from a desire to possess it, formed
the plan of invading it. Nor is there any sin
in desiring true goodness and blessedness.
For the Lord says, " The kingdom of heaven
suffereth violence, and the violent take it by
force.'"'* This fabulous race of darkness,
then, wished to take by force the good they
desired, for its beautiful and attractive ap-
pearance. But God, instead of returning the
love of those who wished to possess Him,
hated it so as to endeavor to annihilate them.
If, therefore, the evil love the good in the
desire to possess it, while the good hate the
evil in fear of being defiled, I ask the Man-
ichceans, which of these obeys the precept of
the Lord, " Love your enemies"? If you in-
sist on making these precepts opposed to one

4 Matt. xi. 12.

BOOK XIX.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

249

another, it will follow that your god obeyed
what is written in the law of Moses, " Thou
shalt hate thine enemy"; while the race of
darkness obeyed what is written in the Gos-
pel, "Love your enemies." However, you
have never succeeded in explaining the differ-
ence between the flies that fly in the day-time
and the moths that fly at night; for both, ac-
cording to you, belong to the race of dark-
ness. How is it that one kind love the light,
contrary to their nature; while the other kind
avoid it, and prefer the darkness from which
they sprung? Strange, that filthy sewers
should breed a cleaner sort than dark closets !
25. Nor, again, is there any opposition be-
tween that which was said by them of old
time, "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a
tooth," and what the Lord says, "But I say
unto you, that ye resist not evil; but if any
one smiteth thee on thy right cheek, turn to
him the other also," and so on ' The old
precept as w^ell as the new is intended to
check the vehemence of hatred, and to curb
the impetuosity of angry passion. For who
will of his own accord be satisfied with a re-
venge equal to the injury ? Do we not see
men, only slightly hurt, eager for slaughter,
thirsting for blood, as if they could never
make their enemy suffer enough? If a man
receives a blow, does he not summon his
assailant, that he may be condemned in the
court of law? Or if he prefers to return the
blow, does he not fall upon the man with hand
and heel, or perhaps with a weapon, if he can
get hold of one ? To put a restraint upon a
revenge so unjust from its excess, the law es-
tablished the principle of compensation, that
the penalty should correspond to the injury
inflicted. So the precept, " an eye for an eye,
a tooth for a tooth," instead of being a brand
to kindle a fire that was quenched, was rather
a covering to prevent the fire already kindled
from spreading. For there is a just revenge
due to the injured person from his assailant;
so that when we pardon, we give up what we
iright justly claim. Thus, in the Lord's
prayer, we are taught to forgive others their
debts that God may forgive us our debts.
There is no injustice in asking back a debt,
though there is kindness in forgiving it. But
as, in swearing, one who swears, even though
truly, is in danger of perjury, of which one
is in no danger who never swears; and while
swearing truly is not a sin, we are further
from sin by not swearing; so that the com-
mand not to swear is a guard against perjury:
in the same way since it is sinful to wish to be
revenged with an unjust excess, though there

■ i''.

xxi. 24, and Matt. v. 39.

is no sin in w-ishing for revenge within the
limits of justice, the man who wishes for no
revenge at all is further from the sin of an un-
just revenge. It is sin to demand more than
is due, though it is no sin to demand a debt.
And the best security against the sin of mak-
ing an unjust demand is to demand nothing,
especially considering the danger of being
compelled to pay the debt to Him v/ho is in-
debted to none. Thus, I would explain the pas-
sage as follows: It has been said by them of old
time. Thou shalt not take unjust revenge; but I
say, Take no revenge at all: here is the fidfill-
ment. It is thus that Faustus, after quot-
ing," It has been said. Thou shalt not swear
falsely; but I say unto you, swear not at
all," adds: here is the fulfillment. I might
use the same expression if I thought that by
the addition of these words Christ supplied a
defect in the law, and not rather that the in-
tention of the law to prevent unjust revenge
is best secured by not taking revenge at all, in
the same way as the intention to prevent per-
jury is best secured by not swearing at all.
For if " an eye for an eye " is opposed to "If
any one smite thee on the cheek, turn to him
the other also," is there not as much opposi-
tion between " Thou shalt perform unto the
Lord thine oath," and " Swear not at all ? '' -
If Faustus thinks that there is not destruction,
but fulfillment, in the one case, he ought to
think the same of the other. For if " Sw-ear
not " is the fulfillment of " Swear truly," why
should not "Take no revenge " be the fulfill-
ment of " Take revenge justly" ?

So, according to my interpretation, there
is in both cases a guard against sin, either of
false swearing or of unjust revenge; though,
as regards giving up the right to revenge,
there is the additional consideration that, by
forgiving such debts, we shall obtain the for-
giveness of our debts. The old precept was
required in the case of a self-willed people,
to teach them not to be extravagant in their
demands. Thus, when the rage eager for
unrestrained vengeance, was subdued, there
would be leisure for any one so disposed to
consider the desirableness of having his own
debt cancelled by the Lord, and so to be led
by this consideration to forgive the debt of
his fellow-servant.

26. Again, we shall find on examination,
that there is no opposition between the pre-
cept of the Lord about not putting away a
wife, and what was said by them of old time:
"Whosoever putteth away his wife, let liini
give her a writing of divorcement." ^ The
Lord explains the intention of the law, which

2 Matt. V.

34-

3 Deut. xxiv. I, and Matt. v. 31, 32.

250

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XIX.

required a bill of divorce in every case where
a wife was put away. The precept not to put
away a wife is the opposite of saying that a
man may put away his wife if he pleases;
which is not what the law says. On the con-
trary, to prevent the wife from being put
away, the law required this intermediate step,
that the eagerness for separation might be
checked by the writing of the bill, and the
man might have time to think of the evil of
putting away his wife; especially since, as it
is said, among the Hebrews it was unlawful
for any but the scribes to write Hebrew: for
the scribes claimed the possession of superior
wisdom; and if they were men of upright
and pious character, their pursuits might
justly entitle them to make this claim. In
requiring, therefore, that in putting away his
wife, a man should give her a writing of di-
vorcement, the design was that he should be
obliged to have recourse to those from whorfi
he might expect to receive a cautious inter-
pretation of the law, and suitable advice
against separation. Having no other way of
ofetting the bill written, the man should be
obliged to submit to their direction, and to
allow of their endeavors to restore peace and
harmony between him and his wife. In a
case where the hatred could not be overcome
or checked, the bill would of course be written.
A wife might with reason be put away when
wise counsel failed to restore the proper feel-
ing and affection in the mind of her husband.
If the wife is not loved, she is to be put away.
And that she may not be put away, it is the
husband's duty to love her. Now, while a
man cannot be forced to love against his will,
he may be influenced by advice and persua-
sion. This was the duty of the scribe, as a
wise and upright man; and the law gave him
the opportunity, by requiring the husband in
all cases of quarrel to go to him, to get the
bill of divorcement written. No good or pru-
dent man would write the bill unless it were
a case of such obstinate aversion as to make
reconciliation impossible. But according to
your impious notions, there can be nothing
in putting away a wife; for matrimony, ac-
cording to you, is a criminal indulgence.
The word "matrimony" shows that a man
takes a wife in order that she may become a
mother, wliich would be an evil in your esti-
mation. According to you, this would imply
that part of your god is overcome and cap-
tured by the race of darkness, and bound in
the fetters of flesh.

27. But, to explain the point in hand: If
Christ, in adding the words, " But I say unto
you," to the quotations He makes of ancient
sayings, neither fulfilled the law of primitive

times by His additions, nor destroyed the law
given to Moses by opposite precepts, but
rather paid such deference to the Hebrew law
in all the quotations He made from it, as to
make His own remarks chiefly explanatory of
what the law stated less distinctly, or a means
of securing the design intended by the law,
it follows that from the words, "I came not
to destroy the law, but to fulfill it," we are
not to understand that Christ by His precepts
filled up what was wanting in the law; but
that what the literal command failed in doing
from the pride and disobedience of men, is
acccomplished by grace in those who are
brought to repentance and humility. The
fulfillment is not in additional words, but in
acts of obedience. So the apostle says
"Faith worketh by love;"' and again, He
that loveth another hath fulfilled the law."==
This love, by which also the righteousness of
the law can be fulfilled was bestowed in its
significance by Christ in His coming, through
the spirit which He sent according to His
promise; and therefore He said, "I came not
to destroy the law, but to fulfill it." This is
the New Testament in which the promise of
the kingdom of heaven is made to this love;
which was typified in the Old Testament, suit-
ably to the times of that dispensation. So j
Christ says again; "Anew commandment I
give unto you, that ye love one another," ^

28. So we find in the Old Testament all or \\
nearly all the counsels and precepts which ' '
Christ introduces with the words " But I say
unto you.' Against anger it is written,
"Mine eye .s troubled because of anger; "'^
and again, "Better is he that conquers his
anger, than he that taketh a city.''^ Against
hard words, ' The stroke of a whip maketh
a wound; but the stroke of the tongue break-
eth the bones." ^ Against adultery in the
heart, "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's
wife."' It is not," Thou shalt not commit
adultery;" but, "Thou shalt not covet."
The apostle, in quoting this, says: " I had not
known lust, unless the law had said, Thou '
shalt not covet."* Regarding patience in
not offering resistance, a man is praised who
"giveth his cheek to him that smiteth him,
and who is filled full with reproach. "^ Of
love to enemies it is said: "If thine enemy
hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him ,
drink."'" This also is quoted by the apostle.".
In the Psalm, too, it is said, " I was a peace

I Gal. V. 6. 2 Rom. xiii. 8. 3 John xiii. 34.

4 Ps. vi. 7. 5 Prov. xv'i. 32.

6 Ecclus. xxviii. 21. [Augustin makes no distinction between the
Old Testament Apocrypha and the canonical books. Indeed, the
Platonizing Apocryphal writings, snch as Ecc/fsiasticus and
H'isi/n III, seem to have been his favorites. — A. H. N.]

7 Ex. XX. 17. 8 Rom. vii. 7. 9 Lam. iii. 30.
10 Prov, XXV. 21. " Rom. xii. 20.

Book XIX.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.^AN.

^51

maker among them that hated peace;"' and
in many similar passages. In connection
also with our imitating God in refraining from
taking revenge, and in loving even the wicked,
there is a passage containing a full descrip-
tion of God in this character; for it is written:
"To Thee alone ever belongeth great strength,
and who can withstand the power of Thine
arm ? For the whole world before Thee is as
a little grain of the balance; yea, as a drop
of the morning dew that falleth down upon
the earth. But Thou hast mercy upon all,
for Thou canst do all things, and winkest
at the sins of men, because of repentance.
For Thou lovest all things that are, and ab-
horrest nothing which Thou hast made; for
never wouldest Thou have made anything if
Thou hadst liated it. And how could any-
thing have endured, if it had not been Thy
will ? or been preserved, if not called by Thee?
But Thou sparest all; for they are Thine, O
Lord, Thou lover of souls. For Thy good
Spirit is in all things; therefore chastenest
Thou them by little and little that offend, and
warnest them b}^ putting them in remembrance
wherein they have offended, that learning their
wickedness, they may believe in Thee, O
Lord."^ Christ exhorts us to imitate this long-
suffering goodness of God, who maketh the sun
to rise upon the evil and the good, and sendeth
rain on the just and on the unjust; that we
may not be careful to revenge, but may do
good to them that hate us, and so may be
perfect, even as our Father in heaven is per-
fect. ^ From another passage in these ancient
books we learn that, by not exacting the ven-
geance due to us, we obtain the remission of
our own sins; and that by not forgiving the
debts of others, we incur the danger of being
refused forgiveness when we pray for the re-
mission of our own debts: " He that reveng-
eth shall find vengeance from the Lord, and
He will surely keep his sin in remembrance.
Forgive thy neighbor the hurt that he hath
done to thee; so shall thy sins also be for-
given when thou prayest. One man beareth
hatred against another, and doth he seek par-
don of the Lord ? He showeth no mercy to
a man who is like himself; and doth he ask
forgiveness of his own sins? If he that is

I but flesh nourishes hatred, and asks for favor
from the Lord, who will entreat for the par-
don of his sins ? "'*

I 29. As regards not putting away a wife,

j there is no need to quote any other passage
of the Old Testament than that referred to
most appropriately in the Lord's reply to the

' Jews when they questioned Him on this sub-

' Ps. cxx. 6.

3 Matt. V. 44, 48.

2 Wisd. xi. 21, xii. 2.
4 Ecclus. xxviii. 1-5.

ject. For when they asked whether it is law-
ful for a man to put away his wife for any
reason, the Lord answered: "Have ye not
read, that He that made them at the besfin-
nmg made them male and female, and said.
For this cause shall a man leave his father
and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and
they two shall be one flesh ? Therefore they
are no longer twain, but one flesh. What
therefore God hath joined, let no man put
asunder." s Here the Jews, who thought that
they acted according to the intention of the
law of Moses in putting away their wives, are
made to see from the book of Moses that a
wife should not be put away. And, by the
way, we learn here, from Christ's own decla-
ration, that God made and joined male and
female; so that by denying this, the Mani-
chaeans are guilty of opposing the gospel of
Christ as well as the writings of Moses. And
supposing their doctrme to be true, that the
devil made and joined male and female, we
see the diabolical cunning of Faustus in find-
ing fault with Moses for dissolving marriages
by granting a bill of divorce, and praising
Christ for strengthening the union by the
precept in the Gospel. Instead of this,
Faustus, consistently with his own foolish and
impious notions, should have praised Moses
for separating what was made and joined by
the devil, and should have blamed Christ for
ratifying a bond of the devil's workmanship.
To return, let us hear the good Master ex-
plain how Moses, who wrote of the conjugal
chastity in the first union of male and female
as so holy and inviolable, afterwards allowed
the people to put away their wives. For when
the Jews replied, " Why did Moses then com-
mand to give a writing of divorcement, and
to put her away?" Christ said unto them,
" Moses, because of the hardness of yo.ur
heart, suffered you to put away your wives. "^
This passage we have already explained. ^
The hardness must have been great indeed
which could not be induced to admit the res-
toration of wedded love, even though by
means of the writing an opportunity was af-
forded for advice to be given to this effect bv
wise and upright men. Then the Lord
quoted the same law, to show both what was
enjoined on the good and what was permitted
to the hard; for, from what is written of the
union of male and female. He proved that a
wife must not be put away, and pointed out
the divine authority for tiie union; and shows
from the same Scriptures that a bill of di-
vorcement was to be given because of the
hardness of the heart, which might be sub-
dued or might not.

S Matt. xix. 4-6,

6 Matt. xix. 7, 8.

7 Sec. 26.

25:

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Rook XX.

30. Since, then, all these excellent precepts
of the Lord, which Faustus tries to prove to
be contrary to the old books of the Hebrews,
are found in these very books, the only sense
in which the Lord came not to destroy the
law, but to fulfill it, is this, that besides the
fulfillment of the prophetic types, which are
set aside by their actual accomplishment, the
precepts also, in which the law is holy, and
just, and good, are fulfilled in us, not by the
oldness of the letter which commands, and
increases the offence of the proud by the ad-
ditional guilt of transgression, but by the
newness of the Spirit, who aids us, and by the
obedience of the humble, through the saving
grace which sets us free. For, while all
these sublime precepts are found in the an-
cient books, still the end to which they point
is not there revealed; although the holy men
who foresaw the revelation lived in accordance
with it, either veiling it in prophecy as suited
the time, or themselves discovering the truth
thus veiled,

31. I am disposed, after careful examina-
tion, to doubt whether the expression so often
used by the Lord, " the kingdom of heaven,"
can be found in these books. It is said, in-
deed, " Love wisdom, that ye may reign for
ever."'^ And if eternal life had not been
clearly made known in the Old Testament,
the Lord would not have said, as He did even
to the unbelieving Jews: " Search the Script-
ures, for in them ye think that ye have eter-
nal life, and they are they that testify of
me.-" ^ And to the same effect are the words
of the Psalmist: "I shall not die, but live,
and declare the works of the Lord."^ And
again: " Enlighten mine eyes, lest I sleep the
sleep of death."-* Again, we read, "The
souls of the righteous are in the hand of the
Lo/d, and pain shall not touch them;" and
immediately following: " They are in peace;
and if they have suffered torture from men.

their hope is full of immortality; and after a
few troubles, they shall enjoy many rewards, "s
Again, in another place: "The righteous
shall live for ever, and their reward is with
the Lord, and their concern with the Highest;
therefore shall they receive from the hand of
the Lord a kingdom of glory and a crown of
l:)eauty." ^ These and many similar declara-
tions of eternal life, in more or less explicit
terms, are found in these writings. Even the
resurrection of the body is spoken of by the
prophets. The Pharisees, accordingly, were
fierce opponents of the Sadducees, who disbe-
lieved the resurrection. This we learn not
only from the canonical Acts of the Apostles,
which the Manichaans reject, because it tells
of the advent of the Paraclete promised by
the Lord, but also from the Gospel, when the
Sadducees question the Lord about the woman
who married seven brothers, one dying after
the other, whose wife she would be in the res-
urrection.' As regards, then, eternal life and
the resurrection of the dead, numerous testi-
monies are to be found in these Scriptures.
But I do not find there the expression, "the
kingdom of heaven." This expression be-
longs properly to the revelation of the Nevv
Testament, because in the resurrection our
earthly bodies shall, by that change which
Paul fully describes, become spiritual bodies,
and so heavenly, that thus we may possess
the kingdom of heaven. And this expression
was reserved for Him whose advent as King
to govern and Priest to sanctify His believing
people, was ushered in by all the symbolism
of the old covenant, in its genealogies, its
typical acts and words, its sacrifices and cer-
emonies and feasts, and in all its prophetic
utterances and events and figures. He came
full of grace and truth, in His grace helping
us to obey the precepts, and in His truth se-
curing the accomplishment of the promises.
He came not to destroy the law, but to fulfill it.

I Wisd. vi. 22.

3 Ps. cxviii. 16.

= John V. 39.
4 Ps. xii. 3.

5 Wisd. iii. 1-5.

6 Wisd. V, 16, 17. 7 Matt. xxii. 23-

BOOK XX.

FAUSTUS REPELS THE CHARGE OF SUN-WORSHIP, AND MAINTAINS THAT WHILE THE MANICH/EANS
BELIEVE THAT GOD'S POWER DWELLS IN THE SUN AND HIS WISDOM IN THE MOON, THEY YET
WORSHIP ONE DEITY, FATHER, SON, AND HOLY SPIRIT. THEY ARE NOT A SCHISiNI OF THE
GENTILES, NOR A SECT. AUGUSTIN EMPHASIZES THE CHARGE OF POLYTHEISM, AND GOES
INTO AN ELABORATE COMPARISON OF MANICH^AN AND PAGAN MYTHOLOGY.

I. Faustus said: You ask why we worship
the sun, if we are a sect or separate religion,
and not Pagans, or merely a schism of the

quire into the matter, that we may see whether
the name of Gentiles is more applicable to
you or to us. Perhaps, in giving you in a

Gentiles. It may therefore be as well to in- 1 friendly way this simple account of my faith,

Book XX.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH/EAN.

25,

I shall appear to be making an apology for
it, as if I were ashamed, which God forbid,
of doing homage to the divine luminaries.
You may take it as you please; but I shall
not regret what I have done if I succeed in
conveying to some at least this much knowl-
edge, that our religion has nothing in common
with that of the Gentiles.

2. We worship, then, one deity under the
threefold appellation of the Almighty God the
Father, and his son Christ, and the Holy
Spirit. While these are one and the same,
we believe also that the Father properly dwells
in the highest or principal light, which Paul
calls "light inaccessible,"' and the Son in
his second or visible light. And as the Son
is himself twofold, according to the apostle,
who speaks of Christ as the power of God and
the wisdom of God,- we believe that His power
dwells in the sun, and His wisdom in the
moon. We also believe that the Holy Spirit,
the third majesty, has His seat and His home
in the whole circle of the atmosphere. By
His influence and spiritual infusion, the earth
conceives and brings forth the mortal Jesus,
who, as hanging from every tree, is the life
and salvation of men.^ Though you oppose
these doctrines so violently, your religion re-
sembles ours in attaching the same sacredness
to the bread and wine that we do to every-
thing. This is our belief, which you will
have an opportunity of hearing more of, if
you wish to do so. Meanwhile there is some
force in the consideration that }^ou or any one
that is asked where his God dwells, will say
that he dwells in light; so that the testimony
in favor of my worship is almost universal.

3. As to your calling us a schism of the
Gentiles, and not a sect, I suppose the word
schism applies to those who have the same
doctrines and worship as other people, and
only choose to meet separately. The word
sect, again, applies to those whose doctrine is
quite unlike that of others, and who have
made a form of divine worship peculiar to
themselves. If this is what the words mean,
in the first place, in our doctrine and worship
we have no resemblance to the Pagans. We
shall see presently whether you have. The
Pagan doctrine is, that all things good and
evil, mean and glorious, fading and unfading,
changeable and unchangeable, material and
divine, have only one principle. In opposi-
tion to this, my belief is that God is the prin-

I I Tim. vi. 16. - I Cor. i. 24.

3 [The JManichaean doctrine of \,hc Jesus fiatabilis is more fully
expounded in this book than elsewhere. Of course, this is only a
way of expressing the familiar Maiiichaean notion that the divine
life which is imprisoned in the world and which is trying to escape
through the growth of plants, etc., suffers from any sort of injury
done to plants. Compare IJauk: Das Manichiiische Religioiis-
systcvi, pp. 72-77. — A. H. N.]

ciple of all good things, and Hyle [matters]
of the opposite. Hylc is the name given by
our master in divinity to the principle or na-
ture of evil. The Pagans accordingly think
it right to worship God with altars, and
shrines, and images, and sacrifices, and in-
cense. Here also my practice differs entirely
from theirs: for I look upon myself as a rea-
sonable temple of God, if I am worthy to be
so; and I consider Clirist his Son as the living
image of his living majesty; and I hold a
mind well cultivated to be the true altar, and
pure and simple prayers to be tli^ true way
of paying divine honors and of offering sacri-
fices. Is this being a schism of the Pagans?

4. As regards the worship of the Almighty
God, you might call us a schism of the Jews,
for all Jews are bold enough to profess this
worship, were it not for the difference in the
form of our worship, though it may be ques-
tioned whether the Jews really worship the
Almighty. But the doctrine I have mentioned
is common to the Pagans in their worship of
the sun, and to the Jews in their worship of
the Almighty. Even in relation to you, we
are not properly a schism, though we ac-
knowledge Christ and worship Him; for our
worship and doctrine are different from yours.
In a schism, little or no change is made from
the original; as, for instance, you, in your
schism from the Gentiles, have brought with
you the doctrine of a single principle, for you
believe that all things are of God. The sac-
rifices you change into love-feasts, the idols
into martyrs, to whom you pray as they do to
their idols. You appease the shades of the
departed with wine and food. You keep the
same holidays as the Gentiles; for example,
the calends and the solstices. In your way
of living you have made no change. Plainly
you are a mere schism; for the only difference
from the original is that you meet separately.
In this you have followed the Jews, who sep-
arated from the Gentiles, but differed only in
not having images. For they used temples,
and sacrifices, and altars, and a priesthood,
and the whole round of ceremonies the same
as those of the Gentiles, only more super-
stitious. Like the Pagans, they believe in a
single principle; so that both you and the
Jews are schisms of the Gentiles, for you
have the same faith, and nearly the same
worship, and you call yourselves sects only
because you meet separately. The fact is,
there are only two sects, the Gentiles and our-
selves. We and the Gentiles are as contrary
in our belief as truth and falsehood, day and
night, poverty and wealth, health and sick-
ness. You, again, are not a sect in relation
either to truth or to error. You are merely

254

THE WORKS OF ST, AUGUSTIN.

[Book XX.

a schism and a schism not of truth, but of

error.

5. AuousTiN repHed: O hateful mixture
of ignorance and cunning ! Why do you put
arguments in the mouth of your opponent,
which no one that knows you would use ? We
do not call you Pagans, or a schism of Pa-
gans; but we say that you resemble them in
worshipping many gods. But you are far
worse than Pagans, for they worship things
which exist, though they should not be wor-
shipped: for idols have an existence, though
for salvation they are nought. So, to worsliip
a tree with prayers, instead of improving it
by cultivation, is not to worship nothing, but
to worship in a wrong way. When the apos-
tle says that " the things which the Gentiles
sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons, and not to
God," ' he means that these demons exist to
whom the sacrifices are made, and with whom
he wishes us not to be partakers. So, too,
heaven and earth, the sea and air, the sun
and moon, and the other heavenly bodies,
ar^all objects which have a sensible existence.
When the Pagans worship these as gods, or
as parts of one great God (for some of them
identify the universe with the Supreme Deity),
the}' worship things which have an existence.
In arguing with Pagans, we do not deny the
existence of these things, but we say that they
should not be worshipped; and we recom-
mend the worship of the invisible Creator of
all these things, in whom alone man can find
the happiness which all allow that he desires.
To those, again, who worship what is invisible
and immaterial, but still is created, as the
soul or mind of man, we say that happiness
is not to be found in the creature even under
this form, and that we must worship the true
God, who is not only invisible, but unchange-
able; for He alone is to be worshipped, in the
enjoyment of whom the worshipper finds
happiness, and without whom the soul must
be wretched, whatever else it possesses. You,
on the other hand, who worship things which
have no existence at all except in your ficti-
tious legends, would be nearer true piety and
religion if you were Pagans, or if you were
worshippers of what has an existence, though
not a proper object of worship. In fact, you
do not properly worship the sun, though he
carries your prayers with him in his course
round the heavens.

6. Your statements about the sun himself
are so false and absurd, that if he were to re-
pay you for the injury done to him, he would
scorch you to death. First of all, you call
the sun a ship, so that you are not only

' I Cor. X. 20.

astray worlds off, as the saying is, but adrift.
Next, while every one sees that the sun is
round, which is the form corresponding from
its perfection to his position among the
heavenly bodies, you maintain that he is tri-
angular, that is, that his light shines on the
earth through a triangular window in heaven.
Hence it is that you bend and bow your heads
to the sun, while you worship not this visible
sun, but some imaginary ship which you sup-
pose to be shining through a triangular open-
ing. Assuredly this ship would never have
been heard of, if the words required for the
composition of heretical fictions had to be paid
for, like the wood required for the beams of
a ship. All this is comparatively harmless,
however ridiculous or pitiable. Very differ-
ent is your wicked fancy about youths of both
sexes proceeding from this ship, whose beauty
excites eager desire in the princes and prin-
cesses of darkness; and so the members of
your god are released from this humiliating'!
confinement in the members of the race of
darkness, by means of sinful passion and sen-
sual appetite. And to these filthy rags of 1
yours you would unite the mystery of the
Trinity; for you say that the Father dwells
in a secret light, the power of the Son in the
sun, and His wisdom in the moon, and the
Holy Spirit in the air.

7. As for this threefold or rather fourfold
fiction, what shall I say of the secret light of
the Father, but that you can think of no light
except what you have seen ? From your
knowledge of visible light, with which beasts
and insects as well as men are familiar, you
form some vague idea in your mind, and call
it the light in which God the Father dwells
with His subjects. How can you distinguish
between the light by which we see, and that
by which we understand, when, according to
your ideas, to understand truth is nothing
else than to form the conception of material
forms, either finite or in some cases infinite;
and you actually believe in these wild fancies?
It is manifest that the act of my mind in
thinking of your region of light which has no
existence, is entirely different from my con-
ception of Alexandria, which exists, though
I have not seen it. And, again, the act of
forming a conception of Alexandria, which I
have never seen, is very different from think-
ing of Carthage, which I know. But this dif-
ference is insignificant as compared with that
between my thinking of material things which
I know from seeing them, and my understand-
ing justice, chastity, faith, truth, love, good-
ness, and things of this nature. Can you
describe this intellectual light, which gives us
a clear perception of the distinction between

Book XX.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.^AN.

255

itself and other things, as well as of the dis-
tinction between those things themselves?
And yet even this is not the sense in which it
can be said that God is light, for this light
is created, whereas God is tiie Creator; the
light is made, and He is the JNIaker; the light
is changeable. For the intellect changes from
dislike to desire, from ignorance to knowl-
edge, from forgetfulness to recollection;
whereas God remains the same in will, in
truth, and in eternity. From God we derive
the beginning of existence, the principle of
knowledge, the law of affection. From God
all animals, rational and irrational, derive the
nature of their life, the capacity of sensation,
the faculty of emotion. From God all bodies
deriv^e their subsistence in extension, their
beauty in number, and their order in weight.
This light is one divine being, in an insepa-
rable triune existence; and yet, without sup-
posing the assumption of any bodily form,
vou assign to separate places parts of the im-
material, spiritual, and unchangeable sub-
stance. And instead of three places for the
Trinity, you have four: one, the light inac-
cessible, which you know nothing about, for
the Father; two, the sun and moon, for the
vSon; and again one, the circle of the atmos-
phere, for the Holy Spirit. Of the inaccessi-
ble light of the Father I shall say nothing fur-
ther at present, for orthodox believers do not
separate the Son and the Spirit from the Father
in relation to this light.

8. It is difficult to understand how you have
been taken with the absurd idea of placing
the power of the Son in the sun, and His wis-
dom in the moon. For, as the Son remains
inseparably in the Father, His wisdom and
power cannot be separated from one another,
so that one should be in the sun and the other
in the moon. Only material things can be
thus assigned to separate places. If you only
understood this, it would have prevented you
from taking the productions of a diseased
fancy as the material for so many fictions.
But there is inconsistency and improbabil-
ity as well as falsehood in your ideas. For,
according to you, the seat of wisdom is infe-
rior in brightness to the seat of power. Now
energy and productiveness are the qualities
of power, whereas light teaches and mani-
fests; so that if the sun had the greater heat,
and the moon the greater light, these absur-
I dities might appear to have some likelihood
' to men of carnal minds, who know nothing
except through material conceptions. From
the connection between great heat and motion,
I they might identify power with heat; while
I light from its brightness, and as making things
discernible,they might represent wisdom. But

what folly as well as profanity, in placing
power in the sun, which excels so much in
light, and wisdom in th.e moon, which is so
inferior in brightness ! And while you sepa-
rate Christ from Himself, you do not distin-
guish between Christ and the Holy Spirit;
whereas Christ is one, the power of God, and
the wisdom of God, and the Spirit is a dis-
tinct person. But according to you, the air,
which you make the seat of the Spirit, fills and
pervades the universe. So the sun and moon
in their course are always united to the air.
But the moon approaches the sun at one time,
and recedes from it at another. So that, if
we may believe you, or rather, if we may
allow ourselves to be imposed on by you, wis-
dom recedes from power by half the circum-
ference of a circle, and again approaches it
by the other half. And when wisdom is full,
it is at a distance from power. For when the
moon is full, the distance between the two
bodies is so great, that the moon rises in the
east while the sun is setting in the west. But
as the loss of power produces weakness, the
fuller the moon is, the weaker must wisdom
be. If, as is certainly true, the wisdom of
God is unchangeable in power, and the power
of God unchangeable in wisdom, how can you
separate them so as to assign them to differ-
ent places? And how can the place be differ-
ent when the substance is the same ? Is this
not the infatuation of subjection to material
fancies; showing such a want of power and wis-
dom that your wisdom is as weak as your power
is foolish ? This execrable absurdity would
divide Christ between the sun and the moon, —
His power in one, and His wisdom in the other;
so that He would be incomplete in both, lack-
ing wisdom in the sun, and power in the moon,
while in both He supplies youths, male and
female, to excite the affection of the princes
and princesses of darkness. Such are the
tenets which you learn and profess. Such is
the faith which directs your conduct. And
can you wonder that you are regarded with
abhorrence ?

9. But besides your errors regarding these
conspicuous and familiar luminaries, which
you worship not for what they are, but for
what your wild fancy makes them to be, your
other absurdities are still worse than this.
Your illustrious World-bearer, and Atlas who
helps to hold him up, are unreal beings. Like
innumerable other creatures of your fancy,
they have no existence, and yet you worship
them. For this reason we say that you are
worse than Pagans, while you resemble them
in worshipping many gods. You are worse,
because, while they worship things which ex-
ist though they are not gods, you worship

256

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XX.

things which are neither gods nor anything
else, for they have no existence. The Pa-
gans, too, have fables, but they know them
to be fables; and either look upon them as
amusing poetical fancies, or try to explain
them as representing the nature of things, or
the life of man. Thus they say that Vulcan
is lame, because flame in common fire has an
irregular motion: that Fortune is blind, be-
cause of the uncertainty of what are called
fortuitous occurrences: that there are three
Fates, with distaff, and spindle, and fingers
spinning wool into thread, because there are
three times, — the past, already spun and
wound on the spindle; the present, which is
passing through the fingers of the spinner;
and the future, still in wool bound to the dis-
taff, and soon to pass through the fingers to
the spindle, that is, through the present into
the future: and that Venus is the wife of Vul-
can, because pleasure has a natural connec-
tion with heat; and that she is the mistr&ss of
Mars, because pleasure is not properly the
companion of warriors: and that Cupid is a
boy with wings and a bow, from the wounds
inflicted by thoughtless, inconstant passion
in the hearts of unhappy beings: and so with
many other fables. The great absurdity is
in their continuing to worship these beings,
after giving such explanations; for the wor-
ship without the explanations, though crim-
inal, would be a less heinous crime. The
very explanations prove that they do not
worship that God, the enjoyment of whom
can alone give happiness, but things which He
has created. And even in the creature they
worship not only the virtues, as in Minerva,
who sprang from the head of Jupiter, and
who represents prudence, — a qbality of reason
which, according to Plato, has its seat in the
head, — but their vices, too, as in Cupid.
Thus one of their dramatic poets says, " Sin-
ful passion, in favor of vice, made Love a
god."^ Even bodily evils had temples in
Rome, as in the case of pallor and fever.
Not to dwell on the sin of the worshippers of
these idols, who are in a way affected by the
bodily forms, so that they pay homage to
them as deities, when they see them set up in
some lofty place, and treated with great honor
and reverence, there is greater sin in the
very explanations which are intended as apol-
ogies for these dumb, and deaf, and blind,
and lifeless objects. Still, though, as I have
said, these things are nothing in the way of
salvation or of usefulness, both they and the
things they are said to represent are real ex-
istences. But your First Man, warring with

' Sen. Hipp. w. 194, 195.

the five elements; and your Mighty Spirit,
who constructs the world from the captive
bodies of the race of darkness, or rather from
the members of your god in subjection and
bondage; and your World-holder, who has in
his hand the remains of these members, and
who bewails the capture and bondage and
pollution of the rest; and your giant Atlas,
who keeps up Uie AVorld-holder on his shoul-
ders, lest he should from weariness throw
away his burden, and so prevent the comple-
tion of the final imitation of the mass of dark-
ness, which is to be the last scene in your ,
drama; — these and countless other absurdities
are not represented in painting or sculpture,
or in any explanation; and yet you believe ■<
and worship things which have no existence,
while you taunt the Christians with being
credulous for believing in realities with a faith
which pacifies the mind under its influence.
The objects of your worship can be shown to
have no existence by many proofs, which I do
not bring forward here, because, though I
could without difficulty discourse philosophi-
cally on the construction of the world, it would
take too long to do so here. One proof
suffices. If these things are real, God must
be subject to change, and corruption, and
contamination; a supposition as blasphemous
as it is irrational. All these things, there-
fore, are vain, and false, and unreal. Thus
you are much worse than those Pagans, with
whom all are familiar, and who still preserve
traces of their old customs, of which they
themselves are ashamed; for while they wor-
ship things which are not gods, you worship
things which do not exist.

10. If you think that your doctrines are
true because they are unlike the errors of the
Pagans, and that we are in error because we
perhaps differ more from you than from them,
you might as well say that a dead man is in
good health because he is not sick; or that
good health is undesirable, because it differs ;
less from sickness than from death. Or if
the Pagans should be viewed in many cases
as rather dead than sick, )-ou might as well
praise the ashes in the tomb because they
have no longer the human shape, as compared
with the living body, which does not differ so
much from a corpse as from ashes. It is thus :
we are reproached for having more resem- i
blance to the dead body of Paganism than to i
the ashes of Manichceism. But in division, j
it often happens that a thing is placed in]
different classes, according to the point of re-'
semblance on which the division proceeds. |
For instance, if animals are divided into those'
that fly and those that cannot fly, in this di-
vision men and beasts are classed together as ;

Book XX.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICHyEAN.

257

distinct from I)irds, because the}' are both un-
able to fly. But if they are divided into ra-
tional and irrational, beasts and birds are
classed together as distinct from men, for
they are both destitute of reason. Faustus
did not think of this when he said: There
are in fact only two sects, the Gentiles and
ourselves, for we are directly opposed to them
in oar belief. The opposition he means is
this, that the Gentiles believe in a single prin-
ciple, whereas the Manichseans believe also
iu the principle of the race of darkness. Cer-
tainly, according to this division we agree in
-eneral with the Pagans. But if we divide
all who have a religion into those who worship
one God and those who worship many gods,
the jSIanicha^ans must be classed along with
the Pagans, and we along with the Jews.
Tills is another distinction, which may be
said to make only two sects. Perhaps you
will say that you hold all your gods to be of
le substance, which the Pagans do not.
j.ut you at least resemble them in assigning
ti) your gods different powers, and functions,
and employments. One does battle with the
ice of darkness; another constructs the
irld from the part which is captured; an-
'aer, standing above, has the world in his
and; another holds him up from below; an-
other turns the wheels of the fires and winds
and waters beneath; another, in his circuit of
the heavens, gathers with his beams the mem-
I'crs of your god from cesspools. Indeed,
your gods have innumerable occupations, ac-
cording to your fabulous descriptions, which
}ou neither explain nor represent in a visible
lorm. But again, if men were divided into
those who believe that God takes an interest
ia human affairs and those who do not, the
Pagans and Jews, and you and all heretics
that have anything of Christianity, will be
classed together, as opposed to the Epicu-
■L-ans, and any others holding similar views.
As this is a principle of importance, here again
'.vc may say that there are only two sects, and
you belong to the same sect as we do. You
will hardly venture to dissent from us in the
jopinion that God is concerned in human af-
liairs, so that in this matter your opposition to
jthe Epicureans makes you side with us.
Thus, according to the nature of the division,
Ahat is in one class at one time, is in another
at another time: things joined here are sep-
arated there: in some things we are classed
with others, and they with us; in other things
ive are classed separately, and stand alone.
If Faustus thought of this, he would not talk
5ucli eloquent nonsense.

II. But what are we to make of these words
3f Faustus: The Holy Spirit, by his influence

and spiritual infusion, makes the earth con-
ceive and bring forth the mortal Jesus, who,
as hanging from every tree, is the life and
salvation of men ? Letting pass for a mo-
ment the absurdity of this statement, we ob-
serve the folly of believing that the mortal
Jesus can be conceived through the power of
the Holy Spirit by the earth, but not by the
Virgin Mary. Dare you compare the holi-
ness of that chaste virgin's womb with any
piece of ground where trees and plants grow ?
Do you pretend to look with abhorrence upon
a pure virgin, while you do not shrink from
believing that Jesus is produced in gardens
watered by the filthy drains of a city ? For
plants of all kinds spring up and are nour-
ished in such moisture. You will have Jesus
to be born in this way, while you cry out
against the idea of His being born of a virgin.
Do you think flesh more unclean than the ex-
crements which its nature rejects ? Is the filth
cleaner than the flesh which expels it ? Are
you not aware how fields are manured in order
to make them productive ? Your folly comes
to this, that the Holy Spirit, who, according to
you, despised the womb of Mary, makes the
earth conceive more fruitfully in proportion
as it is carefully enriched with animal off-
scourings. Do you reply that the Holy Spirit
preserves His incorruptible purity everywhere?
I ask again, Why not also in the virgin's
womb ? Passing from the conception, you
maintain m regard to the mortal Jesus — who,
as you say, is born from the earth, which has
conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit —
that He hangs in the shape of fruit from every
tree: so that, besides this pollution. He suffers
additional defilement from the flesh of the
countless animals that eat the fruit; except,
indeed, the small amount that is purified by
your eating it. While we believe and confess
Christ the Son of God, and the Word of God,
to have become flesh without suffering defile-
ment, because the divine substance is not de-
filed by flesh, as it is not defiled by anything,
your fanciful notions would make Jesus to be
defiled even as hanging on the tree, before
entering the flesh of any animal; for if He
were not defiled, there would be no need of
His being purified by your eating Him. And
if all trees are the cross of Christ, as Faustus
seems to impl}' when he says that Jesus hangs
from every tree, why do you not pluck the
fruit, and so take Jesus down from hanging
on the tree to bury Hun in your stomach,
which would correspond to the good deed of
Joseph of Arimathea, when he took down the
true Jesus from the cross to bury Him?'

' John xi.x. 38.

258

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Bock XX.

Why should it be impious to take Christ from
the tree, while it is pious to lay Him in the
tomb? Perhaps you wish to apply to your-
selves the words quoted from the prophet by
Paul, " Their throat is an open sepulchre;" '
and so you wait with open mouth till some
one comes to use your throat as the best sep-
ulchre for Clirist. Once more, how many
Christs do you make ? Is there one whom
you call the mortal Christ, whom the earth
conceives and brings forth by the power of
the Holy Spirit; and another crucified by the
Jews under Pontius Pilate; and a third whom
you divide between the sun and the moon?
Or is it one and the same person, part of
whom is confined in the trees, to be released
by the help of the other part which is not con-
fined ? If this is the case, and you allow that
Christ suffered under Pontius Pilate, though
it is difficult to see how he could have suffered
without flesh, as. you say he did, the great
question is, with whom he left those ships
you speak of, that he might come down and
suffer these things, which he certainly could
not have suffered without having a body of
some kind. A mere spiritual presence could
not have made him liable to these sufferings,
and in his bodily presence he could not be at
the same time in the sun, in the moon, and
on the cross. So, then, if he had not a bod}^,
he was not crucified; and if he had a body,
the question is, where he got it: for, accord-
ing to you, all bodies belong to the race of
darkness, though you cannot think of the
divine substance except as being material.
Thus you must say either that Christ was
^crucified without a body, which is utterly ab-
surd; or that he was crucified in appearance
and not in reality, which is blasphemy; or
that all bodies do not belong to the race of
darkness, but that the divine substance has
also a body, and that not an immortal body,
but liable to crucifixion and death, which,
again, is altogether erroneous; or that Christ
had a mortal body from the race of darkness,
so that, while you will not allow that Christ's
body came from the Virgin Mary, you derive
it from the race of demons. Finally, as in
Faustus'statement, in which he alludes in the
briefest manner possible to the lengthy
stories of Manichaean invention, the earth by
the power of the Holy Spirit conceives and
brings forth the mortal Jesus, who, hanging
from every tree, is the life and salvation of
men, why should this Saviour be represent-
ed by whatever is hanging, because he
hung on the tree, and not by whatever
is born, because he was born ? But if

' Rom. iii. 13.

you mean that the Jesus on the trees, anc
the Jesus crucified under Pontius Pilate,
and the Jesus divided between tlie sun anc
the moon, are all one and the same substance,
why do you not give the name of Jesus to
your whole host of deities ? Why should not
your World-holder be Jesus too, and Atlas
and the King of Honour, and the Mighty
Spirit, and the First Man, and all the rest,
with their various names and occupations ?

12. So, with regard to the Holy Spirit, how
can you say that he is the third person, when
the persons you mention are innumerable ?
Or why is he not Jesus himself? And why
does Faustus mislead people, in trying to make
out an agreement between himself and true
Christians, from whom he differs only too
widely, by saying. We worship one God un-
der the threefold appellation of the Almighty
God the Father, Christ his Son, and the Holy
Spirit ? Why is the appellation only threefold,
instead of being manifold ? And why is the
distinction in appellation only, and not in re-j
ality, if there are as many persons as ther
are names ? For it is not as if you gave thre^
names to the same thing, as the same weapon
may be called a short sword, a dagger, or a
dirk; or as you give the name of moon, and
the lesser ship, and the luminary of nighty
and so on, to the same thing. For you cannot
say that the First Man is the same as the
Mighty Spirit, or as the World-Holder, or as,
the giant Atlas. They are all distinct per-
sons, and you do not call any of them Christ.
How can there be one Deity with opposite
functions ? Or why should not Christ himself
be the single person, if in one substance Christ!
hangs on the trees, and was persecuted by the
Jews, and exists in the sun and moon? The,
fact is, your fancies are all astra)', and are no
better than the dreams of insanity.

13. How can Faustus think that we resem,
ble the Manichseans in attaching sacredness
to bread and wine, when they consider it sac-
rilege to taste wine ? They acknowledge their;
god in the grape, but not in the cup; perhaps
they are shocked at his being trampled on
and bottled. It is not any bread and winei
that we hold sacred as a natural production,
as if Christ were confined in corn or in vines,,
as the Manichccans fancy, but what is truly:
consecrated as a symbol. What is not con-,
secrated, though it is bread and wine, is only,
nourishment or refreshment, with no sacred-
ness about it; although we bless and thanki
God for every gift, bodily as well as spiritual.!
According to your notion, Christ is confined
in everything you eat, and is released by di-
gestion from the additional confinement of,
your intestines. So, when you eat, your god.

JOOK XX.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH/EAN.

259

suffers; and when you digest, you suffer from
his recovery. When he fills you, your gain
is his loss. This might be considered kind-
ness on his part, because he suffers in you for
your benefit, were it not that he gains freedom
l)y escaping and leaving you empty. There
is not the least resemblance between our rev-
erence for the bread and wine, and your doc-
trines, which have no truth in them. To
compare the two is even more foolish than to
say, as some do, that in the bread and wine
we worship Ceres and Bacchus. I refer to
tliis now, to show where you got your silly
idea that our fathers kept the Sabbath in
honor of Saturn. For as there is no connec-
tion with the worship of the Pagan deities
Ceres and Bacchus in our observance of the
sacrament of the bread and wine, which you
approve so highly that you wish to resemble
us in it, so there was no subjection to Saturn
in the case of our fathers, who observed the
rest of the Sabbath in a manner suitable to
prophetic times.

14. You might have found a resemblance
in your religion to that of the Pagans as re-
L,Qrds Hyle [matter], which the Pagans often
speak of. You, on the contrary, maintain
that you are directly opposed to them in your
I)elief in the evil principle which your teacher
in theology calls Hyle. But here you only
show your ignorance, and, with an affectation
of learning, use this word without knowing
what it means. The Greeks, when speaking of
I nature, give the name Hyle to the subject-mat-
jter of things, which has no form of its own, but
admits of all bodily forms, and is known only
I through these changeable phenomena, not be-
!ing itself an object of sensation or perception.
Some Gentiles, indeed, erroneously make this
matter co-eternal with God, as not being de-
rived from Him, though the bodily forms
are. In this manifest error you resemble the
Pagans, for you hold that Hyle has a princi-
ple of its own, and does not come from God.
It is only ignorance that leads you to deny
this resemblance. In saying that Hyle has no
form of its own, and can take its forms only
from God, the Pagans come near to the truth
which we beheve in contradistinction from
your errors. Not knowing what Hyle or the
subject-matter of things is, you make it the
irace of darkness, in which you place not only
innumerable bodily forms of five different
ikinds, but also a formative mind. Such, in-
jdeed, is your ignorance or insanity, that you
call this mind Hyle, and make it give forms ,
instead of taking them. If there were such
a formative mind as you speak of, and bodily
elements capable of form, the word Hyle
would properly be applicable to the bodily

elements, which would be the matter to be
formed by the mind, which you make the
principle of evil. Even this would not be a
quite accurate use of the word Hyle, which
has no form of any kind; whereas these ele-
ments, although capable of new forms, have
already the form of elements, and belong to
different kinds. Still this use of the word
would not be so much amiss, notwithstanding
your ignorance; for it would thus be applied,
as it properly is, to that which takes form,
and not to that which gives it. Even here,
however, your folly and impiety would appear
in tracing so much that is good to the evil
principle, from your not knowing that all na-
tures of 'every kind, all forms in their propor-
tion, and all weights in their order, can come
only from the Father, the Son, and the Holy
Spirit. As it is, you know neither what Hyle
is, nor what evil is. Would that I could per-
suade you to refrain from misleading people
still more ignorant than yourselves!

15. Every one must see the folly of your
boasting of superiority to the Pagans because
they use altars and temples, images and sac-
rifices and incense, in the worship of God,
which you do not. As if it were not better
to build an altar and offer sacrifice to a stone,
which has some kind of existence, than to
employ a heated imagination in worshipping
things which have no existence at all. And
what do you mean by saying that you are a
rational temple of God ? Can that be God's
temple which is partly the construction of the
devil ? And is this not true of you, as you
say that all your members and your whole
body were formed by the evil principle which
you call Hyle, and that part of this formative
mind dwells in the body along with part of
your god ? And as this part of your god is
bound and confined, you should be called the
prison of God rather than his temple. Per-
haps it is your soul that is the temple of God,
as you have it from the region of light. But
you generally call your soul not a temple, but
a part or member of God. So, when you say
you are the temple of God, it must be in your
l)ody, which, you say, was formed by the
devil. Thus you blaspheme the temple of
God, calling it not only the workmanship of
Satan, but the prison-house of God, The
apostle, on the other hand, says: " The tem-
ple of God is holy, which temple ye are."
And to show that this refers not merely to the
soul, he says expressly: " Know ye not that
your bodies are the temple of the Holy
Ghost, which is in you, which ye have of
God ? " ' You call the workmanship of devils

' I Cor. iii. 17, and vi. 19.

26o

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XX.

the temple of God, and there, to use Faustus'
words, you place Christ, the Son of God, the
living image of living majesty. Your impiety
may well contrive a fabulous temple for a
fabulous Christ. The image you speak of
must be so called, because it is the creature
of your imagination.

i6. If your mind is an altar, you see
whose altar it is. You may see from the very
doctrines and duties in which you say you are
trained. You are taught not to give food to
a beggar; and so your altar smokes with the
sacrifice of cruelty. Such altars the Lord
destroys; for in words quoted from the law
He tells us what offering pleases God: "I
desire mercy, and not sacrifice." Observe
on what occasion the Lord uses these
words. It was when, in passing through a
field, the disciples plucked the ears of corn
because they were hungry. Your doctrine
would lead you to call this murder. Your
mind is an altar, not of God, but of lying
devils, by whose doctrines the evil conscience
is seared as with a hot iron,' calling murder
what the truth calls innocence. For in His
words to the Jews, Christ by anticipation
deals a fatal blow to you: " If ye had known
what this meaneth, I desire mercy, and not
sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the
guiltless." ^

17. Nor can you say that you honor God
with sacrifices in the shape of pure and simple
prayers: for, in your low, dishonoring notions
about tlie divine nature and substance, you
make your god to be the victim in the sacri-
fices of Pagans; so far are you from pleasing
the true God with your sacrifices. For you
hold that God is confined not only in trees
and plants, or in the human body, but also
in the flesh of animals, which contaminates
Him with its impurity. And how can your
soul give praise to God, when you actually
reproach Him by calling your soul a particle
of His substance taken captive by the race of
darkness; as if God could not maintain the
conflict except by this corruption of His mem-
bers, and this dishonorable captivity ? In-
stead of honoring God in your prayers, you
insult Him. For what sin did you commit,
when you belonged to Him, that you should
be thus punished by the god you cry to, not
because you left Him sinfully of your own
choice; for he himself gave you to His ene-
mies, to obtain peace for His kingdom ? You
are not even given as hostages to be honor-
ably guarded. Nor is it as when a shepherd
lays a snare to catch a wild beast: for he does
not put one of his own members in the snare.

I I Tim. iv. 2.

2 Matt, xii. 7.

but some animal from his flock; and gener-
ally, so that the wild beast is caught before
the animal is hurt. You, though you are the
members of your god, are given to the enemy,
whose ferocity you keep off from your god
only by being contaminated with their impur-
ity, infected with their corruptions, without
any fault of your own. You cannot in your
prayers use the words: " Free us, O Lord,
for the glory of Thy name; and for Thy
name's sake pardon our sins.'^^ Your prayer
is: " Free us by Thy skill, for we suffer here
oppression, and torture, and pollution, only
that Thou mayest mourn unmolested in Thy
kingdom." These are words of reproach,
not of entreaty. Nor can you use the words
taught us by the Master of truth: " Forgive
us our debts, as we forgive our debtors."*
For who are the debtors who have sinned
against you ? If it is the race of darkness,
you do not forgive their debts, but make them
be utterly cast out and shut up in eternal impri-
sonment. And how can God forgive your
debts, when He rather sinned against you by
sending you into such a state, than you
against Him, whom you obeyed by going ? If.
this was not a sin in Him, because He was
compelled to do it, this excuse must apply to
you, now that you have been overthrown in
the conflict, more than to Him before the con-
flict began. You suft'er now from the mix-
ture of evil, which was not the case with Him
when nevertheless He was compelled to send
you. So either He requires that you should
forgive Him his debt; or, if He is not in debt
to you, still less are you to Him. It appears
that your sacrifices and your pure and simple
prayers are false and vile blasphemies.

18. How is it, by the way, that you use the
words temple, altar, sacrifice, for the purpose
of commending your own practices ? If such
things can be spoken of as properly belonging
to true religion, they must constitute the true
worship of the true God. And if there is such
a thing as true sacrifice to the true God, which
is implied in the expression divine honors,
there must be some one true sacrifice of which
the rest are imitations. On the one hand, we
have the spurious imitations in the case of
false and lying gods, that is, of devils, who
proudly demand divine honors from their de-
luded votaries, as is or was the case in the
temples and idols of the Gentiles, On the
other hand, we have the prophetic intima-
tions of one most true sacrifice to be offered
for the sins of all believers, as in the sacrifices
enjoined by God on our fathers; along with
which there was also the svmbolical anointing

3 Ps. Ixxix. g.

4 Matt. vi. 12.

liOOK XX.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.^AN.

261

' typical of Christ, as tlie name Christ itself
! means anointed. The animal sacrifices, there-
' fdre, presumptuously claimed by devils, were
n imitation of the true sacrifice which is due
! only to the one true God, and which Christ
alone offered on His altar. Thus the apostle
says: "The sacrifices which the Gentiles
(iffer, they offer to devils, and not to God."'
He does not find fault with sacrifices, but with
offering to devils. The Hebrews, again, in
! their animal sacrifices, which they offered to
God in many varied forms, suitably to the
significance of the institution, typified the
sacrifice offered by Christ. This sacrifice is
also commemorated by Christians, in the sa-
cred offering and participation of the body and
lilood of Christ. The Manichaeans under-
stand neither the sinfulness of the Gentile
sacrifices, nor the importance of the Hebrew
sacrifices, nor the use of the ordinance of the
Christian sacrifice. Their own errors are the
offering they present to the devil who has de-
ceived them. And thus they depart from the
faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and to
doctrines of devils, speaking lies in hypocrisy.
19. It may be well that Faustus, or at least
that those who are charmed with Faustus'
writings, should know that the doctrine of a
single principle did not come to us from the
Gentiles; for the belief in one true God, from,
whom every kind of nature is derived, is a
])art of the original truth retained among the
Gentiles, notwithstanding their having fallen
away to many false gods. For the Gentile
philosophers had the knowledge of God, be-
cause, as the apostle says, "the invisible
things of God, from the creation of the world,
are clearly seen, being understood by the
things that are made, even His eternal power
and Godhead; so that they are without ex-
, cuse. " But, as the apostle adds, "when they
I knew God, they glorified Him not as God,
neither were thankful; but became vain in
their imaginations, and their foolish heart w^as
darkened. Professing themselves to be wise,
j they became fools, and changed the glory of
the incorruptible God into an image made
like to corruptible man, and to birds, and
I four-footed beasts, and creeping things. "'^
■f^hese are the idols of the Gentiles, which
they cannot explain except by referring to
the creatures made by God; so that this very
explanation of their idolatry, on which the
! more enlightened Gentiles were wont to pride
'themselves as a proof of their superiority,
shows the truth of the following words of the
npostle: "They worshipped and served the
I creature rather than the Creator, who is

' I Cor. -v. 30.

Rom. i. 20-23.

blessed forever." 3 Where you differ from
the Gentiles, you are in error; where you re-
semble them, you are worse than they. You
do not believe, as they do, in a single princi-
ple; and so you fall into the impiety of be-
lieving the substance of the one true God to
be liable to subjugation and corruption.
As regards the worship of a plurality of gods,
the doctrine of lying devils has led the Gen-
tiles to worship many idols, and you to wor-
ship many phantasms.

20. We do not turn the sacrifices of the
Gentiles into love-feasts, as Faustus says we
do. Our love-feasts are rather a substitute
for the sacrifice spoken of by the Lord, in the
words already quoted: "I will have mercy,
and not sacrifice." At our love-feasts the
poor obtain vegetable or animal food; and so
the creature of God is used, as far as it is
suitable, for the nourishment of man, who is
also God's creature. You have been led by
lying devils, not in self-denial, but in blas-
phemous error, "to abstain from meats
which God hath created to be received with
thanksgiving of them which believe and know
the truth. For every creature of God is
good, and nothing to be refused, if it be re-
ceived with thanksgiving.'''* In return for
the bounties of the Creator, you ungrate-
fully insult Him with your impiety; and be-
cause in our love-feasts flesh is often given to
the poor, you compare Christian charity to
Pagan sacrifices. This indeed, is another
point in which you resemble some Pagans.
You consider it a crime to kill animals, be-
cause you think that the souls of men pass
into them; which is an idea found in the writ-
ings of some Gentile philosophers, although
their successors appear to have thought dif-
ferently. But here again you are most in
error: for they dreaded slaughtering a rela-
tive in the animal; but you dread the slaugh-
ter of your god, for you hold even the souls
of animals to be his members.

21. As to our paying honor to the memory
of the martyrs, and the accusation of Faustus,
that we worship them instead of idols, I should
not care to answer such a charge, were it not
for the sake of showing how Faustus, in his
desire to cast reproach on us, has overstepped
the INIanich^an inventions, and has fallen
heedlessly into a popular notion found in
Pagan poetry, although he is so anxious to be
distinguished from the Pagans. For in saying
that we have turned the idols into martyrs,
he speaks of our worshipping them with sim-
ilar rites, and appeasing the shades of the
departed with wine and food. Do you, then.

3 Rom. i. 25.

4 I Tim. iv. 3, 4.

262

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XX.

believe in siiades ? We never heard you speak
of such things, nor have we read of them in
your books. In fact, you generally oppose
such ideas: for you tell us that the souls of
the dead, if they are wicked, or not purified,
are made to pass through various changes, or
suffer punishment still more severe; while
the good souls are placed in ships, and sail
through heaven to that imaginary region of
light which they died fighting for. According
to you, then, no souls remain near the bury-
ing-place of the body; and how can there be
any shades of the departed ? What and
where are they? Faustus' love of evil-speak-
ing has made him forget his own creed; or
perhaps he spoke in his sleep about ghosts,
and did not wake up even when he saw his
words in writing. It is true that Christians
pay religious honor to the memory of the
martyrs, both to excite us to imitate them,
and to obtain a share in their merits, and the
assistance of their prayers. But we build
altars not to any martyr, but to the God of
martyrs, although it is to the memory of the
martyrs. No one officiating at the altar in
the saints' burying-place ever says. We bring
an offering to thee, O Peter ! or O Paul! or
O Cyprian! The offering is made to God,
who gave the crown of martyrdom, while it is
in memory of those thus crowned. The
emotion is increased by the associations of
the place, and love is excited both towards
those who are our examples, and towards
Him by whose help we may follow such ex-
amples. We regard the martyrs with the
same affectionate intimacy that we feel to-
wards holy men of God in this life, when we
know that their hearts are prepared to endure
the same suffering for the truth of the gospel.
There is more devotion in our feeling towards
the martyrs, because we know that their con-
flict is over; and we can speak with greater con-
fidence in praise of those already victors in
heaven, than of those still combating here.
What is properly divine worship, which the
Greeks call lairia, and for which there is no
word in Latin, both in doctrine and in prac-
tice, we give only to God. To this worship
belongs the offering of sacrifices; as we see
in the word idolatry, which means the giving
of this worship to idols. Accordingly we
never offer, or require any one to offer, sac-
rifice to a martyr, or to a holy soul, or to any
angel. Any one falling into this error is in-
structed by doctrine, either in the way of cor-
rection or of caution. For holy beings them-
selves, whether saints or angels, refuse to
accept what they know to be due to God
alone. We see this in Paul and Barnabas,
when the men of Lycaonia wished to sacrifice

to them as gods, on account of the miracles
they performed. They rent their clothes, and
restrained the people, crying out to them, and
persuading them that they were not gods.
We see it also in the angels, as we read in the
Apocalypse that an angel would not allow
himself to be worshipped, and said to his
worshipper, "I am thy fellow- servant, and
of thy brethen." ' Those who claim this wor-
ship are proud spirits, the devil and his an-
gels, as we see in all the temples and rites of
the Gentiles. Some proud men, too, have
copied their example; as is related of some
kings of Babylon. Thus the holy Daniel
was accused and persecuted, because when
the king made a decree that no petition
should be made to any god, but only to the
king, he was found worshipping and praying
to his own God, that is, the one true God.^
As for those who drink to excess at the feasts
of the martyrs, we of course condemn their
conduct; for to do so even in their own
houses would be contrary to sound doctrine.
But we must try to amend what is bad as
well as prescribe what is good, and must of
necessity bear for a time with some things
that are not according to our teaching. The
rules of Christian conduct are not to be taken
from the indulgences of the intemperate or
the infirmities of the weak. Still, even in
this, the guilt of intemperance is much less
than that of impiety. To sacrifice to the
martyrs, even fasting, is worse than to go
home intoxicated from their feast: to sacri-
fice to the martyrs, I say, which is a different
thing from sacrificing to God in memory of
the martyrs, as we do constantly, in the man-
ner required since the revelation of the New
Testament, for this belongs to the worship
or latria which is due to God alone. But it
is vain to try to make these heretics under-
stand the full meaning of tliese words of the
Psalmist: " He that offereth the sacrifice of
praise glorifieth me, and in this way will I
show him my salvation. "3 Before the com-
ing of Christ, the flesh and blood of this
sacrifice were foreshadowed in the animals
slain; in the passion of Christ the types were
fulfilled by the true sacrifice; after the as-
cension of Christ, this sacrifice is commem-
orated in the sacrament. Between the sacri-
fices of the Pagans and of the Hebrews there
is all the difference that there is between a
false imitation and a typical anticipation. We
do not despise or denounce the virginity of
holy women because there were vestal virgins.
And, in the same way, it is no reproach to
the sacrifices of our fathers that the Gentiles

' Rev. xi.\. 10.

' Dan. vi

3 Ps. 1. 23.

Book XX.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

263

, also had sacrifices. The difference between
1 the Christian and vestal virginity is great, yet
it consists wholly in the being to whom the vow
is made and paid; and so the difference in the
being to whom the sacrifices of the Pagans and
, Hebrews are made and offered makes a wide
■ difference between them. In the one case they
are offered to devils, who presumptuously
make this claim in order to be held as gods, be-
cause sacrifice is a divine honor. In the other
case they are offered to the one true God, as a
type of the true sacrifice, which also was to be
offered to Him in the passion of the body
and blood of Christ.

22. Faustus is wrong in saying that our
Jewish forefathers, in their separation from
the Gentiles, retained the temple, and sacri-
fices, and altars, and priesthood, and aban-
doned only graven images or idols, for they
might have sacrificed, as some do, without
any graven image, to trees and mountains, or
even to the sun and moon and the stars. If
they had thus rendered to these objects the
worship called latria, they would have served
liie creature instead of the Creator, and so
would have fallen into the serious error of
iieathenish superstition; and even without
, idols, they would have found devils ready to
I take advantage of their error, and to accept
' their offerings. For these proud and wicked
spirits feed not, as some foolishly suppose,
on the smell of the sacrifice, and the smoke,
hue on the errors of men. They enjoy not
I)odily refreshment, but a malevolent gratifi-
cation, when they in any way deceive people,
' >r when, with a bold assumption of borrowed
majesty, they boast of receiving divine
honors. It was not, therefore, only the
idols of the Gentiles that our Jewish fore-
fathers abandoned. They sacrificed neither
ito the earth nor to any earthly thing, nor to
! the sea, nor to heaven, nor to the hosts of
1 heaven, but laid the victims on the altar of
'he one God, Creator of all, who required
liiese oft'erings as a means of foreshadowing
the true victim, by whom He has reconciled
ns to Himself in the remission of sins through
our Lord Jesus Christ. So Paul, addressing
!l)elievers, who are made the body of which
Christ is the Head, says: "I beseech you,
I therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God,
I that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice,
I holy, acceptable to God."' The Manichjeans,
I on the other hand, say that human bodies are
[the workmanship of the race of darkness,
jand the prison in which the captive deity is
confined. Thus Faustus' doctrine is very
different from Paul's. But since whosover

■ I

ixom. .\ii. I.

preaches to you another gospel than that ye
have received must be accursed, what Christ
says in Paul is the truth, while Manichaeus in
Faustus is accursed.

23. Faustus says also, without knowing
what he says, that we have retained the man-
ners of the Gentiles. But seeing that the
just lives by faith, and that the end of the
commandment is love out of a pure heart,
and a good conscience, and faith unfeigned,
and that these three, faith, hope, and love,
abide to form the life of believers, it is im-
possible that there should be similarity in the
manners of those who differ in these three
things. Those who believe differently, and
hope differently, and love differently, must
also live differently. And if we resemble the
Gentiles in our use of such things as food
and drink, and houses and clothes and baths,
and those of us who marry, in taking and
keeping wives, and in begetting and bringing
up children as our heirs, there is still a great
difference between the man who uses these
things for some end of his own, and the man
who, in using them, gives thanks to God,
having no unworthy or erroneous ideas about
God. For as you, according to your own
heresy, though you eat the same bread as
other men, and live upon the produce of the
same plants and the water of the same foun-
tain, and are clothed like others in wool and
linen, yet lead a different life, not because
you eat or drink, or dress differently, but
because you differ from others in your ideas
and in your faith, and in all these things have
in view an end of your own — ^the end, namely,
set forth in your false doctrines; in the same
way we, though we resemble the Gentiles in
the use of this and other things, do not re-
semble them in our life; for while the things
are the same, the end is different: for the end
we have in view is, according to the just com-
mandment of God, love out of a pure heart,
and a good conscience, and faith unfeigned;
from which some having erred, are turned to
vain jangling. In this vain jangling you bear
the palm, for you do not attend to the fact
that so great is the difference of life produced
by a different faith, even when the things in
possession and use are the same, that though
your followers have wives, and in spite of
themselves get children, for whom they gather
and store up wealth; though they eat flesh,
drink wine, bathe, reap harvests, gather vin-
tages, engage in trade, and occupy high offi-
cial positions, you nevertheless reckon them
as belonging to you, and not to the Gentiles,
though in their actions they approach nearer
to the Gentiles tlian to you. And though
some of the Gentiles in some things resemble

264

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXI.

you more than your own followers, — those,
for instance, who in superstitious devotion
abstain from flesh, and wine, and marriage,
— you still count your own followers, even
though they use all these things, and so are
unlike you, as belonging to the flock of Man-
ichKus rather than those who resemble you
in their practices. You consider as belong-
ing to you a woman that believes in Mani-
chaeus, though she is a mother, rather than a
Sibyl, though she never marries. But you
will say that many who are called Catholic
Christians are adulterers, robbers, misers,
drunkards, and whatever else is contrary to
sound doctrine. I ask if none such are to be
found in your company, which is almost too
small to be called a company. And because
there are some among the Pagans who are
not of this character, do you consider them
as better than yourselves ? And yet, in fact,
your heresy is so blasphemous, that even

your followers who are not of such a charac- .
ter are worse than the Pagans who are. It is ;
therefore no impeachment to sound doctrine,
which alone is Catholic, that many wish to
take its name, who will not yield to its bene-
ficial influence. We must bear in mind the
true meaning of the contrast which the Lord 1
makes between the little company and the mass !
of mankind, as spread over all the world; for
the company of saints and believers is small, as
the amount of grain is small when compared
with the heap of chaff; and yet the good grain
is quite sufficient far to outnumber you, good
and bad together, for good and bad are both
strangers to the truth. In a word, we are
not a schism of the Gentiles, for we differ from
them greatly for the better; nor are you, for
you differ from them greatly for the worse.'

I [Augustin's exposure of the paganism of Manichseism is an
admirable and effective piece of arg^umentniii ad hominein.
I'hat tfie Cliristianity of Augustin's time was becoming paganized
is undoubted, but iVlanichjeism was pure paganism. — A. H. N.]

BOOK XXI.

FAUSTUS DENIES THAT MANICH.EANS BELIEVE IN TWO GODS. HYLE NO GOD. AUGUSTIN DIS-
CUSSES AT LARGE THE DOCTRINE OF GOD AND HYLE, AND FIXES THE CHARGE OF DUALISM
UPON THE MANICHiEANs.

I. Faustus said: Do we believe in one |
God or in two? In one, of course. If we
are accused of making two gods, I reply that
it cannot be shown that we ever said anything
of the kind. Why do you suspect us of this ?
Because, you say, you believe in two princi-
ples, good and evil. It is true, we believe in
two principles; but one we call God, and the
other Hyle^ or, to use common popular lan-
guage, the devil. If you think this means
two gods, you may as well think that the
health and sickness of which doctors speak are
two kinds of health, or that good and evil are
two kinds of good, or that wealth and poverty
are two kinds of wealth. If I were describing
two things, one white and the other black, or
one hot and the other cold, or one sweet and
the other bitter, it would appear like idiocy
or insanity in you to say that I was describ-
ing two white things, or two hot things, or
two sweet things. So, when I assert that
there are two principles, God and Hyle, you
have no reason for saying that I believe in two
gods. Do you think that we must call them
both gods because we attribute, as is proper,
all the power of evil to Hyle, and all the
power of good to God ? If so, you may as
well say that a poison and the antidote must
both be called antidotes, because each has a
power of its own, and certain effects follow

from the action of both. So also, you may
say that a physician and a poisoner are both
physicians; or that a just and an unjust man
are both just, because both do something. If
this is absurd, it is still more absurd to say
that God and Hyle must both be gods, be-
cause they both produce certain effects. It
is a very childish and impotent wav of argu-
ing, when you cannot refute my statements,
to make a quarrel about names. I grant that
we, too, sometimes call the hostile nature
God; not that we believe it to be God, but
that this name is already adopted by the wor-
shippers of this nature, who in their error
suppose it to be God. Thus the apostle says:
" The god of this world has blinded the
minds of them that believe not." ' He calls
him God, because he would be so called by
his worshippers; adding that he blinds their
minds, to show that he is not the true God.

2. AuGUSTiN replied: You often speak in
your discourses of two gods, as indeed you
acknowledge, though at first you denied it.
And you give as a reason for thus speaking
the words of the apostle: " The god of this
world has blinded the minds of them that be-
lieve not." Most of us punctuate this sen-
tence differently, and explain it as meaning

' 2 Cor. iv. 4.

Book XXI.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^:AN.

265

that the true God has blinded the minds of
unbeHevers. They put a stop after the word
God, and read the following words together.
Or without this punctuation you may, for the
sake of exposition, change the order of the
words, and read, " In whom God has blinded
the minds of unbelievers of this world," which
gives the same sense. The act of blinding
the minds of unbelievers may in one sense
be ascribed to God, as the effect not of mal-
ice, but of justice. Thus Paul himself says
elsewhere, " Is God unjust, who taketh
vengeance?"' and again, "What shall we
say then ? Is there unrighteousness with
God ? God forbid. For Moses saith, I will
have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and
will have compassion on whom I will have
compassion." Observe what he adds, after
asserting the undeniable truth that there is
no unrighteousness with God: "But what
if God, willing to show His wrath, and to
make His power known, endured with much
long-suffering the vessels of wrath fitted for
destruction, and that He might manifest the
riches of His grace towards the vessels of
mercy, which He hath before prepared unto
L;lory?"= etc. Here it evidently cannot be
said that it is one God who shows his wrath,
and makes known his power in the vessels of
wrath fitted for destruction, and another God
who shows his riches in the vessels of mercy.
According to the apostle's doctrine, it is one
r:nd the same God who does both. Hence he
says again, " For this cause God gave them
up to the lusts of their own heart, to unclean-
ness, to dishonor their own bodies between
themselves;'' and immediately after, "For
this cause God gave them up unto vile affec-
tions; " and again, "And even as they did
not like to retain God in their knowledge,
(iod gave them over to a reprobate mind."^
Here we see how the true and just God blinds
the minds of unbelievers. For in all these
words quoted from the apostle no other God
is understood than He whose Son, sent by
Him, came saying, "For judgment am I
come into this world, that they which see not
might see, and that they which see might be
made blind."* Here, again, it is plain to
the minds of believers how God blinds the
minds of unbelievers. For among the secret
things, which contain the righteous principles
of God's judgment, there is a secret which
determines that the minds of some shall be
blinded, and the minds of some enlightened.
Regarding this, it is well said of God, "Thy
judgments are a great deep." ^ The apostle,
in admiration of the unfathomable depth of

this abyss, exclaims: *' O the depth of the
riches both of the wisdom and of the knowl-
edge of God ! How unsearchable are His
judgments, and His ways past finding
out!"^

3. You cannot distinguish between what
God does in mercy and what He does in judg-
ment, because you can neither understand
nor use the words of our Psalter: " I will sing
of mercy and judgment unto Thee, O Lord." ^
Accordingly, whatever in the feebleness of
your frail humanity seems amiss to you, you
separate entirely from the will and judgment
of God: for you are provided with another
evil god, not by a discovery of truth, but by
an invention of folly; and to this god you
attribute not only what you do unjustly, but
also what you suffer justly. Thus you assign
to God the bestowal of blessings, and take
from Him the infliction of judgments, as if
He of whom Christ says that He has prepared
everlasting fire for the wicked were a differ-
ent being from Him who makes His sun to
rise upon the evil and the good, and sends
rain on the just and on the unjust. Why do
you not understand that this great goodness
and great severity belong to one God, but
because you have not learned to sing of mercy
and judgment ? Is not He who causes the
sun to rise on the evil and the good, and
sends rain on the just and on the unjust, the
same who also breaks off the natural branches,
and engrafts contrary to nature the wild olive
tree ? Does not the apostle, in reference to
this, say of this one God: " Thou seest, then,
the goodness and severity of God: to them
which were broken off, severity; but toward
thee, goodness, if thou continue in His good-
ness ? "^ Here it is to be observed how the
apostle takes away neither judicial severity
from God, nor free-will from man. It is a
profound mystery, impenetrable by human
thought, how God both condemns the ungodly
and justifies the ungodly; for both these
things are said of Him in the truth of the
Holy Scriptures. But is the mysteriousness
of the divine judgments any reason for taking
pleasure in cavilling against them ? How
much more becoming, and more suitable to
the limitation of our powers, to feel the same
awe which the apostle felt, and to exclaim,
" O the depth of the riches both of the wis-
dom and of the knowledge of God ! How
unsearchable are His judgments, and His
ways past finding out ! " How much better
thus to admire what you cannot explain, than
to try to make an evil god in addition to the
true God, simply because you cannot under-

' Rom. iii. 5.
3 Rom. i. 24, 25,

- Knm. ix. 14, 15, 22, 2-^.

4 John IX. 3g. 5 Ps. xxxvi. 6.

6 Rom. xi. 33.

7 Ps. ci. 1.

* Rom. xi. 17-24.

266

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXI.

stand the one good God ! For it is not a ques-
tion of names, but of actions.

4. Faustus glibly defends liimself b}^ say-
ing, " We speak, not of two gods, but of God
and ffylr." But when you ask for the mean-
ing of Hyle, you find that it is in fact another
god. If the Manichteans gave the name of
//i7r, as the ancients did, to the unformed
matter which is susceptible of bodily forms,
we should not accuse them of making two
gods. But it is pure folly and madness to
give to matter the power of forming bodies,
or to deny that what has this power is God.
When you give to some other being the power
which belongs to the true God of making the
qualities and forms, by which bodies, ele-
ments, and animals exist, according to their
respective modes, whatever name you choose
to give to this being, you are chargeable with
making another god. There are indeed two
errors in this blasphemous doctrine. In the
first place, you ascribe the act of God to a
being whom you are ashamed to call god;
though you must call him god as long as you
make him do things which only God can do.
In the second place, the good things done by
a good God you call bad, and ascribe to an
evil god, because you feel a childish horror
of whatever shocks the frailty of fallen hu-
manity, and a childish pleasure in the oppo-
site. So you think snakes are made by an
evil being; while you consider the sun so
great a good, that you believe it to be not the
creature of God, but an emission from His
substance. You must know that the true
God, in whom, alas, you have not yet come
to believe, made both the snake along with
the lower creatures, and the sun along with
other exalted creatures. Moreover, among
still more exalted creatures, not heavenly
bodies, but spiritual beings. He has made
what far surpasses the light of the sun, and
what no carnal man can perceive, much less
you, who, in your condemnation of flesh, con-
demn the very principle by which you deter-
mine good and evil. For your only idea of
evil is from the disagreeableness of some
things to the fleshly sense; and your only
idea of good is from sensual gratification.

5. When I consider the things lowest in
the scale of nature, which are within our view,
and which, though earthly, and feeble, and
mortal, are still the works of God, I am lost
in admiration of the Creator, who is so great
in the great works and no less great in the
small. For the divine skill seen in the forma-
tion of all creatures in heaven and earth is
always like itself, even in those things that
differ from one another; for it is everywhere
perfect, in the perfection which it gives to

everything in its own kind. We see each
creature made not as a whole by itself, but in
relation to the rest of the creation; so that
the whole divine skill is displayed in the
formation of each, arranging each in its
proper place and order, and providing what
is suitable for all, both separately and unitedly.
See here, lowest in the scale, the animals
which fly, and swim, and walk, and creep.
These are mortal creatures, whose life, as it
is written, "is as a vapor which appeareth
for a little time.^' ' Each of these, according
to the capacity of its kind, contributes the
measure appointed in the goodness of the
Creator to the completeness of the whole, so
I that the lowest partake in the good which the
j highest possess in a greater degree. Show
me, if you can, any animal, however despica-
ble, whose soul hates its own flesh, and does
not rather nourish and cherish it, by its vital
motion minister to its growth and direct its
activity, and exercise a sort of management
over a little universe of its own, which it
makes subservient to its own preservation.
Even in the discipline of his own body by a
rational being, who brings his body under,
I that earthly passion may not hinder his per-
ception of wisdom, there is love for his own
flesh, which he then reduces to obedience,
which is its proper condition. Indeed, you
yourselves, although your heresy teaches you
a fleshly abhorrence of the flesh, cannot help
loving your own flesh, and caring for its safety
and comfort, both by avoiding all injury from
blows, and falls, and inclement weather, and
by seeking for the means of keeping it in
health. Thus the law of nature is too strong
for your false doctrine. ;

6. Looking at the flesh itself, do we not
see in the construction of its vital parts, in
the symmetry of form, in the position and
arrangement of the limbs of action and the
organs of sensation, all acting in harmony;
do we not see in the adjustment of measures,
in the proportion of numbers, in the order of
weights, the handiwork of the true God, of
whom it is truly said, " Thou hast ordered
all things in measure, and number, and
weight "?"= If your heart was not hardened
and corrupted by falsehood, you would under-
stand the invisible things of God from the
things which He has made, even in these
feeble creatures of flesh. For who is the au-
thor of the things I have mentioned, but He
whose unity is the standard of all measure,
whose wisdom is the model of all beauty, and
whose law is the rule of all order? If you
are blind to these things, hear at least the
words of the apostle.

I Jas. iv. 15.

2 Wisd. xi. 21.

Book XXL]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

267

7. For the' apostle, in speaking of the love
which husbands ought to have for their wives,
gives, as an example, the love of the soul for
The body. The words are: " He that loveth
his wife, loveth himself: for no man ever yet
hated his own flesh, but nourisheth and cher-
isheth it, even as Christ the Church."' Look
at the whole animal creation, and you find in
the instinctive self-preservation of every ani-
mal this natural principle of love to its own
flesh. It is so not only with men, who, when
they live aright, both provide for the safety

their flesh, and keep their carnal appetites
m subjection to the use of reason; the brutes
also avoid pain, and shrink from death, and
escape as rapidly as they can from whatever
might break up the construction of their
bodies, or dissolve the connection of spirit
and flesh; for the brutes, too, nourish and
cherish their own flesh. " For no one ever
yet,'' says the apostle, "hated his own flesh,
but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as
Christ the Church." See where the apostle
begins, and to what he ascends. Consider, if
you can, the greatness which creation derives
from its Creator, embracing as it does the
whole extent from the host of heaven down
to flesh and blood, with the beauty of mani-
fold form, and the order of successive grada-
tions.

8. The same apostle again, when speaking
of spiritual gifts as diverse, and yet tending
to harmonious action, to illustrate a matter
so great, and divine, and mysterious, makes
a comparison with the human body,- — thus
plainly intimating that this flesh is the handi-
work of God. The whole passage, as found
in the Epistle to the Corinthians, is so much
to the point, that though it is long, I think it
not amiss to insert it all: "Now concerning
spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you
ignorant. Ye know that ye were Gentiles,
carried away unto these dumb idols, even as
ye were led. Wherefore I give you to under-
stand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of
God calleth Jesus accursed; and that no man
can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the
Holy Ghost. Now there are diversities of
gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are
diversities of administrations, but the same
Lord. And there are diversities of opera-
tions, but it is the same God which worketh
all in all. But the manifestation of the Spirit
is given to every man to profit withal. For
to one is given by the Spirit the word of wis-
dom; to another the word of knowledge by
the same Spirit; to another faith by tlie same
Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the

I F.pli.

same Spirit; to another the working of mira-
cles; to another prophecy; to another dis-
cerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of
tongues; to another the interpretation of
tongues: but all these worketh that one and
the self-same Spirit, dividing to every man
severally as He will. For as the body is one,
and hath many members, and all the members
of that one body, being many, are one body:
so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we
all baptized into one bod}^, whether we be
Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free;
and have been all made to drink into one
Spirit. For the body is not one member, but
many. If the foot shall say. Because I am
not the hand, I am not of the body; is it
therefore not of the body ? And if the ear
shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not
of the body; is it therefore not of the body?
If the whole body were an eye, where were
the liearing ? If the whole were hearing,
where were the smelling? But now hath God
set the members every one of them in the
body, as it hath pleased Him. And if they
were all one member, where were the body ?
But now are they many members, j^et but one
body. And the eye cannot say unto the hand,
I have no need of thee; nor again the head
to the feet, I have no need of you. Nay,
much more those members of the body, which
seem to be more feeble, are necessary; and
those members of the body which we think to
be less honorable, upon these we bestow more
abundant honor; and our uncomely parts'
have more abundant comeliness. For our
comely parts have no need; but God hath
tempered the body together, having given
more abundant honor to that part which
lacked: that there should be no schism in the
body, but that the members should have the
same care one for another. And whether one
member suffer, all the members suffer with it;
or one member be honored, all the members
rejoice with it."- Apart altogether from
Christian faith, which would lead you to be-
lieve the apostle, if you have common sense
to perceive what is self-evident, let each ex-
amine and see for himself the plain truth re-
garding those things of which the apostle
speaks, — what greatness belongs to the least,
and what goodness to the lowest; for these
are the things which the apostle extols, in
order to illustrate by means of these common
and visible bodily objects, unseen spiritual
realities of the most exalted nature.

9. Whoever, then, denies that our body
and its members, which the apostle so ap-
proves and extols, are the handiwork of God,

2 I Cor. xii. 1-26.

26S

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXI.

3'on see whom he contradicts, preaching con-
trary to what you have received. So, instead
of refuting his opinions, 1 may leave him to
be accursed of all Christians. The apostle
says, God tempered the body. Faustus says,
Not God, but Hyle. Anathemas are more
suitable than arguments to such contradic-
tions. You cannot say that God is here
called the God of this world. And if any
one understands the passage where this ex-
pression does occur to mean that the devil
blinds the minds of unbelievers, we grant that
he does so by his evil suggestions, from yield-
ing to which, men lose the light of righteous-
ness in God's righteous retribution. This is
all in accordance with sacred Scripture. The
apostle himself speaks of temptation from
without: " I fear lest, as the serpent beguiled
Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should
1)6 corrupted from the simplicity and purity
that is in Christ."' To the same purpose
are the words. " Evil communications corrupt
good manners; "= and when he speaks of a
man deceiving himself, "Whoever thinketh
himself to be anything, when he is nothing,
deceiveth himself; " ^ or again, in the passage
already quoted of the judgment of God,
"God gave them over to a reprobate mind,
to do those things which are not convenient." '*
Similarly, in the Old Testament, after the
words, "God did not create death, nor hath
He pleasure in the destruction of the living/'
we read, " By the envy of the devil death
entered into the world. ''s And again of
death, that men may not put the blame from
themselves, "The wicked invite her with
hands and voice; and thinking her a friend,
they are drawn down."^ Elsewhere, how-
ever, it is said, "Good and evil, life and
death, riches and poverty, are from the Lord
God.'' 7 This seems perplexing to people
who do not understand that, apart from the
manifest judgment to follow hereafter upon
every evil work, there is an actual judgment
at the time; so that in one action, besides the
craft of t!ie deceiver and the wickedness of
the voluntary agent, there is also the just
penalty of the judge: for while the devil sug-
gests, and man consents, God abandons. So,
if you join the words, God of this worlds and
understand that the devil blinds unbelievers
by his mischievous delusions, the meaning is
not a bad one. For the word God is not used
by itself, but with the qualification of this
world, that is, of wicked men, who seek to
prosper only in this age. In this sense the
world is also called evil, where it is written,

I 2 Cor. xi. ;?.
•t Rom. i. 28.
7 Ecclus. xi. 14.

- I Cor. XV. 33.

5 Wisd. i. 13, and ii. 24.

3 Gal. vi. 3.
6 Wisd. i. it

"that He might deliver us from this present
evil age."^ In the same way, in the ex-
pression, "whose god is their belly," it is
only in connection with the word 7ohose that
the belly is called god. So also, in the
Psalms, the devils would not be called gods
without adding "of the nations. "^ But in
the passage we are now considering it is not
said, The god of this world, or, Whose god
is their belly, or. The gods of the nations
are devils; but simply, God has tempered the
body, which can be understood only of the
true God, the Creator of all. There is no
disparaging addition here, as in the other
cases. But perhaps Faustus will say that
God tempered the body, not as the maker of
it, in the arrangement of its members, but by
mixing His light with it. Thus Faustus
would attribute to some other being than
God the construction of the body, and the
arrangement of its members, while God tem-
pered the evil of the construction by the mix-
ture of His goodness. Such are the inven-
tions with which the Manichjeans cram feeble
minds. But God, in aid of the feeble, by the
mouth of the sacred writers rebukes this
opinion. For we read a few verses before:
"God has placed the members every one of
them in the body, as it has pleased Him."
Evidently, God is said to have tempered the
bod}', because He has constructed it of many
members, which in their union preserve the
variety of their respective functions.

10. Do the Manich^eans suppose that the
animals which, according to their wild notions,
were constructed by Hy/e in the race of dark-
ness, had not this harmonious action of their
members, commended by the apostle, before
God mixed His light with them; so that then
the head did say to the feet, or the eye to the
hand, I have no need of thee? This is not
and cannot be the Manichsan doctrine, for
they describe the animals as using all these
members, and speak of them as creeping,
walking, swimming, flying, each in its own
kind. They could all see, too, and hear, and
use the other senses, and nourish and cherish
their own bodies with appropriate means and
appliances. Hence, moreover, they had the
power of reproduction, for they are spoken
of as having offspring. All these things, of
which Faust speaks disparagingly as the
works of Hyle, could not be done without that
harmonious arrangement which the apostle
praises and ascribes to God. Is it not now
plain who is to be followed, and who is to be
pronounced accursed ? Indeed, the Mani-
chaeans tell us of animals that could speak;

8 Gal. i. 4.

9 Ps. xcvi. 5.

Book XXI.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

269

and their speeches were heard and understood
and approved of by all creatures, wnether
.reaping things, or quadrupeds, or birds, or
fish. Amazing and supernatural eloquence !
Especially as they had no grammarian or
elocutionist to teach them, and had not passed
through the painful experience of the cane |
rmd the birch. Why, Faustus himself began j
late in life to learn oratory, that he might j
discourse eloquently on these absurdities;!
and witii all his cleverness, after ruining his
health by study, his preaching has gained a
mere handful of followers. What a pity that
he was born in the light, and not in that re-
gion of darkness ! If he had discoursed there
against the light, the whole animal creation,
from the biped to the centipede, from the
dragon to the shell-fish, would have listened
eagerly, and obeyed at once; whereas, when
he discourses here against the race of dark-
ness, he is oftener called eloquent than
learned, and oftener still a false teacher of
the worst kind. And among the few Mani-
chceans w'ho extol him as a great teacher, he
has none of the lower animals as his disciples;
and not even his horse is any the wiser for
his master's instructions, so that the mixture
of a part of deity seems only to make the
animals more stupid. What absurdity is this !
When will these deluded beings have the sense
to compare the description in the Manichaean
fiction of what the animals were formerly in
their own region, with what they are now in
this world? Then their bodies were strong,
now they are feeble; then their power of vision
was such that they were induced to invade the
region of God on account of the beauty which
they saw, now it is too weak to face the rays
of the sun; then they had intelligence suffi-
cient to understand a discourse addressed to
them, now they have no ability of the kind;
then this astonishing and effective eloquence
was natural, now eloquence of the most
meagre kind requires diligent study and
preparation. How many good things did the
race of darkness lose by the mixture of good !
II. Faustus has displayed his ingenuity, in
the remarks to which I am now replying, by
making for himself a long list of opposites-
health and sickness, riches and poverty,
white and black, cold and hot, sweet and bit-
ter. We need not say much about black and
white. Or, if there is a character for good
or evil in colors, so that white must be ascribed
to God and black to Hylc; if God threw a
white color en the wings of birds, when Hyle,
as the Manichaeans say, created them, where
had the crows gone to when the swans got
whitened? Nor need we discuss heat and
cold, for both are good in moderation, and

dangerous in excess. With regard to the
rest, Faustus probablj'' intended that good
and evil, which he might as well have put
first, should be understood as including the
rest, so that health, riches, white, hot, sweet,
should belong to good; and sickness, poverty,
black, cold, bitter, to evil. The ignorance
and folly of this is obvious. It might look
like reviling if I were to take up separately
white and black, hot and cold, sweet and bit-
ter, health and sickness. For if white and
sweet are both good, and black and bitter evil,
how is it that most grapes and all olives be-
come black as they become sweet, and so get
good by getting evil ? And if heat and health
are both good, and cold and sickness evil,
why do bodies become sick when heated ? Is
it healthy to have fever? But I let these
things pass, for they may have been put down
hastil}^ or they may have been given as
merely instances of opposition, and not as
being good and bad, especially as it is no-
where stated that the fire among the race of
darkness is cold, so that heat in this case
niust unquestionably be evil.

12. We pass on, then, to health, riches,
sweetness, which Faustus evidently accounts
good in his contrasts. Was there no health
of body in the race of darkness where animals
were born and grew up and brought forth,
and had such vitality, that when some that
were with child were taken, as the story is,
and were put in bonds in heaven, even the
abortive offspring of a premature birth, fall-
ing from heaven to earth, nevertheless lived,
and grew, and produced the innumerable
kinds of animals which now exist? Or were
there no riches where trees could grow not
only in water and wind, but in smoke and fire,
and could bear such a rich produce, that ani-
mals, according to their several kinds, sprang
from the fruit, and were provided with the
means of subsistence from those fertile trees,
and showed how well fed they were by a
numerous progeny? And all this where there
was no toil in cultivation, and no inclement
change from summer to winter, for there was
no sun to give variety to the seasons by his
annual course. There must have been per-
ennial productiveness where the trees were
not only born in their own element, but had
a supply of appropriate nourishment to make
them constantly fertile; as we see orange-
trees bearing fruit all the year round if they
are well watered. The riches must have been
abundant, and they must have been secure
from harm; for there could be no fear of hail-
storms when there were no light-gatherers
who, in your fable, set the thunder in motion.

13. Nor would the beings in this race of

270

THE AVORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXI.

darkness have sought for food if it had not
been sweet and pleasant, so that they would
have died from want. For we find that all
bodies have their peculiar wants, according
to which food is either agreeable or offensive.
If it is agreeable, it is said to be sweet or
pleasant; if it is offensive, it is said to be
bitter or sour, or in some way disagreeable.
In human beings we find that one desires food
which another dislikes, from a difference in
constitution or habit or state of health. Still
more, animals of quite different make can find
pleasure in food which is disagreeable to us.
Why else should the goats feed so eagerly on
the wild olives ? This food is sweet to them,
as in some sicknesses honey tastes bitter to
us. To a thoughtful inquirer these things
suggest the beauty of the arrangement in
which each finds what suits it, and the great-
ness of the good which extends from the low-
est to the highest, and from the material to
the spiritual. As for the race of darkness, if
an animal sprung from any element fed on
what was produced by that element, doubtless
the food must have been sweet from its ap-
propriateness. Again, if this animal had
found food of another element, the want of
appropriateness would have appeared in its
offensiveness to the taste. Such offensive-
ness is called sourness, or bitterness, or dis-
agreeableness, or something of the kind; or
if its adverse nature is such as to destroy the
harmony of the bodily constitution, and so
take away life or reduce the strength, it is
called poison, simply on account of this want
of appropriateness, while it may nourish the
kind of life to which it is appropriate. So, if
a hawk eat the bread which is our daily food,
it dies; and we die if we eat hellebore, which
cattle often feed on, and which may itself in
a certain form be used as a medicine. If
Faustus had known or thought of this, he
would not have given poison and antidote as
an example of the two natures of good and
evil, as if God were the antidote and Hyle the
poison. For the same thing, of one and the
same nature, kills or cures, as it is used ap-
propriately or inappropriately. In the Mani-
chcean legends, their god might be said to
have been poison to the race of darkness; for
he so injured their bodies, that from being
strong, they became utterly feeble. But then
again, as the light was itself taken, and sub-
jected to loss and injury, it may be said to
have been poison to itself.

14. Instead of one good and one evil prin-
ciple, you seem to make both good or both evil,
or rather two good and two evil; for they are
good in themselves, and evil to one another.
We may see afterwards which is the better or

the worse; but meanwhile we may think of
them as both good in themselves. Thus God
reigned in one region, while Hyle reigned in
the other. There was health in both king-
doms, and rich produce in both; both had a
numerous progeny, and both tasted the sweet-
ness of pleasures suitable to their respective
natures. But the race of darkness, say the
Manichasans, excepting the part which was
evil to the light which it bordered on, was
also evil to itself. As, however, I have al-
ready pointed out many good things in it, if
you can point out its evils, there will still be
two good kingdoms, though the one where
there are no evils will be the better of the
two. What, then, do you call its evils ?
They plundered, and killed, and devoured
one another, according to Faustus. But if
they did nothing else than this, how could
such numerous hosts be born and grow up to
maturity ? They must have enjoyed peace
and tranquillity too. But, allowing the king-
dom where there is no discord to be the
better of the two, still they should both be
called good, rather than one good and the
other bad. Thus the better kingdom will be
that where they killed neither themselves nor
one another; and the worse, or less good,
where, though they fought with one another,
each separate animal preserved its own nature
in health and safety. But we cannot make
much difference between your god and the
prince of darkness, whom no one opposed,
whose reign was acknowledged by all , and
whose proposals were unanimously agreed to.
All this implies great peace and harmony.
Those kingdoms are happy where all agree
heartily in obedience to the king. Moreover,
the rule of this prince extended not only to
his own species, or to bipeds whom you make
the parents of mankind, but to all kinds of
animals, who waited in his presence, obeying
his commands, and believing his declarations.
Do you think people are so stupid as not to
recognize the attributes of deity in your de-
scription of this prince, or to think it possible
that you can have another ? If the authority
of this prince rested on his resources, he
must have been very powerful; if on his fame,
he must have been renowned; if on love, the
regard must have been universal; if on fear,
he must have kept the strictest order. If
some evils, then, were mixed with so many
good things, who that knows the meaning of
words would call this the nature of evil ? Be-
sides, if you call this the nature of evil, be-
cause it was not only evil to the other nature,
but was also evil in itself, was there no evil,
think you, in the dire necessity to which your
god was subjected before the mixture with

Book XXI.J

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

271

the opposite nature, so that he was compelled
to fight with it, and to send his own members
to be swallowed up so mercilessly as to be
beyond the hope of complete recovery ?
Tnis was a great evil in that nature before its
mixture with the only thing you allow to be
evil. Your god must either have had it in
his power not to be injured and sullied by the
race of darkness, in which case his own folly
must have brought him into trouble; or if his
substance was liable to corruption, the object
of your worship is not the incorruptible God
of whom the apostle speaks.' Does not, then,
this liability to corruption, even apart from
the actual experience, seem to you to be an evil
in your god ?

15. It is plain, moreover, that either he
must have been destitute of prescience, — a
great defect, surely, in the Deity, not to know
what is coming; or if he had prescience, he
can never have felt secure, but must have
lieen in constant terror, which you must allow
to be a serious evil. There must have been
tlie fear at every moment, that the time might
he come for that conflict in which his mem-
bers suffered such loss and contamination,
that to liberate and purify them costs infinite
labor, and, after all, can be done only partially.
If it is ofoing too far to attribute this state of
alarm to the Deity himself, his members at
least must have dreaded the prospect of suf-
fering all these evils. Then, again, if they
were ignorant of what was to happen, the
substance of your god must have been so far
wanting in prescience. How many evils do
you reckon in your chief good ? Perhaps you
will say that they had no fear, because they
foresaw, along with the suffering, their ultimate
liberation and triumph. But still they must
have feared for their companions, if they knew
that they were to be cut off from their own
kingdom, and bound for ever in the mass of
darkness.

16. Had they not the charity to feel a
kindly sympathy for those who were doomed
to suffer eternal punishment, without having
committed any sin? These souls that were
to be bound up with the mass, were not they
too part of your god ? Were they not of the
same origin, the same substance ? They at
least must have felt grief or fear in the pros-
pect of their own eternal bondage. To say
that they did not know what was to happen,
while the others did, is to make one and the
same substance partly acquainted with the
future, and partly ignorant. How can you
call this substance the pure, and perfect, and
supreme good, if there were such evils in it,

• I Ti.n. i. 17.

even before its mixture with the evil principle ?
You will have to confess your two principles
either both good or both evil. If you make
two evils, you may make either of them the
worse, as you please. But if you make two
goods, we shall have to inquire which you
make the better. Meanwhile there is an end
to your doctrine of two principles, one good
and the other evil, which are in fact two gods,
one good and the other evil. But if hurting
another is evil, they both hurt one another.
Perhaps the greater evil was in the principle
that first began the attack. But if one began
the injury, the other returned it; and not by
the law of compensation, an eye for an eye,
which you are foolish enough to find fault
with, but with far greater severity. You must
choose which you will call the worse, — the
one that began the injury, or the one that
had the \v\\\ and the power to do still greater
injury. The one tried to get a share in the
enjoyment of light; the other effected the en-
tire overthrow of its opponent. If the one
had got what it desired, it would certainly
have done no harm to itself. But the other,
in the discomfiture of its adversary, did
great mischief to part of itself; reminding us
of the well-known passionate exclamation,
which is on record as having been actually
used, " Perish our friends, if that will rid us
of our enemies." - For part of your god was
sent to sufter hopeless contamination, that
there might be a covering for the mass in
which the enemy is to be buried for ever
alive. So much will he continue to be
dreaded even when conquered and bound,
that the security, such as it is, of one i)art of
the deity must be purchased by the eternal
misery of the other parts. Such is the harm-
lessness of the good principle ! Your god, it
appears, is guilty of the crime with which you
charge the race of darkness — of injuring both
friends and enemies. The charge is proved
in the case of your god, by that final mass in
which his enemies are confined, while his own
subjects are involved in it. In fact, the prin-
ciple that you call god is the more injurious
of the two, both to friends and to enemies.
In the case of Ifv/^, there was no desire to
destroy the opposite kingdom, but only to
possess it; and though some of its subjects
were put to death by the violence of others,
they appeared again in other forms, so that
in the alternation of life and death they had
intervals of enjoyment in their history. But
your god, with all the omnipotence and per-
fect excellence that you ascribe to him, dooms
his enemies to eternal destruction, and his

2 Quoted Cic. /ro Dcjor. 9 9

272

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXII

friends to eternal punishment. And the
height of insanity is in behaving that while
internal contest occasions the injury of the
members of Hylc, victory brings punishment
to the members of God, What means this
folly? To use Faustus' comparison of God
and Hyle to the antidote and poison, the anti-
dote seems to be more mischievous than the
poison. We do not hear of Hyle shutting up
God for ever in a mass of darkness, or driv-
ing its own members into it; or, which is
worst of all, slandering this unfortunate rem-
nant, as an excuse for not effecting its purifi-
cation. For ManichKus, in his Fundamental
Epistle, says that these souls deserved to be
thus punished, because they allowed them-
selves to be led away from their original
brightness, and became enemies of holy light;
whereas it was God himself that sent them to
Jose themselves in the region of darkness,
that light might be opposed to light: which
was unjust, if he forced them against their
will; while, if they went willingl)^ he is un-
grateful in punishing them. These souls can
never have been happy, if they were tormented
with fear before the conflict, from knowing
that they were to become enemies to their
original principle, and then in the conflict
were hopelessly contaminated, and afterwards
eternally condemned. On the other hand,
they can never have been divine, if before the
conflict they were unaware of what was com-
ing, from want of prescience, and then showed
feebleness in the conflict, and suffered misery

afterwards. And what is true of them must
be true of God, since they are of the same! .
substance. Is there any hope of your seeing! i
the folly of these blasphemies ? You attempt,;
indeed, to vindicate the goodness of God, byi
asserting that Hyle when shut up is prevented
from doing any more injury to itself. Hyk,,
it seems, is to get some good, when it has noi
longer any good mixed with it. Perhaps, asj
God before the conflict had the evil of neces-i
sity, when the good was unmixed with evil,i
so Hyle after the conflict is to have the good|
of rest, when the evil is unmixed with good..
Your principles are thus either two evils, j
one worse than the other; or two goods, both,
imperfect, but one better than the other, j
The better, however, is the more miserable;;
for if the issue of this great conflict is that.
the enemy gets some good by the cessation,
of mutual injuries in Hyle, while God's own^
subjects suffer the serious evil of being driven'
into the mass of darkness, we may ask whoi
has got the victory. The poison, we are to
understand, is Hyle, where, nevertheless, ani- 1.
mal life found a plentiful supply of the means . i
of growth and productiveness; while the anti- 1
dote is God, who could condemn his own 1
members, but could not restore them. In
reality, it is as absurd to call the one Hyle, as,
it is to call the other God. These are the j
follies of men who turn to fables because they '
cannot bear sound doctrine.'

I [This is one of Augustin's most effective refutations of Man-
icha;an dualism. — A. H. N.]

BOOK XXII.

FAUSTUS STATES HIS OBJECTIONS TO THE MORALITY OF THE LAW AND THE PROPHETS, AND
AUGUSTIN SEEKS BY THE APPLICATION OF THE TYPE AND THE ALLEGORY TO EXPLAIN AWAY
THE MORAL DIFFICULTIES OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.

I. Faustus said: You ask why we blas-
pheme the law and the prophets. We are so
far from professing or feeling any hostility to
the law and the prophets, that we are ready,
if you will allow us, to declare the falsehood
of all the writings which make the law and
the prophets appear objectionable. But this
you refuse to admit, and by maintaining the
authority of your writers, you bring a perhaps
unmerited reproach upon the prophets; you
slander the patriarchs, and dishonor the law.
You are so unreasonable as to deny that your
writers are false, while you uphold the piety
and sanctity of those who are described in
these writings as guilty of the worst crimes,
and as leading wicked lives. These opinions

are inconsistent; for either these were bad
characters, or the writers were untruthful.

2. Supposing, then, that we agree in con-
demning the writers, we may succeed in vin-
dicating the law and the prophets. By the
law must be understood not circumcision, or
Sabbaths, or sacrifices, or the other Jewish
observances, but the true law, viz., Thou shalt
not kill. Thou shalt not commit adultery,
Thou shalt not bear false witness, and so on.
To this law, promulgated throughout the
world, that is, at the commencement of the
present constitution of the world, the Hebrew
writers did violence, by infecting it with the
pollution of their disgusting precepts about
circumcision and sacrifice. As a friend of

Booi-: XXII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

7 '»
/ J

the law, you should join with me in condemn-
ing the Jews for injuring the law by this mix-
ture of unsuitable precepts. Plainly, you
must be aware that these precepts are not the
law, or any part of the law, since you claim
to be righteous, though you make no attempt
to keep the precepts. In seeking to lead a
righteous life, you pay great regard to the
commandments which forbid sinful actions,
while you take no notice of the Jewisli ob-
servances; which' would be unjustifiable if
they were one and the same law. You resent
as a foul reproach being called negligent of
the precept," Thou shalt not kill," or " Thou
shalt not commit adultery.'' And if you
showed the same resentment at being called
uncircumcised, or negligent of the Sabbath,
it would be evident tliat you considered both
to be the law and the commandment of God.
In fact, however, you consider the honor and
L^lory of keeping the one no way endangered
by disregard of the ^other. It is plain, as I
have said, that these observances are not the
law, but a disfigurement of the law. If we
condemn them, it is not as being genuine,
but as spurious. In this condemnation there
is no reproach of the law, or of God its au-
thor, but only of those who published their
shocking superstitions under these names.
If we sometimes abuse the venerable name of
law in attacking the Jewish precepts, the fault
is yours, for refusing to distinguish between
Hebrew observances and the law. Only re-
store to the law its proper dignity, by remov-
ing these foul Israelitish blots; grant that these
writers are guilty of disfiguring the law, and
you will see at once that we are the enemies
I not of the law, but of Judaism. You are
! misled by the word law; for you do not know
to what that name properly belongs.

3. For my part, I see no reason for your
thinking that we blaspheme your prophets
land patriarchs. There would indeed be some
-round for the charge, if we had been directly
')r remotely the authors of the account given
of their actions. But as this account is written
ijither by themselves, in a criminal desire to
l)e famous for their misdeeds, or by their
companions and coevals, why should you
'l)lame us ? You condemn them in abhorrence
of the wicked actions of which they have vol-
|Untarily declared themselves guilty, though
Ithere was no occasion for such a confession.
< )r if the narrative is only a malicious fiction,
let its authors be punished, let the books be
condemned, let the prophetic name be cleared
from this foul reproach, let the patriarchs re-
cover the respect due to their simplicity and
ipurity of manners.

I 4. These books, moreover, contain shock-
is

^ng calumnies against God' himself. We are
told that he existed from eternity in darkness,
and admired the light when he saw it; that
he was so ignorant of the future, that he gave
Adam a command, not foreseeing that it
would be broken; that his perception was so
limited that he could not see Adam when,
from the knowledge of his nakedness, he hid
himself in a corner of Paradise; tliat envy
made him afraid lest his creature man should
taste of the tree of life, and live for ever;
that afterwards he was greedy for blood, and
fat from all kinds of sacrifices, and jealous if
they were offered to any one but himself;
that he was enraged sometimes against his
enemies, sometimes against his friends; that
he destroyed thousands of men for a slight
offense, or for nothing; that he threatened to
come with a sword and spare nobody, right-
eous or wicked. The authors of such bold
libels against God might very well slander the
men of God. You must join with us in lay-
ing the blame on the writers if you wish to
vindicate the prophets.

5. Again, we are not responsible for what
is said of Abraham, that in his irrational crav-
ing to have children, and not believing God,
who promised that his wife Sara should have
a son, he defiled himself with a mistress, with
the knowledge of his wife, which only made
it worse;' or that, in sacrilegious profanation
of his marriage, he on different occasions,
from avarice and greed, sold his wife Sara for
the gratification of the kings Abimelech and
Pharas, telling them that she was his sister,
because she was very fair."" The narrative is
not ours, which tells how Lot, Abraham's
brother, after his escape from Sodom, lay
with his two daughters on the mountain ^
(better for him to have perished in the con-
flagration of Sodom, than to have burned
with incestuous passion); or how Isaac imi-
tated his father's conduct, and called his wife
Rebecca his sister, that he might gain a
shameful livelihood by her;-* or how his son
Jacob, husband of four wives — two full sisters,
Rachel and Leah, and their handmaids — led
the life of a goat among them, so that there
was a daily strife among his women who
should be the first to lay hold of him when he
came from the field, ending sometimes in their
hiring him from one another for the night; ^
or, again, how his son Judah slept with his
daughter-in-law Tamar, after she had been
married to two of his sons, deceived, we are
told, by the harlot's dress which Tamar put
on, knowing that her father-in-law was in the

I Oen. .\vi. 2-4. ^ Gen. xii. 13, and xx. 2.

3 Gen. xix. 33, 35. 4 Gen. xxvi. 7. 5 Gen. xxix. and xxx.

2/4

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXII.

habit of associating witli such cliaracters; ' or
how David, after having a number of wives, se-
duced the wife of his soldier Uriah, and caused
Uriah himself to be killed in the battle;^
or how his son Solomon had three hundred
wives, and seven hundred concubines, and
princesses without number; ^ or how the first
prophet Hosea got children from a prostitute,
and, what is worse, it is said that this dis-
graceful conduct was enjoined by God;-* or
how Moses committed murder, ^ and plundered
Egypt,* and waged wars, and commanded, or
himself perpetrated, many cruelties. ' And
he too was not content with one wife. We
are neither directly nor remotely the authors
of these and similar narratives, which are
found in the books of the patriarchs and the
prophets. Either your writers forged these
things, or the fathers are really guilty. Choose
which you please; the crime in either case is
detestable, for vicious conduct and falsehood
are equally hateful.

6. AuGUSTiN replied: You understand
neither the symbols of the law nor the acts of
the prophets, because you do not know what
holiness or righteousness means. We have
repeatedly shown at great length, that the
precepts and symbols of the Old Testament
contained both what was to be fulfilled in
obedience through the grace bestowed in the
New Testament, and what was to be set aside
as a proof of its having been fulfilled in the
truth now made manifest. For in the love of
God and of our neighbor is secuied the accom-
plishment of the precepts of the law, while
the accomplishment of its promises is shown
in the abolition of circumcision, and of other
typical observances formerly practised. By
the precept men were led, through a sense of
guilt, to desire salvation; by the promise they
were led to find in the typical observances the
assurance that the Saviour would come. The
salvation desired was to be obtained through
the grace bestowed on the appearance of the
New Testament; and the fulfillment of the
expectation rendered the types no longer
necessary. The same law that was given by
Moses became grace and truth in Jesus
Christ. By the grace in the pardon of sin,
the precept is kept in force in the case of
those supported by divine help. By the truth
the symbolic rites are set aside, that the
promise might, in those who trust in the di-
vine faithfulness, be brought to pass.

7. Those, accordingly, who, finding fault
with what they do not understand, call the
typical institutions of the law disfigurements

I Gen. xxxviii.
4 Hos. i. 2, j.
7 Ex. xvii. 9.

2 2 Sam. xi. 4, 15.
5 Ex. ii. 12.

3 1 Kinss xi. 1-3.
6 Ex. xii. 35, 36.

and excrescences, are like men displeased
with things of which they do not know the
use. As if a deaf man, seeing others move
their lips in speaking, were to find fault with
the motion of the mouth as needless and un-
sightly; or as if a blind man, on hearing a
house com_mended, were to test the truth of
what he heard by passing his hand over the
surface of the wall, and on coming to the
windows were to cry out against them as flaws
in the level, or were to suppose that the wall
had fallen in.

8. How shall I make those whose minds
are full of vanity understand that the actions
of the prophets were also mystical and pro-
phetic? The vanity of their minds is shown
in their thinking that we believe God to have
once existed in darkness, because it is written,
" Darkness was over the deep." ^ As if we
called the deep God, where there was dark-
ness, because the light did not exist there
before God made it by His word. From their
not distinguishing between the light which is
God, and the light which God made, they
imagine that God must have been in darkness
before He made light, because darkness was
over the deep before God said, "Let there
be light, and there was light." In the New
Testament both these things are ascribed to
God. For we read, "God is light, and in
Him is no darkness at all;"' and again,
" God, who commanded the light to shine out
of darkness, hath shined in our hearts.^' ^° So
also, in the Old Testament, the name
"Brightness of eternal light''" is given to
the wisdom of God, which certainly was not
created, for by it all things were made; and
of the light which exists only as the produc-
tion of this wisdom it is said, " Thou wilt light
my candle, O Lord; my God, Thou wilt en-
lighten my darkness."'^ In the same way,
in the beginning, when darkness was over the
deep, God said, " Let there be light, and
there was light," which only the light-giving,
light, which is God Himself, could have made. .

9. For as God is His own eternal happi- ,
ness, and is besides the bestower of happi-j
ness, so He is His own eternal light, and isj
also the bestower of light. He envies the,
good of none, for He is Himself the source
of happiness to all good beings; He fears the,
evil of none, for the loss of all evil beings is
in their being abandoned by Him. He can
neither be benefited by those on whom He,
Himself bestows happiness, nor is He afraid,
of those whose misery is the doom awarded
by His own judgment. Very different, 0;
Manichasus, is the object of your worship.,

8 Gen. i. 2.

" W'isd. vii. 26.

9 I John. i. 5.
•= Ps. xviii. 28.

1° 2 Cor. iv. 6.

Book XXII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

275

You have departed from God in the pursuit
of your own fancies, which of all kinds have
increased and multiplied in your foolish rov-
ing hearts, drinking in through the sense of
sight the light of the heavenly bodies. This
light, though it too is made by God, is not
to be compared to the light created in the
minds of the pious, whom God brings out of
darkness into light, as He brings them out of
sinfulness into righteousness. Still less can
it be compared to that inaccessible light from
which all kinds of light are derived. Nor is
this light inaccessible to all; for " blessed are
the pure in heart, for they shall see God,"'
"God is light, and in Him is no darkness at
all;'' but the wicked shall not see light, as is
said in Isaiah.^ To them the light-giving
light is inaccessible. From the light comes
not only the spiritual light in the minds of
the pious, but also the material light, which
is not denied to the wicked, but is made to
rise on the evil and on the good.

10. So, when darkness was over the deep.
Me who was light said, " Let there be light.''
I'rom what light this light came is clear; for
:the words are, "God said." What light is
{that which was made, is not so clear. For
there has been a friendly discussion among
[Students of the sacred Scriptures, whether
God then made the light in the minds of the
;ingels, or, in other words, these rational
spirits themselves, or some material light
ivhich exists in the higher regions of the uni-
verse beyond our ken. For on the fourth day
He made the visible luminaries of heaven.
\nd it is also a question whether these bodies
,vere made at the same time as their light, or
|.vere somehow kindled from the light made
il ready. But whoever reads the sacred writ-
ings in the pious spirit which is required to
(inderstand them, must be convinced that
|\'hatever the light was which was made when,
It the time that darkness was over the deep,
'od said, " Let there be light," it was created
L;ht, and the creating Light was the maker
•\ it.

. II. Nor does it follow that God, before He
Inade light, abode in darkness, because it is
lid that darkness was over the deep, and
hen that the Spirit of God moved on the
iaters. The deep is the unfathomable
hyss of the waters. And the carnal mind
iiight suppose that the Spirit abode in the
larkness which was over the deep, because it
li said that He moved on the waters. This
l from not understanding how the light shin-
p in darkness, and the darkness compre-
jendeth it not, till l)y the word of God those

■ Matt. V. 8.

2 Isa. viii. 20.

who were darkness are made light, and it is
said to them, "Ye were once darkness, but
now are ye light in the Lord."^ But if
rational minds which are in darkness through
a sinful will cannot comprehend the light of
the wisdom of God, though it is present
everywhere, because they are separated from
it not in place, but in disposition: why may
not the Spirit of God have moved on the
darkness of the waters, when He moved on
the waters, though at an immeasurable dis-
tance from it, not in place, but in nature?

12. In all this I know I am singing to deaf
ears; but the Lord, from whom is the truth
which we speak, can open some ears to catch
the strain. But what shall we say of those
critics of the Holy Scriptures who object to
God's being pleased with His own works, and
find fault with the words, "God saw the light
that it was good," as if this meant that God
admired the light as something new ? God's
seeing His works that they were good, means
that the Creator approved of His own works
as pleasing to Himself. For God cannot be
forced to do anything against His will, so
that He should not be pleased with His own
work; nor can He do anything by mistake, so
that He should regret having done it. Why
should the Manichseans object to our God
seeing His work that it was good, when their
god placed a covering before himself when he
mingled his, own members with the darkness?
For instead of seeing his work that it is good,
he refuses to look at it because it is evil.

13. Faustus speaks of our God as aston-
ished, which is not said in Scripture; nor does
it follow that one must be astonished when he
sees anything to be good. There are many
good things which we see without being as-
tonished, as if they were better than we ex-
pected; we merely approve of them as being
what they ought to be. We can, however,
give an instance of God being astonished, not
from the Old Testament, which the Mani-
chaeans assail with undeserved reproach, but
from the New Testament, which they profess
to believe in order to entrap the unwary. For
they acknowledge Christ as God, and use this
as a bait to entice Christ's followers into their
snares. God, then, was astonished when
Christ was astonished. For we read in the
Gospel, that when Christ heard the faith of a
certain centurion, He was astonished, and
said to His disciples, "Verily I have not
found so great faith, no, not in Israel." * We
have already given our explanation of the
words, "God saw that it was good." Better
men may give a better explanation. Mean-

3 Eph. V. 8

4 Matt. viii. 10.

276

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXII-

while let the Manichaeans explain Christ's
being astonished at wliat He foresaw before
it hirppened, and knew before He heard it.
For though seeing a thing to be good is quite
different from being astonished at it, in this
case there is some resemblance, for Jesus was
astonished at the light of faith which He
Himself had created in the heart of the cen-
turion; for Jesus is the true light, which en-
lighteneth every man that cometh into the

world.

14. Thus an irreligious Pagan might bring
the same reproaches against Christ in the
Gospel, as Faustus brings against God in the
Old Testament. He might say that Christ
lacked foresight, not only because He was
astonished at the faith of the centurion, but
because He chose Judas as a disciple who
proved disobedient to His commands; as
Faustus objects to the precept given in Para-
dise, which, as it turned out, was not obeyed.
He might also cavil at Christ's not knowing
who touched Him, when the woman suffering
from an issue of blood touched the hem of
His garment; as Faustus blames God for not
knowing where Adam had hid himself. If
this ignorance is implied in God's saying,
"Where art thou, Adam?"' the same may
be said of Christ's asking, " Who* touched
me?"^ The Pagans also might call Christ
timid and envious, in not wishing five of the
ten virgins to gain eternal life by entering
into His kingdom, and in shutting them out,
so that they knocked in vain in their entreaty
to have the door opened, as if forgetful of
His own promise, " Knock, and it shall be
opened unto you; " ^ as Faustus charges God
with fear and envy in not admitting man after
his sin to eternal life. Again, he might call
Christ greedy of the blood, not of beasts, but
of men, because he said, " He that loseth his
life for my sake, shall keep it unto life eter-
nal;"'* as Faustus reproaches God in refer-
ence to those animal sacrifices which pre-
figured the sacrifice of blood-shedding by
which we are redeemed. He might also ac-
cuse Christ of jealousy, because in narrating
His driving the buyers and sellers out of the
temple, the evangelist quotes as applicable to
Him the words, " The jealousy of Thine
house hath eaten me up;"^ as Faustus ac-
cuses God of jealousy in forbidding sacrifices
to be offered to other gods. He might say
that Christ was angry with both His friends
and His enemies: with His friends, because
He said, " The servant that knows his lord's
will, and doeth it not, shall be beaten with
man)' stripes;" and with His enemies, be-

1 Gen. iii. 9.
4 Matt. X. 39.

2 Luke viii. 44, 45.

5 John ii. 17.

3 Matt. vii. 7.

cause He said, " If any one shall not receive
you, shake off against him the dust of your
shoes; verily I say unto you, that it shall be
more tolerable for Sodom in the day of judg-
ment than for that city; " * ,as Faustus accuses
God of being angry at one time with His
friends, and at another with His enemies;
both of whom are spoken of thus by the apos-
tle: " They that have sinned without law shall
perish without law, and they that have sinned
in the law shall be judged by the law." ^ Or
he might say that Christ shed the blood of
many without mercy, for a slight offense or
for nothing. For to a Pagan there would ap-
pear to be little or no harm in not having a
wedding garment at the marriage feast, for
which our King in the Gospel commanded a
man to be bound hand and foot, and cast into
outer darkness;^ or in not wishing to have
Christ for a king, which is the sin of which
Christ says, " Those that would not have me
to reign over them, bring hither and slay
before me;"' as Faustus blames God in the
Old Testament for slaughtering thousands of
human beings for slight offenses, as Faustus
calls them, or for nothing. Again, if Faustus
finds fault with God's threatening to come
with the sword, and to spare neither the right-
eous nor the wicked, might not the Pagan find
as much fault with the words of the Apostle
Paul, when he says of our God, ' ' He spared not
His own Son, but gave Him up for us all; " '"
or of Peter, when, in exhorting the saints to
be patient in the midst of persecution and
slaughter, he says, " It is time that judgment
begin from the house of God; and if it first!
begin at us, what shall the end be of them
that believe not the gospel of the Lord ? Andi
if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shallj
the ungodly and sinner appear ? " " What can!
be more righteous than the Only-Begotten,i
whom nevertheless the Father did not spare?]
And what can be plainer than that the right
eous also are not spared, but chastised with|
manifold afflictions, as is clearly implied in;
the words, "If the righteous scarcely arei
saved " ? As it is said in the Old Testament
"Whom the Lord loveth He correcteth, anc
chastiseth every 'son whom He receiveth; "'■
and, "If we receive good at the hand of thd
Lord, shall we not also receive evil ? " '^ Sci
we read also in the New Testament, " Whon-i
I love I rebuke and chasten; " '-» and, " If wtt
judge ourselves, we shall not be judged of th('
Lord; but when we are judged, we are cor
rected of the Lord, that we may not be conj
demned with the world. '"s if a Pagan wen

6 Matt. X. 14, 15.
9 Luke xix. 27.
'2 Prov. iii. 12.
'S I Cor. xi. 31, 32.

7 Rom. ii. 12.
10 Rom. viii. 32.
13 Job ii. 10.

8 Matt. xxii. 11, i;)
II I Pet. iv. 17, 18
14 Rev. iii. 19.

Book XXII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^EAN.

277

to make such objections to the New Testa-
ment, would not the Manichreans try to an-

swer

them, though they themselves make
similar objections to the Old Testament?
But supposing them able to answer the Pagan,
how absurd it would be to defend in the one
Testament what they find fault with in the
other ! But if they could not answer the ob-
jections of the Pagan, why should they not
allow in both Testaments, instead of in one
only, that what appears wrong to unbelievers,
from their ignorance, should be believed to
be right by pious readers even when they also
are ignorant ?

15. Perhaps our opponents will maintain
that these parallel passages quoted from the
New Testament are themselves neither au-
thoritative nor true: for they claim the im-
pious liberty of holding and teaching, that
whatever they deem favorable to their heresy
was said by Christ and the apostles; while
they have the profane boldness to say, that
whatever in the same writings is unfavorable
to them is a spurious interpolation I have

{already at some length, as far as the inten-
jtion of the present work required, exposed
I the unreasonableness of this assault upon the
authority of the whole of Scripture.

16. At present I would call attention to the
fact, that when the Manichaeans, although
they disguise their blasphemous absurdities
under the name of Christianity, bring such
objections against the Christian Scriptures,
we have to defend the authority of the divine
record in both Testaments against the Mani-

jch^eans as much as against the Pagans. A
Pagan might find fault with passages in the
New Testament in the same way as Faustus
does with what he calls unworthy representa-
tions of God in the Old Testament; and the
Pagan might be answered by the quotation
of similar passages from his own authors, as
in Paul's speech at Athens.' Even in Pagan
writings we might find the doctrine that God
created and constructed the world, and that
jHe is the giver of light, which does not imply
jthat before light was made He abode in dark-
|ness; and that when His work was finished
He was elated with joy, which is more than
saying that He saw that it was good; and that
He made a law with rewards for obedience,
and punishments for disobedience, by which
they do not mean to say that God was ignorant
of the future, because He gave a law to those
by whom it was to be broken. Nor could
they make asking questions a proof of a want
iof foresight even in a human beintr; for in

Itheir books many questions are

being; for
asked

only

' Acts xvii. 28.

for the purpose of using the answers for the
conviction of the persons addressed: for the
questioner knows not only what answer he
desires, but what will actually be given.
Again, if the Pagan tried to make out God
to be envious of any one, because He will not
give happiness to the wicked, he would find
many passages in the writings of his own au-
thors in support of this principle of the divine
government.

17. The only objection that a Pagan would
make on the subject of sacrifice would refer
to our reason for finding fault with Pagan
sacrifices, when in the Old Testament God is
described as requiring men to offer sacrifice
to Him. If I were to reply at length on this
subject, I might prove to him that sacrifice is
due only to the one true God, and that this
sacrifice was offered by the one true Priest,
the Mediator of God and man; and that it
was proper that this sacrifice should be pre .
figured by animal sacrifices, in order to fore-
shadow the flesh and blood of the one sacrifice
for the remission of sins contracted by flesh
and blood, which shall not inherit the king-
dom of God: for the natural body will be en-
dowed with heavenly attributes, as the fire in
the sacrifice typified the swallowing up of
death in victory. Those observances properly
belonged to the people whose kingdom and
priesthood were prophetic of the King and
Priest who should come to govern and to con-
secrate believers in all nations, and to lead
them into the kingdom of heaven, and the
holy society of angels and eternal life. And
as this true sacrifice was piously set forth in
the Hebrew observances, so it was impiously
caricatured by the Pagans, because, as the
apostle says, what they offer they offer to
devils, and not to God.= The typical rite of
blood-shedding in sacrifice dates from the
earliest ages, pointing forward from the out-
set of human history to the passion of the
Mediator. For Abel is mentioned in the
sacred Scripture as the first who offered such
sacrifices. 3 We need not therefore wonder
that fallen angels who occupy the air, and
whose chief sins are pride and falsehood,
should demand from their worshippers by
whom they wished to be considered as gods
what they knew to be due to God only. This
deception was favored by the folly of the
human heart, especially when regret for the
dead led to the making of likenesses, and so
to the use of images.'* By the increase of this
homage, divine honors came to be paid to tlie
dead as dwelling in heaven, while devils took
their place on earth as the objects of worship.

2 I Cor. X. ;

3 Gen. iv. 4.

4 Wisd. xiv. 15.

278

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXII.

ex-

the
not

and required that their deluded and degraded
votaries should present sacrifices to tliem.
Thus the nature of sacrifice as due only to
God appears not only when God righteously
claims it, but also when a false god proudly ar-
rogates it. If the Pagan was slow to believe
these things, I should argue from the prophe-
cies, and point out that, though uttered long
ago, they are now fulfilled. If he still re-
mained in unbelief, this is rather to be
pected than to be wondered at; for
prophecy itself intimates that all would
believe.

18. If the Pagan, in the next place, were
to find fault with both Testaments as attri-
buting jealousy to God and Christ, he would
only show his own ignorance of literature, or
his forgetfulness. For though their philoso-
phers distinguish between desire and passion^
joy and gratification, caution and fear, gen-
tleness and tender-heartedness, prudence and
cunning, boldness and daring, and so on,
giving the first name in each pair to what is
good, and the second to what is bad, their
books are notwithstanding full of instances in
which, by the abuse of these words, virtues
are called by the names which properly be-
long to vices; as passion is used for desire,
gratification for joy, fear for caution, tender-
heartedness for gentleness, cunning for pru-
dence, daring for boldness. The cases are
innumerable in which speech exhibits similar
inaccuracies. Moreover, each language has
its own idioms. For in religious writings
I remember no instance of the word tender-
heartedness being used in a bad sense. And
common usage affords examples of similar
peculiarities in the use of words. In Greek,
one word stands for two distinct things, labor
and pain; while we have a separate name for
each. Again, we use the word in two senses,
as when we say of what is not dead, that it
has life; and again, of any one that he is a
man of good life, whereas in Greek each of
these meanings has a word of its own. So
that, apart from the abuse of words which
prevails in all languages, it may be an Hebrew
idiom to use jealousy in two senses, as a man is
called jealous when he suffers from a diseased
state of mind caused by distress on account
of the faithlessness of his wife, in which sense
the word cannot be applied to God; or as
when diligence is manifested in guarding con-
jugal chastity, in which sense it is profitable
for us not only unhesitatingly to admit, but
thankfully to assert, that God is jealous of
His people when He calls them His wife, and
warns them against committing adultery with
a multitude of false gods. The same may be
said of the anger of God. For God does not

suffer perturbation when He visits men in
anger; but either by an abuse of the word, or
by a peculiarity of idiom, anger is used in the
sense of punishment.

19. The slaughter of multitudes would not
seem strange to the Pagan, unless he denied
the judgment of God, which Pagans do not^
for they allow that all things in the universe,
from the highest to the lowest, are governed
by God's providence. But if he would not
allow this, he would be convinced either by
the authority of Pagan writers, or by the more
tedious method of demonstration; and if still
obstinate and perverse, he would be left to
the judgment which he denies. Then, if he
were to give instances of the destruction of
men for no offense, or for a very slight one,
we should show that these were offenses, and
that they were not slight. For instance, to-
take the case already referred to of the wed-
ding garment, we should prove that it was a
great crime in a man to attend the sacred
feast, seeking not the bridegroom's glory, but
his own, or whatever the garment may b^
found on better interpretation to signify.
And in the case of the slaughter before the
king of those who would not have him to reign
over them, we might perhaps easily prove
that, though it may be no sin in a man to re-
fuse to obey his fellow-man, it is both a fault
and a great one to reject the reign of Him in
whose reign alone is there righteousness, and
happiness, and continuance.

20. Lastly, as regards Faustus' crafty in-
sinuation, that the Old Testament misrepre-
sents God as threatening to come with a sword,
which will spare neither the righteous nor
the wicked, if the words were explained to the
Pagan, he would perhaps disagree neither with
the Old Testament nor with the New; and
he might see the beauty of the parable in the
Gospel, which people who pretend to be
Christians either misunderstand from their
blindness, or reject from their perversity.
The great husbandman of the vine uses his
pruning-hook differently in the fruitful and
in the unfruitful branches; yet he spares
neither good nor bad, pruning one and cut-
ting off the other.' There is no man so just
as not to require to be tried by affliction to
advance, or to establish, or to prove his vir-
tue. Do the Manichceans not reckon Paul as
righteous, who, while confessing humbly and
honestly his past sins, still gives thanks for
being justified b}^ faith in Jesus Christ? Was
Paul then spared by Him whom fools misun-
derstand, when He says, " I will spare neither
the righteous nor the sinner"? Hear the

I John XV. 1-3.

Book: XXII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANlCHyEAN.

-79

apostle himself: " Lest I should be exalted
above measure by the abundance of the revela-
tion, there was given me a thorn in the flesh,
a messenger of Satan to buffet me. For this
I besought the Lord thrice, that He would
remove it from me; and He said unto me,
My grace is sufificient for thee: for strength
is perfected in weakness." ' Here a just man
is not spared that his strength might be per-
fected in weakness by Him who had given
him an angel of Satan to buffet him. If you
say that the devil gave this angel, it follows
that the devil sought to prevent Paul's being
exalted above measure by the abundance of
the revelation, and to perfect his strength.
This is impossible. Therefore He who gave
up this righteous man to be buffeted by the
messenger of Satan, is the same as He who,
through Paul, gave up to Satan himself the
wicked persons of whom Paul says: "I have
delivered them to Satan, that they may learn
not to blaspheme." ^ Do you see now how
the Most High spares neither the righteous
nor the wicked? Or is it the sword that
frightens you ? For to be buffeted is not so
l-ad as to be put to death. But did not the
thousands of martyrs suffer death in various
forms? And could their persecutors have
:iad this power against them except it had
been given them by God, who thus spared
neither the righteous nor the wicked ? For
the Lord Himself, the chief martyr, says ex-
pressly to Pilate: "Thou couklst have no
power at all against me, except it were given
thee from above." ^ Paul also, besides re-
cording his own experience, says that the
afflictions and persecutions of the righteous
exhibit the judgment of God.* This truth is
set forth at length by the Apostle Peter in
the passage already quoted, where he says:
''It is time that judgment should begin at
the house of the Lord. And if it first begin
at us, what shall the end be of those that be-
lieve not the gospel of God? And if the
righteous scarcely are saved, where shall the
ungodly antl the sinner appear ? " ^ Peter also
explains how the wicked are not spared, for
they are branches broken off to be burnt;
while the righteous are not spared, because
their purification is to be brought to perfec-
tion. He ascribes these things to the will of
Him who says in the Old Testament, I will
spare neither the righteous nor the wicked;
for he says: " It is better, if the will of the
Spirit of God be so, that we suffer for well-
doing than for evil-doing.''* So, when by
the will of the Spirit of God men suffer for
well-doing, the righteous are not spared; when

' 2 Cor. xii. j-q.
4 2 1 he?*, i. -.

2 I Tim. i. 2o.
5 I Pet. iv. 17, i8

3 John xix. 11.
I Pet. iii. 17.

they suffer for evil-doing, the wicked are not
spared. In both cases it is according to the
will of Him who says: I will spare neither the
righteous nor the wicked; correcting the one
as a son, and punishing the other as a trans-
gressor.

21. I have thus shown, to the best of my
power, that the God we worship did not abide
from eternity in darkness, but is Himself
light, and in Him is no darkness at all; and
in Himself dwells in light inaccessible; and
the brightness of this light is His coeternal
wisdom. From what we have said, it appears
that God was not taken b)^ surprise by the
unexpected appearance of light, but that light
owes its existence to Him as its Creator, as
its owes its continued existence to His ap-
proval. Neither was God ignorant of the
future, but the author of the precept as well
as the punisher of disobedience; that by
showing His righteous anger against trans-
gression, He might provide a restraint for the
time, and a warning for the future Nor
does He ask questions from ignorance, but
by His very inquiry declares His judgment.
Nor is He envious or timid, but excludes the
transgressor from eternal life, which is the
just reward of obedience. Nor is He greedy
for blood and fat; but by requiring from a
carnal people sacrifices, suited to their charac-
ter, He by certain types prefigures the true
sacrifice. Nor is His jealousy an emotion of
pale anxiety, but of quiet benevolence, in de-
sire to keep the soul, which owes chastity to
the one true God, from being defiled and
prostituted by serving many false gods. Nor
is He enraged with a passion similar to human
anger, but is angrj^, not in the sense of de-
siring vengeance, but in the peculiar sense of
sriving full effect to the sentence of a righteous
retribution. Nor does He destroy thousands
of men for trifling offenses, or for nothing,
but manifests to the world the benefit to be
obtained from fearing Him, by the temporal
death of those already mortal. Nor does He
punish the righteous and sinners indiscrimi-
nately, but chastises the righteous for their
good, in order to perfect them, and gives to
sinners the punishment justly due to them.
Thus, ye Manicha^ans, do your suspicions
lead you astray, when, by misunderstanding
our Scriptures, or by hearing bad inter-
preters, you form a mistaken judgment of
Catholics. Hence you leave sound doctrine,
and turn to impious fables; and in your per-
versity and estrangement from the society of
saints, you reject the instruction of the New
Testament, which, as we have shown, con-
tains statements similar to those which you
condemn in the Old Testament. So we are

2 So

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXII.

obliged to defend both Testaments against
you as well as against the Pagans.

22. But supposing that there is some one
so deluded by carnality as to worship not the
God whom we worship, who is one and true,
but the fiction of your suspicions or your
slanders, whom you say we worship, is not
even this god better than yours ? Observe, I
beseech you, what must be plain to the
feeblest understanding; for here there is no
need of great perspicacity. I address all,
wise and unwise. I appeal to the common
sense and judgnient of all alike. Hear, con-
sider, judge. Would it not have been better
for your god to have remained in darkness
from eternity, than to have plunged the light
coeternal with him and cognate to him into
darkness ? Would it not have been better to
have expressed admiration in surprise at the
appearance of a new light coming to scatter
the darkness, than to have been unable to
baffle the assault of darkness except by the
concession of his own light? Unhappy if he
did this in alarm, and cruel if there was no
need of it. Surely it would have been better
to see light, made by himself, and to admire
it as good, than to make the light begotten by
himself evil; better than that his own light
should become hostile to himself in repelling
the forces of darkness. For this will be the
accusation against those who will be con-
demned for ever to the mass of darkness, that
they suffered themselves to lose their original
brightness, and became the enemies of sacred
light. If they did not know from eternity
that they would be thus condemned, they must
have suffered the darkness of eternal ignor-
ance; or if they did know, the darlcness of
eternal fear. Thus part of the substance of
your god really did remain from eternity in
its own darkness; and instead of admiring
new light on its appearance, it only met with
another and a hostile darkness, of which it
had always been in fear. Indeed, God him-
self must have been in the darkness of fear
for this part of himself, if he was dreading
the evil coming upon it. If he did not fore-
see the evil, he must have been in the dark-
ness of ignorance. If he foresaw it, and was
not in fear, the darkness of such cruelty is
worse than the darkness either of ignorance
or of fear. Your god appears to be destitute of
the quality which the apostle commends in the
body, which you insanely believe to be made
not by God, but by Hyle: " If one member
suffers, all the members suffer with it."' But
suppose he did suffer; he foresaw, he feared,
he suffered, but he could not help himself.

» I Cor. xii. 26.

Thus he remained from eternity in the dark-
ness of his own misery; and then, instead of
admiring a new light which was to drive awav
the darkness, he came in contact, to the in-
jury of his own light, with another darkness
which he had always dreaded. Again, would
it not have been much better, I say, not to
have given a commandment like God, but
even to have received a commandment like
Adam, which he would be rewarded for keep-
ing and punished for breaking, acting either
way by his own free-will, than to be forced by
inevitable necessity to admit darkness into
his light in spite of himself? Surely it would
have been better to have given a precept to
human nature, not knowing that it would be-
come sinful, than to have been driven by
necessity to sin contrary to his own divine
nature. Think for a moment, and say how-
darkness could be conquered by one who was
himself conquered by necessity. Conquered
already by this greater enemy, he fought
under his conqueror's orders against a less
formidable opponent. Would it not have
been better not to know where Adam had hid
himself, than to have been himself destitute
of any means of escape, first from a hard and
hateful necessity, and then from a dissimilar
and hostile race ? Would it not have been
better to grudge eternal life to human nature,
than to consign to misery the divine nature;
to desire the blood and fat of sacrifices, than
to be himself slaughtered in so many forms,
on account of his mixture with the blood and
fat of every victim; to be disturbed by jeal-
ousy at these sacrifices being offered to other
gods as well as to himself, than to be himself
offered on all altars to all devils, as mixed up
not only with all fruits, but also with all ani-
mals ? Would it not have been much better
to be affected even with human anger, so as
to be enraged against both his friends and
his enemies for their sins, than to be himself
influenced by fear as well as by anger wherever
these passions exist, or than to share in all
the sin that is committed, and in all punish-
ment that is suffered ? For this is the doom
of that part of your god which is in confine-
ment everywhere, condemned to this by him-
self, not as guilty, but in order to conquer
his dreaded enemy. Doomed himself to such
a fatal necessity, the part of himself which he
has given over to condemnation might pardon
him, if he were as humble as he is miserable.
But how can you pretend to find fault with
God for His anger against both friends and
enemies when they sin, when the god of your
fancies first under compulsion compels his
own members to go to be devoured by sin,
and then condemns them to remain in dark-

Hook XXII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.EAN.

281

ness ? Though he does this, you say that it
will not be in anger. But will he not be
ashamed to punish, or to appear to punish,
those from whom he should ask pardon in
words such as these: " Forgive me, I beseech
you. You are my members; could I treat
you thus, except from necessity? You know
yourselves, that you were sent here because a
formidable enemy had arisen; and now you
must remain here to prevent his rising again " ?
Again, is it not better to slay thousands of
men for trifling faults, or for nothing, than to
cast into the abyss of sin, and to condemn to
the punishment of eternal imprisonment,
God's own members, his substance — in fact,
God himself ? It cannot properly be said of
the real substance of God that it has the
choice of sinning or not sinning, for God's
substance is absolutely unchangeable. God
cannot sin, as He cannot deny Himself.
Man, on the contrary, can sin and deny God,
or he can choose not to do so. But suppose
the members of your god had, like a rational
human soul, the choice of sinning or not sin-
ning; they might perhaps be justly punished
for heinous offenses by confinement in the
mass of darkness. But you cannot attribute
to these parts a liberty which you deny to God
himself. For if God had not given them up
to sin, he would have been forced to sin him-
self, by the prevalence of the race of dark-
ness. But if there was no danger of being
thus forced, it was a sin to send these parts to
a place where they incurred this danger. To
do so, indeed, from free choice is a crime
deserving the torment which your god un-
naturally inflicts upon his own parts, more
han the conduct of these parts in going by
iiis command to a place where they lost the
power of living in righteousness. But if God
limself was in danger of being forced to sin
by invasion and capture, unless he had se-
cured himself first by the misconduct and
then by the punishment of his own parts,
there can have been no free-will either in your
i^^od or in his parts. Let him not set him-
self up as judge, but confess himself a crimi-
nal. For though he was forced against his
own will, he professes to pass a righteous sen-
tence in condemning those whom he knows to
have suffered evil rather than done it; making
this profession that he may not be thought of
as having been conquered; as if it could do
a beggar any good to be called prosperous and
happy. Surely it would have been better for
your god to have spared neither righteous nor
wicked in indiscriminate punishment (which
is Faustus' last charge against our God),
than to have been so cruel to his own mem-
bers,— first giving them up to incurable con-

tamination, and then, as if that was not
enough, accusing them falsely of misconduct.
Faustus declares that they justly suffer this
severe and eternal punishment, because they
allowed themselves to be led astray from their
original brightness, and became hostile to
sacred light. But the reason of this, as
Faustus says, was that they were so greedily
devoured in the first assault of the princes of
darkness, that they were unable to recovei*
themselves, or to separate themselves from
the hostile principle. These souls, therefore,
did no evil themselves, but in all this were
innocent sufferers. The real agent was he
who sent them away from himself into this
wretchedness. They suffered more from
their father than from their enemy. Their
father sent them into all this misery; while
their enemy desired them as something good,
wishing not to hurt them, but to enjoy them.
The one injured them knowingly, the other
in ignorance. This god was so weak and
helpless that he could not otherwise secure
himself first against an enemy threatening
attack, and then against the same enemy in
confinement. Let him, then, not condemn
those parts whose obedience defended him,
and whose death secures his safety. If he
could not avoid the conflict, why slander his
defenders ? When these parts allowed them-
selves to be led astray from their original
brightness, and became hostile to sacred light,
this must have been from the force of the
enemy; and if they were forced against their
will, they are innocent; while, if they could
have resisted had they chosen, there is no
need of the origin of evil in an imaginary evil
nature, since it is to be found in free-will.
Their not resisting, when they could have
done so, is plainly their own fault, and not
owing to any force from without For, sup-
posing them able to do a thing, to do which
is right, while not to do it is great and hein-
ous sin, their not doing it is their own choice.
So, then, if they choose not to do it, the fault
is in their will not in necessity. The origin
of sin is in the will; therefore in the will is
also the origin of evil, both in the sense of
acting against a just precept, and in the sense
of suffering under a just sentence. There is
thus no reason why, in your search for the
origin of evil, you should fall into so great an
evil as that of calling a nature so rich in good
things the nature of evil, and of attributing
the terrible evil of necessity to the nature of
perfect good, before any commixture with
evil. The cause of this erroneous belief is
your pride, which you need not have unless
you choose; but in your wish to defend at all
hazards the error into which you have fallen.

282

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXII.

you take away the origin of evil from free-
will, and place it in a fabulous nature of evil.
And thus you come at last to say, that the
souls which are to be doomed to eternal con-
f^.nement in the mass of darkness became
enemies to sacred light not from choice, but
by necessity; and to make your god a judge
with whom it is of no use to prove, in behalf
of your clients, that they were under compul-
sion, and a king who will make no allowance
for your brethren, his own sons and members,
whose hostility against you and against him-
self you ascribe not to choice, but to necessity.
What shocking cruelty ! unless you proceed
in the next place to defend your god, as also
acting not from choice, but by necessity.
So, if there could be found another judge free
from necessity, who could decide the question
on the principles of equity, he would sentence
your god to be bound to this mass, not by
being fastened on the outside, but by being
shut up inside along with the formidable
enemy. The first in the guilt of necessity
oueht to be first in the sentence of condemna-
tion. Would it not be much better, then, in
comparison with such a god as this, to choose
the god whom we indeed do not worship, but
whom 3^ou think or pretend to think we wor-
ship? Though he spares not his servants,
whether righteous or sinful, making' no proper
separation, and not distinguishing between
punishment and discipline, is he not better
than the god who spares not his own members
though innocent, if necessity is no crime, or
guilty from their obedience to him, if neces-
sity itself is criminal; so that they are con-
demned eternally by him, along with whom
they should have been released, if any liberty
was recovered by the victory, while he should
have been condemned along with them if the
victory reduced the force of necessity even
so far as to give this small amount of force to
justice ? Thus the god whom you represent
us as worshipping, though he is not the one
true God whom we really worship, is far better
than your god. Neither, indeed, has any ex-
istence; but both are the creatures of your
imaginations. But, according to your own
representations, the one whom you call ours,
and find fault with, is better than the one
whom you call your own, and whom you wor-
ship.'

23. So also the patriarchs and prophets
v/hom you cry out against are not the men
whom we honor, but men whose characters
are drawn from your fancy, prompted by ill-
will. And yet even thus as you paint them,

I [ Augustin certainly makes it appear that the God in the Old
Testament is not so bad as the God of the Manichaeans, yet he
cannot be said to reach a complete theodicy. — A. H, N.]

I will not be content with showing them to be
superior to your elect, who keep all the pre-
cepts of Manichgeus, but will prove their
superiority to your god himself. Before
proving this, however, I must, with the help
of God, defend our holy fathers the patriarchs
and prophets against your accusations, by a
clear exposition of the truth as opposed to the
carnality of your hearts. As for you Mani-
chccans, it would be enough to say that the
faults you impute to our fathers are prefera-
ble to what you praise iri your own, and to
complete your shame by adding that your god
can be proved far inferior to our fathers as
you describe them. This would be a suffi-
cient reply for you. But as, even apart from
your perversities, some minds are of them-
selves disturbed when comparing the life of
the prophets in the Old Testament with that
of the apostles in the New, — not discerning
between the manner of the time when the
promise was under a veil, and that of the time
when the promise is revealed, — I must first
of all reply to those who either have the bold-
ness to pride themselves as superior in tem-
perance to the prophets, or quote the prophets
in defence of their own bad conduct.

24. First of all, then, not only the speech
of these men, but their life also, was pro-
phetic; and the whole kingdom of the He-
brews was like a great prophet, corresponding'
to the greatness of the Person prophesied.
So, as regards those Hebrews who were made
wise in heart by divine instruction, we may
discover a prophecy of the coming of Christ
and of the Church, both in what they said and
in what they did; and the same is true as re-
gards the divine procedure towards the whole
nation as a body. For, as the apostle says,
"all these things were our examples."

25. Those who find fault with the prophets,
accusing them of adultery for instance, in ac-
tions which are above their comprehension,
are like those Pagans who profanely charge
Christ with folly or madness because He
looked for fruit from a tree out of the season;*
or with childishness, because He stooped
down and wrote on the ground, and, after
answering the people who were questioning
Him, began writing again. ^ Such critics are
incapable of understanding that certain virtues
in great minds resemble closely the vices of
little minds, not in reality, but in appearance.
Such criticism of the great is like that of boys
at school, whose learning consists in the im-
portant rule, that if the nominative is in the
singular, the verb must also be in the singular;
and so they find fault with the best Latin

2 Matt. xxi.

19.

3 John viii. 6-8.

Book XXIL]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

283

author, because he says, Pars in frusta secant.^
He should have written, say they, secat. And
again, knowing that religio is spelt with one /,
they blame him for writing relUgio, when he
says, Rclligionc patrum." Hence it may with
reason be said, that as the poetical usage of
words differs from the solecisms and barbar-
isms of the unlearned, so, in their own way,
the figurative actions of the prophets differ
from the impure actions of the vicious. Ac-
cordingly, as a boy guilty of a barbarism
would be whipped if he pled the usage of Vir-
gil; so any one quoting the example of Abra-
ham begetting a son from Hagar, in defence
of his own sinful passion for his wife's hand-
maid, ought to be corrected not by caning
only, but by severe scourging, that he may
not suffer the doom of adulterers in eternal
l)unishment. This indeed is a comparison of
great and important subjects with trifles; and
it is not intended that a peculiar usage in
speech should be put on a level with a sacra-
ment, or a solecism with adultery. Still,
allowing for the difference in the character of
the subjects, what is called learning or ignor-
ance in the proprieties and improprieties of
speech, resembles wisdom or the want of it in
reference to the grand moral distinction be-
tween virtue and vice.^

26. Instead of entering' on the distinctions
between the praiseworthy and the blame-
worthy, the criminal and the innocent, the
dangerous and the harmless, the guilty and the
guiltless, the desirable and the undesirable,
which are all illustrations of the distinction
between sin and righteousness, we must first
consider what sin is, and then examine the
actions of the saints as recorded in the holy
books, that, if we find these saints described
as sinning, we may if possible discover the
true reason for keeping these sins in memory
liy putting them on record. Again, if we find
things recorded which, though they are not
sins, appear so to the foolish and the malevo-
lent, and in fact do not exhibit any virtues,
liere also we have to see why these things are
])ut into the Scriptures which we believe to
contain wholesome doctrine as a guide in the
present life, and a title to the inheritance of
the future. As regards the examples of right-
eousness found among the acts of the saints,
the propriety of recording these must be plain
even to the ignorant. The question is about
those actions the mention of which may seem
useless if they are neither righteous nor sin-
ful, or even dangerous if the actions are really
sinful, as lending people to imitate them, be-

' .^n. i. 212. 2 /JZn. ii. 715.

3 ( riiis coinpari^ion of the objectors to the Old Testament to
hlunderinj; school-boys is very fine. — A. H. X.]

cause they are not condemned in these books,
and so may be supposed not to be sinful, or
because, though they are condemned, men
may copy them from the idea that they must
be venial if saints did them.

27. Sin, then, is any transgression in deed,
or word, or desire, of the eternal law. And
the eternal law is the divine order or will of
God, which requires the preservation of
natural order, and forbids the breach of it.
But what is this natural order in man ? Man,
we know, consists of soul and bod}- but so
does a beast. Again, it is plain that in the
order of nature the soul is superior to the
body. Moreover, in the soul of man there is
reason, which is not in a beast. Therefore,
as the soul is superior to the body, so in the
soul itself the reason is superior by the law of
nature to the other parts which are found also
in beasts; and in reason itself, which is partly
contemplation and partly action, contempla-
tion is unquestionably the superior part. The
object of contemplation is the image of God,
by which we are renewed through faith to
sight. Rational action ought therefore to be
subject to the control of contemplation, which
is exercised through faith while we are absent
from the Lord, as it will be hereafter through
sight, when we shall be like Him, for we shall
see Him as He is.'* Then in a spiritual body
we shall by His grace be made equal to
angels, when we put on the garment of im-
mortality and incorruption, with which this
mortal and corruptible shall be clothed, that
death may be swallowed up of victory, when
righteousness is perfected through grace.
For the holy and lofty angels have also their
contemplation and action. They require of
themselves the performance of the commands
of Him whom they contemplate, whose eternal
government they freely because sweetly obey.
We, on the other hand, whose body is dead
because of sin, till God quicken also our
mortal bodies by His Spirit dwelling in us,
live righteously in our feeble measure, ac-
cording to the eternal law in which the law of
nature is preserved, when we live by that faith
unfeigned whicli works by love, having in a
good conscience a hope of immortality and in-
corruption laid up in heaven, and of the per-
fecting of righteousness to the measure of an
inexpressible satisfaction, for which in our
pilgrimage we must hunger and thirst, while
we walk by faith and not by sight.

28. A man, therefore, who acts in obedience
to the faith which obeys God, restrains all
mortal affections, and keeps them within the
natural limit, regulating his desires so as to

4 I John iii. 2.

284

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXII.

put the higher before the lower. If there was
no pleasure in what is unlawful, no one would
sin. To sin is to indulge tliis pleasure instead
of restraining it. And by unlawful is meant
what is forbidden by the law in which the
oriler of nature is preserved. It is a great
question whether there is any rational creature
for which there is no pleasure in what is un-
lawful. If there is such a class of creatures,
it does not include man, nor that angelic
nature which abode not in the truth. These
rational creatures were so made, that they had
the potentiality of restraining their desires
from the unlawful; and in not doing this they
sinned. Great, then, is the creature man, for
he is restored by this potentiality, by which, if
he had so chosen, he would not have fallen.
And great is the Lord, and greatly to be
praised, who created man. For He created
also inferior natures which cannot sin, and
superior natures which will not sin. Beasts
do not sin, for their nature agrees with the
eternal law from being subject to it, without
being in possession of it. And again, angels
do not sin, because their heavenly nature is
so in possession of the eternal law that God is
the only object of its desire, and they obey
His will without any experience of temptation.
But man, whose life on this earth is a trial on
account of sin, subdues to himself what he
has in common with beasts, and subdues to
God what he has in common with angels; till,
when righteousness is perfected and immor-
tality attained, he shall be raised from among
beasts and ranked with angels.

29. The exercise or indulgence of the bod-
ily appetites is intended to secure the contin-
ued existence and the invigoration of the in-
dividual or of the species. If the appetites
go beyond this, and carry the man, no longer
master of himself, beyond the limits of tem-
perance, they become unlawful and shameful
lusts, which severe discipline must subdue.
But if this unbridled course ends in plunging
the man into such a depth of evil habits that
he supposes that there will be no punishment
of his sinful passions, and so refuses the
wholesome discipline of confession and re-
pentance by which he might be rescued; or,
from a still worse insensibility, justifies his
own indulgences in profane opposition to the
eternal law of Providence; and if he dies in
this state, that unerring law sentences him
now not to correction, but to damnation.

30. Eeferring, then, to the eternal law
which enjoins the preservation of natural or-
der and forbids the breach of it, let us see
how our father Abraham sinned, that is, how
he broke this law, in the things which Faus-
tus has charged him with as highly crimmal.

In his irrational craving to have children,
says Faustus, and not believing God, who
promised that his wife Sara should have a
son, he defiled himself with a mistress.
But here Faustus, in his irrational desire to
find fault, both discloses the impiety of his
heresy, and in his error and ignorance praises
Abraham's intercourse with the handmaid.
For as the eternal law — that is, the will of
God the Creator of all — for the preservation
of the natural order, permits the indulgence
of the bodily appetite under the guidance of
reason in sexual intercourse, not for the grat-
ification of passion, but for the continuance
of the race through the procreation of chil-
dren; so, on the contrary, the unrighteous
law of the Manichaeans, in order to prevent
their god, whom the}' bewail as confined in
all seeds, from suffering still closer confine-
ment in the womb, requires married people
not on any account to have children, their
great desire being to liberate their god. In-
stead, therefore, of an irrational craving in
Abraham to have children, we find in Man-
ichccus an irrational fancy against having
children. So the one preserved the natural
order by seeking in marriage only the pro-
duction of a child; while the other, influenced
by his heretical notions, thought no evil could
be greater than the confinement of his god.

31. So, again, when Faustus says that the
wife's being privy to her husband's conduct
made the matter worse, while he is prompted
only by the uncharitable wish to reproach
Abraham and his wife, he really, without in-
tending it, speaks in praise of both. Fori
Sara did not connive at any criminal action
in her husband for the gratification of his un-
lawful passions; but from the same natural
desire for children that he had, and know-
ing her own barrenness, she warrantably 1
claimed as her own the fertility of her hand-
maid; not consenting with sinful desires in
her husband, but requesting of him what it
was proper in him to grant. Nor was it the|
request of proud assumption; for every one
knows that the duty of a wife is to obey her]
husband. But in reference to the body, we
are told by the apostle that the wife has power I
over her husband's bod}'-, as he has over hers;'
so that, while in all other social matters the j
wife ought to obey her husband, in this one
matter of their bodily connection as man and
wife their power over one another is mutual,
— the inan over the woman, and the woman
over the man. So, when Sara could not have I
children of her own, she wished to have them
by her handmaid, and of the same seed from

Cor.

vn. 4.

Book XXII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

28i

which she herself would have had them, if
that had been possible. No woman would do
this if her love for her husband were merely
an animal passion; she would rather be jeal-
ous of a mistress than make her a mother.
So here the pious desire for the procreation
of children was an indication of the absence
of criminal indulgence.

32. Abraham, indeed, cannot be defended,
if, as Faiistus says, he wished to get children
by Hagar, because he had no faith in God,
who promised that he should have children by
Sara. But this is an entire mistake: tiiis pro-
mise had not yet been made. Any one who
reads the preceding chapters will find that
Abraham had already got the promise of the
land with a countless number of inhabitants,'
but that it had not yet been made known to
him how the seed spoken of was to be pro-
duced, whether by generation from his own
body, or from his choice in the adoption of
a son, or, in the case of its being from his
own body, whether it would be by Sara or
another. Whoever examines into this will
find that Faustus has made either an nnpru-
dent mistake or an impudent misrepresenta-
tion. Abraham, then, when he saw that he
had no children, though the promise was to his
seed, thought first of adoption. This appears
from his saying of his slave, when speaking
to God, "This is mine heir;" as much as
to say, As Thou hast not given me a seed of
my own, fulfill Thy promise in this man. For
the word seed may be applied to what has
not come out of a man's own body, else the
apostle could not call us the seed of Abra-
ham: for we certainly are not his descend-
ants in the flesh; but we are his seed in fol-
lowing his faith, by believing in Christ,
whose flesh did spring from the flesh of Abra-
ham. Then Abraham was told by the Lord:
"This shall not be thine heir; but he that
Cometh out of thine own bowels shall be thine
heir."= The thought of adoption was thus
removed; but it still remained uncertain
whether the seed which was to come from
himself would be by Sara or another. And
this God was pleased to keep concealed, till a
figure of the Old Testament had been sup-
plied in the handmaid. We may thus easily
understand how Abraham, seeing that his
wife was barren, and that she desired to ob-
tain from her husband and her handmaid the
offspring which she herself could not pro-
duce, acted not in compliance with carnal ap-
petite, but in obedience to conjugal authority,
believing that Sara had the sanction of God
for her wish; because God had already pro-

' Gen. xii. 3.

^ Gen. XV. 3, 4.

mised him an heir from his own body, but
had not foretold who was to be the mother.
Thus, when Faustus shows his own infidelity
in accusing Abraham of unbelief, his ground-
less accusation only proves the madness of
the assailant. In other cases, Faustus' in-
fidelity has prevented him from understand-
ing; but here, m his love of slander, he has
not even taken time to read.

33. Again, when Faustus accuses a right-
eous and faithful man of a shameless profan-
ation of his marriage from avarice and greed,
by selling his wife Sara at different times to
the two kings Abimelech and Pharaoh, telling
them that she was his sister, because she was
very fair, he does not distinguish justly be-
tween right and wrong, but unjustly con-
demns tiie whole transaction. Those who
think that Abraham sold his wife cannot dis-
cern in the light of the eternal law the dif-
ference between sin and righteousness; and so
they call perseverance obstinacy, and confi-
dence presumption, as in these and similar
cases men of wrong judgment are wont to
blame what they suppose to be wrong actions.
Abraham did not become partner in crime
with his wife by selling her to others: but as
she gave her handmaid to her husband, not
to gratify his passion, but for the sake of off-
spring, in the authority she had consistently
with the order of nature, requiring the per-
formance of a duty, not complying with a
sinful desire; so in this case, the husband, in
perfect assurance of the chaste attachment of
his wife to himself, and knowing her mind to
be the abode of modest and virtuous affection,
called her his sister, without saying that she
was his wife, lest he himself should be killed,
and his wife fall into the hands of strangers
and evil-doers: for he was assured by his God
that He would not allow her to suffer violence
or disgrace. Nor was he disappointed in his
faith and hope; for Pharaoh, terrified by-
strange occurrences, and after enduring many
evils on account of her, when he was informed
by God that Sara was Abraham's wife, re-
stored her with honor uninjured. Abimelech
also did the same, after learning the truth in
a dream. '

34. Some people, not scoffers and evil-
speakers like Faustus, but men who pay due
honor to the Scriptures, which Faustus finds
fault with because he does not understand
them, or which he fails to understand because
of his fault-finding, in commenting on this
act of Abraham, are of opinion that he stum-
bled from weakness of faith, and denied his
wife from fear of death, as Peter denied the
Lord. If this is the correct view, we must
allow that Abraham sinned; but the sin should

286

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXII-

not cancel or obliterate all his merits, any
more than in the case of the apostle. Be-
sides, to deny his wife is not the same as to
deny the Saviour. But when there is another
explanation, why not abide by it, instead of
giving blame without cause, since there is no
proof that Abraham told a lie from fear ? He
did not deny that Sara was his wife in answer
to any question on the subject; but when
asked who she was, he said she was his sister,
without denying her to be his wife: he con-
cealed part of the truth, but said nothing
false.

35. It is waste of time to observe Faustus'
remark, that Abraham falsely called Sara his
sister; as if Faustus had discovered the family
of Sara, though it is not mentioned in Script-
ure. In a matter which Abraham knew, and
we do not, it is surely better to believe the
patriarch when he says what he knows,
than to believe Manichaeus when he finds
fault with what he knows nothing about.
Since, then, Abraham lived at that period in
human history, when, though marriage had
become unlawful between children of the
same parents, or of the same father or
mother, no law or authority interfered with
the custom of marriage between the children
of brothers, or any less degree of consan-
guinity, why should he not have had as wife
his sister, that is, a woman descended from
his father ? For he himself told the king,
when he restored Sara, that she was his sister
by his father, and not by his mother. And
on this occasion he could not have been led
to tell a falsehood from fear, for the king
knew that she was his wife, and was restoring
her with honor, because he had been warned
by God. We learn from Scripture that,
among the ancients, it was customary to call
cousins brothers and sisters. Thus Tobias
says in his prayer to God, before having in-
tercourse with his wife, 'And now, O Lord,
Thou knowest that not in wantonness I take
to wife my sister;" ' though she was not
sprung immediately from the same father or
the same mother, but only belonged to the
same family. And Lot is called the brother
of Abraham, though Abraham was his uncle.-
And, by the same use of the word, those
called in the Gospel the Lord's brothers are
certainly not children of the Virgin Mary,
but ail the blood relations of the Lord.^

36. Some may say, Why did not Abraham's
confidence in God prevent his being afraid to
confess his wife ? God could have warded off
from him the death which he feared, and
could have protected both him and his wife

• Tob. viii. 9. 2 Gen. xiii. 8, and xi. 31. 3 Matt. xii. 46.

while among strangers, so that Sara, although
very fair, should not have been desired by
any one, nor Abraham killed on account of her.
or course, God could have done this; it would
be absurd to deny it. But if, in reply to the
people, Abraham had told them that Sara was
his wife, his trust in God would have included
both his own life and the chastity of Sara.
Now it is part of sound doctrine, that when a
man has any means in his power, he should
not tempt the Lord his God. So it was not
because the Saviour was unable to protect
His disciples that He told them, " When ye
are persecuted in one city, flee to another. "'*
And He Himself set the example. For
though He had the power of laying down His
own life, and did not lay it down till He chose
to do so, still when an infant He fled to
Egypt, carried by His parents ;5 and when He
went up to the feast. He went not openly,
but secretly, though at other times He spoke
openly to the Jews, who in spite of their rage
and hostility could not lay hands on Him,
because His hour was not come,* — not the
hour when He would be obliged to die, but
the hour when He would consider it season-
able to be put to death. Thus He who dis-
played divine power by teaching and reprov-
ing openly, without allowing the rage of his
enemies to hurt Him, did also, by escaping
and concealing Himself, exhibit the conduct
becoming the feebleness of men, that they
should not tempt God when they have any
means in their power of escaping threatened
danger. So also in the apostle, it was not
from despair of divine assistance and protec-
tion, or from loss of faith, that he was let
down over the wall in a basket, in order to
escape being taken by his enemies:' not from
want of faith in God did he thus escape, but
because not to escape, when this escape was'
possible, would have been tempting God.
Accordingly, when Abraham was among
strangers, and when, on account of the re-
markable beauty of Sara, both his life and
her chastity were in danger, since it was in
his power to protect not both of these, but
one only, — his life, namely, — -to avoid tempt-
ing God he did what he could; and in what he
could not do, he trusted to God. Unable to
conceal his being a man, he concealed his be-
ing a husband, lest he should be put to death;
trusting to God to preserve his wife's purit}\
37. There might also be a difference of
opinion on the nice point whether Sara's chas-
tity would have been violated even if some
one had had intercourse with her, since she
submitted to this to save her husband's life,

4 Matt. X. 23.

6 John vii. 10, 30.

5 Matt. ii. I.).
7 Acts ix. 2^.

Book XXII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

287

both with his knowledge and by his authority.
In this there would be no desertion of con-
jugal fidelity or rebellion against her hus-
band's authority; in the same way as Abra-
ham was not an adulterer, when, in submis-
sion to the lawful authority of his wife, he
consented to be made a father by his wife's
handmaid. But, from the nature of the rela-
tionship, for a wife to have two husbands,
both in life, is not the same thing as for a
man to have two wives: so that we regard the
explanation already given of Abraham's con-
duct as the most correct and unobjectionable;
that our father Abraham avoided tempting
God by taking what measures he could for the
preservation of his own life, and that he
showed his hope in God by entrusting to Him
the chastity of his wife.

38. But a pleasure which all must feel is
obtained from this narrative so faithfully re-
corded in the Holy Scriptures, when we exam-
ine into the prophetic character of the action,
and knock with pious faith and diligence at
the door of the mystery, that the Lord may
open, and show us who was prefigured in the
ancient personage, and whose wife this is,
who, while in a foreign land and among
strangers, is not allowed to be stained or de-
filed, that she may be brought to her own
husband without spot or wrinkle. Thus we
find that the righteous life of the Church is
for the glory of Christ, that her beauty may
bring honor to her husband, as Abraham was
honored on account of the beauty of Sara
among the inhabitants of that foreign land.
To the Church, to whom it is said in the Song
of Songs, "O thou fairest among women,"'
kings offer gifts in acknowledgment of her
beauty; as king Abimelech offered gifts to
Sara, admiring the grace of her appearance;
all the more that, while he loved, he was not
allowed to profane it. The holy Church,
too is in secret the spouse of the Lord Jesus
Christ. For it is secretly, and in the hidden
depths of the Spirit, that the soul of man is
joined to the word of God, so that they two
are one flesh; of which the apostle speaks as
a great mystery in marriage, as referring to
Christ and the Church.- Again, the earthly
kingdom of this world, typified by the kings
which were not allowed to defile Sara, had no
knowledge or experience of the Church as
the spouse of Christ, that is, of how faithfully
she maintained her relation to her Husband,
till it tried to violate her, and was compelled
to yield to the divine testimony borne by the
faith of the martyrs, and in the person of later
monarchs was brought humbly to honor with

gifts the Bride whom their predecessors had
not been able to humble by subduing her to
themselves. What, in the type, happened in
the reign of one and the same king, is ful-
filled in the earlier monarchs of this era and
their successors.

39. Again, when it is said that the Church
is the sister of Christ, not by the mother but
by the father, we learn the excellence of the
relation, which is not of the temporary nature
of earthly descent, but of divine grace, which
is everlasting. By this grace we shall no
longer be a race of mortals when we receive
power to be called and to become sons of
God. This grace we obtain not from the
synagogue, which is the mother of Christ
after the flesh, but from God the Father.
And when Christ calls us into another life
where there is no death, He teaches us, in-
stead of acknowledging, to deny the earthly
relationship, where death soon follows upon
birth; for He says to His disciples, " Call no
man your father upon earth; for you have
one Father, who is in heaven. "3 And He
set us an example of this when He said,
" Who is my mother, and who are my breth-
ren ? And stretching forth His hand to His
disciples. He said, These are my brethren.''
And lest any one should think that He re-
ferred to an earthly relationship, He added,
" Whosoever shall do the will of my Father,
the same is my brother, and sister, and
mother;"* as much as to say, I derive this
relationship from God my Father, not from
the Synagogue my mother; I call you to eter-
nal life, where I have an immortal birth, not
to earthly life, for to call you away from this
life I have taken mortality.

40. As for the reason why, though it is
concealed among strangers whose wife the
Church is, it is not hidden whose sister she
is, it is plainly because it is obscure and hard
to understand how the human soul and the
Word of God are united or mingled, or what-
ever word may be used to express this con-
nection between God and the creature. It is
from this connection that Christ and the
Church are called bridegroom and bride, or
husband and wife. The other relationship, in
which Christ and all the saints are brethren
by divine grace and not by earthly consangu-
inity, or by the father and not by the mother,
is more easily expressed in words, and more
easily understood. For the same grace makes
all the saints to be also lirethren of one an-
other; while in their society no one is the
bridegroom of all the rest. So also, notwith-
standing the surpassing justice and wisdom

' Cant. i. 7.

2 Eph. V. 31, 32.

1 Matt, x.xiii. o.

4 .Malt. xii. 48-30.

2b8

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXII.

of Christ, His manhood was much more
plainly and readily recognized by strangers,
who, indeed, were not wrong in believing Him
to be man, but they did not understand His
being God as well as man. Hence Jeremiah
says: " He is both a man, and who shall know
Him ? " ' He is a man, for it is made mani-
fest that He is a brother. And who shall
know Him ? for it is concealed that He is a
husband. This must suffice as a defense of
our father Abraham against Faustus ' impu-
dence and ignorance and malice.

41. Lot also, the brother of Abraham, was
just and hospitable m Sodom, and was found
worthy to escape the conflagration which pre-
figured the future judgment; for he was free
from all participation in the corruption of the
people of Sodom. He was a type of the body
of Christ, which in the person of all the saints
both groans now among the ungodly and
wicked, to whose evil deeds it does not con-
sent, and will at the end of the world be res-
cued from their society, when they are
doomed to the punishment of eternal fire.
Lot's wife was the type of a different class of
men, — of those, namely, who, when called by
the giace of God, look back, instead of, like
Paul, forgetting the things that are behind,
and looking forward to the things that are
before.'' The Lord Himself says: " No man
that putteth his hand to the plough, and look-
eth back, is fit for the kingdom of Heaven." ^
Nor did He omit to mention the case of Lot's
wife; for she, for our warning, was turned
into a pillar of salt, that being thus seasoned
we might not trifle thoughtlessly with this
danger, but be on our guard against it. So,
when the Lord was admonishing every one to
get rid of the things that are behind by the
most strenuous endeavor to reach the things
that are before. He said, "Remember Lot's
wife."+ And, in addition to these, there is
still a third type in Lot, when his daughters
lay with him. For here Lot seems to prefig-
ure the future law; for those who spring from
the law, and are placed under the law, by mis-
understanding it, stupefy it, as it were, and
bring forth the works of unbelief by an unlaw-
ful use of the law. " The law is good," says
the apostle, " if a man use it lawfully. '^^

42. It is no excuse for this action of Lot
or of his daughters that it represented the per-
versity which was afterwards in certain cases to
be displayed. The purpose of Lot's daugh-
ters is one thing, and the purpose of God is
another, in allowing this to happen that He
might make some truth manifest; for God
both pronounces judgment on the actions of

■ Jer. xvii. 9.
4 Luke xvii. 32.

2 Phil. iii. 13.
5 I Tim. i. 8.

3 Luke ix. 62.

the people of those times, and arranges in
His providence for the prefigurement of the
future. As a part of Scripture, this action is
a prophecy; as part of the history of those
concerned, it is a crime.

43. At the same time there is in this trans-
action no reason for the torrent of abuse
which Faustus' blind hostility discharges on
it. By the eternal law which requires the
preservation of the order of nature and con-
demns its violation, the judgment in this case
is not what it would have been if Lot had been
prompted by a criminal passion to commit in-
cest with his daughters, or if they had been
inflamed with unnatural desires. In justice,
we must ask not only what was done, but witli
what motive, in order to obtain a fair view
of the action as the effect of that motive. The
resolution of Lot's daughters to lie with their
father was the effect of the natural desire for
offspring in order to preserve the race; for
they supposed that there were no other men
to be found, thinking that the whole world
had been consumed in that conflagration,
which, for all they knew, had left no one alive
but themselves. It would have been better
for them never to have been mothers, than to
have become mothers by their own father.
But still, the fulfillment of a desire like this
is very different from the accursed gratifica-
tion of lust.

44. Knowing that their father would con-
demn their design. Lot's daughters thought
it necessary to fulfill it without his knowl-
edge. We are told that they made him
drunk, so that he was unaware of what hap-
pened. His guilt therefore is not that of in-
cest, but of drunkenness. This, too, is con-
demned by the eternal law, which allows meat
and drink only as required by nature for the
preservation of health. There is, indeed, a
great difference between a drunk man and an
habitual drunkard; for the drunkard is not
always drunk, and a man may be drunk on
one occasion without being a drunkard.
However, in the case of a righteous man, we
require to account for even one instance of
drunkenness. What can have made Lot con-
sent to receive from his daughters all the cups
of wine which they went on mixing for him,
or perhaps giving him unmixed ? Did they
feign excessive grief, and did he resort to
this consolation in their loneliness, and in
the loss of their mother, thinking that they
were drinking too, while they only pretended
to drink ? But this does not seem a proper
method for a righteous man to take in consol-
ing his friends when in trouble. Had the
daughters learned in Sodom some vile art
which enabled them to intoxicate their father

Bo K XXII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

289

with a few cups, so that in his ignorance he
might sin, or rather be sinned against? But

i it is not likely that the Scripture would have
omitted all notice of this, or that God would
nave. allowed His servant to be thus abused

i without any fault of his own.

I 45. But we are defending the sacred Script-

' ures, not man's sins. Nor are we concerned
to justify this action, as if our God had
either commanded it or approved of it; or as

I if, when men are called just in Scripture, it

' meant that they could not sin if they chose.
And as, in the books which those critics find
fault with, God nowhere expresses approval
of this action, what thoughtless folly it is to
bring a charge from this narrative against

\ these writings, when in other places such ac-
tions are condemned by express prohibitions!
In the story of Lot's daughters the action is
related, not commended. And it is proper
tiiat the judgment of God should be declared

' in some cases, and concealed in others, that
by its manifestation our ignorance may be
enlightened, and that by its concealment our
minds may be improved by the exercise of
recalling what we already know, or our indo-
lence stimulated to seek for an explanation.
Here, then, God, who can bring good out of
evil, made nations arise from this origin, as
He saw good, but did not bring upon His own
Scriptures the guilt of man's sin. It is God's
writing, but not His doing; He does not pro-
pose these things for our imitation, but holds
them up for our warning.

46. Faustus' effrontery appears notably in
his accusing Isaac also, the son of Abraham,
of pretending that his wife Rebecca was his
sister.' For as regards the family of Rebecca
Scripture is not silent, and it appears that
she was his sister in the well-known sense of
the word. His concealing that she was his
wife is not surprising, nor is it insignificant,
if he did it in imitation of his father, so that
he can be justified on the same grounds. We
need only refer to the answer already given
to Faustus' charge against Abraham, as being
equally applicable to Isaac. Perhaps, how-
ever some inquirer will ask what typical sig-
nificance there is in the foreign king discover-
[ ing Rebecca to be the wife of Isaac by seeing
him playing with her; for he would not have
known, had he not seen Isaac playing with
' Rebecca as it would have been improper to
I do with a woman not his wife. When holy
men act thus as husbands, they do it not fool-
ishly, but designedly: for they accommodate
themselves to the nature of the weaker sex
in words and actions of gentle playfulness;

' Clen. xxvi. 7.

not in effeminacy, but in subdued manliness.
But such behavior towards any woman except
a wife would be disgraceful. This is a ques-
tion in good manners, which is referred to
only in case some stern advocate of insensi-
bility should find fault with the holy man
even for playing with his wife. For if these
men without humanity see a sedate man chat-
ting playfully with children that he may adapt
himself to the childish understanding with
kindly sympathy, they think that he is insane;
forgetting that they themselves were once
children, or unthankful for their maturity.
The typical meaning, as regards Christ and
His Church, which is to be found in this great
patriarch playing with his wife, and in the
conjugal relation being thus discovered, will
be seen by every one who, to avoid offending
the Church by erroneous doctrine, carefully
studies in Scripture the secret of the Church's
Bridegroom. He will find that the Husband
of the Church concealed for a time in the form
of a servant the majesty in which He was
equal to the Father, as being in the form of
God, that feeble humanity might be capable
of union with Flim, and that so He might ac-
commodate Himself to His spouse. So far
from being absurd, it has a symbolic suitable-
ness that the prophet of God should use a
playfulness which is of the flesh to meet the
affection of his wife, as the Word of God
Himself became flesh that He might dwell
among us.

47. Again, Jacob the son of Isaac is
charged with having committed a great crime
because he had four wives. But here there
is no ground for a criminal accusation: for a
plurality of wives was no crime when it was
the custom; and it is a crime now, because
it is no longer the custom. There are sins
against nature, and sins against custom, and
sins against the laws. In which, then, of
these senses did Jacob sin in having a plural-
ity of wives ? As regards nature, he used the
women not for sensual gratification, but for
the procreation of children. For custom, this
was the common practice at that time in those
countries. And for the laws, no prohibition
existed. The only reason of its being a crime
now to do this, is because custom and the
laws forbid it. Whoever despises these re-
straints, even though he uses his wives only
to get children, still commits sin, and does
an injury to human society itself, for the sake
of which it is that the procreation of children
is required. In the present altered state of
customs and laws, men can have no pleasure
in a plurality of wives, except from an excess
of lust; and so the mistake arises of suppos-
ing that no one could ever have had mnny

290

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXII.

wives but from sensuality and the veliemence
of sinful desires. Unable to form an idea of
men whose force of mind is beyond their con-
ception, they compare themselves with them-
selves, as the apostle says,' and so make mis-
takes. Conscious that, in their intercourse
lliough with one wife only, they are often in-
lluenced by mere animal passion instead of
an intelligent motive, they think it an obvious
inference that, if the limits of moderation are
not observed where there is only one wife, the
infirmity must be aggravated where there are
more than one.

48. But those who have not the virtues of
temperance must not be allowed to judge of
the conduct of holy men, any more than those
in fever of the sweetness and wholesomeness
of food. Nourishment must be provided not
by the dictates of the sickly taste, but rather
i)y the judgment and direction of health, so
as to cure the sickness. If our critics, then,
wish to attain not a spurious and affected, but
a genuine and sound moral health, let them
find a cure in believing the Scripture record,
that the honorable name of saint is given not
without reason to men who had several wives;
and that the reason is this, that the mind can
exercise such control over the flesh as not to
allow the appetite implanted in our nature by
Providence to go beyond the limits of delib-
erate intention. By a similar misunderstand-
ing, this criticism, which consists rather in
dishonest slander than in honest judgment,
might accuse the holy apostles too of preach-
ing the gospel to so many people, not from
the desire of begetting children to eternal
life, but from the love of human praise.
There was no lack of renown to these our
fathers in the gospel, for their praise was
spread in numerous tongues through the
churches of Christ. In fact, no greater
honor and glory could have been paid by men
to their fellgw-creatures. It was the sinful
desire for this glory in the Church which led
the reprobate Simon in his blindness to wish
to purchase for money what was freely be-
stowed on the apostles by divine grace. "=
There must have been this desire of glory in
the man whom the Lord in the Gospel checks
in his desire to follow Him, saying, " The
foxes have holes, and the birds of the air
have nests, but the Son of man hath not
where to lay His Head."^ The Lord saw
that his mind was darkened by false appear-
ances and elated by sudden emotion, and that
there was no ground of faith to afford a lodg-
ing to the Teacher of humility; for in Christ's
discipleship the man sought not Christ's

I 2 Cor. X. 12

2 Acts viii. 18-20.

3 Matt. viii. 20.

grace, but his own glory. By this love of
glory those were led away whom the Apostle
Paul characterizes as preaching Christ not
sincerely, but of contention and envy; and
yet the apostle rejoices in their preaching,
knowing that it might happen that, while the
preachers gratified their desire for human
praise, believers might be born among their
hearers, — not as the result of the envious
feeling which made them wish to rival or sur-
pass the fame of the apostles, but by means
of the gospel which they preached, though
not sincerely; so that God might bring good
out of their evil. So a man may be induced
to marry by sensual desire, and not to beget
children; and yet a child may be born, a good
work of God, due to the natural power, not
to the misconduct of the parent. As, there-
fore, the holy apostles were gratified when
their doctrine met with acceptance from their
hearers, not because they were greedy for
praise, but because they desired to spread
the truth; so the holy patriarchs in their con-
jugal intercourse were actuated not by the
love of pleasure, but by the intelligent desire
for the continuance of their family. Thus
the number of their hearers did not make the
apostles ambitious; nor did the number of
their wives make the patriarchs licentious.
But why defend the husbands, to whose
character the divine word bears the highest
testimony, when it appears that the wives
themselves looked upon their connection
with their husbands only as a means of getting
sons? So, when they found themselves bar-
ren, they gave their handmaids to their hus-
bands; so that while the handmaids had the
fleshly motherhood, the wives were mothers
in intention.

49. Faustus makes a most groundless state-
ment when he accuses the four women of
quarreling like abandoned characters for the
possession of their husband. Where Faus-
tus read this I know not, unless it was in his
own heart, as in a book of impious delusions,
in which Faustus himself is seduced by that
serpent with regard to whom the apostle
feared for the Church, which he desired to
present as a chaste virgin to Christ; lest, as
the serpent had deceived Eve by his subtlety,
so he should also corrupt their minds by turn-
ing them away from the simplicity of Christ.*
The Manichaeans are so fond of this serpent,
that they assert that he did more good than
harm. From him Faustus must have got his
mind corrupted with the lies instilled into it,
which he now reproduces in these infamous
calumnies, and is even bold enough to put

,or. xi. 2, 3.

Book XXII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

291

down in writing. It is not true that one of
the handmaids carried off Jacob from the
other, or that they quarreled about possess-
ing him. There was arrangement, because
there was no licentious passion; and the law
of conjugal authority was all the stronger that
there was none of the lawlessness of fleshly
desire. His being hired by one of his wives
proves what is here said, in plain opposition
to the libels of the Manichaeans. Why should
one have hired him, unless by the arrange-
ment he was to have gone in to the other?
It does not follow that he would never have
gone in to Leah unless she had hired him.
He must have gone to her always in her turn,
for he had many children by her; and in
obedience to her he had children by her hand-
maid, and afterwards, without any hiring, by
herself. On this occasion it was Rachel's
turn, so that she had the power so expressly
mentioned in the New Testament by the
apostle, ' ' The husband hath not power over
his own body, but the wife."' Rachel had
a bargain with her sister, and, being in her
sister's debt, she referred her to Jacob, her
own debtor. For the apostle uses this figure
when he says, " Let the husband render unto
the wife what is due."^ Rachel gave what
was in her power as due from her husband,
in return for what she had chosen to take
from her sister.

50. If Jacob had been of such a character
as Faustus in his incurable blindness supposes,
and not a servant of righteousness rather than
of concupiscence, would he not have been
looking forward eagerly all day to the pleas-
ure of passing the night with the more beau-
tiful of his wives, whom he certainly loved
more than the other, and for whom he paid
the price of twice seven years of gratuitous
service ? How, then, at the close of the day,
on his way to his beloved, could he have con-
sented to be turned aside, if he had been such
as the ignorant Manichseans represent him ?
Would he not have disregarded the wish of
the women, and insisted upon going to the
fair Rachel, who belonged to him that night
not only as his lawful wife, but also as com-
ing in regular order? He would thus have
used his power as a husband, for the wife
also has not power over her own body,
but the husband; and having on this oc-
casion the arrangement in their obedience
in favor of the gratification of his love of
beauty, he might have enforced his author-
ity the more successfully. In that case it
would be to the credit of the women, that
while he thought of his own pleasure they

' I Cor. vii. 4.

2 I Cor. vii. 3.

contended about having a son. As it was,
this virtuous man, in manly control of sen-
sual appetite, thought more of what was due
from him than to him, and instead of using
his power for his own pleasure, consented to
be only the debtor in this mutual obligation.
So he consented to pay the debt to the person
to whom she to whom it was due wished him
to pay it. When, by this private bargain of
his wives, Jacob was suddenly and unexpec-
tedly forced to turn from the beautiful wife
to the plain one, he did not give way either
to anger or to disappointment, nor did he try
to persuade his wives to let him have his own
way; but, like a just husband and an intelli-
gent parent, seeing his wives concerned about
the production of children, which was all he
himself desired in marriage, he thought it
best to yield to their authority, in desiring
that each should have a child: for, since all
the children were his, his own authority was
not impaired. As if he had said to them:
Arrange as you please among yourselves
which is to be the mother; it matters not to
me, since in any case I am the father. This
control over the appetites, and simple desire
to beget children, Faustus would have been
clever enough to see and approve, unless his
mind had been corrupted by the shocking
tenets of his sect, which lead him to find fault
with everything in the Scripture, and, more-
over, teach him to condemn as the greatest
crime the procreation of children, which is
the proper design of marriage.

51. Now, having defended the character of
the patriarch, and refuted an accusation aris-
ing from these detestable errors, let us avail
ourselves of the opportunity of searching out
the symbolical meaning, and let us knock with
the reverence of faith, that the Lord may
open to us the typical significance of the four
wives of Jacob, of whom two were free, and
two slaves. We see that, in the wife and
bond-slaves of Abraham, the apostle under-
stands the two Testaments. ^ But there, one
represents each; here, the application does
not suit so well, as there are two and two.
There, also, the son of the bond-slave is dis-
inherited; but here the sons of the slaves re-
ceive the land of promise along with the sons
of the free women: so that this type must
have a different meaning.

52. Supposing that the two free wives point
to the New Testament, by which we are
called to liberty, what is the meaning of there
being two? Perhaj^s ])ecause in Scripture,
as the attentive reader will find, we are saiil
to have two lives in the body of Christ, — or.e

3 Gal. iv. 22-

24.

292

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXII.

temporal, in which we suffer pain, and one
eternal, in which we shall behold the blessed-
ness of God. We see the one in the Lord's
passion, and the other in His resurrection.
The names of the women point to this mean-
ing. It is said that Leah means Suffering,
and Rachel the First Principle made visible,
or the Word which makes the First Principle
visible. The action, then, of our mortal hu-
man life, in which we live by faith, doing
many painful tasks without knowing what
benefit may result from them to those in whom
we are interested, is Leah, Jacob's first wife.
And thus she is said to have had weak eyes.
For the purposes of mortals are timid, and
our plans uncertain. Again, the hope of the
eternal contemplation of God, accompanied
with a sure and delightful perception of truth,
is Rachel. And on this account she is des-
cribed as fair and well-formed. This is the
beloved of every pious student, and for this
he serves the grace of God, by which our sins,
thoua:h like scarlet, are made white as snow.'
For Laban means making white; and we read
that Jacob served Laban for Rachel. = No
man turns to serve righteousness, in subjec-
tion to the grace of forgiveness, but that he
may live in peace in the Word which makes
visible the First Principle, or God; that is,
he serves for Rachel, not for Leah. For
what a man loves in the works of righteous-
ness is not the toil of doing and suffering.
No one desires this life for its own sake; as
Jacob desired not Leah, who yet was brought
to him, and became his wife, and the mother
of children. Though she could not be loved
of herself, the Lord made her be borne with
as a step to Rachel; and then she came to
be approved of on account of her children.
Thus every useful servant of God, brought
into His grace by which his sins are made
white, has in his mind, and heart, and affec-
tion, when he thus turns to God, nothing but
the knowledge of wisdom. This we often ex-
pect to attain as a reward for practising the
seven precepts of the law which concern the
love of our neighbor, that we injure no one:
namely. Honor thy father and mother; Thou
shalt not commit adultery; Thou shalt not
kill; Thou shalt not steal; Thou shalt not
bear false witness; Thou shalt not desire thy
neighbor's wife; Thou shalt not covet thy
neighbor's property. When a man has
obeyed these to the best of his ability, and,
instead of the bright joys of truth which he
desired and hoped for, finds in the darkness
of the manifold trials of this world that he is
bound to painful endurance, or has embraced

Isa. i. ig

2 Gen. xxix. 17.

Leah instead of Rachel, if there is persever-
ance in his love, he bears with the one in or-
der to attain the other; and as if it were said
to him, Serve seven other years for Rachel,
he hears seven new commands, — to be poor
m spirit, to be meek, to be a mourner, to
hunger and thirst after righteousness, to be
merciful, pure, and a peacemaker. ^ A man
would desire, if it were possible, to obtain at
once the joys of lovely and perfect wisdom,
without the endurance of toil in action and
suffering; but this is impossible in mortal life.
This seems to be meant, when it is said to
Jacob: " It is not the custom in our country
to marry the younger before the elder."*
The elder may very well mean the first in or-
der of time. So, in the discipline of man,
the toil of doing the work of righteousness
precedes the delight of understanding the
truth.

53. To this purpose it is written: "Thou
hast desired wisdom; keep the command-
ments, and the Lord shall give it thee. "^
The commandments are those concerning
righteousness, and the righteousness is that
which is by faith, surrounded with the un-
certaiqty of temptations; so that understand-
ing is the reward of a pious belief of what is

The meaning I have
"Thou hast desired
wisdom; keep the commandments, and the
Lord shall give it thee, "I find also in the
passage, " Unless ye believe, ye shall not un
derstand;" * showing that as righteousness is.
by faith, understanding comes by wisdom
Accordingly, in the case of those who eagerly
demand evident truth, we must not condemn
the desire, but regulate it, so that beginning
with faitn it may proceed to the desired end
through good works. The life of virtue is.
one of toil; the end desired is unclouded wis-
dom. Why should I believe, says one, what
is not clearly proved? Let me hear some
word which will disclose the first principle ofi
all things. This is the one great craving ofi
the rational soul in the pursuit of truth. And
the answer is. What you desire is excellent,
and well worthy of your love; but Leah is to
be married first, and then Rachel. The pro-jj
per effect of your eagerness is to lead you to^
submit to the right method, instead of rebel-
ling against it; for without this method you
cannot attain what you so eagerly long for.
And when it is attained, the possession of the
lovely form of knowledge will be in this world
accompanied with the toils of righteousness.
For however clear and true our perception in
this life may be of the unchangeable good,

not yet understood,
given to these words

I'
1-

3 Matt. V.
5 Ecclus. i

3-9-
■ 33-

4 Gen. xxix. 26.
6 Isa. vi:. 9, Vulg.

Book XXII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

293

the mortal body is still a weight on the mind,
and the earthly tabernacle is a clog on the
intellect in its manifold activity. The end,
then, is one, luit many things must be gone
through for the sake of it.

54. Thus Jacob has two free wives; for
hoth are daughters of the remission of sins,
mt of whitening, that is, of Laban. One is
l')ved, the other is borne. But she that is
borne is the most and the soonest fruitful,
that she may be loved, if not for herself, at
least for her children. For the toil of the
righteous is specially fruitful in those whom
they beget for the kingdom of God, by
preaching the gospel amid many trials and
temptations; and they call those their joy
and crown' for whom they are in labors more
abundantly, in stripes above measure, in
deaths often, = — for whom they have fightings
without and fears within. ^ Such births re-
sult most easily and plentifully from the word
of faith, the preaching of Christ crucified,
which speaks also of His human nature as
far as it can be easily understood, so as not
to hurt the weak eyes of Leah. Rachel,
again, with clear eye, is beside herself to
< lod,-' and sees in the beginning the Word of
God with God, and wishes to bring forth, but
cannot; for who shall declare His generation ?
So the life devoted to contemplation, in order
to see with no feeble mental eye things invis-
ible to flesh, but understood by the things
that are made, and to discern the ineffable
manifestation of the eternal power and divin-
ity of God, seeks leisure from all occupation,
and is therefore barren. In this habit of re-
tirement, where the fire of meditation burns
bright, there is a want of sympathy with hu-
man weakness, and with the need men have
of our help in their calamities. This life also
burns with the desire for children (for it
wishes to teach what it knows, and not to go
with the corruption of envy 5), and sees its
sister-life fully occupied with work and with
bringing forth; and it grieves that men run
after that virtue which cares for their wants
and weaknesses, instead of that which has a
divine imperishable lesson to impart. This
is what is meant when it is said, " Rachel en-
vied her sister."* Moreover, as the pure in-
tellectual perception of that which is not mat-
ter, and so is not the object of the bodliy
sense, cannot be expressed in words which
si)ring from the flesh, the doctrine of wisdom
prefers to get some lodging for divine truth
in the mind by whatever material figures and
illustrations occur, rather than to give up
teaching these things; and thus Rachel pre-

• Phil. iv. :.

4 2 Cor. V. l:;

2 2 Cor. xi. 23.
5 Wisd. vi. 23.

3 2 Cor. vii. 5.
6 Gen. x.\.\. I.

ferred that her husband should have children
by her handmaid, rather than that she should
be without any children. Bilhah, the name
of her handmaid, is said to mean old; and
so, even when we speak of the spiritual and
unchangeable nature of God, ideas are sug-
gested relating to the old life of the bodily
senses.

55. Leah, too, got children by her hand-
maid, from the desire of having a numerous
family. Zilpah, her handmaid, is, interpreted,
an open mouth. So Leah's handmaid repre-
sents those who are spoken of in Scripture as
engaging in the preaching of tlie gospel with
open mouth, but not with open heart. Thus
it is written of some: "This people honor me
with their lips, but their heart is far from
me. "7 To such the apostle says: " Thou
that preachest that a man should not steal,
dost thou steal ? Thou that sayest a man
should not commit adultery, dost thou commit
adultery ?"^ But that even by this arrangement
the free wife of Jacob, the type of labor or en-
durance, might obtain children to be heirs of
the kingdom, the Lord says: " What they say,
do; but do not after their works. "5 And again,
the apostolic life, when enduring imprison-
ment, says: " Whether Christ is preached in
pretence or in truth, I therein do rejoice,
yea, and w'ill rejoice." '° It is the joy of the
mother over her numerous family, though
born of her handmaid.

56. In one instance Leah owed her becom-
ing a mother to Rachel, who, in return for
some mandrakes, allowed her husband to give
her night to her sister. Some, I know, think
that eating this fruit has the effect of making
barren women productive, and that Rachel,
from her desire for children, was thus bent
on getting the fruit from her sister. But I
should not agree to this, even had Rachel
conceived at the time. As Leah then con-
ceived, and, besides, had two other children
before God opened Rachel's womb, there is
no reason for supposing any such quality in
the mandrake, without any experience to
prove It. I will give my explanation; those
better able than I may give a better. Though
this fruit is not often met with, I had once, to
my great satisfaction, on account of its con-
nection with this passage of Scripture, an op-
portunity of seeing it. I examined the fruit
as carefully as I could, not with the help of
any recondite knowledge of the nature of
roots or the virtues of plants, but only as to
what I or any one might learn from the sight,
and smell, and taste. I thought it a nice-
looking fruit, and sweet-smelling, but in-

7 Isa. xxi.x. 13.
9 Matt, xxiii. 3.

8 Rom. ii. 21, 22.
lo Phil. i. i8.

294

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXIiJ

sipid; and I confess it is hard to say why
Raciiel desired it so much, unless it was for
its rarity and its sweet smell. Why the inci-
dent should be narrated in Scripture, in which
the fancies of women would not be mentioned
as important unless it was intended that we
should learn some important lesson from
them, the only thing I can think of is the
very simple idea that the fruit represents a
good character; not the praise given a man
by a few just and wise people, but popular
report, which bestows greatness and renown
on a man, and which is not desirable for its
own sake, but is essential to the success of
good men in their endeavors to benefit their
fellow-men. So the apostle says, that it is
proper to have a good report of those that are
without;' for though they are not infallible,
the lustre of their praise and the odor of
their good opinion are a great help to the
efforts of those who seek to benefit them.
And this popular renown is not obtained by
those that are highest in the Church, unless
they expose themselves to the toils and hazards
of an active life. Thus the son of Leah
found the mandrakes when he went out into
the field, that is, when walking honestly to-
wards those that are without. The pursuit
of wisdom, on the other hand, retired from
the busy crowd, and lost in calm meditation,
could never obtain a particle of this public
approval, except through those who take the
management of public business, not for the
sake of being leaders, but in order to be use-
ful. These men of action and business exert
themselves for the public benefit, and by a
popular use of their influence gain the ap-
proval of the people even for the quiet life
of the student and inquirer after truth; and
thus through I^eah the mandrakes come into
the hands of Rachel. Leah herself got them
from her first-born son, that is, in honor of
her fertility, which represents all the useful
result of a laborious life exposed to the com
mon vicissitudes; a life which many avoid on
account of its troublesome engagements, be-
cause, although they might be able to take the
lead, they are bent on study, and devote all
their powers to the quiet pursuit of knowl-
edge, in love with the beauty of Rachel.

57. But as it is right that this studious life
should gain public approval by letting itself
be known, while it cannot rightly gain this
approval if it keeps its follower in retirement,
instead of using his powers for the manage-
ment of ecclesiastical affairs, and so prevents
his being generally useful; to this purpose
Leah says to her sister, "Is it a small matter

that thou hast taken my husband ? and would--
est thou take away my son's mandrakes
also?"= The husband represents all those j
who, though fit for active life, and able to
govern the Church, in administering to be-
lievers the mystery of the faith, from their
love of learning and of the pursuit of wisdom,
desire to relinquish all troublesome occupa-
tions, and to bury themselves in the class-
room. Thus the words, " Is it a small mat-
ter that thou hast taken my husband? and]
wouldest thou take away my son's mandrakes
also?" mean, " Is it a small matter that the!
life of study keeps in retirement men required
for the toils of public life ? and does it ask for
popular renown as well ? "

58. To get this renown justly, Rachel
gives her husband to her sister for the night;
that is, those wno, by a talent for business,
are fitted for government, must for the public
benefit consent to bear the burden and suffer
the hardships of public life; lest the pursuit
of wisdom, to which their leisure is devoted,
should be evil spoken of, and should not gain
from the multitude the good opinion, repre-
sented by the fruit, which is necessary for the
encouragement of their pupils. But the life
of business must be forced upon them. This
is clearly shown by Leah's meeting Jacob
when coming from the field, and laying hold
of him, saying, " Thou shalt come in to mej
for I have hired thee with my son's man-
drakes.''^ As if she said. Dost thou wish
the knowledge which thou lovest to be well
thought of? Do not shirk the toil of busi-
ness. The same thing happens constantly
in the Church. What we read is explained
by what we meet with in our own experience.
Do we not everywhere see men coming from
secular employments, to seek leisure for the
study and contemplation of truth, their be
loved Rachel, and intercepted mid-way by
ecclesiastical affairs, which require them t
be set to work, as if Leah said to them, You
must come in to me ? When such men mia
ister in sincerity the mystery of God, so as in
the night of this world to beget sons in thel
faith, popular approval is gained also for thai
life, in love for which they were led to aban
don worldly pursuits, and from the adoption]
of which they were called away to undertake
the benevolent task of government. In all
their labors they aim chiefly at this, that their
chosen way of life may have greater and
wider renown, as having supplied the people
with such leaders; as Jacob consents to goi
with Leah, that Rachel may obtain the sweet

I I Tim. iii. 7.

smelling

and

good-looking

fruit. Rachel,!

- Gen. xxx. 15.

3 Gen. xxx. 16.

Book XXII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.^AN.

295

too, in course of time, by the mercy of God,
brings forth a child herself, but not till after
some time; for it seldom happens that there

j is a sound, though only partial, apprehension,

I without fleshly ideas, of such sacred lessons
of wisdom as this: " In the beginning was the
Word, and the Word was with God, and the

I Word was God." '

; 59. This must suffice as a reply to the false
accusations brought by Faustus against the

; three fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,
from whom the God whom the Catholic
Church worship was pleased to take His
name. This is not the place to discourse on
the merits and piety of these three men, or
on the dignity of their prophetic character,
which is beyond the comprehension of carnal
minds. It is enough in this treatise to defend
them against the calumnious attacks of male-
volence and falsehood, in case those who read
the Scriptures in a carping and hostile spirit
should fancy that they have proved anything
ngainst the sacredness and the profitableness
of these books, by their attempts to blacken
the character of men who are there mentioned
so honorably.

60. It should be added that Lot, the
brother, that is the blood relation, of Abra-
ham, is not to be ranked as equal to those of
whom God says, " I am the God of Abraham,
of Isaac, and of Jacob;'' nor does he belong
to those testified to in Scripture as having
continued righteous to the end, although in
Sodom he lived a pious and virtuous life, and
showed a praiseworthy hospitality, so that he
was rescued from the fire, and a land was
given by God to his seed to dwell in, for the
sake of his uncle Abraham. On these ac-
counts he is commended in Scripture — not
for intemperance or incest. But when we
find bad and good actions recorded of the
same person, we must take warning from the
one, and example from the other. As, then,
'iie sin of Lot, of whom we are told that he
was righteous previous to this sin, instead of
''ringing a stain on the character of God, or
iie truth of Scripture, rather calls on us to
approve and admire the record in its resem-
blance to a faithful mirror, which reflects not
only the beauties and perfections, but also the
faults and deformities, of those who approach
it; still more, in the case of Judah, who lay
with his daughter-in-law, we may see how
L;roundless are the reproaches cast on the nar-
ative. The sacred record has an authority
which raises it far above not merely the cavils
of a handful of Manichaians, but the deter-
mined enmity of the whole Gentile world;

■ John i. I.

for, in confirmation of its claims, we see that
already it has brought nearly all people from
their idolatrous superstitions to the worship
of one God, according to the rule of Chris-
tianity. It has conquered the world, not by
violence and warfare, but by the resistless
force of truth. Where, then, is Judah praised
in Scripture ? Where is anything good said
of him, except that in the blessing pronounced
by his father he is distinguished above the
rest, because of the prophecy that Christ
would come in the flesh from his tribe ? '

61. Judah, as Faustus says, committed for-
nication; and besides that, we can accuse him
of selling his brother into Egypt. Is it any
disparagement to light, that in revealing all
things it discloses what is unsiglitly ? So
neither is the character of Scripture affected
by the evil deeds of which we are informed
by the record itself. Undoubtedly, by the
eternal law, which requires the preservation
of natural order, and forbids the transgression
of it, conjugal intercourse should take place
only for the procreation of children, and after
the celebration of marriage, so as to maintain
the bond of peace. Therefore, the prostitu-
tion of women, merely for the gratification of
sinful passion, is condemned by the divine
and eternal law. To purchase the degrada-
tion of another, disgraces the purchaser; £0
that, though the sin would have been greater
if Judah had knowingh^ lain with his daugh-
ter-in-law (for if, as the Lord says, man and
wife are no more two, but one flesh, ^ a daugh-
ter-in-law is the same as a daughter); still, it
is plain that, as regards his own intention, he
was disgraced by his intercourse with an har-
lot. The woman, on the other hand, who de-
ceived her father-in-law, sinned not from
wantonness, or because she loved the gains
of iniquity, but from her desire to have chil-
dren of this particular family. So, being dis-
appointed in two of the brothers, and not ob-
taining the third, she succeeded by craft in
getting a child by their fatner; and the re-
ward which she got was kept, not as an orna-
ment, but as a pledge. It would certainly
have been better to have remained childless
than to become a mother without marriage.
Still, her desire to have her father-in-law as
the father of her children was verj^ different
from having a criminal affection for him.
And when, by his order, she was brought out
to be killed, on her producing the staff and
necklace and ring, saying that the father of
the child was the man who had given her
those i)Iedges, Judah acknowledged them, and
said, " She hath been more righteous than I"

2 Gen. .\li.\. S-12.

3 .Ma'.t. xix. 6.

296

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXII.

— not praising her, but condemning himself.
He blamed her desire to have children less
than his own unlawful passion, which had led
him to one whom he thought to be an harlot.
In a similar sense, it is said of some that they
justified Sodom;' that is, their sin was so
great, that Sodom seemed righteous in com-
parison. And even allowing that this woman
is not spoken of as comparatively less guilty,
but is actually praised by her father-in-law,
while, on account of her not observing the
established rites of marriage, she is a criminal
in the eye of the eternal law of right, which
forbids the transgression of natural order,
both as regards the body, and first and chiefly
as regards the mind, what wonder though one
sinner should praise another?

62. The mistake of Faustus and of Manich-
nsism generally, is in supposing that these ob-
jections prove anything against us, as if our
reverence for Scripture, and our profession
of regard for its authority, bound us to ap-
prove of all the evil actions mentioned in it;
whereas the greater our homage for the
Scripture, the more decided must be our con-
demnation of what the truth of Scripture itself
teaches us to condemn. In Scripture, all
fornication and adultery are condemned by
the divine law; accordingl)^, when actions of
this kind are narrated, without being expressly
condemned, it is intended not that we should
praise them, but that we should pass judg-
ment on them ourselves. Every one execrates
the cruelty of Herod in the Gospel, when, in
his uneasiness on hearing of the birth of
Christ, he commanded the slaughter of so
many infants. - But this is merely narrated
without being condemned. Or if Manichaean
absurdity is bold enough to deny the truth of
this narrative, since they do not admit the
birth of Christ, which w-as what troubled
Herod, let them read the account of the blind
fury of the Jews, which is related without any
expression of reproach, although the feeling
of abhorrence is the same in all.

63. But, it is said, Judah, who lay with his
daughter-in-law, is reckoned as one of the
twelve patriarchs. And was not Judas, who
betrayed the Lord, reckoned among the
twelve apostles ? And was not this one of
them, who was a devil, sent along with them
to preach the gospel ? ' In reply to this, it
will be said that after his crime Judas hanged
himself, and was removed from the number
of the apostles; while Judah, after his evil
conduct, was not only blessed along with his
brethren, but got special honor and approval
from his father, who is so highly spoken of

I Ezek. xvi. 52

2 Matt. ii. 16.

3 John vi. 70, 71.

in Scripture. But the main lesson to be
learned from this is, that this prophecy refers
not to Judah, but to Christ, who was foretold
as to come in the flesh from his tribe; and
the very reason for the mention of this crime
of Judah is to be found in the desirableness
of teaching us to look for another meaning
in the words of his father, which are seen
not to be applicable to him in his misconduct,
from the praise which they express.

64. Doubtless, the intention of Faustus'
calumnies is to damage this very assertion,
that Christ was born of the tribe of Judah.
Especially, as in the genealogy given by
Matthew we find the name of Zara, whom
this woman Tamar bore to Judah. Had
Faustus wished to reproach Jacob's family
merely, and not Christ's birth, he might have
taken the case of Reuben the first-born, who
committed the unnatural crime of defiling his
father's bed, of which fornication the apostle
says, that it was not so much as named among
the Gentiles.'* Jacob also mentions this in
his blessing, charging his son with the infa-
mous deed. Faustus might have brought up
this, as Reuben seems to have been guilty of
deliberate incest, and there was no harlot's
disguise in this case, were it not that Tamar's
conduct in desiring nothing but to have chil-
dren is more odious to Faustus than if she had
acted from criminal passion, and did he nut
wish to discredit the incarnation, by bringing
reproach on Christ's progenitors. Faustus
unhappily is not aware that the most true and
truthful Saviour is a teacher, not only in His
words, but also in His birth. In His fleshly
origin there is this lesson for those who
should believe on Him from all nations, that
the sins of their fathers need be no hindrance
to them. Besides, the Bridegroom, who was
to call good and bad to His marriage, ^ was
pleased to assimilate Himself to His guests,
in being born of good and bad. He thus
confirms as typical of Himself the symbol of
the Passover, in which it was commanded
that the lamb to be eaten should be taken
from the sheep or from the goats — that is,
from the righteous or the wicked. * Preserv-
ing throughout the indication of divinity and
humanity, as man He consented to have both
bad and good as His parents, while as God
He chose the miraculous birth from a virgin.

65. The impiety, therefore, of Faustus'
attacks on Scripture can injure no one but
himself; for what he thus assails is now de-
servedly the object of universal reverence.
As has been said already, the sacred record,
like a faithful mirror, has no flattery in its

4 I Cor. V. I.

5 Matt. x.\ii. 10.

6 Ex.

XII. 3-5.

Book XXII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN

297

portraits, and either itself passes sentence
upon human actions as worthy of approval
or disapproval, or leaves the reader to do so.
And not only does it distinguish men as
lijameworthy or praiseworthy, but it also takes
notice of cases where the blameworthy deserve
praise, and the praiseworthy blame. Thus,
although Saul was blameworthy, it was not
tiie less praiseworthy in him. to examine so
carefully who had eaten food during the
curse, and to pronounce the stern sentence
in obedience to the commandment of God. '
So, too, he was right in banishing those that
had familiar spirits and wizards out of the
land. ' And although David was praise-
worthy, we are not called on to approve or
imitate his sins, which God rebukes by the
prophet. And so Pontius Pilate was not
wrong in pronouncing the Lord innocent, in
spite of the accusations of the Jews;^ nor was
it praiseworthy in Peter to deny the Lord
thrice; nor, again, was he praiseworthy on
that occasion when Christ called him Satan,
l)ecause, not understanding the things of God,
he wished to withhold Christ from his passion,
that is, from our salvation. Here Peter, im-
mediately after being called blessed, is called
Satan. •• Which character most truly belonged
to him, we may see from his apostleship, and
from his crown of martyrdom.

66. In the case of David also, we read of
iioth good and bad actions. But where
David's strength lay, and what was the secret
of his success, is sufficiently plain, not to the
bhnd malevolence with which Faustus assails
iioly writings and holy men, but to pious dis-
cernment, which bows to the divine authority,
and at the same time judges correctly of
human conduct. The Manichaeans will find,
if they read the Scriptures, that God rebukes
David more than Faustus does, ^ But they
will read also of the sacrifice of his penitence,
of his surpassing gentleness to his merciless
and bloodthirsty enemy, whom David, pious
as he was brave, dismissed unhurt when now
and again he fell into his hands. '^ They will
1 read of his memorable humility under divine
chastisement, when the kingly neck was so
l)Owed under the Master's yoke, that he bore
with perfect patience bitter taunts from his
enemy, though he was armed, and had armed
men with him. And when his companion
was enraged at such things being said to the
king, and was on the point of requiting the
insult on the head of the scoffer, he mildly
restrained him, appealing to the fear of God
in support of his own royal order, and saying
that this had happened to him as a punish-

' I Sam. xiv.

■t Matt. XVI. 17, 22, 23.

2 I Sam.
5 2 Sam.

xxviii. 3. 3 John xix. 4, 6.
xii. 6 I Sam. xxiv. and xxvi.

ment from God, who had sent the man to
curse him. ^ They will read how, with the
love of a shepherd for the flock entrusted to
him, he was willing to die for them, when,
after he had numbered the people, God saw
good to punish his sinful pride by lessening
the number he boasted of. In this destruc-
tion, God, with whom there is no iniquity, in
His secret judgment, both took away the lives
of those whom He knew to be unworthy of
life, and by this diminution cured the vain-
glory which had prided itself on the number of
the people. They will read of that scrupu-
lous fear of God in his regard for the emblem
of Christ in the sacred anointing, which made
David's heart smite him with regret for hav-
ing secretly cut off a small piece of Saul's
garment, that he might prove to him that he
had no wish to kill him, when he might have
done it. They will read of his judicious be-
havior as regards his children, and also of his
tenderness toward them — how, when one was
sick, he entreated the Lord for him with
many tears and with much self-abasement,
but when he died, an innocent child, he did
not mourn for him; and again, how, when his
youthful son was carried away with unnatural
hostility to an infamous violation of his
father's bed, and in a parricidal war, he wished
him to live, and wept for him when he was
killed; for he thought of the eternal doom of
a soul guilty of such crimes, and desired that
he should live to escape this doom by being
brought to submission and repentance.
These, and many other praiseworthy and ex-
emplary things, may be seen in this holy man
by a candid examination of the Scripture
narrative, especially if in humble piety and
unfeigned faith we regard the judgment of
God, who knew the secrets of David's heart,
and who, in His infallible inspection, so ap-
proves of David as to commend him as a
pattern to his sons.

67. It must have been on account of this
inspection of the depths of David's heart by
the Spirit of God that, when on being re-
proved by the prophet, he said, I have
sin.ned, he was considered worthy to be told,
immediately after this brief confession, that
he was pardoned — that is, that he was ad-
mitted to eternal salvation. For he did not
escape the correction of the fatherly rod, of
which God spoke in His threatening, that,
while by his confession he obtained eternal
exemption, he might be tried by temporal
chastisement. And it is a remarkable evi-
dence of the strength of David's faith, and
of his meek and submissive spirit, that, when

7 2 Sam. xvi.

298

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXII.

he had been told by the propaet that God
had forgiven him, altliouga the threatened
consequences were still permitted to follow,
he did not accuse the prophet of having de-
luded him, or murmur against God as having
mocked him with a declaration of forgiveness.
This deeply holy man, whose soul was lifted
up unto God, and not against God, knew that
had not the Lord mercifully accepted his
confession and repentance, his sins would
have deserved eternal punishment. So when,
instead of this, he was made to smart under
temporal correction, he saw that, while the
pardon remained good, wholesome discipline
was also provided. Saul, too, when he was
reproved by Samuel, said, I have sinned.'
Wny, then, was he not considered fit to be
told, as David was, that the Lord had par-
doned his sin ? Is there acceptance of persons
with God ? Far from it. While to the human
ear the words were the same, the divine eye
siw a difference in the heart. The lesson for
us to learn from these things is, that the king-
dom of heaven is within us,^ and that we must
worship God from our inmost feelings, that
out of the abundance of the heart the mouth
may speak, instead of honoring Him with our
lips, like the people of old, while our hearts
nre far from Him. We may learn also to
;iudge of men, whose hearts we cannot see,
only as God judges, who sees what we can-
not, and who cannot be biased or misled.
Having, on the high authority of sacred Script-
ure, the plainest announcement of God's
opinion of David, we may regard as absurd
or deplorable the rashness of men who hold
a different opinion. The authority of Script-
ure, as regards the character of these men
of ancient times, is supported by the evidence
from the prophecies which they contain, and
which are now receiving their fulfillment.

68. We see the same thing in the Gospel,
where the devils confess that Christ is the
Son of God in the words used by Peter, but
with a very different heart. So, though the
words were the same, Peter is praised for his
faith, while the impiety of the devils is
checked. For Christ, not by human sense,
but by divine knowledge, could inspect and
infallibly discriminate the sources from which
the words came. Besides, there are multi-
tudes who confess that Christ is the Son of
the living God, without meriting the same
approval as Peter — not only of those who
shall say in that day, "Lord, Lord," and
shall receive the sentence, " Depart from
me," but also of those who shall be placed
on the right hand. They may probably

m. XV. 24.

2 Luke xvii. 28.

never have denied Christ even once; they
may never have opposed His suffering for our
salvation; they may never have forced the
Gentiles to do as the Jews; 3 and yet they
shall not be honored equally with Peter, who,
though he did all these things, will sit on one
of the twelve thrones, and judge not only the
twelve tribes, but the angels. So, again,
many who have never desired another man's
wife, or procured the death of the husband,
as David did, will never reach the place which
David nevertheless held in the divine favor.
There is a vast difference between what is in
itself so undesirable that it must be utterly
rejected, and the rich and plenteous harvest
which may afterwards appear. For farmers
are best pleased with the fields from which,
after we;eding them, it may be, of great this-
tles, they receive an hundred-fold; not with
fields which have never had any thistles, and
hardly bear thirty-fold.

69. So Moses, too, who was so faithful a
servant of God in all his house; the minister
of the holy, just, and good law; of whose
character the apostle speaks in the words here
quoted;-* the minister also of the symbols
which, though not conferring salvation, prom-
ised the Saviour, as the Saviour Himself
shows, when He says, " If ye believed Moses,
ye would also believe me, for he wrote of
me," — from which passage we have already
sufficiently answered the presumptuous cavils
of the Manichseans; — this Moses, the servant
of the living, the true, the most high God,
that made heaven and earth, not of a foreign
substance, but of nothing — not from the
pressure of necessity, but from plenitude of
goodness — not by the suffering of His mem-
bers, but by the power of His word; — this
Moses, who humbly put from him this high
ministry, but obediently accepted it, and
faithfully kept it, and diligently fulfilled it;
who ruled the people with vigilance, reproved
them with vehemence, loved them with fer-
vor, and bore with them in patience, standing
for his subjects before God to receive His
counsel, and to appease His wrath; — this
great and good man is not to be judged of
from Faustus' malicious representations, but
from what is said by God, whose word is a
true expression of His true opinion of this
man, whom He knew because He made him.
For the sins of men are also known to God,
though He is not their author; but He takes
notice of them as a judge in those who refuse
to own them, and pardons them as a father in
those who make confession. His servant
Moses, as thus described, we love and ad-

3 Gal. ii. 14.

4 Heb. Hi. 5.

Look XXII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

299

mire, and to the best of our power imitate,
coming indeed far short of his merits, though
we have killed no Egyptian, nor plundered
any one, nor carried on any war; which ac-
tions of Moses were in one case prompted by
the zeal of the future champion of his peo-
ple, and in the other cases commanded by
God.

70. It might be shown that, though Moses
slew the Egyptian, without being commanded
by God, the action was divinely permitted, as,
from the prophetic character of Moses, it
prefigured something in the future. Now,
however, I do not use this argument, but
view the action as having no symbolical mean-
ing. In the light, then, of the eternal law, it
was wrong for one who had no legal authority
to kill the man, even though he was a bad
character, besides being the aggressor. But
in minds where great virtue is to come, there
is often an early crop of vices, in which we
may still discern a disposition for some par-
ticular virtue, which will come when the mind
is dul}^ cultivated. For as farmers, when they
see land bringing forth huge crops, though
of weeds, pronounce it good for corn; or
when they see wild creepers, which have to be
rooted out, still consider the land good for
useful vines; and when they see a hill covered
with wild olives, conclude that with culture it
will produce good fruit: so the disposition of
mind which led Moses to take the law into
his own hands, to prevent the wrong done to
his brother, living among strangers, by a
wicked citizen of the country from being un-
requited, was not unfit for the production of
virtue, but from want of culture gave signs of
its productiveness in an unjustifiable manner.
He who afterwards, by His angel, called
Moses on Mount Sinai, with the divine com-
mission to liberate the people of Israel from
Egypt, and who trained him to obedience by
the miraculous appearance in the bush burn-
ing but not consumed, and by instructing
him in his ministry, was the same who, by
the call addressed from heaven to Saul when
persecuting the Church, humbled him,
raised him up, and animated him; or in fig-
urative words, by this stroke He cut off the
branch, grafted it, and made it fruitful. For
the fierce energy of Paul, when in his zeal
for hereditary traditions he persecuted the
Church, thinking that he was doing God ser-
vice, was like a crop of weeds showing great
signs of productiveness. It was the same in
Peter, when he took his sword out of its sheath
to defend the Lord, and cut off the right ear
of an assailant, when the Lord rebuked him
with something like a threat, saying, " Put
up thy sword into its sheath; for he t'nat

taketh the sword shall perish by the sword."'
To take the sword is to use weapons against
a man's life, without the sanction of the con-
stituted authority. The Lord, indeed, had
told His disciples to carry a sword; but He
did not tell them to use it. But that after
this sin Peter should become a pastor of the
Church was no more improper than that
Moses, after smiting the Egyptian, should be-
come the leader of the congregation. In
both cases the trespass originated not in in-
veterate cruelty, but in a hasty zeal which
admitted of correction. In both cases there
was resentment against injury, accompanied
in one case by love for a brother, and in the
other by love, though still carnal, of the Lord.
Here was evil to be subdued or rooted out;
but the heart with such capacities needed
only, like good soil, to be cultivated to make
it fruitful in virtue.

71. Then, as for Faustus' objection to the
spoiling of the Egyptians, he knows not what
he says. In this Moses not only did not sbn,
but it would have been sin not to do it. It
was by the command of God,'^ who, from His
knowledge both of the actions and of the
hearts of men, can decide on what every one
should be made to suffer, and through whose
agency. The people at that time were still
carnal, and engrossed with earthly affections;
while the Egyptians were in open rebellion
against God, for they used the gold, God's
creature, in the service of idols, to the dis-
honor of the Creator, and they had griev-
ously oppressed strangers by making them
work without pay. Thus the Egyptians de-
served the punishment, and the Israelites
were suitably emplo3''ed in inflicting it. Per-
haps, indeed, it was not so much a command
as a permission to the Hebrews to act in the
matter according to their own inclinations;
and God, in sending the message by Moses,
only wished that they should thus be informed
of His permission. There may also have
been mysterious reasons for what God said to
the people on this matter. At any rate, God's
commands are to be submissively received, not
to be argued against. The apostle says, "Who
hath known the mind of the Lord ? or who
hath been His counsellor ?" ^ Whether, then,
the reason was what I have said, or whether
in the secret appointment of God, there was
some unknown reason for His telling the peo-
ple by Moses to borrow things from the
Egyptians, and to take them away with them,
this remains certain, that this was said for
some good reason, and that Moses could not
lawfully have done otherwise than God told

• Matt. xxvi. 51, 52.
^ Rom. xi. 34.

2 Ex. lii. 21, 22; xi. 2; xii. 35, 36.

^,oo

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXII.

him, leaving to God the reason of the com-
mand, while the servant's duty is to obey.

72. But, says Faustus, it cannot be ad-
mitted that the true God, who is also good,
ever gave such a command. I answer, such
a command can be rightly given by no other
than the true and good God, who alone knows
the suitable command in every case, and who
alone ^s incapable of inflicting unmerited suf-
fering^on any one. This ignorant and spuri-
ous goodness of the human heart may as well
denv what Christ says, and object to the
wicked being made to suffer by the good God,
when He shall say to the angels, " Gather first
the tares into bundles to burn them." The
servants, however, were stopped when they
wished to do this prematurely: " Lest by
chance, when ye would gather the tares, ye root
up the wheat also with them." ' Thus the true
and good God alone knows when, to whom,
and by whom to order anything, or to permit
anything. In the same way, this human
goodness, or folly rather, might object to the
Lord's permitting the devils to enter the
swine, which they asked to be allowed to do
with a mischievous intent, "" especially as the
Manichaeans believe that not only pigs, but
the vilest insects, have human souls. But
setting aside these absurd notions, this is un-
deniable, that our Lord Jesus Christ, tli« onl^
son of God, and therefore the true and good
God, permitted the 'destruction of swine be-
longing to strangers, implying loss of life and
of a great amount of property, at the request
of devils. No one can be so insane as to sup-
pose that Christ could not have driven the
devils out of the men without gratifying their
malice by the destruction of the swine. If,
tnen, the Creator and Governor of all natures,
in His superintendence, which, though mys-
terious, is ever just, indulged the violent and
unjust inclination of those lost spirits already
doomed to eternal fire, why should not the
Egyptians, who were unrighteous oppressors,
be spoiled by the Hebrews, a free people,
who would claim payment for their enforced
and painful toil, especially as the earthly pos-
sessions which they thus lost were used by
the Egyptians in their impious rites, to the
dishonor of the Creator? Still, if Moses had
originated this order, or if the people had
done it spontaneously, undoubtedly it would
have been sinful; and perhaps the people did
sin, not in doing what God commanded or
permitted, but in some desire of their own
for what they took. The permission given
to this action by divine authority was in ac-
cordance with the just and good counsel of

' Matt. xiii. 29,

Matt. viii. 31,

Him who uses punishments both to restrain
the wicked and to educate His own people;
who knows also how to give more advanced
precepts to those able to bear them, while He
begins on a lower scale in the treatment of
the feeble. As for Moses, he can be blamed
neither for coveting the property, nor for dis-
puting, in any instance, the divine authority.

73. According to the eternal law, which re-
quires the preservation of natural order, and
forbids the transgression of it, some actions
have an indifferent character, so that men are
blamed for presumption if they do them with-
out being called upon, while they are de-
servedly praised for doing them when re-
quired. The act, the agent, and the author-
ity for the action are all of great importance
in the order of nature. For Abraham to sac-
rifice his son of his own accord is shocking
madness. His doing so at the command of
God proves him faithful and submissive.
This is so loudly proclaimed by the very
voice of truth, that Faustus, eagerly rummag-
ing for some fault, and reduced at last to
slanderous charges, has not the boldness to
attack this action. It is scarcely possible
that he can have forgotten a deed so famous,
that it recurs to the mind of itself without any
study or reflection, and is in fact repeated by
so many tongues, and portrayed in so many
places, that no one can pretend to shut his
eyes or his ears to it. If, therefore, while
Abraham's killing his son of his own accord
would have been unnatural, his doing it at the
command of God shows not only guiltless but
praiseworthy compliance, why does Faustus
blame Moses for spoiling the Egyptians ?
Your feeling of disapproval for the mere hu-
man action should be restrained by a regard
for the divine sanction. Will you venture to
blame God Himself for desiring such actions ?
Then "Get thee behind me, Satan, for thou
understandest not the things which be of God,
but those which be of men." Would that
this rebuke might accomplish in you what it
did in Peter, and that you might hereafter
preach the truth concerning God, which you
now, judging by feeble sense, find fault with !
as Peter became a zealous messenger to an-
nounce to the Gentiles what he objected to at
first, when the Lord spoke of it as His inten-
tion.

74. Now, if this explanation suffices to sat-
isfy human obstinacy and perverse misinter-
pretation of right actions of the vast difference
between the indulgence of passion and pre-
sumption on the part of men, and obedience
to the command of God, who knows what to
permit or to order, and also the time and the
persons, and the due action or suffering in

Book XXII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

301

each case, the account of the wars of Moses
will not excite surprise or abhorrence, for in
wars carried on by divine command, he
showed not ferocity but obedience; and God,
in giving the command, acted not in cruelty,
but in righteous retribution, giving to all what
they deserved, and warning those who needed
warning. What is the evil in war? Is it the
death of some who will soon die in any case,
that others may live in peaceful subjection?
This is mere cowardly dislike, not any relig-
ious feeling. The real evils in war are love
of violence, revengeful cruelty, fierce and im-
placable enmity, wild resistance, and the lust
of power, and such like; and it is generally
to punish these things, when force is required
to inflict the punishment, that, in obedience
to God or some lawful authority, good men
undertake wars, when they find themselves in
such a position as regards the conduct of
human affairs, that right conduct requires
them to act, or to make others act in this
way. Otherwise John, when the soldiers
who came to be baptized asked. What shall
we do ? would have replied, Throw away your
arms; give up the service; never strike, or
wound, or disable any one. But knowing that
such actions in battle were not murderous,
but authorized by law, and that the soldiers
did not thus avenge themselves, but defend
the public safety, he replied, " Do violence
to no man, accuse no man falsely, and be
content with your wages." ' But as the Man-
ichseans are in the habit of speaking evil of
John, let them hear the Lord Jesus Christ
Himself ordering this money to be given to
Caesar, which John tells the soldiers to be
content with. "Give," ^e says, "to Caesar
the things that are Caesar's.''^ For tribute-
money is given on purpose to pay the soldiers
for war. Again, in the case of the centurion
who said, " I am a man under authority, and
have soldiers under me: and I say to one.
Go, and he goeth; and to' another, Come,
and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this,
and he doeth it," Christ gave due praise to
his faith; 3 He did not tell him to leave the
service. But there is no need here to enter
on the long discussion of just and unjust
wars.

75. A great deal depends on the causes for
which men undertake wars, and on the au-
thority they have for doing so; for the natu-
ral order which seeks the peace of mankind,
ordains that the monarch shouid have the
power of undertaking war if he thinks it ad-
visal:)le, and that the soldiers should perform
their military duties in behalf of the peace

' Luke iii. 14.

- Matt. xxii. 21.

3 Matt. viii. 9, 10.

and safety of the community. When war is
undertaken in obedience to God, who would
rebuke, or humble, or crush the pride of man,
it must be allowed to be a righteous war; for
even the wars which arise from human pas-
sion cannot harm the eternal well-being of
God, nor even hurt His saints; for in the trial
of their patience, and the chastening of their
spirit, and in bearing fatherly correction, they
are rather benefited than injured. No one
can have any power against them but what is
given him from above. For there is no power
but of God, ■* who either orders or permits.
Since, therefore, a righteous man, serving it
may be under an ungodly king, may do the
duty belonging to his position in the State in
fighting by the order of his sovereign, — for in
some cases it is plainly the will of God that
he should fight, and iw others, where this is
not so plain, it may be an unrighteous com-
mand on the part of the king, while the sol-
dier is innocent, because his position makes
obedience a duty, — how much more must the
man be blameless who carries on war on the
authority of God, of whom every one who
serves Him know'S that He can never require
what is wrong?

76. If it is supposed that God could not
enjoin warfare, because in after times it was
said by the Lord Jesus Christ, "I say unto
you. That ye resist not evil: but if any one
strike thee on the right cheek, turn to him
the left also," ^ the answer is, that what is
here required is not a bodily action, but an
inward disposition. The sacred seat of virtue
is the heart, and such were the hearts of our
fathers, the righteous men of old. But order
required such a regulation of events, and such
a distinction of times, as to show first of all
that even earthly blessings (for so temporal
kingdoms and victory over enemies are con-
sidered to be, and these are the things which
the community of the ungodly all over the
world are continually begging from idols and
devils) are entirely under the control and at
the disposal of the one true God. Thus, un-
der the Old Testament, the secret of the
kingdom of heaven, which was to be disclosed
in due time, was veiled, and so far obscured,
in the disguise of earthly promises. But
when the fullness of time came for the revela-
tion of the New Testament, which was hidden
under the types of the Old, clear testmiony
was to be borne to the truth, that there is
another life for which this life ought to be
disregarded, and another kingdom for which
the opposition of all earthly kingdoms should
be patiently borne. Thus the name martyrs,

4 Rom. xiii. i.

5 Matt. V.

^9-

\02

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[DooK XXII.

which means witnes.ses, was given to those
who, by the will of God, bore this testimony,
by their confessions, their sufferings, and
their death. The number of such witnesses
is so great, that if it pleased Christ — who
called Saul by a voice from heaven, and hav-
ing changed him from a wolf to a sheep, sent
him into the midst of wolves — to unite them
all in one army, and to give them success in
battle, as He gave to the Hebrews, what na-
tion could withstand tliem ? what kingdom
would remain unsubdued ? But as the doc-
trine of the New Testament is, that we must
serve God not for temporal happiness in this
life, but for eternal felicity hereafter, this
truth was most strikingly confirmed by the
patient endurance of what is commonly called
adversity for the sake of that felicity. So in
fullness of time the Son of God, made of a
woman, made under the law, that He might
redeem them that were under the law, made
of the seed of David according to the flesh,
sends His disciples as sheep into the midst of
wolves, and bids them not fear those that can
kill the body, but cannot kill the soul, and
promises that even the body will be entirely
restored, so that not a hair shall be lost.'
Peter's sword He orders back into its sheath,
restoring as it was before the ear of His en-
emy that had been cut off. He says that He
could obtain legions of angels to destroy His
enemies, but that He must drink the cup
which His Father's will had given Him.- He
sets the example of drinking this cup, then
hands it to His followers, manifesting thus,
both in word and deed, the grace of patience.
Therefore God raised Him from the dead,
and has given Him a name which is above
every name; that in the name of Jesus every
knee should bow, of things in heaven and of
things in earth, and of things under the earth;
and that every tongue should confess that
Jesus is Lord, to the glory of God the
Father. 3 The patriarchs and prophets, then,
have a kingdom in this world, to show that
these kingdoms, too, are given and taken
away by God: the apostles and martyrs had
no kingdom here, to show the superior desir-
ableness of the kingdom of heaven. The
prophets, however, could even in those times
die for the truth, as the Lord Himself says,
"From the blood of Abel to the blood of
Zacharia;'^ and in these days, since the com-
mencement of the fulfillment of what is pro-
phesied in the psalm of Christ, under the fig-
ure of Solomon, which means the peace-
maker, as Christ is our peace,^ " All kings of

' Matt. X. i6, 28, 30.

=! Matt. xxvi. 52, 53; Luke xxii. 42, 51; John xviii. 11.

3 Phil. ii. (>-ii 4 Matt, xxiii. 35. 5 Eph. ii. 14.

the earth shall bow to Him, all nations shall
serve Him,"* we have seen Christian empe-
rors, who have put all their confidence in
Christ, gaining splendid victories over un-
godly enemies, whose hope was in the rites
of idolatry and devil-worship. There are
public and undeniable proofs of the fact, that
on one side the prognostications of devils
were found to be fallacious, and on the other,
the predictions of saints were a means of sup-
port; and we have now writings in which
those facts are recorded.

77. If our foolish opponents are surprised
at the difference between the precepts given
by God to the ministers of the Old Testa-
ment, at a time when the grace of the New
was still undisclosed, and those given to the
preachers of the New Testament, now that
the obscurity of the Old is removed, they will
find Christ Himself saying one thing at one
time, and another at another. " When I sent
you," He says, "without scrip, or purse, or
shoes, did ye lack anything? And they said.
Nothing. Then saith He to them. But now,
he that hath a scrip, let him take it, and also
a purse; and he that hath not a sword, let
him sell his garment, and buy one." If the
Manichasans found passages in the Old and
New Testaments differing in this way, they
would proclaim it as a proof that the Testa-
ments are opposed to each other. But here
the difference is in the utterances of one and
the same person. At one time He says, "I
sent you without scrip, or purse, or shoes,
and ye lacked nothing;" at another, "Now
let him that hath a scrip take it, and also a
purse; and he that hath a tunic, let him sell
it and buy a sword." Does not this show
how, without any inconsistency, precepts and
counsels and permissions may be changed, as
different times require different arrangements?
If it is said that there was a symbolical mean-
ing in the command to take a scrip and purse,
and to buy a sword, why may there not be a
symbolical meaning in the fact, that one and
the same God commanded the prophets in old
times to make war, and forbade the apostles ?
And we find in the passage that we have
quoted from the Gospel, that the words spoken
by the Lord were carried into effect by His
disciples. For, besides going at first without
scrip or purse, and yet lacking nothing, as
from the Lord's question and their answer it
is plain they did, now that He speaks of buy-
ing a sword, they say, " Lo, here are two
swords;" and He replied, " It is enough."
Hence we find Peter with a weapon when he
cut off the assailant's ear, on which occasion

fi Ps. Ixxii. II.

Book XXII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.^AN.

303

his spontaneous boldness was checked, be-
cause, although he had been told to take a
sword, he had not been told to use it.'
Doubtless, it was mysterious that the Lord
should require them to carry weapons, and
forbid the use of them. But it was His part
to give the suitable precepts, and it was their
part to obey without reserve.

78. It is therefore mere groundless calumny ,
to charge Moses with making \>'ar, for there !
would have been less harm in making war of;
his own accord, than in not doing it when j
God commanded him. And to dare to find ,
fault with God Himself for giving such a
command, or not to believe it possible that a
just and good God did so, shows, to say the
least, an inability to consider that in the view i
of divine providence, which pervades all
things from the highest to the lowest, time
can neither add anything nor take away; but
all things go, or come, or remain .according to
the order of nature or desert in each separate
case, while in men a right will is in union with
the divine law, and ungoverned passion is re-
strained by the order of divine law; so that a
good man wills only what is commanded, and
a bad man can do only what he is permitted,
at the same time that he is punished for what
he wills to do unjustly. Thus, in all the
things which appear shocking and terrible to
human feebleness, the real evil is the injus-
tice; the rest is only the result of natural
properties or of moral demerit. This injus-
tice is seen in every case where a man loves
for their own sake things which are desirable
only as means to an end, and seeks for the
sake of something else things which ought to
be loved for themselves. For thus, as far
as he can, he disturbs in himself the natural
order which the eternal law requires us to ob-
serve. Again, a man is just when he seeks
to use things only for the end for which God
appointed them, and to enjoy God as the end
of all, while he enjoys himself and his friend
in God and for God. For to love in a friend
the love of God is to love the friend for God.
Now both justice and injustice, to be acts at
all, must be voluntary; otherwise, there can
be no just rewards or punishments; which no
man in his senses will assert. The ignorance
and infirmity which prevent a man from know-
ing his duty, or from doing all he wishes to
do, belong to God's secret penal arrangement,
and to His unfathomable judgments, for with
Him there is no iniquity. Thus we are in-
formed by the sure word of God of Adam's
sin; and Scripture truly declares that in him
all die, and that by him sin entered into the

• Luke xxii. 35-38, 50, 51.

world, and death by sin.- And our experi-
ence gives abundant evidence, that in punish-
ment for this sin our body is corrupted, and
weighs down the soul, and the clay tabernacle
clogs the mind in its manifold activity; ^ and
we l.now that we can be freed from this pun-
ishment only by gracious interposition. So
the apostle cries out in distress, " O wretched
man that I am ! who shall deliver me from
the body of this death? The grace of
God through Jesus Christ our Lord."-* So
much we know; but the reasons for the dis-
tribution of divine judgment and mercy, why
one is in this condition, and another in that,
though just, are unknown. Still, we are sure
that all these things are due either to the
mercy or the judgment of God, while the
measures and numbers and weights by which
the Creator of all natural productions arranges
all things are concealed from our view. For
God is not the author, but He is the con-
troller of sin; so that sinful actions, which
are sinful because they are against nature,
are judged and controlled, and assigned to
their proper place and condition, in order that
they may not bring discord and disgrace on
universal nature. This being the case, and
as the judgments of God and the movements
of man's will contain the hidden reason why
the same prosperous circumstances which
some make a right use of are the ruin of
others, and the same afflictions under which
some give way are profitable to others, and
since the whole mortal life of man upon earth
is a trial, 5 who can tell whether it may be
good or bad in any particular case — in time
of peace, to reign or to serve, or to be at ease
or to die — or in time of war, to command or
to fight, or to conquer or to be killed ? At
the same time, it remains true, that whatever
is good is so by the divine blessing, and
whatever is bad is so by the divine judgment.
79. Let no one, then, be so daring as to
make rash charges against men, not to say
against God. If the service of the ministers
of the Old Testament, who were also heralds
of the New, consisted in putting sinners to
death, and that of the ministers of the New
Testament, who are also interpreters of the
Old, in being put to death by sinners, the
service in both cases is rendered to one God,
who, varying the lesson to suit the times,
teaches both that tem[)oral blessings are to
be sought from Him, and that they are to be
forsaken for Him, and that temporal distress
is both sent by Him and should be endured
for Him. There was, therefore, no cruelty
in the command, or in the action of Moses,

= Rom. V. 12, 19.
4 Roiu. vii. 24, 25.

3 Wisd. ix. 15.

5 Job vii. 4.

304

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXII.

when, in his holy jealousy for his people,
whom he wished to be subject to the one true
God, on learning that they had fallen away to
the worship of an idol made by their own
hands, he impressed their minds at the time
with a wholesome fear, and gave them a warn-
ing for the future, by using the sword in the
punishment of a few, whose just punishment
God, against whom they had sinned, ap-
pointed in the depth of His secret judgment
to be immediately inflicted. That Moses
acted as he did, not in cruelty, but in great
love, may be seen from the words in which
he prayed for the sins of the people: "If
Thou wilt forgive their sin, forgive it; and if
not, blot me out of Thy book."' The pious
inquirer who compares the slaughter with the
prayer will find in this the clearest evidence
of the awful nature of the injury done to the
soul by prostitution to the images of devils,
smce such love is roused to such anger. We
see the same in the apostle, who, not in
cruelty, but in love, delivered a man up to
Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the
spirit might be saved in the day of the Lord
Jesus.^ Others, too, he delivered up, that
they might learn not to blaspheme. ^ In the
apocryphal books of the Manichseans tliere is
a collection of fables, published by some un-
known authors under the name of the apos-
tles. The books would no doubt have been
sanctioned by the Church at the time of their
publication, if holy and learned men then in
life, and competent to determine the matter,
had thought the contents to be true. One of
the stories is, that the Apostle Thomas was
once at a marriage feast in a country where he
was unknown, when one of the servants struck
him, and that he forthwith by his curse
brought a terrible punishment on this man.
For when he went out to the fountain to pro-
vide water for the guests, a lion fell on him
and killed him, and the hand with which he
had given a slight blow to the apostle was
torn off, in fulfillment of the imprecation, and
brought by a dog to the table at which the
apostle was reclining. What could be more
cruel than this ? And yet, if I mistake not,
the story goes on to say, that the apostle
made up for the cruelty by obtaining for the
man the blessing of pardon in the next world;
so that, while the people of this strange coun-
try iearned to fear the apostle as being so
dear to God, the man's eternal welfare was
secured in exchange for the loss of this mor-
tal life. It matters not whether the story is
true or false. At any rate, the Manichseans,
who regard as genuine and authentic books

'■ Ex. xxxii.

32-

2 I Cor. V. 5.

3 I Tim. i. 2.:,

which the canon of the Church rejects, must
allow, as shown in the story, that the virtue
of patience, which the Lord enjoins when He
says, " If any one smite thee on the right
cheek, turn to him thy left also," may be inl
the inward disposition, though it is not ex-|
hibited in bodily action or in words. Fori
when the apostle was struck, instead of turn-
ing his other side to the man, or telling himi
to repeat the blow, he prayed to God to par-
don his assailant in the next world, but not]
to leave the injury unpunished at the time.
Inwardly he preserved a kindly feeling, while!
outwardly he wished the man to be punished
as an example. As the Manichseans believe
this, rightly or wrongly, they may also believe
that such was the intention of Moses, the ser-
vant of God, when he cut down with the I
sword the makers and worshippers of the]
idol; for his own words show that he so en-
treated for pardon for their sin of idolatry as I
to ask to be blotted out of God's book if his I
prayer was not heard. There is no compari- }
son between a stranger being struck with the|
hand, and the dishonor done to God by for-
saking Him for an idol, when He had brought j
the people out of the bondage of Egypt, had j
led them through the sea, and had covered
with the waters the enemy pursuing them.
Nor, as regards the punishment, is there any I
comparison between being killed with the!
sword and being torn in pieces by wild beasts.
For judges in administering the law condemn 1
to exposure to wild beasts worse criminals 1
than are condemned to be put to death by '
the sword.

80. Another of Faustus' malicious and im-
pious charges which has to be answered, is I
about the Lord's saying to the prophet Hosea,
"Take unto thee a wife of whoredoms and 1
children of whoredoms,"'' As regards this|
passage, the impure mind of our adversaries
is so blinded that they do not understand
the plain words of the Lord in His gospel,
when He says to the Jews, "The publicans!
and harlots shall go into the kingdom of|
heaven before you."5 There is nothing con-
trary to the mercifulness of truth, or incon-
sistent with Christian faith, in a harlot leav-|
ing fornication, and becoming a chaste wife.
Indeed, nothing could be more unbecoming!
in one professing to be a prophet than not to
believe that all the sins of the fallen woman!
were pardoned when she changed for the|
better. So when the prophet took the harlot
as his wife, it was both good for the woman
to have her life amended, and. the action
symbolized a truth of which we shall speak

4 Hos. i, 2,

5 Matt. xxi. 31.

r.ooK XXII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

305

presently. But it is plain what offends the
ManichEcans in this case; for their great anx-
iety is to prevent harlots from being with
child. It would have pleased them better
that the woman should continue a prostitute,
so as not to bring their god into confinement,
than that she should become the wife of one
man, and have children.

81. As regards Solomon, it need only be
said that the condemnation of his conduct in
the faithful narrative of holy Scripture is
much more serious than the childish vehe-
mence of Faustus' attacks. The Scripture
tells us with faithful accuracy both the good
that Solomon had at first, and the evil actions
by which he lost the good he began with;
while Faustus, in his attacks, like a man
closing his eyes, or with no eyes at all, seeks
no guidance from the light, but is prompted
only by violent animosity. To pious and
discerning readers of the sacred Scriptures
evidence of the chastity of the holy m.en who
are said to have had several wives is found in
this, that Solomon, who by his polygamy
gratified his passions, instead of seeking for
olTspring, is expressly noted as chargeable
v.ith being a lover of women. This, as we
are informed by the truth which accepts no
man's person, led him down into the abyss
of idolatry.

82. Having now gone over all the cases in
which Faustus finds fault with the Old Testa-
ment, and having attended to the merit of
each, either defending men of God against
the calumnies of carnal heretics, or, where
the men were at fault, showing the excellence
and the majesty of Scripture, let us again
take the cases in the order of Faustus' accusa-
tions, and see the meaning of the actions re-
corded, what they typify, and what they fore-
tell. This we have already done in the case
of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, of whom God
said that He was their God, as if the God of
universal nature were the God of none besides
them; not honoring them with an unmeaning
title, but because He, who could alone have
a full and perfect knowledge, knew the sincere
and remarkable charity of these men; and
l)ecause these three patriarchs united formed
a notable type of the future people of God,
in not only having free children by free
women, as by Sarah, and Rebecca, and Leah,
and Rachel, but also bond children, as of this
same Rebecca was born Esau, to whom it was

isaid, "Thou shalt serve thy brother; " ' and
in having by bond women not only bond
children, as by Hagar, but also free children,
as by Bilhah and Zilphah. Thus also in the

» Gen. x.wii. 40.

people of God, those spiritually free not only
have children born into the enjoyment of lib-
erty, like those to whom it is said, " Be ye
followers of me, as I also am of Christ," - but
they have also children born into guilty bond-
age, as Simon was born of Philip.^ Again,
from carnal bondmen are born not only chil-
dren of guilty bondage, who imitate them, but
also children of happy liberty, to whom it is
said, "What they say, do; but do not after
their works. " •* Whoever rightly observes the
fulfillment of this type in the people of God,
keeps the unity of the Spirit in the bond of
peace, by continuing to the end in union with
some, and in patient endurance of others.
Of Lot, also, we have already spoken, and
have shown what the Scripture mentions as
praiseworthy in him, and what as blameworthy
and the meaning of the whole narrative.

83. We have next to consider the prophetic
significance of the action of Judah in lying
with his daughter-in-law. But, for the sake
of those whose understanding is feeble, we
shall begin with observing, that in sacred
Scripture evil actions are sometimes prophetic
not of evil, but of good. Divine providence
preserves throughout its essential goodness,
so that, as in the example given above, from
adulterous intercourse a man-child is born,
a good work of God from the evil of man, by
the power of nature, and not due to the mis-
conduct of the parents; so in the prophetic
Scriptures, where both good and evil actions
are recorded, the narrative being itself pro-
phetic, foretells something good even by the
record of what is evil, the credit being due not
to the evil-doer, but to the writer. Judah,
when, to gratify his sinful passion, he went in
to Tamar, had no intention by his licentious
conduct to typify anything connected with the
salvation of men, any more than Judas, who
betrayed the Lord, intended to produce any
result connected with the salvation of men.
So then if from the evil deed of Judas the
Lord brought the good work of our redemp-
tion by His own passion, why should not His
prophet, of whom He Himself says " He wrote
of me," for the sake of instructing us make
the evil action of Judah significant of some-
thing good ? Under the guidance and inspira-
tion of the Holy Spirit, the prophet has com-
piled a narrative of actions so as to make a
continuous prophecy of the things he designed
to foretell. In foretelling good, it is of no
consequence whether the typical actions are
good or bad. If it is written in red ink that
the Ethiopians are black, or in black ink that
the Gauls are white, this circumstance does

2 I Cor. iv. 16.

3 Acts viii. 13.

4 Matt, x.xiii. 3.

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[15(H)K XXII.

not affect the information which the writini^
conveys. No doubt, if it was a paintin;;- in-
stead of a writing, the wrong color woulil he
a fault; so when human actions are repre-
sented for example or for warning much de-
jiends on whether they are good or bad. Uut
when actions are related or recorded as types,
the merit or demerit of the agents is a matter
of no importance, as long as there is a true
typical relation between the action and the
thing signified. So in the case of Caiaphas in
the Gospel as regards his iniquitous and mis-
chievous intention, and even as regards his
words in the sense in which he used them, that
a just man should be put to death unjustly,
assuredly they were bad; and yet there was a
iiood meaning in his words which he did not
know of when he said, " It is expedient that
one man should die for the people and that
the whole nation perish not." So it is written
of Him. " This he spake not of himself; but
being the high priest, he projihesietl that Jesus
should die for the people." " In the same
Avay the action of Judah was bad as regards
his sinful passion, but it typified a great good
he knew nothing of. Of himself he did evil,
while it was not of himself that he typified
good. These introductory remarks apply not
only to Judah, but also to all the other cases
where in the narrative of bad actions is con-
tained a prophecy of good.

84. In Tamar, then, the daughter-in-law of
Judah, we see the people of the kingdom of
Judah, whose kings, answering to Tamar's
husbands, were taken from this tribe. Tamar
means bitterness; and the meaning is suita-
ble, for this people gave the cu[) of gall to the
Lord.- The two sons of Judah represent two
classes of kings who governed ill — those who
did harm and those who did no good. One
of these sons was evil or cruel before the
Lord," the other spilled the seed on the ground
that Tamar might not become a mother.
Tliere are only those two kinds of useless
])eopIe in the world — the injurious and those
who will not give the good they have but lose
it or spill it on the ground. And as injury is
worse than not doing good, the evil-doer is
called the elder and the other the younger.
Er, the name of the elder, means a preparer of
skins, which were the coats given to our first
parents when they were punished with expul-
sion from paradise.^ Onan, the name of the
younger, means, their grief; that is, the grief
of those to whom he does no good, wasting
the good he' has on the earth. The loss of
life implied in the name of the elder is a
greater evil than the want of help implied in

Tohn

xi. 50, 51.

- Matt, xxvii. 34.

Gen.

the name of the younger. Both being killed
by God typifies the removal of the kingdom
from men of this character. The meaning of
tlie third son of Judah not being joined to the
woman, is that for a time the kings of Judah
were not of that tribe. So this third son did
not become the husband of Tamar; as Tamar
represents the tribe of Judah, which con-
tinued to exist, although the people received
no king from it. Hence the name of this
son, Selom, means, his dismission. None of
those types apply to the holy and righteous
men who, like David, though they lived in
those times, belong properly to the New
Testament, which the}'' served by their en-
lightened predictions. Again, in the time
when Judah ceased to have a king of its own
tribe, the elder Herod does not count as one
of the kings typified by the husbands of
Tamar; for he was a foreigner, and his union
with the people was never consecrated with
the holy oil. His was the power of a stranger,
given him by the Romans and by Caisar. And
it was the same with his sons, the tetrarchs,
one of whom, called Herod, like his father,
agreed with Pilate at the time of the Lord's
passion.* So plainly were these foreigners
considered as distinct from the sacred mon-
archy of Judah, that the Jews themselves,
when raging against Cln'ist, exclaimed openly,
"We have no king but Cossar. "^ Nor was
Cresar properly their king, except in the sense
tliat all the world was subject to Rome. The
Jews tlius condemned themselves, only to ex
press their rejection of Christ, and to flatter
C^sar.

85. The time when the kingdom was re
moved from the tribe of Judah was the time
appointed for the coming of Christ our Lord,
the true Saviour, who should come not for
harm, but for great good. Thus was it pro-
phesied, "A prince shall not fail from Judah,
nor a leader from his loins, till He come lor
whom it is reserved: He is the desire of na-
tions."* Not only the kingdom, but all gov-
ernment, of the Jews had ceased, and also,
as prophesied by Daniel, the sacred anointing
from which the name Christ or Anointed is
derived. Then came He for whom it was re.
served, the desire of nations; and the holy of
holies was anointed with the oil of gladness
above His fellows.^ Christ was born in the
time of the elder Herod, and suffered in the
time of Herod the tetrarch. He who thus
came to the lost sheep of the house of Israel
was typified by Judah when he went to shear
his sheep in Thamna, which means, failing.
For then the prince had failed from Judah,

4 Luke xxiii. 12.
* Gen. xlix. 10.

5 John xix. 15.

7 Dan. ix. 24, and Ps. xlv. 7.

;OK XXII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH/TCAN.

307

th all the government and anointing of the also glorified." ' This was while she was still

|(,\vs, that He might come for whom it was
reserved. Judah, we are told, came with his
Adullamite shepherd, whose name was Iras;

id Adullamite means, a testimony in water.

n it was with this testimony that the Lord

I came, having indeed greater testimony than

jliiat of John;' but for the sake of his feeble

sheep he made use of the testimony in water.

The name Iras, too, means, vision of my

lirother. So John saw his brother, a brother

;;i the family of Abraham, and from the re-

i.iiionship of Mary and Elisabeth; and the

same person he recognised as his Lord and

A (}od, for, as he himself says, he received

His fullness.- On account of this vision,

iiong those born of woman, there has arisen
;io greater than he;^ because, of all who fore-
told Christ, he alone saw what many righteous
men and prophets desired to see and saw not.
He saluted Christ from the womb;'' he knew
Him more certainly from seeing the dove;
and therefore, as the Adullamite, he gave
testimony by water. The Lord came to shear
His sheep, in releasing them from painful
burdens, as it is said in praise of the Church
in the Song of Songs, that her teeth are like
a flock of sheep after shearing. ?

86. Next, we have Tamar changing her
dress; for Tamar also means changing. Still,
the name of bitterness must be retained — not
that bitterness in which gall was given to the
Lord, but that in which Peter wept bitterly.^'
For Judah means confession; and bitterness
is mingled with confession as a type of true
repentance. It is this repentance which gives
ruitfulness to the Church established among
all nations. For " it behoved Christ to suffer,
and to rise from the dead, and that repent-
ance and the remission of sins be preached
among all nations in His name, beginning at
Jerusalem."'' In the dress Tamar put on
here is a confession of sins; and Tamar sit-
ing in this dress at the gate of yl-^nan or
/Enaim, which means fountain, is a type of
;he Church called from among the nations.
She ran as a hart to the springs of water, to
meet with the seed of Abraham; and there
she is made fruitful by one who knows her
lot, as it is foretold, "A people whom I have
[lot known shall serve me."* Tamar received
under her disguise a ring, a bracelet, a staff;
she is sealed in her calling, adorned in her
ustification, raised in her glorification. For
'whom He predestinated, them He also
Jailed: and whom He called, them He also
ustified: and whom He justified, them He

disguised, as I have said; and in the same
state she conceives, and becomes fruitful in
holiness. Also the kid promised is sent to
her as to a harlot. The kid rejjresents rebuke
for sin, and it is sent by the Adullamite al-
ready mentioned, who, as it were, uses the
reproachful words, "O generation of vi-
pers!""' liut this rebuke for sin does aot
reach her, for she has been changed by the
bitterness of confession. Afterwards, by ex-
hibiting the pledges of the ring and l^racelet
and staff, she prevails over the Jews, in their
hasty judgment of her, who are now repre-
sented by Judah himself; as at this day we
hear the Jews saying that we are not tlie
people of Christ, and have not the seed of
Abraham. But when we exhibit the sure
tokens of our calling and justification and
glorification, they will immediately be con-
founded, and will acknowledge that we are
justified rather than they. I should enter
into this more particularly, taking, as it were,
each limb and joint separately, as the Lord
might enable me, were it not that such minute
inquiry is prevented by the necessity of
bringing this work to a close, for it is already
longer than is desirable.

87. As regards the prophetic significance
of David's sin, a single word must suffice.
The names occurring in the narrative show
what it typifies. David means, strong of
hand, or desirable; and what can be stronger
than the Lion of the tribe of Judah, who has
conquered the world, or more desirable than
He of whom the prophet says, "The desire
of all nations shall come ? " " Bersabee means,
well of satisfaction, or seventh well: either of
these interpretations will suit our purpose.
So, in the Song of Songs, the spouse, who is
the Church, is called a well of living water;"
or again, the number seven represents the
Holy Spirit, as in the number of days_ in
Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit came from
heaven. We learn also from the book of
Tobit, that Pentecost was the feast of seven
weeks.'' To forty-nine, which is seven times
seven, one is added to denote unity. To
this effect is the saying of the apostle: " Bear-
ing with one another in love, endeavoring to
keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of
peace." '* The Church becomes a well of sat-
isfaction by this gift of the Spirit, the number
seven denoting its spirituality; for it is in her
a fountain of living water springing up unto
everlasting life, and he who has it shall never
thirst. '5 Uriah, Bersabee's husband, must,

' John V. 36.
4 Luke i. ^4.
7 Luke XXIV. 4<;, 47.

2 John i. 6.
S Cant. iv. 2.

8 Ps. xviii. 43.

3 Matt. xi. II.
6 Matt. XXVI. 75.

9 Rom. viii. 30.
'2 Cant. iv. 15.
'5 John iv. 13, 14.

"i Matt. iii. 7.
'3 Tob. ii. I.

■' Hax. ii. 3.
'4 Kph. iv. 2, 3.

io8

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXII.

from the meaning of his name, be understood
as representing the devil. It is in union to
the devil that all are bound whom the grace
of God sets free, that the Church without spot
or wrinkle may be married to her true Saviour.
Uriah means, my light of God; and Hittite
means, cut off, referrmg either to his not
abiding in the truth, when he was cut off on
account of his pride from the celestial light
which he had of God, or to his transforming
himself into an angel of light, because, after
losing his real strength by his fall, he still
dares to say. My light is of God. The literal
David, then, was guilty of a heinous crime,
which God by the prophet condemned in the
rebuke addressed to David, and which David
atoned for by his repentance. On the other
hand, He who is the desire of all nations lov^ed
the Church when washing herself on the roof,
that is, when cleansing herself from the pol-
lution of the world, and in spiritual contem-
plation mounting above her house of clay, and
trampling upon it; and after commencing an
acquaintance, He puts to death the devil,
whom He first entirely removes from her, and
joins her to Himself in perpetual union.
While we hate the sin, we must not overlook
the prophetical significance; and while we love,
as is His due, that David who in His mercy
has freed us from the devil, we may also love
the David who by the humility of his repent-
ance healed the wound made by his trans-
gression.

88. Little need be said of Solomon, who is
spoken of in Holy Scripture in terms of the
strongest disapproval and condemnation, while
nothing is said of his repentance and restora-
tion to the divine favor. Nor can I find in
his lamentable fall even a svmbolical connec-
tion with anything good,
women he lusted after
represent the churches
the Gentiles. This idea might have been ad-
missible, if the women had left their gods for
Solomon's sake to worship his God. But as
he for their sakes offended his God and wor-
shipped their gods, it seems impossible to
think of any good meaning. Doubtless,
something is typified, but it is something
bad, as in the case already explained of Lot's
wife and daughters. We see in Solomon a
notable pre-eminence and a notable fall.
Now, this good and evil which we see in him
at different periods, first good and then evil,
are in our day found together in the Church.
What is good in Solomon represents, I think,
the good members of the Church; and what
was bad in him represents the bad members.
Both are in one man, as the bad and the
good are in the chaff and grain of one floor,

Perhaps the strange
may be thought to
chosen from

among

or in the tares and wheat of one field. A
closer inquiry into what is said of Solomon
in Scripture might disclose, either to me or to
others of greater learning and greater worth,
some more probable interpretation. But as
we are now engaged on a different subject, we
must not allow this matter to break the con-
nection of our discourse.

89. As regards the prophet Hosea, it is
unnecessary for me to explain the meaning
of the command, or of the prophet's conduct,
when God said to him, "Go and take unto
thee a wife of whoredoms and produce chil-
dren of whoredoms," for the Scripture itself
informs us of the origin and purpose of this
direction. It proceeds thus: " For the land
hath committed great whoredom, departing
from the Lord. So he went and took Gomer
the daughter of Diblaim; which conceived,
and bare him a son. And the Lord said unto
him. Call his name Jezreel; for yet a little
while, and I will avenge the blood of Jezreel
upon the house of Judah, and will cause to
cease the kingdom of the house of Israel. And
it shall come to pass at that day, that I will
break the bow of Israel in the valley of Jezreel.
And she conceived again, and bare a daugh-
ter. And God said unto him, Call her name
No-mercy: for I will no more have mercy
upon the house of Israel; but I will utterly
take them away. But I will have mercy upon
the house of Judah, and will save them by the
Lord their God, and will not save them by
bow, nor by sword, nor by battle, by horses,
nor by horsemen. Now when she had weaned
No-mercy, she conceived, and bare a son
Then said God, Call his name Not-my-people:
for ye are not my people, and I will not be
your God. Yet the number of the children
of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which
cannot be measured for multitude; and it
shall come to pass that in the place where it
was said unto them. Ye are not my people,
there it shall be said unto them. Ye are the
sons of the living God. Then shall the chil
dren of Israel and the children of Judah be
gathered together, and appoint themselves
one head, and they shall come up out of the
land: for great shall be the day of Jezreel
Say ye unto your brethrert, My people; and
to your sister. She hath found mercy.'
Since the typical meaning of the commanc
and of the prophet's conduct is thus explained
in the same book by the Lord Himself, anc
since the writings of the apostles declare the,
fulfillment of this prophecy in the preaching
of the New Testament, every one must accepi
the explanation thus given of the command

I H

OS. 1. 2 — 11. I.

Book XXII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICHyEAN.

309

and of the action of the prophet as the true
explanation. Thus it is said by the Apostle
Paul, " That He might make known the riciies
of His glory en the vessels of mercy, which
He had afore prepared unto glory, even us,
whom He hath called, not of the Jews only,
l)Ut also of the Gentiles. As He saith also in
Rosea, I will call them my people, which were
not my people; and her beloved, which was
not beloved. And it shall come to pass, that
in the place where it was said unto them. Ye
are not my people, there shall they be called
the children of the living God." ' Here Paul
applies the prophecy to the Gentiles. So also
I'eter, writing to the Gentiles, witnout naming
the prophet, borrows his expressions when he
says, " But ye are a chosen generation, a
royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar
people; that ye might show forth the praises
of Him who has called you out of darkness
into His marvellous light; which in time jiast
were not a people, but are now the people of
God: which had not obtained mercy, but now
have obtained mercy." - From this it is plain
that the words of the prophet, "And the
number of the children of Israel shall be as
the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured

j for multitude," and the words immediately
following, "And it shall be that in the place
where it was said unto them. Ye are not my
people, there they shall be called the children
of the living God,'" do not apply to that Israel
which is after the flesh, but to that of which
the apostle says to the Gentiles, " Ye there-
fore are the seed of Abraham, and heirs ac-
cording to the promise." 3 But, as many
Jews who were of the Israel after the flesh
have believed, and will yet believe; for of
these were the apostles, and all the thousands
in Jerusalem of the company of the apostles,
as also the churches of which Paul speaks,
when he says to tlie Galatians, " I was un-
known by face to the churches of Judsea
which were in Christ;''* and again, he ex-
plains the passage in the Psalms, where the

' Lord is called the cornerstone, ^ as referring

• to His uniting in Himself the two walls of
circumcision and uncircumcision, "that He
might make in Himself of twain one new man,
so making peace; and that He might reconcile
both unto God in one body by the cross, hav-
ing slain the enmity thereby: and that He
might come and preach peace to them that
are far oft", and to them that are nigh,"

'that is, to the Gentiles and to the Jews;
'' for He is our peace, who hath made of
both one;''^ to the same purjwse we find
the prophet speaking of the Jews as the chil-

' Rom. IX.
4 Gal. i. 22

23-26.

2 I Pet. ii. 9, 10.
5 Ps. cxviii. 22.

3 Gal. tii. 29.
* Kph. ii. 11-22.

dren of Judah, and of the Gentiles as children
of Israel, where he says, " The children of
Judah and the children of Israel shall be
gathered together, and shall make to them-
selves one head, and shall go up from the
land." Therefore, to speak against a prophecy
thus confirmed by actual events, is to speak
against the writings of the apostles as well as
those of the prophets; and not only to speak
against writings, but to impugn in the most
reckless manner the evidence clear as noon-
day of established facts. In the case of the
narrative of Judah, it is per naps not so easy
to recognize, under the disguise of the woman
called Tamar, the harlot representing the
Church gathered from among the corruption
of Gentile superstition; but here, where Script-
ure explains itself, and where the explana-
tion is confirmed by the writings of the apos--
ties, instead of dwelling longer on this, we
may proceed at once to inquire into the mean-
ing of the very things to which Faustus objects
in Moses the servant of God.

90. Moses killing the Egyptian in defend-
ing one of his brethren reminds us naturally
of the destruction of the devil, our assailant
in this land of strangers, by our defender the
Lord Christ. And as Moses hid the dead
body in the sand, even so the devil, though
slain, remains concealed in those who are not
firmly settled. The Lord, we know, builds
the Church on a rock; and those who hear
His word and do it. He compares to a wise
man who builds his house upon a rock, and
who does not yield or give way before temp-
tation; and those who hear and do not. He
compares to a foolish man who builds on the
sand, and when his house is tried its ruin is
great. ^

91. Of the prophetic significance of the
spoiling of the Egyptians, which was done by
Moses at the command of the Lord his God,
who commands nothing but what is most just,
I remember to have set down what occurred
to me at the time in my book entitled On
Christian Doctrine;^ to the effect that the gold
and silver and garments of the Egyptians
typified certain branches of learning which
may be profitably learned .or taught among
the Gentiles. This may be the true explana-
tion; or we may suppose that the vessels of
gold and silver represent the precious souls,
and the garments the bodies, of those from
among the Gentiles who join themselves to
the people of God, that along with them they
may be freed from the Egypt of this world.
Whatever the true interpretation may be, the
pious student of the Scriptures will feel certain

7 Matt. vii. 24-27.

8 ii. sec. 40.

3IO

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXIL

that in the command, in the action, and in the
narrative there is a purpose and a symbolic

meaning.

92. It would take too long to go through
all the wars of Moses. It is enough to refer
to what has already been said, as sufficient
for the purpose in this reply to Faustus of
the prophetic and symbolic character of the
war with Amalek." There is also the charge
of cruelty made against Moses by the enemies
of Scriptures^ or by those who have never
read anything. Faustus does not make any
specific charge, but speaks of Moses as com-
manding and doing many cruel things. But,
knowing the things they are in the habit of
bringing forward and of misrepresenting, I
have already taken a particular case and have
defended it, so that any Manichseans who are
willing to be corrected, and all other ignorant
and irreligious people, may see that there is
no ground for their accusations. We must
now inquire into the prophetic significance of
the command, that many of those who, while
Moses was absent, made an idol for them-
selves should be slain without regard to rela-
tionship. It is easy to see that the slaughter
of these men represents the warfare against the
evil principles which led the people into the
same idolatry. Against such evil we are com-
manded to wage war in the words of the psalm,
" Be ye angry and sin not.^ And a similar
command is given by the apostle, when he says,
" Mortify your members which are on earth;
fornication, uncleanness, luxury, evil concu-
piscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry. "3

93. It requires closer examination to see
the meaning of the first action of Moses in
burning the calf in fire, and grinding it to pow-
der, and sprinkling it in the water for the people
to drink. The tables given to him, written with
the finger of God, that is, by the agency of the
Holy Spirit, he may have broken, because he
judged the people unworthy of having them
read to them; and he may have burned the
calf, and ground it, and scattered it so as to be
carried away by the water, in order to let no-
thing of it remain among the people. But why
should he have made them drink it ? Every
one must feel anxious to discover the typical
significance of this action. Pursuing the in-
quiry, we may find that in the calf there was
an embodiment of the devil, as there is in
men of all nations who have the devil as their
head or leader in their impious rites. The
calf is gold, because there is a semblance
of wisdom in the institution of idolatrous wor-
ship. Of this the apostle says, " Knowing
God, they glorified Him not as God, nor were

I L. xii. sec. 30.

= Ps. iv. 4.

3 Col.

111. 5.

thankful; but they became vain in their im-
aginations, and their foolish heart was dark-
ened. Professing themselves to be wise they
became foolish, and changed the glory of the
incorruptible God into the likeness of corrup-
tible man, and of birds, and of four-footed
beasts, and of creeping things."'* From this.
so-called wisdom came the golden calf, which
was one of the forms of idolatry among the
chief men and professed sages of Egypt.
The calf, then, represents every body or
society of Gentile idolaters. This impious
society the Lord Christ burns with that fire of
which He says in the Gospel, *' I am come tO'
send fire on the earth;" ^ for, as there is
nothing hid from His heat,^ when the Gen-
tiles believe in Him they lose the form of the
devil in the fire of divine influence. Then
all the body is ground, that is, after the dis-
solution of the combination in the member-
ship of iniquity comes humiliation under the
word of truth. Then the dust is sprinkled in
the water, that the Israelites, that is, the
preachers of the gospel, may in baptism ad-
mit those formerly idolaters into their own
body, that is, the body of Christ. To Peter,
who was one of those Israelites, it was said
of the Gentiles, "Kill, and eat."' To kill
and eat is much the same as to grind and
drink. So this calf, by the fire of zeal, and the
keen penetration of the word, and the water
of baptism, was swallowed up by the people,
instead of their being swallowed up by it.

94. Thus, when the very passages on which
the heretics found their objections to the
Scriptures are studied and examined, the
more obscure they are the more wonderful
are the secrets which we discover in reply to
our questions; so that the mouths of blas-
phemers are completely stopped, and the evi-
dence of the truth so stifles them that they
cannot even utter a sound. The unhappy
men who will not receive into their hearts
the sweetness of the truth must feel its force
as a gag in their mouths. All those passages
speak of Christ. The head now ascended in-
to heaven along with the body still suffering
on earth is the full development of the whole
purpose of the authors of Scripture, which is
well called Sacred Scripture. Every part of
the narrative in the prophetical books should
be viewed as having a figurative meaning, ex-
cept what serves merely as a framework for
the literal or figurative predictions of this
king and of his people. For as in harps and
other musical instruments the musical sound
does not come from all parts of the instru-
ment, but from the strings, and the rest is

4 Rom. i. zi-23.
6 Ps. xix. 6.

S Luke xii. 49.
7 Acts X. 13.

Book XXII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.^ilAN.

311

Illy for fastening and stretching the strings
so as to tune them, that when they are struck
l.y the musician they may give a pleasant
^ound; so in these prophetical narratives the
circumstances selected by the prophetic spirit
cither predict some future event, or if they

.ave no voice of their own, they serve to con-
nect together other significant utterances.

95. Should the heretics reject our exposi-
tion of those allegorical narratives, or even
insist on understanding them only in a literal
sense, to dispute about such a difference of
understanding would be as useless as to dis-
pute about a difference of taste. Only, the fact
that the divine precepts have either a moral
and religious character or a prophetic mean-
ing must be believed, whether intelligently or
not. Moreover, the figurative interpretations
must all be in the interest of morality and
religion. So, if the Manichaeans or any
others disagree with our interpretation, or
differ from us in method or in any particular
opinion, suffice it that the character of the
fathers whom God commends for their con-
duct and obedience to His precepts is vindi-
caced on a principle which all but those in-
veterate in their hostility will acknowledge to
be true; and that the purity and dignity of
the Scriptures are maintained in reference to
those passages which the enemies of the truth
find fault with, where certain actions are either
praised or blamed, or merely narrated for us
to form a judgment of them.

96. In fact, nothing could have been de-
vised more likely to instruct and benefit the
pious reader of sacred Scripture than that,
besides describing praiseworthy characters as
examples, and blameworthy characters as
warnings, it should also narrate cases where
good men have gone back and fallen into evil,
whether they are restored to the right path or
continue irreclaimable; and also where bad
men have changed, and have attained to
goodness, whether they persevere in it or re-
lapse into evil; in order that the righteous
may be not lifted up in the pride of security,
nor the wicked hardened in despair of cure.
And even those passages in Scripture which
contain no examples or warnings are either
required for connection, so as to pass on to
essential matters, or, from their very appear-
ance of superfluity, indicate the presence
of some secret symbolical meaning. For in
the books we speak of, so far from there
being a want or a scarcity of prophetical
announcements, such announcements are
numerous and distinct; and now that the
fulfillment has actually taken place, the tes-
timony thus borne to the divine author-
ity of the books is irresistibly strong, so

that it is mere madness to suppose that there
can be any useless or unmeaning passages in
books to which all classes of men and of
minds do homage, and which themselves pre-
dict what we see thus actually coming to pass,

97. If, then, any one reading of the action
of David, of which he repented when the Lord
rebuked and threatened him, find in the nar-
rative an encouragement to sin, is Scripture
to be blamed for this ? Is not the man's own
guilt in proportion to tne abuse which he
makes for his own injury or destruction of
what was written for his recovery and release ?
David is set forth as a great example of re-
pentance, because men who fall into sin either
proudly disregard the cure of repentance, or
lose themselves in despair of obtaining salva-
tion or of meriting pardon. The example is
for the benefit of the sick, not for the injury
of those in health. If madmen destroy them-
selves, or if evil-doers destroy others, with sur-
gical instruments, it is not the fault of surgery.

98. Even supposing that our fathers the
patriarchs and prophets, of whose devout and
religious habits so good a report is given in
that Scripture which every one who knows it,
and has not lost entirely the use of his rea-
son, must admit to have been provided by
God for the salvation of men, were as lustful
and cruel as the Manichaeans falsely and
fanatically allege, they might still be shown to
be superior not only to those whom the Mani-
chseans call the Elect, but also to their god him-
self. Is there in the licentious intercourse of
man with woman anything so bad as the self-
abasement of unclouded light by mixture with
darkness ? Here, is a man prompted by
avarice and greed to pass off his wife as his
sister and sell her to her lover; but worse still
and more shocking, that one should disguise
his own nature to gratify criminal passion,
and submit gratuitously to pollution and de-
gradation. Why, even one who knowingly
lies with his own daughters is not equally
criminal with one who lets his members share
in the defilement of all sensuality as gross
as this, or grosser. And is not the Manich-
aean god a partaker in the contamination of
the most atrocious acts of uncleanness ?
Again, if it were true, as Faustus says, that
Jacob went from one to another of his four
wives, net desiring offspring, but resembling
a he -goat in licentiousness, he would still not
be sunk so low as your god, who must not only
have shared in this degradation, from his
being confined in the bodies of Jacob and his
wives so as to be mixed up with all their move-
ments, but also, in union with this very he-
goat of Faustus' coarse comparison, must
have endured all the pains of animal apjietite,

312

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXIT.

incurring fresh defilement at every step, as
partaking in tlie passion of the male, the con-
ception of tlie female, and the birth of the
kid. And, in the same way, supposing Judah
to have been guilty not only of fornication,
but of incest, a share in the heats and impur-
ities of this incestuous passion would also be-
long to your god. David repented of his sin
in loving the wife of another, and in ordering
the death of her husband; but when will your
god repent of giving up his members to the
wanton passion of the male and female chiefs
of the race of darkness, and of putting to
death not the husband of his mistress, but his
own children, whom he confines in the mem-
bers of the very demons who were his own
lovers ? Even if David had not repented, nor
been thus restored to righteousness, he would
still have been better than your god. David
may have been defiled by this one act, or to
the extent to which one man is capable of
such defilement; but your god suffers the
pollution of his members in all such actions
by whomsoever committed. The prophet
Hosea, too, is accused by Faustus: and, sup-
posing him to have taken the harlot to wife
because he had a criminal affection for her,
if he is licentious and she a prostitute, their
souls, according to your own assertion, are
parts and members of your god and of his
nature. In plain language, the harlot herself
must be your god. You cannot pretend that
)^our god is not confined in the contaminated
body, or that he is only present, while pre-
serving entire the purity of his own nature;
and you acknowledge that the members of
your god are so defiled as to require a special
purification. This harlot, then, for whom you
venture to find fault with the man of God,
even if she had not been changed for the bet-
ter by becoming a chaste wife, would still
have been your god; at least you must admit
her soul to have been a part, however small,
of your god. But one single harlot is not so
bad as your god, for he on account of his
mixture with the race of darkness shares in
every act of prostitution; and wherever such
impurities are perpetrated, he goes through the
corresponding experiences of abandonment,
of release, and of confinement, and this from
generation to generation, till this most cor-
rupt part reaches its final state in the mass
of darkness, like an irreclaimable harlot.
Such are the evils and such the shameful
abominations which your god could not ward
off from his members, and to which he was
brought irresistibly by his merciless enemy;
for only by the sacrifice of his own subjects,
or rather his own parts, could he effect the
destruction of his formidable assailant.

Surely, there was nothing so bad as this in
killing an Egyptian so as to preserve uninjured
a fellow-countryman. Yet Faustus finds
fault with this most absurdly, while with
amazing infatuation he overlooks the case of
his own god. Would it not have been better
for him to have carried off the gold and silver
vessels of the Egyptians, than to let his mem-
bers be carried off by the race of darkness ?
And yet the worshippers of this unfortunate
god find fault with the servant of our God for
carrying on wars, in which he with his fol-
lowers were always victorious, so that, under
the leadership of Moses, the children of Israel
carried captive their enemies, men and
women, as your god would have done too, if
he had been able. You profess to accuse
Moses of doing wrong, while in fact you envy
his success. There was no cruelty in punishing
with the sword those who had sinned griev-
ously against God. Indeed, Moses entreated
pardon for this sin, even offering to bear him-
self in their stead the divine anger. But
even had he been cruel instead of compas-
sionate, he would still have been better than
your god. For if any of his followers had
been sent to break the force of the enemy
and had been taken captive, he would never,
if victorious, have condemned him when he
had done no wrong, but acted m obedience
to orders. And yet this is what your god is
to do with the part of himself which is to be
fastened in the mass of darkness, because it
obeyed orders, and advanced at the riskof
its own life in defence of his kingdom against
the body of the enemy. But, says the Man-
ichaean, this part, after mixture and combina-
tion with evil during the course of ages, has
not been obedient. . But why ? If the obe-
dience was voluntary, the guilt is real, and
the punishment just. But from this it would
follow that there is no nature opposed to sin;
otherwise it would not sin voluntarily; and
so the whole system of Manichseism falls
at once. If, again, this part suffers from the
power of this enemy against whom it was sent,
and is subdued by a force it was unable to
resist, the punishment is unjust, and fla-
grantly cruel. The god who is defended on
the plea of necessity is a fit object of worship
to those who refuse to worship the one true
God. Still, it must be allowed that, however
debasing the worship of this god may be, the
worshippers are so far better than their deity,
that they have an existence, while he is noth-
ing more than a fabulous invention. Pro-
ceed we now to the rest of Faustus' vagaries.'

I [This book is one of the most unsatisfactory parts of the en-
tire treatise. We have here some of the worst specimens of per-
verse Scripture interpretation. — A. H. X.]

Book XXIII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

BOOK XXIII.

FAUSTUS RECURS TO THE GENEALOGICAL DIFFICULTY, AND INSISTS THAT EVEN ACCORDING TO
MATTHEW JESUS WAS NOT SON OF GOD UNTIL HIS BAPTISM. AUGUSTIN SETS FORTH THE
CATHOLIC VIEW OF THE RELATION OF THE DIVINE AND THE HUMAN IN THE PERSON OF
CHRIST.

1. Faustus said: On one occasion, when
addressing a large audience, I was asked by
one of the crowd, Do you beheve that Jesus
was born of Mary ? I replied, Which Jesus
do you mean ? for in the Hebrew it is the
name of several people. One was the son of
Nun, the follower of Moses;' another was the
son of Josedech the high priest ;= again, an-
other is spoken of as the son of David; ^ and
another is the Son of God.-* Of which of
these do you ask whether I believe him to
have been born of Mary? His answer was,
The Son of God, of course. On what evi-
dence, said I, oral or written, am I to believe
this? He replied, On the authority of Mat-
thew. What, said I, did Matthew write ? He
replied, "The book of the generation of
Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of
Abraham "(Matt. i. i). Then said I, I was
afraid you were going to say, The book of
the generation of Jesus Christ, the Son of
God; and I was prepared to correct you.
Now that you have quoted the verse accu-
rately, you must nevertheless be advised to
pay attention to the words. Matthew does
not profess to give an account of the genera-
tion of the Son of God, but of the son of
David.

2. I will, for the present, suppose that this
person was right in saying that the son of
David was born of Mary. It still remains
true, that in this whole passage of the gener-
ation no mention is made of the Son of God
till we come to the baptism; so that it is an
injurious misrepresentation on your part to
speak of this writer as making the Son of God
the inmate of a womb. The writer, indeed,
seems to cry out against such an idea, and
in the very title of his book to clear himself
of such blasphemy, asserting that the person
whose birth he describes is the son of David,
not the Son of God. And if you attend to
the writer's meaning and purpose, you will
see that what he wishes us to believe of Jesus
the Son of God is not so much that He was
born of Mary, as that He became the Son of
God by baptism at the river Jordan. He tells
us that the person of whom he spoke at the
outset as the son of David was baptized by

' Ex. xxiii. II.

3 Kciiii. i. 1-3.

2 Haj;. i. i.
4 Mark i. i.

John, and became the Son of God on this
particular occasion, when about thirty years
old, according to Luke, when also the voice
was heard saying to Him, " Thou art my Son;
this day have I begotten Thee." ^ It appears
from this, that what was born, as is supposed,
of Mary thirty years before, was not the Son
of God, but what was afterwards made so by
baptism at Jordan, that is, the new man, the
same as in us when we were converted from
Gentile error, and believe in God. This
doctrine may or may not agree with what
you call the Catholic faith; at all events, it
is what Matthew says, if Matthew is the real
author. The words. Thou art my Son, this
day I have begotten Thee, or. This is my
beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased, do
not occur in connection with the story of
Mary's motherhood, but with the putting
away of sin at Jordan. This is what is writ-
ten; and if you believe this doctrine, you
must be called a Matthjean, for you will no
longer be a Catholic. The Catholic doctrine
is well known; and it is as unlike Matthew's
representations as it is unlike the truth. In
the words of your creed, you declare that you
believe in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who
was born of the Virgin Mary. According to
you, therefore, the Son of God comes from
Mary; according to Matthew, from the Jor-
dan; while we believe Him to come from
God. Thus the doctrine of Matthew, if we
are right in assigning the authorship to him,
is as different from yours as from ours; only
we acknowledge that he is more cautious than
you in ascribing the being born of a woman
to the son of David, and not to the 9bn of
God. As for you, your only alternative is
to deny that those statements were made, as
they appear to be, by Matthew, or to allow
that you have abandoned the faith of the
apostles.

3. For our part, while no one can alter our
conviction that the Son of God comes from
God, we might indulge a credulous disposi-
tion, to the extent of admitting the fiction, that
Jesus became the Son of God at Jordan, but
not that the Son of God was born of a woman.
Then, again, the son said to have been born

5 Luke iii. 22, 23.

314

T?IE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book. XXIII.

of Mary cannot properly be called the son of
David, unless it is ascertained that he was
begotten by Joseph. You say he was not,
and therefore you must allow him not to have
been the son of David, even though he were
the son of Mary. The genealogy proceeds
in the line of Hebrew fathers from Abraham
to David, and from David to Joseph; and as
we are told that Josei)h was not the real father
of Jesus, Jesus cannot be said to be the son
of David. To begin with calling Jesus the
son of David, and then to go on to tell of his
being born of Mary before the consummation
of her marriage with Joseph, is pure madness.
And if the son of Mary cannot be called the
son of David, on account of his not being the
son of Joseph, still less can the name be
given to the Son of God.

4. Moreover, the Virgin herself appears to
have belonged not to the tribe of Judah, to
which the Jewish kings belonged, and which all
agree was David's tribe, but to the priestly
tribe of Levi. This appears from the fact
that the Virgin's father Joachim was a priest;
and his name does not occur in the genealogy.
How, then, can Mary be brought within the
pale of relationship to David, when she has
neither father nor husband belonging to it ?
Consequently, Mar3^'s son cannot possibly be
the son of David, unless you can bring the
mother into some connection with Joseph, so
as to be either his wife or his daughter.

5. AuGUSTiN replied: The Catholic, which
is also the apostolic, doctrine, is, that our
Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is both the
Son of God in His divine nature., and the Son
of David after the flesh. This we prove
from the writings of the evangelists and apos-
tles, so that no one can reject our proofs
without also rejecting these writings. Faus-
tus' plan is to represent some one as saying a
few words, without bringing forward any evi-
dence in answer to Faustus' fertile sophistry.
But with all his ingenuity, the proofs I have
to give will leave Faustus no reply, but that
these passages are spurious interpolations in
the sacred record, — a reply which serves as a
means of escaping, or of trying to escape,
the force of the plainest statements in Holy
Scripture. We have already in this treatise
sufficiently exposed the irrational absurdity,
as well as the daring profanity, of such criti-
cism; and not to exceed all limits, we must
avoid repetition. It cannot be necessary that
we should bring together all the passages scat-
tered throughout Scripture, which show, in
answer to Faustus, that in the books of the
highest and most sacred authority He who is
called the only-begotten Son of God, even
God with God, is also called the Son of David,

on account of His taking the form of a ser-
vant from the Virgin Mary, the wife of
Joseph. To instance only Matthew, since
Faustus' argument refers to this Gospel, as
the whole book cannot be quoted here, let
whoever choose read it, and see how Matthew
carries on to the passion and the resurrection
the narrative of Him whom He calls the Son
of David in the introduction to the genealogy.
Of this same Son of David he speaks as being
conceived and born of the Virgin Mary by
the Holy Ghost. He also applies to this the
declaration of the prophet, " Behold, a virgin
shall conceive, and shall bear a son, and they
shall call His name Emmanuel, which is be-
ing interpreted, God with us."^ Again, He
who was called, even from the Virgin's womb,
God-with-us. is said to have heard, when He
was baptized by John, a voice from heaven,
saying, " This is my beloved Son, in whom I
am well pleased." - Will Faustus say that to
be called God is less than to be called the
Son of God ? He seems to think so, for he
tries to prove that because this voice came
from heaven at the time of the baptism, there-
fore, according to Matthew, He must ^then
have become the Son of God; whereas the
same evangelist, in a previous passage, quotes
the sacred announcement made by the pro-
phet, in which the child born of the Virgin is
called God-with-us.

6. It is remarkable how, amid his wild ir-
relevancies, this wretched trifler loses no avail-
able opportunity of darkening the declarations
of Scripture by the fabulous creations of his
own fancy. Thus he says of Abraham, that
when he took his handmaid to wife, he disbe-
lieved God's promise that he should have a
child by Sarah; whereas, in fact, this promise
had not at that time been given. Then he
accuses Abraham of falsehood in calling
Sarah his sister, not having read what may
be learned on the authority of Scripture about
the family of Sarah. Abraham's son Isaac
also he accuses of falsely calling his wife his
sister, though a distinct account is given of
her family. Then he accuses Jacob of there
being a daily quarrel among his four wives,
which should be the first to appropriate him
on his return from the field, while nothing
of this is said in Scripture. And this is the
man who pretends to hate the writers of the
sacred books for their falsehood, and who has
the effrontery so to misrepresent even the
gospel record, though its authority is admitted
by all as possessing the most abundant con-
firmation, as to try to make it appear, not in-
deed that Matthew himself, — for in that case

' Isa, viii. 14, and Matt. i. 23.

2 Matt. iii. 17.

Book XXIII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.^AN.

he would have been forced to yield to apos-
tolic authority, — but that some one under the
name of Matthew, has written about Christ
what he refuses to believe, and attempts to
refute with a contumelious ingenuity !

7. The voice from heaven at the Jordan
should be compared with the voice heard on
the Mount.' In neither case do the words,
" This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well
pleased," imply that He was not the Son of
God before; for He who from the Virgin's
womb took the form of a servant "was in the
form of God, and thought it no robbery to be
equal with God."^ And the same Apostle
Paul himself says distinctly elsewhere,"
" But in the fullness of time, God sent His
Son, made of a woman, made under the
law;" 3 that is, a woman in the Hebrew sense,
not a wife, but one of the female sex. The
Son of God is both Lord of David in His di-
vine nature, and Son of David as being of
the seed of David after the flesh. And if it
were not profitable for us to believe this, the
same apostle would not have made it so
prominent as he does, when he says to Timo-
thy, " Remember that Christ Jesus, of the
seed of David, rose from the dead, according
to my gospel." ■* And he carefully enjoins
believers to regard as accursed whoever
preaches another gospel contrary to this.

8. This assailant of the holy Gospel need
find no difficulty in the fact that Christ is
called the Son of David, though He was born
of a virgin, and though Joseph was not His
real father; while the genealogy is brought
down by the evangelist Matthew, not to
Mary, but to Joseph. First of all, the hus-
band, as the man, is the more honorable; and
Joseph was Mary's husband, though she did
not live with him, for Matthew himself men-
tions that she was called Joseph's wife by the
angel; as it is also from Ma,tthew that we
learn that Mary conceived not by Joseph, but
by the Holy Spirit. But if this, instead of
being a true narrative written by Matthew
the apostle, was a false narrative written by
some one else under his name, is it likely
that he would have contradicted himself in
such an apparent manner, and in passages so
immediately connected, as to speak of the
Son of David as born of Mary without conju-
gal intercourse, and then, in giving His
genealogy, to bring it down to the very man
with whom the Virgin is expressly said not
to have had intercourse, unless he had some
reason for doing so ? Even supposing tliere
were two writers, one calling Christ the Son
of David, and giving an account of Christ's

' Matt. xvii. 5.
3 Gal. iv, 4,

= Phil. ii. 6.
4 2 Tim. ii, 8.

progenitors from David down to Joseph;
while the other does not call Christ the Son
of David, and says that He was born of the
Virgin Mary without intercourse with any
man; those statements are not irreconcilable,
so as to prove that one or both writers must
be false. It will appear on reflection that
both accounts might be true; for Joseph might
be called the husband of Mary, though she
was his wife only in affection, and in the in-
tercourse of the mind, which is more intimate
than that of the body. In this way it might
be proper that the husband of the virgin-
mother of Christ should have a place in the
list of Christ's ancestors. It might also be
the case that some of David's blood flowed
in Mary herself, so that the flesh of Christ,
although produced from a virgin, still owed
its origin to David's seed. But as, in fact,
both statements are made by one and the
same writer, who informs us both that Joseph
was the husband of Mary and that the mother
of Christ was a virgin, and that Christ was of
the seed of David, and that Joseph is in the
list of Christ's progenitors in the line of David,
those who prefer the authority of the sacred
Gospel to that of heretical fiction must con-
clude that Mary was not unconnected with
the family of David, and that she was prop-
erly called the wife of Joseph, because being
a woman she was in spiritual alliance with
him, though there was no bodily connection.
Joseph, too, it is plain, could not be omitted
in the genealogy; for, from the superiority
of his sex, such an omission would be equiva-
lent to a denial of his relation to the woman
with whom he was inwardly united; and be-
lievers in Christ are taught not to think car-
nal connection the chief thing in marriaere, as
if without this they could not be man and wife,
but to imitate in Christian wedlock as closely
as possible the parents of Christ, that so they
may have the m.ore intimate union with the
members of Christ. ,

9. We believe that Mary, as well as Joseph,
was of the family of David, because we be-
lieve the Scriptures, which assert both that
Christ was of the seed of David after the
flesh, and that His mother was the Virgin
Mary, He having no human father. There-
fore, whoever denies the relationship of Mary
to David, evidently opposes the pre-eminent
authority of these passages of Scripture; and
to maintain this opposition he must bring evi-
dence in support of his statement from writ-
ings acknowledged by the Church as canoni-
cal and catholic, not from any writings he
pleases. In the matters of which we are
now treating, only the canonical writings have
any weight witfi us; for they only are received

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXIV.

and acknowledged by the Church spread
over all the world, which is itself a fulfillment
of the prophecies regarding it contained in
these writings. Accordingly, I am not bound
to admit the uncanonical account of Mary's
birth which Faustus adopts, that her father
was a priest of the tribe of Levi, of the name
of Joachim. But even were I to admit this
account, I should still contend that Joachim
must have in some way belonged to the fam-
ily of David, and had somehow been adopted
from the tribe of Judah into that of Levi; or
if not he, one of his ancestors; or, at least,
that while born in the tribe of Levi, he had
still some relation to the line of David; as
Faustus himself acknowledges that Mary,
though belonging to the tribe of Levi, could
be given to a husband of the tribe of Judah;
and he expressly says that if Mary were
Joseph's daughter, the name Son of David
would be applicable to Christ. In this way,
by the marriage of Joseph's daughter in the
tribe of Levi, her son, though born in the
tribe of Levi, might not improperly be called
the Son of David. And so, if the mother of
that Joachim, who in the passage quoted by
Faustus is called the father of Mary, married
in the tribe of Levi while she belonged to the
tribe of Judah and to the family of David,
there would thus- be a sufficient reason for
speaking of Joachim and Mary and Mary's
son as belonging to the seed of David. If I
felt obliged to pay any regard to the apocry-
phal scripture in which Joachim is called the
father of Mary, I should adopt some such
explanation as the above, rather than admit
any falsehood in the Gospel, where it is writ-
ten both that Jesus Christ, the Son of God,
and our Saviour, was of the seed of David
after the flesh, and that He was born of the
Virgin Mary. It is enough for us that the
enemies of these Scriptures, which record
these truths and which we believe, cannot
• prove against them any charge of falsehood.
lo. Faustus cannot pretend then I am
unable to prove that Mary was of the family
of David, as I have shown him unable to
prove that she was not. I produce the strong-
est evidence from Scriptures of established
authority, which declare that Christ was of

the seed of David, and that He was born with-
out a father of the Virgin Mary. Faustus
expresses what he considers a most becom-
ing indignation against impropriety when he
says, It is an injurious misrepresentation of
the writer to make him speak of the Son of
God as the inmate of a womb. Of course,
the Catholic doctrine which teaches that
Christ the Son of God was born in the flesh
of a virgin, does not make the Son of God
the inmate of her womb in the sense of having
no existence beyond it, as if He had aban-
doned the government of heaven and earth,
or as if He had left the presence of the Father.
The mistake is with the Manichaeans, whose
understanding is so incapable of forming a
conception of anything except what is ma-
terial, that they cannot comprehend how the
Word of God, who is the virtue and wisdom
of God, while remaining in Himself and with
the Father, and while governing the universe,
reaches from end to end in strength, and
sweetly orders all things." In the faultless
procedure of this adorable providence. He
appointed for Himself an earthly mother;
and to free His servants from the bondage
of corruption He took in this mother the
form of a servant, that is, a mortal body;
and this body which He took He showed
openly, and when it had been exposed, even
to suffering and death. He raised it again
from the dead, and built again the temple
which had been destroyed. You who shrink
from this doctrine as blasphemous, make the
members of your god to be confined not in a
virgin's womb, but in the wombs of all female
animals, from elephants down to flies. Per-
haps you think the less of the true Christ,
because the Word is said so to have become
incarnate in the Virgin's womb as to provide
a temple for Himself in human nature, while
His own nature continued unaltered in its
integrity; and, on the other hand, you think
the more of your god, because in the bonds
and pollution of his confinement in flesh, in
the part which is to be made fast to the mass
of darkness, he seeks for help to no purpose,
or is even rendered powerless to ask for help.

I Wisd. viii. i.

BOOK XXIV.

FAUSTUS EXPLAINS THE MANICHyEAN DENIAL THAT MAN WAS MADE BY GOD AS APPLYING TO THE
FLESHLY MAN NOT TO THE SPIRITUAL. AUGUSTIN ELUCIDATES THE APOSTLE PAUL'S CON-
TRASTS BETWEEN FLESH AND SPIRIT SO AS TO EXCLUDE THE MANICH.EAN VIEW.

I. Faustus said: We are a^ked the reason I But we do not assert that man is in no sense
for our denial that man is made by God. | made by God; we only ask in what sense,

Book XXIV.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.'EAN.

and when, and how. For, according to the
apostle, there are two men, one of whom he
calls sometimes the outer man, generally the
1 1 earthy, sometimes, too, the old man: the
other he calls the inner or heavenly or new
man.' The question is, Which of these is
made by God ? For there are likewise two
times of our nativity; one when nature brought
us forth into this light, binding us in the bonds
of flesh; and tiie other, when the truth regen-
erated us on our conversion from error and
our entrance into the faith. It is this second
birth of which Jesus speaks in the Gospel,
when He says, " Except a man be born again,
he cannot see the kingdom of God." - Nico-
demus, not knowing what Christ meant, was
at a loss, and inquired how this could be, for
an old man could not enter into his mother's
womb and be born a second time. Jesus
said in reply, " Except a man be born of
water and of the Holy Spirit, he cannot see
the kingdom of God." Then He adds,
'* That which is born of the flesh is flesh;
and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit."
Hence, as the birth in which our bodies ori-
ginate is not the only birth, but there is an-
other in which we are born again in spirit, an
im.portant question arises from this distinction
as to which of those births it is in w'hich
God makes us. The manner of birth also is
twofold. In the humiliating process of ordi-
nary generation, we spring from the heat of
animal passion; but when we are brought into
the faith, we are formed under good instruc-
tion in honor and purity in Jesus Christ, by
the Holy Spirit. For this reason, in all reli-
gion, and especially in the Christian religion,
young children are invited to membership.
This is hinted at in the words of His apostle:
" My little children, of whom 1 travail in birth
again until Christ be formed in you."^ The
question, then, is not whether God makes
man, but what man He makes, and when,
and how. For if it is when we are fashioned
in the womb that God forms us after His own
image, which is the common belief of Gen-
tiles and Jews, and which is also your belief,
then God makes the old man, and produces
us by means of sensual passion, which does
not seem suitable to His divine nature. But
if it is when we are converted and brought to
a better life that we are formed by God, which
is the general doctrine of Christ and His
apostles, and which is also our doctrine, in
this case God makes us new men, and pro-
duces us in honor and ]:)urity, which would
agree perfectly with His sacred and adorable
majesty. If you do not reject Paul's author-

1 Rom. vi., vii.; i Cor. xv,; 2 Cor. iv., Eph. iii. iv., and Col. iii.

2 John iii. 3. 3 Gal. iv. 19.

ity, we will prove to you from him what man
God makes, and when, and how. He says
to the Ephesians, "That ye put off according
to your former conversation the old man,
which is corrupt through deceitful lusts; and
be renewed in the spirit of your mind; and
put on the new man, which after God is cre-
ated in righteousness and holiness of truth. "-^
This shows that in the creation of man after
the image of God, it is another man that is
spoken of, and another birth, and another
manner of birth. The putting off and put-
ting on of which he speaks, point to the time
of the reception of the truth; and the asser-
tion that the new man is created by God im-
plies that the old man is created neither by
God nor after God. And when he adds, that
this new man is made in holiness and right-
eousness and truth, he thus points to another
manner of birth of which this is the charac-
ter, and which, as I have said, differs widely
from the manner in which bodily generation is
effected. And as he declares that only the
former is of God, it follows that the latter is
not. Again, writing to the Colossians, he
uses words to the same effect: " Put off the
old man with his deeds, and put on the new
man, which is renewed in the knowledge of
God according to the image of Him who
created Him in you. " Here he not only shows
that it is the new man that God makes, but he
declares the time and manner of tlie forma-
tion, for the words in the knowledge of God
point to the time of believing. Then he adds,
according to the image of Him who created
him, to make it clear that the old man is not
the image of God, nor formed by God. More-
over, the following words, " Where there is
neither male nor female, Jew nor Greek, Bar-
barian nor Scythian, "5 show more plainly still
that the birth by which we are made male and
female, Greeks and Jews, Scythians and Bar-
barians, is not the birth in which God effects
the formation of man; but that the birth with
which God has to do is that in which we lose
the difference of nation and sex and condition,
and become one like Him who is one, that is,
Christ. So the same apostle says again, "As
many as have been baptized in Christ have
put on Christ: there is neither Jew nor Greek,
there is neither male nor female, there is
neither bond nor free; but all are one in
Christ.''^ Man, then, is made by God, not
when from one he is divided into many, but
when from many he becomes one. The di-
vision is in the first birth, or that of the bod}^;
union comes by the second, which is innna-
terial and divine. This affords sufficient

4 Eph. iv. 22-24.

5 Col. iii. 9-1 1.

* Gal. iii. 27, 28.

3i8

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXIV.

o-round for our opinion, tliat the birth of the
body should be ascribed to nature, and the
second birth to the Supernal Majesty. So
the same apostle says again to the Corinthians,
" I have begotten you in Christ Jesus by the
gospel;"' and, speaking of himself, to the
Galatians, " When it pleased Him, who sepa-
rated me from my mother's womb, to reveal
His Son in me, that I might preach Him
among the Gentiles, immediately I conferred
not with flesh and blood."' = It is plain that
everywhere he speaks of the second or spirit-
ual birth as that in which we are made by
God, as distinct from the indecency of the
first birth, in which we are on a level with
other animals as regards dignity and purity,
as we are conceived in the maternal womb,
and are formed, and brought forth. You
may observe that in this matter the dispute
between us is not so much about a question
of doctrine as of interpretation. For you
think that it is the old or outer or earthy man
that is said to have been made by God; while
we apply this to the heavenly man, giving
the superiority to the inner or new man. And
our opinion is not rash or groundless, for we
have learned it from Christ and His apostles,
who are proved to have been the first in the
vvorld who thus taught.

2. AuGUSTiN replied: The Apostle Paul cer-
tainly uses the expression the inner man for
the spirit of the mind, and the outer man for
the body and for this mortal life; but we
nowhere find him making these two different
men, but one, which is all made by God, both
the inner and the outer. However, it is made
in the image of God only as regards the inner,
which, besides being immaterial, is rational,
and is not possessed by the lower animals.
God, then, did not make one man after His
own image, and another man not after that
image; but the one man, which includes both
the inner and the outer, He made after His
own image, not as regards the possession of a
body and of mortal life, but as regards the
rational mind with the power of knowing God,
and with the superiority as compared with
all irrational creatures which the possession
of reason implies. Faustus allows that the
inner man is made by God, when, as he says,
it is renewed in the knowledge of God after
the image of Him that created him. I read-
ily admit thisonthe apostle's authority. Why
does not Faustus admit on the same authority
that "God has placed the members every one
in the body, as it has pleased Him " ?3 Here
we learn from the same apostle that God is
the framer of the outer man too. Why does

r. IV. 15.

2 Gal. i. 15, 16.

3 I Cor. xii. iS

Faustus take only what he thinks to be in his
own favor, while he leaves out or rejects what
upsets the follies of the Manichaeans ? More-
over, in treating of the earthy and the heav-
enly man, and making the distinction between
the mortal and the immortal, between that
which we are in Adam and that which we shall
be in Christ, the apostle quotes the declara-
tion of the law regardmg the earthy or natural
body, referring to the very book and the very
passage where it is written that God made the
earthy man too. Speaking of the manner in
which the dead shall rise again, and of the
body with which they shall come, after using
the similitude of the seeds of corn, that they
are sown bare grain, and that God gives them
a body as it pleases Him, and to every seed
his own body, — thus, by the way, overthrow-
ing the error of the Manichaeans, who say
that grains and plants, and all roots and
shoots, are created by the race of darkness,
and not by God, who, according to them, in-
stead of exerting power in the production of
these objects, is Himself subject to confine-
ment in them, — he goes on, after this refuta-
tion of Manichsan impieties, to describe the
different kinds of flesh. " All flesh," he says,
" is not the same flesh." Then he speaks of
celestial and terrestrial bodies, and then of
the change of our body by which it will be-
come spiritual and heavenly. " It is sown,"
he says, "in dishonor, it shall rise in glory;
it is sown in weakness, it shall rise in power;
it is sown a natural body, it shall rise a spir-
itual body." Then, in order to show the
origin of the animal body, he says, "There
is a natural body, and there is a spiritual
body; as it is written. The first man, Adam,
was made a living soul." •» Now this is writ-
ten in Genesis, 5 where it is related how God
made man, and animated the body which He
had formed of the earth. By the old man
the apostle simply means the old life, which
is a life in sin, and is after the manner of
Adam, of whom it is said, " By one man sin
entered into the world, and death by sin; and
so death passed upon all men, in that all have
sinned."^ Thus the whole of this man, both
the inner and the outer part, has become old
because of sin, and liable to the punishment
of mortality. There is, however, a restora-
tion of the inner man, when it is renewed
after the image of its Creator, in the putting
off of unrighteousness — that is, the old man,
and putting on righteousness — that is, the
new man. But when that which is sown a
natural body shall rise a spiritual body, the
outer man too shall attain the dignity of a

4 I Cor. XV. 33-45.

5 Gen. 11.

6 Rom. V. 12.

Book XXV.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICHyI':AN.

319

celestial character; so that all that has been
created may be created anew, and all that has
been made be remade by the Creator and
Maker Himself. This is briefly explained in
the words: " The body is dead because of sin;
but the spirit is life because of righteousness.
But if the Spirit of Him who raised up Jesus
from the dead dwell in you. He that raised
up Christ from the dead will also quicken
your mortal bodies by His Spirit dwelhng in
you."' No one instructed in the Catholic
doctrine but knows that it is in the body that
some are male and some female, not in the
spirit of the mind, in which we are renewed
after the image of God. But elsewhere the
apostle teaches that God is the Maker of
both; for he says, "Neither is the woman
without the man, nor the man without the
woman, in the Lord; for as the woman is of
the man, so is the man b}'' the woman; but
all things are of God."'' The only reply given
to this, by the per^'erse stupidity of those who
are alienated from the life of (iod by the ig-
norance which is in them, on account of the
blindness of their heart, is, that whatever
pleases them in the apostolic writings is true,
and whatever displeases them is false. This

I Rom, viii. 10, ii.

- I Cor. xi. II, 12.

is the insanity of the Manichteans, who will
be wise if they cease to be Manicha^ans. As
it is, if they are asked whether it is He that
remakes and renews the inner man (which
they acknowledge to be renewed after the im-
age of God, and they themselves quote the
passage in support of this; and, according to
Faustus, God makes man when the inner man
is renewed in the image of God), they will
answer, yes. And if we then go on to ask
when God made what He now renews, they
must devise some subterfuge to prevent the
exposure of their absurdities. For, accord-
ing to them, the inner man is not formed or
created or originated by God, but is part of
His own substance sent against His enemies;
and instead of becoming old by sin, it is
through necessity captured and damaged by
the enemy. Not to repeat all the nonsense
they talk, the first man they speak of is not
the man of the earth earthy that the apostle
speaks of,^ but an invention proceeding from
their own magazine of untruths. Faustus,
though he chooses man as a subject for dis-
cussion, says not a word of this first man; for he
is afraid that his opponents in the discussion
might come to know something about him.

3 1 Cor. XV. 47.

BOOK XXV.

FAUSTUS SEEKS TO BRING INTO RIDICULE THE ORTHODOX CLAIM TO BELIEVE IN THE INFINITY OF
GOD BY CARICATURING THE ANTHROPOMORPHIC REPRESENTATIONS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
AUGUSTIN EXPRESSES HIS DESPAIR OF BEING ABLE TO INDUCE THE MANICH.'EANS TO ADOPT
RIGHT VIEWS OF THE INFINITUDE OF GOD SO LONG AS THEY CONTINUE TO REGARD THE SOUL

AND GOD AS EXTENDED IN SPACE.

I, Faustus said: Is God finite or infinite ?
He must be finite unless you are mistaken
in addressing Him as the God of Aliraham
and Isaac and Jacob; unless, indeed, the be-
ing thus addressed is different from the God
you call infinite. In the case of the God of
Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, the mark of
circumcision, which separated these men from
fellowship with other people, marked also the
limit of God's power as extending only to
them. And a being whose power is finite
cannot himself be infinite. Moreover, in
this address, you do not mention even the an-
cients before Abraham, such as PLnoch, Noah,
and Shem, and others like them, whom you
allow to have been righteous though in uncir-
cumcision; but because they lacked this dis-
tinguishing mark, you will not call God their
God, but only of Abraham and his seed.
Now, if God is one and infinite, what need of

such careful particularity in addressing Him,
as if it was not enough to name God, without
adding whose God He is — Abraham's, name-
ly, and Isaac's and Jacob's; as if Abraham
were a landmark to steer by in your invoca-
tion, to escape shipwreck among a shoal of
deities? The Jews, who are circumcised,
may very properly address this deity, as hav-
ing a reason for it, because they call God the
God of circumcision, in contrast to the gods
of uncircumcision. But why you should dp
the same, it is difficult to understand; for
you do not pretend to have Abraham's sign,
though you invoke his God. If we under-
stand the matter rightly, the Jews and their
God seem to have set marks upon one another
for the purpose of recognition, that they might
not lose each other. So God gave them the
disgusting mark of circumcision, that, in
whatever land or among whatever people they

320

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXVI.

might be, they might by being circumcised
be known to be His. They again marl^ed
God by calHng Him the God of their fathers,
that, wherever He might be, though among a
crowd of gods. He might, on hearing the name
God of Abraham, God of Isaac, God of Jacob,
know at once that He was addressed. So
we often see, in a number of people of the
same name, that no one answers till called by
his surname. In the same way the shepherd
or herdsman makes use of a brand to prevent
his property being taken by others. In thus
marking God by calling Him the God of
Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, you show
not only that He is finite, but also that
you have no connection with Him, because
you have not the mark of circumcision by
which He recognizes His own. Therefore,
if this is the God you worship, there can be
no doubt of His being finite. But if you say
that God is infinite, you must first of all give
up this finite deity, and by altering your in-
vocation, show your penitence for your past
errors. We have thus proved God to be
finite, taking you on your own ground. But
to determine whether the supreme and true
God is infinite or not, we need only refer to
the opposition between good and evil. If
evil does not exist, then certainly God is infi-
nite; otherwise He must be finite. Evil,
however, undoubtedly exists; therefore God
is not infinite. It is where good stops that
evil begins.

2. AuGUSTiN replied: No one that knows
you would dream of asking you about the in-
finitude of God, or of discussing the matter
with you. For, before there can be any
degree of spirituality in any of your concep-
tions, you must first have your minds cleared
by simple faith, and by some elementary
knowledge, from the illusions of carnal and
material ideas. This your heresy prevents
you from doing, for it invariably represents
the body and the soul and God as extended
in space, either finite or infinite, while the
idea of space is applicable only to the body.

As long as this is the case, it will be better
for you to leave this matter alone; for you
can teach no truth regarding it, any more than
in other matters; and in this you are unfit
for learning, as you might do in other things,
if you were not proud and quarrelsome. For
in such questions as how God can be finite,
when no space can contain Him; how He
can be infinite, when the Son knows Him per-
fectly; how He can be finite, and yet un-
bounded; how He can be infinite, and yet
perfect; how He can be finite, who is without
measure; how He can be infinite, who is the
measure of all things — all carnal ideas go for
nothing; and if the carnality is to be removed,
it must first become ashamed of itself. Ac-
cordmgly, your best way of ending the matter
you have brought forward of God as finite or
infinite, is to say no more about it till you
cease going so far astray from Christ, who is
the end of the law. Of the God of Abra-
ham and Isaac and Jacob we have already
said enough to show why He who is the true
God of all creatures wished to be familiarly
known by His people under this name. On
circumcision, too, we have already spoken in
several places in answer to ignorant re-
proaches. The Manichccans would find noth-
ing to ridicule in this sign if they would view
it as appointed by God, to be an appropriate
symbol of the putting off of the flesh. They
ought thus to consider the rite with a Christian
instead of a heretical mind; as it is written,
"To the pure all things are pure." But,
considering the truth of the following words,
"To the unclean and unbelieving nothing is
pure, but even their mind and conscience are
defiled,"' we must remind our witty opponents,
that if circumcision is indecent, as they say
it is, they should rather weep than laugh at
it; for their god is exposed to restraint and
contamination in conjunction both with the
skin which is cut and with the blood which is
shed.

1 Tit. i. IS.

BOOK XXVI.

FAUSTUS INSISTS THAT JESUS MIGHT HAVE DIED THOUGH NOT BORN, BY THE EXERCISE OF DIVINE
POWER, YET HE REJECTS BIRTH AND DEATH ALIKE. AUGUSTIN MAINTAINS THAT THERE ARE
SOME THINGS THAT EVEN GOD CANNOT DO, ONE OF WHICH IS TO DIE. HE REFUTES THE
DOCETISM OF THE MANICHyEANS.

I. Faustus said: You ask. If Jesus was not
born, how did He die? Well this is a proba-
bility, such as one makes use of in want of
proofs. We will, however, answer the ques-

tion by examples taken from what you gener-
ally believe. If they are true, they will prove
our case; if they are false, they will help you
no more than they will us. You say then,.

Book XXVI.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

How could Jesus die, if He were not man ?
In return, I ask you. How did Elias not die,
though he was a man ? Could a mortal en-
croach upon the limits of immortality, and
could not Christ add to His immortality what-
ever experience of death was required ? If
Elias, contrary to nature, lives for ever, why
not allow that Jesus, with no greater con-
trariety to nature, could remain in death for
three days ? Besides that, it is not onl^^ Elias,
but Moses and Enoch you believe to be im-
mortal, and to have been taken up with their
l)odies to heaven. Accordingly, if it is a
L:;ood argument that Jesus was a man because
He died, it is an equally good argument that
Elias was not a man because he did not die.
But as it is false that Elias was not a man,
notwithstanding his supposed immortality, so
it is false that Jesus was a man, though He
is considered to have died. The truth is, if
you will believe it, that the Hebrews were in
a mistake regarding both the death of Jesus
and the immortality of Elias. For it is
equally untrue that Jesus died and that Elias
did not die. But you believe whatever you
please; and for the rest, you appeal to nature.
And, allowing this appeal, nature is against
l)0th the death of the immortal and the im-
mortality of the mortal. And if we refer to
the power of effecting their purpose as pos-
sessed by God and by man, it seems more
possible for Jesus to die than for Elias not to
die; for the power of Jesus is greater than
that of Elias. But if you exalt the weaker to
heaven, though nature is against it, and, for-
getting his condition as a mortal, endow him
with eternal felicity, why should I not admit
that Jesus could die if He pleased, even
though I were to grant His death to have been
real, and not a mere semblance ? For, as
from the outset of His taking the likeness of
man He underwent in appearance all the ex-
periences of humanity, it was quite consistent
that He should complete the system by ap-
pearing to die.

2. Moreover, it is to be remembered that
this reference to what nature grants as possi-
ble, should be made in connection with all the
history of Jesus, and not only with His death.
According to nature, it is impossible that a
man blind from his birth should seethe light;
and yet Jesus appears to have performed a
miracle of this kind, so that the Jews them-
selves exclaimed that from the beginning of
the world it was not seen that one opened the
eyes of a man born blind.' So also healing
a withered hand, giving the power of utter-
ance and expression to those born dumb,

' John ix.

restoring animation to the dead, with the re-
covery of their bodily frame after dissolution
had begun, produce a feeling of amazement,
and must seem utterly incredible in view of
what is naturally possible and impossible.
And yet, as Christians, we believe all the
things to have been done by the same person;
for we regard not the law of nature, but the
powerful operation of God. There is a story,
too, of Jesus having been cast from the brow
of a hill, and having escaped unhurt. If,
then, when thrown down from a height He
did not die, simply because He chose not to
die, why should He not have had the power
to die when He pleased ? We take this way
of answering you, because you have a fancy
for discussion, and affect to use logical weapons
not properly belonging to you. As regards
our own belief, it is no more true that Jesus
died than that Elias is immortal.

3. AuGUSTiN replied: As to Enoch and
Elias and Moses, our belief is determined not
by Faustus' suppositions, but by the declara-
tions of Scripture, resting as they do on
foundations of the strongest and surest evi-
dence. People in error, as you are, are unfit
to decide what is natural, and what contrary
to nature. We admit that what is contrary
to the ordinary course of human experience is
commonly spoken of as contrary to nature.
Thus the apostle uses the words, " If thou
art cut out of the wild olive, and engrafted
contrary to nature in the good olive." '^ Con-
trary to nature is here used in the sense of
contrary to human experience of the course
of nature; as that a wild olive engrafted in a
good olive should bring forth the fatness of
the olive instead of wild berries. But God,
the Author and Creator of all natures, does
.nothing contrary to nature; for whatever is
done by Him who appoints all natural order
and measure and proportion must be natural
in every case. And man himself acts con-
trary to nature only when he sins; and then
by punishment he is brought back to nature
again. The natural order of justice requires
either that sin should not be committed or
that it should not go unpunished. In either
case, the natural order is preserved, if not by
the soul, at least by God. For sin pains the
conscience, and brings grief on the mind of
the sinner, by the loss of the light of justice,
even should no physical sufferings follow,
which are inflicted for correction, or are re-
serv-ed for the incorrigible. There is, how-
ever, no impropriety in saying that God does
a thing contrary to nature, when it is con-
trary to what we know of nature. For we

- Rom. xi. 24.

'5 2 2
O ** ""

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXVI.

give the name nature to the usual common
course of nature; and whatever God does
contrary to this, we call a prodigy, or a mira-
cle. But against the supreme law of nature,
which is beyond the knowledge both of the
ungodly and of weak believers, God never
acts, any more than He acts against Himself.
As regards spiritual and rational beings, to
which class the human soul belongs, the more
they partake of this unchangeable law and
light, the more clearly they see what is possi-
ble, and what impossible; and again, the
greater their distance from it, the less their
perception of the future, and the more fre-
quent their surprise at strange occurrences.

4. Thus of what happened to Elias we are
ignorant; but still we believe the truthful
declarations of Scripture regarding him. Of
one thing we are certain, that what God willed
happened, and that except by God's will
nothing can happen to any one. So, if I am
told that it is possible that the flesh of a cer-
tain man shall be changed into a celestial
body, I allow the possibility, but I cannot tell
whether it will be done; and the reason of my
ignorance is, that I am not acquainted with
the will of God in the matter. That it will
be done if it is God's will, is perfectly clear
and indubitable. Again, if I am told that
something would happen if God did not pre-
vent it from happening, I reply confidently
that what is to happen is the action of God,
not the event which might otherwise have
happened. For God knows His own future
action, and therefore He knows also the effect
of that action in preventing the happening of
what would otherwise have happened; and,
beyond all question, what God knows is more
certain than what man thinks. Hence it is as
impossible for what is future not to happen,
as for what is past not to have happened; for
it can never be God's will that anything
should, in the same sense, be both true and
false. Therefore all that is properly future
cannot but happen; what does not happen
never was future; even as all things which
are properly in the past did indubitably take
place.

5. Accordingly, to say, if God is almighty,
let Him make what has been done to be un-
done, is in fact to say, if God is almighty, let
Him make a thing to be in the same sense
both true and false. God can put an end to
the existence of anything, when the thing to
be put an end to has a present existence; as
when He puts an end by death to the exist-
ence of any one who has been brought into
existence in birth; for in this case there is an
actual existence which may be put a stop to.
But when a thing does not exist, the existence

cannot be put a stop to. Now, what is past
no longer exists, and whatever has an exist-
ence which can be put an end to cannot be
past. What is truly past is no longer present;
and the truth of its past existence is in our
judgment, not in the thing itself which no
longer exists. The proposition asserting
anything to be past is true when the thing no
longer exists. God cannot make such a
proposition false, because He cannot contra-
dict the truth. The truth in this case, or the
true judgment, is first of all in our own mind,
when we know and give expression to it. But
should it disappear from our minds by our
forgetting it, it would still remain as truth.
It will always be true that the past thing
which is no longer present had an existence;
and the truth of its past existence after it has
stopped is the same as the truth of its future
existence before it began to be. This truth
cannot be contradicted by God, in whom abides
the supreme and unchangeable truth, and
whose illumination is the source of all the
truth to be found in any mind or understand-
ing. Now God is not omnipotent in the sense
of being able to die; nor does this inability
prevent His being omnipotent. True omni-
potence belongs to Him who truly exists, and
who alone is the source of all existence, both
spiritual and corporeal. The Creator makes
what use He pleases of all His creatures; and
His pleasure is in harmony with true and un-
changeable justice, by which, as by His own
nature. He, Himself unchangeable, brings to
pass the changes of all changeable things ac-
cording to the desert of their natures or of
their actions. No one, therefore, would be so
foolish as to deny that Elias being a creature
of God could be changed either for the worse
or for the better; or that by the will of the
omnipotent God he could be changed in a
manner unusual among men. So we can have
no reason for doubting what on the high au-
thority of Scripture is related of him, unless
we limit the power of ^God to things which we
are familiar with.

6. Faustus' argument is. If Elias who was
a man could escape death, why might not
Christ have the power of dying, since He was
more than man ? This is the same as to say,
If human nature can be changed for the better,
why should not the divine nature be changed
for the worse ? — a weak argument, seeing that
human nature is changeable, while the divine
nature is not. Such a method of inference
would lead to the glaring absurdity, that if
God can bestow eternal glory on man, He
must also have the power of consigning Him-
self to eternal misery. Faustus will reply
that his argument refers only to three days

Book XXVI.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.-EAN.

0^0

of death for God, as compared with eternal
life for man. Well, if you understood the
three days of death in the sense of the death
of the flesh which God took as a part of our
mortal nature, you would be quite correct;
for the truth of the gospel makes known that
the death of Christ for three days was for the
eternal life of men. But in arguing that there
IS no impropriety in asserting a death of three
days of the divine nature itself, without any
assumption of mortality, because human na-
ture can be endowed with immortality, you
display the folly of one who knows neither
God nor the gifts of God. And indeed, since
you make part of your god to be fastened to
the mass of darkness for ever, how can you
escape the absurd conclusion already men-
tioned, that God consigns Himself to eternal
misery ? You will then require to prove that
part of light is light, while part of God is not
God. To give you in a word, without argu-
ment, the true reason of our faith, as regards
Elias having been caught up to heaven from
the earth, though only a man, and as regards
Christ being truly born of a virgin, and truly
dying on the cross, our belief in both cases is
grounded on the declaration of Holy Script-
ure,' which it is piety to believe, and impiety
to disbelieve. What is said of Elias you pre-
tend to deny, for you will pretend anything.
Regarding Christ, although even you do not
go the length of saying that He could not die,
though He could be born, still you deny His
birth from a virgin, and assert His death on
the cross to have been feigned, which is
equivalent to denying it too, except as a
mockery for the delusion of men; and you
ilow so much merely to obtain indulgence
for your own falsehoods from the believers in
these fictions.

7. The question which Faustus makes it
appear that he is asked by a Catholic, If Jesus
was not born, how could He die? could be
asked only by one who overlooked the fact
that Adam died, though he was not born.
AVho will venture to say that the Son of God
could not, if He had pleased, have made for
Himself a true human body in the same way
as He did for Adam; for all things were made
by Him ?^ or who will deny that He who is
the Almighty Son of the Alm.ighty could, if
lie had chosen, have taken a body from a
heavenl}^ substance, or from air or vapor, and
have so changed it into the precise character
if a human body, as that He might have lived
IS a man, and have died in it? Or, once
more, if He had chosen to take a body of
none of the material substances which He had

made, but to create for Himself from nothing
real flesh, as all things were created by Him
from nothing, none of us will oppose this by
saying that He could not have done it. The
reason of our believing Him to have been
born of the Virgin Mary, is not that He
could not otherwise have appeared among
men in a true body, but because it is so written
in the Scripture, which we must believe in
order to be Christians, or to be saved. We
believe, then, that Christ was born of the
Virgin Mary, because it is so written in the
Gospel; we believe that He died on the cross,
because it is so written in the Gospel; we be-
lieve that both His birth and death were real,
because the Gospel is no fiction. Why He
chose to suffer all these things in a body taken
from a woman is a matter known only to
Himself. Perhaps He took this way of giv-
ing importance and honor to both the sexes
which He had created, taking the form of a
man, and being born of a woman; or there
may have been some other reason, we cannot
tell. But this may be confidently affirmed,
that what took place was exactly as we are
told in the Gospel narrative, and that what
the wisdom of God determined upon was ex-
actly what ought to have happened. We
place the authority of the Gospel above all
heretical discussions; and we admire the
counsel of divine wisdom more than any
counsel of any creature.

8. Faustus calls upon us to believe him,
and says, The truth is, if you will believe
it, that the Hebrews were in a mistake re-
garding both the death of Jesus and the im-
mortality of Elias. And a little after he
adds, As from the outset of His taking the
likeness of man He underwent in appearance
all the experiences of humanity, it was quite
consistent that He should seal the dispensa-
tion by appearing to die. How can this in-
famous liar, who declares that Christ feigned
death, expect to be believed ? Did Christ
utter falsehood when He said, '* It behoves
the Son of man to be killed, and to rise the
third day? ^^3 And do you tell us to believe
what you say, as if you utter no falsehoods?
In that case, Peter was more truthful than
Christ when he said to Him, " Be it far from
Thee, Lord; this shall not be unto Thee;"
for which it was said to him, " Get thee be-
hind me, Satan.''-* This rebuke was not lost
upon Peter, for, after his correction and full
preparation, he preached even to his own
death the truth of the death of Christ. But
if Peter deserve<l to be called Satan for think-
in"; that Christ would not die, what should

' 2 Kings ii. 11; Matt. i. 25, xvii. 50.

2 John i. 3.

3 Luke .\.\iv. 7.

4 Matt. .xvi. 22, 23.

324

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXVIII.

you be called, when you not only deny that
Christ died, but assert that He feigned death ?
You give, as a reason for Christ's appearing
to die, that He underwent in appearance all
the experiences of humanity. But that He
feigned all the experiences of humanity is
only your opinion in opposition to the Gospel.
In reality, when the evangelist says that Jesus
slept,' that He was hungry, = that He was
thirsty, 3 that He was sorrowful," or glad, and
so on, — these things are all true in the sense

I Matt. viii. 24.
3 John xix. 28.

2 Matt. iv. 2.
4 Matt. xxvi. 37.

of not being feigned, but actual experiences;
only that they were undergone, not from a
mere natural necessity, but in the exercise of
a controlling will, and of divine power. In
the case of a man, anger, sorrow, sleeping,
being hungry and thirsty, are often involun-
tary; in Christ they were acts of His own will.
So also men are born without any act of their
own will, and suffer against their will; while
Christ was born and suffered by His own will.
Still, the things are true; and the accurate
narrative of them is intended to instruct who-
ever believes in Christ's gospel in the truth,
not to delude him with falsehoods.

BOOK XXVII.

FAUSTUS WARNS AGAINST PRESSING TOO FAR THE ARGUMENT, THAT IF JESUS WAS NOT BORN HE
CANNOT HAVE SUFFERED. AUGUSTIN ACCEPTS THE BIRTH AND DEATH ALIKE ON THE TES-
TIMONY OF THE GOSPEL NARRATIVE, WHICH IS HIGHER AUTHORITY THAN THE FALSEHOOD
OF MANICH.EUS. .

1. Faustus said: If Jesus was not born,
He cannot have suffered; but since He did
suffer, He must have been born. I advise
you not to have recourse to logical inference
in these matters, or else your whole faith will
be shaken. For, even according to you, Jesus
was born miraculously of a virgin; which the
argument from consequents to antecedents
shows to be false. For your argument might
thus be turned against you: If Jesus was born
of a woman, He must have been begotten by
a man; but He was not begotten by a man,
therefore He was not born of a woman. If,
as you believe, He could be born without
being begotten, why could He not also suffer
without being brought forth ?

2. AuGUSTiN replied: The argument which
you here reply to is one which could be used
only by such ignorant people as you succeed

in misleading, not b}' those who«kno\v enough
to refute you. Jesus could both be born
without being begotten and suffer without
being brought forth. His being one and not
the other was the effect of His own will. He
chose to be born without being begotten, and
not to suffer without being brought forth.
And if you ask how I know that He was
brought forth, and that He suffered, I read
this in the faithful Gospel narrative. If I
ask how you know what you state, you bring
forward the authority of Manichasus, and
charge the Gospel with falsehood. Even if
Manichseus did not set forth falsehood as an
excellence in Christ, I should not believe his
statements. His praise of falsehood comes
from nothing that he found in Christ, but
from his own moral character.

BOOK XXVIII.

faustus recurs to the GENEALOGY AND INSISTS UPON EXAMINING IT AS REGARDS ITS CONSIS-
TENCY WITH ITSELF. AUGUSTIN TAKES HIS STAND ON SCRIPTURE AUTHORITY AND MAIN-
TAINS THAT MATTHEW'S STATEMENTS AS TO THE BIRTH OF CHRIST MUST BE ACCEPTED AS
FINAL.

I. Faustus said: Christ, you say, could
not have died, had He not been born. I re-
ply. If He was born. He cannot have been
God; or if He could both be God and be
born, why could He not both be born and
die ? Plainly, arguments and necessary con-
sequences are not applicable to those matters,

where the question is of the account to be
given of Jesus. The answer must be obtained
from His own statements, or from the state-
ments of His apostles regarding Him. The
genealogy must be examined as regards its
consistency with itself, instead of arguing
from the supposition of Christ's death to the

Book XXVIII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.^AN.

325

fact of His birth; for He might have suffered
without having been born, or He might have
been born, and yet never have suffered; for
you yourselves acknowledge that with God
nothing is impossible, which is inconsistent
with the denial that Christ could have suffered
without having been born.

2. AuGUSTiN replied: You are always an-
swering arguments which no one uses, instead
of our real arguments, which you cannot an-
swer. No one says that Christ could not die if
He had not been born; for Adam died though
he had not been born. What we say is, Christ
was born, because this is said not by this or
that heretic, but in the holy Gospel; and He
died, for this too is written, not in some
heretical production, but in the holy Gospel.
You set aside argument on the question of
the true account to be given of Jesus, and
refer to what He savs of Himself, and what
His apostles say of Him; and yet, when I
begin to quote the Gospel of His apostle
^Matthew, where we have the whole narrative
of Christ's birth, you forthwith deny that
Matthew wrote the narrative, though this is
affirmed by the continuous testimony of the
whole Church, from the days of apostolic
presidency to the bishops of our own time.
What authority will you quote against this ?
Perhaps some book of Manichaeus, where it is
denied that Jesus was born of a virgin. As,
then, I believe your book to be the produc-
tion of Manichseus, since it has been kept and
handed down among the disciples of Mani-
cheeus, from the time when he lived to the
present time, by a regular succession of your
presidents, so I ask you to believe the book
which I quote to have been written by Mat-
thew, since it has been handed down from the
days of Matthew in the Church, without any
break in the connection between that time and
the present. The question then is, whether
we are to believe the statements of an apostle
who was in the company of Christ while He
was on earth, or of a man away in Persia,
born long after Christ. But perhaps you will
quote some other book bearing the name of
an apostle known to have been chosen by
Christ; and you will find there that Christ
was not born of Mary. Since, then, one of
the books must be false, the question in this
case is, whether we are to yield our belief to
a book acknowledged and approved as handed
down from the beginning in the Church
founded by Christ Himself, and maintained
through the apostles and their successors in
an unbroken connection all over the world to
the present day; or to a book which this
Church condemns as unknown, and which,
moreover, is brought forward by men who

prove their veracity by praising Christ for
falsehood.

3. Here you will say. Examine the gene-
alogy as given in the two Gospels, and see if
it is consistent with itself. The answer to this
has been given already.' Your difficulty is
how Joseph could have two fathers. But
even if you could not have thought of the
explanation, that one was his own father, and
the other adopted, you should not have been
so ready to put yourself in opposition to such
high authority. Now that this explanation
has been given you, I call upon you to ac-
knowledge the truth of the Gospel, and above
all to cease your mischievous and unreason-
able attacks upon the truth.

4. Faustus most plausibly refers to what
Jesus said of Himself. But how is this to be
known except from the narratives of His dis-
ciples ? And if we do not believe them when
they tell us that Christ was born of a virgin,
how shall we believe what they record as said
by Christ of Himself? For, as regards any
writing professing to come immediately from
Christ Himself, if it were really His, how is
it not read and acknowledged and regarded
as of supreme authority in the Church, which,
beginning with Christ Himself, and continued
by His apostles, who v/ere succeeded by the
bishops, has been maintained and extended
to our own day, and in which is found the
fulfillment of many former predictions, while
those concerning the last days are sure to be
accomplished in the future ? In regard to the
appearance of such a waiting, it would require
to be considered from what quarter it issued.
Supposing it to have issued from Christ Him-
self, those in immediate connection with Him
might very well have received it, and have
transmitted it to others. In this case, the
authority of the writing would be fully estab-
lished by the traditions of various communi-
ties, and of their presidents, as I have already
said. Who, then, is so infatuated as in our
day to believe that the Epistle of Christ is-
sued by Manichseus is genuine, or to disbe-
lieve jSIatthew's narrative of Christ's words
and actions ? Or, if the question is of Mat-
thew being the real author, who would not,
in this also, believe what he finds in the
Church, which has a distinct history in un-
broken connection from the days of Matthew
to the present time, rather than a Persian
interloper, who comes more than two hundred
years after, and wishes us to believe his ac-
count of Christ's words and actions rather
than that of Matthew; whereas, even in the
case of the Apostle Paul, who was called from

I III. 3.

326

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXIX.

heaven after the Lord's ascension, the Church
would not have beheved him, had there not
been apostles in life with whom he might
communicate, and compare his gospel with
theirs, so as to be recognized as belonging to
the same society? When it was ascertained
that Paul preached what the apostles preached,
and that he lived in fellowship and harmony
with them, and when God's testimony vvas
added by Paul's working miracles like those
done by the apostles, his authority became so
great, that his words are now received in the
Church, as if, to use his own appropriate
words, Christ were speaking in him.' Mani-
chaaus, on the other hand, thinks that the
Church of Christ should believe what he says
in opposition to the Scriptures, which are
supported by such strong and continuous evi-
dence, and in which the Church finds an em-
phatic injunction, that whoever preaches to
her differently from what she has received
must be anathema. =

5 . Faustus tells us that he has good grounds
for concluding that these Scriptures are un-
worthy of credit. And yet he speaks of not
using arguments. But the argument too shall
be refuted. The end of the whole argument
is to bring the soul to believe that the reason
of its misery in this world is, that it is the
means of preventing God from being deprived
of His kingdom, and that God's substance and
nature is so exposed to change, corruption,
injury, and contamination, that part of it is

I 2 Cor. xiii. 3.

2 Gal. i. 8, (

incurably defiled, and is consigned by Him-
self to eternal punishment in the mass of dark-
ness, though, when it was in harmless union
with Himself, and guilty of no crime. He
knowingly sent it where it was to suffer defile-
ment. This is the end of all your argum.ents
and fictions; and would that there were an
end of them as regards your heart and your
lips, that you might sometime desist from
believing and uttering those execrable blas-
phemies ! But, says Faustus, I prove from
the writings themselves that they cannot be
in all points trustworthy, for they contradict
one another. Why not say, then, that they
are wholly untrustworthy, if their testimony is
inconsistent and self-contradictory ? But,
says Faustus, I say what I think to be in ac-
cordance with truth. With what truth ? The
truth is only your own fiction, which begins
with God's battle, goes on to His contamina-
tion, and ends with His damnation. No one,
says Faustus, believes writings which contra-
dict themselves. But if you think they do
this, it is because you do not understand
them; for your ignorance has been manifested
in regard to the passages you have quoted in
support of your opinion, and the same will
appear in regard to any quotations you may
still make. So there is no reason for our not
believing these writings, supported as they
are by such weighty testimony; and this is
itself the best reason for pronouncing accursed
those whose preaching differs from what is
there written.

BOOK XXIX.

FAUSTUS SEEKS TO JUSTIFY THE DOCETISM OF THE MANICH.EANS. AUGUSTIN INSISTS THAT

THERE IS NOTHING DISGRACEFUL IN BEING BORN.

1. Faustus said: If Christ was visible, and
suffered without having been born, this was
sorcery. This argument of yours may be
turned against you, by replying that it was
sorcery if He was conceived or brought forth
without being begotten. It is not in accord-
ance with the law of nature that a virgin
should bring forth, and still less that she
should still be a virgin after bringing forth.
Why, then, do you refuse to admit that
Christ, in a preternatural manner, suffered
without submitting to the condition of birth ?
Believe me: in substance, both our beliefs
are contrary to nature; but our belief is de-
cent, and yours is not. We give an explana-
tion of Christ's passion which is at least prob-
able, while the only explanation you give of
His birth is false. In fine, we hold that He

suffered in appearance, and did not really die;
you believe in an actual birth, and conception
in the womb. If it is not so, you have only
to acknowledge that the birth too was a delu-
sion, and our whole dispute will be at an end.
As to what you frequently allege, that Christ
could not have appeared or spoken to men
without having been born, it is absurd; for,
as our teachers have shown, angels have often
appeared and spoken to men.

2. AuGUSTiN replied: We do not say that to
die without having been born is sorcery; for,
as we have said already, this happened in the
case of Adam. But, though it had never
happened, who will venture to say that Christ
could not, if He had so pleased, have come
without taking His body from a virgin, and
yet appearing in a true body to redeem us by

Book XXIX.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH-4-:AN.

,27

a true death ? However, it was better that
He should be, as He actually was, born of a
virgin, and, by His condescension, do honor
to both sexes, for whose deliverance He was
to die, by taking a man's body born of a
woman. In this He testiiies emphatically
against you, and refutes your doctrine, which
makes the sexes the work of the devil. What
we call sorcery in your doctrine is your mak-
ing Christ's passion and death to have been
only in appearance, so that, by a spectral il-
lusion. He seemed to die when He did not.
Hence you must also make His resurrection
spectral and illusory and false; for if there
was no true death, there could not be a real
resurrection. Hence also the marks which
He showed to His doubting disciples must
have been false; and Thomas was not assured
by truth, but cheated by a lie, when he ex-
claimed, "My Lord, and my God."' And
yet you would have us believe that your
tongue utters truth, though Christ's whole
body was a falsehood. Our argument against
you is, that the Christ you make is such that
you cannot be His true disciples unless you
too practise deceit. The fact that Christ's
body was the only one born of a virgin does
not prove that there was sorcery in His birth,
any more than there is sorcery in its being
the only body to rise again on the third day,
never to die any more. Will you say that
there was sorcery in all the Lord's miracles
because they were unusual ? They really
happened, and their appearance, as seen by
men, was true, and not an illusion; and when
they are said to be contrary to nature, it is
not that they oppose nature, but that they
transcend the method of nature to which we
are accustomed. May God keep the minds
of His people who are still babes in Christ
from being influenced by Faustus, when he
recommends as a duty that we should acknowl-
edge Christ's birth to have been illusory and
not real, that so we may end our dispute !
Nay, verily, rather let us continue to contend
for the truth against them, than agree with
them in falsehood.

3. But if we are to end the controversy by
saying this, why do not our opponents them-
selves say it ? While they assert the death of
Christ to have been not real but feigned, why
do they make out that He had no birth at all,
not even of the same kind as His death ? If
they had so much regard for the authority of
the evangelist as to oblige them to admit that
Christ suffered, at least in appearance, it is
the same authority which testifies to His birth.
Two evangelists, indeed, give the story of the

' John XX. 28.

birth ;= but in all we read of Jesus having a
mother.3 Perhaps Faustus was unwilling to
make the birth an illusion, because the differ-
ence of the genealogies given in Matthew and
Luke causes an apparent discrepancy. But,
supposing a man ignorant, there are many
things also relating to the passion of Christ in
which he will think the evangelists disagree;
suppose him instructed, he finds entire agree-
ment. Can it be right to feign death, and
wrong to feign birth? And yet Faustus will
have us acknowledge the birth to be feigned,
in order to put an end to the dispute. It will
appear presently in our reply to another ob-
jection what we think to be the reason why
Faustus will not admit of any birth, even a
feigned one.

4. We deny that there is anything disgrace-
ful in the bodies of saints. Some members,
indeed, are called uncomely, because they
have not so pleasing an appearance as those
constantly in view.'* But attend to what the
apostle says, when from the unity and har-
mony of the body he enjoins charity on the
Church: " Much more those members of the
body, which seem to be feeble, are necessary:
and those members of the body, which we
think to be less honorable, upon these we
bestow more abundant honor; and our un-
comely parts have more abundant comeliness.
For our comely parts have no need: but God
hath tempered the body together, having
given more abundant honor to that part which
lacked: that there should be no schism in the
body. "5 The licentious and intemperate use
of those members is disgraceful, but not the
members themselves; for they are preser\-ed
in purity not only by the unmarried, but also
by wedded fathers and mothers of holy life,
in whose case the natural appetite, as serving
not lust, but an intelligent purpose in the
production of children, is in no way disgrace-
ful. Still more, in the holy Virgin Mary,
who by faith conceived the body of Christ,
there was nothing disgraceful in the members
which served not for a common natural con-
ception, but for a miraculous birth. In order
that we might conceive Christ in sincere
hearts, and, as it were, produce Him in con-
fession, it was meet that His body should
come from the substance of His mother with-
out injury to her bodily purity. We cannot
suppose that the mother of Christ suffered
loss by His birth, or that the gift of produc-
tiveness displaced the grace of virginity. If

= Matt. i. 25; Luke ii. 7.

3 Matt. li. 11; Mark iii. 32; Luke u. 33; John li. i.

4 In the Retractations, ii. sec. 7, AuRustin refers in correction
of this remark to his Rcfly to the Second A itswer 0/ Julian, iv.
sec. 3(5, where he makes uncomeiiness tht effect of sin.

5 I Cor. xii. 22-25.

326

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXX.

these occurrences, which were real and no il-
lusion, are new and strange, and contrary to
the common course of nature, the reason is,
that they are great, and amazing, and divine;
and all the more on this account are they
true, and firm, and sure. Angels, says Faus-
tus, appeared and spoke without having been
born. As if we held that Christ could not

have appeared or spoken without having been
born of a woman ! He could, but He chose
not; and what He chose was best. A.nd that
He chose to do what He did is plain, because
He acted, not like your god, from necessity,
but voluntarily. That He was born we know,
because we put faith not in a heretic, but in
Christ's gospel.

BOOK XXX.

FAUSTUS REPELS THE INSINUATION THAT THE PROPHECY OF PAUL WITH REFERENCE TO THOSE
THAT SHOULD FORBID TO MARRY, ABSTAIN FROM MEATS, ETC., APPLIES TO THE MANICH^ANS
MORE THAN TO THE CATHOLIC ASCETICS, WHO ARE HELD IN THE HIGHEST ESTEEM IN THE
CHURCH. AUGUSTIN JUSTIFIES THIS APPLICATION OF THE PROPHECY, AND SHOWS THE DIF-
FERENCE BETWEEN MANICH^AN AND CHRISTIAN ASCETICISM.

1. Faustus said: You apply to us the
words of Paul: " Some shall depart from the
faith, giving heed to lying spirits, and doc-
trines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy;
having their consciences seared as with a hot
iron; forbidding to marry, abstaining from
meats, which God has created to be received
with thanksgiving by believers." ' I refuse to
admit that the apostle said this, unless you
first acknowledge that Moses and the prophets
taught doctrines of devils, and were the inter-
preters of a lying and malignant spirit; since
they enjoin with great emphasis abstinence
from swine's flesh and other meats, which
they call unclean. This case must first be
settled; and you must consider long and
carefully how their teaching is to be viewed:
whether they said these things from God, or
from the devil. As regards these matters,
either Moses and the prophets must be con-
demned along with us, or we must be acquitted
along with them. You are unjust in con-
demning us, as you do now, as followers of
the doctrine of devils, because we require the
priestly class to abstain from animal food;
for we limit the prohibition to the priesthood,
while you hold that your prophets, and Moses
himself, who forbade all classes of men to eat
the flesh of swine, and hares, and conies, be-
sides all varieties of cuttle-fish, and all fish
wanting scales, said this not in a lying spirit,
nor in the doctrine of devils, but from God,
and in the Holy Spirit. Even supposing,
then, that Paul said these words, you can
convince me only by condemning Moses and
the prophets; and so, though you will not do
it for reason or truth, you will contradict
Moses for the sake of your belly.

2. Besides, you have in your Book of

I I Tim. iv. 1-3.

Daniel the account of the three youths, which
you will find it difficult to reconcile with the
opinion that to abstain from meats is the doc-
trine of devils. For we are told that they
abstained not only from what the law forbade,
but even from what it allowed;^ and you are
wont to praise them, and count them as mar-
tyrs; though they too followed the doctrine
of devils, if this is to be taken as the apostle's
opinion. And Daniel himself declares that
he fasted for three weeks, not eating flesh or
drinking wine, while he prayed for his people. ^
How is it that he boasts of this doctrine of
devils, and glories in the falsehood of a lying
spirit ?

3. Again, what are we to think of you, or
of the better class of Christians among you,
some of whom abstain from swine's flesh,
some from the flesh of quadrupeds, and some
from all animal food, while all the Church
admires them for it, and regards them with
profound veneration, as only not gods ? You
obstinately refuse to consider that if the
words quoted from the apostle are true and
genuine, these people too are misled by doc-
trines of devils. And there is another ob-
servance which no one will venture to explain
away or to deny, for it is known to all, and is.
practised yearly with particular attention in
the congregation of Catholics all over the
world — I mean the fast of forty days, ni the
due observance of which a man must abstain
from all the things which, according to this
verse, were created by God that we might re-
ceive them, while at the same time he calls
this abstinence a doctrine of devils. So, my
dear friends, shall we say that you too, dur-
ing this fast, while celebrating the mysteries
of Christ's passion, live after the manner of

2 Dan. i. 12

3 Dan. X. 2, 1.

Book XXX.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.EAN.

3-^9

devils, and are deluded by a seducing spirit,
and speak lies in hypocrisy, and have your
conscience seared with a hot iron ? If this
does not apply to you, neither does it apply
to us. What is to be thought of this verse,
or its author; or to whom does it apply, since
it agrees neither with the traditions of the Old
Testament, nor with the institutions of the
New? As regards the New Testament, the
proof is from your own practice; and though
the Old requires abstinence only from certain
things, still it requires abstinence. On the
other hand, this opinion of yours makes all
abstinence from animal food a doctrine of
devils. If this is your belief, once more I
say it, you must condemn Moses, and reject
the prophets, and pass the same sentence on
yourselves; for, as they always abstained from
certain kinds of food, so you sometimes ab-
stain from all food.

4, But if you think that in making a dis-
tinction in food, Moses and the prophets es-
tablished a divine ordinance, and not a doc-
trine of devils; if Daniel in the Holy Spirit
observed a fast of three weeks; if the youths
Ananias, Azarias, and Mishael, under divine
guidance, chose to live on cabbage or pulse;
if, again, those among you who abstain, do it
not at the instigation of devils; if your absti-
nence from wine and flesh for forty days is
not superstitious, but by divine command, —
consider, I beseech you, if it is not perfect
madness to suppose these words to be Paul's,
that abstinence from food and forbidding to
marry are doctrines of devils. Paul cannot
I have said that to dedicate virgins to Christ is
j a doctrine of devils. But you read the words,
and inconsiderately, as usual, apply them to
us, without seeing that this stamps your vir-
gins too as led away by the doctrine of devils,
and that you are the functionaries of the devils
} in your constant endeavors to induce virgins
' to make this profession, so that in all your
churches the virgins nearly outnumber the
married women. Why do you still adhere to
such practises ? Why do you ensnare
wretched young women, if it is the will of
devils, and not of Christ, that they fulfill?
But, first of all, I wish to know if making vir-
gins is, in all cases, the doctrine of devils, or
inily the prohibition of marriage. If it is the
prohibition, it does not apply to us, for we
too hold it equally foolish to prevent one who
wishes, as it is criminal and impious to force
I one who has some reluctance. But if you say
that to encourage the proposal, and not to re-
sist such a desire, is all the doctrine of devils,
. to say nothing of the consequence as regards
you, the apostle himself will be thus brought
into danger, if he must be considered as hav-

ing introduced the doctrines of devils into
Iconium, when Thecla, after having been be-
j trothed, was by his discourse inflamed with
the desire of perpetual virginity.' And what
shall we say of Jesus, the Master Himself,
and the source of all sanctity, who is the un-
wedded spouse of the virgins who make this
profession, and who, when specifying in the
Gospel three kinds of eunuchs, natural, arti-
ficial, and voluntary, gives the palm to those
who have " made themselves eunuchs for the
kingdom of heaven,"'' meaning the youths of
both sexes who have extirpated from their
hearts the desire of marriage, and who in the
Church act as eunuchs of the King's palace?
Is tnis also the doctrine of devils ? Are those
words, too, spoken in a seducing spirit ? And
if Paul and Christ are proved to be priests of
devils, is not their spirit the same that speaks
in God ? I do not mention the other apostles
of our Lord, Peter, Andrew, Thomas, and the
example of celibacy, the blessed John, who
in various ways commended to young men
and maidens the excellence of this profession,
leaving to us, and to you too, the form for
making virgins. I do not mention them,
because you do not admit them into the canon,
and so you will not scruple impiously to im-
pute to them doctrines of devils. But will
you say the same of Christ, or of the Apostle
Paul, who, we know, everywhere expressed
the same preference for unmarried women to
the married, and gave an example of it in the
case of the saintly Thecla ? But if the doc-
trine preached by Paul to Thecla, and which
the other apostles also preached, was not the
doctrine of devils, how can we believe that
Paul left on record his opinion, that the very
exhortation to sanctity is the injunction and
the doctrine of devils ? To make virgins
simply by exhortation, without forbidding to
marry, is not peculiar to you. That is our
principle too; and he must be not only a fool,
but a madman, who thinks that a private law
can forbid what the public law allows. As
regards marriage, therefore, we too encour-
age virgins to remain as they are when they
are willing to do so; we do not make them
virgins against their will. For we know the
force of will and of natural appetite when op-
posed by public law; much more when the
law is only private, and every one is at lib-
erty to disobey 't. If, then, it is no crime to
make virgins in this manner, we are guiltless
as well as you. If it is wrong to make vir-
gins in any way, you are guilty as well as we.
So that what you mean, or intend, by quoting
this verse against us, it is impossible to say.

I See the apocryphal book, Paul and Thecla.
= Matt. xi.\. 12.

1 ->^

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXX.

5. AuGUSTiN replied: Listen, and you
shall hear what we mean and intend by quot-
ing this verse against you, since you say that
you do not know. It is not that you abstain
from animal food; for, as you observe, our
ancient fathers abstained from some kinds of
food, not, however, as condemning them,
but with a typical meaning, which you
do not understand, and of which I have
said already in this work all that appeared
necessary. Besides, Christians, not heretics,
but Catholics, in order to subdue the body,
that the soul may be more humbled in
prayer, abstain not only from animal food,
but also from some vegetable productions,
without, however, believing them to be un-
clean. A few do this always; and at certain
seasons or days, as in Lent, almost all, more
or less, according to the choice or ability of
individuals. You, on the other hand, deny
that the creature is good, and call it unclean,
saying that animals are made by the devil of
the worst impurities in the substance of evil;
and so you reject them with horror, as being
the most cruel and loathsome places of con-
finement of your god. You, as a concession,
allow your followers, as distinct from the
priests, to eat animal food; as the apostle al-
lows, in certain cases, not marriage in the
general sense, but the indulgence of passion
in marriage.' It is only sin which is thus
made allowance for. This is the feeling you
have toward all animal food; you have learned
it from your heresy, and you teach it to your
followers. You make allowance for your fol-
lowers, because, as I said before, they supply
you with necessaries; but you grant them in-
dulgence without saying that it is not sinful.
For yourselves, you shun contact with this
evil and impurity; and hence our reason for
quoting this verse against you is found in the
words of the apostle which follow those with
which you end the quotation. Perhaps it was
for this reason that you left out the words,
and then say that you do not know what we
mean or intend by the quotation; for it suited
you better to omit the account of our inten-
tion than to express it. For, after speaking
of abstaining from meats, which God has
created to be received with thanksgiving by
believers, the apostle goes on, "And by them
who know the truth; for every creature of
God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it
be received with thanksgiving: for it is sanc-
tified by the word of God and prayer."- This
you deny; for your idea, and motive, and be-
lief in abstaining from such food is, that they
are not typically, but naturally, evil and im-
pure. In this assuredly you blaspheme the

I I Cor. vii. 5, 6.

- I Tim. iv. 3-5.

Creator; and in this is the doctrine of devils.
You need not be surprised that, so long be-
fore the event, this prediction regarding you
was made by the Holy Spirit.

6. So, again, if your exhortations to vir-
ginity resembled the teaching of the apostle,
" He who giveth in marriage doeth well, and
he who giveth not in marriage doeth better; " ^
if you taught that marriage is good, and vir-
ginity better, as the Church teaches which is
truly Christ's Church, you would not have
been described in the Spirit's prediction as
forbidding to marry. What a man forbids he
makes evil; but a good thing may be placed
second to a better thing without being for-
bidden. Moreover, the only honorable kind
of marriage, or marriage entered into for
its proper and legitimate purpose, is precisely
that you hate most. So, though you may
not forbid sexual intercourse, you forbid
marriage; for the peculiarity of marriage is,
that it is not merely for the gratification of
passion, but, as is written in the contract, for
the procreation of children. And, though
you allow many of your followers to retain
their connection with you in spite of their re-
fusal, or their inability, to obey you, you can-
not deny that you make the prohibition. The
prohibition is part of your false doctrine,
while the toleration is only for the interests of
the society. And here we see the reason,
which I have delayed till now to mention, for
your making not the birth but only the death
of Christ feigned and illusory. Death being
the separation of the soul, that is, of the
nature of your god, from the body which be-
longs to his enemies, for it is the work of the
devil, you uphold and approve of it; and thus,
according to your creed, it was meet that
Christ, though He did not die, should com-
mend death by appearing to die. In birth,
agam, you believe your god to be bound in-
stead of released; and so you will not allow
that Christ was born even in this illusory
fashion. You would have thought better of
Mary had she ceased to be a virgin without
being a mother, than as being a mother with-
out ceasing to be a virgin. You see, then,
that there is a great difference between ex-
horting to virginity as the better of two good
things, and forbidding to marry by denounc-
ing the true purpose of marriage; between
abstaining from food as a symbolic observ-
ance, or for the mortification of the body,
and abstaining from food which God has
created for the reason that God did not create
it. In one case, we have the doctrine of the
prophets and apostles; in the other, the doc-
trine of lying devils.

3 I Cor. vii. 38.

Book XXXI.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

1 I T

BOOK XXXI.

THE SCRIPTURE passage: '^TO THE PURE ALL THINGS ARE PURE, BUT TO THE IMPURE AND
DEFILKD IS NOTHING PURE; BUT EVEN THEIR MIND AND CONSCIENCE ARE DEFILED," IS
DISCUSSED FROM BOTH THE MANICH/EAN AND THE CATHOLIC POINTS OF VIEW, FAUSTUS
OBJECTING TO ITS APPLICATION TO HIS PARTY AND AUGUSTIN INSISTING ON ITS APPLICATION.

1. Faustus said: " To the pure all things
are pure. But to the impure and defiled is
nothing pure; but even their mind and con-
science are defiled." As regards this verse,
too, it is very doubtful whether, for your own
sake, you should believe it to have been writ-
ten by Paul. For it would follow that Moses
and the prophets were not only influenced by
devils in making so much in their laws of the
distinctions in food, but also that they them-
selves were impure and defiled in their mind
and conscience, so that the following words
also might properly be applied to them:
"They profess to know God, but in works
deny Him." ' This is applicable to no one
more than to Moses and the prophets, who
are known to have lived very differently from
what was becoming in men knowing God.
Up to this time I have thought only of adul-
teries and frauds and murders as defiling the
conscience of Moses and the prophets; but
now, from what this verse says, it is plain that
they were also defiled, because they looked
upon something as defiled. How, then, can
you persist in thinking that the vision of the
divine majesty can have been bestowed on
such men, when it is written that only the
pure in heart can see God ? Even supposing
that they had been pure from unlawful crimes,
this superstitious abstinence from certain
kinds of food, if it defiles the mind, is enough
to debar them from the sight of deity. Gone
for ever, too, is the boast of Daniel, and of
the three youths, who, till now that we are
told that nothing, is unclean, have been re-
garded among the Jews as persons of great
purity and excellence of character, because,
in observance of hereditary customs, they
carefully avoided defiling themselves with
Gentile food, especially that of sacrifices.^
Xow it appears that they were defiled in mind
and conscience most of all when they were
'losing their mouth against blood and idol-
feasts.

2. But perhaps their ignorance may excuse
them; for, as this Christian doctrine of all
things being pure to the pure had not then ap-
peared, they may have thought some things
impure. But there can be no excuse for you in

I Tit. i. i6.

- Dan. i. i2.

the face of Paul's announcement, that there is
nothing which is not pure, and that abstinence
from certain food is the doctrine of devils, and
that those who think anything defiled are pol-
luted in their mind, if you not only abstain,
as we have said, but make a merit of it, and
believe that you become more acceptable to
Christ in proportion as you are more abste-
mious, or, according to this new doctrine, as
your minds are defiled and your conscience
polluted. It should also be observed that,
while there are three religions in the world
which, though in a very different manner, ap-
point chastity and abstinence as the means of
purification of the mind, the religions, namely,
of the Jews, the Gentiles, and the Christians,
the opinion that everything is pure cannot
have come from any one of the three. It is
certainly not from Judaism, nor from Pagan-
ism, which also makes a distinction of food;
the only difference being, that the Hebrew
classification of animals does not harmonize
with the Pagan. Then as to the Christian
faith, if you think it peculiar to Christianity
to consider nothing defiled, you must first of
all confess that there are no Christians among
you. For things oft'ered to idols, and what
dies of itself, to mention nothing else, are
regarded by you all as great defilement. If.
again, this is a Christian practice, on your
part, the doctrine which is opposed to all ab-
stinence from impurities cannot be traced to
Christianity either. How, then, could Paul
have said what is not in keeping with any re-
ligion ? In fact, when the apostle from a Jew
became a Christian, it was a change of cus-
toms more than of religion. As for the writer
of this verse, there seems to be no religion
which favors his opinion.

3. Be sure, then, w-henever you discover
anything else in Scripture to assail our faith
with, to see, in the first place, that it is not
against you, before you commence your attack
on us. For instance, there is the passage
you continually quote about Peter, that he
once saw a vessel let down from heaven in
which were all kinds of animals and serpents,
and that, when he \vas surprised and aston-
ished, a voice was heard, saying to him,
Peter, kill and eat whatsoever thou seest in
the vessel, and that he replied, Lord I will

332

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXXII.

not touch what is common or unclean. On
this the voice spoke again, What I have
cleansed, call not unclean.' This, indeed,
seems to have an allegorical meaning, arid
not to refer to the absence of distinction in
food. But as you choose to give it this
meaning, you are bound to feed upon all wild
animals, and scorpions, and snakes, and rep-
tiles in general, in compliance with this vision
of Peter's. In this way, you will show that
you are really obedient to the voice which
Peter is said to have heard. But you must
never forget that you at the same time con-
demn Moses and the prophets, who considered
many things polluted which, according to this
utterance, God has sanctified.

4. AuGUSTiN replied: When the apostle
says, "To the pure all things are pure," he
refers to the natures which God had created,
— as it is written by Moses in Genesis, "And
God made all things; and behold they were
very good,"- — not to the typical meanings,
according to which God, by the same Moses,
distinguished the clean from the unclean.
Of this we have already spoken at length more
than once, and need not dwell on it here. It
is clear that the apostle called those impure
who, after the revelation of the New Testa-
ment, still advocated the observance of the
shadows of things to come, as if without them
the Gentiles could not obtain the salvation
which is in Christ, because in this they were
carnally minded; and he called them unbe-
lieving, because they did not distinguish
between the time of the law and the time
of grace. To them, he says, nothing is
pure, because they made an erroneous and
sinful use both of what they received and

I Acts X. 11-15.

2 Gen. i. 31.

of what they rejected; which is true of
all unbelievers, but especially of you Mani-
chaeans, for to you nothing whatever is
pure. For, although you take great care to
keep the food which you use separate from
the contamination of flesh, still it is not pure
to you, for the only creator of it you allow is
the devil. And you hold, that, by eating it,
you release your god, who suffers confine-
ment and pollution in it. One would think
you might consider yourselves pure, since
your stomach is the proper place for purify,
ing your god. But even your own bodies, in
your opinion, are of the nature and handi-
work of the race of darkness; while your souls
are still affected by the pollution of your
bodies. What, then, is pure to you ? Not
the things you eat; not the receptacle of your
food; not yourselves, by whom it is purified.
Thus you see against whom the words of the
apostle are directed.; he expresses himself so
as to include all who are impure and unbeliev-
ing, but first and chiefly to condemn you.
To the pure, therefore, all things are pure,
in the nature in which they were created; but
to the ancient Jewish people all things were
not pure in their typical significance; and, as
regards bodily health, or the customs of so-
ciety, all things are not suitable to us. But
when things are in their proper places, and
the order of nature is preserved, to the pure
all things are pure; but to the impure and
unbelieving, among whom you stand first,
nothing is pure. You might make a whole-
some application to yourselves of the follow-
ing words of the apostle, if you desired a cure
for your seared consciences. The words are:
" Their very mind and conscience are de-
filed."

BOOK XXXII.

FAUSTUS FAILS TO UNDERSTAND WHY HE SHOULD BE REQUIRED EITHER TO ACCEPT OR REJECT
THE NEW TESTAMENT AS A WHOLE, WHILE THE CATHOLICS ACCEPT OR REJECT THE VARIOUS
P;^RTS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT AT PLEASURE. AUGUSTIN DENIES THAT THE CATHOLICS
TREAT THE OLD TESTAMENT ARBITRARILY, AND EXPLAINS THEIR ATTITUDE TOWARDS IT.

I. Faustus said: You say, that if we be-
lieve the Gospel, we must believe everything
that is written in it. Why, then, since you
believe the Old Testament, do you not believe
all that is found in any part of it? Instead
of that, you cull out only the prophecies tell-
ing of a future King of the Jews, for you
suppose this to be Jesus, along with a few
precepts of common morality, such as. Thou
shalt not kill, Thou shalt not commit adul-
tery; and all the rest you pass over, thinking

of the other things as Paul thought of the
things which he held to be dung.' Why,
then, should it seem strange or singular in
me that I select from the New Testament
whatever is purest, and helpful for my salva-
tion, while I set aside the interpolations of
your predecessors, which impair its dignity
and grace ?

2. If there are parts of the Testament of

I Phil. iii. 8.

Book XXXII. ]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

-^ -^ ->

the Father which we are not bound to observe
(for you attribute the Jewish law to the Father,
and it is well known that many things in it
shock you, and make you ashamed, so that
m heart you no longer regard it as free from
corruption, though, as you believe, the Father
Himself partly wrote it for you with His own
finger while part was written by Moses, who
was faithful and trustworthy), the Testament
of the Son must be equally liable to corrup-
tion, and may equally well contain objec-
tionable things; especially as it is allowed not
to have been written by the Son Himself, nor
l)y His apostles, but long after, by some un-
known men, who, lest they should be sus-
pected of writing of things they knew nothing
of, gave to their books the names of the apos-
tles, or of those who were thought to have
followed the apostles, declaring the contents
to be according to these originals. In this, I
think, they do grievous wrong to the disciples
of Christ, by quoting their authority for the
discordant and contradictory statements in
these writings, saying that it was according
to them that they wrote the Gospels, which
are so full of errors and discrepancies, both
in facts and in opinions, that they can be
harmonized neither with themselves nor with
one another. This is nothing else than to
slander good men, and to bring the charge
of dissension on the brotherhood of the disci-
ples. In reading the Gospels, the clear in-
tention of our heart perceives the errors, and,
to avoid all injustice, we accept whatever is
useful, in the way of building up our faith,
and promoting tne glory of the Lord Christ,
aid of the Almiighty God, His Father, while
we reject the rest as unbecoming the majesty
of God and Christ, and inconsistent with our
belief.

3. To return to what I said of your not ac-
cepting everything in the Old Testament.
You do not admit carnal circumcision, though
tliat is what is written;^ nor resting from all
"ccupation on the Sabbath, though that is en-
joined;'' and instead of propitiating God, as
1 Moses recommends, by offerings and sacri-
fices, you cast these things aside as utterly
out of keeping with Christian worship, and as
having nothing at all to recommend them. In
some cases, however, you make a division,
I and while you accept one part, you reject
' the other. Thus, in the Passover, which is
also the annual feast of the Old Testament,
j while it is written that in this observance you
must slay a lamb to be eaten in the evening,
and that you must abstain from leaven for
-even days, and be content with unleavened

9-14.

■ Ex. xxxi. 13,

bread and bitter herbs, ^ you accept the feast,
but pay no attention to the rules for its ob-
servance. It is the same with the feast of
Pentecost, or seven weeks, and the accom-
paniment of a certain kind and number of
sacrifices which Moses enjoins:'* you observe
the feast, but you condemn the propitiatory
rites, which are part of it, because they are
not in harmony with Christianity. As re-
gards the command to abstain from Gentile
food, you are zealous believers in the un-
cleanness of things offered to idols, and of
what has died of itself; but you are not so
ready to believe the prohibition of swine's
flesh, and hares, and conies, and mullets, and
cuttle-fish, and all the fish that you have a
relish for, although Moses pronounces them
all unclean.

4. I do not suppose that you will consent,
or even listen, to such things as that a father-
in-law should lie with his daughter-in-law, as
Judah did; or a father with his daughters, like
Lot; or prophets with harlots, like Hosea; or
that a husband should sell his wife for a night
to her lover, like Abraham; or that a man
should marry two sisters, like Jacob; or that
the rulers of the people and the men you con-
sider as most inspired should keep their mis-
tresses by hundreds and thousands; or, ac-
cording to the provision made in Deuteronomy
about wives, that the wife of one brother, if
he dies without children, should marry the
surviving brotlier, and that he should raise
up seed from her instead of his brother; and
that if the man refuses to do this, the fair
plaintiff should bring her case before the
elders, that the brother may be called and
admonished to perform this religious duty;
and that, if he persists in his refusal, he must
not go unpunished, but the woman must loose
his shoe from his right foot, and strike him
in the face, and send him away, spat upon
and accursed, to perpetuate the reproach in
his family. 3 These, and such as these, are
the examples and precepts of the Old Testa-
ment. If they are good, why do you not
practise them ? If they are bad, why do you
not condemn the Old Testament, in which
they are found ? But if you think that these
are spurious interpolations, that is precisely
what we think of the New Testament. You
have no right to claim from us an acknowledg-
ment for the New Testament which you your-
selves do not make for the Old.

5. Since you hold to the divine authorship
of the Old as well as of the New Testament,
it would surely be more consistent and more
becoming, as you do not obey its precepts, to

3 Ex, xii.

4 Lev. xxiii.

5 Deut. XXV. 5-10.

134

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXXII.

confess that it has been corrupted by improper
additions, than to treat it so contemptuously,
if it is genuine and uncorrupted. Accord-
ingly, my explanation of your neglect of the
requirements of the Old Testament has always
been, and still is, that you are either wise
enough to reject them as spurious, or that
you have the boldness and irreverence to dis-
regard them if they are true. At any rate,
when you would oblige me to believe every-
thing contained in the documents of the New
Testament because I receive the Testament
itself, you should consider that, though you
profess to receive the Old Testament, you in
your heart disbelieve many things in it. Thus,
you do not admit as true or authoritative the
declaration of the Old Testament, that every
one that hangeth on a tree is accursed,' for
this would apply to Jesus; or that every man
is accursed who does not raise up seed in
Israel, "^ for that would include all of both
sexes devoted to God ; or that whoever is not
circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin will
be cut off from among his people,^ for that
would apply to all Christians; or that whoever
breaks the Sabbath must be stoned to death;-*
or that no mercy should be shown to the man
who breaks a single precept of the Old Testa-
ment. If you really believe these things as
certainly enjoined by God, you would, in the
time of Christ, have been the first to assail
Him, and you would now have no quarrel
with the Jews, who, in persecuting Christ with
heart and soul, acted in obedience to their
own God.

6. I am aware that instead of boldly pro-
nouncing these passages spurious, you make
out that these things were required of the
Jews till the coming of Jesus; and that now
that He is come, according, as you say, to
the predictions of this Old Testament, He
Himself teaches what we should receive, and
what we should set aside as obsolete. Whether
the prophets predicted the coming of Jesus
we shall see presently. Meanwhile, I need
say no more than that if Jesus, after being
predicted in the Old Testament, now subjects
it to this sweeping criticism, and teaches us
to receive a few things and to throw over
many things, in the same way the Paraclete
who is promised in the New Testament
teaches us what part of it to receive, and
what to reject; as Jesus Himself says in the
Gospel, when promising the Paraclete, "He
shall guide you into all truth, and shall teach
you all things, and bring all things to your
remembrance.'' 5 So then, with the help of the
Paraclete, we may take the same liberties with

I Deut. xxi. 23.
4 Num. XV. 35.

2 Deut. XXV. 5-10. 3 Gen. xvii. 14.

5 John xvi. 13, xiv. 26.

the New Testament as Jesus enables you to
take with the Old, unless you suppose that the
Testament of the Son is of greater value than
that of the Father, if it is really the Father's;
so that while many parts of the one are to be
condemned, the other must be exempted
from all disapproval; and that, too, when we
know, as I said before, that it was not written
by Christ or by His apostles.

7. Hence, as you receive nothing in the
Old Testament except the prophecies and the
common precepts of practical morality, which
we quoted above, while you set aside circum-
cision, and sacrifices, and the Sabbath and its
observance, and the feast of unleavened bread,
why should not we receive nothing in the New
Testament but what we find said in honor and
praise of the majesty of the Son, either by
Himself or by His apostles, with the proviso,
in the case of the apostles, that it was said by
them after reaching perfection, and when no
longer in unbelief; while we take no notice
of the rest, which, if said at the time, was the
utterance of ignorance or inexperience, or, if
not, was added by crafty opponents with a
malicious intention, or was stated by the
writers without due consideration, and so
handed down as authentic? Take as exam-
ples, the shameful birth of Jesus from a
woman, His being circumcised like the Jews,
His offering sacrifice like the Gentiles, His
being baptized in a humiliating manner, His
being led about by the devil in the wilderness,
and His being tempted by him in the most
distressing way. With these exceptions, be-
sides whatever has been inserted under the
pretence of being a quotation from the Old
Testament, we believe the whole, especially
the mystic nailing to the cross, emblematic
of the wounds of the soul in its passion; as
also the sound moral precepts of Jesus, and
His parables, and the whole of His immortal
discourse, which sets forth especially the dis-
tinction of the two natures, and therefore
must undoubtedly be His. There is, then,
no reason for 3^our thinking it obligatory in
me to believe all the contents of the Gospels;
for you, as has been proved, take so dainty
a sip from the Old Testament, that you
hardly, so to speak, wet your lips with it.

8. AuGUSTiN replied: We give to the whole
Old Testament Scriptures their due praise as
true and divine; you impugn the Scriptures
of the New Testament as having been tam-
pered with and corrupted. Those things in
the Old Testament which we do not observe
we hold to have been suitable appointments
for the time and the people of that dispensa-
tion, besides being symbolical to us of truths
in which they have still a spiritual use, though

I300K XXXII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.'EAN.

the outward observance is abolished; and this
' opinion is proved to be the doctrine of the
' apostolic writings. You, on the other hand,
! find fault with everything in the New Testa-
ment which you do not receive, and assert
that these passages were not spoken or written
by Christ or His apostles. In these respects
' there is a manifest difference between us.
Wlien, therefore, you are asked why you do
not receive all the contents of the New Testa-
ment, but, while you approve of some things,
! reject a great many in the very same books as
false and spurious interpolations, you must
not pretend to imitate us in the distinction
which we make, reverently and in faith, but
must give account of your own presumption.

,9. If we are asked why we do not worship
God as the Hebrew fathers of the Old Testa-
ment worshipped Him, we reply that God has
taught us differently by the New Testament
fathers, and yet in no opposition to the Old
Testament, but as that Testament itself pre-
dicted. For it is thus foretold by the prophet:
"Behold, the days come, saith the Lord,
when I will make a new covenant with the
house of Israel, and with the house of Judah;
not according to the covenant which I made
with their fathers when I took them by the
I hand to bring them out of the land of
I^gypt.'" Thus it was foretold that that
covenant would not continue, but that there
would be a new one. And to the objection
that we do not belong to the house of Israel
' ir to the house of Judah, we answer accord-
ing to the teaching of the apostle, who calls
Christ the seed of Abraham, and says to us,
as belonging to Christ's body, " Therefore ye
are Abraham's seed."^ Again, if we are
asked why we regard that Testament as au-
ithoritative when we do not observe its ordi-
nances, we find the answer to this also in the
apostolic writings; for the apostle says, " Let
no man judge you in meat or drink, or in re-
spect of a holiday, or a new moon, or of Sab-
baths, which are a shadow of things to come.''^
Here we learn both that we ought to read of
ithese observances, and acknowledge them to
be of divine institution, in order to preserve
the memory of the prophecy, for they were
shadows of things to come; and also that we
need pay no regard to those who would judge
us for not continuing the outward observance;
as the apostle says elsewhere to the same
purpose, " These things happened to them
i'or an example; and they are written for our
admonition, on whom the end of the ages are
'ome."'* So, when we read anything in the
ibooks of the Old Testament which we are not

required to observe in the New Testament,
or which is even forbidden, instead of findine
fault with it, we should ask what it means;
for the very discontinuance of the observance
proves it to be, not condemned, but fulfilled.
On this head we have already spoken re-
peatedly.

10. To take, for example, this requirement
on which Faustus ignorantly grounds his
charge against the Old Testament, that a man
should take his brother's wife to raise up seed
for his brother, to be called by his name;
what does this prefigure, but that every
preacher of the gospel should so labor in the
Church as to raise up seed to his deceased
brother, that is, Christ, who died for us, and
that this seed should bear His name ? iMore-
over, the apostle fulfills this requirement not
now in the typical observance, but in the
spiritual reality, when he reproves those of
whom he says that he had begotten them in
Christ Jesus by the gospel, ^ and points out to
them their error in wishing to be of Paul.
"Was Paul," he says, "crucified for you?
Or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?''^
As if he should say, I have begotten you for
my deceased brother; your name is Christian,
not Paulian. Then, too, whoever refuses the
ministry of the gospel when chosen by the
Church, justly deserves the contempt of
the Church. So we see that the spittmg in
the face is accompanied with a sign of re-
proach in loosing a shoe from one foot, to
exclude the man from the company of those
to whom the apostle says, "Let your feet be
shod with the preparation of the gospel of
peace;"'' and of whom the prophet thus
speaks, " How beautiful are the feet of them
who publish peace, who bring good tidings of
good ! " ^ The man who holds the faith of
the gospel so as both to profit himself and to
be ready when called to serve the Church, is
properly represented as shod on both feet.
But the man who thinks it enough to secure
his own safety by believing, and shirks the
duty of benefiting others, has the reproach of
being unshod, not in type, but in reality.

11. Faustus needlessly objects to our ob-
servance of the passover, taunting us with
differing from the Jewish observance: for in
the gospel we have the true Lamb, not in
shadow, but in substance; and instead of pre-
figuring the death, we commemorate it daily,
and especially in the yearly festival. Thus
also the day of our paschal feast does not cor-
respond with the Jewish obsei-vance, for we

j take in the Lord's day, on which Christ rose.
And as to the feast of unleavened bread, all

' Jer. xxxi. 31, 32.
3 Col. ii. 16, 17.

- Gal. iii. 29.
4 I Cor, X. II.

5 I Cor. iv. 15.
7 Eph. vi. 15.

* 1 Cor. ii. 13.
8 Isa. Hi. 7.

o 1 A
00^

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXXII.

Christians sound in the faith keep it, not in
the leaven of the old life, that is, of wicked-
ness, but in the truth and sincerity of the
faith; ' not for seven days, but always, as was
typified by the number seven, for days are
always counted by sevens. And if this ob-
servance is somewhat difficult in this world,
since the way which leads to life is strait and
narrow, = the future reward is sure; and this
difficulty is typified in the bitter herbs, which
are a little distasteful.

12. The Pentecost, too, we observe, that
is, the fiftieth day from the passion and resur-
rection of the Lord, for on that day He sent
to us the Holy Paraclete whom He had
promised; as w-as prefigured in the Jewish
passover, for on the fiftieth day after the
slaying of the lamb, Moses on the mount re-
ceived the law written with the finger of God.^
If you read the Gospel, you will see that the
Spirit is there called the finger of God.^ Re-
markable events which happened on certain
days are annually commemorated in the
Church, that the recurrence of this festival
may preserve the recollection of things so
important and salutary. If you ask, then,
why we keep the passover, it is because Christ
was then sacrificed for us. If you ask why
we do not retain the Jewish ceremonies, it is
because they prefigured future realities which
we commemorate as past; and the difference
between the future and the past is seen in the
different words we use for them. Of this we
have already said enough.

13. Again, if you ask why, of all the kinds
of food prohibited in the former typical dis-
pensation,'we abstain only from food offered
to idols and from what dies of itself, you shall
hear, if for once you will prefer the truth to
idle calumnies. The reason why it is not
expedient for a Christian to eat food offered
to idols is given by the apostle: "I would
not," he says, "that ye should have fellow-
ship with demons.' Not that he finds fault
with sacrifice itself, as offered by the fathers
to typify the blood of the sacrifice with which
Christ has redeemed us. For he first says,
" The things which the Gentiles offer, they
offer to demons, and not to God; " and then
adds these words: '' I would not that ye should
have fellowship with demons." ^ If the un-
cleanness were in the nature of sacrificial
flesh, it would necessarily pollute even when
eaten in ignorance. But the reason for not
partaking knowingly is not in the nature of
the food, but, for conscience sake, not to
seem to have fellowship with demons. As
regards what dies of itself, I suppose the rea-

I I Cor. V. 8.

4 Luke xi. 8.

2 Matt. vii. 13.
5 I Cor. X. 20.

3 Ex. xix.-xxxi.

son why such food was prohibited was that
the flesh of animals which have died of them-
selves is diseased, and is not likely to be
wholesome, which is the chief thing in food.
The observance of pouring out the blood
which was enjoined in ancient times upon Noah
himself after the deluge,*^ the meaning of
which we have already explained, is thought
by many to be what is meant in the Acts of
the Apostles, where we read that the Gentiles
were required to abstain from fornication, and
from things sacrificed, and from blood,' that
is, from flesh of which the blood has not been
poured out. Others give a different meaning
to the words, and think that to abstain from
blood means not to be polluted with the crime
of murder. It would take too long to settle
this question, and it is not necessary. For,
allowing that the apostles did on that occasion
require Christians to abstain from the blood
of animals, and not to eat of things strangled,
they seem to me to have consulted the time
in choosing an easy observance that could not
be burdensome to any one, and which the
Gentiles might have in common with the
Israelities, for the sake of the Corner-stone,
who makes both one in Himself;^ .while at
the same time they would be reminded how
the Church of all nations was prefigured by
the ark of Noah, when God gave this com-
mand,—a type which began to be fulfilled in
the time of the apostles by the accession of
the Gentiles to the faith. But since the close
of that period during which the two walls of
the circumcision and the uncircumcision, al-
though united in the Corner-stone, still re-
tained some distinctive peculiarities, and now
that the Church has become so entirely Gen-
tile that none who are outwardly Israelites
are to be found in it, no Christian feels bound
to abstain from thrushes or small birds be-
cause their blood has not been poured out, or
from hares because they are killed by a stroke
on the neck without shedding their blood.
Any who still are afraid to touch these things
are laughed at by the rest: so general is the
conviction of the truth, that "not what en-
tereth into the mouth defileth you, but what
Cometh out of it;"' that evil lies in the com-
mission of sin, and not in the nature of any
food in ordinary use.

14. As regards the deeds of the ancients,
both those which seem sinful to foolish and
ignorant people, when they are not so, and
those which really are sinful, we have already
explained why they have been written, and
how this rather adds to than impairs the dig-
nity of Scripture. So, too, about the curse

* Gen. ix. 6.
8 Eph. ii. 11-22.

7 Acts XV. 29.
9 Matt. XV. II.

BouK XXXII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

00/

on him who hangeth on a tree, and on him
who raises not up seed in Israel, our reply has
already been given in the proper place, when
meeting Faustus' objections.' And in reply
to all objections whatsoever, whether we have
already answered them separately, or whether
they are contained in the remarks of Faustus
which we are now considering, we appeal to
our established principles, on which we main-
tain the authority of sacred Scripture. The
principle is this, that all things written in the
books of the Old Testament are to be received
with approval and admiration, as most true
and most profitable to eternal life; and that
those precepts which are no longer observed
outwardly are to be understood as having been
most suitable in those times, and are to be
viewed as having been shadows of things to
come, of which we may now perceive the ful-
fillments. Accordingly, whoever in those
times neglected the observance of these sym-
Itolical precepts was righteously condemned
to suffer the punishment required by the di-
vine statute, as any one would be now if he
were impiously to profane the sacraments of
the New Testament, which differ from the
old observances only as this time differs from
that. For as praise is due to the righteous
men of old who refused not to die for the Old
Testament sacraments, so it is due to the
martyrs of the New Testament. And as a
sick man should not find fault with the medi-
cal treatment, because one thing is prescribed
to-day and another to-morrow, and what was at
first required is afterwards forbidden, since the
method of cure depends on this; so the human
race, sick and sore as it is from Adam to the
end of the world, as long as the corrupted
body weighs down the mind,- should not find
fault with the divine prescriptions, if some-
times the same observances are enjoined, and
sometimes an old observance is exchanged
for one of a different kind; especially as there
was a promise of a change in the appointments.
15. Hence there is no force in the analogy
which Faustus institutes between Christ's
pointing out to us what to believe and what
to reject in the Old Testament, in which He
Himself is predicted, and the Paraclete's
doing the same to you as regards the New
Testament, where there is a similar prediction
of Him. There might have been some plausi-
bility in this, had there been anything in the
Old Testament which we denounced as a mis-
take, or as not of divine authority, or as un-
true. We do nothing of the kind; we receive
everything, both what we observe as rules of
conduct, and what we no longer observe, but

■ Book XXII.

■■' Wisd. ix. i^.

Still recognize as having been prophetical ob-
servances, once enjoined and now fulfilled.
And besides, the promise of the Paraclete is
found in those books, all the contents of
which you do not accept; and His mission is
recorded in the book which you shrink from
even naming. For, as is stated above, and
has been said repeatedly, there is a distinct
narrative in the Acts of the Apostles of the
mission of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost,
and the effect produced showed who it was.
For all who first received Him spoke with
tongues; 3 and in this sign there was a promise
that in all tongues, or in all nations, the
Church of after times would faithfully pro-
claim the doctrine of the Spirit as well as of
the Father and of the Son.

16. Why, then, do you not accept every-
thing in the New Testament ? Is it because
the books have not the authority of Christ's
apostles, or because the apostles taught what
was wrong ? You reply that the books have
not the authority of the apostles. That the
apostles were wrong in their teaching is what
Pagans say. But what can you say to prove
that the publication of these books cannot
be traced to the apostles ? You reply that in
many things they contradict themselves and
one another. Nothing could be more untrue;
the fact is, you do not understand. In every
case where Faustus has brought forward what
you think a discrepancy, we have shown that
there was none; and we will do the same in
every other case. It is intolerable that the
reader or learner should dare to lay the blame
on Scriptures of such high authority, instead
of confessing his own stupidity.- Did the
Paraclete teach you that these writings are
not of the apostles' authorship, but written by
others under their names ? But where is the
proof that it was the Paraclete from whom
you learned this ? If you say that the Para-
clete was promised and sent by Christ, we re-
ply that your Paraclete was neither promised
nor sent by Christ; and we also show you
when He sent the Paraclete whom He prom-
ised. What proof have you that Christ sent
your Paraclete ? Where do you get the evi-
dence in support of your informant, or rather
misinformant ? You reply that you find the
proof in the Gospel. In what Gospel ? You
do not accept all the Gospel, and you say that
it has been tampered with. Will you first ac-
cuse your witness of corruption, and then call
for his evidence ? To believe him when you
wish it, and then disbelieve him when you
wish it, is to believe nobody but yourself. If
we were prepared to believe you, there would

3 Acts ii.

33^

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXXII.

be no need of a witness at all. Moreover, in
the promise of the Holy Spirit as the Para-
clete, it is said, " He shall lead you into all
truth; " ' but how can you be led into all truth
by one who teaches you that Christ was a de-
ceiver? And again, if you were to prove that
all that is said in the Gospel of the promise
of the Paraclete could apjjly to no one but
Manichjeus, as the predictions of the prophets
are applicable to Christ; and if you quoted
passages from those manuscripts which you
say are genuine, we might say that on this
very point, as proving Manichseus to be the
only person intended, the passages have been
altered in the interest of your sect. Your
only answer to this would be, that you could
not possibly alter documents already in the
possession of all Christians; for at the very
outset of such an attempt, it would be met by
an appeal to older copies. But if this proves
that the books could not be corrupted by you,
it also proves that they could not be corrupted
by any one. The first person who ventured
to do such a thing would be convicted by a
comparison of older manuscripts; especially
as the Scripture is to be found not in one lan-
guage only, but in many. As it is, false
readings are sometimes corrected by compar-
ing older copies or the original language.
Hence you must either acknowledge these
documents as genuine, and then- your heresy
cannot stand a moment; or if they are spuri-
ous, you cannot use their authority in support
of your doctrine of the Paraclete, and so you
refute yourselves.

17. Further, what is said in the promise of
the Paraclete shows that it cannot possibly
refer to Manichgeus, who came so many years
after. For it is distinctly said by John, that
the Holy Spirit was to come immediately after
the resurrection and ascension of the Lord:
" For the Spirit was not yet given, because
that Jesus was not yet glorified." =" Now, if
the reason why the Spirit was not given was,
that Jesus was not glorified, He would neces-
sarily be given immediately on the glorifica-
tion of Jesus. In the same way, the Cata-
phrygians^ said that they had received the
promised Paraclete; and so they fell away
from the Catholic faith, forbidding what Paul
allowed, and condemning second marriages,
which he made lawful. They turned to their
own use the words spoken of the Spirit, " He
shall lead you into all truth," as if, forsooth,
Paul and the other apostles had not taught all
the truth, but had left room for the Paraclete
of the Cataphrygians. The same

meanmg

I John xvi. 13. = John vii. 39.

3 [Another name for the Montanists, who arose in Phrygia
shortly after the middle of the second century. — A. H. N.]

tiiey forced from the words of Paul: "We
know in part, and we prophesy in part; but
when that which is perfect is come, then that
which is in part shall be done away; ''■' making
out that the apostle knew and prophesied in
part, when he said, " Let him do what he will;
if he marries, he sinneth not," ^ and that this
is done away by the perfection of the Phry-
gian Paraclete.^ And if they are told that
they are condemned by the authority of the
Church, which is the subject of such ancient
promises, and is spread all over the world,
they reply that this is in exact fulfillment of
what is said of the Paraclete, that the world
cannot receive Him.^ And are not those
passages, " He shall lead you into all truth,"
and, "When that which is perfect is come,
that which is in part shall be done away,"
and, "The world cannot receive Him," pre-
cisely those in which you find a prediction of
Manichseus? And so every heresy arising
under the name of the Paraclete will have the
boldness to make an equally plausible appli-
cation to itself of such texts. For there is
no heresy but will call itself the truth; and
the prouder it is, the more likely it will be to
call itself perfect truth: and so it will profess
to lead into all truth; and since that which is
perfect has come by it, it will try to do away
with the doctrine of the apostles, to which its
own errors are opposed. And as the Church
holds by the earnest admonition of the apos-
tle, that "whoever preaches another gospel
to you than that which ye have received, let
him be accursed;"^ when the heretical
preacher begins to be pronounced accursed
by all the world, will he not forthwith ex-
claim, This is what is written, "The world
cannot receive Him"?

18. Where, then, will you find the proof
required to show that it is from the Paraclete
that you have learned that the Gospels were
not written by the apostles ? On the other
hand, we have proof that the Holy Spirit,
the Paraclete, came immediately after the
glorification of Jesus. For " He was not yet
given, because that Jesus was not yet glori-
fied." We have proof also that He leads intc
all truth, for the only way to truth is by love,
and "the love of God," says the apostle,
" is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy
Ghost who is given unto us."' We show,
too, that in the words, *' when that which is
perfect is come," Paul spoke of the perfec-
tion in the enjoyment of eternal life. For in
^the same place he says: *' Now we see through
a glass darkly, but then face to face." " You

4 I Cor. xiii. g, n
7 John xiv. 17.
'o I Cor. xiii. 12.

5 I Cor. vii.
" (^al. !. 9.

(< Montanus.
9 Kom. V. 5.

Book XXXII. ]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.^^AN.

:.Q

cannot reasonably maintain that we see God
face to face here. Therefore that which is
perfect has not come to you. It is thus clear
what the apostle thought on this subject.
This perfection will not come to the saints till
the accomplishment of what John speaks of:
" Now we are the sons of God, and it doth
not yet appear what we shall be; but we know
that when it shall appear we shall be like Him,
for we shall see Him as He is." ' Then we
shall be led into all truth by the Holy Spirit,
of which we have now received the pledge.
Again, the words, " The world cannot receive
Him," plainly point to those who are usually
called the world in Scripture — the lovers of
the world, the wicked, or carnal; of whom
the apostle says: " The natural man perceiv-
eth not the things which are of the Spirit of
God."^ Those are said to be of this world
who can understand nothing beyond material
things, which are the objects of sense in this
world; as is the case with you, when, in your
admiration of the bun and moon, you suppose
all divine things to resemble them. Deceivers,
and being deceived, you call the author of
this silly theory the Paraclete. But as you
have no proof of his being the Paraclete, you
have no reliable ground for the statement that
the Gospel writings, which you receive only
in part, are not of apostolic authorship. Thus
your only remaining argument is, that these
writings contain things disparaging to the
glory of Christ; such as, that He was born of
a virgin, that He was circumcised, that the
customary sacrifice was offered for Him, that
He was baptized, that He was tempted of the
devil.

19. With those exceptions, including also
the testimonies quoted from the Old Testa-
ment, you profess, to use the words of Faus-
tus, to receive all the rest, especially the
mystic nailing to the cross, emblematic of the
wounds of the soul in its passion; as also
the sound moral precepts of Jesus, and the
whole of His immortal discourse, which sets
forth especially the distinction of the two
natures, and therefore must undoubtedly be
His. Your design clearly is to deprive Script-
ure of all authority, and to make every man's
mind the judge what passage of Scripture he
is to approve of, and what to disapprove of.
This is not to be subject to Scripture in
matters of faith, but to make Scripture sub-
ject to you. Instead of making the high
authority of Scripture the reason of approval,
every man makes his approval the reason for
thinking a passage correct. If, then, you
discard authority, to what, poor feeble soul.

John ;

darkened by the misls of carnality, to what, I
beseech you, will you betake yourself? Set
aside authority, and let us hear the reason of
your beliefs. Is it by a logical process that
your long story about the nature of God con-
cludes necessarily with this startling announce-
ment, that this nature is subject to injury and
corruption ? And how do you know that
there are eight continents and ten heavens,
and that Atlas bears up the world, and that it
hangs from the great world-holder, and in-
numerable things of the same kind ? Who is
your authority? Manichaeus, of course, you
will say. But, unhappy being, this is not
sight, but faith. If, then, you submit to re-
ceive a load of endless fictions at the bidding
of an obscure and irrational authority, so that
you believe all those things because they are
written in the books which your misguided
judgment pronounces trustworthy, though
there is no evidence of their truth, why not
rather submit to the authority of the Gospel,
which is so well founded, so confirmed, so
generally acknowledged and admired, and
which has an unbroken series of testimonies
from the apostles down to our own day, that
so you may have an intelligent belief, and
may come to know that all your objections
are the fruit of folly and perversity; and that
there is more truth in the opinion that the un-
changeable nature of God should take part of
mortality, so as, without injury to itself from
this union, to do and to suffer not feignedly,
but really, whatever it behoved the mortal
nature to do and to suffer for the salvation of
the human race from which it was taken, than
in the belief that the nature of God is subject
to injury and corruption, and that, after suf-
fering pollution and captivity, it cannot be
wholly freed and purified, but is condemned
by a supreme divine necessity to eternal pun-
ishment in the mass of darkness ?

20. You say, in reply, that you believe in
what Manichaeus has not proved, because he
has so clearly proved the existence of two
natures, good and evil, in this world. But
here is the very source of your unhappy de-
lusion; for as in the Gospels, so in the world,
your idea of what is evil is derived entirely
from the effect on your senses of such dis-
agreeable things as serpents, fire, poison, and
so on; and the only good you know of is what
has an agreeable effect on your senses, as
pleasant flavors, and sweet smells, and sun-
light, and whatever else recommends itself
strongly to your eyes, or your nostrils, or
your palate, or any other organ of sensation.
But had you begun with looking on the book
of nature as the production of the Creator of
all, and had you believed that your own finite

340

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXXIII.

understanding might be at fault wherever
anything seemed to be amiss, instead of ven-
turing to find fault with the works of God,
you would not have been led into these im-
pious follies and blasphemous fancies with
which, in your ignorance of what evil really
is, you heap all evils upon God.

21. We can now answer the question, how
we know that these books were written by the
apostles. In a word, we know this in the
same way that you know that the books
whose authority you are so deluded as to pre-
fer were written by Manichaus. For, sup-
pose some orte should raise a question on this
point, and should contend, in arguing with
you, that the books which you attribute to
Manichceus are not of his authorship; your
only reply would be, to ridicule the absurdity
of thus gratuitously calling in question a mat-
ter confirmed by successive testimonies of
such wide extent. As, then, it is certain that
these books are the production of Manichseus,
and as it is ridiculous in one born so many
years after to start objections of his own, and
so raise a discussion on the point; with equal
certainty may we pronounce it absurd, or
rather pitiable, in Manicha^us or his followers
to bring such objections against writings
originally well authenticated, and carefully
handed down from the times of the apostles
to our own day through a constant succession
of custodians.

22. We have now only to compare the au-
thority of Manichseus with that of the apos-
tles. The genuineness of the writings is
equally certain in both cases. But no one
will compare Manichaeus to the apostles, un-
less he ceases to be a follower of Christ, who
sent the apostles. Who that did not mis-
understand Christ's words ever fiound in them

the doctrine of two natures opposed to one
another, and having each its own principle ?
Again, the apostles, as becomes the disciples
of truth, declare the birth and passion of
Christ to have been real events; while Mani-
chaeus, who boasts that he leads into all truth,
would lead us to a Christ whose very passion
he declares to have been an illusion. The
apostles say that Christ was circumcised in the
flesh which He took of the seed of Abraham;
Manichaeus says that God, in his own nature,
was cut in pieces by the race of darkness.
The apostles say that a sacrifice was offered
for Christ as an infant in our nature, accord-
ing to the institutionsof the time; Manichaeus,
that a member, not of humanity, but of the
divine substance itself, must be sacrificed to
the whole host of demons by being introduced
into the nature of the hostile race. The
apostles say that Christ, to set us an example,
was baptized in the Jordan; Manichaeus, that
God immersed himself in the pollution of
darkness, and that he will never wholly
emerge, but that the part which cannot be
purified will be condemned to eternal punish-
ment. The apostles say that Christ, in our
nature, was tempted by the chief of the de-
mons; Manichaeus, that part of God was taken
captive by the race of demons. And in the
temptation of Christ He resists the tempter;
while in the captivity of God, the part taken
captive cannot be restored to its origin even
after victory. To conclude, Manichaeus,
under the guise of an improvement, preaches
another gospel, which is the doctrine of devils;
and the apostles, after the doctrine of Christ,
enjoin that whoever preaches another gospel
shall be accursed.'

I Gal. i. S.

BOOK XXXIII.

FAUSTUS DOES NOT THINK IT WOULD BE A GREAT HONOR TO SIT DOWN WITH ABRAHAM, ISAAC
AND JACOB, WHOSE MORAL CHARACTERS AS SET FORTH IN THE OLD TESTAMENT HE DETESTS.
HE JUSTIFIES HIS SUBJECTIVE CRITICISM OF SCRIPTURE. AUGUSTIN SUMS UP THE ARGUMENT,
CLAIMS THE VICTORY, AND EXHORTS THE MANICH^ANS TO ABANDON THEIR OPPOSITION TO
THE OLD TESTAMENT NOTWITHSTANDING THE DIFFICULTIES THAT IT PRESENTS, AND TO
RECOGNIZE THE AUTHORITY OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

I. Faustus said: You quote from the Gos-
pel the words, " Many shall come from the
east and the west, and shall sit down with
Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the king-
dom of heaven," ' and ask why we do not ac-

I Matt. viii. ii.

knowledge the patriarchs. Now, we should
be the last to grudge to any human being that
God should have compassion on him, and
bring him out of perdition to salvation. At
the same time, we should acknowledge in such
a case the clemency shown in this act of com-
passion, and not the merit of the person whose

Book XXXIII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.EAN.

341

life is undeniably blameworthy. Thus, in the
case of the Jewish fathers, Abraham, and
Isaac, and Jacob, who are mentioned by
Christ in this verse, supposing it to be gen-
uine, although they led wicked lives, as we
may learn from their descendant Moses, or
whoever was the author of the history called
Genesis, which describes their conduct as
having been most shocking and detestable;
we are ready to allow that they may, after all,
be in the kingdom of heaven, in the place
which they neither believed in, nor hoped for,
as is plain enough from their books. But
then it must be kept in mind that, as you
yourselves confess, if they did attain to what
is spoken of in this verse, it was something
very different from the nether dungeons of
woe to which their own deserts consigned
them, and that their deliverance was the work
of our Lord Christ, and the result of His
mystic passion. Who would grudge to the
thief on the cross that deliverance was granted
to him by the same Lord, and that Christ
said that on that very day he should be with
Him in the paradise of His Father ? ' Who is
so hard-hearted as to disapprove of this act
of benevolence ? Still, it does not follow that,
because Jesus pardoned a thief, we must ap-
prove of the habits and practices of thieves;
any more than of the publicans and harlots,
whose faults Jesus pardoned, declaring that
they would go into the kingdom of heaven
before those who behaved proudly.^ For,
when He acquitted the woman accused by the
Jews as sinful, and as having been caught in
adultery. He told her to sin no more.^ If,
then. He has done something of the same
kind in the case of Abraham, and Isaac, and
Jacob, all the praise is His; for such actions
towards souls are becoming in Him who mak-
eth His sun to rise upon the evil and upon the
good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the
unjust.^ One thing perplexes me in your
doctrine: why you limit your statements to
the fathers of the Jews, and are not of opinion
that the Gentile patriarchs had also a share in
this grace of our Redeemer; especially as the
Christian Church consists of their children
more than of the seed of Abraham, Isaac,
and Jacob. You will say that the Gentiles
worshipped idols, and the Jews the Almighty
God, and that therefore Jesus had regard
only to the Jews. It would seem from this
that the worship of the Almighty God- is the
sure way to hell, and that the Son must come
to the aid of the worshipper of the Father.
That is as you please. For my part, I am
ready to join you in the belief that the fathers

' Liiloe xxiii. 43.
3 John viii. 3-11.

2 >fatt. xxi. 31.
4 Matt. V. 45.

reached heaven, not by any merit of their
own, but by that divine mercy which is
stronger than sin.

2. However, there is a difificulty in deciding
as regards this verse too, whether the words
were really spoken to Christ, for there is a
discrepancy in the narratives. For while two
evangelists, Matthew and Luke, both alike
tell of the centurion whose servant was sick,
and to whom these words of Jesus are sup-
posed to have applied, that He had not seen
so great faith, no, not in Israel, as in this
man, though a Gentile and a Pagan, because
he said that he was not worthy that Jesus
should come under his roof, but wished Him
only to speak the word, and his servant should
be healed; Matthew alone adds that Jesus
went on to say, " Verily I say unto you, that
many shall come from the east and from the
west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and
Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven;
but the children of the kingdom shall be cast
into outer darkness. ' ' By the many who should
come are meant the Pagans, on account of
the centurion, in whom, although he was a
Gentile, so great faith was found; and the
children of the kingdom are the Jews, in
whom there was no faith found. Luke, again,
though he too mentions the occurrence in his
Gospel as part of the narrative of the miracles
of Christ, says nothing of Abraham, Isaac,
and Jacob. If it is said that he omitted it
because it had been already said by Matthew,
why does he tell the story at all of tke cen-
turion and his servant, since that, too, has the
advantage of being recorded at length in
Matthew's ingenious narrative ? But the pas-
sage is corrupt. For, in describing the cen-
turion's application to Jesus, Matthew says
that he came himself to ask for a cure; while
Luke says he did not, but sent elders of the
Jews, and that they, in case Jesus should de-
spise the centurion as a Gentile (for they will
have Jesus to be a thorough Jew), set about
persuading Him, by saying that he was worthy
for whom He should do this, because he
loved their nation, and had built them a syna-
gogue ;5 here again taking for granted that
the Son of God was concerned in a pagan
centurion having thought it proper to build
a synagogue for the Jews. The words in
question are, indeed, found in Luke also,
perhaps because on reflection he thought they
might be genuine; but they are found in an-
other place, and in a connection altogether
different. The passage is where Jesus says
to His disciples, "Strive to enter in at the
strait gate; for many shall come seeking to

5 Matt. viii. 5-13; Luke vii. 2-ia,

142

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXXIII.

enter in, and shall not be able. When once
the Master of the house has entered in, and
has shut to the door, ye shall begin to stand
without, and to knock, saying Lord, open to
us. And He shall answer and say, I know
you not. Then ye shall begin to say, We
have eaten and drunk in Thy presence, and
Thou hast taught in our streets and syna-
gogues; but He shall say unto you, I know
not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye
workers of iniquity. There shall be weeping
and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see
Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the
prophets, entering into the kingdom of God,
and you yourselves cast out. And they shall
come from the east, and from the west, and
from the north, and from the south, and shall
sit down in the kingdom of God."' The
part where it is said that many shall be shut
out of the kingdom of God, who have only
borne the name of Christ, without doing His
works, is not left out by Matthew; but he
makes no mention here of Abraham, and
Isaac, and Jacob. In the same way, Luke
mentions the centurion and his servant, with-
out alluding in that connection to Abraham,
and Isaac, and Jacob. Since it is uncertain
when the words were spoken, we are at liberty
to doubt whether they were spoken at all.

3. It is not without reason that we bring a
critical judgment to the study of Scriptures
where there are such discrepancies and con-
tradictions. By thus examining everything,
and comparing one passage with another, we
determine which contains Christ's actual
words, and what may or may not be genuine.
For your predecessors have made many in-
terpolations in the words of our Lord, which
thus appear under His name, while they dis-
agree with His doctrine. Besides, as we have
proved again and again, the writings are not
the production of Christ or of His apostles,
but a compilation of rumors and beliefs,
made, long after their departure, by some
obscure semi-Jews, not in harmony even with
one another, and published by them under
the name of the apostles, or of those con-
sidered the followers of the apostles, so as to
give the appearance of apostolic authority to
all these blunders and falsehoods. But what-
ever you make of that, as regards this verse,
I repeat that I do not insist on rejecting it.
It is enough for my position, that, as I said
be-fore, and as you are obliged to confess,
befere the coming of our Lord all the patri-
archs and prophets of Israel lay in infernal
darkness for their sins. Even though they
may have been restored to light and liberty

• Luke xiii. 24-29.

by Chdst, that has nothing to do with the
hateful character of their lives. We hate and
eschew not their persons, but their characters;
not as they are now, when they are purified,
but as they were, when impure. So, what-
ever you think of this verse, it does not affect

us: for if it

is genume, it only illustrates

Christ's goodness and compassion; and if it
is spurious, those who wrote it are to blame.
Our cause is as safe as it always is.

4. AuGUSTix replied: Poor safety, indeed!
when you contradict yourself by hating the
patriarchs as impure, at the same time that
you grieve for your impure god. You allow
that, since the advent of the Saviour, the
patriarchs have had purity restored, and have
enjoyed the rest of the blessed; while your
god, even after the Saviour's advent, still lies
in darkness, is still sunk in the ocean of in-
iquity, still wallows in the mire of all un-
cleanness. These men, therefore, were not
only better than your god in their lives, but
also happier in their death. Where was the
abode of the just who departed from this life
before Christ's coming in the flesh, and
whether their condition also was improved
by the passion of Christ, in whom they had
believed as to come, and to suffer, and to rise
again, and had, moreover, foretold this in
suitable language under the guidance of the
Spirit of prophecy, is to be discovered from
the Holy Scriptures, if any clear discovery in
this matter is possible; we are not called on
to adopt the crude notions of all and sundry,
still less the heretical opinions of men wno have
gone astray into such egregious error. There is
a vain attempt here on the part of Faustus to
introduce by a side-door the idea that we may
obtain something after this life besides the
due reward of our conduct in this life. It
will be better for you to abandon your error
while you are still alive, and to embrace and
hold the truths of the Catholic faith. Other-
wise the expectations of the unrighteous will
be sadly disappointed when God begins to
fulfill His threatenings to the unrighteous.

5. I have already given what I considered
a sufficient answer to Faustus' calumnies of
the lives of the patriarchs. That they were
punished at their death, or that they were
justified after the Lord's passion, is not what
we learn from His commendation of them,
when He admonished the Jews that, if they
were Abraham's children, they should do the
works of Abraham, and said that Abraham
desired to see His day, and was glad when
he saw it; ^ and that it wa^ into his bosom,
that is, some deep recess of blissful repose,

= John viii. 39, 56.

Book XXXIII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.

343

that the angels carried the poor sufferer who
was despised by the proud rich man.' And
what are we to make of the Apostle Paul ?
Is there any idea of justification after death
in his praise of Abraham, when he says that
before he was circumcised he believed God,
and that it was counted to him for righteous-
ness?^ And so much importance does he
attach to this, that the single ground which
he specifies for our becoming Abraham's
children, though not descended from him in
the flesh, is, that we follow the footsteps of
liis faith.

6. You are so hardened in your errors
against the testimonies of Scripture, that
nothing can be made of you; for whenever
anything is quoted against you, you have the
boldness to say that it is written not by the
apostle, but by some pretender under his
name. The doctrine of demons which you
preach is so opposed to Christian doctrine,
that you could not continue, as professing
Christians, to maintain it, unless you denied
the truth of the apostolic writings. How can
you thus do injury to your own souls ? Where
will you find any authority, if not in the Gos-
pel and apostolic writings ? How can we be
sure of the authorship of any book, if we
doubt the apostolic origin of those books
which are attributed to the apostles by the
Church which the apostles themselves founded,
and which occupies so conspicuous a place in
all lands, and if at the same time we ac-
knowledge as the undoubted production of
the apostles what is brought forward by here-
tics in opposition to the Church, whose au-
thors, from whom they derive their name,
lived long after the apostles ? And do we not
see in profane literature that there are well-
known authors under whose names many
things have been published after their time
which have been rejected, either from incon-
sistency with their ascertained writings, or
from their not having been known in the life-
time of the authors, so as to be handed down
with the confirmatory statement of the authors
themselves, or of their friends ? To give a
single example, were not some books pub-
lished lately under the name of the distin-
guished physician Hippocrates, which were
not received as authoritative by physicians ?
And this decision remained unaltered in spite
of some similarity in style and matter: for,
when compared to the genuine writings of
Hippocrates, these books were found to be
inferior; besides that they were not recog-
nized as his at the time when his authorship
of his genuine productions was ascertained.

' Luke xvi. 23.

Rom. iv. 3.

Those books, again, from a comparison with
which the productions of questionable origin
were rejected, are with certainty attributed to
Hippocrates; and any one who denies their
authorship is answered only by ridicule, sim-
ply because there is a succession of testi-
monies to the books from the time of Hij)-
pocrates to the present day, which makes it
unreasonable either now or hereafter to have
any doubt on the subject. How do we know
the authorship of the works of Plato, Aris-
totle, Cicero, Varro, and other similar writers,
but by the unbroken chain of evidence ? So
also with the numerous commentaries on the
ecclesiastical books, which have no canonical
authority, and yet show a desire of usefulness
and a spirit of inquiry. How is the author-
ship ascertained in each case, except by the
author's having brought his work into public
notice as much as possible in his own lifetime,
and, by the transmission of the information
from one to another in continuous order, the
belief becoming more certain as it becomes
more general, up to our own day; so that,
when we are questioned as to the authorship
of any book, we have no difficulty in answer-
ing? But why speak of old books? Take
the books now before us: should any one,
after some years, deny that this boek was
written by me, or that Faustus' was written
by him, where is evidence for the fact to be
found but in the information possessed by
some at the present time, and transmitted by
them through successive generations even to
distant times ? From all this it follows, that
no one who has not yielded to the malicious
and deceitful suggestions of lying devils, can
be so blinded by passion as to deny the ability
of the Church of the apostles — a community
of brethren as numerous as they were faith-
ful— to transmit their writings unaltered to
posterity, as the original seats of the apostles
have been occupied by a continuous succes-
sion of bishops to the present day, especially
when we are accustomed to see this happen
in the case of ordinary writings both in the
Church and out of it.

7. But Faustus finds contradictions in the
Gospels. Say, rather, that Faustus reads the
Gospels in a wrong spirit, that he is too fool-
ish to understand, and too blind to see. If
you were animated with piety instead of being
misled by party spirit, you might easily, by
examining these passages, discover a wonder-
ful and most instructive harmony among the
writers. Who, in reading two narratives of
the same event, would think of charging one
or both of the authors with error or false-
hood, because one omits what the other men-
tions, or one tells concisely, but with sub-

344

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book XXXIIL

stantial agreement, what the other relates in
detail, so as to indicate not only what was
done, but also how it was done ? This is
what Faustus does in his attempt to impeach
the truth of the Gospels; as if Luke's omit-
ting some saying of Christ recorded in Mat-
thew implied a denial on the part of Luke of
Matthew's statement. There is no real diffi-
cult}'^ in the case; and to make a difficulty
shows want of thought, or of the ability to
think. There is, indeed, a point in the narra-
tive of the centurion which is discussed among
believers, and on which objections are raised
by unbelievers of no great learning, who
prove their quarrelsomeness, when, after
being instructed, they do not give up their
errors. The point is, that Matthew says that
the centurion came to Jesus "beseeching
Him, and saying; " while Luke says that he
sent to Jesus the elders of the Jews with this
same request, that He would heal his servant
who was sick; and that when He came near
the house he sent others, through whom he
said that he was not worthy that Jesus should
come into his house, and that he was not
worthy to come himself to Jesus. How, then,
do we read in Matthew, " He came to Him,
beseeching Him, and saying, My servant lieth
at home sick of the palsy, and grievously tor-
mented ?" ' The explanation is, that Mat-
thew's narrative is correct, but brief, mention-
ing the centurion's coming to Jesus, without
saying whether he came himself or by others,
or whether the words about his servant were
spoken by himself or through others. But is
it not common to speak of a person as com-
ing near to a thing, although he may not reach
it ? And even the word reach, which is the
strongest form of expression, is frequently
used in cases where the person spoken of acts
through others, as when we say he took his
case to court, he reached the presence of the
judge; or, again, he reached the presence of
some man in power, although it may proba-
bly have been through his friends, and the
person may not have seen him whose pres-
ence he is said to have reached. And from
the word for to reach we give the name of
Perventors to those who by ambitious arts
gain access, either personally or through
friends, to the, so to speak, inaccessible
minds of the great. Are we, then, in read-
ing to forget the common usage of speech ?
Or must the sacred Scripture have a language
of its own ? The cavils of forward critics are
thus met by a reference to the usual forms of
speech.

8. Those who examine this matter not in a

J Matt. viii. 5-13; Luke vii. 2-10.

disputatious but in a calm believing spirit are
invited to come to Jesus, not outwardly but
in heart, not in bodily presence but in the
power of faith, as the centurion did, and then
they will better understand Matthew's narra-
tive. To such it is said in the Psalm " Come
unto Him, and be enlightened; and your
faces shall not be ashamed." = Hence we
learn that the centurion, whose faith was so
highly spoken of, came to Christ more truly
than the people who carried his message. We
find an analogous case in the woman with the
issue of blood, who was healed by touching
the hem of Christ's garment, when Christ
said, "Some one hath touched me." The
disciples wondered what Christ meant by
saying, "Who hath touched me?" *'Some
one hath touched me,'' when the crowd was
thronging Him. In fact, they made this re-
ply: " The crowd throngeth Thee, and sayest
Thou, Who hath touched me ? " ^ Now, as
the people thronged Christ while the woman
touched Him, so the messengers were sent to
Christ, but the centurion really came to Him.
In Matthew we have a not infrequent form of
expression, and at the same time a symbolical
import; while in Luke there is a simple narra-
tive of the whole event, such as to draw our
attention to the manner in which Matthew has
recorded it. I wish one of those people who
found their silly objections to the Gospels on
such trifling difficulties would himself tell a
story twice over, honestly giving a true ac-
count of what happened, and that his words
were written down and read over to him. We
should then see whether he would not say
more or less at one time than at another; and
whether the order would not be changed, not
only of words, but of things; and whether he
would not put some opinion of his own into
the mouth of another, because, though he
never heard him say it, he knew it perfectly
well to be in his mind; and whether he would
not sometimes put in a few words what he
had before related at length. In these and
other ways, which might perhaps be reduced
to rule, the narratives of the same thing by
two persons, or two narratives by the same
person, might differ in many things without
being opposed, might be unlike without being
contradictory. Thus are undone all the
bandages with which poor Manichaeans stifle
themselves to keep in the spirit of error, and
to keep out all that might lead to their salva-
tion.

9. Now that all Faustus' calumnies have
been refuted, those at least on the subjects
here treated of at large and explained fully

= Ps. XX

3 Luke \'iil. 43, 46.

Book XXXIII.]

REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.EAN.

345

as the Lord has enabled me, I close with a
word of counsel to you who are implicated in
those shocking and damnable errors, that, if
vou acknowledge the supreme authority of
Scripture, you should recognise that authority
which from the time of Christ Himself,
through the ministry of His apostles, and
through a regular succession of bishops in the
seats of the apostles, has been preserved to
our own day throughout the whole world, with
a reputation known to all. There the Old
Testament too has its difficulties solved, and
its predictions fulfilled. If you ask for de-
monstration, consider first what you are, how

unfit for comprehending the nature of your
own soul, not to speak of God; I mean an
intelligent comprehension, such as you pro-
fess to desire, or to have once desired, and
I not the notions of a credulous fancy. Ad-
I mitting this incompetency, which must con-
I tinue while you remain as you are, you may
at least be referred to the natural conviction
of every human mind, unless it is corrupted
by error, of the perfect unchangeableness and
incorruptibility of the nature and substance
of God. Admit this, or believe it, and you
will no longer be ^Nlanichsans, so that in
, course of time you may become Catholics.

ST. AUGUSTIN:

CONCERNING THE NATURE OF GOOD,
AGAINST THE MANICH^ANS.

[DE NATURA BONI CONTRA MANICH.-EOS.]

CIRCA A.D. 495.

TRANSLATED BY

ALBERT H. NEWMAN, D.D., LL.D.,

PROFESSOR OF CHURCH HISTORY AND COMPARATIVE RELIGION, IN TORONTO
BAPTIST (theological) COLLEGE, TORONTO, CANADA.

CONTENTS ON CONCERNING THE NATURE OF GOOD.

Chap. I. — God the highest and unchangeable good, from whom are all other good things, spiritual and

corporeal 351

Chap. II. — How this may suffice for correcting the Manichceans 351

Chap. III. — Measure, form and order, generic goods in things made by God 352

Chap. IV. — Evil is corruption of measure, form or order 352

Chap. V. — The corrupted nature of a more excellent order sometimes better than an inferior nature

even uncorrupted. 352

Chap. VI. — Nature which cannot be corrupted is the highest good ; that which can, is some good. . 352

Chap. VII. — The corruption of rational spirits is on the one hand voluntary, on the other penal. . . 352

Chap. VIII. — From the corruption and destruction of inferior things is the beauty of the universe. . 352

Chap. IX. — Punishment is constituted for the sinning nature that it may be rightly ordered. . . . 353

Chap. X. — Natures corruptible, because made of nothing 353

Chap. XI. — God cannot suffer harm, nor can any other nature, except by his permission 353

Chap. XII. — All good things are from God alone 353

Ch.\p. XIII. — Individual good things, whether small or great, are from God 353

Ch.\p. XIV. — Small good things in comparison with greater are called by contrary names 353

Chap. XV. — In the body of the ape the good of beauty is present, though in a less degree. . . . 354

Chap. XVI. — Privations in things are fittingly ordered by God 354

Chap. XVII. — Nature, in as far as it is nature, no evil 354

Chap. XVfll. — Hyle, which was called by the ancients the formless material of things, is not an evil. 354

Ch.ap. XIX. — To have true existence is an exclusive prerogative of God 354

Chap. XX. — Pain only in good natures 355

Chap. XXI. — From measure things are said to be moderate-sized 355

Chap. XXII. — Measure in some things is suitable to God himself 355

Chap. XXIII. — Whence a bad measure, a bad form, a bad order may sometimes be spoken of. . . . 355
Chap. XXIV. — It is proved by the testimonies of Scripture that God is unchangeable. The Son of

God begotten, not made 356

Chap. XXV. — This last expression misunderstood by some. . , 356

Chap. XXVI. — That creatures are made of nothing 356

Chap. XXVII. — "From Him" and "of Him " do not mean the same thing 357

Chap. XXVIII. — Sin not from God, but from the will of those sinning 357

Chap. XXIX. — That God is not defiled by our sins 357

Chap. XXX. — That good things, even the least, and those that are earthly, are by God 357

Chap. XXXI. — To punish and to forgive sins belong equally to God 357

Chap. XXXII. — From God also is the very power to be hurtful 358

Chap. XXXIII. — That evil angels have been made evil, not by God, but by sinning 358

350 CONTENTS ON CONCERNING THE NATURE OF GOOD.

PAGE

Chap. XXXIV. — That sin is not the striving for an evil nature, but the desertion of a better. . . . 35S
Chap. XXXV. — The tree was forbidden to Adam not because it was evil, but because it was good for

man to be subject to God 35S

Chap. XXXVI. — No creature of God is evil, but to abuse a creature of God is evil 359

Chap. XXXVII. — God makes good use of the evil deeds of sinners 35g

Chap. XXXVIII. — Eternal fire torturing the wicked, not evil 35g

Chap. XXXIX. — Fire is called eternal, not as God is, but because without end 359

Chap. XL. — Neither can God suffer hurt, nor any other, save by the just ordination of God. . . . 359
Chap. XLI. — How great good things the Manichseans put in the nature of evil, and how great evil

things in the nature of good 359

Chap. XLII. — Manichsean blasphemies concerning the nature of God 360

Chap. XLIII. — Many evils before his commingling with evil are attributed to the nature of God by the

Manichseans 361

Chap. XLIV. — Incredible turpitudes in God imagined by Manichgeus 362

Chap. XLV. — Certain unspeakable turpitudes believed, not without reason, concerning the Mani-

chseans themselves 363

Chap. XLVI. — The unspeakable doctrine of the fundamental epistle 363

Chap. XLVII. — He compels to the perpetration of horrible turpitudes 364

Chap. XLVIII. — Augustin prays that the Manichseans may be restored to their senses 364

CONCERNING THE NATURE OF GOOD,
AGAINST THE MANICH^ANS.

[DE NATURA BONI CONTRA MANICH^EOS.] c. A.D. 405.

IN ONE BOOK,

Written after the year 404. It is put in the Retractations immediately after the De Actis
cum Felice Manich'xo, which was written about the end of the year 404. It is one of the
most argfumentative of the Anti-Manichaean treatises, and so one of the most abstruse
and difficult. The lines of argument here pursued have already been employed in part in
tiie earlier treatises. The most interesting portions of the contents of the treatise, and the
most damaging to the Manichaeans, are the long extracts from Mani's Thesaurus, and
\\\% Fundamental Epistle. — A. H. N.

CHAP. I. GOD THE HIGHEST AND UNCHANGE-
ABLE GOOD, FROM W'HOM ARE ALL OTHER
GOOD THINGS, SPIRITUAL AND CORPOREAL.

The highest good, than which there is no
higher, is God, and consequently He is un-
changeable good, hence truly eternal and truly
immortal. All other good things are only
from Him, not of Him. For what is of Him,
is Himself. And consequently if He alone
is unchangeable, all things that He has made,
because He has made them out of nothing,
are changeable. For He is so omnipotent,
that even out of nothing, that is out of what
is absolutely non-existent, He is able to make
good things both great and small, both ce-
lestial and terrestrial, both spiritual and
corporeal. But because He is also just, He
has not put those things that He has made
out of nothing on an equality with that which
He begat out of Himself. Because, there-
fore, no good things whether great or small,
through whatever gradations of things, can
exist except from God; but since every na-
ture, so far as it is nature, is good, it follows
that no nature can exist save frym the most
high and true God; because all things even

not in the highest degree good, but related to
the highest good, and again, because all good
things, even those of most recent origin, which
are far from the highest good, can have their
existence only from the highest good. There-
fore every spirit, though subject to change,
and every corporeal entity, is from God, and
all this, having been made, is nature. For
every nature is either spirit or body. Un-
changeable spirit is God, changeable spirit,
having been made, is nature, but is better
than body; but body is not spirit, unless when
the wind, because it is invisible to us and yet
its power is felt as something not inconsid-
erable, is in a certain sense called spirit.

CHAP. 2. — HOW THIS MAY SUFFICE FOR COR-
RECTING THE MANICH.EANS.

But for the sake of those who, not being
able to understand that all nature, that is,
every spirit and every body, is naturally good,
are moved by the iniquity of spirit and the
mortality of body, and on this account en-
deavor to bring in another nature of wicked
spirit and mortal body, which God did not
make, we determine thus to bring to their

33-

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. VIII.

understanding what we say can be brought.
For they acknowledge that no good thing can
exist save from the highest and true God,
which also is true and suffices for correcting
them, if they are willing to give heed.

CHAP. 3. — MEASURE, FORM, AND ORDER, GENE-
RIC GOODS IN THINGS MADE BY GOD.

For we Catholic Christians worship God,
from whom are all good things whether great
or small; from whom is all measure great or
small; from whom is all form great or small;
from whom is all order great or small. For
all things in proportion as they are better
measured, formed, and ordered, are assuredly
good in a higher degree; but in proportion
as they are measured, formed, and ordered
in an inferior degree, are they the less good.
These three things, therefore, measure, form,
and order, — not to speak of innumerable other
things that are shown to pertain to these
three, — these three things, therefore, m.eas-
ure, form, order, are as it were generic goods
in things made by God, whether in spirit or in
body. God is, therefore, above every meas-
ure of the creature, above every form, above
every order, nor is He above by local spaces,
but by ineffable and singular potency, from
whom is every measure, every form, every
order. These three things, where they are
great, are great goods, where they are small,
are small goods; where they are absent, there
is no good. And again where these things
are great, there are great natures, where they
are small, there are small natures, where
they are absent, there is no nature. Therefore
all nature is good.

CHAP. 4. — EVIL IS CORRUPTION OF MEASURE,
FORM, OR ORDER.

When accordingly it is inquired, whence is
evil, it must first be inquired, what is evil,
which is nothing else than corruption, either
of the measure, or the form, or the order, that
belong to nature. Nature therefore which
has been corrupted, is called evil, for assured-
ly when incorrupt it is good; but even when
corrupt, so far as it is nature it is good, so
far as it is corrupted it is evil.

CHAP. 5. — THE CORRUPTED NATURE OF A MORE
EXCELLENT ORDER SOMETIMES BETTER THAN
AN INFERIOR NATURE EVEN UNCORRUPTED.

But it may happen, that a certain nature
which has been ranked as more excellent by
reason of natural measure and form, though
corrupt, is even yet better than another in-
corrupt which has been ranked lower by rea-
son of an inferior natural measure and form;

as in the estimation of men, according to the
quality which presents itself to view, corrupt
gold is assuredly better than incorrupt sil-
ver, and corrupt silver than incorrupt lead;
so also in more powerful spiritual natures a
rational spirit even corrupted through an evil
will is better than an irrational though incor-
rupt, and better is any spirit whatever even
corrupt than any body whatever though in-
corrupt. For better is a nature which, when
it is present in a body, furnishes it with life,
than that to which life is furnished. But
however corrupt may be the spirit of life that
has been made, it can furnish life to a body,
and hence, though corrupt, it is better than
the body though incorrupt.

CHAP. 6. — NATURE WHICH CANNOT BE COR-
RUPTED IS THE HIGHEST GOOD ; THAT WHICH
CAN, IS SOME GOOD.

But if corruption take away all measure, al!
form, all order from corruptible things, no na-
ture will remain. And consequently every
nature which cannot be corrupted is the high-
est good, as is God. But every nature thai
can be corrupted is also itself some good; for
corruption cannot injure it, except by taking,
away from or diminishing that which is good.

CHAP. 7. — THE CORRUPTION OF RATIONAL
SPIRITS IS ON THE ONE HAND VOLUNTARY,
ON THE OTHER PENAL.

But to the most excellent creatures, that is,
to rational spirits, God has oft'ered this, that
if they will not they cannot be corrupted;
that is, if they should maintain obedience
under the Lord their God, so should they ad-
here to his incorruptible beauty; but if they
do not will to maintain obedience, since will-
ingly they are corrupted in sins, unwillingly
they shall be corrupted in punishment, since
God is such a good that it is well for no one
who deserts Him, and among the things made
by God the rational nature is so great a good,
that there is no good by which it may be
blessed except God. Sinners, therefore, are
ordained to punishment; which ordination is
punishment for the reason that it is not con-
formable to their nature, but it is justice be-
cause it is conformable to their fault.

CHAP. 8. FROM THE CORRUPTION AND DE-
STRUCTION OF INFERIOR THINGS IS THE
BEAUTY OF THE UNIVERSE.

But the rest of things that are made of
nothing, which are assuredly inferior to the
rational soul, can be neither blessed nor mis-
erable. But because in proportion to their
fashion and appearance are things themselves

Chap. XIV.] NATURE OF GOOD, AGAINST THE MANICH.ilANS.

oO J

good, nor could there be good things in a less
or the least degree except from God, they
are so ordered that the more infirm yield to
the firmer, the weaker to the stronger, the
more impotent to the more powerful; and so
earthly things harmonize with celestial, as
being subject to the things that are pre-emi-
nent. But to things falling away, and suc-
ceeding, a certain temporal beauty in its kind
belongs, so that neither those things that die,
or cease to be what they were, degrade or
disturb the fashion and appearance and order
of the universal creation; as a speech well
composed is assuredly beautiful, although in
it syllables and all sounds rush past as it were
in being born and in dying.

CHAP. 9. — PUNISHMENT IS CONSTITUTED FOR
THE SINNING NATURE THAT IT MAY BE
RIGHTLY ORDERED.

What sort of punishment, and how great, is
due to each fault, belongs to Divine judgment,
not to human; which punishment assuredly
when it is remitted in the case of the converted,
there is great goodness on the part of God,
and when it is deservedly inflicted, there is
I no injustice on the part of God; because na-
' ture is better ordered by justly smarting under
I punishment, than by rejoicing with impunity
I in sin; which nature nevertheless, even thus
having some measure, form, and order, in
; whatever extremity there is as 3^et some good,
which things, if they were absolutely taken
j away, and utterly consumed, there will be ac-
cordingly no good, because no nature will re-
main.

HAP. 10. — NATURES CORRUPTIBLE, BECAUSE
MADE OF NOTHING.

All corruptible natures therefore are natures
j at all only so far as they are from God, nor
I would they be corruptible if they were of
I Him; because they would be what He him-
self is. Therefore of whatever measure, of
whatever form, of whatever order, they are,
' they are so because it is God by whom they
were made; but they are not immutable, be-
' I use it is nothing of which they were made.
I or it is sacrilegious audacity to make nothing
Mid God equal, as when we wish to make what
as been born of God such as what has been
lade by Him out of nothing.

I I HAP. II. GOD CANNOT SUFFER HARM, NOR

CAN ANY OTHER NATURE EXCEPT BY HIS
PERMISSION.

Wherefore neither can God's nature suffer

arm, nor can any nature under God suffer

n.'irm unjustlv: for when by sinning unjustly

','3

some do harm, an unjust will is imputed to
them; but the power by which they are per-
mitted to do harm is from God alone, who
knows, while they themselves are ignorant ,
what they ought to suffer, whom He permits
them to harm.

CHAP. 12. — ALL GOOD THINGS ARE FROM GOD

ALONE.

All these things are so perspicuous, so as-
sured, that if they who introduce another na-
ture which God did not make, were willing to
give attention, they would not be filled with
so great blasphemies, as that they should
place so great good things in supreme evil,
and so great evil things in God. For what
the truth compels them to acknowledge,
namely, that all good things are from God
alone, suffices for their correction, if they
were willing to give heed, as I said above.
Not, thei^fore, are great good things from
one, and small good things from another;
but good things great and small are from the
supremely good alone, which is God.

CHAP. 13. INDIVIDUAL GOOD THINGS, WHETH-
ER S:^IALL OR GREAT, ARE FROM GOD.

Let us, therefore, bring before our minds
good things however great, which it is fitting
that we attribute to God as their author, and
these having been eliminated let us see
whether any nature will remain. All life both
great and small, all power great and small,
all safety great and small, all memory great
and small, all virtue great and small, all in-
tellect great and small, all tranquillity great
and small, all plenty great and small, all sen-
sation great and small, all light great and
small, all suavity' great and small, all measure
great and small, all beauty great and small,
all peace great and small, and whatever other
like things may occur, especially such as are
found throughout all things, whether spiritual
or corporeal, every measure, every form,
Cv'ery order both great and small, are from the
Lord God. All which good things whoever
should wish to abuse, pays the penalty by
divine judgment; but where none of these
things shall have been present at all, no nature
will remain.

CHAP. 14, — SMALL GOOD THINGS IN COMPARI-
SON WITH GREATER ARE CALLED BY CONTRA-
RY NAiMES.

But in all these things, whatever are small
are called by contrary names in comparison
with greater things; as in the form of a man

' Or sanity, accordin; to another rcjdinj. — A. H. N.

354

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XIX.

because the beauty is greater, the beauty of
the ape in comparison with it is called de-
formity. And the imprudent are deceived,
as if the former is good, and the latter evil,
nor do they regard in the body of the ape its
own fashion, the equality of members on both
sides, the agreement of parts, the protection
of safety, and other things which it would be
tedious to enumerate.

CHAP. 15. — IN THE BODY OF THE APE THE
GOOD OF BEAUTY IS PRESENT, THOUGH IN A
LESS DEGREE.

But that what we have said may be under-
stood, and may satisfy those too slow of com-
prehension, or that even the pertinacious and
those repugnant to the most manifest truth
may be compelled to confess what is true, let
them be asked, whether corruption can harm
the body of an ape ? But if it can, so that it
may become more hideous, what ^jminishes
but the good of beauty ? Whence as long as
the nature of the body subsists, so long some-
thing will remain. If, accordingly, good
having been consumed, nature is consumed,
the nature is therefore good. So also we say
that slow is contrary to swift, but yet he who
does not move at all cannot even be called
slow. So we say that a heavy voice is con-
trary to a sharp voice, or a harsh to a musi-
cal; but if you completely remove any kind
of voice, there is silence where there is no
voice, which silence, nevertheless, for the sim-
ple reason that there is no voice, is usually
opposed to voice as something contrary there-
to. So also lucid and obscure are called as it
were two contrary things, yet even obscure
things have something of light, which being
absolutely wanting, darkness is the absence
of light in the same way in which silence is
the absence of voice.

CHAP. 16. — PRIVATIONS IN THINGS ARE FIT-
TINGLY ORDERED BY GOD.

Yet even these privations of things are so
ordered in the universe of nature, that to
those wisely considering they not unfittingly
have their vicissitudes. For by not illumin-
ating certain places and times, God has also
made the darkness as fittingly as the day.
For if we by restraining the voice fittingly in-
terpose silence in speaking, how much more
does He, as the perfect framer of all things,
fittingly make privations of things ? Whence
also in the hymn of the three children, light
and darkness alike praise God,' that is, bring
forth praise in the hearts of those who well
consider.

' Pan. ill.

CHAP. 17. NATURE, IN AS FAR AS IT IS NA-

TURE, NO KVIL.

No nature, therefore, as far as it is nature,
is evil; but to each nature there is no evil ex-
cept to be diminished in respect of good.
But ii by being diminished it should be con-
sumed so that there is no good, no nature
would be left; not only such as the Mani-
chseans introduce, where so great good things f^
are found that their exceeding blindness is
wonderful, but such as any one can intro-
duce.

CHAP. 18. — ^HYLEj WJilCH WAS CALLED BY THE
ANCIENTS THE FORMLESS MATERIAL OF
THINGS, IS NOT AN EVIL.

For neither is that material, which the an-
cients called Ifj^e, to be called an evil. I do
not say that which Manichceus with most sense-
less vanity, not knowing what he says, de-
nominates Hv/e, namely, the former of cor-
poreal beings; whence it is rightly said to
him, that he introduces another god. For
nobody can form and create corporeal beings
but God alone; for neither are they created
unless there subsist with them measure^Torm,
and order, which I think that now even they
themselves confess to be good things, and
things that cannot be except from God. But
by Ify/e I mean a certain material absolutely
formless and without quality, whence those
qualities that we perceive are formed, as the
ancients said. For hence also wood is called
in Greek uXtj, because it is adapted to work-
men, not that itself may make anything, but
that it is the material of which something
may be made. Nor is that Hyle, therefore,
to be called an evil which cannot be perceived
through any appearance, but can scarcely be
thought of through any sort of privation of
appearance. For this has also a capacity of
forms; for if it cannot receive the form im.-
posed by the workman, neither assuredly may
it be called material. Hence if form is some
good, whence those who excel in it are called
beautiful,^ as from appearance they are called
handsome, 3 even the capacity of form is un-
doubtedly something good. As because wis-
dom is a good, no one doubts that to be capa-
ble of wisdom is a good. And because every
good is from God, no one ought to doubt that
even matter, if there is any, has its existence
from God alone.

CHAP. 19. TO HAVE TRUE EXISTENCE IS AN

EXCLUSIVE PREROGATIVE OF GOD.

Magnificently and divinely, therefore, our
God said to his servant: " I am that I am,''

' Forina^/ortiiosus.

3 Sl'ecies — speciosus.

Chai.. XXIII.] NATURE OF GOOD, AGAINST THE MANICH^ANS.

o:)D

and " Thou shalt say to the children of Israel,
He who is sent me to you." ' For He truly
is because He is unchangeable. For every
change makes what was not, to be: therefore
He truly is, who is unchangeable; but all
other things that were made by Him have re-
ceived being form Him each in its own meas-
ure. To Him who is highest, therefore,
nothing can be contrary, save what is not;
and consequently as from Him everything
that is good has its being, so from Him is
everything that by nature exists; since every-
thing that exists by nature is good. Thus
every nature is good, and everytliing good is
from God; therefore every nature is from God.

CHAP. 20. PAIN ONLY IN GOOD NATURES.

But pain which some suppose to be in an
especial manner an evil, whether it be in
mind or in body, cannot exist except in good
natures. For the very fact of resistance in
any being leading to pain, involves a re-
fusal not to be what it was, because it was
something good; but when a being is com-
pelled to sorms.thing better, the pain is useful,
when to something worse, it is useless.
Therefore in the case of the mind, the will
resisting a greater power causes pain; in the
case of the body, sensation resisting a more
powerful body causes pain. But evils without
pain are worse: for it is worse to rejoice in in-
iquity than to bewail corruption; yet even such
rejoicing cannot exist save from the attain-
ment of inferior good tilings. But iniquity
is the desertion of better things. Likewise
in a body, a wound with pain is better than
painless putrescence, which is especially
called the corruption which the dead flesh of
the Lord did not see, that is, did not suffer,
as was predicted in prophecy: "Thou shalt
not suffer Thy Holy one to see corruption."^
For who denies that He was wounded by the
piercing of the nails, and that He was stabbed
with the lanes ? ^ But even what is properly
called by men corporeal corruption, that is,
putrescence itself, if as yet there is anything
left to consume, increases by the diminution
of the good. But if corruption shall have
absolutely consumed it, so that there is no
good, no nature will remain, for there will be
nothing that corruption may corrupt; and so
there will not even be putrescence, for there
will be nowhere at all for it to be.

CHAP. 21. FROM MEASURE THINGS ARE SAID

TO BE MODERATE-SIZED.-*

Therefore now by common usage things

' Ex. iii. 14.

3 John xix. iS, 34.

- Ps. xvl. 10.

4 ModttSy iiiodica.

small and mean are said to have measure, be-
cause some m.easure remains in them, with-
out which they would no longer be moderate-
sized, but would not exist at all. But those
things that by reason of too much progress
are called immoderate, are blamed for very
excessiveness; but yet it is necessary that
those things themselves be restrained in
some manner under God who has disposed all
things in extension, number, and weight. ^

CHAP. 22. AIEASURE IN SOME SENSE IS SUITA-

"bLE to god HIMSELF.

But God cannot be said to have measure,
lest He should seem to be spoken of as lim-
ited. Yet He is not immoderate by whom
measure is bestowed upon all things, so that
they may in any measure exist. Nor again
ought God to be called measured, as if He
received measure from any one. But if we
say that -He is the highest measure, by chance
we say something; if indeed in speaking of

the highest measure we mean

the highest

good. For every measure in so far as it is
a measure is good; whence nothing can be
called measured, modest, modified, without
praise, although in another sense we use meas-
ure for liviit, and speak of no measure where
there is no //;;///, which is sometimes said with
praise as when it is said: " And of His king-
dom there shall be no limit." * For it might
also be said, "There shall be no measure,"
so that measure might be used in the sense
of limit; for He who reigns in no measure,
assuredly does not reign at all.

CHAP.

-WHENCE A

BAD MEASURE, A BAD

FORM, A BAD ORDER MAY SOMETIMES BE
SPOKEN OF.

Therefore a bad measure, a bad form, a
bad_order, are either so called because they
are less than they should be, or because they
are not adapted to those things to which they
should be adapted ; so that they may be called
bad as being alien and incongruous; as if any
one should be said not to have done in a
good measure because he has done less than
he ought, or because he has done in such a
thing as he ought not to have done, or more
than was fitting, or not conveniently; so that
the very fact of that being reprehended which
is done in a bad measure, is justly repre-
hended for no other cause than that the meas-
ure is not there maintained. Likewise a form
is called bad either in comparison with some-
tlTihg more handsome or more beautiful, this
form being less, that greater^ not in size but

5 Wisd. xi. 21.

* Luke i. 33.

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XXVI.

in comeliness; or because it is out of har-
mony with the thing to which it is applied, so
that it seems alien and unsuitable. As if a
man should walk forth into a public place
naked, which nakedness does not offend if
seen in a bath. Likewise also order is called
bad when order itself is maintained in an in-
ferior degree. Hence not order, but rather
j disorder, is bad; since either the ordering is
' less than it should be, or not as it should be.
Yet where there is any measure, any form,
any order, there is some good and some na-
l ture; but where there is no measure, no form,
I no order, there is no good, no nature.

CHAP. 24. IT IS PROVED BY THE TESTIMONIES

OF SCRIPTURE THAT GOD IS UNCHANGEABLE.
THE SON OF GOD BEGOTTEN, NOT MADE.

Those things which our faith holds and
which reason in whatever way has traced
out, are fortified by the testimonies of
the divine Scriptures, so that those who by
reason of feebler intellect are not able to
comprehend these things, may believe the
divine authority, and so ma)' deserve to
know. But let not those who understand,
but are less instructed in ecclesiastical litera-
ture, suppose that we set forth these things
from our own intellect rather than what are in
those Books. Accordingly, that God is un-
changeable is written in the Psalms: " Thou
shalt change them and they shall be changed;
but Thou thyself art the same." ' And in
the book of Wisdom, concerning wisdom:
" Remaining in herself, she renews all
things."- Whence also the Apostle Paul:
" To the invisible, incorruptible, only God." -
And the Apostle James: " Every best giving
and every perfect gift is from above, descend-
ing from the Father of light, with whom there
is no changeableness, neither obscuring of in-
fluence."'* Likewise because what He begat
of Himself is what He Himself is, it is said
in brief by the Son Himself: " I and the
Father are one,'" ^ But because the Son was
not made, since through Plim were all things
made, thus it is written- " In the beginning
was the Word, and the Word was with God,
and God was the Word; this was in the be-
ginning with God. All things were made
through Him, and without Him was made
nothing; " * that is, without Him was not any-
thing made.

CHAP. 25. — THIS LAST EXPRESSION MISUNDER-
STOOD BY SOME.

For no attention should be paid to the rav-

' Ps. cii. 27.
4 James i. 17.

2 Wisd. vii.
5 John X. y

27.

3 I Tim. i. 17.
6 John i. 1-3.

ings of men who think that nothing should be
understood to mean soinethitig, and moreover
think to compel any one to vanity of this kind
on the ground that noihiiig is placed at the
end of the sentence. Therefore, they say,
it was made, and because it was made, noth-
ing is itself something. They have lost their
senses by zeal in contradicting, and do not
understand that it makes no difference whether
it be said: "Without Him was made noth-
ing," or "without Him nothing was made."
For even if the order were the last mentioned,
they could nevertheless say, that nothing is it-
self something because it was made. For in the
case of what is in truth something, what differ-
ence does it make if it be said " Without him
a house was made,'' so long as it is understood
chat something was made without him, which
something is a house ? So also because it is
said: "Without Him was made nothing,"
since nothing is assuredly not anything, when
it is truly and properly spoken, it makes no
difference whether it be said: " Without Him
was made nothing or Without Him nothing
was made," or " nothing was made." But who
cares to speak with men who can say of this
very expression of mine " It makes no differ-
ence," " Therefore it makes some difference,
for nothing itself is something? '' But those
whose brains are not addled, see it as a thing
most manifest that this something is to be
understood when it says " It makes no differ-
ence," as when I say " It matters in no re-
spect." But these, if they should say to any
one, " What hast thou done ? " and he should
reply that he has done nothing, would, ac-
cording to this mode of disputation, falsely
accuse him saying, " Thou hast done some-
thing, therefore, because thou hast done
nothing; for nothing is itself something."
But they have also the Lord Himself placing
this word at the end of a sentence, when He
says: "And in secret have I spoken noth-
ing. "^ Let them read, therefore, and be si-
lent.«

CHAP. 26. THAT CREATURES ARE MADE OF

NOTHING.

Because therefore God made all things
which He did not beget of Himself, not of
those things that already existed, but of those
things that did not exist at all, that is, of
nothing," the Apostle Paul says: "Who calls
the things that are not as if they are."^' But
stilU more plainly it is written in the book of
Maccabees: "I pray thee, son, look at the

7 John xviii. 20.

8 It is difficult for us to understand why Augustin should have
thought it worth while to refute so elaborately an argument so
puerile. But it is his way to be prolix in such matters.— A. H. N.

9 Rom. iv. 17.

vjy

-€^^A-.''KW, <;- T

-* 'v^vu^ y^t^-n^^ EPv^'^wU.^— w* ,

Chap. XXXL] NATURE OF GOOD, AGAINST THE MANICH.iANS.

157

heaven and the earth and all the things that
are in them; see and know that it was not
these of which the Lord God made us." ' And
from this that is written in the Psalm: " He
spake, and they were made."' It is manifest,
that not of Himself He begat these things,
but that He made them by word and com-
mand. But what is not of Himself is as-
suredly of nothing. For there was not
anything of which he should make them,
concerning which the apostle says most
/openly: " For from Him, and through Him,
and in Him are all things. "(^£^

CHAP. 27. — ''from him" and " OF HIM" DO
NOT MEAN THE SAME THING.

Bu^ " from Him '^ does not mean the same
vas " of Hi^m." ^ For what is of Him may
be said to belrom Him; but not everything
that is from Him is rightly said to be of Him.
For from Him are he^^en and earth, because
He made them;/Kijt not of Him because
they are not of His substance. As in the
case of a man who begets a son and makes a
house, from himself is the son, from himself
is the house, but the son is of him, the house
is of earth and wood. But this is so, be-
cause as a man he cannot make something
even of nothing; but God of whom are all
things, through whom are all things, in whom
are all things, had no need of any material
which He had not made to assist His omni-
potence.

CHAP. 28. — SIN NOT FROM GOD, BUT FROM THE
WILL OF THOSE SINNING.

But when we hear: "All things are from
Him, and through Him, and in Him," we
ought assuredly to understand all natures
which naturally exist. For sins, which do not
preserve but vitiate nature, are not from Him;
which sins, Hoh' Scripture in many ways testi-
fies, are from the will of those sinning, espec-
ially in the passage where the apostle says:
"But dost thou suppose this, O man, that judg-
est those who do such things, and doest them,
that thou shalt escape the judgment of God ?
Or dost thou despise the riches of His good-
ness, and patience, and long-suffering, not
knowing that the patience of God leadeth
thee to repentance ? But according to the
hardness of thy heart and thy impenitent
heart, thou treasurest up for thyself wrath
against the day of wrath and of the revelation
of the just judgment of God, who will ren-
der unto every one according to his works. "^

I Mac. vii. 2S. 2 Ps. cxlviii. 5. 3 Rom. xi. 36.

* £x i/'so and de ipso. 5 Rom. ii. 3-6.

CHAP. 29. THAT GOD IS NOT DEFILED BY OUR

SINS.

And yet, though all things that He estab-
lished are in Him, those who sin do not defile
Him, of whose wisdom it is said: "She
touches all things by reason of her purity,
and nothing defiled assails her." * For it 'he-
hooves us to believe that as God is incorrup-
tible and unchangeable, so also is He conse-
quently undefilable.

CHAP. 30. THAT GOOD THINGS, EVEN THE

LEAST, AND THOSE THAT ARE EARTHLY, ARE
BY GOD.

But that God made even the least things, that
is, earthly and mortal things, must undoubt-
edly be understood from that passage of the
apostle, where, speaking of the members of
our flesh: " For if one member is glorified, all
the members rejoice with it, and if one mem-
ber suffers, all the members suffer with it;"
also this he then says: "God has placed the
members each one of them in the body as he
willed;" and "God has tempered the body,
giving to that to which it was wanting greater
honor, that there should be no schism in the
body, but that the members should have the
same care one for another. "^ But what the
apostle thus praises in the measure and form
and order of the members of the flesh, you
find in the flesh of all animals, alike the great-
est and the least; for all flesh is among earthly
goods, and consequently is esteemed among
the least.

CHAP. 31. — TO PUNISH AND TO FORGIVE SINS
BELONG EQUALLY TO GOD.

Likewise because it belongs to divine judg-
ment, not human, what sort of punishment
and how great is due to every fault, it is thus
written: "O the height of the riches of the
wisdom and the knowledge of God ! how in-
scrutable are His judgments and his ways past
finding out !" * Likewise because by the good-
ness of God sins are forgiven to the converted,
the very fact that Christ was sent sufficiently
shows, who not in His own nature as God,
but in our nature, which He assumed from a
woman, died for us; which goodness of God
with reference to us, and which love of God,
the apostle thus sets forth: " But Go(' com-
mendeth His love toward us, in that while
we were yet sinners Christ died for us; much
more now being justified in His blood we shall
be saved from wrath through Him. For if
when we were enemies we were reconciled to

6 Wisd. vii. 24, 25.
8 Rom. xi. 33.

7 I Cor. xii. s6, iS, 24, 25.

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XXXV.

God through the death of His Son, much more
being reconciled we shall be saved in .His
life.^'' But because even when due punish-
ment is rendered to sinners, there is no un-
righteousness on God's part, he thus says:
"What shall we say? Is God unrighteous
who visiteth with wrath ? " " But in one place
he has briefly admonished that goodness and
severity are alike from Him, saying: " Thou
seest then the goodness and severity of God;
toward them that have fallen, severity, but
towards thee goodness, if thou shouldst con-
tinue in goodness.3

CHAP. 32. FRO:\I GOD ALSO IS THE VERY POWER

TO BE HURTFUL.

Likewise because the power even of those
that are hurtful is from God alone, thus it
stands written, Wisdom speaking: " Through
me kings reign and tyrants hold the land
through me."'* The apostle also says: "For
there is no power but of God.'-'-v But that it
is worthily done is written in the book of Job:
" Who maketh to reign a man that is a hypo-
crite, on account of the perversity of the
people."* And concerning the people of Israel
God says: " I gave them a king in my wrath. "?
For it is not unrighteous, that the wicked
receiving the power of being hurtful, both the
patience of the good should be proved and
the iniquity of the evil punished. For through
power given to the Devil both Job was proved
so that he might appear righteous,^ and Peter
was tempted lest he should be presumptuous,^
and Paul was buffeted lest he should be ex-
alted,'" and Judas was damned so that he
should hang himself." When, therefore,
through the power which He has given the
Devil, God Himself shall have done all things
righteously, nevertheless punishment shall at
last be rendered to the Devil not for these
things justly done, but for the unrighteous
willing to be hurtful, which belonged to him-
self, when it shall be said to the impious who
persevered in consenting to his wickedness,
"Go ye into everlasting fire which my God
has prepared for the Devil and his angels." ^-

CHAP. 33. THAT EVIL ANGELS HAVE BEEN

MADE EVIL, NOT BY GOD, BUT BY SINNING.

But because evil angels also were not con-
stituted evil by God, but were made evil by
sinning, Peter in his ef istle says: " For if God
spared not angels when they sinned, but

I Rom. V. 8-10. - /did. iii. 5. 3 /did. xi. 22.

4 Prov. viii. 15. 5 Rom. xiii. i.

6 Job xxxiv. 30. Compare the Revised English Version. The
sense seems to be completely missed in Augustin's text. — A. H. N.

7 Hos. xiii. II. 8 Job i. and ii. 9 Matt. xxvi. 31-35, 69-75.
10 2 Cor. .\ii. 7. " Matt, xxvii. 5. 12 Matt. x.xv. 41.

casting them down into the dungeons of smoky
hell, He delivered them to be reserved for
punisiiment in judgment." '^ Hence Peter
shows that there is still due to them the pen-
alty of the last judgment, concerning which
the Lord says: "Go ye into everlasting fire,
which has been prepared for the Devil and
his angels." Although they have already
penally received this hell, that is, an inferior
smoky air as a prison, which nevertheless
since it is also called heaven, is not that
heaven in which there are stars, but this lower
heaven by the smoke of which the clouds are
conglobulated, and where the birds fly; for
both a cloudy heaven is spoken of, and flying
things are called heavenly. As when the
Apostle Paul calls those evil angels, against
whom as enemies by living piously we con-
tend, " spiritual things of wickedness in heav-
enly places." '** That this may not be under-
stood of the upper heavens, he plainly says
elsewhere: "According to the presence of the
prince of this air, who now worketh in the
sons of disobedience." '^

CHAP. 34. THAT SIN IS NOT THE STRIVING

FOR AN EVIL NATURE, BUT THE DESERTION
OF A BETTER.

Likewise because sin, or unrighteousness,
is not the striving after evil nature but the
desertion of better, it is thus found written in
the Scriptures: " Every creature of God is
good." '* And accordingly every tree also
which God planted in Paradise is assuredly
good. Man did not therefore strive after an
evil nature when he touched the forbidden
tree; but by deserting what was better, he
committed an evil deed. Since the Creator
is better than any creature which He has
made, His command should not have been
deserted, that the thing forbidden, however
good, might be touched; since the better hav-
ing been' deserted, the good of the creature
was striven for, which was touched contrary
to the command of the Creator. God did not
plant an evil tree in Paradise; but He Him-
self was better who prohibited its being
touched.

CHAP. 35. THE TREE WAS FORBIDDEN TO ADAM

NOT BECAUSE IT WAS EVIL, BUT BECAUSE IT
WAS GOOD FOR MAN TO BE SUBJECT TO GOD.

For besides. He had made the prohibition,
in order to show that the nature of ihe ra-
tional soul ought not to be in its own power,
but in subjection to God, and that it guards
the order of its salvation through obedience.

13 2 Pet. ii. 4.

13 /iid. ii. 2.

14 Eph. vi. 12.
16 I 'I'im. iv. 4.

Chap. XLL]

NATURE OF GOOD, AGAINST THE .MANICH.-EANS.

159

corrupting it through disobedience. Hence
also He called the tree, the touching of which
He forbade, the tree "of the knowledge of
good and evil;"' because when man should
have touched it in the face of the prohibition,
he would experience the penalty of sin, and
so would know the difference between the
good of obedience, and the evil of disobe-
dience.

CHAP. ^6. NO CREATURE OF GOD IS EVJL, BUT

TO ABUSE A CREATURE OF GOD IS EVIL.

For who is so foolish as to think a creature
of God, especially one planted in Paradise,
blameworthy; when indeed not even thorns
and thistles, which the earth brought forth,
according to the judiciary judgment of God,
for wearing out the sinner in labor, should be
blamed ? For even such herbs have their
measure and form and order, which whoever
considers soberly will find praiseworthy; but
t;iey are evil to that nature which ought thus
to be restrained as a recompense for sin.
Therefore, as I have said,* sin is not the striving
after an evil nature, but the desertion of a
better, and so the deed itself is evil, not the
nature which the sinner uses amiss. For it
is evil to use amiss that which is good.
Whence the apostle reproves certain ones as
condemned by divine judgment, "Who have
worshipped and served the creature more than
the Creator.''- He does not reprove the
creature, which he who should do would act
injuriously towards the Creator, but those
who, deserting the better, have used amiss
the good.

CHAP. 37. GOD MAKES GOOD USE OF THE EVIL

DEEDS oTsTnNERsV

Accordingly, if all natures should guard
their own proper measure and form and order,
there would be no evil: but if any one should
wish to misuse these good things, not even
thus does he vanquish the will of God, who
knows how to order righteously even the un-
righteous; so that if they themselves through
the iniquity of their will should misuse His
good things. He through the righteousness
of His power may use their evil deeds, rightly
ordaining to punishment those who have per-
versely ordained themselves to sins.

CHAP 38. — ETERNAL FIRE TORTURING THE
WICKED, NOT EVIL.

For neither is eternal fire itself, which is
to torture the impious, an evil nature, since
it has its measure, its form and its order de-

' Gen. ii. 9,

2 Rom. i. 25.

praved by no iniquity; but it is an evil torture
for the damned, to whose sins it is due. For
neither is yonder light, because it tortures the
blear-eyed, an evil nature.

CHAP. 39. FIRE IS CALLED ETERNAL, NOT AS

GOD IS, BUT BECAUSE WITHOUT END.

But fire is eternal, not as God is eternal,
because, though without end, yet it is not
without beginning; but God is also without
beginning. Then, although it may be em-
ployed perpetually for the punishment of
sinners, yet it is mutable nature. But that is
true eternity which is true immortality, that
is that highest immutability, which cannot
be changed at all. For it is one thing not to
suffer change, when change is possible, and
another thing to be absolutely incapable of
change. Therefore, just as man is called
good, yet not as God, of whom it v/as said,
"There is none good save God alone; "^
and just as the soul is called immortal, yet
not as God, of whom it was said, " Who alone
hath immortality; " * and just as a man is
called wise, yet not as God, of whom it was
said, "To God the only wise;" s so fire is
called eternal, yet not as God, whose alone
is immortality itself and true eternity.

CHAP. 40. — NEITHER CAN GOD SUFFER HURT,
NOR ANY OTHER, SAVE BY THE JUST ORDINA-
TION OF GOD.

Since these things are so, according to the
Catholic faith, and wholesome doctrine, and
truth perspicuous to those of good under-
standing, neither can any one hurt the nature
of God, nor can the nature of God unright-
eously hurt any one, or suffer any one to do
hurt with impunity. " For he that doeth hurt
shall receive," says the apostle, "according
to the hurt that he has done; and there is no
accepting of persons with God." *

CHAP. 41. HOW GREAT GOOD THINGS THE

MANICH^ANS PUT IN THE NATURE OF EVIL,
AND HOW GREAT EVIL THINGS IN THE NA-
TURE OF GOOD.

But if the Manichasans were willing, with-
out pernicious zeal for defending their error,
and with the fear of God, to think, they would
not most criminally blaspheme by supposing
two natures, the one good, which they call
God, the other evil, which God did not make:
so erring, so delirious, nay so insane, are they
that they do not see, that even in what they
call the nature of supreme evil they place so
great good things: life, power, safety, mem-

3 Mark x. 18.
5 Rom. xvi. 27.

4 I Tim. vi. 16.
* Col. iii. 25.

;6o

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XLII.

ory, intellect, temperance, virtue, plenty,
sense, light, suavity, extensions, numbers,
peace, measure, form, order; but in whiat
they call supreme good, so many evil things;
death, sickness, forgetfulness, foolishness,
confusion, impotence, need, stolidity, blind-
ness, pam, unrighteousness, disgrace, war,
intemperance, deformity, perversity. For
they say that the princes of darkness also have
been alive in their own nature, and in their
own kingdom were safe, and remembered and
understood. For they say that the Prince of
Darkness harangued in such a manner, that
neither could he have said such things, nor
could he have been heard by those by whom
he was said to have been heard, without
memory and understanding; and to have had
a temper suitable to his mind and body, and
to have ruled by virtue of power, and to have
had abundance and fruitfulness with respect
to his elements, and they are said to have
perceived themselves mutually and the light
as near at liand, and to have had eyes by which
they could see the light afar off; which eyes
assuredly could not have seen the light with-
out some light (whence also they are rightly
called light); and they are said to have en-
joyed exceedingly the sweetness of their
pleasures, and to have been determined by
measured members and dwelling-places. But
unless there had been some sort of beauty
there, they would not have loved their wives,
nor would their bodies have been steady by
adaptation of parts; without which, those
things could not have been done there which
the Manichaeans insanely say were done. And
unless some peace had been there, they would
not have obeyed their Prince. Unless meas-
ure had been there, they would have done
nothing else than eat or drink, or rage, or
whatever they might have done, without any
societv: although not even those that did
these things would have had determinate
forms, unless measure had been there. But
now the Manichaeans say that they did such
things that they cannot be denied to have had
in all their actions measures suitable to them-
selves. But if form had not been there, no
natural quality would have there subsisted.
But if there had been no order there, some
would not have ruled, others been ruled;
they would not have lived harmoniously in
their elements; in fine, they would not have
had their members adapted to their places,
so that they could not do all those things
that the Manicheeans vainly fable. But if
they say that God's nature does not die,
what according to their vanity does Christ
raise from the dead ? If they say that it
does not grow sick, what does He cure?

If they say that it is not subject to
forgetfulness, what does He remind ? If
they say that it is not deficient in wisdom,
what does He teach ? If they say that it is
not confused, what does He restore ? If they
say that it was not vanquished and taken cap-
tive, what does He liberate ? If they say that
it was not in need, to what does He minister
aid ? If they say that it did not lose feeling,
what does He animate ? If they say that it
has not been blinded, what does He illuminate?
If it is not in pain, to what does He give re-
lief? If it is not unrighteous, what does He
correct through precepts ? If it is not in dis-
grace, what does He cleanse ? If it is not in
war, to what does He promise peace ? If it is
not deficient in moderation, upon what does
He impose the measure of law? If it is not
deformed, what does He reform ? If it is not
perverse, what does He emend? For all these
things done by Christ, they say, are to be at-
tributed not to that thing which was made
by God, and which has become depraved by
its own free choice in sinning, but to the very
nature, yea to the very substance of God,
which is what God Himself is.

CHAP. 42. — MANICH.^AN BLASPHEMIES CON-
CERNING THE NATURE OF GOD.

What can be compared to those blasphe-
mies ? Absolutely nothing, unless the errors
of other sectaries be considered; but if that
error be compared with itself in another as-
pect, of which we have not yet spoken, it will
be convicted of far worse and more execrable
blasphemy. For they say that some souls,
which they will have to be of the substance of
God and of absolutely the same nature, which
have not sinned of their own accord, but have
been overcome and oppressed by the race of
darkness, which they call evil, for combating
which they descended not of their own ac-
cord, but at the command of the Father, are
fettered forever in the horrible sphere of dark-
ness. So according to their sacrilegious
vaporings, God liberated Himself in a certain
part from a great evil, but again condemned
Himself in another part, which He could not Ij
liberate, and triumphed over the enemy itself
as if it had been vanquished from above.
O criminal, incredible audacity, to believe, to
speak, to proclaim such things about God !
Which when they endeavor to defend, that
with their eyes shut they may rush headlong
into yet worse things, they say that the com-
mingling of the evil nature does these things,
in order that the good nature of God may
suffer so great evils: for that this good nature
in its own sphere could or can suffer no one
of these things. As if a nature were lauded

Chap. XLIIL] NATURE OF GOOD, AGAINST THE MANICH.^ANS.

361

as incorruptible, because it does not hurt itself,
and not because it cannot suffer hurt from
another. Then if the nature of God hurt the
nature of darkness, and the nature of darkness
hurt the nature of God, there are therefore
two evil things which hurt each other in turn,
and the race of darkness was the better dis-
posed, because if it committed hurt it did it
unwillingly; for it did not wish to commit
hurt, but to enjoy the good which belonged to
God. But God wished to extinguish it, as
Manichseus most openly raves forth in his
epistle of the ruinous Foundaiiofi. For for-
getting that he had shortly before said: "Rut
His most resplendent realms were so founded
upon the shining and happy land, that they
could never be either moved or shaken by any
one ; " he afterwards said: " But the Father
of the most blessed light, knowing that great
ruin and desolation which would arise from
the darkness, threaten his holy worlds, unless
he should send in opposition a deity excel-
lent and renowned, mighty in strength, by
whom he might at the same time overcome
and destroy the race of darkness, which hav-
ing been extinguished, the inhabitants of light
would enjoy perpetual rest." Behold, he
feared ruin and desolation that threatened
his worlds ! Assuredly they were so founded
upon the shining and happy land that they
never could be either moved or shaken by any
one ? Behold, from fear he wished to hurt
the neighboring race, which he endeavored to
destroy and extinguish, in order that the in-
habitants of light might enjoy perpetual rest.
Why did he not add, and perpetual bondage ?
Were not these souls that he fettered forever
in the sphere of darkness, the inhabitants of
light, of whom he says plainly, that "they
have suffered themselves to err from their
former bright nature? " when against his will
he is compelled to say, that they sinned by
free will, while he wishes to ascribe sin only
to the necessity of the contrary nature: every-
where ignorant what to say, and as if he were
himself already in the sphere of darkness
which he invented, seeking, and not finding,
how he may escape. But let him say what
he will to the seduced and miserable men by
whom he is honored far more highly than
Christ, that at this price he may sell to them
such long and sacrilegious fables. Let him
say what he will, let him shut up, as it were,
in a sphere, as in a prison, the race of dark-
ness, and let him fasten outside the nature
of light, to which he promised perpetual rest
on the extinction of the enemy: behold, the
penalty of light is worse than that of dark-
ness; the penalty of the divine nature is worse
than that of the adverse race. But since al-

though the latter is in the midst of darkness it
pertains to its nature to dwell in darkness;
but souls which are the very same thing that
God is, cannot be received, he says, into those
peaceful realms, and are alienated from the
life and liberty of the holy light, and are
fettered in the aforesaid horrible sphere:
whence he says, "Those souls shall adhere
to the things that they have loved, having
been left in the same sphere of darkness,
bringing this upon themselves by their own
deserts. ' ' Is not this assuredly free voluntary
choice ? See how insanely he ignores what he
says, and by making self-contradictory state-
ments wages a worse war against himself
than against the God of the race of darkness
itself. Accordingly, if the souls of light are
damned, because they loved darkness, the
race of darkness, which loved light, is unjustly
damned. And the race of darkness indeed
loved light from the beginning, violently, it
may be, but yet so as to wish for its posses-
sion, not its extinction: but the nature of light
wished to extinguish in war the darkness;
therefore when vanquished it loved darkness.
Choose which you will: whether it was com-
pelled by necessity to love darkness, or se-
duced by free will. If by necessity, where-
fore is it damned ? if by free will, wherefore
is the nature of God involved in so great in-
iquity ? If the nature of God was compelled
by necessity to love darkness, it did not van-
quish, but was vanquished: if by free will,
why do the wretches hesitate any longer to
attribute the will to sin to the nature which
God made out of nothing, lest they should
thereby attribute it to the light which He
begat ?

CHAP. 43, MANY EVILS BEFORE HIS COMMIN-
GLING WITH EVIL ARE ATTRIBUTED TO THE
N.A.TURE OF GOD BY THE MANICH.^ANS.

What if we should also show that before
the commingling of evil, which stupid fable
they have most madly believed, great evils
were in what they call the nature of light ?
what will it seem possible to add to these blas-
phemies ? For before the conflict, there was
the hard and inevitable necessity of fighting:
here is truly a great evil, before evil is com-
mingled with good. Let them say whence
this is, when as yet no commingling had taken
place ? But if there was no necessity, there
was therefore free will: whence also this so
great evil, that God himself should wish to
hurt his own nature, which could not be hurt
by the enemy, by sending it to be cruelly
commingled, to be basely purged, to be un-
justly damned ? Behold, the great evil of a
pernicious, noxious, and savage will, before

;62

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XLIV.

any evil from the contrary nature was mingled
with it ! Or perchance he did not know that
this would happen to his members, that they
should love darkness and become hostile to
holy light, as Manichaeus says, that is, not
only to their own God, but also to the Father
from whom they had their being ? Whence
therefore this so great evil of ignorance, be-
fore any evil from the nature of darkness was
minofled with it? But if he knew that this
would happen, either there was in him ever-
lasting cruelty, if he did not grieve over the
contamination and damnation of his own na-
ture that was to take place, or everlasting
misery, if he did so grieve: whence also this
so great evil of your supreme good before any
commingling with your supreme evil ? As-
suredly that part of the nature itself which
was fettered in the eternal chain of that
sphere, if it knew not that this fate awaited it,
even so was there everlasting ignorance in the
nature of God, but if it knew, then ever-
lasting misery: whence this so great evil be-
fore any evil from the contrary nature was
commingled ? Or perchance did it, in the
greatness of its love (charity), rejoice that
through its punishment perpetual rest was
prepared for the residue of the inhabitants of
light ? Let him who sees how abominable it
is to say this, pronounce an anathema. But
if this should be done so that at least the
good nature itself should not become hostile
to the light, it might be possible, perchancC;
not for the nature of God indeed, but for
some man, as it were, to be regarded as praise-
worthy, who for the sake of his country should
be willing to suffer something of evil, which
evil indeed could be only for a time, and not
forever: but now also they speak of that fet-
tering in the sphere of darkness as eternal,
and not indeed of a certain thing but of the
nature of God; and assuredly it were a most
unrighteous, and execrable, and ineffably
sacrilegious joy, if the nature of God rejoiced
that it should love darkness, and should be-
cogie hostile to holy light. Whence this so
monstrous and abominable evil before any
evil from the contrary nature was com-
mingled ? Who can endure insanity so per-
verse and so impious, as to attribute so
great good things to supreme evil, and so
great evils to supreme good, which is God ?

CHAP, 44. INCREDIBLE TURPITUDES IN GOD

IMAGINED BY MANICHAEUS.

But now when they speak of that part of
the nature of God as everywhere mixed up
in heaven, in earth, in all bodies dry and
moist, in all sorts of flesh, in all seeds of
trees, herbs, men, and animals: not as pres-

ent by the power of divinity, for administer-
ing and ruling all things, undefilably, inviola-
bly, incorruptibly, without any connection
with them, which we say of God; but fet-
tered, oppressed, polluted, to be loosed and
liberated, as they say, not only through the
running to and fro of the sun and the moon,
and through the powers of light, but also
through their Elect: what sacrilegious and
incredible turpitudes this kind of error recom-
mends to them even if it does not induce them
to accept, it is horrible to speak of. For
they say that the powers of light are trans-
formed into beautiful males and are set over
against the women of the race of darkness;
and that the same powers again are trans-
formed into beautiful females and are set over
against the males of the race of darkness;
that through their beauty they enkindle the
foulest lust of the princes of darkness, and
in this manner vital substance, that is, the
nature of God, which they say is held fettered
in their bodies, having been loosed from their
members relaxed through lust, flies away, and
when it has been taken up or cleansed, is lib-
erated. This the wretches read, this they say,
this they hear, this they believe, this they put
as follows, in the seventh book of their Thesau-
rus (for so they call a certain writing of Mani-
chaeus, in which these blasphemies stand
written): " Then the blessed Father, who has
bright ships, little apartments, dwelling-
places, or magnitudes, according to his in-
dwelling clemency, brings the help by which
he is drawn out and liberated from the im-
pious bonds, straits, and torments of his vital
substance. And so by his own invisible nod
he transforms those powers of his, which are
held in this most brilliant ship, and makes
them to bring forth adverse powers, which
have been arranged in the various tracts of
the heavens. Since these consist of both
sexes, male and female, he orders the afore-
said powers to bring forth partly in the form
of beardless youths, for the adverse race of
females, partly in the form of bright maidens,
for the contrary race of males: knowing that
all these hostile powers on account of the
deadly and most foul lust innate in them, are
very easily taken captive, delivered up ' to
these most beautiful forms which appear, and
in this manner they are dissolved. But you
may know that this same blessed Father of
ours is identical with his powers, which for a
necessary reason he transforms into the un-
defiled likeness of youths and maidens. But
these he uses as his own arms, and through
them he accomplishes his will. But there are
bright ships full of these divine powers, which
are stationed after the likeness of marriage

Chap. XLVL] NATURE OF GOOD, AGAINST THE MANICH.EANS.

over against the infernal races, and who with
alacrity and ease effect at the very moment
what they have planned. Therefore, when
reason demands that these same holy powers
should appear to males, straightway also they
show by their dress the likeness of most
beautiful maidens. Again when females are
to be dealt with, putting aside the forms of
maidens, they show the forms of beardless
youths. But by this handsome appearance
of theirs, ardor and lust increase, and in this
way the chain of their worst thoughts is
loosed, and the living soul which was held
iiy their members, relaxed by this occasion,
escapes, and is mingled with its own most
pure air; when the souls thoroughly cleansed
ascend to the bright ships, which have been
prepared for conveying them and for ferrying
them over to their own country. But that
which still bears the stains of the adverse
race, descends little by little through billows
and fires, and is mingled with trees and other
plants and with all seeds, and is plunged into
divers fires. And in what manner the figures
of youths and maidens from that great and
most glorious ship appear to the contrary
powers which live in the heavens and have a
fiery nature; and from that handsome appear-
ance, part of the life which is held in their
members having been released is conducted
away through fires into the earth: in the same
manner also, that most high power, which
dwells in the ship of vital waters appears in
the likeness of youths and holy maidens to
those powers whose nature is cold and moist,
and which are arranged in the heavens. And
indeed to those that are females, among these
the form of youths appears, but to the males,
the form of maidens. By his changing and
diversity of divine and most beautiful per-
sons, the princes male and female of the
moist and cold race are loosed, and what is
vital in them escapes; but whatever should
remain, having been relaxed, is conducted into
the earth through cold, and is mingled with
all the races of darkness." Who can endure
this ? Who can believe, not indeed that it is
true, but that it could even be said ? Behold
those who fear to anathematize Manichneus
teaching these things, and do not fear to be-
lieve in a God doing them and suffering
them !

CHAP. 45. — CERTAIN UNSPEAKABLE TURPITUDES
BELIEVED, NOT WITHOUT REASON, CONCERN-
ING THE MANICH.EANS THEMSELVES.

But they say, that through their own Elect
that same commingled part and nature of God
is purged, by eating and drinking forsooth,
(because they say that it is held fettered in

all foods); that when they are taken up by the
Elect for the nourishment of the body in eat-
ing and drinkmg, it is loosed, sealed, and lib-
erated through their sanctity. Nor do the
wretches pay heed to the fact that this is be-
lieved about them not without good reason,
and they deny it in vain, so long as they do
not anathematize the books of Manichseus
and cease to be Manichseans. For if, as they
say, a part of God is fettered in all seeds, and
is purged by eating on the part of the Elect;
who may not properly believe, that they do
what they read in the Thesaurus was done
among the powers of heaven and the princes
of darkness; since indeed they say that their
flesh is also from the race of darkness, and
since they do not hesitate to believe and to af-
firm that the vital substance fettered in them
is a part of God ? Which assuredly if it is to
be loosed, and purged by eating, as their
lamentable error compels them to acknowl-
edge; who does not see, who does not shud-
der at the greatness and the unspeakableness
of what follows ?

CHAP. 46. — THE UNSPEAKABLE DOCTRINE OF
THE FUNDAMENTAL EPISTLE.

For they even say that Adam, the first man,
was created by certain princes of darkness so
that the light might be held by them lest it
should escape. For in the epistle which they
call Fundamental, Manichccus wrote as fol-
lows respecting the way in which the Prince of
Darkness, whom they represent as the father
of the first man, spoke to the rest of his allied
princes of darkness, and how he acted:
" Therefore with wicked inventions he said
to those present: What does this huge light
that is rising seem to you to be ? See how
the pole moves, how it shakes most of the
powers. Wherefore it is right for me rather
to ask you beforehand for whatever light you
have in your powers: since thus I will form
an image of that great one who has appeared
in his glory, through which we may be able
to rule, freed in some measure from the con-
versation of darkness. Hearing these thinirs,
and deliberating for a long time among them-
selves, they thought it most just to furnish
what was demanded of them. For they did
not have confidence in being able to retain
the light that they had forever; hence they
thought it better to offer it to their Prince,
by no means without hope that in this way
they would rule. It must be considered
therefore how they furnished the light that
they had. For this also is scattered through-
out all the divine scriptures and the heavenly
secrets; but to the wise it is easy enough to
know how it was given: for it is known imme-

3<^4

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XLVIII.

diatel}' and openly by him who should truly
and faithfully wish to consider. Since there
was a promiscuous throng of those who had
come together, females and males of course,
he impelled them to coi)ulate among them-
selves: in which copulation the males emitted
seed, the females were made pregnant. But
the offspring were like those who had begot-
ten them, the first obtaining as it were the
largest portion of the parents' strength.
Taking these as a special gift their Prince re-
joiced. And just as even now we see take
place, that the nature of evil taking thence
strength forms the fashioner of bodies, so
also the aforesaid Prince, taking the offspring
of his companions, which had the senses of
their parents, sagacity, light, procreated at
the same time with themselves in the process
of generation, devoured them; and very many
powers having been taken from food of this
kind, in which there was present not only
fortitude, but much more astuteness and de-
praved sensibilities from the ferocious race of
the progenitors, he called his own spouse to
himself, springing from the same stock as
himself, emitted, like the rest, the abundance
of evils that he had devoured, himself also
adding something from his own thought and
power, so that his disposition became the
former and arranger of all the things that he
had poured forth; whose consort received
these things as soil cultivated in the best
way is accustomed to receive seed. For in
her were constructed and woven together the
images of all heavenly and earthly powers,
so that what was formed obtained the likeness,
so to speak, of a full orb."

CHAP. 47. HE COMPELS TO THE PERPETRATION

OF HORRIBLE TURPITUDES.

O abominable monster ! O execrable per-
dition and ruin of deluded souls ! I am not
speaking of the blasphemy of saying these
things about the nature of God which is thus
fettered. Let the wretches deluded and
hunted by deadly error give heed to this at
least, that if a part of their God is fettered
by the copulation of males and females which
they profess to loose and purge by eating it,
the necessity of this unspeakable error com-
pels them not only to loose and purge the
part of God from bread and vegetables and
fruits, which alone they are seen publicly to
partake of, but also from that which might be
fettered through copulation, if conception
should take place. That they do this some
are said to have confessed before a public
tribunal, not only in Paphlagonia, but also
in Gaul, as I heard in Rome from a certain
Catholic Christian; and when they were asked

by the authority of what writing they did these
things, they betrayed this fact concerning
the Thesaums that I have just mentioned.
But when this is cast in their teeth, they are
in the habit of replying, that some enemy or
other has withdrawn from their number, that
is from the number of their Elect, and has
made a schism, and has founded a most foul
heresy of this kind. Whence it is manifest
that even if they do not themselves practise
this thing, some who do practise it do it on
the basis of their books. Therefore let them
reject the books, if they abhor the crime,
which they are compelled to commit, if they
hold to the books; or if they do not commit
them, they endeavor in opposition to the
books to live more purely. But what do they
do when it is said to them, either purge the
light from whatever seeds you can, so that
you cannot refuse to do that which you assert
that you do not do; or else anathematize
Manich^eus, when he says that a part of God
is in all seeds, and that it is fettered by copu-
lation, but that whatever of light, that is, of
the aforesaid part of God, should become the
food of the Elect, is purged by being eaten.
Do you see what he compels you to believe,
and do you still hesitate to anathematize
him '' What do they do, I say, when this is
said to them ? To what subterfuges do they
betake themselves, when either so nefarious a
doctrine is to be anathematized, or so nefa-
rious a turpitude committed, in comparison
with which all those intolerable evils to which
I have already called attention, seem tolera-
ble, namely, that they say of the nature of
God that it was pressed by necessity to wage
war, that it was either secure by everlasting
ignorance, or was disturbed by everlasting
grief and fear, when the corruption of com-
mingling and the chain of everlasting damna-
tion should come upon it, that finally as a re-
sult of the conflict it should be taken captive,
oppressed, polluted, that after a false victory
it should be fettered forever in a horrible
sphere and separated from its original bless-
edness, while if considered in themselves they
cannot be endured ?

CHAP. 48. AUGUSTIN PRAYS THAT THE MANI-

CH^ANS MAY BE RESTORED TO THEIR SENSES.

O great is Thy patience. Lord, full of com-
passion and gracious, slow to anger, and
plenteous in mercy, and true;' who makest Thy
sun to rise upon the good and the evil, and
who sendest rain upon the just and the un-
just;- who wiliest not the death of the sinner,
so much as that he return and live;^ who

I Ps. ciii. 8.

2 Matt. V. 45.

3 Ezek. .xxxiii. 11.

chai'. xlviil] nature of good, aCxAinst the manich.eans.

)65

reproving in parts, dost give place to repen-
tance, that wickedness liaving been aban-
doned, they may beheve on Thee, O Lord;'
who by Thy patience dost lead to repentance,
although many according to the hardness of
their heart and their impenitent heart treasure
up for themselves wrath against the day of
wrath and of the revelation of Thy righteous
i judgment, who wilt render to every man ac-
1 corduig to his works;- who in the day when a
man shall have turned from his iniquity to
Thy mercy and truth, wilt forget all his in-
I iquities:^ stand before us, grant unto us that
! through our ministry, by which Thou hast
been pleased to refute this execrable and too
horrible error, as many have already been lib-
erated, many also may be liberated, and
whether through the sacrament of Thy holy

baptism, or through the sacrifice of a broken
spirit and a contrite and huml)led heart,'* in
tne sorrow of repentance, they may deserve
to receive the remission of their sins and blas-
I phemies, by which through ignorance they
: have offended Thee. For nothing is of any
' avail, save Thy surpassing mercy and power,
and the truth of Thy baptism, and the keys
of the kingdom of heaven in Thy holy Church;
so that we must not despair of men as long as by
Thy patience they live on this earth, who even
knowing how great an evil it is to think or to
say such things about Thee, are detained in
that malign profession on account of the use
or the attainment of temporal or earthly con-
venience, if rebuked by Thy reproaches they
in any way flee to Thy ineffable goodness,
and prefer to all the enticements of the carnal
life, the heavenly and eternal life.

I W'isd. xii. 2.

- Rom. ii. 4-6.

3 Ezek. xviii. 21,

4Ps.

1. 17.

WRITINGS

IN CONNECTION WITH THE

DONATIST CONTROVERS\

TRANSLATED BY THE

REV. J. R. KIXG, M.A.,

VICAR OF ST. Peter's in the east, oxford; and late fellow and tutor of

MERTON COLLEGE, OXFORD.

REVISED, WITH ADDITIONAL NOTES,

BY THE

REV. CHESTER I). HARTRANFT, D.D.,

PROFESSOR OF BIBLICAL AND ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY, IN THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

AT HARTFORD, CONN.

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.
By Rev. Chester D. Hartranft, D.D.

CHAPTER I.— BIBLIOGRAPHY.

A. Sources.

I. Of course all the Anti-Donatist writings of Augustin are found in the general editions
from Amerbach, 1506, to Migne, i86i. A few are also collected in Du Pin's edd. of
Optatus Mil. I. In the Monumeiita vctei-a ad JDotiattstarum Historiam pertinentia. 2. In
the Gesta Collationis Carthagini habitae Ilotwrn Caesaris iussu inter Catholicos et JDona-
/isfas. See also the different Collections of Councils, Labbe, Baluze, Harduin, Mansi, etc.
Since these works are discussed in Chapter II. it is unnecessary to repeat the titles here.
Cp. titles in Retractationes: and Indiculus librorutn, tractatuum et epistolarwn S. Augustini, ed.
cur a Fossidii, cap. III.

II. Separate editions of Augustin's Anti-Donatist writings. (From Schonemann's Biblio-
theca, and other bibliographies.)

1. S. Augustini liber sen Epistola de unitate Ecclesiae contra Petiliani Donat. Epistolain,
Argumentis, Notis at que Analysi illustrata, studio Justi Caluini. Moguntiae. 1602.

2. .S^". Cypriani et Augustini de unitate Ecclesiae tractatus. Ace edit Georgii Calixti, S.
Theo. Doct. et in Acad. Julia Prof, primarii, in eorundem librorum lectioneni Introductionis

fragnientum edente Frid. Ulrica Calixto. Georgii filio. Helmcestadii ex iypogr. Calixt.

1657. 8.

3. Aurelii Augustini, Episcopi Hipponensis, Liber de Unitate Ecclesiae contra Donatistas.
Ext. cum Commentariis uberriniis et utillisitnis in Melchioris Lydeckeri Historia illustrata
Ecclesiae Africanae, cujus totum pcene toinuni secujiduin constituit inscriptunr.

Tomus secundus ad Lib rum Augustini de Unitate Ecclesiae contra Donatistas, de principiis
Ecclesiae A fricanae, illiusqtie fide in Articulis de Capite Chris to ct Ecclesia, de Unitate et Schis-
viate,plui-iniisque Religionis Christianae capitibus agit. Ultrajecti apud vidua in Guil. Clcrck,
1690. 4.

4. D. Augustini liber de moderate coercendis haereticis ad Bonifaciutn Comitetn. Nic.
Bergius Revalensis Holmiae, 1696, in 8.

III. Translations.

I. Epistre ou le Livre de St. Augustin de l' Unittf de P Eglise, contre Pcfilirn, Eirsque
Donatiste, avcc certaines observations pour entendre les lieux plus difficiles par Jac. Tigcou,
impritn^ a Reims par Jean de Foigny. 1567, 8.
24

O INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.

2. L' Epistre a Vincent^ Evesque de Vheresie Rogaiianc, traduict de latin par Clement
Vaillant. A Paris, Mathiirin Freiwst. 1573. 8.

3. Traite du Baptei/ie trad, par r abb/ Duj'at, chapelain d'Etampes. Paris. 1778. 12.

4. Writings in connection with the Donatist controversy, translated by the Rev. J. R.
King, M.A. In the Series of Translations of the Works of Augustin. Edinburgh. T. &
T. Clark. 1872.

5. AusgewdJdte Schriften des heil. Aurelius Augusiinus, Kirchenlehrers, iiacn aeni
Crtexte ubersetzt. Mit einer kurzen Lebensbeschreibung des Heiligcn von J. Motzberger.
1871-1879. In the Bibliothek der Kirchenvdter, Kempteti, 1869 sqq.

B. Literature.

This is a selected literature of the Donatist controversy so far as Augustin was con-
nected with it.

I. In the Benedictine editions occur :

1. Their Vita S. Aurelii Augustini.

Tom. XI. A/itw.,pp. i-ZAA- Tom. I. Aligne, pp. 6^-31^.

2. Praefatio of Tom. IX.
Antw. s.p. Migne,pp. 9-24.

3. Index opusculortim S. Augustini contra Donatistas.
Tom. IX. Antw., pp. 463, 4. Migne,pp. 757-760.

4. Excerpta et scripta vetera ad Donatistarujti historiain pertinentia.
Tom. IX. Antw., App.pp. T-^o. Migne, pp. 1li-'&At2.

5. Epistolarum or do chronologicus.

Tom. II. Antw., s. p. Migne, pp. 1 3-48.

II. Possidius : Vita S. Aurelii Augustini.

Reprinted in Migne Aug. Op. Tom. I, pp. 33-66. Cp. Migne Pat. lat. I. p. 407.

III. Ecclesiastica Historia. By the Magdeburg Centuriators. 1559-1574.
Tom. II. and III., Centuria, IV. and V., contain the Donatist history.

IV. Balduinius, Franc.

1 . Delibatio Africanae historiae ecclesticae, s. Optati libri VII. de Schismatc Donatistarum,
etc. Paris, 1563. A second edition with improved readings. lb., 1569. In this the prefaces
and annotations are of value. Reprinted in Du Pin's ed. of Optatus Mil.

2. Historia Carthaginensis Collationis sive disputationis de ecclesia, olim habitae inter
Catholicos et Donatistas. Paris, 1^66. 8. Reprinted in £>u Pin. ib.

V. Baronius. Annates Ecclesiatici. 1588-1607.
Tom. III.-V., contain the Donatist history.

VI. Albaspinceus :

Optati Mel. opera cum notis et observationibus Gabrielis Albaspinm. Paris, 1631.
Valuable mainly for the observations ; reprinted in Du Pin's ed. of Optatus.

Vtl. Casaubonus :

Optati Mel. de schismate Donatistarum libri VII. In eosd. notae et emendationes Merici
Casauboni. Lond. 1631.

These notes are of value and are reproducea with those of other editions in the
Annotationes Variorum of Du Pin's ed

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 371

VIII. Valesius Hetiiicus :

Eusebii Pamph. Historia ecc, libri de Vita Constantini, Fanegyricus, Const. O ratio ad Sanc-
torum coetiim, gr. et lat. cum annotatt. Paris, 1659 and often.
In this is his dissertation : Ve schismate Donatistaruvi.

IX. Long, Thomas, B.D. History of the Donatists. Lond. 1677. 8.

X. Die Pin : Nouvelle Bibliothc'qiie dcs Aitteiirs Eccle'siastiques.

I* St. Aiigustin. Tom. 1 1 [. premiere partie, pp. 522-S39, 1690. Particularly the review
of vol. IX. of Augustin's collected works, pp. 792-811.

2. In Tom. II., Troisieme partie, 1 701, there are also many allusions to the history and
literature.

3. In his ed. of Optatus Mel., Historia Donatistarum.

XL Ittig, Thomas: de HaeresiarcJiis a-vi apostolici at apostol. prox. lips. 1 690-1 703. 4.

XII. Leydecker Melchior ; Historia Ecclesiastica Africana. 2 Tom. i^. See above. Traj.
1690. 4.

XIII. Witsius, Hermann : Miscellaneormn Sacrorum libri. 2 vols. Amst. i6()2. 4.
In vol. I. Disscrtatio de schismate Donatistarum.

XIV. Bernino :

Historia di tutte I'heresie descritta da Domenico Bernino. Vejiezia 171 1. Tom. I.,
contains hist, of Donatism.

XV. Storren, J. Ph. : ansfiihrlicher und griindlicher Bericht von den Namen, Ursprung,
v.s.w. der Donatisten. Frank/. 1723. 8.

XVI. Norisitis, Henricus :

Opera otnnia nunc prim, collecta et ordinata. Veronae, Tumcrmani, 1729-32, /i?/. i\vols.
The fourth volume contains his posthumous work on History of Donatism, as finished
by Ballerini.

XVII. Tillemont : in his Memoires pour servir a Vhistoire Ecclesiastique :

1. Tom. VI. Histoire du schisme des Donatistes, dii Ion marque aussi tou„ ce qui regarde
I 'Eglise d 'Afrique depuis I 'an 2,o^,yusques en I 'an 391 que S. Augustin Jut fait Prestre. 1732.

2. Tom. XIII. La Vie de Saint Augustin, dans laquelle on trouvera Vhistoire des Dona-
tistes de so?i temps, et celle des Pelagic ns. 1732.

XVIII. Or si:

Delia Istoria Ecclesiastica descritta da F. Guiset)pe Agostino Orsi. Tom. IV. (1741) and
V. (1749) contain the history of the Donatists.

XIX. Walch,Ch. Wilh.Fr.:

Entwurf einer vollstdndigen Historic der Ketzereien, Spaltungen und Religionsstreitigkeiten,
bis auf die Zeiten der Reformation. Leipzig, 1768.

Vierter Theil: Von der Spaltung der Donatisten; with its three sections :

(a) Von der historie der Donatisten.

(b) Von den zwischen den Donatisten und ihren Gegnern geWirten Religionsstreitigkeiten.

This work was the beginning of a new critical estimate of the documents.

XX. Schrbckh, Johann Mattheus : Christliche Kirchengeschichtc. Sechster Theil : 1784,
but particularly Elfter Theil, 1786.
A juster estimate of Donatism.

3/2

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.

XXI. Morcellii, Steph. Ant. : Africa Christiana in tres partes distribiita. 3 vols. 4.
Brixiae, 1816-17. 4. P. II. for Donatism.

XXII. Bindemann, C. : Der heilige Aiigustinus, 1 844-1 869.

Bdd. II. & III. contain excellent analyses of the works on Donatism, as well as a
history during Augustin's life.

XXIII. Boux, Adrianus :

Dissertatio de Aurelio Augi/stino, adversaria Donatistarum. Lugduni Batavorum, id>2,^.
A brief summary of the works and doctrine.

XIV. Bibbeck:

Donatiis und Augustinus oder der erste entscheidende Kampf zwisc/ien Separatismus und
Kirche. Bin Kirchen/iistorischer Versuc/i von Berditiand Bibbeck. Elberfeld. 1857. 8.
An uncritical history ; but a vigorous analysis, apologetic and polemic.

XXV. Dcutsch :

Drei Actenstiicke zur GescJiichte des Donatismus. Neii herausgegeben und erkldrt %>on
Ma rtin Deiitsch. Berlin, 1875.

The first work on the textual and historical criticism of the sources.

XXv^I. Voelter :

B)er Ursprung des Donatistnns, nach den Quellen imtersiicht und dargestcllt von Lie Dr,
Daniel Voelter. Brciburg i. B. und Tubingen, 1883.

This keen writer, at present Prof. Ord. in Univ. of Amsterdam, has gone still further
into textual and historical criticism, and gives fair promise of a more impartial
hearing for Donatism. It is to be hoped that he will fulfill his qualified promise
of further research.

Among the general church histories particular mention may be made of Gieseler,
Neander, Lindner, Niedner, Robertson, Ritter, Hergenrother, Schaff. The articles on
Augustin, Donatism and related persons and topics in Ceillier, Ersch und Gruber, Herzog,
Schaff-Herzog, Smith's Dictionary of Christian Biography, Wetzer and Welte, Lichtenberger,
are more or less noteworthy. Mention must also be made of the Patrologies, the biogra-
phies, Hefele's Conciliengeschichte. the Analyses Patrum, etc.

Chapter II. — An Analysis of Augustin's Writings against the Donatists.

The object of this cliapter is to present a rudimentary outline and summary of all that
Augustin penned or spoke against those traditional North African Christians whom he was
pleased to regard as schismatics. It will be arranged, so far as may be, in chronological
order, following the dates suggested by the Benedictine edition. The necessary brevity
precludes anything but a very meagre treatment of so considerable a theme. The writer
takes no responsibility for the ecclesiological tenets of the great Father, nor will he enter
here into any criticism of the text and truth of the documents, upon which the historical
argument was so laboriously and peremptorily built, to the utter ignoring of the Donatist
archives, and the protests of their scholars against the validity and integrity of their oppo-
nents' records. Both parties claimed to be the historic Catholic church; both were little
apart in doctrine, worship, and polity; both tended toward externalism in piety; both accused
one another of fraud in inventing records. Later Romanism in its bright spirit of selec-
tion took much spoil from either camp.

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 373

The city of Augustin's birth, its neighborhood, indeed the whole ecclesiastical province of
Numidia, was a stronghold for this puristic school. Is it not singular, then, that it seems
to have made no impression upon his early years ? As a child he had witnessed its brief*
restoration under Julian; and then the severe or lax efforts at suppression under succeeding
emperors; the Rogatian schism and the Tychonian reformation were quite familiar to him
in his Manichasan period; but the Confessions are silent as to any such stamp or hold upon
his mind. His activity begins with his ordination to the presbyterate, a time marked in
Donatist annals by the Maximianist separation, and increases as he becomes bishop.
From about 392 to near the close of his life, pen and voice were seldom still. In all those
3^ears the outlinear thoughts grew in breadth and depth; endless are the forms in which his
few and radical conceptions manifest themselves; never does he lose sight of the popular
effect, so that he knows when to relax his love of word-play and delight in mysterious induc-
tions, in order to make the chief themes plain to the dullest mind.

How varied the channels through which he struggled for the mastery of his idea of the
Church ! In the pulpit he made Donatism the occasion of many a polemic, many an appeal;
in his correspondence it was an ever-recurrent topic; it was the staple of many a tract and
book; verse was not shunned to destroy its fashionableness and popularity; commentaries and
manuals for the meditative hour or for the training of the theological student, abounded in
warnings against its aggressiveness; no opportunity for debate or conference or epistolary
discussion was left unimproved. And no wonder: it was a living thing, of the street, of the
market, of the social circle, of the home; it threatened at times to obliterate the transmarine
view of the church from North Africa; its spirit of political independence and plea for
religious liberty went to the hearts of a people, more and more restive under the decline of
the Empire.

The literary creations of Donatism had been somewhat more fertile than that of Caecil-
ianism. We must not belittle Donatus the Great, Parmenian, Petilian, Gaudentius, and
certainly the eminence of Tychonius is confessed by Augustin himself. Up to this time
Optatus of Milevis had been the only forcible opponent. But against the great Augustin whom
could they bring into the field ? And against the great Augustin, backed by the energy of
the State, there was little hope of fairness. Augustin found a new and weighty school.
Donatism, with its impossible ideal, already began to despise the culture which seemed to
help its defeat and withdrew into its sensitive shell after the manner of all puristic ten-
dencies under persecution.

The two prevalent lines of attack are the historical on the origin of the schism, which
involved the dissectijon of the documents, and the doctrinal, or the discussion of the true
notes of the Church from rhe basis of the Scriptures. This latter Augustin preferred, because
.final; he bowed to no patristic. One or the other or both may be traced in all his works,
great or small, against them. Out of so protracted a controversy there grew up a symmetri-
cal and comprehensive theory of the Church and the Sacraments on either side.

Of three fundamental points of Donatism, as perpetuated practices of North Africa, rebap-
tism and the encouragement of a martyr spirit with its attendant feasts, the continuance of
theSeniores in the government of the Church, we find Augustin aiming mainly at the over-
throw of the first two. One of his earliest letters suggests to his bishop some means for
checking the drunkenness and great excess connected with the Natalitia. Passing to the
specific subject in view:

In the early period of his presbyterate, (possibly about 392, others place it later),
Augustin journeyed through Mutugenna, which apparently belonged to his bishop's see.
He learned how pacifically disposed Maximin, Donatist bishop of Sinaita, was. The friendly
feeling thus kindled toward him was shaken by the rumor that he had rebaptized a defecting

74 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.

Catholic deacon of Mutugenna; not willing to credit the story, he visited the deacon's home.
His parents testified to their son's reception into the same office by the Donatists. In the
« absence of Bishop Valerius, he writes to Maximin with entreaty, refusing to credit the
repetition of the rite, and urging him to remain firm in the convictions which had been
imputed to him. He solicits a reply, that both letters may be read in the public service,
after the dismission of the military. The prominent points of the letter are: while declining
to recognize the validity of Maximin's orders, he does not refuse to salute him as Dominus
dulcissimns , and Fater venerabilis. His solicitude as a shepherd to do his duty to all the
sheep, constrains him to force himself upon their attention, and to be eager for correspond-
ence or conference with a view to bringing them back to the fold. He is perfectly assured
of the absolute and final correctness of his idea of the Church, and of the hopeless error of
Donatism, an error so great as to merit eternal destruction. He discriminates, however,
between heresy and schism at this time. Rebaptism in any case is a sin, but as applied
to apostatizing Catholics, is an immanissimuvi scelus. There is only one baptism, that of
Christ; as there was no double circumcision, so the sacrament of the New Testament should
not be repeated. The Church is the owner of the nations which are Christ's inheritance,
and of the ends of the earth, which are his possession; hence it is universal; the seamless
robe should not be rent. Moreover the Lord's threshing-floor has chaff upon it along with
the wheat, and therefore he urged the disuse of imputations through unworthy members on
either side, whether Macarius or Circumcelliones, The schism made itself disastrously felt in
all domestic and social relations. He engages to avoid anything that would look like using
the power of the state for coercing conscience, and begs that on Maximin's side the Circum-
celliones may be restrained. \Ep. xxiii.]

A Plenary council of all Africa was convened in Hippo-Regius in 393, before which
Augustin preached the sermon. His subject was Faith and the Creed: his handling made such
an impression that he was induced to expand it into the treatise: De Fide et Symbolo. In
explaining the article credimus et sanctavi ecdcsiam, utique catholicain, he reflects on
heretics and schismatics as claiming the title of churches for their congregations; and dis-
tinguishes between these two opponents of the Catholic body, heretics erring in doctrine,
schismatics, while similar to the Catholic body in views of truth yet transgressing in the rup-
ture of fraternal love. Neither pertain to the true Church of God. (Cp. Retractt. I. xvii).

Determined if possible to win the ear of all classes, the presbyter next affected a poem,
'''' Fsalmus contra Fartem F)onati," in the art of an Abecedarium, running the letters to
U. The line with which it began was to be chanted as a refrain after each group of usu-
ally twelve lines connected with each letter, the whole closing with ar^ extended epilogue.
A generally vulgar performance it is, and purposely disclaimed all metrical dignity; and yet
it contains the germs of his logical and historical opinions on the controverted points. The
Church is a net in the sea of the world, enclosing the good and bad, which are not to be
separated until the net is drawn to the shore. Those who accuse the Catholics of tradition,
were themselves traditors and broke the net. The history is repeated, and all proof of the
Donatist charges declared to be wanting. Unity is a note of the Church, and toleration
within the net essential to its preservation. Over against Macarius he puts the violent
Circumcelliones. The wicked members of the Church do not contaminate the good by a
communion which is only outward and not of the heart. The threshing-floor has chaff upon
it; wheat and tares must grow together. The Catholics rear the Elijah altar, the Donatist
the Baal altar over against it. Christ endured Judas. Why rebaptize us, he exclaims,
when you do not repeat the rite upon your once expelled but now restored Maximianists ?
Surely it is better to draw life from the real root. The character of him who administers
the sacrament has nothing to do with its efificiency; and so he returns to the necessity for

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 3;

toleration within the net, as Judas was forborne in the apostolic company. The epilogue
pictures the personified Church expostulating with the Donatists for quarreling with their
jMother, and presents a loose summary of the previous arguments

It is doubtful whether, even in the fashion of the times, so lengthy a poem could become
a street theme, or find many repeaters in the markets and inns of Hippo or Carthage, although
the refrain for peace and truthful judgment miglu catch the ear of the more zealous.
[Cp. Retractt. I. xx.].

The Bishop of Carthage, Donatus the Great, the sphinx of Donatism, had written a
book to vindicate the claim of his church to the only Christian baptism. The work obtained
considerable currency, and maintained its authority, even in Augustin's day, so he answered
it during the year 393, most probably, in a treatise of one book now no longer extant, but
which has been given the title: ''Contra Episiolam Donati hcerefici.'' The Retractations (I.
xxi.) correct some points which had been lield in this work. (i). According to the Ambrosian
view, Augustin here identified Peter with the rock, on which the Church was to be built; but
afterwards he regarded that rock as Christ, who was the subject of the Petrine confession;
on Christ was the Church to be built, and to the Church as thus reared, were given tlie keys.
(2). The Donatus present at the Roman Synod, he had spoken of as the bishop of Carthage,
the author of the book, which error is corrected in the Retractations. (3). He had also
charged the writer with falsifying a favorite passage of their side, Ecclus. xxxiv. 30, but
afterwards found that some codices read according to the Donatist quotation, and apologizes
for his assertions.

Doubtless many of the sermons preached during his presbyterate had reference to the
schism, but the chronology of these is too uncertain to allow of any definite arrangement.

We pass to the period of his co-bishopric with the aged Valerius, which dates from 395 A.D.

Evodius, a brother connected with the Church at Hippo Regius, had a chance meeting
with Proculeianus, bishop of the Donatist body in that diocese. The two fell into a discussion
of their mutual differences. Evodius spoke in rather a lofty and censorious way, after the
fashion of his side, and wounded the feelings of the older disputant, for the Donatists, like
all kindred bodies, cultivated an undue sensitiveness and were altogether too ready to take
offense. Proculeianus, however, expressed a perfect readiness to have a friendly debate
with Augustin in the presence of competent men. In view of this suggestion, and in the
absence of Valerius, Augustin, always anxious to improve such an opening, addressed A
letter to Proculeianus [c. 396), with courteous recognition, and no such sharp denial of the
episcopal function as in the case of Maximin. He apologizes for the severe language of his
friend, and in every way avoids any expression which might cause the tendrils again to be
drawn in. The methods suggested for discussion show the anxiety of Augustin to beat out
the fire of Donatism; there is the debate before chosen hearers, all the statements to be
written out for use; or there is the private discussion through mutual discourse, to be read
to one another and corrected, and so given to the people; or the single correspondence with
a view to public lections, or any possible way that the aged bishop himself might prefer.
He urges that the dead bury their dead, and the past history be left out of the debate;
tl\e present with its burning dissensions affords sufficient topics. As the people seek the
bishop to arbitrate in their private litigations, let these worthies cultivate peace in this
broader field; to this end he invites to prayer and conference. {Ep. xxxiii.).

Apparently the letter led to nothing practical. A new turn was given to matters. A son
had beaten his mother, and threatened her life; to avoid Catholic discipline, he joined the
Donatists and was rebaptized by them: as Augustin says, he wounded also his spiritual
mother hy contemning her sacrament. Public registration of the facts were made by
Augustin, all the more because the reported instructions, given by bishop Proculeianus to his

376 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.

presbyter Victor concerning the affair, liad already been denied. Tlie case presented an
opportunity for getting at some rule for the recognition of one anotlier's discipline. Accord-
ingly Augustin addresses himself to Eusebius, a judicious Donatist of higher rank. He
professes tuat his aim is peace; he emphasizes with impatient vehemence his opposition to
coercive measures in matters of conscience: ncqiie me id agcrc ut ad coDivimiionein catlio-
licam quisquam cogatiir invitiis. He asks Eusefeius to find out whether Proculeianus had
given the order to his presbyter as recorded; whether the bishop would consent to a collation
between themselves and ten selected men on each side, agreeably to the original suggestion,
so that the whole question might be discussed from the Scriptural grounds, not the his-
torical. Some proposals for a meeting either at the Donatist region of Constantina, or at
their projected council at Milevis, he could not accept, because both lay outside of his
diocese. If Proculeianus objected to the dialectic and rhetorical skill of his counter bishop,
the latter would propose Samsucius, bishop of Turris, an earnest but uncultivated man, as a
substitute to lead the Catholic side. {£p- xxxiv.).

Eusebius declined to interfere on the ground that he could not be a judge, so Augustin
replies {Ep. xxxv, ) that he had only asked him to make some inquiries, because the bishop
refused to have any direct communication. The need for some adjustment concerning
discipline had become very pressing; a Catholic subdeacon and some nuns under rebuke
had been received into full standing by the Donatists, yet their subsequent career had been
even more scandalous. Augustin claimed that the Catholics always respected the penal
enactments of their opponents. To show his own hostility to compulsory conversions, he
cites the case of a daughter, who against the paternal will had joined the Donatists, and had
professed among them; when the father was about to use violence for her recall, he was
dissuaded by Augustin, and when a presbyter of Proculeianus had shouted abusive epithets
at him, although upon the property of a Catholic woman, he neither replied nor allowed
others to resent the insult.

A practical treatise is ascribed by some to this time, called de Agotic Christiano. In
expounding the faith he warns against different groups of heretics and schismatics. In
Chap. xxix. 31, he cautions against listening to the Donatist party, who deny the one holy
Catholic church to be diffused throughout the whole world, and claim it to be alone in Africa,
and there among themselves, against th^ plain Scripture teaching of its universality; they
affirm that the prophecies of its extension have already been fulfilled, after which the whole
church perished outside of their remnant. He alludes to the divisions which have befallen
them as a retribution for their separation. If the end shall come after the preaching of
the gospel to all nations, how can all nations have lapsed from the faith, when there re-
main some who are yet to hear and believe ? This system robs Cnrist of His glory, and is
to be avoided by all who love the Church. (Cp. Rctractt. II. iii.).

In 397 A. D., at the death of Valerius, he became sole bishop. In this year, while on a
visit to Tibursi, he had met with Glorius and other Donatists, with whom he held a friendly
disputation on the origin and history of the schism, during which some Donatist documents
were produced which he declared to be false, and from memory recapitulated the archives
current on his side. Augustin pursued his journey to Gelizi, where he attended to some
episcopal duties, and brought back with him a copy of the Catholic Gesta, and spent a day
with these friends in reading them, but could not quite finish. He subsequently reproduces
this story with the arguments in a letter. {Ep. xliii.). The chief burden is a criticism of
the Acts, highly important in its place, but it must be passed by here save to remark that
in speaking of Bishop Secundus, he suggests that it would have been better to appeal to the
principalities of Rome or of some other apostolic church, than to have proceeded as he did;
he should have preserved the unity at all hazards; had the case been inexplicable, he should

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. Z']']

have left it to God; if definable, he should have addressed the transmarine bishops, after
j finding that his peers at home could not adjust the difficulty; disobedience on the part of
C^ecilian to such an order, would have made him the author of the schism; but now the
Donatist altar is set up against the Universal Church, It may be well to note that tnrough-
out the survey of these acts, there appears a manifest contradiction as to the beginning of
the appellations. In the next place, the Donatists are held guilty of schism, rebaptism, and
resistance to civil correction; of non-communion with those churches concerning whom they
read in their lections; and of the demand for purism against the Lord's parable. The angels
of the churches in the apocalypse are ecclesiastical powers, not heavenly messengers. The
Church cannot be charged with the crimes of the evil men in it. Toleration is the only
practice by which unity can be conserved; Moses bore with murmurers, David with Saul,
Samuel with the sons of Eli, Christ with Judas. They themselves forbear with Circunicel-
liones, with Optatus bishop of Thamugada. The emphasis, however, is not so much upon
those matters as upon schism. He would rather leave the archives and elucidate the
doctrine, in which he claims to have the book of the world; that the Catholics are the Lord's
inheritance; that they stand in fellowship with the churches of the New Testament; they are
the light of the world. A divine rebuke has befallen Donatism in all the tenets of its partic-
ularity, by the schism and return of the Maximianists.

No open door was passed by. On a journey to Cirta, possibly about the beginning of
398 A.D., he visited with clerical friends the aged Donatist, bishop Fortunius, at Tibursi.
A great company gathered who interrupted the debate; all attempts at taking notes were
finally given up. In a letter {Ep. xliv.) to the Donatists, Eleusius, Glorius, and the two
Felixes, who were of the number of those addressed in the previous epistle, he speaks of
their witness to the conciliatory disposition of Fortunius, and recounts the substance of the
inten'iew, with the desire that it may be submitted to that bishop for correction. The dis-
cussion had opened with the question of the Church. Fortunius regretted that Augustin
was not in it; the latter reversed the wish. What is the Church? Is it diffused through-
out the whole world, or is it confined to Africa ? Can the Donatists send letters of com-
munion to any of the apostolic churches? Thence they dissected the Donatist claim to be
the people of God, on account of their subjection to persecution; in wliich it appears
that they recorded the schism of the whole world from themselves as the true Church
as due to sympathy with the Macarian persecution; up to that time they had held fel-
lowship with the whole world, and as proof thereof brought forward a letter of a coun-
cil of Sardica addressed to them. From the condemnation of Athanasius and Julius
by this document, Augustin, to whom it was new, concluded that this was an Arian coun-
cil, and was only the more damaging to their theory. The note of persecution being re-
sumed, he maintained that there was no approved suffering unless for a just cause, and hence
the justice of the cause must first be established. Though Ambrose had endured violence
at the hand of the soldiery, they would deny him to be a Christian, for they would rebap-
tize even him. Maximianists on the other hand were confessed to be just, although they
had been dispossessed of their basilicas by the Primianist appeal to the state. As an off-
set, Fortunius urged the curious fact that before the election of Majorinus, an interventor
had been chosen, whom the Caecilianists put out of the way. On the following day
Augustin had to confess that there was no example in the New Testament to justify com-
pulsion in matters of faith. The next topic was Discipline. Augustin pleaded for tolera-
tion in order to keep unity. A point as to Johannic baptism sprang up, but was not pressed.
From this time the debate became miscellaneous and repetitious; in its progress Fortunius
confessed reluctantly that rebaptism was a fixed practice among them, and that even a
Catholic bishop so highly esteemed among the Donatists for his non-persecuting spirit as was

7S INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.

Genethlius, would have to submit to the rite before he could be recognized by their body.
Augustiii proposes a further examination of matters, with a view to peace, but the pacific
Fortunius doubts whetlier many of the so-called Catnolics really desire concord, to which
Augustin replies that he can find ten men who would heartily enter into such a con-
ference.

On the next day the venerable Donatist calls upon his opponent to resume their talk,
until an ordination called Augustin away; we also obtain information of the Ccelicolce as
professing a new sort of baptism, with whose leader he desired to confer. The letter closes
with a proposition to meet in the little village of Titia, near Tibursi, where there was no
church, and the population pretty equally divided, and where no crowd could disturb the
progress of the investigation; thither all documents should be brought and the whole sub-
ject canvassed for as long a time as it might take to terminate the discussion.

During the year Augustin issued a weighty work, which stands closely related to these
visits to Fortunius. It was in two books named by himself: Contra partem Donati. Un-
happily it is lost, but in the Retractations (II. v.), he says, that in the first book he had
opposed the use of the secular power for compelling the schismatics to return to the com-
munion of the State Church, a form of discipline which experience afterwards persuaded \A
him was necessary and wholesome.

Possibly it was at the close of the year 398 that a hint from the Donatist bishop Hon-
oratus was brought by Herotes to Augustin, to the effect that they carry on a correspon-
dence on the questions in dispute between them, and avoid the uproar of public debates.
Augustin acquiesces heartily, and at once plunges i^Ep. xlix.) into the doctrinal aspect of the
matter. He begins with the note of Universality, the Church is diffused through the whole
world, to establish which he brings forward some of his key passages, Ps. ii. 7, 8, Matt,
xxiv. 14, Rom. i. 5. With all the apostolic churches Catholics communicate, Donatists
do not. How then can this universality be limited .'' Why call the Catholic church Macarian,
when the name of Macarius or Donatus is not known in any of these gospel regions ? It rests
with Donatists to prove how the Church is lost from the whole world and is confined to
them. Catholics can rely on the Scriptures only for their theory. Correspondence seems
to him also the better plan for discussion. Whether this mutual approach went further is
not known.

It may have been in 399 A.D. that the Donatist presbyter Crispinus had met Augustin
at Carthage; the two joined words, and both seem to have become heated; the former made
promise to resume the parley at a later date, to the fulfillment of which the bishop had
occasionally urged him. When Crispinus was elevated to the see of Calama, c. 400 A.D., '
and was not far from Augustin's diocese, the latter addressed him a letter {Ep. li.) rehears
ing these facts. A new rumor credited Crispinus with being ready to enter the arena once
more. All salutation is avoided in Augustin's letter, because the Donatists had accused him
of servility. For the sake of accuracy and instruction he proposes simply to correspond,
whether by one interchange of letters or by many. He pleads that present interests alone may
be touched upon. Schism according to the Old Testament was more severely punished
than idolatry or the burning of the sacred scroll. The charge of traditorship is set off Iiy
the acceptance of the Maximianists, whom the council of Bagai had condemned in such
severe terms. If a mistake was made with regard to them why not in Caecilian's case? If
these were really guilty, you consulted the wider duties of unity and toleration, and win-
not carry these principles farther and apply them to communion with the Catholics ?
As to the charge of persecution, Augustin will not enter into the merits of the matter
theoretically, nor stop to plead the mildness of the measures used, but at once asks why
the Donatists used the State to dislodge the Maximianists, and to deny the Catholics the

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 379

possession of genuine baptism is made foolish by the recognition of the rite as existing
among the Maximianists who had been cut off, and were restored without a renewal of the
ceremony. The whole world had been condemned by the Donatists without an opportunity
of being heard, and yet they accept the sacrament of the condemned Felicianus and
Praetextatus. While they deny tiie validity of the symbol as administered by apostolic
communions, and by the missionary churches which brought the light to Africa, they main-
tain that their little fraction alone is its possessor. Summarizing these arguments as a
weight for the bishop to stagger under, he invokes the peace of Christ to conquer his
heart.

In this same year one of his relatives, Severinus, who was a Donatist, sent a communi-
cation to him at Hippo by a special messenger, with a view of reopening friendly intercourse
with his kinsman; and Augustin seizes it as a way to reestablish as well the higher kinship in
Christ (i5)^. Hi.). TheChurch is an unconcealabie city set on a hill; it is Catholic, being diffused
throughout the whole world. The party of Donatus is cut off from the historic root of the
Oriental churches, and therefore cannot bring forth the fruits of peace and love; indeed it
suppresses Christ by its rebaptism. Had their charges been genuine the transmarine bishops
would have supported them; at any rate they should not have withdrawn from the Unity,
I but rather have practiced toleration. He hopes that the bonds of custom may be broken
j by Severinus, and that both may find their truest relationship in Christ, since the state of
I schism is a despising of the eternal heritage and of perpetual salvation.

Further along in the year, a Donatist presbyter had sent to Generosus an ordo Chris-
I tiatutatis, or episcopal succession of Constantina, his native city, asserting that it had been
delivered by an angel from heaven. About nothing were the church externalists of every
camp so eager as the preservation of the succession in proof of antiquity. Generosus had
only laughed at the man's stupidity, but nevertheless wrote to the bishop of Hippo about it.
Fortunatus, Alypius and Augustin combine in a reply, undeniably written by the latter,
commending him [Ep. liii.). The ordo Christia?iitatis of the whole world is theirs, from
which the Donatists do not hesitate to separate themselves. This presbyter's fiction
would have to be rejected at any rate, even had it come from an angel, since all other gos-
pels than that which teaches the universality of the Church are anathema. That doc-
trine is in Matt. xxiv. 14, Gen. xii. 3, Gal. iii. 16. The true ordo is the Roman, which
he gives from Peter to Anastasius, the cotemporary pope; no Donatist is found in
this list; yet as Montenses and Cutzupitse, they have intruded into Rome. Had there
been an actual tradition, or any wicked man in the Church, that would not have vitiated
the ordo, or the Church, for the law of Christ is plain, Matt, xxiii. 3, a passage again
and again quoted by Augustin to substantiate this thought. They are separated from
the peace of these very churches, concerning which they read in their codices, and sing
pax tecum. There follows a very full and notable summary of the acts, as a refutation of
the schism. He prefers the Scriptural proofs, which certify to the world-wide reach of
Christ's inheritance, and its existence among all nations; from this they are separated by
a nefarious schism, and charge upon the Catholics the crimes of the chaff on the threshing-
floor, which must be mixed with the grain until the winnowing; these accusations do not
affect the wheat which grows with the tares in the field until the end. Their divinely appointed
retribution is in the history of the Maximianists, with whom they now commune, and
affirm that they are not stained thereby; let them apply that lenity of judgment to the in-
heritance of Christ. The angel then was either Satan, or the man is Satanic, yet his sal-

ation is desired; the sharp writing concerning him is without odium, and seeks only his
correction.

Celer was a Donatist, a man of middle age and of considerable estate and civil position.

-So INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.

He afterwards rose to the proconsulship. Augustin expresses {^Ep. Ivi.) a peculiar respect
and affection for him, as a man of integrity and seriousness. He had desired direct instruc-
tion from the bishop, both in a matter of Christian culture and in the controversies between
the two parties. Weighed down with the cares of visitation, Augustin had to delegate his
presbyter Optatus to the reading and explanations of the bishop's works and views in Celer's
leisure hours. The superior claims of the life beyond are set before him, together with the ij
overwhelming force of the proofs against the schism, so that the dullest with patience and
attention can get correction. The sundering of the bonds of custom and of a perversity
that has become familiar, is a matter requiring great strength of character, for which step,
however, he, under God, would be readily capable.

But Celer was not persuaded to change his church connection by this first endeavor. On
the contrary, Augustin thought he saw a laxity in the enforcement of the repressive measures
ordered by the gos^ernment, and so wrote a second time {Ep. Ivii.). He affirms that there
is no just cause for separation from that Catiiolic church which prophets and evangelists
have declared should be diffused through the whole world. A long retained codex of
Augustin, which had been loaned to Celer through Caecilian, his own son, who seems t:)
have been under the special tutelage of the bishop, was designed to convince the state
oiificial on this very point (we do not know which writing it may have been), should inclination
or leisure lead him to its perusal, and whatever difificulties might occur, Augustin was ready to
answer. He desires him also to stir up his subordinates to greater care in restoring the
Catholic unity in the region of Hippo; indeed he cautions him to diligence on his own estates;
a friend there, who fears to be strict in the carrying out of the statutes, could have his position
alleviated by a word from Celer his patron. From this point we notice a decided sympathy
with the effort to break up Donatism by force.

Parmenian, the successor of Donatus the Great in the see of Carthage, was one of the
brightest disputants on their side. Against him Optatus of Milevis had directed his review
of the schism, full indeed of grave historical blunders, but not lacking in that suavity which
those who think they have the keys of heaven sometimes affect. When Tychonius had
exposed some of the inconsequences and weaknesses of the Donatist theory of the Church,
Parmenian undertook a reply, whose main object was to fortify the propositions, (i) that the
evil defile the good in the Church, and must therefore be cut off; and (2) that puristic
folly, that the Donatist community was absolutely pure in its membership and priesthood.
To this much-esteemed work, Augustin replies {c. 400 A.D.) in three books: Contra Episto-
lam Parmeniani.

In Book I. the main question is, who really incurred the guilt of schism, and initiated
the appeal to the State ? He opens with the praise of Tychonius as man and author, but
misses the acute drift of that great man's argument. He seeks to answer the data of the i
origin of the separation as given by Parmenian, who attributes it to the joint movement of i
Gaul, Spain and Italy in seeking to make their views universal, and to the influence of !
Hosius over Constantine, in winning him to tneir opinion; nor does Parmenius cease to j
deprecate the imperial intervention Augustin defends this use of the secular arm, but \
accuses the Donatists by their history of beginning it in the appeal to Constantine, in the j
treatment of the Rogatists and Maximianists, in the abuses of the Circumcelliones, in their j
petition to Julian. |

Book II. discusses the texts alleged by the Donatists in support of the purity of the ''■
Church, the need of discipline, the sole validity of their baptism and ordination, the blame- i
lessness of their members and clergy. While both fail in exegetical principles, Parmenian, i
after the manner of his school, is aggravatingly guilty of using mere catch-words, without j
regard to text or context. He quotes indiscriminately whatever sounds favorable to his I

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 381

cause. Some of the passages are: Is. v. 20, Prov. xvii. 15, Is. lix. i-S, Ecclus. x. 2,
Is. Ixvi. 3, Prov. xxi. 27, and others. Augustin gives his interpretations, and does not fail
to prod his opponent with barbs of Optatus, Maximianists, and Circumcelliones.

Book III. handles further the theory of purism in the light of Scriptural proofs. The
first part is mainly an endeavor to give the true significance of i Cor. v. 12, 13. (Compare
his correction in the Retractt. II. xvii.). Augustin is constrained to confess the need of
some internal discipline, and then enforces with wider range the notes of universality,
unity and toleration, especially as illustrated by Cyprian. [Cp. Retractt. II. xvii.].

In the work against Parmenian, he had promised to write more fully on this subject of
baptism, the frequent persuasions of the brethren also moved him so that in this same year
(4C0 A.D.) he issued the seven books De Baptismo: Co?itra Donaiistas. The double pur-
pose is to define that sacrament as the property of Christ, and to overthrow the Donatist
appeal to the authority of Cyprian and the famous council of Carthage, with its eighty-seven
deliverances in favor of the repetition of the rite. Since this is one of the works translated
in the accompanying volume any further analysis may be passed by. [Cp. Retractt. II.
xviii.].

In this period of frequent and heated controversy, a Donatist layman, Centurius by
name, brought some of their quotations and writings, and supported with Scriptural proofs
to the Church in Hippo. It seems to have begun with an exposition of Prov. ix. 17.
(N. Afr. version and LXX). Augustin answered them briefly in a tractate, which he
entitles: Contra quod attulit Centurius a Donatistls. It is however not extant. In the
Retractations (II. xix.) it is placed immediately after the work on Piaptism.

Meanwhile, and as the Retractations tell us, before he had finished his work on the
Trinity, and his literal commentary on Genesis, he found it desirable to reply to the
pastoral letter of Petilian, Donatist bishop of Constantina; unfortunately only a part of the
epistle came into his hand, so strenuous and vigilant were the efforts to hide their literature
from the eyes of this ardent foe. He replied with one book to so much as he had received,
c. 400 A.D. Some of his clergy subsequently obtained and wrote out a complete copy, so
that he composed the second book, c. 401 A.D. Meanwhile Petilian responded to the
first issue, and this necessitated a third book, c. 401 or 402 A.D. The three books were
collected into one treatise, and are known under the title Contra Litteras Petiliani. The
main object of the series is the refutation of Petilian's proposition: " Conscientla namquc
{sancte) dantls attenditur, quce {qtii) abluat accipientis.'' ''''Nam qui fideni {sciens) a pei-fido
sumpscrit, non fidevi percipit, sed rcatuni." " Wnat we look for is the conscience of the
giver (him who gives in holiness), to cleanse that of the recipient.'' " For he who (wittingly)
receives faith from the faithless receives not faith, but guilt.'* Since the work is also a
part of this volume, we need not dwell on it farther. [Cp. Retractt. II. xxv.]

The civil restraints were applied with vigor on the one side and resented on the other
by the retaliatory Circumcelliones. To Pammachius, a man of senatorial rank, Augustin,
in 401 A.D., sends a letter [^/.Iviii.] of exuberant congratulations and flatteries, because he
had compelled some of his Numidian tenants to return to the mother Church; a converting
agency which he condemns unmercifully when practised by the Donatists. The plan, he
says, would have been urged upon other landholders, had the clergy not been afraid of the
scornful finger of the Donatists, who were in such favor with the proprietors, that an effort
like this might have failed. He desires the senator to circulate this letter wherever there
was promise of effect. The bishop, now thoroughly committed to these arbitrary pro-
cedures, was in some trepidation lest the plausible arguments which the Donatists were
urg-ina:, mieht shake the resolution of Pammachius himself, and so he sends a secret com-
mission of instruction.

382 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.

The coercive measures yielded fruit, and the question about the status of recedent Dona-
tist clergy now became pressing. Augustin had already met with a certain Theodore on
this subject, and in a letter addressed to him \^Ep. Ixi.] c. 401, recapitulated the proposition
then ao-reed upon, to be used as a basis for treatment with all who wanted to come over.
The Catholic church opposed only the schism and the rebaptism among the Donatists; what
was good she was ready to acknowledge. Baptism itself, ordination, self-denial, celibacy,
doctrinal views, especially as to the Trinity, these were confessedly right, only to reap the
profit of them, it was essential for Donatists to be in the unity and in the root.

The Council of Carthage of September 13, 401, adopted this view. Can. 2. There had
also been a remarkable scarcity of Catholic clergy, so that application had been made to
Rome and Milan for relief; probably this had its influence upon so charitable a view of
schismatic ordination.

It was alleged that Crispinus, the bishop of Calama, had bought a state farm at Mappalia,
and had rebaptized the tenants. Augustin was roused by this counter-irritant and wrote
him a letter, c. 402 A. D. \^Ep. Ixvi.], wondering what he would do if the authorities were to
impose the fine for every offense. He pleads for an answer to Christ, whose was all the
world, because bought with his blood, while the Donatist would affirm that Christ had lost
all the world save Africa. He urges a public discussion of the mooted points before these
converts, which should be reported and done into Punic as a test of their freedom in this
conversion, and frankly enough offers to do the same for any case of coercion on his side.
Unless Crispinus and his helpers acquiesce, he will hold them guilty.

The uppermost talk of those times was the extraordinary charity of the Donatists toward
the Maximianists. One form of apology for such a seeming vacation of all their tenets was
to say, e.g., of Felicianus of Musti, that he was ignorantly condemned when innocent and
absent, so in his absence, he was reinstated. This statement was made by a Donatist
bishop, Clarentius, in reply to the inquiries of Naucelio. Alypius and Augustin, who were
made aware of this defense, urged in criticism [-£/>. Ixx.] that the Council of Bagai was
therefore guilty in condemning Felicianus unheard, and all the more in that they afterwards
found him to be innocent. Either he ought not to have been condemned if he was inno-
cent, or if guilty, he ought not to have been received back. If the council erred, why not
apply such a liability to error to the origin of the schism; might not C^ecilian, unheard,
have been condemned although innocent ? But, as a matter of fact, Felicianus was found
guilty while in thorough and declared sympathy with Maximian, and the state was called
upon to enforce his ejection. If he was welcomed without rebaptism, why not treat the
Church diffused through the whole world with the same consideration?

It was probably in the year 402 that he addressed a general appeal to the Donatists
\Ep. Ixxvi.], not to endanger their salvation by continuance in schism. If they counted the
surrender of the sacred books so great a sin, how much more grievous a transgression ought
the refusal to obey the plain commands of these books as to unity be considered. He
brings forward the usual array of passages to demonstrate the universality of the Church,
and that any limitation of this note, can only be at the end of the world. The attempt to
separate the wheat from the tares before the harvest, is only a proof that they are of the
tares. A rapid survey of the origin of the schism follows, and all the archives are made
to tell against them. He asks how they can hold any theory of purism while they regard
Optatus as a martyr and welcome the excommunicated Maximianists? Schism in the
Scriptures is punished more severely than the burning of the books. Why complain about
traditorship when Maximianists are received ? Why abuse the imperial laws directed against
them, when they had invoked the same against the Maximianists ? If theirs is the only bap-
tism, what is the baptism of these Maximianists, which is without question validated ? He

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 3S

-1

challenges the Donatist bishops to discuss these matters with their laity, if they persist in
declining to meet the Catholics, and bids the sheep beware of the wolves and their den.

The ad Catholicos Epistola^ popularly known as de Uniiate Ecclesice, is pretty generally
attributed to Augustin, and is addressed to the brethren of his charge; it may be taken as a
contrast to the previous letter directed to the Donatists, and not unlikely saw the light in 402
A.D. This book is designed as a continuance of the controversy with Petilian, and indeed a
further correspondence is proposed, so that the work must have appeared before that bishop's
death, which is generally placed in this year. The chief question between the two parties
is, Where is the Church ? Is it with Catholic or Donatist? The Church is one and Catholic:
it is the body of Christ, consisting of Him as its Head and those in Him as members.
The historical issue in any of four possibilities of truth or falsity does not justify separation
from this body. The point is. What does the Lord say ? The Donatist should believe in
the books, which he says were delivered up, and put aside all other documents except the
divine canons. Do the Scriptures say that the Church is in Africa only, and in the few
Cutzupitance or Montenses at Rome, and in the house or patrimony of one woman in Spain,
or is it in the whole world ? A second time does he start out with a definition of the Church,
as having for its head the Only Begotten Son, and for its body the members in Him; as
bridegroom and bride, two in one flesh. Any divergence from the Head or the body,
whether caused by difference in doctrine or government, is per se outside of the Church.
He meets the two favorite Donatistic comparisons of the divine institution with the ark and
Gideon's fleece, and then enlarges upon the note of universality, with included unity, by
Scripture texts from the Law, the Prophets, especially Isaiah, and the Psalm.s. From the
Donatist position these are not fulfilled, because, say they, men are unwilling. Men were
created with free will; they believe or disbelieve accordmg to that. When the Church
began to increase in the world, men refused to persevere, and the Christian religion was
lost from all the nations with the exception of the Donatists. All this, replies Augustin, as
if the Spirit of God did not know the future volitions of men. But Christ, after the resur-
rection, said that the Law, the Prophets and the Psalms testified of Him, and that the
fulfillment of his kingdom should begin from Jerusalem. He then follows out the ex-
pansion of the Church as given in the Acts, and the foundation of Christian communities as
mentioned in the Epistles and the Revelation. The Donatists reply to this theory of devel-
opment that the Church perished save among them in North Africa. It is among the few:
for which they cite a similar state of things under Enoch, Noah, Lot, Abraham, Isaac,
and Jacob, and the Kingdom of Judah. The spread of the Church did indeed begin
from Jerusalem, but afterwards an apostasy befell it, in the progress of which the com-
munion of the Donatists alone remained faithful. Augustin says the fact that there are
evil persons in the Church is simply a proof of the fulfillment of those parables of our Lord,
which illustrate the mixed characters in his kingdom. There is indeed a paucity of the
good, but within that communion. Then follows a discussion of the geographical limita-
tion, the Donatists maintaining that the Oriental churches and the rest mentioned in the
sacred canon had receded from the faith. Especially is their favorite paragraph, a passage
from Cant. i. 7, commented upon. He presses the continuous preaching among all nations,
after which event the end is to come; there must be such a universal growth to that end.
Let us cease drawing from the acts and sayings of men about this great matter, and take
the simple testimony of the Scriptures. But the Donatists object: If the Church lie
among you why do you compel us by force to enter its peace? Or if we are evil why
do you desire us? and if we are tares why hinder us from growing until the harvest?
Augustin then justifies the system of correction adopted in loving care foi their salvation,
not failing to remind them of the Circumcelliones and their own action with regard to the

;84 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.

Maximianists. Another inquiry of the Donatists was, How will you recognize us if we"
come to you ? Augustin says, as the universally founded Church is wont to receive, put
away all hatred and your sacraments are acknowledged. This leads to the discussion of
baptism and of that related topic, the effect, of the celebrant's character, upon the re-
cipient. He returns finally to the note of universality as essential to the unity, with the
one Head and the one body.

Somewhere about 404 A. D. two official cases of discipline had occurred in Augustin's
monasterium, which had grieved the pride of the clergy, because they had boasted of their
establishment as really purer than the puristic body gathered about the Donatist bishop Pro-
culeianus. They were more troubled about this than about the sins of the suspected
brethren, one of whom, however, seemed to have considerable injustice done him. While
discussing this matter [in Ep. Ixxviii.] he incidentally mentions the lapse of two Donatists,
who had been received into Augustm's communion, and whose conduct the clergy had
regarded as a proof of the laxity of discipline under Proculeianus.

A sermon on the 95th Ps. (96) may have been preached in the year 404 or thereabouts,
in which he rebukes the Donatists for their pride in claiming either that they, the few in
Africa, are the ones bought by Christ, or that they are so great because this large gift was
bestowed on them alone. And in commenting on v. 10, dicite in nationibus, Dominus
regnavit a ligno, etc., he twits them with seeking this reign by the wood through the cudgels
of the Circumcelliones; and enlarges too upon the theme of universality, against their un-
discoverable here and there.

Caecilianus, whose exact civil office, whether vicar or prcefechis annonce is yet undetermined,
Augustin addresses as presses in Ep. Ixxxvi., which is ascribed to 405 A.D. The severer
edicts of Honorius had just been published. This official had carried them out with telling
earnestness. His administration in the greater part of Africa is particularly commended; the
bishop begs of him to restore the Catholic unity also in Hippo and the frontiers of Numidia.
The ill-success of his own work is not due to lack of episcopal duty, and he asks Csecilianus
to inquire of the clergy, or of the bearer, a commissioned presbyter, about the true state of
matters; he would have the State begin with monitions in the hope of preventing a resort to
severer remedies.

Emeritus, the bishop of Julia Cassarea, one of the seven Donatist disputants at the later
conference, did not shun correspondence or association with his opponents. He is
described as a man of parts and character. Augustin had written a letter to him, which is
not preserved, and it had received no reply. He once more seeks to win him to a friendly
discussion or correspondence \Ep. Ixxxvii.], in this time of general return to the mother
Church, He would have all men of culture come back to the true fellowship. What
Emeritus's particular ground for continuing in separation may be he does not know. He
proceeds to discuss universality, purism, the validity of the documents, the heinousness of
schism, the paucity of numbers, and the right of coercion.

The enforcement of the civil edicts was followed by violent outbreaks of the Circumcel-
liones, especially in Augustin's diocese. The clergy united in a protest \^Ep. Ixxxviii.]
addressed to the venerable Bishop Januarius, a Donatist, probably in 406 A.D. They claim
(i) that they are receiving evil for good. (2) The appeal to the state was begun by the
Majorinists, and two full documents are given in proof. (3) All decrees of the empire since,
are the simple execution of the edict of Constantine against the party of Donatus, which
these had wanted to be issued against Caecilian. (4) The acts of the Circumcelliones, were
the real occasion for sharper efforts at suppression; instances of their cruelty are mentioned. I
(5) "The Catholics have pursued a conciliatory policy by conferences and by desiring a '•
mitigation of the penalties, which were frustrated the one by refusals, the other by a gross \

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 38;

assault on the Catholic bishop of Bagai; all who come into the hands of the state clergy, are
treated with merciful persuasion. (6) Various proposals for peace are suggested.

Festus, a government official and a landed proprietor apparently in Hippo, had written
a letter urging a return of the Donatists to the mother Church. It bore little fruit, and he
asks Augustin first to instruct him and also to give him a tractate for general use. Augustin,
c. 406. \Ep. Ixxxix.], enforces the duty of perseverance in the civil reclamation of the Dona-
tists; their claim of persecution as a note attesting them to be the true people of God is folly,
because it is not the mere suffering but the cause for which one suffers that makes a martyr.
He exhorts him to read the archives and see how the schismatics initiated the appeal to"
the secular power, and' how all things that have befallen them through that arm would have
been the just fate of the Csecilianists, had the Donatist course been approved. Besides,
why this unjust treatment of the Church universal in condemning it unheard, and rebaptiz-
ing its members, who have done them no wrong? The theory that baptism alone is valid
when administered by the just, is putting a trust in man which the Scriptures condemn;
the sacrament is not man's but Christ's; further, one would prefer to be baptized by a bad
man, for then he would receive grace from Christ directly, according to their subterfuge.
He is vexed with their active and passive opposition; the mother has to correct, although
her obstinate child may not like it. They aver that the Catholics accept them without
requiring any change in them, but the change required is great, no less a one than from
error to truth. The bishop proposes as a substitute for Festus's plan, the sending of an
authorized messenger secretly to himself, and they would devise together a method for the
correction of the Donatists.

In the second sermon on Ps. cii. fci.) preached about this time, when enlarging upon the
unity he ridicules the Donatist assertion that the Church which was among all the nations
had perished, as the impudent voice of those who are not in it declares. So is their affirmation
that Scripture prophecies about the spread of the kingdom have been fulfilled; all nations
have believed, but this diftused communion apostatized and perished. He rebukes the
conceit that the Lord's saying, I am with you, even to the end of the world, was designed
for them alone, the Lord foreseeing that the party of Donatus would be in the earth. If
emperors have propounded laws against heretics, it is a part of the predictions which fore-
told how kings would serve the Lord. Thence he expands the notes of universality and
perpetuity.

Cresconius, a layman and philologist, read Augustin's first book in answer to Petilian, and
wrote a reply, which, however, was circulated among the Donatists only. Augustin at last
secured a copy, and wrote (406 A.D., some say as late as 409) Contra Crcsconium Gram-
maticiiin Partis JDo/iati, libri IV Three of these books controvert the arguments of Cres-
conius; part of the third and the fourth entire is a detailed polemic history of the Maxi-
mian schism.

In Book I. he alludes to the occasion of the writing, and hesitates between being
regarded as contumelious if he declined an answer, and arrogant, should he reply. Cres-
conius had attacked eloquence, which Augustin defends as simply the art of speaking, and
as not to be condemned because it has been abused. You do not condemn military arma-
ment for your country because others have taken up arms against the country; the physi-
cian does not refuse to use all drugs because some are baneful; because there are sophists
one is not to deny the value of eloquence. Cresconius seemed to regard its cultivation as
injurious to the simplicity of Christian law and teaching. He also had accused Augustin of
persistent arrogance in his pertinacious pursuit of the Donatists. Augustin claims to du a
good work with good ends in view, and says its fruit has been a rich harvest for the Church.
So the discussion passes on to the use of dialectics, which Cresconius assails, but Augustin
2«;

386

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.

defends as noticing else than a demonstration of residts, either the true from the true or
the false from the false. He justifies not disputatiousness, but the arguments by which
truth is built up, for Christ employed it, and St, Paul wielded its weapons not only with
the Jews but with Epicureans and Stoics. In all this we have an illustration of that un-
fortunate tendency to undervalue culture whenever a puristic community passes into the
lires. Augustin applies the art to one of the points which Cresconius had discussed, viz.,
rebaptism. He had endeavored to prove that it was solely among them. Augustin con-
cedes that the rite is there, but not its profit; in order to enjoy its profit, it must be ad-
ministered lawfully. The oneness of baptism as a ceremony is not dependent on the
oneness of the Church, whereas its profit is. A reprobate society of heretics can have a
good baptism, but it is not properly and not profitably administered among them; the
proper and profitable administration is solely in the Church to salvation; the rite outside is
to judgment.

In Book II. after a resume oi the previous book, he notices first the criticism as to the
true construction of the name Donatista.'; it should rather be Donatiani as Cresconius claimed.
He is ready to concede this, and in his controversy with the philologist will use that form,
but on all other occasion he would prefer the more familiar termination. Cresconius also
protests against the term heretic as applied to them, which he regards as a divergence of
views from the Christian faith; while a schism has sprung up among those for whom the
same Christ was born, died and rose again, who have one religion, the same sacraments, and no
diversity in Christian observance. Augustin, however, while not particularly dwelling on
these agreements, presses upon him the articles of divergence, and asks why they rebaptize ?
The recognition of Donatist ordination concerning which Cresconius had asked, Augustin
declares to be a matter of charity. As to the question of Cresconius, Why, if the Donatists
are such heretics and so sacrilegious, if they are indeed guilty of a nefarious and inexpiable
crime, some purification is not adopted when they come over to the Catholic church ? Augustin
answers: We do not regard it as inexpiable, and baptism is not to be repeated, it is Christ's;
on coming to us the Donatist receives the Spirit signified by that rite; he begins to have health-
fully what he previously had hurtfuUy and unworthily. The relation of the celebrant to the
symbol as presented by Cresconius is a modification of Petilianism. " Regard is had,'' says
he, " to the conscience of the giver, not according to its actuality, which cannot be perceived,
but according to his reputation, whether that be true or false.'' Augustin does not fail to
crowd him for the change of base. The favorite passages of Ps. cxli. 5, Jer. xv. 18, and
Ecclus. xxxiv. 31 , are gone over. Then he answers the charge made by Cresconius, as to the
right of any sinner to baptize among the Catholics. Finally, he reviews Cyprian's relation
to rebaptism, who is not a canonical authority for him; the Scriptures alone are such; but
the Donatists ought to consider that decision of his to remain in unity from the fact that
the mixed nature of its membership requires toleration.

Book III. Augustin contends that the Donatists by their schism from especially the
Eastern churches had violated the principle of toleration, which their boasted leader had
so strenuously enforced. There follows then a seriatim consideration of the points made
by Cresconius, similar to those maintained by Petilian, as to the importance of the origin
and the head and root in baptism, or the character of the celebrant, and the rebaptism by
Paul of John's disciples. The case of Optatus and the Maximianists next come under
review, as witnesses against their testimonies. Cresconius says he will neither absolve nor
condemn Optatus, and as to the Maximianists, he professes to have made special inquiry
into the whole history. The Synod had granted a season of delay during which all who
returned should be held innocent. Of this very many availed themselves; the baptism of
these was valid; those who remained outside lost both baptism and the church. Augustin

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 387

refutes the statement from its inherent contradictions and from the language of the Synod
against the Maximianists. Cresconius also brings forward the Sardican council's letter to
Donatus as a proof of sustained fellowship. Augustin declares it lO be an Arian council; and
he insists on paralleling all Cresconius would say about Crecilianism with the career of the Max-
imianists. With reference to persecution, he c\tt?> i?i extc?iso their own persecutions, thecase
of Severus, bishop of Thubursicubur; the acts of Optatus; his own treatment at a collation by
the Circumcelliones; the case of Crispinus, the Donatist bishop of Calama; their own
invocation of the state against the Maximianists. Thence he returns to the doctrine of the
unity as universal with many of the familiar Scripture texts, and asserts by the documents
that the Donatists were the occasion of the rupture

Book IV. is a review of Cresconius's work by the light of the Maximianist records.
Beginning with a pleasantry as to their eloquence and dialectic spirit, he follows in detail
the points of Cresconius whether doctrinal or historical as to Csecilian, mainly with Maximi-
anist data as offsets. Cresconius charges Augustin with having called Petilian Satan, and
so violating the peace he professes. Augustin claims that he only compared the error not the
person, to Satan. Nor had Cresconius forgotten to bring out the Manichaeism of his opponent.
Augustin reminds him both of what he had written against them and also of what sins were for-
given in the return of Maximian, who was an old man when Augustin was but young; these
were the sins of his youth. The theories of fellowship, of persecution, of baptism, are all
considered in the light of their own council of Bagai and its sequences. [Cp. Retracit. II.
xxvi.].

After concluding his work against Cresconius, he issued, probably in this same year, a little
treatise he had promised, containing a collection of proofs both for Donatist and Catholic
I popular use. To the pledge itself an unknown Donatist replied, which led to the production
of a second book, whose title Augustin designed to be: Contra iiescio qiccm Donatlstam. The
original promise was fulfilled in the publication of the Probatioms et Testinio7iia contra
Donatistas, embracing all the ecclesiastical and public acts and Scripture proofs bearing on
the questions between them. It was designed mainly for public reading in the basilicas.
Both were joined in one book, although apparently afterwards separated. In each he con-
fesses to the error of placing the purgation of Felix after instead of before the vindication
of Csecilian. At this writing he still regarded the Donatists as psychics and babes, but in
his old age corrects his application of the words to them, since he came to consider them
rather as dead and lost. Unfortunately neither treatise has been preserved. [Cp. Retractt.
II. xxvii. and xxviii.].

He also conceived the plan of preparing a polemic for the people who had little time ^or
extended reading, by refuting the entire theory of the schism through the story of the
excision and restoration of the Maximianists. It appeared c. 406 A.D. under the name of
Admonitio Dofiatistarum de Maximianistis: this too is lost. [Cp. Retractt. II. xxix.].

An acquaintance of earlier days in Carthage, Vincentius, had become bishop of the little
Rogatist fragment as the immediate successor of Rogatus himself at Cartenna. He, or
some one of that little band, had written a letter to Augustin with a pretty strong plea against
persecution. This was not unlikely in c. 408 A.D., and Augustin answers in one of his
most weighty epistles [Ep. xciii.), under the supposition that Vincentius was the author,
and vindicates the help of the State. Evidently a change had come over Numidia, for he
boasts of the multitudes who had been converted, and rejoices in the fruitful use of the
secular arm for their salvation. Even Circumcelliones had become steadfast Catholics,
Coercion stimulates the thoughtless and those bound by custom, and delivers these held
back by fear; it is like a wholesome medicine, or the wounds inflicted by a friend. God
chastens in order to better the life and to bring men to repentance. The householder

3SS INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.

instructs us to compel them to come in. Sarah and Hagar are types; so the mother Church
corrects her children. Everything depends on the aim in persecution, whether it be done
for oppression or for good; it is the difference between Pharaoh and Moses in their treat-
ment of Israel, The Father gave up the Son, and the Son gave Himself up; while Judas
betrayed Him. The righteousness of the end for which one suffers alone constitutes
martyrdom. The Rogatist is not suffering for righteousness but for unrighteousness.
Augustin is constrained to confess that there are no persecutions recorded in the New
Testament as inflicted by Christians, but explains the omission as due to the fact that
rulers were not yet members of the Church. He thinks, too, that the moderate and dis-
criminating form of the correction employed, helps to justify a resort thereto. If the
Rogatists have nothing to do with the violence of the Circumcelliones, and use no force
as the rest of the Donatists do, it is because they are so few and feeble. The Donatists,
however, did use the secular arm against the Maximianists, and in the appeal to Julian. He
will not allow a distinction between resort to law for the recovery of property and for the
coercion of the conscience. He claims that to regain one's own in this way has no apostolic
warrant. The Donatists, too, sought imperial aid to coerce Csecilianus. Why shall not
Catholics return in kind ? The very edict of confiscation which had hit them they had hoped
might fall on the head of Csecilian and his followers. What Tychonius said describes the very
essence of Donatist arbitrariness: quodvobimus sanctum est. The sin of separation from the
whole world followed; the universal church was condemned unheard, and the toleration which
Cyprian urged disregarded. He traces his own change of views from the non coercive to the
coercive policy, the success of the method in hastening conversions won him wholly as an en-
thusiastic and persistent supporter. He bids Vincentius flee from the wrath to come. What
is his little handful compared with the universal Church? This note of universality he develops
m extenso against their limitation, and especially their new definition of Catholic, as obedience
to all the laws and the sacraments, and to their childish allegory of Cant. i. 7. He hints that in
the ancient times there might have been a little schism which anticipated the Rogatists, and
which had called itself exclusively the Church. He thinks it is also the duty of the State to
suppress idolatry. The passage quoted from Hilary by Vincentius, as to the few who in Asia
in his day were believers in spite of the spread of the Church, Augustin softens into an excited
picture of the dark times of persecution. Next, he discusses the position of Cyprian, All
patristic testimony, however, is of no final value; the only authority is the Word of God.
Moreover, if Cyprian be quoted, why not on the side of his love for unity and toleration?
The averment that the Church, with the exception of the Rogatists, perished by fellowship
with the unbaptized, is met with the fact that in Cyprian's time men had been received with-
out rebaptism into the Church, and therefore the Church, according to their theory, must
have perished before their day; if it, however, survived that condition, then there is no
excuse left for a schism on that ground. One is not of higher merit than Cyprian simply
because he may abhor that father's error, any more than they who did not fall into Peter's
mistake are above him in worth on that account. Indeed Cyprian may have rectified his
fault before death; and some say that those passages are interpolations. Augustin, however,
concedes their authenticity. Cyprian, in his Epistle to Antonianus, shows how the African
bishops maintained unity in spite of the corrupt lives of some colleagues; variations of opinion
were allowed; neither were they contaminated by such a fellowship, nor was the Church de-
stroyed. Tychonius states the result of a Donatist council which granted fellowship to those
in their own body who had been guilty of tradition, and that without rebaptism, in case the
restored should oppose such a repetition of the rite. Deuterius, bishop of Macriana, had
admitted traditors to his communion without renewing the sacrament, and many witnesses of
both facts were living in Tychonius' s own day. Parmenian had indeed replied to the argu-

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 389

meats, but could not gainsay the facts. Augustin professes in all sincerity his anxiety for
the salvation of the jeopardized Donatists; the Church acknowledges the Sacrament which
they have administered, and desires them to have the profit thereof. In defence of rebaptism
Vincentius had alleged the case of Paul, repeating the ceremony after John. Augustin asks
was John then a heretic ? If not, it is for you to say why the ordinance was iterated. Christ's
baptism is always the same and must not be iterated; it has nothing to do with the merit or de-
merit of the individual, or else Paul would not have declined its continuous administration.
He begs him to put no confidence in the accident of their being a little company, and
not to arrogate to themselves tlie title of Catholic, in the sense of being keepers of the
entire law and all the sacraments, nor to peculiar sanctity as the few who were to have faith
at the coming of the Son of Man. The Church does not take pleasure in correction, save
for conversion; she abhors those who seek Donatist property out of sheer covetousness, yet
all property does belong to the true Church. She has also no delight in any who disre-
gard Donatist discipline, by receiving members who have been ejected from that body for
sin. The Catholic Churcli sustains the unity, and recognizes the mixture of chaff and
wheat, good and bad fish, the goats and the sheep. He bids him come to that Church
into whose fellowship Vincentius had described Augustin as entering. He closes with reflec-
tions on the aggravations in the sin of schism and on the need of repentance.

Olympius had recently been elevated to the dignity of magistcr officioriiin. He had
written to Augustin soliciting his advice on the best way for the civil authority to help the
Ciiurch. Augustin, c. 408 \^Ep. xcvii.], welcomes his elevation, commends his devotion to
the body of Christ, and is glad to have his own timidity relieved by this invitation to lay
before the highest official the exacting needs of the hour. These had become grave; the
very success of coercion had precipitated new commotions among the Circumcelliones and
their clerical abettors. A commission had sailed in mid-winter to solicit imperial help
against their fury. The first point he would suggest, but without having had the oppor-
tunity of consultation, save probably with bishop Sevcrus, is to declare by proclamation that
the imperial edicts were not the invention of Stilicho, as the Donatists and heathen boasted.
As to further plans, the episcopal commission would doubtless consult with him on their
return from court. He invites Olympius to rejoice with him on the practical benefits of
coercion thus far.

It may have been a little later (c. 408 or 409) that Augustin writes to Donatus the pro-
consul {Ep. c.) regretting indeed that the Church must avail herself of the State, but he is
gratified that so devoted a son is wielding the sword for her. The crimes against the
Church are greater than all other crimes, but in her discipline he deprecates any spirit of
revenge, and pleads most beseechingly against the infliction of capital punishment; that
would be a deterrent to the bringing in of any charges against the guilty. He asks for a
republication of the repressive laws, since the enemy is boasting of their repeal.

Augustin wrote a general letter to the Donatist people in c. 409 \Ep. cv.], in which he
declares that the Catholic effort at their conversion is the work of peacemakers. Some
Donatist presbyters had ordered the Catholics to let their people alone, if they did not want
to be killed, but Augustin would all the rather ask the people to recede from the schismatics
cause they were separated from that body for which Christ died. Catholics must seek
ior the stolen sheep that had on them the mark of Christ. The charge of being traditors,
says he, we meet with a like accusation against you, and then you bid us leave. You claim
to be the Church on this unproved charge, unmindful of what law, prophecy. Psalms, Apos-
tles and Gospels say as to its universality beginning at Jerusalem. You are not in commu-
nion with that universal body, and you prevent the escape of others from a similar perdition.
The objection as to persecution he meets with an invitation to look at the deeds of clergy

390 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.

and CircLimcelliones, and cites instances of grievous ill-treatment toward voluntary converts:
Marcus, presbyter of Casphalia, Restitutus of Victoria, Marcianus of Urga, Maximinus and
Possidius, and then protests against their general violence and robberies, and especially
against attributing martyrdom to those who had only been punished for their crimes. To
all this compulsion we oppose the State, he affirms, and many of your own people rejoice in
deliverance from your oppressions. You have filled Africa with false charges as to Csecilian,
Felix, etc., and though we do not place our hope in man, yet we do recognize the State as
the servant of the Church. Nebuchadnezzar is an example both of the persecutor and the cor-
rectionist. You despise the baptism of Christ; ought this not to be punished ?• He then reviews
the history of the case in the light of the documents; commenting on them as forms of their !
own appeal to the State. The liberty of error is most deadly to the soul. Christ and the
Apostles command unity, and this command the Emperors seek to enforce. Only Julian and
the heathen emperors were persecutors; the only martyrs are those who suffer for Catholic
truth. The whole imperial legislation against Donatism is the outcome of the original statute
of Constantine and sprang after all from their appeal. He next discusses their view of bap-
tism and insists that the rite is independent of the character of the celebrant; were it dependent,
then, according to their notion, we should rather desire to be baptized by a bad man, in order
to receive the grace directly from Christ. The appeal to unity follows. Make concord with us,
he urges; we love you and desire to serve you, even by the aid of the temporal laws; we do not
want you to perish as aliens from your Catholic mother. Your charges you are unable to
substantiate, and yet you avoid all conference with us, as if to shun fellowship with sinners;
a false pride, which is rebuked by Paul's conduct, by the Lord's in his treatment of Judas;
the Lord held conference even with the devil. This he follows with extended Scriptural
proofs of the universality of the Church. He reminds them agam of the unproved charges
which apply rather to themselves; but he has no desire for the historical argument, rather for
the doctrinal. The Catholic aim is their conversion, whether by the persuasion of argument
or the correction of laws. They should remember the mixed nature of the Church, and
that mere contact with evil does not defile. If you hold to Christ, hold also to His Church;
you kill us who seek to tell you the truth, and do not want you to perish in evil. May God
vindicate us and his cause by slaying your errors and making you rejoice with us in the
truth.

On the death of Proculeianus, Macrobius succeeded to the see of Hippo Regius.
Augustin hears that he is about to rebaptize a subdeacon (Rusticianus) who under discipline
left the Catholics. Augustin urges him \^Ep. cvi.], c. 409, not to do this by his desire to have
life in God, and to please God by not making the sacraments vain, and by his hope of not
being separated from the body of Christ eternally. The Donatists have admitted the validity
of baptism as administered by Felicianus and Primianus, why then rebaptize others ?
and begs him to search that case as a test of the whole matter.

Maximus and Theodore had been commissioned to deliver the previous letter to Bishop
Macrobius. He at first declined to listen to its reading, but was at last persuaded to attend,
and in reply said: It was his duty to receive all who came, and to give faith to those who
asked it. Into the question about Primian he would not enter, because of his own recent
ordination; he was not a judge of his father, and he would remain in what his predecessors
had accepted. These replies were conveyed to Augustin in the letter cvii. {c. 409) by the!
two commissioners.

In still further hope of reaching Bishop Macrobius, Augustin addressed another epistle,
(cviii.) c. 409, to him in answer to the objections offered by him at the interview with the com-
missioners. I. As to the point that he must receive those who come and give them the faith
they ask: Augustin proposes the case of some one who has received the rite in their communion^

tit

lot!

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 39 1

but had been separated from it for a time, and having returned, conscientiously desires to be
rebaptized; Macrobius, according to his objection, could not repeat the rite, but would pro-
ceed to instruct him. Why repeat it when Augustin administers it ? May be you will
quote, " keep thyself from strange water and do not drink from a strange fountain." How
then will you explain the reception of Felicianus ? 2. As to the second conclusion, that
you would remain in the faith of your predecessors: It is a pity for a young man of
good parts to say so; notliing compels you to remain in evil; you had better be in
the Church which began in Jerusalem and spread thence through the world. 3. And
if you will not judge your fathers why judge my fathers? If not Primian, why Csecilian ?
Why deny us to be brethren ? why rend the body ? why extinguish the baptism of Christ,
who baptizes with the Spirit, and who gave Himself for the Church ? Yet your col-
leagues in effect do yield to the truth in their recognition of the Maximianists. Judge
not the evil but do judge what was good in Primian. That act of his, the reception of the
Maximianists, absolves the nations who are ignorant of what you accuse us. He then traces
the whole development of that schism and its overthrow, to show that those schismatics were
not rebaptized at their return. That history Augustin considers a divinely appointed refuta-
tion of all the Donatist tenets. He proceeds to criticise their Scripture proofs, Prov. ix. 18,
Jer. XV. 18, Eccl. xxxiv. 30, Ps. cxii. 5, which he turns against them through the story of the
schism. He next addresses himself to their theory of fellowship, and discusses their proof
texts, I Tim. v. 22, Is. lii. 11, i Cor. v. 6; Ezekiel, Daniel, the Apostles, Christ and Paul all
rebuke this purism. Cyprian's authority for rebaptism is reviewed. Augustin repeats the
doubts of very many as to the authenticity of those parts of his works which favor this view; but
granted that they are valid, Cyprian, nevertheless, maintained unity and toleration, and by
martyrdom purged his mistake. There is, however, no martyrdom outside of the unity, as
that father also testified. Cyprian acknowledged as well the presence of many evil persons
in the ministry and in the Church, but stood to it that unity must not be sacrificed on that
account. The Church is a mixed society; this is Christ's law. Had Macrobius's associates
remembered the parable of the wheat and tares they would not have separated. This argu-
ment is concluded with a sort of summary of the points traversed before. As to the note of
persecution: that alone is a martyrdom which surrenders the life for a good cause. The
Donatists too used the State in the case of the Maximianists, and to them belong the Cir-
cumcelliones. Tiie matter of unity and the connected points of toleration and fellowship
are again enlarged upon.

A sermon attributed to Augustin, De Rusficiano siibdiacono a Donatistis rebaptizaio et in
diaconum ordinato, falls in the same year, 409, with the letter to Bish'op Macrobius. There
is an outburst of deep grief over the act. It would appear that Rusticianus had been a
special favorite of Augustin, on whom he had expended much care; but he had become
involved in scurrilous deeds, in feasting and intemperance, day and night, and was plunged
in debt, and at last was excommunicated by his presbyter, and so fled to the Donatists, by
whom he was rebaptized and made a deacon; this defection happened in the diocese of the
bishop Valerius (?); so Augustin interposed through Maximius and Theodorus with Bishop
Macrobius, but in vain. He deplores the disgrace done to the sacrament, as dishonor done
to the sign of the King. The repetition is contradicted by the procedure with regard to the
returning Maximianists. Pie corrects the misinterpretation of Ecclus. xxxiv. 30. He
wishes for the Donatists the experience of the prodigal, that they may be forgiven by return
to the Church and so attain to the profit of charity.

Great calamities were befalling the Church in all parts of the world. Victorianus, a
presbyter, wrote to Augustin for relief from doubts as to the office of such afiflictions; in
the bishop's reply, \Ep. cxi.] possibly of Nov., 409, he mentions the cruelties of the Dona-

39^

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.

lists at Hippo exceeding those oi" the barbarians, especially in the resort to acidified hnie,
clubbing, robberies, and other destructive measures to compel rebaptism; forty-eignt in one
place were thus forced to a repetition. The coercion policy, in other words, had stimulated
some of the Donatists to retaliation.

Donatus had resigned his proconsulship. Augustin writes \Ep. cxii.] at the end of 409
or beginning of 410 A.D., to express his regrets at not meeting him on his visit to Tibilis;
his retirement would now give leisure for a larger development in graces, and would lead
him to esteem the superiority of eternal things. He praises him for his official worth,
which indeed was in everybody's mouth, but he urges him not to defer to that popularity,
but to seek the higher approbation. After reminding him of the duty of Christian pro-
gress, he asks for a reply and an exhortation to be addressed to all his dependents at Sinitis
and Hippo to return to the Church. Greetings are sent to his father, Vv'hom the son had
been instrumental in converting to the faith.

Petilian of Constantina had written a treatise, de unico baptismo, which Constantinus had
come into possession of through some Donatist presbyter, and then gave it to Augustin
while they were in the country, imploring him to answer it. He did so, c. 410, in the book
bearing the same title. He scorns those who desire secrecy in such matters; when the
deeds are public let the discussion be. Petilian claims that the only true baptism is theirs;
and therefore it is not repeated by the sacrilegious theorists. Yes, replies Augustin, baptism is
indeed one, but it is Christ's, not yours; }-ours is only a repetition of the rite. We correct what
is yours and recognize what is Christ's. Therefore we do not repeat it. So Christ corrected
what was evil and recognized what was good among the Jews. So Paul exposed the sin of the
heathen world but acknowledged what truth it had. Moreover you perform the ceremony, but it
is to destruction: there is no real advantage in baptism outside of the Church. Petilian pleads
for rebaptism because Paul rebaptized John's disciples; but, says Augustin, that is to declare
John a heretic. These are two different things, as indeed Petilian himself suggests, some
might say, and then gives two irrelevant passages, Matt. xii. 30, and vii. 21 — 23, as if the
Catholics had no fellowship with Christ and were not recognized by Him. Augustin, after
considering the import of these passages, avers the readiness of the Church to recognize the
baptism of Christ as administered by Donatists when they return to the Church; for to deny
Christ's baptism because it is administered by heretics, is to say Christ Himself should be
denied, when even demons confess Him. There is a belief in God outside of the Church;
the devils believe in Him outside of the Church. So there is one baptism of Christ which
may exist also outside of the Church. Petilian's declaration that true baptism is where the
true faith is, Augustin -disproves by citing the case of the unbelieving and schismatic, yet
baptized Corinthians. So all the ages of the kingdom bear witness to a like state of things.
The action of Agrippinus and Cyprian on the one side, and of Stephen on the other, as
to rebaptism is reviewed; differing in this, they yet maintained unity, especially Cyprian.
Further, if the contact of evil men within the fellowship really defiles the good, then the
Church perished in Cyprian's time; where could Donatus then have been spiritually born?
If there is no such pollution, then there is no occasion to rage for separation. The origin
of the schism is then denied from documentary testimony, and the charges declared to be
not sustained; on the other hand, these archives prove the schismatics to have been trad-
itors. A summary of the main points concludes his plea for the sole baptism as that of
Christ. [Cp. Rctractt. II. xxxiv.].

After this book against Petilian just mentioned had been finished, he wrote another work
of larger proportions and with more thoroughness, in refutation of their schism, by the data
of the Maximian schism, which he considered a full surrender of all their particularism.
This has been styled: Dc Maximianistis contra Donatistas. It is lost, but noticed in the j
Retractations (II. xxxv.) immediately after de unico Baptismo.

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 393

At Carthage, about May 15, 411, he preached in praise of peace (Sermo ccclvii.). After
its eulogy, he summons his hearers to the love of that peace; and recalls Donatists as
alienated from the unity unto the concord which exists in the Church only. Patience and
prayer are better means to their conquest than reproof. After the pentecostal fast he bade
them exercise hospitality toward the guests who should attend the Conference.

The two edicts concerning the great Conference had been issued by Marcellinus. The
Donatists had sent in their protest to the second, while the Catholic bishops sent in their
acquiescence in a letter \Ep. cxxviii.], which is ascribed to Augustin's hand. It was of
course written before June 1, 411, the day appointed for the opening. They agree to all
the provisions for maintaining an orderly discussion; to the time and place of meeting; to the
numbers to be present; to the requirement that all the delegated disputants sign their deliver-
ances; to the countersignatures; to the order prohibiting the people from access to the Confer-
ence. If the Donatists prove the Church universal to have been lost and to be solely with them,
the Catholic bishops will resign their sees; if, however, the collation prove the universality
of the Church, then they suggest the recognition of the ordination and office of the Donatist
clergy, and propose details for the succession in case of any jointure. The conciliatory
example of Christ persuades them to this step; the peace of Christ in the Church is higher
than the episcopate. The Donatist use of the civil authority against the Maximianists, and
their gladness in receiving the returning schismatics without rebaptism, and without any
diminution of their honors, give hope of a return to the root.

Before the meeting of the Conference, Augustin preached a sermon (No. ccclviii.) in Carth-
age, on peace and love, of which the main thoughts were the peace to which the Catholics
cling and which they love under the persuasion of the divine testimonies; the victory of truth is
love. He presents the Scripture proofs of charity and universality; the inheritance should
not be divided. Donatus and Csecilian were but men, but baptism is Christ's and not man's.
The charity spread abroad in the heart is a broad commandment. He invites the Donatists
to share in the Church's possessions, and to be bishops along with the Catholics, and pleads
for a joint fraternal recognition; the Catholics seek peace and want to build up the Church.
He finally requests the people to keep aloof from the place of dispute, but invokes their
prayers in its belialf.

The objection to the second edict on the part of the Donatists respecting the restriction
upon the number to be present at the collation, led the Catholics to write a second letter to
Marcellinus, which is most likely also from the pen of Augustin. \Ep- cxxix.]. Solicitude
over the opposition is expressed; some seem disposed to present a hindrance to the peaceful
progress of the Conference; and yet the writers hope that the thought and sus[)icion may not
prove true, but tnat the desire of the whole body may after all be to press into the unity of the
Catholic Church. Then they go on, very wrongfully in such a document, to discuss their favor-
ite note of the universality of the Church, as the body of Christ was not stolen, so neither are
His members outside of the few in Africa, dead. From Jerusalem outward was to be its pro-
gress and thence it filled the whole world. The fact tiiat the Donatists have the very same
Scriptures as the Catholics which contain these proofs of universality, fills the complainants
with grief for them. The Jews who denied the resurrection rejected also the New Testa-
ment; but the Donatists receive it, and yet they deny the note of universality, and accuse
the Catholics of being traditors of the sacred books. Now at the collation probably they
wish to be in full numbers, in order to search completely the Scriptures; and through their
innumerable testimonies they long to come en nmssc, not to create a tumult, but to put an
end to the old discord. It is true that they have found fault with our use of the State; and
yet the Scriptures vindicate such a recourse, and the Donatists themselves appealed to Con-
stantine. The Scriptures too show the mixed character of the Church, wheat and chaff, good

594

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY

and bad fish, to the final harvest, the winnowing, and the further shore. Perhaps they see the
wrono- of their opposition to the Church. The case of the Maximianists has shown their
wiUingness to use tlie power of the State and to ignore rebaptism; and probably moved by
these thing's, they want to come in such large numbers in the interest not of tumult but of
peace. They desire to show that they are not so few as their enemies report them to be.
The Catholic numbers exceed in proconsular Africa, and, except in Numidia, are more
numerous than in the rest of the African provinces; and most of all when one comes to
compare the whole world with the few Donatists. Why, however, could not the number be
just as well certified by the subscription? Even though quiet be preserved, yet at such a
Conference the murmur of such a crowd will impede the progress of the work. If they all
are allowed to be present, the writers, nevertheless, will limit themselves to the delegation
succrested by the Judge, and then no blame for disorder can attach to them. If, however,
the protest has been made in behalf of unity, they all will be present joyfully to welcome
the Donatists as brethren.

The Mandatum Catholicorum, a sort of voucher and letter of instruction for the dis-
putants on the side of the State Church, was undoubtedly the product of Augustin's pen.
After a preamble which attests the sufficiency of the Church through her divine proofs
against all heretics and schismatics, and the desire of Church and State to settle the long
pending controversy in Africa, and the duty to enlighten men as to the eternal salvation,
which things had induced them to convene and to select defenders, there follows the note
of the universality, which, as the great proposition, is expanded with many proof texts
from the Old and the New Testament. This truth is to be defended against the Donatist
assertion that the universal Church had perished through contamination with Csecilian; for
the Church is a mixed society of good and evil, and not to be condemned on this account,
but its unity is to be preserved by toleration. If they maintain this view, the documents
concerning Caeciiian's character must be examined. The contestants must prove that the
Church was thus defiled, or else the evil do not defile the good in this unity. The mandate
then gives Scriptural and also post-apostolic proofs on this point, especially from Cyprian,
and quotes the Donatist action concerning the Maximianists. The next topic is baptism as a
sacrament of Christ and not of man, and as independent of the character of the celebrant:
the Maximian schism again affords material for the confutation of this Donatistic tenet.
They are instructed also to use the archives to show that their opponents initiated civil appel-
lation.

In the session of the second day, Augustin is the speaker, mainly on the matter of delay
and adjournment.

In the third session, he appears as the chief disputant on the doctrinal and historical
points, and also as answering the letter of the Donatists in reply to the mandate.

In a sermon preached after the close of the Conference, (Sermo ccclix. on Ecclus. xxv. 2),
he exhorted all Christians to be brethren; the Catholics desire to have the Donatists unite
with them in worship in the universal Church. The history of Csecilian should not affect the
doctrine of the body. He claims a triumph indeed for his side and rejoices over the many
who are returning to the mother Church, but candidly confesses that many harden them-
selves in their opposition. His exordium appeals for a restoration of brotherly harmony.

A little later in the year, probably, Augustin preached from Gal. vi. 2-5 (Sermo clxiv. ),
in which he rebukes those who say: " We are saints, we do not carry your burdens, therefore
we do not communicate with you; " and says: " your ancestors carry burdens of separation,
burdens of schism, burdens of heresy, burdens of dissension, burdens of animosity, burdens
of false proofs, burdens of calumnious accusations." In your boast of non-participation in
other's sins, you desert the flock, the threshing-floor and the net. The traditors who had

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 395

condemned the absent Caecilian dissolved connection with the whole world. He reminds
them of the Maximianists; he charges them with breaking the parables, and yet inculcates
patience. The whole sermon indicates that the effect of the conference had been to embitter
botli sides.

Another sermon (xcix.) on Luke vii. 36, 50, was also preached about this time, in which
he conceives that the Puristic noli me tangerc may develop into a system for sin-pardoning,
and justiiication and sanctification; the men of the Gesta Collationis are likely to bring about
such a machine religion. Already do they say: if men do not remit sins, then what Christ
says is false as to loosing on earth and in heaven. With this conception of the tendency
of their tenets he further says against them, that the cleansing in baptism does not depend
on the man.

In a fragment of another sermon (ccclx.), preached on the vigils of Maximian, he
personates a Donatist, who has returned to the unity, thanking the Lord that the lost is
found, and expressing his joy in the vine, the unity, the baptism and peace of Christ.

The authorized acts of the council of 411 were too unwieldy for either general or popular
use, and a compendium framed from them was too obscure ; so Augustin, about the close
of 411, determined to make a digest, called the Breviculus collationis cum Donatislis. It
gives the collations of the three days, but it is thoroughly disconnected without the ofificial
account, for too many links known to the actors alone are not apparent to the uninitiated;
too much of what would throw light on the animus of the parties in power is passed over,
and a considerable deal of the minor business necessary to the understanding of the spirit
of the debate does not appear. A reader would certainly get a still more one-sided and
intolerant idea of the Conference from the digest than from the Gcsta. The analysis of the
order of business would require a comparison with \X\^Gesta Collationis, and that lies outside
of our present purpose. [Cp. Retractt. II. xxxix.].

The decision of the Conference again stirred up a counter movement by the Circumcel-
liones, especially in Augustin's diocese, during which some terrible outrages were perpe-
trated; the presbyter Restitutus was killed; the presbyter Innocentius was clubbed and muti-
lated. A trial was instituted by Marcellinus and the crimes confessed. Augustin hastens to
write to him \^Ep. cxxxiii.], somewhere about the opening of 412 A.D., imploring that the
punishment be not capital or retaliatory; restraint and labor would be just. He commends
the tribune-notary's moderation in the examination, in that he did not resort to torture for
extorting evidence, but only to whipping. He commands him, as bishop, not to proceed to
extremity, which would be an injury to the Church, or at least to the diocese of Hippo.
Since the pronouncing of the sentence presumably belonged to the proconsul, he had also
indicted a letter to him.

Apringius, the proconsul, was a brother of Marcellinus. To him Augustm addressed a
letter in the same interest, and at the same date, \_Ep. cxxxiv. ] For the use of his newly
gained authority, he was accountable to God; he was also a Christian, so that Augustin felt
a greater confidence in petitioning and in warning, and begs that he may regard his inter-
ference as a part of a bishop's zeal for the welfare of the Church. He repeats the story of
the arrest of the Circumcelliones and Donatist clergy, tlie trial by Apringius's own brother,
the tribune-notary, Marcellinus, and the gentleness of the hearing, in which the accused
confessed their crime, especially as to the copresbyters. He now begs for a mild punish-
ment; in the one case it cannot be strictly retaliatory; in that of the homicide he fears itmaj^
!)e capital punishment. Apringius must not only consider the State, but the Church, and
respect her clemency. He is not only a ruler of exalted power but a son of Christian piety.
Our enemies boast of persecution; we must give them no occasion for it. These acts
should be read for the cure of the minds which have been perverted. If the extreme pen-

396 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.

alty has to fall, spare at least the children. He implores him to imitate the patience and
mildness of the Church and of Christ.

Augustin, in 412, writes to Marcellinus \^Ep. cxxxix.] expressing his delight that the pro-
ceedings connected with the trial are in preparation, and for the intention of having them
read in the churches of tne city, and, if possible, in all the churches of his diocese. The
crimes mentioned are the same as before, with added confessions of many who were in some
dearee abettors. These are the men who refuse to commune with the Catholic Church for
fear of pollution from wicked men, and yet refuse to leave a schism debased l)y such a
fellowship. It was a question in Marcellinus's mind whether the Gesta should be read in
the Donatist church of Theoprepia in Carthage. Augustin urges it, and if it be too small,
then in some other quarter, in that region of the city. Augustin pleads for a mild punish-
ment in imitation of the clemency of the Church; however weak it may seem at the outset,

men will afterward regard it with favor, and the reading of the Gcsta will be more welcome
and more effective by the contrast between Donatist cruelty and Catholic moderation.
He speaks of the commission of the bishop Bonifacius and the bearer Peregrinus,
who were empowered to treat upon some new measures for the benefit of the Church.
The Donatist Bishop Macrobius was busy reopening the churches of his sect, followed
by a band of both sexes. In the absence of Celer, a Donatist, his procurator, Spondeus, a
Catholic, had broken their audacity. He is commended to the favorable notice of Marcel-
linus. While Spondeus was on a visit to Carthage, Macrobius had actually reopened the
Donatist churches on the estates of Celer. He was assisted by Donatus, a rebaptized deacon
and. a leader in the slaughter; from which fact other outrages might be expected. Should the
plea for mildness not be granted, Augustin asks that his letters urging clemency \Epp.
cxxxiii. and cxxxiv.] be read along with the Gcsta. At least let a remission be granted to
give time for an appeal to the Emperors, for no martyrs desire their blood to be avenged by
death. In apologizing for his inability to complete his work on the baptism of infants, he
urges the variety of his labors; among other things he had completed the Breviculus Col-
latioms, as a compend for those who had not the leisure to read the entire proceedings of
the Conference; also a letter addressed to the Donatist laity.

The Donatists were charged with circulating the story of the bribery of the cognitor or
judge of the Conference. The letter from the council of Zerta, June 14, 412, in refutation of
this was written by Augustin, \^Ep. cxli.] in which it is said that they had become acquainted
with this rumor so easily credited by the common people. The vote of the council was to
authorize a refutation of it as a falsehood. The Donatists had been convicted of mendacity
in the charge which they had made and signed against the Catholics as traditors; they had
also invented stories to account for the signature of an absent bishop. How can they be
believed in such a charge against the cognitor? Since the acts of the Collation are so
voluminous we present herewith a digest. The meeting, the election of disputants and
scribes, the matter of the subscriptions, are then recapitulated. In the attempt at discussion,
the whole aim of the Donatist disputants was to avoid coming to the point to be debated,
while the Catholic representatives exerted themselves to reach just that goal and nothing
else. When at last the Donatists were forced to the issue, they were vanquished by
the clear testimony of the Scriptures to the universality of the Church. Any one sep-
arated from this unity has not life; the wrath of God abides upon him. The com-
munion with the wicked does not defile any one by the mere participation in the sac-
raments, but only by agreement with their deeds. All these truths they had to acknow-
ledge. The Catholics had prevented a confusion between the doctrinal and historical sides
of the question. In the discussion of the documents, the chief offset to all the points was
found in the case of the Maximianists, although the Donatists plead that a case should not

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 397

be prejudged by a case, nor a person by a person. All the accusations which had been
concentrated against C^cilian they were unable to meet with proofs. Defeated men
are wont to suggest such a defense as the corruption of the judge. Then says the paper
in effect: If you will believe us, let us hold fast to the unity which God commands and
loves. But if you are unwilling to believe us, read the proceedings themselves, or allow
them to be read to you, and do you yourselves test whether what we have written to you
be true. If you decline all these, and will still cleave to the Donatists, we are clear from
your judgment. If you will renounce the schism, we will welcome you to the peace of
Christ, and you will have the profit of that sacrament which was administered among you
to judgment.

The Donatist presbyters Saturninus and Eufrates had joined the Catholic Church and
maintained their rank. Augustin writes \Ep. cxlii.], c. 412 A.D., to express his joy at their
arrival and bids them not to grieve at his absence, for they are now in the one Church whose
note of universality he expands as the one Body of the one Head, and as the one house in
all the earth; in the unity of this house we rejoice as embracive of those transmarine
churches, to whom the appeal had vainly been made by the Donatists. He who lives evilly
in this Church eats and drinks condemnation to himself, but whoever lives correctly,
another case and another person cannot prejudge him. The Donatists had protested against
the parallel proofs drawn from the Maximianists, on the ground that a case should not be
prejudged by a case nor a person by a person. On the Lord's threshing-floor the chaff
must be tolerated. He exhorts them to a faithful discharge of their clerical duties, especially
in mercifulness and also in prayer for the removal of the schism.

The hostility of the Donatists was increased by the Collation. Their clergy charged the
judge with bribery, and protested against the unfairness of the trial, the compulsion of the
meeting, the unjust decision. Augustin felt compelled to write, c. 412 A.D., to the people
in order to stay the fury of their leaders. The treatise is known as Ad Donatistas post
Collationem. Why make such a charge ? Why does Primian say, it is unworthy for the
sons of the martyrs to meet in the same place with the offspring of traditors ? Why did they
come ? Why were they unable to prove the old accusations ? And how are they the sons of
martyrs ? The universality of the Church was demonstrated at the Conference. Donatists do
not commune with the churches addressed in those epistles which they read at their services,
because they say these perished by communion with the African Cscilians, and yet they put
in the plea that a case should not be prejudged by a case nor a person by a person. He
meets the Caecilian charge by the Maximianists in spite of this caveat. He represents all the
New Testament churches and the East as expostulating on the basis of this very plea with
the Donatists for separation from them. So the case and the person of the bad does not
prejudice the case and the person of the good; they must abide together until the end. He
condemns their arrogant pretense to holiness. The wicked must be tolerated in the Church,
but their deeds are not to be participated in. Cyprian would not destroy the unity because
bad people were in it; frequent are the examples of such forbearance in the Scriptures, and
the principle was not changed after the resurrection of Christ; it continued in force in the
New Testament Church; the winnowing and severance come at the end of the world. They
would perhaps deny their own words as uttered in the Conference were they not written;
that was the beauty of requiring subscription. They charge too that the sentence against
them was pronounced in the night. Augustin playfully speaks of many good things which
have been said and done in the night. He subsequently reminds them of the days in which
they tried to prove the origin of heresy, and their defeat at every point of the Cnecilian his-
tory. It appears here again that the Donatists had a considerable body of acts of their own.
The plea of persecution as a note of the Church and as an experience of the Donatists

198 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.

was one of the points urged at the conference in the Donatist reply to the CathoUc mandate,
and by Primian, to which we have the usual answer. Another complaint of the Donatists
was that they were tried by those who had been condemned by themselves, and were com-
pelled to unite with sinners; to which Augustin gives a little Maximianist parallel and then
considers the questions of purism, the paucity of believers, the need of discipline, the fel-
lowship of a mixed community which ought not to degenerate into a participation in the
deeds of the wicked therein. These are discussed with considerable detail of quotations from
the Old and New Testaments. Some who thought Csecilian guilty would not break the unity;
they imitated Cyprian. He charges their clergy with duplicity. He reminds them of the
deception practiced in presenting the signature of a Donatist, who was already dead; so with
regard to the show of numbers in attendance and the alleged multitude absent, and also the
means adopted for securing delay, the interruptions and turnings of the debate from the true
object in view. He vindicates the cognitor's method and rulings. He then renews the dis-
cussion concerning the archival origin of the schism. In conclusion he addresses them as
brethren and exhorts them to love peace and unity.

The Donatists of Cirta, clergy and people, had returned to the Catholic Church and had
written a letter of thanks to Augustin for his preaching, under which they had been per-
suaded to renounce the schism. Augustin in reply [Ep. cxliv.], probably at end of 412 A.D.,
says that this is not man's work, but God's. Their allusion to the conversion of the
drunken and luxurious Polemo by Xenocrates, draws from him the reflection, that such a
change of character, though not a Christian repentance, is, nevertheless, a work of God.
So he bids them not to give thanks to himself but to God, for their return to the unity.
Those who still are alienated, whether from love or fear, he charges to remember the
undeceived scrutiny of God; to weigh Scripture testimony as to the universality of the
Church; and the documents as to the origin of the schism. The case has been tried or not
been tried by the transmarine churches; if not, then there is no existing ground for the
separation; if it has, the defeated ones are the separatists. But alas ! the obstacles to their
persuasion are well-nigh insuperable. He hopes that the mutual desire for his visit to them
may be fulfilled.

About the beginning of the year 413, appeared the book De Fide et Operibus. In Chap. iv.
6, he speaks of the need of coercion against the Donatists as disturbers of the peace of the
Church, as separaters of the tares from the wheat before the time, as those who have blindly
preferred to cut themselves off from the unity; commixture of evil and good is a necessity,
and we ought to remain in that fellowship which is not at all destitute of discipline.
[Cp. Retractt. II. xxxviii,]

Donatus, a Donatist presbyter, and another person connected with that body, had been
arrested by order of Augustin about the beginning of 416 A. D. Mounted upon a beast
against his will, he dashed himself to the ground and so received injuries which his less
obstinate companion escaped Augustin writes \Ep. clxxiii.] to vindicate himself as con-
cerned about the salvation of the recusants, and puts the blame of the wounds upon the
offender. Donatus urged in opposition to this style of conversion that no one should be
compelled to be good, Augustin claims on the other hand that many are compelled to take
the good office of a bishop against their will. Donatus argues that God had given us free
will, therefore a man should not be compelled even to be good. Augustin replies that the
effort of a good will is to restrain and change the evil will, because of the awful results
which follow a vitiated will. Why were the Israelites compelled to go to the land of promise ?
Why was Paul forced to turn from persecution to the embrace of the truth ? Why do
parents correct children ? Why are negligent shepherds blamed ? You are an errant sheep,
with the Lord's mark upon you, and I as shepherd must save you from perishing. Of your

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 399

o'.vn will }'ou threw yourself into a well, but it would have been wicked to leave you there
where you had cast yourself according to your will, and hence the attendants took you out;
how much more is it a duty to save you from eternal death. Besides, it is unlawful to inflict
death upon yourself. He reminds him that the Scriptures do not allow suicide; and con-
troverts his use of I. Cor. xiii. 3, " though I give my body to be burned." Severed from
charity and unity, nothing can profit, not even the surrender of the body to burning.
The points of the recent joint Conference are then dwelt upon. Donatus was under-
stood to have criticized the saying of his party as to the Maximianist parallel: do not pre-
judge a case by a case or a person by a person. Augustin twits him in this wise: If you
object to this, then you are deceived concerning it, because you oppose your authority to
theirs, and if you say it is not true, the hope of vindicating the great schism falls through
entirely. He presses him to weigh all the proceedings. But Donatus objects also that the
Lord did not cause the seventy to come back, and did not put a barrier in the way of the
twelve when he asked, '" Will ye also go away ? " Augustin says that was in the beginning of
Christianity; kings were not yet converted; now the State helps the Church. Our Lord said
prophetically, Compel them to come in. So we hunt you in the hedges; the unwilling
sheep is brought to the true pasture.

The series of Tractatus on the Gospel of John, which are ascribed to 416 A.D., contain
manv reflections on Donatism. We can only notice the passages:

Tractatus IV. in Jo. i. 19-33.

VI.

IX.

XI.

XII.

XIII.

1- 33-

i. 32, 33. Quite fully.

ii. i-ii.

ii. 12-21.

ii. 23-25, and iii. 1-5.

iii. 6-21.

iii. 22-29.

To the same year are ascribed the Tractatus on the I. Ep. of John.

Tractatus I. i Jo. i. and ii. i-ii.

II. " ii. 12-17.

III. " ii. iS-27. '

IV. •' iii. 1-8.

In the Retractations, II. xlvi., we read of a book addressed to Emeritus, the Donatist
bishop of Csesarea, in the province of Mauritania Caesariensis. [See j5/. Ixxxvii.J He speaks
of him as the best of the seven Donatist disputants at the Conference. The work marked
briefly the lines on which the Donatists were defeated. Its title is: Ad Emeritum Donatist-
ariiin Episcopicm, post collationem, liber unus. Since the Retractations place it before Dc Gcstis
Fclagii, and De Correctione £>onatisfarum, it was most likely written in the beginning of 417
A.D.

Boniface had requested from Augustin a letter of instructions on the relation of the
Donatists to the Arians. The bishop replies, c. 417 \^Ep. clxxxv.], which he himself calls a
book de Correctione Donaiistarum. [Cp. Retractt. II. xlviii.]. Since this is translated in
the present volume, we will omit any further notice.

The above-mentioned Emeritus was present at a Synod of the Catholics, near Deute-
Tius, September 20, 418. At a service held two days after, Augustin preached the Scrmo
id Casarierisis Ecclcsice plebem. Emeritus was present. In the church during a previous
colloquy with Augustin he had said: I cannot will what you will, but I can will what I will.
Augustin in this sermon (and the writing has all the abruptness and repetition of an
extempore address) urges him to will what God wills, viz., peace, and that now, in response

400 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.

to the cry of the people; and if you ask why I, who call you schismatics and heretics,
desire to receive you, it is because you are brethren; because you have the baptism of
Christ; because I want you to have salvation: one can have everything outside the Church
except salvation; he can have honor, he can' have the sacraments, he can sing AUelulia, he
can respond Amen, he can hold to the gospels, he can have faith in the name of the Father
and tlie Son and the Holy Spirit, and can preach. Persecution after all is rather of you.
The failure of the archival evidence as to Caecilian is alleged as usual, and hence no reason
for separation exists. He recites too the story of the seizure, escape, reseizure, compulsory
baptism and ordination of Petilian, while at the time a Catholic catechumen. This occurred
at Constantina, when that city and region were largely Donatist. He was seized unto death,
do we not draw him to salvation ? Here or nowhere, says Augustin, repeating the voice of
the people, is the place for peace.

There was a gathering of clergy (the bishops Alypius, Augustinus, Possidius, Rusticus,
Palladius, etc., many presbyters and deacons and a considerable number of people) in the
exedra of the larger church at Caesarea, c. 418 A.D. Emeritus, the Donatist bishop of the
city, was also present. Augustin addresses those devoted to the unity, and says that when
he came to the city on the day before yesterday he found Emeritus returned from a journey,
Augustin met him in the street and invited him to the Church, and Emeritus consented
without any demur. The sermon of Augustin is full of the peace, love and related themes
of the Church, in hope of winning Emeritus. He alludes to the many conversions in the city
and since the collation; if Emeritus has anything new to say in defense of his side, he invites
him to state it. Emeritus had been reported as affirming that at the Conference the Dona-
tists were overcome by power rather than by truth. Augustin then addresses inquiries to
Emeritus directly: as to why he had come if he was defeated at the council; or if he thought
his party had triumphed, then to state the ground for such an opinion. Emeritus said:
The acts show whether I am defeated or not, whether I am defeated by truth or oppressed
by power. Augustin: Then why do you come ? Emeritus: That I might say this very thing
which you ask, and so on. Under some taunting and arrogant observations to the brethren.
Emeritus keeps quiet. From Augustin's statement it appears that the Acts were read dur-
ing Lent, at Thagaste, Constantina, Hippo, and all the faithful churches. Part of these
Gesia are then read by Alypius, viz.^ the imperial convocation of the Conference, and com-
ments are made by Augustin. Then follows his application of the lessons afforded by the
Maximianist schism, in which he says the Donatists make shipwreck of all their tenets.
Emeritus, however, remained a silent hearer. The account of the above meeting is given
in the treatise: Dc Gestis cum E/nerito, Ccesarietisi Donatistariim Episcopo liber uiius, [Cp.
Rctractt. TI. li.].

The book a')? /'a/'/>;^//a is assigned to 418 A.D. In Chapter xiii. he contrasts genuine
and false martyrdom.

Dulcitius had been appointed Tribune-notary. The effect of his carrying out of the
renewed edicts against the Donatists was signalized by many conversions, but also by many
suicides. He had written to Augustin requesting directions about how he ought to proceed
against the heretics. Augustin replies \Ep. cciv.], c. 430 A.D., that his work had indeed
persuaded many to return to their salvation, but others were stirred either to kill the
Catholics or themselves. We indeed do desire the return of all to unity, yet some
are doubtless predestinated to perish by an occult yet just decree of God. They perish
not only in their own fires but in that of Gehenna. The Church grieves over them,
as David over his son, although they have met the deserved punishment of rebels.
Augustin does not find fault with the notary's edict at Thamugada, only with the phrase:
You may know that you are to be given over to the death which you deserve; for that is not

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. , 401

contained in the rescripts. In the second edict there is a clearer statement of the notary's
aim. Augustin also criticizes his courtesy toward Gaudentius, the Donatist bishop of
Thamugada. As to a special reply to that bishop Augustin urges a more diligent refuta-
tion of the fallacious doctrines by which the Donatists are accustomed to be seduced. He
had already done this in very many works, but adds some points by way of suggestion. He
alone is a martyr who dies for a true cause. Man's will is free, but nevertheless amenable
to divine and human laws. The State can punish not only adulteries and homicides, but
also sacrileges. Many think it strange that we do not rebaptize, l^ut the sacrament once
given ought not to be repeated. Suicides are utterly prohibited by the Scriptures. The
case of Razius gives the Donatist no pretext, for the deed is simply mentioned but not
commended. (II. Mac. xiv. 37 — 46). In conclusion he intimates that in answer to the
united wish of the people of Thamugada, of himself and of Eleusinus, the tribune of that
place, that Augustin should answer both epistles of Gaudentius, the Donatist bishop, and
especially the latter of the two, which contained Scriptural proofs, he will write such a
criticism.

Dulcitius had written a pacific letter to Gaudentius, the Donatist bishop of Thamugada,
one of the quieter members of the seven Donatist disputants, concerning the enforcement
of the imperial edicts. Gaudentius replied in two epistles, one short, the other longer and
fortified by Scripture proofs. Augustin was requested to answer these, which he does
(r. 420) in the work Cofitra Gaiidentium Donatistarum Episcopum, libri duo. In Book I. he
makes a change of form from the Petilian cast of personal dialogue, because of the captious
fault found with that way as savoring of untruth, and takes a duller formula, " Verba
Epistolce " and " ad haec responsio,'' whose dryness and literality the most sensitive Donatist
could take no exception to. In the first epistle of Gaudentius, the fairly courteous strain in
which he had replied to the tribune-notary, with titles and recognition of character, Augus-
tin rather resents by saying that the Catholic had treated the heretic too kindly and incau-
tiously, and bids Gaudentius consider what he had said at the Collation. Gaudentius
proposes to remain in the communion where the name of God and of his Christ is and where
the Sacraments are, and pleads for religious liberty against compulsion as to matters of faith;
and concludes, by another hand, with wishing him well and desiring his recession from the
disquieting of Christians. Augustin objects that Gaudentius had not reproduced the lan-
guage of Dulcitius correctly, and accuses the Donatists of holding the truth of baptism in
the iniquity of human error; he comments on their false eagerness for death; he responds
to all the good wishes for the tribune, but not that he should cease from correcting the
heretics.

The second epistle of Gaudentius is mainly a protest from Scriptural grounds; against per-
secution he brings forward the case of Gabinus, who, if bad, should not have been received
without correction, that is, baptism; but if innocent, why kill the innocent Donatists from
whom he came to you ? The false rumor about Emeritus, as having turned Catholic, is
another instance of this persecution. The duty of a persecuted pastor is to be a doer of
the law and to lay down his life for the sheep; there is no place wliither the persecuted
may now flee; the divine right of free will is restrained by the arbitrary laws of the emperor;
persecution is a note of the Church from the blessings attached to it by Christ and the
apostles. The peace of Christ invites the willing but does not compel the unwilling; a thing
very different from the war-bearing peace and the bloody unity which their oppressors present.
We rejoice in the hatred of the world; there is a martyr host of the apocalypse; Christians
may yield up their souls in testimony against sacrilege, as Razius did. He begs Dulcitius
to turn to the few who have the solidity and not the semblance of truth. God gave prophets

not kings to teach the people: the Saviour sent fishermen not soldiers. God never needs the
26

4o:

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.

aid of soldiers, Gaudentius charges the Catholics with coveting the Donatist possessions.
The farewell is in another handwriting, in which he wishes Dulcitius well, and advises him
to pursue a lenient and temperate course.

The points of Augustin's reply are in no way different save form from those so constantly
presented, unless there be an increase of roughness and a more hardened idea of the
Church's right to use coercion. As to Gabinus, the Church's course with regard to him is
a vindication of the right to receive a convert without rebaptism: in communion with charity
and unity he received tl>e profit of that rite which had been administered among the Donatists.
In the case of Emeritus, Augustin confesses that the rumor of his having turned Catholic
was false; but Emeritus came to Csesarea of his own will; he came to the Church where a
multitude was present; he could say nothing for his or his party's defense; he kept quiet.
The arg-ument against suicide from the case of Razius is well made; he died rather in suffer-
ing for the state; and besides the narrative does not commend the deed, but only states it;
then too the books have not the weight that the Law, the Prophets and the Psalms carry
with them. The plea for correction is precisely as usual. The doctrines of universality
and unity and charity are incidentally brought forward. Circumcelliones, Secundus and
Maximianists furnish the concluding parallels.

Book II. Gaudentius had written a reply to Augustin's first book. He had taken refuge
under the example of Cyprian; but Augustin now refers him to the writings of Cyprian on
De Simplicitate Prcdatormn sen De CathoUcm Ecclesice imitate, showing Cyprian's belief in the
universality of the Church which Augustin expands by the explanation of the term Catholic.
Purgation of the Church is not by separation, but by toleration, as Cyprian too held in his
letter to Maximus and others. The explanation of the field not as the Church, but rather
as the world outside of the Church, had been supported at the Conference and is repeated
bv Gaudentms; and also its alternative, that were the field the Church then it must have
perished from the tares which were in it. If so, says Augustin, then the ancestors of the
Donatists would have perished. The period of separation is at the end, when the Gospel
shall have been preached in the whole world. As to their theme of rebaptism, Augustin re-
plies that he had already before referred him to his Maximianist practice, so that the ac-
tion of Agrippinus and Cyprian are vain for him. And then too, according to Cyprian's
own confession, and Stephen's testimony, there were crimes in the Church in their day;
did the Church perish then ? If so where was Donatus born ? If not, then why did
the party of Donatus separate? They are guilty of the very schism which Cyprian partic-"
ularly deprecated as a cure, instead of toleration and discipline, for the ills of the Church.
As to baptism: The Catholics recognize the Donatist rite, for the sacrament cannot be
lost upon those who receive it among Catholics and then pass over to heretics; they have
the truth but in iniquity; the truth is not the property of the Donatists. The apostle
recognized such truth as he found among the Gentiles. Gaudentius had vindicated his
reference to the tribune's letter, as to the Donatists having the names of God and of his
Christ, and quoted the passage in proof. Augustin acknowledges his mistake, which, how-
ever, was not intentional, and he apologizes for the tribune's error as that of a military man
who was not familiar with theology. Since Gaudentius had called the tribune religious
in his first letter, Augustin accuses him of insincerity and berates him as superstitious.
He also corrects Gaudentius for saying that God sent Jonah not to the king but only to
the people of Nineveh, for the king compelled the humiliation of his subjects. In conclu-
sion he quotes from Cyprian's letter to Maximus in behalf of universality and tolerant unity.
His exordium is an earnest appeal to the Catholics to maintain all the notes of the Church.
[Cp. Retractt. II. lix.].

Felicia had been a Donatist originally and was converted by force. She had devoted

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 403

herself to the virgin life and apparently had become head of a religious house; but by
reason of some wicked deeds of the clergy, possibly the extortion and rapacity of Antonius
at Fussala, she was much disturbed and seemed inclinepd to relapse into her earlier puristic
notions, if not to return to the body that upheld them. To quiet her doubts Augustin writes
Ep. ccviii. c. 423. The Lord had predicted offenses. There are two kinds of shepherds
over the flock, and will be to the end: the flocK too has the good and the bad in it.
The gathering is the present duty, the separation will be the future one: this latter is the
Lord's prerogative. To abide in unity under such circumstances is a duty until the win-
nowing, and one is to believe what these shepherds teach, not what they do. Good and bad
are therefore in the world under the widely diffused Catholic Church; the Donatist has no
such note of universality. Love Christ and the Church, and then He will not permit you
to lose the fruit of your virginity and to perish with the lost. If you go out of this life,
separated from the unity of the body of Christ, this preserved integrity of the body will not
profit you. Y'ou were compelled to come in; be thankful to those who compelled you.
Show your devotion to the Lord, as your only hope, by being unmoved with these offenses,
and by cleaving to his body, the Church.

A letter addressed to Pope Coelestine is ascribed to Augustin \Ep. ccix. c. 423]; its
authenticity has been disputed. The author, in giving an account of the appointment of
Antonius as bishop of Fussala, remarks that at Fussala, acastellum about forty miles distant
from Hippo, as in all the adjoining region, there had been a Donatist population; in Fussala
itself there had not been a solitary Catholic; the Punic was the common language. The
coercive measures had converted the whole territory, but the process had also aroused a
violent opposition in the form of robbery, beating, blinding, murder. After its conversion,
the distance from Hippo and the great numbers to be instructed, required a new bishopric,
the history of which and the troubles growing out of it, the author further relates.

In that valuable book De doctrma Christiana, (begun in 397, but ended in 426, including
the part having reference to our subject III. xxx. 42), Augustin quotes approvingly
from the book of Tychonius the De septem regulis, and prefaces a discussion of these rules
by an allusion to the treatise of Tychonius, which had refuted some of the narrow and
puristic doctrines of the Church, as held by his own party; this we have already seen was
answered by Parmenian, whose letter in turn was dissected by Augustin. The first, second,
fourth and seventh of these rules bear especially upon the doctrinal points under discus-
sion. [Cp. Retractt. II. iv. and Tychonius de Septem Regulis reprinted in Migne. Pat. Lat.
xviii.]

In his de Hoeresibus \c. 428 A.D.] Chapter Ixix. gives a brief account of the Donatiani
or Donatistse: {ci) as to origin and progress; {F) Donatus's view of the Trinity; {c) the
Montenses at Rome; {d) the Circumcelliones; (<?) the schism of Maximian.

This was his parting arrow after the thirty-six years of battle. Catholics and Donatists
passed under the persecutions of the Arian Vandals. Two years after this treatise Augus-
tin laid aside his weapons to enter the land of eternal peace and unity.

More or less extended allusions are made to Donatism in the following sermons, arranged
in the order of the Benedictine editions; for the years in which they were delivered cannot
be determined. Want of space prevents the presentation of any analysis.

Sermo X

I Kings, iii. 16-2S.

" XLV

Is. Ivii. 13 and 2 Cor. vii. i

" XLVI. . . .

Ez. xxxiv. 1-16.

" XLVIl. . . .

Ez. xxxiv. 17-31.

" LXXI

. . Matt. xil. 32.

" LXXXVIIl. . .

. . Matt. XX. 30-34.

404

INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.

Sermo XC. . .

" CVII.

" CXXIX.

" CXXXVII.

" CXXXVIIl.

" CLXXXIII.

" CCXVIII.

" CCXLIX.

" CCLII. .

" CCLXV.

" CCLXVI.

" CCLXVIII.

" CCLXIX.

" CCLXXXV.

" CCXCII.

" cccxxv.

Matt. xxii. 1-14.

Luc. xii. 13-21.

Jo. V. 39-47.

Jo. X. I- 16.

Jo. X. 11-16.

I Jo. iv. 2.

Luc. xxiv. 3S-47.

Jo. xxi. I-14.

Jo. xxi. 1-14.

The Ascension.

Ps. c.kH. (cxl.) 5.

Pentecost.

Anniversary of tlie martyrs Castus and .Emilus.

John the Baptist.

Anniversary of the Twenty Martyrs.

Similar references are to be found in the expositions and sermons based on tlie Psalms.
The first column is the Hebrew and English order; the second that of LXX. and Vulgate.

Exposition of Psalms XL (X.)

XXVL (XXV.) Sermon.
" XXXL (XXX.) Sermons L and IL

XXXin. (XXXII.) Sermon IL
XXXIV. (XXXin.) Sermon IL

XXXVI. (XXXV.) Sermon.

XXXVII. (XXXVI.) Sermons II. (archival) and III
" " XL. (XXXIX.) Sermon.

" " LV. (LIV.) Sermon.

" LVIII. (LVII.) Sermon.

LXXXVI. (LXXXV.) Sermon.

XCIX. (XCVIir.) Sermon.

CXX. (CXIX.) Sermon.

CXXV. (CXXIV.) Sermon.

CXXXIII. (CXXXII.) Sermon.
•' " CXLVI. (CXLV.) Sermon.

CXLVII. 12-20 (CXLVII.) Sermon.

CXLIX. Sermon.

The time of writing the de Utilitate Jejiinii is unknown. Chapter V. 9, contrasts pagan,
heretical and Catholic fasts; heretics claim indeed to fast in order to please God; how can
they, when they sever the unity? All heretics perish; they are the dividers of the inheri-
tance of Christ.

In conclusion the reviser desires to commend the fidelity and lucidity of the translation
made by the Rev. J. R. King, M.A.

No changes made by the reviser have been indicated, since all could not be without con-
fusion. The translation had taken most of its notes and references from the Benedictines.
The citations of Cyprian are according to the numerals in Hartel's edition.

PREFACE.

The schism of the Donatists, with which the treatises in the present volume are concerned, arose indirectly
out of the persecution under Diocletian at the beginning of the fourth century. At that time Mensurius, bishop
of Carthage, and his archdeacon Coecilianus, had endeavored to check the fanatical spirit in which many of the
Christians courted martyrdom ; and consequently, on the death of Mensurius in 311, and the elevation of
Ca;cilianus to the see of Carthage in his place, the opposing party, alleging that Felix, bishop of Aptunga, by
whom Csecilianus had been consecrated, had been a tradilor, and that therefore his consecration was invalid,
set up against him Majorinus, who was succeeded in 315 by Donatus. The party had by this time gained
strength, through the professions that they made of extreme purity in the discipline which they maintained, and
had gone so far, under the advice of another Donatus, bishop of Casss Nigroe in Numidia, as to accuse Ctecili-
anus before the Roman Emperor Constantine, — thus setting the first precedent for referring a spiritual cause to
the decision of a civil magistrate. Constantine accepted the appeal, and in 313 the matter was laid for decision
before Melchiades, bishop of Rome, and three bishops of the province of Gaul. They decided in favor of the
validity of the consecration of Caecilianus ; and a similar verdict was given by a council held at Aries, by direc-
tion of the Emperor, in the following year. I'he party of Majorinus then appealed to the personal judgment of
the Emperor, which was likewise given against them, not without strong expressions of his anger at their
pertmacity. This was followed by severe laws directed against their schism ; but so far from crushing them,
the attack seemed only to increase their enthusiasm and develope their resources. And, under the leadership
of Donatus, the successor of Majorinus, their influence spread widely throughout Africa, and continued to
prevail, in spite of various efforts at their forcible suppression, during the whole of the fourth century. They
especially brought on themselves the vengeance -of the civil powers, by the turbulence of certain fanatical ascetics
who embraced their cause, and who, under the name of Circumcelliones, spread terror through the country,
seeking martydom for themselves, and offering violence to every one who opposed them.'

Towards the close of the century, this schism attracted the attention of Augustin, then a priest of Hippo
Regius in Numidia. The controversy seems to have had for him a special attraction, not merely because of its
intrinsic importance, but also because of the field which it presented for his unrivalled powers as a dialectician.
These the Donatists had recently provoked, by inconsistently receiving back into their body a deacon of Carthage
named Maximianus who had separated himself from them, and by recognizing as valid all baptism administered
by his followers. Hence they naturally shrank from engaging in a contest with an antagonist who was sure to
make the most of such a deviation from the very principles on which they based their schism ; and, on the other
hand, Augustin was so firmly convinced that his own position was impregnable, that he seems to have thought
that if he could only secure a thorough and dispassionate discussion of the matter, the Donatists must necessarily
be brought to acknowledge not only their theoretical errors, but also the practical sinfulness of their separation
from the Church. Throughout the controversy, however, he appears to have put out of sight two considerations :
first, the influence of party spirit and prejudice in blinding men to argument ; and, secondly, the necessity of
treating his opponents in a logical discussion as on an equal footing with himself. The first was in some degree
an unavoidable element of disappointment ; but Augustin made concession yet more difficult on the part of his
opponents, by expecting them to acknowledge his superior position as a member of the Catholic Church, whose
duty it was to expose the error of their views. He practically begs the very point at issue, by assuming that he,
and not the Donatists, vi'as in the Catholic communion ; and though his argument is conducted independently
of this premiss, yet it naturally rendered them more unwilling to admit its force.

This dogmatism was of less consequence in the first pamphlet which Augustin published on the subject, —
his Alphabetical Psalm, in which he set forth the history antl errors of the Donatists in a popular form, — since
it was not intended as a controversial treatise, but only as a means of enlightening the less educated as to the
Catholic tenets on the question in dispute. His next work, written in answer to a letter of Donatus of Carthage,
in which the latter tried to prove that the baptism of Christ existed only in his communion, is unfortunately lost ;

I Aug. Dc Hcer. c. 69 ; Eiiarr. in Ps. 132, sees. 3, 6 ; C. Cresc. iii. c. xlii. 46., c. xliii . 47; C. Citii<ie>itiiiiii, i. c. .xxviii. 32.

4o6

PREFACE.

and we can only gather hints as to the further part which he took in the controversy during the next few years
from certain of his letters, especially those to the Donatist T?ishops Ilonoratus and Crispinus.' From the former
he claims the admission that the exclusiveness of the Donatists proves that they are not the Church of Christ ;
and his letter to the latter contains an invitation to discuss the leading points at issue, which Crispinus seems to

have declined.

In the year 400 he wrote two books Against the Party of Donatus, which are also lost ; and about the same
time he published his refutation of the letter of Parmenianus in answer to Tichonius, in which he handles and
solves the famous question, whether, while abiding in unity in the communion of the same sacraments, the
wicked pollute the good by their society.^

Then followed his seven books On Baptism, included in this volume, in which he shows the emptiness of
the arguments of the Donatists for the repetition of baptism ; and proves that so far was Cyprian from being on
their side, that his letters and conduct are of the highest value as overthrowing their position, and utterly
condemning their separation from the Church.

Not long after this, Petilianus, bishop of Cirta or Constantina, the most eminent theologian among the
Donatist divines, wrote a letter to his clergy against the Catholics, of which Augustin managed to obtain a copy,
though the Donatists used their utmost care to keep it from him ; and he replied to it in two books, written at
different times, — the first in the year 400, before he was in possession of the whole letter, the remainder in 402.
To the first book Petilianus made an answer, of which we gather the main tenor from a third book written by
Augustin in reply to it. It appears to have been full of vehement abuse, and to have assumed the question in
dispute, that the existence of the true Church, and the catholicity of any branch of it, depended on the purity
and orthodoxy of all its ministers ; so that the guilt or heresy of any minister would invalidate the whole of his
ministerial acts. Hence he argued that Caecilianus being the spiritual father of the so-called Catholics, and having
been a traditor, none of them could possibly have been lawfully baptized, much less rightfully ordained.

Augustin admits neither of his assumptions ; but, leaving the guilt or innocence of Coecilianus as a point
which was irrelevant (though practically the case against him utterly broke down), he addresses himself to the
other point, and argues most conclusively that all the functions of the clergy in celebrating the rites of the
Church being purely ministerial, the efficacy of those rites could in no way depend upon the excellence of the
individual minister, but was derived entirely from Christ. Hence there was a certainty of the grace bestowed
through the several ordinances, which otherwise there could not possibly have been, had their virtue depended
on the character of any man, in whom even an unblemished reputation might have been the fruit of a skilled
hypocrisy.

The third treatise in this volume belongs to a later period, being a letter written to Bonifacius, the Roman
Count of Africa under Valentinian the Third. He had written to Augustin to consult him as to the best means
of dealing with the Donatists ; and Augustin in his reply points out to him his mistake in supposing that the
Donatists shared in the errors of the Arians, whilst he urges him to use moderation in his coercive measures ;
though both here and in his answer to Petilianus we find him countenancing the theory that the State has a right
to interfere in constraining men to keep within the Church. Starting with a forced interpretation of the words,
'''Compel them to come in," in Luke xiv. 23, he enunciates principles of coercion which, though in him they
were subdued and rendered practically of little moment by the spirit of love which formed so large an element in
his character, yet found their natural development in the despotic intolerance of the Papacy, and the horrors of
the Inquisition. It is probable that he was himself in some degree misled by confounding the necessity of
repressing the violence of the Circumcelliones, which was a real offense against the State, with the expediency
of enforcing spiritual unity by temporal authority.

The Donatist treatises have met with little attention from individual editors. There is a dissertation, De
Am: A ugustino adversaria Donatistarutn, by Adrien Roux, published at Louvain in 1838 ;3 but it is believed
that no treatises of this series have ever before been translated into English, nor are they separately edited.
They are in themselves a valuable authority for an important scene in the history of the Church, and afford a
good example both of the strength and the weakness of Augustin's writing, — its strength, in the exhaustive
way in which he tears to pieces his opponent's arguments, and the clearness with which he exposes the fallacies
of their reasoning ; its weakness, in the persistency with which he pursues a point long after its discussion might
fairly have been closed, as though he hardly knew when he had gained the victory ; and his tendency to claim,
by right of his position, a vantage-ground which did not in reality belong to him till the superiority of his cause
was proved.

J. R. KING

OXFO D, March, 1S70.

I Epist. xlix. li. 2 Bened. Ed. Vol. i.\. pp. 7-52. Mi),'ne, Vol. i.x. pp. -^t, -108.

3 The other works bearing on this controversy are mentioned in the exhaustive volume of Ferd. Ribbeck, Donatus und August-
injis (Elberfeld, 185S). — Eo.

THE

SEVEN BOOKS OF AUGUSTIN,

BISHOP OF HIPPO,

BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

[DE BAPTISIMO CONTRA DONATISTAS.]

CIRCA A.D. 400.

TRANSLATED BY THE

REV. J. R. KING, M.A.,

VICAR OF ST. Peter's in the east, oxford; and late fellow and tutor of

MERTON COLLEGE, OXFORD.

CONTENTS ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

PACE

BOOK I.

He proves that baptism can be conferred outside the Catholic communion by heretics or schismatics, but
that it ought not to be received from them ; and that it is of no avail to any while in a state of her-
esy or schism 4il

BOOK II.

In which Augustin proves that it is to no purpose that the Donatists bring forward the authority of
Cyprian, bishop and martyr, since it is really more opposed to them than to the Catholics. For that
he held that the view of his predecessor Agrippinus, on the subject of baptizing heretics in the
Catholic Church when they join its communion, should only be received on condition that peace
should be maintained with those who entertained the opposite view, and that the unity of the Church
should never be broken by any kind of schism 4-5

BOOK III.
Augustin undertakes the refutation of the arguments which might be derived from the Epistle of Cyp-
rian to lubaianus, to give color to the view that the baptism of Christ could not be conferred by
heretics 43^

BOOK IV.
In which he treats of what follows in the same Epistle of Cyprian to Jubaianus 447

BOOK V.

He examines the last part of the Epistle of Cj^prian to Jubaianus, together with his Epistle to Quintus,

the letter of the African Synod to the Numidian bishops, and Cyprian's Epistle to Pompeius. . . 463

BOOK VI.

In which is considered the Council of Carthage, held under the authority and presidency of Cyprian, to

determine the question of the baptism of heretics 479

HOOK VII.
In which the remaining judgments of the Council of Carthage are examined 499

THE

SEVEN BOOKS OF AUGUSTIN,

BISHOP OF HIPPO,

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

This treatise was written about 400 a.d. Concerning it Aug. in Retract. Book II. c. xviii.,
says: I liave written seven boolcs on Baptism against the Donatists, who strive to defend
themselves by the authority of the most blessed bishop and martyr Cyprian; in which I
show that nothing is so effectual for the refutation of the Donatists, and for shutting their
mouths directly from upholding their schism against the Catholic Church, as the letters
and act of Cyprian.

BOOK I.

HE PROVES THAT BAPTISM CAN BE CONFERRED OUTSIDE THE CATHOLIC COMMUNION BY HERE-
TICS OR SCHISMATICS, BUT THAT IT OUGHT NOT TO BE RECEIVED FROM THEM; AND
THAT IT IS OK NO AVAIL TO ANY WHILE IN A STATE OF HERESY OR SCHISM.

Chap, i . — i . In the treatise which we wrote j
against the published epistle of Parmenianus '
to Tichonius,^ we promised that at some fu- !
ture time we would treat the question of bap-
tism more thoroughly; ^ and indeed, even if
we had not made this promise, we are not
unmindful, that this is a debt fairly due from
us to the prayers of our brethren. Where-
fore in this treatise we have undertaken, with
the help of God, not only to refute the objec-
tions which the Donatists have been wont to
urge against us in this matter, but also to
advance what God may enable us to say in
respect of the authority of the blessed mar-

' Parmenianus was successor to Donatus the Great in the See of
I .irthaife, circ. 350 A.n., and diedcirc. 392 a.d.

- Tichonius, who flourished circ. 380, was the leader of a refor-
matory movement in Donatism, which Parmenianus opposed, in
the writini; here alluded to. I'^e reformer was excommunicated.
He had the clearest ideas concerning the church and concerning
interpretation of any of the ancients.

3 Contra Epist. Farmen, ii. 14, also written circ. 400 a.d.

tyr Cyprian, which they endeavor to use as a
prop, to prevent their perversity from falling
before the attacks of truth/ And this we
propose to do, in order that all whose judg-
ment is not blinded b)' party spirit may un-
derstand that, so far from Cyprian's authority
being in their favor, it tends directly to their
refutation and discomfiture.

2. In the treatise above mentioned, it has
already been said that the grace of baptism
can be conferred outside the Catholic com-
munion, just as it can be also there retained.
But no one of the Donatists themselves denies
that even apostates retain the grace of bap-
tism; for when they return within the pale of
the Cliurch, and are converted through re-

4 Cyprian, in his controversy with Pope Stephen of Rome, de-
nied the validity of heretical or schismatical baptism. The Donat-
ists denied the validity of Catholic baptism. See Schaff, C/titri':
History, vol. ii. 262 sqq.

412

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book L

pentance, it is never given to them a second
time, and so it is ruled that ic never could
have been lost. So those, too, who in the
sacrilege of schism depart from the com-
munion of the Church, certainly retain the
grace of baptism, which they received before
their departure, seeing that, in case of their
return, it is not again conferred on them;
whence it is proved, that what they had re-
ceived while within the unity of the Church,
they could not have lost in their separation.
But if it can be retained outside, wliy may
it not also be given there? If you say, "It
is not rightly given without the pale;" we
answer, "As it is not rightly retained, and yet
is in some sense retained, so it is not indeed
rightly given, but yet it is given. ^' But as,
by reconciliation to unity, that begins to be
profitably possessed which was possessed to
no profit in exclusion from unity, so, by
the same reconciliation, that begins to be
profitable which without it was given to no
profit. Yet it cannot be allowed that it
should be said that that was not given
which was given, nor that any one should re-
proach a man with not having given this,
while confessing that he had given what he
had himself received. For the sacrament of
baptism is what the person possesses who is
baptized; and the sacrament of conferrmg
baptism is what he possesses who is ordained.
And as the baptized person, if he depart from
the unity of the Church, does not thereby
lose the sacrament of baptism, so also he who
is ordained, if he depart from the unity of the
Church, does not lose the sacrament of con-
ferring baptism. For neither sacrament may
be wronged. If a sacrament necessarily be-
comes void in the case of the wicked, both
must become void; if it remain valid with the
wicked, this must be so with both. If, there-
fore, the baptism be acknowledged whicii he
could not lose who severed himself from the
unity of the Church, that baptism must also
be acknowledged which was administered by
one who by his secession had not lost the
sacrament of conferring baptism. For as
those who return to the Church, if they had
been baptized before their secession, are not
rebaptized, so those who return, having been
prdained before their secession, are certainly
not ordained again; but either they again ex-
ercise their former ministry, if the interests
of the Church require it, or if they do not
exercise it, nt any rate they retain the sacra-
ment of their ordination; and hence it is,
that when hands are laid on them,' to mark
their reconciliation, they are not ranked with

I Comp. V. 23, and iii. 16, note.

the laity. For Felicianus,^ when he separated
himself from them with Maximianus, was not
held by the Donatists themselves to have lost
either the sacrament of baptism or the sacra-
ment of conferring baptism. For now he is
a recognized member of their own body, in
company with those very men whom he bap-
tized while he was separated from them in
the schism of Maximianus. And so others
could receive from them, whilst they still had
not joined our society, what they themselves
had not lost by severance from our society.
And hence it is clear that they are guilty of
impiety who endeavor to rebaptize those who
are in Catholic unity; and we act rightly who
do not dare to repudiate God's sacraments,
even when administered in schism. For in
all points in which they think with us, they
also are in communion with us, and only are
severed from us in those points in which they
dissent from us. For contact and disunion
are not to be measured by different laws in
the case of material or spiritual affinities. For
as union of bodies arises from continuity of
position, so in the agreement of wills there
is a kind of contact between souls. If, there-
fore, a man who has severed himself from
unity wishes to do anything different from
that which had been impressed on him while
in the state of unity, in this point he does
sever himself, and is no longer a part of the
united whole; but wherever he desires to con-
duct himself as is customary in the state of
unity, in which he himself learned and re-
ceived the lessons which he seeks to follow,
in these points he remains a member, and is
united to the corporate whole.

Chap. 2. — 3. And so the Donatists in some
matters are with us; in some matters have
gone out from us. Accordingly, those things
wherein they agree with us we do not forbid
them to do; but in those things in which they
differ from us, we earnestly encourage them
to come and receive them from us, or return
and recover them, as the case may be; and
with whatever means we can, we lovingly busy
ourselves, that they, freed from faults and cor-
rected, may choose this course. We do not
therefore say to them, "Abstain from giv-
ing baptism,'' but "Abstain from giving it
in schism.'' Nor do we say to those whom
we see them on the point of baptizing, " Do

2 Felicianus, bishop of Musti, headed the revolt against Primi-
anus, the successor of Parmenianus in the Carthaijinian See. Lis-
tening to the complaint of the deacon Maximianus, who had been
deposed by I'riraianus, a synod was convened in ^qiM Obarsussis,
which ordained Maximianus as bishop of Carthage Hence the
title Maximianista;. Primianus, it» 304, at the council of Kagai.was
recognized by 310 bishops. The larger fraction, according to the
Catholics, was subsequently forced into reunion. Pr<Etextatus, bp.
of AssuriSjWas also one of the leaders in this separation.

A;'!

Chap. III.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

413

not receive the baptism," but " Do not re-
ceive it in schism." For if any one were
compelled by urgent necessity, being unable
to find a Catholic from whom to receive bap-
tism, and so, while preserving Catholic peace
in his heart, should receive from one without
the pale of Catholic unity the sacrament
which .he was intending to receive within its
pale, this man, should he forthwith depart
this life, we deem to be none other than a
Catholic. But if he should be delivered from
the death of the body, on his restoring him-
self in bodily presence to that Catholic con-
ure2:ation from which in heart he had never
departed, so far from blaming his conduct,
'■vd should praise it with the greatest truth
:ind confidence; because he trusted that God
was present to his heart, while he was striving
to preserve unity, and was unwilling to depart
this life without the sacrament of holy bap-
tism, which he knew to be of God, and not of
men, wherever he might find it. But if any
one who has it in his power to receive baptism
within the Catholic Church prefers, from
some perversity of mind, to be baptized in
schism, even if he afterwards bethinks him-
self to come to the Catholic Church, because
he is assured that there that sacrament will
profit him, which can indeed be received but
cannot profit elsewhere, beyond all question
he is perverse, and guilty of sin, and that the
more flagrant in proportion as it was com-
mitted wilfully. For that he entertains no
doubt that the sacrament is rightly received
in the Church, is proved by his conviction
that it is there that he must look for profit
even from what he has received elsewhere.

Chap. 3. — 4. There are two propositions,
moreover, which we affirm, — that baptism ex-
ists in the Catholic Church, and that in it
alone can it be rightly received, — both of
which the Donatists deny. Likewise there
are two other propositions which we affirm, —
that baptism exists among the Donatists, but
that with them it is not rightly received, —
of which two they strenuously confirm the
former, that baptism exists with them; but
they are unwilling to allow the latter, that in
their Church it cannot be rightly received.
Of these four propositions, three are peculiar
to us; in one we both agree. For that bap-
tism exists in the Catholic Church, that it is
rightly received there, and that it is not
rightly received among the Donatists, are as-
sertions made only by ourselves; but that
baptism exists also among the Donatists, is
asserted by them and allowed by us. If any
one, therefore, is desirous of being baptized,
and is already convinced that he ought to

choose our Church as a medium for Christian
salvation, and that the baptism of Christ is
only profitable in it, even when it has been
received elsewhere, but yet wishes to be bap-
tized in the schism of Donatus, because- not
they only, nor we only, but both parties alike
say that baptism exists with them, let him
pause and look to the other three points. For
if he has made up his mind to follow us in
the points which they deny, though he prefers
what both of us acknowledge to what only we
assert, it is enough for our purpose that he
prefers what they do not affirm and we alone
assert, to what they alone assert. That bap-
tism exists in the Catholic Church, we assert
and they deny. That it is rightly received
in the Catholic Church, we assert and they
deny. That it is not rightly received in the
schism of Donatus, we assert and they deny.
As, therefore, he is the more ready to believe
what we alone assert should be believed, so
let him be the more ready to do what we alone
declare should be done. But let him believe
more firmly, if he be so disposed, what both
parties assert should be believed, than what
we alone maintain. For he is inclined to be-
lieve more firmly that the baptism of Christ
exists in the schism of Donatus, because tha^
is acknowledged by both of us, than that it
exists in the Catholic Church, an assertion
made alone by the Catholics. But again, he
is more ready to believe that the baptism of
Christ exists also with us, as we alone assert,
than that it does not exist with us, as ttiey
alone assert. For he has already determined
and is fully convinced, that where we differ,
our authority is to be preferred to theirs.
So that he is more ready to believe what we
alone assert, that baptism is rightly received
with us, than that it is not rightly so received,
since that rests only on their assertion. And,
by the same rule, he is more ready to believe
what we alone assert, that it is not rightly re-
ceived with them, than as they alone assert,
that it is rightly so received. He finds,
therefore, that his confidence in being bap-
tized among the Donatists is somewhat profit-
less, seeing that, though we both acknowledge
that baptism exists with them, yet we do not
both declare that it ought to be received from
them. But he has made up his mind to cling
rather to us in matters where we disagree.
Let him therefore feel confidence in receiving
baptism in our communion, where he is as-
sured that it both exists and is rightly re-
ceived ; and let him not receive it in a com-
munion, where those whose opinion he has
determined to follow acknowledge indeed that
it exists, but say that it cannot rightly be re-
ceived. Nay, even if he should hold it to be

414

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book I.

a doubtful question, whether or no it is im-
possible for that to be rightly received among
the Donatists which he is assured can rightly
be received in the Catholic Church, he would
commit a grievous sin, in matters concerning
the salvation of his soul, in the mere fact of
preferring uncertainty to certainty. At any
rate, he must be quite sure that a man can
be rightly baptized in the Catholic Church,
from the mere fact that he has determnied to
come over to it, even if he be baptized else-
where. But let him at least acknowledge it
to be matter of uncertainty whether a man be
not improperly baptized among the Donatists,
when he finds this asserted by those whose
opinion he is convinced should be preferred
to theirs; and, preferring certainty to uncer-
tainty, let him be baptized here, where he has
good grounds for being assured that it is
rightly done, in the fact that when he thought
of doinof it elsewhere, he had still determined
that he ought afterwards to come over to this
side.

Chap. 4. — 5. Further, if any one fails to
understand how it can be that we assert that
the sacrament is not rightly conferred among
the Donatists, while we confess that it exists
among them, let him observe that we also
deny that it exists rightly among them, just
as they deny that it exists rightly among those
who quit their communion. Let him also
consider the analogy of the military mark,
which, though it can both be retained, as by
deserters, and, also be received by those who
are not in the army, yet ought not to be either
received or retained outside its ranks; and,
at the same time, it is not changed or renewed
when a man is enlisted or brought back to
his service. However, we must distinguish
between the case of those who unwittingly
join the ranks of these heretics, under the
impression that they are entering the true
Church of Christ, and those who know that
there is no other Catholic Church save that
which, according to the promise, is spread
abroad throughout the whole world, and ex-
tends even to the utmost limits of the earth;
which, rising amid tares, and seeking rest in
the future from the weariness of offenses,
says in the Book of Psalms, " From the end
of the earth I cried unto Thee, while my heart
was in weariness: Thou didst exalt me on a
rock.''^ But the rock was Christ, in whom
the apostle says that we are now raised up,
and set together in heavenly places, though
not yet actually, but only in hope.' And so
the psalm goes on to say, " Thou wast my

I Ps. Ixi. 2, 3. Cp. Hieron. and LXX.

- Eph. ii. 6.

guide, because Thou art become my hope, a
tower of strength from the face of the
enemy." ' By means of His promises, which
are like spears and javelins stored up in a
strongly fortified place, the enemy is not only
guarded against, but overthrown, as he clothes
his wolves in sheep's clothing,^ that they may
say, " Lo, here is Christ, or there; "•♦ and
that they may separate many from the Catho-
lic city which is built upon a hill, and bring
them down to the isolation of their own snares,
so as utterly to destroy them. And these
men, knowing this, choose to receive the bap-
tism of Christ without the limits of the com-
munion of the unity of Christ's body, though
they intend afterwards, with the sacrament
which they have received elsewhere, to pass
into that very communion. For they propose
to receive Christ's baptism in antagonism to
the Church of Christ, well knowing that it is
so even on the very day on which they receive
it. And if this is a sin, who is the man that
will say. Grant that for a single day I may
commit sin ? For if he proposes to pass over
to the Catholic Church, I would fain ask why.
What other answer can he give, but that it is
ill to belong to the party of Donatus, and not
to the unity of the Catholic Church? Just
so many days, then, as you commit this ill, of
so many days' sin are you going to be guilty.
And it may be said that there is greater sin
in more days' commission of it, and less in
fewer; but in no wise can it be said that no
sin is committed at all. Bat what is the need
of allowing this accursed wrong for a single
day, or a single hour ? For the man who
wishes this license to be granted him, might
as well ask of the Church, or of God Himself,
that for a single day he should be permitted
to apostatize. For there is no reason why
he should fear to be an apostate for a day, if
he does not shrink from being for that time a
schismatic or a heretic.

Chap. 5. — 6. I prefer, he says, to receive
Christ's baptism where both parties agree
that it exists. But those whom you intend
to join say that it cannot be received there
rightly; and those who say that it can be re-
ceived there rightly are the party whom you
mean to quit. What they say, therefore,
whom you yourself consider of inferior au-
thority, in opposition to what those say whom
you yourself prefer, is, if not false, at any
rate, to use a milder term, at least uncertain.
I entreat you, therefore, to prefer what is true
to what is false, or what is certain to what is
uncertain. For it is not only tliose whom

3 MatU vii. 15.

4 iMatt. x.xiv. 2!

Chap. VI.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

4^5

vou are going to join, but you yourself who
are going to join them, that confess that what
you want can be rightly received in that body
which you mean to join when you have re-
ceived it elsewhere. For if you had any
doubts whether it could be rightly received
there, you would also have doubts whether
you ought to make the change. If, there-
fore, it is doubtful whether it be not sin to
receive baptism from the party of Donatus,
who can doubt but that it is certain sin not to
prefer receiving it where it is certain that it is
not sin? And those who are baptized there
through ignorance, thinking that it is the true
Church of Christ, are guilty of less sin in
comparison than these, though even they are
wounded by the impiety of schism; nor do
they escape a grievous hurt, because others
suffer even more. For when it is said to cer-
tain men, " It shall be more tolerable for the
land of Sodom in the day of judgment than
for you,'" it is not meant that the men of
Sodom shall escape torment, but only that
the others shall be even more grievously tor-
mented.

7. And yet this point had once, perhaps,
been involved in obscurity and doubt. But
that which is a source of health to those who
give heed and receive correction, is but an
aggravation of the sin of those who, when
they are no longer suffered to be ignorant,
persist in their madness to their own destruc-
tion. For the condemnation of the party of
Maximianus, and their restoration after they
had been condemned, together with those
whom they had sacrilegiously, to use the lan-
guage of their own Council,- baptized in
schism, settles the whole question in dispute,
and removes all controversy. There is no
point at issue between ourselves and those
Donatists who hold communion with Primi-
anus, which could give rise to any doubt that
the baptism of Christ may not only be re-
tained, but even conferred by those who are
severed from the Church. For as they them-
selves are obliged to confess that those whom
'•'elicianus baptized in schism received true
uaptism, inasmuch as they now acknowledge
them as members of their own body, with no
other baptism than that which they received
in schism; so we say that that is Christ's bap-
tism, even without the pale of Catholic com-
munion, which they confer who are cut off
from that communion, inasmuch as they had
not lost it when they were cut off. And what
tney themselves think that they conferred on
those persons whom Felicianus baptized in

' Matt. xi. 24.

- The Coumil of 310 Donatist bishops, held at Bagai in Nu-
idja, A.u. April 24. 394. Cp. Contr. Crcscon. iii. 52, 56.

schism, when they admitted them to recon-
cilation with themselves, viz., not that they
should receive that which they did not as yet
possess, but that what they had received to
no advantage in schism, and were already in
possession of, should l)e of profit to them,
this God really confers and bestows through
the Catholic communion on those who come
from any heresy or schism in which they re-
ceived the baptism of Christ; viz., not that
they should begin to receive the sacrament
of baptism as not possessing it before, but
that what they already possessed should now
begin to profit them.

Chap. 6. — 8. Between us, then, and what
we may call the genuine ^ Donatists, whose
bishop is Primianus at Carthage, there is
now no controversy on this point. For God
willed that it should be ended by means of
the followers of Maximianus, that they should
be compelled by the precedent of his case to
acknowledge what they would not allow at
the persuasion of Christian charity. But this
brings us to consider next, whether those men
do not seem to have something to say for
themselves, who refuse communion with the
party of Primianus, contending that in their
body there remains greater sincerity of Dona-
tism, just in proportion to the paucity of their
numbers. And even if these were only the
party of Maximianus, we should not be justi-
fied in despising their salvation. How much
more, then, are we bound to consider it, when
we find that this same party of Donatus is
split up into many most minute fractions, all
which small sections of the body blame the
one much larger portion which has Primianus
for its head, because they receive the baptism
of the followers of Maximianus; while each
endeavors to maintain that it is the sole re-
ceptacle of true baptism, which exists no-
where else, neither in the whole of the world
where the Catholic Church extends itself, nor
in that larger main body of the Donatists, nor
even in the other minute sections, but only
in itself. Whereas, if all these fragments would
listen not to the voice of man, but to the most
unmistakable manifestation of the truth, and
would be willing to curb the fiery temper of
their own perversity, they would return from
their own barrenness, not indeed to the main
body of Donatus, a mere fragment of which
they are a smaller fragment, but to the never-
failing fruitfulness of the root of the Catholic
Church. For all of them who are not against
us are for us; but when they gather not with
us, they scatter abroad.

3 Quodain inodo cardinaUs Donatistas.

4i6

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book I.

Chap. 7. — 9. For, in the next place, that
I may not seem to rest on mere human argu-
ments,— since there is so much obscurity in
this question, that in earlier ages of the
Church, before the schism of Donatus, it has
caused men of great weight, and even our
fathers, the bishops, whose hearts were full of
charity, so to dispute and doubt among them-
selves, saving always the peace of the Church,
that the several statutes of their Councils in
their different districts long varied from each
other, till at length the most wholesome
opinion was established, to the removal of all
doubts, by a plenary Council of the whole
world : ' — I therefore bring forward from the
gospel clear proofs, by which I propose, with
God's help, to prove how rightly and truly in
the sight of God it has been determined, that
in the case of every schismatic and heretic,
the wound which caused his separation should
be cured by the medicine of the Church; but
that what remained sound in him should rather
be recognized with approbation, than wounded
by condemnation. It is indeed true that the
Lord says in the gospel, " He that is not with
me is against me; and he that gathereth not
with me scattereth abroad." ^ Yet when the
disciples had brought word to Him that they
had seen one casting out devils in His name,
and had forbidden him, because he followed
not them. He said, " Forbid him not: for he
that is not against us is for us. For there is
no man which shall do a miracle in my name,
that can lightly speak evil ofme."^ If, in-
deed, there were nothing in this man requiring
correction, then any one would be safe who,
setting himself outside the communion of the
Church, severing himself from all Christian
brotherhood, should gather in Christ's name;
and so there would be no truth in this, " He
that is not with me is against me; and he that
gathereth not with me scattereth abroad."
But if he required correction in the point
where the disciples in their ignorance were
anxious to check him, why did our Lord, by
saying, " Forbid him not," prevent this check
from being given ? And how can that be true
which He then says, " He that is not against
you is for you ? " For in this point he was
not against, but for them, when he was work-
ing miracles of healing in Christ's name.
That both, therefore, should be true, as both
are true, — both the declaration, that " he that
is not with me is against me, and he that
gathereth not with me scattereth abroad;"
and also the injunction, "Forbid him not;
for he that is not against you is for you," —
what must we understand, except that the

I See below, on ii. q.

3 Mark ix. 38, 39 ; Luke ix. 50.

2 Matt. xii. 30.

man was to be confirmed in his veneration for
that mighty Name, in respect of which he was
not against the Church, but for it; and yet
he was to be blamed for separating himself
from the Church, whereby his gathering be-
came a scattering; and if it should have so
happened that he sought union with the
Church, he should not have received what he
already possessed, but be made to set right
the points wherein he had gone astray ?

Chap. 8. — lo. Nor indeed were the prayers
of the Gentile Cornelius unheard, nor did his
alms lack acceptance; nay, he was found
worthy that an angel should be sent to him,
and that he should behold the messenger,
through whom he might assuredly have
learned everything that was necessary, with-
out requiring that any man should come to
him. But since all the good that he had in
his prayers and alms could not benefit him
unless he were incorporated in the Church by
the bond of Christian brotherhood and peace,
he was ordered to send to Peter, and through
him learned Christ; and, being also baptized
by his orders, he was joined by the tie of
communion to the fellowship of Christians, to
which before he was bound only by the like-
ness of good works/ And indeed it would
have been most fatal to despise what he did
not yet possess, vaunting himself in what he
had. So too those who, by separating them-
selves from the society of their fellows, to the
overthrow of charity, thus break the bond of
unity, if they observe none of the things
which they have received in that society, are
separated in everything; and so any one whom
they have joined to their society, if he after-
wards wish to come over to the Church, ought
to receive everything which he has not already
received. But if they observe some of the
same things, in respect of these they have not
severed themselves; and so far they are still
a part of the framework of the Church, while
in all other respects they are cut off from it.
Accordingly, any one whom they have asso-
ciated with themselves is united to the Church
in all those points in which they are not sepa-
rated from it. And therefore, if he wish ta
come over to the Church, he is made sound
in those points in which he was unsound and
went astray; but where he was sound in union
with the Church, he is not cured, but recog-
nized,— lest in desiring to cure what is sound
we should rather inflict a wound. Therefore
those whom they baptize they heal from the
wound of idolatry or unbelief; Ibut they injure
them more seriously with the wound of schism.

4 Acts X.

Chaf. X.j

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

417

For idolaters among the people of the Lord
were smitten with the sword;' but schismatics
were swallowed up by the earth opening her
mouth.- And the apostle says, "Though I
have all faith, so that 1 could remove moun-
tains, and have not charity, I am nothing/' ^

II. If any one is brought to the surgeon,
afflicted with a grievous wound in some vital
part of the body, and the surgeon says that
unless it is cured it must cause death, the
friends who brought him do not, I presume,
act so foolishly as to count over to the sur-
geon all his sound limbs, and, drawing his
attention to them, make answer to him, " Can
it be that all these sound limbs are of no avail
to save his life, and that one wounded limb is
enough to cause his death ?" They certainly
do not say this, but they entrust him to the
surgeon to be cured. Nor, again, because
they so entrust him, do they ask the surgeon
to cure the limbs that are sound as well; but
they desire him to apply drugs with all care
to the one part from which death is threaten-
ing the other sound parts too, with the cer-
tainty that it must come, unless the wound
be healed. What will it then profit a man
that he has sound faith, or perhaps only
soundness in the sacrament of faith, when
the soundness of his charity is done away
with by the fatal wound of schism, so that by
the overthrow of it the other points, which
were in themselves sound, are brought into
the infection of death? To prevent which,
the mercy of God, through the unity of His
holy Church, does not cease striving that
they may come and be healed by the medi-
cine of reconciliation, through the bond of
peace. And let them not think that they are
sound because we admit that they have some-
thing sound in them; nor let them think, on
the other hand, that what is sound must needs
be healed, because we show that in some parts
there is a wound. So that in the soundness
of the sacrament, because they are not against
us, they are for us; but in the wound of
schism, because they gather not with Christ,
they scatter abroad. Let them not be exalted
I'V what they have. Why do they pass the
eyes of pride over those parts only which are
sound ? Let them condescend also to look
humbly on their wound, and give heed not

ily to what they have, but also to what is
I wanting in them.

I Chap. 9. — 12. Let them see how many
things, and what important things, are of no

j avail, if a certain single thing be wanting, and
let them see what that one thing- is. And

■ Ex.

* Num. xvi.

3 I Cor. xiii. 2.

herein let them hear not my words, but those
of the apostle: "Though I speak with the
tongues of men and of angels, and have not
charity, I aui become as sounding brass, or a
tinkling cymbal. And though I have the gift
of prophecy, and understand all mysteries,
and all knowledge; and though I have all
faith, so that I could remove mountains, and
have not charity, I am nothing."* What does
it profit them, tiierefore, if they have bot'a
the voice of angels in the sacred mysteries,
and the gift of prophecy, as had Caiaphas^
and Saul,*^ that so they may be found prophe-
sying, of whom Holy Scripture testifies that
they were worthy of condemnation ? If they
not only know, but even possess the sacra-
ments, as Simon Magus did;' if they have
faith, as the devils confessed Christ (for we
must not suppose that they did not believe
when they said, "What have we to do with
Thee, O Son of God ? We know Thee who
Thou art" ^); if they distribute of themselves
their own substance to the poor, as many do,
not only in the Catholic Church, but in the
different heretical bodies; if, under the pres-
sure of any persecution, they give their bodies
with us'; to be burned for the faith which they
like us confess: yet because they do all these
things apart from the Church, not " forbear-
ing one another in love," nor "endeavoring
to keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of
peace,"' insomuch as they have not charity,
they cannot attain to eternal salvation, even
with all those good things which profit them
not.

Chap. id. — 13. But they think within
themselves that they show very great subtlety
in asking whether the baptism of Christ in
the party of Donatus makes men sons or not;
so that, if we allow that it does make them
sons, they may assert that theirs is the
Church, the mother which could give birth to
sons in the baptism of Christ; and since the
Church must be one, they may allege that
ours is no Church. But if we say that it does
not make them sons, "Why then," say they,
" do you not cause those who pass from us to
you to be born again in baptism, after they
have been baptized with us, if they are not
thereby born as yet ? "

14. Just as though their party gained the
power of generation in virtue of what consti-
tutes its division, and not from what causes
its union with the Church. For it is severed
from the bond of peace and charity, but it is
joined in one baptism. And so there is one
Church which alone is called Catholic; and

4 I Cor. xiii.
7 Acts viii. 1

5 John XI. 51.
^ ^\lark i. 24.

"am. xviii. 10.

9 HpU.

4i8

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book I.

whenever it has anythuig of its own in these
communions of different bodies which are
separate from itself, it is most certainly in
virtue of this which is its own in each of them
that it, not they, has the power of generation.
For neither is it their separation that gener-
ates, but what they have retained of the es-
sence of the Church; and if they were to go
on to abandon this, they would lose the power
of generation. The generation, then, in each
case proceeds from the Church, whose sacra-
ments are retained, from which any such birth
can alone in any case proceed, — although not
all who receive its birth belong to its unity,
which shall save those who persevere even to
the end. Nor is it those only that do not
belong to it who are openly guilty of the
manifest sacrilege of schism, but also those
who, being outwardly joined to its unity, are
yet separated by a life of sin. For the Church
had herself given birth to Simon Magus
through the sacrament of baptism; and yet
it was declared to him that he had no part in
the inheritance of Christ.' Did he lack any-
thing in respect of baptism, of the gospel, of
the sacraments ? But in that he wanted
charity, he was born in vain; and perhaps it
had been well for him that he had never been
born at all. Was anything wanting to their
birth to whom the apostle says, " I have fed
you with milk, and not with meat, even as
babes in Christ " ? Yet he recalls them from
the sacrilege of schism, into which they were
rushing, because they were carnal: " I have
fed you," he says, "with milk, and not with
meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear
it, neither yet now are ye able. For ye are
yet carnal: for whereas there is among you
envying and strife, are ye not carnal, and
walk as men ? For while one saith, I am of
Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye
not men ? " = For of these he says above:
" Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name
of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak
the same thing, and that there be no divisions
among you; but that ye be perfectly joined
together in the same mind, and in the same
judgment. For it hath been declared unto
me of you, my brethren, by them which are
of the house of Chloe, that there are conten-
tions among you. Now this I say, that every
one of you saith, I am of Paul, and I of
Apollos, and I of Cephas, and I of Christ.
Is Christ divided ? was Paul crucified for you ?
or were ye baptized in the name of Paul ? " ^
These, therefore, if they continued in the
same perverse obstinacy, were doubtless in-
deed born, but yet would not belong by the

' Acts viii. 13, 21.

^or. 111. I-'

3 I Cor. i.

bond of peace and unity to the very Church
in respect of which they were born. There-
fore she herself bears them in her own womb
and in the womb of her handmaids, by virtue
of the same sacraments, as though by virtue
of the seed of her husband. For it is not
without meaning that the apostle says that all
these things were done by way of figure."
But those who are too proud, and are not
joined to their lawful mother, are like Ishmael,
of whom it is said, "Cast out this bond-
woman and her son: for the son of the bond-
woman shall not be heir with my son, even
with Isaac." ^ But those who peacefull}' love
the lawful wife of their father, whose sons
they are by lawful descent, are like the sons
of Jacob, born indeed of handmaids, but yet
receiving the same inheritance.^ But those
who are born within the family, of the womb
of the mother herself, and then neglect the
grace they have received, are like Isaac's son
Esau, who was rejected, God Him.self bearing
witness to it, and saying, " I loved Jacob,
and I hated Esau;"'' and that though they
were twin-brethren, the offspring of the same
womb.

Chap. ii. — 15. They ask also, "Whether
sins are remitted in baptism in the party of
Donatus: " so that, if we say that they are
remitted, they may answer, then the Holy
Spirit is there; for when by the breathing of
our Lord the Holy Spirit was given to the
disciples, He then went on to say, " Baptize
all nations in the name of the Father, and of
the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. " ^ Whose
soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto
them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they
are retained. "9 And if it is so, they say,
then our communion is the Church of Christ;
for the Holy Spirit does not work the re-
mission of sins except in the Church. And
if our communion is the Church of Christ,
then your communion is not the Church of
Christ. For that is one, wherever it is, of
which it is said, " My dove is but one; she is
the only one of her mother;"'" nor can there
be just so many churches as there are schisms.
But if we should say that sins are not there
remitted, then, say they, there is no true
baptism there; and therefore ought you to
baptize those whom you receive from us.
And since you do not do this, you confess
that you are not in the Church of Christ.

16. To these we reply, following the Script-
ures, by asking them to answers themselves
what they ask of us. For I beg them to tell

4 I Cor. .\. II. l>i /igiira : tuttiko)? ; A. V., " for ensamples."

5 Gen. XXI. lo. '" Gen. xxx. 3. 7 Mai. i. 2, 3; Gen. x.w. 24.
8 Matt, xxvhi. 19. 9 John xx. 23. i" Song of Sol. vi. 9.

Chap. XII.]

OX BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

419

us whether there is any remission of sins
where there is not charity; for sins are the
darkness of the soul. For we find St. John
saying, " He that hateth his brother is still
in darkness."' But none would create
schisms, if they were not blinded by hatred
of their brethren. If, therefore, we say that
sins are not remitted there, how is he regen-
erate who is baptized among them ? And
what is regeneration in baptism, except the
being renovated from the corruption of the
old man ? And how can he be so renovated
whose past sins are not remitted ? But if he
be not regenerate, neither does he put on
Christ; from which it seems to follow that he
ought to be baptized again. For the apostle
says, " For as many of you as have been bap-
tized into Christ have put on Christ; " = and
if he has not so put on Christ, neither should
he be considered to have been baptized in
Christ. Further, since we say that he has
l)een baptized in Christ, we confess that he
has put on Christ; and if we confess this, we
confess that he is regenerate. And if this be
so, how does St. John say, "He that hateth
his brother remaineth still in darkness,'' if
remission of his sins has already taken place ?
Can it be that schism does not involve hatred
of one's brethren ? Who will iriaintain this,
when both the origin of, and perseverance in
schism consists in nothing else save hatred
of tae brethren ?

17. They think that they solve this ques-
tion when they say: "There is then no re-
mission of sins in schism, and therefore no
creation of the new man by regeneration, and
accordingly neither is there the baptism of
Christ." But since we confess that the bap-
tism of Christ exists in schism, we propose
this question to them for solution: Was Simon
Magus endued with the true baptism of
Christ? They will answer, Yes; being com-
pelled to do so by the authority of holy Script-
ure. I ask them whether thev confess that
he received remission of his sins. They will
certainly acknowledge it. So I ask why
Peter said to him that he had no part in the
lot of the saints. Because, they say, he
sinned afterwards, wishing to buy with money
the gift of God, which he believed the apostles
were able to sell.

Chap. 12. — 18. What if he approached
baptism itself in deceit? were his sins re-
mitted, or were they not ? Let them choose
which they will. Whichever they choose will
answer our purpose. If they say they were
remitted, how then shall "the Holy Spirit of

' I John ii. II.

2 Gal. iii. 27.

discipline flee deceit," ^ if in him who was full
of deceit He worked remission of sins ? If
they say they were not remitted, I ask
whether, if he should afterwards confess his
sin with contrition of heart and true sorrow, it
would be judged that he ought to be baptized
again. And if it is mere madness to assert
this, then let them confess that a man can be
baptized with the true baptism of Christ, and
that yet his heart, persisting in malice or sac-
rilege, may not allow remission of sins to be
given; and so let them understand that men
may be baptized in communions severed from
the Church, in which Christ's baptism is given
and received in the said celebration of the
sacrament, but that it will only then be of
avail for the remission of sins, when the re-
cipient, being reconciled to the unity of the
Church, is purged from the sacrilege of deceit,
by which his sins were retained, and their re-
mission prevented. For, as in the case of
him who had approached the sacrament in
deceit there is no second baptism, but he is
purged by faithful discipline and truthful
confession, which he could not be without
baptism, so that what was given before be-
comes then powerful to work his salvation,
when the former deceit is done away by the
truthful confession; so also in the case of the
man who, while an enemy to the peace and
love of Christ, received in any heresy or
schism the baptism of Christ, which the schis-
matics in question had not lost from among
them, though by his sacrilege his sins were
not remitted, yet, when he corrects his error,
and comes over to the communion and unity
of the Church, he ought not to be again bap-
tized: because by his very reconciliation to
the peace of the Church he receives this bene-
fit, that the sacrament now begins in unity to
be of avail for the remission of his sins, which
could not so avail him as received in schism.
19. But if they should say that in the man
who has approached the sacrament in deceit,
his sins are indeed removed by the holy power
of so great a sacrament at the moment when
he received it, but return immediatelv in con-
sequence of his deceit: so that the Holy Spirit
has both been present witli him at his baptism
for the removal of his sins, and has also fled
before his perseverance in deceit so that they
should return: so that both declarations prove
true, — both, "As many of you as have been
baptized into Christ have put on Christ;"
and also, "The holy spirit of discipline will
flee deceit; " — that is to say, that both the
holiness of baptism clothes him with Christ,
and the sinfulness of deceit strips him of

3 Wisd. i. 5.

420

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book L

Christ; like the case of a man who passes
from darkness through Hght into darkness
again, his eyes being always directed towards
darkness, though the light cannot but pene-
trate them as he passes; — if they should say
this, let them understand that this is also the
case with those who are baptized without the
pale of the Church, but yet with the baptism
of the Church, which is holy in itself, wherever
it may be; and which therefore belongs not to
those who separate themselves, but to the body
from which they are separated; while yet it
avails even among them so far, that they pass
through its light back to their own darkness,
their sins, which in that moment had been
dispelled by the holiness of baptism, return-
ing immediately upon them, as though it were
the darkness returning which the light had
dispelled while they were passing through it.
20. For that sins which have been remitted
do return upon a man, where there is no
brotherly love, is most, clearly taught by our
Lord, in the case of the servant whom He
found owing Him ten thousand talents, and
to whom He yet forgave all at his entreaty.
But when he refused to have pity on his
fellow-servant who owed hhn a hundred pence,
the Lord commanded him to pay what He
had forgiven him. The time, then, at which
pardon is received through baptism is as it
were the time for rendering accounts, so that
all the debts which are found to l)e due may
be remitted. Yet it was not afterwards that
the servant lent his fellow-servant the money,
which he had so pitilessly exacted when the
other was unable to pay it; but his fellow-
servant already owed him the debt, when he
himself, on rendering his accounts to his
master, was excused a debt of so vast an
amount. He had not first excused his fellow-
servant, and so come to receive forgiveness
from his Lord. This is proved by the words
of the fellow-servant: " Have patience with
me, and I will pay thee all." Otherwise he
would have said, "You forgave me it before;
why do you again demand it?" This is made
more clear by the words of the Lord Himself.
For He says, " But the same servant went out,
and found one of his fellow-servants which was
owing' him a hundred pence." ^ He does not
say, " To whom he had already forgiven a debt
of a hundred pence.'' Since then He says,
"was owing him," it is clear that he had not
forgiven him the debt. And indeed it would
have been better, and more in accordance
with the position of a man who was going to
render an account of so great a debt, and ex-
pected forbearance from his lord, that he

1 Debebat. Hieron. debebat, LXX. ai(#)ec\ei'.

2 j\Iatt. xviii. 23-35.

should first have forgiven his fellow-servant
what was due to him, and so have come to
render the account when there was such need
for imploring the compassion of his lord. Yet
the fact that he had not yet forgiven his fellow-
servant, did not prevent his lord from forgiv-
ing him all his debts on the occasion of re-
ceiving his accounts. But what advantage
was it to him, since they all immediately re-
turned with redoubled force upon his head,
in consequence of his persistent want of char-
ity ? So the grace of baptism is not prevented
from giving remission of all sins, even if he
to whom they are forgiven continues to cher-
ish hatred towards his brother in his heart.
For the guilt of yesterday is remitted, and all
that was before it, nay, even the guilt of the
very hour and moment previous to baptism,
and during baptism itself. But then he im-
mediately begins again to be responsible, not
only for the days, hours, moments which en-
sue, but also for the past, —the guilt of all
the sins which were remitted returning on
him, as happens only too frequently in the
Church.

Chap. 13.— 21. For it often happens that
a man has an enemy whom he hates most un-
justly; although we are commanded to love
even our' unjust enemies, and to pray for
them. But in some sudden danger of death
he begins to be uneasy, and desires baptism,
which he receives in such haste, that the
emergency scarcely admits of the necessary
formal examination of a few words, much less
of a long conversation, so that this hatred
should be driven from his heart, even sup-
posing it to be known to the minister who
baptizes him. Certainly cases of this sort are
still found to occur not only with us, but also
with them. What shall we say then ? Are
this man's sins forgiven or not? Let them
choose just which alternative they prefer.
For if they are forgiven, they immediately
return: this is the teaching of the gospel,
the authoritative announcement of truth.
Whether, therefore, they are forgiven or not,
medicine is necessary afterwards; and yet if
the man lives, and learns that his fault stands
in need of correction, and corrects it, he is
not baptized anew, either with them or with
us. So in the points in which schismatics
and heretics neither entertain different
opinions nor observe different practice from
ourselves, we do not correct them when they
join us, but rather commend what we find in
them. For where they do not differ from us,
they are not separated from us. But because
these things do them no good so long as they
are schismatics or heretics, on account of

Chap. XV.]

OX BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DOXATISTS.

421

other points in whicii they differ from us, not
to mention tiie most grievous sin that is in-
volved in separation itself, therefore, whether
their sins remain in them, or return again
immediately after remission, in either case we
exhort them to come to the soundness of
peace and Christian charity, not only that they
may obtain something which they had not
before, but also that what they had may begin
to be of use to them.

Chap. 14. — 22. It is to no purpose, then,
that they say to us, " If you acknowledge our
baptism, what do we lack that should make
you suppose that we ought to think seriously
of joining your communion ? " For we reply,
We do not acknowledge any baptism of yours;
for it is not the baptism of schismatics or
heretics, but of God and of the Church, where-
soever it may be found, and whithersoever it
may be transferred. But it_is_m no sense
yours, except because you entertam False
opinions, and do sacrilegious acts, and have
impiously separated yourselves from the
Church. For if everything else in your prac-
tice and opinions were true, and still you
were to persist in this same separation, con-
trary to the bond of brotherly peace, contrary
to the union of all the brethren, who have
been ''manifest, according to the promise, in
all the world; the particulars of whose his-
tory, and the secrets of whose hearts, you
never could have known or considered in
every case, so as to have a right to condemn
them; who, moreover, cannot be liable to
condemnation for submitting themselves to
the judges of the Church rather than to one
■of the parties to the dispute, — in this one
thing, at least, in such a case, you are defi-
cient, in which he is deficient who lacks char-
ity. Why should we go over our argument
again ? Look and see yourselves in the apos-
tle, how much there is that you lack. For
what does it matter to him who lacks charity,
whether he be carried away outside the
Church at once by some blast of temptation,
or remain within the Lord's harvest, so as to
be separated only at the final winnowing?
And yet even such, if they have once been
born in baptism, need not be born again.

Chap. 15. — 23. For it is the Church that
gives birth to all, either within her pale, of
her own womb; or beyond it, of the seed of
her bridegroom, — (either of herself, or of her
handmaid.') But Esau, even though born
of the lawful wife, was separated from the
people of God because he quarrelled with his

' The words in parenthesis are wanting in the mss..
to have crept from the margin into the text.

and seem

brother. And Asher, born indeed by the au-
thority of a wife, but yet of a handmaid, was
admitted to the land of promise on account of
his brotherly good-will. Whence also it was
not the being born of a handmaid, but his
quarrelling with his brother, that stood in the
way of Ishmael, to cause his separation from
the people of God; and he received no bene-
fit from the power of the wife, whose son he
rather was, inasmuch as it was in virtue of her
conjugal rights that he was both conceived
in and born of the womb of the handmaid.
Just as with the Donatists it is by the right
of the Church, which exists in baptism, that
whosoever is born receives his birth; but if
they agree with their brethren, through the
unity of peace they come to the land of
promise, not to be again cast out from the
bosom of their true mother, but to be ac-
knowledged in the seed of their father; but
if they persevere in discord, they will belong
to the line of Ishmael. For Ishmael was
first, and then Isaac; and Esau was the elder,
Jacob the younger. Not that heresy gives
birth before the Church, or that the Church
herself gives birth first to those who are carnal
or animal, and afterwards to those who are
spiritual; but because, in the actual lot of our
mortality, in which we are born of the seed
of Adam, " that was not first which is spirit-
ual, but that which is natural, and aftenvard
that which is spiritual."^ But from mere
animal sensation, because " the natural man
receivethnot the things of the Spirit of God," ^
arise all dissensions and schisms. And the
apostle says* that all who persevere in this
animal sensation belong to the old covenant,
that is, to the desire of earthly promises,
which are indeed the type of the spiritual;
but " the natural man receiveth not the things
of the Spirit of God." ^

24. At whatever time, therefore, men have
begun to be of such a nature in this life, that,
although they have partaken of such divine
sacraments as were appointed for the dis-
pensation under which they lived, they yet
savor of carnal things, and hope for and de-
sire carnal things from God, whether in this
life or afterwards, they are yet carnal. But
the Church, which is the people of God, is an
ancient institution even in the pilgrimage of
this life, having a carnal interest in some men,
a spiritual interest in others. To the carnal
belongs the old covenant, to the spiritual the
new. But in the first days both were hidtlen,
from Adam even to Moses. But by Moses
the old covenant was made manifest, and in
it was hidden the new covenant, because after

= I Cor. .\v. 46.

3 I Cor. ii. I •

* Gal. iv.

422

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book I.

a secret fashion it was typified. But so soon
as tne Lord came in the flesh, the new cov-
enant was revealed; yet, though the sacra-
ments of the old covenant passed away; the
dispositions peculiar to it did not pass away.
For they still exist in those whom the apostle
declares to be already born indeed by the
sacrament of the new covenant, but yet in-
capable, as being natural, of receiving the
things of the Spirit of God. For, as in the
sacraments of the old covenant some persons
were already spiritual, belonging secretly to
the new covenant, which was tiien concealed,
so now also in the sacrament of the new cov-
enant, which has been by this time revealed,
many live who are natural. And if they will
not advance to receive the things of the Spirit
of God, to which the discourse of the apostle
urges them, they will still belong to the old
covenant. But if they advance, even before
they receive them, yet by their very advance
and approach they belong to the new cov-
enant; and if, before becoming spiritual, they
are snatched away from this life, yet through
the protection of the holiness of the sacra-
ment they are reckoned in the land of the
living, where the Lord is our hope and our
portion. Nor can I find any truer interpre-
tation of the scripture, "Thine eyes did see
my substance, yet being imperfect"' con-
sidering what follows, "And in Thy book
shall all be written.""

Chap. i6. — 25. But the same mother
which brought forth Abel, and Enoch, and
Noah, and Abraham, brought forth also
Moses and the prophets who succeeded him
till the coming of our Lord; and the mother
which gave birth to them gave birth also to
our apostles and martyrs, and all good Chris-
tians. For all these that have appeared have
been born indeed at different times, but are
included in the society of our people; and it
is as citizens of the same state that they have
experienced the labors of this pilgrimage,
and some of them are experiencing them,
and others will experience them even to the
end. Again, the mother who brought forth
Cain, and Ham, and Ishmael, and Esau,
brought forth also Dathan and others like
him in the same people; and she who gave
birth to them gave birth also to Judas the
false apostle, and Simon Magus, and all the
other false Christians who up to this time
have persisted obstinately in their carnal af-
fections, whether they have been mingled in
the unity of the Church, or separated from it

1 Ps. cxxxix. 16.

2 Cf. Hieron. and LXX. A. V. " In Thy book were all ray
members written."

in open schism. But when men of this kind
have the gospel preached to them, and receive
the sacraments at the hand of those who are
spiritual, it is as though Rebecca gave birth
to them of her own womb, as she did to
Esau; but when they are produced in the
midst of the people of God through the in-
strumentality of those who preach the gospel
not sincerely,^ Sarah is indeed the mother,
but through Hagar. So when good spiritual
disciples are produced by the preaching or
baptism of those who are carnal, Leah, indeed,
or Rachel, gives birth to them in her right
as wife, but from the womb of a handmaid.
But when good and faithful disciples are born
of those who are spiritual in the gospel, and
either attain to the development of spiritual
age, or do not cease to strive in that direc-
tion, or are only deterred from doing so by
want of power, these are born like Isaac from
the womb of Sarah, or Jacob from the womb
of Rebecca, in the new life and the new cov-
enant.

Chap. 17. — 26. Therefore, whether they
seem to abide witliin, or are openly outside,
whatsoever is flesh is flesh, and what is chaff
is chaff, whether they persevere in remaining
in their barrenness on the threshing-floor, or,
when temptation befalls them, are carried out
as it were by the blast of some wind. And
even that man is always severed from the
unity of the Church which is without spot or
wrinkle,* who associates with the congrega-
tion of the saints in carnal obstinacy. Yet
we ought to despair of no man, whether he
be one who shows himself to be of this nature
within the pale of the Church, or whether he
more openly opposes it from without. But
the spiritual, or those who are steadily ad-
vancing with pious exertion towards this end,
do not stray without the pale; since even
when, by some perversity or necessity among
men, they seem to be driven forth, they are
more approved than if they had remained
within, since they are in no degree roused to
contend against the Church, but remain rooted
in the strongest foundation of Christian char-
ity on the solid rock of unity. For hereunto
belongs what is said in the sacrifice of Abra-
ham: " But the birds divided he not. "^

Chap. 18. — 27. On the question of bap-

3 Non caste; ov^ a.yvii>^, Phil. i. i6. Hieron. fton sincere.

4 In the Retractations, ii. i8, Augustin notes on this passage^
that wherever he uses this quotation from the Epistle to the
Ephesians, he means it to be understood of the progress of the
Church towards this condition, and not of her success in its attain-
ment; for at present tlie infirmities and ignorance of her meinbers
give ground enough for the whole Church joining daily in the pc
tition, " Forgive us our debts."

5 (.'.en. XV. ic.

Chap. XVIII. ]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

42.

tism, then, I think that I have argued at sufifi-
cient length; and since this is a most manifest
schism which is called by the name of the
Donatists, it only remains that on the subject
of baptism we should believe with pious faith
what the universal Church maintains, apart
from the sacrilege of schism. And yet, if
within the Church different men still held dif-
ferent opinions on the point, without mean-
waile violating peace, then till some one clear
and simple decree should have been passed
by an universal Council, it would have been
right for the charity which seeks for unity
to throw a veil over the error of human in-
firmity, as it is written " For charity shall
cover the multitude of sins."' For, seeing
that its absence causes the presence of all
other things to be of no avail, we may well
suppose that in its presence there is found
pardon for the absence of some missing things.
28. There are great proofs of this existing
on the part of the blessed martyr Cyprian, in
his letters, — to come at last to him of whose
authority they carnally flatter themselves they
are possessed, whilst by his love they are
spiritually overthrown. For at that time, be-
fore the consent of the whole Church had
declared authoritatively, by the decree of a
plenary Council,^ what practice should be fol-
lowed in this matter, it seemed to him, in
common with about eighty of his fellow-
bishops of the African churches, that every
man \vho had been baptized outside the com-
munion of the Catholic Church should, on
joining the Church, be baptized anew. And
I take it, that the reason why the Lord did
not reveal the error in this to a man of such
eminence, was, that his pious humility and
charity in guarding the peace and health of
the Church might be made manifest, and
might be noticed, so as to serve as an exam-
ple of healing power, so to speak, not only to
Christians of that age, but also to those who
should come after. For when a bishop of so
important a Church, himself a man of so great
merit and virtue, endowed with such excellence
of heart and power of eloquence, entertained
an opinion about baptism different from that
which was to be confirmed by a more diligent
searching into the truth; though many of his
colleagues held what was not yet made mani-
fest by authority, but was sanctioned by the
past custom of the Church, and afterwards
embraced by the whole Catholic world; yet
under these circumstances he did not sever
himself, by refusal of communion, from the
"thers who thought differently, and indeed
never ceased to urge on the others that they

1 I Pet. iv.

2 See below, ii.

should " forbear one another in love, endeav-
oring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the
bond of peace." ^ For so, while the frame-
work of the body remained whole, if any in-
firmity occurred in certain of its members, it
m.ight rather regain its health from their gen-
eral soundness, than be deprived of the chance
of any healing care by their death in sever-
ance from the body. And if he had severed
himself, how many were there to follow !
what a name was he likely to make for him-
self among men ! how much more widely
would the name of Cyprianist have spread
than that of Donatist ! But he was not a son
of perdition, one of those of whom it is said,
" Thou castedst them down while they were
elevated; " ■^ but he was the son of the peace
of the Church, who in the clear illumination
of his mind failed to see one thing, only that
through him another thing might be more ex-
cellently seen. "And yet," says the apos-
tle, " show I unto you a more excellent way:
though I speak with the tongues of men and
of angels, and have not charity, I am become
as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal, "s
He had therefore imperfect insight into the
hidden mystery of the sacrament. But if he
had known the mysteries of all sacraments,
without having charity, it would have been
nothing. But as he, with imperfect insight
into the mystery, was careful to preserve
charity with all courage and humility and
faith, he deserved to come to the crown of
martyrdom; so that, if any cloud had crept
over the clearness of his intellect from his in-
firmity as man, it might be dispelled by the
glorious brightness of his blood. For it was
not in vain that our Lord Jesus Christ, Avhen
He declared Himself to be the vine, and His
disciples, as it were, the branches in the vine,
gave command that those which bare no fruit
should be cut off, and removed from the vine
as useless branches.* But what is really fruit,
save that new offspring, of which He further
says, "A new commandment I give unto you,
that ye love one another ? '' ' This is that
very charity, without which the rest profiteth
nothing. The apostle also says: "But the
fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-
suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meek-
ness, temperance;"** which all begin with
charity, and with the rest of the combination
forms one unity in a kind of wondrous cluster.'
Nor is it again in vain that our Lord added,
"And every branch that beareth fruit, my
Father purgeth it, that it may bring forth
more fruit,"'" but because those who are

3 Eph. iv. 2, 3.

5 I Cor. xii. 3T, xiii. i.

8 Gal. V. 22, 23.

4 Ps. Ix.xiii. 18; cp. Hieron.

^ John XV. I, 2. 7 John xiii. 34.

9 Hotrum. 'ojohnxv. 2.

424

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book I,

strong in the fruit of charity may yet have
something which requires purging, which the
Husbandman will not leave untended. Whilst,
then, that holy man entertained on the sub-
ject of baptism an opinion at variance with
the true view, which was afterwards thor-
oughly examined and confirmed after most
diligent consideration, his error was compen-
sated by his remaining in catholic unity, and
by the abundance of his charity; and finally
it was cleared away by the pruning-hook of
martyrdom.

Chap. 19. — 29. But that I may not seem
to be uttering these praises of the blessed
martyr (which, indeed, are not his, but rather
those of Him by whose grace he showed him-
self what he was), in order to escape the bur-
den of proof, let us now bring forward from
his letters the testimony by which the mouths
of the Donatists may most of all be stopped.
For they advance his authority before the un-
learned, to show that in a manner they do well
when they baptize afresh the faithful who
come to them. Too wretched are they — and,
unless they correct themselves, even by them-
selves are they utterly condemned — who
choose in the example set them by so great a

man to imitate just that fault, which only did
not injure him, because he w-alked with con-
stant steps even to the end in that from which
they have strayed who " have not known the
way of peace." ' It is true that Christ's bap-
tism is holy; and although it may exist among
heretics or schismatics, yet it does not belong
to the heresy or schism; and therefore even
those who come from thence to the Catholic
Church herself ought not to be baptized
afresh. Yet to err on this point is one thing;
it is another thing that those who are straying
from the peace of the Church, and have fallen
headlong into the pit of schism, should go on
to decide that any who join them ought to be
baptized again. For the former is a speck on
the brightness of a holy soul which abundance
of charity ^ would fain have covered; the latter
is a stain in their nether foulness which the
hatred of peace in their countenance ostenta-
tiously brings to light. But the subject for
our further consideration, relating to the au-
thority of the blessed Cyprian, we will com-
mence from a fresh beginning.

1 Rom. iii. 17; from which it has been introduced into the Alex-
andrine MS. of the Septuagint at Ps. xiv. 3, cf. Hieron.; it is also
found in the EngUsh Prayer-book version of the Psalms.

2 Cliaritatis ubera.

BOOK II.

IN WHICH AUGUSTIN PROVES THAT IT IS TO NO PURPOSE THAT THE DONATISTS BRING FOR-
WARD THE AUTHORITY OF CYPRIAN, BISHOP AND MARTYR, SINCE IT IS REALLY MORE
OPPOSED TO THEM THAN TO THE CATHOLICS. FOR THAT HE HELD THAT THE VIEW OF
HIS PREDECESSOR AGRIPPINUS, OX THE SUBJECT OF BAPTIZING HERETICS IN THE CATHO-
LIC CHURCH WHEN THEV JOIN ITS COMMUNION, SHOULD ONLY BE RECEIVED ON CONDI-
TION THAT PEACE SHOULD BE MAINTAINED WITH THOSE WHO ENTERTAINED THE OPPO-
SITE VIEW, AND THAT THE UNITY OF THE CHURCH SHOULD NEVER BE BROKEN BY ANY
KIND OF SCHISM.

Chap. i. — i. How much the arguments
make for us, that is, for cathoUc peace, which
the party of Donatus profess to bring forward
against us from the authority of the blessed
Cyprian, and how much they prove against
those who bring them forward, it is my inten-
tion, with the help of God, to show in the en-
suing boolc. If, therefore, in the course of
my argument, I am obUged to repeat what I
have already said in other treatises (although
I will do so as little as I can,) yet this ought
not to be objected to by those who have al-
ready read them and agree with them; since
it is not only right that those things which are
necessary for instruction should be frequently
instilled into men of dull intelligence, but even
in the case of those who are endowed with
larger understanding, it contributes very much
both to make their learning easier and their
powers of teaching readier, where the same
points are handled and discussed in many
various ways. For I know how much it dis-
courages a reader, when he comes upon any
knotty question in the book which he has in
hand, to find himself presently referred for
its solution to another which he happens not
to have. Wherefore, if I am compelled, by
the urgency of the present questions, to re-
peat what I have already said in other books,
I would seek forgiveness from those who
know those books already, that those who are
ignorant may have their difificulties removed;
for it is better to give to one who has already,
than to abstain from satisfying any one who
is in want.

2. What, then, do they venture to say.

when their mouth is closed ' by the force of
truth, with which they will not agree ?
"Cyprian," say they, "whose great merits
and vast learning we all know, decreed in a
Council,'' with many of his fellow-bishops
contributing their several opinions, that all
heretics and schismatics, that is, all who are
severed from the communion of the one
Church, are without baptism; and therefore,
whosoever has joined the communion of the
Church after being baptized by them must be
baptized in the Church." The authority of
Cyprian does not alarm me, because I am re-
assured by his humility. We know, indeed,
the great merit of the bishop and martyr
Cyprian; but is it in any way greater than
that of the apostle and martyr Peter, of whom
the said Cyprian speaks as follows in his epis-
tle to Quintus? "For neither did Peter,
whom the Lord chose first, and on whom He
built His Church, 3 when Paul afterwards dis-
puted with him about circumcision, claim or
assume anything insolently and arrogantly to
himself, so as to say that he held the primacy,
and should rather be obeyed of those who
were late and newly come. Nor did he despise
Paul because he had before been a persecutor
of the Church, but he admitted the counsel
of truth, and readily assented to the legitimate
grounds which Paul maintained; giving us
thereby a pattern of concord and patience.

' Pra/ocantur.

- The Council of Carthage, A.n. 256, in which ei.?hty-seven
African bishops declared in favor of rebaptuini; heretics. The
opinions of the bishops are quoted and answered by Augustin,
one by one, in I'ooks vi. and vii.

3 ^Iatt. xvi. iS.

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

that we should not pertinaciously love our
own opinions, but should rather account as
our own any true and rightful suggestions of
our brethren and colleagues for the common
health and weal,'' ' Here is a passage in which
Cyprian records what we also learn in holy
Scripture, that the Apostle Peter, in whom
the primacy of the apostles shines with such
exceeding grace, was corrected by the later
Apostle Paul, when he adopted a custom in
the matter of circumcision at variance with
the demands of truth. If it was therefore
possible for Peter in some point to walk not
uprightly according to the truth of the gospel,
so as to compel the Gentiles to judaize, as
Paul writes in that epistle in which he calls
God to witness that he does not lie; for he
says, " Now the things which I write unto you.
behold, before God, I lie not;"== and, after
this sacred and awful calling of God to wit-
ness, he told the whole tale, saying in the
course of it, " But when I saw that they
walked not uprightly, according to the truth
of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them
all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the
manner of the Gentiles, and not as do the
Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live
as do the Jews ? " ^ — if Peter, I say, could
compel the Gentiles to live after the manner
of the Jews, contrary to the rule of truth
which the Church afterwards held, why might
not Cyprian, in opposition to the rule of faith
which the whole Church afterwards held,
compel heretics and schismatics to be bap-
tized afresh ? I suppose that there is no slight
to Cyprian in comparing him with Peter in
respect to his crown of martyrdom; rather I
ought to be afraid lest I am showing disrespect
towards Peter. For who can be ignorant that
the primacy of his apostleship is to be pre-
ferred to any episcopate whatever ? But,
granting the difference in the dignity of their
sees, yet they have the same glory in their
martyrdom. And whether it may be the case
that the hearts of those who confess and die
for the true faith in the unity of charity take
precedence of each other in different points,
the Lord Himself will know, by the hidden
and wondrous dispensation of whose grace
the thief hanging on the cross once for all
confesses Him, and is sent on the selfsame
day to paradise, "» while Peter, the follower of
our Lord, denies Him thrice, and has his
crown postponed: 5 for us it were rash to form
a judgment from the evidence. But if any
one were now found compelling a man to be
circumcised after the Jewish fashion, as a
necessary preliminary for baptism, this would

I Cypr. E/>. Ixxi.
4 Luke xxiii. 40 43.

- Gal. i. 20. 3 Gal. ii. 14.

5 Matt. xxvi. 69-75.

meet with much more general repudiation by
mankind, than if a man should be compelled
to be baptized again. Wherefore, if Peter,
on doing this, is corrected by his later col-
league Paul, and is yet preserved by the bond
of peace and unity till he is promoted to
martyrdom, how much more readily and con-
stantly should we prefer, either to the au-
thority of a single bishop, or to the Council
of a single province, the rule that has been
established by the statutes of the universal
Church ? For this same Cyprian, in urging
his view of the question, was still anxious to
remain in the unity of peace even with those
who differed from him on this point, as is
shown by his own opening address at the be-
ginning of the very Council which is quoted
by the Donatists. For it is as follows:

Chap. 2. — 3. "When, on the calends of
September, very many bishops from the
provinces of Africa,* Numidia, and Mauri-
tania, with their presbyters and deacons, had
met together at Carthage, a great part of the
laity also being present; and when the letter
addressed by Jubaianus^ to Cyprian, as also
the answer of Cyprian to Jubaianus, on the
subject of baptizing heretics, had been read,
Cyprian said: 'Ye have heard, most beloved
colleagues, what Jubaianus, our fellow-bishop,
has written to me, consulting my moderate
ability concerning the unlawful and profane
baptism of heretics, and what answer I gave
him, — giving a judgment which we have once
and again and often given, that heretics com-
ing to the Church ought to be baptized, and
sanctified with the baptism of the Church.
Another letter of Jubaianus has likewise been
read to you, in which, agreeably to his sincere
and religious devotion, in answer to our epis-
tle, he not only expressed his assent, but re-
turned thanks also, acknowledging that he
had received instruction. It remains that we
severally declare our opinion on this subject,
judging no one, nor depriving any one of the
right of communion if he differ from us. For
no one of us sets himself up as a bishop of
bishops, or, by tyrannical terror, forces his
colleagues to a necessity of obeying, inas-
much as every bishop, in the free use of his
liberty and power, has the right of forming
his own judgment, and can no more be judged
by another than he can himself judge another.
But we must all await the judgment of our
Lord Jesus Christ, who alone has the power
both of setting us in the government of His
Church, and of judging of our acts therein.'

* That is, the proconsular province of Africa, or Africa
Zeugitana, answering to the northern part of the territory of
Tunis.

7 The letters of Jubaianui, Mauritanian bishop, are not extant.

Chap. V.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

427

Chap. 3. — 4. Now let the proud and swell-
ing necks of the heretics raise themselves, if
they dare, against the holy humility of tiiis
address. Ye mad Donatists, whom we desire
earnestly to return to the peace and unity of
the holy Church, that ye may receive health
therein, what have ye to say in answer to this ?
You are wont, indeed, to bring up against us
the letters of Cyprian, his opinion, his Coun-
cil; why do ye claim the authority of Cyprian
for your schism, and reject his example when
it makes for the peace of the Church ? But
who can fail to be aware that the sacred canon
of Scripture, both of the Old and New Testa-
ment, is confined within its own limits, and
that it stands so absolutely in a superior posi-
tion to all later letters of the bishops, that
about it we can hold no manner of doubt or
. disputation whether what is confessedly con-
tained in it is right and true; but that all the
letters of bishops which have been written, or
are being written, since the closing of the
canon, are liable to be refuted if there be
anything contained in them which strays from
the truth, either by the discourse of some one
who happens to be wiser in the matter than
themselves, or by the weightier authority and
more learned experience of other bishops, or
by the authority of Councils; and further,
that the Councils themselves, which are held
in the several districts and provinces, must
yield, beyond all possibility of doubt, to the
authority of plenary Councils which are
formed for the whole Christian world; and
that even of the plenary Councils, the earlier
are often corrected by those which follow
them, when, by some actual experiment,
things are brought to light which were before
concealed, and that is known which previ-
ously lay hid, and this without any whirlwind
of sacrilegious pride, without any puffing of
the neck through arrogance, without anv strife
of envious hatred, simply with holy humility,
catholic peace, and Christian charity ?

Chap. 4. — 5. Wherefore the holy Cyprian,
whose dignity is only increased by his humil-
ity, who so loved the pattern set by Peter as
to use the words, "Giving us thereby a pat-
tern of concord and patience, that we should
not pertinaciously love our own opinions, but
should rather account as our own any true and
rightful suggestions of our brethren and col-
leagues, for the common health and weal,"'
— he, I say, abundantly shows that he was
most willing to correct his own opinion, if
any one should prove to him that it is as cer-
tain that the baptism of Christ can be given

by those who have straved from the fold, as
that it could not be lost when they strayed;
on which subject we have already said much.
Nor should we ourselves venture to assert
anything of the kind, were we not supported
by the unanimous .authority of the whole
Church, to which he himself would unques-
tionably have yielded, if at that time the truth
of this question had been placed beyond dis-
pute by the investigation and decree of a
plenary Council. For if he quotes Peter as
an example for his allowing himself quietly
and peacefulh^ to be corrected by one junior
colleague, how much more readily would he
himself, with the Council of his province,
have yielded to the aut'p.orit}' of the whole
world, when the truth had been thus broug/.t
to light? For, indeed, so holy and peaceful
a soul would have been most ready to assent
to the arguments of any single person who
could prove to him the truth; and perhaps he
even did so,- though we have no knowledge
of the fact. For it was neither possible that
all the proceedings which took place between
the bishops at that time should have been
committed to writing, nor are we acquainted
with all that was so committed. For how
could a matter which was involved in such
mists of disputation even have been brought
to the full illumination and authoritative de-
cision of a plenary Council, had it not first
been known to be discussed for some con-
siderable time in the various districts of the
world, with many discussions and comparisons
of the views of the bishop on every side ?
But this is one effect of the soundness of
peace, that when any doubtful points are long
under investigation, and when, on account of
the difficulty of arriving at the truth, they
produce difference of opinion in the course of
brotherly disputation, till men at last arrive
at the unalloyed truth; yet the bond of unity
remains, lest in the part that is cut away there
should be found the incurable wound of
deadly error.

Chap. 5. — 6. And so it is that often some-
thing is imperfectly revealed to the more
learned, that their patient and humble char-
ity, from which proceeds the greater fruit,
may be proved, either in the way in which
they preserve unity, when they hold different
opinions on matters of comparative obscurity,
or in the temper with which they receive the
truth, when they learn that it has been de-
clared to be contrary to what they thought.
And of these two we have a manifestation in
the blessed Cyprian of the one, viz., of the

' See above, c. i. 2.

■' Bede asserts that this was the case, Book VIII. qu. 5.

428

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

way in which he preserved unity with those
from whom he differed in opinion. For he
says, 'Judging no one nor d.epriving any
one of the right of communion if he differ
from us."' And the other, viz., in what tem-
per he could receive the truth when found to
be different from what he thought it, though
his letters are silent on the point, is yet pro-
claimed by his merits. If there is no letter
extant to prove it, it is witnessed by his crown
of martyrdom; if the Council of bishops de-
clare it not, it is declared by the host of an-
gels. For it is no small proof of a most
peaceful soul, that he won the crown of mar-
tyrdom in that unity from which he would not
separate, even though he differed from it.
For we are but men; and it is therefore a
temptation incident to men that we should
hold views at variance with the truth on any
point. But to come through too great love
for our own opinion, or through jealousy of
our betters, even to the sacrilege of dividing
the communion of the Church, and of found-
ing heresy or schism, is a presumption worth}-
of the devil But never in any point to en-
tertain an opinion at variance with the truth
is perfection found only in the angels. Since
then we are men, yet forasmuch as in hope
we are angels, whose equals we shall be in
the resurrection,^ at any rate, so long as we
are wanting in the perfection of angels, let
us at least be without the presumption of the
devil. Accordingly the apostle says, " There
hath no temptation taken you but such as is
common to man." ^ Jt js therefore part of
man's nature to be sometimes wrong. Where-
fore he says in another place, " Let us there-
fore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded:
and if in anything ye be otherwise minded,
God shall reveal even this unto you.'"'' But
to whom does He reveal it when it is His will
(be it in this life or in the life to come), save
to those who walk in the way of peace, and
stray not aside into any schism ? Not to such
as those who have not known the way of
peace, 5 or for some other cause have broken
the bond of unity. ' And so, when the apos-
tle said, "And if in anything ye be otherwise
minded, God shall reveal even this unto you,"
lest they should think that besides the way
of peace their own wrong views might be re-
vealed to them, he immediately added,
" Nevertheless, whereto we have already at-
tained, let us walk by the same rule."* And
Cyprian, walking by this rule, by the most
persistent tolerance, not simply by the shed-
ding of his blood, but because it was shed in

'See above, c. ii. 3,
4Phil. iii. 15.
6PhiL iii. 16.

2 Matt. xxii. 30. 3 i Cor x. 13.

5 Rom. iii. 17 ; see on i. 19, 29

unity (for if he gave his body to be burned,
and had not charity, it would profit him
nothing'), came by the confession of martyr-
dom to the light of the angels, and if not be-
fore, at least then, acknowledged the revela-
tion of the truth on that point on which, while
yet in error, he did not prefer the mainte-
nance of a wrong opinion to the bond of unity.

Chap. 6. — 7. What then, ye Donatists,
what have ye to say to this? If our opinion
about baptism is true, yet all who thought
differently in the time of Cyprian were not cut
off from the unity of the Church, till God re-
vealed to them the truth of the point on which
they were in error, why then have ye by your
sacrilegious separation broken the bond of
peace? But if yours is the true opinion about
baptism, Cyprian and the others, in conjunc-
tion with whom ye set forth that he held such
a Council, remained in unity with those who
thought otherwise; why, therefore, have ye
broken the bond of peace ? Choose which
alternative ye will, ye are compelled to pro-
nounce an opinion against your schism. An-
swer me, wherefore have ye separated your-
selves ? Wherefore have ye erected an altar
in opposition to the whole world ? Wherefore
do ye not communicate with the Churches to
which apostolic epistles have been sent, which
you yourselves read and acknowledge, in ac-
cordance with whose tenor you say that you
order your lives ? Answer me, wherefore have
ye separated yourselves ? I suppose in order
that ye might not perish by communion with
wicked men. How then was it that Cyprian,
and so many of his colleagues, did not perish ?
For though they believed that heretics and
schismatics did not possess baptism, yet they
chose rather to hold communion with them
when they had been received into the Church
without baptism, although they believed that
their flagrant and sacrilegious sins were yet
upon their heads, than to be separated from
the unity of the Church, according to the
words of Cyprian, " Judging no one, nor de-
priving any one of the right of communion if
he differ from us."

8. If, therefore, by such communion with
the wicked the just cannot but perish, the
Church had already perished in the time of
Cyprian. Whence then sprang the origin of
Donatus? where was he taught, where was he-
baptized, where was he ordained, since the
Church had been already destroyed by the
contagion of communion with the wicked ?
But if the Church still existed, the wicked
could do no harm to the good in one com-

7 I Cor.

-xui. 3.

Ckai'. VII.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

429

munion with them. Wherefore did ye sepa-
rate yourselves ? Behold, I see in unity
Cyprian and others, his colleagues, who, on
holding a council, decided that those who
have been baptized without the communion
of the Church have no true baptism, and that
therefore it must he given them when they
join the Church. But again, behold I see in
the same unity that certain men think differ-
ently in this matter, and that, recognizing in
tnose who come from heretics and schismatics
the baptism of Christ, they do not venture to
baptize them afresh. All of these catholic
unity embraces in her motherly breast, bear-
ing each other's burdens by turns, and en-
deavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in
the bond of peace,' till God should reveal to
one or other of them any error in their views.
If the one party held the truth, were they in-
fected by the others, or no ? If the others
held the truth, were they infected by the first,
or no ? Choose which ye will. If there was
contamination, the Church even then ceased
to exist; answer me, therefore, whence came
ye forth hitlier ? But if the Church remained,
the good are in no wise contaminated by the
bad in such communion; answer me, there-
fore, why did ye break the bond ?

9. Or is it perhaps that schismatics, when
received without baptism, bring no infection,
but that it is brought by those who deliver up
the sacred books P"" For that there were
traditors of your number is proved by the
clearest testimony of history. And if you
had then brought true evidence against those
whom you were accusing, you would have
proved your cause before the unity of the
whole world, so that you would have been re-
• lined whilst they were shut out. And if you
:de;;vored to do this, and did not succeed,
. -e world is not to blame, which trusted the
judges of the Church rather than the beaten
parties in the suit; whilst, if you would not
"rge your suit, the world again is not to blame,

. aich could not condemn men without their
cause being heard. Why, then, did you
separate yourselves from the innocent? You
cannot defend the sacrilege of your schism.
r.ut this I pass over. But so much I say,
lat if the traditors could have defiled you,

/no were not convicted by you, and by whom,
<^\\ the contrary, you were beaten, much more
luld the sacrilege of schismatics and here-
tics, received into tlie Church, as you main-
tain, without baptism, have defiled Cyprian.
Vet he did not separate himself. And inas-
j much as the Church continued to exist, it is
clear that it could not be defiled. Wherefore,

' Eph. iv. 3

2 Iraditoes sanctorum librortun.

then, did you separate yourselves, I do not
say from the innocent, as the facts proved
them, but from the traditors, as they were
never proved to be ? Are the sins of tradi-
tors, as I began to say, heavier than those of
schismatics ? Let us not bring in deceitful
balances, to which we may hang what weights
we will and how we will, saying to suit our-
selves, " This is heavy and this is light; " but
let us bring forward the sacred balance o-ut of
holy Scripture, as out of the Lord's treasure-
house, and let us weigh them by it, to see
which is the heavier; or rather, let us not
weigh them for ourselves, but read the weights
as declared by the Lord. At the time when
the Lord showed, by the example of recent
punishment, that there was need to guard
against the sins of olden days, and an idol
was made and worshipped, and the prophetic
l)Ook was burned by the wrath of a scoffing
king, and schism was attempted, the idolatry
was punished with the sword, ^ the burning of
the book by slaughter in war and captivity in
a foreign land,-* schism by the earth opening,
and sw^allowing up alive the leaders of the
schism while the rest were consumed with
fire from heaven. ^ Who will now doubt that
that was the worse crime which received the
heavier punishment ? If men coming from
such sacrilegious company, without baptism,
as you maintain, could not defile Cyprian,
how could those defile you who \vere not con-
victed but supposed betrayers of the sacred
books?* For if they had not only given up
the books to be burned, but had actually
burned them with their own hands, they
would have been guilty of a less sin than if
they had committed schism; for schism is
visited with the heavier, the other with the
lighter punishment, not at man's discretion,
but by the judgment of God.

Chap. 7. — 10. Wherefore, then, have ye
severed yourselves ? If there is any sense
left in you, you must surely see that you can
find no possible answer to these arguments.
" We are not left," they say, " so utterly
without resource, but that we can still answer.
It is our will, ' Who art thou that judgest
anotlier man's servant? to his own master he
standeth or falleth.' " ' They do not under-
stand that this was said to men who were
wishing to judge, not of open facts, but of
the hearts of other men. For how does the
apostle himself come to say so much about
the sins of schisms and heresies ? Or how
comes that verse in the Psalms, '* If of a truth
ye love justice, judge uprightly, O ye sons of

3 E.\. xxxii. 4 Jer. xxxvi.

(• Non ccnvicti sed conjicii tradiiorcs.

5 Xiim. xvi.
7 Koin. xiv. 4.

430

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

men?"' But why does the Lord Himself
say, " Judge not accorduig to the appearance,
but judge righteous judgment," Mf we may
not judge any man ? Lastly, why, in the case
of those traditors, whom they have judged
unrighteously, have they themselves ventured
to pass any judgments at all on another man's
servants ? To their own master they were
standing or falling. Or why, in the case of
the recent followers of Maximianus, have they
not hesitated to bring forward the judgment
delivered with the infallible voice, as they
aver, of a plenary Council, in such terms as
to compare them with those first schismatics
whom the earth swallowed up alive ? And
yet some of them, as they cannot deny, they
either condemned though innocent, or re-
ceived back again in their guilt. But when a
truth is urged which they cannot gainsay, they
mutter a truly wholesome murmuring: "It is
our will: ' Who art thou that judgest another
man's servant? to his own master he standeth
or falleth.' " But when a weak sheep is es-
pied in the desert, and the pastor who should
reclaim it to the fold is nowhere to be seen,
then there is setting of teeth, and breaking
of the weak neck: " Thou wouldst be a good
man, wert thou not a traditor. Consult the
welfare of thy soul; be a Christian." What
unconscionable madness ! When it is said to
a Christian, ''Be a Christian," what other
lesson is taught, save a denial that he is a
Christian ? Was it not the same lesson which
those persecutors of the Christians washed to
teach, by resisting whom the crown of mar-
tyrdom was gained ? Or must we even look
on crime as lighter when committed with
threatening of the sword than with treachery
of the tongue ?

II. Answer me this, ye ravening wolves,
who, seeking to be clad in sheep's cloLaing,^
think that the letters of the blessed Cyprian
are in vour favor. Did the sacrilege of
schismatics defile Cyprian, or did it not? If
it did, the Church perished from that instant,
and there remained no source from which ye
might spring. If it did not,' then by what
offense on the part of others can the guiltless
possibly be defiled, if the sacrilege of schism
cannot defile them ? Wherefore, then, have
ye severed yourselves? Wherefore, while
shunning the lighter offenses, which are in-
ventions of your own, have ye committed the
heaviest offense of all, the sacrilege of
schism ? Will ye now perchance confess that
those men were no longer schismatics or

I Ps. Iviii. I. Aug.: .5"/ vevc justitiain diligiiiSy rectejudicate
filii horninum. Cp.Hieron.: .SV vere utique justitiam loguiinini,
recta judicate fill i lioiiiinuiii.

- John vii. 24. 3 Matt. vii. 15.

heretics who had been baptized without the
communion of the Church, or in some heresy
or schism, because by coming over to the
Church, and renouncing their former errors,
they had ceased to be what formerly they
were ? How then was it, that though they
were not baptized, their sins remained not on
their heads ? Was it that the baptism was
Christ's, but that it could not profit thenr
Avithout the communion of the Church; yet
when they came over, and, renouncing their
past error, were received mto the communion
of the Church by the laying on of hands,
then, being now rooted and founded in char-
ity, without which all other things are profit-
less, they began to receive profit for the re-
mission of sins and the sanctification of their
lives from that sacrament, which, while with-
out the pale of the Church, they possessed in
vain ?

12. Cease, then, to bring forward against
us the authority of Cyprian in favor of re-
peating baptism, but cling with us to the ex-
ample of Cyprian for the preservation of unity-
For this question of baptism had not been as
yet completely worked out, but yet the Church
observed the most wholesome custom of cor-
recting what was wrong, not repeating what
was already given, even in the case of schis-
matics and heretics: she healed the wounded
part, but did not meddle with what was whole.
And this custom, coming, I suppose, from
apostolical tradition (like many other things
which are held to have been handed down
under their actual sanction, because they are
preserved throughout the whole Church,
though they are not found either in their
letters, or in the Councils of their successors),
— this most wholesome custom, I say, accord-
ing to the holy Cyprian, began to be what is
called amended by his predecessor Agrip-
pinus.'* But, according to the teaching which
springs from a more careful investigation into
the truth, which, after great doubt and fluc-
tuation, was brought at last to the decision of
a plenary Council, we ought to believe that
it rather began to be corrupted than to rective
correction at the hands of Agrippinus. Ac-
cordingly, when so great a question forced
itself upon him, and it was difticult to decide
the point, whether remission of sins and
man's spiritual regeneration could take place
among heretics or schismatics, and the au-
thority of Agrippinus was there to guide him,
with that of some few men who shared in his
misapprehension of this question, having pre^

"* Agrippinus was probably the second (some place him stil^
earlier) bishop before Cyprian. He convened the council of 70-
(disputed date), who were the first to take action in favor of re-
baptism. Cp. Cypr. Ep. Ixxi. 4, boitce iueinoria vir. Cp.
l.xxiii. 3.

Chap. IX.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

431

ferred attempting something new to maintain-
ing a custom wliicli they did not understand
how to defend; under these circumstances,
considerations of probability forced them-
selves into the eyes of his soul, and barred
the way to the thorough investigation of the
truth.

Chap. 8. — 13. Nor do I think that the
blessed Cyprian had any other motive in the
free expression and earlier utterance of what
he thought in opposition to the custom of the
Church, save that he should thankfully receive
any one that could be found with a fuller
revelation of the truth, and that he should
show forth a pattern for imitation, not only of
diligence in teaching, but also of modesty in
learning; but that, if no one should be found
to bring forward any argument by which those
considerations of probability should be re-
futed, then he should abide by his opinion,
with the full consciousness that he had neither
concealed what he conceived to be the truth,
nor violated the unity which he loved. For
so he understood the words of the apostle:
" Let the prophets speak two or three, and
let the other judge. If anything be revealed
to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his'
peace." ' " In which passage he has taught
and shown, that many things are revealed to
individuals for the better, and that we ought
not each to strive pertinaciously for what he
has once imbibed and held, but if anything
has appeared better and more useful, he
should willingly embrace it.'"= At any rate,
in these words he not only advised those to
agree with him who saw no better course, but
also exhorted any who could to bring forward
arguments by which the maintenance of the
former custom might rather be established;
that if they should be of such a nature as not
to admit of refutation, he might show in his
own person with what sincerity he said "that
we ought not each to strive pertinaciously for
what he has once imbibed and held, but that,
if anything has appeared better and more use-
ful, he should willingly embrace it."- But
inasmuch as none appeared, except such as
simply urged the custom against him, and the
arguments which they produced in its favor
were not of a kind to bring conviction to a
soul like his, this mighty reasoner was not
content to give up his opinions, which, though
they were not true, as he was himself unable
to see, were at any rate not confuted, in favor
of a custom which had truth on its side, but
j had not yet been confirmed. And yet, had
' not his predecessor Agrippinus, and some of

I I Cor. x'v. 29, 30.

* Cypr. /,"/. Ixxi.

ids fellow-bishops throughout Africa, first
tempted him to desert this custom, even by
the decision of a Council, he certainly would
not have dared to argue against it. But,
amid the perplexities of so obscure a ques-
tion, <ind seeing everywhere around him a
strong universal custom, he would rather have
put restraint upon himself by prayer and
stretching forth his mind towards God, so as
to have perceived or taught that for truth
which was afterwards decided by a plenary
Council. But when he had found relief amid
his weariness in the authority of the former
Council 3 which was held by Agrippinus, he
preferred maintaining what was in a manner
the discovery of his predecessors, to 'expend-
ing further toil in investigation. For, at the
end of his letter to Quintus, he thus shows
how he has sought repose, if one may use the
expression, for his weariness, in what might
be termed the resting-place of authority."

Chap. 9. — 14. " This, moreover," says he,
"Agrippinus, a man of excellent memory,
with the rest, bishops with him, who at that
time governed the Church of the Lord in the
province of Africa and Numidia, did establish
and, after the investigation of a mutual Coun-
cil had weighed it, confirm; whose sentence,
being both religious and legitimate and salu
tary in accordance with the Catholic faith and
Church, we also have followed. "^ By this
witness he gives sufficient proof how much
more ready he would have been to bear his
testimony, had any Council been held to dis-
cuss this matter which either embraced the
whole Church, or at least represented our
brethren beyond the sea.^ But such a Coun-
cil had not yet been held, because the whole
world was bound together by the powerful
bond of custom; and this was deemed suffi-
cient to oppose to those who wished to intro-
duce what was new, because they could not
comprehend the truth. Afterwards, however,
while the question became matter for dis-
cussion and investigation amongst many on
either side, the new practice was not only in-
vented, but even submitted to the authority
and power of a plenary Council, — after the
martyrdom of Cyprian, it is true, but before
we were born.^ But that this was indeed the

3 The former Council of CarthaKc was held by Agrippinus
early in the third century, the ordinary date given being 215-7 a^.;
others 186-7.

4 Tanquain leciulo auctoritatis. 5 Cypr. Ef<. Ixxi. 4.
* '/'ransiimri'itii HI 7'i'l iiniTcrsuU Coii iliii 111.

7 The plenary Council, on whose authority Augustin relies in
many places in this work, was either that of .Vrles, in ■^\^ a.d., or
of Nicaa, in 325 a.d., both of them being before his birth, in
354 A.D. He quotes the decision of the same council, rontra Par-
iiieniaKutii, ii. 13, 30; de Hipresil'us, t^g: Efi. xliii. 7, 19. Contra
Partiirniamiviy iii. 4, 21 : " They condemned," he says, " st>me
few in .Africa, by whom they were in turn vanquished by the judg-
ment of the whole world;" and he adds, that " the Catholics

4,^2

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

custom of the Church, which afterwards was
confirmed by a plenary Council, in which the
trutli was brought to light, and many dififi-
culties cleared away, is plain enough from the
words of the blessed Cyprian himself in that
same letter to Jubaianus, which was quoted as
being read in the Council.' For he says,
" But some one asks. What then will be done
in the case of those who, coming out of heresy
to the Church, have already been admitted
without baptism?" where certainly he shows
plainly enough what was usually done, though
he would have wished it otherwise; and in the
very fact of his quoting the Council of Agrip-
pinus, he clearly proves that the custom of
the Church was different. Nor indeed was it
requisite that he should seek to establish the
practice by this Council, if it was already
sanctioned by custom; and in the Council
itself some of the speakers expressly declare,
in giving their opinion, that they went against
the custom of the Church in deciding what
they thought was right. Wherefore let the
Donatists consider this one point, which surely
none can fail to see, that if the authority of
Cyprian is to be followed, it is to be followed
rather in maintaining unity than in altering
the custom of the Church; but if respect is
paid to his Council, it must at any rate yield
place to the later Council of the universal
Church, of which he rejoiced to be a mem-
ber, often warning his associates that they
should all follow his example in upholding
the coherence of the whole body. For both
later Councils are preferred among later gen-
erations to those of earlier date; and the
whole is always, with good reason, looked
upon as superior to the parts.

Chap. io. — 15. But what attitude do they
assume, when it is shown that the holy
Cyprian, though he did not himself adtnit as
members of the Church those who had been
baptized in heresy or schism, yet held com-
munion with those who did admit them, ac-
cording to his express declaration, " Judging
no one, nor depriving any one of the right of
communion if he differ from us ? " ^ If he
was polluted by communion with persons of
this kind, why do they follow his authority in
the question of baptism' But if he was not
polluted by communion with them, why do

trusted ecclesiastical judges like these in preference to the defeated
parties in the suit." lb. 6, 30: He says that the Donatists, " hav-
ing made a schism in the unity of the Church, were refuted, not
by the authority of 310 African bishops, but by that of the whole
world." And in the sixth chapter of the first book of the same
treatise, he says that the Donatists, after the decision at Aries,
came again to Constantine, and there were defeated " by a final
decision," r'.e. at Milan, as is seen from .f/. xl'ii. 7, 20, in the year
316 A.o. Substance of note in Benedictine ed. reproduced in
Aligne.

I See above, ch. ii. 3. s 73.

they not follow his example in maintaining
unity ? Have they anything to urge in their
defense except the plea, " We choose to have
it so?" What other answer have any sinful
or wicked men to the discourse of truth or
justice, — the voluptuous, for instance, the
drunkards, adulterers, and those who are im-
pure in any way, thieves, robbers, murderers,
plunderers, evil-doers, idolaters, — what other
answer can they make when convicted by the
voice of truth, except "I choose to do it;"
"It is my pleasure so" ? And if they have
in them a tinge of Christianity, they say
further, " Who art thou that judgest another
man's servant ? " ^ Yet these have so much
more remains of modesty, that when, in ac-
cordance with divine and human law, they
meet with punishment for their abandoned
life and deeds, they do not style themselves
martyrs; whde the Donatists wish at once to
lead a sacrilegious life and enjoy a blameless
reputation, to suffer no punishment for their
wicked deeds, and to gain a martyr's glory
in their just punishment. As if they were
not experiencing the greater mercy and
patience of God, in proportion as "executing
His judgments upon them by little and little.
He giveth them place of repentance,"" and
ceases not to redouble His scourgings in this
life; that, considering what they suffer, and
why they suffer it, they may in time grow
wise; and that those who have received the
baptism of the party of Maximianus in order
to preserve the unity of Donatus, may the
more readily embrace the baptism of the
whole world in order to preserve the peace of
Christ; that they may be restored to the root,
may be reconciled to the unity of the Church,
may see that they have nothing left for them
to say, though something yet remains for
them to do; that for their former deeds the
sacrifice of loving-kindness may be offered to
a long-suffering God, whose unity they have
broken by their wicked sin, on whose sacra-
ments they have inflicted such a lasting wrong.
For " the Lord is merciful and gracious, slow
to anger, plenteous in mercy and truth." s
Let them embrace His mercy and long-suffer-
ing in this life, and fear His truth in the next, u
For He willeth not the death of a sinner, but
rather that he should turn from his way and
live;* because He bends His judgment against
the wrongs that have been inflicted on Him.
This is our exhortation.

Chap. 9. — 16. For this reason, then, we
hold them to be enemies, because we speak
the truth, because we are afraid to be silent,

3 Rom. xiv. 4.

5 Not Ps. ciii. 8, but Ixxxvi. 15.

4 Wisd. xii. 10.
6 Ezek. xxiii. 11.

Chap. XIII.J

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

because we fear to shrink from pressing our
point with all the force that lies within our
power, because we obey the apostle when he
says, " Preach the word; be instant in season,
out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort."'
But, as the gospel says, "They love the
praise of men more than the praise of God; " '
and while they fear to incur blame for a time,
they do not fear to incur damnation for ever.
They see, too, themselves what wrong they
are doing; they see that they have no answer
which they can make, but they overspread the
inexperienced with mists, whilst they them-
selves are being swallowed up alive, — that is,
are perishing knowingly and willfully. They
; see that men are amazed, and look v;ith ab-
[ horrence on the fact that they have divided
themselves into many schisms, especially in
' Carthage, 5 the capital and most noted city of
I all Africa; they have endeavored to patch up
the disgrace of their rags. Thinking that
they could annihilate the followers of Maxi-
i mianus, they pressed heavily on them through
jthe agency of Optatus the Gildonian;-* they
j inflicted on them many wrongs amid the
cruellest of persecutions. Then they received
back some, thinking that all could be con-
verted under the influence of the same terror;
but they were unwilling to do those whom they
received the wrong of baptizing afresh those
who had been baptized by them in their
schism, or rather of causing them to be bap-
tized again within their communion by the
very same men by whom they had been bap-
tized outside, and thus they at once made an
exception to their own impious custom. They
feel how wickedly they are acting in assailing
the baptism of the whole world, when they
have received the baptism of the followers of
Maximianus. But they fear those whom they
have themselves rebaptized, lest they should
receive no mercy from them, when they have
shown it to others; lest these should call them
to account for their souls when they have
ceased to destroy those of other men.

Chap. 12. — 17. What answer they can give
about the followers of Maximianus whom
they have received, they cannot divine. If
they say, "Those we received were innocent,"

' 2 Tim. iv. 2. - John xii. 43.

j 3 He is alluding to that chief schism among the Donatists,
jwhich occurred when Maximianus was consecrated bishop of Car-
'^f^e, in opposition to Primianus, probably immediately after the

■>'>d of Cabarsussum, 393.

-1 Optatus, a Donatist bishop of Thamogade in Numidia, was
jcalled Gildonianus from his adherence to Gildo, Count of Africa,
]and ceneralissimo of the province under the elder Theodosius.
1 1 )n !n~ death, in 395 A.D., (jildo usurped supreme authority, and
My 1 •- ,iid Optatus was enabled to oppress the Catholics in the
Iprovinie, till, in 398 A.i)., Cildo was defeated by his brother Mas-
|cezel, and destroyed himself, and Optatus was put in prison, where
itr- died soon afterwards. He is not to be confounded with Op-

Ls, Bishop of Milevis, the strenuous opponent of the Donatists.

the answer is obvious, "Then you had con-
demned the innocent." If they say, "We
did it in ignorance," then you judged rashly
(just as you passed a rash judgment on the
traditors), and your declaration was false that
" you must know that they were condemned
by the truthful voice of a plenary Council."^
For indeed the innocent could never be con-
demned by a voice of truth. If they saj^,
" We did not condemn them," it is only nec-
essary to cite the Council, to cite the names
of bishops and states alike. If they say,
" The Council itself is none of ours,'' then
we cite the records of the proconsular prov-
ince, where more than once they quoted the
same Council to justify the exclusion of the
followers of Maximianus from the basilicas,
and to confound them by the din of the judges
and the force of their allies. If they say that
Felicianus of Musti, and Prstextatus of As-
savae, whom they afterwards received, were
not of the party of Maximianus, then we cite
the records in which they demanded, in the
courts of law, that these persons should be
excluded from the Council which they held
against the party of Maximianus. If they
say, "They were received for the sake of
peace," our answer is, " Why then do ye not
acknowledge the only true and full peace?
Who urged you, who compelled you to re-
ceive a schismatic whom you had condemned,
to preserve the peace of Donatus, and to con-
demn the world unheard, in violation of the
peace of Christ ?" Truth hems them in on
every side. They see that there is no answer
left for them to make, and they think that
there is nothing left for them to do; they
cannot find out what to say. They are not
allowed to be silent.. They had rather strive
with perverse utterance against truth, than
be restored to peace by a confession of their
faults.

Chap. 13. — 18. But who can fail to under-
stand what they may be saying in their hearts ?
" What then are we to do," say they, "with
those whom we have already rebaptized?"
Return with them to the Church. Bring
those whom you have wounded to be healed
by the medicine of peace: bring those whom
you have slain to be l^rought to life again by
the life of charity. Brotherly union has great
power in propitiating God. " If two of you,"
says our Lord, "shall agree on earth as
touching anything that they shall ask, it shall
be done for them."' If for two men who
agree, how much more for two communities ?
Let us throw ourselves together on our knees

5 The Council of Bagai. See above, I. v. 7.
^ Matt. .wiii. 19.

434

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

before the Lord Do you share with us our
unity; let us share with you your contrition;
and let charity cover the multitude of sins.'
Seek counsel from the blessed Cyprian him-
self. See how much he considered to depend
upon the blessing of unity, from which he did
not sever himself to avoid the communion of
those who disagreed with him; how, though
he considered that those who were baptized
outside the communion of the Church had no
true baptism, he was yet willing to believe that,
by simple admission into the Church, they
might, merely in virtue of the bond of unity,
be admitted to a share in pardon. For thus
he solved the question which he proposed to
himself in writing as follows to Jubaianus:
" But some will say, 'What then will become
of those who, in times past, coming to the
Church from heresy, were admitted without
baptism ?' The Lord is able of His mercy to
grant pardon, and not to sever from the gifts
of His Church those who, being out of sim-
plicity admitted to the Church, have in the
Church fallen asleep. "=

Chap. 14. — 19. But which is the worse,
not to be baptized at all, or to be twice bap-
tized, it is difficult to decide. I see., indeed,
which is more repugnant and abhorrent to
men's feelings; but when I have recourse to
that divine balance, in which the weight of
things is determined, not by man's feelings,
but by the authority of God, I find a state-
ment by our Lord on either side. For He
said to Peter, "He who is washed has no
need of washing a second time;" ^ and to
Nicodemus, " Except a man be born of water
and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the
kingdom of God."'* What is the purport of
the more secret determination of God, it is
perhaps difficult for men like us to learn; but
as far as the mere words are concerned, any
one may see what a difference there is be-
tween " has no need of washing," and " can-
not enter into the kingdom of heaven." The
Church, lastly, herself holds as her tradition,
that without baptism she cannot admit a man
to her altar at all; but since it is allowed that
one who has been rebaptized may be admitted
after penance, surely this plainly proves that
his baptism is considered valid. If, there-
fore, Cyprian thought that those whom he
considered to be unbaptized yet had some
share in pardon, in virtue of the bond of unity,
the Lord has power to be reconciled even to
the rebaptized by means of the simple bond

1 I Pet. iv. 8. 2 Cypr. Ep. Ixxiii. 23, to Jubaianus.

3 John xiii. 10. '• Qui loins est, noti habei neccssitatem iterum
lavandi." The Latin, with the A.V., loses the distinction be-
tween 0 AeAovfieVos, "he that has bathed" and riTTTeic, "to
7vash :" and further wrongfully introduces the idea of repetition.

4 'olin iii. T.

of unity and peace, and by this same compen-
sating power of peace to mitigate His displeas-
ure against those by whom they were rebap-
tized, and to pardon all the errors which they
had committed while in error, on their offer-
ing the sacrifice of charity, which covereth
the multitude of sins; so that He looks not
to the number of those who have been wounded
by their separation, but to the greater number
who have been delivered from bondage by
their return. For in the same bond of peace
in which Cyprian conceived that, through the
mercy of God, those whom he considered to
have been admitted to the Church without
baptism, were yet not severed from the gifts
of the Church, we also believe that through
the same mercy of God the rebaptized can
earn their pardon at His hands.

Chap. 15. — 20, Since the Catholic Church,
both in the time of the blessed Cyprian and
in the older time before him, contained within
her bosom either some that were rebaptized
or some that were unbaptized, either the one
section or the other must have won their sal-
vation only by the force of simple unity. For
if those who came over from the heretics were
not baptized, as Cyprian asserts, they were
not rightly admitted into the Church; and yet
he himself did not despair of their obtaining
pardon from the mercy of God in virtue of
the unity of the Church. So again, if they
were already baptized, it was not right to re-
baptize them. What, therefore, was there to
aid the other section, save the same charity
that delighted in unity, so that what was hid-
den from man's weakness, in the considera-
tion of the sacrament, might not be reckoned,
by the mercy of God, as a fault in those who
were lovers of peace ? Why, then, while ye
fear those whom ye have rebaptized, do ye
grudge yourselves and them the entrance to
salvation ? There was at one time a doubt
upon the subject of baptism; those who held
different opinions yet remained in unity. In
course of time, owing to the certain discovery
of the truth, that doubt was taken away. The
question which, unsolved, did not frighten
Cyprian into separation from the Church, in-
vites you, now that it is solved, to return once
more within the fold. Come to the Catholic
Church in its agreement, which Cyprian did
not desert while yet disturbed with doubt; or
if now you are dissatisfied with the example
of Cyprian, who held communion with those
who were received with the baptism of here-
tics, declaring openly that we should " neither
judge any one, nor deprive any one of the
right of communion if he differ from us,"'

5 See above, cii. 3.

CiiAP. XV.]

ON BAPTISM. AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

435

whither are ye going, ye wretched men ?
What are ye doing? You are bound to fly
even from yourselves, because you have ad-
vanced beyond the position where he abode.
But if neither his own sins nor those of others
could stand in his way, on account of the

abundance of his charity and his love of broth-
erly kindness and the bond of peace, do you
return to us, where you will find much less
hindrance in the way of either us or you from
the fictions which your party have invented.

BOOK III.

AUGUSTIN UNDERTAKES THE REFUTATION OF THE ARGUMENTS WHICH MIGHT BE DERIVED
FROM THE EPISTLE OF CYPRIAN TO JUBAIANUS, TO GIVE COLOR TO THE VIEW THAT THE
BAPTISM OF CHRIST COULD NOT BE CONFERRED BY HERETICS.

Chap. i. — i. I think that it may now be
considered clear to every one, that the au-
thority of the blessed Cyprian for the main-
tenance of the bond of peace, and the avoid-
ing of any violation of that most wholesome
charity which preserves unity in the Church,
may be urged on our side rather than on the
side of the Donatists. For if they have
chosen to act upon his example in rebaptizing
Catholics, because he thought that heretics
ought to be baptized on joining the Catholic
Church, shall not we rather follow his exam-
ple, whereby he laid down a manifest rule
that one ought in no wise, by the establish-
ment of a separate communion, to secede from
the Catholic communion, that is, from the
body of Christians dispersed throughout the
world, even on the admission of evil and sac-
rilegious men, since he was unwilling even to
remove from the right of communion those
whom he considered to have received sacrile-
gious men without baptism into the Catholic
communion, saying, "Judging no one, nor
deprivmg any of the right of communion if
he differ from us? "

Chap. 2. — 2. Nevertheless, I see what
may still be required of me, viz., that I should
answer those plausible arguments, by which, in
even earlier times, Agrippinus, or Cyprian him-
self, or those in Africa who agreed with them,
or any others in far distant lands beyond the
sea, were moved, not indeed by the authority
of any plenary or even regionary Council, but
by a mere epistolary correspondence, to think
that they ought to adopt a custom which had
no sanction from the ancient custom of the
Church, and which was expressly forbidden
by the most unanimous resolution of the Cath-
olic world in order that an error which had
begun to creep into the minds of some men,

I See above, II. ii. 3.

through discussions of this kind, might be
cured by the more powerful truth and univer-
sal healing power of unity coming on the side
of safety. And so they may see with what
security I approach this discourse. If I am
unable to gain my point, and show how those
arguments may be refuted which they bring
forward from the Council and the epistles of
Cyprian, to the effect that Christ's baptism
may not be given by the hands of heretics, I
shall still remain safely in the Church, in
whose communion Cyprian himself remained
with those who differed from him.

3. But if they say that the Catholic Church
existed then, because there were a few, or, if
they prefer it, even a considerable number,
who denied the validity of any baptism con-
ferred in an heretical body, and baptized all
who came from thence, what then ? Did the
Church not exist at all before Agrippinus,
with whom that new kind of system began> at
variance with all previous custom ? Or how,
again after the time of Agrippinus, when,
unless there had been a return to the primitive
custom, there would have been no need for
Cyprian to set on foot another Council ? Was
there no Church then, because such a custom
as this prevailed everywhere, that the baptism
of Christ should be considered nothing but
the baptism of Christ, even though it were
proved to have been conferred in a body of
heretics or schismatics ? But if the Church
existed even then, and had not perished
through a breach of its continuity, but was,
on the contrary, holding its ground, and re-
ceiving increase in every nation, surely it is
the safest plan to abide by this same custom,
which then embraced good and bad alike in
unity. But if there was then no Church in
existence, because sacrilegious heretics were
received without baptism, and this prevailed
by universal custom, whence has Donatus
made his appearance ? From what land did

Chap. III.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

437

' he spring? or from what sea did he emerge?
' or from what sky did he fall ? And so we, as
I I had begun to say, are safe in the commu-
j nion of that Church, throughout the whole ex-
I tent of which the custom now prevails, which
prevailed in like manner through its whole
[ extent before the time of Agrippinus, and in
' the interval between Agrippinus and Cyprian,
! and whose unity neither Agrippinus nor Cyp-
rian ever deserted, nor those who agreed
with them, although they entertained different
\iews from the rest of their brethren — all of
tiiem remaining in the same communion of
unity with the very men from whom they dif-
I, red in opinion. But let the Donatists them-
-^Ives consider what their true position is, if
riiey neither can say whence they derived their
origin, if the Church had already been de-
stroyed by the plague-spot of communion
with heretics and schismatics received into
lier bosom without baptism; nor again agree
v.ith Cyprian himself, for he declared that he
remained in communion with those who re-
ceived heretics and schismatics, and so also
with those who were received as well: while
u\ey have separated themselves from the com-
munion of the whole world, on account of the
I charge of having delivered up the sacred
I l)Ooks, which they brought against the men
whom they maligned in Africa, but failed to
convict wtien brought to trial beyond the sea;
although, even had the crimes which they al-
leged been true, they were much less heinous
! than the sins of heresy and schism; and yet
i these could not defile Cyprian in the persons of
those who came from them without baptism, as
lie conceived, and were admitted without bap-
tism into the Catholic communion. Nor, in the
very point in which they say that they imitate
Cyprian, can they find any answer to make
.'ibout acknowledging the baptism of the fol-
lowers of Waximianus, together with those
hom, though they belonged to the party
[;iat they had first condemned in their own
l>!enary Council, and then gone on to prose-
( lite even at the tribunal of the secular power,
tiey yet received back into their communion,
111 the episcopate of the very same bishop un-
der whom they had been condemned. Where-
fore, if the communion of w'icked men de-
stroyed the Church in the time of Cyprian,
tiiey have no source from which they can
derive their own communion; and if the
I'inirch was not destroyed, they have no ex-
( use for their separation from it. Moreover,
t ley are neither following the example of
Cyprian, since they have burst the bond of
I unity, nor abiding by their own Council, since
tiiey have recognized the baptism of the fol-
lowers of Maximianus.

Chap. 3. — 4. Let us therefore, seeing that
we adhere to the example of Cyprian, go on
now to consider Cyprian's Council. What
says Cyprian ? "Ye have heard," he says,
" most beloved colleagues, what Jubaianus
our fellow-bishop has written to me, consulting
my moderate ability concerning the unlawful
and profane baptism of heretics, and what
answer I gave him, — giving a judgment which
we have once and again and often given, that
heretics coming to the Church ought to be
baptized and sanctified with the baptism of
the Church. Another letter of Jubaianus has
likewise been read to you, in which, agreeably
to his sincere and religious devotion, in an-
swer to our epistle, he not only expressed his
assent, but returned thanks also, acknowledg-
ing that he had received instruction."' In
these words of the blessed Cyprian, we find
that he had been consulted by Jubaianus, and
what answer he had given to his questions,
and how Jubaianus acknowledged with grati-
tude that he had received instruction. Ought
we then to be thought uareasonably persistent
if we desire to consider this same epistle by
which Jubaianus was convinced ? For till such
time as we are also convinced (if there are any
arguments of truth whereby this can be done),
Cyprian himself has established our security
by the right of Catholic communion.

5. For he goes on to say: " It remains that
we severally declare our opinion on this same
subject, judging no one, nor depriving any
one of the right of communion if he differ
from us." ' He allows me, therefore, with-
out losing the right of communion, not only
to continue inquiring into the truth, but even
to hold opinions differing from his own. ' ' For
no one of us," he says, " setteth himself up
as a bishop of bishops, or by tyrannical terror
forces his colleagues to a necessity of obey-
ing." What could be more kind? what more
humble? Surely there is here no authority
restraining us from inquiry into what is truth.
" Inasmuch as every bishop," he says, " in
the free use of his liberty and power, has the
right of forming his own judgment, and can
no more be judged by another than he can
himself judge another," — that is, I suppose,
in those questions which have not yet been
brought to perfect clearness of solution; for
he knew what a deep question about the sac-
rament was then occupying the whole Church
with every kind of disputation, and gave free
liberty of inquiry to every man, that the truth
might be made known by investigation. For
he was surely not uttering what was false, and
trying to catch his simpler colleagues in their

• See above, II. ii. 3.

43^

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book III.

speech, so that, when they should have be-
trayed that they held op nions at variance
with his, he might then propose, in violation
of his promise, that they should be excom-
municated. Far be it from a soul so holy to
entertain such accursed treachery; indeed,
they who hold such a view about such a man,
thinking that it conduces to his praise, do but
show that it would be in accordance with their
own nature. I for my part will in no wise
believe that Cyprian, a Catholic bishop, a
Catholic martyr, whose greatness only made
him proportionately humble in all things, so
as to find favor before the Lord/ should ever,
especially in the sacred Council of his col-
leagues, have uttered with his mouth what
was not echoed in his heart, especially as he
further adds, " But we must all await the
judgment of our Lord Jesus Christ, who alone
has the power both of setting us in the gov-
ernment of His Church, and of judging of
our acts therein."^ When, then, he called
to their remembrance so solemn a judgment,
hoping to hear the truth from his colleagues,
would he first set them the example of lying ?
May God avert such madness from every
Christian man, and how much more from
Cyprian ! We have therefore the free liberty
of inquiry granted to us by the most mode-
rate and most truthful speech of Cyprian.

Chap. 4. — 6. Next nis colleagues pro-
ceed to deliver their several opinions. But
first they listened to the letter written to
Jubaianus; for it was read, as was mentioned
in the preamble. Let it therefore be read
among ourselves also, that we too, with the
help of God, may discover from it what we
ought to think. "What!" I think I hear
some one saying, "do you proceed to tell us
what Cyprian wrote to Jubaianus ? " I have
read the letter, I confess, and should certainly
have been a convert to his views, had I not
been induced to consider the matter more
carefully by the vast weight of authority,
originating in those whom the Church, dis-
tributed throughout the world amid so many
nations, of Latins, Greeks, barbarians, not to
mention the Jewish race itself, has been able
to produce, — that same Church which gave
birth to Cyprian himself, — men whom I could
in no wise bring myself to think had been un-
willing without reason to hold this view, — not
because it was impossible that in so difficult
a question the opinion of one or of a few might
not have been more near the truth than that
of more, but because one must not lightlv,
without full consideration and investigation

' Ecclus. iii. 18.

2 See above, II. ii. 3.

of the matter to the best of his abilities, de-
cide in favor of a single individual, or even
of a few, against the decision of so very many
men of the same religion and communion, all
endowed with great talent and abundant learn-
ing. And so how much was suggested to me
on more diligent inquiry, even by the letter
of Cyprian himself, in favor of the view
which is now held by the Catholic Church,
that the baptism of Christ is to be recognized
and approved, not by the standard of their
merits by whom it is administered, but by
His alone of whom it is said, " The same is
He which baptizeth,"^ will be shown naturally
in the course of our argument. Let us there-
fore suppose that the letter which was written
by Cyprian to Jubaianus has been read among
us, as it was read in the Council.'' And I
would have every one read it who means to
read what I am going to say, lest he might
possibly think that I have suppressed some
things of consequence. For it would take
too much time, and be irrelevant to the eluci-
dation of the matter in hand, were we at this
moment to quote all the words of this epistle.

Ch.'^p. 5. — 7. But if any one should ask
what I hold in the meantime, while discuss-
ing this question, I answer that, in the first
place, the letter of Cyprian suggested to me
what I should hold till I should see clearly
the nature of the question which next begins
to be discussed. For Cyprian himself says:
" But some will say, ' What then will become
of those who in times past, coming to the
Church from heresy, were admitted without
baptism ? ' "^ Whether they were really with-
out baptism, or whether they were admitted
because those who admitted them conceived
that they had partaken of baptism, is a matter
for our future consideration. At any rate, Cyp-
rian himself shows plainly enough what was
the ordinary custom of the Church, when he
says that in past time those who came to the
Church from heresy were admitted without
baptism.

8. For in the Council itself Castus of Sicca
says: " He who, despising truth, presumes to
follow custom, is either envious or evil-dis-
posed towards the brethren to whom the truth
is revealed, or is ungrateful towards God, by
whose inspiration His Church is instructed."*
Whether the truth had been revealed, we
shall investigate hereafter; at any rate, he
acknowledges that the custom of the Church
was different.

3 John i. 33. 4 The Council of Carthage,

5 Epist. I.x.xiii. 23, to Jubaianus.

6 Seventh Cone. Garth, under Cyprian, the third which dealt
with baptism, a.d. 256, sec. 28. These opinions are quoted agaia
in Hooks VI. and VII.

Chap. X.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

439

Chap. 6. — 9. Libosus also of Vaga says:
"The Lord says in the gospel, 'I am the
Truth.'' He does not say, 'I am custom.'
Therefore, when the truth is made manifest,
custom must give way to truth." = Clearly,
no one could doubt that custom must give
way to truth where it is made manifest. But
we shall see presently about the manifestation
of the truth. Meanwhile he also makes it
clear that custom was on the other side.

Chap. 7. — 10. Zosimus also of Tharassa
said: 'MVhen a revelation of the truth has
been made, error must give way to truth; for
even Peter, who at the first circumcised, after-
wards gave way to Paul when he declared the
truth." 3 He indeed chose to say error, not
custom; but in saying " for even Peter, who
at the first circumcised, afterwards gave way
to Paul when he declared the truth," he shows
plainly enough that there was a custom also
on the subject of baptism at variance with his
views. At the same time, also, he warns us
that it was not impossible that Cyprian might
have held an opinion about baptism at vari-
ance with that required by the truth, as held
by the Church both before and after him, if
even Peter could hold a view at variance with
the truth as taught us by the Apostle Paul.'*

Chap. 8 — 11. Likewise Felix of Buslacene
said: "In admitting heretics without the
baptism of the Church, let no one prefer cus-
tom to reason and truth; because reason and
truth always prevail to the exclusion of cus-
tom, "s Nothing could be better, if it be rea-
son, and if it be truth; but this we shall see
presently. Meanwhile, it is clear from the
words of this man also that the custom was
the other way.

Chap, 9. — 12. Likewise Honoratus of Tucca^
said: " Since Christ is the Truth, we ought
to follow truth rather than custom. "^ By all
these declarations it is proved that we are
not excluded from the communion of the
Church, till it shall have been clearly shown
what is the nature of the truth, which they say
must be preferred to our custom. But if the
truth has made it clear that the very regulation
ought to be maintained which the said custom
had prescribed, then it is evident both that this
custom was not established or confirmed in
vain, and also that, in consequence of the
discussions in question, the most wholesome
observance of so great a sacrament, which
could never, indeed, have been changed in

I John xiv. 6. = Cone. Garth, sec. 30. 3 //■. sec 56.

4 C.al. ii. 11-14. 5 Cone. Garth, sec. 63. ' Thucca.

7 Cone. Garth, see. 77.

the Catholic Church, was even more watch-
fully guarded with the most scrupulous cau-
tion, when it had received the further corro-
boration of Councils.

Chap. lo. — 13. Therefore Cyprian writes
to Jubaianus as follows, "concerning the
baptism of heretics, who, being placed with-
out, and set down out of the Church," seem
to him to " claim to themselves a matter over
which they have neither right nor power.
Which we," he says, "cannot account valid
or lawful, since it is clear that among them it
is unlawful."* Neither, indeed, do we deny
that a man who is baptized among heretics,
or in any schism outside the Church, derives
no profit from it so far as he is partner in the
perverseness of the heretics and schismatics;
nor do we hold that those who baptize, al-
though they confer the real true sacrament of
baptism, are yet acting rightly, in gathering
adherents outside the Church, and entertain-
ing opinions contrary to the Church. But it
is one thing to be without a sacrament, an-
other thing to be in possession of it wrongly,
and to usurp it unlawfully. Therefore they
do not cease to be sacraments of Christ and
the Church, merely because they are unlaw-
fully used, not only by heretics, but by all
kinds of wicked and impious persons. These,
indeed, ought to be corrected and punished,
but the sacraments should be acknowledged
and revered.

14. Cyprian, indeed, says that on this sub-
ject not one, but two or more Councils were
held; always, however, in Africa. For indeed
in one he mentions that seventy-one bishops
had been assembled,^ — to all whose authority
we do not hesitate, with all due deference to
Cyprian, to prefer the authority, supported
by many more bishops, of the whole Church
spread throughout the whole world, of which
Cyprian himself rejoiced that he was an in-
separable member.

15. Nor is the water " profane and adulter-
ous "^ over which the name of God is invoked,
even though it be invoked by profane and
adulterous persons; because neither the crea-
ture itself of water, nor the name invoked, is
adulterous. But the baptism of Christ, con-
secrated by the words of the gospel, is neces-
sarily holy, however polluted and unclean its
ministers may be; because its inherent sanc-
tity cannot be polluted, and the divine excel-
lence abides in its sacrament, whether to the
salvation of those who use it aright, or to the
destruction of those who use it wrong.
V/ould you indeed maintain that, while the

6 Gypr. Ep. Ix.xiii. i.

440

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book III.

light of the sun or of a candle, diffused
through unclean places, contracts no foulness
in itself therefrom, yet the baptism of Christ
can be defiled by the sins of any man, what-
soever he may be ? For if we turn our thoughts
to the visible materials themselves, which are
to us the medium of the sacraments, every
one must know that they admit of corruption.
But if we think on that which they convey to
us, who can fail to see that it is incorruptible,
however much the men through whose min-
istry it is conveyed are either being rewarded
or punished for the character of their lives ?

Chap. ii. — 16. But Cyprian was right in
not being moved by what Jubaianus wrote,
that "the followers of Novatian' rebaptize
those who come to them from the Catholic
Church." = For, in the first place, it does not
follow that whatever heretics have done in a
perverse spirit of mimicry, Catholics are
therefore to abstain from doing, because the
heretics do the same. And again, the rea-
sons are different for which heretics and the
Catholic Church ought respectively to abstain
from rebaptizing. For it would not be right
for heretics to do so, even if it were fitting in
the Catholic Church; because their argument
is, that among the Catholics is wanting that
which they themselves received whilst still
within the pale, and took away with them
when they departed. Whereas the reason
why the Catholic Church should not adminis-
ter again the baptism which was given among
heretics, is that it may not seem to decide
that a power which is Clirist's alone belongs
to its members, or to pronounce that to be
wanting in the heretics which they have re-
ceived within her pale, and certainly could
not lose by straying outside. For thus much
Cyprian himself, with all the rest, estab-
lished, that if any should return from heresy
to the Church, they should be received back,
not by baptism, but by the discipline of peni-
tence; whence it is clear that they cannot be
held to lose by their secession what is not re-
stored to them when they return. Nor ought
it for a moment to be said that, as their heresy
is their own, as their error is their own, as
the sacrilege of disunion is their own, so also
the baptism is their own, which is really
Christ's. Accordingly, while the evils which
are their own are corrected when they return,
so in that which is not theirs His presence
should be recognised, from whom it is. '•

Chap. 12. — 17. But the blessed Cyprian

I The Novatian bishop, Acesius, was invited by Constantine to
attend the Council of Nicaea. Soc, H. E. I. lo.
- Cypr. j^/. Ixxiii. 2.

shows that it was no new or sudden thing that
he decided, because the practice had already
begun under Agrippinus. " Many years,"
he says, "and much time has passed away
since, under Agrippinus of honored memory,
a large assembly of bishops determined this
point.'' Accordingly, under Agrippinus, at
any rate, the thing was new. But I cannot
understand what Cyprian means by saying,
"And thenceforward to the present day, so
many thousand heretics in our provinces, hav-
ing been converted to our Church, showed
no hesitation or dislike, but rather with full
consent of reason and will, have embraced the
opportunity of the grace of the laver of life
and the baptism unto salvation," ^ unless in-
deed he says, "thenceforward to the present
day," because from the time when they were
baptized in the Church, in accordance with
the Council of Agrippinus, no question of ex-
communication had arisen in the case of any
of the rebaptized. Yet if the custom of bap-
tizing those who came over from heretics re-
mained in force from the time of Agrippinus
to that of Cyprian, why should new Councils
have been held by Cyprian on this point?
Why does he say to this same Jubaianus that
he is not doing anything new or sudden, but
only what had been established by Agrippinus ?
For why should Jubaianus be disturbed by
the question of novelty, so as to require to
be satisfied by the authority of Agrippinus, if
this was the continuous practice of the Church
from Agrippinus till Cyprian ? Why, lastly,
did so many of his colleagues urge that reason
and truth must be preferred to custom, in-
stead of saying that those who wished to act
otherwise were acting contrary to truth and
custom alike ?

Chap. 13. — 18. But as regards the remis-
sion of sins, whether it is granted through
baptism at the hands of the heretics, I have
already expressed my opinion on this point in
a former book;-* but I will shortly recapitulate
it here. If remission of sins is there con-
ferred by the sacredness of baptism, the sins
return again through obstinate perseverance
in heresy or schism; and therefore such men
must needs return to the peace of the Catholic
Church, that they may cease to be heretics
and schismatics, and deserve that those sins
which had returned on them should be
cleansed away by love working in the bond of
unity. But if, although among heretics and
schismatics it be still the same baptism of
Christ, it yet cannot work remission of sins
owing to this same foulness of discord and

3 Cypr. £/. I.xxiii. 3.

4 Above, Book I. c. xi. sqq.

Cuw. XIV.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

4-LT

wickedness of dissent, then the same baptism
begins to be of avail for the remission of sins
when they come to the peace of the Church,
— [not]' that what has been already truly re-
mitted should not be retained; nor that here-
tical baptism should be repudiated as belong-
ig to a different religion, or as being different
from our own, so that a second baptism should
be administered; but that the very same bap-
tism, which was working death by reason of
discord outside the Church, may work salva-
tion by reason of the peace within. It was,
111 fact, the same savor of which the apostle
says, "We are a sweet savor of Christ in
every place; " and yet, says he, " both in them
tiiat are saved and in them that perish. To
t';ie one we are the savor of life unto life; and
to the other the savor of death unto death," ^
And although he used these words with refer-
ence to another subject, I have applied them
to this, that men may understand that what
is good may not only work life to those who
use it aright, but also death to those who use
it wrong.

Chap. 14, — 19. Nor is it material, when
we are considering the question of the genu-
ineness and holiness of the sacrament, " what
the recipient of the sacrament believes, and
with what faith he is imbued." It is of the
very highest consequence as regards the en-
trance into salvation, but is wholly immaterial
as regards the question of the sacrament.
For it is quite possible that a man may be
possessed of the genuine sacrament and a
corrupted faith, as it is possible that he may
hold the words of the creed in their integrity,
and yet entertain an erroneous belief about
the Trinity, or the resurrection, or any other
I)oint. For it is no slight matter, even within
the Catholic Church itself, to hold a faith en-
tirely consistent with the truth about even
God Himself, to say nothing of any of His
creatures. Is it then to be maintained, that
if any one who has been baptized within the
Catholic Church itself should afterwards, in
the course of reading, or by listening to in-
struction, or by quiet argument, find out,
through God's own revelation, that he haci
before believed otherwise than he ought, it
is requisite that he should therefore be bap-
tized afresh ? But what carnal and natural
man is there who does not stray through the
vain conceits 3 of his own heart, and picture

' XiJi! lit j'titn 7'cre dhnissa non retiiteanttir. One of the
negatives here appears to be superfluous, and the former is omitted
in Amerbach's edition, and in many of the r.is^., which continue
the sentence, " itnn ut illr hnf>iismtts," instead of " iwqut- itt
7i'/,\" etc. If the latter negative were omitted, the sense would be
improved, and " ne/jue" would appropriately remain.

- 2 Cor. ii. 15, 16. 3 Phanuisinata.

God's nature to himself to be such as he has
imagined out of his carnal sense, and difier
from the true conception of God as far as
vanity from truth ? Most truly, indeed,
speaks the apostle, filled with the light of
truth: " The natural man," says he, " receiv-
eth not the things of the Spirit of God."*
And yet herein he was speaking of men whom
he himself shows to have been baptized. For
he says to them, "Was Paul crucilied for
you ? or were ye baptized in the name of
Paul ?" 5 These men had therefore the sac-
rament of baptism; and yet, inasmuch as
tlieir wisdom was of the flesh, what could they
believe about God otherwise than according
to the perception of their flesh, according to
which "the natural man receiveth not the
things of the Spirit of God?" To such he
says: "I could not speak unto you as unto
spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto
babes in Ciirist. I have fed you with milk, and
not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able
to bear it, neither yet now are ye able. For
ye are yet carnal." ^ For such are carried about
with every wind of doctrine, of which kind
he says, " That we be no more children, tossed
to and fro, and carried about with every wind
of doctrine." 7 It is then true that, if these
men shall have advanced even to the spiritual
age of the inner man, and in the integrity of
understanding shall have learned how far dif-
ferent from the requirements of tlie truth has
been the belief which they have been led by
the fallacious character of their conceits to
entertain of God, they are therefore to be
baptized again ? For, on this principle, it
would be possible for a Catholic catechumen
to light upon the writings of some heretic,
and, not having the knowledge requisite for
discerning truth from error, he might enter-
tain some belief contrary to the Catholic faith,
yet not condemned by the words of the creed,
just as, under color of the same words, in-
numerable heretical errors have sprung up.
Supposing, then, that the catechumen was
under the impression that he was studying
the work of some great and learned Catholic,
and was baptized with that belief in tiie
Catholic Church, and by subsequent research
should discover what he ought to believe, so
that, embracing the Catholic faith, he should
reject his former error, ought he, on confes.s-
ing this, to be baptized again .<' Or supposing
that, before learning and confessing this for
himself, he should be found to entertain such
an opinion, and should be taught what he
ought to reject and what he should believe,
and it were to become clear that he had held

4 I Cor. ii. 14.
6 : Cor. iii. 1-3.

5 I Cor. i. 13.
7 Eph. iv. 14.

442

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book III.

this false belief when he was baptized, ought
he therefore to be baptized again ? Why
should we maintain the contrary? Because
the sanctity of the sacrament, consecrated in
the words of the gospel, remains upon him in
its integrity, just as he received it from the
hands of the minister, although he, being
firmly rooted in the vanity of his carnal mind,
entertained a belief other than was right at
the time when he was baptized. Wherefore
it is manifest that it is possible that, with de-
fective faith, the sacrament of baptism may
yet remain without defect in any man; and
therefore all that is said about the diversity
of the several heretics is beside the question.
For in each person that is to be corrected
which is found to be amiss by the man who
undertakes his correction. That is to be made
whole which is unsound; that is to be given
- which is wanting, and, above all, the peace of
Christian charity, without which the rest is
profitless. Yet, as the rest is there, we must
not administer it as though it were wanting,
only take care that its possession be to the
profit, not the hurt of him who has it, through
the very bond of peace and excellence of
charity.

Chap. 15. — 20. Accordingly, if Marcion
consecrated the sacrament of baptism with
the words of the gospel, " In the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost,"' the sacrament was complete, al-
though his faith expressed under the same
words, seeing that he held opinions not taught
by the Catholic truth, was not complete, but
stained with the falsity of fables.^ For
under these same words, " In the name of
the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost," not Marcion only, or Valentinus, or
Arius, or Eunomius, but the carnal babes of
the Church themselves (to whom the apostle
said, " I could not speak unto you as unto
spiritual, but as unto carnal"), if they could
be individually asked for an accurate exposi-
tion of their opinions, would probably show
a diversity of opinions as numerous as the
persons who held them, " for the natural man
receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God."
Can it, however, be said on this account that
they do not receive the complete sacrament ?
or that, if they shall advance, and correct the
vanity of their carnal opinions, they must seek
again what they had received ? Each man

I Matt, xxviii. 19.

- Cp. Conciliiiin Arelatcnse^ a.d. 314, can. ?. " De A/ris,
quod propria lege iituntitr 7ct rcbap'tizent : placiiit ut si ad
ecclesiain aliqiiis de hteresi venerit, interrogent czdh symbolurn;
et si perz'iderint euvi in Paire, et Filio^ et Spiritu sancto esse
baptizatnin, viamis ei iaittiiui imponatur^ 7ii accipiat Spiritutn
sanctum. Quod si interrogatus 71071 respo7idcrit ka7ic Trini-
tatenz, baptizeiur."

receives after the fashion of his own faith;
yet how much does he obtain under the guid-
ance of that mercy of God, in the confident
assurance of which the same apostle says,
" If in anything ye be otherwise minded, God
shall reveal even this unto you " ?3 Yet the
snares of heretics and schismatics prove for
this reason only too pernicious to the carnally-
minded, because their very progress is inter-
cepted when their vain opinions are confirmed
in opposition to the Catholic truth, and the
perversity of their dissension is strengthened
against the Catholic peace. Yet if the sacra-
ments are the same, they are everywhere
complete, even when they are wrongly under-
stood, and perverted to be instruments of dis-
cord, just as the very writings of the gospel,
if they are only the same, are everywhere
complete, even though quoted with a bound-
less variety of false opinions. For as to what
Jeremiah says: — "Why do those who grieve
me prevail against me ? My wound is stub-
born, whence shall I be healed ? In its origin
it became unto me as lying water, having no
certainty," ■» — if the term " water " were never
used figuratively and in the allegorical lan-
guage of prophecy except to signify baptism,
we should have trouble in discovering what
these words of Jeremiah meant; but as it is,
when "waters" are expressly used in the |"
Apocalypses to signify "peoples," I do not
see why, by " lying water having no cer-
tainty," I should not understand, a "lying
people, whom I cannot trust."

Chap. i6. — 21. But when it is said that
"the Holy Spirit is given by the imposition
of hands in the Catholic Church only, I sup-
pose that our ancestors meant that we should
understand thereby what the apostle says,
" Because the love of God is shed abroad in
our heaits by the Holy Ghost which is given
unto us." ^ For this is that very love which
is wanting in all who are cut off from the
communion of the Catholic Church; and for
lack of this, "though they speak with the
tongues of men and of angels, though they
understand all mysteries and all knowledge,
and though they have the gift of prophecy,
and all faith, so that they could remove moun-
tains, and though they bestow all their goods
to feed the poor, and though they give their
bodies to be burned, it profiteth them
nothing."' But those are wanting in God's
love who do not care for the unity of the
Church; and consequently we are right in
understanding that the Holy Spirit may be
said not to be received except in the Catholic

3 Phil. iii. 15.
6 Rom. v. 5,

4 Jer. XV. 18, cp. LXX.
7 I Cor. xiii. 1-3.

5 Rev. XVII 15.

Chap. XVIII.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

443

Church. For the Holy Spirit is not only given
by the laying on of hands amid the testimony
of temporal sensible miracles, as He was given
in former days to be the credentials of a
rudimentary faith, and for the extension of
the first beginnings of the Church. For who
expects in these days that those on whom
iiands are laid that they may receive the Holy
Spirit should forthwith begin to speak with
tongues? but it is understood that invisibly
and imperceptibly, on account of the bond of
peace, divine love is breathed into their hearts,
so that they may be able to say, " Because
the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts
l)y the Holy Ghost which is given unto us."
But there are many operations of the Holy
Spirit, which the same apostle commemorates
in a certain passage at such length as he
thinks sufficient, and then concludes: '* But
all these worketh that one and the selfsame
Spirit, dividing to every man severally as He
will."' Since, then, the sacrament is one
thing, which even Simon Magus could have;-
and the operation of the Spirit is another
thing, which is even often found in wicked
men, as Saul had the gift of prophecy; ^ and
that operation of the same Spirit is a third
thing, which only the good can have, as " the
end of the commandment is charity out of a
pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of
faith unfeigned:"-* whatever, therefore, may
be received by heretics and schismatics, the
charity which covereth the multitude of sins
is the especial gift of Catholic unity and
peace; nor is it found in all that are within
that bond, since not all that are within it are
of it, as we shall see in the proper place.
At any rate, outside the bond that love can-
not exist, without which all the other requi-
sites, even if they can be recognized and ap-
proved, cannot profit or release from sin.
But the laying on of hands in reconciliation
to the Church is not, like baptism, incapable
of repetition; for what is it more than a prayer
offered over a man ? s

Chap. 17. — 22. "For as regards the fact
that to preserve the figure of unity the Lord
gave the power to Peter that whatsoever he
should loose on earth should be loosed," * it
is clear that that unity is also described as
one dove without fault.' Can it be said,
then, that to this same dove belong all those
greedy ones, whose existence in the same
Catholic Church Cyprian himself so griev-

• I Cor. xii. II. - Acts viii. 13.
3 I Sam. X.6, 10. 4 i Tim. i. 5.

5 He refers to laying on of hands such as he mentions below,
Book V. c. xxiii.: "If the layin'.; <jn of hands were not applied to
one coming from heresy, he_would be, as it were, judged to be
wholly blameless."

* Matt. xvi. 19. 7 Song of Sol. vi. 9.

ously bewailed ? For birds of prey, I believe,
cannot be called doves, but rather hawks.
How then did they baptize those who used to
plunder estates by treacherous deceit, and in-
crease their profits by compound usury,* if
baptism is only given by that indivisible and
chaste and perfect dove, that unity which can
only be understood as existing among the
good ? Is it possible that, by the prayers of
the saints who are spiritual within the Church,
as though by the frequent lamentations of the
dove, a great sacrament is dispensed, witn a
secret administration of the mercy of God, so
that their sins also are loosed who are bap-
tized, not by the dove but by the hawk, if
they come to that sacrament in the peace of
Catholic unity ? But if this be so, why should
it not also be the case that, as each man comes
from heresy or schism to the Catholic peace,
his sins should be loosed through their
prayers ? But the integrity of the sacrament
is everywhere recognized, though it will not
avail for the irrevocable remission of sins out-
side the unity of the Church. Nor will the
prayers of the saints, or, in other words, the
groanings of that one dove, be able to help
one who is set in heresy or schism; just as
they are not able to help one who is placed
within the Church, if by a wicked life he him-
self retain the debts of his sins against himself,
and that though he be baptized, not by this
hawk, but by the pious ministry of the dove
herself.

Chap. i8. — 23. "As my Father hath sent
me," says our Lord, "even so send I you.
And what He had said this, He breathed on
them, and saith unto them. Receive ye the
Holy Ghost. Whose soever sins ye remit,
they are remitted unto them; and whose so-
ever sins ye retain, they are retained." '
Therefore, if they represented the Church,
and this was said to them as to the Church
herself, it follows that the peace of the Church
looses sins, and estrangement from the
Church retains them, not according to the
will of men, but according to the will of God
and the prayers of the saints who are spiritual,
who "judge all things, but themselves are
judged of no man."" For the rock retains,
the rock remits; the dove retains, the dove
remits; unity retains, unity remits. But the
peace of this unity exists only in the good, in
those who are either already spiritual, or are
advancing by the obedience of concord to
spiritual things; it exists not in the bad,
whether they make disturbances abroad, or
are endured within the Church with lamenta-

8 Cypr. <ie Lapsis c vn.
10 I Cor. ii. 15.

9 John^x.T. 21-23.

444

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

L15U0K III.

tions, baptizing and being baptized. But just
as those wUo are tolerated with groanings
within the Church, although they do not be-
long to the same unity of the dove, and to

that

glorious

Church, not having spot or

wrinkle, or any such thing,"' yet if they are
corrected, and confess that they approached
to baptism most unworthily, are not baptized
again, but begin to belong to the dove, through
whose groans those sins are remitted which
were retained in them who were estranged
from her peace; so those also who are more
openly without the Church, if they have re-
ceived the same sacraments, are not freed
from their sins on coming, after correction,
to the unity of the Church, by a repetition of
baptism, but by the same law of charity and
bond of unity. For if " those only may bap-
tize who are set over the Church, and estab-
lished by the law of the gospel and ordination
as appointed by the Lord," were they in any
wise of this kind who seized on estates by
treacherous frauds, and increased their gains
by compound interest ? I trow not, since those
are established by ordination as appointed of
the Lord, of whom the apostle, in giving them
a standard, says, " Not greedy, not given to
filthy lucre."- Yet men of this kind used to
baptize in the time of Cyprian himself; and
he confesses with many lamentations that
they were his fellow-bishops, and endures
them with the great reward of tolerance. Yet
did they not confer remission of sins, which
is granted through the prayers of the saints,
that is, the groans of the dove, whoever it be
that baptizes, if those to whom it is given be-
long to her peace. For the Lord would not
say to robbers and usurers, "Whose soever
sins ye remit, they shall be remitted to him;
and whose soever sins ye retain, they shall be
retained." "Outside the Church, indeed,
nothing can be either bound or loosed, since
there there is no one who can either bind or
loose; '' but he is loosed who has made peace
with the dove, and he is bound who is not at
peace with the dove, whether he is openly
without, or appears to be within.

24. But we know that Dathan, Korah, and
Abiram,3 who tried to usurp to themselves
the right of sacrificing, contrary to the unity
of the people of God, and also the sons of
Aaron wno offered strange fire upon the altar,''
did not escape punishment. Nor do we say
that such offenses remain unpunished, unless
those guilty of them correct themselves, if
the patience of God leading them to repent-
ance ^ give them time for correction.

I Eph. V. 27. Cp. Retract, ii. 18, quoted above on I. xvii.
~ Tit. i. 7. 3 Num. xvi.

4 Lev. X. I, 2. 5 Rom. ii. 4.

Chap. 19. — 25. They indeed who say that
baptism is not to be repeated, because only
hands were laid on those whom Philip the
deacon had baptized,* are saying what is quite
beside the point; and far be it from us, in
seeking the truth, to use such arguments as
this. Wherefore we are all the further from
"yielding to heretics," ^ if we deny that what
they possess of Christ's Church is their own
property, and do not refuse to acknowledge
the standard of our General because of the
crimes of deserters; nay, all the more because
" the Lord our God is a jealous God,"* let us
refuse, whenever we ?ee anything of His with
an alien, to allow him to consider it his own.
For of a truth the jealous God Himself re-
bukes the woman who commits fornication
against Him, as the type of an erring people,
and says that she gave to her lovers what be-
longed to Him, and again received from them
what was not theirs but His. In the hands
of the adulterous woman and the adulterous
lovers, God in His wrath, as a jealous God,
recognizes His gifts; and do we say that bap-
tism, consecrated in the words of the gospel,
belongs to heretics? and are we willing, from
consideration of their deeds, to attribute to
them even what belongs to God, as though
they had the power to pollute it, or as though
they could make what is God's to be their
own, because they themselves have refused
to belong to God ?

26. Who is that adulterous woman whom
the prophet Hosea points out, who said, "I
will go after my lovers, that give me my bread
and my water, my wool and my flax, and
everything that befits me ? " » Let us grant
that we may understand this also of the people
of the Jews that went astray; yet whom else
are the false Christians (such as are all here-
tics and schismatics) wont to imitate, except
false Israelites ' For there were also true
Israelites, as the Lord Himself bears witness
to Nathanael, " Behold an Israelite indeed,
in whom is no guile." '° But who are true
Christians, save those of whom the same Lord
said, "He that hath my commandments, and
keepeth them, he it is that loveth me ? " " But
what is it to keep His commandments, except
to abide in love ? Whence also He says, "A
new commandment I give unto you, that ye
love one another; " and again, " By this shall
all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye
have love one to another." '= But who can
doubt that this was spoken not only to those

6 Acts viii 5-17.

7 Because Cyprian, in his letter to Jubaianus {E/>. Ixxiii. lo),
had urj^ed as followin.y from this, that " there is no reason, dearest
brother, why we should think it right to \ ield to heretics that bap
tism which was granted to the one and only Church."

8 Lieut, iv. 24. 9 Hos. li. 5, cp. LXX. "^ John i. 47.
" John xiv. 21. '- John xiii. 34, 35

Chap. XIX. ]

ON BAPTISiM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

445

who heard His words with their fleshly ears
when He was present with them, but also to
those who learn His words through the gos-
pel, when He is sitting on His throne in
heaven ? For He came not to destroy the
law, but to fulfill/ But the fulfilling of the
law is love.= And in this Cyprian abounded
greatly, insomuch that though he held a dif-
ferent view concerning baptism, he yet did
not forsake the unity of the Church, and was
in the Lord's vine a branch firmly rooted,
bearing fruit, which the heavenly Husband-
man purged with the knife of suffering, that
it should bear more fruit. ^ But the enemies
of this brotherly love, whether they are openly
without, or appear to be within, are false
Christians, and antichrists. For when they
have found an opportunity, they go out, as it
is written: "A man wishing to separate him-
self from his friends, seeketh opportunities.^' ••
But even if occasions are wanting, while they
seem to be within, they are severed from that
invisible bond of love. Whence St. John
says, " They went out from us, but they were
not of us; for had they been of us, they
would no doubt have continued with us. "^
He does not say that they ceased to be of us
by going out, but that they went out because
they were not of us. The Apostle Paul also
speaks of certain men who had erred concern-
ing the truth, and were overthrowing the faith
of some; whose word was eating as a canker.
Yet in saying that they should be avoided, he
nevertheless intimates that they were all in
one great house, but as vessels to dishonor,
— I suppose because they had not as yet gone
out. Or if they had already gone out, how
can he say that they were in the same great
house with the honorable vessels, unless it
was in virtue of the sacraments themselves,
which even in the severed meetings of heretics
are not changed, that he speaks of all as be-
longing to the same great house, though in
different degrees of esteem, some to honor
and some to dishonor ? For thus he speaks
in his Epistle to Timothy: " But shun pro-
fane and vain babblings; for they will increase
unto more ungodliness. And their word will
eat as doth a canker; of whom is Hymenseus
and Philetus; who concerning the truth have
erred, saying that the resurrection is past al-
ready; and overthrow the faith of some.
Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth
firm, having this seal. The Lord knoweth
them that are His. And, Let every one that
nameth the name of Christ depart from in-
iquity. But in a great house there are not
only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of

I Matt. V. 17. = Rom. xiii. 10. 3 John xv. 1-5.

4 Prov. ,\viii. I, cp. Hieron. and LXX. 5 i John ii. iq.

wood and of earth; and some to honor, and
some to dishonor. If a man therefore purge
himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto
honor, sanctified, and meet for the master's
use, and prepared unto every good work."^
But what is it to purge oneself from such as
these, except what he said just before, " Let
every one that nameth the name of Christ
depart from iniquity." And lest any one
should think that, as being in one great house
with them, he might perish with such as these,
he has most carefully forewarned them, " The
Lord knoweth them that are His," — those,
namely, who, by departing from iniquity,
purge themselves from the vessels made to
dishonor, lest they should perish with them
whom they are compelled to tolerate in the
great house.

27. They, therefore, who are wicked, evil-
doers, carnal, fleshly, devilish, think that they
receive at the hands of their seducers what
are the gifts of God alone, whether sacra-
ments, or any spiritual workings about present
salvation. But these men have not love to-
wards God, but are busied about those by
whose pride they are led astray, and are com-
pared to the adulterous woman, whom the
prophet introduces as saying, " I will go after
my lovers, that give me my bread and my
water, my wool and my flax, and my oil, and
everything that befits me." For thus arise
heresies and schisms/when the fleshly people
which is not founded on the love of God says,
" I will go after my lovers," with whom, either
by corruption of her faith, or by the puffing
■up of her pride, she shamefully commits adul-
tery. But for the sake of those who, having
undergone the difficulties, and straits, and
barriers of the empty reasoning of those by
whom they are led astray, afterwards feel the
prickings of fear, and return to the way of
peace, to seeking God in all sincerity, — for
their sake He goes on to say, "Therefore,
behold, I will hedge up thy way with thorns,
and make a wall, that she shall not find her
paths. And she shall follow after her lovers,
but she shall not overtake them; and she
shall seek them, but she shall not find them:
then shall she say, I will go and return to my
first husband; for then was it better with me
than now." Then, that they may not attribute
to their seducers what they have that is sound,
and derived from the doctrine of truth, by
which they lead them astray to the falseness
of their own dogmas and dissensions; that
they may not think that what is sound in th^^m
belongs to them, he immediately added, "And
she did not know that I gave her corn, and

* 2 Tim. ii. 16-21.

446

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[i;ooK III.

wine, and oil, and multiplied her money; but
sae made vessels of gold and silver for Baal.'' '
l"'or she had said above, " I will go after my
lovers, that give me my bread," etc., not at
all understanding that all this, which was held
soundly and lawfully by her seducers, was of
God, and not of men. Nor would even they
themselves claim these things for themselves,
and as it were assert a right in them, had not
they in turn been led astray by a people which
had gone astray, when faith is reposed in
them, and such honors are paid to them, that
they should be enabled thereby to say such
things, and claim such things for themselves,
that their error should be called truth, and
their iniquity be thought righteousness, in
virtue of the sacraments and Scriptures, which
they hold, not for salvation, but only in ap-
pearance. Accordingly, the same adulterous
woman is addressed by the mouth of Ezekiel:
" Thou hast also taken thy fair jewels of my
gold and of my silver, which I had given thee,
and madest to thyself images of men, and
didst commit whoredom with them; and
tookest my^" broidered garments, and cover-
ed st them: and thou hast set mine oil and
mine incense before them. Ivly meat also
which I gave thee, fine flour, and oil, and
honey, wherewith I fed thee, thou hast even
set it before thine idols for a sweet savor:
and this thou hast done." ^ For she turns all
the sacraments, and the words of the sacred
books, to the images of her own idols, with
which her carnal mind delights to wallow^
Nor yet, because those images are false, and
the doctrines of devils, speaking lies in hypoc-
risy,'* are those sacraments and divine utter-
ances therefore so to lose their due honor, as
to be thought to belong to such as these; see-
ing that the Lord says," Of m}' gold, and my
silver, and my broidered garments, and mine
oil, and mine incense, and my meat," and so
forth. Ought we, because those erring ones
think that these things belong to their se-
ducers, therefore not to recognize whose they
really are, when He Himself says, "And she
did not know that I gave her corn, and wine,
and oil, and multiplied her money" ? For He
did not say that she did not have these things
because she was an adulteress; but she is said

> Hos. ii. 5 S, cp. LXX.

2 In Hieron. and T.XX., as well ; s in the English version, this
is in the second person, vesthiu-nta tua iniiiticclai-ia ; t'ov
tjHaTtCT^LLnv rov ttolkl\ov cov.

3 Ezek. xvi. 17-19. 4 i Tim. iv. i, 2.

to have had them, and that not as belonging
to herself or her lovers, but to God, whose
alone they are. Although, therefore, she had
her fornication, yet those things wherewith
she adorned it, whether as seduced or in her
turn seducing, belonged not to her, but to
God. If these things were spoken in a figure
of the Jewish nation, when the scribes and
Pharisees were rejecting the commandment
of God in order to set up their own traditions,
so that they were in a manner committing
whoredom with a people which was abandon-
ing their God; and yet for all that, whoredom
at that time among the people, such as the
Lord brought to light by convicting it, did not
cause that the mvsteries should belong to
them, which were not theirs but God's, who,
in speaking to the adulteress, says that all
these things w-ere His; whence the Lord Him-
self also sent those whom He cleansed from
leprosy to the same mysteries, that they
should offer sacrifice for themselves before
the priests, because that sacrifice had not be-
come efficacious for them, which He Himself
afterwards wished to be commemorated in
the Church for all of them, because He Him-
self proclaimed the tidings to them all; — if
this be so, how much the more ought we,
when we find the sacraments of the New
Testament among certain heretics or schis-
matics, not to attribute them to these men,
nor to condemn them, as though we could not

recognize

them ? We ought to recognize the

gifts of the true husband, though in the pos-
session of an adulteress, and to amend, by
the word of truth, that whoredom which is
the true possession of the unchaste woman,
instead of finding fault with the gifts, which
belong entirely to the pitying Lord.

28. From these considerations, and such as
these, our forefathers, not only before the
time of Cyprian and Agrippinus, but even
afterwards, maintained a most w'holesome
custom, that w'henever they found anything
divine and lawful remaining in its integrity
even in the midst of any heresy or schism,
they approved rather than repudiated it; but
whatever they found that was alien, and pecu-
liar to that false doctrine or division, this
thev convicted in the light of the truth, and
healed. The points, however, which remain
to be considered in the letter written by
Jubaianus, must, I think, when looking at the
size of this book, be taken in hand and treated
with a fresh beginning.

BOOK IV.

IX WHICH HE TREATS OF WHAT FOLLOWS IN THE SAME EPISTLE OF CYPRIAN TO JUBAIANUS.

Chap. i. — i. The comparison of the
Church with Paradise ' shows us that men
may indeed receive her baptism outside her
pale, but that no one outside can either
receive or retain the salvation of eternal
happiness. For, as the words of Script-
ure testify, the streams from the fountain
of Paradise flowed copiously even beyond its
bounds. Record indeed is made of their
names; and through what countries they flow,
and that they are situated beyond the limits
of Paradise, is known to all;= and yet in Me-
sopotamia, and in Egypt, to which countries
those rivers extended, there is not found that
blessedness of life which is recorded in Para-
dise. Accordingly, though the waters of Para-
dise are found beyond its boundaries, yet its
happiness is in Paradise alone. So, therefore,
the baptism of the Church may exist outside,
but the gift of the life of happiness is found
alone within the Church, which has been
founded on a rock, which has received the keys
of binding and loosing.^ " She it is alone who
holds as her privilege the whole power of her
Bridegroom and Lord;"* by virtue of which
power as bride, she can bring forth sons even
of handmaids. And these, if they be not
high-minded, shall be called into the lot of
the inheritance; but if they be high-minded,
they shall remain outside.

Chap. 2. — 2. All the more, then, because
"we are fighting ^ for the honor and unity " of
the Church, let us beware of giving to here-
tics the credit of whatever we acknowledged
among them as belonging to the Church; but
let us teach them by argument, that what
they possess that is derived from unity is of
no efificacy to their salvation, unless they shall
return to that same unity. For " the water
of the Church is full of faith, and salvation,
and holiness"^ to those who use it rightly.
No one, however, can use it well outside the

Church. But to those who use it perversely,
whether within or without the Church, it is
employed to work punishment, and does not
conduce to their reward. And so baptism
"cannot be corrupted and polluted," though
it be handled by the corrupt or by adulterers,
just as also " the Church herself is uncorrupt,
and pure, and chaste." " And so no share in it
belongs to the avaricious, or thieves, or usu-
rers,— many of whom, by the testimony of
Cyprian himself in many places of his letters,
exist not only without, but actually within the
Church, — and yet they both are baptized and
do baptize, with no change in their hearts.

3. For this, too, he says, in one of his epis-
tles® to the clergy on the subject of prayer to
God, in which, after the fashion of the holy
Daniel, he represents the sins of his people
as falling upon himself. For among many
other evils of which he makes mention, he
speaks of them also as " renouncing the world
in words only and not in deeds;" as the ajxjs-
tle says of certain men, "They profess that
they know God. but in works they deny
Him." 5 These, therefore, the blessed Cyp-
rian shows to be contained within the Church
herself, who are baptized without their hearts
being changed for the better, seeing that they
renounce the world in words and not in
deeds, as the Apostle Peter says, " The like
figure whereunto even baptism doth also now
save us, (not the putting away of the filth of
the flesh, but the answer of a good con-
science)," '" which certainly they had not of
whom it is said that they " renounced the
world in words only, and not in deeds;" and
yet he does his utmost, by chiding and con-
vincing them, to make them, at length walk in
the way of Christ, and be His friends rather
than friends of the world.

Chap. 3. — 4. And if they would have
obeyed him, and begun to live rightly, not as

' Cypr. Ep. Ixxiii. ad Jubaian. lo. - Gen. ii. 8-14.
3 Matt. xvi. 18, 19. 4 Cypr. Ep. Ixxiii. 11. 5 lb.

f' lb.

7 Cypr. Ep. Ixxiii. 11.
9 Tit. i. 16.

8 Cypr. Ep. xi. i.
'0 I Pet. iii. 2\.

448

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book IV.

false but as true Christians, would he have
ordered them to be baptized anew ? Surely
not; but their true conversion would have
gained this for them, that the sacrament which
availed for their destruction while they were
yet unchanged, should begin when they
changed to avail for their salvation.

5. For neither are they "devoted to the
Church "' who seem to be within and live
contrary to Christ, that is, act against His
commandments; nor can they be considered
in any way to belong to that Church, which
He so purifies by the washing of water, " that
He may present to Himself a glorious Church,
not having spot or wrinkle,or any such thing." ^
But if they are not in that Church to whose
members they do not belong, they are not in
the Church of which it is said, " My dove is
but one; she is the only one of her mother;"^
(or she herself is without spot or wrinkle. Or
else let him who can assert that those are
members of this dove who renounce the world
in words but not in deeds. Meantime there is
one thing which we see, from which I think it
was said, " He that regardeth the day, re-
gardeth it unto the Lord,"-* for God judgeth
every day. For, according to His fore-
knowledge, who knows whom He has foreor-
dained before the foundation of the world to
be made like to the image of His Son, many
who are even openly outside, and are called
heretics, are better than m.any good Catholics.
For we see what they are to-day, what they
shall be to-morrow we know not. And with
God, with whom the future is already present,
they already are what they shall hereafter be.
But we, according to what each man is at
present, inquire whether they are to be to-day
reckoned among the members of the Church
which is called the one dove, and the Bride
of Christ without a spot or wrinkle, = of whom
Cyprian says in the letter which I have quoted
above, that "they did not keep in the way of the
Lord, nor observe the commandments given
unto them for their salvation; that they did
not fulfill the will of their Lord, being eager
about their property and gains, following the
dictates of pride, giving way to envy and dis-
sension, careless about single-mindedness and
faith, renouncing the world in words only and
not in deeds, pleasing each himself, and dis-
pleasing all men." * But if the dove does not
acknowledge them among her members, and
if the Lord shall say to them, supposing that
they continue in the same perversity, "I never
knew you: depart from me, ye that work in-
iquity;" ' then they seem indeed to be in the

I Cypr. Ep. Ixxiii. 11. 2 Fph. v. 26, 27. 3 Song of Sol. vi. 9.

4 Rom. .\iv. 6. 5 Retract, ii. 18. quoted on I. 17.

6 Cypr. Ep. xi. i, first part loosely quoted. 7 Matt. vii. 23.

Church, but are not; " nay, they even act
against the Church. How then can they bap-
tize with the baptism of the Church," ■- which
is of avail neither to themselves, nor to those
who receive it from them, unless they are
changed in heart with a true conversion, so
that the sacrament itself, which did not avail
them when they received it whilst they were
renouncing the world in words and not in
deeds, may begin to profit them when they
shall begin to renounce it in deeds also ? And
so too in the case of those whose separation
from the Church is open; for neither these
nor those are as yet among the members of
the dove, but some of them perhaps will be
at some future time.

Chap. 4. — 6. We do not, therefore, " ac-
knowledge the baptism of heretics,"' when
we refuse to baptize after them; but because
we acknowledge the ordinance to be of Christ
even among evil men, whether openly separ-
ated from us, or secretly severed whilst within
our body, we receive it with due respect, hav-
ing corrected those who were wrong in the
points wherein they went astray. However
as I seem to be hard pressed when it is said
to me, " Does then a heretic confer remission
of sins ? ^' so I in turn press hard when I say,
Does then he who violates the commands of
Heaven, the avaricious man, the robber, the
usurer, the envious man, does he who re-
nounces the world in words and not in deeds,
confer such remission ? If you mean by the
force of God's sacrament, then both the one
and the other; if by his own merit, neither of
them. For that sacrament, even in the hands
of. wicked men, is known to be of Christ; but
neither the one nor the other of these men is
found in the body of the one uncorrupt, holy,
chaste dove, which has neither spot nor
wrinkle. And just as baptism is of no profit
to the man who renounces the world in words
and not in deeds, so it is of no profit to him
who is baptized in heresy or schism; but each
of them, when he amends his ways, begins to
receive profit from that which before was not
profitable, but was yet already in him.

7. " He therefore that is baptized in heresy
does not become the temple of God;"'^ but
does it therefore follow that he is not to be
considered as baptized ? For neither does
the avaricious man, baptized within the
Church, become the temple of God unless he
depart from his avarice; for they who become
the temple of God certainly inherit the king-
dom of God. But the apostle says, among

8 Cypr. Ep. Ixxiii. ii.

9 //'., Ixxiii. 12, qitando a ttobis baptisma eoruiii in accepttiiit
re/crtur.

"> Cypr. Ep. Ixxvii. 12.

Chap. V.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

449

many other things, " Neither the covetous,
nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom
of God."' For in another place the same
apostle compares covetousness to the worship
of idols: " Nor covetous man," he says,
"who IS an idolater;''- which meaning the
same Cyprian has so far extended in a letter
to Antonianus, that he did not hesitate to
compare the sin of covetousness with that of
men who in time of persecution had declared
in writing that they would offer incense. ^
The man, then, who is l)aptized in heresy in
the name of the Holy Trinity, yet does not
become the temple of God unless he abandons
his heresy, just as the covetous man who has
been baptized in the same name does not be-
come the temple of God unless he abandons
his covetousness, which is idolatry. For
this, too, the same apostle says: " Wnat
agreement hath the temple of God with idols?"-*
Let it not, then, be asked of us " of what God
he is made the temple "^ when we say that
he is not made the temple of God at all. Yet
he is not therefore unbaptized, nor does his
foul error cause that what he has received,
consecrated in the words of the gospel, should
not be the holy sacrament; just as the other
man's covetousness (which is idolatry) and
great uncleanness cannot prevent what he re-
ceives from being holy baptism, even though
he be baptized with the same words of the
gospel by another man covetous like himself.

Chap. 5. — 8. "Further," Cyprian goes
on to say, " in vain do some, who are over-
come by reason, oppose to us custom, as
though custom were superior to truth, or that
were not to be followed in spiritual things
which has been revealed by the Holy Spirit,
as the better way."* This is clearly true,
since reason and truth are to be preferred to
custom. But when truth supports custom,
nothing should be more strongly maintained.
Then he proceeds as follows: '* For one may
pardon a man who merely errs, as the Apostle
Paul says of himself, "Who was before a blas-
phemer, a persecutor, and injurious; but I
obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly;'^
but he who, after inspiration and revelation
given, perseveres advisedly and knowingly in
his former error, sins without hope of pardon
on the ground of ignorance. For he rests on
a kind of presumption and obstinacy, when
he is overcome by reason." This is most
true, that his sin is much more grievous who
has sinned wittingly than his who has sinned
through ignorance. And so in the case of the

' I Cor. vi. 10.
■t 2 Cor. vi. 16.
7 1 Tim. i. 13.

2 Eph. V. 5. 3 Cypr. Ep. Iv. 26.

5 Cypr. Ep. l.\.xvii. 12. ^ Cypr. £/. l.\.\iii. 13.

holy Cyprian, who was not only learned, but
also patient of instruction, which he so fully
himself understood to be a part of the praise
of the bishop whom the apostle describes,^
that he said, " This also should be approved
in a bishop, that he not only teach with knowl-
edge, but also learn with patience." ' I do
not doubt that if he had had the opportunity
of discussing this question, which has been so
long and so much disputed in the Church,
with the pious and learned men to whom we
owe it that subsequently that ancient custom
was confirmed by the authority of a plenary
Council, he would have shown, without hesi-
tation, not only how learned he was in those
things which he had grasped with all the secur-
ity of truth, but also how ready he was to re-
ceive instruction in what he had failed to per-
ceive. And yet, since it is so clear that it is
much more grievous to sin wittingly than in
ignorance, I should be glad if any one would
tell me which is the worse, — the man who falls
into heresy, not knowing how great a sin it is,
or the man who refuses to abandon his covet-
ousness, knowing its enormity ? I might
even put the question thus: If one man un-
wittingly fall into heresy, and another know-
ingly refuse to depart from idolatry, since
the apostle himself says, " The covetous man,
which is an idolater; " and Cyprian too under-
stood the same passage in just the same way,
when he says, in his letter to Antonianus,
" Nor let the new heretics flatter themselves
in this, that they say they do not communi-
cate with idolaters, whereas there are amongst
them both adulterers and covetous persons,
who are held guilty of the sin of idolatry;
' for know this, and understand, that no
whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor cov-
etous man, who is an idolater, hath any in-
heritance in the kingdom of Christ and of
God ; ' '° and again, ' Mortify therefore your
members which are upon the earth; fornica-
tion, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil
concupiscence, and covetousness, which is
idolatry.' " " I ask, therefore, which sins more
deeply, — he who ignorantly has fallen into
heresy, or he who wittingly has refused to
abandon covetousness, that is idolatry ? Ac-
cording to that rule by which the sins of those
who sin wittingly are placed before those of
the ignorant, the man who is covetous with
knowledge takes the first place in sin. But
as it is possible that the greatness of the act-
ual sin should produce the same effect in the
case of heresy that the witting commission
of the sin produces in that of covetousness,
let us suppose the ignorant heretic to be on

8 2 Tim. ii. 24.
"3 Eph. V. 5.

9 Cypr. Ep. Ixxiv. 10.

" Col. iii. 5. Cypr. Ep. Iv. 27.

450

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book IV.

a par in guilt with tlie consciously covetous
man, although the evidence which Cyprian
himself has advanced from the apostle does
not seem to prove this. For what is it that
we abominate in heretics except their blas-
phemies? But when he wished to show that
ignorance of the sin may conduce to ease in
obtaining pardon, he advanced a proof from
the case of the apostle, when he says, " Who
was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor,
and injurious; but I obtained mercy, because
I did it ignorantly." ' But if possible, as I
said before, let the sins of the two men — the
blasphemy of the unconscious, and the idol-
atry of the conscious sinner — be esteemed of
equal weight; and let them be judged by the
same sentence, — he who, in seeking for Christ,
falls into a truth-like setting forth of what is
false, and he who wittingly resists Christ
speaking through His apostle, " seeing that
no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor
covetous man, which is an idolater, hath any
inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of
God," ' — and then I would ask why baptism
and the words of the gospel are held as naught
in the former case, and accounted valid in
the latter, when each is alike found to be es-
tranged from the members of the dove. Is
it because the former is an open combatant
outside, that he should not be admitted, the
latter a cunning assenter within the fold, that
he may not be expelled ?

Chap. 6. — 9. But as regards his saying,
" Nor let any one afifirm that what they have
received from the apostles, that they follow;
for the apostles handed down only one Church
and one baptism, and that appointed only in
the same Church:" 3 this. does not so much
move me to venture to condemn the baptism
of Christ when found amongst heretics (just
as it is necessary to recognize the gospel itself
when I find it with them, though I abominate
their error), as it warns me that there were
some even in the times of the holy Cyprian
who traced to the authority of the apostles
that custom against which the African Coun-
cils were held, and in respect of which he
himself said a little above, " In vain do those
who are beaten by reason oppose to us the
authority of custom.'' Nor do I find the
reason why the same Cyprian found this very
custom, which after his time was confirmed
by nothing less than a plenary Council of the
whole world, already so strong before his
time, that when with all his learning he sought
an authority worth following for changing it,
he found nothing but a Council of Agrippinus
held in Africa a very few years before his own

' I Tim. i. 13.

Eph. V. 5.

3 Cypr. Ep. Ixxiii'. 13.

time. And seeing that this was not enough
for him, as against the custom of the whole
world, he laid hold on these reasons which we
just now, considering them with great care,
and being confirmed by the antiquity of the
custom itself, and by the subsequent authority
of a plenary Council, found to be truth-like
rather than true; which, however, seemed to
him true, as he toiled in a question of the
greatest obscurity, and was in doubt about the
remission of sins, — whether it could fail to be
given m the baptism of Christ, and whether
it could be given among heretics. In which
matter, if an imperfect revelation of the truth
was given to Cyprian, that the greatness of
his love in not deserting the unity of the
Church might be made manifest, there is yet
not any reason why any one should venture to
claim superiority over the strong defenses and
excellence of his virtues, and the abundance
of graces which were found in him, merely
because, with the instruction derived from the
strength of a general Council, he sees some-
thing which Cyprian did not see, because the
Church had not yet held a plenary Council on
the matter. Just as no one is so insane as
to set himself up as surpassing the merits of
the Apostle Peter, because, taught by the
epistles of the Apostle Paul, and confirmed
by the custom of the Church herself, he does
not compel the Gentiles to judaize, as Peter
once had done.'*

10. We do not then "find that any one, after
being baptized among heretics, was afterwards
admitted by the apostles with the same bap-
tism, and communicated ; '" ^ but neither do we
find this, that any one coming from the society
of heretics, who had been baptized among
them, was baptized anew by the apostles.
But this custom, which even then those who
looked back to past ages could not find to have
been invented by men of a later time, is
rightly believed to have been handed down
from the apostles. And there are many other
things of the same kind, which it would be
tedious to recount. Wherefore, if they had
something to say for themselves to whom
Cyprian, wishing to persuade them of the .
truth of his own view, says, " Let no one say,
What we have received from the apostles,
that we follow," with how much more force
we now say, What the custom of the Church
has always held, what this argument has failed
to prove false, and what a plenary Council
has confirmed, this we follow ! To this we
may add that it may also be said, after a
careful inquiry into the reasoning on both
sides of the discussion, and into the evidence

4 Gal. ii. 14.

5 Cypr. Ep. Ixxiii. 13.

Chap. VIII.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

451

of Scripture, What truth has declared, that
we follow.

Chap. 7. — 1 1 . For in fact, as to what some
opposed to the reasoning of Cyprian, that the
apostle says, " Notwithstanding every way,
whether in pretence or in truth, let Christ be
preached," ' Cyprian rightly exposed their
error, showing that it has nothing to do with
the case of heretics, since the apostle was
speaking of those who were acting within the
Church, with malicious envy seeking their
own profit. They announced Christ, indeed,
according to the truth whereby we believe in
Christ, but not in the spirit in which He was
announced by the good evangelists to the
sons of the dove. " For Paul,'' he says,
" in his epistle was not speaking of heretics,
or of their baptism, so that it could be shown
that he had laid down anything concerning
this matter. He was speaking of brethren,
whether as walking disorderly and contrary
to the discipline of the Church, or as keeping
the discipline of the Church in the fear of
God. And he declared that some of them
spoke the word of God steadfastly and fear-
lessly, but that some were acting in envy and
strife; that some had kept themselves encom-
passed with kindly Christian love, but that
others entertained malice and strife: but yet
that he patiently endured all things, wnth the
view that, whether in truth or in pretence,
the name of Christ, which Paul preached,
mignt come to the knowledge of the greatest
number, and that the sowing of the word,
which was as yet a new and unaccustomed
work, might spread more widely by the
preaching of those that spoke. Furthermore,
it is one thing for those who are within the
Church to speak in the name of Christ, an-
other thing for those who are without, acting
against the Church, to baptize in the name
of Christ."^ These words of Cyprian seem
to warn us that we must distinguish betw^een
those who are bad outside, and those who are
bad within the Church. And those whom he
says that the apostle represents as preaching
the gospel impurely and of envy, he says
truly were within. This much, however, I
think I may say without rashness, if no one
outside can have anything which is of Christ,
neither can any one within have anything
which is of the devil. For if that closed gar-
den can contain the thorns of the devil, why
cannot the fountain of Christ equally flow
beyond the garden's bounds ? But if it can-
not contain them, whence, even in the time
of the Apostle Paul himself, did there arise

1 Phil. i. 18. Hieron.

2 Cypr. I'.p. Ixxiii. \\.

' annitntietur."

amongst those who were w-ithin so great an
evil of envy and malicious strife ? For these
are the words of Cyprian. Can it be that
envy and malicious strife are a small evil ?
How- then were those in unity who were not at
peace ? For it is not my voice, nor that of
any man, but of the Lord Himself; nor did
the sound go forth from men, but from
angels, at the birth of Christ, " Glory to God
in the highest, and on earth peace to men of
good will. "3 And this certainly would not
have been proclaimed by the voice of angels
when Christ was born upon the earth, unless
God wished this to be understood, that those
are in the unity of the body of Christ who
are united in the peace of Christ, and those
are in the peace of Christ who are of good
will. Furthermore, as good will is shown in
kindliness, so is bad will shown in malice.

Chap. 8 — 12. In short, we may see how
great an evil in itself is envy, which cannot be
other than malicious. Let us not look for
other testimony. Cyprian himself is sufficient
for us, through w-hose mouth the Lord poured
forth so many thunders in most perfect truth,
and uttered so many useful precepts about
envy and malignity. Let us therefore read
the letter of Cyprian about envy and malig-
nity, and see how great an evil it is to envy
those better than ourselves, — an evil whose
origin he shows in memorable words to have
sprung from the devil himself. \ " To feel
jealousy," he says, "of what you regard as
good, and to envy those who are better than
yourselves, to some, dearest brethren, seems
a light and minute offense.'''' And again a
little later, when he was inquiring into the
source and origin of the evil, he says, " From
this the devil, in the very beginning of the
world, perished first himself, and led others
to destruction." 5 And further on in the
same chapter: "What an evil, dearest
brethren, is that by which an angel fell ! by
which that exalted and illustrious loftiness
was able to be deceived and overthrown ! by
which he was deceived who was the deceiver !
From that time envy stalks upon the earth,
when man, about to perish through malignity,
submits himself to the teacher of perdition,
— when he who envies imitates the devil, as
it is written, ' Through envv of the devil came
death into the world, and they that do hold
of his side do find it.'''* How true, how
forcible are these words of Cyprian, in an
epistle known throughout the world, we can-
not fail to recognize. It was truly fitting for

3 Luke ii. i^. " Ifoininibtis boner VQluntntis ." and so the
Vuli;ate, following the reading iv avOpwiroi.^ euSoKia?.

4 Cypr. at' Zel. et Liv. c. i. 5 lb. c. 4. * Wisd. ii. 24, 25.

45^

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book IV.

Cyprian to argue and warn most forcibly
about envy and malignity, from which most
deadly evil he proved his own heart to be so
far removed by the abundance of his Christian
love; by carefully guarding which he remained
in the unity of communion with his colleagues,
who without ill-feeling entertained different
views about baptism, whilst he himself dif-
fered in opinion from them, not through any
contention of ill will, but through human in-
firmity, erring in a point which God, in His
own good time, would reveal to him by reason
of his perseverance in love. For he says
openly, "Judging no one, nor depriving any
of the right of communion if he differ from
us. For no one of us setteth himself up as
a bishop of bishops, or by tyrannical terror
forces his colleagues to a necessity of obey-

ing.

And in the end of the epistle before

us he says, " These things I have written to
you briefly, dearest brother, according to my
poor ability, prescribing to or prejudging no
one, so as to prevent each bishop from doing
what he thinks right in the free exercise of
his own judgment. We, so far as in us lies,
do not strive on behalf of heretics with our
colleges and fellow-bishops, with whom we
hold the harmony that God enjoins, and the
peace of our Lord, especially as the apostle
says, ' If any man seem to be contentious, we
have no such custom, neither the churches of
God.'^ Christian love in our souls, the honor
of our fraternity, the bond of faith, the har-
mony of the priesthood, all these are main-
tained by us with patience and gentleness.
For this cause we have also, so far as our
poor ability admitted, by the permission and
inspiration of the Lord, written now a treatise
on the benefit of patience, ^ which we have
sent to you in consideration of our mutual
affection." "

Chap. 9. — 13. By this patience of Christian
love he not only endured the difference of
opinion manifested in all kindliness by his
good colleagues on an obscure point, as he
also himself received toleration, till, in pro-
cess of time, when it so pleased God, what
had always been a most wholesome custom
was further confirmed by a declaration of the
truth in a plenary Council, but he even put
up with those who were manifestly bad, as
was very well known to himself, who did not
entertain a different view in consequence of
the obscurity of the question, but acted con-
trary to their preaching in the evil practices

' Cone. Garth. s!</> in. 2 i Cor. .\i. 16.

3 This treatise is still extant. See Trans, in Ante-Xicene Fathers,
vol. v. 484-490.

4 Cypr. Ep. l.x.\iii. 26.

of an abandoned life, as the apostle says of
them, " Thou that preachest a man should
not steal, dost thou steal ? "' s For Cyprian
says in his letter of such bishops of his own
time, his own colleagues, and remaining in
communion with him, "While they had
brethren starving in the Church, they tried
to amass large sums of money, they took
possession of estates by fraudulent proceed-
ings, they multiplied their gains by accumu-
lated usuries."* For here there is no ob'
scure question. Scripture declares openly,
" Neither covetous nor extortioners shall in-
herit the kingdom of God;"' and " He that
putteth out his money to usury," ^ and " No
whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covet-
ous man, who is an idolater, hath any inherit-
ance in the kingdom of Christ and of God."^
He therefore certainly would not, without
knowledge, have brought accusations of such
covetousness, that men not only greedily treas-
ured up their own goods, but also fraudulently
appropriated the goods of others, or of idolatry
existing in such enormity as he understands
and proves it to exist; nor assuredly would
he bear false witness against his fellow-
bishops. And yet with the bowels of fatherly
and motherly love he endured them, lest that,
by rooting out the tares before their time, the
wheat should also have been rooted up,'° imi-
tating assuredly the Apostle Paul, who, with
the same love towards the Church, endured
those who were ill-disposed and envious to-
wards him."

14. But yet because " by the envy of the
devil death entered into the world, and they
that do hold of his side do find it,'''- not be-
cause they are created by God, but because
they go astray of themselves, as Cyprian also
says himself, seeing that the devil, before he
was a devil, was an angel, and good, how can it
be that they who are of the devil's side are in
the unity of Christ? Beyond all doubt, as
the Lord Himself says, " an enemy hath done
this," who " sowed tares among the wheat." '^
As therefore what is of the devil within the
fold must be convicted, so what is of Christ
without must be recognized. Has the devil
what is his within the unity of the Church,
and shall Christ not have what is His without?
This, perhaps, might be said of individual
men, that as the devil has none that are his
among the holy angels, so God has none that
are His outside the communion of the Church.
But though it may be allowed to the devil to
mingle tares, that is, wicked men, with this
Church which still wears the mortal nature of

5 Rom. n. 21.
s Ps. y.x. 5.
II Phil. i. 15-18.

^ Cypr. de Lapsis. c. vi.

9 Eph. V. 5.

1= Wisd. 11. 24, 25.

7 I Cor. VI. 10.
■o Matt. -xiii. 29.
13 Matt. xiii. 28, 25.

Chap. X.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

453

flesh, so long as it is wandering far from
God, he being allowed this just because of
the pilgrimage of the Church herself, that
men may desire more ardently the rest of
that country which the angels enjoy, yet this
cannot be said of the sacraments. For, as
the tares within the Church can have and
handle them, though not for salvation, but
for the destruction to which they are destined
in the fire, so also can the tares without,
which received them from seceders from
within; for they did not lose them by seced-
ing. This, indeed, is made plain from the
fact that baptism is not conferred again on
their return, when any of the very men who
seceded happen to come back again. And
let not any one say, Why, what fruit hath the
tares ? For if this be so, their condition is
the same, so far as this goes, both inside and
without. For it surely cannot be that grains
of corn are found in the tares inside, and not
in those without. But when the question is
of the sacrament, we do not consider whether
the tares bear any fruit, but whether they
have any share of heaven; for the tares, both
within and without, share the rain with the
wheat itself, which rain is in itself heavenly
and sweet, even though under its influence
the tares grow up in barrenness. And so the
sacrament, according to the gospel of Christ,
is divine and pleasant; nor is it to be esteemed
as naught because of the barrenness of tho^e
on whom its dew falls even without.

Chap. io. — 15. But some one may say that
the tares within may more easily be converted
into wheat. I grant that it is so; but what
has this to do with the question of repeating
baptism ? You surely do not maintain that
if a man converted from heresy, through the
occasion and opportunity given by his con-
version, should bear fruit before another who,
being within the Church, is more slow to be
washed from his iniquity, and so corrected
and changed, the former therefore needs not
to be baptized again, but the churchman to
be baptized again, who was outstripped by
him who came from the heretics, because of
the greater slowness of his amendment. It
has nothing, therefore, to do with the ques-
tion now at issue who is later or slower in
being converted from his especial wayward-
ness to the straight path of faith, or hope, or
charity. For although the bad within the
fold are more easily made good yet it will
sometimes happen that certain of the number
of those outside will- outstrip in their conver-
sion certain of those within; and while these
remain in barrenness, the former, being re-
stored to unity and communion, will bear fruit

with patience, thirty-fold, or sixty-fold, or
a hundred-fold." Or if those only are to be
called tares who remain in perverse error to
the end, there are many ears of corn outside,
and many tares within.

16. But it will be urged that the bad out-
side are worse than those within. It is indeed
a weighty question, whether Nicolaus, being
already severed from the Church, "^ or Simon,
who was still within it,' was the worse, — the
one being a heretic, the other a sorcerer.
But if the mere fact of division, as being the
clearest token of violated charity, is held to
be the worse evil, I grant that it is so. Yet
many, though they have lost all feelings of
charity, yet do not secede from considerations
of worldly profit; and as they seek their own,
not the things which are Jesus Christ's," what
they are unwilling to secede from is not the
unity of Christ, but their own temporal ad-
vantage. Whence it is said in praise of
charity, that she " seeketh not her own.''^

17. Now, therefore, the question is, how
could men of the party of the devil belong to
the Church, which has no spot, or wrinkle, or
any such thing,^ of which also it is said, " My
dove is one ? " ' But if they cannot, it is clear
that she groans among those who are not of
her, some treacherously laying wait within,
some barking at her gate without. Such
men, however, even within, both receive bap-
tism, and possess it, and transmit it holy in
itself; nor is it in any way defiled by their
wickedness, in which they persevere even to
the end. Wherefore the same blessed Cyprian
teaches us that baptism is to be considered
as consecrated in itself by the words of the
gospel, as the Church has received, without
joining to it or mingling with it any considera-
tion of waywardness and wickedness on the
part of either minister or recipients; since he
himself points out to us both truths, — both
that there have been some within the Church
who did not cherish kindly Christian love, but
practised envy and unkind dissension, of
whom the Apostle Paul spoke; and also that
the envious belong to the devil's party, as he
testifies in the most open way in the epistle
which he wrote about envy and malignity.
Wherefore, since it is clearly possible that in
those who belong to the devil's party, Christ's
sacrament may yet be holy, — not, indeed, to
their salvation, but to their condemnation, —
and that not only if they are led astray after
they have been baptized, but even if they
were such in heart when they received the
sacrament, renouncing the world (as thesame

I Matt. xiii. 23
3 Acts viii. 9-24
ph. V. 27- '

6 r:

Luke viii. 15.

4 Phil. ii. 21.
Retract, ii. 18.

2 Rev. ii. 6.
5 1 Cor. xiii. 5.
7 Song of Sol. vi.

454

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book IV.

Cyprian shows) in words only and not in
deeds;' and since even if afterwards they be
brought into the right way, the sacrament is
not to be again administered which they re-
ceived when they were astray; so far as I can
see, the case is already clear and evident, that
in the question of baptism we have to con-
sider, not who gives, but what he gives;
not who receives, but what he receives;
not who has, but what he has. For if men
of the party of the devil, and therefore in no
way belonging to the one dove, can yet re-
ceive, and have, and give baptism in all its
holiness, in no way defiled by their wayward-
ness, as we are taught by the letters of Cyprian
himself, how are we ascribing to heretics what
does not belong to them ? how are we saying
that what is really Christ's is theirs, and not
rather recognizing in them the signs of our
Sovereign, and correcting the deeds of de-
serters from Him ? Wherefore it is one thing,
as the holy Cyprian says, " for those within,
in the Church, to speak in the name of Christ,
another thing for those without, who are act-
ing against the Church, to baptize in His
name." - But both many who are within act
against the Church by evil living, and by en-
ticing weak souls to copy their lives; and
some who are without speak in Christ's name,
and are not forbidden to work the works of
Christ, but only to be without, since for the
healing of their souls we grasp at them, or
reason with them, or exhort them. For he,
too, was without who did not follow Christ
with His disciples, and yet in Christ's name
was casting out devils, which the Lord en-
joined that he should not be prevented from
doing; 3 although, certainly, in tHe point
where he was imperfect he was to be made
whole, in accordance with the words of the
Lord, in which He says, " He that is not with
me is against me; and he that gathereth not
with me scattereth abroad." * Therefore both
some things are done outside in the name of
Christ not against the Church, and some
things are done inside on the devil's part
which are against the Church.

Chap. ii. — 18. What shall we say of what
is also wonderful, that he who carefully ob-
serves may find that it is possible that certain
persons, without violating Christian charity,
may yet teach what is useless, as Peter wished
to compel the Gentiles to observe Jewish cus-
toms,s as Cyprian himself would force heretics
to be baptized anew ? whence the apostle says
to such good members, who are rooted in
charity, and yet walk not rightly in some

' Cypr. £/. xi. i.
3 Luke ix. 49, 50.

- Cypr. £/i. Ixxiii. 14.

4 Matt. xii. 30. 5 Gal. ii. 14.

points, " If in anything ye be otherwise
minded, God shall reveal even this unto
you;"* and that some again, though devoid
of charity, may teach something wholesome ?
of whom the Lord says, " The scribes and the
Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: all therefore
whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe
and do; but do not ye after their works: for
they say and do not," ^ Whence the apostle
also says of those envious and malicious ones
who yet preach salvation through Christ,
" Whether in pretense, or in truth, let Christ
be preached."^ Wherefore, both within and
without, the waywardness of man is to be cor-
rected, but the divine sacraments and utter-
ances are not to be attributed to men. He
is not, therefore, a " patron of heretics " who
refuses to attribute to them what he knows
not to belong to them, even though it be
found among them. We do not grant bap-
tism to be theirs; but we recognize His
baptism of whom it is said, " The same is He
which baptizeth,"5 wheresoever we find it.
But if "the treacherous and blasphemous
man " continue in his treachery and blas-
phemy, he receives no " remission of sins
either without " or within the Church; or if,
by the power of the sacrament, he receives it
for the moment, the same force operates
both without and within, as the power of the
name of Christ used to work the expulsion of
devils even without the Church.

Chap. 12. — 19. But he urges that "we find
that the apostles, in all their epistles, exe-
crated and abhorred the sacrilegious wicked-
ness of heretics, so as to say that ' their word
does spread as a canker.'"'" What then?
Does not Paul also show that those who said,
"Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we
die," were corrupters of good manners by
their evil communications, adding imme-
diately afterwards, " Evil communications
corrupt good manners; " and yet he intimated
that these were within the Church when he
says, " How say some among you that there
is no resurrection of the dead ? " " But when
does he fail to express his abhorrence of the
covetous ? Or could anything be said in
stronger terms, than that covetousness should
be called idolatry, as the same apostle de-
clared ? '- Nor did Cyprian understand his
language otherwise, inserting it when need
required in his letters; though he confesses
that in his time there were in the Church not
covetous men of an ordinary type, but robbers

6 Phil. iii. 15. 7 Matt, xxiii. 2, 3.

8 Phil. i. 18 ; see on ch. 7. 10. 9 John i. 33.

1° Cypr. £/. Ixxiii. 15; 2 Tim. ii. 17.
II I Cor. XV. 32, 33, 12. I- Eph. V. 5.

Chap. XIII.]

OX BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

455

and usurers, and these found not among the
masses, but among the bishops. And yet I
should be willing to understand that those of
whom the apostle says, "Their word does,
spread as a canker," were without the Church,
but Cyprian himself will not allow me. For,
when showing, in his letter to Antonianus,'
that no man ought to sever himself from the
unity of the Church before the time of the
final separation of the just and unjust, merely
because of the admixture of evil men in the
Church, when he makes it manifest how holy
he was, and deserving of the illustrious mar-
tyrdom which he won, he says, " What swell-
ing of arrogance it is, what forgetfulness of
humility and gentleness, that any one should
dare or believe that he can do what the Lord
did not grant even to the apostles, — to think
that he can distinguish the tares from the
wheat, or, as if it were granted to him to carry
the fan and purge the floor, to endeavor to
separate the chaff from the grain ! And
whereas the apostle says, ' But in a great
house there are not only vessels of gold and
of silver, but also of wood and of earth/ ^ that
he should seem to choose those of gold and
of silver, and despise and cast away and
condemn those of wood and of earth, when
really the vessels of wood are only to be
burned m the day of the Lord by the burning
of the divine conflagration, and those of
earth are to be broken by Him to whom the
'rod of iron 5 has been given.'"'' By this
argument, therefore, against those who, under
the pretext of avoiding the society of wicked
men, had severed themselves from the unity
of the Church, Cyprian shows that by ttie
great house of which the apostle spoke, in
which there were not only vessels of gold and
of silver, but also of wood and of earth, he
understood nothing else but the Church, in
which there should be good and bad, till at
the last day it should be cleansed as a thresh-
ing-floor by the winnowing-fan. And if this
be so, in the Church herself, that is, in the
great house itself, there were vessels to dis-
honor, whose word did spread like a canker.
For the apostle, speaking of them, taught as
follows: "And their word," he says, "will
spread as doth a canker; of whom is Hyme-
naeus and Philetus; who concerning the truth
have erred, saying that the resurrection is
past already; and overthrow the faith of some.
Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth

' Antonianus, a bishop of Numidia, wrote 252 A.D., to Cyprian,

' . oring his milder view in opposition to the purism of Novatian:

i^equently Xovatian wrote to him, advocating the purist move-

,,.cnt and impugning the laxity of Cornelius, bp. of Rome. To

overthrow the effect upon A. of this letter, Cyprian wrote Epistle

I I.V. In Ep. LXX., A. is of the number of those Nuinidian bish-

■^ whom Cyprian addresses.

' 2 Tim. i'i. 20. 3 Ps. ii. 9. 4 Cypr. Ep. Iv. 23.

sure, having this seal. The Lord knoweth
them that are His. And, Let every one that
nameth the name of Christ depart from in-
iquity. But in a great house there are not
only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of
wood and of earth." ^ If, therefore, they
whose words did spread as doth a canker were
as it were vessels to dishonor in the great
house, and by that "great house" Cyprian
understands the unity of the Church itself,
surely it cannot be that their canker polluted
the baptism of Christ. Accordingly, neither
without, any more than within, can any one
who is of the devil's party, either in himself
or in any other person, stain the sacrament
which is of Christ. It is not, therefore, the
case that " the word which spreads as a canker
to the ears of those who hear it gives remis-
sion of sins; "^ but when baptism is given in
the words of the gospel, however great be the
perverseness of understanding on the part
either of him through whom, or of him to
whom it is given, the sacrament itself is holy
in itself on account of Him whose sacrament
it is. And if any one, receiving it at the
hands of a misguided man, yet does not re-
ceive the perversity of the minister, but only
the holiness of the mystery, being closely
bound to the unity of the Church in good
faith and hope and charity, he receives re-
mission of his sins, — not by the words which
do eat as doth a canker, but by the sacraments
of the gospel flowing from a heav^enly source.
But if the recipient himself be misguided, on
the one hand, what is given is of no avail for
the salvation of the misguided man; and yet,
on the other hand, that which is received re-
mains holy in the recipient, and is not re-
newed to him if he be brought to the right
way.

Chap. 13. — 20. There is therefore " no
fellowship between righteousness and un-
righteousness," ^ not only without, but also
within the Church; for "the Lord knoweth
them that are His," and " Let every one that
nameth the name of Christ depart from in-
iquity." There is also " no communion be-
tween light and darkness," ^ not only without,
but also within the Church; for *' he that
hateth his brother is still in darkness." » And
they at any rate hated Paul, who, preaching
Christ of envy and malicious strife, supposed
that they added affliction to his bonds;"' and
yet the same Cyprian understands these still
to have been within the Church. Since, there-
fore, "neither darkness can enlighten, nor

5 2 Tim. li. 17-20. * Cypr. E/-. Ix.xiii. 15.

7 Cypr. E/>. Ix.xiii. 15; 2 Cor. vi. 14. ' //>.

9 I John ii. 9. '" I'hil. i. 15, 16

456

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book IV.

unrighteousness justify,"" as Cyprian again
says, I ask, how could those men baptize
within the very Church herself? I ask, how
could those vessels which the large house
contains not to honor, but to dishonor, ad-
minister what is holy for the sanctifying of
men within the great house itself, unless be-
cause that holiness of the sacrament cannot
be polluted even by the unclean, either when
it is given at their hands, or when it is re-
ceived by those who in heart and life are not
changed for the better? of whom, as situated
within the Church, Cyprian himself says,
" Renouncing the world in word only, and
not in deed."-

21. There are therefore also within the
Church "enemies of God, whose hearts the
spirit of Antichrist has possessed ;'' and yet
they " deal with spiritual and divine things,'' ^
which cannot profit for their salvation so long
as they remain such as they are; and yet
neither can they pollute them by their own un-
cleanness. With regard to what he says,
therefore, "that they have no part given
them in the saving grace of the Church, who,
scattering and fighting against the Church of
Christ, are called adversaries by Christ Him-
self, and antichrists by His apostles, ^ this
must be received under the consideration that
there are men of this kind both within and
without. But the separation of those that are
within from the perfection and unity of the
dove is not only known in the case of some
men to God, but even in the case of some to
their fellow-men; for, by regarding their
openly abandoned life and confirmed wicked-
ness, and comparing it with the rules of God's
commandments, they understand to what a
multitude of tares and chaff, situated now
some within and some without, but destined
to be most manifestly separated at the last
day, the Lord will then say, " Depart from
me, ye that work iniquity,"'* and "Depart
into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil
and his angels. "s

Chap. 14. — 22. But we must not despair
of the conversion of any man, whether situated
within or without, so long as "the goodness
of God leadeth him to repentance,"^ and
"visits their transgressions with the rod, and
their inquity with stripes." For in this way
" He does not utterly take from them His
loving-kindness,"' if they will themselves
sometimes "love their own soul, pleasing
God."^ But as the good man "that shall

3 Cypr. EJ>. Ixxiii. 15.
* Rom. ii. 4.

' Cypr. I.e. ^ Cypr. Ep. .\i. i

4 Matt. vii. 23. 5 Matt. xxv. 41.

7 Ps. Ixxxix. 32, 33.

8 Ecclus. XXX. 23. The viords,'-^ placetites Z>fo " are ^derived
from the Latin version only.

endure unto the end, the same shall be
saved,"' so the bad man, whether within or
without, who shall persevere in his wicked-
ness to the end, shall not be saved. Nor do
we say that "all, wheresoever and howsoever
baptized, obtain the graceof baptism, ' ' '° if by
the grace of baptism is understood the actual
salvation which is conferred by the celebra-
tion of the sacrament; but many fail to obtain
this salvation even within the Church, although
it is clear that they possess the sacrament,
which is holy in itself. Well, therefore, does
the Lord warn us in the gospel that we should
not company with ill-advisers," who walk under
the pretence of Christ's name; but these are
found both within and without, as, in fact,
they do not proceed without unless they have
first been ill-disposed within. And we know
that the apostle said of the vessels placed in
the great house, " If a man therefore purge
himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto
honor, sanctified, and meet for the Master's
use, and prepared unto every good work." "^
But in what manner each man ought to purge
himself from these he shows a little above,
saying, " Let every one that nameth the name
of Christ depart from iniquity," '^ that he may
not in the last day, with the chaff, whether
with that which has already been driven from
the threshing-floor, or with that which is to be
separated at the last, hear the command,
" Depart from me, ye that work iniquity,"'*
Whence it appears, indeed, as Cyprian says,
that " we are not at once to admit and adopt
whatsoever is professed in the name of Christ,
but only what is done in the truth of Christ. ' ' 's
But it is not an action done in the truth of
Christ that men should " seize on estates by
fraudulent pretenses, and increase their gains
by accumulated usury," '^ or that they should
"renounce the world in word only;""" and
yet, that all this is done within the Church,
Cyprian himself bears sufficient testimony.

Chap. 15. — 23. To go on to the point
which he pursues at great length, that "they
who blaspheme the Father of Christ cannot
be baptized in Christ," "^ since it is clear that
they blaspheme through error (for he who
comes to the baptism of Christ will not openly
blaspheme the Father of Christ, but he is led
to blaspheme by holding a view contrary to
the teaching of the truth about the Father of
Christ), we have already shown at sufficient
length that baptism, consecrated in the words
of the gospel, is not affected by the error of

9 Matt. xxiv. 13.

10 From a letter of Pope Stephen's, quoted Cypr. E/>. Ixxiii. i6.

11 Mark xiii. 21. 1= 2 Tim. ii. 21. '3 2 Tim. ii . 10.

U Matt. vii. 23. 15 Cypr. £p. Ixxiii. 16. '6 /{,. de Laps. c. vi.
17 lb. Ep. xi. I. 18 //'. Ep. Ixxiii. 17.

Chap. XVI.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

457

any man, whether ministrant or recipient,
whether he hold views contrary to the revela-
tion of divine teaching on the subject of the
Father, or the Son, or the Holy Ghost. For
many carnal and natural men are baptized
even within the Church, as the apostle ex-
pressly says: "The natural man receiveth
not the things of the Spirit of God;'" and
after they had received baptism, he says that
they "are yet carnal."- But according to it
carnal sense, a soul given up to fleshly appe-
tites cannot entertain but fleshly wisdom
about God. Wherefore many, progressing
after baptism, and especially those who have
been baptized in infancy or early youth, in
proportion as their intellect becomes clearer
and brighter, while " the inward man is re-
newed day by day,"^ throw away their former
opinions which they held about God while
they were mocked with vain imaginings, with
scorn and horror and confession of their mis-
take. And yet they are not therefore con-
sidered not to have received baptism, or to
have received baptism of a kind corresponding
to their error; but in them both the perfec-
tion of the sacrament is honored and the de-
lusion of their mind is corrected, even though
it had become inveterate through long con-
firmation, or been, perhaps, maintained in
many controversies. Wherefore even the
heretic, who is manifestly without, if he has
there received baptism as ordained in the
gospel, has certainly not received baptism of
a kind corresponding to the error which blinds
him. And therefore, in returning into the
way of wisdom he perceives that he ought
to relinquish what he has held amiss, he must
not at the same time give up the good which
he had received; nor because his error is to be
condemned, is the baptism of Christ in him to
be therefore extinguished. For it is already
sufficiently clear, from the case of those who
happen to be l:)aptized within the Church with
false views about God, that the truth of the
sacrament is to be distinguished from the
error of him who believes amiss, although
both may be found in the same man. And
therefore, when any one grounded in any
error, even outside the Church, has yet been
baptized with the true sacrament, when he is
restored to the unity of the Church, a true
baptism cannot take the place of a true bap-
tism, as a true faith takes the place of a false
one, because a thing cannot take the place of
itself, since neither can it give j^lace. Here-
tics therefore join the Catholic Church to this
end, that what they have evil of themselves
may be corrected, not that what they have
good of God should be repeated.

I I Cor. ii. 14.

2 1 Cor. iii. 3.

3 2 Cor. iv. 16.

Chap. 16. — 24. Some one says, Does it
then make no difference, if two men, rooted
in like error and wickedness, be baptized
without change of life or heart, one without,
the other within the Church? I acknowledge
that there is a difference. For he is worse
who is baptized without, in addition to his
other sin, — not because of his baptism, how-
ever, but because he is without; for the evil
of division is in itself far from insignificant or
trivial. Yet the difference exists only if he
who is baptized within has desired to be with-
in not for the sake of any earthly or temporal
advantage, but because he has preferred the
unity of the Church spread throughout the
world to the divisions of schism; otherwise
he too must be considered among those who
are without. Let us therefore put the two
cases in this way. Let us suppose that the
one, for the sake of argument, held the same
opinions as Photinus'' about Christ, and was
baptized in his heresy outside the communion
of the Catholic Church; and that another held
the same opinion but was baptized in the
Catholic Church, believing that his view was
really the Catholic faith. I consider him as
not yet a heretic, unless, when the doctrine
of the Catholic faith is made clear to him, he
chooses to resist it, and prefers that which he
already holds; and till this is the case, it is
clear that he who was baptized outside is the
worse. And so in the one case erroneous
opinion alone, in the other the sin of schism
also, requires correction; but in neither of
them is the truth of the sacrament to be re-'
peated. But if any one holds the same view
as the first, and knows that it is only in heresy
severed from the Church that such a view is
taught or learned, but )'et for the sake of
some temporal emolument has desired to be
baptized in the Catholic unity, or, having
been already baptized in it, is unwilling on ac-
count of the said emolument to secede from
it, he is not only to be considered as seceding,
but his offense is aggravated, in so far as to
the error of heresy and the division of unity
he adds the deceit of hypocrisy. Wherefore
the depravity of each man, in proportion as it
is more dangerous and wanting in straight-
forwardness, must be corrected with the more
earnestness and energy; and yet, if he has
anything that is good in him, especially if it
be not of himself, but from God, we ought not
to think it of no value because of his deprav-
ity, or to be blamed like it, or to be ascribed
to it, rather than to His bountiful goodness,
who even to a soul that plays the harlot, and

4 Various Synods from 345 on anathematized Photinus, the
bishop of Sirmium. The two of Sirmium, 351 and 357, accused
him of constituting two Gods.

458

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book IV,

goes after her lovers, yet gives His bread,
and His wine, and His oil, and other food or
ornaments, which are neither from herself nor
from her lovers, but from Him who in com-
passion for her is even desirous to warn her
to whom she should return,'

Chap. 17. — 25. " Can the power of bap-
tism," says Cyprian, "be greater or better
than confession ? than martyrdom ? that a
man should confess Christ before men, and be
baptized in his .own blood? And yet," he
goes on to say, " neither does this baptism
profit the heretic, even though for confessing
Christ he be put to death outside the Church. "^
This is most true; for, by being put to death
outside the Chruch, he is proved not to have
had charity, of which the apostle says,
" Though I give my body to be burned, and
have not charity, it profiteth me nothing. "^
But if martyrdom is of no avail for this rea-
son, because it has not charity, neither does it
profit those who, as Paul says, and Cyprian
further sets forth, are living within the Church
without charity in envy and malice; and yet
they can both receive and transmit true bap-
tism. " Salvation," he says, " is not without
the Church."" Who says that it is? And
therefore, whatever men have that belongs to
the Church, it profits them nothing towards
salvation outside the Church. But it is one
thing not to have, another to have so as to be
of no use. He who has not must be baptized
that he may have; but he who has to no avail
must be corrected, that what he has may
profit him. Nor is the water in the baptism
of heretics " adulterous,"'* because neither is
the creature itself which God made evil, nor is
fault to be found with the words of the gospel
in the mouths of any who are astray; but the
fault is theirs in whom there is an adulterous
spirit, even though it may receive the adorn-
ment of the sacrament from a lawful spouse.
Baptism therefore can " be common to us,
and the heretics," ■* just as the gospel can be
common to us, whatever difference there may
be between our faith and their error, — whether
they think otherwise than the truth about the
Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit; or,
being cut away from unity, do not gather with
Christ, but scatter abroad, ^ — seeing that the
sacrament of baptism can be common to us,
if we are the wheat of the Lord, with the
covetous within the Church, and with rob-
bers, and drunkards, and other pestilent per-
sons of the same sort, of whom it is said,
"They shall not inherit the kingdom of
God,'' * and yet the vices by which they are

I Hos. ii. 5-8
4 Gyp. I.e.

= Cypr. E/>. Ixxiii. 21
5 Matt. xii. -io.

3 I Cor. xiii. 3.
6 I Cor. vi. 10.

separated from the kingdom of God are not
shared by us.

Chap. i8. — 26. Nor indeed, is it of here-
sies alone that the apostle says " that they
which do such things shall not inherit the
kingdom of God." But it may be worth
while to look for a moment at the things
which he groups together. " The works of
the flesh," he says "are manifest, which are
these; fornication, uncleanness, lascivious-
ness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance,
emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings,
and such like: of the which I tell you before,
as I have also told you in time past, that
they which do such things shall not inherit
the kingdom of God." ' Let us suppose some
one, therefore, chaste, continent, free from
covetousness, no idolater, hospitable, chari-
table to the needy, no man's enemy, not
contentious, patient, quiet, jealous of none,
envying none, sober, frugal, but a heretic;
it is of course clear to all that for this one
fault only, that he is a heretic, he will fail to
inherit the kingdom of God. Let us suppose
another, a fornicator, unclean, lascivious,
covetous, or even more openly given to idola-
try, a student of witchcraft, a lover of strife
and contention, envious, hot-tempered, sedi-
tious, jealous, drunken, and a reveller, but a
Catholic; can it be that for this sole merit,
that he is a Catholic, he will inherit the king-
dom of God, though his deeds are of the kind
of which the apostle thus concludes: "Of
the which I tell you before, as I have also
told you in time past, that they which do such
things shall not inherit the kingdom of God ? "
If we say this, we lead ourselves asti'ay. For
the word of God does not lead us astray,
which is neither silent, nor lenient, nor de-
ceptive through any flattery. Indeed, it
speaks to the same effect elsewhere: " For
this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor un-
clean person, nor covetous man, which is an
idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom
of Christ and of God. Let no man deceive
you with vain words. " * We have no reason,
therefore, to complain of the word of God.
It certainly says, and says openly and freely,
that those who live a wicked life have no
part in the kingdom of God.

Chap. 19. — 27. — Let us therefore not
flatter the Catholic who is hemmed in with all
these vices, nor venture, merely because he
is a Catholic Christian, to promise him the
impunity which holy Scripture does not prom-

7 Gal.

V. 19-21.

8 Eph. V. 5, 6.

Chap. XXL]

On baptism, against the dOnatists.

459

ise him; nor, if he has any one of the faults
above mentioned, ought we to promise him
a partnership in that heavenly land. For, in
writing to the Corinthians, the apostle enu-
merates the several sins, under each of which
it is implicitly understood that it shall not in-
herit the kingdom of God: " Be not deceived,
he says: " neither fornicators, nor idolaters,
nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of
themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor
covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor
extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of
God." ' He does not say, those who possess
all these vices together shall not inherit the
kingdom of God; but neither these nor those:
so that, as each is named, you may under-
stand that no one of them shall inherit the
kingdom of God. As, therefore, heretics
shall not possess the kingdom of God, so the
covetous shall not inherit the kingdom of
God. Nor can we indeed doubt that the
punishments themselves, with which they shall
be tortured who do not inherit the kingdom
of God, will vary in proportion to the differ-
ence of their offences, and that some will be
more severe than others; so that in the eter-
nal fire itself there will be different tortures in
the punishments, correspondmg to the differ-
ent weights of guilt. For indeed it was not
idly that the Lord said, " It shall be more
tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of
judgment than for thee."^ But yet, so far as
failing to inherit the kingdom of God is con-
cerned, it is just as certain, if you choose any
one of the less heinOus of these vices, as if
you choose more than one, or some one which
you saw was more atrocious; and because
those will inherit the kingdom of God whom
the Judge shall set on His right hand, and
for those who shall not be found worthy to
be set at the right hand nothing will remain
but to be at the left, no other announcement
is left for them to hear like goats from the
mouth of the Shepherd, except, " Depart
into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil
and his angels; "^ though in that fire, as I
said before, it may be that different punish-
ments will be awarded corresponding to the
difference of the sins.

Chap. 2c. — 28. But on the question whether
we ought to prefer a Catholic of the most
abandoned character to a heretic in whose
life, except that he is a heretic, men can find
nothing to blame, I do not venture to give a
hasty judgment. But if any one says, be-
cause he is a heretic, he cannot be this only
without other vices also following, — for he is

I Cor. vi. 9, 10

2 Matt. xi. 24.

3 Matt. XXV. 41.

carnal and natural, and therefore must be also
envious, and hot-tempered, and jealous, and
hostile to truth itself, and utterly estranged
from it, — let him fairly understand, that of
those other faults of which he is supposed to
have chosen some one less flagrant, a single
one cannot exist by itself in any man, because
he in turn is carnal and natural; as, to take
the case of drunkenness, which people have
now become accustomed to talk of not only
without horror, but with some degree of mer-
riment, can it possibly exist alone in any one
in whom it is found ? For what drunkard is
not also contentious, and hot-tempered, and
jealous, and at variance with all soundness of
counsel, and at grievous enmity with those
who rebuke him? Further, it is not easy for
him to avoid being a fornicator and adulterer,
though he may be no heretic; just as a heretic
may be no drunkard, nor adulterer, nor for-
nicator, nor lascivious, nor a lover of money,
or given to witchcraft, and cannot well be all
these together. Nor indeed is any one vice
followed by all the rest. Supposing, there-
fore, two men, — one a Catholic with all these
vices, the other a heretic free from all from
which a heretic can be free, — although they
do not both contend against the faith, and
yet each lives contrary to the faith, and each
is deceived by a vain hope, and each is far
removed from charity of spirit, and therefore
each is severed from connectioa with the body
of the one dove; why do we recognise in one
of them the sacrament of Christ, and not in
the other, as though it belonged to this or
that man, whilst really it is the same in both,
and belongs to God alone, and is good even
in the worst of men ? And if of the men who
have it, one is worse than another, it does
not follow that the sacrament which they have
is worse in the one than in the other, seeing
that neither in the case of two bad Catholics,
if one be worse than the other, does he pos-
sess a worse baptism, nor, if one of them be
good and another bad, is baptism bad in the
bad one and good in the good one; but it is
good in both. Just as the light of the sun,
or even of a lamp, is certainly not less bril-
liant when displayed to bad eyes than when
seen by better ones; but it is the same in the
case of both, although it either cheers or
hurts them differently according to the differ-
ence of their powers.

Chap. 21. — 29. With regard to the objec-
tion brought against Cyprian, that the cate-
chumens who were seized in martyrdom, and
slain for Christ's name's sake, received a
crown even without baptism, I do not quite
see what it has to do with the matter, unless,

460

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book IV.

indeed, they urged that heretics could much
more be admitted with baptism to Christ's
kingdom, to which catechumens were admitted
without it, since He Himself has said, " Ex-
cept a man be born of water and of the Spirit,
he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."'
Now, in this matter I do not hesitate for a
moment to place the Catholic catechumen,
who is burning with love for God, before the
baptized heretic; nor yet do we thereby do
dishonor to the sacrament of baptism which
the latter has already received, the former
not as yet; nor do we consider that the sacra-
ment of the catechumen - is to be preferred to
the sacrament of baptism, when we acknowl-
edge that some catechumens are better and
more faithful than some baptized persons.
For the centurion Cornelius, before baptism,
was better than Simon, who had been bap-
tized. For Cornelius, even before his bap-
tism, was filled with the Holy Spirit; ^ Simon,
even after baptism, was puffed up with an
unclean spirit." Cornelius, however, would
have been convicted of contempt for so holy a
sacrament, if, even after he had received the
Holy Ghost, he had refused to be baptized.
But when he was baptized, he received in no
wise a better sacrament than Simon; but the
different merits of the men were made mani-
fest under the equal holiness of the same sac-
rament— so true is it that the good or ill de-
serving of the#recipient does not increase or
diminish the holiness of baptism. But as
baptism is wanting to a good catechumen to
his receiving the kingdom of heaven, so true
conversion is wanting to a bad man though
baptized. For He who said, " Except a man
be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot
enter into the kingdom of God," said also
Himself, "except your righteousness shall
exceed the righteousness of the scribes and
Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the
kingdom of heaven." ^ For that the righteous-
ness of the catechumens might not feel secure,
it is written, " Except a man be born again of
water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into
the kingdom of God." And again, that the
unrighteousness of the baptized might not feel
secure because they had received baptism, it
is written, " Except your righteousness shall

^ John iii. 5.

2 Another readinir, of less authority, is, ''^ Ait't catechtimeno
sacramentum baptisini pra'/eroiduin putavms." This does
not suit the sense of the passage, and probably sprung from want
of knowledge of the meaning of the ' ' catechumen's sacrament."
It is mentioned in the Council of Carthage, a.d. 397, as " the sacra-
ment of salt" (cap. 5). Augustin (dc Pcccat. Meritis^ ii. c. 26), says
that '■ what the catechumens receive, though it be not the body of
Christ, yet is holy, more holy than the food whereby our bodies
are sustained, because it is a sacrament." — Cp. de Catech. Rudi-
bus, c. 26 [Bened.]. It appears to have been only a taste of salt,
given them as the emblem of purity and incorruption. See Kmg-
ham, Orig. EccUs, Book x. c. ii. 16.

3 Acts X. 44. ■ 4 Acts viii. 13, iS, 19. 5 l\Iatt. v. 20.

exceed the righteousness of the scribes and
Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the
kingdom of heaven." The one were too
little without the other; the two make perfect
the heir of that inheritance. As, then, we
ought not to depreciate a man's righteousness,
which begins to exist before he is joined to
the Church, as the righteousness of Cor-
nelius began to exist before he was in the
body of Christian men, — which righteousness
was not thought worthless, or the angel would
not have said to him, *' Thy prayers and thine
alms are come up as a memorial before God; "
nor did it yet suffice for his obtaining the
kingdom of heaven, or he would not have
been told to send to Peter,* — so neither ought
we to depreciate the sacrament of baptism,
even though it has been received outside the
Church, But since it is of no avail for salva-
tion unless he who has baptism indeed in full
perfection be incorporated into the Church,
correcting also his own depravity, let us there-
fore correct the error of the heretics, that we
may recognize what in them is not their own
but Christ's.

Chap. 22. — 30. That the place of baptism
is sometimes supplied by martyrdom is sup-
ported by an argument by no means trivial,
which the blessed Cyprian adduces ^ from the
thief, to whom, though he was not baptized, it
was yet said, " To-day shalt thou be with me
in Paradise."^ On considering which, again
and again, I find that not only martyrdom for
the sake of Christ may supply what was want-
ing of baptism, but also faith and conversion
of heart, if recourse may not be had to the
celebration of the mystery of baptism for
want of time. 5 For neither was that thief
crucified for the name of Christ, but as the
reward of his own deeds; nor did he suffer
because he believed, but he believed while
suffering. It was shown, therefore, in the
case of that thief, how great is the power,
even without the visible sacrament of bap-
tism, of what the apostle says, "With the
heart man believeth unto righteousness, and
with the mouth confession is made unto sal-
vation." " But the want is supplied invisibly
only when the administration of baptism is
prevented, not by contempt for religion, but
by the necessity of the moment. For much
more in the case of Cornelius and his friends,
than in the case of that robber, might it seem
superfluous that they should also be baptized
with water, seeing that in them the gift of the
Holy Spirit, t\'hich, according to the testi-

6 Acts X. 4, 5. 7 Cypr. Ep. Ixxiii. 22. * Luke xxiii. 43.

9 In Retract, ii. 18, Augustin e.xpresses a doubt whether the
thief may not have been baptized.

10 Rom. X, ID.

Chap. XXIV.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

461

mony of holy Scripture, was received by other
rnen only after baptism, had made itself mani-
fest by every unmistakable sign apppropriate
to those times when they spoke with tongues.
Yet they were baptized, and for this action
we have the authority of an apostle as the
warrant. So far ought all of us to be from
being induced by any imperfection in the inner
man, if it so happen that before baptism a
person has advanced, through the workings of
a pious heart, to spiritual understanding, to
despise a sacrament which is applied to the
body by the hands of the minister, but which
is God's own means for working spiritually a
man's dedication to Himself. Nor do I con-
ceive that the function of baptizing was as-
signed to John, so that it should be called
John's baptism, for any other reason except
that the Lord Himself, who had appointed it,
in not disdaining to receive the baptism of
His serv'ant,' might consecrate the path of
humility, and show most plainly by such an
action how high a value was to be placed on
His own baptism, with which He Himself was
afterwards to baptize. For He saw, like an
excellent physician of eternal salvation, that
overweening pride would be found in some,
who, having made such progress in the under-
standing of the truth and in uprightness of
character that they would not hesitate to place
themselves, both in life and knowledge, above
many that were baptized, would think it was
unnecessary for them to be baptized, since
they felt that they had attained a frame of
mind to which many that were baptized were
still only endeavoring to raise themselves.

Chap. 23. — 31. But what is the precise
value of the sanctification of the sacrament
(which that thief did not receive, not from
any want of will on his part, but because it
was unavoidably omitted) and what is the
effect on a man of its material application, it
is not ecsy to say. Still, had it not been of
tiie greatest value, the Lord would not have
received the baptism of a servant. But since
we must look at it in itself, without entering
upon the question of the salvation of the re-
cipient, which it is intended to work, it shows
clearly enough that both in the bad, and in 1
ose who renounce the world in word and
)t in deed, it is itself complete, though they
' annot receive salvation unless they amend
j their lives. But as in the thief, to whom the
material administration of the sacrament was
necessarily wanting, the salvation was com- 1
I plete, because it was spiritually present \
I through his piety, so, when the sacrament

■ Matt. iii. 6, 13.

itself is present, salvation is complete, if what
the thief possessed be unavoidably wanting.
And this is the firm tradition of the universal
Church, in respect of the baptism of infants,
who certainly are as yet unable "with the
heart to believe unto rignteousness, and with
the mouth to make confession unto salva-
tion,'^ as the thief could do; nay, who even,
by crying and moaning when the mystery is
performed upon them, raise their voices in
opposition to the mysterious words, and yet
no Christian will say that they are baptized to
no purpose.

Chap. 24. — 32. And if any one seek for
divine authority in this matter, though what
is held by the whole Church, and that not as
instituted by Councils, but as a matter of in-
variable custom, is rightly held to have been
handed down by apostolical authority, still we
can form a true conjecture of the value of the
sacrament of baptism in the case of infants,
from the parallel of circumcision, which was
received by God's earlier people, and before
receiving which Abraham was justified, as
Cornelius also was enriched with. the gift of
the Holy Spirit before he was baptized. Yet
the apostle says of Abraham himself, that
" he received the sign of circumcision, a seal
of the righteousness of the faith,'' having al-
ready believed in his heart, so that " it was
counted unto him for righteousness." ^ Why,
therefore, was it commanded him that he
should circumcise every male child in order
on the eighth day,^ though it could not yet be-
lieve with the heart, that it should be counted
unto it for righteousness, because the sacra-
ment in itself was of great avail? And this
was made manifest by the message of an
angel in the case of Moses' son; for when he
was carried by his mother, being yet uncir-
cumcised, it was required, by manifest present
peril, that he should be circumcised, •• and
when this was done, the danger of death was
removed. As therefore in Abraham the justi-
fication of faith came first, and circumcision
was added afterwards as the seal of faith; so
in Cornelius the spiritual sanctification came
first in the gift of the Holy Spirit, and the
sacrament of regeneration was added after-
wards in the laver of baptism. And as in
Isaac, who was circumcised on the eighth day
after his birth, the seal of this righteousness
of faith was given first, and afterwards, as he
imitated the faith of his father, the righteous-
ness itself followed as he grew up, of which
the seal had been given before when he was
an infant; so in infants, who are baptized,

2 Rom. iv. II, 3.

i Gen. xvii. 9-14.

4 Ex. iv. 24-26.

462

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[I]f)OK IV.

the sacrament of regeneration is given first,
and if they maintain a Christian piety, con-
version also in the heart will follow, of which
the mysterious sign had gone before in the
outward body. And as in the thief the
gracious goodness of the Almighty supplied
what had been wanting in the sacrament of
baptism, because it had been missing not from
pride or contempt, but -from want of oppor-
tunity; so in infants who die baptized, we
must believe that the same grace of the Al-
mighty supplies the want, that, not from per-
versity of will, but from insufficiency of age,
they can neither believe with the heart unto
righteousness, nor make confession with the
mouth unto salvation. Therefore, when
others take the vows for them, that the cele-
bration of the sacrament may be complete in
their behalf, it is unquestionably of avail for
their dedication to God, because they cannot
answer for themselves. But if another were
to answer for one who could answer for him-
self, it would not be of the same avail. In
accordance with which rule, we find in the
gospel what strikes every one as natural when
he reads it, " He is of age, he shall speak
for himself."'

Chap. 25. — 33. By all these considerations
it is proved that the sacrament of baptism is
one thing, the conversion of the heart an-
other; but that man's salvation is made com-
plete through the two together. Nor are we
to suppose that, if one of these be wanting,
it necessarily follows that the other is want-
ing also; because the sacrament may exist in
the infant without the conversion of the heart;
and this was found to be possible without the
sacrament in the case of the thief, God in
either case filling up what was involuntarily

I John ix. 21.

wanting

But when either of these requisites
is wanting intentionally, then the man is re-
sponsible for the omission. And baptism
may exist when the conversion of the heart is
wanting; but, with respect to such conver-
sion, it may indeed be found when baptism
has not been received, but never when it has
been despised. Nor can there be said in any
way to be a turning of the heart to God when
the sacrament of God is treated with con-
tempt. Therefore we are right in censuring,
anathematizing, abhorring, and abominating
the perversity of heart shown by heretics;
yet it does not follow that they have not the
sacrament of the gospel, because they have
not what makes it of avail. Wherefore, when
they come to the true faith, and by penitence
seek remission of their sins, we are not flatter-
ing or deceiving them, when we instruct them
by heavenly discipline for the kingdom of
heaven, correcting and reforming in them
their errors and perverseness, to the intent
that we may by no means do violence to what
is sound in them, nor, because of man's fault,
declare that anything which he may have in
him from God is either valueless or faulty.

Chap. 26. — 34. A few things still remain
to be noticed in the epistle to Jubaianus; but
since these will raise the question both of the
past custom, of the Church and of the bap-
tism of John, which is wont to excite no small
doubt in those who pay slight attention to a
matter which is sufficiently obvious, seeing
that those who had received the baptism of
John were commanded by the apostle to be
baptized again, ^ they are not to be treated in
a liast}^ manner, and had better be reserved
for another book, that the dimensions of this
may not be inconveniently large.

= Acts xix. 3-5.

BOOK V.

HE EXAMINES THE LAST PART OF THE EPISTLE OF CYPRIAN TO JUBAIANUS, TOGETHER WITH
HIS EPISTLE TO QUINTUS, THE LETTER OF THE AFRICAN SYNOD TO THE NUMIDIAN

BISHOPS, AND Cyprian's epistle to pompeius.

Chap, i, — i. We have the testimony of
the blessed Cyprian, that the custom of the
Cathohc Church is at present retained, when
men coming from the side of heretics or
schismatics, if they have received baptism as
consecrated in the words of the gospel, are
not baptized afresh. For he himself pro-
posed to himself the question, and that as
coming from the mouth of brethren either
seeking the truth or contending for the truth.
For in the course of the arguments by which
he wished to show that heretics should be
baptized again, which we have sufficiently
considered for our present purpose in the
former books, he says: " But some will say,
What then will become of those who in times
past, coming to the Church from heresy, were
admitted without baptism ? " ' In this ques-
tion is involved the shipwreck of the whole
cause of the Donatists, with whom our con-
test is on this point. For if those had not
really baptism who were thus received on
coming from heretics, and their sins were still
upon them, then, when such men wer,e ad-
mitted to communion, either by those who
came before Cyprian or by Cyprian himself,
we must acknowledge that one of two things
occurred, — either that the Church perished
; then and there from the pollution of com-
munion with such men, or that any one abid-
' ing in unity is not injured by even the notori-
ous sins of other men. But since they cannot
bay that the Church then perished through
I the contamination arising from communion
I with those who, as Cyprian says, were ad-
I mitted into it without baptism — for otherwise
' they cannot maintain the validity of their own
j origin if the Church then perished, seeing
'that the list of consuls proves that more than
fi)rty years elapsed between the martyrdom

' Cypr. 77/. Ixxiii. ad Jtibaian. 23.

of Cyprian and the burning of the sacred
books,- from which they took occasion to
make a schism, spreading abroad the smoke
of their calumnies, — it therefore is left for
them to acknowledge that the unity of Christ
is not polluted by any such communion, even
with known offenders. And, after this con-
fession, they will be unable to discover any
reason which will justify them in maintaining
that they were bound to separate from the
churches of the whole world, which, as we
read, were equally founded by the apostles,
seeing that, while the others could not have
perished from any admixture of offenders, of
whatsoever kind, they, though they would not
have perished if they had remained in unity
with them, brought destruction on themselves
in schism, by separating themselves from their
brethren, and breaking the bond of peace.
For the sacrilege of schism is most clearly
evident in them, if they had no sufficient cause
for separation. And it is clear that there was
no sufficient cause for separation, if even the
presence of notorious offenders cannot pollute
the good while they abide in unity. But that
the good, abiding in unity, are not polluted
even by notorious offenders, we teach on the
testimony of Cyprian, who says that " men
in past times, coming to the Church from
heresy, were admitted without baptism;"
and yet, if the wickedness of their sacrilege,
which was still upon them, seeing it had not
been purged away by baptism, could not pol-
lute and destroy the holiness of the Church,
it cannot perish by any infection from wickecl
men. Wherefore, if they allow that Cyprian
spoke the truth, they are convicted of schism
on his testimony; if they maintain that he
does not speak truth, let them not use his
testimony on the question of baptism.

= See below, Book VII. c. 2, 3.

464

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book V.

Chap. 2. — 2. But now that we have begun
a disputation with a man of peace like Cyprian,
let us go on. For when he had brought an
objection against himself, which he knew was
urged by his brethren, "What then will be-
come of those who in times past, coming to
the Church from heresy, were admitted with-
out baptism? The Lord," he answers, "is
able of His mercy to grant indulgence, and
not to separate from the gifts of His Church
those who, being admitted in all honesty to
His Church, have fallen asleep within the
Church."' Well indeed has he assumed that
charity can cover the multitude of sins. But
if they really had baptism, and this were not
rightly perceived by those who thought that
they should be baptized again, that error was
covered by the charity of unity so long as it
contained, not the discord and spirit of the
devil, but merely human infirmity, until, as
the apostle says, " if they were otherwise
minded, the Lord should reveal it to them.''^"
But woe unto those who, being torn asunder
from unity by a sacrilegious rupture, either
rebaptize, if baptism exists with both us and
them, or do not baptize at all, if baptism exist
in the Catholic Church only. Whether, there-
fore, they rebaptize, or fail to baptize, they
are not in the bond of peace; wherefore let
them apply a remedy to which they please of
these two w^ounds. But if we admit to the
Church without baptism, we are of the num-
ber of those who, as Cyprian has assumed,
may receive pardon because they preserved
unity. But if (as is, I think, already clear
from what has been said in the earlier books)
Christian baptism can preserve its integrity
even amid the perversity of heretics, then
even ttiough any in those times did rebaptize,
yet without departing from the bond of unity,
they might still attain to pardon in virtue of
that same love of peace, through which
Cyprian bears witness that those admitted
even without baptism might obtain that they
should not be separated from the gifts of the
Church. Further, if it is true that with here-
tics and schismatics the baptism of Christ
does not exist, how much less could the sins
of others hurt those who were fixed in unity,
if even men's own sirfs were forgiven when
they came to it even without baptism ! For
if, according to Cyprian, the bond of unity is
of such efficacy, how could they be hurt by
other men's sins, who were unwilling to sepa-
rate themselves from unity, if even the un-
baptized, who wished to come to it from
heresy, thereby escaped the destruction due
to their own sins .''

Chap.

saymg-

' Cypr. Ej>. Ixxiii. 23.

Phil.

3. — 3. But in what Cyprian adds,
j3. Nor yet because men once have
erred must there be always error, since it
rather befits wise and God-fearing men gladly
and unhesitatingly to follow truth, when it is
clearly laid before their eyes, than obstinately
and persistently to fight for heretics against
their brethren and their fellow-priests,^' ^ he
is uttering the most perfect truth; and the
man who resists the manifest truth is oppos-
ing himself rather than his neighbors. But,
so far as I can judge, it is perfectly clear and
certain, from the many arguments which I
have already adduced, that the baptism of
Christ cannot be invalidated even by the per-
versity of heretics, when it is given or re-
ceived among them. But, granting that it is
not yet certain, at any rate no one who has
considered what has been said, even from a
hostile point of view, will assert that the ques-
tion has been decided the other way. There-
fore we are not striving against manifest truth,
but either, as I think, we are striving in be-
half of what is clearly true, or, at any rate, as
those may hold who think that the question
has not yet been solved, we are seeking for
the truth. And therefore, if the truth be
other than we think, yet we are receiving
those baptized by heretics with the same
honesty of heart with which those received
them whom, Cyprian supposed, in virtue of
their cleaving to the unity of the Church, to
be capable of pardon. But if the baptism of
Christ, as is indicated by the many arguments
used above, can retain its integrity amid any
defect either of life or faith, whether on the
part of those who seem to be within, and yet
do not belong to the members of the one dbve,
or on the part of those whose severance from
her extends to being openly without, then
those who sought its repetition in those former
days deserved the same pardon for their
charity in clinging to unity, which Cyprian
thought that those deserved for charity of the
same kind whom he believed to have been
admitted without baptism. They therefore
who, without any cause (since, as Cyprian
himself shows, the bad cannot hurt the good
in the unity of the Church), have cut them-
selves off from the charity which is shown in
this unity, have lost all place of pardon, and
whilst they would incur destruction by the
very crime of schism, even though they did
not rebaptize those who had been baptized in
the Catholic Church, of how bitter punish-
ment are they deserving, who are either en-
deavoring to give to the Catholics \vho have
it what Cyprian affirms that they themselves

I Cypr. Ep. Ixxiii. 23.

Chai'. v.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

465

have not, or, as is clear from the facts of the
case, are bringing as a charge against the
Catholic Church that she has not what even
they themselves possess ?

Chap. 4. — 4. But since now, as I said be-
fore, we have begun a disputation with the
epistles of Cyprian, I think that I should not
seem even to him, if he were present, " to
be contending obstinately and persistently in
defense of heretics against my brethren and
my fellow-priests," when he learned the
powerful reasons which move us to believe
that even among heretics, who are perversely
obstinate in their malignant error, the bap-
tism of Christ is yet in itself most holy, and
most highly to be reverenced. And seemg
that he himself, whose testimony has such
weight with us, bears witness that they were
wont in past times to be admitted without a
second baptism, I would have any one, who
is induced by Cyprian's arguments to hold it
as certain that heretics ought to be baptized
afresh, yet consider that those who, on ac-
count of weight of the arguments on the other
side, are not as yet persuaded that this should
be so, hold the same place as those in past
time, who in all honesty admitted men who
were baptized in heresy on the simple correc-
tion of their individual error, and who were
capable of salvation with them in virtue of
the bond of unity. And let any one, who is
led by the past custom of the Church, and
by the subsequent authority of a plenary
Council, and by so many powerful proofs
from holy Scripture, and by much evidence
from Cyprian himself, and by the clear rea-
soning of truth, to understand that the bap-
tism of Christ, consecrated in the words of
the gospel, cannot be perverted by the error
of any man on earth, — let such an one under-
stand, that they who then thought otherwise,
but yet preserved their charity, can be saved
by the same bond of unity. And herein he
should also understand of those who, in the
society of the Church dispersed throughout

e world, could not have been defiled by any
tares, by any chaff, so long as they themselves
desired to be fruitful corn, and who therefore
severed themselves from the same bond of

.ity without any cause for the divorce, that
i.iL any rate, whichever of the two opinions be
|true, — that which Cyprian then held, or that
I which was maintained by the universal voice
iof the Catholic Church, which Cyprian did
Inot abandon, — in either case they, having
Imost openly placed themselves outside in the
Iplain sacrilege of schism, cannot possibly be
'saved, and all that they possess of the holy
sacraments, and of the free gifts of the one

legitimate Bridegroom, is of avail, while they
continue what they are, for their confusion
rather than the salvation of their souls.

CH.A.P. 5. — 5. Wherefore, even if heretics
should be truly anxious to correct their error
and come to the Church, for the very reason
that they believed that they had no baptism
unless they received it in the Church, even
under these circumstances we should not be
bound to yield to their desire for the repeti-
tion of baptism; but ratiier they should be
taught, on the one hand, that baptism, though
perfect in itself, could in no way profit their
perversity if they would not submit to be cor-
rected; and, on the other hand, that the per-
fection of baptism could not be impaired by
their perversity, while refusing to be cor-
rected: and again, that no further perfection
is added to baptism in them because they are
submitting to correction; but that, while they
themselves are quitting their iniquity, that
which was before wittiin them to their destruc-
tion is now beginning to be of profit for sal-
vation. For, learning this, they will both
recognize the need of salvation in Catholic
unity, and will cease to claim as their own
what is really Christ's, and will not confound
the sacrament of truth, although existing in
themselves, with their own individual error.

6. To this we may add a further reason,
that men, by a sort of hidden inspiration from
heaven, shrink from any one who for the
second time receives baptism which he had
already received in any quarter whatsoever,
insomuch that the very heretics themselves,
when their arguments start with that subject,
rub their forehead in perplexity, and almost
all their laity, even those who have grown old
in their body, and have conceived an obstinate
animosity against the Catholic Church, confess
that this one point in their system displeases
them; and many who, for the sake of gaining
some secular advantage, or avoiding some
disadvantage, wish to secede to them, strive
with many secret efforts that they may have
granted to them, as a peculiar and individual
privilege, that they should not be rebaptized;
and some, who are led to place credence in
their other vain delusions and false accusa-
tions against the Catholic Church, are recalled
to unity by this one consideration, that they
are unwilling to associate with them lest they
should be compelled to be rebaptized. And
the Donatists, through fear of this feeling,
which has so thorough possession of all men's
hearts, have consented to acknowledge the
baptism which was conferred among the fol-
lowers of Maximianus, whom they had con-
demned, and so to cut short their own tongues

466

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book V.

and close their mouths, in preference to bap-
tizing again so many men of the people of
Musti, and Assurae, and other districts, whom
they received with Felicianus and Praetexta-
tus, and the others who had been condemned
by them and afterwards returned to them.

Chap. 6. — 7. For when this is done oc-
casionally in the case of individuals, at great
intervals of time and space, the enormity of
the deed is not equally felt; but if all were
suddenly to be brought together who had been
baptized in course of time by the aforesaid fol-
lowers of Maximianus, either under pressure
of the peril of death or at their Easter
solemnities, and it were told them that they
must be baptized again, because what they
had already received in the sacrilege of schism
was null and void, they might indeed say what
obstinate perseverance in their error would
compel them to say, that they might hide the
rigor and iciness of their hardness under any
kind of false shade of consistency against the
warmth of truth. But in fact, because the
party of Maximianus could not bear this, and
because the very men who would have to en-
force it could not endure what must needs
have been done in the case of so many men
at once, especially as those very men would
be rebaptizing them in the party of Primianus
who had already baptized them in the party
of Maximianus, for these reasons their bap-
tism was received, and the pride of the Dona-
tists was cut short. And this course they
would certainly not have chosen to adopt, had
they not thought that more harm would have
been done to their cause by the offense men
would have taken at the repetition of the bap-
tism, than by the reputation lost in abandon-
ing their defense. And this I would not say
with any idea that we ought to be restrained
by consideration of human feelings, if the
truth compelled those who came from heretics
to be baptized afresh. But because the holy
Cyprian says, " that heretics might have been
all the more impelled to the necessity of com-,
ing over, if only they were to be rebaptized in
the Catholic Church," ' on this account I have
wished to place on record the intensity of the
repugnance to this act which is seated deeply
in the heart of nearly every one, — a repug-
nance which I can believe was inspired by
God Himself, that the Church might be forti-
fied by the instinct of repugnance against any
possible arguments which the weak cannot
dispel.

Chap. 7. — 8. Truly, when I look at the

1 Cypr. Ep. Ixxiii. 24.

actual words of Cyprian, I am warned to say
some things which are very necessary for the
solution of this question. " For if they were
to see,'' he says, " that it was settled and es-
tablished by our formal decision and vote,
that the baptism with which they are baptized
in heresy is considered just and lawful, they
will think that they are in just and lawful
possession of the Church also, and all its other
gifts."- He does not say "that they will
think they are in possession," but "in just
and lawful possession of the gifts of the
Church.'' But we say that we cannot allow
that they are in just and la-iofid possession of
baptism. That they are in possession of it
we cannot deny, when we recognize the sacra-
ment of the Lord in the words of the gospel.
They have therefore lawful baptism, but they
do not have it lawfully. For whosoever has
it both in Catholic unity, and living worthily
of it, both has lawful baptism and has it law-
fully; but whosoever has it either within the
Catholic Church itself, as chaff mixed with
the wheat, or outside, as chaff carried away
by the wind, has indeed lawful baptism, but
not lawfully. For he has it as he uses it.
But the man does not use it lawfully who uses
it against the law, — which every one does,
who, being baptized, yet leads an abandoned
life, whether inside or without the Church.

Chap 8. — 9. Wherefore, as the apostle said
of the law, " The law is good, if a man use it
lawfully," 3 so we may fairly say of baptism.
Baptism is good, if a man use it lawfully.
And as they who used the law unlawfully
could not in that case cause that it should not
be in itself good, or make it null and void, so
any one who uses baptism unlawfully, either
because he lives in heresy, or because he' lives
the worst of lives, yet cannot cause that the
baptism should be otherwise than good, or
altogether null and void. And so, when he is
converted either to Catholic unity, or to a
mode of living worthy of so great a sacrament,
he begins to have not another and a lawful
baptism, but that same baptism in a lawful
manner. Nor does the remission of irrevo-
cable sins follow on baptism, uniess a man
not only have lawful baptism, but have it
lawfully; and yet it does not follow that if a
man have it not lawfully, so that his sins are
either not remitted, or, being remitted, are
brought on him again, therefore the sacra-
ment of baptism should be in the baptized
person either bad or null and void. For as
Judas, to whom the Lord gave a morsel, gave
a place within himself of the devi'i, not by re-

■^Ib.

3 I Tim. 1. 8.

Chap. IX.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

467

ceiving what was bad, but by receiving it
badly/ so each person, on receiving the sacra-
ment of the Lord, does not cause that it is
bad because he is bad himself, or that he has
received nothing because he has not received
it to salvation. For it was none the less the
body of the Lord and the blood of the Lord,
even in those to whom the apostle said, " He
that eateth unworthily, eateth and drinketh
damnation to himself."- Let the heretics
therefore seek in the Catholic Church not
what they have, but what they have not, —
that is, the end of the commandment, without
which many holy things may be possessed,
but they cannot profit. " Now, the end of
the commandment is charity out of a pure
heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith
unfeiofned." 3 Let them therefore hasten to
the unity and truth of the Catholic Church,
not that they may have the sacrament of
washing, if they have been already bathed in
it, although in heresy, but that they may have
it to their health.

Chap. 9. — 10. Now we must see what is
said of the baptism of John. For " we read
in the Acts of the Apostles, that those who
had already been baptized with the baptism
of John were yet baptized by Paul," " simply
because the baptism of John was not the bap-
tism of Christ, but a baptism allowed by
Christ to John, so as to be called especially
John's baptism; as the same John says, "A
man can receive nothing, except it be given
him from heaven, "s And that he might not
possibly seem to receive this from God the
Father in such wise as not to receive it from
the Son, speaking presently of Christ Him-
self, he says, "Of His fullness have all we
received."'^ But by the grace of a certain
dispensation John received this, which was to
last not for long, but only long enough to
prepare for the Lord the way in which he
must needs be the forerunner. And as our
Lord was presently to enter on this way with
all humility, and to lead those who humbly
followed Him to perfection, as He washed the
feet of His servants,^ so was He willing to be
baptized with the baptism of a servant.* For
as He set Himself to minister to the feet of
those whose guide He was Himself, so He
submitted Himself to the gift of John which
He Himself had given, that all might under-
stand what sacrilegious arrogance they would
show in despising the baptism which they
ought each of them to receive from the Lord,
when the Lord Himself accepted what He

' John xiii. 27. - i Cor. xi. 29. 3 i Tim. i. 5.

4 Cypr. A/. Ixxiii. 24; Acts xix. 3-5. 5 John iii. 27.

<> John i. 16. 7 John xiii. 4, 5. 8 Matt. iii. 13.

Himself had bestowed upon a servant, that
he might give it as his own; and that when
John, than whom no greater had arisen among
them that are born of women,' bore such testi-
mony to Christ, as to confess that he was not
worthy to unloose the latchet of His shoe,"
Christ might both, by receiving his baptism,
be found to be the humblest among men,
and, by taking away the place for the bap-
tism of John, be believed to be the most high
God, at once the teacher of humility and the
giver of exaltation.

II. For to none of the prophets, to no one
at all in holy Scripture, do we read that it was
granted to baptize in the water of repentance
for the remission of sins, as it was granted
to John; that, causing the hearts of the
people to hang upon him through this mar-
vellous grace, he might prepare in them the
way for Him whom he declared to be so in-
finitely greater than himself. But the Lord
Jesus Christ cleanses His Church by such a
baptism that on receiving it no other is re-
quired; while John gave a first washing with
such a baptism that on receiving it there was
further need of the baptism of the Lord, — not
that the first baptism should be repeated, but
that the baptism of Christ, for whom he was
preparing the way, might be further bestowed
on those who had received the baptism of
John. For if Christ's humility were not to
be commended to our notice, neither would
there be any need of the baptism of John;
again, if the end were in John, after his bap-
tism there would be no need of the baptism
of Christ. But because "Christ is the end
of the law for righteousness to every one that
believeth,"" it was shown by John to whom
men should go, and in whom, when they had
reached Him, they should rest. The same,
John, therefore, set forth both the exalted
nature of the Lord, when he placed Him far
before himself, and His humility, when he
baptized Him as the lowest of the people.
But if John had baptized Christ alone, he
would be thought to have been the dispenser
of a better baptism, in that with which Christ
alone was baptized, than the baptism of Christ
with which Christians are baptized; and again,
if all ought to be baptized first with the bap-
tism of John, and then with that of Christ,
the baptism of Christ would deservedly seem
to be lacking in fullness and perfection, as not
sufficing for salvation. Wherefore the Lord
was baptized with the baj^tism of John, that
He might bend the proud necks of men to
His own health-giving baptism; and He was
not alone baptized with it, lest He should

9Nfatt. xi. II.

' John i.

27-

" Rom. X. 4.

468

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book V. f

show His own to be inferior to this, with
which none but He Himself had deserved to
be baptized; and He did not allow it to con-
tinue longer, lest the one baptism with which
He baptizes might seem to need the other to
precede it.

Chap. io. — 12. I ask, therefore, if sins
were remitted by the baptism of John, what
more could the baptism of Christ confer on
those whom the Apostle Paul desired to be
baptized with the baptism of Christ after they
had received the baptism of John ? But if
sins were not remitted by the baptism of
John, were those men in the days of Cyprian
better than Jonn, of whom he says himself
that they "used to seize on estates by
treacherous frauds, and increase their gains
by accumulated usuries,'" through whose
administration of baptism the remission of
sins was yet conferred ? Or was it because
they were contained within the unity of the
Church ? What then ? Was John not con-
tamed within that unity, the friend of the
Bridegroom, the preparer of the way of the
Lord, the baptizer of the Lord Himself?
Who will be mad enough to assert this ?
Wherefore, although my belief is that John
so baptized with the water of repentance for
the remission of sins, that those who were
baptized by him received the expectation of
the remission of their sins, the actual remis-
sion taking place in the baptism of the Lord,
— just as the resurrection which is expected
at the last day is fulfilled in hope in us, as
the apostle says, that " He hath raised us up
together, and made us sit together in heavenly
places in Christ Jesus; ''"" and again, "For
we are saved by hope;"^ or as again John
himself, while he says, " I indeed baptize
you with water unto repentance, for the re-
mission of your sins,'*'* yet says, on seeing
our Lord, " Behold the Lamb of God, which
taketh away the sin of the world, ''s — never-
theless I am not disposed to contend vehe-
mently against any one who maintains that
sins were remitted even in the baptism of
John, but that some fuller sanctification was
conferred by the baptism of Christ on those
whom Paul ordered to be baptized anew.*^

Chap. ii. — 13. For we must look at the
point which especially concerns the matter
before us (whatever be the nature of the bap-
tism of John, since it is clear that he belongs
to the unity of Christ), viz., what is the rea-
son for which it was right that men should be

' Cypr. Serm. de Lapsis^ c. vi.
3 Rom. viii. 24,
5 John i. 29.

2 Eph. ii. 6.
4 Matt. iii. ii.
6 Acts xi.\. 3-5.

baptized again after receiving the baptism of
the holy John, and why they ought not to be
baptized again after receiving the baptism of
the covetous bishops. For no one denies that
in the Lord's field John was as wheat, bear-
ing an hundred-fold, if that be the highest
rate of increase; also no one doubts that
covetousness, which is idolatry, is reckoned
in the Lord's harvest among the chaff. Why
then is a man baptized again after receiving
baptism from the wheat, and not after receiv-
ing it from the chaff? If it was because he
was better than John that Paul baptized after
John, why did not also Cyprian baptize after
his usurious colleagues, than whom he was
better beyond all comparison? If it was be-
cause they were in unity with him that he did
not baptize after such colleagues, neither
ought Paul to have baptized after John, be-
cause they were joined together in the same
unity. Can it be that defrauders and extor-
tioners belong to the members of that one
dove, and that he does not belong to it to
whom the full power of the Lord Jesus Christ
was shown by the appearance of the Holv
Spirit in the form of a dove?^ Truly he be-
longs most closely to it; but the others, wh"
must be separated from it either by the occa-
sion of some scandal, or by the winnowing ar
the last day, do not by any means belong to
it, and yet baptism was repeated after John
and not after them. What then is the cause,
except that the baptism which Paul orderetl
them to receive was not the same as that which
was given at the hands of John ? And so in
the same unity of the Church, the baptism of
Christ cannot be repeated though it be given
by an usurious minister; but those who re-
ceive the baptism of John, even from the
hands of John Himself, ought to be after-
wards baptized with the baptism of Christ.

Chap. 12. — 14. Accordingly, I too might
use the words of the blessed Cyprian to turn
the hearts of those that hear me to the con-
sideration of something truly marvellous, if I
were to say "that John, who was accounted
greater among the prophets, — he who was
filled with divine grace while yet in his
mother's womb; he who was upheld in the
spirit and power of Elias; who was not the
adversary, but a forerunner and herald of the
Lord; who not only foretold our Lord in
words, but also showed Him to the sight; who
baptized Christ Himself, through whom all
others are baptized," ^ — he was not worthy to
baptize in such wise that those who were bap-
tized by him should not be baptized again

7 Matt. ill. 16; John i.

8 Cypr. F.p. Ixxiii. 25.

Chap. XIV.]

ON BAPTISM. AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

469

after him; and shall no one think that a man
should be baptized in the Church after he had
been baptized by the covetous, by defrauders,
by extortioners, by usurers? Is not the an-
swer ready to this invidious question. Why
do you think this unmeet, as though either
John were dishonored, or the covetous man
honored ? But His baptism ought not to be
repeated, of whom John says, " The same is
He which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost." '
For whoever be the minister by whose hands
it is given, it is His baptism of whom it was
said, "The same is He which baptizeth."
But neither was the baptism of John himself
repeated, when the Apostle Paul commanded
those who had been baptized by him to be
baptized in Christ. For what they had not
received from the friend of the Bridegroom,
this it was right that they should receive from
the Bridegroom Himself, of whom that friend
had said, "The same is He which baptizeth
with the Holy Ghost."

Chap. 13. — 15. For the Lord Jesus might,
if He had so thought fit, have given the power
of His baptism to some one or more of His
chief servants, whom He had alreadv made
His friends, such as those to whom He says,
"Henceforth I call you not servants, but
friends;"^ that, as Aaron was shown to be
the priest by the rod that budded, ^ so in His
Church, when more and greater miracles are
performed, the ministers of more excellent
holiness, and the dispensers of His mysteries,
might be made manifest by some sign, as
those who alone ought to baptize. But if this
had been done, then though the power of
baptizing were given them by the Lord, yet
it would necessarily be called their own bap-
tism, as in the case of the baptism of John.
And so Paul gives thanks to God that he bap-
tized none of those men who, as though for-
getting in whose name they had been baptized,
were for dividing themselves into factions
under the names of different individuals. •♦
For when baptism is as valid at the hands of
a contemptible man as it was when given by
an apostle, it is recognized as the baptism
neither of this man nor of that, but of Christ;
as John bears witness that he learned, in the
case of the Lord Himself, through the ap-
pearance of the dove. For in what other re-
spect he said, "And I knew Him not," I
cannot clearly see. For if he had not known
Him in any sense, he could not have said to
Him when He came to his baptism, " I have
need to be baptized of Thee."5 What is it,
therefore, that he says, " I saw the Spirit de-

scending from heaven like a dove, and it
abode upon Him. And I knew Him not:
but He that sent me to baptize with water,
the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt
see the Spirit descending, and remaining on
Him, the same is He which baptizeth with
the Holy Ghost?"* The dove clearly de-
scended on Him after He was baptized. But
while He was yet coming to be baptized, John
had said, "I have need to be baptized of
Thee." He therefore already knew Him.
What does he therefore mean by the words,
"I knew Him not: but He that sent me to
baptize with water, the same said unto me,
Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descend-
ing, and remaining on Him, the same is He
which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost," since
this took place after He was baptized, unless
it were that he knew Him in respect of certain
attributes, and in respect of others knew Him
not? He knew Him, indeed, as the Son of
God, the Bridegroom, of whose fullness all
should receive; but whereas of His fullness
he himself had so received the power of bap-
tizing that it should be called the baptism of
John, he did not know whether He would so
give it to others also, or whether He would
have His own baptism in such wise, that at
whosesoever hands it was given, whether by
a man that brought forth fruit a hundredfold,
or sixtyfold, or thirtyfold, whether by the
wheat or by the chaff, it should be known to
be of Him alone; and this he learned through
the Spirit descending like a dove, and abiding
on Him.

Chap. 14. — 16. Accordingly we find the
apostles using the expressions, " My glory-
ing," "though it was certainly in the Lord;
and " Mine ofitice.''® and " My knowledge,"'
and " My gospel," " although it was confess-
edly bestowed and given by the Lord; but
no one of them ever once said, " My bap-
tism.'' For neither is the glorying of all of
them equal, nor do they all minister with
equal powers, nor are they all endowed with
equal knowledge, and in preaching the gos-
pel one works more forcibly than another, and
so one may be said to be more learned than
another in the doctrine of salvation itself;
but one cannot be said to be more or less bap-
tized than another, whether he be baptized
by a greater or a less worthy minister. So
when " the works of the flesh are manifest,
which are these, fornication, uncleanness,
lasciviousnness, idolatry, witclicraft, hatred,
variance, emulations, strife, seditions, here-
sies, envyings, drunkenness, revellings, and

I John 1 33.
4 I C(>r..i. 12-

- John .\v. 15.
5 .Matt. iii. 14.

•3 Num. xvii. 8.

* John i. 32, 33.
9 Eph. ill. 4.

1 I Cor. i.x. 15.
'0 2 'I'im. ii. 8.

8 Rom. XI. 13.

470

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book V.

such like; "' if it be strange that it should be
said, " Men were baptized after John, and
are not baptized after heretics," why is it not
equally strange that it should be said, " Men
were baptized after John, and are not bap-
tized after the envious,'' seeing that Cyprian
himself bears witness in his epistle concern-
ing envy and malignity that the covetous are
of the party of the devil, and Cyprian himself
makes it manifest from the words of the
Apostle Paul, as we have shown above, that
in the time of the apostles themselves there
were envious persons in the Church of Christ
among the very preachers of the name of
Christ ?

Chap. 15. — 17. That therefore the bap-
tism of John was not the same as the baptism
of Christ, has, I think, been shown with suffi-
cient clearness; and therefore no argument
can be drawn from it that baptism should be
repeated after heretics because it was repeated
after John: since John was not a heretic,
and could have a baptism, which, though
granted by Christ, was yet not the very bap-
tism of Christ, seeing that he had the love
of Christ; while a heretic can have at once
the baptism of Christ and the perversity of
the devil, as another within the Church may
have at once the baptism of Christ and the
envy of the devil.

18. But it will be urged that baptism after
a heretic is much more required, because
John was not a heretic, and yet baptism was
repeated after him. On this principle, a man
may say, much more must we rebaptize after
a drunkard, because John was sober, and yet
baptism was repeated after him. And we
shall have no answer to make to such a man,
save that the baptism of Christ was given to
those who were baptized by John, because
they had it not; but where men have the bap-
tism of Christ, no iniquity on their part can
possibly effect that the baptism of Christ
should fail to be in them.

19. It is not therefore true that "by bap-
tizing first, the heretic obtains the right of
baptism;"^ but because he did not baptize
with his own baptism, and though he did not
possess the right of baptizing, yet that which
he gave is Christ's, and he who received it is
Christ's. For many things are given wrong-
fully, and yet they are not therefore said to
be non-existent or not given at all. For
neither does he who renounces the world m
word only and not in deed receive baptism
lawfully, and yet he does receive it. For
both Cyprian records that there were such

' Gal. V. 19-21.

Cypr. Ep. Ixxiii. 25.

men in the Church in his day, and we ourselves
experience and lament the fact.

20. But it is strange in what sense it can
be said that " baptism and the Church can-
not in any way be separated and detached
from one another." ^ For if baptism remains
inseparably in him who is baptized, how can
it be that he can be separated from the i
Church, and baptism cannot ? But it is clear '
that baptism does remain inseparably in the !
baptized person; because into whatever depth
of evil, and into whatever fearful whirlpool of
sin the baptized person may fall, even to the
ruin of apostasy, he yet is not bereft of his
baptism. And therefore, if through repen-
tance he returns, it is not given again, be-
cause it is judged that he could not have been
bereft of it. But who can ever doubt that a
baptized person can be separated from the
Church ? For hence all the heresies have pro-
ceeded which deceive by the use of Christiaa
terms.

Ch.4p, 16. — Wherefore, since it is mani-
fest that the baptism remains in the baptized
person when he is separated from the Church,
the baptism which is in him is certainly sepa-
rated with him. And therefore not all who
retain the baptism retain the Church, just as
not all who retain the Church retain eternal
life. Or if we say that only those retain the
Church who observe the commandments of
God, we at once concede that there are many
who retain baptism, and do not retain the
Church.

21. Therefore the heretic is not "the first
to seize baptism," since he has received it
from the Church. Nor, though he seceded,
could baptism have been lost by him whom
we assert no longer to retain the Church, and
yet allow to retain baptism. Nor does any
one " yield his birthright, and give it to a
heretic," ■* because he says that he took away
with him what he could not give lawfully, but
what would yet be according to law when
given; or that he no longer has lawfully what
yet is in accordance with law in his possession.
But the birthright rests only in a holy con-
versation and good life, to which all belong
of whom that bride consists as her members
which has no spot or wrinkle, ^ or that dove
that groans amid the wickedness of the many
crows, — unless it be that, while Esau lost
his birthright from his lust after a mess of
pottage,* we are yet to hold that it is retained
by defrauders, robbers, usurers, envious per-
sons, drunkards and the like, over whose

3 If,, 4 Cypr. E/>. Ixxiii. 25.

S Eph. V. 27. Cp. Aug. Retract, i'i. 18, quoted above, I.
17, 26. ^ Gen. XXV. 29-34.

Chap. XVIL]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

4/1

existence in the Church of his time Cyprian
groaned in his epistles. Wherefore, either
it is not the same thing to retain the Church
and to retain the birthright in divine things,
or, if every one who retains the Church also
retains the birthright, then all those wicked
ones do not retain the Church who yet both
seem and are allowed by every one of us to
give baptism within the Church; for no one,
save the man who is wholly ignorant of sacred
things, would say that they retain the birth-
right in sacred things

Chap. 17. — 22. But, having considered
and handled all these points, we have now
come to that peaceful utterance of Cyprian at
the end of the epistle, with which I am never
sated, though I read and re-read it again and
again, — so great is the pleasantness of
brotherly love which breathes forth from it,
so great the sweetness of charity in which it
abounds. "These things," he says, "we
have written unto you, dearest brother,
shortly, according to our poor ability, pre-
scribing to or prejudging no one, lest each
bishop should not do what he thinks right, in
the free exercise of his own will. We, so
far as in us lies, do not contend on the sub-
ject of heretics with our colleagues and fellow-
bishops, with whom we maintain concord and
peace in the Lord; especially as the apostle
also says, ' If any man seem to be conten-
tious, we have no such custom, neither the
churches of God.' ' We observe patiently and
gently charity of spirit, the honor of our
brotherhood, the bond of faith, the harmony
of thie priesthood. For this reason also, to
the best of our poor ability, by the permission
and the inspiration of God we have written
this treatise on 'The Good of Patience,* which
we have sent to you in consideration of our
mutual love." ^

23. There are many things to be considered
in these words, wherein the brightness of
Christian charity shines forth in this man,
who "loved the beauty of the Lord's.house,
and the place of the tabernacle of His habi-
tation. "^ First, that he did not conceal what
he felt; then, that he set it forth so gently
and peacefully, in that he maintained the
peace of the Church with those who thought
otherwise, because he understood how great
healthfulness was bound up in the bond of
peace, loving it so much, and maintaining it
with sobriety, seeing and feeling that even
men who think differently may entertain their
several sentiments with saving charity. For
he would not say that he could maintain

' I Cor. xi. i'. - Cypr. £/•. Ixxiii. 26.

3Ps.

divine concord or the peace of the Lord with
evil men; for the good man can observe peace
towards wicked men, but he cannot be united
with them in the peace which they have not.
Lastly, that prescribing to no one, and pre-
judging no one, lest each bishop should not
do what he thinks right in the free exercise
of his own will, he has left for us also, what-
soever we may be, a place for treating peace-
fully of those things with him. For he is
present, not only in his letters, but by that
very charity which existed in so extraordinary
a degree in him, and which can never die.
Longing, therefore, with the aid of his
prayers, to cling to and be in union with him,
if I be not hindered by the unmeetnessof my
sins, I will learn if I can through his letters
with how great peace and comfort the Lord
administered His Church through him; and,
putting on the bowels of humility through the
moving influence of his discourse, if, in
common with the Church at large, I enter-
tain any doctrine more true than his, I will
not prefer my heart to his, even in the point
in which he, though holding different views,
was yet not severed from the Church through-
out the world. For in that, when that ques-
tion was yet undecided for want of full dis-
cussion, though liis sentiments differed from
those of many of his colleagues, yet he ob-
served so great moderation, that he would
not mutilate the sacred fellowship of the
Church of God by any stain of schism, a
greater strength of excellence appeared in him
than would have been shown if, without that
virtue, he had held views on every point not
only true, but coinciding with their own.
Nor should I be acting as he would wish, if
I were to pretend to prefer his talent and his
fluency of discourse and copiousness of learn-
ing to the holy Council of all nations, where-
at he was assuredly present through the unity
of his spirit, especially as he is now placed in
such full light of truth as to see with perfect
certainty what he was here seeking in the spirit
of perfect peace. For out of that rich abun-
dance he smiles at all that here seems elo-
quence in us, as though it were the first essay
of infancy; there he sees by what rule of piety
he acted here, that nothing should be dearer
in the Church to him than unity. There,
too, with unspeakable delight he beholds with
what prescient and most merciful providence
the Lord, that He might heal our swellings,
"chose the foolish thingsof the world to con-
found the wise," * and, in the ordering of the
members of His Church, placed all things in
such a healthful way, that men should not say

4 I Cor. i. 27.

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book Y

that they were chosen to the help of the gos-
pel for their own talent or learning, of whose
source they yet were ignorant, and so be
puffed up with deadly pride. Oh, how Cy-
prian rejoices ! With how much more perfect
calmness does he behold how greatly it con-
duces to the health of the human race, that
in the writings even of Christian and pious
orators there should be found what merits
blame, and in the writings of the fishermen
there should nothing of the sort be found !
And so I, being fully assured of this joy of
that holy soul, neither in any way venture to
think or say that my writings are free from
every kind of error, nor, in opposing that
opinion of his, wherein it seemed to him that
those who came from among heretics were to
be received otherwise than either they had
been in former days, as he himself bears wit-
ness, or are now received, as is the reasona-
ble custom, confirmed by a plenary Council of
the whole Christian world, do I set against
him my own view, but that of the holy Cath-
olic Church, which he so loved and loves, in
which he brought forth such abundant fruit
with tolerance, whose entirety he himself was
not, but in whose entirety he remained;
whose root he never left, but, though he
already brought forth fruit from its root, he
was purged by the heavenly Husbandman that
he should bring forth more fruit; ' for whose
peace and safety, that the wheat might not be
rooted out together with the tares, he both
reproved with the freedom of truth, and en-
dured with the grace of charity, so many evils
on the part of men who were placed in unity
with himself.

Chap. i8. — 24. Whence Cyprian himself^
again admonishes us with the greatest fullness,
that many who were dead in their trespasses
and sins, although they did not belong to the
body of Christ, and the members of that in-
nocent and guileless dove (so that if she alone
baptized, they certainly could not baptize),
yet to all appearance seemed both to be bap-
tized and to baptize withm the Church. And
among them, however dead they are, their
baptism nevertheless lives, which is not dead,
and death shall have no more dominion over
it. Since, therefore, there be dead men
within the Church, nor are they concealed,
for else Cyprian would not have spoken of
them so much, who either do not belong at
all to that living dove, or at least do not as
yet belong to her; and since there be dead
men without, who yet more clearly do not

• John XV. 2.

- In this and the following chapter, Augustin is examining the
seventy-first epistle of Cypnan to his brother Quintus, bishop in
Mauritania. Here LXXI. i.

belong to her at all, or not as yet; and since
it is true that " another man cannot be quick-
ened by one who himself liveth not," — it is
therefore clear that those who within are bap-
tized by such persons, if they approach the
sacrament with true conversion of heart, are
quickened by Him whose baptism it is. But
if they renounce the world in word and not in
deed, as Cyprian declares to be the case with
some who are within, it is then manifest that
they are not themselves quickened unless
they be converted, and yet that they have
true baptism even though they be not con-
verted. Whence also it is likewise clear that
those who are dead without, although they
neither " live themselves, nor quicken others,"
yet have the living baptism, which would profit
them unto life so soon as they should be con-
verted unto peace.

Chap. 19. — 25. Wherefore, as regards those
who received the persons who came from
heresy in the same baptism of Christ witli
which they had been baptized outside the
Church, and said " that they followed ancient
custom," as indeed the Church now receives
such, it is in vain urged against them "that
among the ancients there were as yet only
the first beginning of heresy and schisms, ^ so
that those were involved in them who were
seceders from the Church, and had originally
been baptized within the Church, so that it
was not necessary that they should be bap-
tized again when they returned and did pen-
ance." For so soon as each several heresy
existed, and departed from the communion
of the Catholic Church, it was possible that,
I will not even say the next day, but even
on that very day, its votaries might have bap-
tized some who flocked to them. And there-
fore if this was the old custom, that they
should be so received into the Church (as
could not be denied even by those who main-
tained the contrary part in the discussion),
there can be no doubt in the mind of any one
who pays careful attention to the matter, that
those also were so received who had been
baptized without in heresy.

26. But I cannot see what show of reason
there is in this, that the name of " erring
sheep " " should be denied to one whose lot it
has been that, while seeking the salvation
which is in Christ, he has fallen into the error
of heretics, and been baptized in their body;
while he is held to have become a sheep al-

3 A/'ud veteres h/ereses et schisviata ^rima adhuc fuisse
initia ; that among the ancients heresies and schisms were yet in
their very infancy. Benedictines suggest: 'Witri-t-sis et schis-
inatiiiH." Hartel reads: apud vetcr^s hisreseos et sc/iismatuin
privta adhuc fiierint initia.

4 Cypr. EJ>. Ixxi. 2.

Chap. XXI.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

ready within tlie body of the CathoHc Church
lierself, who has renounced the world in words
and not in deeds, and has received baptism in
such falseness of heart as this. Or if such
an one also does not become a sheep unless
after turning to God with a true heart, then,
as he is not baptized at the time when he be-
comes a sheep, if he had been already bap-
tized, but was not yet a sheep; so he too,
who comes from the heretics that he may be-
come a sheep, is not then to be baptized if he
had been already baptized with the same bap-
tism, though he was not yet a sheep. Where-
fore, since even all the bad that are within —
the covetous, the envious, the drunkards, and
those that live contrary to the discipline of
Christ — may be deservedly called liars, and
in darkness, and dead, and antichrists, do
they yet therefore not baptize, on the ground
that " there can be nothing common between
truth and falsehood, between light and dark-
ness, between death and immortality, between
Antichrist and Christ ? " '

27. He makes an assumption, then, not
"of mere custom," but "of the reason of

I truth itself," = when he says that the sacra-
ment of God cannot be turned to error by the
error of any men, since it is declared to exist
even in those who have erred. Assuredly the
Apostle John says most plainly, " He that
hateth his brother is in darkness d\^en until
now; "3 and again, "Whosoever hateth his
brother is a murderer; "" and why, therefore,
do they baptize those within the Church whom
Cyprian himself declares to be in the envy of
malice ?s

Chap. 20. How does a murderer cleanse
and sanctify the water ?® How can darkness
Mess the oil? But if God is present in His
sacraments to confirm His words by whomso-
ever the sacraments may be administered,
then both the sacraments of God are every-
where valid, and evil men whom they profit
not are everywhere per^^erse.

28. But what kind of argument is this, that
''a heretic must be considered not to have
baptism, because he has not the Church?"
And it must be acknowledged that "when he
;s baptized, he is questioned about the
Church." 7 Just as though the same ques-
tion about the Church were not put in bap-
tism to him who within the Church renounces
the world in word and not in deed. As there-

' Cypr. Ep. Ixxi. 2. = Cypr. Ef>. Ixxi. 3.

3 I John ii. o. 4 I John ii!. 15. 3 Cypr. yT/.lxxiii. 14.

* In this and the next two chapters Auijustin is examinins: the
ventieth epistle of Cyprian, from himself and thirty other bish-
:'S (text of Hartel), to Januarius, Saturninus, Maximus, and lif-
'•n others.

" in the question, " Dost thou believe in eternal life and remis-

11 of sins through the holy Church ?" Cyp. I.e. 2.

fore his false answer does not prevent what
he receives from being baptism, so also tiie
false reply of the other al;out the holy Church
does not prevent what he receives from being
baptism; and as the former, if he afterwards
fulfill with truth what he promised in false-
hood, does not receive a second baptisjn, but
only an amended life, so also in the case of
the latter, if he come afterwards to the
Church about which he gave a false answer
to the question put to him, thinking that he
had it when he had it not, the Church herself
which he did not possess is given him, but
what he had received is not repeated. But I
cannot tell why it should be, that while God
can " sanctify the oil " in answer to the words
which proceed out of the mouth of a mur-
derer, " He yet cannot sanctify it on the altar
reared by a heretic," unless it be that He who
is not hindered by the false conversion of the
heart of man within the Church is hindered
by the false erection of some wood without
from deigning to be present in His sacra-
ments, though no falseness on the part of
men can hinder Him. If, therefore, what is
said in the gospel, that " God heareth not
sinners,"® extends so far that the sacraments
cannot be celebrated by a sinner, how then
does He hear a murderer praying, eitlier over
the water of baptism, or over the oil, or over
the eucharist, or over the heads of those on
whom his hand is laid ? All which things are
nevertheless done, and are valid, even at the
hands of murderers, that is, at the hands of
those who hate their brethren, even within, in
the Church itself. Since " no one can give
what he does not possess himself," ' how does
a murderer give the Holy Spirit ? And yet
such an one even baptizeth within the Church.
It is God, therefore, that gives the Holy Spirit
even when a man of this kind is baptizing.

Chap. 21. — 29. But as to what he says,
that " he who comes to the Church is to be
baptized and renewed, that within he may be
hallowed through the holy,"' what will he do,
if within also he meets with those who are not
holy? Or can it be that the murderer is
holy? And if the reason for his being bap-
tized in the Church is that "he should put
off this very thing also that he, being a man
that sought to come to God, fell, through the
deceit of error, on one profane," » where is
he afterwards to put off this, that he may
chance, while seeking a man of God within
the Church itself, to have fallen, through the
deceit of error, on a murderer? If "there
cannot be in a man something that is void

John ix. 31.

9 Cypr. £/•. Ixx. 2.

474

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book V.

and something that is valid," ' why is it possi-
ble that in a murderer the sacrament should
be holy and his heart unholy? If "whoso-
ever cannot give the Holy Spirit cannot bap-
tize," ' why does the murderer baptize within
the Church? Or how has the murderer the
Holy Spirit, when every one that has the
Holy Spirit is filled with light, but " he who
hates his brother is still in darkness?"^ If
because "there is one baptism, and one
Spirit," ' therefore they cannot have the one
baptism who have not the one Spirit, why do
the innocent man and the murderer within
the Church have the one baptism and not
have the one Spirit? So therefore the heretic
and the Catholic may have the one baptism,
and yet not have the one Church, as in the
Catholic Qhurch the innocent man and the
murderer may have the one baptism, though
they have not the one Spirit; for as there is
one baptism, so there is one Spirit and one
Church. And so the result is, that in each
person we must acknowledge what he already
has, and to each person we must give what
he has not. If "nothing can be confirmed
and ratified with God which has been done by
those whom God calls His enemies and foes,"^
why is the baptism confirmed which is given
by murderers ? Are we not to call murderers
t'ae enemies and foes of the Lord ? But
" he that hateth his brother is a murderer."
How then did they baptize who hated Paul,
the servant of Jesus Christ, and thereby
hated Jesus Himself, since He Himself said
to Saul, " Why persecutest thou me ?"'' when
he was persecuting His servants, and since at
the last He Himself shall say, " Inasmuch
as ye did it not to one of the least of these
that are mine, ye did it not to me ? " ^ Where-
fore all who go out from us are not of us, but
not all who are with us are of us; just as when
men thresh, all that flies from the threshino-.
floor IS shown not to be corn, but not all that
remains there is therefore corn. And so
John too says, " They went out from us, but
they were not of us; for if they had been of
us, they would no doubt have continued with
us."* Wherefore God gives the sacrament
of grace even through the hands of wicked
men, but the grace itself only by Himself or
through His saints. And therefore He gives
remission of sins either of Himself, or through
the members of that dove to whom He says,
"Whosesoever sins ye remit, they are re-
mitted unto them; and whosesoever sins ye
retain, they are retained. '' ' But since no one
can doubt that baptism, which is the sacra-

I I Cypr. E/>. Ixx. 3.
4 Acts ix. 4.
7 John XX. 23.

' I John ii. 9.
5 Matt. XXV. 45.

3 Cypr. jT/. Ixx.
' I John ii. 19.

ment of the remission of sins, is possessed
even by murderers, who are yet in darkness
because the hatred of their brethren is not
excluded from their hearts, therefore either
no remission of sins is given to them if their
baptism is accompanied by no change of
heart for the better, or if the sins are re-
mitted, they at once return on them again.
And we learn that the baptism is holy in itself,
because it is of God; and whether it be given
or whether it be received by men of such like
character, it cannot be polluted by any per-
versity of theirs, either within, or yet outside
the Church.

Chap. 22. — 30. Accordingly we agree with.
Cyprian that " heretics cannot give remission
of sins; " ^ but we maintain that they can give
baptism, — which indeed in them, both when
they give and when they receive it, is profita-
ble only to their destruction, as misusing so
great a gift of God; just as also the malicious
and envious, whom Cyprian himself acknowl-
edges to be within the Church, cannot give
remission of sins, while we all confess that
they can give baptism. For if it was said of
those who have sinned against us, " If ye for-
give not men their trespasses, neither will
your Father forgive your trespasses,"® how
much more impossible is it that their sins
should be'forgiven who hate the brethren by
whom they are loved, and are baptized in that
very hatred; and yet when they are brought
to the right way, baptism is not given them
anew, but that very pardon which they did
not then deserve is granted them in their true
conversion ? And so even what Cyprian wrote
to Quintus, and what, in conjunction with his
colleagues Liberalis, Caldonius, Junius, and
the rest, he wrote to Saturninus, Maximus,
and others, is all found, on due consideration,
to be in no wise meet to be preferred as
against the agreement of the whole Catholic
Church, of which they rejoiced that they
were members, and from which they neither
cut themselves away nor allowed others to be
cut away who held a contrary opinion, until
at length, by the will of the Lord, it was made
manifest, by a plenary Council many years
afterwards, what was the more perfect way,
and that not by the institution of any novelty,
but by confirming what was old.

Chap. 23. — 31. Cyprian writes also to
Pompeius^ about this selfsame matter, and
clearly shows in that letter that Stephen,
who, as we learn, was then bishop of the

8 Matt. vi. 15.

9 Cypr. E/i. Ixxiv., which is examined by Augustin in the re-
maining chapters of this book.

Chap. XXIV.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

475

Roman Church, not only did not agree with
him upon the points before us, but even wrote
and taught the opposite views. But Stephen
certainly did not " communicate with here-
tics," ' merely because he did not dare to im-
pugn the baptism of Christ, which he knew
remained perfect in the midst of their per-
versity. For if none have baptism who enter-
tain false views about God, it has been proved
sufificiently, in my opinion, that this may
happen even within the Church. " The apos-
tles,'' indeed, "gave no injunctions on the
point; " ' but the custom, which is opposed to
Cyprian, may Ije supposed to have had its
origin in apostolic tradition, just as there are
many things which are observed by the whole
Church, and therefore are fairly held to have
been enjoined by the apostles, which yet are
not mentioned in their writings.

32. But it will be urged that it is written
of heretics that "they are condemned of
themselves." ^ What then ? are they not also
condemned of themselves to whom it was
said, "■ For wherein thou judgest another,
thou condemnest thyself?" ^ gyt ^q these
the apostle says, "Thou that preachest a
man should not steal, dost thou steal 7" * and
so forth. And such truly were they who,
being bishops and established in Catholic
unity with Cyprian himself, used to plunder
estates by treacherous frauds, preaching all
the time to the people the words of the apos-
tle, who says, " Nor shall extortioners inherit
the kingdom of God.''^

33. Wherefore I will do no more than run
shortly through the other sentiments founded
on the same rules, which are in the aforesaid
letter written to Pompeius. By what authority
of holy Scripture is it shown that " it is against
tlie commandment of God that persons com-
ing from the society of heretics, if they have
already there received the baptism of Christ,
are not baptized again?"* But it is clearly
shown that many pretended Christians, though
they are not joined in the same bond of char-
ity with the saints, without which anything
holy that they may have been able to possess

of no profit to them, yet have baptism in
_^mmon with the saints, as has been already
sufficiently proved with the greatest fullness.
He says "that the Church, and the Spirit,

:d baptism, are mutually incapable of sepa-
- Mon from each other, and therefore" he
wishes that "those who are separated from
the Church and the Holy Spirit should be
understood to be separated also from bap-
tism.'"^ But if this is the case, then when

■Cypr. j^/. Ixxiv. 2. = Tit. iii. ii. 3 Rom. ii. i.

4 Rom. ii. 21. 5 i Cor. vi. lo. * Cypr. /i/. Ix.xiv. 4.

any one has received baptism in the Catholic
Church, it remains so long in him as he him-
self remains in the Church, which is not so.
For it is not restored to him when he returns,
just because he did not lose it when he se-
ceded. But as the disaffected sons have not
the Holy Spirit in the same manner as the
beloved sons, and yet they have baptism; so
heretics also have not the Church as Catholics
have, and yet they have baptism. " For the
Holy Spirit of discipline will flee deceit," '
and yet baptism will not flee from it. And
so, as baptism can continue in one from whom
the Holy Spirit withdraws Himself, so can
baptism continue where the Church is not.
But if "the laying on of hands" were not
"applied to one coming from heresy," ° he
would be as it were judged to be wholly
blameless; but for the uniting of love, which
is the greatest gift of the Holy Spirit, without
which any other holy thing that there may be
in a man is profitless to his salvation, hands
are laid on heretics when they are brought to
a knowledge of the truth.'

Chap. 24. — 34. I remember that I have al-
ready discussed at sufficient length the ques-
tion of "the temple of God," and how this
saying is to be taken, "As many of you as
have been baptized into Christ have put on
Christ." " For neither are the covetous the
temple of God, since it is written, "What
agreement hath the temple of God with
idols ? " " And Cyprian has adduced the testi-
mony of Paul to the fact that covetousness is
idolatry. But men put on Christ, sometimes
so far as to receive the sacrament, sometimes
so much further as to receive holiness of life.
And the first of these is common to good and
bad alike; the second, peculiar to the good
and pious. Wherefore, if "baptism cannot
be without the Spirit," then heretics have the
Spirit also, — but to destruction, not to salva-
tion, just as was the case with Saul." For in
the Holy Spirit devils are cast out through
the name of Christ, which even he was able
to do who was without the Church, which called
forth a suggestion from the disciples to tiieir
Lord.'^ Just as the covetous have the Holy
Spirit, who yet are not the temple of God.
For " what agreement hath the temple of God
with idols?" If tlierefore the covetous have
not the Spirit of God, and yet have baptism,
it is possible for baptism to e.xist without the
Spirit of God.

7 Wisd. i. 5. ^ Cypr. ^/. Ixxiv. 5.

9 Cyprian, in the laying on of h.inds, appears to refer to cori-
firmation, but Aiigustin interprets il of the restoration of peni-
tents. Cp. III. 16, 21.

"^ (Jal. iii. 27. " 2 Cor. vi. 16. n

■2 I Sam. xix. 23. '3 Mark ix. 38.

476

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book V.

35. If therefore heresy is rendered " un-
able to engender sons to God through Christ,
because it is not the bride of Christ," ' neither
can that crowd of evil men established within
the Church, since it is also not the bride of
Christ; for the bride of Christ is described as
being without spot or wrinkle.^ Therefore
either not all baptized persons are the sons of
God, or even that which is not the bride can
engender the sons of God. But as it is asked
whether " he is spiritually born who has re-
ceived the baptism of Christ in the midst of
heretics," ^ so it may be asked whether he is
spiritually born who has received the baptism
of Christ in the Catholic Church, without being
turned to God in a true heart, of whom it can-
not be said that he has not received baptism.

Chap. 25. — 36. I am unwilling to go on
to handle again what Cyprian poured forth
with signs of irritation against Stephen, as it
is, moreover, quite unnecessary. For they
are but the selfsame arguments which have
already been sufificiently discussed; and it is
better to pass over those points which involved
the danger of baneful dissension. But Stephen
thought that we should even hold aloof from
those who endeavored to destroy the primi-
tive custom in the matter of receiving heretics;
whereas Cyprian, moved by the difificulty of
the question itself, and being most largely
endowed with the holy bowels of Christian
charity, thought that we ought to remain at
unity with those who differed in opinion from
ourselves. Therefore, although he was not
without excitement, though of a truly brotherly
kind, in his indignation, yet the peace of Christ
prevailed in their hearts, that in such a dis-
pute no evil of schism should arise between
them. But it was not found that " hence grew
more abundant heresies and schisms,"-* be-
cause what is of Christ in them is approved,
and what is of themselves is condemned: for
all the more those who hold this law of re-
baptizing were cut into smaller fragments.

Chap. 26. — 37. To go on to what he
says, "that a bishop should be 'teachable,' "^
adding, "But he is teachable who is gentle
and meek to learn; for a bishop ought not
only to teach, but to learn as well, since he is
indeed the better teacher who daily grows
and advances by learning better things; " * —
in these words assuredly the holy man, en-

I Cypr. E^^. Ixxiv. 6.

■2 Eph. V. 27. Cp. Aug. Retract, ii. iS, quoted above, I.
17, 26.

3 Cypr. Ei>. Ixxiv. 7. 4 //..

5 " Docibilis ,■" and so the passage (2 Tim. ii. 24) is quoted fre-
quently by Augustm. The English version, "apt to teach,'" is
more true to the original, 6i6aKTtK09.

^ Cypr. -£■/. Ixxiv. 10.

dowed with pious charity, sufficiently points
out that we should not hesitate to read his
letters in such a sense, that we should feel
no difficulty if the Church should afterwards
confirm what had been discovered by further
and longer discussions; because, as there
were many things which the learned Cyprian
might teach, so there was still something
which the teachable Cyprian might learn.
But the admonition that he gives us, "that
we should go back to the fountain, that is, to
apostolic tradition, and thence turn the chan-
nel of truth to our times," *^ is most excellent,
and should be followed without hesitation.
It is handed down to us, therefore, as he him-
self records, by the apostles, that there is
"one God, and one Christ, and one hope,
and one faith, and one Church, and one bap-
tism.''^ Since then we find that in the times
of the apostles themselves there were some
who had not the one hope, but had the one
baptism, the truth is so brought down to us
from the fountain itself, that it is clear to us
that it is possible that though there is one
Church, as there is one hope, and one bap-
tism, they may yet have the one baptism who
have not the one Church; just as even in
those early times it was possible that men
should have the one baptism who had not the
one hope. For .how had they one hope with
the holy and the just, who used to say, " Let
us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die," ^ as-
serting that there was no resurrection of the
dead ? And yet they w^ere among the very
men to whom the same apostle says, " Was
Paul crucified for you ? or were you baptized
in the name of Paul ? " ^ For he writes most
manifestly to them, saying, " How say some
among you that there is no resurrection of
the dead ? " '°

Chap. 27, — 38. And in that the Church is
thus described in the Song of Songs, "A gar-
den enclosed is my sister, my spouse; a spring
shut up, a fountain sealed, a well of living
water; thy plants are an orchard of pomegran-
ates, with pleasant fruits; "" I dare not under-
stand this save of the holy and just, — not of
the covetous, and defrauders, and robbers,
and usurers, and drunkards, and the eiivi-
ous, of whom we yet both learn most fully
from Cyprian's letters, as I have often shown,
and teach ourselves, that they had baptism in
common with tlie just, in common with whom
they certainly had not Christian charity.
For I would that some one would tell me how
they " crept into the garden enclosed and the

7 //'. II, and Eph. iv, 4-6.
^ I Cor. XV. 32.
i^ I Cor. XV. 12.

9 I Cor. i. 13.
II Cant. iv. 12, 13.

Chap. XXVIII.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

477

fountain sealed," of whom Cyprian bears wit-
ness that they renounced the world in word
and not in deed, and that yet they were with-
in the Church. For if they both are them-
selves tnere, and are themselves the bride of
Christ, can she then be as she is described,
"without spot or wrinkle," ' and is the fair
dove defiled with such a portion of her mem-
bers? Are these the thorns among which she
is a lily, as it is said in the same Song ? - So
far therefore, as the lily extends, so far does
"the garden enclosed and the fountain
sealed," namely, through all those just per-
sons who are Jev.'s inwardly in the circum-
cision of the heart 3 (for" the king's daughter
is all glorious within " •*), in whom is the fixed
number of the saints predestined before the
foundation of the. world. But that multitude
of thorns, whether in secret or in open sepa-
ration, is pressing on it from without, above
number. "If I would declare them," it is
said, " and speak of them, they are more taan
can be numbered. "^ The number, tnere-
fore, of the just persons, " who are the called
according to His purpose,"^ of whom it is
said, "The Lord knoweth them that are
His,"' is itself " the garden enclosed, the
fountain sealed, a well of living water, the
orchard of pomegranates with pleasant fruits.''
Of this number some live according to the
Spirit, and enter on the excellent way of
charity; and when they "restore a man that
is overtaken in a fault in the spirit of meek-
ness, they consider themselves, lest they also
be tempted. "'^ And when it happens that
they also are themselves overtaken, the affec-
tion of charity is but a little checked, and not
extinguished; and again rising up and being
kindled afresh, it is restored to its former
course. For they know how to say, " My soul
melteth for heaviness: strengthen thou me
according unto Thy word.''* But when " in
anything they be otherwise minded, God shall
reveal even this unto them," '° if they abide
in the burning flame of charity, and do not
break the bond of peace. But some who are
yet carnal, and full of fleshly appetites, are
instant in working out their progress; and
that they may become fit for heavenly food,
they are nourished with the milk of the holy
mysteries, they avoid in the fear of God what-
ever is manifestly corrupt even in the opinion
of the world, and they strive most watchfully
that they may be less and less delighted with
worldly and temporal matters. They observe
most constantly the rule of faith which has

' Epn. V. 27.
4 Ps. xlv. 13.
7 2 Tim. ii. ig.
"■' Phil. iii. 15.

2 Cant. ii. 2.
5Ps. xl. 5.
8 Gal. vi. 1.

3 Rom. ii. 2g.
6 Rom. viii. 2
9 Ps. cxix. 28.

been sought out with diligence; and if in
aught they stray from it, they submit to
speedy correction under Catholic authority,
although, in Cyprian's words, they be tossed
about, by reason of their fleshly appetite,
with the various conflicts of phantasies.
There are some also who as yet live wickedly,
or even lie in heresies or the superstitions of
the Gentiles, and yet even then "the Lord
knoweth them that are His." For, in that
unspeakable foreknowledge of God, many
who seem to be without are in reality witnin,
and many who seem to be within yet really
are without. Of all those, therefore, who, if
I may so say, are inwardly and secretly with-
in, is that " enclosed garden " composed,
" the fountain sealed, a well of living water,
the orchard of pomegranates, with pleasant
fruits.'' The divinely imparted gifts of these
are partly peculiar to themselves, as in this
world the charity that never faileth, and in
the world to come eternal life; partly they
are common with evil and perverse men, as
all the other things in which consist the holy
mysteries.

Chap. 28. — 39. Hence, therefore, we
have now set before us an easier and more
simple consideration of that ark of which
Noah was the builder and pilot. For Peter
says that in the ark of Noah, " few, that is,
eight souls, were saved by water. The like
figure whereunto even baptism doth also now
save us, (not the putting away of the filth of
the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience
towards God)."" Wherefore, if those appear
to men to be baptized in Catholic unity who
renounce the world in words only and not in
deeds, how do they l)elong to the mystery of
this ark in whom there is not the answer of a
good conscience ? Or how are they saved by
water, who, making a bad use of holy bap-
tism, though they seem to be within, yet per-
severe to the end of their days in a wicked
and abandoned course of life ? Or how can
they fail to be saved by water, of whom Cy-
prian himself records that they were in time
past simply admitted to the Church with the
baptism which they had received in heresy?
For the same unity of the ark saved them, in
which no one has been saved except by water.
For Cyprian himself says, " The Lord is able
of His mercy to grant pardon, and not to sever
from the gifts of His Church those who,
being in all simplicity admitted to the Church,
have fallen asleep within her [lale." " If not
by water, how in the ark ? If not in the ark,
how in the Church? But if in the Church,

" I Pet. iii. 20, 21.

'- Cypr. £p. Ixxiii. 2j

478

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book V.

certainly in the ark; and if in tiie ark, cer-
tainly by water. It is therefore possible that
some who have been baptized without may be
considered, through tlie foreknowledge of
God, to have been really baptized within,
because within the water begins to be profita-
ble to them unto salvation; nor can tliey be
said to have been otherwise saved in the ark
except by water. And again, some who
seemed to have been baptized within may be
considered, through the same foreknowledge
of God, more truly to have been baptized
without, since, by making a bad use of bap-
tism, they die by water, which then happened
to no one who was not outside the ark. Cer-
tainly it is clear that, when we speak of with-
in and without in relation to the Church, it is
the position of the heart that we must con-
sider, not that of the body, since all who are
within in heart are saved in the unity of the

ark through the same water, through which
all who are in heart without, whether they are
also in body without or not, die as enemies
of unity. As therefore it was not another but
the same water that saved those w;io were
placed within the ark, and destroyed those
who were left without the ark, so it is not by
different baptisms, but by the same, that
good Catholics are saved, and bad Catholics
or heretics perish. But what the miost bless-
ed Cyprian thinks of the Catholic Church,
and how the heretics are utterly crushed by
his authority, notwithstanding the much I;
have already said, I have yet determined to
set forth by itself, if God will, with somewhat
greater fullness and perspicuity, so soon as I
shall have first said about his Council what I
think is due from me, which, in God's will,
I shall attempt in the following book.

BOOK VI.

IX WHICH IS CONSIDERED THE COUNCIL OF CARTHAGE, HELD UNDER THE AUTHORITY AND
PRESIDENCY OF CYPRIAN, TO DETERMINE THE QUESTION OF THE BAPTISM OF HERETICS.

Chap. i. — i. It might perhaps have been
sufficient, that after the reasons have been so
often repeated, and considered, and discussed
with such variety of treatment, supplemented,
too, with the addition of proofs from holy
Scripture, and the concurrent testimony of so
many passages from Cyprian himself, even
those who are slow of heart should thus un-
derstand, as I believe they do, that the bap-
tism of Christ cannot be rendered void by
any perv-ersity on the part of man, whether in
administering or receiving it. And when we
find that in those times, when the point in
question was decided in a manner contrary to
ancient custom, after discussions carried on
without violation of saving charity and unity,
it appeared to some even eminent men who
were bishops of Christ, among whom the
blessed Cyprian was specially conspicuous,
that the baptism of Christ could not exist
among heretics or schismatics, this simply
arose from the^ not distinguishing the sacra-
ment from the effect or use of the sacrament;
and because its effect and use were not found
among heretics in freeing them from their sins
and setting their hearts right, the sacrament
itself was also thought to be wanting among
them. But if we turn our eyes to the multi-
tude of chaff within the Church, since these
also who are perverse and lead an abandoned
life in unity itself appear to have no power
either of giving or retaining remission of sins,
seeing that it is not to the wicked but the
good sons that it was said, "Whosesoever
I sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them;
■ind whosesoever sins ye retain, they are re-
tained,"'yet that such persons both have,
and give, and receive the sacrament of bap-
tism, was sufficiently manifest to the pastors
of the Catholic Church dispersed over the
whole world, through whom the original cus-

' John XX. 23.

tom was afterwards confirmed by the author-
ity of a plenary Council; so that even the
sheep which was straying outside, and had
received the mark of the Lord from false
plunderers outside, if it seek the salvation of
Christian unity, is purified from error, is freed
from captivity, is healed of its wound, and
yet the mark of the Lord is recognized rather
than rejected in it; since the mark itself is
often impressed both by wolves and on wolves,
who seem indeed to be within the fold, but
yet are proved by the fruits of their conduct,
in which they persevere even to the end, not
to belong to that sheep which is one in many;
because, according to the foreknowledge of
God, as many sheep wander outside, so many
wolves lurk treacherously within, among wiiom
tne Lord yet knoweth them that are His,
which hear only the voice of the Shepherd,
even when He calls by the voice of men like
the Pharisees, of whom it was said, "What-
soever they bid you observe that observe and
do.*'==

2. For as the spiritual man, keeping " the
end of the commandment," that is, " charity
out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience,
and of faith unfeigned," ^ can see some things
less clearly out of a body which is yet " cor-
ruptible and presseth down the soul,"'* and is
liable to be otherwise minded in some things
which God will reveal ^ to him in His own
good time if he abide in the same charity, so
in a carnal and perverse man something good
and useful may be found, whch has its origin
not in the man himself, but in some other
source. For as in the fruitful branch there
is found something which must be purged that
it may bring forth more fruit, so also a grape
is often found to hang on a cane that is bar-
ren and dry or fettered. And so, as it is fool-
ish to love the portions which require purg-

- Matt, xxiii. 3.
4 Wisd. IX. 15.

3 I Tim. i. 5.
5 Phil. iii. 15.

4So

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

Chap. III.J

ing in the fruitful branch, while he acts wisely
who does not reject the sweet fruit wherever it
may hang, so, if anyone cuts himself off from
unity by rebaptizing, simply because it seemed
to cVprian that one ought to baptize again
those who came from the heretics, such a man
turns aside from what merits praise in that
great man, and follows what requires correc-
tion, and does not even attain to the very
thing he follows after. For Cyprian, while
grievously abhorring, in his zeal for God, all
those who severed themselves from unity,
thought that thereby they were separated from
baptism itself; while these men, thinking it
at most a slight offense that they themselves
are severed from the unity of Christ, even
maintain that His baptism is not in that
unit}^, but issued forth with them. Therefore
they are so far from the fruitfulness of Cy-
prian, as not even to be equal to the parts in
him which needed purging.

Chap. 2. — 3. Again, if anyone not having
charity, and walking in the abandoned paths
of a most wicked life, seems to be within
while he really is without, and at the same
time does not seek for the repetition of bap-
tism even in the case of heretics, it in no wise
helps his barrenness, because he is not ren-
dered fruitful with his own fruit, but laden with
that of others. But it is possible that some
one may flourish in the root of charity, and
may be most rightly minded in the point in
which Cyprian was otherwise minded, and yet
there may be more that is fruitful in Cyprian
than in him, more that requires purging in
him than in Cyprian. Not only, therefore, do
we not compare bad Catholics with the bless-
ed Cyprian, but even good Catholics we do
not hastily pronounce to be on an equality with
him whom our pious mother Church counts
among the few rare men of surpassing excel-
lence and grace, although these others may
recognize the baptism of Christ even among
heretics, while he thought otherwise; so that,
by the instance of Cyprian, who saw one point
less clearly, and yet remained most firm in
the unity of the Church, it might be shown
more clearly to heretics what a sacrilegious
crime it was to break the bond of peace. For
neither were the blind Pharisees, although
they sometimes enjoined what was right to be
done, to be compared to the Aapstle Peter,
though he at times enjoined \niat was not
right. But not only is their dryness not to
be compared to his greenness, but even the
fruit of others may not be deemed equal to
his fertility. For no one now compels the
Gentiles to judaize, and yet no one now in
the Church, however great his progress in

goodness, may be compared with the apostle-
ship of Peter. Wherefore, while rendering
due reverence, and paying, so far ss I can,
the fitting honor to the peaceful bishop and
glorious martyr Cyprian, I yet venture to say
that his view concerning the baptism of
schismatics and heretics was contrary to that
which was afterwards brought to light by a
decision, not of mine, but of the whole Church,
confirmed and strengthened by the authority
of a plenary Council: just as, while paying
the reverence he deserves to Peter, the first
of the apostles and most eminent of martyrs,
I yet venture to say that he did not do right
in compelling the Gentiles to judaize; for
this also, I say, not of my own teaching, but
according to the wholesome doctrine of the
Apostle Paul, retained and preserved through
out the whole Church.'

4. Therefore, in discussing the opinion of
Cyprian, though myself of far inferior merit
to Cyprian, I say that good and bad alike can
have, can give, can receive the sacrament of
baptism, — the good, indeed, to their health
and profit; the bad to their destruction and
ruin, — while the sacrament itself is of equal
perfectness in both of them; and that it is of
no consequence to its equal perfectness in
all, how much worse the man may be that
has it among the bad, just as it makes no
difference how much better he may be that
has it among the good. And accordingly it
makes no difference either how much worse
he may be that confers it, as it makes no dif-
ference how much better he may be; and so
it makes no difference how much worse he
may be that receives it, as it makes no differ-
ence how much better he may be. For the
sacrament is equally holy, in virtue of its own
excellence, both in those who are unequally
just, and in those who are unequall" unjust.

Chap. 3. — 5. But I think that we have
sufficiently shown, both from the canon of
Scripture, and from the letters of Cyprian
himself, that bad men, while by no means
converted to a better mind, can have, and
confer, and receive baptism, of whom it is
most clear that they do not belong to the
holy Church of God, though they seem to be
within it, inasmuch as they are covetous,
robbers, usurers, envious, evil thinkers, and
the like; while she is one dove,^ modest and
chaste, a bride without spot or wrinkle, ^ a gar-
den enclosed, a fountain sealed, an orchard of
pomegranates with pleasant fruits," with all
similar properties which are attributed to her;

I Gal. li. 14. 2 Cant. vi. 8, 9.

3 Eph. V. 27; cp. Aug. Retract, ii. 18. 4 Cant. iv. 12, 13.

Chap. VI.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

48 I

and all Lhis can only be understood to be in
the good, and holy, and just, — following, that
is, not only the operations of the gifts of God,
which are common to good and bad alike,
but also the inner bond of charity conspicu-
ous in those who have the Holy Spirit, to
whom the Lord says, " Whosesoever sins
ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and
whosesoever sins ye retain, they are re-
tained." '■

Chap. 4. — 6. And so it is clear that no
good ground is shown herein why the bad
man, who has baptism, may not also confer
it; and as he has it to destruction, so he may
also confer it to destruction, — not because
this is the character of the thing conferred,
nor of the person conferring, but because it
is the character of him on whom it is con-
ferred. For when a bad man confers it on a
good man, that is, on one in the bond of
unity, converted with a true conversion, the
wickedness of him who confers it makes no
severance between the good sacrament which
is conferred, and the good member of the
Church on whom it is conferred. And when
his sins are forgiven him on his true conver-
sion to God, they are forgiven by those to
whom he is united by his true conversion.
For the same Spirit forgives them, which is
given to all the saints that cling to one another
in love, whether they know one another in the
body or not. Similarly when a man's sins are
retained, they are assuredly retained by those
from whom he, in whom they are retained,
separates himself by dissimilarity of life, and
by the turning away of a corrupt heart,
whether they know him in the body or not.

Chap. 5. — 7. Wherefore all bad men are
separated in the spirit from the good; but if
they are separated in the body also by a
manifest dissension, they are made yet
worse. But, as it has been said, it makes no
difference to the holiness of baptism how
much worse the man may be that has it, or
how much worse he that confers it: yet he
that is separated may confer it, as he that is
separated may have it; but as he has it to
destruction, so he may confer it to destruc-
tion. But he on whom he confers it may re-
ceive it to his soul's health, if he, on his part,
receive it not in separation; as it has hap-
pened to many that, in a catholic spirit, and
with heart not alienated from the unity of
peace, they have, under some pressure of im-
pending death, turned hastily to some heretic
and received from him the baotism of Christ

■ John xx. 23.

without any share in his per\'ersity, so that,
whether dying or restored to life, they by no
means remain in communion with those to
whom they never passed in heart. But if the
recipient himself has received the baptism in
separation, he receives it so much the more to
his destruction, in proportion to the greatness
of the good which he has not received well;
and it tends the more to his destruction in his
separation, as it would avail the more to the
salvation of one in unity. And so, if, reform-
ing himself from his perverseness and turning
from his separation, he should come to the
Catholic peace, his sins are remitted through
the bond of peace and the same baptism under
which his sins were retained through the sac-
rilege of separation, because that is always
holy both in the just and the unjust, which is
neither increased by the righteousness nur
diminished by the unrighteousness of any
man.

8. This being the case, what bearing has it
on so clear a truth, that many of his fellow-
bishops agreed with C3'prian in that opinion,
and advanced their own several opinions on
the same side, except that his charity towards
the unity of Christ might become more and
more conspicuous ? For if he had been the
only one to hold that opinion, with no one to
agree with him, he might have been thought,
in remaining, to have shrunk from the sin of
schism, because he found no companions in
his error; but when so many agreed with him,
he showed, by remaining in unity with the
rest who thought differently from him, that
he preserved the m.05t sacred bond of univer-
sal catholicity, not from any fear of isolation,
but from the love of peace. Wherefore it
might indeed seem now to be superfluous to
consider the several opinions of the other
bishops also in that Council; but since those
who are slow in heart think that no answer
has been made at all, if to any passage in any
discourse the answer which might be brought
to bear on the spot be given not there br.t
somewhere else, it is better that by reading
much they should be polished into sharpness,
than that by understanding little they should
have room left for complaining that the argu-
ment has not been fairly conducted.

Chap. 6. — 9. First, then, let us record
for further consideration the case proposed
for decision by Cyprian himself, with which
he initiates the proceedings of the Council,
and by which he shows a peaceful spirit,
abounding in the fruitfulness of Christian
charity. "Ye have head," he says, "most
beloved colleagues, what Jubaianus, our fel-
low-bishop, has written to me, consulting my

482

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book VI.

poor ability about tlie unlawful and profane
baptism of heretics, and what I have written
back to him, expressing to him the same
opinion tliat I have expressed once and again
and often, that heretics coming to the Church
ought to be baptized, and sanctified with the
baptism of the Church. Another letter also
of Jubaianus has been read to you, in which,
agreeably to his sincere and religious devo-
tion, in answer to our epistle, he not only ex-
pressed his assent to it, but also gratefully
acknowledged that he had received instruc-
tion. It remains that we should individually
express our opinions on this same subject,
judging no one, and removing no one from
the right of communion if he should entertain
a different opinion. For neither does any
one of us set himself up as a bishop of
bishops, or by tyrannical terror force his col-
leagues to the necessity of obeying, since
every bishop, in the free use of his liberty and
power, has the right of free judgment, and can
no more be judged by another than he can
himself judge another. But we are all await-
ing the judgment of our Lord Jesus Christ,
who alone has the power both of preferring us
in the government of His Church, and of
judging of our actions. '' '

Chap. 7. — 10. I have already, I think,
argued to the best of my power, in the preced-
ing books, in the interests of Catholic unani-
mity and counsel, in whose unity these conti-
nued as pious members, in reply not only to
the letter which Cyprian wrote to Jubaianus,
but also to that which he sent to Quintus, and
that which, in conjunction with certain of his
colleagues, he sent to certain other col-
leagues, and that which he sent to Pompeius.
Wherefore it seems now to be fitting to con-
sider also what the others severally thought,
and that with the liberty of which he himself
would not deprive us, as he says, " Judging
no one, nor removing any from the right of
communion if he entertain different opinions. "
And that he did not say this with the object
of arriving at the hidden thoughts of his col-
leagues, extracted as it were from their secret
lurking-places, but because he really loved
peace and unity, is very easily to be seen
from other passages of the same sort, where
he wrote to individuals as to Jubaianus him-
self. "These things," he says, "we have
written very shortly in answer to you, most
beloved brother, according to our poor ability,
not preventing any one of the bishops by
our writing or judgment, from acting as he

I Cone. Carth., the seventh under Cyprian, a.d. 256. Intro
ducti^n.

thinks right, having a free exercise of his
own judgment."^ And that it might not seem
that any one, because of his entertaining
different opinions in this same free exercise
of his judgment, should be driven from the
society of his brethren, he goes on to say,
"We, so far as lies in us, do not strive on
behalf of heretics against our colleagues and
fellow-bishops, with whom we maintain godly
unity and the peace of our Lord; " - and a lit-
tle later he says, "Charity of spirit, respect
for our fraternity, the bond of faith, the har-
mony of the priesthood, are by us maintained
with patience and gentleness."- And so also
in the epistle which he wrote to Magnus, when
he was asked whether there was any differ-
ence in the efficacy of baptism by sprinkling
or by immersion, " Li this matter," he says,
" I am too modest and diffident to prevent
any one by my judgment from thinking as he
deems right, and acting as he thinks." ' By
which discourses he clearly shows that these
subjects were being handled by them at a
time when they were not )'et received as de-
cided beyond all question, but were being in-
vestigated with great care as being yet unre-
vealed. We, therefore, maintaining on the
subject of the identity of all baptisms what
must be acknowledged everywhere to be the
custom '^ of the universal Church, and what is
confirmed by the decision of general Coun-
cils,= and taking greater confidence also from
the words of Cyprian, ^yhich allowed me even
then to hold opinions differing from his own
without forfeiting the right of communion,
seeing that greater importance and praise were
attached to unity, such as the blessed Cyprian
and his colleagues, with whom he held that
Council, maintained with those of different
opinions, disturbing and overthrowing there-
by the seditious calumnies of heretics and
schismatics in the name of the Lord Jesus
Christ, who, speaking by His apostle, says,
" Forbearing one another in love, endeavoring
to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of
peace;"* and again, by the mouth of the
same apostle, " If in anything ye be otherwise
minded, God shall reveal even this unto
you," ' — we, I say, propose for consideration
and discussion the opinions of the holy
bishops, without violating the bond of unity
and peace with them, in maintaining which
we imitate them so far as we can by the aid
of the Lord Llimself.

- Cypr. E/>. Ixxiii. 26. 3 Cypr. ii/. Ixix. 12.

4 De baptismi sitnplicitate nbigtie m^nosretidain consuet^idi-
neiii. The Benedictines give the reading of some mss.: '''■ De
baptismi simplicitatc iibigtie agnoscetuiu,'^ etc., " maintaining
the custom of the universal Church to acknowledge everywhere
the identity of baptism."

5 Conciliis universalibus, ^ Eph. iv. 2, 3,

7 Phil. iii. IS. I

Chap. IX.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

483

Chap. viii. — u. C^ecilius of Bilta' said:
" I know of one baptism in the one Church,
and of none outside the Church. The one
will be where there is true hope and sure
faith. For so it is written, 'One faith, one
hope, one baptism.'^ Not among heretics,
where there is no hope and a false faith; where
all things are done by a lie; where one pos-
sessed of a devil exorcises; the question of the
sacrament is asked by one from whose mouth
and words proceeds a cancer; the faithless
gives faith; the guilty gives pardon for sins;
and Antichrist baptizes in the name of Christ;
one accursed of God blesses; the dead prom-
ises life; the unpeaceful gives peace; the blas-
phemer calls on God; the profane administers
the priesthood; the sacrilegious sets up the
altar. To all this is added this further evil,
that the servant of the devil dares to celebrate
the eucharist. If this be not so, let those
who stand by them prove that all of it is false
concerning heretics. See the kind of things
to which the Church is compelled to assent,
being forced to communicate without baptism
or the remission of sins. This, brethren, we
ought to shun and avoid, separating ourselves
from so great a sin, and holding to the one
baptism which is granted to the Church
alone." ^

12. To this I answer, that all who even
within the Church profess that they know
God, but deny Him in their deeds, such as
are the covetous and envious, and those who,
because they hate their brethren, are pro-
nounced to be murderers, not on my testi-
mony, but on that of the holy Apostle John,'*
— all these are both devoid of hope, because
they have a bad conscience; and are faithless,
because they do not do what they have vowed
to God; and liars, because they make false
professions; and possessed of devils, because
they give place in their heart to the devil and
ins angels; and their words work corruption,
since they corrupt good manners by evil com-
numications; and they are infidels, because
tiey laugh at the threats which God utters
a-ainst such men; and accursed, because
tiiey live wickedly; and antichrists, because
i-iieir lives are opposed to Christ; and cursed
if God, since holy Scripture everywhere calls

'wn curses on such men; and dead, because

' -cy are witliout the life of righteousness;

and unpeaceful, because by their contrary

j deeds they are at variance with God's behests;

:d blasphemous, because by their abandoned

Ixx

' Bilta (Hiltha, Vilta) was in Africa Proconsularis. This Caecil-
- is probably the same as the one addressed by Cyprian in Ep.

1.; and who unites with Cyprian and other bishops in let-
!,■- addressed tu others. Epp. iv. (to Pomponiusl, Ivii., Ixvli.,

- Eph. iv. 4, 5. 3 Cone. Garth, sec. i. 4 i John iii. 15.

acts despite is done to the name of Christian;
and profane, because they are spiritually shut
out from that inner sanctuary of God; and
sacrilegious, because by their evil life they
defile the temple of God within themselves;
and servants of the devil, because they do
service to fraud and covetousness, which is
idolatry. That of such a kind are some, nay
very many, even within the Church, is testi-
fied both by Paul the apostle and by Cyprian
the bishop. Why, then, do they baptize?
Why also are some, who " renounce the world
in words and not in deeds," baptized without
being converted from a life like this, and not
rebaptized when they are converted ? And
as to what he says with such indignation,
" See the kind of things to which the Church
is compelled to assent, being forced to com-
municate without baptism or the remission
of sms," he could never have used such ex-
pressions had there not been the other bishops
who elsewhere forced men to such things.
Whence also it is shown that at that time
those men held the truer views who did not
depart from the primitive custom, which is
since confirmed by the consent of a general
Council. 5 But what does he mean by adding,
" This, brethren, we ought to shun and avoid,
separating ourselves from so great a sin ? ''
For if he means that he is not to do nor to
approve of this, that is another matter; but if
he means to condemn and sever from him
those that hold the contrary opinion, he is
setting himself against the earlier words of
Cyprian, "Judging no man, nor depriving
any of the right of communion if he differ
from us."

Chap. 9. — 13. The elder Felix* of Migirpa
said: "I think that every one coming from
heresy should be baptized. For in vain does
any one suppose that he has been baptized
there, seeing that there is no baptism save
the one true baptism in the Church; for there
is one Lord, and one faith, and one Church,
in which rests the one baptism, and holiness,
and the rest. For the things that are prac-
tised without have no ])ower to work salvation."

14. To what Felix of Migirpa said we an-
swer as follows. If the one true baptism did
not exist except in the Church, it surely would
not exist in those who depart from unity.
But it does exist in them, since they do not

5 Concilii v>ii7>e>silntc\

6 This section is wanting in the Mss. and in the edition of Amer-
bach, so that it has been supposed to have been added by Erasmus
from Cyprian (Cone. Carth. sec. a), — the name of Eelix (really
Primus), which is not found in Cyprian, bein.i; derived from the
followin.ir section of Autrustin. So Hartel : I'yiiniis a Misgir/ia
iiixit. IMiv'irpaor Misi;irpa, was in ZeuKitana. This Primus is
seemincfly identical with the Primus of Cypr. Epp. 67 (following
Ca;ciliHjs/, and 70 (preceding Cacilius).

484

THE AVORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book VI.

receive it when they return, simply because
they had not lost it when they departed. But
as regards his statement, that "the things
that are practised without have no power to
work salvation," I agree with him, and think
that it is quite true; for it is one thing that
baptism should not be there, and another that
it should have no power to work salvation.
For when men come to the peace of the
Catholic Church, then what was in them be-
fore they joined it, but did not profit them,
begins at once to profit them.

Chap. io. — 15. To the declaration of Poly-
carp of Adrumetum,' that " those who declare
the baptism of heretics to be valid, make ours
of none effect," we answer, if that is the bap-
tism of heretics which is given by heretics,
then that is the baptism of the covetous and
murderers which is given by them within the
Church. But if this be not their baptism,
neither is the other the baptism of heretics;
and so it is Christ's, by whomsoever it be
given.

Chap. ii. — 16. Novatus of Thamugadis^
said: "Though we know that all Scripture
gives its testimony respecting saving baptism,
yet we ought to express our belief that heretics
and schismatics, coming to the Church with
the semblance of having been baptized, ought
to be baptized in the unfailing fountain; and
that therefore, according to the testimony of
the Scriptures, and according to the decree
of those most holy men, our colleagues, ^ all
schismatics and heretics who are converted to
the Church ought to be baptized; and that,
moreover, all that seemed to have received
ordination should be admitted as simple lay-
men.''

17. Novatus of Thamugadis has stated
what he has done, but he has brought forward
no proofs by which to show that he ought to
have acted as he did. For he has made
mention of the testimony of the Scriptures,
and the decree of his colleagues, but he has
not adduced out of them anything which we
could consider.

Chap. 12. — 18. Nemesianus of Tubunse''

I Adrumetum (Hadrumetum) was an ancient Phoenician settle-
ment, made a Roman colony by Trajan, on the coast of the Sinus
Neapolitanus. some ninety miles south-east of Carthage, capital of
Byzacium. Cyprian writes to I!p. Cornelius, Ep. xlviii., vindicat-
ing Polycarp : his name occurs also in the titles of Cypr. Epp.
Ivii., Ixvii. (after Primus), and Ixx. (after Ca;cilius).

= Thamugadis (Thamogade), a town in Numidia, on the east
side of Mount Aurasius. The whole opinion of Novatus (Cone.
Garth, sec. 4), is omitted in the mss.

3 The words in Cyprian are, " secundum decretum coUegai-tim
iiostroriiiu safictissiinte incinorice ■s'irorum.'''' The decree re-
ferred to is one of the Council held by Agrippinus.

4 Tubuna;, a town in Mauritania Csesariensis. Nemesianus
probably same with one of that name in Cypr. Epp. Ixii., Ixx.,
Ixxvi., Ixxvii.

said:

That the baptism which is given
heretics and schismatics is not true is every-
where declared in the holy Scriptures, inas-
much as their very prelates are false Christs
and false prophets, as the Lord declares l)y
the mouth of Solomon, ' Whoso trusteth in
lies, the same feedeth the winds; he also fol-
loweth flying birds. For he deserteth the
ways of his own vineyard, and hath strayed
from the paths of his own field. For he
walketh through pathless and dry places, and
a land destined to thirst; and he gathereth
fruitless weeds in his hands. 's And again,
'Abstain from strange water, and drink not of
a strange fountain, that thou mayest live lorn,',
and that years may be added to thy life.'^
And in the gospel our Lord Jesus Christ
spake with His own voice, saying, ' Except
a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he
cannot enter into the kingdom of God.''
This is the Spirit which from the beginning
'moved upon the face of the waters. '° For
neither can the Spirit act without the water,
nor the water without the Spirit. Ill, there-
fore, for themselves do some interpret, saying
that by imposition of hands they receive the
Holy Ghost, and are received into the Church,
when it is manifest that they ought to be born
again by both sacraments in the Catholic
Church. For then indeed will they be able
to become the sons of God, as the apostle
says, ' Endeavoring to keep the unity of the
Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one
body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in
one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith,
one baptism, one God.' ^ All this the Catholic
Church asserts. And again he says in the
gospel, ' That which is born of the flesh is
flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is
spirit; for the Spirit is God, and is born of
God.''° Therefore all things whatsoever all
heretics and schismatics do are carnal, as the
apostle says, ' Now the works of the flesh are
manifest, which are these: fornication, un-
cleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft,

5 Prov. ix. 12, LXX., the passage being altogether absent in the
Hebrew, and consequently in the English version. Probably in
N. Afr. version. The text in Erasmus is somewhat different, and
was revised by the Louvain editors to bring it into harmony with
the ansvi^er of Augustin and the text of Cyprian (Cone. Carth.
sec. 5).

6 Prov. ix. 18, LXX., possibly N. Afr. version also.

7 John iii. 5. 8 Gen. i. 2. 9 Eph. iv. 3-6.

10 Qzioniatn Sjiin'tus Deus est,et de Deo natus est. These
words are found at the end of John iii. 6, in the oldest Latin ms.
(in the Bodleian Library), and their meaning appears to be. as
given in the text, that whatsoever is born of the Spirit is spirit,
since the Holy Ghost, being God, and born of, or proceeding from
God, in virtue of His supreme power makes those to be spirits
whom He regenerates. If the meaning had been (as Bishop Fell
takes it), that " he who is born of the Spirit is born of God.'' the
neuter " de Deo tiatum est" would have been required. To refer
" Spiritus Dens est" with the Benedictines, to John iv. 24, " God
is a Spirit," reverses the grammar and destroys the sense of the
passage. The ab(n e explanation is taken from the preface to
Cyprian by the monk of St. Maur (Maranus), p. xxxvi., quoted
by Routh, Rel. Sac. iii. 193.

Chap. XII.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

485

hatred, variance, emulations, wratli, seditions,
heresies, and such like: of the which I tell
you before, as I have also told you in time
past, that they which do such things shall not
inherit the kingdom of God.'' The apostle
condemns, equally with all the wicked, those
also who cause divisions, that is, schismatics
and heretics. Unless therefore they receive
that saving baptism which is one, and found
only in the Catholic Church, they cannot be
saved, but will be condemned with the carnal
in the judgment of the Lord."

19. Nemesianus of Tubunae has advanced
many passages of Scripture to prove his point;
but he has in fact said much on behalf of the
view of the Catholic Church, which we have
undertaken to set forth and maintain. Un-
less, indeed, we must suppose that he does
not " trust in what is false " who trusts in the
hope of things temporal, as do all covetous
men and robbers, and those "who renounce
the world in words but not in deeds," of
whom Cyprian yet bears witness that such
men not only baptize, but even are baptized
within the Church.'' For they themselves
also " follow flying birds," ^ since they do not
attain to what they desire. But not only the
heretic, but everyone who leads an evil life,
" deserteth the ways of his own vineyard, and
hath strayed from the paths of his own field.
And he walketh through pathless and dry
places, and a land destined to thirst; and he
gathereth fruitless weeds in his hands;" be-
cause all justice is fruitful, and all iniquity is
barren. Those, again, who "drink strange
water out of a strange fountain," are found
not only among heretics, but among all who
do not live according to the teaching of God,
and do live according to the teaching of the
devil. For if he were speaking of baptism,
he would not say, " Do not drink of a strange
fountain," but, do not wash thyself in a
strange fountain. Again, I do not see at all
what aid he gets towards proving his point
from the words of our Lord, " Except a man
be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot
enter into the kingdom of God."" For it is
one thing to say that every one who shall enter
into the kingdom of heaven is first born again
of water and the Spirit, because except a man
be born of water and of the Spirit, he shall
not enter into the kingdom of heaven, which
is the Lord's saying, and is true; another

'ng to say that every one who is born of

[water and the Spirit shall enter into the king-

Irlom of heaven, which is assuredly false. For

> mon Magus also was born of water and of

jtiie Spirit,^ and yet he did not enter into the

' Oal. V. 19-21.

3 Prov. i.\. 12, cp. LXX.

2 Cypr. £/. .\i.
4 John in. 5.

5 Acts viii. 13.

kingdom of heaven; and this may possibly be
the case with heretics as well. Or if only
those are born of the Spirit who are changed
with a true conversion, all " who renounce the
world in word and not in deed " are assuredly
not born of the Spirit, but of water only, and
yet they are within the Church, according to
the testimony of Cyprian. For we must per-
force grant one of two things, — either those
who renounce the world deceitfully are born
of the Spirit, though it is to their destruction,
not to salvation, and therefore heretics may
be so born; or if what is written, that "the
Holy Spirit of discipline will flee deceit,"^
extends to proving as much as this, that those
who renounce the world deceitfully are not
born of the Spirit, then a man may be bap-
tized with water, and not born of the Spirit,
and Nemesianus says in vain that neither the
Spirit can work without the water, nor the
water without the Spirit. Indeed it has been
already often shown how it is possible that
men should have one baptism in common
who have not one Church, as it is possible
that in the body of the Church herself those
who are sanctified by their righteousness, and
those who are polluted through their covet-
ousness, may not have the same one Spirit,
and yet have the same one baptism. For it
is said " one body," that is, the Church, just
as it is said " one Spirit " and " one baptism."
The other arguments which he has adduced
rather favor our position. For he has brought
forward a proof from the gospel, in the words,
" That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and
that which is born of the Spirit is spirit; for
the Spirit is God, and born of God; " ^ and he
has advanced the argument that therefore all
things that are done by any heretic or schis-
matic are carnal, as the apostle says, '^The
works of the flesh are manifest, which are
these: fornication, uncleanness; " and so he
goes through the list which the apostle there
enumerates, amongst which he has reckoned
heresies, since "they who do such things
shall not inherit the kingdom of God." ^ Then
he goes on to add, that '* therefore the apos-
tle condemns with all wicked men those also
who cause division, that is, schismatics and
heretics." And in this he does well, that
when he enumerates the works of the flesh,
among which are also heresies, he found and
declared that the apostle condemns them all
alike. Let him therefore question the holy
Cyprian himself, and learn from him how
many even within the Church live according
to the evil works of the flesh, which the apos-
tle condemns in common with the heresies,

6 Wisd.

7 John iii. 6.

8 Gal.

V. 19-21.

486

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book VI.

and yet these both baptize and are baptized.
Why then are heretics alone said to be in-
capable of possessing baptism, which is pos-
sessed by the very partners in their con-
demnation ?

Chap. 13. — 20. Januarius of Lambaese '
said: "Following the authority of the holy
Scriptures, I pronounce that all heretics
should be baptized, and so admitted into the
holy Church." =

21. To him we answer, that, following the
authority of the holy Scriptures, a universal
Council of the whole world decreed that the
baptism of Christ was not to be disavowed,
even when found among heretics. But if he
had brought forward any proof from the
Scriptures, we should have shown either that
they were not against us, or even that they
were for us, as we proceed to do with him
who follows.

Chap. 14. — 21. Lucius of Castra Galbae^
said: " Since the Lord hath said in His gos-
pel, 'Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the
salt have lost his savor, that which is salted
from it shall be thenceforth good for nothing,
but to be cast out, and to be trodden under
foot of men;'* and seeing that again, after
His resurrection, when sending forth His
apostles. He commanded them, saying, 'All
power is given unto me in heaven and in earth:
go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptiz-
ing them in the name of the Father, and of
the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,' ^ — since then
it is plain that heretics, that is, the enemies
of Christ, have not the full confession of the
sacrament, also that schismatics cannot reason
with spiritual wisdom, since they themselves,
by withdrawing when they have lost their
savor from the Church, which is one, have
become contrary to it,^ let that be done which
is written, ' The houses of those that are op-
posed to the law must needs be cleansed; '^
and it therefore follows that those who have
been polluted by being baptized by men op-
posed to Christ should first be cleansed, and
only then baptized."®

I Lambaese (Lambese) was one of the chief cities in southern
Numidia. This Januarius is not unlikely identical with the first
of that name in Cypr. Ep. Ixvii., and with the one of Epp. Ixii.
and Ixx. For an opponent of Cyprian in Lambese. see Cypr.
Epp. XXXVI. and lix.

' Cone. Carth. sec. 6.

3 Castra Galbse was most likely in Numidia. Lucius as bishop
occurs in Cypr. Epp. Ixvii., Ixx., Ixxvi.and Ixxvii., but it is doubt-
ful to which of the four of this name attendant on this council
these references may apply.

4 Matt. v. ij;. ^'' Id guodsalieiur ex eo,adnihilujn valebit.'"

5 Matt, xxviii. t8, ig.

6 Recedcndo infatuati conirarii /acti sunt. Dr. Routh, from
a MS. in his own possession, inserts " f /■ " -Axitx ^' infatiiuti.,'" ■—
"have lost their savor and become contrary to the Church."
Rel. Sac. iii. p. 194.

7 Prov. xiv. 9, cp. LXX. 8 Cone. Carth. sec. 7.

23. Lucius of Castra Galbje has broughtj
forward a proof from the gospel, in the wordsf
of the Lord, "Ye are the salt of the earth:
but if the salt have lost his savor, that whichj
is salted from it shall be good for nothing, |
but to be cast out, and to be trodden under
foot of men; " just as though we maintained
that men when cast out were of any profit for
the salvation either of themselves or of any
one else. But those also who, though seeming
to be within, are yet of such a kind, not only
are without spiritually, but will in the end be
separated in the body also. For all such are
profitable for nothing. But it does not there-
fore follow that the sacrament of baptism
which is in them is nothing. For even in the
very men who are cast out, if they return to
their senses and come back, the salvation
which had departed from them returns; but
the baptism does not return, because it never
had departed. And in what the Lord says,
"Go therefore, and teach all nations, baptiz-
ing them in the name of the Father, and of
the Son, and of the Holy Ghost," He did not
permit any to baptize except the good, inas
much as He did not say to the bad, " Whose
soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto
them; and whosesoever sins ye retain, they
are retained. "^ How then do the wicked
baptize within, who cannot remit sins? How
also is it that they baptize the wicked whose
hearts are not changed, whose sins are yet
upon them, as John says, " He that hateth
his brother is in darkness even until now?''"*
But if the sins of these men are remitted
when they join themselves in the close bonds
of love to the good and just, through whom
sins are remitted in the Church, though they
have been baptized by the wicked, so the sins
of those also are remitted who come from
without and join themselves by the inner
bond of peace to the same framework of
the body of Christ. Yet the baptism of
Christ should be acknowledged in both,
and held invalid in none, whether before
they are converted, though then it profit
them nothing, or after they are converted,
that so it may profit them, as he says, " Since
they themselves, by withdrawing when they
have lost their savor from the Church, which
is one, have become contrary to it, let that
be done which is written, 'The houses of
those that are opposed to the law must need
be cleansed.' And it therefore follows," he
goes on to say, " that those who have been
polluted by being baptized by men opposed'
to Christ should first be cleansed, and only
then baptized." What then? Are thieves

9 John XX. 23.

1° I John ii. 9.

Chap. XVII.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

487

and murderers not contrary to the law, which
says, "Thou shalt not kill; thou shalt not
steal?"' "They must therefore needs be
cleansed." Who will deny it? And yet not
only those who are baptized by such within
^ne Church, but also those who, being such
cmselves, are baptized without being
langed in heart, are nevertheless exempt
from further baptism when they are so
changed. So great is the force of the sacra-
ment of mere baptism, that though we allow
that a man who has been baptized and con-
tinues to lead an evil life requires to be
cleansed, we yet forbid him to be any more
baptized.

Chap. 15. — 24. Crescens of Cirta^ said:
" The letters of our most beloved Cyprian to
Jubaianus, and also to Stephen, ^ having been
read in so large an assembly of our most holy
brethren in the priesthood, containing as they
do so large a body of sacred testimony de-
rived from the Scriptures that give us our
God,'' that we have every reason to assent to
them, being all united by the grace of God, I
give my judgment that all heretics or schis-
matics who wish to come to the Catholic
Church should not enter therein unless they
have been first exorcised and baptized; with
the obvious exception of those who have been
originally baptized in the Catholic Church,
these beins: reconciled and admitted to the
penance of the Church by the imposition of
hands. "5

25 Here we are warned once more to in-
quire why he says, " Except, of course, those
who have been originally baptized in the
Catholic Church." Is it because they had
not lost what they had before received ? Why
then could they not also transmit outside the
Church what they were able to possess out-
side ? Is it that outside it is unlawfully trans-
mitted ? But neither is it lawfully possessed
outside, and yet it is possessed; so it is un-
lawfully given outside, but yet it is given.
But what is given to the person returning
from heresy who had been baptized inside, is
given to the person coming to the Church who
had been baptized outside, — that is, that he
may have lawfully inside what before he had
unlawfully outside. But perhaps some one
may ask what was said on this point in the
letter of the blessed Cyprian to Stephen,
which is mentioned in this judgment, though
not in the opening address to the Council, —
I suppose because it was not considered

' Ex. XX. 13, 15.

- Cirta, an inland city of the Massylii in Numidia, was rebuilt
by Constantine, and called Constantina.

3 See below, on sec. 25. 4 Ex Scripturis dcificis.

5 Cone. Garth, sec. 8.

necessary. For Crescens stated that the let-
ter itself had been read in the assembly,
which I have no doubt was done, if I am not
mistaken, as is customary, in order that the
bishops, being already assembled, might re-
ceive some information at the same time on
the subject contained in that letter. For it
certainly has no bearing on the present sub-
ject; and I am more surprised at Crescens
having thought fit to mention it at all, than
at its having been passed over in the opening
address. But if any one thinks that I have
shrunk from bringing forward something
which has been urged in it that is essential to
the present point, let him read it and see
that what I say is true; or if he finds it other-
wise, let him convict me of falsehood. For
that letter contains nothing whatsoever about
baptism administered among heretics or schis-
matics, which is the subject of our present
argument.*

Chap. i6. — 26. Nicomedes of Segermi^
said: " My judgment is that heretics coming
to the Church should be baptized, because
they can obtain no remission of sins among
sinners outside.^' ®

27. The answer to which is: The judgment
of the whole Catholic Church is that heretics,
being already baptized with the baptism of
Christ, although in heresy, should not be re-
baptized on coming to the Church. For if
there is no remission of sins among sinners,
neither can sinners within the Church remit
sins; and yet those who have been baptized
by them are not rebaptized.

Chap, 17. — 28. Monnulus of Girba' said:
" The truth of our mother, the Catholic
Church, hath continued, and still continues
among us, brethren, especially in the three-
fold nature '° of baptism, as our Lord says,
' Go, baptize all nations in the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost.'" Since, therefore," he goes on to
say, "we know clearly that heretics have
neither Father, Son, nor Holy Ghost, they

6 There are two letters extant from Cyprian to Stephen, No.
68, respecting Marcianus of Aries, who had joined Novatian, and
Xo. 72, on a Council concerning heretical baptism. It is clear,
however, from Ep. Ix.xiv. i, that this Council, and consequently
the letter to Stephen, was subsequent to the Council under con-
sideration; and consequently Augustin is right in ignoring it, and
referring solely to the former. Dr. Routh thinks the words an
interpolation, of course before Augustin's time ; and tlu-y may
perhaps have been inserted by some one who had Cyprian s later
letter to Stephen before his mind Rcl. Sac. iii. p. 194.

7 Segermi church province of Byzacium. A Nicomedes occurs
in Cypr. Epp. Ivii., Ixvii., Ixx.

8 Cone. Carth. sec. q.

9 Girba, formerly ^leninx (Lotophagitist, an island to the
south-east of the Lesser Syrtis belonged to church province of
Tripolis. For Bp. Monnulus, see Cypr. Ep. Ivii.

^° In baptismi trinitate. "Quia t'-ina iiiiincysione expcdie-
btttur. in nomine Patris, Filii, et S. Spiritus."-Bishop Fell.
" Matt, xxviii. 19.

488

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book VI.

ought, on coming to our mother, the Church,
to be truly regenerated and baptized, that the
cancer which they had, and the wrath of con-
demnation, and the destructive energy of
error,' may be sanctified by the holy and
heavenly laver. "^

29. To this we answer. That all who are
baptized with the baptism that is consecrated
in the words of the gospel have the Father,
and the Son, and the Holy Ghost in the sac-
rament alone; but that in heart and in life
neither do those have them who live an aban-
doned and accursed life within.

Chap. 18. — 30. Secundinusof Cedias^ said:
" Since our Lord Christ said, ' He that is not
with me is against me,' -^ and the Apostle John
declares those who go out from the Church
to be antichrists, 5 without all doubt the ene-
mies of Christ, and those who are called anti-
christs, cannot minister the grace of the bap-
tism which gives salvation; and therefore my
judgment is that those who take refuge in the
Church from the snares of heresy should be
baptized by us, who of His condescension are
called the friends of God."^

31. The answer to which is, That all are
the opponents of Christ, to whom, on their
saying, " Lord, have we not in Thy name
done many wonderful things?" with all the
rest that is there recorded. He shall at the
last day answer, "I never knew you: depart
from me, ye that work iniquity," ^ — all which
kind of chaff is destined for the fire, if it per-
severe to the last in its wickedness, whether
any part of it fly outside before its winnow-
ing, or whether it seem to be within. If,
therefore, those heretics who come to the
Church are to be again baptized, that they
may be baptized by the friends of God, are
those covetous men, those robbers, murderers,
the friends of God, or must those whom they
have baptized be baptized afresh ?

Chap. 19.— 32. Felix of Bagai^ said: "As
when the blind leads the blind, both fall into
the ditch, 9 so when a heretic baptizes a here-
tic, both fall together into death."

1 Erroris offectura. Other readings are '' offensa " and " ef-
fectura. -^

2 Cone. Garth, sec. lo.

3 Cedias (Cedia) has been identified, bjt without sufficient rea-
son, with Quidias, or Quiza, m Mauritania Caesariensis for both
places have bishops at the Collation of 411. A Bp Secundinus is
.•nentioned in Cypr. Epp. lv:i., Ixvii., but whether these refer to
him of Cedias or him of Carpos (ch. 31) cannot be decided.

4Matt. xu. 30. 5 I John ii. 18

6Conc. Carth sec. 11. 7 Matt. vii. 22,23.

= Bagai, in church province of Numidia. .See on I ■; 7
Amons the many of the name of Feli.x in the letters of Cyprian
VI. lyu., Ixvii., title 16, l.xx., Ixxvi. his, Ixxvii., Ixxix.. title and
text, It would be unsafe to decide a sure reference to distinguish
^"^m" °"'^"' l^ishops of the same cognomen in this

9 Matt. XV. 14.

council.

2,z. This is true, but it does not follow that
what he adds is true. "And therefore," he
says, "the heretic must be baptized and
brought to life, lest we who are alive should
hold communion with the dead." »° Were they
not dead who said, " Let us eat and drink,
for to-morrow we die ? " " for they did not be-
lieve in the resurrection of the dead. Those
then who were corrupted by their evil com-
munications, and followed them, were not
they likewise falling with them into the pit ?
And yet among them there were men to whom
the apostle was writing as being already bap-
tized; nor would they, therefore, if they were
corrected, be baptized afresh. Does not the
same apostle say, " To be carnally-minded is
death ? " '= and certainly the covetous, the de-
ceivers, the robbers, in the midst of whom
Cyprian himself was groaning, were carnally-
minded. What then? Did the dead hurt
him who was living in unity ? Or who would
say, that because such men had or gave the
baptism of Christ, that it was therefore vio-
lated by their iniquities ?

Chap. 20. — 34. Polianus of Mileum'^ said:
" It is right that a heretic should be baptized
in the holy Church. "''*

35. Nothing, indeed, could be expressed
more shortly. But I think this too is short:
It is right that the baptism of Christ should
not be depreciated in the Church of Christ.

Chap. 21. — 36. Theogenes of Hippo Re-
gius's said: "According to the sacrament of
the heavenly grace of God which we have re-
ceived, we believe in the one only baptism
which is in the holy Church." '*

37. This may be my own judgment also.
For it is so balanced, that it contains nothing
contrary to the truth. For we also believe
in the one only baptism which is in the holy
Church. Had li,e said, indeed. We believe
in that which is in the holy Church alone, the
same answer must have been made to him as
to the rest. But as it is, since he has ex-
pressed himself in this wise, "We believe in
the one only baptism which is in the holy
Church," so that it is asserted that it exists
in the holy Church, but not denied that it
may be elsewhere as well, whatever his mean-
ing may have been, there is no need to argue
against these words. For if I were ques-

10 Cone. Carth. sec. 12. " i Cor. xv. 32. 12 Rom. viii. 6.

13 Mileum, Milevis, Mileve, in ecclesiastical province of Nu-
midia, noted as the seat of two Councils 402 a.d. and 416 .ad.;
also as the See of Optatus. Polianus is most likely to be identi-
fied with the one in Cypr. Epp. Ixxvi., Ixxix.

'4 Cone. Cath. sec. 13.

13 Hippo Regius, the see of Augustin himself, in ecclesiastical
province of Is' umidia.

'6 Cone. Carth. sec. 14.— O. D. H.

Chap. XXIV.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

489

tioned on the several points, first, whether
there was one baptism, I should answer that
there was one. Then if I were asked, whether
this was in the holy Church, I should answer
that it was. In the third place, if it were
asked whether I believed in this baptism, I
should answer that I did so believe; and con-
sequently I should answer that I believed in
the one baptism which is in the holy Church.
But if it were asked whether it was found in
the holy Church alone, and not among here-
tics and schismatics, I should answer that, in
common with the whole Church, I believed
the contrary. But since he did not insert this
in his judgment, I should consider that it
was mere wantonness if I added words which
I did not find there, for the sake of arguing
against them. For if he were to say. There
is one water of the river Euphrates, which is
in Paradise, no one could gainsay the truth
of what he said. But if he were asked whether
that water were in Paradise and nowhere else,
and were to say that this was so, he would be
saying what was false. For, besides Para-
dise, it is also in those lands into which it
flows from that source. But who is rash
enough to say that he would have been likely
to assert what is false, when it is quite possi-
ble that he was asserting what is true ?
Wherefore the ^yords of this judgment re-
quire no contradiction, because they in no
wise run counter to the truth.

Chap. 22. — 38. Dativus of Badiae' said
"We, so far as lies within our power, refuse
to communicate with a heretic, unless he has
been baptized in the Church, and received re-
mission of his sins." ^

39. The answer to this is: If your reason
for wishing him to be baptized is that he has
not received remission of sins, supposing you
find a man within the Church who has been
baptized, though entertaining hatred towards
his brother, since the Lord cannot lie, who
says, "If ye forgive not men their trespasses,
neither will your Father forgive your tres-
p.isses," 3 will you bid such an one, when cor-
rected, to be baptized afresh ? Assuredly not;
so neither should you bid the heretic. It is
clear that we must not pass unnoticed why he
did not briefly say, " We do not communicate
w ith a heretic," but added, " so far as lies
within our power." For he saw that a greater
number agreed with this view, from whose
communion, however, he and his friends
could not separate themselves, lest unity
should be impaired, and so he added, " so far

' Badiae (Vada) in ecclesiastical province of Numidia.
'.itiviis see Cypr. Epp. Ixxvi., Ixxvii.
- Cone. Carth. sec. 15. 3 Matt. vi. 15.

For

as lies within our power,'' — showing beyond
all doubt that he did not w'illingly communi-
cate with those whom he held to be without
baptism, but that yet all things were to be en-
dured for the sake of peace and unity; just
as was done also by those who thought that
Dativus and his party were in the wrong, and
who held what afterwards was taught by a
fuller declaration of the truth, and urged by
ancient custom, which received the stronger
confirmation of a later Council; yet in turn,
with anxious piety, they showed toleration
towards each other, though without violation
of Christian charity they entertained differ-
ent opinions, endeavoring to keep the unity of
the Spirit in the bond of peace, •» till God should
reveal to one of them, were he otherwise
minded, even this error of his ways.s And to
this I would have those give heed, by whom
unity is attacked on the authority of this very
Council by which it is declared how much
unity should be loved.

Chap. 23. — 40. Successus of Abbir Ger-
maniciana* said: "Heretics may either do
nothing or everything. If they can baptize,
they can also give the Holy Spirit; but if they
cannot give the Holy Spirit, because they do
not possess the Holy Spirit, then can they not
either spiritually baptize. Therefore we give
our judgment that heretics should be bap-
tized." '

41. To this we may answer almost word for
word: Murderers may either do nothing or
everything. If they can baptize, they can
also give the Holy Spirit; but if they cannot
give the Holy Spirit, because they do not pos-
sess the Holy Spirit, then can they not either
spiritually baptize. Therefore we give our
judgment that persons baptized by murderers,
or murderers themselves who have been bap-
tized without being converted, should, when
they have corrected themselves, be baptized.
Yet this is not true. For " whosoever hatetn
his brother is a murderer;" * and Cyprian knew
such men within the Church, who certainly
baptized. Therefore it is to no purpose
that words of this sort are used concerning
heretics.

Chap. 24. — 42. Fortunatus of Thucca-
bori 9 said : ' ' Jesus Christ our Lord and God,
the Son of God the Father and Creator, built
His Church upon a rock, not upon heresy,

4 F.ph. iv. 3. 5 Phil. iii. 15.

<> Abbir Germaniciana was in ecclesiastical province of Zeugi-
tana, or Africa Proconsularis. Successiis probably identical with
one mentioned in Cypr. Epp. Ivii., Ixvii., Ixx., Ixxx.

7 Cone. Carth. sec. 16. * i John iii. 15.

9 Thuccabori.Tucca orTerebrinthina, in ecclesiastical province
of Africa Proconsularis or Zeugitana. For Bp. Fortunatus, see
Cypr. Epp. xlviii., Ivi., Ivii. (the first), Ixvii., Ixx.

490

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book VI.

and gave the power of baptizing to bishops,
not to heretics. Wherefore those who are
outside the Church, and stand against Christ,
scattering His sheep and flock, cannot bap-
tize outside." '

43. He added the word " outside " in order
that he might not be answered with a like
brevity to Successus. For otherwise he
misiht also have been answered word for
word: Jesus Christ our Lord and God, the
Son of God the Father and Creator, built His
Church upon a rock, not upon iniquity, and
gave the power of baptizing to bishops, not
to the unrighteous. Wherefore those who do
not belong to the rock on which they build,
who hear the word of God and do it,- but, liv-
ing contrary to Christ in hearing the word and
not doing it, and hereby building on the sand,
in this way scatter His sheep and flock by the
example of an abandoned character, cannot
baptize. Might not this be said with all the
semblance of truth ? and yet it is false. For
the unrighteous do baptize, since those robbers
are unrighteous whom Cyprian maintained to
be at unity with himself. ^ But for this reason,
says the Donatist, he adds " outside." Why
therefore can they not baptize outside ? Is it
because they are worse from the very fact that
they are outside ? But it makes no difference,
in respect of the validity of baptism, how
much worse the minister m.ay be. For there
is not so much difference between bad and
worse as between good and bad; and yet,
when the bad baptizes, he gives the selfsame
sacrament as the good. Therefore, also,
when the worse baptizes, he gives the self-
same sacrament as the less bad. Or is it that
it is not in respect of man's merit, but of the
sacrament of baptism itself, that it cannot be
given outside ? If this were so, neither could
it be possessed outside, and it would be nec-
essary that a man should be baptized again
so often as he left the Church and again re-
turned to it.

44. Further, if we inquire more carefully
what is meant by "outside," especially as he
himself makes mention of the rock on which
the Church is built, are not they in the
Church who are on the rock, and they who
are not on the rock, not in the Church either ?
Now. therefore, let us see whether they build
their house upon a rock who hear the words
of Christ and do them not. The Lord Him-
self declares the contrary, saying, " Whoso-
ever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth
them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which
built his house upon a rock;" and a little
later, " Every one that heareth these sayings

' Cone. Garth, sec. 17.
= Cypr. Serin, de Laps.

2 Matt. vii. 24.

of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened
unto a foolish man, which built his house
upon the sand."'' If, therefore, the Church
is on a rock, those who are on the sand^ be-
cause they are outside the rock, are necessa-
rily outside the Church. Let us recollect,
therefore, how many Cyprian mentions as
placed within who build upon the sand, that
is, who hear the words of Christ and do them
not. And therefore, because they are on
the sand, they are proved to be outside the
rock, that is, outside the Church; yet even
while they are so situated, and are either not
yet or never changed for the better, not only
do they baptize and are baptized, but the
baptism which they have remains valid in
them though they are destined to damnation.
45. Neither can it be said in this place, s
Yet who is there that doeth all the words of
the Lord which are written in the evangelic
sermon itself,5 at the end of which He says,
that he who heard the said words and did
them built upon a rock, and he who heard
them and did them not built upon the sand ?
For, granting that by certain persons all the
words are not accomplished, 3^et in the same
sermon He has appointed the remedy, saying,
" Forgive, and ye shall be forgiven."^ And
after the Lord's prayer had been recorded in
detail in the same sermon, He says, " For I
say unto you, if ye forgive men their tres-
passes, your heavenly Father will also forgive
you: but if ye forgive not men their tres-
passes, neither will your Father forgive your
trespasses." ' Hence also Peter says, " For
charity shall cover the multitude of sins;"^
which charity they certainly did not have, and
on this account they built upon the sand, of
whom the same Cyprian says, that within the
Church they held conversation, even in the
time of the apostles, in unkindly hatred alien
from Christian charity; ^ and therefore they
seemed indeed to be within, but really were
without, because they were not on that rock
by which the Church is signified.

Chap. 25.-^46. Sedatus of Tuburbo '°
said: "Inasmuch as water, sanctified by the
prayer of the priest in the Church, washes
away sins, just so much does it multiply sins
when infected, as by a cancer, with the words
of heretics. Wherefore one must strive, with
all such efforts as conduce to peace, that no
one who has been infected and tainted by

4 Matt. vii. 24, 26.

5 It is pointed out by the Louvain editors that this passage
shows that Augustin considered our Lord's precept to comprehend
everything contained in the Sermon on the Mount.

6 Luke vi. 37. 7 .\!att.vi. 14, 15.

^ I Pet. iv. 8. 9 Cypr. Ep. Lxxiii. 14.

K' Tuburbo (Thuburbo) was in the ecclesiastical province of
Zeugitana. Sedatus is not unlikely the same as the one men-
tioned in Cypr. Epp. iv., l.xvii., Ixx.

Chap. XXVI. J

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

491

heretical error should refuse to receive the
one true baptism, with which whosoever is
not baptized shall not inherit the kingdom
of heaven.'' '

47. To this we answer, that if the water is
not sanctified, when through want of skill the
priest who pra3's utters some words of error,
many, not only of the bad, but of the good
brethren in the Church itself, fail to sanctify
the water. For the prayers of many are cor-
rected every day on being recited to men of
f,^reater learning, and many things are found
in them contrary to the Catholic faith. Sup-
posing, then, that it were shown that some
persons were baptized when these prayers had
been uttered over the water, will they be
bidden to be baptized afresh ? Why not ?
Because generally the fault in the prayer is
more than counterbalanced by the intent of
him who offers it; and those fixed words of
the gospel, without which baptism cannot be
consecrated, are of such efificacj'', that, by
their virtue, anything faulty that is uttered in
the prayer contrary to the rule of faith is
made of no effect, just as the devil is excluded
by the name of Cnrist. For it is clear that if
a heretic utters a faulty prayer, he has no
good intent of love whereby that want of skill
may be compensated, and therefore he is like
any envious or spiteful person in the Catholic
Church itself, such as Cyprian proves to exist
within the Church. Or one might offer some
prayer, as not unfrequently happens, in which
he should speak against the rule of faith, since
many rush into the use of prayers which are
composed not only by unskillful men who love
to talk, but even by heretics, and in the sim-
plicity of ignorance, not being able to discern
their true character, use them, thinking they
are good; and yet what is erroneous in them
does not vitiate what is right, but rather it is
rendered null thereby, just as in the man of
good hope and approved faith, who yet is but
a man, if in anything he be otherwise minded,
what he holds aright is not thereby vitiated
until God reveal to him also that in which he
is otherwise minded.^ But supposing that the
j man himself is wicked and perverse, then, if
' he should offer an upright prayer, in no part
contrary to the Catholic faith, it does not fol-
low that because the prayer is right the man
himself is also right; and if over some he
offer an erroneous prayer, God is present to
j uphold the words of His gospel, without
I which the baptism of Christ cannot be conse-
crated, and He Himself consecrates His sac-
rament, that in the recipient, either before he
is baptized, or when he is baptized, or at some

• Cone. Carth sec. 18.

= Phil. iii. 15.

future time when he turns in truth to God,
that very sacrament may be profitable to sal-
vation, which, w-ere he not to be converted,
would be powerful to his destruction. But
who is tiiere who does not know that there is
no baptism of Christ, if the words of the gos-
pel in wiiich consists the outward visible sign
be not forthcoming? But you will more
easily find heretics who do not baptize at all,
than any who baptize without those words.
And therefore we say, not that every baptism
(for in many of the blasphemous rites of idols
men are said to be baptized), but that the bap-
tism of Christ, that is, every baptism conse-
crated in the words of the gospel, is every-
where the same, and cannot be vitiated by
any perversity on the part of any men.^

48. We must certainly not lightly pass over
in this judgment that he here inserted a clause,
and says, " Wherefore we must strive, with
all such efforts as conduce to peace, that no
one who has been infected," etc. For he
had regard to those words of the blessed Cy-
prian in his opening speech, "Judging no
man, nor depriving any of the right of com-
munion if he entertain a different view." See
of what power is the love of unity and peace
in the good sons of the Church, that they
should choose rather to show tolerance towards
those whom they called sacrilegious and pro-
fane, being admitted, as they thought, witiiout
the sacrament of baptism, if they could not
correct them as they thought was right, than
on their account to break that holy bond, lest
on account of the tares the wheat also should
be rooted out,-* — permitting, so far as rested
with them, as in that noblest judgment of
Solomon, that the infant body should rather
be nourished by the false mother than be cut
in pieces. 5 But this was the opinion both of
those who held the truer view about the sac-
rament of baptism, and of those to whom God,
in consideration of their great love, was pur-
posing to reveal any point in which they were
otherwise minded.

Chap. 26. — 49 Privatianus of Sufetula*
said: " He who says that heretics have the
power of baptizing should first say who it was
that founded heresy. For if heresy is of God,
it may have the divine favor; but if it be not
of God, how can it either have or confer on
any one the grace of God ? " '

50. This man may thus be answered word

3 See above. III. cc. 14, 15. * Matt. xiii. 29.

5 I Kings iii. 26.

6 Sufetula was a town in ecclesiastical province of Bvzacene,
twenty-five miles from Sufes (same priivince), of which the name
is a diminutive. Bp. Privatianus is mentioned in Cypr. Epp. Ivi.,
Ivii.

7 Cone. Carth. sec. ig.

49-

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book VI.

for word: He who says that malicious and
envious persons have the power of baptizing,
should first say who was the founder of malice
and envy. For if malice and envy are of
God, they may have the divine favor; but if
they are not of God, how can they either have
or confer on any one the grace of God ? But
as these words are in the same way most
manifestly false, so are also those which these
were uttered to confute. For the malicious
and envious baptize, as even Cyprian himself
allows, because he bears testimony that they
also are within. So therefore even heretics
may baptize, because baptism is the sacra-
ment of Christ; hut envy and heresy are the
works of the devil. Yet though a man possesses
them, he does not thereby cause that if he
have the sacrament of Christ, it also should
itself be reckoned in the number of the devil's
works.

Chap. 27. — 51. Privatus of Sufes ^ said:
'' What can be said of the man who approves
the baptism of heretics, save that he commu-
nicates with heretics V^

52. To this we answer: It is not the bap-
tism of heretics which we approve in heretics,
as it is not the baptism of the covetous, or
the treacherous, or deceitful, or of robbers,
or of envious men which we approve in them;
for all of these are unjust, but Christ is just,
■whose sacrament existing in them, they do
not in its essence violate. Otherwise another
man might say: What can be said of the
man who approves the baptism of the un-
just, save that he communicates with the
unjust. And if this objection were brought
against the Catholic Church herself, it would
be answered just as I have answered the
above.

Chap. 28. — 53. Hortensianus of Lares ^
said: " How many baptisms there are, let
those who uphold or favor heretics determine.
We assert one baptism of the Church, which
Ave only know in the Church. Or how can
those baptize any one in the name of Christ
Avhom Christ Himself declares to be His
enemies ? " '•

54. Giving answer to this man in a like
tenor of words, we say: Let those who uphold
or favor the unrighteous see to it: we recall
to the Church when we can the one baptism
which we know to be of the Church alone,
wherever it be found. Or how can they bap-

^ See n. 6. p. 475.
- Cone. Garth, sec. 20.

3 Lares, in ecclesiastical province of Numidia. Hortensianus
is very likely the same as the one in Cypr. Epp. Ivii., Ix.x.
•* Cone. Carth. sec. 21.

tize any one in the name of Christ whom
Christ Himself declares to be His enemies ':'
For He says to all the unrighteous, " I never
knew you: depart from me, ye that work in-
iquity; "^ and yet, when they baptize, it is
not themselves that baptize, but He of whom
John says, "The same is He which bap-
tizeth."^

Chap. 29. — 55. Cassius of Macomades'
said: " Since there cannot be two baptisms,
he w^ho grants baptism unto heretics takes it
away from himself. I therefore declare my
judgment that heretics, those objects for our
tears, those masses of corruption,^ should be
baptized when they begin to come to the
Cliurch, and that so being washed by the sa-
cred and divine laver, and enlightened with
the light of life, they may be received into
the Church, — as being now made not enemies,
but peaceful; not strangers, but of the house-
hold of the faith of the Lord; not bastards, '
but sons of God; partaking not of error, but
of salvation, — with the exception of those
who, being believers transplanted from the
Church, had gone over to heresy, and that
these should be restored by the laying on of
hands."'"

56. Another might say: Since there cannot
be two baptisms, he who grants baptism to the
unrighteous takes it away from himself. But
even our opponents would join us in resisting
such a man when he says that we grant bap-
tism to the unrighteous, which is not of the
unrighteous, like their unrighteousness, but
of Christ, of whom is righteousness, and
w^hose sacrament, even among the unright-
eous, is not unrighteous. What, therefore,
they would join us in saying of the unright-
eous, that let them say to themselves of here-
tics. And therefore he should rather have
said as follows: I therefore give my judgment
that heretics, those objects for our tears, those
masses of corruption, should not be baptized
when they begin to come to the Church, if
they already have the baptism of Christ, but
should be corrected from their error. For
we may similarly say of the unrighteous, of
whom the heretics are a part: I therefore give

5 INIatt. vii. 23. 6 John i. 33.

7 Macomades [in ecclesiastical province of Numidia. Pip. Cas-
sius is probably to be identified with the one in Cypr. Ep. Ix.v.

** Flebiles et tabidos. This is otherwise taken of the repentant
heretics, " Melting with the grief and wretchedness of penitence;"
but Kishop P'ell points out that the interpretation in the te.xt is
supported by an expression in c. 3^, 63 : Mens hcFvei'ica, gtice
diniurna tahe polliita est. Routh lie!. Sac. iii. p. 199.

9 AduUL'7-os. So all the MSs. of Augustin, though in Cyprian is
sometimes found " adulien'nos." In classical Latin, however,
" (f(/«^/i't'r/i' " is sometimes used in the sense of " tidii/it-rinus."
Cassius seems to have had in mind Heb. xii. 8, " Then are ye bas-
tards, and not sons."

'■J Cone. Carth. sec. 22.

Chap. XXXI.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

49:

my judgment that the unrighteous, those ob-
jects for our tears, and masses of corruption,
if they have been already baptized, should
not be baptized again when they begin to
come to the Church, that is, to that rock out-
side which are all who hear the words of
Christ and do them not; but being already
washed with the sacred and divine laver, and
now further enlightened with the light of
truth, should be received into the Church no
longer as enemies but as peaceful, for the
unrighteous have no peace; no longer as
strangers, but of the household of the faith of
the Lord, for to the unrighteous it is said,
" How then art thou turned into the degener-
ate plant of a strange vine unto me?"' no
longer as bastards, but the sons of God, for
the unrighteous are the sons of the devil, par-
taking not of error but of salvation, iov un-
righteousness cannot save. And by the
Church I mean that rock, that dove, that
garden enclosed and fountain sealed, which
is recognized only in the wheat, not in the
chaff, whether that be scattered far apart by
the wind, or appear to be mingled with the
corn even till the last winnowing. In vain,
therefore, did Cassius add, "With ttie excep-
tion of those who, being believers transplanted
from the Church, had gone over to heresy. '
For if even they themselves had lost baptism
by seceding, to themselves also let 't be re-
stored; but if they had not lost it, let what
was given by them receive due recognition.

Chap. 30. — 57. Another Januarius of Yicus
Csesaris- said: " If error does not obey truth,
much more does truth refuse assent to error;
and therefore we stand by the Church in which
we preside, so that, claiming her baptism for
herself alone, we baptize those whom the
Church has not baptized." ^

58. We answer: Whom the Church bap-
tizes, those that rock baptizes outside which
are all they who hear the words of Christ and
do them not. Let all, therefore, be baptized
again who have been baptized by such. But
if this is not done, then, as we recognize the
baptism of Christ in these, so should we
recognize it in heretics, though we either con-
demn or correct their unrighteousness and
error.

Chap. 31. — 59. Another Secundinus of
Carpis" said: "Are heretics Christians or

' Jer. ii. 21.

2 Vicus Ca;saris, probably of ecclesiastical province of B^•zaci-
um. This l!p. Januarius may be the second of that name m Cypr.
Ep. Ixvii., and is to be distinguished from P.p. Januarius of Lam-
bJEse, ch. xiii. 20.

3 Cone. Garth, sec. 23.

4 Carpis ((^arpos) was in ecclesiastical province of Zeugitana.
See for Secundinus, note on chap. iS.

not? If they are Christians, why are they
not in the Church of God? If they are not
Christians, let them be made so.^ Else what
will be the reference in the discourse of the
Lord, in which He says, ' He that is not with
me is against me; and he that gathereth not
with me scattereth abroad ? ' ^ Whence it is
clear that on strange children and the off-
spring of Antichrist the Holy Spirit cannot
descend by the laying on of hands alone, since
it is clear that heretics have not baptism." ="

60. To this we answer: Are the unrighteous
Christians or not? If they are Christians,
why are they not on that rock on which the
Church is built? for they hear the words of
Christ and do them not. If they are not
Christians, let them be made so. Else what
will be the reference in the discourse of our
Lord, in which He says, " He that is not with
me is against me; and he that gathereth not
with me scattereth abroad ? " For they scat-
ter His sheep who lead them to the ruin of
their lives by a false imitation of the Lord.
Whence it is clear that upon strange children
(as all the unrighteous are called), and upon
the offspring of Antichrist (which all are who
oppose themselves to Christ), the Holy Spirit
cannot descend by the laying on of hands
alone, if there be not added a true conversion
of the heart; since it is clear that the un-
righteous, so long as they are unrighteous,
may indeed have baptism, but cannot have
the salvation of which baptism is the sacra-
ment. For let us see whether heretics are
described in that psalm where the follow-
ing words are used of strange children:
" Deliver me, O Lord, from the hand of
strange children, whose mouth speaketh van-
ity, and their right hand is a right hand of
falsehood: whose sons are like young shoots
well established, and their daughters polished
after the similitude of the temple. Their
garners are full, affording all manner of store;
their sheep are fruitful, bringing forth plente-
ously in their streets; their oxen are strong:
there is no breaking down of their fence, no
opening of a passage out, no complaining in
their streets. Men deemed happy the people
that is in such a case; rither blessed is the
people whose God is the Lord."^ If, there-
fore, those are strange children who place
their happiness in temporal things, and in the
abundance of earthly prosperity, and depsise
the commandments of the Lord, let us see
whether these are not the very same of whom
Cyprian so speaks, transforming them also

5 Fiant. Another reading in some Mss. of Cyprian (not found
in those of .AuKustin) is, '^ quomodo C/tristittuos /aciuiit," which
is less in harmony with the context.

6 Matt. xii. 30. 7 Cone. Carth. sec. 24.
s Ps. cxiiv. 11-15, soLXX. cp. Hieron. Ps. c.xliii. 11-15.

494

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book VI.

into himself, that he may show that he is
speaking of men with whom he held com-
munion in the sacraments: " In not keep-
ing," he says, " the way of the Lord, nor ob-
serving the heavenly commandments given
us for our salvation. Our Lord did the will
of His Father, and we do not do the will of
the Lord, being eager about our patrimony
or our gains, following after pride, and so
forth." ' But if these could both have and
transmit baptism, why is it denied that it may
e.xist among strange children, whom he yet
exhorts, that, by keeping the heavenly com-
mandments conveyed to them through the
only-begotten Son, they should deserve to be
His brethren and the sons of God ?

Chap. 32. — 61. Victorious of Thabraca^
said: " If heretics may baptize, and give re-
mission of sins, why do we destroy their credit,
and call them heretics ?"^

62. What if another were to say: If the un-
righteous may baptize, and give remission of
sins, why do we destroy their credit, and call
them unrighteous ? The answer which we
should give to such an one concerning the un-
righteous may also be given to the other con-
cerning heretics, — that is, in the first place,
that the baptism with which they baptize is
not theirs; and secondly, that it does not
follow that whosoever has the baptism of
Christ is also certain of the remission of his
sins if he has this only in the outward sign,
and is not converted with a true conversion
of the heart, so that he who gives remission
should himself have remission of his sins.

Chap. 33. — 63. Another Felix of Uthina''
said: " No one can doubt, most holy brethren
in the priesthood, that human presumption
has not so much power as the adorable and
venerable majesty of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Remembering then the danger, we ought not
only to observe this ourselves, but to confirm
it by our general consent, that all heretics
who come to the bosom of our mother the
Church be baptized, that the heretical mind,
which has been polluted by long-continued
corruption, may be reformed when cleansed
by the sanctification of the laver." s

64. Perhaps the man who has placed the
strength of his case for the baptizing of here-

I Cypr. Presbyteris ei diaconihus /ratrihus^'E.p. xi. i.

= Thabraca was on the coast of Numidia, in ecclesiastical prov-
ince of that name, the frontier town towards Zeugitana, at the
mouth of the Tucca. The name of a Victoricus occurs in Cypr.
Epp. Ivii., Ixvii.

3 Cone. Garth, sec. 25.

4 Uthina was in ecclesiasticalr province of Zeugitana. This
Feli.\ is to be distinguished from the bishop of Bagai, ch. 19: A
reference to a bishop of Utina is made by Tert. de Monog. ch. xii.,
but he cannot have been this Felix, as some assume.

5 Cone. Garth, sec. 26.

ong-

tics in the cleansing away of the
continued corruption, would spare those who
having fallen headlong into some heresy, had
remained in it a brief space, and presently
being corrected, had passed from thence to
the Catholic Church. Furthermore, he has
himself failed to observe that it might be
said that all unrighteous persons who come to
that rock, in which is understood the Church,
should be baptized, so that the unrighteous
mind, which was building outside the rock
upon the sand by hearing the words of Christ
and not doing them, might be reformed when
cleansed by the sanctification of the laver;
and yet this is not done if they have been
baptized already, even if it be proved that
such was their character when they were bap-
tized, that is, that they " renounced the world
in words and not in deeds."

Chap. 34. — 65. Quietus of Burug^ said:
" We who live by faith ought with believing
observance to obey what has been before
foretold for our instruction. For it is written
in Solomon, ' He that is washed by one dead,
what availeth his washing ? ' ' Which assuredly
he says of those who are washed by heretics,
and of those who wash. For if they who are
baptized among them receive eternal life
through the remission of their sins, why do
they come to the Church ? But if no salva-
tion is received from a dead person, and they
therefore, acknowledging their former error,
return with penance to the truth, they ought
to be sanctified with the one life-giving bap-
tism which is in the Catholic Church." ®

66. What it is to be baptized b)^ the dead,
we have already, without prejudice to the
more careful consideration of the same scrip-
ture, sufficiently declared before.' But I
would ask why it is that they wish heretics
alone to be considered dead, when Paul the
apostle has said generally of sin, " The wages
of sin is death; " '° and again, "To be carnally
minded is death." " And when he says that
a widow that liveth in pleasure is dead," how
are they not dead " who renounce the world
in words and not in deeds"? What, there-
fore, is the profit of washing in him who is
baptized by them, except, indeed, that if he
himself also is of the same character, he has
the laver indeed, but it does not profit him to
salvation ? But if he by whom he is baptized

6 Burug (Buruc) or Burca was in ecclesiastical province of Nu-
midia. Quietus may be identical with the one mentioned in Cypr.
Ep. Ixvii.

7 In the English version this is, " He that washeth himself af-
ter touching a dead body, if he touch it again, what availeth his
washing?" — Ecclus. xxxiv. 25.

8 Gone. Garth, sec. 27.

9 Contra Pcirvienianunt ,11. 10. 22. '° Rom. vi. 23.
" Rom. viii. 6. '^ i Tim. v. 6.

Chap. XXXVII.j

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

495

is such, but the man who is baptized is turned
to the Lord with no false heart, he is not bap-
tized by that dead person, but by that living
One of whom it is said, "The same is He
wiiich i^aptizeth!"' But to what he says of
heretics, that if they who are baptized among
them receive eternal life through the remis-
sion of their sins, why do they come to the ,
Church ? we answer: They come for this rea- 1
son, that although they have received the
baptism of Christ up to the point of the cele-
bration of the sacrament, yet they cannot at-
tain to life eternal save through the charity
of unity; just as neither would those envious
and malicious ones attain to life eternal, who
would not have their sins forgiven them, even
if they entertained hatred only against those
from whom they suffered wrong; since the
Truth said, " If ye forgive not men their tres-
passes, neither will your Father forgive your
trespasses,"^ how much less when they were
hating those towards whom they were reward-
ing evil for good?^ And yet these men,
though " renouncing the world in words and
not in deeds," would not be baptized again,
if they should afterwards be corrected, but
they would be made holy by the one living
baptism. And this is indeed in the Catholic
Church, but not in it alone, as neither is it
in the saints alone who are built upon the
rock, and of whom that one dove is composed/

Chap. 35. — 67. Castus of Sicca^ said: He
who presumes to follow custom in despite of
truth is either envious and evilly disposed
towards the brethren to whom the truth is
revealed, or else he is ungrateful towards
God, by whose inspiration His Church is in-
structed."^

68. If this man proved that those who dif-
fered from him, and held the view that has
since been held by the whole world under the
sanction of a Christian Council, were follow-
ing custom so as to despise truth, we should
have reason for fearing these words; but see-
ina: that this custom is found both to have had
Its origin in truth and to have been confirmed
hy truth, we have nothing to fear in this judg-
ment. And yet, if they were envious or
evilly disposed towards the brethren, or un-
grateful towards God, see with what kind of
men they were willing to hold communion;
^ee what kind of men, holding different
opinions from their own, they treated as
Cyprian enjoined them at the first, not re-
moving them from the right of communion;

' John i. 33. 2 Matt. vi. 15.

3 Ps. xx,\v. 12. 4 Cant. vi. 9.

5 Sicca was in ecclesiastical province of Zeiigitana. This is
certainly not the Castus of Cypr. dc Laps. c. xiii.
* C\>nj. Garth, sec. zS.

see by what kind of men they were not pol-
luted in the preservation of unity; see how
greatly the bond of peace was to be loved;
see what views they hold who bring charges
against us, founded on the Council of bishops,
tneir predecessors, whose example they do
not imitate, and by whose example, when the
rights of the case are considered, they are
condemned. If it was the custom, as this
judgment bears witness, that heretics coming
to the Church should be received with the
baptism which they already had, either this
was done rightly, or the evil do not pollute
the good in unity. If it was rightly done,
why do they accuse the world because they
are so received ? But if the evil do not pol-
lute the good in unity, how do they defend
themselves against the charge of sacrilegious
separation ?

Chap. 36. — 69. Eucratius of Theni'said:
"Our God and Lord Jesus Christ, teaching
the apostles with His own mouth, fully laid
down our faith, and the grace of baptism, and
the rule of the law of the Church, saying,
' Go ye, and teach all nations, baptizing them
in the name of the Father, and of the Son,
and of the Holy Ghost.' ^ Therefore the
false and unrighteous baptism of heretics is
to be repudiated by us, and contradicted with
all solemnity of witness, seeing that from
their mouth issues not life, but poison, not
heavenly grace, but blaspheming of the
Trinity. And so it is plain that heretics
coming to the Church ought to be baptized
with perfect and Catholic baptism, that, being
purified from the blasphemy of their presump-
tion, they may be reformed by the grace of
the Holy Spirit."^

70. Clearly, if the baptism is not conse-
crated in the name of the Father, and of the
Son, and of the Holy Ghost, it should be
considered to be of the heretics, and re-
pudiated as unrighteous by us with all so-
lemnity of witness; but if we discern this
name in it, we do better to distinguish the
words of the gospel from heretical error, and
approve what is sound in them, correcting
what is faulty.

Chap. 37. — 71. Libosus of Vaga" said:
"The Lord says in the gospel, 'I am the
truth;' " He did not say, I am custom. There-
fore, when the truth is made manifest, let
custom yield to truth; so that, if even in time

7 Then! was in ecclesiastical province of Hyzacene. A Eucra-
tius occurs in Cypr. Ep. ii.

8 Matt, xxviii. 19. 9 Cone. Garth, sec. 29.

'0 Vaga was in ecclesiastical province of Byzacium. 'I'he name
of a Libosus occurs in Cypr. Kp. Ixvii.
'■ John xiv. 6.

496

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book VI.

past any one did not baptize heretics in the
Church, he may now begin to baptize them."'
72. Here he has in no way tried to show
how that is the truth to which he says that
custom ought to yield. But it is of more im-
portance that he helps us against those who
have separated themselves from unity, by
confessing that the custom existed, than that
he thinks it ought to yield to a truth which he
does not show. For the custom is of such a
nature, that if it admitted sacrilegious men to
the altar of Christ without the cleansing of
baptism, and polluted none of the good men
who remained in unity, then all who have cut
themselves off from the same unity, in which
they could not be polluted by the contagion
of any evil persons whatsoever, have separated
themselves without reason, and have com-
mitted the manifest sacrilege of schism. But
if all perished in pollution through that cus-
tom, from what cavern do they issue without
the original truth, and with all the cunning of
calumny? If, however, the custom was a
right one by which heretics were thus re-
ceived, let them abandon their madness, let
them confess their error; let them come to the
Catholic Church, not that they may be bathed
again with the sacrament of baptism, but that
they may be cured from the wound of sever-
ance.

Chap. 38. — 73. Lucius of Thebaste ^ said:
"I declare my judgment that heretics, and
blasphemers, and unrighteous men, who with
various words pluck away the sacred and
adorable words of the Scriptures, should be
held accursed, and therefore exorcised and
baptized." 3

74. I too think that they should be held
accursed, but not that therefore they should
be exorcised and baptized; for it is their own
falsehood which I hold accursed, but Christ^s
sacrament which I venerate.

Chap. 39. — 75. Eugenius of Ammedera'*
said: " I too pronounce this same judgment,
that heretics should be baptized.'' s

76. To him we answer: But this is not the
judgment which the Church pronounces, to
which also God has now revealed in a plenary
Council the point in which ye were then still
otherwise minded,* but because saving charity
was in you, ye remained in unity.

Chap. 40. — 77. Also another Felix of

' Cone. Garth, sec. 30.

- Thebaste (Thebeste) in ecclesiastical province of Numidia.
For Lucius, cp. c. 14.

3 Cone. Garth, sec. 31.

4 Ammedera, probably in ecclesiastical province of Proconsu-
laris Africa.

5 Cone. Garth, sec. 32. 6 Phil. iii. 15.

Ammacura^ said: " I too, following the au-
thority of the holy Scriptures, give my judg-
ment that heretics should be baptized, and
with them those also who maintain that they
have been baptized among schismatics. For
if, according to the warning of Christ, our
fountain is sealed to ourselves,*^ let all the
enemies of our Church understand that it can-
not belong to others; nor can He who is the
Shepherd of our flock give the water unto sal-
vation to two different peoples. And there-
fore it is clear that neither heretics nor schis-
matics can receive anything heavenly, who
dare to accept from men that are sinners and
aliens from the Church. When the giver has
no ground to stand upon, surely neither can
the receiver derive any profit. "»

78. To him we answer, that the holy Script-
ures nowhere have enjoined that heretics
baptized among heretics should be baptized
afresh, but that they have shown in many
places that all are aliens from the Church who
are not on the rock, nor belong to the mem-
bers of the dove, and yet that they baptize
and are baptized and have the sacrament of
salvation without salvation. But how our
fountain is like the fountain of Paradise, in
that, like it, it flows forth even beyond the
bounds of Paradise, has been sufficiently set
forth above; " and that "" He who is the Shep-
herd of our flock cannot give the water unto
salvation to two different peoples," that is,
to one that is His own, and to another that
is alien, I fully agree in admitting. But does
it follow that because the water is not unto
salvation it is not the identical water ? For
the water of the deluge was for salvation unto
those who were placed within the ark, but it
brought death to those without, and yet it was
the same water. And many aliens, that is to
say, envious persons, whom Cyprian declares
and proves from Scripture to be of the party
of the devil, seem as it were to be within, and
yet, if they were not without the ark, they
would not perish by water. For such men
are slain by baptism, as the sweet savor of
Christ was unto death to those of whom the
apostle speaks." Why then do not either
heretics or schismatics receive anything heav-
enly, just as thorns or tares, like those who
were without the ark received indeed the rain
from the floods of heaven, but to destruc-
tion, not to salvation ? And so I do not take
the pains- to refute what he said in conclusion:
"When the giver has no ground to stand
upon, surely neither can the receiver derive

7 Ammacura (Bamacorra) in ecclesiastical province of Nu-
midia.

s Cant. iv. 12. 9 Cone. Garth, sec. 33.

'o Gh. 21, 37. •' 2 Gor. ii. 15.

Chap. XLIV.]

ON B.^TIS.M, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

497

any profit," since we also say that it does not
profit the receivers while they receive it in
heresy, consenting with the heretics; and
therefore they come to Catholic peace and
unity, not that they may receive baptism, but
that what they had received may begin to
profit them.

Chap. 41. — 79. Also another Januarius of
Muzuli' said: " I wonder that, while all ac-
knowledge that there is one baptism, all do
not understand the unity of the same baptism.
For the Church and heresy are two distinct
things. If heretics have baptism we have it
not; but if we have it, heretics cannot have
it. But there is no doubt that the Church
alone possesses the baptism of Christ, since it
alone possesses both the fa\ror and the truth
of Christ.'' =

80. Another might equally say, and say
with equal want of truth: I wonder that,
while all confess there is one baptism, all do
not understand the unity of baptism. For
righteousness and unrighteousness are two
distinct things. If the unrighteous have bap-
tism, the righteous have it not; but if the
righteous have it, the unrighteous cannot have
it. But there is no doubt that the righteous
alone possess the baptism of Christ, since
they alone possess both the favor and the
truth of Christ. This is certainly false, as
they confess themselves. For those envious
ones also who are of the party of the devil,
though placed within the Church, as Cyprian
tells us, and who were well known to the
Apostle Paul, had baptism, but did not belong
to the members of that dove which is safely
sheltered on the rock.

Chap. 42. — 81. Adelphius of Thasbalte^
said: "It is surely without cause that they
find fault with the truth in false and invidious
ttrms, saying that we rebaptize, since the
( Viurch does not rebaptize heretics, but bap-
tizes them." ■*

82. Truly enough it does not rebaptize
them, because it only baptizes those who were
iiot baptized before; and this earlier custom
has only been confirmed in a later Council by
:i more careful perfecting of the truth.

Chap. 43.-
Leptis- said:

-83. Demetrius of the Lesser
" We uphold one baptism, be-

■ Muzuli is perh.-ips the same as Muzuca in ecclesiastical prov-

of Byzacium.
• Cone. Garth, sec. 34.

^ Thasbahe (Thasvalthe) was in ecclesiastical province of By-
' ne. An .*\clelphius is mentioned in Cypr. Ep. Ixvii.
■» Cone. Carth. sec. 35.

"^ Leptis the Lesser was in ecclesiastical province of I'yzacene,
Greater being in that of Tnpolis. A Demetrius occurs in
pr. Epp. Ivii., Ixx.

cause we claim for the Catholic Church alone
what is her own. But those who say that
heretics baptize truly and lawfully are them-
selves the men who make, not two, but many
baptisms; for since heresies are many in
number, the baptisms, too, will be reckoned
according to their number."*

84. To him we answer: If this were so,
then would as many baptisms be reckoned as
there are works of the flesh, of which the
apostle says " that they which do such things
shall not inherit the kingdom of God;"'
among which are reckoned also heresies; and
so many of those very works are tolerated
within the Church as thougii in the chaff, and
3''et there is one baptism for them all, which
is not vitiated by any work of unrighteousness.

CH.A.P. 44. — 85. Vincentius of Thibari^
said; " We know that heretics are worse than
heathen.s. If they, being converted, wish to
come to God, they have assuredly a rule of
truth, which the Lord by His divine precept
committed to the apostles, saying, ' Go ye,
lay on hands in my name, cast out devils; ' '
and in another place, ' Go ye, and teach all
nations, baptizing them in the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost.' '° Therefore, first by the laying on
of hands in exorcism, secondly by regenera-
tion in baptism, they may come to the promises
of Christ; but my judgment is that in no other
way should this be done.**"

86. By what rule he asserts that heretics
are worse than heathens I do not know, see-
ing that the Lord says, "If he neglect to
hear the Church, let him be unto thee as a
heathen man and a publican.'*'^ Is a heretic
worse even than such ? I do not gainsay it.
I do not, however, allow that because the man
himself is worse than a heathen, that is, than
a Gentile and pagan, therefore whatever the
sacrament contains that is Christ's is mingled
with his vices and character, and perishes
through the corruption of such admixture.
For if even those who depart from the Church,
and become not the followers but the founders
of heresies, have been baptized before their
secession, they continue to have baptism, al-
though, according to the above rule, they are
worse than heatliens; for if on correction they
return, they do not receive it, as they certainly
would do if they had lost it. It is therefore
possible that a man may be worse than a
heathen, and yet that the sacrament of Christ

6 Cone. Carth. sec. 36. 7 Oal. v. 21.

8 Thibari, perhaps the same as Tabora, in ecclesiastii al province
of Mauritania Ca;sariensis. A Bp. Vincentius is mentioned in
Cypr. Ep. Ixvii.

9 Mark xvi. 15-18. '° Matt, xxviii. iq.
" Cone. Carth. sec. 37. " Matt. .wiii. 17.

49S

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book VI.

may not only be in him, but be not a whit
inferior to what it is in a holy and righteous
man. For although to the extent of his
powers he has not preserved the sacrament,
but done it violence in heart and will, yet so
far as the sacrament's own nature is con-
cerned, it has remained unhurt in its integrity
even in the man who despised and rejected it.
Were not the people of Sodom heathens, that
is to say, Gentiles ? The Jews therefore were
worse, to whom the Lord says, "It shall be
more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the
day of judgment than for thee;"* and to
whom the prophet says, "Thou hast justified
Sodom," ^ that is to say, in comparison with
thee Sodom is righteous. Shall we, however,
maintain that on this account the holy sacra-
ments which existed among the Jews partook of
the nature of the Jews themselves, — those sac-
raments which the Lord Himself also accepted,
and sent the lepers whom He had cleansed
to fulfill them, 3 of which when Zacharias was
administering them, the angel stood by him,
and declared that his prayer had been heard
while he was sacrificing in the temple ? '' These
same sacraments were both in the good men
of that time, and in those bad men who were
worse than are the heathens, seeing that they
were ranked before the Sodomites for wicked-
ness, and yet those sacraments were perfect
and holy in both,

87. For even if the Gentiles themselves
could have anything holy and right in their
doctrines, our saints did not condemn it, how-
ever much the Gentiles themselves were to be
detested for their superstitions and idolatry
and pride, and the rest of their corruptions,

I Jilatt. xi. 24.
3 Luke xvii. 14,

= Ezek. xvi. 51.
4 Luke i. II, 13.

and to be punished with judgment from heaven
unless they submitted to correction. For
when Paul the apostle also was saying some-
thing concerning God before the Athenians,
he adduced as a proof oi what he said, that
certain of them had said something to the
same effect, ^ which certainly would not be
condemned but recognized in them if they
should come to Christ, And the holy Cyprian
uses similar evidence against the same hea-
thens; for, speaking of the magi, he says,
" The chief of them, however, Hostanes, as-
serts both that the form of the true God can-
not be seen, and also that true angels stand
beside His seat. In which Plato also agrees
in like manner, and, maintaining the existence
of one God, he calls the others angels or de-
mons. Hermes Trismegistus also speaks of
one God, and confesses that He is incompre-
hensible, and past our powers of estimation."*
If, therefore, they were to come to the per-
ception of salvation in Christ, it surely would
not be said to them, This that ye have is bad,
or false; but clearly it would deservedly be
said, Though this in you is perfect and true,
yet it would profit nothing unless ye came to
the grace of Christ. If, therefore, anything
that is holy can be found and rightly approved
in the very heathens, although the salvation
which is of Christ is not yet to be granted to
them, we ought not, even though heretics are
worse than they, to be moved to the desire of
correcting what is bad in them belonging to
themselves, without being willing to acknow-
ledge what is good in them of Christ. But
we will set forth from a fresh preface to con-
sider the remaining judgments of this Coun-
cil.

5 Acts xvii: 28.

' Cypr. de Idol. P'aJi'tate, c. vi.

BOOK VIL

IN WHICH THE REMAINING JUDGMENTS OF THE COUNCIL OF CARTHAGE ARE EXAMINED.

Chap. i. — i. Let us not be considered
troublesome to our readers, if we discuss
the same question often and from different
points of view. For although the Holy
Catholic Church throughout all nations be
fortified by the authority of primitive custom
and of a plenary Council against those argu-
ments which throw some darkness over the
question about baptism, whether it can be the
same among heretics and schismatics that it
is in the Catholic Church, yet, since a differ-
ent opinion has at one time been entertained
in the unity of the Church itself, by men who
are in no wise to be despised, and especially
by Cyprian, whose authority men endeavor to
use against us \yho are far removed from his
charity, we are therefore compelled to make
use of the opportunity of examining and
considering all that we find on this subject in
his Council and letters, in order, as it were,
to handle at some considerable length this
same question, and to show how it has more
truly been the decision of the whole body of
the Cathclic Church, that heretics or schis-
matics, wIto have received baptism already in
the body from which they came, should be
admitted with it into the communion of the
Catholic Church, being corrected in their er-
ror and rooted and grounded in the faith,
that, so far as concerns the sacrament of bap-
tism, there should not be an addition of some-
thing that was wanting, but a turning to pro-
fit of what was in them. And the holy Cyprian
indeed, now that the corruptible body no
longer presseth down the soul, nor the earthly
tabernacle presseth down the mind that museth
uix)n many things.' sees with greater clearness
that truth to which his charity made him de-
serving to attain. May he therefore help us
by his prayers, while we labor in the mortality
of the flesh as in a darksome cloud, that if
the Lord so grant it, we may imitate so far as

' Wisd. ix. 15.

we can the good that was in him. But if he
thought otherwise than right on any point,
and persuaded certain of his brethren and
colleagues to entertain his views in a matter
which he now sees clearly through the revela-
tion of Him whom he loved, let us, who are
far inferior to his merits, yet following, as
our weakness will allow, the authority of the
Catholic Church of which he was himself a
conspicuous and most noble member, strive
our utmost against heretics and schismatics,
seeing that they, being cut off from the unity
which he maintained, and barren of the love
with which he was fruitful, and fallen away
from the humility in which he stood, are dis-
avowed and condemned the more by him, in
proportion as he knows that they wish to
search out his writings for purposes of
treachery, and are unwilling to imitate what
he did for the .maintainance of peace, — like
those who, calling themselves Nazarene
Christians, and circumcising the foreskin of
their flesh after the fashion of the Jews, be-
ing heretics by birth in that error from which
Peter, when straying from the truth, was
called by Paul- persist in the same to the pre-
sent day. As therefore they have remained
in their perversity cut off from the body of
the Church, while Peter has been crowned in
the primacy of the apostles through the glory
of martyrdom, so these men, while Cyprian,
through the abundance of his love, has been
received into the portion of the saints through
the brightness of his passion, are obliged to
recognize themselves as exiles from unity,
and, in defence of their calumnies, set up a
citizen of unity as an opponent against the
very home of unity. Let us, therefore, go on
to examine the other judgments of that Coun-
cil after the same fashion.

Chap. 2. — 2. INLarcus of Mactaris^ said:

- Cial. ii. II.

3 Mactaris (Macthari) was in ecclesiastical province of Byza-
cium. This bishop is probably the Marcus of Cypr. Ep. Ixx.

500

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book VII.

" It is not to be wondered at if heretics, being
enemies and opponents of the truth, claim to
themselves what has been entrusted and
vouchsafed to o;;:ier men. What is marvel-
lous is that some of us, traitors to the truth,
uphold heretics and oppose Christians; there-
fore we decree that heretics should be bap-
tized."'

3. To him we answer: It is indeed much
more to be wondered at, and deserving of
expressions of great praise, that Cyprian and
his colleagues had such love for unity that
they continued in unity with those whom they
considered to be traitors to the truth, without
any apprehension of being polluted by them.
For when Marcus said, " It is marvellous that
some of us, traitors to the truth, uphold here-
tics and oppose Christians," it seemed natural
that he should add, Therefore we decree that
communion should not be held with them.
This he did not say; but what he does say is,
" Therefore we decree that heretics should be
baptized," adhering to what the peaceful
Cyprian had enjoined in the first instance,
saying, " Judging no man, nor removing any
from the right of communion if he entertain a
different opinion." While, therefore, the
Donatists calumniate us and call us traditors,
I should be glad to know, supposing that any
Jew or pagan were found, who, after reading
the records of that Council should call both
us and them, according to their own rules,
traitors to the truth, how we should be able
to make our joint defense so as to refute and
wash away so grave a charge. They give the
name of traditors to men whom they were
never able in times past to convict of the of-
fense, and whom they cannot now show to be
involved in it, being themselves rather shown
to be liable to the same charge. But what
has this to do with us ? What shall v/e say of
them who, by their own showing, are unques-
tionably traitors ? For if we, however falsely,
are called traditors, because, as they allege,
we took part in the same communion with
traditors, we have all taken part with the tradi-
tors in question, seeing that in the time of
the blessed Cyprian the party of Donatus had
not yet separated itself from unity. For the
delivery of the sacred books, from which they
began to be called traditors, occurred some-
what more than forty years after his martyr-
dom. If, therefore, we are traditors, because
we sprang from traditors, as they believe or
pretend, we both of us derive our origin from
those other traitors. For there is no room
for saying that they did not communicate with
these traitors, since they call them men of
their own party. In the words of tne Council

I Cone. Garth, sec. 38.

which they are most forward to quote, " Some
of us," it declares, "traitors to the truth,
uphold heretics." To this is added the testi-
mony of Cyprian, showing clearly that he re-
mained in communion with them, when he
says, "Judging no man, nor removing any
from the right of communion if he entertain a
different opinion." For those who entertained
a different opinion were the very persons whom
Marcus calls traitors to t!ie truth because they
upheld heretics, as he maintains, by receiving
them into the Church without baptism. That
it was, moreover, the custom that they should
be so received, is testified both by Cyprian
himself in many passages, and by some bish-
ops in this Council. Whence it is evident
that, if heretics have not baptism, the Church
of Christ of those days was full of traitors,
who upheld them by receiving them in this
way. I would urge, therefore, that we plead
our cause in common against the charge of
treason which they cannot disavow, and there-
in our special case will be argued against the
charge of delivering the books, which they
could not prove against us. But let us argue
the point as though they had convicted us;
and what we shall answer jointly to those who
urge against both of us the general treason of
our forefathers, that we will answer to these
men who urge against us that our forefathers
gave up the sacred books. For as we were
dead because our forefathers delivered up the
books, which caused them to divide them-
selves from us, so both we and they themselves
are dead through the treason of our fore-
fathers, from whom both we and they are
sprung. But since they say they live, they
hold that that treason does not in any way
affect them, therefore neither are we affected
by tne delivery of the books. And it should
be observed that, according to them, the trea-
son is indisputable: while, according to us,
there is no truth either in the former charge
of treason, because we say that heretics also
may have the baptism of Christ; nor in the
latter charge of delivering the books, because
in that they were themselves beaten. They
have therefore no reason for separating them-
selves by the wicked sin of schism, because,
if our forefathers were not guilty of deliver-
ing up the books, as we say, there is no charge
which can affect us at all; but if they were
guilty of the sin, as these men say, then it is
just as far from affecting us as the sin of those
other traitors is from affecting either us or
them. And hence, since there is no charge
that can implicate us from the unrighteous-
ness of our forefathers, the charge arising
against them from their own schism is mani-
festly proved.

Chap. V.]

ON BAPTISxM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

501

Chap. 3, — 4. Satius of Sicilibba ' said:
" If heretics receive forgiveness of their sins
in their own baptism, it is without reason that
they come to the Church. For since it is for
sins that men are punished in the day of
judgment, heretics have nothing to fear in the
judgment of Christ if they have obtained re-
mission of their sins.^'-

5. This too might also have been our own
judgment; but let its author beware in what
spirit it was said. For it is expressed in
terms of such import, that I should feel no
compunction in consenting and subscribing to
it in the same spirit in which I too believe that
heretics may indeed have the baptism of
Christ, but cannot have the remission of their
sins. But he does not say, If heretics baptize
or are baptized, but "If heretics," he says,
" receive forgiveness of their sins in their
own baptism, it is without reason that they
come to the Church." For if we were to set
in the place of heretics those whom Cyprian
knew within the Church as " renouncing the
world in words alone and not in deeds," we
also might express this same judgment, in
just so many words, with the most perfect
truth. If those who only seem to be con-
verted receive forgiveness of their sins in their
own baptism, it is without reason that they are
afterwards led on to a true conversion. For
since it is for sins that men are punished in
the day of judgment, " those who renounce the
world in words and not in deeds " have nothing
to fear in the judgment of Christ if they have
obtained remission of their sins. But this
reasoning is only made perfect by some such
context as is formed by the addition of the
words, But they ought to fear the judgment
of Christ, and to lose no time in being con-
verted in the truth of their hearts; and, when
they have done this, it is certainly not neces-
sary that they should be baptized a second
time. It was possible, therefore, 'for them to
receive baptism, and either not to receive re-
mission of their sins, or to be burdened again
at once with the load of sins which were for-
given them; and so the same is the case also
with the heretics.

Chap. 4. — 6. Victor of Gor^said: " Seeing
that sins are forgiven only in the baptism of
the Church, he who admits heretics to com-
munion without baptism is guilty of two errors

' Sicilibba was in ecclesiastical province of Zeugitana. In the
text of this Council the bishop's name is Sattius, and the name
occurs in Cypr. Epp. Ivii., lxvii.,lxx.

-■ Con. Carth. sec. 39.

3 Gor (Worduba) is variously supposed to be Garra in ecclesias-
I al province of Mauritania Caesariensis, or Garriana in ecclesias-
tical province of Byzacium. The name of a bishop Victor occurs
in Cypr. Epp. iv,, Ivii,, Ixii., Ixvii. In Ep. Ixx. the names of three.

contrary to reason; for, on the one hand, he
does not cleanse the heretics, and, on the
other, he defiles the Christians."*

7. To this we answer that the baptism of
the Church exists even among heretics, though
they themselves are not within the Church;
just as the water of Paradise was found in the
land of Egypt, though that land was not itself
in Paradise. We do not therefore admit
heretics to communion without baptism; and
since they come with their waywardness cor-
rected, we receive not their sins, but the sac-
raments of Christ. And, in respect of the
remission of their sins, we say again here
exactly what we said above. And certainly,
in regard of what he says at the end of his
judgment, declaring that he " is guilty of two
errors contrary to reason, seeing that on the
one hand he does not cleanse the heretics,
and on the other he defiles the Christians,"
Cyprian himself is the first and the most
earnest in repudiating this with the colleagues
who agreed with him. For neither did he
think that he was defiled, when, on account
of the bond of peace, he decreed that it was
right to hold communion with such men, when
he used the words, " Judging no one, nor re-
moving any from the right of communion if
he entertain a different opinion." Or, if
heretics defile the Church by being admitted
to communion without being baptized, then
the whole Church has been defiled in virtue
of that custom which has been so often re-
corded here. And just as those men call us
traJitors because of our forefathers, in whom
they were able to prove nothing of the sort
when they laid the charge against them, so,
if every man partakes of the character of those
with whom he may have held communion, all
were then made heretics. And if every one
who asserts this is mad, it must be false that
Victor says, when he declares that *' he who
admits heretics to communion without bap-
tism, not only fails to cleanse the heretics,
but pollutes the Christians as well." Or if
this be true, they were then not admitted
without baptism, but those men had the bap-
tism of Christ, although it was given and re-
ceived among heretics, who were so admitted
in accordance with that custom which these
very men acknowledged to exist; and on the
same grounds they are even now rightly ad-
mitted in the same manner.

Chap. -. — 8. Aurelius of Utica^ said:

■V Cone. Carth. sec. 40.

5 Utica, the well-known city in ecclesiastical province of Zeu-
gitana. The Aurelius of Cypr. Epp. xxvii. 4, Ivii. and Ixvii.
(the first) are more likely to be identical witJ» the bishop of Utica,
than with the Aurelius of ChuUabis, who delivers his opinion the
8ist in order.

502

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book VII.

" Since the apostle says that we ought not to
be partakers with the sins of other men/ what
else does he do but make himself partaker
with the sins of other men, who holds com-
munion with heretics without the baptism
of the Church ? And therefore I pronounce
my judgment that heretics should be baptized,
that they may receive remission of their sins,
and so communion be allowed to them."^

9. The answer is: Therefore Cyprian and
all those bishops were partakers in the sins of
other men, inasmuch as they remained in
communion with such men, when they re-
moved no one from the right of communion
who entertained a different opinion. Where,
then, is the Church ? Then, to say nothing
for the moment of heretics, — since the words
of this, judgment are applicable also to other
sinners, such as Cyprian saw with lamentation
to be in the Church with him, whom, while he
confuted them, he yet tolerated, — where is
the Church, which, according to these words,
must be held to have perished from that very
moment by the contagion of their sins ? But
if, as is the most firmly established truth, the
Church both has remained and does remain,
the partaking of the sins of others, which is
forbidden by the apostle, must be considered
only to consist in consenting to them. But
let heretics be baptized again, that they may
receive remission of their sins, if the wayward
and the envious are baptized again, who,
seeing that "they renounced the world in
words and not in deeds," were indeed able to
receive baptism, but did not obtain remission
of their sins, as the Lord says, " If ye forgive
not men their trespasses, neither will your
Father forgive your trespasses.'' ^

Chap. 6 —10. Iambus of Germaniciana'*
said: "Those who approve the baptism of
heretics disapprove ours, so as to deny that
such as are, I will not say washed, but defiled
outside the Church, ought to be baptized
within the Church, "s

II. To him we answer, that none of our
party approves the baptism of heretics, but
all the baptism of Christ, even though it be
found in heretics who are as it were chaff out-
side the Church, as it may be found in other
unrighteous men who are as chaff within the
Church. For if those who are baptized without
the Church are not washed, but defiled, as-
suredly those who are baptized outside the
rock on which the Church is built are not

- Cone. Garth, sec. 41.

I Tim. V. 22.
Matt. vi. !■;.

4 Germaniciana Nova was in ecclesiastical province of Byzaci-
um, and so called after the German veterans settled there. An
Iambus is mentioned as bishop in Cypr. Epp. Ivii., Ixvii.

5 Cone. Garth, see. 42.

washed, but defiled. But all are without the
said rock who hear the words of Christ and
do them not. Or if it be the case that they
are washed indeed in baptism, but yet con-
tinue in the defilement of their unrio-hteous-
ness, from which they were unwilling to be
changed for the better, the same is true also
of the heretics.

Chap. 7. — 12. Lucianus of Rucuma^ said:
" It is written, 'And God saw the light that it
was good, and God divided the light from
the darkness. "7 If light and darkness can
agree, then can there be something in com-
mon between us and heretics. Therefore
I give my judgment that heretics should be
baptized."^

13. To him the answer is: If light and
darkness can agree, then can there be some-
thing common between the righteous and un-
righteous. Let him therefore declare his
judgment that those unrighteous should be
baptized afresh whom Cyprian confuted within
the Church itself; or let him who can say if
those are not unrighteous "who renounce the
world in words and not in deeds."

Chap. 8. — 14. Pelagianus of Luperciana^
said: " It is written, ' Either the Lord is God,
or Baal is God.' '° So now either the Church
is the Church, or heresy is the Church.
Further, if heresy be not the Church, how
can the baptism of the Church exist among
heretics? ""

15. To him we may answer as follows:
Either Paradise is Paradise, or Egypt is Para-
dise. Further, if Eygpt be not Paradise, how
can the water of Paradise be in Egypt ? But
it will be said to us that it extends even thither
by flowing forth from Paradise. In like man-
ner, therefore, baptism extends to heretics.
Also we say: Either the rock is the Church,
or the sand is the Church. Further, since
the sand is not the Church, how can baptism
exist with those who build upon the sand by
hearing the words of Christ and doing them
not?'- And yet it does exist with them; and
in like manner also it exists among the
heretics.

Chap. 9. — 16. Jader of Midila'^ said: " We
know that there is but one baptism in the
Catholic Church, and therefore we ought not

(• Riicuraa was in ecclesiastical province of Zeugitana. This
Lucianus is probably the same with the one mentioned in Cypr.
Epp. Ivii., Ixx.

7 Gen. i. 4. ** Gone Garth, sec. 43.

9 The position of Luperciana is unknown.

1° See I Kings xviii. 21. " Gon. Garth, sec. 44.

I- Matt. vii. 24-27.

■3 Midila (Midili) was in ecclesiastical province of Numidia.
Jader is Punic name. Occurs as bishop in Gypr. Epp. Ixxvi., '
Ixxix,

Chap. XIV.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

50.

to admit a heretic unless he has been baptized
in our bod}-, lest he should think that he has
been baptized outside the Catholic Church.'''
I 17. To him our answer is, that if this were
i said of those unrighteous men who are out-
I side the rock, it certainly would be falsely
I said. And so it is therefore also in the case
' of heretics.

I Chap. id. — 18. Likewise another Felix of
Marazana= said: "There is one faith, one
baptism,' but of the Catholic Church, to which
alone is given authority to baptize." ••

19. What if another were to say as follows:
i One faith, one baptism, but of the righteous
: only, to whom alone authority is given to bap-
tize.'' As these words might be refuted, so
also may the judgment of Felix be refuted.
Do even the unrighteous who are not ^ changed
in heart in baptism, while " they renounce the
world in words and not in deeds " yet belong
to the members of the Church ? Let them
consider whether such a Church is the actual
rock, the very dove, the bride herself without
spot or wrinkle.*

Chap. ii. — 20. Paul of Bobba^ said: "I
for my part am not moved if some fail to up-
iiold the faith and truth of the Church, seeing
tiiat the apostle says ' For what if some did
not believe ? shall their unbelief make the
faith of God without effect ? God forbid: yea
let God be true, but every man a liar.' ^ But
if God be true, how can the truth of baptism
be in the company of heretics, where God is
not? "5

21. To him we answer: What, is God among
the covetous ? And yet baptism exists among
them; and so also it exists among heretics.
For they among whom God is, are the temple
of God. " But what agreement hath the
temple of God with idols ? " '° Further, Paul
considers, and Cyprian agrees with him, that
covetousness is idolatry; and Cyprian himself
again associates with his colleagues, who were
robbers, but yet baptized, with great reward
of toleration.

Chap. 12. — 22. Pomponius of Dionysiana"

' Cone. Garth, sec. 45.

- Marazana was in ecclesiastical province of Byzacene. On
Feli.x, see Bk. VI. c. 19, note 2.

3 Eph. iv. 5.

4 Cone. Carth. sec. 46.

5 A'(v . . . tnutatt. "Nee "is restored by the Benedic-
tines from the MSS.

'' Eph. V. 27. See Retraet. ii. 18, quoted on I. 17, 26.

7 Bobba (Obba) was in ecclesiastical province of Mauritania
Csesariensis, including Tingitana. A bishop Paul is mentioned
in Cypr. Ep. l.wii.

^ Kom. iii. 3, 4. 9 Cone. Carth. sec. 47.

'" 2 Cor. vi. 16.

'■ Dionysiana was in ecclesiastical province of Byzacium. The
name of- Pomponius occurs in Cypr. Epp. iv., Ivii., Ixvii., lx.x.

said: "It is manifest that heretics cannot
baptize and give remission of sins, seeing that
no power is given to them that they should
be able either to loose or bind anythmg on
earth." '=

23. The answer is: This power is not given
to murderers either, that is, to those who hate
their brothers. For it was not said to such
as these, "whosesoever sins ye remit, they
are remitted unto them; and whosesoever
sins ye retain, they are retained." '^ And yet
they baptize, and both Paul tolerates them in
the same communion of baptism, and Cyprian
acknowledges them.

Chap. 13. — 24. Venantius of Tinisa'^ said:
" If a husband, going on a journey into for-
eign countries, had entrusted the guardian-
ship of his wife to a friend, he would surely
keep her that was entrusted to his care with
the utmost diligence, that her chastity and
holiness might not be defiled by any one.
Christ our Lord and God, when going to the
Father, committed His bride to our care: do
we keep her uncorrupt and undefiled, or do
we betray her purity and chastity to adulterers
and corrupters ? For he who makes the bap-
tism of Christ common with heretics betrays
the bride of Christ to adulterers." 's

25. We answer: What of those who, when
they are baptized, turn themselves to the Lord
with their lips and not with their heart? do
not they possess an adulterous mind ? Are
not they themselves lovers of the world, which
they renounce in words and not in deeds; and
they corrupt good manners through evil com-
munications, saying, "Let us eat and drink;
for to-morrow we die?"'* Did not the dis-
course of the apostle take heed even against
such as these, when he says, " But I fear, lest
by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve
through his subtilty, so your minds [also]
should be corrupted from the simplicity that
is in Christ?"" When, therefore, Cyprian
held the baptism of Christ to be in common
with such men, did he therefore betray the
bride of Christ into the hands of adulterers,
or did he not rather recognize the necklace of
the Bridegroom even on an adulteress?

Chap. 14. — 26. Aymnius'® of Ausuaga'^
said: " We have received one baptism, which
same also we administer; but he who says
that authority is given to heretics also to baj)-
tize, the same makes two baptisms." "

'2 Cone. Carth. sec. 48. '^ John xx. 23.

M Tinisa (Thinisa) was in ecclesiastical province of Zeugitana.
In Cypr. Ep. l.xvii. the name Veiiantius is found.

'3 Cone. Carth. sec. 49. '-' i Cor. xv. 33, 32.

'7 2 Cor. xi. 3. '^ Ahymmus. Sec Cvpr. Ep. Ivi.

19 Ausuaga was in ecclesiastical province of Zcugitana.
2'' Cone. Carth. sec. 50.

504

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book VII.

27. To him we answer: Why does not he
also make two baptisms who maintains that
the unrighteous also can baptize ? For al-
though the righteous and unrighteous are in
themselves opposed to one another, yet the
baptism which the righteous give, such as
was Paul, or such as was also Cyprian, is not
contrary to the baptism which those un-
righteous men were wont to give who hated
Paul, whom Cyprian understands to have
been not heretics, but bad Catholics; and al-
though the moderation which was found in
Cyprian, and the covetousness which was
found in his colleagues, are in themselves op-
posed to one another, yet the baptism which
Cyprian used to give svas not contrary to the
baptism which his colleagues who opposed
him used to give, but one and the same with
it, because in both cases it is He that baptizes
of whom it is said, " The same is He which
baptizeth."'

Chap. 15. — 28. Saturninus of Victoriana""
said: " If heretics may baptize, they are ex-
cused and defended in doing unlawful things;
nor do I see why either Christ called them
His adversaries, or the apostle called them
antichrists. "3

29. To him we answer: We say that here-
tics have no authority to baptize in the same
sense in which we say that defrauders have no
authority to baptize. For not only to the
heretic, but to the sinner, God says, " What
hast thou to do to declare my statutes, or
that thou shouldest take my covenant in thy
mouth ? " To the same person He assuredly
says, " When thou sawest a thief, then thou
consentedst with him."'* How much worse,
therefore, are those who did not consent with
thieves, but themselves were wont to plunder
farms with treacherous deceits ? Yet Cyprian
did not consent with them, though he did
tolerate them in the corn-field of the Catholic
Church, lest the wheat should be rooted out
together with it. And yet at the same time
the baptism which they themselves conferred
was the very selfsame baptism, because it was
not of them, but of Christ. As therefore
they, although the baptism of Christ be
recognized in them, were yet not excused and
defended in doing unlawful things, and Christ
rightly called those His adversaries who were
destined, by persevering in such things, to
hear the doom, "Depart from me, ye that
work iniquity," ^ whence also they are called

' John i. 33.

2 Victoriana was in ecclesiastical province of Byzacium. [Ttie
name Saturninus is found in Cypr. Epp. xxi. 4, xxi'i. 3, xxvii. 1,11,
Ivii. tc>\ Ixvii. bis^ Ixx. quinquies.

3 Cone. Garth, sec. 51. 4 Ps. 1. 16, 18.
5 Matt. vii. 23.

antichrists, because they are contrary to
Christ while they live in opposition to His
words, so likewise is it the case with heretics.

Chap. 16.^30. Another Saturninus of
Tucca*^ said: " Tiie Gentiles, although they
worship idols, yet acknowledge and confess
the supreme God, the Father and Creator.
Against Him Marcion blasphemes, and some
men do not blush to approve the baptism of
Marcion.' How do such priests either main-
tain or vindicate the priesthood of God, who
do not baptize the enemies of God, and hold
communion with them while they are thus
unbaptized ?" ®

31. The answer is this: Truly when such
terms as this are used, all moderation is
passed; nor do they take into consideration
that even they themselves hold communion
with such men, " judging no one, nor remov-
ing any from the right of communion if he
entertain a contrary opinion." But Saturni-
nus has used an argument in this very judg-
ment of his, which might furnish materials
for his admonition (if he would pay attention
to it), that in each man what is wrong should
be corrected, and what is right should be ap-
proved, since he says, " The Gentiles, al-
though they worship idols, yet acknowledge
and confess the supreme God, the Father and
Creator." If, then, any Gentile of such a
kind should come to God, would he wish to
correct and change this point in him, that he
acknowledged and confessed God the Father
and Creator? I trow not. But he would
amend in him his idolatry, which was an evil
in him; and he would give to him the sacra-
ments of Christ, which he did not possess;
and anything that was wayward which he
found in him he would correct; and anything
which had been wanting he would supply.
So also in the Marcionist heretic he would
acknowledge the perfectness of baptism, he
would correct his waywardness, he would
teach him Catholic truth.

Chap. 17. — 32. Marcellus of Zama^ said:
" Since sins are remitted only in the baptism
of the Church, he who does not baptize a
heretic holds communion with a sinner."'"

33. What, does he who holds communion

* Tucca was in ecclesiastical province of Numidia. For Sat-
urninus see, c. 15-28, n. 2.

7 He is alluding to Stephen, bishop of Rome, of whom Cyprian
says in his Ep. Ixxiv. 7 (to Pompeius): " Why has the perverse ob-
stinacy of our brother Stephen burst out to such a point, that he
should even contend that sons of God are born of the baptism of
Marcion, also of Valentinus and Apelles, and others who blas-
pheme against Ciod the Father?"

*Conc. Garth, sec. 52.

9 Zama was in ecclesiastical province of Nuraidia. For I'.Iar-
cellus, see Gypr. Ep. Ixvii.
'^•^ Gone. Garth, sec. 53.

Chap. XXIIL]

BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

505

with one who does this not hold communion
with a sinner ? But what else did all of them
do, " in judging no one, or removing from
the right of communion any one who enter-
tained a different opinion " ? Where, then, is
the Church ? x'Vre tiiose things not an obsta-
cle to those who are patient, and tolerate the
tares lest the wheat should be rooted out to-
gether with them ? I would have them there-
fore say, who have committed the sacrilege of
schism by separating themselves from the
whole world, how it comes that they have in
their mouths the judgment of Cyprian, while
they do not have in their hearts the patience
of Cyprian. But to this Marcellus we have
an answer in what has been said above con-
cerning baptism and the remission of sins,
explaining how there can be baptism in a man
although there be in him no remission of his
sins.

Chap. 18. — 34. Irenaeus of Ululi ' said:
"If the Church does not baptize a heretic,
because it is said that he has been baptized
already, then heresy is the greater." -

35. The answer is: On the same principle
it might be said. If therefore the Church does
not baptize the covetous man, because it is
said that he has been baptized already, then
covetousness is the greater. But this is false,
therefore the other is also false.

Chap. 19.^ — 36. Donatus of Cibaliana^
said: " I acknowledge one Church, and one
baptism that appertains thereto. If there is
any one who says that the grace of baptism
exists among heretics, he must first show and
prove that the Church exists with them." *

37. To him we answer: If you say that the

_^race of baptism is identical with baptism,

t.ien it exists among heretics; but if baptism

■- the sacrament or outward sign of grace,

iiile the grace itself is the abolition of sins,

■ i.en the grace of baptism does not exist with

t-retics. But so there is one baptism and

-le Church, just as there is one faith. As

• lerefore the good and bad, not having one

ope, can yet have one baptism, so those who

;ave not one common Church can have one

ommon baptism.

Chap. 2c. — 38. Zozimusof Tharassa^ said:
" When a revelation has been made of the
truth, error must give way to truth; inasmuch
as Peter also, who before was wont to circum-

1 Ululi (Ullita, Vallita) in ecclesiastical piovince of Numidia.

2 Cone. Garth, sec. 54.

3 [Cibaliana (Cybaliana), most probably in ecclesiastical province
! Africa Proconsularis. Donatus, as cotemporary bishop, occurs
11 Cypr. £//'■ Ivii. iis, L\x. /'/V,

4 Cone. Carth. sec. 55.

5 I'harassa was in ecclesiastical province of Numidia.

cise, gave way to Paul when he declared the
truth." ^

39. The answer is: This may also be con-
sidered as the expression of our judgment too,
and this is just what has been done in respect
of this question of baptism. For after that
the trut;i had been more clearly revealed,
error gave way to truth, when that most
wholesome custom was further confirmed by
the authority of a plenary Council. It is
well, however, that they so constantly bear in
mind that it was possible even for Peter, the
chief of the apostles, to have been at one
time minded otherwise than the truth re-
quired; which we believe, without any disre-
spect to Cyprian, to have been the case with
him, and that with all our love for Cyprian,
for it is not right that he should be loved with
greater love than Peter.

Chap. 21. — 40. Julianus of Telepte" said:
"It is written, 'A man can receive nothing,
except it be given him from heaven;'^ if
heresy is from heaven, it can give baptism."'

41. Let him hear another also saying: If
covetousness is from heaven, it can give bap-
tism. And yet the covetous do confer it; so
therefore also may the heretics.

Chap. 22. — 42. Faustus of TimidaRegia"
said: "Let not these persons flatter them-
selves who favor heretics. He who interferes
with the baptism of the Church on behalf of
heretics makes them Christians, and us here-
tics." "

43. To him we answer: If any one were
to say that a man who, when he received
baptism had not received remission of his
sins, because he entertained hatred towards
his brother in his heart, was neverthe-
less not to be baptized again when he dis-
missed that hatred from his heart, does such
a man interfere with the baptism of the
Church on behalf of murderers, or does he
make them righteous and us murderers ? Let
him therefore understand tiie same also in the
case of heretics.

Chap. 23. — 44. Geminius of Furn: '- said:
" Certain of our colleagues may prefer here-
tics to themselves, they cannot prefer them
to us: and therefore what we have once de-
creed we hold, that we should baptize those
who come to us from heretics.'"^

6 Gal. ii. II ; Cone. Carth. sec. 56. . , ■ r

7 Telepte (Thelepte) or I'hala, was in ecclesiastical province of
Byzacium.

8 John iii. 27. 9 Cone. Carth. sec. 57. , , .

>o Timida Rejiia was in ecclesiastical province of Zeugitana.
A Faustus is mentioned in Cypr. £/*. l.wii.

■■ Cone. Carth. sec. 58. . , „ . r

■= Furni was in ecclesiastical province of Zeugitana. hor
Geminius as bishop, see Cypr. £/. Ixvii.

»3 Cone. Carth. sec. 5q.

;o6

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book VII. i,

45. This man also acknowledges most
openly that certain of his colleagues enter-
tained opinions contrary to his own: whence
again and again the love of unity is con-
firmed, because they were separated from one
another by no schism, till God should reveal
to one or other of them anything wherein they
were othewise minded.' But to him our an-
swer is, that his colleagues did not prefer
heretics to themselves, but that, as the bap-
tism of Christ is acknowledged in the covet-
ous, in the fraudulent, in robbers, in mur-
derers, so also they acknowledged it in
heretics.

Chap. 24. — 46. Rogatianus of Nova= said:
"Christ established the Church, the devil
heresy: how can the synagogue of Satan
have the baptism of Christ ? " ^

47. To him our answer is: Is it true that
because Christ established the well-affectioned,
and the devil the envious, therefore the party
of the devil, which is proved to be among the
envious, cannot have the baptism of Christ ?

Chap. 25. — 48. Therapius of Bulla'' said:
" If a man gives up and betrays the baptism
of Christ to heretics, what else can he be said
to be but a Judas to the Bride of Christ ? " ^

49. How great a condemnation have we
here of all schismatics, who have separated
themselves by wicked sacrilege from the in-
heritance of Christ dispersed throughout the
whole world, if Cyprian held communion witn
such as was the traitor Judas, and yet was not
defiled by them; or if he was defiled, then
were all made such as Judas; or if they were
not, then the evil deeds of those who went
before do not belong to those who came after,
even though they were the offspring of the
same communion. Why, therefore, do they
cast in our teeth the traditores, against whom
they did not prove their charge, and do not
cast in their own teeth Judas, with whom
Cyprian and his colleagues held communion ?
Behold the Council in which these men are
wont to boast ! We indeed say, that he who
approves the baptism of Christ even in here-
tics, does not betray to heretics the baptism
of Christ; just in the same way as he does
not betray to murderers the baptism of Christ
who approves the baptism of Christ even in
murderers: but inasmuch as they profess to
prescribe to us from the decrees of this Coun-

1 Phil. iii. 15.

2 Nova was in ecclesiastical province of Mauritania Caesarien-
sis. For Rogatianus as bishop, see Cypr. Epp. Ivii., Ixvii., Ixx..
bis.

.1 Cone. Carth. sec. ^o.

4 Bulla (Vulla) was in ecclesiastical province of Africa Procon-
sulans. For Therapius cp. Cypr. Ep. Ixiv. i.

5 Cone. Carth. sec. 6i.

cil what opinions we ought to hold, let them
first assent to it themselves. See how therein
were compared to the traitor Judas, all who
said that heretics, although baptized in heresy,
yet should not be baptized again. Yet with
such Cyprian was willing to hold communion,
when he said, " Judging no man, nor depriv-
ing any of the right of communion if he en-
tertain a contrary opinion." But that there
had been men of such a sort in former times
within the Church, is made clear by the sen-
tence in which he says: " But some one will
say, What, then, shall be done with these
men who m times past were admitted into the
Church without baptism?"* That such had
been the custom of the Church, is testified
again and again by the very men who com-
pose this Council. If, therefore, any one
who does this " can be said to be nothing else
but a Judas to the Bride of Christ," accord-
ing to the terms in which the judgment of
Therapius is couched; but Judas, according
to the teaching of the gospel, was a traitor;
then all those men held communion with
traitors who at that time uttered those very
judgments, and before they uttered them they
all had become traitors through that custom
which at that time was retained by the Church.
All, therefore — that is to say, both we and
they themselves who were the offspring of
that unity — are traitors. But we defend our-
selves in two ways: first, because without
prejudice to the right of unity, as Cyprian
himself declared in his opening speech, we do
not assent to the decrees of this Council in
which this judgment was pronounced; and
secondly, because we hold that the wicked in
no way hurt the good in Catholic unity, until
at the last the chaff be separated from the
wheat. But our opponents, inasmuch as they
both shelter themselves as it were under the
decrees of this Council, and maintain that
the good perish as by a kind of infection
from communion with the wicked, have no
resource to save them from allowing both that
the earlier Christians, whose offspring they
are, were traitors, inasmuch as they are con-
victed by their own Council; and that the
deeds of those who went before them do re-
flect on them, since they throw in our teeth
the deeds of our ancestors.

Chap. 26. — 50. Also another Lucius of
Membresa'' said: " It is written, ' God heareth
not sinners.'^ How can he who is a sinner
be heard in baptism ? "^

6 Cypr. Ep. Ixxiii. 23.

7 Membresa was in ecclesiastical province of Zeugitana.
Lucius, See, Bk. VI. c. 38.

8 John ix, 31. 9 Cone. Carth. sec. 62.

(HAP. XXXIV.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

507

' 51. We answer; HOiV is the covetous man
heard, or the robber, and usurer, and murder-
ier' Are they not sinners ? And yet Cyprian,
jwhile he finds fault with them in the Catholic
[Church, yet tolerates them.

: Chap. 27. — 52. Also another Felix of Eus-
laceni' said: "In admitting heretics to the
Ciuirch without baptism, let no one place cus-

•n before reason and truth; for reason and
truth always exclude custom." ^

53. To him our answer is: You do not show
the truth; you confess the existence of the
custom. We should therefore do right in
iv.aintaining the custom which has since been
. onfirmed by a plenary Council, even if the
: !th were still concealed, which we believe
III have been already made manifest.

Chap. 28. — 54. Another Saturninus of
Ai)itini' said: " If Antichrist can give to any
(ine the grace of Christ, then can heretics also
baptize, who are called Antichrists."-*

55. What if another were to say. If a mur-
'' rer can give the grace of Christ, then can

•:y also baptize that hate their brethren,
w'no are called murderers ? For certainly he
would seem in a way to speak the truth, and
yet they can baptize; in like manner, there-
fore, can the heretics as well.

Chap. 29. — 56. Quintus of Aggyas said:
" He who has a thing can give it; but what
can the heretics give, who are well known to
have nothing ? " *

57. To him our answer is: If, then, any
man can give a thing who has it, it is clear
that heretics can give baptism: for when they
separate from the Church, they have still the
sacrament of washing which they had received
while in the Church; for when they return
they do not again receive it, because they
had not lost it when they withdrew from the
Church.

Chap. 30. — 58. Another Julianus of Mar-
'.Hana'" said: " If a man can serve two mas-
ters, God and mammon,* then baptism also
n serve two, the Christian and the heretic." '

' Buslaceni (Cussaceni) is probably Byzacium, the capital of
, : ■ vince of Byzacium, since we know that it was also called Bizica
I irana; others place it in Africa Proconsularis. For Felix, cp.
!■►;. VI. cc. 19 and 23.

= Cone. Garth, sec. 63.

? .Abitini (Avitini) was in ecclesiastical province of Africa
T'rc.consularis. For Saturninus, cp. cc. 15, 16.

* Cone. Carth. sec. 64.

5 .'\ggya, probably the same as .^ggiva and the .^ga in eccle-
siastical province of Pnjconsular Africa. The name Quintas as
bishop occurs in Cypr. jt'// Ivii., l.wii., l.xx., Ixxi., but this one is
of Mauritania, as appears from £/'p. Ixxii. i, Ixxiii. i.

* Cone. Carth. sec. 65.

7 Marcelliana (Gyrnmarcelli) in ecclesiastical province of Nu-
midia.

^ Matt. vi. 24. 9 Cone. Carth. sec. 66.

59. Truly, if it can serve the self-restrained
and the covetous man, the sober and the
drunken, the well-affectioned and the mur-
derer, why should it not also serve the Chris-
tian and the heretic? — whom, indeed, it does
not really serve; but it ministers to them, and
is administered by them, for salvation to
those who use it right, and for judgment to
such as use it wrong.

Chap. 31. — 60. Tenax of Horrea Celiae"
said: "There is one baptism, but of the
Church; and where the Church is not, there
baptism also cannot be. ' "

61. To him we answer: How then comes it
that it may be where the rock is not, but only
sand; seeing that the Church is on the rock,
and not on sand .''

Chap. 32. — 62. Another Victor of Assuras"
said: " It is written, that 'there is one God
and one Christ, one Church and one bap-
tism.''^ How then can any one baptize in a
place where there is not either God, or Christ,
or the Church ?'"*

63. How can any one baptize either in that
sand, where the Church is not, seeing that it
is on the rock; nor God and Christ, seeing
that there is not there the temple of God and
Christ?

Chap. 33. — 64. Donatulus of Capse's said:
" I also have always entertained this opinion,
that heretics, who have gained nothing out-
side the Church, should be baptized when
they are converted to the Church." "^

65. To this the answer is: They have, in-
deed, gained nothing outside the Church, but
that is nothing towards salvation, not nothing
towards the sacrament. For salvation is
peculiar to the good; but the sacraments are
common to the good and bad alike.

Chap. 34. — 66. Verulusof Rusiccade'^said:
"A man that is a heretic cannot give that
which he has not; much more is this the case
with a schismatic, who has lost what he had." '*

67. We have already shown that they still
have it, because they do not lose it when they
separate themselves. For they do not re-

•o Horrea Celia; (Cselise) was a village of ecclesiastical province
of Byzacium, ten miles north of Hadrumetum. A Tenax is
mentioned as bishop in Cypr. £/>. Ixvii.

" Cone. Carth. sec. 67.

12 Assuras was in ecclesiastical province of Zeugitana. For
Victor, cp. c. 4.

'3 See Eph. iv. 4-6. '4 Cone. Carth. sec. 68.

■5 Capse was in ecclesiastical province of Byzaeene. This
Donatulus is probably to be identified with the one mentioned
Cypr. /C/. Ivi.

'(> Cone. Carth. sec. 69.

'7 Rusiccade was at the mouth of the Thapsus, in ecclesiastical
province of Numidia.

'- Cone. Carth. sec. 70.

5o8

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book VII.

ceive it again when they return: wherefore,
if it was thought that they could not give it
because they were supposed not to have it, let
it now be understood that they can give it,
because it is understood that they also have it.

Chap. 35. — 68. Pudentianus of Cuiculi'
said: "My recent ordination to the episco-
pate induced me, brethren, to wait and hear
what my elders would decide. For it is plain
that heresies have and can have nothing; and
so, if any come from them, it is determined
righteously that they should be baptized." "^

69. As, therefore, we have already an-
swered those who went before, for whose
judgment this man was waiting, so be it un-
derstood that we have answered himself.

Chap. 36. — 70, Peter of Hippo Diarrhy-
tus^ said: "Since there is one baptism in
the Catholic Church, it is clear that a man
cannot be baptized outside the Church; and
therefore I give my judgment, that those who
have been bathed in heresy or in schism ought
to be b ptized on coming to the Church." *

71. There is one baptism m the Catholic
Church, in such a sense that, when any have
gone out from it, it does not become two in
those who go out, but remains one and the
same. What, therefore, is recognized in
those who return, should also be recognized
in those who received it from men who have
separated themselves, since they did not lose
it when they went apart into heresy.

Chap. 37. — 72. Likewise another Lucius of
Ausafas said: "According to the motion of
my mind and of the Holy Spirit, since there is
one God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,
and one Christ, and one hope, one Spirit, one
Church, there ought also to be only one bap-
tism. And therefore I say, both that if any-
thing has been set on foot or done among the
heretics, that it ought to be rescinded; and
also, that they who come out from among the
heretics should be baptized in the Church.""^

73. Let it therefore be pronounced of no
effect that they baptize, who hear the words
of God and do them not, when they shall begin
to pass from unrighteousness to righteous-
ness, that is, from the sand to the rock. And
if this is not done, because what there was in
them of Christ was not violated by their un-

I Cuiculi was in ecclesiastical province of Nuraidia.
= Cone. Garth, sec. 71.

3 Hippo Ciarrhytus (Hippozaritus) was on the coast in eccle-
siastical province of Zeugitana. For Petrus, cp. Cypr. Ep.
l.\vii.

4 Cone. Garth, sec. 72.

5 Ausafa was in ecclesiastical province of Zeugitana. For Lu-
cius, cp. Bk. Vr. cc. 14 and 3S, and Bk. VII. c. 26.

* Cone. Garth, sec. 73.

righteousness, then let this also be understood
in the case of heretics: for neither is there
the same hope in the unrighteous, so long as
they are on the sand, as there is in those who
are upon the rock; and yet there is in both
the same baptism, although as it is said that
there is one hope, so also is it said that there
is one baptism.

Chap. 38. — 74. Felix of Gurgites^ said:
" I give my judgment, that, according to the
precepts of the holy Scriptures, those who
have been unlawfully baptized outside the
Church by heretics, if they wish to flee to the
Church, should obtain the grace of baptism
where it is lawfully given." ®

75. Our answer is: Let them indeed begin
to have in a lawful manner to salvation what
they before had unlawfully to destruction; be-
cause each man is justified under the same
baptism, when he has turned himself to God
with a true heart, as that under which he was
condemned, when on receiving it he "re-
nounced the world in words alone, and not in
deeds."

Chap. 39. — 76. Pusillus of Lamasba' said:
" I believe that baptism is not unto salvation
except within the Catholic Church. Whatso-
ever is without the Catholic Church is mere
pretense." '°

77. This indeed is true, that "baptism is
not unto salvation except within the Catholic
Church." For in itself it can indeed exist
outside the Catholic Church as well; but there
it is not unto salvation, because there it does
not work salvation; just as that sweet savor
of Christ is certainly not unto salvation in
them that perish," though from a fault not in
itself, but in them. But " whatsoever is with-
out the Catholic Church is mere pretense,"
yet only in so far as it is not Catholic. But
there may be something Catholic outside the
Catholic Church, just as the name of Christ
could exist outside the congregation of Christ,
in which name he who did not follow with the
disciples was casting out devils. '= For there
may be pretense also within the Catholic
Church, as is unquestionable in the case of
those "who renounce the world in words and
not in deeds," and yet the pretense is not
Catholic. As, therefore, there is in the
Catholic Church something which is not
Catholic, so there ma}' be something which is
Catholic outside the Catholic Church.

7 Gurgites was in ecclesiastical province of Byzacium. For Fe-
lix, cp. Bk. VI. cc. 19, 33, 40; Bk. VII. cc. lo, 28.
^ Cone. Garth, sec. 74.

9 I.amasba was in ecclesiastical province of Nuraidia.
iJ Gone. Garth, sec. 75. " 2 Gor. ii. 15.

12 Mark ix. 38.

,,HAr. XLV.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

I Chap. 40. — 78. Salvianus of Gazaufala' said :

I '* It is generally known that heretics have

I nothing; and therefore they come to us, that

they may receive what previously they did

not have.'' -

79. Our answer is: On this theory, the very
men who founded heresies are not heretics
themselves, because they separated them-
selves from the Church, and certainly they
previously had what they received there.
But if it is absurd to say that those are not
heretics through whom the rest became here-
tics, it is therefore possible that a heretic
should have what turns to his destruction
through his evil use of it.

Chaf. 41. — 80. Honoratus of Tucca^ said:

Since Christ is the truth, we ought to follow

the truth rather than custom; that we may

sanctify by the baptism of the Church the

icretics who come to us, simply because they

could receive nothing outside."-'

81. This man, too, is a witness to the cus-
tom, in which he gives us the greatest assist-
ance, whatever else he may appear to say
against us. But this is not the reason why
heretics come over to us, because they have re-
ceived nothing outside, but that what they did
receive may begin to be of use to them: for
this it could not be outside in any wise.

Chap. 42. — 82. Victor of Octavus^ said:
"As ye yourselves also know, I have not been
long appointed a bishop, and therefore I waited
for the counsel of my seniors. This therefore
I express as my opinion, that whosoever
comes from heresy should undoubtedly be
baptized." *

83. What, therefore, has been answered to
those for whom he waited, may be taken as
the answer also to himself.

Chap. 43. — 84. Clarus of Mascula^ said:
" The sentence of our Lord Jesus Christ is
manifest, when He sent forth His apostles,
and gave the power which had been given
Him of His Father to them alone, whose suc-
cessors we are, governing the Church of the
Lord with the same power, and baptizing
those who believe the faith. And therefore
heretics, who, being without, have neither

' Gazaufala (Gazophyla) was in ecclesiastical province of Nu-
midia.

= Cone. Garth, sec. 76.

3 Tucca (Thucca) was in ecclesiastical province of Numidia.
Honoratus occurs as bishop's name in Cypr. £//>. Ivii., l.xii.,
Ixvii., Ix.x. ^;V. The attempts to distinguish or to identify these
are hazardous.

4 Cone. Garth, sec. 77.

5 Octavus was in ecclesiastical province of Numidia. For Vic-
tor, cp. cc. 4, 32.

* Gone. Garth, sec. 78.

7 Mascula was in ecclesiastical province of Numidia.

509

power nor the Church of Christ, cannot bap-
tize any one with His baptism." ^

85. Are, then, ill-affectioned murderers
successors of the apostles ? VVhy, then, do
they baptize ? Is it because the)' are not out-
side ? But they are outside the rock, to which
the Lord gave the keys, and on which He
said that He would build His Church. ^

Chap. 44. — 86. Secundianus of Thambei '°
said: " We ought not to deceive heretics by
our too great forwardness, that not having
been baptized in the Church of our Lord Jesus
Christ, and having therefore not received re-
mission of their sins, they may not impute to
us, when the day of judgment comes, that we
have been the cause of their not being bap-
tized, and not having obtained the indulgence
of the grace of God. On which account, since
there is one Church and one baptism, when
they are converted to us, let them receive to-
gether with the Church the baptism also of the
Church.""

87. Nay, when they are transferred to the
rock, and joined to the society of the Dove,
let them receive the remission of their sins,
which they could not have outside tiie rock
and outside the Dove, whether they were
openly without, like the heretics, or apparently
within, like the abandoned Catholics; of
whom, however, it is clear that they both
have and confer baptism without remission of
sins, when even from themselves it is received
by men, who, being not changed for the better,
honor God with their lips, while their heart
is far from Him.'- Yet it is true that there is
one baptism, just as there is one Dove,
though those who are not in the one com-
munion of the Dove may yet have baptism in
common

Chap. 45. — 88.^ — Also another Aurelius of
Chullabi'' said: " The Apostle John has laid
down in his epistle the following precept: ' If
there come any unto you, and bring not this
doctrine, receive him not into your house,
neither bid him God speed: for he that bid-
deth him God speed is partaker of his evil
deeds.'"' How can such men be admitted
without consideration into the house of God,
who are forbidden to be admitted into our
private house ? Or how can we hold com-
munion with them without the baptism of
Christ, when, if we only so much as l)id them

** Gone. Garth. /HJ. sec. 79.

9 Matt. xvi. 18, 19.

"■ Thambei (Thambi, Satambei), was in ecclesiastical province
of I'.yzacium.

" Gone. Garth, sec. 80. " Isa. xxix. 13.

nChullabi, or Gululi, was in ecclesiastical province of Byza-
cium. For Aurelius, cp. c. 5.

u 2 John 10 II.

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book VII.

God speed, we are partakers of their evil
deeds?'"

89. In respect of this testimony of John
there is no need of further disputation, since
it has no reference at all to the question of
baptism, which we are at present discussing.
For he says, "If any come unto you, and
bring not the doctrine of Christ." But here-
tics leaving the doctrine of their error are
converted to the doctrine of Christ, that they
may be incorporated with the Church, and
may begin to belong to the members of that
Dove whose sacrament they previously had;
and therefore what previously they lacked be-
longing to it is given to them, that is to say,
peace and charity out of a pure heart, and of
a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned. =
But what they previously had belonging to the
Dove is acknowledged, and received without
any depreciation; just as in the adulteress
God recognises His gifts, even when she is
following her lovers; because when after her
fornication is corrected she is turned again
to chastity, those gifts are not laid to her
charge, but she herself is corrected. ^ But
just as Cyprian might have defended himself,
if this testimony of John had been cast in his
teeth whilst he was holding communion with
men like these, so let those against whom it
is spoken make their own defense. For to
the question before us, as I said before, it has
no reference at all. For John says that we
are not to bid God speed to men of strange
doctrine; but Paul the apostle says, with even
greater vehemence, " If any man that is called
a brother be covetous, or a drunkard,'' or
anything of the sort, with such an one no not
to eat;" and yet Cyprian used to admit to
fellowship, not with his private table, but with
the altar of God, his colleagues who were
usurers, and treacherous, and fraudulent, and
robbers. But in what manner this may be
defended has been sufficiently set forth in
other books already.

Chap. 46. — 90. Litteus^ of Gemelli*^ said:
" ' If the blind lead the blind, both shall fall
into the ditch.' ? Since, therefore, it is clear
that heretics can give no light '^ to any one, as
being blind themselves, therefore their bap-
tism is invalid."'

91. Neither do we say that it is valid for
salvation so long as they are heretics, just as

it is of no value to those murderers of whom
we spoke, so long as they hate their brethren:
for they also themselves are in darkness, and
if any one follows them they fall together into
the ditch; and yet it does not follow that they
either have not baptism or are unable to con-
fer it.

Chap. 47. — 92. Natalis of Oea'°said: "It
is not only I myself who am present, but also
Pompeius of Sabrati,'" and Dioga of Leptis
Magna,'" who commissioned me to represent
their views, being absent indeed in body, but
present in spirit, who deliver this same judg-
ment as our colleagues, that heretics cannot
have communion with us, unless they have
been baptized with the baptism of the
Church.""

93. He means, I suppose, tnat communion
which belongs to the society of the Dove; for
in the partaking of the sacraments they doubt-
less held communion with them, judging no
man, nor removing any from the right of
communion if he held a different opinion.
But with whatever reference he spoke, there
is no great need for these words being re-
futed. For certainly a heretic would not be
admitted to communion, unless he had been
baptized with the baptism of the Church.
But it is clear that the baptism of the Church
exists even among heretics if it be consecrated
with the words of the gospel; just as the
gospel itself belongs to the Church, and has
nothing to do with their waywardness, but
certainly retains its own holiness.

' Cone. Garth, sec. 8i.

2 I Tim. i. 5. 3 Hos. li. 4 i Cor. v. ii.

5 Some read Licteus; not unlikely the bishop of Cypr. Ep.
l.\xvi.

6 Gemelli was a Roman colony in ecclesiastical province of Nu-
midia.

7 Matt. XV. 14.

8 Ilhiminare , baptism being often called 0ujTicr/xos.

9 Cone. Carth. sec. 82.

Chap. 48. — 94. Junius of Neapolis '^ said;
" I do not depart from the judgment which
we once pronounced, that we should baptize
heretics on their coming to the Church." '^

95. Since this man has adduced no argu-
ment nor proof from the Scriptures, he need
not detain us long.

Chap. 49. — 96. Cyprian of Carthage said:
" My opinion has been set forth with the
greatest fullness in the letter which has been
written to our colleague Jubaianus,'-' that
heretics being called enemies of Christ and
antichrists according to the testimony of the
gospel and the apostles, should, when they
come to the Church, be baptized with the one
baptism of the Church, that from enemies
they may be made friends, and that from
antichrists they may be made Christians.'" '^ ,

13 Sabrati, Oea and Leptis Magna were the three cities whose
combination gave its name to Tripolis, an ecclesiastical province.

" Cone. Carth. sec. 83-85.

'= Neapolis was in ecclesiastical province of Zeugitana. The.
name Junius as bishop appears in Cypr. Epp. Ivii., Ixx.
'3 Cone. Carth, sec. 86.

14 Cypr. Ep. Ixxiii. '5 Cone. Carth. sec. 87.

Chap. LL]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

511

97. What need is there of further disputa-
I tion here, seeing that we have already handled
I with the utmost care that very epistle to
! Jubaianus of which he has made mention ?
And as to what he has said here, let us not
I'orget that it might be said of all unrighteous
: men who, as he himself bears witness, are in
, the Catholic Church, and whose power of
! possessing and of conferring baptism is not
! questioned by any of us. For they come to
the Church, who pass to Christ from the party
of the devil, and build upon the rock, and
are incorporated with the Dove, and are
i)laced in security in the garden enclosed and
iountain sealed; where none of those are
. found who live contrary to the precepts of
Christ, wherever they may seem to be. For
•n the epistle which he wrote to Magnus,
while discussing this very question, he him-
self warned us at sufificient lengch, and in no
I ambiguous terms, of what kind of society we
'lould understand that the Church consists.
i or he says, in speaking of a certain man,
•■ Let him become an alien and profane, an
nemy to the peace and unity of the Lord,
;.ot dwelling in the house of God, that is to
>3.y, in the Church of Christ, in which none
ihvell save those who are of one heart and of
ne mind." ' Let those, therefore, who would
.ay injunctions on us on the authority of
Cyprian, pay attention for a time to what we
;ere say. For if only those who are of one
..eart and of one mind dwell in the Church
()( Christ, beyond all question those were not
dwelling in the Church of Christ, however
much they might appear to be within, who of
envy and contention were announcing Christ
v.-ithout charity; by whom he understands, not
the heretics and schismatics who are men-
tioned by the Apostle Paul,^ but false brethren
holding conversation with him within, who
certainly ought not to have baptized, because
they were not dwelling in the Church, in
which he himself says that none d^vell save
those who are of one heart and of one mind:
unless, indeed, any one be so far removed
from the truth as to say that those were of
one heart and of one mind who were envious
and malevolent, and contentious without
charity; and yet tliey used to baptize: nor
did the detestable waywardness which they
displayed in any degree violate or diminish
from the sacrament of Christ, which was
handled and dispensed by them.

Chap. 50. — 98. It is indeed worth while to
consider the whole of the passage in the afore-
said letter to ALagnus, which he has put to-

' Cypr. E/'. Ixix. 5.

2 Phil. i. 13, 17.

gether as follows: "Not dwelling," he says,
" in the house of God — that is to say, in the
Church of Christ — in which none dwell save
those that are of one heart and of one mind,
as the Holy Spirit says in the Psalms, speak-
ing of ' God that maketh men to be of one
mind in an house.' ^ Finally, the very sacri-
fices of the Lord declare that Christians are
united among themselves by a firm and insepa-
rable love for one another. For when the
Lord calls bread, which is compacted together
by the union of many grains, His body,"* He
is signifying one people, whom He bore,
compacted into one body; and when He calls
wine, which is pressed out from a multitude
of branches and clusters and brought together
into one. His blood, s He also signifies one
flock joined together by the mingling of a
multitude united into one.'' These words of
the blessed Cyprian show that he both under-
stood and loved the glory of the house of God,
which house he asserted to consist of those
who are of one heart and of one mind, prov-
ing it by the testimony of the prophets and
the meaning of the sacraments, and in which
house certainly were not found those envious
persons, those malevolent without charity,
who nevertheless used to baptize. From
whence it is clear that the sacrament of
Christ can both be in and be administered by
those who are not in the Church of Christ, in
which Cyprian himself bears witness that
there are none dwelling save those who are
of one heart and of one mind. Nor can it
indeed be said that they are allowed to bap-
tize so long as they are undetected, seeing
that the Apostle Paul did not fail to detect
those of whose ministry he bears unquestion-
able testimony in his epistle, saying that he
rejoices that they also were proclaiming
Christ. For he says of them, " Whether in
pretense or in truth, Christ is preached; and
I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice."*

Chap. 51. — 99. Taking all these things,
therefore, into consideration, I think that I
am not rash in saying that there are some in
the house of God after such a fashion as not
to be themselves the very house of God,
which is said to be built upon a rock," which
is called the one dove,* wliich is styled the
beauteous bride without spot or wrinkle,' and
a garden enclosed, a fountain sealed, a well
X){ living water, an orchard of pomegranates
with pleasant fruits; '° which house also re-
ceived the keys, and the power of binding
and loosing." If any one shall neglect this

3 Ps. Ixviii. 6; cp. LXX. and Hieron.
5 Matt. xxvi. 26-29. '^ '''"'■ '■ '^- '

8 Cant. vi. 9. 9 Eph. v. 27; «p. Retract, ii. 18.

'° Cant. iv. 12, 13. " Matt. xvi. 19.

4 John vi. 51.
7 Xiatt. xvi. i3.

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book VII.

house when it arrests and corrects him, the
Lord says, " Let him be unto thee as an
heathen man and a publican."' Of this
liouse it is said, " Lord, I have loved the
habitation of Thy house, and the place where
Thine honor dwelleth;"= and, '' He maketh
men to be of one mind in an house; " ^ and,
" I was glad when they said unto me, Let us
go into the house of the Lord;''-* and,
" Blessed are they that dwell in Thy house,
O Lord; they will be still praising Thee;"^
with countless other passages to the same
effect. This house is also called wheat,
bringing forth fruit with patience, some thirty-
fold, some sixtyfold, and some an hundred-
fold.* This house is also in vessels of gold
and of silver,^ and in precious stones and im-
perishable woods. To this house it is said,
" Forbearing one another in love, endeavor-
ing to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond
of peace; "^ and, " For the temple of God is
holy, which temple ye are." » For this house
is composed of those that are good and faith-
ful, and of the holy servants of God dispersed
throughout the world, and bound together
by the unity of the Spirit, whether they know
each other personally or not. But we hold
that others are said to be in the house after
such a sort, that they belong not to the sub-
stance of the house, nor to the society of
fruitful and peaceful justice, but only as the
chaff is said to be among the corn; for that
they are in the house we cannot deny, when
the apostle says, " But in a great house there
are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but
also of wood and of earth; and some to honor,
and some to dishonor."" Of this countless
multitude are found to be not only the crowd
which within the Church afflicts the hearts of
the saints, who are so few in comparison with
so vast a host, but also the heresies and
schisms which exist in those who have burst
the meshes of the net, and may now be said
to be rather out of the house than in the
house, of whom it is said, "They went out
from us, but they were not of us. ' ' " For they
are more thoroughly separated, now that they
are also divided from us in the body, than
are those who live within the Church in a
carnal and worldly fashion, and are separated
from us in the spirit.

I Matt, xviii. 17. 2 Ps. xxvi. 8.

3Ps. Ixviii. 6; cp. LXX. and Hieron. 4 Ps. cxxii. i.

5 Ps. Ixx.xiv. 4. 6 Matt. xiii. 23; Luke viii. 15.

7 2 Tim. ii. 20. 8 Eph. iv. z, 3. 9 i Cor. iii. 17.

10 2 Tim. ii. 20. In Retract, ii. 18, Augustin says that he thinks
the ineaning of this last passage to be, not as Cyprian took it, Ep.
liv. 3, that the vessels of gold and silver are the good, which are
to honor; the vessels of wood and earth the wicked, which are to
dishonor: but that the material of the vessels refers to the outward
appearance of the several membersof the Church, and that in each
class some will be found to honor, and some to dishonor. This
interpretation he derives from Tychonius.

" I John ii. 19.

Chap. 52. — 100. Of all these several classes,
then, no one doubts respecting those first, who
are in the house of God in such a sense as
themselves to be the house of God, whether
they be already spiritual, or as yet only babes
nurtured with milk, but still making progress
with earnestness of heart, towards that which
is spiritual, that such men both have baptism
so as to be of profit to themselves, and trans-
mit it to those who follow their example so as
to benefit them; but that in its transmission
to those who are false, whom the Holy Spirit
shuns, though they themselves, so far as lies
with them, confer it so as to be of profit, yet
the others receive it in vain, since they do
not imitate those from whom they receive it.
But they who are in the great house after the
fashion of vessels to dishonor, both have bap-
tism without profit to themselves, and trans-
mit it without profit to those who follow their
example: those, however, receive it with profit,
who are united in heart and character, not to
their ministers, but to the holy house of God.
But those who are more thoroughly separated,
so as to be rather out of the house than in the
house, have baptism without any profit to
themselves; and, moreover, there is no profit
to those who receive it from them, unless
they be compelled by urgent necessity to re-
ceive it, and their heart in receiving it does
not depart from the bond of unity: yet never-
theless they possess it, though the possession
be of no avail; and it is received from them,
even when it is of no profit to those who so
receive it, though, in order that it may be-
come of use, they must depart from their
heresy or schism, and cleave to that house of
God. And this ought to be done, not only
by heretics and schismatics, but also by those
who are in the house through communion in
the sacraments, yet so as to be outside the
house through the perversity of their charac-
ter. For so the sacrament begins to be of
profit even to themselves, which previously
was of no avail.

Chap. 53. — loi. The question is also com-
monly raised, whether baptism is to be held
valid which is received from one who had not
himself received it, if, from some promptings
of curiosity, he had chanced to learn how it
ought to be conferred; and whether it makes
no difference in what spirit the recipient re-
ceives it, whether in mockery or in sincerity:
if in mockery, whether the difference arises
when the mocker}^ is of deceit, as in the
Church, or in what is thought to be the
Church; or when it is in jest, as in a play: and
which is the more accursed, to receive it de-
ceitfully in the Church, or in heres}' or schism

Chap. LIV.]

ON BAPTISM, AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

513

without deceit, that is to say, with full sin-
cerity of heart; or whether it be worse to re-
ceive it deceitfully in heresy or in good faith
in a play, if any one were to be moved by a
sudden feeling of religion in the midst of his
acting. And yet, if we compare such an one
even with him who receives it deceitfully in
the Catholic Church itself, I should be sur-
prised if any one were to doubt which of the
two should be preferred; for I do not see of
what avail the intention of him who gives in
truth can be to him who receives deceitfully.
But let us consider, in the case of some one
also giving it in deceit, when both the giver
and the recipient are acting deceitfully in the
unity of the Catholic Church itself, whether
this should rather be acknowledged as bap-
tism, or that which is given in a play, if any
6ne should be found who received it faithfully
from a sudden impulse of religion: or whether
it be not true that, so far as the men them-
selves are concerned, there is a very great dif-
ference between the believing recipient in a
play, and the mocking recipient in the Church;
but that in regard to the genuineness of the
sacrament there is no difference. For if it
makes no difference in respect to the genuine-
ness of the sacrament within the Catholic
Church itself, whether certain persons cele-
brate it in truth or in deceit, so long as both
still celebrate the same thing, I cannot see
why it shoujd make a difference outside, see-
ing that he who receives it is not cloaked by
his deceit, but he is changed by his religious
impulse. Or have those truthful persons
among whom it is celebrated more power for
the confirmation of the sacrament, than those
deceitful men by whom and in whom it is cele-
brated can e.xert for its invalidation ? And
yet, if the deceit be subsequently brought to
light, no one seeks a repetition of the sacra-
ment; but the fraud is either punished by
excommunication or set right by penitence.

102. But the safe course for us is, not to
advance with any rashness of judgment in
setting forth a view which has neither been
started in any regionary Council of the
Catholic Church nor established in a plenary
one; but to assert, with all the confidence of
a voice that cannot be gainsaid, what has been
confirmed by the consent of the universal
Church, under the direction of our Lord God
and Saviour Jesus Christ. Nevertheless, if
any one were to press me — supposing I were
duly seated in a Council in which a question
were raised on points like these — to declare
what my own opinion was, without reference
to the previously expressed ViCws of others,
whose judgment I would rather follow, if I
were under the influence of the same feelings

as led me to assert what I have said before, I
should have no hesitation in saying that all
m.en possess baptism who have received it in
any place, from any sort of men, provided
that it were consecrated in the words of the
gospel, and received without deceit on their
part with some degree of faith; although it
would be of no profit to them for the salva-
tion of their souls if they were without char-
ity, by which they might be grafted into the
Catholic Church. For " though I have faith,''
says the apostle, "so that I could remove
mountains, but have not charity, I am
nothing." ' Just as already, from the es-
tablished decrees of our predecessors, I have
no hesitation in saying that all those have
baptism who, though they receive it deceit-
fully, yet receive it in the Church, or where
the Church is thought to be by those in whose
society it is received, of whom it was said,
" They went out from us." - But when there
was no society of those who so believed, and
when the man who received it did not himself
hold such belief, but the whole thing was
done as a farce, or a comedy, or a jest, — if I
were asked whether the baptism which was
thus conferred should be approved, I should
declare my opinion that we ought to pray for
the declaration of God's judgment through the
medium of some revelation seeking it with
united prayer and earnest groanings of sup-
pliant devotion, humbly deferring all the time
to the decision of those who were to give their
judgment after me, in case they should set
forth anything as already known and deter-
mined. And, therefore, how much the more
must I be considered to have given my opinion
now without prejudice to the utterance of more
diligent researcn or authority higher than my
owai !

Chap. 54. — 103. But now I think that it is
fully time for me to bring to their due termina-
tion these books also on the subject of bap-
tism, in which our Lord God has shown to
us, through the words of the peaceful Bishoi)
Cyprian and his brethren who agreed with
him, how great is the love which should be
felt for catholic unity; so that even where
they were otherwise minded until God should
reveal even this to them,' they should rather
bear with those who thought differently from
themselves, than sever themselves from them
by a wicked schism; whereby the mouths of
the Donatists are wholly closed, even if we
say nothing of the followers of ^Laximian.
For if the wicked pollute the good in unity,
then even Cyprian himself already found no

' I Cor. xiii. 2.

I John ii. 19.

3 Phil. iii. 15.

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book VII.

Church to which he could be joined. But if
the wicked do not infect the good in unity,
then the sacrilegious Donatist has no ground
to set before himself for separation. But if
baptism is both possessed and transferred by
the multitude of others who work the works
of the flesh, of which it is said, that " they
which do such things shall not inherit the
kingdom of God/' ' then it is possessed and
transferred also by heretics, who are numbered
among those works; because they could have
transferred it had they remained, and did
not lose it by their secession. But men of
this kind confer it on their fellows as fruit-

1 Gal. V. 19-21.

lessly and uselessly as the others who resem-
ble them, inasmuch as they shall not inherit
the kingdom of God. And as, when those
others are brought into the right path, it is
not that baptism begins to be present, having
been absent before, but that it begins to prolit
them, having been already in them; so is it
the case with heretics as well. Whence
Cyprian and those who thought with him could
not impose limits on the Catholic Church,
which they would not mutilate. But m that
they were otherwise minded we feel no fear,
seeing that we too share in their veneration
for Peter; yet in that they did not depart
from unity we rejoice, seeing that we, like
tliem, are founded on the rock.

:$•!

THE

THREE BOOKS OF AUGUSTIN,

BISHOP OF HIPPO,
IN ANSWER

TO THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN,

THE DON ATI ST.

BISHOP OF CIRTA.
[CONTRA LITTERAS PETILIANI DONATIST.'E CORTENSIS, EPISCOPI.]

CIRCA A. D. 400.

TRANSLATED BY THE

REV. 1. R. KIXG, M.A.,

VICAR OF ST. Peter's in the easi', oxford ; and late fellow and tutor of

MERTON COLLEGE, OXFORD.

COXT]:XTS OF ANSWER TO LETTERS OF I'ETILL\N

BOOK I.

Written in the form of a letter addressed to the Catholics, in which the first portion of the letter which

Petilian had written to his adherents is examined and refuted 519

BOOK II.

In which Augustin replies to all the several statements in the letter of I'etilianus, 'as -though disputing

with an adversary face to face 53 j

BOOK III.

In this Book Augustin refutes the second letter which Petilianus wrote to him after having seen the first
of Augustin"s earlier Books. This letter had been full of violent language ; and Augustin rather
snows that the arguments of Petilianus had been deficient and irrelevant, than brings forward argu-
ments in support of his own statements 596

THE

THREE BOOKS OF AUGUSTIN,

BISHOP OF HIPPO.

IN ANSWER TO

THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST,

BISHOP OF CIRTA.

Written c. 400 a.d., some say 398 a.d. , but Augustin places it some time after the trea-
tise on Baptism: Retractt. Bk. ii. xxv. From the same, we gather the following points as
to the origin of this treatise: Before A. had finished his books on the Trinity and his word-
for-word commentary on Genesis, a reply to a letter which Petilian had addressed to his
followers, only a small part of which however had come into A.'s hands, demanded immedi-
ate preparation. This constitutes Book First. Subsequently the whole document was obtained,
and he was engaged in preparing the second Book, c. 401; but even before the full treatise of
Petilian had been secured, the latter had obtained A.'s first book, and afterwards put an
epistle abusive of A. in circulation. The answer to this latter is Book Third, c. 402. Petilian
was originally an advocate. The opponents charged him with having become a Donatist by
compulsion, with assuming the title of Paraclete, and with endeavoring to prevent all access
on their part to his writings.

BOOK I.

WRITTEN IN THE FORM OF A LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE CATHOLICS, IN WHICH THE FIRST
PORTION OF THE LETTER WHICH PETILIAN HAD WRITTEN TO HIS ADHERENTS IS EXAM-
INED AND REFUTED.

Augustin, to the well-beloved brethren that belong to the care of our charge, greeting in the Lord :

Chap. i. — i. Ye know that we have often , already in times past rendered themselves
wished to bring forward into open notoriety,
and to confute, not so much from our own

arguments as from theirs, the sacrilegious 1 character, with the view that, having discussed
error of the Donatist heretics; whence it came the question with us which caused them to
to pass that we wrote letters even to some of i break off from the holy communion of the
tiieir leaders, — not indeed for purposes of I whole world, they might, on consideration of
communion with them, for of that they had the truth, be willing to be corrected, and

unworthy by dissenting from the Church; nor
yet in terms of reproach, but of a conciliatory

520

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book I.

might not defend the headstrong perversity
of their predecessors with a yet more foolish
obstinacy, but might be reunited to the
CatlioHc stock, so as to bring forth the fruits
of charity. But as it is written, " With those
who have hated peace I am more peaceful," '
so they rejected my letters, just as they hate
the very name of peace, in whose interests they
were written. Now, however, as I was in the
church of Constantina, Absentius= being pres-
ent, with my colleague Fortunatus, his bishop,
the brethren brought before my notice a letter,
which they said that a bishop of the said
schism had addressed to his presbyters, as
was set forth in the superscription of the letter
itself. When I had read it, I was so amazed
to find that in his very first words he cut away
the very roots of the whole claims of his party
to communion, that I was unwilling to believe
that it could be the letter of a man who, if
fame speaks truly, is especially conspicuous
among them for learning and eloquence. But
some of those who were present when I read
it, being acquainted with the polish and em-
bellishment of his composition, gradually per-
suaded me that it was undoubtedly his ad-
dress. I thought, however, that whoever the
author might be, it required refutation, lest
the writer should seem to himself, in the
company of the inexperienced, to have written
something of weight against the Catholic
Church.

2. The first point, then, that he lays down
in his letter is the statement, " that we find
fault with them for the repetition of baptism,
while we ourselves pollute our souls with a
laver stained with guilt." But to what profit
is it that I should reproduce all his insulting
terms ? For, since it is one thing to strengthen
proofs, another thing to meddle with abusive
words by way of refutation, let us rather turn
our attention to the mode in which he hac
sought to prove that we do not possess bap-
tism, and that therefore they do not require
the repetition of what was already present,
but confer what hitherto was wanting. For
he says: " What we look for is the conscience
of the giver to cleanse that of the recipient."
But supposing the conscience of the giver is
concealed from view, and perhaps defiled with
sin, how will it be able to cleanse the con-
science of the recipient, if, as he says, "what
we look for is the conscience of the giver to
cleanse that of the recipient?" For if he
should say that it makes no matter to the re-
cipient what amount of evil may lie concealed
from view in the conscience of the giver, per-
haps that ignorance may have such a degree of

Ps. cxx. 7; cf. Hieron.

2 Probably Alypius.

efficacy as this, that a man cannot be defiled
by the guilt of the conscience of him from]
whom he receives baptism, so long as he is
unaware of it. i^et it then be granted that
the guilty conscience of his neighbor cannot j
defile a man so long as he is unaware of it,
but is it therefore clear that it ran further
cleanse him from his own guilt ?

Chap. 2. — 3. Whence, then, is a man to be
cleansed who receives baptism, when the con-
science of the giver is polluted without the
knowledge of him who is to receive it ? Es-
pecially when he goes on to say, " For he who
receives faith from the faithless receives not
faith, but guilt. " There stands before us one
that is faithless ready to baptize, and he who
should be baptized is ignorant of his faithless-
ness: what think you that he will receive?
Faith, or guilt ? If you answer faith, then you
will grant that it is possible^-that a man should
receive not guilt, but faith, from him that is
faithless; and the former saying will be false,
that " he who receives faith from the faithless
receives not faith, but guilt." For we find
that it is possible that a man should receive
faith even from one that is faithless, if he be
not aware of the faithlessness of the giver.
For he does not say, He who receives faith
from one that is openly and notoriously faith-
less; but he says, " He who receives faith
from the faithless receives not faith, but
guilt;" which certainly is false when a per-
son is baptized by one who hides his faith-
lessness. But if he shall say, Even when the
faithlessness of the baptizer is concealed, the
recipient receives not faith from him, but
guilt, then let them rebaptize those who are
well known to have been baptized by men
who in their own body have long concealed a
life of guilt, but have eventually been de-
tected, convicted, and condemned.

Chap. 3. — For, so long as they escaped de-
tection, they could not bestow faith on any
whom they baptized, but only guilt, if it be
true that whosoever receives faith from one
that is faithless receives not faith, but guilt.
Let them therefore be baptized by the good,
that they may be enabled to receive not guilt,
but faith.

4. But how, again, shall they have any cer-
tainty about the good who are to give them
faith, if what we look to is the conscience of
the giver, which is unseen by the eyes of the
proposed recipient ? Therefore, according to
their judgment, the salvation of the spirit is
made uncertain, so long as in opposition to
the holy Scriptures, which say, "It is better
to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in

Chap. VI.]

THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

i2I

man," ' and, " Cursed be the man that trust-
eth in man," - they remove the hope of those
who are to be baptized from the Lord their
God, and persuade them that it should be
placed in mqn; the practical result of which
is, that their salvation becomes not merely-
uncertain, but actually null and void. For
" salvation belongeth unto the Lord," ^ and
" vain is the help of man." "• Therefore, who-
soever places his trust in man, even in one
whom he knows to be just and innocent, is
accur'-ed. Whence also the Apostle Paul finds
fault with those who said they were of Paul,
saying, " Was Paul crucified for you ? or were
ye baptized in the name of Paul ?" ^

Chap. 4. — 5, Wherefore, if they were in
\ error, and would have perished had they not
been corrected, who wished to be of Paul,
what must we suppose to be the hope of those
who wished to be of Donatus ? For they use
their utmost endeavors to prove that the ori-
gin, root, and head of the baptized person is
none other than the individual by whom he is
baptized. The result is, that since it is very
often a matter of uncertainty what kind of
man the baptizer is, tlie hope therefore of the
baptized being of uncertain origin, of uncer-
tain root, of uncertain head, is of itself un-
certain altogether. And since it is possible
that the conscience of the giver may be in
such a condition as to be accursed and defiled
without the knowledge of the recipient, it re-
sults that, being of an accursed origin, ac-
cursed root, accursed head, the hope of the
baptized may prove to be vain and un-
i grounded. For Petilian expressly states in
: his epistle, that "everything consists of an
rigin and root; and if it have not something
lor a head, it is nothing." And since by the
origin and root and head of the baptized per-
son he wishes to be understood the man by
whom he is baptized, what good does the un-
happy recipient derive from the fact that he
does not know how bad a man his baptizer
really is ? For he does not know that he him-
self has a bad head, or actually no head at all.
And yet what hope can a man have, who,
whether he is aware of it or not, has either a
very bad head or no head at all ? Can we
maintain that his very ignorance forms a
head, when his baptizer is either a bad head
or none at all ? Surely any one who thinks
this is unmistakeably without a head.

Chap. 5. — 6. We ask, therefore, since he
says, " He who receives faith from the faith-
less receives not faith, but guilt," and imme-

diately adds to this the further statement, that
''everything consists of an origin and root;
and if it have not something for a head, it is
nothing;" — we ask, I say, in a case where the
faithlessness of the baptizer is undetected:
If, then, the man whom he baptizes receives
faith, and not guilt; if, then, the baptizer is
not his origin and root and -head, who is it
from whom he receives faith ? where is the
origin from which he springs ? where is the
root of which he is a shoot ? where the head
which is his starting-point? Can it be, that
when he who is baptized is unaware of the
faithlessness of his baptizer, it is then Christ
who gives faith, it is then Christ who is the
origin and root and head ? Alas for human
rashness and conceit ! Why do you not allow
thit it is always Christ who gives faith, for
the purpose of making a man a Christian by
giving it? Why do you not allow that Christ
is always the origin of the Christian, that
the Christian always plants his root in Christ,
that Christ is the head of the Christian ? Do
we then maintain that, even when spiritual
grace is dispensed to those that believe by
the hands of a holy and faithful minister, it is
still not the minister himself who justifies, but
that One of whom it is said, that " He justi-
fieth the ungodly?"* But unless we admit
this, either the Apostle Paul was the head
and origin of those \vhom he had planted, or
Apollos the root of those whom he had
watered, rather than He who had given them
faith in believing; whereas the same Paul
says, " I have planted, Apollos watered, but
God gave the increase: so then neither is he
that planteth anything, nor he that watereth,
but God that giveth the mcrease.' ^ Nor was
the apostle himself their root, but rather He
who says, " I am the vine, ye are the
branches."^ How, too, could he be their
head, when he says, that "we, being many,
are one body in Christ,"' and expressly de-
clares in many passages that Christ Himself
is the head of the whole body ?

Chap. 6. — 7. Wherefore, whether a man
receive the sacrament of baptism from a
faithful or a faithless minister, his whole hope
is in Christ, that he fall not under the con-
demnation that "cursed is he that placeth
his hope in man." Otherwise, if each man
is born again in spiritual grace of the same
sort as he by whom he is baptized, and if
when he who baptizes him is manifestly a
good man, then he himself gives faith, he is
himself the origin and root and head of him
who is being born; whilst, when tlie baptizer

I Ps. cxviii. 8.

4 Ps. Ix. II.

2 Jer. xvii. -.
5 I Cor. i. 13.

3 Ps. iii. 8.

6 Rom. iv. 5.
8 John XV. 5.

7 I Cor. iii. 6, 7.
9 Rom. xii. 5.

522

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book I.

is faithless without its being known, then the
baptized person receives faith from Christ,
then he derives his origin from Christ, then
he is rooted in Christ, then he boasts in
Christ as his head, — in that case all who are
baptized should wish that they might have
faithless baptizers, and be ignorant of their
faithlessness: for however good their bap-
tizers might have been, Christ is certainly be-
yond comparison better still; and He will
then be the head of the baptized, if the faith-
lessness of the baptizer shall escape detection.

Chap. 7. — 8. But if it is perfect madness
to hold such a view (for it is Christ always
that justifieth the ungodly, by changing his
ungodliness into Christianit}^; it is from Christ
always that faith is received, Christ is always
the origin of the regenerate and the head of
the Church), what weight, then, will those
words have, which thoughtless readers value
by their sound, without inquiring what their
inner meaning is ? For the man who does
not content himself with hearing the words
with his ear, but considers the meaning of
the phrase, when he hears, "What we look
to is the conscience of the giver, that it may
cleanse the conscience of the recipient," will
answer. The conscience of man is often un-
known to me, but I am certain of the mercy
of Christ: when he hears, " He who receives
faith from the faithless receives not faith, but
guilt," will answer, Christ is not faithless,
from whom I receive not guilt, but faith:
when he hears, " Everything consists of an
origin and root; and if it have not something
for a head, is nothing," will answer. My ori-
gin is Christ, my root is Christ, my head is
Christ. When he hears, " Nor does anything
well receive second birth, unless it be born
again of good seed," he will answer. The seed
of which I am born again is the Word of God,
which I am warned to hear with attention,
even though he through whom I hear it does
not himself do what he preaches; according
to the words of the Lord, which make me
herein safe, "All whatsoever they bid you
observe, that observe and do; but do not ye
after their works: for they say, and do not." '
When he hears, " What perversity must it be,
that he who is guilty through his own sins
should make another free from guilt ! " he will
answer. No one makes me free from guilt but
He who died for our sins, and rose again for
our justification. For I believe, not in the
minister by whose hands I am baptized, but in
Him who justifieth the ungodly, that my faith
may be counted unto me for righteousness. ="

I Matt, xxiii. 5.

- Rom. iv. 25, 5.

Chap. 8. — 9. When he hears, " Every good
tree bringeth good fruit, but a corrupt tree
bringeth forth evil fruit: do men gather grapes
of thorns? "3 and, "A good man out of the
good treasure of his heart bringeth forth good
things, and an evil man out of the evil treas-
ure bringeth forth evil things; " '^ he will an-
swer. This therefore is good fruit, that I
should be a good tree, that is, a good man,
that I should show forth good fruit, that is,
good works. But this will be given to me,
not by him that planteth, nor by him that
watereth, but by God that giveth the increase.
For if the good tree be the good baptizer, so
that his good fruit should be the man whom
he baptizes, then any one who has been bap-
tized by a bad man, even if his wickedness be
not manifest, will have no power to be good,
for he is sprung from an evil tree. For a
good tree is one thing; a tree whose quality
is concealed, but yet bad, is another. Or if,
when the tree is bad, but hides its badness,
then whosoever is baptized by it is born not
of it, but of Christ; then they are justified
with more perfect holiness who are baptized
by the bad who hide their evil nature, than
they who are baptized by the manifestly good.s

Chap. 9. — 10. Again, when he hears, " He
that is washed by one dead, his washing profit-
eth him nought,"^ he will answer, "Christ,
being raised from the dead, dieth no more;
death hath no more dominion over Him:"^
of whom it is said, " The same is He which
baptizeth with the Holy Ghost." ^ But they
are baptized by the dead, who are baptized
in the temples of idols. For even they
themselves do not suppose that they receive
the sanctification which they look for from
their priests, but from their gods; and since
these were men, and are dead in such sort as
to be now neither upon earth nor in the rest
of heaven, 5 they are truly baptized by the
dead: and the same answer will hold good if
there be any other way in which these words
of holy Scripture may be examined, and
profitably discussed and understood. For if
in this place I understand a baptizer who is a
sinner, the same absurdity will follow, that
whosoever has been baptized by an ungodly
man, even though his ungodliness be undis-
covered, is yet washed in vain, as though

3 Matt. vii. 17, 16. 4 Matt. xii. 35.

5 See below, Book II. 6, 12.

6 So the Donatists commonly quoted Ecclus. xxiv. 25, which is
more correctly rendered in our version, " He that washeth himself
after the touching of a dead body, if he touch it again, what
availeth his washing?" Augustin {RetracttA. 21, 3) says that
the misapplication was rendered possible by the omission in many
African Mss. of the second clause, "and touches it again." Cp.
Hieron., Ecclus. xxxiv, 30.

7 Rom. vi. 9. 8 John i. 33.

9 Cp. Contra Cyesconiutn, Book II. 25. 30: ^'' Ita mcriui
' sunt, ut neque super terras, neque in reqttie sanctorum vivant."

Chap. XII.]

THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

523

baptized by one dead. For he does not say,
He that is baptized by one manifestly dead,
but absolutely, " by one dead." And if they
consider any man to be dead whom they
know to be a sinner, but any one in their
communion to be alive, even though he man-
ages most adroitly to conceal a life of wicked-
ness, in the first place with accursed pride
they claim more for themselves than they
ascribe to God, that when a sinner is unveiled
to them he should be called dead, but when
he is known by God he is held to be alive.
In the next place, if that sinner is to be called
dead who is known to be such by men, what
answer will they make about Optatus, whom
they were afraid to condemn though they had
long known his wickedness ? Whv are those
who were baptized by him not said to have
been baptized by one dead ? Did he live be-
cause the Count was his faith?' — an elegant
and well-turned saying of some early col-
leagues of their own, which they themselves
are wont to quote with pride, not understand-
ing that at the death of the haughty Goliath
it was his own sword by which his head was
cut off.^

Chap. 10. — 11. Lastly, if they are willing
to give the name of dead neither to the wicked
man whose sin is hidden, nor to him whose
sin is manifest, but who lias yet not been con-
demned by them, but only to him whose sin
is manifest and condemned, so that whosoever
is baptized by him is himself baptized by the
dead, and his washing profits him nothing;
what are we to say of those whom their own
party have condemned " by the unimpeach-
able voice of a plenary Council," ^ together
with Maximianus and the others who ordained
him, — I mean Felicianus of Musti, and Pras-
textatus of Assura, of whom I speak in the
meantime, who are counted among the twelve
ordainers of Maximianus, as erecting an altar
in opposition to their altar at which Primianus
stands ? They surely are reckoned by them
among the dead. To this we have the ex-
press testimony of the noble decree of that
Council of theirs which formerly called
forth shouts of unreserved ■' applause when
it was recited among them for the purpose
of being decreed, but which would now be
received in silence if we should chance to
recite it in their ears; whereas they should
rather have been slow at first to rejoice in its
eloquence, lest they should afterwards come
to mourn over it when its credit was destroyed.

' Benedictines suggest as an emendation, " (jttod Deus Hit
comes erat" as in II. 23, 53; 37, 88,103, 2J7.

' I Sam. xvii. 51. 3 That of P.agai. "See on rfr Bnpt. I. 5, 7.

4 Ore latissitno acclavtaveruut. The Louvain edition has
'■'■ latissiiuo" both here and Contra Crescon. IV. 41, 48.

For in it they speak in the following terms of
the followers of Maximianus, who were shut
out from their communion: " Seeing that the
shipwrecked members of certain men have
been dashed by the waves of truth upon the
sharp rocks, and after the fashion of the
Egyptians, the shores are covered with the
bodies of the dying; whose punishment is in-
tensified in death itself, since after their life
has been wrung from them by the avenging
waters, they fail to find so much as burial."
In such gross terms indeed, do they insult
those who were guilty of schism from their
body, that they call them dead and unburied;
but certainly they ought to have wished that
they might obtain burial, if it were only that
they might not have seen Optatus Gildonianus
advancing with a military force, and like a
sweeping wave that dashes beyond its fellows,
sucking back Felicianus and Prretextatus once
again within their pale, out of the multitude
of bodies lying unburied on the shore.

Chap. ii. — 12. Of these I would ask,
whether by coming to their sea they were re-
stored to life, or whether they are still dead
there? For if still they are none the less
corpses, then the laver cannot in any way
profit those who are baptized by such dead
men. But if they have been restored to life,
yet how can the laver profit those whom they
baptized before outside, v.iiile they were lying
without life, if the passage, " He who is bap-
tized by the dead, of what profit is his bap-
tism to him," is to be understood in the way
in which they think ? For those whom Prae-
textatus and Felicianus baptized while they
were yet in communion with Maximianus are
now retained among them, sharing in their
communion, without being again baptized,
together with the same men who baptized
them — I mean Felicianus and Prx^textatus:
taking occasion by which fact, if it were not
that they cherish the beginning of their own
obstinacy, instead of considering the certain
end of their spiritual salvation, they would
certainly be bound to vigilance, and ought to
recover the soundness of their senses, so as
to breathe again in Catholic peace; if only,
laying aside the swelling of tiieir pride, and
overcoming the madness of their stubborn-
ness, they would take heed and see what
monstrous sacrilege it is to curse the baptism
of the foreign churches, which we have
learned from the sacred books were planted
in primitive times, and to receive the baptism
of the followers of Maximianus, whom they
have condemned with their own lips.

Chap. 12. — n,. But our brethren t'.iem-

5-4

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book

selves, the sons of the aforesaid churches,
were both ignorant at the time, and still are
ignorant, of what has been done so many
years ago in Africa: wherefore they at any
rate cannot be defiled by the charges which
have been brought, on the part of the Dona-
tists, against the Africans, without even know-
ing whether they were true. But the Dona-
tists having openly separated and divided
themselves off, although they are even said to
have taken part in the ordination of Primi-
anus, yet condemned the said Primianus,
ordained another bishop in opposition to
Primianus, baptized outside the communion
of Primianus, rebaptized after Primianus, and
returned to Primianus with their disciples
who had been baptized by themselves outside,
and never rebaptized by any one inside. If
such a union with the party of Maximianus
does not pollute the Donatists, how can the
mere report concerning the Africans pollute
the foreigners? If the lips meet together
without offense in the kiss of peace, which
reciprocally condemned each other, why is
each man that is condemned by them in the
churches very far removed by the intervening
sea from their jurisdiction, not saluted with a
kiss as a faithful Catholic, but driven forth
with a blast of indignation as an impious
pagan? And if, in receiving the followers of
Maximianus, they made peace in behalf of
their own unity, far be it from us to find fault
with them, save that they cut their own throats
by their decision, that whereas, to preserve
unity in their schism, they collect together
again what had been parted from themselves,
they yet scorn to reunite their schism itself to
the true unity of the Church.

Chap. 13. — 14. If, in the interests of the
unity of the party of Donatus, no one rebap-
tizes those who were baptized in a wicked
schism, and men, who are guilty of a crime of
such enormity as to be compared by them in
their Council to those ancient authors of
schism whom the earth swallowed up alive,'
are either unpunished after separation, or re-
stored again to their position after condemna-
tion; why is it that, in defence of the unity of
Ciirist, which is spread throughout the whole
inhabited world, of which it has been pre-
dicted that it shall have dominion from sea to
sea, and from the river unto the ends of the
earth, ^ — a prediction which seems from actual
proof to be in process of fulfillment; why is
it that, in defence of this unity, they do not
acknowledge the true and universal law of
that inheritance which rings forth from the

' Num. xvi

= Ps. Ixxii, S.

books that are common to us all: "I shall
give Thee the heathen for Thine inheritance,
and the uttermost parts of the earth for Thy
possession ?'■ 3 In behalf of the unity of
Donatus, they are not compelled to call to-
gether again what they have scattered abroad,
but are warned to hear the cry of the Script-
ures: why will they not understand that they
meet with such treatment through the mercy
of God, that since they brought false charges
against the Catholic Church, by contact as it
were with which they were unwilling to defile
their own excessive sanctity, they should be
compelled by the sovereign authority of
Optatus Gildonianus to receive again and as-
sociate with themselves true offenses of the
greatest enormity, condemned by the true
voice, as they say, of their own plenary Coun-
cil ? Let them at length perceive how they
are filled with the true crimes of their own
party, after inventing fictitious crimes where-
with to charge their brethren, when, even if
the charges had been true, they ought at
length to feel how much should be endured
in the cause of peace, and in behalf of Christ's
peace to return to a Church which did not
condemn crimes undiscovered, if on behalf
of the peace of Donatus they were ready to
pardon such as were condemned.

Chap. 14. — 15. Therefore, brethren, let it
suffice us that they should be admonished
and corrected on the one point of their con-
duct in the matter of the followers of Maxi-
mianus. We do not ransack ancient archives,
we do not bring to light the contents of time-
honored libraries, we do not publish our
proofs to distant lands; but we bring in, as
arbiters betwixt us, all the proofs derived
from our ancestors, we spread abroad the
witness that cries aloud throughout the world.

Chap. 15. — 16. Look at the states of
Musti'» and Assurar^ there are many still re-
maining in this life and in this province who
have severed themselves, and many from
whom they have severed themselves; many
who have erected an altar, and many against
whom that altar has been erected; many who
have condemned, and many who have been
condemned; who have received, and who have
been received; who have been baptized out-
side, and not baptized again within: if all
these things in the cause of unity defile, let
the defiled hold their tongues; if these things
in the cause of unity do not defile, let them
submit to correction, and terminate their strife.

3 Ps. ii. 8.

4 Musti is in ecclesiastical province of Numidia.

5 Assnra is in ecclesiastical provinc-e of Zeugitana. See Treat-
ise on Btiptistn^ Book VII. c. 32.

HAP. XVIII.] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAX, THE DONATIST.

525

Chap. 16. — 17. As for the words which
follow in his letter, the writer himself could
scarcely fail to laugh at them, when, having
made an unlearned and lying use of the proof
in which he quotes the words of Scripture,
" He who is washed by the dead, what profit-
eth him his washing?" he endeavors to show
to us " how far a traditor being still in life may
he accounted dead." And then he goes on
furtaer to say: " That man is dead who has not
been worthy to be born again in true baptism;
he is likewise dead who, although born in gen-
uine baptism, has joined himself to a traditor.'"
If, therefore, the followers of Maximianus are
not dead, why do the Donatists say, in their
plenary Council, that " the shores are covered
with their dying bodies?" But if they are
dead, whence is there life in the baptism
which they gave? Again, if Maximianus is
not dead, why is a man baptized again who
had been baptized by him ? But if he is dead,
why is not also Felicianus of Musti dead with
him, who ordained him, and might have died
beyond the sea with some African colleague
or another who was a traditor 2 Or, if he also
is himself dead, how is there life with him in
your society in those who, having been bap-
tized outside by him who is dead, have never
been baptized again within ?

Chap. 17. — 18. Then he further adds:
" Both are without the life of baptism, both
he who never had it at all, and he who had it
but has lost it." He therefore never had it,
whom Felicianus, the follower of Maximianus
or Praetextatus, baptized outside; and these
men themselves have lost what once they had.
When, therefore, these were received with
their followers, who gave to those whom they
baptized what previously they did not have ?
and who restored to themselves what they
had lost ? But they took away with them the
form of baptism, but lost the veritable excel-
lence of baptism by their wicked schism.
Why do you repudiate the form itself, which
is holy at all times and all places, in the
Catholics whom you have not heard, whilst
you are willing to acknowledge it in the
followers of Maximianus whom you have
punished ?

19. But whatever he seemed to himself to
say by way of accusation about the traitor
Judas, I see not how it can concern us, who
are not proved by them to have betrayed our
trust; nor, indeed, if such treason were proved
on the part of any who before our time have
died in our communion, would that treason
in any way defile us by whom it was dis-
avowed, and to whom it was displeasing.
For if they themselves are not defiled by

offenses condemned by themselves, and after-
wards condoned, how much less can we be
defiled by what we have disavowed so soon as
we have heard of them ! However weighty,
therefore, his invective against traditors, let
him be assured that they are condemned by
me in precisely the same terms. But yet I
make a distinction; for he accuses one on my
side who has long been dead without havinor
been condemned in any investigation made
by me. I point to a man adhering closely to
his side, who had been condemned by him,
or at least had been separated by a sacrilegious
schism, and whom he received again with
undiminished honor.

Chap. 18. — 20. He says: "You who are
a most abandoned traditor have come out in
the character of a persecutor and murderer of
us who keep the law." If the followers of
Maximianus kept the law when they separated
from you, then we may acknowledge you as
a keeper of the law, when you are separated
from the Church spread abroad throughout
the world. But if you raise the question of
persecutions, I at once reply: If you have
suffered anything unjustly, this does not con-
cern those who, though they disapprove of
men who act in such a way,' yet endure them
for the peace that is in unity, in a manner
deserving of all praise. Wherefore you have
nothing to bring up against the Lord's wheat,
who endure the chaff that is among them till
the last winnowing, from whom you never
would have separated yourself, had you not
shown yourself lighter than chaff by flying
away under the blast of temptation before t le
coming of the Winnower. But not to leave
this one example, which the Lord hath tarust
back in their teeth, to close the mouths of
these men, for their correction if they will
show themselves to be wise, but for their con-
fusion if they remain in their folly: if those
are more just that suffer persecution than
those who inflict it, then those same followers
of Maximianus are the more just, whose
basilica was utterly overthrown, and who
were grievously maltreated by the military
following of Optatus, when the mandates of
the proconsul, ordering that all of them
should be shut out of the basilicas, were mani-
festly procured by the followers of Primianus.
Wherefore, if, when the emperors hated their
communion, they ventured on such violent
measures for the persecution of the followers
of Maximianus, what would they do if they

I Qui talia facientes quamzns imf'robent. A comparison of
the explanation of this passage in Ci^tifr^ foreseen. III. 4'. 45,
shows the probability of Aligne's conjcrinrr, "(/naiiiT:s iiiiprcbe,
" who endure the men that act in such a way, however monstrous
their conduct may be."

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book I.

were enabled to work their will by being in
communion with kings ? And if they did such
things as I have mentioned for the correction
of the wicked, why are they surprised that
Catholic emperors should decree with greater
power that they should be worked upon and
corrected who endeavor to rebaptize the whole
Christian world, when they have no ground
for differing from them ? seeing that they
themselves bear witness that it is right to bear
with wicked men even where they have true
charges to bring against them in the cause of
peace, since they received those whom they
had themselves condemned, acknowledging
the honors conferred among themselves, and
the baptism administered in schism. Let
them at length consider what treatment they
deserve at the hands of the Christian powers
of the world, who are the enemies of Chris-
tian unity throughout the world. If, there-
fore, correction be. bitter, yet let them not
fail to be ashamed; lest when they begin to
read what they themselves have written, they
be overcome with laughter, when they do not
find in themselves what they wish to find in
others, and fail to recognize' in their own
case what they find fault with in their neigh-
bors.

Chap. 19. — 21. What, then, does he mean
by quoting in his letter the words with which
our Lord addressed the Jews: "Wherefore,
behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise
men, and scribes; and some of them ye shall
kill and crucify, and some of them shall ye
scourge ? " "" For if by the wise men and the
scribes and the prophets they would have
themselves be understood, while we were as
it were the persecutors of the prophets and
wise men, why are they unwilling to speak
with us, seeing they are sent to us ? For, in-
deed, if the man who wrote that epistle which
we are at this present moment answering, were
to be pressed by us to acknowledge it as his
own, stamping its authenticity with his signa-
ture, I question much whether he would do
it, so thoroughly afraid are they of our pos-
sessing any words of theirs. For when we
were anxious by some means or other to pro-
cure the latter part of this same letter, because
those from whom we obtained it were unable
to describe the whole of it, no one who was
asked for it was willing to give it to us, so
soon as they knew that we were making a
reply to the portion which we had. There-
fore, when they read how the Lord says to
the prophet, " Cry aloud, spare not, and write

1 Ncc in se agnoscuttt . The reading of the Louvain edition
gives better sense, " Et in se agnoscunt,' " and discover in them-
selves."

2 IMatt. xxiii. 34.

their sins with my pen,"^ these men who are
sent to us as prophets have no fears on this
score, but take every precaution that their
crying may not be heard by us: wliich they
certainly would not fear if what they spoke of
us were true. But their apprehension is not
groundless, as it is written in the Psalm,
" The mouth of them that speak lies shall be
stopped."" For if the reason that they do
not receive our baptism be that we are a gen-
eration of vipers — to use the expression in his
epistle — why did they receive the baptism erf
the followers of Maximianus, of whom their
Council speaks in the following terms: "Be-
cause the enfolding of a poisoned womb has
long concealed the baneful offspring of a
viper's seed, and the moist concretions of
conceived iniquity have by slow heat flowed
forth into the members of serpents " ? Is it
not therefore of themselves also that it is
said in the same Council, "The poison of
asps is under their lips, their mouth is full of
cursing and bitterness, their feet are swift to
shed blood; destruction and unhappiness is
in their ways, and the way of peace have they
not known " ?= And yet they now hold these
men themselves in undiminished honor, and
receive within their body those whom these
men had baptized without.

Chap. 20. — 22. Wherefore all this about
the generation of vipers, and the poison of
asps under their lips, and all the other things
which they have said against those which have
not known the way of peace, are really, if they
would but speak the truth, more strictly ap-
plicable to themselves, since for the sake of
the peace of Donatus they received the bap-
tism of these men, in respect of which they
used the expressions quoted above in the
wording of the decree of the Council; but the
baptism of the Church of Christ dispersed
throughout the world, from which peace itself
came into Africa, they repudiate, to the sac-
rilegious wounding- of the peace of Christ.
Which, therefore, are rather the false
prophets, who come in sheep's clothing, while
inwardly they are ravening wolves,^ — they
who either fail to detect the wicked in the
Catholic Church, and communicate with
them in all innocence, or else for the sake of
the peace of unity are bearing with those
whom they cannot separate from the thresh-
ing-floor of the Lord before the Winnower
shall come, or they who do in schism what
they censure in the Catholic Church, and re-
ceive in their own separation, when manifest

3 Isa. Iviii. I. 4 Ps. Ixiii. ii.

5 Ps. xiv. 5-7, LXX. and Hieron.,and probably N. Af. version..!

6 Matt. vii. 15.

Chap. XXIII.] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

5^7

to all and condemned by their own voice, what
! they profess that they shun in the unity of
I the Church when it calls for toleration, and

does not even certainly exist ?

Chap. 21. — 23. Lastly, it has been said,
: as he himself has also quoted, "Ye shall
, know them by their fruits: " ' let us therefore
' examine into their fruits. You bring up
against our predecessors their delivery of the
sacred books. This very charge we urge with
-reater probability against their accusers
themselves. And not to carry our search too
tar, in the same city of Constantina your pre-
tlecessors ordained Silvanus bishop at the
very outset of his schism. He, while he was
still a subdeacon, was most unmistakeably
entered as a traditor in the archives of the
rity.- If you on your side bring forward
documents against our predecessors, all that
we ask is equal terms, that we should either
1 elieve both to be true or both to be false.
If both are true, you are unquestionably
-uilty of schism, who have pretended that
you avoid offenses in the communion of the
uliole world, which you had commonly among
you in the small fragment of your own sect.
But again, if both are false, you are unques-
tionably guilty of schism, who, on account of
the false charges of giving up the sacred
books, are staining yourselves with the hei-
nous offence of severance from the Church.
But if we have something to urge in accusa-
tion while you have nothing, or if our charges
are true whilst yours are false, it is no longer
matter of discussion how thoroughly your
mouths are closed.

Chap. 22. — 24. What if the holy and true
Church of Christ were to convince and over-
come you, even if we held no documents in
support of our cause, or only such as were
false, while you had possession of some genu-
ine proofs of delivery of the sacred books?
what would then remain for you, except that,
if you would, you should show your love of
peace, or otherwise should hold your
tongues? 3 For whatever, iri that case, you
might bring forward in evidence, I should be
able to say with the greatest ease and the most
perfect truth, that then you are bound to
prove as much to the full and catholic unity
of the Church already spread abroad and es-
tablished throughout so many nations, to the
end that you should remain within, and that

> Malt. vii. 16.

2 See below, III. 57, 69; 68, 70; and Contra Cresc. Ill, 29,
33, IV. 56, 66.

3 " Obmutescatis " is the most probable conjecture of MiRne
for " obtumescatis,' which could only mean, " you should swell
with confusion."

those whom you convict should be expelled.
And if you have endeavored to do this, cer-
tainly you have not been able to make good
your proof; and being ranquished or en-
raged, you have separated yourselves, with
all the heinous guilt of sacrilege, from the
guiltless men who could not condemn on in-
sufificient proof. But if you have not even
endeavored to do this, then with most accursed
and unnatural blindness you have cut your-
selves off from the wheat of Christ, which
grows throughout His whole fields, that is,
throughout the whole world, until the end,
because you have taken offense at a few tares
in Africa.

Chap. 23. — 25. In conclusion, the Testa-
ment is said to have been given to the flames
by certain men in the time of persecution.
Now let its lessons be read, from whatever
source it has been brought to light. Cer-
tainly in the beginning of the promises of the
Testator this is found to have been said to
Abraham: " In thy seed shall all the nations
of the earth be blessed; " " and this saying is
truthfully interpreted by the apostle: "To
thy seed," he says, "which is Christ." ^ No
betrayal on the part of any man has made the
promises of God of none effect. Hold com-
munion with all the nations of the earth, and
then you may boast that you have preserved
the Testament from the destruction of the
flames. But if you will not do so, which
party is the rather to be believed to have in-
sisted on the burning of the Testament, save
that which will not assent to its teaching when
it is brought to light? For how much more
certainly, without any sacrilegious rashness,
can he be held to have joined the company of
traditors who now persecutes with his tongue
the Testament which they are said to have
persecuted with the flames ! You charge us
with the persecution: the true wheat of the
Lord answers you, " Either it was done
justly, or it was done by the chaff that was
among us." What have you to say to this?
You object that we have no baptism: the
same true wheat of the Lord answers you,
that the form of the sacrament even within
the Church fails to profit some, as it did no
good to Simon Magus when he was baptized,
much more it fails to profit those who are
without. Yet that baptism remains in them
when they depart, is proved from this, that
it is not restored to them when they return.
Never, therefore, except by the greatest
shamelessness, will you be al)le to cry out
against that wheat, or to call them false

4 Gen. xxii. j8.

S Gal. iii. i6.

528

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Bock I.

prophets clad in sheep's clothing, whilst in-
wardly they are ravening wolves; since either
they do not know the wicked in the unity of
the Catholic Church, or for the sake of unity
bear with those whom they know.

Chap. 24. — 26. But let us turn to the con-
sideration of your fruits, I pass over the
tyrannous exercise of authority in the cities,
and especially in the estates of other men; I
pass over the madness of the Circurncelliones,
and the sacrilegious and profane adoration of
the bodies of those who had thrown them-
selves of their own accord over precipices,
the revellings of drunkenness, and the ten
years' groaning of the whole of Africa under
the cruelty of the one man Optatus Gildon-
anius: all this I pass over, because there are
certain among you who cry out that these
things are, and have ever been displeasing to
them. But they say that they bore with
them in the cause of peace, because they
could not put them down; wherein they con-
demn themselves by their own judgment: for if
indeed they felt such love for peace, they never
would have rent in twain the bond of unity.
For what madness can be greater, than to be
willing to abandon peace in the midst of
peace itself, and to be anxious to retain it in
the midst of discord ? Therefore, for the
sake of those who pretend that they do not
see the evils of this same faction of Donatus,
which all men see and blame, ignoring them
even to the extent of saying of Optatus him-
self, "What did he do?" "Who accused
him?" "Who convicted him?'' "I know
nothing/' "I saw nothing/' "I heard noth-
ing,"—for the sake of these, I say, who pre-
tend that they are ignorant of what is gener-
ally notorious, the party of Maximianus has
arisen, through whom their eyes are opened,
and their mouths are closed: for they openly
sever themselves; they openly erect altar
against altar; they are openly in a Council '
called sacrilegious and vipers, and swift to
shed blood, to be compared with Dathan and
Abiram and Korah, and are condemned in
cutting terms of abhorrence; and are as
openly received again with undiminished
honors in company with those whom they
have baptized. Such are the fruits of these
men, who do all this for the peace of Donatus,
that they may clothe themselves in sheep's
clothing, and reject the peace of Christ
throughout the world that they may be raven-
ing wolves within the fold.

Chap. 25. — 27. I think that I have left un-

^ That of Bagai.

answered none of the statements in the letter
of Donatus, so far at least as relates to what
I have been able to find in that part of which
we are in possession. I should be glad if they
would produce the other part as well, in case
there should be anything in it which does not
admit of refutation. But as for these answers
which we have made to him, with the help of
God, I admonish your Christian love, that ye
not only communicate them to those who seek
for them., but also force them on those who
show no longing for them. Let them answer
anything they will; and if they shrink from
sending a reply to us, let them at any rate
send letters to their own party, only not for-
bidding that the contents should be shown to
us. For if they do this, they show their fruits
most openly, by which they are proved to
demonstration to be ravening wolves disp-uised
in sheep's clothing, in that they secretly lay
snares for our sheep, and openly shrink from
giving any answer to the shepherds. We only
lay to their charge the sin of schism, in v/hich
they are all most thoroughly involved, — not
the offenses of certain of their party, which
some of them declare to be displeasing to
themselves. If they, on the other hand,
abstain from charging us with the sins of
other men, they have nothing they can lay to
our charge, and therefore they are wholly un-
able to defend themselves from the charofe of
schism; because it is by a wicked severance
that they have separated themselves from the
threshing-floor of the Lord, and from the in-
nocent company of the corn that is growing
throughout the world, on account of charges
which either are false, and invented by them-
selves, or even if true, involve the chaff alone.

Chap 26. — 28. But it is possible that you
may expect of me that I should go on to re-
fute what he has introduced about Manichaeus.
Now, in respect of this, the only thing that
offends me is that he has censured a most
pestilent and pernicious error — I mean the
heresy of the Manichasans — in terms of wholly
inadequate severity, if indeed they amount to
censure at all, though the Catholic Church
has broken down his defenses by the strongest
evidence of truth.'' For the inheritance of
Christ, established in all nations, is secure
against heresies which have been shut out from
the inheritance; but, as the Lord says, "How
can Satan cast out Satan ?"3 so how can the
error of the Donatists have power to over-
throw the error of the Manichccans?'*

2 Veritatis /ortissimis dociitnentis Cathclica e.xf'ii^nnf : and
so the Mss. The earlier editors, apparently not understanding the
omission of " ecclesia" read " Veritas."

3 Mark iii. 23. 4 See II. 18, 40, 41.

Chap. XXIX.] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

529

Chap. 27. — 29. Wherefore, my beloved
brethren, though that error is exposed and
overcome in many ways, and dare not oppose
the truth on any show of reason whatsoever,
but only with the unblushing obstinacy of im-
pudence; yet, not to load your memory with
a multitude of proofs, I would have you bear
in mind this one action of the followers of
Maximianus, confront them with this one fact,
thrust this in their teeth, to make them hold
their treacherous tongues, destroy their cal-
umny with this, as it were a three-pronged
dart destroying a three-headed monster.
They charge us with betrayal of the sacred
books; they charge us with persecution; they
charge us with false baptism: to all their
charges make the same answer about the fol-
lowers of Maximianus. For they think that
the proofs are lost which show that their
predecessors gave the sacred volumes to the
flames; but this at least they cannot hide,
that they have received with unimpaired
honors those who were stained with the sacri-
lege of schism. Also they think that those
most violent persecutions are hidden, which
they direct against any who oppose them
whenever they are able; but whilst spiritual
persecution surpasses bodily persecution, they
received with undiminished honors the fol-
lowers of Maximianus, whom they themselves
persecuted in the body, and of whom they
tliemselves said, " Tiieir feet are swift to shed
blood;"' and this at any rate they cannot
hide.

Chap. 28. Finally, they think that the
question of baptism is hidden, with which
they deceive wretched souls. But whilst they
s ly that none have baptism who were bap-
-■zed outside the communion of the one
L.iurch, they received with undiminished

I Ps. xiv. 6, LXX. Hieron., N. Af. version.

honors the followers of Maximianus, with
those whom they baptized in schism outside
the Donatist communion, and this at least
they cannot hide.

30. "But these things," they say, ''bring
no pollution in the cause of peace; and it is
well to bend to mercy the rigor of extreme
severity, that broken branches may be grafted
in anew." Accordingly, in this way the whole
question is settled, by defeat in them, by the
impossibility of defeat for us; for if the name
of peace be assumed for even the faintest
shadow of defense to justify the bearing with
wicked men in schism, then beyond all doubt
the violation of true'pe''ice itself involves de-
testable guilt, .with nothing to be said in its
defence throughout the unity of the world.

Chap. 29. — 31. These things, brethren, I
would have you retain as the basis of your
action and preaching with untiring gentleness:
love men, while you destroy errors; take of
the truth without pride; strive for the truth
without cruelty. Pray for those whom you
refute and convince of error. For the
prophet prays to God for mercy upon such as
these, saying, " Fill their faces with shame,
that they may seek Thy name, O Lord. "='
And this, indeed, the Lord has done already,
so as to fill the faces of the followers of
Maximianus with shame in the sight of all
mankind: it only remains that they should
learn how to blush to their soul's health. For
so they will be able to seek the name of the
Lord, from which they are turned away to
their utter destruction, whilst they exalt their
own name in the place of that of Christ.
May ye live and persevere in Christ, and be
multiplied, aikl abound in the love of God,
and in love towards one another, and towards
all men, brethren well beloved.

2 Ps. Ixxxiii. 16.

BOOK II.'

IN WHICH AUGUSTIN REPLIES TO ALL THE SEVERAL STATEMENTS IN THE LETTER OF PETILIANUS,
AS THOUGH DISPUTING WITH AN ADVERSARY FACE TO FACE.

Chap. i. — i. That we made a full and
sufficient answer to the first part of the letter
of Petilianu?, which was all that we had been
able to find, will be remembered by all who
were able to read or hear what we replied.
But since the whole of it was afterwards
found and copied by our brethren, and sent
to us with the view that we should answer it
as a whole, this task was one which our pen
could not escape, — not that he says anything
new in it, to which answer has not been al-
ready made in many ways and at various
times; but still, on account of the brethren of
slower comprehension, who, when they read
a matter in any place, cannot always refer to
everything that has been said upon the same
subject, I will comply with those who urge
me by all means to reply to every point, and
that as though we were carrying on the dis-
cussion face to face in the form of a dialogue.
I will set down the words of his epistle under
his name, and I will give the 'answer under
my own name, as though it had all been taken
down by reporters while we were debating.
And so there will be no one who can complain
either that I have passed anything over, or
that they have been unable to understand it
for want of distinction between the parties to
the discussion; at the same time that the
Donatists themselves, who are unwilling to
argue the question in our presence, as is
shown by the letters which they have circu-
lated among their party, may thus not fail to
find the truth answering them point by point,
just as though they were discussing the matter
with us face to face.

2. In 'the very beginning of the letter
Petilianus said: " Petilianus, a bishop, to
his well-beloved brethren, fellow-priests, and
deacon's, appointed ministers with us through-
out our diocese in the gospel, grace be to you

I Written probably in the beginning of 401 a.d. Some say in 402.

and peace, from God our Father and from
•the Lord Jesus Christ."

3. AuGUSTiN answered: I acknowledge the
apostolic greeting. You see who you are that
employ it, but see from what source you have
learned what you say. For in these terms
Paul salutes the Romans, and in the same
terms the Corinthians, the Galatians, the
Ephesians, the Colossians, the Philippians,
the Thessalonians. What madness is it,
therefore, to be unwilling to share the salva-
tion of peace with those very Churches in
whose epistles you learned its form of saluta-
tion ?

Chap. 2. — 4. Petilianus said: "Those
who have polluted their souls with a guilty
laver, under the name of baptism, reproach
us with baptizing twice,' — than whose ob-
scenity, indeed, any kind of filth is more
cleanly, seeing that through a perversion of
cleanliness they have come to be made fouler
by their washing."

5. AuGusTiN answered: We are neither
made fouler by our washing, nor cleaner by
yours. But when the water of baptism is
given to any one in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, it is
neither ours nor yours, but His of whom it
was said to John, " Upon whom thou shalt
see the Spirit descending, and remaining on
Him, the same is He which baptizeth with
the Holy Ghost. "^

Chap. 3. — 6. Petilianus said: "Forwhat
we look to is the conscience of the giver, to
cleanse that of the recipient."

7. AuGUSTiN answered: We therefore need
have no anxiety about the conscience of
Christ. But if you assert any man to be the
be he who he may, there will be no

■M

giver,

= John 1. 33.

Chap. VII.]

THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

53T

ertainty about the cleansing of the recipient,
[lecause there is no certainty about the con-
science of the giver.

Chap. 4.^8. Petilianus said: ''For he
who receives faith from the faithless, receives
not faith but guilt."

9. AuGUSTiN answered: Christ is not faith-
less, from whom the faithful man receives not
u:uilt but faith. For he believeth on Him
that justifieth the ungodly, that hi-s faith may
l)e counted for righteousness.'

CHAP.5. — ID. Petilianus said: "For every-
thing consists of an origin and root; and if it
have not something for a head, it is nothing:
nor does anything well receive second birth,
unless it be born again of good seed."

II. AuGUSTiN answered: Why will you put
}Ourself forward in the room of Christ, when
YOU will not place yourself under Him? He
■■ the origin, and root, and head of him who
:^5 being born, and in Him we feel no fear, as
we must in any man, whoever he may be,
lest he should prove to be false and of aban-
doned character, and we should be found to
be sprung from an abandoned source, grow-
ing from an abandoned root, united to an
abandoned head. For what man can feel
secure about a man, when it is written,
" Cursed be the man that trusteth in man ? " -
pjut the seed of which we are born again is the
word of God, that is, the gospel. Whence

j the apostle says, "For in Christ Jesus I have

! begotten you through the gospel."-^ And
\et he allows even those to preach the gospel
who were preaching it not in purity, and re-
ioices in their preaching;'* because, although
taey were preaching it not in purity, but seek-
ing their own, not the things which are Jesus
Christ's, 5 yet the gospel which they preached
\'as pure. And the Lord had said of certain
(•I like character, "Whatsoever they bid you

j observe, that observe and do; but do not ye
after their works; for they say, and do not."*
I !', therefore, what is in itself pure is preach-

i ed in purity, then the preacher himself also,
in that he is a partner with the word, has his
siiare in begetting the believer; but if he

, himself be not regenerate, and yet what he
■eaches be pure, then the believer is born
: '>t from the barrenness of the minister, but
from the fruitfuJness of the word.

Chap. 6. — 12. Petilianus said: "This be-

[ ing the case, brethren, what perversity must

it be, that he who is guilty through his own

^ins should make another free from guilt,

vien the Lord Jesus Christ says, 'Every good

' Rom. iv. 5.

-iPhil. i. 17, i8.

'■ Jer. xvii. 5.
iPhil. ii. 21

3 I Cor. iv. 15.
<> Matt, .x.xiii. 3.

tree bringeth forth good fruit, but a corrupt
tree bringeth forth evil fruit: do men gather
grapes of thorns ?' ? And again: 'A good
man, out of the good treasure of the heart,
bringeth forth good things: and an evil man,
out of the evil treasure, bringeth forth evil
things.^ "^

13. AuGUSTiN answered: No man, even
though he be not guilty through his own sins,
can make his neighbor free from sin, because
he is not God. Otherwise, if we were to
expect that out of the innocence of the bap-
tizer should be produced the innocence of the
baptized, then each will be the more inno-
cent in proportion as he may have found a
more innocent person by whom to be baptiz-
ed; and will himself be the less innocent in
proportion as he by whom he is baptized
is less innocent. And if the man who bap-
tizes happens to entertain hatred against
another man, this will also be imputed to him
who is baptized. AVhy, therefore, does the
wretched man hasten to be baptized, — that
his own sins may be forgiven him., or that
those of others may be reckoned against him ?
Is he like a merchant ship, to discharge one
burden, and to take on him another ? But by
the good tree and its good fruit, and the cor-
rupt tree and its evil fruit, we are wont to
understand men and their works, as is conse-
quently shown in those other words which
you also quoted: "A good man, out of the
good treasure of his heart, bringeth forth
good things: and an evil man, out of the evil
treasure, bringeth forth evil things." But
when a man preaches the word of God, or
administers the sacraments of God, he does
not, if he is a bad man, preach or minister
out of his own treasure; but he will be count-
ed among those of whom it is said, "Whatso-
ever they bid you observe, that observe and
do; but do not ye after their works:" for they
bid you observe what is God's, but their works
are their own. For if it is as you say, that
is, if the fruit of those who baptize consist in
the baptized persons themselves, you declare
a great woe against Africa, if a young Opta-
tus has sprung up for every one that Optatus
baptized.

Chap. 7. — 14. Petilianus said: "And
again, 'He who is baptized by one that is
dead, his washing profiteth him nothing.''
He did not mean that the baptizer was a
corpse, a lifeless body, the remains of a man
ready for burial, but one lacking the Spirit of
God, who is compared to a dead body, as He
declares to a disciple in another place, ac-

7 Matt. vii. 17, 76. 8 Matt. xii. 35.

9 Ecclus. .\x.xiv. 25 ; see on I. g, 10.

532

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book 11

cording to the witness of the gospel. For
His disciple says, 'Lord, suffer me iirst to go
and bury my father. But Jesus said unto
him, Follow me, and let the dead bury their
dead.' ' The father of the disciple was not
baptized. He declared him as a pagan to
belong to the company of pagans; unless he
said this of the unbelieving, The dead cannot
bury the dead. He was dead, therefore, not
as smitten by soiue death, but as smitten even
during life. For he who so lives as to be
doomed to eternal death is tortured by a
death in life. To be baptized, therefore, by
the dead, is to have received not life but
death. We must therefore consider and de-
clare how far the traditor is to be accounted
dead while yet alive. He is dead who has
not deserved to be born again with a true
baptism; he is ikewise dead who, having
been born again with a true baptism, has be-
come involved with a ■'raditor. Both are
wanting in the life of baptism, — both he who
never had it at all, and he who had it and has
lost it. For the Lord Jesus Christ says.
'There shall come to that man seven soirits
more wicked than the former one, and the
last state of that man shall be worse than the
first. ' " ^

15. AuGUSTiN answered: Seek with greater
care to know in what sense the words which
you have quoted from Scripture in proof of
your position were really uttered, and how
they should be understood. For that all un-
righteous persons are wont to be called dead
in a mystical sense is clear enough; but
Christ, to whom true baptism belongs, which
you say is false because of the faults of men,
is alive, sitting at the right hand of the
Father, and He will not die any more through
any infirmity of the flesh: death will no more
have dominion over Him.^ And they who
are baptized with His baptism are not baptiz-
ed by one who is dead. And if it so hap-
pen that certain ministers, being deceitful
workers, seeking their own, not the things
which are Jesus Christ's, proclaiming the
gospel not in purity, and preaching Christ of
contention and envy, are to be called dead
because of their unrighteousness, yet the sac-
rament of the living God does not die even in
one that is dead. For that Simon was dead
who was baptized by Philip in Samaria, who
wished to purchase the gift of God for money;
but the baptism which he had lived in him
still to work his punishment.

16. But how false the statement is which
you make, that "both are wanting in the life
of baptism, both he who never had it at all,

I Matt. viii. 21, 22,
3 Rom. vi. 9.

" Matt. xii. 45.

4 Acts viii. 13, 18, 19.

and he who had it and has lost it/' you may
see from this, that in the case of those who
apostatize after having been baptized, and
who return through penitence, baptism is not
restored to them, as it would be restored if it
were lost. In what manner, indeed, do your
dead men baptize according to your inter-
pretation ? Must we not reckon the drunken
among the dead (to say nothing of the rest,
and to mention only what is well known and
of daily experience among all), seeing that
the apostle says of the widow, "But she that
liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth?''^
In the next place, in that Council of yours, in
which you condemned Maximianus with his
advisers or his ministers, have you forgotten
with what eloquence you said, "Even after
the manner of the Egyptians, the shores are
full of the bodies of the dying, on whom the
weightier punishment falls in death itself, in
that, after their life has been wrung from
them by the avenging waters, they have not
found so much as burial ? " And yet you
yourselves may see whether or no one of
them, Felicianus, has been brought to life
again; yet he has with him within the com-
munion of your body those whom he baptized
outside. As therefore he is baptized by One
that is alive, who is clothed with the baptism
of the living Christ, so he is baptized by the
dead who is wrapped in the baptism of the
dead Saturn, or any one like him; that we
may set forth in the meanwhile, with what
brevity we may, in what sense the words
which you have quoted may be understood
without any cavilling on the part of any one
of us. For. in the sense in which they are
received by you, you make no effort to ex-
plain them, but only strive to entangle us
together with yourselves.

Chap. 8. — 17. Petilianus said: "We must
consider, I say, and declare how far the
treacherous traditor is to be accounted dead
while yet in life. Judas was an apostle when
he betrayed Christ; and the same man was
already dead, having spiritually lost the office
of an apostle, being destined afterwards to
die by hanging himself, as it is written: 'I
have sinned,' says he, 'in that I have betray-
ed the innocent blood; and he departed, and
went and hanged himself.' ^ The traitor per-
ished by the rope: he left the rope for others
like himself, of whom the Lord Christ cried
aloud to the Father, 'Father, those that Thou
gavest me I have kept, and none of them is
lost, but the son of perdition; that the Script-
ure might be fulfilled.' ' For David of old

5 I Tim. V. 6.

6 Matt, .\xvii. 4, 5. 7 John xvii. 12.

Chap. VIII.]

THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

5t ->

had passed this sentence on him who was to
betray Christ to the unbeHevers: 'Let another
take his office. Let his children be father-
less, and his wife a widow." See how mighty
is the spirit of the prophets, that it was able
to see all future things as though they were
present, so that a traitor who was to be born
hereafter should be condemned many centu-
ries before. Finally, that the said sentence
should be completed, the holy Matthias re-
ceived the bishopric of that lost apostle.
Let no one be so dull, no one so faithless, as
to dispute this: Matthias won for himself a
victory, not a wrong, in that he carried off the
spoils of the traitor from the victory of the
Lord Christ. Why then, after this, do you
claim to yourself a bishopric as the heir of a
worse traitor? Judas betrayed Christ in the
flesh to the unbelievers; you in the spirit
madly betrayed the holy gospel to the flames
of sacrilege. Judas betrayed the Lawgiver to
the unbelievers; you, as it were, betraying all
that he had left, gave up the law of God to be
destroyed by men. Whilst, had you loved
the law, like the youthful Maccabees, you
would have welcomed death for the sake of
the laws of God (if indeed that can be said to
be death to men which makes them immortal
because they died for the Lord); for of those
brethren we learn that one replied to the
sacrilegious tyrant with these words of faith:
'Thou like a fury takest us out of this present
life;, but the King of the world (who reigns
for ever, and of His kingdom there shall be no
end) shall raise us up who have died for His
laws, unto everlasting life.'" If you were to
burn with fire the testament of a dead man,
would you not be punished as the falsifier of
a will ? What therefore is likely to become of
you who have burned the most holy law of
our God and Judge? Judas repented of his
deed even in death; you not only do not re-
pent, but stand forth as a persecutor and
butcher of us who keep the law, whilst you
are the most wicked of traaifors."

iS. AuGUSTiN answered: See what a differ-
ence there is between your calumnious words
and our truthful assertions. Listen for a lit-
tle while. See how you have exaggerated the
sin of delivering up the sacred books, com-
paring us in most odious terms, like some
sophistical inventor of charges, with the traitor
Judas. But when I shall have answered you
on this point with the utmost brevity, — I did
not do what you assert; I did not deliver up
r.ie sacred books; your charge i^ false; you
fv-ill never be able to prove it, — will not all

I Ps. ci.\. 8, Q.

2-2 Mace. vii. 9. The words in brackets are not m the original
Greek.

that smoke of mighty words presently vanish
away ? Or will you perchance endeavor to
prove the truth of what you say ? This, then,
you should do first; and then you might rise
against us, as against men who were already
convicted, with whatever mass of invective
you might choose. Here is one absurdity:
behold again a second.

19. You yourself, when speaking of the
foretelling of the condemnation of Judas,
used these expressions: ''See how mighty is
the spirit of the prophets, that it was able to
see all future things as though they were pres-
ent, so that a traitor who was to be born here-
after should be condemned many centuries
before;" and yet you did not see that in the
same sure prophecy, and certain and unshaken
truth, in which it was foretold that one of tiie
disciples should hereafter betray the Christ,
it was also foretold that the whole world should
hereafter believe in Christ. Why did you pay
attention in the prophecy to the man who be-
trayed Christ, and in the same place give no
heed to the world for which Christ was be-
trayed ? Who betrayed Christ ? Judas. To
whom did he betray Him? To the Jews.
What did the Jews do to Him ? "They pierc-
ed my hands and my feet,'' says the Psalmist,
"I may tell all my bones: they look and stare
upon me. They part my garments among
them, and cast lots upon my vesture." ^ Of
what importance, then, that is which is bought
at such a price, I would have you read a little
later in the psalm itself: "All the ends of the
world shall remember and turn unto the Lord;
and all the kindreds of the nations shall wor-
ship before Thee. For the kingdom is the
Lord's; and He is the governor among the
nations." ■* But who is able to suffice for the
quotation of all the other innumerable pro-
phetic passages which bear witness to the
world that is destined to believe ? Yet you
quote a prophecy because you see in it the
man who sold Christ: you do not see in it
the possession which Christ bought by being
sold. Here is the second absurdity: behold
again the third.

20. Among the many other expressions in
your invective, you said: "If you were to
burn with fire the testament of a dead man,
would you not be punished as the falsifier of
a will ? What therefore is likely to become of
you who have burned the most holy law of
our God and Judge ? " In these words you
have paid no attention to what certainly
ought to have moved you, to the question of
how it might be that we should burn the testa-
ment, and yet stand fast in the inheritance

3 Ps. x.xii. i6-i£.

4 Ps.

x.\n. 27, :

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book I:

which was described in that testament; but it
is marvellous that you have preserved the
testament and lost the inheritance. Is it not
written in that testament, "Ask of me, and I
shall give thee the heathen for thine inheri-
tance, and the uttermost parts of the earth
for tliy possession " ?' Take part in this in-
heritance, and you may bring what charges
you will against me about the testament. For
what madness is it, that while you shrank from
committing the testament to the flames, you
should yet strive against the words of the
testator ! We, on the other hand, though we
hold in our hands the records of the Church
and of the State, in which we read that those
who ordained a rival bishop^ in opposition to
Cfficilianus were rather the betrayers of the
sacred books, yet do not on this account in-
sult you, or pursue you with invectives, or
mourn over the ashes of the sacred pages in
your hands, or contrast the burning torments
of the Maccabees with the sacrilege of your
fear, saying, "You should deliver your own
limbs to the flames rather than the utterances
of God." For we are unwilling to be so
absurd as to excite an empty uproar against
you on account of the deeds of others, which
you either know nothing of, or else repudi-
ate. But in that we see you separated from
the communion of the whole world (a sin both
of the greatest magnitude, and manifest to all
mankind, and common to you all), if I were
desirous of exaggerating, I should find time
failing me sooner than words. And if you
should seek to defend yourself on this charge,
it could only be by bringing accusations
against the whole world, of such a kind that,
if they could be maintained, you would sim-
ply be furnishing matter for further accusa-
tion against yourself; if they could not be
maintained, there is in them no defence for
you. Why therefore do you puff yourself up
against me about the betrayal of the sacred
books, which concerns neither you nor me
if we abide by the agreement not to charge
each other with the sins of other men; and
which, if that agreement does not stand,
affects you rather than me ? And yet, even
without any violation of that agreement, I
think I may say with perfect justice that he
should be deemed a partner with him who
delivered up Christ who has not delivered
himself up to Christ in company with the
whole world. "Then," says the apostle,
"then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs ac-
cording to the promise." ^ And again he says,
"Heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ." "

1 Ps. ii. 8.

2 Majorinus, ordained by the Numidian bishops In 311 a.d.

3 Gal. iii. 29. 4 Rom, viii. 17.

And the same apostle shows that the seed of
Abraham belongs to all nations from the
promise which was given to Abraham, " In
thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be
blessed." 5 Wherefore I consider that I am
only making a fair demand in asking that we
should for a moment consider the testament
of God, which has already long been opened,
and that we should consider every one to be
himself an heir of the traitor whom we do
not find to be a joint-heir with Him whom he
betrayed ; that every one should belong to him
who sold Christ who denies that Christ has
bought the whole world. For when H'e show-
ed Himself after His resurrection to His
disciples, and gave His limbs to those who
doubted, that they should handle them, He
says this to them, "For thus it is written, and
thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise
again from the dead the third day: and that
repentance and remission of sin-s should be
preached in His name among all nations, be-
ginning at Jerusalem."* See from what an
inheritance you estrange yourselves! see what
an Heir you resist ! Can it really be that a
man would spare Christ if He were walking
here on earth who speaks against Him while
He sits in heaven ? Do you not yet under-
stand that whatever you allege against us you
allege against His words ? A Christian world
is promised and believed in: the promise is
fulfilled, and it is denied. Consider, I en-
treat of you, what you ought to suffer for such
impiety. And yet, if I know not what you
have suffered, — if I have not seen it, have
not wrought it, — then do you to-day, who do
not suffer the violence of my persecution,
render to me an account of your separation.
But you are likely to say over and over again
what, unless you prove it, can affect no one,
and if you prove it, has no bearing upon me.

CHAP.9. — 21. Petilianus said: "Hemmed
in, therefore, by these offenses, you cannot
be a true bishop."

22. AuGUSTiN answered: By what offenses ?
What have you shown ? What have you
proved ? And if you have proved charges on
the part of I know not whom, what has that
to do with the seed of Abraham, in which all
the nations of the earth are blessed ?

Chap. 10. — 23. Petilianus said: "Did the
apostle persecute any one ? or did Christ be-
tray any one .'* "

24. AuGUSTiN answered; I might indeed
say that Satan himself was worse than all
wicked men; and yet the apostle delivered a

5 Gen. xxii. i8.

S Luke xxiv, 46, 47.

Chap. XIII.]

THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

DOO

man over to him for the destruction of the
flesh, that his spirit might be saved in the day
of the Lord .Jesus.' And in the sam.e way he
delivered over others, of whom he says,
" Whom I have delivered unto Satan, that
they may learn not to blaspheme."- And the
Lord Christ drove out the impious m.erchants
from the temple with scourges; in which con-
nection we also find advanced the testimony
of Scripture, where it says, 'The zeal of Thine
house hath eaten me up."^ So that we do find
the apostle delivering over to condemnation,
and Christ a persecutor. All this I might
say, and put you into no small heat and per-
turbation, so that you would be compelled to
inquire, not into the complaints of those who
suffer, but into the intention of those who
cause the suffering. But do not trouble your-
self about this; I do not say this. But I do
say that it has nothing to do with the seed of
Abraham, which is in all nations, if anything
has been done to you which ought not to have
been done, perhaps by the chaff among the
harvest of the Lord, which in spite of this is
found among all nations. Do you therefore
render an account of your separation. But
first, consider what kind of men you have
among you, with whom you would not wish to
be reproached ; and see how unjustly you act,
when you cast in our teeth the acts of other
men, even if you proved what you assert.
Therefore it v^^ill be found that there is no
ground for your separation.

Chap. ii. — 25. Petilianus said: "Yet
some will be found to say, We are not the
sons of a traditor. Any one is the son of that
man whose deeds he imitates. For those are
niost assuredly sons, and at the same time
bear a strong resemblance to their parents,
who are born in the likeness of their parents,
not only as being of their flesh and blood,
but in respect of their characters and deeds. '^

26. AuGUSTiN answered : A little while ago
you were saying nothing contrary to us, now
you even begin to say something in our favor.
For this proposition of yours binds you to as
much as this, that if you shall fail to-day to
convict us, with whom you are arguing, of
"eing traditors and murderers, and any-
thing else with which you charge us, you will
then be wholly powerless to hurt us by any
charge of the kind which you may prove
against those who have gone before us. For
we cannot be the sons of those to whose deeds
our actions bear no resemblance. And see to
.vhat you have committed yourself. If you
should be so successful as to convict some

man, even of our own times, and living with
us, of any guilt of the kind, that is in no way
to the prejudice of all the nations of the earth
who are blessed in the seed of Abraham, by
separating yourself from whom you are found
to be guilty of sacrilege. Accordingly, un-
less (as is altogether impossible) you are
acquainted with all men that exist throughout
the world, and have not only made yourself
familiar with all their characters and deeds,
but have also proved that they are as bad as
you describe, you have no ground for re-
proaching all the world, which is among the
saints, with parentage of I know not what
description, to whom you prove that they are
like. Nor will it help you at all, even if you
are able to show that those who are not of the
same character take the holy sacraments in
common with those who are. In the first
place, because you ought yourselves to look
at those with whom you celebrate those sacra-
ments, to whom you give them, from whom
you receive them, and whom you would be
unwilling to have cast up against you as a
reproach. And again, if all those are the
sons of Judas, who was the devil among the
apostles, who imitate his deeds, why do we
not call those of the sons of the apostles
who make such men partakers, not in their own
deeds, but in the sacraments of the Lord,
as the apostles partook of the supper of the
Lord in company with that traitor ? and in this
way they are very different from you, who
cast in the teeth of men who are striving for
the preservation of unity the very thing that
you do to the rending asunder of unity.

Chap. 12. — 27. Petilianus said: "The
Lord Jesus said to the Jews concerning Him-
self, 'If I do not the works of my Father,
believe me not.' "■*

28. AuGUSTiN answered: I have already
answered above. This is both true, and makes
for us against you.

Chap. 13. — 29. Petilianus said: Over
and over again He reproaches the false
speakers and liars in such terms as these: ' Ye
are the children of the devil, for he also was a
slanderer from the beginning, and abode not
in the truth.' "

30. AuGUSTiN answered: We are not wont
to say, " He was a slanderer," but " He was a
murderer. "5 But we ask how it was that the
devil was a murderer from the beginning; and
we find that he slew the first man, not by
drawing a sword, nor by applying to him any
bodily violence, but by persuading him to

' I Cor. V. 5.

2 I Tim. i. 20.

3 John ii. 15-17

4 John X. 37.

5 John viii. 44.

536

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

sin, and thus driving liim from the hap-
piness of Paradise. What, then, was Para-
dise is now represented by the Church.
Therefore those are the sons of the devil who
slay men by withdrawing them from the
Church. But as by the words of God we
know what was the situation of Paradise, so
now by the words of Christ we have learned
where the Church is to be found: "Through-
out all nations," He says, "beginning at Jeru-
salem." Whosoever, therefore, separates a
man from that complete whole to place him
in any single part, is proved to be a son of
the devil and a murderer. But see, further,
what is the application of the expression which
you yourself employed in saying of the devil,
"He was a slanderer, and abode not in the
truth." For you bring an accusation against
the whole world on account of the sins of
others, though even those others themselves
you were more able to accuse than to convict;
and you abode not in the truth of Christ.
For He says that the Church is "throughout
all nations, beginning at Jerusalem;" but
ye say that it is in the party of Donatus.

Chap. 14. — 31. Petilianus said: "In the
third place, also, He calls the madness of
persecutors in like manner by this name, 'Ye
generation of vipers, how can ye escape the
damnation of hell ? Wherefore, behold, I
send unto you prophets, and wise men, and
scribes; and some of them ye shall kill and
crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge
in your synagogues, and persecute them from
city to city: that upon you may come all the
righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the
blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of
Zacharias, son of Barachias, whom ye slew
between the temple and the altar.'' Are they
th^n really the sons of vipers according to the
flesh, and not rather serpents in mind, and
three-tongued malice, and deadliness of
touch, and burning with the spirit of poison ?
They have truly become vipers, who by their
bites have vomited forth death against the
innocent people."

32. AuGUSTiN answered: If I were to say
that this is said of men of character like unto
yourselves, you would reply, "Prove it."
What then, have you proved it ? Or if you
think that it is proved by the mere fact of
it£ being uttered, there is no need to repeat
the same words. Pronounce the same judg-
ment against yourselves as coming from us to
you. See you not that I too have proved it,
if this amounts to proof? And yet I would
have you learn what is really meant by

I Matt, xxiii, 33-35.

proof. For indeed I do not even seek for
evidence from without to enable me to prove
you vipers. For be well assured that this
very fact marks in you the nature of vipers,
that you have not in your mouth the founda-
tion of truth, but the poison of slanderous
abuse, as it is written, "The poison of asps
is under their lips."= And because this might
be said indiscriminately by any one against
any one, as though it were asked, Under
whose lips? he immediately adds, "Their
mouth is full of cursing and bitterness. "^
When, therefore, you say such things as this
against men dispersed throughout the whole
world, of whom you know nothing v/hatsoever,
and many of whom have never heard the
name either of Caecilianus or of Donatus, and
when you do not hear them answering amid
silence. Nothing of what you say has refer-
ence to us; we never saw it; we never did it;
we are totally at a loss to understand what
you are saying, — seeing that you desire noth-
ing else than to say what you are entirely
powerless to prove, how can you help allow-
ing that your mouth is full of cursing and bit-
terness ? See, therefore, whether you can
possibly show that you are not vipers, '' unless
you show that all Christians throughout all
nations of the world are iraditors, and mur-
derers, and anything but Christians. Naj', in
very truth, even though you should be able
to know and set before us the lives and deeds
of every individual man throughout the world,
yet before you can do that, seeing that you
act as you do without any consideration, your
mouth is that of a viper, your mouth is full of
cursing and bitterness. Show to us now, if
you can, what prophet, what wise man, what
scribe we have slain, or crucified, or scourged
in our synagogues. Look how much labor
you have expended without in any way being
able to prove that Donatus and Marculus^
were prophets, or wise men, or scribes, be-
cause, in fact, they were nothing of the sort.
But even if you could prove as much as this,
what progress would you have made towards
proving that they had been killed by us, when
even we ourselves did not so much as know
them ? and how much less the whole world,
whom you calumniate with poisonous mouth ?*
Or whence will you be able to prove that we
have a spirit like that of those who murdered
them, when you actually cannot show that

2 Ps. xiv. 5, LXX, cp. Hieron. 3 Ps. xiv. 6, LXX. cp. Hieron.

4 A suggested reading is, " nos esse vipcras."

5 These both with others are celebrated in the martyrology of
the Donatists ; see II II. Idas Mart it Ser7no de Passione SS.
Donati et Advocati^c. 340; Passio Marculi sacerdotis Dona-
Wsicp qui sub Macario interfcctus a Donatistis pro fliartyre
habebatzir (Dec. 25, a. 348), and others. See Die Pin Monuvienta
Vetera ad Donatistarum Historiam pertinentia^xn his edition of
Optatus.

'' See below, c. 20, 46 : and Contra Crescan. III. 49, 54.

Chap. XV.]

THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST

537

they were murdered by any one at all ? Look
carefully to all these points, see whether you
can prove any single one of them either about
the whole world, or to the satisfaction of the
whole world, — in your persevering calumnies
against which you show that the charges are
true in you, which you falsely propagate
against the world.

33. Further, even if we should desire to
prove you to be slayers of the prophets, it
would be too long a task to collect the evi-
dence through all the several instances of the
slaughter which your infuriated leaders of the
Circumceiliones, and the actual crowd of men
inflamed by wine and madness, not only have
committed since the beginning of your schism,
but even continue to commit at the present
time. To take the case nearest at hand.
Let the divine utterances be produced, which
are commonly in the hands of both of us.
Let us consider those to be murderers of the
prophets whom we find contradicting the
words of the prophets. What more learned
definition could be given ? What could admit
of speedier proof? You would be acting less
cruelly in piercing the bodies of the prophets
with a sword, than in endeavoring to destroy
the words of the prophets with your tongue.
The prophet says, "All the ends of the world
shall remember and turn unto the Lord."'
Behold and see how this is being done, how
it is being fulfilled. But you not only close
your ears in disbelief against what is said, but
you even thrust out your tongues in madness
to speak against what is already being done.
Abraham heard the promise, "In thy seed
shall all the nations of the earth be blessed," =
and "he believed, and it was counted unto
him for righteousness."^ You see the fact
accomplished, and you cry out against it; and
you will not that it should be counted unto
you for unrighteousness, as it fairly would be
counted, even if your refusal to believe v/as
not on the accomplishment, but only on the
utterance of the prophecy. Nay, not only
are you not willing that it should be counted
unto you. for unrighteousness, but even what
you suffer as the punishment of this impiety
you would fain have counted unto you for
righteousness. Or if your conduct is not a
persecution of the prophets, because your in-
strument is not the sword but the tongue,
what was the reason of its being said under
divine inspiration, "The sons of men, whose
teeth are spears and arrows, and their tongue
a sharp sword"? •* But what time would sufifice
me to collect from all the prophets all the
testimonies to the Church dispersed through-

- Ps. xxii. 27.
3 Rom. iv. 3.

- Gen. x.\ii. 18.
4 Ps. Ivii. 4.

out the world, all of which you endeavor to
destroy and render nought by contradicting
them? But you are caught; for "their sound
is gone out into all lands, and their words to
the end of the world." ^ I will, however, ad-
vance this one saying from the mouth of the
Lord, who is the Witness of witnesses* "All
things must be fulfilled," He says, "which
were written in the law of Moses, and in the
prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning me."
And what these were let us hear from Him-
self: "Then opened He their understanding,
that they miglit understand the Scriptures,
and said unto them. Thus it is written, and
thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise
from the dead the third day: and that repent-
ance and remission of sins should be preached
in His name among all nations, beginning at
Jerusalem." ^ See what it is that is written in
the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in
the Psalms, concerning the Lord. See what
the Lord Himself revealed about Himself and
about the Church, making Himself manifest,
uttering promises about the Church. But for
you, see that you resist such manifest proofs
as these, and as you cannot destroy them,
endeavor to pervert them, what would you do,
if you were to come across the bodies of the
prophets, when you rage so madly against the
utterances of the prophets, as not even to
hearken to the Lord when He is fulfilling, and
making manifest, and expounding the pro-
phets ? For do you not, to the utmost of
your power, strive to slay the Lord Himself,
since even to Himself you will not yield ?

Chap. 15. — 34. Petilianus said: "David
also spoke of you as persecutors in the fol-
lowing terms: ' Their throat is an open
sepulchre; with their tongues have they de-
ceived; the poison of asps is under their lips.
Their mouth is full of cursing and bitterness;
their feet are swift to shed blood. Destruc-
tion and unhappiness is in their ways, and the
way of peace have they not known: there is
no fear of God before their eyes. Have all
the workers of wickedness no knowledge, who
eat up my people as they eat bread?' " '

35. AuGUSTix answered: Their throat is an
open sepulchre, whence they breathe out
death by lies. For "the mouth that belieth
slayeth the soul, "^ But if nothing is more
true than that which Christ said, that His
Church should be throughout all nations,
beginning at Jerusalem, then there is nothing
more false than that which you say, that it is
in the party of Donatus. But the tongues

5 Ps. xix. 4. '' I.vike xxiv. 44-47.

7 I^s. xiv. 5-8, cp. LXX. and Hieron., the last verse only being ia
the Hebrew.
" Wisd. i. II.

53S

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book 1 1.

which have deceived are the tongues of those
who, whilst they are acquainted with their
own deeds, not only say that they are just
men, but that they are justifiers of men, which
is said of One only "that justifieth the un-
godly," ' and that because ''He is just and the
justifier." - As regards the poison of asps,
and the mouth full of cursing and bitterness,
we have said enough already. But you have
yourselves said that the followers of Maxi-
mianus .had feet swift to shed blood, as is
testified by the sentence of your plenary
Council, so often quoted in the records of
the proconsular province and of the state.
But they, so far as we hear, never killed any
one in the body. You evidently, therefore,
understood that the blood of the soul was shed
in spiritual murder by the sword of schism,
which you condemned in Maximianus. See
then if your feet are not swift to shed blood,
when you cut off men from the unity of the
whole world, if you were right in saying it of
the followers of Maximianus, because they cut
off some from the party of Donatus. Are we
again without the knowledge of the way of
peace, who study to preserve the unity of
the Spirit in the bond of peace ? and yet do
you possess that knowledge, who resist the
discourse which Christ held with His disciples
after His resurrection, of so peaceful a nature
that He began it with the greeting, "Peace be
unto you;" ^ and that so strenuously that you
are proved to be saying nothing less to Him
than this, '' What Thou saidst of the unity of
all nations is false; what we say of the offense
of all nations is true"? Who would say such
things as this if they had the fear of God
before their ej^es ? See, therefore, if in daily
saying things like this you are not trying to
destroy the people of God dispersed through-
out the world, eating them up as it were
bread.

Chap. i6. — 36. Petilianus said: "The
Lord Christ also warns us, saying, ' Beware
of false prophets, which come unto you in
sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are raven-
ing wolves; and ye shall not know them by
their fruits.' "*

37. AuGUSTiN answered: If I were to in-
quire of you by what fruits you know us to
be ravening wolves, you are sure to answer
by charging us with the sins of other men,
and these such as were never proved against
those who are said to have been guilty of
them. But if you should ask of me by what
fruits we know you rather to be ravening
wolves, I bring against you the charge of

I Rom. IV. 5.

3 John XX. 19, 21.

2 Rom. iii. 26.
4 Matt vii. 15, 16.

schism, which you will deny, but which I will |
straightway go on to prove; for, as a matter \
of fact, you do not communicate with all the. !
nations of the earth, nor with those Churches ;
which were founded by the labor of the apos-
tles. Hereupon you v/ill say, "I do not '
communicate with traditors and murderers." .
The seed of Abraham answers you, " These
are those charges which you made, which are
either not true, or have no reference to me.'^
But these I set aside for the present; do you
meanwhile show me the Church. Now that
voice will sound in my ears which the Lord
showed was to be avoided in the false prophets
who made a show of their several parties,
and strove to estrange men from the Catholic
Church, " Lo, here is Christ, or there." But
do you think that the true sheep of Christ are
so utterly destitute of sense, who are told,
"Believe it not," s that they will hearken to
the wolf when he says, " Lo, here is Christ,^'
and will not hearken to the Shepherd when
He says, " Throughout all nations, beginning
at Jerusalem ? '^

Chap. 17. — 38. Petilianus said: "Thus,
thus, thou wicked persecutor, under whatso-
ever cloak of righteousness thou hast con-
cealed thyself, under whatsoever name of
peace thou wagest war with kisses, under
whatsoever title of unity thou endeavorest to
ensnare the race of men — thou, who up to this
time art cheating and deceiving, thou art the
true son of the devil, showing thy. parentage
by thy character.'^

39. AuGUSTiN answered: Consider in reply
that these things have been said by us against
you; and that you may know to which of us
they are more apppropriate, call to mind what
I have said before.

Chap. 18. — 40. Petilianus said: "Nor is
it, after all, so strange that you assume to
yourself the name of bishop without authority.
This is the true custom of the devil, to choose
in preference a mode of deceiving by which
he usurps to himself a word of holy meaning,
as the apostle declares to us: 'And no marvel,*
he says: ' for Satan himself is transformed
into an angel of light. Therefore it is no
great thing if his ministers also be trans-
formed as the ministers of righteousness.'^
Nor is it therefore a marvel if you falsely call
yourself a bishop. For even those fallen
angels, lovers of the maidens of the world,
who were corrupted by the corruption of their
flesh, though, from having stripped them-
selves of divine excellence, they have ceased

S Matt. x.\

23.

Cor.

XI. 14, 15.

Chap. XIX.]

THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

539

to be angels, yet retain the name of angels,
and always esteem themselves as angels,
though, being released from the service of
God, they have passed from the likeness of
their character into the army of the devil, as
the great God declares, ' My spirit shall not
always strive with man, for that he also is
flesh.'' To those guilty ones and to you the
Lord Christ will say, ' Depart from me, ye
cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the
devil and his angels.'- If there were no evil
angels, the devil would have no angels; of
whom the apostle says, that in the judgment
of the resurrection they shall be condemned
by the saints: ' Know ye not,' says he, ' that
we shall judge angels?'' If they were true
angels, men would not have authority to judge
the angels of God. So too those sixty apos-
tles, who, when the twelve were left alone
with the Lord Christ, departed in apostasy
from the faith, are so far yet considered
among wretched men to be apostles, that from
them Manichjeus and the rest entangle many
souls in many devilish sects which they de-
stroyed-* that they might take them in their
snares. For indeed the fallen ]Manichceus, if
fallen he was, is not to be reckoned among
those sixty, if it be that we can find his name
as an apostle among the twelve, or if he was
ordained by the voice of Christ when Matthias
'vas elected into the place of the traitor Judas,
or another thirteenth like Paul, who calls
himself the last ^ of the apostles, expressly
that any one who wps later than himself might
not be held to be an apostle. For these are
his words: ' For I am the last of the apostles,
that am not meet to be called an apostle, be-
cause I persecuted the Church of God.'*
And do not flatter yourselves in this: he was
a Jew that had done this. You too, as Gen-
tiles, may work destruction upon us. For you
carry on war without license, against whom
we may not fight in turn. For you desire to
live when you have murdered us; but our vic-
tory is either to escape or to be slain."

41. AuGUSTiN answered: See how you
have quoted the testimony of holy Scripture,
or how you have understood it, when it has
no bearing at all upon the present point at
issue. For all that you have brought forward
was simply said to prove that there are false
bishops, just as there are false angels and
false apostles. Now we too know quite well
that there are false angels and false apostles,
and false bishops, and, as the true apostle
says, false brethren also;'' but, seeing that
charges such as yours may be brought by

' Gen. vi. 3. 2 Matt. xxv. 41. 3 i Cor. vi. 3.

4 " Perdidertmt," which the Benedictines think may be a con-
fusion for '^/>erit'r:tni.^'

5 Novissiinus. * i Cor. xv. 9. 7 2 Cor. xi. 26.

either side against the other, what is required
is a certain degree of proof, and not mere
empty words. But if you would see to which
of us the charge of falseness more truly ap-
plies, recall to mind what we have said before,
and you will see it there set forth, that we
may not become tedious to our readers by
repeating the same thing over and over again.
And yet now is the Church dispersed through-
out the world affected either by what you m^y
have found to say about its chaff, which is
mixed wit a it throughout the whole world; or
by what you said of Manichaeus and the other
devilish sects ? For if the wheat is not af-
fected by anything which is said even about
the chaff which is still mingled with it, how
much less are the members of Christ dis-
persed throughout the whole world affected
by monstrosities * which have been so long
and so openly separated from it?'

Chap. 19. — 42. Petiltanus said: "The
Lord Jesus Christ commands us, saying,
' When they persecute you in this city, flee
ye into another; and if they persecute you in
that, flee yet into a third; for verily I say
unto you, ye shall not have gone over the
cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.'"
If He gives us this warning in the case of
Jews and pagans, you who call yourself a
Christian ought not to imitate the dreadful
deeds of the Gentiles. Or do you serve God
in such wise that we should be murdered at
your hands ? You do err, you do err, if you
are wretched enough to entertain such a belief
as this. For God does not have butchers for
His priests.'*

43. AuGUSTiN answered: To flee from one
state to another from the face of persecution
has not been enjoined as precept or per-
mission on heretics or schismatics, such as
you are; but it was enjoined on the preachers
of the gospel, whom you resist. And this
we may easily prove in this wise: you are
now in your own cities, and no man perse-
cutes you. You must therefore come forth,
and give an account of your separation. For
it cannot be maintained that, as the weakness
of the flesh is excused when it yields before
the violence of persecution, so truth also
ought to yield to falsehood. Furthermore,
if you are suffering persecution, why do you
not retire from the cities in which you are,
that you may fulfill the instructions which you
quote out of the gospel ? But if you are not
suffering persecution, why are you unwilling
to reply to us? Or if the fact be that you

8 Portenta.

9 Down to this point .^ugustin had alreaoy answered Petihanus
in the First Book, as he says himself below, III. 50, 61.

'" Matt. X. 23.

540

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

are afraid lest, when you should have made
reply, you then should suffer persecution, in
that case how are you following the example
of those preachers to whom it was said, " Be-
hold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst
of wolves?" To whom it was also further
said, " Fear not them which kill the body,
but are not able to kill the soul." ' And how
do you escape the charge of acting contrary
to the injunction of the Apostle Peter, who
says, " Be ready always to give an answer to
every man that asketh you a reason of the
faith and hope that is in you ? " ^ And, lastly,
wherefore are you ever eager to annoy the
Catholic Churches by the most violent dis-
turbances, whenever it is in your power, as is
proved by innumerable instances of simple
fact ? But you say that you must defend
your places, and that you resist with cudgels
and massacres and with whatever else you
can. Wherefore in such a case did you not
hearken to the voice of the Lord, when He
says, " But I say unto you, that ye resist not
evil " ?3 Or, allowing that it is possible that
in some cases it should be right for violent
men to be resisted by bodily force, and that
it does not violate the precept which we re-
ceive from the Lord, " But I say unto you,
that ye resist not evil," why may it not also
be that a pious man should eject an impious
man, or a just man him that is unjust, in the
exercise of duly and lawfully constituted au-
thority, from seats which are unlawfully
usurped, or retained to the despite of God ?
For you would not say that the false prophets
suffered persecution at the hands of Elijah,
in the same sense that Elijah suffered perse-
cution from the wickedest of kings?'' Or
that because the Lord was scourged by His
persecutors, therefore those whom He Him-
self drove out of the temple with scourges are
to be put in comparison with His sufferings ?
It remains, therefore, that we should acknowl-
edge that there is no other question requiring
solution, except whether you have been pious
or impious in separating yourselves from the
communion of the whole world. For if it
shall be found that you have acted impiously,
you would not be surprised if there should be
no lack of ministers of God by whom you
might be scourged, seeing that you suffer per-
secution not from us, but as it is written,
from their own abominations. ^

Chap. 20. — 44. Petilianus said: "The
Lord Christ cries again from heaven to Paul,
' Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? It is
hard for thee to kick against the pricks.''^

I Matt. X. 16, 2S.
4 I Kings xviii.

- I Pet. iii. 15.
5 Wisd. xii. 23.

3 Matt. V. 39.
6 Acts ix. 4, 5.

He was then called Saul, that he might after-
wards receive his true name in baptism. But
for you it is not hard so often to persecute
Christ in the persons of His priests, though
the Lord Himself cries out, ' Touch not mine
anointed.' ? Reckon up all the deaths of the
saints, and so often have you murdered Christ,
who lives in each of them.^ Lastly, if you
are not guilty of sacrilege, then a saint cannot
be a murderer."

45. AuGUSTiN answered: Defend your-
selves from the charge of the persecution
which those men suffered at the hands of
your party who separated themselves from
you with the followers of Maximianus, and
therein you will find our defence. For if you
say that you committed no such deeds, we
simply read to you the records of the pro-
consular province and the state. If you say
that you were right in persecuting them, why
are you unwilling to suffer the like your-
selves? If you say, "But we caused no
schism," then let this be inquired into, and,
till it is decided whether it be so or not, let
no one make accusation against persecutors.
If you say that even schismatics ought not to
have suffered persecution, I ask whether it is
also the case that they ought not to have been
driven out of the basilicas, in which they lay
snares for the leading astray of the weak,
even though it were done by duly constituted
authorities? If you say that this also should
not have been done, first restore the basilicas
to the followers of Maximianus, and then dis-
cuss the point with us. If you say that it
was right, then see what they ought to suffer
at the hands of duly constituted authority,
who, in resisting it, "resist the ordinance of
God." Wherefore the apostle expressly says,
" For he beareth not the sword in vain: for
he is the minister of God, a revenger to exe-
cute wrath on him that doeth evil. "9 But
even if this had been discovered after the
truth had been searched out with all diligence,
that not even after public trial ought schis-
matics to undergo any punishment, or be
driven from the positions which they have
occupied, for their treachery and deceit; and
if you should say that you are vexed that the
followers of Maximianus should have suffered
such conduct at the hands of some of you, —
why does not the wheat of the Lord cry out
with the more freedom from the whole field
of the Lord, that is, from the world, and say.
Neither are we at all affected by what the
tares and the chaff amongst us do, seeing that
it is contrary to our wish ? If you confess
that it is sufificient to clear you of responsi-

7 Ps. cv.

8 l'ivace7>t Christzim.

9 Rom. xiii. 2, 4.

Chap. XXL] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

541

bility, that all the evil that is done by men of
your party is done in opposition to your
wishes, why then have you separated your-
selves ' For if your reason for not separating
fcom the unrighteous among the party of
Donatus is that each man bears his own bur-
den, why have you separated yourselves from
t lose throughout the world whom you think,
or profess to think, to be unrighteous ? Is it
that you might all share equally in bearing
t':ie burden of schism ?

46. And when we ask of you which of your
]iarty you can prove to have been slain by us,
i indeed can remember no law issued by the
emperors to the effect that you should be put
to death. Those indeed whose deaths you
(^r.ote most frequently to brijig us into odium,
]\Iarculus and Donatus, present a great ques-
t. on,— whether they threw themselves down a
; recipice, as your teaching does not hesitate
: I encourage by examples of daily occurrence,
or whether they were thrown down by the
true command of some authority. For if it
;s a thing incredible that the leaders of the
(^ircumcelliones should have wrought upon
• icmselves a death in accordance with their
^-istom, how much more incredible it is that
the Roman authorities should have been able
condemn them to a punishment at variance

ith custom ! Accordingly, in considering
Liis matter, which you think excessive in its

itefulness, supposing what you say is true,
what is there in it which bears upon the Lord's
wheat ? Let the chaff which flew away outside
accuse the chaff which yet remained within;
for it is not possible that it should all be
separated till the winnowing at the last day.
Hut if what you say is false, what wonder is
It if, when the chaff is carried away as it were
' V a light blast of dissension, it even attacks

le wheat of the Lord with false accusations ?
Wherefore, on the consideration of all such

'lious accusations, the wheat of Christ, which
.> ordered to grow together with the tares
throughout the field, that is, throughout the
whole world, makes this answer to you with
:i free and fearless voice: If you cannot prove
what you say, it has no application to any
! lie; and if you prove it, it yet does not apply
to me. The result of which is, that whoso-
ever has separated himself from the unity of
the wheat on account of the offenses charge-
able against the tares, or against the chaff, is
unable to defend himself from the charge of
murder which is involved in the mere offense
df dissension and schism, as the Scripture
viys,
derer.

Whoso hateth his brother is a mur-

' 1 John iii. 15.

Chap. 21. — 47. Petilianus said: "Ac-
cordingly, as we have said, the Lord Christ
cried, ' Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me ?
It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.
And he said. Who art Thou, Lord ? And the
Lord said, I am Christ of Nazareth, whom
thou persecutest. And he, trembling and as-
tonished, said, Lord, what wilt Thou have me
to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise,
and go into the city, and it shall be told thee
what thou must do.' And so presently it
goes on, ' But Saul arose from the earth; and
when his eyes were opened, he saw no man,'
See here how blindness, coming in punish-
ment of madness, obscures the light in tne
eyes of the persecutor, not to be again ex-
pelled except by baptism ! Let us see, there-
fore, what he did in the city. 'Ananias,' it
is said, ' entered into the house to Saul, and
putting his hands on him, said, Brother Saul,
the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto
thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent
me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and
be filled with the Holy Ghost. And imme-
diately there fell from his eyes as it had been
scales; and he received sight forthwith, and
arose, and was baptized.'- Seeing therefore
that Paul, being freed by baptism from the
offense of persecution, received again his eye-
sight freed from guilt, why will not you, a
persecutor and traditor, blinded by false bap-
tism be ba'^tized by those whom you perse-
cute?"

48. AuGUSTiN answered: You do not prove
that I, whom you wish to baptize afresh, am
either a persecutor or a traditor. And if you
prove this charge against any one, yet the
persecutor and traditor is not to be baptized
afresh, if he had been baptized already with
the baptism of Christ. For the reason why
it was necessary that Paul should be baptized
was that he had never been washed in any
baptism of the kind. Therefore what you
have chosen to insert about Paul has no point
of resemblance with the case which you are
arguing with us. But if you had not inserted
this, you would have found no place for your
childish declamation, "See how blindness
comes in punishment of madness, not to be
again expelled except by baptism ! " For
with how much more force might one exclaim
against you, See how blindness comes in
punishment of madness, which, finding its
similitude in Simon, not in Paul, is not ex-
pelled from you even when you have received
baptism? For if persecutors ought to be
batpized by those whom they persecute, then
let Primianus be baptized by tiie followers of

» Actsix. 4-18.

54^

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

Maximianus, whom he persecuted with the

utmost eagerness.

Chap. 22. — 49. Petilianus said: " It may
be urged that Christ said to His apostles, as
you are constantly quoting against us, ' He
that is washed needeth not save to wash his
feet, but is clean every whit.' Now if you
discuss those words in all their fullness, you
are bound by what immediately follows. For
this is what He said, in His very words: ' He
that is washed needeth not save to wash his
feet, but is clean every whit; and ye are
clean, but not all. But this he said on ac-
count of Judas, who should betray Him;
therefore said He, Ye are not all clean.''
Whosoever, therefore, has incurred the guilt
of treason, has forfeited, like you, his bap-
tism. Again, after that the betrayer of Christ
had himself been condemned, He thus more
fully confirmed His words to the eleven apos-
tles: ' Now are ye clean through the word
which I have spoken unto you. Abide in
me, and I in you.'- And again He said to
these same eleven, ' Peace I leave with you,
my peace I give unto you.'^ Seeing, then,
that these things were said to the eleven
apostles, when the traitor, as we have seen,
had been condemned, you likewise, being
traditors, are similarly without both peace
and baptism."

50. AuGUSTiN answered: If therefore every
traditor has forfeited his baptism, it will fol-
low that every one who, having been baptized
by you, has afterwards become a traditor,
ought to be baptized afresh. And if you do
not do this, you yourselves sufficiently prove
the falseness of the saying, '^ Whosoever
therefore has incurred the guilt of treason,
has forfeited, like you, his baptism." For if
he has forfeited it, let him return and receive
it again; but if he returns and does not re-
ceive it, it is clear that he had not forfeited it.
Again, if the reason why it was said to the
apostles, "Now are ye clean," and "My
peace I give unto you," was that the traitor
had already left the room, then was not that
supper of so great a sacrament clean and able
to give peace, which He distributed to all
before his going out ? And if you venture to
say this with your eyes closed against the
truth, what can we do save exclaim the more.
See how blindness comes in punishment of
the madness of those who wish to be, as the
apostle says, "teachers of the law, under-
standing neither what they say, nor whereof
they affirm?"'* And yet, unless blindness
came in the way of their pertinacity, it was

' John xiii. lo, ii.
3 John xiv. 27.

- John XV. 3, 4.
'• I Tim. i. 7.

not a very difficult matter that you should
understand and see that the Lord did not say
in the presence of Judas, Ye are not yet clean,
but "Now are ye clean." He added, how-
ever, "But not all," because there was one
there who was not clean; yet if he had been
polluting the others by his presence, it would
not have been declared to them, " Now are ye
clean,'' but, as I said before. Ye are not yet
clean. But, after Judas had gone out, He
said to them, " Now are ye clean," and did
not add the words. But not all, because he
had now departed in whose presence indeed,
as had been said to them, they were already
clean, but not all, because there was one
there unclean. Wherefore in these words the
Lord rather declared that in the one company
of men receiving the same sacraments, the
uncleanness of some members cannot hurt
the clean. Certainly, if you think that there
are among us men like Judas, you might ap-
ply to us the words, "Ye are clean, but not
all." But this is not what you say; but you
say that because of the presence of some
who are unclean, therefore we are all unclean.
This the Lord did not say to the disciples in
the presence of Judas, and therefore whoever
says this has not learned from the good Mas-
ter what He says.

Chap. 23. — 51. Petilianus said: " But if
you say that we give baptism twice over, truly
it is rather you who do this, who slay men
who have been baptized; and this we do not
say because you baptize them, but because
you cause each one of them, by the act of
slaying him, to be baptized in his own blood.
For the baptism of water or of the Spirit is as
it were doubled when the blood of the martyr
is wrung from him. And so our Saviour also
Himself, after being baptized in the first in-
stance by John, declared that He must be
baptized again, not this time with water nor
with the Spirit, but with the baptism of blood,
the cross of suffering, as it is written, ' Two
disciples, the sons of Zebedee, came unto
Him, saying, Lord, when thou comest into thy
kingdom grant that we may sit, one on Thy
right hand, and the other on Thy left hand.
But Jesus said unto them. Ye ask a difficult
thing: can ye drink of the cup that I drink of,
and be baptized with the baptism that I am
baptized with ? They said unto Him, We are
able. And He said unto them. Ye can indeed
drink of the cup that I drink of; and with the
baptism that I am baptized withal shall ye be
baptized,' 5 and so forth. If these are two
baptisms, you commend us by your malice,

5 Mark x. 33-39.

Chap. XXIII.] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

543

we must needs confess. For when you kill
our bodies, tlien we do celebrate a second
baptism; but it is tliat we are baptized witli
our baptism and witli blood, like Christ.
Blush, blush, ye persecutors. Ye make mar-
tyrs like unto Christ, who are sprinkled with
the baptism of blood after the water of the
genuine baptism."

52. AuGUSTix answered: In the first place,
we reply without delay that we do not kill you,
but you kill yourselves by a true death, when
you cut yourselves off from the living root of
unity. In the next place, if all who are killed j
are baptized in their own blood, then all rob-
bers, all unrighteous, impious, accursed men,
who are put to death by the sentence of the
law, are to be considered martyrs, because
they are baptized in their own blood. But if
only those are baptized in their own blood
who are put to death for righteousness' sake,
since theirs is the kingdom of heaven,' you
have already seen that the first question is
why you suffer, and only afterwards should
we ask what you suffer. Why therefore do
you puff out your cheeks before you have
shown the righteousness of your deeds ? Why
does your tongue resound before your charac-
ter is approved ? If you have made a schism,
you are impious; if you are impious, you die
as one guilty of sacrilege, when you are pun-
ished for impiety; if you die as one guilty of
sacrilege, how are you baptized in your blood ?
Or do you say, I have not made a schism ?
Let us then inquire into this. Why do you
make an outcry before you prove your case ?

53. Or do )'0u say, Even if I am guilty of
sacrilege, I ought not to be slain by you ? It
is one question as to the enormity of my ac-
tion, which you never prove with any truth,
another as to the baptism of your blood, from
whence you derive your boast. For I never
killed you, nor do you prove that you are
killed by any one. Nor even if you were to
prove it would it in any way affect me, who-
ever it was that killed you, whether he did it
justly in virtue of power lawfully given by the
Lord, or committed the crime of murder, like
the chaff of the Lord's harvest, through some
evil desire; just as you are in no way con-
cerned with him who in recent times, with an
intolerable tyranny, attended even by a com-
pany of soldiers, not because he feared any
one, but that he might be feared by all, op-
pressed widows, destroyed pupils, betrayed
the patrimonies of other men, annulled the
marriages of other men, contrived the sale of
the property of the innocent, divided the price
of the property when sold with its mourning

« Matt. V. la

owners. I should seem to be saying all this
out of the invention of my own head, if it
were not sufficiently obvious of whom I speak
without the mention of his name.'' And if
all this is undoubtedly true, then just as you
are not concerned with this, so neither are we
concerned with anything you say, even though
it were true. But if that colleague of yours,
being really a just and innocent man, is ma-
ligned by a lying tale, then should w^e also
learn in no way to give credit to reports, which
have been spread abroad of innocent men, as
though they had delivered up the sacred
books, or murdered any of their fellow-men.
To this we may add, that I refer to a man
w'ho lived with you, whose birthday you were
wont to celebrate with such large assemblies,
with whom you joined in the kiss of peace in
the sacraments, in whose hands you placed
the Eucharist, to whom in turn you extended
your hands to receive it from his ministering,
whose ears, when they were deaf amid the
groanings of all Africa, you durst not offend
by free speech; for paying to whom, even in-
directly, a most witty compliment, by saying
that in the Count ^ he had a god for his com-
panion, some one of your party was extolled
to the skies. But you reproach us with the
deeds of men with whom we never lived,
whose faces we never saw, in whose lifetin^e
we were either boys, or perhaps as yet not
even born. What is the meaning, then, of
your great unfairness and perversity, that you
should wish to impose on us the burdens of
those whom we never knew, whilst you will
not bear the burdens of your friends ? The
divine Scriptures exclaim: " When thou sawest
a thief, then thou consentedst with him."
If he whom you saw did not pollute you, why
do you reproach me with one whom I could
not have seen ? Or do you say, I did not
consent with him, because his deeds were dis-
pleasing to me ? But, at any rate, you went
up to the altar of God with him. Come now,
if you would defend yourself, make a distinc-
tion between your two positions, and say that
it is one thing to consent together for sin, as
the two elders consented together when they
laid a plot against the chastity of Susannah,
and another tiling to receive the sacrament
of the Lord in company with a thief, as the
apostles received even that first supper in
company with Judas. I am all in favor of
your defense. But why do you not consider
how much more easily, in the course of your

" Optatus Gildonianus is the person to whom ho refers.

^riildo, from subservience to whom Optatus received the name
Gildonianus, was "Comes Africae." '1 he play on the meanings
of '■ Comes," in the expression " fnoc/ Comiicm haberet Deum,
is incapable of direct translation. Cp. 37, 88; 103, 237.

4 Ps. 1. 18.

544

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II

defense, you have acquitted all the nations
and boundaries of the earth, throughout
which the inheritance of Christ is dispersed ?
For if it was possible for you to see a thief,
and to share the sacraments with the thief
whom you saw, and yet not to share his sin,
how much less was it possible for the remotest
nations of the earth to have anything in com-
mon with the sins of African traditors and
persecutors, supposing your charges and as-
sertions to be true, even though they held the
sacraments in common with them ? Or do
you say, I saw in him the bishop, I did not
see in him the thief ? Say what you will. I
allow this defense also, and in this the world
is acquitted of the charges which you brought
against it. For if it was permitted you to
ignore the character of a man whom you
knew, why is the whole world not allowed to
be ignorant of those it never knew, unless,
indeed, the Donatists are allowed to be ig-
norant of what they do not wish to know,
while the nations of the earth may not be
ignorant of what they cannot know ?

54. Or do you say, Theft is one thing, de-
livery of the sacred books or persecution is
another ? I grant there is a difference, nor is
it worth while now to show wherein that dif-
ference consists. But listen to the summary
of the argument. If he could not make you
a thief, because his thieving was displeasing
in your sight, who can make men traditors or
murderers to whom such treachery or murder
is abhorrent ? First, then, confess that you
share in all the evil of Optatus, whom you
knew, and even so reproach me with any evil
which was found in those whom I knew not.
And do not say to me, But my charges are
serious, yours but trifling. You must first
acknowledge them, however trifling they may
be in your case, not before I on my side con-
fess the charges against me, but before I can
allow you to say these serious things about
me at all. Did Optatus, whom you knew,
make you a thief by being your colleague, or
not ? Answer me one or the other. If you
say he did not, I ask why he did not, — be-
cause he was not a thief himself? or because
you do not know it ? or because you disap-
prove of it ? If you say. Because he himself
was not a thief, much more ought we not to
believe that those with whom you reproach us
were of such a character as you assert. For
if we must not believe of Optatus what both
Christians and pagans and Jews, ay, and
what both our party and yours assert, how
much less should we believe what you assert
of any one ? But if you say. Because you do
not know it, all the nations of the earth an-
swer you, Much more do we not know of all

that you reproach us with in these men. But
if you say. Because you disapproved of it,
they answer you with the same voice, Al-
though you have never proved the truth of
what you say, yet acts like these are viewed
by us with disapproval. But if you say, Lo,
Optatus, whom I knew, made me a thief be-
cause he was my colleague, and I was in the
habit of going to the altar with him when he
committed those deeds; but I do not greatly
heed it, because the fault was trivial, but your
party made you a traditor and a murderer, — I
answer that I do not allow that I too am made
a traditor and a murderer by the sins of other
men, just because you confess that you are
made a thief by the sin of another man; for
it must be remembered that you are proved a
thief, not by our judgment, but by your own
confession. For we say that every man must
bear his own burden, as the apostle is our
witness.' But you, of your own accord, have
taken the burden of Optatus on your own
shoulders, not because you committed the
theft, or consented to it, but because you de-
clared your conviction that what another did
applied to you. For, as the apostle says,
when speaking of food, " I know, and am
persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is
nothing unclean of itself: but to him that es-
teemeth anything to be unclean, to him it is
unclean;"^ by the same rule, it may be said
that the sins of others cannot implicate those
who disapprove of them; but if any ons
thinks that they affect him, then he is affected
by them. Wherefore you do not convict us
of being traditors or murderers, even though
you were to prove something of the sort
against those who share the sacraments with
us; but the guilt of theft is fastened on you,
even if you disapprove of everything that
Optatus did, not in virtue of our accusation,
but by your own decision. And that you may
not think this a trivial fault, read what the
apostle says, " Nor shall thieves inherit the
kingdom of God."^ But those who shall not
inherit the kingdom of God will certainly not
be on His right hand among those whom it
shall be said, "Come, ye blessed of my
Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you
from the foundation of the world.' If they
are not there, where will they be except on
the left hand ? Therefore among those to
whom it shall be said, " Depart from me, ye
cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the
devil and his angels. '''' In vain, therefore,
do you indulge in your security, thinking it a
trivial fault which separates you from the
kingdom of God, and sends you into everlast-

I Gal. vi. 5.
3 I Cor. vi. 10.

' Rom. xiv. 14.

4 Matt. XXV. 34, 41.

Chap. XXVL]

THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

545

03-

its being

ing fire. How much better will you do to
betake yourself to true confusion, saying,
Every one of us shall bear his own burden,
and the winnowing fan at the last day shall
separate the chaff from the wheat !

But it is evident that you are afraid of
forthwith said to you, "Why then,
whilst you attempt to place on some men's
backs the burdens of their neighbors, have
you dared to separate yourselves from the
Lord's corn, dispersed throughout the world,
before the winnowing at the last day ? " Ac-
cordingly, you who disapprove of the deeds
of your party, whilst you are taking precau-
tions against being charged with the schism
which you all have made, are involving your-
selves also in their sins which you did not
commit; and while the shrewd Petilianus is
afraid of my being able to say that am I not
such as he thinks Ctecilianus was, he is
obliged to confess that he himself is such as
he knows Optatus to have been. Or are you
not such as the common voice of Africa pro-
claims him to have been ? Then neither are
we such as those with whom you reproach us
are either suspected to have been by your
mistake, or calumniously asserted to have
been by your madness, or proved to have
een by the truth. Much less is the wheat
<•( the Lord in all the nations of the earth of
such a character, seeing that it never heard
t :ie names of those of whom you speak.
'['here is therefore no reason why you should
jierish in such sin of separation and such sac-
rilege of schism. And yet, if you are made to
suffer for this great impiety by the judgment
vi God, you say that you are even baptized
in your blood; so that you are not content
with feeling no remorse for your division, but
' ou must even glory in your punishment.

Chap. 24. — 56. Petilianus said: "But
vou will answer that you abide by the same
'leclaration, ' He that is once washed needeth
iiDt save to wash his feet.' ' Now the ' once '
■> once that has authority, once that is con-
firmed by the truth."

57. AuGUSTiN answered: Baptism in the

ame of the Father and of the Son and of the

Holy Ghost- has Christ for its authority, not

' ny man, whoever he may be; and Christ is

e truth, not any man.

Chap. 25. — 58. Petilianus said: " For

vvhen you in your guilt perform what is false,

I do not celebrate baptism twice, which you

ave never celebrated once."

59. AuGUSTiN answered: In the first place.

J.ihn

- Matt, xxviii.

19.

you do not convict us of guilt. And if a
guilty man baptizes with a false baptism, then
none of those have true baptism who are bap-
tized by men in your party, that are, I do
not say openly, but even secretly guilty. For
if he who gives baptism gives something that
is God's, if he is already guilty in the sight
of God, how can he be giving something that
is God's if a guilty man cannot give true bap-
tism ? But in reality you wait till he is guilty
in your sight as well, as though what he pro-
poses to confer were something that belonged
to you.

Chap. 26. — 60 Petilianus said: " For if
you mix what is false with what is true, false-
hood often imitates the truth by treading in
its steps. Just in the same way a picture
imitates the true man of nature, depicting
with its colors the false resemblance of truth.
And in the same way, too, the brilliancy of
a mirror catches the countenance, so as to
represent the eyes of him who gazes on it.
In this way it presents to each comer his own
countenance, so that the very features of the
comer meet themselves in turn; and of such
virtue is the falsehood of a clear mirror, that
the very eyes which see themselves recognize
themselves as though in some one else. And
even when a shadow stands before it, it
doubles the reflection, dividing its unity in
great part through a falsehood. Must we
then hold that anything is true, because a ly-
ing representation is given of it? But it is
one thing to paint a man, another to give
birth to one. For does any one represent
fictitious children to a man who wishes for an
heir ? or would any one look for true heirs in
the falsehood of a picture? Truly it is a
proof of madness to fall in love with a pic-
ture, letting go one's hold of what is true."

61, AuGUSTiN answered: Are you then
really not ashamed to call the baptism of
Christ a lie, even when it is found in the
most false of men ? Far be it from any one
to sunpose that the wheat of the Lord, whicli
has been commanded to grow among the tares
throughout the wiiole field, that is, through-
out the whole of this world, until the har\'est,
that is, until the end of the world,' can have
perished in consequence of your evil words.
Nay, even among the very tares themselves,
which are commanded not to be gathered, but
to be tolerated even to the end, and among
the very chaff, which shall only be separated
from the wheat by the winnowing at the last
dav,^ does any one dare to say that any bap-
tism is false which is given and received in

3 Matt. xiii. 24-30, 36-43.

4 Matt. iii. 12.

546

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

the name of the Father, and of the Son, and
of the Holy Ghost? Would you say that
those whom you depose from their office,
whether as your colleagues or your fellow-
priests, on the testimony of women whom they
have seduced (since examples of this kind are
not wanting anywhere), were false or true
before their crime was proved against them ?
You will certainly answer, False. Why then
were they able both to have and to give true
baptism ? Why did not their falseness as
men corrupt in them the truth of God ? Is it
not most truly written, " For the Holy Spirit
of discipline will flee deceit ? " ' Seeing then
that the Holy Spirit fled from them, how came
it that the truth of baptism was in them, ex-
cept because what the Holy Spirit fled from
was the falseness of man, not the truth of the
sacrament? Further, if even the deceitful
have the true baptism, how do they have it
who possess it in truthfulness ? Whence you
ought to observe that it is rather your con-
versation which is colored with childish pig-
ments; and accordingly, he who neglects the
living Word to take pleasure in such coloring
is himself loving the picture in the place of
the reality.

Chap. 27. — 62. Petilianus said: " It will
be urged against us, that the Apostle Paul
said, 'One Lord, one faith, one baptism.' -
We profess that there is only one; for it is
certain that those who declare that there are
two are mad."

63. AuGUSTiN replied: These words of
yours are arguments against yourselves; but
in your madness you are not aware of it. For
the men who say there are two baptisms are
those who declare their opinion that the just
and the unjust have different baptisms;
whereas it belongs neither to one party nor
the other, but in both of them is one, being
Christ's, although they themselves are not
one: and yet the baptism, which is one, the
just have to salvation, the unjust to their de-
struction.

Chap. 28. — 64. Petilianus said: "But
yet, if I may be allowed the comparison, it is
certain that the sun appears double to the in-
sane, although it only be that a dark blue
cloud often meets it, and its discolored sur-
face, being struck by the brightness, while
the rays of the sun are reflected from it,
seems to send forth as it were rays of its own.
So in the same way in the faith of liaptism, it
is one thing to seek for reflections, another
to recognize the truth."

1 Wisd. i. 5.

2 Eph. iv. 5.

65. AuGUSTix answered: What are you
saying, if I may ask? When a dark blue
cloud reflects the rays of the sun with which
it is struck, is it only to the insane, and not
to all who look on it, that there appear to be
two suns ? But when it appears so to the in-
sane as such, it appears to them alone. But
if I may say so without being troublesome, I
would have you take care lest saymg sucn
things and talking in such a way should \>r
itself a sign of madness. I suppose, however,
that what you meant to say was this, — that
the just had the truth of baptism, the unjust
only its reflection. And if this be so, I ven-
ture to say that the reflection was found in
that man of your party,^ to whom not God,
but a certain Count,-* was God; but that the
truth was either in you or in him who uttered
the witty saying against Optatus, when he
said that " in the Count he had a god for his
companion. "5 And distinguish between those
who were baptized by either of these, and m
the one party approve the true baptism, in
the others exclude the reflection, and intro-
duce the truth.

Chap. 29. — 66. Petilianus said: " But to
pass rapidly through these minor points: can
he be said to lay down the law who is not a
magistrate of the court ? or is what he lavs
down to be considered law, when in the char-
acter of a private person he disturbs public
rights ? Is it not rather the case that he not
only involves himself in guilt, but is held to
be a forger, and that which he, composes a
forgerv ? ' '

67. AuGUSTiN answered: What if your pri-
vate person, whom you deem a forger, were
to set forth to any one the law of the emperor ?
Would not the man, w^ien he had compared
it with the law of those who have the srenuine
lav.-, and found it to be identically the same,
lay aside all care about the source from which
he had obtained it, and consider only what he
had obtained ? For what the forger gives is
false when he gives it of his own falseness;
but when something true is given by any per-
son, even though he be a forger, yet, although
the giver be not truthful, the gift is notwith-
standing true.

Chap. 30. — 68. Petilianus said: "Or if
any one chance to recollect the chants of a
priest, is he therefore to be deemed a priest,
because with sacrilegious mouth he publishes
the strain of a priest ? "

69. AuGUSTiN answered: In this question
you are speaking just as though we were at

3 Optatus.

4 Gildo.

5 See above, on 23, 53.

Chap. XXXIL] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

547

present inquiring what constituted a true
priest, not wtiat constituted true baptism. For
that a man should be a true priest, it is re-
quisite that he should be clothed not with the
sacrament alone, but with righteousness, as it
is written, "Let thy priests be clothed with
righteousness." ' But if a man be a priest in
virtue of the sacrament alone, as was the
high priest Caiaphas, the persecutor of the
one most true Priest, then even though he
himself be not truthful, yet what he gives
is true, if he gives not what is his own but
what is God's; as it is said of Caiaphas him-
self, "This spake he not of himself: but
being high priest that year, he prophesied," =
And yet, to use the same simile which you
employed yourself: if you were to hear even
from any one tnat was profane the prayer of
the priest couched in the words suitable to
the mysteries of the gospel, can you possibly
say to him, Your prayer is not true, though
he himself may be not only no true priest,
but not a priest at all ? seeing that the Apostle
Paul said that certain testimony of I know
not what Cretan prophet was true, though he
was not reckoned among the prophets of God;
for he says, "One of themselves, even a
prophet of their own, said the Cretians are
always liars, evil beasts, slow bellies: this
witness is true." 3 If, therefore, the apostle
even himself bore witness to the testimony of
some obscure prophet of a foreign race,
because he found it to be true, why do not
we, when we find in any one what belongs to
Christ, and is true even though the man with
whom it may be found be deceitful and
perverse, why do not we in such a case make
a distinction between the fault which is found
in the man, and the truth which he has not of
his own but of God's? and why do we not
say, This sacrament is true, as Paul said,
"This witness is true' " ? Does it at all follow
that we say, fhe man himself also is truthful,
because we say. This sacrament is true ? Just
as I would ask whether the apostle counted
that prophet among the prophets of the Lord,
because he confirmed the truth of what he
found to be true in him. Likewise the same
apostle, when he was at Athens, perceived a
certain altar among the altars of the false
gods, on which was this inscription, "To the
unknown God." And this testimony he made
use of to build them up in Christ, to the
extent of quoting the inscription in his ser-
mon, and adding, "Whom, therefore, ye ig-
norantly worship. Him declare I unto you."'
Did he. because he found that altar among
the altars of idols, or set up by sacrilegious

• Ps. cxxxii. 9.

2johnxi. 51.

3 Tit. i. 12, 13.

hands, therefore condemn or reject what he
found in it that was true ? or did he, because
of the truth which he found upon it, there-
fore persuade them that they ought also to
follow the sacrilegious practices of the pagans ?
Surely he did neither of the two; but pres-
ently, when, as he judged fitting, he wished
to introduce to their knowledge the Lord
Himself unknown to them, but known to him,
he says among other things, that "He is not
far from every one of us: for in Him we live,
and move, and have our being; as certain also
of your own poets have said." ■» Can it be
said that here also, because he found among
the sacrilegious, the evidence of truth, he
either approved their wickedness because of
the evidence, or condemned the evidence
because of their wickedness ? But it is un-
avoidable that you should be always in the
wrong, so long as you do despite to the sacra-
ments of God because of the faults of men,
or think that we take upon ourselves the sacri-
lege even of your schism, for the sake of the
sacraments of God, to which we are unwilling
to do despite in you.

Chap. 31. — 70. Petilianus said: "For
there is no power but of God,' " ^ none in any
man of power; as the Lord Jesus Christ
answered Pontius Pilate, 'Thou couldest have
no power at all against me, except it were
given thee from above.'* And again, in the
words of John, 'A man can receive nothing,
except it be given him from heaven.'" Tell
us, therefore, iraditor, when you received the
power of imitating the mysteries."

71. AuGUSTiN answered: Tell us rather
thyself when the power of baptizing was lost
by the whole world through which is dispers-
ed the inheritance of Christ, and by all that
multitude of nations in which the apostles
founded the Churches. You will never be
able to tell us, — not only because you have
calumniated them, and do not prove them to
be traditors, but because, even if you did
prove this, yet no guilt on the part of any
evil-doers, whether they be unsuspected, or
deceitful, or be tolerated as the tares or as
the chaff, can possibly overthrow the prom-
ises, so that all the nations of the earth should
not be blessed in the seed of Abraham; in
which promises you deprive them of their
share when you will not have the communion
of unity with all nations of the earth.

Chap. 32. — 72, Pktilianus said: "For
although there is only one baptism, yet it is
consecrated in three several grades. John

4 Acts xvii. 23, 27, 28.
6 John xix. II.

S Rom. xiii. i.
7 John iii. 27.

548

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

gave water without the name of the Trinity,
as he declared himself, saying, 'I indeed
baptize you with water unto repentance: but
He that cometh after me is mightier than I,
whose shoes I am not worthy to bear; He
shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and
with fire.'' Christ gave the Holy Spirit, as it
is written, 'He breathed on them, and saith
unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost,' ^
And the Comforter Himself came on the
apostles as a fire burning with rustling flames.
O true divinity, which seemed to blaze, not
to burn! as it is written, 'And suddenly there
came a sound from heaven as of a rushing
mighty wind, and it filled all the house where
the apostles were sitting. And there appear-
ed unto them cloven tongues, like as of fire,
and it sat upon each of them. And they
were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began
to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave
them utterance. '3 But you, O persecutor,
have not even the water of repentance, seeing
that you hold the power not of the murdered
John, but of the murderer Herod. You
therefore, O tradltor, have not the Holy Spirit
of Christ; for Christ did not betray others to
death, but was Himself betrayed. For you,
therefore, the fire in the spirit in Hades is
full of life, — that fire which, surging with
hungry tongues of flame, will be able to burn
your limbs to all eternity without consuming
them, as it is written of the punishment of the
guilty in hell, 'Neither shall their fire be
quenched.' "■*

73. AuGUSTiN answered: You are the
calumnious slanderer, not the truthful arguer.
Will you not at length cease to make asser-
tions of a kind which, if you do not prove
them, can apply to nobody; and even if you
prove them, certainly cannot apply to the
unity of the whole world, which is in the
saints as in the wheat of God ? If we too
were pleased to return calumnies for calum-
nies, we too might possibly be able to give
vent to eloquent slanderers. We too might
use the expression, "With rustling flames;"
but to me an expression never sounds in any
way eloquent which is inappropriate in its use.
We too might say, "Surging with hnngry
tongues of flame;" but we do not wish that
the tongues of flame in our writings, when
they are read by any one in his senses, should
be judged hungry for want of the sap of
weightiness, or that the reader himself, while
he finds in them no food of useful sentiments,
should be left to suffer from the hunger of
excessive emptiness. See, I declare that your
Circumcelliones are burning, not with rust-

' Matt. iii. 11.
3 Acts ii. 2-4.

2 John XX. 22.
4 Isa. Ixvi. 24.

ling but with headlong flames. If you answer,
What is that to us ? why do not you, when you
reproach with any one whom you vvill, not
listen in turn to our answer, We too know
nothing of it ? If you answer. You do not
prove the fact, why may not the whole word
answer you in turn, Neither do you prove it ?
Let us agree, therefore, if you please, that
you should not charge us with the guilt of
the wicked men whom you consider to belong-
to us, and that we should abstain from simi-
lar charges again-^t you. So you will see, by
this just agreement, confirmed and ratified,
that you have no charge which you can bring
against the seed of Abraham, as found In all
the nations of the earth. But I find without
difficulty a grievous charge to bring against
you: Why have you impiously separated
yourselves from the seed of Abraham, which
is in all nations of the earth ? Against this
charge you certainly have no means whereby
you may defend yourselves. For we each of
us clear ourselves of the sins of other men;
but this, that you do not hold communion
with all the nations of the earth, which are
blessed in the seed of Abraham, is a very
grievous crime, of which not some but all of
you are guilty.

74. And yet you know, as you prove by
your quotation, that the Holy Spirit descend-
ed in such wise, that those who were then
filled with it spake with divers tongues: what
was the meaning of that sign and prodigy ?
Why then is the Holy Spirit given now in such
wise, that no one to whom it is given speaks
with divers tongues, except because that
miracle then prefigured that all nations of the
earth should believe, and that thus the gospel
should be found to be in every tongue ? Just
as it was foretold in the psalm so long before:
"There is no speech nor language where their
voice is not heard." This was said with
reference to those men who were destined,
after receiving the Holy Spirit, to speak with
every kind of tongue. But because this pas-
sage itself signified that the gospel should
be found hereafter in all nations and lan-
guages, and that the body of Christ should
sound forth throughout all the world in every
tongue, therefore he goes on to say, "Their
sound is gone out throughout all the earth,
and their words to the ends of the world.''
Hence it is that the true Church is hidden
from no one. And hence comes that which
the Lord Himself says in the gospel, "A
city that is set on a hill cannot be hid.''^ And
therefore David continues in the same psalm,
"In the sun hath He placed His tabernacle,''

5 Matt. V. 14.

Chap. XXXII.] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

549

that is, in ttie open light of clay; as we read
in the Book of Kings, " For thou didst it
secretly; but I will do this thing before all
Israel, and before the sun."' And He Him-
self is "as a bridegroom coming out of His
chamber, and rejoiceth as a giant to run His
race. His going forth is from the end of
heaven:" here you have the coming of the
Lord in the fiesh. "And His circuit unto the
ends of it:" here you have His resurrection
and ascension. "And there is nothing hid
from the heat thereof:" = here you have the
coming of the Holy Spirit, whom He sent in
tongues of fire, that He might make manifest
the glowing heat of charity, which he certainly
cannot have who does not keep the unity of
the Spirit in the bond of peace with the
Church, which is throughout all languages.

75. Next, however, with regard to your
statement that there is indeed one baptism, ^
bat that it is consecrated in three several
grades, and to your having distributed the
three forms of it to three persons after such
fashion, that you ascribe the water to John,
the Holy Spirit to the Lord Jesus Christ, and,
in the third place, the fire to the Comforter
sent down from above, — consider for a mo-
ment in how great an error you are involved.
For you were brought to entertain such an
opinion simply from the words of John: "I
indeed baptize you with water: but He that
cometh after me is mightier than I: He shall
baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with
fire."" Nor were you willing to take into con-
sideration that the three things are not attri-
buted to three persons taken one by one, —
water to John, the Holy Spirit to Christ, fire
to the Comforter, — but that the three should
rather be referred to two persons — one of
them to John, the other two to our Lord. For
neither is it said, I indeed baptize you with
water: but He that cometh after me is mighti-
er than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to
bear: He shall baptize you with the Holy
Ghost: and the Comforter, who is to come
after Him, He shall baptize you with fire; but
"I indeed," He says, "with water: but He
that cometh after me with the Holy Ghost,
and with fire." One he attributes to himself,
two to Him that cometh after him. You see,
therefore, how you have been deceived in the
number. Listen further. You said tliat
there was one baptism consecrated in three
stages — water, the Holy Spirit, and fire; and
you assigned three persons to the three stages
severally — John to the water, Christ to the
Spirit, the Comforter to the fire. If, there-
fore, the water of John bears reference to the

' 2 Sam. xii.
3 Eph. iv. 5.

•-' Ps. xix. 3-6, cp. Hieron.
4 Matt. iii. 11.

same baptism which is commended as being
one, it was not right that those should have
been baptized a second time by the command
of the Apostle Paul whom he found to have
been baptized by John. For they already
had water, belonging, as you say, to the same
baptism; so that it remainecUhat they should
receive the Holy Spirit and fire, because these
were wanting in the baptism of John, that
their baptism might be completed, being con-
secrated, as you assert, in three stages. But
since they were ordered to be baptized by the
authority of an apostle, it is sufficiently made
manifest that that water with which John
baptized had no reference to the baptism of
Christ, but belonged to another dispensation
suited to the exigencies of the times.

76. Lastly, when you wished to prove that
the Holy Spirit was given by Christ, and had
brought forward as a proof from the gospel,
that Jesus on rising from the dead l)reati'ied
into the face of His disciples, saying, "Re-
ceive ye the Holy Ghost;"^ and when you
wished to prove that that last fire which was
named in connection with baptism was found
in the tongues of fire which were displayed on
the coming of the Holy Ghost, how came it
into your head to say, "And the Comforter
Himself came upon the apostles as a fire
burning with rustling flames," as though there
were one Holy Sj)irit whom He gave by
breathing on the face of His disciples, and
another who, after His ascension, came on the
apostles ? Are we to suppose, therefore, tiiat
there are two Holy Spirits ? Who will be
found so utterly mad as to assert this ? Christ
therefore Himself gave the same Holy Spirit,
whether by breathing on the face of the dis-
ciples, or by sending Him down from heaven
on the day of Pentecost, with undoubted com-
mendation of His holy sacrament. Accord-
ingly it was not that Christ gave the Holy
Spirit, and the Comforter gave the fire, that
the saying might be fulfilled, "With the Holy
Spirit, and with fire;" but the same Christ
Himself gave the Holy Spirit in both cases,
making it manifest while He was yet on earth
by His breathing, and when He was ascended
into heaven by the tongues of flame. For
that you may know that the words of John,
"He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost,"
were not fulfilled at the time when He breath-
ed on His disciples' face, so that they
should require to be baptized, when the Com-
forter should come, not with the Spirit any
longer, but with fire, I would have you re-
member the most outspoken words of Script-
id see what the Lord Himself said to

5 John XX. 22.

iSO

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

them when He ascended into heaven: "John
truly baptized you with water; but ye shall be
baptized with the Holy Ghost, whom ye shall
receive not many days hence at Pentecost.'
What could be plainer than this testimony ?
But according to your interpretation, what
He should have said was this: John verily
baptized you with water; but ye were baptized
with tne Holy Spirit when I breathed on
your faces; and next in due order shall ye be
i)aptized with fire, which ye shall receive not
many days hence; — in order that by this
means the three stages should be completed,
in which you say that the one baptism was
consecrated. And so it proves to be the
case that you are still ignorant of the meaning
of the words. "He shall baptize you with the
Holy Ghost, and with fire;" and you are rash
enough to be williing to teach what you do
not know yourselves.

Chap. t,^. — 77. Petilianus said- "But
that I may thoroughly investigate the baptism
in the name of the Trinity, the Lord Christ
said to His apostles: 'Go ye, and baptize the
nations, in the name of the Father, and of the
Son, and of the Holy Ghost; teaching them
to observe all things whatsoever I command
you.'- Whom do you teacii, traditor^ Him
whom you condemn ? Whom do you teach,
traditorl Him whom you slay ? Once more,
whom do you teach ? Him whom you have
made a murderer ? How then do you baptize
in the name of the Trinity? You cannot call
God your Father. For when the Lord Christ
said, ' Blessed are the peacemakers, for they
shall be called the children of God, '^ you who
have not peace of soul cannot have God for
your Father. Or how, again, can you baptize
in the name of the Son, who betray that Son
Himself, who do not imitate the Son of God
in any of His sufferings or crosses ? Or how,
again, can you baptize in the name of the
Holy Ghost, when the Holy Ghost came only
on those apostles who were not guilty of trea-
son ? Seeing, ^lerefore, that God is not your
Father, neither^are you truly born again with
the water of baptism. No one of you is born
perfectly. You in your impiety have neither
father nor mother. Seeing, then, that you
are of such a kind, ought I not to baptize
you, even though you wash yourselves a
thousand times, after the similitude of the
Jews, who as it were baptize the flesh ? "

78. AuGUSTiN answered; certainly you had
proposed thoroughly to investigate the bap-
tism in the name of the Trinity, and you had
set us to listen with much attention; but fol-

' Acts i. 5.

= I\Iatt. xxviii. 19, 20.

3 Matt.

lowing, as it would seem, what is the easiest
course to you, how soon have you returned to
your customary abuse! This you carry out
with genuine fluency. For you set before
yourself what victims you please, againsn
whom to inveigh with whatsoever bitterness
you please: in the midst of which last latitude
of discourse you are driven into the greatest
straits if any one does but use the little word.
Prove it. For this is what is said to you by
the seed of Abraham; and since in him all
nations of the earth are blessed, they care
but little when they are cursed by you. But
yet, since you are treating of baptism, which
you consider to be true when it is found in a
just man, but false when it is found in the
unjust, see how I too, if I were to investigate
baptism in the name of the Trinity, according
to your rule, might say, with great fullness, as
it seems to me, that he has not God for his
father who in a Count has God for his com-
panion,'' nor believes that any is his Christ,
save him for whose sake he has endured suf-
fering; and that he has not the Holy Ghost
who burned the wretched Africa in so ver}'
different a fashion with tongues of fire. How
then can they have baptism, or how can they
administer it in the name of the Father, and
of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost ? Surely
you must now perceive that baptism can exist
in an unrighteous man, and be administered
by an unrighteous man, and that no unrighte-
ous baptism, but such as is just and true, —
not because it belongs to the unrighteous
man, but because it is of God. And herein
I am uttering no calumny against you, as you
never cease to do, on some pretense or other,
against the whole world; and, what is even
more intolerable, you do not even bring any
proof about the very points on which you
found your calumnies. But I know not how
this can possibly be endured, because you not
only bring calumnies against holy men about
unrighteous men, but you even bring a charge
against the holy baptism itself, which must
needs be holy in any man, however unright-
eous he may be, from a comparison with the
infection arising from the sins of wicked men,
so that you say that baptism partakes of the
character of him by whom it is possessed, or
administered, or received. Furthermore, if a
man partakes of the character of him in whose
company he approaches sacred mysteries,
and if the sacraments themselves partake of
the character of the men in whom they are,
holy men may well be satisfied to find conso-
lation in the thought that they only fare like
holy baptism itself in hearing false accusa-

4 See above, 23, 53,

Chap. XXXVL] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

551

tions from your lips. But it would be well for
you to see how you are condemned out of
your own mouths, if both the sober among
you are counted as drunken from the infec-
tion of the drunken in your ranks, and the
merciful among you become robbers from the
infection of the robbers, and whatever evil is
found among you in the persons of wicked
men is perforce shared by those who are not
wicked; and if baptism itself is unclean in all
of you who are unclean, and if it is of differ-
ent kinds according to the varying character
of u,ncleanness itself, as it must be if it is per-
force of the same character as the man by
whom it is possessed or administered. These
suppositions most undoubtedly are false, and
accordingly they in no wise injure us, when
you bring them forward against us without
looking back upon yourselves. But they do
injure you, because, when you bring them
forward falsely, they do not fall on us; but
since you imagine them to be true, they recoil
upon yourselves.

Chap. 34. — 79. Petiliaxus said: " For if
the apostles were allowed to baptize those
whom John had washed with the baptism of
repentance, shall it not likewise be allowed to

juilty of

sacrilege

me to baptize men
yourselves ? ''

80. AUGUSTIN answered: Where then is
what you said above, that there was not one
baptism of John and another of Ciirist, but
that tliere was one baptism, consecrated in
three stages, of which three stages John gave
the water, Christ the Spirit, and the Comfor-
ter the fire ? Why then did the apostles re-
peat the water in the case of those to whom
Jonn had already administered water belong-
ing to the one baptism which is consecrated
in three stages ? Surely you must see how
necessary it is that every one should under-
stand the meaning of what he is discussing.

Chap. 35. — 81. PETiLiANUSsaid: "Norin-
CittA will it be possible that the Holy Spirit
should be implanted in the heart of any one
by the laying on of the hands of the priest,
unless the water of a pure conscience has gone
before to give him birth.''

82. AuGUSTiN answered: In these few words
of yours two errors are involved; and one of
them, indeed, has no great bearing on the
question which is being discussed between us,
but yet it helps to convict you of want of skill.
For the Holy Spirit came upon a hundred and
twenty men. without the laying on of any per-
son's hands, and again upon Cornelius the
centurion and those who were with him, even

before they were baptized.' But the second
error in these words of yours entirely over-
throws your whole case. For you say that
the water of a pure conscience must neces-
sarily precede to give new birth, before the
Holy Spirit can follow on it. Accordingly,
either all the water consecrated in the name
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the
Holy Ghost, is water of a pure conscience,
not for the merits of those by whom it is ad-
ministered, or by whom it is received, but in
virtue of the stainless merits of Him -who in-
stituted this baptism; or else if only a pure
conscience on the part both of the ministrant
and the recipient can produce the water of a
pure conscience, what do you make of those
whom you find to have been baptized by men
who bore a conscience stained with as yet
undiscovered guilt, especially if there exist
among the said baptized persons any one that
should confess that he at the time when he
was baptized had a bad conscience, in that he
might possbily have desired to use that oppor-
tunity for the accomplishment of some sinful
act ? When, therefore, it shall be made clear
to you that neither the man who administered
baptism, nor the man who received it, had a
pure conscience, will you give your judgment
that he ought to be baptized afresh ? You will
assuredly neither say nor do anything of the
sort. The purity therefore of baptism is
entirely unconnected with the purity or im-
purity of the conscience either of the giver
or the recipient. Will you therefore dare to
say that the deceiver, or the robber, or the
oppressor of the fatherless and widows, or the
sunderer of marriages, or the betrayer, the
seller, the divider of the patrimony of other
men,= was a man of pure conscience ? Or will
you further dare to say that those were men
of pure conscience, whom it is hard to imagine
wanting in such times, men who made inter-
est with the man I have described, that they
might be baptized, not for the sake of Christ,
nor for the sake of eternal life, but to conci-
liate earthly friendships, and to satisfy earth-
ly desires? Further, if you do not venture
to say that these were men of pure consci-
ence, then if you find any of their number
who have been baptized, give to them the
water of a pure conscience, which they as yet
have not received; and if you will not do this,
then leave, off casting in our teeth a matter
which you do not understand, lest you sliould
be forced to answer in reply to us about a
matter which you know full well.

Chap. t,G. — 83. Pktilianus said: "Which

J \cis i. 15

11. 4, X. 44.

■ Optatus Gildonianus.

552

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

Holy Spirit certainly cannot come on you,
who have not been washed even with the bap-
tism of repentance; but the water of the
traditor, which most truly needs to be repent-
ed of, does but work pollution."

84. AuGUSTiN answered: As a matter of
fact, not only do you not prove us to be
fradifors, but neither did your fathers prove
that our fathers were guilty of that sin;
though, even if that had been proved^ the con-
sequence would have been that they would
not be our fathers, according to your earlier
assertion, seeing that we had not followed
their deeds; yet neither should we on their
account be severed from the companionship
of unity, and from the seed of Abraham, in
which all nations of the earth are blessed.'
However, if the water of Christ be one thing,
and the water of the /r^^^/Vwanother, because
Christ was not a fradifoi-, why should not the
water of Christ be one thing, and the water of
a robber another, since certainly Christ was
not a robber ? Do you therefore baptize again
after baptism by your robb'ei', and I will bap-
tize again after the traditor, who is neither
mine nor yours; or, if one must believe the
documents which are produced, who is both
mine and yours; or, if we are to believe the
communion of the whole world rather than
the party of Donatus, who is not mine, but
yours. But, by a better and a sounder judg-
ment, because it is according to the words of
the apostle, every one of us shall bear his own
burden;- nor is either that robber yours, if
you are not yourselves robbers; nor does any
tradiior belong to any one either of us or you,
who is not himself a tradiior. And yet we
are Catholics, who, following the spirit of that
judgment, do not desert the unity of the
Church; but you are heretics, who, on ac-
count of charges, whether true or false, which
you have brought against certain men, are
unwilling to maintain Christian charity with
the seed of Abraham,

Chap. 37. — 85. Petilianus said: "Butthat
the truth of this may be made manifest from
the apostles, we are taught by their actions, as
it is written: 'It came to pass that while
Apollos was at Corinth, Paul, having passed
through the upper coasts, came to Ephesus;
and finding certain disciples, he said unto
them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since
ye believed ? And they said unto him, We
have not so much as heard whether there be
any Holy Ghost. And he said unto them,
Unto what then were ye baptized ? And they
said. Unto John's baptism. Then said Paul,

' Gen. xxii. i8

= Cal.

John verily baptized with the baptism of re-
pentance, saying unto the people, that they
should believe on Him which should come
after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. When
they heard this, they were baptized in the
name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had
laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost
came on them; and they spake with tongues,
and prophesied. And all the men were about
twelve. '3 If, therefore, they were baptized
that they might receive the Holy Ghost, why
do not you, if you wish to receive the Holy
Ghost, take measures to obtain a true renew-
ing, after your falsehoods ? And if we do ill
in urging this, why do you seek after us ? or
at any rate, if it is an offense, condemn Paul
in the first instance; the Paul who certainly
washed off what had already existed, whereas
we in you give baptism which as yet does not
exist. For you do not, as we have often said
before, wash with a true baptism; but you
bring on men an ill repute by your empty
name of a false baptism."

86. AuGUSTiN answered: "We bring no
accusation against Paul, who gave to men the
baptism of Christ because they had not the
baptism of Christ, but the baptism, of John,
according to their own reply; for, being ask-
ed. Unto what were ye baptized ? they an-
swered. Unto John's baptism; which has
nothing to do with the baptism of Christ, and
is neither. a part of it nor a step towards it.
Otherwise, either at that time the water of
the baptism of Christ was renewed a second
time, or if the baptism of Christ was then
made perfect by the two waters, the baptism
is less perfect which is given now, because it
is not given with the water which was given
at the hands of John. But either one of these
opinions it is impious and sacrilegious to en-
tertain. Therefore Paul gave the baptism of
Christ to those who had not the baptism of
Christ, but only the baptism of John.

87. But v\4iy the baptism of John, which is
not necessary now, was necessary at that
time, I have explained elsewhere; and the
question has no bearing on the point at issue
between us at the present time, except so far
as that it may appear that the baptism of
John was one thing, the baptism of Christ
another, — just as that baptism was a different
thing with which the apostle says that our
fathers were baptized in the cloud and in the
sea, when they passed through the Red Sea
under the guidance of Moses.-* For the law
and the prophets up to the time of John the
Baptist had sacraments which foreshadowed
things to come; but the sacraments of our

3 Acts -xix. 1-7.

4 I Cor. X. I, 2.

Chap. XXXVIL] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

5^3

time bear testimony that tliat has come already
which the former sacraments foretold should
come. John therefore was a foreteller of
Christ nearer to Him in time than all who
went before him. And because all the righte-
ous men and prophets of former times desir-
ed to see the fulfillment of what, through the
revelation of the Spirit, they foresaw would
come to pass, — whence also the Lord Him-
self says, "That many prophets and righte-
ous men have desired to see those things
which ye see, and have not seen them; and
to hear those things which ye hear, and have
not heard them," ' — therefore it was said of
John that he was more than a prophet, and
that among all that were born of women there
was none greater than he;- because to the
righteous men who went before him it w^as
only granted to foretell the coming of Christ,
but to John it was given both to foretell Him
m His absence and to behold His presence,
so that it should be found that to him was
made manifest what the others had desired.
And therefore the sacrament of his baptism is
still connected with the foretelling of Christ's
coming, though as of something very soon to
lie fulfilled, seeing that up to his time there
were still foretellings of the first coming of our
Lord, of which coming we have now an-
nouncements, but no longer predictions. But
tae Lord, teaching the way of humility, con-
:!escended to make use of the sacraments
which He found here in reference to the fore-
telling of His coming, not in order to assist
le operation of His cleansing, but as an ex-
ample for our piety, that so He mght show to
us with what reverence we ought to receive
those sacraments which bear witness that He
is already come, when He did not disdain to
make use of those which foreshadowed His
coming in the future. And John, therefore,
though the nearest to Christ in point of time,
and within one year of the same age with
Him, yet, while lie was baptizing, went be-
fore the way of Christ who was still to come;
for which reason it was said of him, "Behold,
I send my messenger before Thy face, which
shall prepare Thy way before Thee."^ And
he himself preached, saymg, "There cometh
one mightier than I after me. ' '•* Li like man-
ner, therefore, the circumcision on the eighth
day, which was given to the patriarchs, fore-
told our justification, to the putting away of
carnal lusts through the resurrection of our
Lord, which took place after tiie seventh day,
which is the Sabbath-day, on the eighth, that
is, the Lord's day, which fell on 'Jie third day
after His burial; vet the infant Christ receiv-

' Matt. .\iii. 17.

3 Mark i. 2; cp. Mai.

' Matt, xi
4 Mark i.

ed the same circumcision of the flesh, with its
prophetic signification. And as the Passover,
which was celebrated by the Jews with the
slaying of a lamb, prefigured the passion of
our Lord and His departure from this world
to the Father, yet the same Lord celebrated
the same Passover with His disciples, when
they reminded Him of it, saying, Where wilt
Thou that we prepare for Thee to eat t!ie
Passover? 3 so too He Himself also received
the baptism of John, which formed a part of
the latest foretelling' of His coming. But as
the Jews' circumcision of the flesh is one
thing, and the ceremony which we observe on
the eighth day after persons are baptized is
another;* and the Passover which the Jews
still celebrate with the slaying of a lamb is
one thing,'' and that which we receive in the
body and blood of our Lord is another, — so
the baptism of John was one thing, the bap-
tism of Christ is another. For by the former
series of rites the latter were foretold as des-
tined to arrive; by these latter the others are
declared to be fulfilled. And even thouafh
Christ received the others, yet are they not
necessary for us, who have received the Lord
Himself who was foretold in them. But when
the coming of our Lord was as yet recent, it
was necessary for any one who had received
the former that he should be imbued with the
latter also; but it was wholly needless that
any one who had been so imbued should be
compelled to go back to the former rites.

88. Wherefore do not seek to raise confu-
sion out of tie baptism of John, the source
and intention of which was either such as I
have here set forth; or if any other better
explanation of it can be given, this much still
is clear, that the baptism of John and the
baptism of Christ are two distinct and sepa-
rate things, and that the former was expressly
called the baptism of John, as is clear both
from the answer of those men whose case you
quoted, and from the words of our Lord Him-
self, when he says, "The baptism of John,
whence was it? from heaven, or of men?"*
But the latter is never called the baptism of
CKcilianus, or of Donatus, or of Augustin,
or of Petilianus, but the baptism of Christ.
For if you think that we are shameless, because
we will not allow that any one should be bap-

5 Matt. xxvi. 17.

6 In his treatise on tiic Sermon on the Mount, Book 1. iv 12,
Augustin again compares the "'i:i/,'fir;ttt\' ociaiuir u »i /i-rinrii iii
quits in regeneyttlionc novi hoininis ceU'hraiinis" with the cir
cumcision on the eighth day ; and in Serm. 376, c. ii. 2, he says
that the heads of tht infants were uncovered on the eighth day,
asatoken of liberty. Cp. llinghani, Oyig. Sacr. XII. iv. 3.

7 Augustin apparently supposed that the sacriticeof the paschal
lamb was still observed among the Jews of the dispersion; cp.
Retract. I. x. 2. It was, however, forbidden them to sacrifice the
Passover except in the place w'.uch the Lord should choose to
place His name there ; and hence the Jews, though they observe
the other paschal solemnities, abstain from the sacrifice of the
lamb. " Ma"- "•'«'• ^S-

554

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN,

[Book II.

tized after baptism from us, although we see
that men were baf tized again who had receiv-
ed the baptism of John, who certainly is in-
comparably greater than ourselves, will you
maintain tiiat John and Optatus were of equal
dignity ? The thing appears ridiculous. And
yet I fancy that you do not hold them to be
equals, but consider Optatus the greater of
the two. For the apostle baptized after bap-
tism by John: you venture to baptize no one
after baptism by Optatus. Was it because
Optatus was in unity with you ? I know not
with what heart a theory like this can be
maintained, if the friend of the Count,' who
had in the Count a god for his companion, is
said to have been in unit}'^, and the friend of
the Bridegroom to have been excluded from it.
But if John was preeminently in unity, and far
more excellent and greater than all of us and
all of you, and yet the Apostle Paul baptized
after him, why do you then not baptize after
Optatus ? Unless indeed it be that your blind-
ness brings you into such a strait that you
should say that Optatus had the power of giv-
ing the Holy Spirit, and that John had not !
And if you do not say this, for fear of being
ridiculed for your madness even by the insane
themselves, what answer will you be able to
make when you are asked why men should
have required to be baptized after receiving!
baptism from John, while no one needs to be |
baptized after receiving it from Optatus, i
unless it be that the former were baptized
with the baptism of John, while, whenever
any one is baptized with the baptism of Christ,
whether he be baptized by Paul or by Optatus, ;
there is no difference in the nature of his bap-
tism, though there is so great a difference be-
tween Paul and Optatus ? Return then, O ye
transgressors, to a right mind,= and do not
seek to weigh the sacraments of God by con-
siderations of the characters and deeds of
men. For the sacraments are holy through
Him to whom they belong; but when taken
in hand worthily, they bring reward, when
unworthily, judgment. And although the
men are not one who take in hand the sacra-
ment of God worthily or unworthily, yet that
which is taken in hand, whether worthily or
unworthily, is the same; so that it does not
become better or worse in itself, but only
turns to the life or death of those who handle
it in either case. And in respect of what you
said, that " in those whom Paul baptized after
they had received the baptism of John, he
washed off what had already existed," you
certainly would not have said it had you taken
a moment to consider what you were saying.

For if the baptism of John required washing!
off, it must, beyond all doubt, have had some!
foulness in it. Why then should I press you
further? Recollect or read, and see whence
John received it, so shall you see against j
whom you have uttered that blasphemy; and
when you have discovered this, your heart will
surely be beaten, if a rein be not set on your

tengue.

I Gildo; see above, 23, 53.

2 Isa.

89. To come next to what you think you
say against us with so much point: " If we do
ill in urging this, why do you seek after us?'*
cannot you even yet call to mind that only
those are sought after who have perished ?
Or is the incapacity for seeing this an elcv
ment in your ruin ? For the sheep might say
to the shepherd with equal absurdity, If I do
wrong in straying from the flock, why do you
search after me ? not understanding that the
very reason why it is being sought is because
it thinks there is no need for seeking it. But
who is there that seeks for you, either through
His Scriptures, or by catholic and concilia-
tory voices, or by the scourgings of temporal
afflictions, save only Him who dispenses that
mercy to you in all things ? We therefore
seek you that we may find you; for we love
you that you should have life, with the same
intensity with which we hate your error, that
it might be destroyed which seeks to ruin you,
so long as it is not itself involved in your des-
truction. And would to God that we might
seek you in such a manner as even to find,
and be able to say with rejoicing of each one
of you, " He was dead, and is alive again; he
was lost, and is found ! " ^

Chap, 38. — 90, Petilianus said: "If you
declare that you hold the Catholic Church,
the word ' catholic ' is merely the Greek
equivalent for entire or whole. But it is
clear that you are not in the whole, because
you have gone aside into the part,''

91. AuGUSTiN answered: I too mdeed have
attained to a very slight knowledge of the
Greek language, scarcely to be called knowl-
edge at all, yet I am not shameless in saying
that I know that o/ov means not "one," but
" the whole; " and that y.aO' oXov means " ac-
cording to the whole:" whence the Catholic
Church received its name, according to the
saying of the Lord, "It is not for you to
know the times, which the Father hath put in
His own power. But ye shall receive power,
after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you:
and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in
Jerusalem, and in Judea, and in Samaria, and
even in the whole earth," * Here you have the

3 Luke XV, 32,

4 Acts i. 7,

Chap. XXXIX.] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

DDD

origin of the name " Catholic." But you are
so bent upon runnmg with your eyes shut
against the mountain which grew out of a
small stone, according to the prophecy of
Daniel, and filled the whole earth,' that you
actually tell us that we have gone aside into
a part, and are not in the whole among those
whose communion is spread throughout the
whole earth. But just in the same way as,
supposing you were to say that I was Petili-
anus, I should not be able to find any method
of refuting you unless I were to laugh at you
as being in jest, or mourn over you as being
mad, so in the present case I see that I have
no other choice but this; and since I do not
believe that you are in jest, you see what al-
ternative remains.

Chap, 39. — 92. — Petilianus said: "But
there is no fellowship of darkness with light,
nor any fellowship of bitterness with the sweet
of honey; there is no fellowship of life with
death, of innocence with guilt, of water with
Mood; the lees have no fellowship with oi ,
though they are related to it as being its
dregs, but everything that is reprobate will
flow away. It is the very sink of iniquity;
according to the saying of John, ' They went
out from us, but they were not of us; for if
they had been of us, they would no doubt
nave continued with us.'- There is no gold
among their pollution: all that is precious has
lieen purged away. For it is written, 'As
'^n\d is tried in the furnace, so also are the
just tried by the harassing of tribulation.' ^
Cruelty is not a part of gentleness, nor re-
];L,non a part of sacrilege; nor can the party

■ f Macarius* in anyway be part of us, be-
iiise he pollutes the likeness of our rite.

lor the enemy's line, which fills up an

enemy's name, is no part of the force to

wiiich it is opposed; but if it is truly to be

.lied a part, it will find a suitable motto in

■ e judgment of Solomon, ' Let their part be
It off from the earth.' "5

93. AuGUSTiN answered: What is it but
sheer madness to utter these taunts without
proving anything ? You look at the tares
throughout the world, and pay no heed to the
wheat, although both have been bidden to
grow together throughout the whole of it.
You look at the seed sown by the wicked one,
which shall be separated in the time of har-
vest,* and you pay no heed to the seed of
Abraham, in which all nations of the earth

' Dan. ii. 35. 21 John ii. 19.

3 Apparently from Wisd. iii. 6.

4 Macarius acted as imperial commissioner with Paulus, c. 34S,
to settle the disputes between Donatists and Catholics, but only to
the further exasperation of the former, who accused him of intru-
sion and murder, and thereafter called their opponents Macarians.

5 Prov. ii. 22. 6 Matt. xiii. 24-30.

shall be blessed.^ Just as though you were
already a purged mass, and virgin honey, and
refined oil, and pure gold, or rather the very
similitude of a whited wall. For, to say
nothing of your other faults, do the drunken
form a portion of the sober, or are the covet-
ous reckoned among the portion of the wise ?
If men of gentle temper appropriate the term
of light, where shall the madness of the Cir-
cumcelliones be esteemed to be, excepting in
the darkness? Why then is baptism, given
by men like these, held valid among you, and
the same baptism of Christ not held valid, by
whatsoever men it may be administered
throughout the world ? You see, in fact, that
you are separated from the communion of the
whole world in so far as this, that you are not
indeed all drunk, nor all of you covetous, nor
all men of violence, but that you are all here-
tics, and, in virtue of this, are all impious and
all sacrilegious.

94. But as to your saying that the whole
world that rejoices in Christian communion is
the party of iSLacarius, who with any remnant
of sanity in his brain could make such a
stacement? But because we say that you are
of the party of Donatus, you therefore seek
for a man of whose party you may say we are;
and, being in a great strait, you mention the
name of some obscure person, who, if he is
known in Africa, is certainly unknown in any
other quarter of the globe. And therefore
hearken to the answer made to you by all the
seed of Abraham from every corner of tlie
earth: Of that Macarius, to whose party you
assert us to belong, we know absolutely
nothing. Can you reply in turn that you
know nothing of Donatus? But even if we
were to say that you are the party of Optatus,
which of you can say that he is unacquainted
with Optatus, unless in the sense that he does
not know him personally, as perhaps he does
not know Donatus either ? But you acknowl-
edge that you rejoice in the name of Donatus,
do you also take any pleasure in the name of
Optatus ? What then can the name of Dona-
tus profit you, when all of you alike are pol-
luted by Optatus ? What advantage can you
derive from the sobriety of Donatus, when
you are defiled by the drunkenness of tlie
Circumcelliones ? What, according to your
views, are you profited by the innocence of
Donatus, when you are stained by the rapacity
of Optatus? For this is your mistake, that
you think that the unrighteousness of a man
has more power in infecting his neighbor than
the righteousness of a man has in purifying
those around him. Therefore, if two share

7 Gen. .\xii. 18.

556

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

in common the sacraments of God, the one
a just man, the other an unrighteous one, but
so that neither the former should imitate the
unrighteousness of the latter, nor the latter
the righteousness of the former, you say that
the result is not that both are made just, but
t'-.at both are made unrighteous; so that also
that holy thing, which both receive' in com-
mon, becomes unclean and loses its original
holiness. When does unrighteousness find
for herself such advocates as these, through
whose madness she is esteemed victorious ?
How comes it then that, in the midst of such
mistaken perversity, you congratulate your-
selves upon the name of Donatus, when it
shows not that Petilianus deserv'es to be what
Donatus is, but that Donatus is compelled to
be what Optatus is? But let the house of
Israel say, "God is my portion for ever;"'
let the seed of Abraham say in all nations,
" The Lord is the portion of mine inherit-
ance. " - For they know how to speak through
the gospel of the glory of the blessed God.
For you, too, through the sacrament which is
in you, like Caiaphas the persecutor of the
Lord, prophesy without being aware of it.^
For what in Greek is expressed by the word
May.dp'.(>i is in our language simply " Blessed; "
and in this way certainly we are of the party
of Macarius, the Blessed One. For what is
more blessed than Christ, of whose party we
are, after whom all the ends of the earth are
called, and to whom they all are turned, and
in whose sight all the countries of the nations
worship? Therefore the party of this JNIaca-
rius, that is to say, of this Blessed One, feels
no apprehension at your last curse, distorted
from the words of Solomon, lest it should
perish from the earth. For what is said by
him of the impious you endeavor to apply
to the inheritance of Christ, and you strive to
prove that this has been achieved with inex-
pressible impiety; for when he was speaking
of the impious, he says, " Let their portion
perish from off the earth."'' But when you
say, with reference to the words of Scripture,
" I shall give Thee the heathen for Thine in-
heritance," ^ and " all the ends of the world
shall remember and turn unto the Lord,"*
that the promise contained in them has al-
ready perished from the earth, 3-ou are seek-
ing to turn against the inheritance of Christ
what was foretold about the lot of the impious;
but so long as the inheritance of Christ en-
dures and increases, you are perishing in sa}--
ing such things. For you are not in every
case prophesying through the sacrament of
God, since in this case you are merely utter-

I Ps. Ixxiii. z6.
4 Prov. ii. 22.

2 Ps. xvi.
S Ps. ii. 8.

'i John xi. 51.
6 Ps. xxii. 27.

ing evil wishes through your own madness.
But the prophecy of the true prophets is morel
powerful than the evil speaking of the falsef
prophets.

Chap. 40. — 95. Petilianus said: "Paul!
the apostle also bids us, ' Be ye not unequallyl
yoked with unbelievers: for what fellowship!
hath righteousness with unrighteousness ? and!
what communion hath light with darkness ?j
and what concord hath Christ with Belial ? or|
what part hath he that believeth with an in-
fidel ?" ^

96. AuGUSTiN answered: I recognize the|
words of the apostle; but how they can help
you I cannot see at all. For which of us saysj
that there is any fellowship between righteous-
ness and unrighteousness, even though thai
righteous and the unrighteous, as in the case
of Judas and Peter, should be alike partakers
of the sacraments ? For from one and the same
holy thing Judas received judgment to him-
self and Peter salvation, just as you received!
the sacrament with Optatus, and, if you were|
unlike him, were not therefore partakers inj
his robberies. Or is robbery not unrighteous-
ness ? Who would bemad enough to assert I
that ? What fellowship was there, then, on
the part of your righteousness with his un-
righteousness, when you approached together
to the same altar ?

Chap. 41. — 97. Petilianus said: "And,
again, he taught us that schisms should not
arise, in the following terms: 'Now this I
say, that every one of you saith, I am of
Paul, and I of ApoUos, and I of Cephas, and
1 of Christ. Is Christ divided ? was Paul
crucified for you ? or were ye baptized in the
name of Paul ? ' " ^

98. AuGUSTiN answered. Remember all of
you who read this, it was Petilianus who
quoted these words from the apostle. For
who could have believed that he would have
brought forward words which tell so much for
us against himself?

Chap, 42. — 99. Petilianus said: " If Paul
uttered these words to the unlearned and to
the righteous, I say this to you who are un-
righteous. Is Ciirist divided, that you should
separate yourselves from the Church?"

100. AuGUSTiN answered: I am afraid lest
any one should think that in this work of
mine the writer has made a mistake, and has
written the heading Fctiliaiuis said, when he
ought to have written Attgttsim answered.
But I see what your object is: you wished, as

iCor

VI. 14, 15.

*> I Cor. i. 12, 13.

I HAP. XLV.]

THE LETTERS OF PETILIAX, THE DONATIST.

55!

Mt were, to preoccupy the ground, lest we should
Hiring those words in testimony against j^ou.
iBut what have you really done, except to
'cause them to be quoted twice? If, there-
'fore, you are so much pleased with hearing
Itiie words which make against you, as to ren-
tier It necessary that they should be repeated,
:ar, I pray you, these words as coming from
hit', Petilianus: Is Christ divided, that you
'should separate yourselves from the Church?

Chap. 43. — loi. Petilianus said: " Can it
lie that the traitor Judas hung himself for
vou, or did he imbue you with his character,
tiiat, following his deeds, you should seize
rm the treasures of the Church, and sell for
money to the powers of this world us who are
tne heirs of Christ?"

102. AuGUSTiN answered: Judas did not
die for us, but Christ, to whom the Church
dispersed throughout the world says, "So
siiall I have wherewith to answer him that re-
: proacheth me: for I trust in Thy word."'
When, therefore, I hear the words of the
lord, saying, "Ye shall be witnesses unto
me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and
in Samaria, and even in the whole earth," =
and through the voice of His prophet, " Their
sound is gone out through all the earth, and
their words into the ends of the world, "3 no
] odily admixture of evil ever is able to dis-
turb me, if I know how to say, " Be surety
•' r Thy servant for good: let not the proud

'press me.""* I do not, therefore, concern
myself about a vain calumniation when I have
:i substantial promise. But if you complain
1' out matters or places appertaining to the
'lurch, which you used once to hold, and
' 'Id no longer, then the Jews also may say
* at they are righteous, and reproach us with

irighteousness, because the Christians now
occupy the place in which of old they mi-
piously reigned. What then is there unfit-
ting, if, according to a similar will of the Lord,
the Catholics now hold the things which for-
merly the heretics used to have ? For against
all such men as this, that is to say, against
all impious and unrighteous men, those words
of the Lord have force, " The kingdom of
God shall be taken from you, and be given
to a nation liringing forth the fruits thereof; "^
or is it written in vain, '' The righteous shall
eat of the labors of the impious " ?* Where-
fore you ought rather to be amazed that you
still possess something, than that there is
something which you have lost. But neither
need you wonder even at this, for it is by
degrees that the whitened wall falls down.

' Ps. cxix. 42.
^ Ps. cxix. 122.

2 Acts i. 8.

5 Matt. xxi. 43.

3 Ps. xix. 4.

6 Ps. cv. 44.

Yet look back at the followers of Maximianus,
see what places they possessed, and by whose
agency and under whose attacks they were
driven from them, and do you venture, if you
can, to say that 10 suffer thmgs like these is
righteousness, while to do them is unright-
eousness. In the first place, because you
did the deed, and they suffered them; and
secondly, because, according to the rule of
this righteousness, you are found to l)e in-
ferior. For they were driven from the ancient
palaces by Catiiolic emperors acting through
judges, while you are not even driven forth
by the mandates of the emperors themselves
from the basilicas of unity. For what reason
is this, save that you are of less merit, not
only than the rest of your colleagues, Init
even than those very men whom you assuredly
condemned as guilty of sacrilege by the mouth
of your plenary Council^

Chap. 44. — 103. Petilianus said: "For
we, as it is written, when we are baptized, put
on Christ who was betrayed;'' you, when you
are infected, put on Judas the betrayer."

104. AuGUSTiN answered: I also might say,
You when you are infected put on Optatus
the betrayer, the robber, the oppressor, the
separater of husband and wife; but far be it
from me that the desire of returning an evil
word should provoke me into any falsehood:
for neither do you put on Optatus, nor we
Judas. Therefore, if each one who comes to
us shall answer to our questions that he has
been baptized in the name of Optatus, he
shall be baptized in the name of Christ; and
if you baptized any that came from us and
said that they had been baptized in the name
of the traitor Judas, in that case we have no
fault to find with what you have done. But
if they had been baptized in the name of
Christ, do you not see what an error you
commit in thinking that the sacraments of
God can undergo change through any change -
ableness of human sins, or be polluted by
defilement in the life of any man?

Chap. 45. — 105. Petilianus said: "But
if these are the parties, the name of memb.er
of a party is no prejudice against us. For
there are two ways, tlie one narrow, in which
we walk; the other is for the impious, wherein
they shall perish. And yet, though the
designations be alike, there is a great differ-
ence in the reality, that the way of righteous-
ness should not be defiled by fellowship in a
name."

106. Augustin answered: You have been

7 Gal. iii. 27.

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Hook

afraid of the comparison of your numbers with
the multitude throughout the world; and
therefore, in order to win praise for the
scantiness of your party, you liave sought to
bring in the comparison of yourself walking
in the narrow path. Would to God that you
had betaken yourself not to its praise, but to
the path itself ! Truly you would have seen
that there was the same scantiness in the
Church of all nations; but that the righteous
are said to be few in comparison with the
multitude of the unrighteous, just as, in com-
parison with the chaff, there may be said to
be few grains of corn in the most abundant
crop, and yet these very grains of themselves,
when brought into a heap, fill the barn. For
the followers of Maximianus themselves will
surpass you in this scantiness of number, if
you think that righteousness consists in this,
as well as in the persecution involved in the
loss of places which they held.

Chap. 46. — 107. Petilianus said: " In the
first Psalm David separates the blessed from
the impious, not indeed making them into
parties, but excluding all the impious from
holiness. ' Blessed is the man that walketh
not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor stand-
eth in the way of sinners.' Let him who had
strayed from the path of righteousness, so
that he should perish, return to it again.
'' Nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.''
When he gives this warning, O ye miserable
men, why do you sit in that seat ? ' But his
delight is in the law of the Lord; and in His
law doth he meditate day and night. And
he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers
of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his
season: his leaf also shall not wither; and
whatsoever he doeth shall prosper. The un-
godly are not so: but are like the chaff which
the wind driveth away.' He blindeth their
eyes, so that they should not see. ' There-
fore the ungodly shall not stand in the judg-
ment, nor sinners in the congregation of the
righteous. For the Lord knoweth the way of
the righteous: but the way of the ungodly
shall perish.' ''"

loS, AuGUSTiN answered: Who is there in
the Scriptures that would not distinguish be-
tween these tw^o classes of men ? But you
slanderously charge the corn with the offenses
of the chaff; and being yourselves mere chaff,
you boast yourselves to be the only corn. But
the true prophets declare that both these class-
es have been mingled together throughout
the whole world, that is, throughout the whole
corn-field of the Lord, until the winnowing

• Et st<pe7- caihedratn pesiilentice, cp. Hieron.

- Ps. i.

which is to take place on the day of judgment.
But I advise you to read that first Psalm in
the Greek version, and then you will not ven-
ture to reproach the whole world with being
of the party of IMacarius; because you will
perhaps come to understand of what Macarius
there is a party among all the saints, who
throughout all nations are blessed in the seed
of Abraham. For what stands in our Ian.
guage as " Blessed is the man," is in Greek
Mo.y.djno<i a-jrip. But that Macarius who offends
you, if he is a bad man, neither belongs to
this division, nor is to its prejudice. But if
he is a good man, let him prove his own
work, that he may have glory in himself
alone, and not in another.^

Chap. 47. — 109. Petilianus said: " But
the same Psalmist has sung the praises of our
baptism. 'The Lord is my shepherd, I shall
not want. He maketh me to lie down in the
green pastures: He leadeth me beside the
still waters. He restoreth my soul: He lead-
eth me in the paths of righteousness for His
name's sake. Yea, though I walk through
the valley of the shadow of death,' — though
the persecutor, he means, should slay me, —
' I will fear no evil; for Thou art with me;
Thy rod and Thy staff comfort me.' It was
by this that it conquered Goliath, being armed
with the anointing oil. ' Thou hast prepared
a table before me in the presence of mine
enemies: Thou anointest my head with oil;
my cup runneth over. Surely goodness and
mercy shall follow me all the days of my life;
and I will dwell in the house of the Lord for
ever.' ""

no. AuGUSTiN answered: This psalm
speaks of those who receive baptism aright,
and use as holy what is so holy. For those
words have no reference even to Simon
Magus, who yet received the same holy bap-
tism; and because he would not use it in a
holy way, he did not therefore pollute it, or
show that in such cases it should be repeated.
But since you have made mention of Goliath,
listen to the psalm which treats of Goliath
himself, and see that he is portrayed in a new
song; for there it is said, " I will sing a new
song unto Thee, O God: upon a psaltery, and
an instrument of ten strings, will I sing praise
unto Thee. "5 And see whether he belongs
to this song who refuses to communicate with
the whole earth. For elsewhere it is said,
" O sing unto the Lord a new song; sing unto
the Lord, all the earth." '^ Therefore the
whole earth, with whom you are not in unity,

m.^

3 Gal. vi. 4.
5 Ps. cxliv. 9.

4 Ps. xxiii.
6 Ps. xcvi. I.

CiiAr. XLVIIL] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

559

sings the

new song.

And

these too are the
words of the whole earth, " The Lord is my
s.iepherd, I shall not want," etc. These are
I not the words of the tares, though thty be
endured until the harvest in the same crop.
I'ney are not the words of the chaff, but of
I tlie wheat, although they are nourished by
one and the same rain, and are threshed out
on the same threshing-floor at the same
i time, till they shall be separated the one from
tie other by the winnowing at the last day.
.\nd yet these both assuredly have the same
baptism, though they are not the same them-
selves. But if your party also were the
Cnurch of God, you would certainly confess
tiat this psalm has no application to the in-
furiated bands of the Circumcelliones. Or if
tiiey too themselves are led through the paths
f)f righteousness, why do you deny that they
are your associates, when you are reproached
v.ith them, although, for the most part, you
L Mnsole yourselves for the scantiness of vour
^ ction, not by the rod and staff of the Lord,
tut by the cudgels of the Circumcelliones,
w ith which you think that you are safe even
r-ainst the Roman laws, — to bring oneself
1 1:0 collision with which is surely nothing less
tnan to walk through the valley of the shadow
of death? But he with whom the Lord is,
fears no evils. Surely, however, you will not
venture to say that the words which are sung
i this song belong even to those infuriated
\ en, and yet you not only acknowledge, but
ostentatiously set forth the fact that they have
baptism. These words, therefore, are not
used by any who are not refreshed by the
holy water, as are all the righteous men of
God; not by those who are brought to de-
struction by using it, as was that magician
when baptized by Philip: and yet the water
itself in both kinds of men is the same, and
of the same degree of sanctity. These words
are not used except by those who will belong
to the right hand; but yet both sheep and
goats feed in the same pasture under one
Shepherd, until they shall be separated, that
they may receive their due reward. These
words are not used except by those who, like
Peter, receive life from the table of the Lord,
not judgment, as did Judas; and yet the sup-
per was itself the same to both, but it was
not of the same profit to both, because they
were not one. These words are not used ex-
cept by those who, by being anointed with the
sacred oil, are blessed in spirit also, as was
David; not merely consecrated in the body
only, as was Saul: and yet, as they had both
received the same outward sign, it was not
the sacrament, but the personal merit that
was different in the two cases. These words

are not used except by those who, with con-
verted heart, receive the cup of the Lord unto
eternal life; not by those who eat and drink
damnation to themselves, as the apostle says: '
and yet, though they are not one, the cup
which they receive is one, exerting its power
on the martyrs that they should obtain a
heavenly reward, not on the Circumcelliones,
that they should mark precipices with death.
Remember, therefore, that the characters of
bad men in no wise interfere with the virtue
of the sacraments, so that their holiness should
either be destroyed, or even diminished; but
that they injure the unrighteous men them-
selves, that they should have them as wit-
nesses of their damnation, not as aids to
health. For beyond all doubt you should
have taken into consideration the actual con-
cluding words of this psalm, and have under-
stood that, on account of those who forsake
the faith after they have been baptized, it
cannot be said by all who receive holy bap-
tism that " I will dwell in the house of the
Lord for ever: " and yet, whether they abide
in the faith, or whether they have fallen
away, though they themselves are not one,
their baptism is one, and though they them-
selves are not both holy, yet the baptism in
both is holy; because even apostates, if they
return, are not baptized as though they had
lost the sacrament, but undergo humiliation,
because they have done a despite to it which
remains in them.

Chap. 48. — iii, Petilianus said: "Yet
that you should not call yourselves holy, in
the first place, I declare that no one has holi-
ness who has not led a life of innocence."

112, AuGUSTiN answered: Show us the tri-
bunal where you have been enthroned as
judge, that the whole world should stand for
trial before you, and with what eyes you have
inspected and discussed, I do not say the con-
sciences, but even the acts of all men, that
you should say that the whole world has lost
its innocence. He who was carried up as far
as the third heaven says, "Yea, I judge not
mine own self;" - and do you venture to pro-
nounce sentence on the whole world, through-
out which the inheritance of Christ is spread
abroad ? In the next place, if what you have
said appears to you to be sufficiently certain,
that " no one has holiness who has not led a
life of innocence," I would ask you, if Saul
had not the holiness of the sacrament, what
was in him that David reverenced? But if he
had innocence, why did he persecute the in-
nocent ? For it was on account of the sanctity

I I Cor. xi. 29.

= I Cor. iv. 3.

56o

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

of his anointing that David honored him
while alive, and avenged him after he was
dead; and because he cut off so much as a
scrap from his garment, he trembled with a
panic-stricken heart. Here you see that Saul
had not innocence, and j^et he had holiness,
— not the personal holiness of a holy life (for
that no one can have without innocence), but
the holiness of the sacrament of God, which
is holy even in unrighteous men.

Chap. 49. — 113. Petilianus said : "For,
granting that yon faithless ones are acquainted
with the law, without any prejudice to the law
itself, I may say so much as this, the devil
knows it too. For in the case of righteous
Job he answered the Lord God concerning
the law as though he were himself righteous,
as it is written, "And the Lord said unto
Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job,
that there is none like him in the earth, a
man without malice, a true worshipper of God,
abstaining from every evil; and still he holdeth
fast his integrity, although thou movedst m^e
against him, to destroy him without cause?"
And Satan answered the Lord, Skin for skin,
yea, all that a man hath will he give for his
life. Behold he speaks in legal phrase, even
when he is striving against the law. And a
second time he endeavored thus to tempt the
Lord Christ with his discourse, as it is written,
' The devil taketh Jesus into the holy city,
and setteth Him on a pinnacle of the temple,
and saith unto Him, If thou be the Son of
God, cast thyself down: for it is written. He
shall give His angels charge concerning thee;
and in their hands they shall bear thee up,
lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a
stone. Jesus said unto him. It is written
again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy
God.'= You know the law, I say, as did the
devil, who is conquered in his endeavors, and
blushes in his deeds."

114. AuGUSTiN answered: I might indeed
ask of you in what law the words are written
which the devil used when he was uttering
calumnies against the holy man Job, if the
position which I am set to prove were this,
that you yourself are unacquainted with the
law which you assert the devil to have known
but as this is not the question at issue be-
tween us, I pass it by. But you nave endeav-
ored in such sort to prove that the devil is
skilled in the law, as though we maintained
that all who know the law are just. Accord-
ingly, I do not see in what manner you are
assisted by what you have chosen to quote
concerning the devil, — unless, indeed, it may

1 Job. ii. 3, 4.

Matt. iv. 5-7.

be that we should be thereby reminded how
you imitate the devil himself. For as he
brought forward- the words of the law against
the Author of the law, so you also out of the
words of the law bring accusation against men
whom you do not know, that you may resist
the promises of God which are made in that
very self-same law. Then I should be glad
if you would tell me in whose honor do those
confessors of yours achieve their martyrdom,
when they throw themselves over precipices,
— in honor of Christ, who thrust the devil
from Him when he made a like suggestion, or
rather in honor of the devil himself, who sug-
gested such a deed to Christ ? There are two
especially vile and customary deaths resorted
to by those who kill themselves, — hanging
and the precipice. You assuredly said in the
earlier part of this epistle, " The traitor hung
himself: he left this death to all who are like
him " This has no application whatever to
us; for we refuse to reverence with the name
of martyr any who have strangled themselves.
With how much greater show of reason mioht
we say against you. That master of all trai-
tors, the devil, wished to persuade Christ to
throw Himself headlong down, and was re-
pulsed! What, therefore, must we say of
those whom he persuaded with success ?
What, indeed, except that they are the ene-
mies of Christ, the friends of the devil, the
disciples of the seducer, the fellow-disciples
of the traitor ? For both have learned to kill
themselves from the same master, — Judas by
hanging himself, the others by throwing them-
selves over precipices.

Chap. 50. — 115. PETU^iANUSsaid: "But that
we may destroy your arguments one by one,
if you call yourselves by the name of priests,
it was said by the Lord God, through the
mouth of His prophet, ' The vengeance of
the Lord is upon the false priests.' "

116, AuGUSTiN answered: Seek rather
what you may say with truth, not whence you
may derive abusive words; and what you may
teach, not what reproaches you may cast in
our teeth.

Chap. 51. — 117. Petilianus said: " If you
wretched men claim for yourselves a seat, as
we said before, you assuredly have that one
of which the prophet and psalmist David
speaks as being the seat of the scornful ^
For to you it is rightly left, seeing that the
holy cannot sit therein.'

118. AuGUSTiN answered: Here again you
do not see that this is no kind of argument,

3 Ps. i. I.

Chap. LIII.J

THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

561

! but empty abuse. For this is what I said a
I little while ago. You utter the words of the
I law, but take no heed against whom you utter
! them; just as the devil uttered the words of
the law, but failed to perceive to whom he ut-
tered them. He wished to thrust down our
Head, who was presently to ascend on high;
but you wish to reduce to a small fraction the
body of that same Head which is dispersed
throughout the entire world. Certainly you
yourself said a little time before that we know
the law, and speak in legal terms, but blush
in our deeds. Thus much indeed you say
without a proof of anything; but even though
you were to prove it of some men, you would
not be entitled to assert it of these others.
However, if all men throughout all the world
were of the character which you most vainly
charge them with, what has the chair done to
you of the Roman Church, in which Peter
sat, and which Anastasius fills to-day; or the
chair of the Church of Jerusalem, in which
James once sat, and in which John sits to-
day, with which we are united in catholic
unity, and from which you have severed your-
selves by your mad fury ? Why do you call
the apostolic chair a seat of the scornful ? If
it is on account of the men whom you believe
to use the words of the law without perform-
ing it, do you find that our Lord Jesus Christ
was moved by the Pharisees, of whom He
says, " They say, and do not," to do any des-
pite to the seat in which they sat ? Did He
not commend the seat of Moses, and main-
tain the honor of the seat, while He convicted
those that sat in it? For He says, "They
sit in Moses' seat: all therefore whatsoever
they bid you observe, that observe and do;
but do not ye after their works: for they say,
and do not."' If you were to think of these
things, you would not, on account of men
whom you calumniate, do despite to the
apostolic seat, in which you have no share.
But what else is conduct like yours but ignor-
ance of what to say, combined with want of
power to abstain from evil-speaking?

Chap. 52. — 119. Petilianus said: " If you
suppose that you can offer sacrifice, God Him-
self thus speaks of you as most abandoned
sinners : ' The wicked man,' He says, ' that
sacrificeth a calf is as if he cut off a dog's
neck; and he that offereth an oblation, as if
he offered swine's blood. '= Recognize herein
your sacrifice, who have already poured out
human blood. And again He says, 'Their
sacrifices shall be unto them as the bread of
mourners; all that eat thereof shall be pol-
luted/"3

' Matt. xKiii. 2, 3.
•3.5

Isa. Ixvi, 3,

3 Hos. ix. 4.

1 30. AuGUSTiN answered : We say that in
the case of every man the sacrifice that is of-
fered partakes of the character of him who
approaches to offer it, or approaches to par-
take of it; and that those eat of the sacrifices
of such men, who in approaching to them
partake of the character of those who offer
them. Therefore, if a bad man offer sacrifice
to God, and a good man receive it at his
hands, the sacrifice is to each man of such
character as he himself has shown himself to
be, since we find it also written that "■ unto
the pure all things are pure." ■* In accordance
with this true and catholic judgment, you too
are free from pollution by the sacrifice of
Optatus, if you disapproved of his deeds.
For certainly his bread was the bread of
mourners, seeing that all Africa was mourning
under his iniquities. But the evil involved
in the schism of all your party makes this
bread of mourners common to vou all. For.
according to the judgment of your Council,
Felicianus of Musti was a shedder of man's
blood. For you said, in condemning them,^
" Their feet are swift to shed blood. "^ See
therefore what kind of sacrifice he offers whom
you hold to be a priest, when you have your-
selves convicted him of sacrilege. And if
you think that this is in no way to your pre-
judice, I would ask you how the emptiness of
your calumnies can be to the prejudice of the
whole world ?

Chap. 53. — 121. Petilianus said: " If you
make prayer to God, or utter supplication, it
profits you absolutely ix)thing whatsoever.
For your blood-stained conscience makes your
feeble prayers of no effect; because the Lord
God regards purity of conscience more than
the words of supplication, according to the say-
ing of the Lord Christ, ' Not every one that
saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the
kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will
of my Father which is in heaven.'' The will
of God unquestionably is good, for therefore
we pray as follows in the holy prayer, ' Thy
will be done in earth, as it is in heaven,'*
that, as His will is good, so it may confer on
us whatever may be good. You therefore do
not do the will of God, because you do what
is evil every day.''

122. AuGUSTiN answered: If we on our
side were to utter against you all that you
assert against us, would not any one who
heard us consider that we were rather insane
litigants than Christian disputants, if he him-
self were in his senses ? We do not, there-

4 Tit. i. 15. 5 In the Council of Rasai.

t' Ps. .\iv. 3, cp. LXX. and Hieron. 7 Matt. vii. 21

^ -Matt. vi. 10.

562

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

fore, render for railing. For it is not fitting
that the servant of the Lord should strive;
but he should be gentle unto all men, willing
to learn, in meekness instructing those that
oppose themselves.' If, therefore, we re-
proach you with those who daily do what is
evil among you, we are guilty of striving un-
befittingly, accusing one for the sins of an-
other. But if we admonish you, that as you
are unwilling that these things should be
brought against yourselves, so you should
abstain from bringing against us the sins of
other men, we then in meekness are instruct-
ing you, solely in the hope that some time
you will return to a better mind.

Chap. 54. — 123. Petilianus said: ''But if
it should so happen, though whether it be so
I cannot say, that you cast out devils, neither
will this in you do any good; because the
devils themselves yield neither to your faith
nor to your merits, but are driven out in the
name of the Lord Jesus Christ."

124. AuGUSTiN answered: God be thank-
ed that you have at length confessed that the
invocation of the name of Christ may be of
profit for the salvation of others, even though
it be invoked by sinners! Hence, therefore,
you may understand that when the name of
Christ is invoked, the sins of one man do not
stand in the way of the salvation of another.
But to determine in what manner we invoke
the name of Christ, we require not your judg-
ment, but the judgment of Christ Himself
who is invoked by us; for He alone can know
in what spirit He is invoked. Yet from His
own words we are assured that He is invoked
to their salvation by all nations, who are bless-
ed in the seed of Abranam.

Ch\p. 55. — 125. Petilianus said: "Even
though you do very virtuous actions, and per-
form miraculous works, yet on account of your
wickedness the Lord does not know you; even
so, according to the words of the Lord Him-
self, 'jSIany will say to ine ui that day. Lord,
Lord, have we not prophesi'ed in Thy name?
and in Thy name have cast out devils ? and
in Thy name done many wonderful works ?
And then will I profess unto them, I never
knew you; depart from me, ye that work in-
iquity.' " =

126. AuGUSTiN answered: We acknowledge
the word of the Lord. Hence also the apos-
tle says, "Though I have all faith, so that I
could remove mountains, and have not chari-
ty, I am nothing. "3 Here therefore we must
'inquire who it is that has charity: you will

I 2 Tim. li. 24, 25

Matt. vii. 22, 23.

3 I Cor. -xiii. 2.

find that it is no one else but those who are
lovers of unity. For as to the driving out of
devils, and as to the working of miracles, see-
ing that very many do not do such things who
yet belong to the kingdom of God, and very
many do them who do not belong to it, neither
our party nor your party have any cause for
boasting, if any of them chance to have this
power, since the Lord did not think it right that
even the apostles, who could truly do such
things both to profit and salvation, should
boast in things like this, when He says to them,
"Li this rejoice not, that the spirits are subjecc
unto you; but rather rejoice, because your
names are written in heaven. "•* Wherefore
all those things which you have advanced
from the writings of the gospel I also might
repeat to you, if I saw you working the pow-
erful acts of signs and miracles; and so might
you repeat them to me, if you saw me doing
things of a like sort. Let us not, therefore,
say one to another what may equally be said
on the other side as well; and, putting aside
all quibbles, since we are inquiring where the
Church of Christ is to be found, let us listen
to the words of Christ Himself, who redeem-
ed it with His own blood: "Ye shall be wit-
nesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all
Judea, and in Samaria, and even in the whole
earth. "s You see then who it is with whom
a man refuses to communicate who will not
communicate with this Church, which is spread
throughout all the world, if at least you hear
whose words these are. For what is a great-
er proof of madness than to hold commun-
ion with the sacraments of the Lord, and to
refuse to hold communion with the words of
the Lord ? Such men at any rate are likely to
say. In Thy name have we eaten and drunken,
and to hear the words, "I never knew you,''*
seeing that they eat His body and drink His
blood in the sacrament, and do not recognize
in the gospel His members which are spread
abroad throughout the earth, and therefore
are not themselves counted among them in
the judgment.

Chap. 56. — 127. Petilianus said: "But
even if, as you yourselves suppose, you are
following the law of the Lord in purity, let us
nevertheless consider the question of the
most holy law itself in a legal form. The
Apostle Paul says, 'The law is good, if a man
use it lawfully. '7 What then does the law
say? 'Thou shalt not kill.' What Cain the
murderer did once, you have often done, m
slaying )'Our brethren.''

128. Augustin answered: We do not wish

4 Luke X. 20.

6 Matt. VII. 22, 23.

5 Acts i. 8.
7 I I'lm. I.

(:hap. lviii.] the letters of petilian, the doxatist.

563

: to be like you : for there are not wanting
words wliich might be uttered, as you too
litter these; and known also, for you do not
know these; and set forth in the conduct of a
life, as these are not set forth by you.

Chap. 57. — 129. Petilianus said: "It is
written, 'Thou shalt not commit adultery.'
Kach one of you, even though he be chaste
in his body, yet in spirit is an adulterer, be-
cause he pollutes his holiness."

130. AuGUSTiN answered: These words
also might be spoken with truth against cer.
tain both of our number and of yours; but if
t/ieir deeds are condemned by us and you
dlike, they belong to neither us nor you. But
you wish that what you say against certain
men, without proving it even in their especial
case, should be taken just as if you had
c-stablished it, — not in the case of some who
liave fallen away from the seed of Abraham,
hut in reference to all the nations of the earth
who are blessed in the seed of Abraham.

Chap. 58. — 131. Petilianus said: "It is
written, 'Thou shalt not bear false witness
against thy neighbor.' When you falsely
declare to the kings of this world that we hold
your opinions, do you not make up a false-
hood ? "

132. AuGUSTiN answered: If those are not
our opinions which you hold, neither were they
your opinions which you received from the fol-
lowers of Maximianus. But if they were there-
fore yours, because they were guilty of a sacri-
legious schism in not communicating with the
party of Donatus, take heed what ground you
occupy, and with whose inheritance you refuse
communion, and consider what answer you can
make, not to the kings of this world, but to
Christ )'Our King. Of Him it is said, "He
shall have dominion also from sea to sea, and
from the river unto the ends of the earth."'
From what river does it mean, save that where
He was baptized, and where the dove de-
scended on Him, that mighty token of charity
and unity ? But you refuse communion with
this unity, and occupy as yet the place of
unity; and you bring us into disfavor with the
kings of this world in making use of the
edicts of the proconsul to expel your schis-
matics from the place of the party of Donatus.
These are not mere words flying at random
through the empty void: the men are still
alive, the states bear witness to the fact, the
archives of the proconsuls and of the several
towns are quoted in evidence of it. Let then
the voice of calumny be at length silent, which

' Ps. Lxxii. 8.

would bring up against the whole earth the
kings of this world, through whose procon-
suls you, yourselves a fragment, would not
spare the fragment which was separated from
you. When then we say that you hold our
opinions, we are not shown to be bearing false
witness, unless you can show that we are not
in the Church of Christ, which indeed you
never cease alleging, but never will be able
to establish; nay, in real truth, when you say
this, you are bringing a charge of false wit-
ness no longer against us, but against the
Lord Himself. For we are in the Church
which was foretold by His own testimony,
and where He bore witness to His witnesses,
saying, ' Ye shall be witnesses unto me both
in Jerusalem and in all Judea, and in Sama-
ria, and even in the whole earth." But you
show yourselves to be false witnesses not only
from this, that you resist this truth, but also
in the very trial in which you joined issue with
the schism of Maximianus. For if you were
acting according to the law of Christ, how
much more consistently do certain Christian
emperors frame ordinances in accordance with
it, if even pagan proconsuls can follow its be-
hests in passing judgment? But if you
thought that even the laws of an earthly em-
pire were to be summoned to your aid, we do
not blame you for this. It is what Paul did
v/hen he bore witness before his adversaries
that he was a Roman citizen.'' But I would
ask by what earthly laws it is ordained that
the followers of Maximianus should be driven
from their place? You will find no law what-
ever to this effect. But, in point of fact, you
have chosen to expel them under laws which
have been passed against heretics, and against
yourselves among their number. You, as
though by superior strength, have prevailed
against the weak. Whence they, being wholly
powerless, say that they are innocent, like the
wolf in the power of the lion. Yet surely you
could not use laws which were passed against
yourselves as instruments against others, ex-
cept by the aid of false witness. For if those
laws are founded on truth, then do you come
down from the position which you occupy;
but if on falsehood, why did you use them to
drive others from the Church? But how if
they both are founded on truth, and could not
be used by you for the exinilsion of others
except with the aid of falsehood ? For that
the judges might submit to their authority,
they were willing to expel heretics from the
Church, from which they ought first to have
expelled yourselves; but you declared your-
selves to be Catholics, that you might es-

' Acts x.\ii. 25.

5^4

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

cape the severity of the laws which you em-
ployed to oppress others. It is for you to
determine what you appear to yourselves
among yourselves; at any rate, under those
laws you are not Catholics. Why then have
you either made them false, if they are true,
by your false witness, or made use of them, if
they are false, for the oppression of others ?

Chap. 59. — 133. Petilianus said: "It is
written, ' Thou shalt not covet anything that
is thy neighbor's.' ' You plunder what is
ours, that you may have it for your own.''

134. AuGUSTiN answered: All things of
which unity was in possession belong to none
other than ourselves, who remain in unity,
not in accordance with the calumnies of men,
but with the words of Christ, in whom all the
nations of the whole earth are blessed. Nor
do w^e separate ourselves from the society of
the wheat, on account of the unrighteous men
whom we cannot separate from the wheat of
the Lord before the winnowing at the judg-
ment; and if there are any things which you
who are cut off begin already to possess, we
do not, because the Lord has given to us
what has been taken away from you, there-
fore covet our neighbors' goods, seeing that
they have been made ours by the authority of
Him to whom all things belong; and they
are rightly ours, for you were wont to use
them for purposes of schism, but we use them
for the promotion of unity. Otherwise your
party might reproach even the first people of
God with coveting their neighbors' goods,
seeing that they were driven forth before their
face by the power of God, because they used
the land amiss; and the Jews in turn them-
selves, from whom the kingdom was taken
away, according to the words of the Lord,
and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits
thereof,- may bring a charge against that
nation of coveting their neighbors' goods, be-
cause the Church of Christ is in possession
where the persecutors of Christ were wont to
reign. And, after all, when it has been said
to yourselves, You are coveting the goods of
other men, because you have driven out from
the basilicas the followers of Alaximianus,
you are at a loss to find any answer that you
can make.

Chap. 60, — 135. Petilianus said: *' Un-
der what law, then, do you make out that you
are Christians, seeing that you do what is
contrary to the law? "

136, AuGusTiN answered: You are anx-
ious for strife, and not for argument.

lE.^

XX. 13-17.

Matt.

XXI. 43.

Chap. 61. — 137. Petilianus said: "But
the Lord Christ says, ' Whosoever shall do
and teach them, the same shall be called the
greatest in the kingdom of heaven.' But He
condemns you wretched men as follows:
' Whosoever shall break one of these com-
mandments, he shall be called the least in the
kingdom of heaven.' "

138. AuGUSTiN answered: When you hap-
pen to quote the testimony of Scripture as
other than it really is, and it does not bear
on the question which is at issue between us,
I am not greatly concerned; but when it in-
terferes with the matter on hand, unless it is
quoted truly, then I think that you have no
right to find fault if I remind you how the
passage really stands. For you must be aware
that the verse which you quoted is not as you
quoted it, but rather thus: " Whosoever shall
break one of these least commandments, and
shall teach men so, he shall be called the
least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoso-
ever shall do and teach them, the same shall

be called

great

in the kingdom of heaven.

And immediately He continues, " For I say
unto you, That except your righteousness
shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes
and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into
the kingdom of heaven." ^ For elsewhere
He shows and proves of the Pharisees that
they say and do not. It is these, therefore,
to whom He is referring also here, when He
said, "Whosoever shall break one of these
commandments, and shall teach men so," —
that is, shall teach in words what he has vio-
lated in deeds; whose righteousness He says
that our righteousness must excel, in that we
must both keep the commandments and teach
men so. And yet not even on account of
those Pharisees, with whom you compare us,
— not from any motives of prudence, but from
malice, — did our Lord enjoin that the seat of
Moses should be deserted, which seat He
doubtless meant to be a figure of His own;
for He said indeed that they who sat in
Moses' seat were ever saying and not doing,
but warns the people to do what they say, and
not to do what they do," lest the chair, with
all its holiness, should be deserted, and the
unity of the flock divided through the faith-
lessness of the shepherds.

Chap. 62. — 139. Petilianus said: "And
again it is written, ' Every sin which a man
shall sin is without the body; but he that
sinneth in the Holy Spirit, it shall not be for-
given him, neither in this world, neither in the
world to come.' "

Matt.

xxm. 2,

Chap. LXV.] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DOXATIST

56-

140. AuGUSTiN answered: This too is not
written as you have quoted it, and see how
far it has led you astray. The apostle, writ-
ing to the Corinthians, says, " Every sin that [
a man doeth is without the body; but he that
committeth fornication sinneth against his
own body."' But this is one thing, and that
is another which the Lord said in the gospel:
"All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be
forgiven unto men : but whosoever speaketh
against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be for-
given him, neither in this world, neither in
the world to come."= But you have begun a
sentence from the writing of the apostle, and
ended it as though it were one from the gos-
pel, which I fancy you have done not with
any intention to deceive, but through mis-
take; for neither passage has any bearing on
the matter in hand. And v\'hy you have said
this, and in what sense you have said it, I am
wholly unable to perceive, unless it be that,
whereas you had said above that all were con-
demned by the Lord who had broken any one
of His commandments, you have considered
since how many there are in your party who
break not one but many of them; and lest an
objection should be brought against you on
that score, you have sought, by way of sur-
passing the difficulty, to bring in a distinction
of sins, whereby it might be seen that it is
one thing to break a commandment in re-
spect of which pardon may easily be obtained,
another thing to sin against the Holy Ghost,
which shall receive no forgiveness, either in
this world or in the world to come. In your
dread, therefore, of infection from sin, you
were unwilling to pass this over in silence;
and again, in your dread of a question too
deep for your powers, you wish to touch
cursorily on it in passing, in such a state of
agitation, that, just as men who are setting
about a task in haste, and consequent con-
fusion, are wont to fasten their dress or shoes
awry, so you have not thought fit either to see
what belongs to what, or in what context or
what sense the passage which you quote oc-
curs. But what is the nature of that sin
which shall not be forgiven, either in this
world or in the world to come, you are so far
from knowing, that, though you believe that
we are actually living in it, you yet promise
us forgiveness of it through your baptism.
And yet how could this be possible, if the sin
be of such a nature that it cannot be for-
given, either in this world or in the world to
come ?

wherein do you fulfill the commandments of
God ? The Lord Christ said, ' Blessed are
the poor in spirit; for theirs is the kingdom
of heaven.' But you by your malice in per-
secution breathe forth the riches of madness."
142. AuGUSTiN answered : Address that
rather to your own Circumcelliones.

Chap. 64. — 143. I'lynnANUSsaid: "'Bless-
ed are the meek : for they shall inherit the
earth.' You therefore, not being meek, have
lost both heaven and earth alike."

144. AuGUSTiN answered: Again and again
you may hear the Lord saying, "Ye shall be
witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all
Judea, and in Samaria, and even in the whole
earth." 3 How is it, then, that those men
have not lost heaven and earth, who, in order
to avoid communicating with all the nations
of the earth, despise the words of Him that
sitteth in heaven ? For, in proof of your
meekness, it is not your words but the cud-
gels of the Circumcelliones which should be
examined. You will say. What has that to
do with us ? Just as though we were mak-
ing the remark with any other object except
to extract that answer from you. For the
reason that your schism is a valid charge
against you is that you do not allow that you
are chargeable with another's sin, whereas
you have separated from us for no other rea-
son but that you charge us with the sins of
other men.

Chap. 65. — 145. PETH^iANUSsaid : " 'Bless-
ed are they that mourn: for they shall be com-
forted.' You, our butchers, are the cause of
mourning in others : you do not mourn your-
selves."

146. AuGUSTiN answered: Consider for a
short space to how many, and with what in-
tensity, the cry of "Praises be to God,"
proceeding from your armed men, has caused
others to mourn.'* Do you say again. What
is that to us ? Then I too will rejoin again
in your own words, What is that to us ? What
is it to all the nations of the earth ? What is
it to those who praise the name of the Lord
from the rising of the sun to the setting of
the same? What is it to all the earth, which
sings a new song ? What is it to the seed of
Abraham, in which all the nations of the
earth are blessed ?5 And so the sacrilege of

Chap. 63. — 141. Petilianus said :

But

' I Cor. \'i. iS.

2 Matt. xii. 31, 32.

3 Acts i. 8.

4 The older editions have, " Qiiain tnultum ct quantum luc-
tutn di'derint Di-o (^rasinus, alone ijco) iiiKiirs amatorum vcs-
trorum : " " How much and howRreat Kr'cf have the praises of

rhe liencdictines restored tlx- read-

Di'O lauiirs ar-
ng the cry of the Circum-
ceiiiones. Cp. Aug. in' Ps. cxxxii. 6 : " .-J quihus f'lus timctur
Di-o laudfs i/uam fremitus Uonis ;" and id.: " Veo laudes ves~
truiit plorant hcmines.'^

5 Gen. xxii. iS.

trorum : How mucii ano nowRreat

your lovers caused to God ?" The liencd
ing translated above (" Qiinm uiultis
matorum vcstrorum "), Deo laudi-s beir

566

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

your schism is chargeable on you, just be-
cause the evil deeds of your companions are
not chargeable on you; and because you are
from this that the deeds of those on whose
account you separated from the world, even if
you proved your charges to be true, do not
involve the world in sin.

Chap. 66. — 147. PETiLiANUSsaid: " 'Bless-
ed are they which do hunger and thirst after
righteousness: for they shall be filled.' To
you it seems to be righteousness that you
thirst after our blood."

148. AuGUSTiN answered: What shall I say
unto thee, O man, except that thou art calum-
nious ? The unity of Christ, indeed, is
hungering and thirsting after all of you; and
I would that it might swallow you up, for then
would you be no longer heretics.

Chap. 67. — 149. Petilianus said: " 'Bless-
ed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mer-
cy.' But how shall I call you merciful when you
inflict punishment on the righteous ? Shall I
not rather call you a most unrighteous com-
munion, so long as you pollute souls ? "

150. AuGUSTiN answered: You have proved
neither point, — neither that you yourselves
are righteous, nor that we inflict punishment
on even the unrighteous; and yet, even as
false flattery is generally cruel, so just correc-
tion is ever merciful. For whence is that
which you do not understand: "Let the
righteous smite me, it shall be a kindness;
and let him reprove me " ? For while he says
this of the severity of merciful correction, the
Psalmist immediately went on to say of the
gentleness of destructive flattery, "But the
oil of sinners shall not break my head."' Do
you therefore consider whither you are called,
and from what you are summoned away. For
how do you know what feelings he entertains
towards you whom you suppose to be cruel ?
But whatever be his feelings, every one must
bear his own burden both with us and with you.
But I would have you cast away the burden
of schism which you all of you are bearing,
that you may bear your good burdens in
unity; and I would bid you mercifully cor-
rect, if you should have the power, all those
Wfxo are bearing evil burdens; and, if this be
beyond your power, I would bid you bear
with them in peace.

Chap. 68. — 151. Petilianus said: " 'Bless-
ed are the pure in heart : for they shall see
God.' When will you see God, who are pos-

I Ps. cxli. 5, LXX., cf. Hieron.

sessed with blindness in the impure malice of
your hearts ?"

152. AUGUSTIN answered: Wherefore say
you this^ Can it be that we reproach all
nations with the dark and hidden things which
are declared by men, and do not choose to
understand the manifest sayings which God
spake in olden time of all the nations of the
earth? This is indeed great blindness of
heart; and if you do not recognize it in your-
selves, that is even greater blindness.

Chap. 69.— 153. Petilianus said: "'Bless-
ed are the peacemakers; for they shall be call-
ed the children of God.'^ You make a pre-
tence of peace by your wickedness, and seek
unity by war."

154. AuGUSTiN answered: We do not make
a pretense of peace by wickedness, but we
preach peace out of the gospel; and if you
were at peace with it, you would be at peace
also with us. The risen Lord, when present-
ing Himself to the disciples, not only that
they should gaze on Him with their eyes, but
also that they should handle Him with their
hands, began His discourse to them with the
words, "Peace be unto you." And how
this peace itself was to be maintained, He
disclosed to them in the words which followed.
For " then opened He their understanding,
that they might understand the Scriptures,
and said unto them. Thus is it written, and
thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise
from the dead the third day; and that repent-
ance and remission of sins should be preached
in His name among all nations, beginning at
Jerusalem." 3 If you will keep peace with
these words, you will not be at variance with
us. For if we seek unity by war, our war
could not be praised in more glorious terms,
seeing that it is written, " Thou shalt love thy
neighbor as thyself." * And again it is written,
"No man ever yet hated his own flesh." ^
And yet the flesh lusteth against the spirit,
and the spirit against the flesh. '^ But if no
man ever yet hated his own flesh, and yet a
man lusteth against his own flesh, here you
have unity sought by war, that the body,
being subject to correction, may be brought
under submission. But what the spirit does
against the flesh, waging war with it, not in
hatred but in love, this those who are spiritual
do against those who are carnal, that they
may do towards them what they do towards
themselves, because they love their neighbors
as neighbors indeed. But the war which the
spiritual wage is that correction which is in

2 Matt. V. 3-9.
4 Matt. xxii. 39.

3 Luke xxiv. 36, 45-47.

5 Eph. V. 20. * Gal. V. 17.

Chap. LXXIIL] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

;67

, love: their sword is the word of God. To
I such a war they are aroused by the trumpet
! of the apostle sounding with a mighty force:
•' Preach the word; be instant in season, out
; of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with all
'ong-suffering and doctrine."' See then that
e act not with the sword, but with the word.
I Hut you answer what is not true, while you
! accuse us falsely. You do not correct your
I own faults, and you bring against us those of
other men. Christ bears true witness con-
1 earning the nations of the earth; you, in op-
position to Christ, bear false witness against
tiie nations of the earth. If we were to be-
j lieve you rather than Christ, you would call
i us peacemakers; because we believe Christ
rather than you, we are said to make a pre-
t-nse of peace by our wickedness. And while
vou say and do such things as this, you have
[:\c further impu^Jence to quote the words,
■' Blessed are the peacemakers; for they shall
■ e called the children of God."

I Chap. 70. — 155. Petilianus said: " Though
the Apostle Paul says, ' I therefore, the pris-
oner of the Lord, beseech you, brethren, that
ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are
called, with all lowliness and meekness, with
long-suffering, forbearing one another in love;
endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in
the bond of peace.' "-

156. AuGUSTiN answered: If you would
not only say these words, but hearken to them
as well, you would put up even with known
evils for the sake of peace, instead of invent-
ing new ones for the sake of quarreling, if it
were only because you subsequently learned,
for the sake of the peace of Donatus, to put
up with the most flagrant and notorious wick-
edness of Optatus. What madness is this
that you display ? Those who are known are
borne with, that a fragment may not be fur-
ther split up; those of whom nothing is known
are defamed, that they themselves may not
remain in the undivided whole.

Chap. 71. — 157. Petilianus said: "To
you the prophet says, 'Peace, peace; and
where is there peace ? ' " 3

158. AuGUSTiN answered: It is you that
say this to us, not the prophet. We there-
fore answer you: If you ask where peace is to
be found, open your eyes, and see of whom it
is said, " He maketh wars to cease in all the
world."'* If you ask where peace is to be
found, open your eyes to see that city which
cannot be hidden, because it is built upon a
hill; open your eyes to see the mountain it-

■ 2 Tim. iv. 2.
3 Jer. viii. ii.

^ Eph. iv. 1-3.
4 Ps. xlvi. 9.

self, and let Daniel show it to you, growing
out of a small stone, and filling the whole
earth. 5 But when the prophet says to you,
"Peace, peace; and where is there peace?"
what will you show ? Will you show the party
of Donatus, unknown to the countless nations
to whom Christ is known ? It is surely not
the city which cannot be hid; and whence is
this, except that it is not founded on the
mountain ? " For He is our peace, who hath
made both one," * — not Donatus, who has
made one into two.

Chap. 72. — 159. Petilianus said: " * Bless-
ed are they which are persecuted for right-
eousness' sake; for theirs is the kingdom of
heaven. '7 You are not blessed; but you
make martyrs to be blessed, with whose souls
the heavens are filled, and the earth has
flourished with their memory. You therefore
do not honor them yourselves, but you pro-
vide us with objects of honor."

160. AuGUSTiN answered: The plain fact
is, that if it had not been said, " Blessed are
they which are persecuted for righteousness'
sake," but had been said instead, Blessed are
they who throw themselves over precipices,
then heaven would have been filled with your
martyrs. Of a truth we see many flowers on
the earth blooming from their bodies; but, as
the saying goes, the flower is dust and ashes.

Chap. 73. — 161. Petilianus said: "Since
then you are not blessed by falsifying the
commands of God, the Lord Christ condemns
you by His divine decrees: 'Woe unto you,
scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites ! for ye shut
up the kingdom of heaven against men: for
ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye
them that are entering to go in. Woe unto
you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites ! for
ye compass sea and land to make one prose-
lyte; and when he is made, ye make him two-
fold more the child of hell than yourselves.
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypo-
crites ! for ye pay tithe of mint, and anise,
and cummin, and have omitted the weightier
matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and
faith: these ought ye to have done, and not
to leave the other undone. Ye blind guides,
which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypo-
crites ! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres,
which indeed appear beautiful outwardly, but
are within full of dead men's bones, and of
all uncleanness. Even so ye also outwardly
appear righteous unto men, but within ye are
full of hypocrisy and iniquity.' "^

5 Dan. ii. 35. * Eph. ii. 14.

7 Matt. V. 10. 8 Matt, xxiii. 13, 15, 23, 24, 27, 28.

568

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

162. AuGUSTiN answered: Tell me whether
you have said anything which may not equally
be said against you in turn by any slanderous
and evil-speaking tongue. But from what has
been said by me before, any one who wishes
may find out that these things may be said
against you, not by way of empty abuse, but
with the support of truthful testimony. As,
however, the opportunity is presented to us,
we must not pass this by. There is no doubt
that to the ancient people of God circumcision
stood in the place of baptism. I ask, there-
fore, putting the case that the Pharisees,
against whom those words you quote are
spoken, had made some proselyte, who, if he
were to imitate them, would, as it is said, be-
come twofold more the child of hell than
themselves, supposing that he were to be
converted, and desire to imitate Simeon, or
Zacharias, or Nathanael, would it be neces-
sary that he should be circumcised again by
them ? And if it is absurd to put this case,
why, although in empty fashion and with
empty sounds you compare us to men like this,
do you nevertheless baptize after us ? But if
you are really men like this, how much better
and how much more in accordance with truth
do we act in not baptizing after you, as
neither was it right that those v/hom I have
mentioned should be circumcised after the
worst of Pharisees ! Furthermore, when such
men sit in the seat of Moses, for which the
Lord preserved its due honor, why do you
blaspheme the apostolic chair on account of
men whom, justly or unjustly, you compare
with these ?

Chap. 74.' — 163. Petilianus said: "But
these things do not alarm us Christians; for
of the evil deeds which you are destined to
commit we have before a warning given us
by the Lord Christ. ' Behold,' He says, ' I
send you forth as sheep in the midst of
wolves.'" You fill up the measure of the
madness of wolves, who either lay or are
preparing to lay snares against the Churches
in precisely the same way in which wolves,
with their mouths wide open against the fold,
even with destructive eagerness, breathe forth
panting anger from their jaws, suffused with
blood."

164. AuGUSTiN answered: I should be glad
to utter the same sentiment against you, but
not in the words which you have used: they
are too inappropriate, or rather mad. But
what was required was, that you should show
that we were wolves and that you were sheep,
not by the emptiest of evil-speaking, but by

I Matt. x. 16.

some distinct proofs. For when I too have
said. We are sheep, and you are wolves, do
you think that there is any difference caused
by tlie fact that you express the idea in swell-
ing words ? But listen whilst I prove what I
assert. For the Lord says in the gospel, as
you know full well, whether you please it or
not, " My sheep hear my voice, and follow
me." ^ There are many sayings of the Lord
on different subjects; but supposing, for ex-
ample, that any one were in doubt whether
the same Lord had risen in the body, and
His words were to be quoted where He says,
" Handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not
flesh and bones, as ye see me have; " — if even
after this he should be unwilling to acquiesce
in the belief that His body had risen from
the dead, surely such a man could not be
reckoned among the sheep of the Lord, be-
cause he would not hear His voice. And so
too now, when the question between us is.
Where is the Church ? whilst we quote the
words that follow in the same passage of the
gospel, where, after His resurrection. He
gave His body even to be handled by those
who were in doubt, in which He showed the
future wide extent of the Church, saying,
"Thus it is written, and thus it behoved
Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the
third day; and that repentance and remission
of sins should be preached in His name
throughout all nations, beginning at Jerusa-
lem;''^ whereas you will not communicate
with all nations, in whom these words have
been fulfilled, how are you the sheep of this
Shepherd, whose words you not only do not
obey when you have heard them, but even
fight against them ? And so we show to you
from this that you are not sheep. But listen
further whence we show }-ou that, on the con-
trary, you are wolves. For necessarily, when
it is shown by His own words where the
Church is to be found, it is also clear where
we must look for the fold of Christ. W^hen-
ever, therefore, any sheep separate themselves
from this fold, which is expressly pointed out
and shown to us by the unmistakeable
declaration of the Lord, — and that, I will not
say because of charges falsely brought, but
on account of charges brought, as no one can
deny, with great uncertainty against their
fellow-men, and consequently slay those
sheep which they have torn and alienated
from the life of unity and Christian love — is
it not evident that they are ravening wolves ?
But it will be said that these very men them-
selves praise and preach the Lord Christ.
They are therefore those of whom He says

2 John X. 27,

3 Luke x.xiv. 39, 46, 47.

-AP. LXXVIL] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAX, THE DOXATIST

569

Himself, "They come unto you in slieep's
I clothing, but inwardly they are ravening
! wolves. By their fruits ye shall know
i them." ' The sheep's clothing is seen in the!
■' praises of Christ; the fruits of their wolfish

nature in their slanderous teeth.

Chap. 75. — 165. Petiliaxus said: "O
wretched traditors ! Thus indeed it was fit-
ting that Scripture should be fulfilled. But
m you I grieve for this, that you have shown
vourselves worthy to fulfill the part of wick-
edness."

166. AuGUSTiN answered: I might rather
say, O wretched traditors ! if I were minded,
or rather if justice urged me to cast up against
all of you the deeds of some among your
i.umber. But as regards what bears on all of
you, O wretched heretics, I on my part will
quote the remainder of your words; for it is
written, " There must be also heresies among
you, that they which are approved may be
made manifest among you."- Therefore
" it was fitting thus that Scripture should be
fulfilled. But in you I grieve for this, that
Aou have shown yourselves worthy to fulfill
tiie part of wickedness."

Chap. 76. — 167. Petilianus said: "But
to us the Lord Christ, in opposition to your
deadly commands, commanded simple pa-
tience and harmlessness. For what says He ?
'A new commandment I give unto you. That
ye love one another; as I have loved you.
that ye. also love one another.' And again,
' By this shall all men know that ye are my
disciples, if ye have love one to another.' " ^

16S. AuGUSTiN answered: If you did not
transfer these v/ords, so widely differing from
your character, to the surface of your talk,
how could you be covering yourselves with
sheep's clothing?

Chap. 77. — 169. Petilianus said: "Paul
also, the apostle, whilst he was suffering fear-
ful persecutions at the hands of all nations,
endured even more grievous troubles at the
hands of false brethren, as he bears witness
of himself, being oftentimes afflicted: ' Li
perils by the heathen, in perils by mine own
countrymen, in perils among false brethren.'-*
And again he says, ' Be ye followers of me,
even as I also am of Christ. '^ When, there-
fore, false brethren like yourselves assault
us, we imitate the patience of our master
Paul under our dangers."

170. x\uGUSTiN answered: Certainly those
of whom you speak are false brethren, of

I Matt. vii. 15, 16.
4 2 Cor. xi. 26.

2 I Cor. xi. 19.
5 I Cor. xi. I.

3 John xiii. 34, 35,

whom the apostle thus complains in another
place, where he is e.xtoUing the natural sin-
cerity of Timothy: "I have no man," he
says, " like-minded, who will naturally care
for your state. For all seek their own, not
the things which are Jesus Christ's." * Un-
doubtedly he was speaking of those who were
with him at the time when he was writing that
epistle; for it could not be that all Christians
in every quarter of the earth were seeking
their own, and not the things which were
Jesus Christ's. It was of those, therefore, as
I said, who were with him at the time when
ne was writing the words which you have
quoted, that he uttered this lamentation.
For who else was it to whom he referred,
when he says in another place, "Without
were fightings, within were fears,"' except
those whom he feared all the more intensely
because they were within? If, therefore, you
would imitate Paul, you would be tolerant of
false brethren within, not a slanderer of the
innocent without.

Chap. 78. — 171. Petilianus said: "For
what kind of faith is that which is in you
which is devoid of charity ? when Paul him-
self says, ' Though I speak with the tongues
of men, and have the knowledge of angels,
and have not charity, I am become as sound-
ing brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And though
I have the gift of prophecy, and understand
all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though
I have all faith, so that I could remove moun-
tains, and have not charity, I am nothing.
And though I bestow all my goods to feed
the poor, and though I give my body to be
burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me
nothing.'"

172. AuGUSTiN answered: This is what I
said just now, that you were desirous to be clad
in sheep's clothing, that, if possible, the sheep
might feel your bite before it had any con-
sciousness of your approach. Is it not that
praise of charity in which you indulge that com-
monlv proves your calumny in the clearest light
of truth ? Will you bring it about that those
arms shall be no longer ours, because you en-
deavor to appropriate them first? Further-
more, these arms are endowed with life: from
whatever quarter they are launched, they rec-
ognize whom they should destroy. If they
have been sent forth from our hands, they
will fix themselves in you; if they are aimed
by you, they recoil upon yourselves. For in
these apostolic words, which commend the
excellence of charity, we are wont to show to
you how profitless it is to man that he should

* Phil. II. 20, 21.

7 2 Cor. vii. 5.

570

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.'

be in possession of faitli or of the sacraments,
when he has not charity, that, when you come
to CathoHc unity, you may understand what
it is that is conferred on you, and how great
a thing it is of which you were at least to
some extent in want; for Christian charity
cannot be preserved except in the unity of the
Church: and that so you may see that with-
out it you are nothing, even though you may
be in possession of baptism and faith, and
through this latter may be able even to remove
mountains. But if this is your opinion as
well, let us not repudiate and reject in you
either the sacraments of God which we know,
or faith itself, but let us hold fast charity,
without which we are nothing even with the
sacraments and with faith. But we hold fast
charity if we cling to unity; while we cling to
unity, if we do not make a fictitious unity in
a party by our own words, but recognize it in
a united whole through the words of Christ.

Chap. 79. — 173. Petilianus said: "And
again, 'Charity suffereth long, and is kind;
charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not it-
self, is not puffed up, doth not behave itself
unseemly, seeketh not her own.' But you
seek what belongs to other men. ' Is not
easily provoked, thinketh no evil; rejoiceth
not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;
beareth all things, endureth all things.
Charity never faileth.' ' This is to say, in
short, Charity does not persecute, does not
inflame emperors to take away the lives of
other men; does not plunder other men's
goods; does not go on to murder men whom
it has spoiled."

174. AuGUSTiN answered: How often must
I tell you the same thing? If you do not
prove these charges, they tell against no one
in the world; and if you prove them, they
have no bearing upon us; just as those things
have no bearing upon you which are daily
done by the furious deeds of the insane, by
the luxury of the drunken, by the blindness
of the suicides, by the tyranny of robbers.
For who can fail to see that what I say is true ?
But now if charity were in you, it would re-
joice in the truth. For how neatly it is said
under covering of the sheep's clothing,
"Charity beareth all things, endureth all
things!" but when you come to the test, the
wolf's teeth cannot be concealed. For when,
in obedience to the words of Scripture, "for-
bearing one another in love, endeavoring to
keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of
peace, "^ charity would compel you, even if
you knew of any evils within the Church, I do

I I Cor. xiii. i-8

Eph. iv. 2, 3.

not say to consent to them, but yet to tolerate
them if you could not prevent them, lest, on
account of the wicked who are to be separat
ed by the winnowing-fan at the last day, you
should at the present time sever the bond of
peace by breaking off from the society of
good men, you, resisting her influence, and
being cast out by the wind of levity, charge
the wheat with being chaff, and declare that
what you invent of the wicked holds good
through the force of contagion even in the
righteous. And when the Lord has said,
"The field is the world, the harvest is the end
of the world," though He said of the wheat
and of the tares, "Let both grow together
until the harvest," ^ you endeavor by your
words to bring about a belief that the wheat
has perished throughout the main portion of
the field, and only continued to exist in your
little corner, — being desirous that Christ
should be proved a liar, but you the man of
truth. And you speak, indeed, against your
own conscience; for no one who in any way
looks truly at the gospel will venture in his
heart to say that in all the many nations
throughout which is heard the response of
Amen, and among whom Alleluia is sung
almost with one single voice, no Christians are
to be found. And yet, that it may not ap-
pear that the party of Donatus, which does
not communicate with the several nations of
the world, is involved in error, if any angel
from heaven, who could see the whole world,
were to declare that outside your communion
good and innocent men were nowhere to be
found, there is little doubt that you would
rejoice over the iniquity of the human race,
and boast of having told the truth before you
had received assurance of it. How then is
there in you that charity which rejoices not in
iniquity? But be not deceived. Throughout
the field, that is, throughout the world, there
will be found the wheat of the Lord growing
till the end of the world. Christ has said
this: Christ is truth. Let charity be in you,
and let it rejoice in the truth. Though an
angel from heaven preach unto you another
gospel contrary to His gospel, let him be ac-
cursed.-*

Chap. 80. — 175. Petilianus said: "Last-
ly, what is the justification of persecution? I
ask you, you wretched men, if it so be that
you think that your sin rests on any authority
of law.''

176. AuGUSTiN answered: He who sins, sins
not on the authority of the law, but against the
authority of the law. But since you ask what

3 Matt. .xiii. 38, 39, 30.

< Gal. i. 8.

Chap. LXXXIL] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

571

is the justification of persecution, I ask you
in turn wliose voice it is tiiat says in the
psalm, "Whoso privily slandereth his neigh-
bor, him will I cut off." ' Seek therefore tne
reason or the measure of the persecution, and
do not display your gross ignorance by find-
ing fault in general terms with those who
Dersecute the unrighteous.

"But I
Jesus

Chap. 81. — 177. Petilianus said
answer you, on the other hand, that
Christ never persecuted any one. And when
the apostle found fault with certain parties,
and suggested tliat He should have recourse
to persecution (He Himself having come to
create faith by inviting men to Him, rather
than by compelling them), those apostles say,
'Many lay on hands in Thy name, and are not
with us:' but Jesus said, 'Let them alone; if
they are not against you, they are on your
side.' "

1 78, AuGUSTiN answered: You say truly
that you will bring forth out of your store with
greater abundance things which are not writ-
ten in the Scriptures. For if you wish to bring
forth proofs from holy Scripture, will you bring
forth even those which you cannot find there-
in ? But it is in your own power to multiply
your lies according to your will. For where
is what you quoted written ? or when was that
either suggested to our Lord, or answered by
our Lord? "Many lay on hands in Thy
name, and are not with us," are words that
no one of the disciples ever uttered to the
Son of God; and therefore neither could the
answer have been made by Him, "Let them
alone: if they are not against you, they are
on your side." But there is something
somewhat like it which we really do read in the
gospel, — that a suggestion was made to the
Lord about a certain man who was casting
out devils in His name, but did not follow
Him with His disciples; and in that case the
Lord does say, "Forbid him not: for he that

IS not agamst us is for us."- But this has
nothing to do with pointing out parties whom
the Lord is supposed to have spared. And
if you have been deceived by an apparent
resemblance of sentiment, this is not a lie,
but merely human infirmity. But if you
wished to cast a mist of falsehood over those
who are unskilled in holy Scripture, then may
you be pricked to the heart, and covered with
confusion and corrected. Yet there is a point
which we would urge in respect of this very
man of whom the suggestion was made to our
Lord. For even as at that time, beyond the
communion of the disciples, the holiness of

Christ was yet of the greatest efficacy, even
so now, beyond the communion of the Church,
the holiness of the sacraments is of avail.
For neither is baptism consecrated save in
the name of the Father, and of the Son, and
of the Holy Ghost. But who will be so
utterly insane as to declare that the name of
the Son may be of avail even beyond the
communion of the Church, but that this is
not possible with the names of the Father and
of the Holy Ghost ? or that it may be of avail
in healing a man, but not in consecrating
baptism ? But it is manifest that outside the
communion of the Church, and the most holy
bond of unity, and the most excellent gift of
charity, neither he by whom the devil is cast
out nor he who is baptized obtains eternal
life; just as those do not obtain it, who
through communion in the sacraments seem
indeed to be within, and through the de-
pravity of their character are understood to
be without. But that Christ persecuted even
with bodily chastisement those whom He
drove with scourges from the temple, we have
already said above.

Chap. 82. — 179. Petilianus said: "But
the holy apostle said this: 'In any way, what-
soever it may be,' he says, 'let Christ be
preached.' "

180. AuGusTiN answered: You speak
against yourself; but yet, since you speak
on the side of truth, if you love it, let what
you say be counted for you. For I ask of
you of whom it was that the Apostle Paul
said this? Let us, if }'ou please, trace this a
little further back. "Some," he says,
"preach Christ even of envy and strife; and
some also of good will, some of love, know-
ing that I am set for the defense of the
gospel. But some indeed preach Christ
even of contention, not sincerely, supposing
to add affliction to my bonds. What then ?
notwithstanding every way, whether in pre-
tense, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I
therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice." ^
We see that they preached what was in itself
holy, and pure, and true, but yet not in a
pure manner, but of envy and contention,
without charity, without purity. Certainly a
short time ago you appeared to be urging the
praises of charity as against us, according to
the witness of the apostle, that where there is
no charity, whatever there is is of no avail;
and yet you see that in those there is no
charity, and there was with them the preach-
ing of Christ, of which the apostle says here
that he rejoices. For it is not that he re-

' Ps. ci. 5.

= Luke i.\. 49, 50.

I 3 Phil. i. 15-18.

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

joices in what is evil in tliem, but in what is
good in the name of Jesus Christ. In him
assuredly there was the charity which "re-
joiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in
the truth. ^' ' The envy, moreover, which
was in them is an evil proceeding from
the devil, for by this he has both killed and
cast down. Where then were these wicked
men whom the apostle thus condemns, and in
whom there was so much that was good to
cause him to rejoice ? Were they within, or
without? Choose which you will. If they
were within, then Paul knew them, and yet
they did not pollute him. And so you would
not be polluted in the unity of the whole
world by those of whom you make certain
charges, whether these be true, or falsehoods
invented by yourselves. Wherefore do you
separate yourself? Why do you destroy
yourself by the criminal sacrilege of schism ?
But if they \vere without, then you see that
even in those who were without, and who cer-
tainly cannot belong to everlasting life, since
they have not charity^ and do not abide in
unity, then is yet found the holiness of the
name of Christ, so that the apostle joyfully con-
firms their teaching, on account of the intrinsic
holiness of the name, although he repudiates
them. We are right, therefore, in not doing
wrong to the actual name, when those come
to us who were without; but we correct the
individuals, while we do honor to the name.
Do you therefore take heed, and see how wick-
edly you act in the case of those whose acts
as it seems you condemn, by treating as naught
the sacrament of the name of Christ, which
is holy in them. And you, indeed, as is
shown by your words, think that those men of
whom the apostle spoke were outside the lim-
its of the Church. Therefore, when you fear
persecution from the Catholics, of which you
speak in order to create odium against us,
you have confirmed in heretics the name of
Christ to which you do despite by rebaptizing.

Chap. 83. — 181. Petilianus said: "If
then there are not some to whom all this
power of faith is found to be in opposition, on
what principle do you persecute, so as to com-
pel men to defile themselves: ?''

182. AuGUSTiN answered: We neither per-
secute you, except so far as truth persecutes
falsehood; nor has it anything to do with us
if any one has persecuted you in other ways,
just as it has nothing to do with you if any of
your party do likewise; nor do we compel you
to defile yourselves, but we persuade you to
be cured.

I I Cor, xiii. 6.

Chap. 84.— 183. Petilianus said: "But if
authority had been given by some law for per-
sons to be compelled to what is good, you
yourselves, unhappy men, ought to have been
compelled by us to embrace the purest faith.
But far be it, far be it from our conscience to
compel any one to embrace our faith."

184, AuGUSTiN answered: No one is indeed
to be compelled to embrace the faith against
his will; but by the severity, or one might
rather say, by the mercy of God, it is com-
mon for treachery to be chastised with the
scourge of tribulation. Is it the case, because
the best morals are chosen by freedom of will,
that therefore the worst morals are not pun-
ished by integrity of law ? But yet discipline
to punish an evil manner of living is out of
the question, except where principles of good
living which had been learned have come to
be despised. If any laws, therefore, have
been enacted against you, you are not thereby
forced to do well, but are only prevented from
doing ill.- For no one can do well unless he
has deliberately chosen, and unless he has
loved what is in free will; but the fear of pun-
ishment, even if it does not share in the
pleasures of a good conscience, at any rate
keeps the evil desire from escaping beyond
the bounds of thought. Who are they, how-
ever; that have enacted adverse laws by which
your audacity could be repressed ? Are they
not those of whom the apostle says that "they
bear not the sword in vain; for they are the
ministers of God, revengers to execute wrath
upon them that do evil 1"'^ The whole ques-
tion therefore is, whether you are not doing
ill, who are charged by the whole v/orld with
the sacrilege of so great a schism. And yet,
neglecting the discussion of this question, you
talk on irrelevant matters; and while you live
as robbers, you boast that you die as mar-
tyrs.'' And, through fear either of the laws
themselves, or of the odium which you migat
incur, or else because you are unequal to the
task of resisting, I do not say so many men,
but so many Catholic nations, you even
glory in your gentleness, that you do not
compel any to join your party. According to
your way of talking, the hawk, when he has
been prevented by flight from carrying off
the fowls, might call himself a dove. For
when have you ever had the power without
using it? And hence you show how ynu

2 See below, 95, 217, and c. Gaiidentiuvi, I. 25, 28 sqq.

3 Rom. xiii. 4.

4 Augustin speaks of the Moor Rogatus, bishop of Cartenna in
ecclesiastical province of Mauritania Cjesariensis, in his ninety-
third epistle, to Vincentius, c. iii. II. ^Ve learn from the eighty-
seventh epistle, to Emeritus, sec. 10, that the followers of Rojjatus
called the other Donatists Firtniani^ because they had been sub-
jected to much cruelty at their hands under the authority of Fir-

; Chap. LXXXV.] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

573

would do more if you only could. Wnen
Julian, envying the peace of Christ, restored
to you tae churches which belonged to unity,
who could tell of all the massacres which were
committed by you, when the very devils re-
joiced with you at the opening of their tem-
ples ? In the war with Firmus and his party,
let Mauritania Csesariensis itself be asked to
tell us what the Moor Rogatus ' suffered at
your hands. In the time of Gildo, because
one of your colleagues- was his intimate
friend, let the followers of Maximianus be
our witnesses to their sufferings. For if one
might appeal to Felicianus himself, w^ho is
now with you, on his oath, whether Optatus
did not compel him against his will to return
to your communion, he would not dare to
open his lips, especially if the people of
^lusti could behold his face, who were wit-
nesses to everything that was done. But let
them, as I have said, be witnesses to what
they have suffered at the hands of those with
whom they acted in such wise towards Roga-
tus. The Catholic Church herself, though
strengthened by the assistance of Catholic
princes ruling by land and sea, was savagely
attacked by hostile troops in arms under
Optatus. It was this that first made it neces-
sary to urge before the vicar Seranus that the
law should be put in force against you which
imposes a fine of ten pounds of gold, which
none of you have ever paid to this very day,
and yet you charge us with cruelty. But
where could you find a milder course of pro-
ceeding, than that crimes of such magnitude
on your part should be punished by the im-
position of a pecuniary fine ? Or who could
enumerate all the deeds which you commit in
the places which you hold, of your own sover-
eign will and pleasure, each one as he can,
without any friendship on the part of judges
or any others in authority ? Who is there of
our party, among the inhabitants of our
towns, who has not either learned something
of this sort from those who came before him,
or experienced it for himself? Is it not the >
case that at Hippo, where I am, there are not ;
wanting some who remember that your leader
Faustinus gave orders, in the time of his
supreme power, in consequence of the scanty
numbers of the Catholics in the place, that no
one should bake their bread for them, inso-
much that a baker, who was the tenant of one
of our deacons, threw away the bread of his
landlord unbaked, and though he was not
sentenced to exile under any law, he cut him
off from all share in the necessaries of life not

' Cp. note 3, p. 556.

- Optatus of Thaumugade (Thamogade), the friend of Ciildo.

only in a Roman state, ^ but even in his own
country, and not only in his own country, but
in his own house ? Why, even lately', as I
myself recall with mourning to this day, did
not Crispinus of Calama, one of your party,
having bought a property, and that only copy-
hold," boldly and unhesitatingly immerse in
the waters of a second baptism no less than
eighty souls, murmuring with miserable
groans under the sole influence of terror; and
this in a farm belonging to the Catholic em-
perors, by whose laws you were forbidden
even to be in any Roman city?^ But what
else was ii, save such deeds as these of yours,
that made it necessary for the very laws to be
passed of which you complain ? The laws,
indeed, are very far from being proportionate
to your offenses; but, such as they are, you
may thank yourselves for their existence.
Indeed, should we not certainly be driven on
all sides from the country by the furious at-
tacks of your Circumcelliones, who iigh'
under your command in furious troops, un-
less we held you as hostages in the towns,
who might well be unwilling to endure under
any circumstances the mere gaze of the peo-
ple, and the censure of all honorable men,
from very shame, if not from fear? Do not
therefore say, "Far be it, far be it from
our conscience, to force any one to em-
brace our faith." For you do it when you
can; and when you do not do it, it is because
you are unable,, either from fear of the laws
or the odium which would accompany it, or
because of the numbers of those who would
resist.

Chap. 85. — 185. Petilianus said: "For
the Lord Christ says, 'No man can come to
me, except the Father which hath sent me
draw him.'' But why do we not permit each
several person to follow his free will, since the
Lord God Himself has given free will to
men, showing to them, however, the way of
righteousness, lest any one by chance should
perish from ignorance of it ? For He said, "I
have placed before thee good and evil. I
have set fire and water before thee; choose
which thou wilt.' From which choice, you
wretched men, you have chosen for yourselves
not water, but rather fire. 'But yet,' He says,
'choose the good, that thou mayest live,''

3 Augustin mentions again in his thirty-fifth epistle, to Euse-
bius, sec. 3. that Hippo had rcciived the Koman citizenship. His
arguinent is that, even if not a native of the place, the deacon
should have been safe from molestation wherever Roman laws
prevailed.

4 Kmphyteuticam. 'I'he land, therefore, w.-is held under the
emperors, and less absolutely in the power of the owner than if it
had been freehold.

5 Augustin remonstrates with Crispinus on the point, Epist.
ixvi.

6 John vi. 44. 7 Ecclus. xv. 16, 17.

5 74

l^HE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

You who will not choose the good, have, by
your own sentence, declared that you do not
wish to live."

1 86. AuGUSTiN answered: If I were to
propose to you the question how God the
Father draws men to the Son, when He has
left them to themselves in freedom of action,
you would perhaps find it difificult of solution.
For how does He draw them to Him if He
leaves them to themselves, so that each should
clioose what he pleases ? And yet both these
facts are true; but this is a truth which few
have intellect enough to penetrate. As there-
fore it is possible that, after leaving men to
themselves in free will, the Father should yet
draw them to the Son, so is it also possible
that those warnings which are given by the
correction of the laws do not take away free
will. For whenever a man suffers anything
that is harsh and unpleasing, he is warned to
consider why it is that he is suffering, so that,
if he shall discover that he is suffering in the
cause of justice, he may choose the good that
consists in the very act of suffering as he does
in the cause of justice; but if he sees that it
is unrighteousness for which he suffers, he
may be induced, from the consideration that
he is suffering and being tormented most
fruitlessly, to change his purpose for the
better, and may at the same time escape both
the fruitless annoyance and the unrighteous-
ness itself, which is likely to prove yet more
hurtful and pernicious in the mischief it pro-
duces. And so you, when kings make any
enactments against you, should consider that
you are receiving a warning to consider why
this is being done to you. For if it is for
righteousness' sake, then are they truly your
persecutors; but you are the blessed ones,
who, being persecuted for righteousness' sake,
shall inherit the kingdom of heaven:' but if
it is because of the iniquity of your schism,
what are they more than your correctors;
while you, like all the others who are guilty
of various crimes, and pay the penalty ap-
pointed by the law, are undoubtedly unhappy
both in this world and in that which is to
come? No one, therefore, takes away from
you your free will. But I would urge you
diligently to consider which you would rather
choose, — whether to live corrected in peace,
or, by persevering in malice, to undergo real
punishment under the false name of martyr-
dom. But I am addressing you just as
though you were suffering something propor-
tionate to your sin, whereas you are commit-
of such enormity and reigning in

tmg sins

I Matt. V. lo ; I Pet. ii. 20.

such impunity. You are so furious, that you
cause more terror than a war trumpet with
your cry of ''^Praise to God;'' so full of
calumny, that even when you throw your-
selves over precipices without any provoca-
tion, you impute it to our persecutions.

187. He says also, like the kindest of
teachers, " You who will not choose the good,
have, by your own sentence, declared that
you do not wish to live." According to this,
if we were to believe your accusations, we
should live in kindness; but because we l;e-
lieve the promises of God, we declare by our
own sentence that we do not wish to live.
You remember well, it seems to me, what the
apostles answered to the Jews when they were
desired to abstain from preaching Christ.
This therefore we also say, that you should
answer us whether we ought rather to obey
God or man.- Traditors, offerers of incense,
persecutors: these are the words of men
against men, Christ remained only in the
love of Donatus: these are the words of men
extolling the glory of a man under the name
of Christ, that the glory of Christ Himself
may be diminished. For it is written, "In
the multitude of people is the king's honor:
but in the want of people is the destruction of
the prince: "3 these, therefore, are the words
of men. But those words in the gospel, " It
behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the
dead the third day; and that repentance and
remission of sins should be preached in His
name among all nations, beginning at Jerusa-
lem," ■* are the words of Christ, showing forth
the glory which He received from His Father
in the wideness of His kingdom. When we
have heard them both, we choose in prefer-
ence the communion of the Church, and pre-
fer the words of Christ to the words of men.
I ask, who is there that can say that we have
chosen what is evil, except one who shall say
that Christ taught what was evil ?

Chap. 86. — 188. Petilianus said: "Is it
then the case that God has ordered the mas-
sacre even of schismatics? and if He were to
issue such an order at all, you ought to be
slain by some barbarians and Scythians, not
by Christians."

189. AuGUSTiN answered: Let your Cir-
cumcelliones remain qui'et, and let me entreat
you not to terrify us about barbarians. But
as to whether we or you are schismatics, let
the question be put neither to you nor to me,
but lo Christ, that He may show where His
Church is to be found. Read the gospel

2 Acts V. 20.

3 Prov. xiv. 23.

4 Luke .\.\iv. 46, 47.

, CHAr. LXXXVIII.J THE LETTERS OF PETILIAX, THE DOxXATIST.

575

I t'.ien, and there you find the answer, "In
j Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria,
' -'nd even in the whole earth." ' If any one,
erefore, is not found within the Church, let
not any further question be put to him, but
I let him either be corrected or converted, or
I else, being detected, let him not complain.

, Chap. 87. — 190. Petilianus said: " For
' neither has the Lord God at any time rejoiced
in human blood, seeing that He was even
willing that Cain, the murderer of his brother,
should continue to exist in his murderer's
l.te.

191. AuGUSTiN answered: If God was un-
willing that death should be inflicted on him
wiio slew his brother, preferring that he should
continue to exist in his murderer's life, see
wiiether this be not the cause why, seeing that
t!;e heart of the king is in the hand of God,
V iiereby he has himself enacted many laws
for your correction and reproof, yet no law
of the king has commanded that vou should
1 c put to death, perhaps with this very object,
t at any one of you who persists in the ob-
stinate self-will of his sacrilegious madness
should be tortured with the punishment of the
fratricide Cain, that is to say, with the life of
a murderer. For we read that many were
slain in mercy by Moses the servant of the
Lord; for in that he prayed thus in inter-
cession to the Lord for their wicked sacri-
lege, saying, "O Lord, if Thou wilt forgive
their sin — ; and if not, blot me, I pray thee,
out of the book which Thou hast written," -
his unspeakable charity and mercy are plainly
shown. Could it be, then, that he was sud-
denly changed to cruelty, when, on descend-
ing from the mount, he ordered so man)''
thousands to be slain ? Consider, therefore,
whether it mav not be a sitrn of greater anger
on the part of God, that, whilst so many laws
have been enacted against you, you have not
been ordered by any emperor to be put to
death. Or do you think that you are not to
be compared to that fratricide? Hearken to
the Lord speaking through His prophet:
" From the rising of the sun, even unto the
going down of the same, my name shall be
great among the Gentiles; and in every place
incense shall be offered unto my name, and a
pure offering; for my name shall be great
among the heathen, saith the Lord of ho^ts."^
On this brother's sacrifice you show that you
look with malignant eyes, over and above the
respect which God pays to it; and if ye have
ever heard that " from the rising of the sun,
unto the going down of the same, the Lord's

I Acts i. 8.

2 Ex. xxxii. 28-32.

3 Mai. i. II.

name is to be praised, "•> which is that living
sacrifice of ivhich it is said, " Offer unto God
thanksgiving," 5 then will your countenance
fall like that of yonder murderer. But inas-
much as you cannot kill the whole world, you
are involved in the same guilt by your mere
hatred, according to the words of John,
"Whosoever hateth his brother is a mur-
derer."'^ And I would that any innocent
brother might rather fall into the hands of
your Circumcelliones, to be murdered by their
weapons, than be subjected to the poison of
your tongue and rebaptized.

Chap. 88. — 192. Petilianus said: "We
advise )-ou, therefore, if so be that you
will hear it willingly, and even though you
do not willingly receive it, yet we warn you
that the Lord Christ instituted for Christians,
not any form of slaying, but one of dying
only. For if He loved men who thus delight
in battle. He would not have consented to be
slain for us."

193. AuGUSTiN answered: Would that your
martyrs would follow the form that He pre-
scribed ! they would not throw themselves
over precipices, which He refused to do at
the bidding of the devil. ' But when you per-
secute our ancestors with false witness even
now that they are dead, whence have you re-
ceived this form ? In that you endeavor to
stain us with the crimes of men we never
knew, while you are unwilling that the most
notorious misdeeds of your own party should
be reckoned against you, whence have you
received this form ? But we are too much
yielding to our own conceit if we find fault
about ourselves, when we see that you utter
false testimony against the Lord Himself,
since He Himself both promised and made
manifest that His Church should extend
throughout all nations, and you maintain the
contrary. This form, therefore, you did not
receive even from the Jewish persecutors
themselves, for they persecuted His body
while He was walking on the earth: you per-
secute His gospel as He is seated in heaven.
Which gospel endured more meekly the flames
of furious kings than it can possibly endure
your tongues; for while they blazed, unity re-
mained, and this it cannot do amid your
words. "Fhey who desired that the word of
God should i)erish in the flames did not be-
lieve that it could be despised if read. They
would not, therefore, set their flames to work
upon the gospel, if you would let them use
your tongues against the gospel. In the
earlier persecution the gospel of Christ was

4 Ps. cxiii. 3.
6 I John lii. 15.

5 Ps. 1. 14.

7 Matt. IV. 6, 7.

576

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

sought by some in their rage, it was betrayed
by others in their fear; it was burned by some
in their rage, it was hidden by others in their
love; it was attaclced, but none were found to
speak against its truth. The more accursed
share of persecution was reserved for you
when the persecution of the heathen was ex-
hausted. Those who persecuted the name
of Christ believed in Christ: now those who
are honored for the name of Christ are found
to speak against His truth.

Chap. 89. — 194. Petilianus said: "Here
you have the fullest possible proof that
a Christian may take no part in the de-
struction of another. But the first establish-
ing of this principle was in the case of Peter,
as it is written, "Simon Peter having a sword,
drew it, and smote the high priest's servant,
and cut off his right ear. Then said Jesus
unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath.
For all they that take the sword shall perish
with the sword.' " '

195. AuGUSTiN answered: Why then do
you not restrain the weapons of the Circum-
celliones with such words as these? Should
you think that you were going beyond the
words of the gospel if you should say, All
they that take the cudgel shall perish with the
cudgel ? Withhold not then your pardon, if
our ancestors were unable to restrain the men
by whom you complain that Marculus was
thrown down a precipice; for neither is it
written in the gospel, He that useth to throw
men down a precipice shall be cast therefrom.
And would that, as your charges are either
false or out of date, so the cudgels of those
friends of yours would cease ! And yet, per-
haps, you take it ill that, if not by force of
law, at any rate in words, we take away their
armor from your legions in saying that they
manifest their rage with sticks alone. For
that was the ancient fashion of their wicked-
ness, but now they have advanced too far.
For amid their drunken revellings, and amid
the free license of assembling together, wan-
dering in the streets, jesting, drinking, pass-
ing the whole night in company with women
who have no husbands, they have learned not
only to brandish cudgels, but to wield swords
and whirl slings. But why should I not say
to them (God knows with what feelings I say
it and with what feelings they receive it !),
Madmen, the sword of Peter, though drawn
from motives not yet free from fleshly im-
purity, was yet drawn in defence of the body
of Christ against the body of His persecutor,
but your arms are portioned out against the

I John xviii. lo, ii; Matt. xxvi. 52.

cause of Christ; but the body of which He is
the head, that is. His Church, extends
throughout all nations. He Himself has said
this, and has ascended into heaven, whither
the fury of the Jews could not follow Him;
and it is your fury which attacks His mem-
bers in the body, which on His ascension He
commended to our care. In defense of those
members all men rage against you, all men
resist you, as many as being in the Catholic
Church, and possessing as yet but little faith,
are influenced by the same motives as Peter
was when he drew his sword in the name of
Christ. But there is a great difference be-
tween your persecution and theirs. You are
like the servant of the Jews' high priest; for
in the service of your princes you arm your-
selves against the Catholic Church, that is,
against the body of Christ. But they are
such as Peter then was, fighting even with
the strength of their bodies for the body of
Christ, that is, the Church. But if they are
bidden to be still, as Peter then was bidden,
how much more should you be warned that,
laying aside the madness of heresy, you
should join the unity of those members for'
which they so fight ? But, being wounded by
such men as these, you hate us also; and, as
though you had lost your right ears, you do
not hear the voice of Christ as He sits at the
right hand of the Father. But to whom shall
I address myself, or how shall I address my-
self to them, seeing that in them I find no
time wherein to speak ? for even early in the
morning they are reeking with wine, drunk,
it may be already in the day, it may be still
from overnight. IVIoreover, they utter threats,
and not they only, but their own bishops utter
threats concerning them, being ready to deny
that what they have done has any bearing on
them. May the Lord grant to us a song of
degrees, in which we may say, " When I am
with those who hate peace, I am peaceful.
When I would speak with them, they are
wont to fight me without cause." - For thus
says the body of Christ, which throughout
the whole world is assailed by heretics, by
some here, by others there, and by all alike
wherever they may be.^

Chap. 90. — 196. Petilianus said: "There-
fore I say. He ordained that we should un-
dergo death for the faith, which each man
should do for the communion of the Church.
For Christianity makes progress by the deaths
of its followers. For if death were feared by
the faithful, no man would be found to live
with perfect faith. For the Lord Christ says,

2 Ps. cxx. 6, 7, cp. Hieron.

3 See Contr. Cresc. 1. III. c. 67, 1. IV. cc. 6o, 6i.

Chap. XCIIL] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

577

' Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground
[ and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it
Iringeth forth much fruit,' " '

197. AuGUSTiN answered: I should be glad

^ to know which of your party it was who first

j threw himself over a precipice. For truly

! that grain of corn was fruitful from which so

-reat a crop of similar suicides has sprung.

j Tell me, when you make mention of the

words of the Lord, that He says a grain of

\', aeat shall die and bring forth much fruit,

why do you envy the real fruit, which has

most truly- sprung up throughout the whole

v.orld, and bring up against it all the charges

cif the tares or chaff which you have ever

either heard of or invented ?

Chap, 91. — 198, PETiLiANUssaid: " But you

scatter thorns and tares, not seeds of corn.

I so that you ought to be burned together with

t:iem at the last judgment. We do not utter

' urses; but every thorny conscience is bound

ider this penalty by the sentence which God

IS pronounced."

199. AuGUSTiN answered: Surely, when you
mention tares, it might bring to your minds
j tie thought of wheat as well; for both have
I'l-en commanded to grow together in the field
iitil the harvest. But you fix the eye of
malice fiercely on the tares, and maintain, in
(-Imposition to tlT,e express declaration of
(-'arist, that they alone have grown throughout
the earth, with the exception of Africa alone.

Chap. 92. — 200. PETiLiANUSsaid: " Where
is the saying of the Lord Christ, 'Whosoever
shall smite thee on the right cheek, turn to
iiim the other also' P^ Where is the patience
\\ iiich He displayed when they spat upon His
i:ice, who Himself with His most holy spittle
: opened the eyes of the blind ? Where is the
' saying of the Apostle Paul, ' If a man smite
)U in the face ?' Where is that other saying
j of the same apostle, ' In stripes above meas-
';re, in prisons more frequent, in deaths oft ' ?••
ile makes mention of the sufferings which he
imderwent, not of the deeds which he per-
formed. It had been enough for the Chris-
tian faith that these things should be done by
the Jews: why do you, wretched men, do
these others in addition?"

201. AuGUSTiN answered: Is it then really
so, that when men smite you on the one
cheek, )'ou turn to them the other ? This is
not the report that your furious bands won
for you by wandering everywiiere throughout

' John xii. 24.
- I 'cracissimc.
abundantly."
3 Matt. 'v. 39.

Another reading is " /fracissiiiic,'
4 2 Cor. xi. 20, 23.

most

the w^hole of Africa with dreadful wickedness.
I would fain have it that men should make a
bargain witii you, that, in accordance with the
old law, you should seek but "an eye for an
eye, a tooth for a tooth," s instead of bring-
ing out cudgels in return for the words which
greet your ears.

Chap, 93. — 202, Petilianus said: "But
what have you to do with the kings of this
world, in whom Christianity has never found
anything save envy towards her? And to
teach you shortly the truth of what I say, A
king persecuted the brethren of the Mac-
cabees,*^ A king also condemned the three
children to the sanctifying flames, being ig-
norant what he did, seeing that he himself
was fighting against God.' A king sought
the life of the infant Saviour.* A king ex-
posed Daniel, as he thought, to be eaten by
wild beasts,' And the Lord Christ Himself
was slain by a king's most wicked judge."
Hence it is that the apostle cries out, ' We
speak wisdom among them that are perfect;
yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the
princes of this world, that come to nought:
but we speak the wisdom of God in a mys-
tery, which was hidden, which God ordained
before the world unto our glory; which none
of the princes of this world knew: for had
they known it, they would not have crucified
the Lord of glory.' " But grant that this was
said of the heathen kings of old. Yet you,
rulers of this present age, because you desire
to be Christians, do not allow men to be
Christians, seeing that, when they are believ-
ing in all honesty of heart, you draw them by
the defilement and mist of your falsehood
wholly over to your wickedness, that with their
arms, which were provided against the ene-
mies of the state, they should assail the Chris-
tians, and should think that, at your instiga-
tion, they are doing the work of Christ if they
kill us whom you hate, according to the say-
ing of the Lord Christ: 'The time cometh,'
He says, 'that whosoever killetli you will
think that he doeth God service.' '- It makes
no matter therefore to you, false teachers,
whether the kings of this world desire to be
heathens, which God forbid, or Christians,
so long as you cease not in your efforts to
arm them against the family of Christ. But
do you not know, or rather, have you not
read, that the guilt of one who instigates a
murder is greater than the guilt of him who
carries it out? Jezebel had excited the king
her husband to the murder of a poor and

5 Deut. Jiix. 21.
8 Matt. ii. 16.
" I Cor. ii. 6-8.

' 2 Mac. vii,
9 l>an. vi,
'= John xvi. 2.

7 Pan. lii.

'0 Matt, xxvii. 26.

5/8

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

righteous man, yet husband and wife alike
perished by an equal punishment.' Nor in-
deed is your mode of urging on kings differ-
ent from that by which the subtle persuasion
of women has often urged kings on to guilt.
For the wife of Herod earned and obtained
the boon by means of her daughter, that the
head of John should be brought to table in a
charger."" Similarly the Jews forced on
Pontius Pilate that he should crucify the Lord
Jesus, whose blood Pilate prayed might re-
main in vengeance upon them and on their
children. 3 So therefore you also overwhelm
yourselves with our blood by your sin. For
it does not follow that because it is the hand
of the judge that strikes the blow, your calum-
nies therefore are not rather guilty of the
deed. For the prophet David says, speaking
in the person of Christ, ' Why do the heathen
rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?
The kings of the earth set themselves, and
the rulers take counsel together, against the
Lord, and against His Anointed, saying, Let
us break their bands asunder, and cast away
their cords from us. He that sitteth in the
heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have
them in derision. Then shall He speak unto
them in His wrath, and vex them in His sore
displeasure. Yet have I set my King upon
my holy hill of Zion. I will declare the de-
cree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art
my Son; this day have I begotten Thee.
Ask of me, and 1 shall give Thee the heathen
for Thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts
of the earth for Thy possession. Thou shalt
rule them with a rod of iron; Thou shalt dash
them in pieces like a potter's vessel.' And
he warned the kings themselves in the follow-
ing precepts, that they should not, like ig-
norant men devoid of understanding, seek to
persecute the Christians, lest they should
themselves be destroyed, — which precepts I
would that we could teach them, seeing that
they are ignorant of them; or, at least, that
you would show them to them, as doubtless
you would do if you desired that they should
live; or, at any rate, if neither of the other
courses be allowed, that your malice would
have permitted them to read them for them-
selves. The first Psalm of David would cer-
tainly have persuaded them that they should
live and reign as Christians; but meanwhile
you deceive them, so long as they entrust
themselves to you. For you represent to
them things that are evil, and you hide from
them what is good. Let them then at length
read this, which they should have read al-
ready long ago. For what does he say, ' Be

wise now therefore, O ye kings; be instructed,
ye judges of the earth. Serve 'the Lord with
fear, and rejoice with trembling. Lay hold
of instruction lest the Lord be angry, and ye.
perish from the right way. Since how quickly
has His wrath kindled over you ? Blessed are
all they that put their trust in Him.^'* You
urge on emperors, I say, with your persua-
sions, even as Pilate, whom, as we showed
above, the Jews urged on, though he himself i
cried aloud, as he washed his hands before
them all, ' I am innocent of the blood of this
just person,' 5 — as though a person could be
clear from the guilt of a sin who had himself
committed it. But, to say nothing of ancient
examples, observe, from instances taken from
your own party, how very many of your em-
perors and judges have perished in perse-
cuting us. To pass over Nero, who was the
first to persecute the Christians, Domitian [
perished almost in the same way as Nero, as ■
also did Trajan, Geta,^ Decius, Valerian,
Diocletian; Maximian also perished, at whose
command that men should burn incense to
their gods, burning the sacred volumes, Mar-
cellinus indeed first, but after him also Men-
surius of Carthage, and Caecilianus, escaped '
death from the sacrilegious flames, surviving
like some ashes or cinders from the burning.
For the consciousness of the guilt of burning
incense involved you all, as many as agreed
with Mensurius. Macarius perished, Ursa-
cius' perished, and all your counts perished
in like manner by the vengeance of God.
For Ursacius was slain in a battle with the
barbarians, after which birds of prey with
their savage talons, and the greedy teeth of
dogs with their biting, tore him limb from
limb. Was not he too a murderer at your
suggestion, who, like king Ahab, whom we
showed to have been persuaded by a woman,
slew a poor and righteous man ?*^ So you too
do not cease to murder us, who are just and
poor (poor, that is, in worldly wealth; for in
the grace of God no one of us is poor). For

' I Kind's XXI.

J Matt. xiv. 8, g.

3 Matt, .\xvii. 24-26

4 Ps. ii., cp. Hieron. 5 Matt, xxvii. 24.

6 Some editions liave Varius in the place of Geta, referring to
Aurelius Antoninus Heliogabalus, of whom I.ampridius asserts
that he derived the name of Varius from the doubtfulness of his
parentage. Aelii Lampridii Antoninus Heliogabalus, in .S'^.
Histoyia; A iigustcp. The Mss. agree, however, in the reading
" Geta," which was a name of the second son of Severus, the
brother of Caracalla.

7 Optatus defends the cause of Macarius at great length in his
third book against Parmenianus. Of Ursacius he says in the
same place : " You areoffended at the timesof a certain Leontius,
of Ursacius, Macarius and others." And Augustin, in his third
book against Cresconius, c. 20, introduces an objection of the
Donatists against himself: " But so soon as Silvanus, bishop of
Cirta, had refused to communicate with Ursacius and Zenophilus
the persecutors, he was driven into exile." Usuardus, deceived
by a false story made up by the Donatists, enters in his Martyr-
ology that a pseudo-martyr Donatus suffered on the ist of March,
under Ursacius and INIarcellinus, to this effect: " On the same day
of the holy martyr Donatus, who suffered under Ursacius the
judge (or dux), and ♦^'e tribu.ie Marc^linus.

t' I Kings xxi.

Chap. XCII.] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

579

even if you do not murder a man with your
iiands, you do not cease to do so witli your
butcherous tongues. For it is written, ' Death
and hfe are in the power of the tongue.' ' All,
therefore, who have been murdered, you, the
instigator of the deed, have slain. Nor in-
deed does the hand of the butcher glow save
at the instigation of your tongue; and that
terrible heat of the breast is inflamed by your
words to take the blood of others, — blood
that shall take a just vengeance upon him
who shed it."

203. AuGUSTiN answered: If I were to an-
swer adequately, and as I ought, to this pas-
sage, which has been exaggerated and ar-
ranged at such length by you, where you
speak in invidious terms against us concerning
the kings of this world, I am much afraid that
you would accuse me too of having wished to
excite the anger of kings against you. And
}et, whilst you are borne after your own
fashion by the violence of this invective
:gainst all Catholics, you certainly do not
liass me by. I will endeavor, however, to
show, if I can, that it is rather you who have
been guilty of this offense by speaking as you
have done, than myself by answering as I
shall do. And first of all, see how you your-
self oppose your self; for certainly you pre-
faced the passage which you quoted with the
words, " What have you to do with the kings
i)f this world, in whom Christianity has never
found anything save envy towards her? " In
these words you certainly cut off from us all
access to the kings of this world. And a
little later you say, "And he warned the kings
themselves in the following precepts, that
they should not, like ignorant men devoid of
understanding, seek to persecute the Chris-
tians, lest they should be themselves de-
stroyed,— which precepts I would that we
could teach them, seeing that they are ig-
norant of them; or, at least, that you would
show them to them, as doubtless you would
do if you desired that they should live." In
what way then do you wish us to be the in-
structors of kings ? And indeed those of our
body who have any friendship with Christian
kings commit no sin if they make a right use
of that friendship; but if any are elated by
it, they yet sin far less grievously than you.
For what had you, who thus reproach us, —
what had you to do with a heathen king, and
what is worse, with Julian, the apostate and
enemy of the name of Christ, to whom, when
you were begging that the basilicas should be
restored to you as though they were your
own, you ascribed this meed of praise, "that

' Prov. xviii. 21.

in him justice alone was found to have a
place"? — in which words (fori believe that
you understand the Latin tongue) both the
idolatry and the apostasy of Julian are styled
justice. I hold in my hands the petition
which your ancestors presented; the memo-
riaP which embodied their request; the
chronicles, where they made their representa-
tion. Watch and attend. To tlie enemy of
Christ, to the apostate, the antagonist of
Christians, the servant of the devil, that
friend, that representative, that Pontius of
yours, made supplication in such words as
these: "Go to then, and say to us, What have
you to do with the kings of this world ?" that
as deaf men you may read to the deaf nations
what you as well as they refuse to hear;
" Thou beholdest the mote that is in thy
brother's eye, but considerest not the beam
that is in thine own eye."^

204. "What," say you, "have you to do
with the kings of this world, in whom Chris-
tianity has never found anything save envy
towards her?" Having said this, you en-
deavored to reckon up what kings the righte-
ous had found to be their enemies, and did
not consider how many more might be enu-
merated who have proved their friends. The
patriarch Abraham was both most friendly
treated, and presented with a token of friend-
ship, by a king who had been warned from
heaven not to defile his wife.'' Isaac his son
likewise found a king most friendly to him.s
Jacob, being received with honor by a king
in Egypt, went so far as to bless him.*
What shall I say of his son Joseph, who, after
the tribulation of a prison, in which his
chastity was tried as gold is tried in the fire,
!)eing raised by Pharaoh to great honors,"
even swore by the life of Pharaoh,** — not as
though puffed up with vain conceit, Init being
not unmindful of his kindness. The daughter
of a king adopted Moses. » David took refuge
with a king of another race, compelled there-
to by the unrighteousness of the king of
Israel.'" Elijah ran before the chariot of a
most wicked king, — not by the king's com-
mand, but from his own loyalty." Elisha
thought it good to offer of his own accord to
the woman who had sheltered him anything
that she might wish to have ol)tained from the
king through his intercession. '= But I will
come to the actual times when the people of

- Constitutio i/utii>t i»tf'ctr(t".'crunt. Some editinns have
^^ quavi clederuiit Constantio :" but there is no place for Con-
stantius in thLs history of the Donatists, nor was any boon either
sought or obtained from him in their name. The I.ouvain editors
therefore restored " constitutio" which is the reading of the
(jallic MSS.

3Matt. vii. 3. 4 Gen. XX. S Gen. xxvi. 11 .

6 Gen. xlvii. 7 Gen. xxxix., xli. ** Gen. xlii. 15.

9 Ex. ii. ID. '° I Sam. xxvii.

■' 1 Kings xviii. 44-46. " a Kings iv. 13.

5 So

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

("lOd were in captivity, in wliich, to use a mild
expression, a strange forgetfulness came over
you. For, wishing to prove that Christianity
has never found anything in kings saving
envy towards her, you made mention of the
three children and Daniel, who suffered at
the hands of persecuting kings, and you could
not derive instruction from circumstances not
occurring near, but in the very same passages,
viz., from the conduct of the king himself
after the miracle of the flames which did no
hurt, whether as shown in praising and set-
ting forth the name of God, or in honoring
the three children themselves, or from the es-
teem in which the king held Daniel, and the
gifts with which he honored him, nothing loth
to receive them, when he, rendering the honor
that was due to the king's power, as suffici-
ently appears from his own words, did not
hesitate to use the gift with which he was en-
dowed by God, in interpreting the king^s
dream. And when, in consequence, the king
was compelled by the men who envied the
holy prophet, and heaped calumnies upon him
with sacrilegious madness, most unwillingly
to cast him into the den of lions, sadly
though he did it, yet he had the conviction
that he would be safe through the help and
protection of his God. Accordingly, when
Daniel, by the miraculous repression of the
lions' rage, had been preserved unhurt, when
the friendly voice of the king spoke first to
him, in accents of anxiety, he himself replied
with benediction from the den, "O king, live
for ever!''' How came it that, when your
argument was turning on the very same sub-
ject, when you were yourself quoting the ex-
amples of the servants of God in whose case
these things were done, you either failed to
see, or were unwilling to see, or seeing and
knowing, were silent, in a manner which I
know not how you will defend, about those
instances' of friendship felt by kings for the
saints ? But if it were not that, as a defender
of the basest cause, you are hindered by the
desire of building up falsehood, and thereby
turned away either as unwilling or as ignorant
from the light of truth, there can be no doubt
that you could, without any difficulty, recall
some good kings as well as some bad ones,
and some friendly to the saints as well as
some unfriendly. And we cannot but wonder
that your Circumcelliones thus throw them-
selves from precipices. Who was running
after you, I pray? What Macarius, what
soldier was pursuing you ? Certainly none
of our party thrust you into this abyss of
falsehood.' Why then did you thus run head-

- Dan. lii.-vi.

long with your eyes shut, so that when you
said, ''Vvhat have you to do with the kings of
this world .^" you did not add. In whom
Christianity has often found envy towards
herself, instead of boldly venturing to say,
"In whom Christianity has never found any-
thing save envy towards her?" Was it really
true that you neither thought yourself, nor
considered that those who read your writings

kings
views ?

would think, how many instances of
there were that went against your
Does he not know what he says ?

205. Or do you think that, because those
whom I have mentioned belonged to olden
times, therefore they form no argument
against you, because you did not say, In
whom righteousness has never found anything
save envy towards her, but "In whom Chris-
tianity has never found anything saving envy
towards her," — meaning, perhaps, that it
should be understood that they began to show
env}^ towards the righteous from the time
when they began to bear the name of Chris
tians ? What then is the meaning of those ex
amples from olden times, by which you ever
more imprudently wished to prove what you
had so imprudently ventured to assert ? For
was it not before Christ was born in the world
that the Maccabees, and the three children,
and Daniel, did and suffered what you told
of them ? And again, why was it, as I asked
just now, that you offered a petition to Julian,
the undoubted foe of Christianity? Why did
you seek to recover the basilicas from him ?
Why did you declare that only righteousness
found a place with him ? If it is the foe of
Christianity that hears such things as these,
what then are they from whom he hears
them ? But it should be observed that Con-
stantine, who was certainly no foe to the name
of Christian, but rather rendered glorious by
it, being mindful of the hope which he main-
tained in Christ, and deciding most justly on
behalf of His unity, was not worthy to be
acknowledged by you, even when you your-
selves appealed to him. Both these were
emperors in Christian times, but yet ncit both
of them were Christians. But if both of them
were foes of Christianity, why did you thus
appeal to one of them ? why did you thus pre-
sent a petition to the other ? For on your
ancestors making their petition, Constantiise
had given an episcopal judgment both at
Rome and at Aries; and yet the first of them
you accused before him, from the other you
appealed to him. But if, as is the case, one
of them had believed in Christ, the other
had apostatized from Christ, why is the
Christian despised while furthering the inter-
ests of unity, the apostate praised while fav-

iiAP. XCIL] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAX, THE DONATIST.

581

orins: deceit? Constantine ordered that the
-asilicas should be taken from you, Julian
I that they should be restored. Do you wish
; to know which of these actions is conducive to
, Christian peace ? The one was done by a man
v;ho had believed in Christ, the other by one
ho had abandoned Christ. O how you
.. ould wish that you could say, It was indeed
11 done that supplication should so be made
to Julian, but what has that to do with us ?
But if you were to say this, the Catholic
(Jhurch would also conquer in these same
\' iirds, whose saints dispersed throughout the
,.orld are much less concerned with what you
^:iy of those towards whom you feel as you
:iay be disposed to feel. But it is beyond
vour power to say, It was ill done that sup-
;;;ication should so be made to Julian. Your
throat is closed; your tongue is checked by
an authority close at home. It was Pontius
that did it. Pontius presented the petition;
Pontius declared that the apostate was most
righteous; Pontius set forth that only righte-
ousness found a place v/ith the apostate.
Tiiat Pontius made a petition to him in these
words, we have the express evidence of Julian
himself, mentioning him by name, without
any disguise. Your representations still exist.
It is no uncertain rumor, but public docu-
ments that bear witness to the fact. Can it
be, that because the apostate made some con-
cession to your prayer, to the detriment of
the unity of Christ, you therefore find truth
in what was said, that only righteousness
found a place with him ? but because Chris-
tian emperors decide against your wishes,
since this appears to them most likely to con-
tribute to the unity of Christ, therefore they
are called the foes of Christianity ? Such
folly may all heretics display; and may they
regain wisdom, so that they should be no
longer heretics.

206. And when is that fulfilled, you will
say, which the Lord declares, "The time
cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think
that he doeth God service"?' At any rate
neither can this be said of the heathen, who
persecuted Christians, not for the sake of
God, but for the sake of their idols. You do
not see that if this had been said of these
emperors who rejoice in the name of Chris-
tian, their chief command would certainly have
been this, that you should have been put to
death; and this command they never gave at
all. But the men of your party, by opposing
the laws in hostile fashion, bring deserved
punishment on themselves; and their own
voluntary deaths, so long as they think that

' Joha xvi. 2.

they bring odium on us, they consider in no
wise ruinous to themselves. But if they
think that that saying of Christ refers to kings
who honor the name of Christ, let them ask
what the Catholic Church suffered in the
East, when, Valens the Arian was emperor.
There indeed I might find what I should un-
derstand to be sufficient fulfillment of the say-
ing of the Lord, "The time cometh, that who-
soever killeth you will think that he doeth
God service," that heretics should not claim,
as conducing to their especial glory, the in-
junctions issued against their errors by
Catholic emperors. But we remember that
that time was fulfilled after the ascension of
our Lord, of which holy Scripture is known by
all to be a witness. The Jews thought that
they were doing a service to God when they
put the apostles to death. Among those who
thought that they were showing service to
God was even our Saul, though not ours as
yet; so that among his causes for confidence
which were past and to be forgotten, he
enumerates the following: "An Hebrew," he
says, "of the Hebrews; as touching the law,
a Pharisee; concerning zeal, persecuting the
Church."- Here was one who thought that
he did God service wtien he did what present-
ly he suffered himself. For forty Jews
bound themselves by an oath that they would
slay him, when he caused that this should be
m.ade known to the tribune, so that under the
protection of a guard of armed men he escap-
ed their snares. ^ But there was no one yet
to say to him. What have you to do (not with
kings, but) with tribunes and the arms of
kings ? There was no one to say to him, Dare
you seek protection at the hand of soldiers,
when your Lord was dragged by them to
undergo His sufferings ? There were as yet
no instances of madness such as yours; but
there were already examples being prepared,
which should be sufficient for their refutation.
207. Moreover, with what terrible force did
you venture to set forth and utter the follow-
ing: "But to say nothing of ancient examples,
observe, from instances taken from your own
party, how very many of your emperors and
judges have perished in persecuting us."
When I read this in your letter, I waited with
the most earnest expectation to see what you
were going to say, and whom you were going
to enumerate, when, lo and behold! as though
passing them over, you began to quote to me
Nero, Domitian, Trajan, Geta, Decius,
Valerian, Diocletian, Maximian. I acknow-
ledge that there were more; but you have
altogether forgotten against whom 3*ou are

Phil. lii. 5, 6.

3 Actb .xxiii. 12-33.

;82

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II

arguing

Were not all of these pagans,
persecuting generally the Christian name on
behalf of their idols? Be vigilant, then; for
the men whom you mention were not of our
communion. They were persecuting the
whole aggregate of unity itself, from which
we, as you think, or you, as Christ teaches,
have gone forth. But you had proposed to
show that our emperors and judges had per-
ished in consequence of persecuting you. Or
is it that you yourself do not require that we
should reckon these, because, in mentioning
them, you passed them, over, saying, "To
pass over Nero;" and with this reservation
did you mean to run through all the rest ?
What then was the use of their being quoted,
if they had nothing to do with the matter ?
But what has it to do with me ? I now join
with you in leaving these. Next, let that
larger number which you promised to us be
produced, unless, indeed, it may be that they
cannot be found, inasmuch as you said that
they had perished.

208. For now you go on to make mention
of the bishops whom you are wont to accuse of
having delivered up the sacred books, con-
cerning whom we on our part are wont to
answer: Either you fail in your proof, and so
it concerns no one at all ; or you succeed,
and then it still has no concern with us. For
they have borne their own burden, whether it
be good or bad; and we indeed believe that
it was ofood. But of whatever character it
was, yet it was their own; just as your bad
men have borne their own burden, and neither
you theirs nor they yours. But the common
and most evil burden of you all is schism.
This we have already often said before. Show
us, therefore, not the names of bishops, but
the names of our emperors and judges, who
have perished in persecuting you. For this,
is what you had proposed, this is what you
had promised, this is what you had caused us
most eagerly to expect. "Hear," he says,
"Macarius perished, Ursacius perished, and
all your counts perished in like manner, by
the vengeance of God." You have mention-
ed only two by name, and neither of them
was emperor. Who would be satisfied with
this, I ask ? Are you not utterly dissatisfied
with yourself ? You promise that you will
mention a vast number of emperors and
judges of our party who perished in persecut-
ing you; and then, without a word of emper-
ors, you mention two who were either judges
or counts. For as to what you add, "And all
your counts perished in like manner by the
vengeance of God," it has nothing to do with
the matter. For on this principle you might
some time ago have closed your argument,

without mentioning the name of any one at
all. Why then have you not made mention
of our emperors, that is to say, of emperors
of our communion ? Were you afraid that
you should be indicted for high treason ?
Where is the fortitude that marks the Cir-
cumcelliones ? And further, what do you
mean by introducing those whom you men-
tioned above in such numbers ? They might
with more right say to you, Why did you seek
us out? For they did nothing to assist your
cause, and yet you mentioned them by name.
What kind of man, then, must you be, who
fear to mention those by name, who, as you
say, have perished ? At any rate, you might
mention more of the judges and counts, of
whom you seem to feel no fear. But yet you
stopped at Macarius and Ursacius. Are
these two whom you m.ention the vast number
of whom you spoke ? Are you thinking of the
lesson which we learned as boys ? For if you
were to ask of me what number two is, singu-
lar or plural, what could I answer, except that
it was plural ? But even so I am still not
without the means of reply. I take away
Macarius from your list; for you certainly
have not told us how he perished. Or do
you maintain that any one who persecutes
you, unless he be immortal on the face of this
earth, is to be deemed when he dies to have
died because of you? What if Constantine
had not lived to enjoy so long a reign, and
such prolonged prosperity, who was the first
to pass many decrees against your errors ?
And what if Julian, who gave you back the
basilicas, had not been so speedily snatched
away from life?' In that case, when would
you make an end of talking such nonsense as
you do, seeing that even now you are unwill-
ing to hold your tongues ? And yet neither
do we say that Julian died so soon because he
gave back the basilicas to you. For we
might be equally prolix with you in this, but
we are unwilling to be equally foolish. Well,
then, as I had begun to say, from these two
we will take away Macarius. For when you
had mentioned the names of two, Macarius
and Ursacius, you repeated the name of
Ursacius with the view of showing us how he
deserved his death; and you said, "For
Ursacius was slain in a battle with the barba-
rians, after which birds of prey with their sav-
age talons, and the greedy teeth of dogs with
their biting, tore him limb from limb."
Whence it is quite clear, since it is your cus-
tom to excite greater odium against us on
account of Macarius, insomuch that you call

I The reign of Constantine lasted about thirty-two years, from
306 to 337 A.D. Julian succeeded Constantius, and reigned one
j'ear and seven months, dying at the age of thirty, in a war against
the Persians, in 563 a.d.

Chap. XCII.] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE UONATIST.

IS not Ursacians but Macarians, that you
would have been sure to say by far the most
concerning him, had you been able to say
anything of the sort about his death. Of
these two, therefore, when you used the plu-
ral number, if you take away Macarius, there
remains Ursacius alone, a proper name of the
singular number. Where is therefore the
fulfillment of your threatening and tremen-
dous promise of so many who should support
your argument ?

209. By this time all men who are in any
degree acquainted with the meaning of words
must understand, it seems to me, how ridicu-

()us it is that, when you had said, "Macarius
jierished, Ursacius perished, and all your
counts perished in like manner, by the ven-
geance of God," as though men were calling
upon you to prove the fact, whereas, in reali-
ty, neither hearer nor reader was calling on
vou for anything further whatsoever, you im-
mediately strung together a long argument in
order to prove that all our counts perished in
iike manner by the vengeance of God. "For
Ursacius," you say, "was slain in a battle
with the barbarians, after which birds of prey
with their savage talons, and the greedy teeth
of dogs with their biting, tore him limb from

:mb." In the same way, any one else, who
was similarly ignorant of the meaning of what
he says, might assert that all your bishops
perished in prison by the vengeance of God;
and when asked how he could prove this fact,
he might at once add. For Optatus, having
been accused of belonging to the company of
Gildo, was put to death in a similar way.
Frivolous charges such as these we are com-
pelled to listen to, to consider, to refute; only
we are apprehensive for the weak, lest, from
the greater slowness of their intellect, they
should fall speedily into your toils. But
Ursacius, of whom you speak, if it be the case
that he lived a good life, and really died as
you assert, will receive consolation from the
promise of God, who says, "Surely your
blood of your lives will I require; at the hand
of every beast will I require it."'

210. But as to the calumnious charges
which you bring against us, saying that by us
the wrath of the kings of the world is excited
against you, so long as we do not teach them
the lesson of holy Scripture, but rather sug-
gest our own desire of war, I do not imagine
that you are so absolutely deaf to the elo-
quence of the sacred books themselves as that
you should not rather fear that they should
be acquainted with it. But whether you so
will or no, they gain entrance to the Church;

I Gen. ix. 5.

give

and even if we hold our tongues, they
heed to the readers; and, to say nothing of
the rest, they especially listen with the most
marked attention to that very psalm which
you quoted. For you said that we do not
teach them, nor, so far as we can help it, al-
low them to become acquainted with the words
of Scripture: "Be wise now therefore, O ye
kings; be instructed ye judges of the earth.
Serve the Lord with fear and rejoice with
trembling. Take hold of instruction lest the
Lord be angry,"- etc. Believe that even this
is sung, and that they hear it. But, at any rate,
they hear what is written above in the same
psalm, which you, unless I am mistaken, were
only unwilling to pass over, for fear you
should be understood to be afraid. They
hear therefore this as well " The Lord hath
said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have
I begotten Thee. Ask of me, and I shall
give Thee the heathen for Thine inheritance,
and the uttermost parts of the earth for Thy
possession. " ^ On hearing which, they cannot
but marvel that some should be found to
speak against this inheritance of Christ, en-
deavoring to reduce it to a little corner of the
earth; and in their marvel they perhaps ask,
on account of what they hear in what follows,
" Serve the Lord with fear," wherein they can
sei've Him, in so far as they are kings. For
all men ought to serve God, — in one sense,
m virtue of the condition common to them all,
in that they are men; in another sense, in
virtue of their several gifts, whereby this man
has one function on the earth, and that man
has another. For no man, as a private in-
dividual, could command that idols should
be taken from the earth, which it was so long
ago foretold should come to pass.-* Accord-
ingly, when we take into consideration t'.ie
social condition of the human race, we find
that kings, in the very fact that they are kings,
have a service which they can render to the
Lord in a manner which is impossible for any
who have not the power of kings.

211. When, therefore, they think over what
you quote, they hear also what you yourself
quoted concerning the three children, and
hear it with circumstances of marvellous solem-
nity. For that same Scripture is most of
all sung in the Church at a time when the very
festal nature of the season excites additional
fervor even in those who, during the rest of the
year, are more given to be sluggish. What
then do you think must be the feelings of
Christian emperors, when they hear of the
three children being cast into the burning
fiery furnace because they were unwilling to

= Ps. ii. 10-12.

3 Ps. ii. 7, 8. ■> Isa. li. 18; Zech. xiii. 2,

584

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

consent to the wickedness of worshipping the
image of the king,' unless you suppose that
they consider that the pious liberty of the
saints cannot be overcome either by the pow-
er of kings, or by any enormity of punish-
ment, and that they rejoice that they are not
of the number of those kings who used to
punish men that despised idols as though they
were guilty of sacrilege ? But, further, when
they hear in what follows that the same king,
terrified by the marvellous sight of, not only
the three children, but the very fiames per-
forming service unto God, himself too began
to serve God in fear, and to rejoice with rev-
erence, and to lay hold of instruction, do they
not understand that the reason that this was
recorded, and set forth with such publicity,
was that an example might be set both before
the servants of God, to prevent them from
committing sacrilege in obedience to kings,
and before kings themselves, that they
should show themselves religious by be-
lief in God ? Being willing, therefore, on
their part, from the admonition of the very
psalm which you yourself inserted in your
writings, both to be wise, and to receive in-
struction, and to serve God with fear and to
rejoice unto Him with reverence, and to lay
hold of instruction, with what attention do
they listen to what that king said afterwards!
For he said that he would make a decree for
all the people over whom he ruled, that who-
soever should speak blasphemy against the
God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego
should perish, and their house be utterly de-
stroyed. And if they know that he made this
decree that blasphemy should not be uttered
against the God who tempered the force of
the fire, and liberated the three children, they
surely go on to consider what decrees they
ought to make in their kingdom, that the
same God who has granted remission of sins,
and given freedom to the whole earth, should
not be treated with scorn among the faithful
in their realm.

212. See therefore, when Christian kings
make any decree against you in defence of
Catholic unity, that it be not the case that
with your lips you are accusing them of being
unlearned, as it were, in holy Scripture, while
in your hearts you are grieving that they are
so well acquainted with its teaching. For
who could put up with the sacrilegious and
hateful fallacy which you advance in the case
of one and the same Daniel, to find fault with
kings because he was cast into the den of
lions, and to refuse praise to kings in that he

• Simtilacri ; and so the MSs. The older editions have " ador-
andi siJinilacra .•"' but the sinirular is more forcible in its special
reference to the image on the plain of Dura. Dan. iii.

was raised to exalted honor, seeing that, even
when he was cast into the den of lions, the
king himself was more inclined to believe that
he would be safe than that he would be de-
stroyed, and, in anxiety for him, refused to
eat his food ? And then do you dare to say
to Christians, "What have you to do with the
kings of the world ?" because Daniel suffered
persecution at a king's hands, and yet not
look back upon the same Daniel faithfully
interpreting dreams to kings, calling a king
lord, receiving gifts and honors from a king?
And so again do you dare, in the case of the
aforesaid three children, to excite the flames
of odium against kings, because, when they
refused to worship the statue, they were cast
into the flames, while at the same time you
hold your tongue, and say nothing about their
being thus extolled and honored by the king ?
Granted that the king was a persecutor when
he cast Daniel into the lions' den; but when,
on receiving him safely out again, in his joy
and congratulations he cast in his enemies to
be torn in pieces and devoured by the same
lions, what was he then, — a persecutor, or
not ? '^ I call on you to answer me. For if he
was, why did not Daniel himself resist him,
as he might so easily have done in virtue of
his great friendship for him, while yet you
bid us restrain kings from persecuting men ?
But if he was not a persecutor, because he
avenged with prompt justice the outrage com-
mitted against a holy man, what kind of ven-
geance, I would ask, must be exacted from
kings for indignities offered to the sacraments
of Christ, if the limbs of the prophet required
such a vengeance because they were exposed
to danger ? Again, I acknowledge that the
king, as indeed is manifest, was a persecutor
when he cast the three children into the fur-
nace because they refused to worship his
image; but I ask whether he was still a perse-
cutor when he set forth the decree that all
who should blaspheme against the one true
God should be destroyed, and their whole
house laid waste ? For if he was a persecutor,
why do you answer Amen to the words of a
persecutor ?3 But if he was not a persecutor,
why do you call those persecutors who deter
you from the madness of blasphemy ? For if
they compel you to worship an idol, then they

2 Dan. ii.-vi.

3 This is illustrated by the words of Aujfustin, Epist. 105, ad
Donatistas, c. I. 7: "Do ye not know that the words of the
king were: ' I thought it good to show the signs and wonders that
the high God hatli wrought toward me." How great are His
signs! and how mighty are His wonders! His kingdom is an
everlasting kingdom, and His dominion from generation to gen-
eration ' (Dan. iv. 2, 3)? Do you not, when you hear this, answer
Amen, and by saying this in a loud voice, place your seal on the
king's decree by a holy and solemn act ?" hi the Gothic liturgy
this declaration was made on Easter Eve (when the third chapter
of Daniel is still read in the Roman Church), and the people an-
swered " Allien. '

1
(

Chap. XCVIL] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

585

' are like the impious king, and you are like

I u\e three children; but if they are preventing

vou from fighting against Christ, it is you

v.ho are impious if you attempt to do this.

Ikit what they may be if they forbid this with

. terrible threats, I do not presume to say. Do

■ vou find some other name for them, if you

V, ill not call them pious emperors.

213. If I had been the person to bring for-
! ward these examples of Daniel and the three
chddren, you would perhaps resist, and de-
clare that they ought not to have been brought
from those times in illustration of our days;
but God be thanked that you yourself brought
j them forward, to prove the point, it is true,
i which you desired to establish, but you see
tiiat their force was rather in favor of what
vou least would wish to prove. Perhaps you
will say that this proceeds from no deceit of
, vours, but from the fallibility of human
nature. Would that this were true ! Amend
it, then You will not lose in reputation;
nav, it marks unquestionably the higher mind
to extinguish the fire of aniniosity by a frank
confession, than merely to escape the mist of
falsehood by acuteness of the understanding.

Chap. 94. — 214. PETiLiANUSsaid: "Where

'■; tlie law of God ? where is your Christianity,
if you not only commit murders and put men
to death, but also order such things to be
<l..ne?"

215. AuGUSTiN answered: In reply to this,
see what the fellow-heirs of Christ say
throughout the world. We neither commit
murders, and put men to death, nor order
such things to be done; and ycu are raging
much more madly than those who do such
things, in that you put such things into the
minds of men in opposition to the hopes of
everlasting life.

Chap. 95. — 216. Petilianus said: " If you
wish that we should be your friends, why do
you drag us to you against our will ? But if
you wish that we should be your foes, why do
you kill your foes ? "

217. AuGUSTiN answered: We neither drag
you to us against your will, nor do we kill our
foes; but whatever we do in our dealings with
you, though we may do it contrary to your
inclination, yet we do it from our love to you,
that you may voluntarily correct yourselves,
and live an amended life. For no one lives
against his will; and yet a boy, in order to
learn this lesson of his own free will,' is

I A'a;« ne»io vivit invitus ; et ta}nen fnier ut hoc volcns dis-
cat, invitiis 7'apula.t. Perhaps a better reading is, " Natn nemo
Z'tilt in-'itus ; et tauten finer iit vo/ens discat" etc., leaving out
"/zcv," which is wanting in the Fleury Mss.: "No one wishes
against his will ; and yeta boy, wishing to learn, is beaten against
his will.'

beaten contrary to his inclination, and that
often by the very man that is most dear to
him. And this, indeed, is what the kings
would desire to say to you if they were to
strike you, for to this end their power has
been ordained of God, But you cry out even
when they are not striking you.

Chap. 96. — 218. Petilianus said: "But
what reason is there, or what inconsistency
of emptiness, in desiring communion with us
so eagerly, when all the time you call us by
the false title of heretics?"

219. AuGUSTiN answered: If we so eagerly
desired communion with heretics, we should
not be anxious that you should be converted
from the error of heresy; but when the very
object of our negotiations with you is that
you should cease to be heretics, how are we
eagerly desiring communion with heretics?
For, in fact, it is dissension and division that
make you heretics; but peace and unity make
men Catholics. When, then, you come over
from your heresy to us, you cease to be what
we hate, and begin to be what we love.

Chap. 97. — 220. Petilianus said: " Choose,
in short, which of the two alternatives you
prefer. If innocence is on your side, why do
you persecute us with the sword ? Or if you
call us guilty, why do you, who are yourselves
innocent, seek for our company ? "

221. AuGUSTiN answered: O most ingenious
dilemma, or rather most foolish verbosity ! Is
it not usual for the choice of two alternatives
to be offered to an antagonist, when it is im-
possible that he should adopt both? For if
you should offer me the choice of the two
propositions, that 1 should say either that we
were innocent, or that we were guilty; or,
again, of the other pair of propositions, viz.,
those concerning you, I could not escape
choosing either one or the other. But as it
is, you offer me the choice of these two,
whether we are innocent or you are guilty,
and wish me to say which of these two I
choose for my reply. But I refuse to make
a choice; for I assert them both, that we are
innocent, and that you are guilty. I say that
we are innocent of the false and calumnious
accusation.s which you bring against us, so far
as any of us, being in the Catholic Church,
can say with a safe conscience that we have
neither given up the sacred books, nor taken
part in the worship of idols, nor murdered
any man, nor been guilty of any of the other
crimes which you allege against us; and that
any who may have committeil any such of-
fenses, which, however, you have not proved
in anv case, have thereby shut the doors of

5S6

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book IL

the kingdom of heaven, not against us, but
against themselves; " for every man shall
bear his own burden." ' Here you have your
answer on the first head. And I further say
that you are all guilty and accursed, — not
some of you owing to the sins of others, which
are wrought among you by certain of your
number, and are censured by certain others,
but all of you by the sin of schism; from
which most heinous sacrilege no one of you
can say that he is free, so long as he refuses
to hold communion with the unity of all
nations, unless, indeed, he be compelled to
say that Christ has told a lie concerning the
Church which is spread abroad among all
nations, beginning at Jerusalem. = And so
you have my second answer. See how I have
made you two replies, of which you were de-
sirous that we should be reduced to choose
the one. At any rate, you should have taken
notice that both assertions might be made by
us; and certainly, if this was what you wished,
you should have asked it as a favor of us that
we should choose one or the other, when
you saw that it was in our power to choose
both.

222. But " if innocence is on your side,
why do you persecute us with the sword?"
Look back for a moment on your troops,
which are not now armed after the ancient
fashion of their fathers only with cudgels, but
have further added to their equipment axes
and lances and swords, and determine for
yourselves to which of us the question best
belongs, "Why do you persecute us with the
sword?" "Or if you call us guilty," say
you, "why do you, who are yourselves inno-
cent, seek for our company?" Here I answer
very briefly. The reason why you, being
guilty, are sought after by the innocent, is
that you may cease to be guilty, and begin to
be innocent. Here then I have chosen both
of the alternatives concerning us, and an-
swered both of those concerning you, only do
you in turn choose one of the two. Are you
innocent or guilty ? Here you cannot choose
to make the two assertions, and yet choose
both, if so it pleases you. For at any rate
you cannot be innocent in reference to the
same circumstances in respect of which you
are guilty. If therefore you are innocent,
do not be surprised that you are invited to be
at peace with your brethren; but if you are
guilty, do not be surprised that you are
sought for punishment by kings. But since
of these two alternatives you assume one for
yourselves, and the other is alleged of you by
us, — for you assume to yourselves innocence,

I Gal. vi. 5.

2 Luke j;xiv. 47.

and it is alleged of you by us that you are
living impiously, — hear again once more what
I shall say on either head. If you are inno-
cent, why do you speak against the testimony
of Christ ? But if you are guilty, why do you
not fly for refuge to His mercy? For His,
testimony, on the one hand, is to the unity
of the world, and His mercy, on the other, is
in brotherly love.

Chap. 98. — 223. pETiLiANussaid: "Lastly,
as we have often said before, how great is
your presumption, that you should speak as
you presume to do of kings, when David
says, ' It is better to trust in the Lord than to
put confidence in man: it is better to trust in
the Lord than to put confidence in princes ?' " ^

224. AuGUSTiN answered: We put no con-
fidence in man, but, so far as we can, we warn
men to place their trust in the Lord; nor do
we put confidence in princes, but, so far as
we can, we warn princes to put confidence in
the Lord. And though we may seek aid from
princes to promote the advantage of the
Church, yet do we not put confidence in them.
For neither did the apostle himself put confi-
dence in that tribune, in the sense in which
the Psalmist talks of putting confidence in
princes, from whom he obtained for himself
that an escort of armed men should be as-
signed to him; nor did he put confidence in
the armed men, by whose protection he es-
caped the snares of the wicked ones, in any
such sense as that of the Psalmist where he
speaks of putting confidence in men.* But
neither do we find fault with you yourselves,
because you sought from the emperor that the
basilicas should be restored to you, as though
you had put your trust in Julian the prince;
but we find fault with you, that you have de-
spaired of the witness of Christ, from whose
unity you have separated the basilicas them-
selves. For you received them at the bid-
ding of an enemy of Christ, that in them you
should despise the commands of Christ, whilst
you find force and truth in what Julian or-
dained, saying, " This, moreover, on the peti-
tion of Rogatianus, Pontius, Cassianus, and
other bishops, not without an intermixture of
clergy, is added to complete the whole, that
those proceedings which were taken to their
prejudice wrongly and without authority being
all annulled, everything should be restored to
its former position; " and yet you find nothing
that has either force or truth in what Christ
ordained, saying, " Ye shall be witnesses unto
me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and
in Samaria, and even in the whole earth." s

3 Ps. cxviii. 8, 9, 4 Acts xxiii. 12-33.

5 Acts i. 8.

HAP. XCIX.] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

--^7

We entreat you, let yourselves be reformed.
Return to this most manifest unity of the
whole world; and let all things be restored to
their former position, not in accordance with
the words of the apostate Julian, but in ac-
icordance with the words of our Saviour Christ.
Have pity on your own soul. We are not now
comparing Constantine and Julian in order to
low how different they are. We are not
lying, If you have not placed confidence in
a man and in a prince, when you said to a
pagan and apostate emperor, that " in him
:-.istice only found a place," seeing that the
irty of Donatus has universally employed
I le prayers and the rescript in which those
''.ords occur, as is proved by the records of
the audience; much less ought we to be ac-
cused by you, as though we put our confi-
dence in any man or prince, if without any
ilasphemous flattery we obtained any request
from Constantine or from the other Christian
emperors; or if they themselves, without our
'■^king for it, but remembering the account
liich they shall render to the Lord, under
whose words they tremble when they hear
—hat you yourself have quoted, " Be wise now
\ lerefore, O ye kings," etc., and many other
sayings of the sort, make any ordinance of
-'leir own accord in support of the unity of
*, ;e Catholic Church. But I say nothing about
( onstantine. It is Christ and Julian that we
>ntrast before you; nay, more than this, it
^ God and man, the Son of God and the son
; hell, the Saviour of our souls and the de-
stroyer of his own. Why do you maintain
the rescript of Julian in the occupation of the
basilicas, and yet not maintain the gospel of
Christ in embracing the peace of the Church ?
We too cry out, " Let all things that have
been done amiss be restored to their ancient
condition." The gospel of Christ is of greater
antiquity than the rescript of Julian; the
unity of Christ is of greater antiquity than
the party of Donatus; the prayers of the
Church to the Lord on behalf of the unity of
the Church are of greater antiquity than the
prayers of Rogatianus, and Pontius, and
Cassianus, to Julian on behalf of the party of
Donatus. Are proceedings wrongly taken
when kings forbid division ? and are they not
wrongly taken when bishops divide unity ? Is
that wrong action when kings minister to the
witness of Christ in defence of the Church ">
and is it not wrong action when bishops con-
tradict the witness of Christ in order to deny
the Church ? We entreat you, therefore, that
the words of Julian himself, to whom you
thus made supplication, may be listened to,
not in opposition to the gospel, but in accord
ance with the gospel, and that

" all things

which have been done amiss may be restored
to their former condition."

Chap. 99. — 225. Petilianus said: "On
you, yes you, you wretched men, I call, who,
being dismayed with the fear of persecution,
whilst you seek to save your riches, not your
souls, love not so much the faithless faith of
the traitors, as the wickedness of the very
men whose protection you have won unto
yourselves, — just in the same way as sailors,
shipwrecked in the waves, plunge into the
waves by which they must be overwhelmed,
and in the great danger of their lives seek
unmistakeably the very object of their dread;
just as the madness of a tyrant, that he may
be free from apprehension of any person
whatsoever, desires to be feared, though this
is fraught with peril to himself: so, so you fly
for refuge to the citadel of wickedness, being
willing to look on the loss or punishment of
the innocent if you may escape fear for your-
selves. If you consider that you escape dan-
ger when you plunge into ruin, truly also it is
a faith that merits condemnation to observe
the faith of a robber. Lastly, it is trafficking
in a madman's gains to lose your own souls
in order not to lose your wealtli. For the
Lord Christ says, ' If a man shall gain the
whole world, and lose his own soul, what shall
a man give in exchange for his soul ?' '' '

226. AuGUSTiN answered: That exhortation
of yours would be useful, I cannot but ac-
knowledge, if any one were to employ it in a
good cause. It is undoubtedly well that you
have tried to deter men from preferring their
riches to their souls. But I would have you,
who have heard these words, listen also for a
time to us; for we also say this, but listen in
what sense. If kings threaten to take away
your riches, because you are not Jews accord-
ing to the flesh, or because you do not wor-
ship idols or devils, or because you are not
carried about into any heresies, but abide in
Catholic unity, then choose rather that your
riches should perish, that you perish not
yourselves; but be careful to prefer neither
anything else, nor the life of this world itself,
to eternal salvation, which is in Christ. But
if kings threaten you with loss or condemna-
tion, simply on the ground that you are here-
tics, such things are terrifying you not in
cruelty, but in mercy; and your determina-
tion not to fear is a sign not of bravery, but
of obstinacy. Hear then the words of Peter,
where he says, " What glory is it, if, when
ye be buffeted for your faults, ye take it
patiently?"'' so that herein you have neither

Matt. xvi. 26.

- I Pet. ii. so.

588

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

consolation upon earth, nor in the world to
come life everlasting; but you have here the
miseries of the unfortunate, and there the
hell of heretics. Do you see, therefore, my
brother, with whom I am now arguing, that
you ought first to show whether you hold the
truth, and then to exhort men that in uphold-
ing it they should be ready to give up all the
blessings which they possess in this present
world ? And so, when you do not show this,
because you cannot, — not that the talent is
wanting, but because the cause is bad, — why
do you hasten by your exhortations to make
men both beggars and ignorant, both in want
and wandering from the truth, in rags and
contentions, household drudges and heretics,
both losing their temporal goods in this world,
and finding eternal evils in the judgment of
Christ ? But the cautious son, who, while he
stands in dread of his father's rod, keeps
away from the lair of the serpent, escapes
both blows and destruction; whereas he who
despises the pains of discipline, when set in
rivalry with his own pernicious will, is both
beaten and destroyed. Do you not now un-
derstand, O learned man, that he who has re-
signed all earthly goods in order to maintain
the peace of Christ, possesses God; whereas
he who has lost even a very few coins in behalf
of the party of Donatus is devoid of heart ?

Chap. ioo. — 227. Petilianus said: "But
we who are poor in spirit' are not apprehen-
sive for oup wealth, but rather feel a dread of
wealth. We, ' as having nothing, and yet
possessing all things,' - look on our soul as
our wealth, and by our punishments and
blood purchase to ourselves the everlasting
riches of heaven. So again the same Lord
says, ' Whosoever shall lose his substance,
shall find it again an hundred fold.' "

228. AuGUSTiN answered: It is not beside
the purpose to inquire into the true meaning
of this passage also. For where my purpose
is not interfered with by any mistake which
you make, or any false impression which you
convey in quoting from the Scriptures, I do
not concern myself about the matter. It is
not then written, " Whosoever shall lose his
substance," but "Whosoever shall lose his
life for rny sake."3 And the passage about
substance is not, "Whosoever shall lose,"
but "Everyone that hath forsaken;"'' and
that not only with reference to substance of
money, but many other things besides. But
you meanwhile have not lost your substance;
but whether you have forsaken it, in that you
so boast of poverty, I cannot say. And if by

I Matt. V.3.
3 Matt. XVI. 2s.

2 2 Cor. vi. 10.
4 Matt. xix. 29.

any chance ray colleague Fortunatus may
know this, being in the same city with you,
he never told me, because I had never asked
him. However, even if you had done this,
you have yet yourself quoted the testimony
of the apostle against yourself in this very
epistle which you have written: " Though I
bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and
though I give my body to be burned, and
have not charity, it profiteth me nothing, "s
For if you had charity, you would not bring
charges against the whole world, which knows
nothing of you, and of which you know no
rriore, — no, not even such charges as are
founded on the proved offenses of the Afri-
cans. If you had charity, you would not pic-
ture to yourself a false unity in your calum-
nies, but you would learn to recognize the unity
that is most clearly set forth in the words
of the Lord: "even in the whole earth."*
But if you did not do this, why do you boast
as though you had done it ? Are you really
so filled with fear of riches, that, having
nothing, you possess all things ? Tell that to
your colleague Crispinus, who lately bought
a farm near our city of Hippo, that he might
there plunge men into the lowest abyss.'
Whence I too know this all too well. You
perhaps are not aware of it, and therefore
shout out in security, " We stand in fear of
riches." And hence I am surprised that
that cry of yours has been allowed to pass
Crispinus, so as to reach us. For between
Constantina, where you are, and Hippo,
where I am, lies Calama, where he is, nearer
indeed to our side, but still between us. I
wonder, therefore, how it was that he did not
first intercept this cry, and strike it back so
that it should not reach to our ears; and that
he did not, in opposition to you, recite in
much more copious phrase a eulogy on riches.
For he not only stands in no fear of riches,
but he actually loves them. And certainly,
before you utter anything about the rest, you
should rehearse such views to him. If he
makes no corrections, then we have our answer
ready. But for yourself, if it be true that
you are poor, you have with you my brother
Fortunatus. You will be more likely with
such sentiments to please him, who is my
colleague, than Crispinus, who is your own.

Chap. idi. — 229. Petilianus said: "In-
asmuch as we live in the fear of God, we have
no fear of the punishments and executions
which you wreak with the sword; but the only
thing which we avoid is that by your most
wicked communion you destroy men's souls,
according to the saying of the Lord Himself:

S I Cor. xiii. 3.

6 Acts i. 8.

7 See above, c. 84.

Chaf. CIL]

THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DOXATIST.

* Fear not them which kill the bod)% but are
not able to kill the soul; but rather fear Him
which is able to destroy both soul and body
in hell.' "'

230. AuGUSTiN answered: You do the de-
struction which you speak of, not with a visi-
ble sword, but with that of which it is said,
" The sons of men, whose teeth are spears
and arrows, and their tongue a sharp sword." ""
For with this sword of accusation and calumny
against the world of which you are wholly
ignorant, you destroy the souls of those who
lack experience. But if you find fault with a
most wicked communion, as you term it, I
would bid you presently, not with my words,
but with your own, to ascend, descend, enter,
turn yourself about, change sides, be such as
was Optatus. But if you return to your
senses, and shall find that you are not such as
he, not because he refused to partake of the
sacraments with you, but because you took
offense at what he did, then you will acquit
the world of crimes which do not belong to it,
and you will find yourself involved in the sin
of schism.

Chap. 102. — 231. Petilianus said: "You,
therefore, who prefer rather to be washed
with the most false of baptisms than to be
regenerate, not only do not lay aside your
sins, but also load your souls with the offenses
of criminals. For as the water of the guilty
has been abandoned by the Holy Spirit, so
it is clearly filled full of the offenses of the
traditors. To any wretched man, then, who
is baptized by one of this sort, we would say.
If you have wished to be free from falsehood,
you are really drenched with falsity. If you
desired to shut out the sins of the fiesh, you
will, as the conscience of the guilty comes
upon you, be partakers likewise of their guilt.
If you wished to extinguish the flames of
avarice, you are drenched with deceit, you are
drenched with wickedness, you are drenched
also with madness. Lastly, if you believe
that faith is identical in the giver and the re-
ceiver, you are drenched with the blood of a
brother by him who slays a man. And so it
comes to pass that you, who had come to
baptism free from sin, return from baptism
guilty of the sin of murder."

232. AuGUSTiN answered: I should like to
come to argument with those who shouted
assent when they either heard or read those
words of yours. For such men have not ears
in their hearts, but their heart in their ears.
Yet let them read again and again, and con-
sider, and find out for themselves, not what

■ Matt. X. 28.

2 Ps. Ivii. 4.

5S9

the sound of those words is, but what they
mean. First of all, to sift the meaning of the
last clause, "So it comes to pass," you say,
" that you who had come to baptism free from
sin, return from baptism guilty of the sin of
murder: " tell me, to begin with, who there is
that comes to baptism free from sin, with the
single exception of Him who came to be bap-
tized, not that His iniquity should be purged
away, but that an example of humility might
be given us ? For what shall be forgiven to
one free from sin? Or are you indeed en-
dowed with such an eloquence, that you can
show to U.S some innocence which yet com-
mitteth sin ? Do you not hear the words of
Scripture saying, " No one is clean from sin
in Thy sight, not even the infant whose life is
but of a single day upon the earth ?" ^ por
whence else is it that one hastens even with
infants to seek remission of their sins ? Do
you not hear the words of another Scripture,
" In sin did my mother conceive me ? " ■> In
the next place, if a man returns a murderer,
who had come without the guilt of murder,
merely because he receives baptism at a mur-
derer's hands, then all they who returned
from receiving baptism at the hands of
Optatus were made partakers with Optatus.
Go now, and see with what face you cast in
our teeth that we excite the wrath of kings
against you. Are you not afraid that as
many satellites of Gildo will be sought for
among you, as there are men who may have
been baptized by Optatus ? Do you see at
length how that sentence of yours, like an
empty bladder, has rattled not only with a
meaningless sound, but on your own head ?

233, To go on to the other earlier argu-
ments which you have set before us to be re-
futed, they are of such a nature that we must
needs allow that every one returns from bap-
tism endued with the character of him by
whom he is baptized; but God forbid that
those whom you baptize should return from
you infected with the same madness as pos-
sesses you when you make such a statement !
And what a dainty sound there was in your
words. "You are drenched with deceit, you
are drenched with wickedness, you are
drenched also with madness ! '' Surely you
would never pour fortli words like this unless
you were, not drenched, but filled even to re-
pletion with madness. Is it then true, to say
nothing of the rest, that all who come un-
tainted with covetousness to receive baptism
at the hands of your covetous colleagues, or
the priests of your party, return guilty of
covetousness, and that ihose who run in

3 Job XIV. 4, 5; cp. LXX.

■4 Ps. li. 5.

599

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II,

soberness to the whirlpool of intoxication to
be baptized return in drunkenness ? If you
entertain and teach such views as this, you
will have the effrontery even to quote, as
making against us, the passage which you
advanced some little time ago: "It is better
to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in
man. It is better to trust in the Lord than
to put confidence in princes.'" What is the
meanmg of your teaching, I would ask, save
only this, that we should put our confidence,
not in the Lord, but in man, when you say
that the baptized person is made to resemble
him who has baptized him ? And since you
assume this as the fundamental principle of
your baptism, are men to place their trust in
you ? and are those to place their trust in
princes who were disposed to place it in the
Lord ? Truly I would bid them hearken not
to you, but rather to those proofs which you
have urged against ourselves, ay, and to words
more awful yet; for not only is it written, " It
is better to trust in the Lord than to put con-
fidence in man," but also, "Cursed be the
man that trusteth in man.'^^

Chap. 103. — 234. Petilianus said: "Imi-
tate indeed the prophets, who feared to have
their holy souls deceived with false baptism.
For Jeremiah says of old that among impious
men water is as one that lies. ' Water,' he
says, ' that lies has not faith.' "

235, AuGUSTiN answered: Any one that
hears these words, without being acquainted
with the Scriptures, and who does not believe
that you are either so far astray as not to
know what you are saying, or deceiving in
such wise that he whom you have deceived
should not know what he says, would believe
that the prophet Jeremiah, wishing to be bap-
tized, had taken precautions not to be bap-
tized by impious men, and had used these
words with this intent. For what was your
object in saying, previous to your quotation
of this passage, " Imitate indeed the prophets,
who feared to have their holy souls deceived
with false baptism?" Just as though, in the
days of Jeremiah, any one were washed with
the sacrament of baptism, except so far as
the Pharisees almost every moment bathed
themselves, and their couches and cups and
platters, with the washings which the Lord
condemned, as we read in the gospel. ^ How
then could Jeremiah have said this, as though
he desired to be baptized, and sought to avoid
being baptized by impious men ? He said
it, then, when he was complaining of a faith-
less people, by the corruption of whose morals

Ps.

2 Jer. xvii. 5

3 Mark vii. 4.

he was vexed, not wishing to associate with
their deeds; and yet he did not separate him-
self bodily from their congregation, nor seek
other sacraments than those which the people
received as suitable to that time, according to
the law of Moses. To this people, there-
fore, in their evil mode of life, he gave the
name of " a wound," with which the heart of
the righteous man was grievously smitten,
whether speaking thus of himself, or fore-
shadowing in himself what he foresaw would
come to pass. For he speaks as follows: " O
Lord, remember me, and visit me; make
clear my innocence before those who perse-
cute me in no spirit of long-suffering: know
that for Thy sake I have suffered rebuke from
those that scorn Thy words. Make their
portion complete; and Thy word shall be unto
me the joy and rejoicing of mine heart: for I
am called by Thy name, O Lord God of hosts.
I sat not in the assembly of the mockers, but
was afraid of the presence of Thy hand; I sat
alone, because I was filled with bitterness.
Why do those who make me sad prevail
against me? My wound is grievous; whence
shall I be healed ? It is become unto me as
lying water, that has no faith."'* In all this
it is manifest what the prophet wished to be
understood, but manifest only to those who
do not wish to distort to their own perverse
cause the meaning of what they read. For
Jeremiah says that his wound has become
unto him as lying water, which cannot in-
spire faith; but he wished that by his wound
those should be understood who made him
sad by the evil conduct of their lives.
Whence also the apostle says, " Without were
fightings, within were fears; "s and again,
" Who is weak, and I am not weak? who is
offended, and I burn not?"* And because
he had no hopes that they could be reformed,
therefore he said, "Whence shall I be
healed?'' as though his own pain must needs
continue so long as those among whom he
was compelled to live continued what they
were. But that a people is commonly under-
stood under the appellation of water is shown
in the Apocalypse, where we understand
"many waters" to mean " many peoples,"
not by any conjecture of our own, but by an
express explanation in the place itself.'' Ab-
stain then from blaspheming the sacrament
of baptism from any misunderstanding, or
rather error, even when found in a man of
most abandoned character; for not even in
the lying Simon was the baptism which he re-
ceived a lying water,® nor do all the liars of
your party administer a lying water when they

[H.*f-

tlie

ere
sei'

4 Jer. XV. 15-18; cp. LXX. 5 2 Cor. yii. 5.

6 2 Cor. xi. 29. 7 Rev. xvii. 15 ^ Acts viii. 13.

Chap. CV.]

THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

"^QI

Waptize in the name of the Trinity. For
neither do they begin to be Uars only when
tiiey are betrayed and convicted, and so
forced to acknowledge their misdeeds; but
rather they were already liars, when, being
adulterers and accursed, they pretended to
1 >i chaste and innocent.

Chap. 104. — 236. Petilianus said :" David

also said, ' The oil of the sinner shall not
, nomt my head.' Who is it, therefore, that
J calls a sinner ? Is it I who suffer your vio-
lence, or you who persecute the innocent? "

237. AuGUSTiN answered: As representing
I .e body of Christ, which is the Church of
t le living God, the pillar and mainstay of the
truth, dispersed throughout the world, on ac-
count of the gospel which was preached, ac-
( ording to the words of the apostle, " to every
( reature which is under heaven:'' ' as repre-
M.-nting the whole world, of which David,
w hose words you cannot understand, has said,
'' The world also is stablished, that it cannot
be moved; '' - whereas you contend that it not
only has been moved, but has been utterly
'estroyed: as representing this, I answer, I
o not persecute the innocent. But David
lid, " The oil of the sinner," not of the
aditor; not of him who offers incense, not
of the persecutor, but '' of the sinner." What
t len will you make of your interpretation?
-ce first whether you are not yourself a sin-
i>t-r. It is nothing to the point if you should
-ay, I am not a traditor, I am not an offerer
(if incense, I am not a persecutor. I myself,
bv the grace of God, am none of these, nor
the world, which cannot be moved. But
say, if you dare, I am not a sinner. For
David says, "The oil of the sinner." For
so long as any sin, however light, be found in
you, what ground have you for maintaining
that you are not concerned in the expression
that is used, " The oil of the sinner" ? For
I would ask whether you use the Lord's prayer
in your devotions ? For if you do not use
that prayer, which our Lord taught His dis-
ciples for their use, where have you learned
another, proportioned to your merits, as ex-
ceeding the merits of the apostles ? But if
you pray, as our great Master deigned to
teach us, how do you say, " Forgive us our
trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass
against us? " For \n tliis petition we are not
referring to those sins which have already
been forgiven us in baptism. Therefore these
words in the prayer either exclude you from
being a petitioner to God, or else they make
it manifest that you too are a sinner. Let

' Co!, i. 23.

Ps. xciii. I.

those then come and kiss your head who have
been baptized by you, whose heads have
perished through your oil. But see to your-
self, both what you are and what you think
about yourself. Is it really true that Optatp.s,
whom pagans, Jews, Christians, men of our
party, men of your party, all proclaim
throughout the whole of Africa to have been
a thief, a traitor, an oppressor, a contriver of
schism; not a 'friend, not a client, but a tool
of him 3 whom one of your party declared to
have been his count, companion, and god, —
is it true that he was not a sinner in any con-
ceivable interpretation of the term ? What
then will they do whose heads were anointed
by one guilty of a capital offense ? Do not
those very men kiss your heads, on whose
heads you pass so serious a judgment by this
interpretation which you place upon the pas-
sage ? Truly I would bid you bring them
forth, and admonish them to heal themselves.
Or is it rather your heads which should be
healed, who run so grievously astray? What
then, you will ask, did David really say :
Why do you ask me: rather ask himself. He
answers you in the verse above: " The right-
eous shall smite me in kindness, and shall
reprove me; but let not the oil of the sinner
anoint myhead."-* What could be plainer?
what more manifest ? I had rather, he says,
be healed by a rebuke administered in kind-
ness, than be deceived and led astray by
smooth flattery, coming on me as an ointment
on my head. The self-same sentiment is
found elsewhere in Scripture under other
words: " Better are the wounds of a friend
than the proffered kisses of an enemy. "^

Chap. 105. — 238. Petilianus said: "But
he thus praises the ointment of concord among
brethren: ' Behold how good and how pleasant
it is for brethren to dwell together in unity !
It is like the precious ointment upon the
head, that ran down upon the beard, even
Aaron's beard; that went down to the skirts
of his garments; as the dew of Hermon, and
as the dew that descended upon the mountains
of Zion: for there the Lord commanded the
blessing, even life for evermore.'*^ Thus, he
says, is unity anointed, even as the priests
are anointed."

239. AuGUSTiN answered: Wiiat you say is
true. For that priesthood in the body of
Christ had an anointing, and its salvation is
secured by the bond of unity. For indeed
Christ Himself derives His nnme from chrism,
that is, from anointing. Him the Hebrews
call the Messiah, which word is closely akin

sGildo. •! Ps. cxii. 5; tp. I-XX and Hieron.

5 Prov. x.tvii. 6; cp. LXX. and Hieron. " Ps. cxxxiii.

592

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book II.

to the Phoenician language, as is the case
with very many other Hebrew words, if not
with almost all.' What then is meant by the
head in that priesthood, what by the beard,
what by the skirts of the garments ? So far
as the Lord enables me to understand, the
head is none other than the Saviour of the
body, of whom the apostle says, "And He is
the head of the body, the Church."^ By the
beard is not unsuitably understood fortitude.
Therefore, on those who show themselves to
be brave in His Church, and cling to the light
of His countenance, to preach the truth with-
out fear, there descends from Christ Himself,
as from the head, a sacred ointment, that is
to say, the sanctification of the Spirit. By
the skirts of the garments we are here given
to understand that which is at the top of the
garments, through which the head of Him
who gives the clothing enters. By this are
signified those who are perfected in faith
within the Church. For in the skirts is per-
fection. And I presume you must remember
what was said to a certain rich man: " If thou
wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast,
and give to the poor, and thou shalt have
treasure in heaven; and come and follow
me. "3 He indeed went away sorrowful,
slighting what was perfect, choosing what
was imperfect. But does it follow that there
were wanting those who were so made perfect
by such a surrender of earthly things, that the
ointment of unity descended upon them, as
from the head upon the skirts of the gar-
ments ? For, putting aside the apostles, and
those who were immediately associated with
those leaders and teachers of the Church,
whom we understand to be represented with
greater dignity and more conspicuous forti-
tude in the beard, read in the Acts of the
Apostles, and see those who "brought the
prices of the things that were sold, and laid
them down at the apostles^ feet. Neither said
any of them that aught of the things which
he possessed was his own: but they had all
things common: and distribution was made
unto every man according as he had need.
And the multitude of them that believed were
of one heart and of one soul." "» I doubt not
that you are aware that it is so written.
Recognize, therefore, how good and how
pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together
in unity. Recognize the beard of Aaron;

^Compare Tract, xv. 27 in Joaniiein : "Messiah was an-
ointed. The Greek for ' anointed ^ is ' Christ,' the Hebrew
Messiah ; whence also in Phcenician we have ' Messe ' for ' an-
oint.' For these languajres, the Hebrew, Phoenician and Syrian,
are closely cognate, as well as geographically bordering on each
other." See also Max Miiller's Lectures en the Science of Lan-
guage, series I. Lect. VIII. " The ancient language of Phoenicia,
to judge from inscriptions, was most closely allied to Hebrew."

2 Col. i. 18. 3 Matt. xix. 21. 4 Acts iv. 32-35.

recognize the skirts of the spiritual garments.
Search the Scriptures themselves, and see j
where those things began to be done; you I
will find that it was in Jerusalem. From this '■
skirt of the garment is woven together the
whole fabric of unity throughout all nations.
By this the Head entered into the garment^
that Christ should be clothed with all the
variety of the several nations of the earth,
because in this skirt of the garment appeared
the actual variety of tongues. Why, there-
fore, is the Head itself, whence that ointment
of unity descended, that is, the spiritual fra-
grance of brotherly love, — why, I say, is the
Head itself exposed to your resistance, while
it testifies and declares that " repentance and
remission of sins should be preached in His
name among all nations, beginning at Jerusa-
lem ^'?s And by this ointment you Vv'ish the
sacrament of chrism to be understood, which
is mdeed holy as among the class of visible
signs, like baptism itself, but yet can exist
even among the worst of men, wasting their
life in the works of the flesh, and never
destined to possess the kingdom of heaven,
and having therefore nothing to do either
with the beard of Aaron, or with the skirts of
his garments, or with any fabric of priestly
clothing. For where do you intend to place
what the apostle enumerates as '' the mani-
fest works of the flesh, which," he says, " are
these: fornication, uncleanness, lascivious-
ness, idolatry, poisonings, hatred, variance,
emulations, wrath, strife, heresies, envyings,
drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the
which I tell you before, as I have also told
you in time past, that they which do such
things shall not inherit the kingdom of
God?"^ I put aside fornications, which are
committed in secret; interpret uncleanness as
you please, I am willing to put it aside as
well. Let us put on one side also poisons,
since no one is openly a compounder or giver
of poisons. I put aside also heresies, since
you will have it so. I am in doubt whether I
ought to put aside idolatry, since the apostle
classes with it covetousness, v/hich is openly
rife among you. However, setting aside all
these, are there none among you lascivious,
none covetous, none open m their indulgence
of enmities, none fond of strife, or fond of
emulation, wrathful, given to seditions, en-
vious, drunken, wasting their time in revel-
lings ? Are none of such a character anointed
among you ? Do none die well known among
you to be given to such things, or openly in-
dulging in them ? If you say there are none,
I would have you consider whether you do

i Luke xxiv. 47.

'^ Cial. V. 19-21.

Chap. CVI.] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

593

not come under the description yourself, since
you are manifestly telling lies in the desire
for strife. But if you are yourself severed
from men of this sort, not by bodily separa-
tion, but by dissimilarity of life, and if you
behold with lamentation crowds like these
around your altars, what shall we say, since
they are anointed with holy oil, and yet, as
the apostle assures us with the clearness of
truth, shall not inherit the kingdom of God ?
Must we do such impious despite to the beard

'' Aaron and to the skirts of his garments, as
to suppose that they are to be placed there ?
I- at be that from us. Separate therefore the

•isible holy sacrament, which can exist both
in the good and in the bad,^in the former
for their reward, in the latter for judgment;
separate it from the invisible unction of
charity, which is the peculiar property of the
good. Separate them, separate them, ay,
and may God separate you from the party of
Donatus, and call you back again into the
Catholic Church, whence you were torn by
them while yet a catechumen, to be bound by
them in the bond of a deadly distinction.
Now are ye not in the mountains of Zion, the
dew of Hermon on the mountains of Zion, in
whatever sense that be received by you; for
you are not in the city upon a hill, which has
this as its sure sign, that it cannot be hid.
It is known therefore unto all nations. But
the party of Donatus is unknown to the ma-
jority of nations, therefore is it not the true
city.

Chap. 106. — 240. Petilianus said: "Woe
unto you, therefore, who, by doing violence
to what is holy, cut away the bond of unity;
whereas the prophet says, ' If the people sliall
sin, the priest shall pray for them: but if the
priest shall sin, who will pray for him? ' "

241. AuGUSTiN answered: I seemed too
a little while ago, when we were disputing
about the oil of the sinner, to anoint your
forehead, in order that you might say, if you
dared, whether you yourself were not a sinner.
You have had the hardihood to say as much.
What a portentous sin ! For in that you as-
sert yourself to be a priest, what else have
you maintained by quoting this testimony of
the prophet, save that you are wholly without
sin? For if you have sin, who is there that
shall pray for you, according to your under-
standing of the words? For thus you blazon
yourselves among the wretched peo]:)Ie, (juot-
ing from the prophet: "If the peoi)le shall
sin, the priest shall pray for them: l)ut if the
priest shah sin, who will pray for him?"' to

» Apparently misquoted from i Sam. ii. 25.

the intent that they may believe you to be
without sin, and entrust the wiping away of
their sins to your prayers. Truly ye are
great men, exalted al)ove your fellows, heav-
enl)^ godlike, angels indeed rather than men,
who pray for the people, and will not have
the people pray for you ! Are you more
righteous than Paul, more perfect than that
great apostle, who was wont to commend him-
self to the prayers of those whom he taught?
" Continue," he says, " in prayer, and watch
in the same with thanksgiving; withal pray-
ing also for us, that God would open unto us
a door of utterance, to speak the mystery of
Christ, for which I am also in bonds; that I
may make it manifest, as I ought to speak."'
See how prayer is made for an apostle, which
you would have not made for a bishop. Do
you perceive of how devilish a nature your
pride is? Prayer is made for an apostle, that
he may make manifest the mystery of Christ
as he ouglit to speak. Accordingly, if you
had a pious people under you, you ought to
have exhorted them to pray for you, that you
might not give utterance as you ought not.
Are you more righteous than the evangelist
John, who says, " If we say that we have no
sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not
in us ? " 3 Finally, are you more righteous
than Daniel, whom you yourself quoted in
this very epistle, going so far as to say,
"The most righteous king cast forth Daniel,
as he supposed, to be devoured by wild
beasts?" — a thing which he never did sup-
pose, since he said to Daniel himself, in the
most friendly spirit, as the context of the
lesson shows, "Thy God, whom thou servest
continually. He will deliver thee." •» But on
this subject we have already said much.
With regard to the question now before us,
viz., that Daniel was most righteous, it is
proved not by your testimony, though that
might be sufiicient for me in the argument
which I hold with you, but by the testimony
of the Spirit of God, speaking also by the
mouth of Ezekiel, where he named three men
of most eminent righteousness, Noah, Daniel,
and Job, who, he said, were the only men
that could be saved from a certain excessive
wrath of God, which was hanging over all the
rest.5 A man, therefore, of the highest
righteousness, one of three conspicuous for
righteousness, prays, and says, " While I was
speaking, and praying, and confessing my sin,
and the sin of my people Israel, and present-
ing my supplication before the Lord my
God."* And you say that you are without
sin, because forsooth you are a priest; and if

- Col. iv. 2-4.
5 Ezek. xiv. 14.

3 I John i. 8.
(> Dan. ix. 30.

4 Dan. vi. 16.

594

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book li.

the people sin, you pray for them: but if you
sin, who shall pray for you ? For clearly by
the impiety of such arrogance you show
yourself to be unworthy of the mediation of
that Priest whom the prophet would have to
be understood in these words, which you do
not understand. For now that no one may
ask why this was said, I will explain it so far
as by God's grace I shall be able. God was
preparing the minds of men, by His prophet,
to desire a Priest of such a sort that none
should pray for Him. He was Himself pre-
figured in the times of the first people and
the first temple, in which all things were figures
for our ensample. Therefore the high priest
used to enter alone into the holy of holies,
that he might make supplication for the
people, which did not enter with the priest
into that inner sanctuary;' just as our High
Priest is entered into the secret places of the
heavens, into that truer holy of holies, whilst
we for whom He prays are still placed here/
It is with this reference that the prophet says,
" If the people shall sin, the priest shall pray
for them: but if the priest shall sin, who will
pray for him?" Seek therefore a priest of
such a kind that he cannot sin, nor need that
one should pray for him. And for this rea-
son prayer is made for the apostles by the
people;- but for that Priest who is the Mas-
ter and Lord of the apostles is prayer not
made. Hear John confessing this, and say-
ing, " My little children, these things write I
unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man
sin, we have an Advocate with the Father,
Jesus Christ the righteous, and He is the
propitiation for our sins." ^ ^' JFc have," he
says; and " for our sins." I pray you, learn
humility, that you may not fall, or rather,
that in time you may arise again. For had
you not already fallen, you never would have
used such words.

Chap. 107. — 242. Petilianus said: "And
that none who is a layman may claim to be
free from sin, they are all bound by this pro-
hibition: 'Be not partakers of other men's
sins.' "

243. AuGUSTiN answered: You are mis-
taken fofo cceIo, as the saying is, by reason of
your pride, whilst, by reason of your humility,
you are unwilling to communicate with the
whole world. For, in the first place, this was
not spoken to a layman; and, in the second
place, you are wholly ignorant in what sense
it was spoken. The apostle, writing to
Timothy, gives this warning to none other
than Timothy himself, to whom he says in

' Lev. xvi.! Heh.

■ '-' Cor.

3 I Tohu ii. I, 2.

another place, "Neglect not the gift that is
in thee, which was given thee by prophecy,
with the laying on of the hands of the presby-
tery."" And by many other proofs it is made
clear that he was not a layman. But in that
he says, " Be not partaker of other men's
sins," 5 he means. Be not partaker voluntarily,
or with consent. And hence he immediately
subjoins directions how he shall obey the in-
junction, saying, " Keep thyself pure." For
neither was Paul himself partaker of other
men's sins, because he endured false brethren,
over whom he groans, in bodily unity; nor
did the apostles who preceded him partake of
the thievery and crime of Judas, because they
partook of the holy supper with him when he
had already sold his Lord, and been pointed
out as the traitor by that Lord.

Chap. 108. — 244. Petilianus said: "By
this sentence, again, the apostle places in the
same category those who have fellowship in
the consciousness of evil. ' ^Vorthy of death,'
he says, ' are both those who do such things,
and those who consent with those that do
them.'"^

245. AuGUSTiN answered: I care not in
what manner you have used these words, they
are true. And this is the substance of the
teaching of the Catholic Church, that there is
a great difference between those who consent
because they take pleasure in such things,
and those who tolerate while they dislike
them. The former make themselves chaff,
while they follow the barrenness of the chaff;
the latter are the grain. Let them wait for
Christ, who bears the winnowing-fan, that
they may be separated from the chaff.

Chap. 109. — 246. Petilianus said: " Come
therefore to the Church, all ye people, and
flee the company of tradiiors, if you would
not also perish with them. For that you may
the more readily know that, while they are
themselves guilty, they yet entertain an ex-
cellent opinion of our faith, let me inform
you that I baptize their polluted ones; they,
though may God never grant them such an
opportunity, receive those who are made
mine by baptism, — which certainly they would
not do if they recognized any defects in our
baptism. See therefore how holy that is which
we give, when even our sacrilegious enemy
fears to destroy it."

247. AuGUSTiN answered: Agamst this
error I have said much already, both in this
work and elsewhere. But since you think
that in this sentence you have so strong a

itw

•» I Tim. iv. 14.

5 I T

im. V. 22.

6 Rom. i. ^2.

Chap. CIX,]

THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

595

I confirmation of your vain opinions, that you
1 deemed it right to end your epistle with these
I words, that they migln remain as it were the
iresher in the minds of your readers, I think
,t well to make a short reply. We recognize
m heretics that baptism, which belongs not to
ilie heretics but to Christ, in such sort as in
fornicators, in unclean persons or effeminate,
i in idolaters, in poisoners, in those who retain
enmity, in those who are fond of contention,
in the credulous, in the proud, given to sedi-
tions, in the envious, in drunkards, in revellers;
and in men like these we hold valid the bap-
tism which is not theirs but Christ's. For of
men like these, and among them are included
heretics also, none, as the apostle says, shall
inherit the kingdom of heaven.' Nor are
they to be considered as being in the body of
Christ, which is the Church, simply because
they are materially partakers of the sacra-
ments. For the sacraments indeed are holy,
even in such men as these, and shall be of
force in them to greater condemnation, be-
cause they handle and partake of them un-
worthily. But the men themselves are not
within the constitution of the Church, which
increases in the increase of God in its mem-
bers through connection and contact with
Christ. For that Church is founded on a
rock, as the Lord says, "Upon this rock I
will build my Church." "" But they build on
the sand, as the same Lord says, " Every
one that heareth these sayings of mine, and
doeth them not, shall be likened unto a fool-
ish man, which built his house upon the
sand." 3 But that you may not suppose that
the Church which is upon a rock is in one
part only of the earth, and does not extend
even to its furthest boundaries, hear her voice
groaning from the psalm, amid the evils of
her pilgrimage. For she says, " From the
end of the earth have I cried unto Thee;
when my heart was distressed Thou didst lift
me up upon the rock; Thou hast led me, Thou,
my hope, hast become a tower of courage
from the face of the enemy.'*" See how she
cries from the end of the earth. She is not
therefore in Africa alone, nor only among the
Africans, who send a bishop from Africa to

I Gal. V. 19-21.
3 Matt. vii. 26.

»Matt. xvi. 18
4 Ps. Ixi. 2, 3.

Rome to *a few Montenses,^ and into Spain
to the house of one lady."^ See how she is
exalted on a rock. All, therefore, are not to
be deemed to be in her which build upon the
sand, that is, which hear the words of Christ
and do them not, even though both among us
and among you they have and transmit the
sacrament of baptism. See how her hope is
in God the Father, the Son, and the Holy
Ghost, — not in Peter or in Paul, still less in
Donatus or Petilianus. What we fear, there-
fore, to destroy, is not yours, but Christ's;
and it is holy of itself, even in sacrilegious
hands. For we cannot receive those who
come from you, unless we destroy in them
whatsoever appertains to you. For we destroy
the treachery of the deserter, not the stamp
of the sovereign. Accordingly, do you your-
self consider and annul what you said: "I,"
say you, "baptize their polluted ones; they,
though may God never grant them such an
opportunity, receive those who are made mine
by baptism." For you do not baptize men
who are infected, but you rebaptize them, so
as to infect them with the fraud of your error.
But we do not receive men who are made
yours by baptism; but we destroy that error
of yours whereby they are made yours, and
we receive the baptism of Christ, by which
they are baptized. Therefore it is not
without significance that you introduce the
words, "Though may God never grant them
such an opportunity." For you said, "They,
though may God never grant them such an
opportunity, receive those who are made mine
by baptism." For while you in your fear that
we may receive your followers desire to be
understood, "may God never give them the
opportunity of receiving such as are mine," I
suppose that, without knowing what it meant,
you said, "May God never make them mine
that you should receive them." For we pray
that those may not be really yours who come
over at the present moment to the Catholic
Church. Nor do they come over so as to lie
ours by right of bainism, but by fellowship
with us, and that with us they may belong to
Christ, in virtue of their baptism.

5 That the Donatists were called at Rome Monicnses^ is ob-
served by Augustin, dc Hcercsibus, c. Ixix., and Epist. liii. 2 ; and
before him by Optatus, Book II. c. iv. That they were also called
Ciitzii/>itittii, or Cutzupitte^ we learn from the same epistle, and
from his treatise tie UniUitt EccUsitty c. iii. 6. * Lucilla.

BOOK III.

IN THIS BOOK AUGUSTIN REFUTES THE SECOND LETTER' WHICH PETILIANUS WROTE TO HIM
AFTER HAVING SEEN THE FIRST OF AUGUSTIN's EARLIER BOOKS. THIS LETTER HAD
BEEN FULL OF VIOLENT LANGUAGE ; AND AUGUSTIN RATHER SHOWS THAT THE ARGU-
MENTS OF PETILIANUS HAD BEEN DEFICIENT AND IRRELEVANT, THAN BRINGS FORWARD
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF HIS OWN STATEMENTS,

Chap, i. — i. Being able to read, Petilianus,
I have read your letter, in which you have
shown with sufficient clearness that, in sup-
porting the party of Donatus against the
Catholic Church, you have neither been able
to say anything to the purpose, nor been
allowed to hold your tongue. What violent
emotions did you endure, what a storm of
feelings surged within your heart, on reading
the answer which I made, with all possible
brevity and clearness, to that portion of your
letter which alone at that time had come into
my hands ! For you saw that the truth which
we maintain and defend was confirmed with
such strength of argument, and illustrated
with such abundant light, that you could not
find anything which could be said against it,.
whereby the charges which we make might be
refuted. You observed, also, that the atten-
tion of many who had read it was fixed on
you, since they desired to know what you
would say, what you would do, how you would
escape from the difficulty, how you would
make your way out of the strait in which the
word of God had encompassed you. Here-
upon you, when you ought to have shown
contempt for the opinion of the foolish ones,
and to have gone on to adopt sound and truth-
ful sentiments, preferred rather to do what
Scripture has foretold of men like you: "Thou
hast loved evil more than good, and lying
rather than to speak righteousness."- Just
as if I in turn were willing to recompense
unto you railing for railing; in which case,
what should we be but two evil speakers, so
that those who read our words would either
preserve their self-respect by throwing us aside

I Possidius, in the third chapter of his Indiculus, designates
this third book as " One book against the second letter of the
same." Cp. Aug. Retractt. Bk. II. c. xxv.

= Ps. lii. 3.

with abhorrence, or eagerly devour what we
wrote to gratify their malice ? For my own
part, since I answer every one, whether in
writing or by word of mouth, even when I have
been attacked with insulting accusations, in
such language as the Lord puts in my mouth,
restraining and crushing the stings of empty
indignation in the interests of my hearer or
reader, I do not strive to prove myself su-
perior to my adversary by abusing him, but
rather to be a source of health in him by con-
victing him of his error.

2. For if those who take into consideration
what you have written have any feelings what-
soever, how did it serve you in the cause
which is at issue between us respecting the
Catholic communion and the party of Dona-
tus, that, leaving a matter which was in a cer-
tain sense of public interest, you should have
been led by private animosity to attack the
life of an individual with malicious revilings,
just as though that individual were the ques-
tion in debate ? Did you think so badly, I do
not say of Christians, but of the whole human
race, as not to suppose that your writings
might come into the hands of some prudent
men, who would lay aside all thoughts of in-
dividuals like us, and inquire rather into the
question which was at issue between us, and
pay heed, not to who and what we were, but
to what we might be able to advance in de-
fense of the truth or against error? You
should have paid respect to these men's judg-
ment, you should have guarded yourself
against their censurej^ lest they should think
that you could find nothing to say, unless you
set before yourself some one whom you might
abuse by any means within your pov/er. But
one may see by the thoughtlessness and fool-
ishness of some men, who listen eagerly to

LHAP.

II.]

THE LETTERS OF PETILIAX, THE DONATIST.

597

the quarrels of any learned disputants, that
while they take notice of the eloquence
wherewith you lavish your abuse, they do not
perceive with what truth you are refuted. At
tae same time, I think your object partly was
that I might be driven, by the necessity of
defending myself, to desert the very cause
which I had undertaken; and that so, while
men's attention was turned to the words of
opponents who were engaged not in disputa-
tion, but in quarrelling, the truth might be
obscured, which you are so afraid should
come to light and be well known among men.
What therefore was I to do in opposing such
a design as this, except to keep strictly to my
subject, neglectnig rather my own defense,
praying withal that no personal calumny may
lead me to withdraw from it ? I will exalt the
house of my God, whose honor I have loved,
with the tribute of a faithful servant's voice,
but myself I wnll humiliate and hold of no
account. "I had rather be a door-keeper in
the house of my God, than to dwell in the
tents of heretics."' I will therefore turn my
discourse from you, Petilianus, for a time,
and direct it rather to those \vhom you have
endeavored to turn away from me by your
revilings, as though my endeavor rather were
that men should be converted unto me, and
not rather with me unto God.

Chap. 2. — 3. Hear therefore, all ye w'ho
have read his revilings, what Petilianus has
vented against me with more anger than con-
sideration. To begin with, I will address you
in the words of the apostle, which certainly
are true, whatever I myself may be: "Let a
man so account of us as of the ministers of
Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God.
Moreover, it is required in stewards, that a
man be found faithful. P>ut with me it is a
very small thing that I should be judged of
you, or of man's judgment: yea, I judge not
mine own self." With regard to what im-
mediately follows, although I do not venture
to apply to myself the words, "For I am con-
scious of nothing in myself," = yet I say con-
fidently in the sight of God, that I am
conscious in myself of none of those charges
which Petilianus has brought against my life
since the time when I was baptized in Christ;
"yet am I not hereby justified, but He that
judgeth me is the Lord. Therefore judge
nothing before the time, until the Lord come,
who both will bring to light the hidden things
of darkness, and will make manifest the coun-
sels of the hearts; and then shall every man
have praise of God. And these things.

brethren, I have in a figure transferred to my-
self; that ye might learn in us not to think of
men above that which is written, that no one
of you be puffed up for one against an-
other. "3 "Therefore let no man glory in
men: for all things are yours; and ye are
Christ's; and Christ is God's."-' Again I say,
"Let no man glory in men;" nay, oftentimes
I repeat it, "Let no man glory in men." If
you perceive anything in us which is deserv-
ing of praise, refer it all to His praise, from
whom is every good gift and every perfect
gift; for it is "from above, and cometh down
from the Father of lights, with whom is no
variableness, neither shadow of turningf. "^
For v/hat have we which we did not receive ?
and if we have received it, let us not boast as
though we had not received it.*^ And in all
these things which you know to be good in
us, be ye our followers, at any rate, if we are
Christ's;^ but if, on the other hand, you either
suspect, or believe, or see that any evil is in
us, hold fast to that saying of the Lord's, in
which you may safely resolve not to desert
His Church because of men's ill deeds.
Whatsoever we bid you observe, that observe
and do; but whatsoever evil works you think
or know to be in us, those do ye not. For
this is not the time for me to justify myself
before you, when I have undertaken, neglect-
ing all considerations of self, to recommend
to you what is for your salvation, that no one
should make his boast of men. For "cursed
be the man that trusteth in man."' So long
as this precept of the Lord and His apostle
be adhered to and observed, the cause which
I serve will be victorious, even if I myself, as
my enemy would fain have thought, am faint
and oppressed in my own cause. For if you
cling most firmly to what I urge on you with
all my might, that every one is cursed who
places his trust in man, so that none should
make his boast of man, then you will in no
wise desert the threshing-floor of the Lord
on account of the chaff which either is now
being dispersed beneath the blast of the wind
of pride, or will be separated by the final
winnowing;'" nor will you fly from the great
house on account of the vessels made to dis-
honor;" nor will you quit the net through the
breaches made in it because of the bad fish
which are to be separated on the shore; " nor
will you leave the good pastures of unity, be-
cause of the goats which are to be placed on
the left when the Good Shepherd shall divide
! the flock;'^ nor will you separate yourselves

' Ps. Ixxxiv. 10.

* Nihil etiim viihi canscius sum.

3 I Cor. iv. 1-6.
6 I Cor. iv. 7.
9 Jer. xvii. ;.
>- .Matt. xiii. 47,48.

4 I Cor. I'ii. 21, 23.

7 I Cor. iv. 16.
'o .Matt iii. \z.
«3 Matt. XXV. 32, 33.

S las. i. 17.

8 "Slatt. x.\iii. 3.

'« a Tim. ii. 20.

598

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book III.

by an impious secession, because of the mix-
ture of the tares, from the society of that
good wheat, whose source is that grain that
dies and is multipHed thereby, and that grows
together throughout the world until the har-
vest. For the field is the world, — not only
Africa; and the harvest is the end of the
world,' — not the era of Donatus.

Chap. 3. — 4. These comparisons of the
gospel you doubtless recognize. Nor can we
suppose them given for any other purpose,
except that no one should make his boast in
man, and that no one should be puffed up for
one against another, or divided one against
another, saying, "I am of Paul," when cer-
tainly Paul was not crucified for you, nor were
you baptized in the name of Paul, much less
in that of Cascilianus, or of any one of us,-
that you may learn^ that so long as the chaff
is being bruised with the corn, so long as the
bad fishes swim together with the good in the
nets of the Lord, till the time of separation
shall come, it is your duty rather to endure
the admixture of the bad out of consideration
for the good, than to violate the principle of
brotherly love towards the good from any
consideration of the bad. For this admix-
ture is not for eternity, but for time alone;
nor is it spiritual, but corporal. And in this
the angels will not be liable to err, when they
shall collect the bad from the midst of the
good, and commit them to the burning fiery
furnace. For the Lord knoweth those which
are His. And if a man cannot depart bodily
from those who practise iniquity so long as
time shall last, at any rate, let every one that
nameth the name of Christ depart from
iniquity itself.^ For in the meantime he may
separate himself from the wicked in life, and
in morals, and in heart and will, and in the
same respects depart from his society; and
separation such as this should always be main-
tained. But let the separation in the body
be waited for till the end of time, faithfully,
patiently, bravely. In consideration of v/hich
expectation it is said, "Wait on the Lord; be
of good courage, and He shall strengthen
thine heart; wait, I say, upon the Lord."^
For the greatest palm of toleration is won by
those who, among false brethren that have
crept in unawares, seeking their own, and not
the things of Jesus Christ, yet show that they
on their part seek not to disturb the love
which is not their own, but Jesus Christ's, by
any turbulent or rash dissension, nor to break
the unity of the Lord's net, in which are
gathered together fish of every kind, till it is

' Matt. xiii. 24-40.
3 2 Tim. ii. 19.

- I Cor. i.i2, 13.
4 Ps. xxvii. 14.

drawn to the shore, that is, till the end of
time, by any wicked strife fostered in the
spirit of pride: whilst each might think him-
self to be something, being really nothing, and
so might lead himself astray, and wish that
sufficient reason might be ^ound for the
separation of Christian peoples in the judg-
ment of himself or of his friends, who declare
that they know beyond all question certain
wicked men unworthy of communion in the
sacraments of the Christian religion: though
whatever it may be that they know of them,
they cannot persuade the universal Church,
which, as it was foretold, is spread abroad
throughout all nations, to give credit to their
tale. And when they refuse communion
with these men, as men whose character they
know, they desert the unity of the Church;
whereas they ought rather, if there really
were in them that charity which endureth all
things, themselves to bear what they know in
one nation, lest they should separate them-
selves from the good whom they were unable
throughout all nations to fill with the teaching
of evil alien to them. Whence even, without
discussing the case, in which they are con-
victed by the weightiest proofs of having
uttered calumnies against the innocent, they
are believed with greater probability to have
invented false charges of giving up the sacred
books, when they are found to have them-
selves committed the far more heinous crime
of wicked division in the Church. For even,
if whatever imputations they have cast of
giving up the sacred books were true, yet
they in no wise ought to have abandoned the
society of Christians, who are commended by
holy Scripture even to the ends of the world,
on considerations which they have been
familiar with, while these men showed that
they were not acquainted with them.

Chap. 4. — 5. Nor would I therefore be
understood to urge that ecclesiastical disci-
pline should be set at naught, and that every
one should be allowed to do exactly as he
pleased, without any check, without a kind
of healing chastisement, a lenity which should
inspire fear, the severity of love. For then
what will become of the precept of the apos-
tle, "Warn them that are unruly, comfort the
feeble-minded, support the weak, be patient
toward all men; see that none render evil for
evil unto any man ?"5 At any rate, when he
added these last words, "See that none ren-
der evil for evil unto any man," he showed
with sufficient clearness that there is no ren-
dering of evil for evil when one chastises

5 I Thess. V. 14, 15.

Chap. VI.]

THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST

599

I those that are unruly, even though for the
! fault of unruliness be administered the punish-
i ment of chastising. The punishment of
chastising therefore is not an evil, though the
fault be an evil. For indeed it is the steel,
not of an enemy inflicting a wound, but of a
surgeon performing an operation. Things
like this are done within the Church, and that
i spirit of gentleness within its pale burns with
zeal towards God, lest the chaste virgin which
is espoused to one husband, even Christ,
should in any of her members be corrupted
from the simplicity which is in Christ, as Eve
was beguiled by the subtilty of the serpent.'
Notwithstanding, far be it from the servants
of the father of the family that they should
be unmindful of the precept of their Lord,
and be so inflamed with the fire of holy indig-
nation against the multitude of the tares,
that while they seek to gather thent in bun-
dles before the time, the wheat should be
rooted up together with them. And of this
sin these men would be held to be guilty, even
though they showed that those were true
charges which tliey brought against the tradi-
tors whom they accused; because they sepa-
j rated themselves in a spirit of impious pre-
! sumption, not only from the wicked, whose
society they professed to be avoiding, but also
from the good and faithful in all nations of
the world, to whom they could not prove the
truth of what they said they knew; and with
themselves they drew away into tlie same
destruction many others over whom they had
some slight authority, and who were not wise
enough to understand that the unity of the
Church dispersed throughout the world was
on no account to be forsaken for other men's
sins. So that, even though they themselves
knew that they were pressing true charges
against certain of their neighbors, yet in tliis
way a weak brother, for whom Christ died,
was perishing through their knowledge;^
whilst, being offended at other men's sins, he
was destroying in himself the blessing of
peace which he had with the good brethren,
who partly had never heard such charges,
partly had shrunk from giving hasty credence
to what was neither discussed nor proved,
partly, in the peaceful spirit of humility, had
left these charges, whatsoever they might be,
to the cognizance of the judges of the Church,
to whom the whole matter had been referred,
across the sea.

Chap. 5. — 6. Do you, therefore, holy
scions of our one Catholic mother, beware
with all the watchfulness of which you are

' 2 Cor. xi. 2, 3.

- I Cor. viii. ii.

capable, in due submission to the Lord, of
the example of crime and error such as this.
With however great light of learning and of
reputation he may shine, however much he
may boast himself to be a precious stone, who
endeavors to lead you after liim, remember
always that that brave woman wiio alone is
lovely only to her husband, whom holy Scrip-
ture portrays to us in the last chapter of the
Book of Proverbs, is more precious than any
precious stones. Let no one say, I will fol-
low such an one, for it was even he that made
me a Christian; or, I will follow such an one,
for it was even he that baptized me. For
"neither is he that planteth anything, neither
he that watereth, but God that giveth the'in-
crease."3 And "God is love; and he that
dwelleth in love, dwelleth in God, and God in
him." + No one also that preaches the name
of Christ, and handles or administers the
sacrament of Christ, is to be followed in op-
position to the unity of Christ. "Let every
man prove his own work; and then shall he
have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in
another. For every man shall bear his own
burden," s — the burden, that is, of rendering
an account; for "every one of shall give an
account of himself. Let us not therefore
judge one another any more." '^ For, so far
as relates to the burdens of mutual love,
"bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfill
the law of Christ, For if a man think iiim-
self to be something, when he is nothing, he
deceiveth himself."' Let us therefore "for-
bear one another in love, endeavoring to keep
the unity of the Spirit in tlie bond of peace;" ^
for no one who gathers outside that peace is
gathering with Christ; but "he that gathering
not with Him scattereth abroad." '

Chap. 6. — 7. Furthermore, whether con-
cerning Christ, or concerning His Church, or
any other matter whatsoever which is connect-
ed with your faith and life, to say nothing of
ourselves, who are by no means to be com-
pared with him who said, "Thougii we," at
any rate, as he went on to say, "Though an
angel from heaven preach any other gospel
unto you than that which" ye have received
in the lawful and evangelical Scripture, "let
him be accursed." '° While carrying out this
principle of action in our dealings with you,
and with all whom we desire to gain in Christ,
and, amongst other things, while preaching the
holy Church which we read of as promised in
the epistle? of God, and see to be fulfilled
according to the promises in all nations of the
world, we have earned, not tlie rendering of

3 1 Cor. iii. 7.

* Kom. xiv. 12, 13.

9 Matt. xii. 30.

' 1 John iv. 16.
/ Oa]. vi. 2, 3.
'u Gal. i. 8.

5 Gal. \\. 4, 5.
•* Eph, iv. J, 3.

6oo

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book III.

thanks, but the flames of hatred, from those
whom we desire to have attracted into His
most peaceful bosom; as though we had
bound them fast in that party for which they
cannot find any defense that they should
make; or as though we so long before had
given injunctions to prophets and apostles
that they should insert in their books no
proofs by wiiich it might be shown that the
party of Donatus was the Church of Christ.
And we indeed, dear brethren, when we hear
false charges brought against us by those
whom we have offended by preaching the
eloquence of truth, and confuting the vanity
of error, have, as you know, the most abun-
dant consolation. For if, in the matters which
they lay to my charge, the testimony of my
conscience does not stand against me in
the sight of God, where no mortal eye can
reach, not only ought I not to be cast down,
but I should even rejoice and be exceeding
glad, for great is my reward in heaven.' For
in fact I ought to consider, not how bitter,
but how false is what I hear, and how true He
is in defense of whose name I am exposed to
it, and to whom it is said, "Thy name is as
ointment poured forth." ^ And deservedly |
does it smell sweet in all nations, though those
who speak evil of us endeavor to confine its
fragrance within one corner of Africa. Why
therefore should we take amiss that we are
reviled by men who thus detract from the
glory of Christ, whose party and schism find
offense in what was foretold so long before
of His ascent into the heavens, and of the
pouring forth of His name, as of the savor
of ointment: "Be Thou exalted, O God,
above the heavens: let Thy glory be above
all the earth " ? ^

Chap. 7. — 8. Whilst we bear the testimony
of God to this and the like effect against the
vain speaking of men, we are forced to under-
go bitter insults from the enemies of the glory
of Christ. Let them say what they will.

whilst He exriorts us,

saymg.

'Blessed are

they which are persecuted for righteousness'
sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you,
and persecute you, and shall say all manner
of evil against you falsely for my sake."
What He says in the first instance, "for
righteousness' sake," He has repeated in the
words that He uses afterwards, "for my sake;"
seeing that He "is made unto us wisdom, and
righteousness, and sanctification, and re-
demption, that, according as it is written, He
that glorieth, let him glorv in the Lord." ■*

I Matt. V. 12.
3Ps. !vii. II.

- Cant. i. 3.

4 I Cor. i. 30, 31.

And when He says, "Rejoice, and be ex-
ceeding glad, for great is your reward in
heaven,'* s if I hold in a good conscience what
is said "for righteousness' sake," and "for
my sake," whosoever willfully detracts from
my reputation is against his will contributing
to my reward. For neither did He only in-
struct me by His word, without also contirra-
ing me by His example. Follow the faith of
the holy Scriptures, and you will find that
Christ rose from the dead, ascended into
heaven, sitteth at the right hand of the Father.
Follow the charges brought by His enemies,
and you will presently believe that He was
stolen from the sepulchre by His disciples.
Why then should we, while defending His
house to the best of the abilities given us by
God, expect to meet with any other treatment
from His enemies? "If they have called the
Master of the house Beelzebub, how much
more shall they call them of His household?" ^
If, therefore, we suffer, we shall also reign
with Him. But if it be not only the wrath of
the accuser that strikes the ear, but also the
truth of the accusation that stings the con-
science, what does it profit me if the whole
world were to exalt me with perpetual praise ?
So neither the eulogy of him who praises has
power to heal a guilty conscience, nor does
the insult of him who reviles wound the good
conscience. Nor, however, is your hope which
is in the Lord deceived, even though we
chance to be in secret what our enemies wish
us to be thought; for you have not placed
your hope in us, nor have you ever heard
from us any doctrine of the kind. You there-
fore are safe, whatever we may be, who have
learned to say, "I have trusted in the Lord;
therefore I shall not slide;" ^ and "In God
have I put my trust: I will not be afraid what
man can do unto me."" And to those who
endeavor to lead you astray to the earthly
heights of proud men, you know how to
answer, "In the Lord put I my trust: how
say ye to my soul, Flee as a bird to your
mountain ? " »

Chap. 8, — 9. Nor is it only you that are
safe, whatever we may be, because you are
satisfied with the very truth of Christ which
is in us, in so far as it is preached through us,
and everywhere throughout the world, and
because, listening to it willingly, so far as it is
set forth by the humble ministry of our ton-
gue, you also think well and kindly of us, —
for so your hope is in Him whom we preach
to you out of His loving-kindness, which ex-
tends over you, — but further, all of you, who

5 Matt. V. 10-12.
sPs. Ivi. II.

6 Matt.x. 25.

9 Ps. xi. L,

7 Ps. .\.xvi.

Chap. X.]

THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

60 1

also received the sacrament of holy baptism
from our ministering, may well rejoice in the
same security, seeing that you were baptized,
not into us, but into Christ. You did not
therefore put on us, but Christ; nor did I ask
you whether you were converted unto me, but
unto the living God; nor whether you believed
in me, but in the Father, tne Son, and the
Holy Ghost. But if you answered my ques-
tion with truthful hearts, you were placed in
a state of salvation, not by the putting away
of the filth of the flesh, but by the answer of
a good conscience towards God;' not by a fel-
low-servant, but by the Lord; not by the
herald, but by the judge. For it is not true,
as Petilianus inconsiderately said, that "the
conscience of the giver," or, as he added,
*'the conscience of him who gives in holiness,
is what we look for to wash the conscience of
the recipient." For when something is given
that is of God, it is given in holiness, even
by a conscience which is not holy. And cer-
tainly it is beyond the power of the recipient
to discern whether the said conscience is holy
or not holy; but that which is given he can
discern with clearness. That which is known
to Him who is ever holy is received with per-
fect safety, whatever be the character of the
minister at whose hands it is received. For
unless the words which are spoken from
Moses' seat were necessarily holy. He that is
the Truth would never have said, "Whatso-
ever they bid you observe, that observe and
do." But if the men who uttered holy words
were themselves holy. He would not have
said, "Do not ye after their works: for they
say, and do not."- For it is true that in no
way do men gather grapes of thorns, because
grapes never spring from the root of a thorn ;
but when the shoot of the vine has entwined
itself in a thorn hedge, the fruit which hangs
upon it is not therefore looked upon with
dread, but the thorn is avoided, while the
grape is plucked.

Ch.4P. 9. — 10. Therefore, as I have often
said before, and am desirous to bring home
to you, whatsoever we may be, you are
safe, who have God for your Father and His
Church for your mother. For although the
goats may feed in company with the sheep,
yet they shall not stand on the right hand;
although the chaff may be bruised together
with the wheat, it shall not be gathered into
the barn; although the bad fish may swim in
company with the good within the Lord's
nets, they shall not be gathered into vessels.
Let no man make his boast even in a good

I I Pet. iii. 21.

2 Matt, xxiii. 2, 3.

man: let no man shun the good gifts of God
even in a bad man.

Ch.ap. 10. — II. Let these things suffice
you, my beloved Christian brethren of the
Catholic Church, so far as the present busi-
ness is concerned; and if you hold fast to this
in Catholic affection, so long as you are one
sure flock of the one Shepherd, I am not too
much concerned with the abuse that any ene-
my may lavish on me, your partner in the
flock, or, at any rate, your watch-dog, so long
as he compels me to bark rather in your de-
fense than in my own. And yet, if it were
necessary for the cause that I should enter on
my own defense, I should do so with the
geatest brevity and the greatest ease, joining
freely with all men in condemning and bear-
ing witness against the whole period of my
life before I received the baptism of Christ,
so far as relates to my evil passions and my
errors, lest, in defending that period, I
should seem to be seeking my own glory, not
His, who by His grace delivered me even
from myself. Wherefore, when I hear that
life of mine abused, in whatever spirit he
may be acting who abuses it, I am not so
thankless as to be grieved. However much
he finds fault with any vice of mine, I praise
him in the same degree as my physician.
Why then should I disturb myself about de-
fending those past and obsolete evils in my
life, in respect of which, though Petilianus
has said much that is false, he has yet left
more that is true unsaid ? But concerning
that period of my life which is subsequent to
my baptism, to you who know me I speak
unnecessarily in telling of those things which
might be known to all mankind; but those
who know me not ought not to act with such
unfairness towards me as to believe Petilimus
rather than you concerning me. For if one
should not give credence to the paneg}'rics of
a friend, neither should one believe the de-
traction of an enemy. There remain, there-
fore, those things which are hidden in a man,
in which conscience alone can bear testimony,
which cannot be a witness before men.
Herein Petilianus says that I am a Mani-
chsean, speaking of the conscience of another
man; I, speaking of ni}' own conscience, aver
that I am not. Clioose which of us you had
sooner believe. Notwithstanding, since there
is not any need even of this short and easy
defense on my part, where the question at
issue is not concerning the merits of any in-
dividual, whoever he may be, but concerning
the truth- of the whole Church, I have more

3 Some editors have " uHit.itc," but Atnerbach and the Mss.
" vn'ifit/c- ." and this is supported by c. 24, 28 below: " De

6o2

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book III.

also to say to an)' of you, who, being of the
party of Donatus, have read the evil words
which Petilianus has written about me, which
I should not have heard from him if I had had
no care about the loss of your salvation; but
then I should have been wanting in the bowels
of Christian love.

Chap. ii. — 12. What wonder is it then, if,
when I draw in the grain that has been shaicen
forth from the threshing-floor of the Lord,
together with the soil and chaff, I suffer injury
from the dust that rebounds against me; or
that, when I am diligently seeking after the
lost sheep of my Lord, I am torn by the
briars of thorny tongues ? I entreat you, lay
aside for a time all considerations of party
feeling, and judge with some degree of fair-
ness between Petilianus and myself. I am
desirous that you should be acquainted with
the cause of the Church; he, that you should
be familiar with mine. For what other reason
than because he dares not bid you disbelieve
my witnesses, whom I am constantly citing in
the cause of the Church, — for they are proph-
ets and apostles, and Christ Himself, the
Lord of prophets and apostles, — whereas you
easily give him credit in whatever he may
choose to say concerning me, a man against
a man, and one, moreover, of your own party
against a stranger to you ? And should I
adduce any witnesses to my life, however im-
portant the thing he might say would be, it
would not be believed by them, and of this
Petilianus would quickly persuade you; es-
pecially when any one would bring forward
a plea for me. Since he is an enemy of
the Donatist party, in virtue of this fact he
would also continually be considered your
enemy. Petilianus therefore reigns supreme.
Whenever he aims any abuse at me, of what-
ever character it may be, you all applaud and
shout assent. This cause he has found wherein
the victory is possible for him, but only with
you for judges. He will seek for neither proof
nor witness; for all that he has to prove in his
words is this, that he lavishes most copious
abuse on one whom you most cordially hate.
For whereas, when the testimony of divine
Scripture is quoted in such abundance and in
such express terms in favor of the Catholic
Church, he remains silent amidst your grief,
he has chosen for himself a subject on which
he may speak amidst applause from you; and
though really conquered, yet, pretending that
he stands unmoved, he may make statements
concerning me like this, and even worse than

ecclesiiE vel bapiisjni veritate ;" and c. 13,22 of the treatise «/f
Unico BaptisDw : '^ A mbulantibus m ecclesicE veritaie"

this. It is enough for me,' in respect of the
cause which I am now pleading, that whatso-
ever I may be found to be, yet the Church
for which I speak ' unconquered.

Chap, 12. — 13. For I am a man of the
threshing-floor of Christ: if a bad man, then
part of the chaff; if good, then of the grain.
The winnowing-fan of this threshing-floor is
not tiie tongue of Petilianus; and hereby,
whatever evil he may have uttered, even with
truth, against the chaff of this threshing-floor,
this in no way prejudices its grain. But
whereinsoever he has cast any revilings or
calumnies against the grain itself, its faith is
tried on earth, and its reward increased in the
heavens. For where men are holy servants
of the Lord, and are fighting with holiness
for God, not against Petilianus, or any flesh
and blood like him, but against principalities
and powers, and the rulers of the darkness of
this world, ^ such as are all enemies of the
truth, to whom I would that we could say,
"Ye were sometime darkness, but now are ye
light in the Lord," ^ — where the servants of
God, I say, are waging such a war as this,
then all the calumnious revilings that are
uttered by their enemies, which cause an evil
report among the malicious and those that
are rash in believing, are weapons on the left
hand: it is with such as these that even the
devil is defeated. For when we are tried by
good report, whether we resist the exaltation
of ourselves to pride, and are tried by evil
report, whether we love even those very ene-
mies by whom it is invented against us, then
we overcome the devil by the armor of righte-
ousness on the right hand and on the left.
For when the apostle had used the expres-
sion, "By the armor of righteousness on the
right hand and on the left," he at once goes
on to say, as if in explanation of the terms,
"By honor and dishonor, by evil report and
good report," '' and so forth, — reckoning hon-
or and good report among the armor on the
right hand, dishonor and evil report among
that upon the left.

Chap. 13. — 14. If, therefore, I am a serv-
ant of the Lord, and a soldier that is not
reprobate, with whatever eloquence Petilianus
stands forth reviling me, ought I in any way
lO be annoyed that he has been appointed for

1 Ubi vobis faztentibus loquaiiir. ct victiis vei-uvi simulans
statinn^ talia vel ctiain scclcratiorz dicat in jitc. Mihi sat est
ad rem, etc. Morel (Elem. Crit. pp. 326-328) susffjests as an im-
provement, " Ubi vohis Javentihus loquattir ct victtis. I'erjim
si Jtiillies tantnin talia 7'el etiam sceleratiora dicat in mi\ mihi
sat est,' etc., — "on which he may speak amidst applause from
you, even when beaten. But if he were to make a thousand
times as many statements concerning me," etc.

2 Eph. vi. 12. 3 Eph. V. 8. 4 2 Cor. vi. 7, 8.

Chap. XVI.]

THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

60:

me as a most accomplished craftsman of the
armor on the left? It is necessary that I
should fight in this armor as skillfully as pos-
sible in defence of my Lord, and should smite
with it the enemy against whom I wage an
unseen fight, who in all cunning strives and
endeavors, with the most perverse and ancient
craftiness, that this should lead me to hate
Petilianus, and so be unable to fulfill the
command which Christ has given, that we
should "love our enemies." ' But from this
may I be saved by the mercy of Him who
loved me, and gave Himself for me, so that,
as He hung upon the cross. He said, "Father,
forgive them; for they know not what they
do;" - and so taught me to say of Petilianus,
and all other enemies of mine like him,
"Father, forgive them; for they know not
what they do.'

Chap. 14. — 15. Furthermore, if I have
obtained from you, in accordance with my
earnest endeavors, that, laying aside from
your minds all prejudice of party, you should
be impartial judges between Petilianus and
myself I \'Al show to you that he has not
replied to what I wrote, that you may under-
stand that he has been compelled by lack of
truth to abandon the dispute, and also see
what revilings he has allowed himself to utter
against the man who so conducted it that he
had no reply to make. And yet what I am
going to say displays itself with such manifest
clearness, that, even though your minds were
estranged from me by party prejudice and
personal hatred, yet, if you would only read
what is written on both sides, you could not
but confess among yourselves, in your inmost
hearts, that I have spoken truth,

16. For, in replying to the former part of
his writings, which then alone had come into
my hands, without taking any notice of his
wordy and sacrilegious revilings, where he
sa}'s, "Let those men cast in our teeth our
twice-repeated baptism, who, under the name
of baptism, have polluted their souls with a
guilty washing; whom I hold to be so
obscene that no' manner of filth is less clean
than they; whose lot it has been, by a per-
version of cleanliness, to be defiled by the
water wherein they washed;" I thought that
what follows was worthy of discussion and
refutation, where he says, "For what we look
for is the conscience of the giver, that the
conscience of the recipient may thereby be
cleansed;' and I asked what means were to
be found for cleansing one who receives bap-
tism when the conscience of the giver is pol-

' Luke vi. 35.

Luke xxiii. 34.

luted, without the knowledge of him who is
to receive the sacrament at his hands. ^

Chap. 15. — 17. Read now the most profuse
revilings wnich he has poured forth whilst
puffed up with indignation against me, and see
whetiier he has given me any answer, when I
ask what means are to be found for cleansing
one who receives baptism when the conscience
of the giver is polluted, without the knowledge
of him who receives the sacrament at his
hands. I beg of you to search minutely, to
examine every page, to reckon every line, to
ponder every word, to sift the meaning of
each syllable, and tell me, if you can discover
it, where he has made answer to the question.
What means are to be found for cleansing the
conscience of the recipient who is unaware
that the conscience of the giver is polluted ?

18. For how did it bear upon the point that
he added a phrase which he said was sup-
pressed by me, maintaining that he had writ-
ten in the following terms: "The conscience
of him who gives in holiness is what we look
for to cleanse the conscience of the recipient?"
For to prove to you that it was not suppress-
ed by me, its addition in no way hinders my
inquiry, or makes up the deficiency wiiich
was found in him. For in the face of those
very words I ask again, and I beg of you to
see whether he has given any answer. If "the
conscience of him who gives in holiness is
what we look for to cleanse the conscience
of the recipient," what means are to be found
for cleansing the conscience of the recipient
when the conscience of the giver is stained
with guilt, without the knowledge of him who
is to receive the sacrament at his hands ? I
insist upon an answer being given to this.
Do not allow that any one should be prejudic-
ed by revilings irrelevant to the matter in
hand. If the conscience of him who gives in
holiness is what we look for, — observe that I
do not say "the conscience of him who gives,"
but that I added the words, "of him who
gives in holiness,'' — if the conscience, then, of
him who gives in holiness is what we look for,
what means are to be found for cleansing one
who receives baptism when the conscience of
the giver is polluted, without the knowledge
of him who is to receive the sacrament at his
hands ?

Chap. 16. — 19. Let him go now, and with
panting lungs and swollen throat find fault
witii me as a mere dialectician. Nay, let him
summon, not me, but the science of dialectics
itself, to the bar of popular opinion as a forger

3 See above, Book \. c. i. 2.

6o4

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book III.

of lies, and let him open his mouth to its
widest against it, with all the noisiest uproar
of a special pleader. Let him say whatever
he pleases before the inexperienced, that so
the learned may be moved to wrath, while
the ignorant are deceived. Let him call me,
in virtue of my rhetoric, by the name of tne
orator Tertullus, by whom Paul was accused; '
and let him give himself the name of Advo-
cate,= in virtue of the pleading in which he
boasts his former power, and for this reason
delude himself with the notion that he is, or
rather was, a namesake of the Holy Ghost.
Let him, with all my heart, exaggerate the
foulness of the Manichaeans, and endeavor to
divert it on to me by his barking. Let him
quote all the exploits of those who have been
condemned, whether known or unknown to
me; and let him turn into the calumnious im-
putation of a prejudged crime, by some new
right entirely his own, the fact that a former
friend of mine there named me in my absence
to the better securing of his own defense.
Let him read the titles that have been placed
upon my letters by himself or by his friends,
as suited their pleasure, and boast that he
has, as it were, involved me hopelessly in
their expressions. When I acknowledge cer-
tain eulogies of bread, uttered in all simplicity
and merriment, let him take away my char-
acter with the absurd imputations of poison-
ous baseness and madness. And let him
entertain so bad an opinion of your under-
standing, as to imagine that he can be believed
when he declares that pernicious love-charms
Vv^ere given to a woman, not only with the
knowledge, but actually with the complicity^
of her husband. What the man who was
afterwards to ordain me bishop ■* wrote about
me in anger, while I was as yet a priest, he
may freely seek to use as evidence against me.
That the same man sought and obtained for-
giveness from a holy Council for the wrong
he thus had done me, he is equally at liberty
to ignore as being in my favor, — being either
so ignorant or so forgetful of Christian gen-
tleness, and the commandment of the gospel,
that he brings as an accusation against a
brother what is wholly unknown to that brother
himself, as he humbly entreats that pardon
may in kindness be extended to him.

Chap. 17. — 20. Let him further go on, in
his discourse of many but manifestly empty

I Acts xxiv. I. = Paracletus.

3 " Fa~ie7ite," which is wanting in the Mss., was inserted in the
margin by Erasmus, as being needed to complete the sense.

4 Megalius, bishop of Calama, primate of Numidia, was the
bishop who ordained Augustin, as we find in c. viii. of his life by
Possidius. Augustin makes further reply to the same calumny,
which was gathered from a letter of Megalius, in Contra Cres-
conium^ Book III. c. 80, 92, and Book IV. c. 64, 78, 79.

words, to matters of which he is wholly igno-
rant, or in which rather he abuses the igno-
rance of the mass of those who hear him, and
from the confession of a certain woman, that
she had called herself a catechumen of the
Manichoeans, being already a full member of
the Catholic Church, let him say or write what
he pleases concerning their baptism, — not
knowing, or pretending not to know, ihat the
name of catechumen is not bestowed among
them upon persons to denote that they are at
some future time to be baptized, but that this
name is given to such as are also called Hear-
ers, on the supposition that they cannot ob-
serve what are considered the higher and
greater commandments, which are observed by
those whom they think right to distinguish and
honor by the name of Elect. Let him also
maintain with wonderful ra.shness, either as
himself deceived or as seeking to deceive,
that I was a presbyter among the Manichaeans.
Let him set forth and refute, in whatever sense
seems good to him, the words of the third book
of my Confessions, which, both in themselves,
and from much that I iiave said before and
since, are perfectly clear to all who read
^.hem. Lastly, let him triumph in my steal-
ing his words, because I have suppressed two
of them, as though the victory were his upon
their restoration.

Chap. i8, — 21. Certainly in all these
things, as you can learn or refresh your mem-
ory by reading his letter, he has given free
scope to the impulse of his tongue, with all
the license of boasting which he cliose to use,
but nowhere has he told us where means are
to be found for cleansing the conscience of
the recipient, when that of tne giver has been
stained with sin without his knowing it. But
amid all his noise, and after all his noise,
serious as it is, too terrible as he himself sup-
poses it to be, I deliberatel)', as it is said, and
to the purpose,^ ask this question once again:"
If the conscience of him who gives in holiness
is what we look for, what means are to be
found for cleansing one who receives baptism
without knowing that the cofiscience of the
giver is stained with sin ? And throughout
his whole epistle I find nothing said in answer
to this question.

Chap. 19. — 22. For perhaps some one of
you will say to me, All these things which he
said against you he wished to have force for
this purpose, that he might take away your
character, and through you the character of

S Lenie, t^i dicitur, et hcne. Morel {Element. Crit. pp. 140,
141) suggests as an amendment, " /t'.vf," as suiting better with
'''' iente."

Chap. XXL]

THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

60 ^

those with whom you hold communion, that
[ neither they themselves, nor those whom you
endeavor to bring over to your communion,
may hold you to be of any further impor-
tance. But, in deciding whether he has given
no answer to the words of your epistle, we
must look at them in the light of the passage
in which he proposed them for considera-
tion. Let us then do so: let us look at his
writings in the light of that very passage.
Passing over, therefore, the passage in which
I sought to introduce my subject to the read-
er, and to ignore those tew prefatory words
of his, which were rather insulting than
revelant to the subject under discussion, I go
on to say, "He says, 'What we look for is the
conscience of the giver, to cleanse that of the
recipient.' But supposing the conscience of
the giver is concealed from view, and perhaps
defiled with sin. how will it be able to cleanse
the conscience of the recipient, if, as he says,
'what we look for is the conscience of the
giver, to cleanse that of the recipient ?' For
if he should say that it makes no matter to
the recipient what amount of evil may be con-
cealed from view in the conscience of the
giver, perhaps that ignorance may have such
a degree of efficacy as this, that a man can-
not be defiled by the guilt of the conscience of
iiim from whom he receives baptism, so long
as he is unaware of it. Let it then be granted
that the guilty conscience of his neighbor
cannot defile a man so long as he is unaware
of it ; but is it therefore clear that it can
further cleanse him from his own guilt?
Whence then is a man to be cleansed who re-
ceives baptism, when the conscience of the
giver is polluted without the knowledge of him
who is to receive it, especially when he goes
on to say, 'For he who receives faith from the
faithless receives not faith but guilt ? ' " '

Chap. 20. — 23. All these statements in
my letter Petilianus set before himself for
refutation. Let us see, therefore, whether
he has refuted them; whether he has made
any answer to them at all. For I add the
words which he calumniously accuses me of
having suppressed, and, having done so, I ask
him again the same question in an even
shorter form; for by adding these two words
he has helped me much in shortening tliis
proposition. If the conscience of him who
gives in holiness is what we look for to cleanse
that of the recipient, and if he who has re-
ceived his faith wittingly from one that is
faithless, receives not faith but guilt, where
shall we find means to cleanse the conscience

' See Book I. c. i, 2, c. 2, 3.

of the recipient, when he has not known that
the conscience of the giver is stained with
guilt, and when he receives his faith unwit-
tingly from one that is faithless ? I ask, where
shall we fnid means to cleanse it ? Let him
tell us; let him not pass off into another sub-
ject; let him not cast a mist over the eyes of
the inexperienced. To end with, at any
rate, after many tortuous circumlocutions
have been interposed and thoroughly worked
out, let him at last tell us where we shall find
means to cleanse the conscience of the recip-
ient when the stains of guilt in the conscience
of the faithless baptizer are concealed from
view, if the conscience of him who gives in
holiness is what we look for to cleanse that of
the recipient, and if he who has received his
faith wittingly from one that is faithless, re-
ceives not faith but guilt ? For the man in
question receives it from a faithless man, who
has not the conscience of one who gives in
holiness, but a conscience stained with guilt,
and veiled from view. Where then shall we
find means to cleanse his conscience ? whence
then does he receive his faith ? For if he is
neither then cleansed, nor then receives faith,
when the faithlessness and guilt of the bap-
tizer are concealed, why, when these are after-
wards brought to light and condemned, is he
not then baptized afresh, that he may be
cleansed and receive faith? But if, while the
faithlessness and guilt of the other are con-
cealed, he is cleansed and does receive faith,
whence does he obtain his cleansing, whence
does he receive faith, when there is not the
conscience of one that gives in holiness to
cleanse the conscience of the recipient? Let
him tell us this; let him make reply to this:
Whence does he obtain his cleansing, whence
does he receive faith, if the conscience of him
that gives in holiness is what we look for to
cleanse the conscience of the recipient, seeing
that this does not exist, when the baptizer
conceals his character of faithlessness and
ofuilt? To this no answer has been made
whatever.

Ch.ap. 21. — 24. But see, when he is reduc-
ed to straits in the argument, he again makes
an attack on me full of mist and wind, that
the calm clearness of tiie truth may lie ob-
scured; and tiirough the extremity of his want
he becomes full of resources, shown not in
saying what is true, but in unbougiit empty
revilings. Hold fast, with the keenest atten-
tion and utmost perseverance, what he ought
to answer, — that is, where means may be
found for cleansing the conscience of the re-
cipient when the stains in that of the giver are
concealed,— lest possibly the blast of his

6o6

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book III.

eloquence should wrest this from your hands,
and you in turn should be carried away by the
dark tempest of his turgid discourse, so as
wholly to fail in seeing whence he has di-
o-ressed, and to what point he should return;
and see where the man can wander, whilst he
cannot stand in the matter which he has un-
dertaken. For see how much he says,
through having nothing that he ought to say.
He says "that I slide in slippery places, but
am held up; that I neither destroy nor con-
firm the objections that I make; that I devise
uncertain things in the place of certainty;
that I do not permit my readers to believe
what is true, but cause them to look with in-
creased suspicion on what is doubtful." He
says *'that I have the accursed talents of the
Academic philosopher Carneades." ' He en-
deavors to insinuate what the Academics
think of the falseness or the falsehood of hu-
man sensation, showing in this also that he is
wholly without knowledge of what he says.
He declares that "it is said by them that
snow is black, whereas it is white; and that
silver is black; and that a tower is round, or
free from projections, when it is really angu-
lar; that an oar is broken in the water, while
it is whole." ' And all this because, when he
had said that "the conscience of him that
gives," or "of him that gives in holiness, is
what we look for to cleanse the conscience of
the recipient," I said in repl}^ What if the
conscience of the giver be hidden from sight,
and possibly be stained with guilt ? Here you
have his black snow, and black silver, and his
tower round instead of angular, and the oar in
the water broken while yet whole, in that I
suggested a state of the case which might be
conceived, and could not really exist, that the
conscience of the giver might be hidden from
view, and possibly might be stained with guilt '
25. Tnen he continues in the same strain,
and cries out: "What is that 7C'/ia^ if] what
is that possibly ? except the uncertain and
wavering hesitation of one who doubts, of
whom your poet says, —

' What if I now return to those who say, What if the

sky should fall ? ' " =

Does he mean that when I said. What if the
conscience of the giver be hidden from sight,
and possibly be stained with guilt ? that it is
much the same as if I had said. What if the
sky should fall ? There certainly is the phrase
What if, because it is possible that it may be

I I.actantius, Dii'in. Instit. Book V. c. xv., tells us of the tal-
ents of Carneades, recording that when he wa^sent on an embassy
to Rome by the Athenians, he spoke there first in defense of jus-
tice, and then on the following day in opposition to it; and that
he was in the habit of speaking with such force on either side, as
to beable to refute any arguments advanced by anybody else.

- Ter. He^iut. act. IV. seen. iii. vers. 41.

hidden from view, and it is possible that it
may not. For when it is not known what the
giver is thinking of, or what crime he has
committed, then his conscience is certainly
hidden from the view of the recipient; but
when his sin is plainly manifest, then it is
not hidden. I used the expression, And pos-
sibly may be stained with guilt, because it is
possible that it may be hidden from view and
yet be pure; and again, it is possible that it
may be hidden from view and be stained with
guilt. This is the meaning of the What if;
this the meaning of the Possibly. Is this at
all like "What if the sky should fall ?" 0 how
often have men been convicted, how often
have they confessed themselves that they had
consciences stained with guilt and adultery,
whilst men were unwittingly baptized by them
after they were degraded by the sin subse-
quently brought to light, and yet the sky did
not fall ! What have we here to do with Pilus
and Furius,3 who defended the cause of in-
justice against justice ? What have we here
to do with the atheist Diagoras,'' who denied
that there was any God, so that he would
seem to be the man of whom the prophet
spoke beforehand, "The fool hath said in his
heart there is no God ?" = What have we here
to do with these ? Why were their names
brought in, except that they might m.ake a
diversion in favor of a man who had nothing
to say ? that while he is at any rate saying
something, though needlessly, about these,
the matter in hand may seem to be progress-
ing, and an ans\ver may be supposed to be
made to a question which remains without an
answer ?

Chap. 22. — 26. Lastly, if these two or
three words, What if, and Possibly, are so
absolutely intolerable, that on their account
we should have aroused from their long sleep
the Academics, and Carneades, and Pilus, and
Furius, and Diagoras, and black snow, and
the falling of the sky, and everything else
that is equally senseless and absurd, let them
be removed from our argument. For, as a
matter of fact, it is by no means impossible
to express what we desire to say without them.
There is quite sufficient for our purpose in
what is found a little later, and has been in-
troduced by himself from my letter: "By
what means then is he to be cleansed who re-
ceives baptism when the conscience of the

3 In de Civ. Dei., Book II. c. xxi., Augustin mentions T,. Furius
Philus, one of the interlocutors in Cicero's Laflius, as maintain-
ing this same view. From the similarity of the name, it has been
thought that here Furius and Pilus are only one man.

4 The Mss. here and below have Protagoras. Both were athe-
ists, according to Cicero, Nat. Dear. I. i. 2, and Lactantiu/
Divin. Instit. I. c. ii.; de Ira Dei, c. ix.

5 Ps. xiv. I,

Chap. XXIV.J THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

607

giver is polluted, and that witiiout the know-
ledge of him who is to receive the sacrament ?" '
Do you acknowledge that here there is no
What if, no Possibly ? Well then, let an an-
swer be given. Give close heed, lest he be
found to answer this in what follows. "But,"
says he, "I bind you in your cavilling to the
faith of believing, that you may not wander
further from it. Why do you turn away your
life from errors by arguments of folly ? Why
do you disturb the system of belief in respect
of matters without reason ? By this one word
I bind and convince you." It was Petilianus
that said this, not I. These words are from
the letter of Petilianus; but from that letter,
to which I just now added the two words which
he accuses me of having suppressed, showing
that, notwithstanding their addition, the per-
tinency of my question, to which he makes
no answer, remains with greater brevity and
simplicity. It is beyond dispute that these
two words are, In holiness, and Wittingly: so
that it should not be, "The conscience of him
who gives," bat "The conscience of him
who eives i7i holiness :" and that it should not
be, "He who has received his faith from one
that is faithless," but "He who has wittingly
received his faith from one that is faithless."
And yet I had not really suppressed these
words; but I had not found them in the copy
which was placed in my hands. It is possible
enouofh that it was incorrect; nor indeed is it
w-hoUy beyond the possibility of belief that
even by this suggestion Academic grudge
should be roused against me, and that it
should be asserted that, in declaring the copy
to be incorrect, I had said much the same sort
of thing as if I had .declared that snow was
black. For why should I repay in kind his
rash suggestion, and say that, though he pre-
tends that I suppressed the words, he really
added them afterwards himself, since the
copy, which is not angry, can confirm that
mark of incorrectness, without any abusive
rashness on my part?

Chap. 23. — 27. And, in the first place,
with regard to that first expression, "Of him
who gives in holiness," it does not interfere
in the least with my inquiry, by which he is
so much distressed, whether I use the express-
ion, "If the conscience of him that gives is
what we look for," or the fuller phrase, "If
the conscience of him that gives in holiness
is what we look for, to cleanse the conscience
of the recipient," by what means then is he to
be cleansed who receives baptism if the con-
science of the giver is polluted, without the

' See Book I. c. 2, 3.

knowledge of him who is to receive the sacra-
ment? And with regard to the other word
that is added, "wittingly," so that the sen-
tence should not run," He who has received
his faith from one that is faithless," but "He
who has wittingly received his faith from one
that is faithless, receives not faith but guilt,"
I confess that I had said some things as
though the word were absent, but I can easily
afford to do without them; for they caused
more hindrance to the facility of my argu-
ment than they gave assistance to its power.
For how much more readily, how much more
plainly and shortly, can I put the question
thus: "If the conscience of him who gives in
holiness is what we look for to cleanse the
conscience of the recipient," and "if he who
has wittingly received his faith from one that
is faithless receives not faith but guilt," by
what means is he cleansed, from whom the
stain on the conscience of him who gives, but
not in holiness, is hidden ? and whence does
be receive true faith, who is baptized unwit-
tingly by one that is faithless ? Let it be de-
clared whence this shall be, and then the
whole theory of baptism will be disclosed;
then all that is matter of investigation will be
brought to light, — but only if it be declared,
not if the time be consumed in evil-speaking.

Chap, 24. — 28. Whatever, therefore, he
finds in these two words, — whether he brings
calumnious accusations about their suppress-
ion, or boasts of their being added, — you
perceive that it in no way hinders my ques-
tion, to which he can find no answer that he
can make; and therefore, not wishing to re-
main silent, he takes the opportunity of mak-
ing an attack upon my character, — retiring,
I should have said, from the discussion, ex-
cept that he had never entered on it. For
just as though the question were about me,
and not about the truth of the Church, or of
baptism, therefore he says that I, by sup-
pressing these two words, have argued as
though it were no stumblingblock in the way
of my conscience, that I have ignored what he
calls the sacrilegious conscience of him who
polluted me. But if this were so, the addi-
tion of the word "wittingly," which is thus
introduced, would be in my favor, and its sup-
pression would tell against me. For if I had
wished that my defense sliould be urged on
the ground that I should be supposed to have
been unacquainted with the conscience of the
man that baptized me, then I would accept
Petilianus as having spoken in my behalf,
since he docs not say in general ttrms, "He
that has received his faith from one that is
faithless," but "He that has wittingly receiv-

6o8

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book III.

ed his faith from one that is faithless, receives
not faith but guilt;" so that hence I might
boast that I had received not guilt, but faith,
since I could say I did not receive it wittingly
from one that was faithless, but was unac-
quainted with the conscience of him that gave
it. See, therefore, and reckon carefully, if you
can, what an amount of superfluous words he
wastes on the one phrase, "I was unacquainted
with," which he declares that I have used;
whereas I never used it at all, — partly because
the question under discussion was not con-
cerning me, so .that I should need to use it;
partly because no fault was apparent in him
that baptized me, so that I should be forced
to say in my defense that I had been unac-
quainted with his conscience.

Chap, 25, — 29. And yet Petilianus, to
avoid answering what I have said, sets before
himself what I have not, and draws men's at-
tention away from the consideration of his
debt, lest they should exact the answer which
he ought to make. He constantly introduces
the expressions, "I have been unacquainted
with," "I say," and makes answer, "But if
you were unacquainted with;" and, as though
convicting me, so that it should be out of my
power to say, "I was unacquainted with," he
quotes Mensurius, Cfficilianus, Macarius,
Taurinus, Romanus, and declares that "they
had acted in opposition to the Church of
God, as I could not fail to know, seeing that
I am an African, and already well advanced
in years," whereas, so far as I hear, Men-
surius died in the unity of the communion of
the Church, before the faction of Donatus
separated itself therefrom; whilst I had read
the history of Csecilianus, that they them-
selves had referred his case to Constantine,
and that he had been once and agam acquitted
by the judges whom that emperor had ap-
pointed to try the matter, and again a third
time by the sovereign himself, when they ap-
pealed to him. But whatever Macarius and
Taurinus and Romanus did, either in their
judicial or executive functions, in behalf of
unity as against their pertinacious madness,
it is beyond doubt that it was all done in ac-
cordance with the laws, which these same per-
sons made it unavoidable should be passed
and put in force, by referring the case of Csci-
lianus to the judgment of the emperor.

50. Among many other things which are
wholly irrevelant, he says that "I was so hard
hit by the decision of the proconsul Messia-
nus, that I was forced to fly from Africa."
And in consequence of this falsehood (to
which, if he was not the author of it, he cer-
tainly lent malicious ears when others malici-

ously invented it), how many other false-
hoods had he the hardihood not only to utter,
but actually to write with wondrous rashness,
seeing that I went to Milan before the consul-
ship of Banto, and that, in pursuance of the
profession of rhetorician which I then follow-
ed, I recited a panegyric in his honor as con-
sul on the first of January, in the presence of
a vast assembly of men; and after that journey
I only returned to Africa after the death of
the tyrant Maximus: whereas the proconsul
Messianus heard the case of the Manichjeans
after the consulship of Banto, as the day of
the chronicles inserted by Petilianus himself
sufficiently shows. And if it were necessary
to prove this for the satisfaction of those who
are in doubt, or beHeve the contrary, I could
produce many men, illustrious in their gene-
ration, as most sufficient witnesses to all that
period of my life.

Chap. 26. — 31. But why do we make in-
quiry into these points ? Why do we both
suffer and cause unnecessary delay ? Are we
likely to find out by such a course as this
what means we are to use for cleansing the
conscience of the recipient, who does not
know that the conscience of the giver is stain-
ed with guilt: whence the man is to receive
faith who is unwittingly baptized by one that
is faithless? — the question which Petilianus
had proposed to himself to answer in my
epistle, then going on to say anything else he
pleased except what the matter in hand re-
quired. How often has he said, "If ignorant
you were," — as though I had said, what I
never did say, that 1 was unacquainted with
the conscience of him who baptized me. And
he seemed to have no other object in all that
his evil-speaking mouth poured forth, except
that he should appear to prove that I had not
been ignorant of the misdeeds of those among
whom I was baptized, and with whom I was
associated in communion, understanding
fully, it would seem, that ignorance did not
convict me of guilt. See then that if I were
ignorant, as he has repeated so often, beyond
all doubt I should be innocent of all these
crimes. Whence therefore should I be cleans-
ed, who am unacquainted with the conscience
of him who gives but not in holiness, so that
I may be least ensnared by his offenses ?
Whence then should I receive faith, seeing
that 1 was baptized' unwittingly by one that
was faithless? For he has not repeated "If
ignorant you were" so often without purpose,
but simply to prevent my being reputed inno-
cent, esteeming beyond all doubt that no
man's innocence is violated if he unwittingly
receives his faith from one that is faithless.

Chap. XXVIIL] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

609

and is not acquainted with the stains on the
conscience of him that gives, but not in holi-
ness. Let him say, therefore, by what means
such men are to be cleansed, whence they are
to receive not guilt but faith. But let him
not deceive you. Let him not, while utter-
ing much, say nothing; or rather, let him
not say much while saying nothing. Next,
to urge a point which occurs to me, and must
not be passed over, — if I am guilty because I
have not been ignorant, to use his own phras-
eology, and I am proved not to have been ig-
norant, because I am an African, and already
advanced in years, let him grant that the
youths of other nations throu^rhout the world

"Who is the man, and from what corner has
he started up, that you propose to us? Why
do you seem to see a man who is the produce
of your imagination, in order to avoid seeing
one whom you are bound to see, and to ex-
amine and test most carefully? But since I
see that you are unacquainted with the order
of the sacrament, I tell you this as shortly as
I can: you were bound both to examine your
baptizer, and to be examined by him."
What is it, then, that we were waiting for?
That he should tell us by what means the
conscience of the recipient is to be cleansed,
who is unacquainted with the stain on the
conscience of him that orives but not in holi-

are not guilty, who had no opportunity either ' ness, and whence the man is to receive not

from their race, or from that age you brin_
against me, of knowi'ng the points that are laid
to our charge, be they true, or be they false;
and yet they, if they have fallen into your
hands, are rebaptized without any considera-
tions of such a kind.

Chap. 27.—
now inquiring

32. But this is not what we are
Let him rather answer (what
he wanders off into the most irrelevant mat-
ters in order to avoid answering) by what
means the conscience of the recipient is
cleansed who is unacquainted with the stain on
the conscience of the giver, if the Conscience
of one that gives in holiness is what we look
for to cleanse the conscience of the recipient ?
and from what source he receives faith who is
unwittingly baptized by one that is faithless,
if he that has wittingly received his faith from
one that is faithless receives not faith but
guilt? Omitting, therefore, his revilings,
which he has cast at me without any sound
consideration, let us still notice that he does
not say what we demand in what follows.
But I should like to look at the garrulous
mode in which he has set this forth, as though
he were sure to overwhelm us with confusion.
"•But let us return," he says, "to that argu-
ment of your fancy, whereby you seem to
have represented to yourself in a form of
words the persons you baptize. For since
you do not see the truth, it would have been
more seemly to have imagined what was pro-
bable." These words of his own, Petilianus
put forth by way of preface, being about to
state the words that I had used. Then he
went on to quote: "Behold, you say, the
faithless man stan
who is to be bapt
faithlessness.''' He has not quoted the whole
of my proposition and question; and presently
he begins to ask me in his turn, saying,

guilt but faith, who has received baptism un-
wittingly from one that is faithless. All that
we have heard is that the baptizer ought most
diligently to be examined by him who wishes
to receive not guilt l>ut faith, that the latter
may make himself acquainted with the con-
science of him that gives in holiness, which
is to cleanse the conscience of the recipient.
For the man that has failed to make tiiis ex-
amination, and has unwittingly received bap-
tism from one that is faithless, from the very
fact that he did not make the examination,
and therefore did not know of the stain on the
conscience of the giver, was incapacitated
from receiving faith instead of guilt. Why
therefore did he add what he made so much
of adding, — the word witfingly, which he ca-
lumniously accused me of having suppressed ?
For in his unwillingness that the sentence
should run, "He who has received his faith
from one that is faithless, receives not faith
but guilt," he seems to have left some hope
to the man that acts unwittingly. But now,
when he is asked whence that man is to re-
ceive faith who is baptized unwittingly by one
that is faithless, he has answered that he
ought to have examined his baptizer; so that,
beyond all doubt, he refuses the wretched
man permission even to be ignorant, by not
finding out from what source he may receive
faith, unless he has placed his trust in the
man that is baptizing him.

Ch.\p. 28.-33. This is what we look upon
with horror in your party; this is what the
sentence of God condemns, crying out with
the utmost truth and the utmost clearness,

tands ready to baptize, but he "Cursed is every one that trusteth in man. '
antized knows nothing of his I This is what is most openly forbidden by holy

' See P.ook I. c. 2. :;.

humility and apostolic

"Let no man glory in nu-n.''^ This is the

reason that the attack of empty calumnies and

ove, as Paul declares,
3

2 Jer. xvii. 5.

3 I Cor. iii. 21.

6io

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book III.

of the bitterest invectives grows even fiercer
against us, that when human authority is as
it were overthrown, there may remain no
ground of hope for those to whom we admin-
ister the word and sacrament of God in ac-
cordance with the dispensation entrusted unto
us. We make answer to them: How long do
you rest your support on man ? The vener-
able society of the Catholic Church makes an-
swer to them: ''Truly my soul waiteth upon
God: from Him cometh my salvation. He
only is my God and my helper; I shall not
be moved."' For what other reason have
the}' had for removing from the house of
God, except that they pretended that they
could not endure those vessels made to dis-
honor, from which the house shall not be free
until the day of judgment? whereas all the
time they rather appear, by their deeds and
by the records of the time, to have themselves
been vessels of this kind, while they threw the
imputation in the teeth of others; of which
said vessels made unto dishonor, in order that
no one should on their account remove in
confusion of mind from the great house, which
alone belongs to the great Father of our fam-
ily, the servant of God, one who was good and
faithful, or was capable of receiving faith in
baptism, as I have shown above, expressly
says, " Truly my soul waiteth upon God''
(on God, you see, and not on man): "from
Him cometh my salvation" (not from man).
But Petilianus would refuse to ascribe to God
the cleansing and purifying of a man, even
when the stain upon the conscience of him
who gives, but not in holiness, is hidden from
view, and any one receives his faith unwit-
tingly from one that is faithless. "I tell you
this," he says, "as shortly as I can; you
were bound both to examine your baptizer,
and to be examilied by him."

Chap. 29.-34. I entreat of you, pay at-
tention to this: I ask where the means shall be
found for cleansing the conscience of the re-
cipient, when he is not acquainted with the
stain upon the conscience of him that gives
but not in holiness, if the conscience of him
that gives in holiness is waited for to cleanse
the conscience of the recipient? and from
what source he is to receive faith, who is un-
wittingly baptized by one that is faithless, if
whosoever has received his faith wittingly
from one that is faithless, receives not faith
but guilt ? and he answers me, that both the
baptizer and the baptized should be subjected
to examination. ..And for the proof of this
point, out of which no question arises, he ad-

I Ps. K-'.i. I, 2; cp. Hieron.

duces the example of John, in that he was
examined by those who asked him who he
claimed to be,^ and that he also in turn exam-
ined those to whom he says, "O generation
of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from
the wrath to come ?"3 What has this to do
with the subject ? What has this to do with
the question under discussion? God had
vouchsafed to John the testimony of most
eminent holiness of life, confirmed by the
previous witness of the noblest prophecy,
l)Oth when he was conceived, and when he
was born. But the Jews put their question,
already believing him to be a saint, to find
out which of the saints he maintained himself
to be, or whether he was himself the saint of
saints, that is, Christ Jesus. So much favor
indeed was shown to him, that credence would
at once have been given to whatever he might
have said about himself. If, therefore, we
are to follow this precedent in declaring that
each several baptizer is now to be examined,
then each must also be believed, v/hatever he
may say of hi.nself. But who is there that is
made up of deceit, whom we know that the
Holy Spirit flees from, in accordance with the
Scripture/ who would not wish the best to be
believed of him, or who would hesitate to
bring this about by the use of any words with-
in his reach ? Accordingly, when he shall
have been asked who he is, and shall have
answered that he is the faithful dispenser of
God's ordinances, and that his conscience is
not polluted with the stain of any crime, will
this be the whole examination, or will there
be a further more careful investigation into
his character and life ? Assuredl}^ there will.
But it is not written that this was done by
those who in the desert of Jordan asked John
who he was.

Chap. 30. — 35. Accordingly this prece-
dent is wholly without bearing on the matter
in hand. We might rather say that the de-
claration of the apostle sufficiently inculcates
this care, when he says, "Let these also first
be proved; then let them use the office of a
deacon, being found blameless. "^ And since
this is done anxiously and habitually in both
parties, by almost all concerned, how comes
it that so many are found to be reprobates
subsequently to the time of having undertak-
en this ministry, except that, on the one hand,
human care is often deceived, and, on the
other hand, those who have begun well occa-
sionally deteriorate ? And since things of this
sort happen so frequently as to allow no man
to hide them or to forget them, what is the

2 John i. 22.
4Wisd. 1. 5.

3 Mat. lii. 7.
5 I Tim. lii. lo.

Chap. XXXII.] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

6ll

reason that Petilianus now teaches us insult-
ingly, in a few words, that the baptizer ought
to be examined by the candidate for baptism,
since our question is, by what means the con-
science of the recipient is to be cleansed,
when the stain on the conscience of him that
gives, but not in holiness, has been con-
cealed from view, if the conscience of one
that gives in holiness is what we look for to
cleanse the conscience of the recipient.
"Since I see," he says, "that you are unac-
quainted with the order of the sacrament, I
tell you this as shortly as I can: you were
bound both to examine your baptizer, and to
be examined by him." What an answer to
make I He is surrounded in so many places
by such a multitude of men that have been
baptized by ministers who, having in the first
instance seemed righteous and chaste, have
subsequently been convicted and degraded in
consequence of the disclosure of their faults;
and he thinks that he is avoiding the force of
this question, in which we ask by what means
the conscience of the recipient is to be cleans-
ed, when he is unacquainted with the stain
upon the conscience of him that gives but not
in holiness, if the conscience of one that gives
in holiness is what we look for to cleanse the
conscience of the recipient, — he thinks, I say,
that he is avoiding the force of this question,
by saying shortly that the baptizer ought to
be examined. Nothing is more unfortunate
than not to be consistent with truth, by which
every one is so shut in, that he cannot find
a means of escape. We' ask from whom he is
to receive faith who is baptized by one that is
faithless ? The answer is, "He ought to have
examined his baptizer.'' Is it therefore the
case that, since he does not examine him, and
so even unwittingly receives his faith from
one that is faithless, he receives not faith but
guilt ? Why then are those men not baptized
afresh, who are found to have been baptized
by men that are detected and convicted re-
probates, while their true character was yet
concealed ?

Chap. 31. — t,6. "And where," he says, "is
the word that I added, 7i>ittingly? so that I
did not say, He that has received his faith
from one that is faithless; but, He that has
received his faith zvittingly from one that is
faithless, receives not faith but guilt." He
therefore who received his faith unwittingly
from one that was faithless, received not guilt
but faith; and accordingly I ask from what
source he has received it ? And being thus
placed in a strait, he answers, "He ought to
have examined him." Granted that he ought
to have done so; but, as a matter of fact, he

did not, or he was not able: what is your ver-
dict about him ? Was he cleansed, or was he
not? If he was cleansed, I ask from what
source ? For the polluted conscience of him
that gave but not in holiness, with which he
was unacquainted, could not cleanse him.
But if he was not cleansed, command that he
be so now. You give no such orders, there-
fore he was cleansed. Tell me by what
means ? Do you at any rate tell me what
Petilianus has failed to tell. For I propose
to you the very same words which he was un-
able to answer. "Behold the faithless man
stands ready to baptize; but he who is to be
baptized knows nothing of his faithlessness:
what do you think that he will receive — faith,
or guilt?"' This is sufficient as a constant
form of question: answer, or search diligently
to find what he has answered. You will find
abuse that has already been convicted. He
finds fault with me, as though in derision,
maintaining that I ought to suggest what is
probable for consideration, since I cannot see
the truth. For, repeating my words, and
cutting my sentence in two, he says, "Behold,
you say, the faithless man stands ready to
baptize; but he who is to be baptized knows
nothing of his faithlessness." Then he goes
on to ask, "Who is the man, and from what
corner has he started up, that you propose to
us ?" Just as though there were some one or
two individuals, and such cases were not con-
stantly occurring everywhere on either side !
Why does he ask of me who the man in ques-
tion is, and from what corner he has started
up, instead of looking round, and seeing that
the churches are few and far between, whether
in cities or in country districts, which do not
contain men detected in crimes, and degraded
from the ministry ? While their true character
was concealed, while they wished to be
thought good, though really bad, and to be
reputed chaste, though really guilty of adul-
tery, so long they were involved in deceit; and
so the Holy Spirit, according to the Scripture,
was fleeing from them.- It is from the crowd,
therefore, of these men who hitherto conceal-
ed their character that the faithless man whom
I suggested started up. Why does he ask
me whence he started up, shutting his eyes to
all this crowd, from which sufficient noise
arises to satisfy the blind, if we take into con-
sideration none but those who might have
been convicted and degraded from their office ?

Chap. 32. — 37. What shall we say of what
he himself advanced in his epistle, that
"Quodvultdeus, having been convicted of two

' P.ook I. CC. I, 2, :

-■ Wisd. i. 5.

6T2

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book III.

adulteries, and cast out from among you, was
received by tliose of our party ?" ' Wiiat tlien
(I would speak witliout prejudice to this man,
who proved his case to be a good one, or at
least persuaded men that it was so), when
such men among you, being as yet undetect-
ed, administer baptism, what is received at
their hands, — faith, or guilt? Surely not
faith, because they have not the conscience
of one who gives in holiness to cleanse the
conscience of the recipient. But yet not guilt
either, in virtue of that added word: "For he
that has received his faith zuittingly from one
that is faithless, receives not faith but guilt."
But when men were baptized by those of
whom I speak, they were surel}' ignorant what
sort of men they were. Furthermore, not
receiving faith from their baptizers, who had
not the conscience of one that gives in holi-
ness, and not receiving guilt, because they
were baptized not knowing but in ignorance
of their faults, they therefore remained v/ith-
out faith and without guilt. They are not,
therefore, in the number of men of such
abandoned character. But neither can they
be in the number of the faithful, because, as
they could not receive guilt, so neither could
they receive faith from their baptizers. But
we see that they are reputed by you in the
number of the faithful, and that no one of
you declares his opinion that they ought to be
baptized, but all of you hold valid the baptism
which they have already received. They have
therefore received faith; and yet they have
not received it from those who had not the
conscience of one that gives in holiness, to
cleanse the conscience of the recipient.
Whence then did they receive it ? This is the
point from which I make my effort; this is the
question that I press most earnestly; to this I
do most urgently demand an answer.

Chap. 33. — t^%. See now how Petilianus, to
avoid answering this question, or to avoid
being proved to be incapable of answering it,
wanders off vainly into irrelevant matter in
abuse of us, accusing us and proving nothing;
and when lie chances to make an endeavor to
resist, with something like a show of fighting
for his cause, he is everywhere overcome with
the greatest ease. But yet he nowhere gives
an answer of any kind to this one question
which we ask: If the conscience of one that
gives in holiness is what we look for to cleanse
the conscience of the recipient, by what means
is he to be cleansed who received baptism
while the conscience of the giver was polluted,

I The Council of Carthage, held on the 13th of September, 401,
passed a decree (canon 2) in favor of receiving the clergy of the
Donatists with full recognition of their orders.

without the knowledge of him who was to re-
ceive it ? for in these words, which he quoted
from my epistle, he set me forth as asking a
question, while he showed himself as giving
no ansiver. For after saying what 1 have just
now recited, and when, on being brought into
a great strait on every side, he had been com-
pelled to say that the baptizer ought to be
examined by the candidate for baptism, and
the candidate in turn by the baptizer; and
when he had tried to fortify this statement by
the example of John, in hopes that he might
find auditors either of the greatest negligence
or of the greatest ignorance, he then went on
to advance other testimonies of Scripture
wholly irrelevant to the matter in hand, as the
saying of the eunuch to Philip, "See, here is
water; what doth hinder m.e to be baptized ?''-
"inasmuch as he knew," says he, "that those
of abandoned character were prevented;"
arguing that the reason why Philip did not
forbid him to be baptized was because he had
proved, in his reading of the Scriptures, how
far he believed in Christ, — as though he had
prohibited Simon ]\Iagus. And again, he
urges that the prophets were afraid of being
deceived by false baptism, and that therefore
Isaiah said, "Lying water that has not faith," ^
as though showing that water among faithless
men is lying; whereas it is not Isaiah but
Jeremiah that says this of lying men, calling
the people in a figure water, as is most clearly
shown in the Apocalypse. '^ And again, he
quotes as words of David, "Let not the oil of
the sinner anoint my head," when David has
been speaking of the flattery of the smooth
speaker deceiving with false praise, so as to
lead the head of the man praised to wax great
with pride. And this meaning is made mani-
fest by the words immediately preceding in
the same psalm. For he says, "Let the
righteous smite me, it shall be a kindness;
and let him reprove me: but the oil of the sin-
ner shall not break my head." s What can be
clearer than this sentence? what more mani-
fest ? For he declares that he had rather be
reproved in kindness with the sharp correction
of the righteous, so that he may be healed,
than anointed with the soft speaking of the
flatterer, so as to be puffed up with pride.

Chap. 34.—:

39. Petilianus quotes also
the warning of the Apostle John, that we
should not believe every spirit, but try the
spirits whether they are of God,* as though
this care should be bestowed in order that the
wheat should be separated from the chaff in

- Acts viii. 36.
4 Rev. xvii. 15.
6 I John iv. I.

3 Jer. XV. 18. See Book II. c. 102, 234, 235
5 Ps. cxh. 5. See Book II. c. 103, 236, 237.

Chap. XXXVI.] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAX, THE D0NATI3T.

this present world before its time, and not
ratiier for fear tiiat the wheat should be de-
ceived by the chaff; or as though, even if the
lying spirit should have said something that
was true, it was to be denied, because the
spirit whom we should abominate had said it.
But if any one thinks this, he is mad enough
to contend that Peter ouglit not to have said,
"Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living
God,"' because the devils had already said
something to the same effect.- Seeing, there-
fore, that the baptism of Christ, whether ad-
ministered by an unrighteous or a righteous
man, is nothing but the baptism of Christ,
wliat a cautious man and faithful Christian
should do is to avoid the unrighteousness of
man, not to condemn the sacraments of God.
40. Assuredly in all these things Petilianus
gives no answer to the question. If the con-
science of one that gives in holiness is what
we look for to cleanse the conscience of the
recipient, by what means is he to be cleansed
who receives baptism, when the conscience of
the giver is polluted without the knowledge of
the proposed recipient? A certain Cyprian,
a colleague of his from Thubursicubur, was
caught in a brothel with a woman of most
abandoned character, and was brought l«efore
Primianus of Carthage, and condemned.
Now, when this man baptized before he was
detected and condemned, it is manifest that
he had not the conscience of one that gives in
holiness, so as to cleanse the conscience of
the recipient. By what means then have they
been cleansed who at this day, after he has
been condemned, are certainly not washed
again ? It was not necessary to name the
man save only to prevent Petilianus from
repeating, 'Who is the man, and from what
corner has he started up, that you propose to
us ? " Why did not your party examine that
baptizer, as John, in the opinion of Petilianus,
was examined ? Or was the real fact this, that
they examined him so far as man can exam-
ine man, but were unable to find him out, as
he long lay hid with cunning falseness?

Chap. 35. — Was the water administered by
this man not lying? or is the oil of the forni-
cator not the oil of the sinner ? or must we
hold what the Catholic Church says, and what
is true, that that water and that oil are not his
by whom they were administered, but His
whose name was then invoked ? Why did they
who were baptized by that hypocrite, whose
sins were concealed, fail to try tlie spirit, to
prove that it was not of God ? For the Holy
Spirit of discipline was even then fleeing from

the hypocrite. 3 Was it that He was fleeing
from him, but at the same time not deserting
His sacraments, though ministered by him ?
Lastly, since you do not deny that those men
have been already cleansed, whom you take
no care to have cleansed now that he is con-
demned, see whether, after shedding over the
subject so many mists in so many different
ways, Petilianus, after all, in any place gives
any answer to the question by what means
these men have been cleansed, if what we look
for to cleanse the conscience of the recipient
is the conscience of one that gives in holiness,
such as the man who was secretly unclean
could not have had.

41. Making then, no answer to this which
is so urgently asked of him, and, in the next
place, even seeking for himself a latitude of
speech, he says, "since both prophets and
apostles have been cautious enough to fear
these things, with what face do you say that
the baptism of the sinner is holy to those who
believe with a good conscience?" Just as
though I or any Catholic maintained that that
baptism was of the sinner which is adminis-
tered or received with a sinner to officiate, in-
stead of being His in virtue of belief in whose
name the candidate is baptized ! Then he goes
off to an invective against the traitor Judas,
saying against hrni whatever he can, quoting
the testimony of the prophets uttered concern-
ing him so long a time before, as though he
would steep the Church of Christ dispersed
throughout the world, whose cause is involved
in this discussion, in the impiety of the traitor
Judas, — not considering what this very thing
should have recalled to his mind, that we
ought no more to doubt that that is the Church
of Christ which is spread abroad throughout
the world, since this was prophesied with truth
so many years before, than we ought to doubt
that it was necessary that Christ should be
betrayed by one of His disciples, because
this was prophesied in like manner.

Chap. 36. — 42. But after this, when Petili-
anus came to that objection of ours, that they
allowed the baptism of the followers of
jMaximianus, whom they had condemned,* —
although in the statement of this question he
thought it right to use his own words rather
than mine; for neither do we assert tiiat the
baptism of sinners is of profit to us, seeing
that we maintain it to belong not only to no
sinners, but to no men whatsoever, in that
we are satisfied that it is Christ's alone, — hav-
ing put the question in this form, he says,
"Yet you obstinately aver that it is right that

I Matt. xvi. 16.

= Matt. viii. 29 ; Mark i. 24 ; Luke viii. 2S. ' 3 Wisd. i. 5.

4 See Book I. cc. 10, 11, 11, 13.

6i4

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book III.

the baptism of sinners should be of profit to
you, because we too, according to your state-
ment, maintained the baptism of criminals
whom we justly condemned." When he
came to this question, as I said before, even
all the show of fight which he had made de-
serted him. He could not find any way to
go, any means of escape, any path by which,
either through subtle watching or bold enter-
prise, he could either secretly steal away, or
sally forth by force. "Although this," he
says, 'I will demonstrate in my second book,
how great the difference is between those of
our party and those of yours whom you call
innocent, yet, in the meantime, first extricate
yourselves from the offenses with which you
are acquainted in your colleagues, and then
seek out the mode of dealing with those whom
we cast out." Would any one, any man upon
the earth, give an answer like this, save one
who is setting himself against the truth,
against which he cannot find any answer that
can be made ? Accordingly, if we too were to
use the same words: In the meantime, first
extricate yourselves from the offenses with
which you are acquainted in your colleagues,
and then bring up against us any charge con-
nected with those whom you hold to be wicked
amongst us, — what is the result? Have we
both won the victory, or are we both defeat-
ed ? Nay, rather He has gained the victory
for His Church and in His Church, who has
taught us in His Scriptures that no man should
glory in men, and that he that glorieth should
glory in the Lord.' For behold in our case,
who assert with the eloquence of truth that
the man who believes is not justified by him
by whom he is baptized, but by Him of whom
it is written, "To him that believeth on Him
that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is count-
ed for righteousness," - since we do not glory
in men, and strive, when we glory, to glory in
the Lord in virtue of His own gift, how wholly
safe are we, whatever fault or charge Petili-
anus may have been able to prove concerning
certain men of our communion ! For amone
us, whatever wicked men are either wholly un-
detected, or, being known to certain persons,
are yet tolerated for the sake of the bond of
unity and peace, in consideration of other
good men to whom their wickedness is un-
known, and before whom they could not be
convicted, in order that the wheat may not be
rooted up together with the tares, yet they so
bear the burden of their own wickedness,
that no one shares it with them except those
who are pleased with their unrighteousness.
Nor indeed have we any apprehension that

^ I Cor. iii. 21, and i. 31.

Rom. iv. 5.

those whom they baptize cannot be justified,
since they believe in Him that justifieth the
ungodly that their faith may be counted for

righteousness. 3

Chap. 37. — 43. Furthermore, according to
our tenets, neither he of whom Petilianus said
that he was cast forth by us for the sin of the
men of Sodom, another being appointed in his
place, and that afterwards he was actually re-
stored to our college, — talking all the time
without knowing what he was saying, — nor he
whom he declares to have been penitent
among you, in whatever degree their respec-
tive cases do or do not admit of any defense,
can neither of them prejudice the Church,
which is spread abroad throughout all nations,
and increases in the world until the harv^est.
For if they were really wicked members of it
that you accuse, then they were already not
in it, but among the chaff; but if they are
good, while you defame their character with
unrighteous accusations, the)^ are themselves
being tried like gold, while you burn after the
similitude of chaff. Yet the sins of other men
do not defile the Church, which is spread
abroad throughout the whole world, according
to most faithful- prophesies, waiting for the'
end of the world as for its shore, on which,
when it is landed, it will be freed from the bad
fish, in company with which the inconvenience
of nature might be borne without sin within
the same nets of the Lord, so long as it was
not right to be impatiently separated from
them. Nor yet is the discipline of the Church
on this account neglected by constant and
diligent and prudent ministers of Christ, in
whose province crimes are in such wise
brought to light that they cannot be defended
on any plea of probability. Innumerable
proofs of this may be found in those who have
been bishops or clergy of the second degree
of orders, and now, being degraded, have
either gone abroad into other lands through
shame, or have gone over to you yourselves
or to other heresies, or are known in their own
districts; of whom there is so great a multi-
tude dispersed throughout the earth, that if
Petilianus, bridling for a time his rashness in
speaking, had taken them into consideration,
he would never have fallen into so manifestly
false and groundless a misconception, as to
think that we ought to join in what he says:
None of you is free from guilt, where no one
that is guilty is condemned.

Chap. t,^,. — 44. For, to pass over others
in different quarters of the earth, —

dwelling

3 Rom. IV. 5.

Chap. XL.]

THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

6i^

for you will scarcely find any place in which
this kind of men is not represented, from
whom it may appear that overseers and min-
isters are wont to be condemned even in the
Catholic Church, — we need not look far to find
the example of Honorius of Milevis. But
take the case of Splendonius, whom Petilianus
ordained priest after he had been condemned
in the Catholic Church, and rebaptized by
himself, whose condemnation in Gaul, com-
municated to us b}' our brethren, our colleague
Fortunatus caused to be publicly read in Con-
stantina, and whom the same Petilianus after-
wards cast forth on experience of his abomi-
nable deceit. From the case of this Splen-
donius, when was there a time when he
might not have been reminded after what
fashion wicked men are degraded from their
office even in the Catholic Church ? I won-
der on what precipice of rashness his heart
was resting when he dictated those words in
which he ventured to say, "No one of you is
free from guilt, where no one that is guilty is
condemned." Wherefore the wicked, being
bodily intermingled with the good, but spirit-
ually separated from them in the Catholic
Church, both when they are undetected
through the infirmity of huqnan nature, and
when they are condemned from considera-
tions of discipline, in every case bear their
own burden. And in this way those are free
from danger who are baptized by them with
the baptism of Christ, if they keep free from
share in their sins either by imitation or con-
sent; seeing that in like manner, if they were
baptized by the best of men, they would not
be justified except by Him that justifieth the
ungodly: since to those that believe on Him
that justifieth the ungodly their faith is count-
ed for righteousness.

Chap, 39. — 45. But as for you, when the
case of the followers of Maximianus is
brought up against you, who, after being con-
demned by the sentence of a Council of 310
bishops;' after being utterly defeated in the
same Council, quoted in the records of so
many proconsuls, in the chronicles of so many
municipal towns; after being driven forth
from the basilicas of which they were in pos-
session, by the order of the judges, enforced
by the troops of the several cities, were yet
again received with all honor by you, together
with those whom they had baptized outside
the pale of your communion, without any
question respecting their baptism, — when
confronted, I say, with their case, you can
find no reply to make. Indeed, you are van-

^ That cf Bagai.

! quished by an expressed opinion, not indeed
: true, but proceeding from yourselves, by
I which you maintain that men perish for the
faults of others in the same communion of the
sacraments, and that each man's character is
determined by that of the man by whom he is
baptized,— that he is guilty if his baptizer is
guilty, innocent if he is innocent. But if these
views are true, there can be no doubt that, to
say nothing of innumerable others, you are
destroyed by the sins of the followers of
Maximianus, whose guilt your party, in so
large a Council, has exaggerated even to the
proportions of the sin of those whom the earth
swallowed up alive. But if the faults of the
followers of Maximianus have not destroyed
you, then are these opinions false which you
entertain; and much less have certain indefi-
nite unproved faults of the Africans been able
to destroy the entire world. And according-
ly, as the apostle says, "Every man shall bear
his own burden;" = and the baptism of Christ
is no one's except Christ's; and it is to no
purpose that Petilianus promises that he will
take as the subject of his second book the
charges which we bring concerning the fol-
lowers of Maximianus, entertaining too low
an opinion of men^s intellects, as though they
do not perceive that he has nothing to say.

Chap. 40. — 46. For if the baptism which
Pra^textatus and Felicianus administered in
the communion of Maximianus was their own,
why was it received by you in those whom they
baptized as though it were the baptism of
Christ? But if it is truly the baptism of Christ,
as indeed it is, and yet could not profit those
who had received it with the guilt of schism,
what do you say that you could have granted
to those whom you have received into your
body with the same baptism, except that, now
that the offense of their accursed division is
wiped out by the bond of peace, they should
not be compelled to receive the sacrament of
the holy laver as though they had it not, but
that, as what they had was before for their
destruction, so it should now begin to be of
profit to them ? Or if this is not granted to
them in your communion, because it could
not possibly be that it should be granted to
schismatics among schismatics, it is at any
rate granted to you in the Catholic commu-
nion, not that you should receive baptism as
though it were lacking in you, but that the
baptism which you have actually received
should be of profit to you. For all the sac-
raments of Christ, if not combined with the
love which belongs to the unity of Clirist, are

2 CJal. vi. 5.

6i6

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book 111.

possessed not unto salvation, but unto judg-
ment. But since it is not a true verdict, but
your verdict, "that through the baptism of
certain iraditors the baptism of Christ has
perished from the world in general/' it is with
good reason that you cannot find any answer
to make respecting the recognition of the bap-
tism of the followers of Maximianus.

47. See therefore, and remember with the
most watchful care, how Petilianus has made
no answer to that very question, which he
proposes to himself in such terms as to seem
to make it a starting-point from which to say
something. For the former question he has
dismissed altogether, and has not wished to
speak of it to us, because I suppose it was
beyond his power; nor is he at any time, up
to the very end of his volume, going to say
anything about it, though he quoted it from
the first part of my epistle as though it were
a matter calling for refutation. For even
though he has added the two words which he
accused me of having suppressed, as though
they were the strongest bulwarks of his posi-
tion, he yet lies wholly defenseless, unable to
find any answer to make when he is asked, If
the conscience of one that gives in holiness is
what we look for to cleanse the conscience of
the recipient, where are we to find means for
cleansing the conscience of the man who is
unacquainted with the conscience of him tliat
gives, but not in holiness ? and if it be the
case that any one who has received his faith
from one that is faithless, receives not faith
but guilt, from what source is he to receive
not guilt but faith, who is unwittingly baptized
by one that is faithless ? To this question it
has long been manifest from what he says that
he has made no answer.

48. In the next place, he has gone on, with
calumnious mouth, to abuse monasteries and
monks, finding fault also with me, as having
been the founder of this kind of life.' And
what this kind of life really is he does not
know at all, or rather, though it is perfectly
well known throughout all tae world, he pre-
tends that he is unacquainted with it. Then,
asserting that I had said that Christ was the
baptizer, he has also added certain words from
my epistle as though I had set this forth as
my own sentiment, v/hen I had really quoted
it as his and yours, and it was inveighed
against with most copious harshness, as if it
were I who had said these things against my-
self, when what he reprehended was not
mine, but his and your sentiment, as I will
presently show clearly to the best of my abil-
ity.= Then he has endeavored to show us, in

I See Possidi'is' Life of St. Au^itsilii, cc. v.-xi.
See c. 45, 54.

many unnecessary words, that Christ does not
baptize, but that baptism is administered in
His name, at once in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; of
which Trinity itself he has said, either because
it was Vv4iat he wished, or because it was all
that he could say, that "Christ is the centre
of the Trinity." In the next place, he has
taken occasion of the names of the sorcerers
Simon and Barjesus to vent against us what
insults he thought fit. Then he goes on,
keeping in guarded suspense the case of
Optatus of Thamugas, that he might not be
steeped in the odium that arose from it, deny-
ing that neither he or his party could have
passed judgment upon him, and actually inti-
mating in respect of him, that he was crushed
in consequence of suggestions from myself.

Chap. 41. — 49. Lastly, he has ended his
epistle vvitli an exhortation and warning to liis
own party, that they should not be deceived
by us, and with a lamentation over those of
our party, that we had made them worse than
they had been before. Having therefore
carefully considered and discussed these
points, as appears with sufficient clearness
from the words, of the epistle which he wrote,
Petilianus has made no answer at all to the
position which I advanced to begin with in
my epistle, v/hen I asked. Supposing it to be
true, as he asserts, that the conscience of pne
that gives — or rather, to add what he con-
siders so great a support to his argument —
that- the conscience of one that gives in holi-
ness is what we look for to cleanse the con-
science of the recipient, by what means he
who receives baptism is to be cleansed, when,
if the conscience of the giver is polluted, it is
without the knowledge of the proposed reci-
pient ? Whence it is not surprising that a man
resisting in the cause of falsehood, pressed
hard in the straits of the truth that contra-
dicts it, should have chosen rather to gasp
forth mad abuse, than to walk in the path of
that truth which cannot be overcome.

50. And now I would beg of you to pay
especial attention to the next few words, that
I may show you clearly what he has been
afraid of in not answering this, and that I
may bring into the light what he has endeav-
ored to shroud in obscurity. It certainly was
in his power, when we asked by what means
he is to be cleansed, who receives baptism
when the conscience of the giver is polluted
without the knowledge of the proposed reci-
pient, to answer with the greatest ease, From
our Lord God; and at any rate to say with
the utmost confidence, God wholly cleanses
the conscience of the recipient, when he is un-

Chap. XLIII.] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

6i-

acquainted with the stain upon the conscience
of him that gives but not in holiness. But
when a man had already been compelled by
the tenets of your sect to rest the cleansing
of the recipient on the conscience of the
giver, in that he had said, " For the conscience
of him that gives," or " of him that gives in
holiness, is looked for to cleanse the con-
science of the recipient," he was naturally
afraid lest any one should seem to be better
baptized by a wicked man who concealed his
wickedness, than by one that was genuinely
and manifestly good; for in the former case
his cleansing would depend not on the con-
science of one that gave in holiness, but on
the m'ost excellent holiness of God Himself.
With this apprehension, therefore, that he
might not be involved in so great an absurd-
ity, or rather madness, as not to know where
he could make his escape, he was unwilling
to say by what means the conscience of the
recipient should be cleansed, when he does
not know of the stain upon the conscience of
him that gives but not in holiness; and he
thought it better, by making a general con-
fusion with his quarrelsome uproar, to con-
ceal what was asked of him, than to give a re-
ply to his question, which shpuld at once dis-
comfit him; never, however, thinking that
our letter could be read by men of such good
understanding, or that his would be read by
those who had read ours as well, to which he
has professed to make an answer.

Chap. 42. — 51. For what I just now said
is put with the greatest clearness in that very
epistle of mine, in answering which he has
said nothing; and I would beg of you to listen
for a few moments to what he there has done.
And although you are partisans of his, and
hate us, yet, if you can, bear it with equanim-
ity. For in his former epistle, to the first
portion of which — the only portion which had
then come into our hands — I had in the first
instance made my reply, he had so rested the
hope that is found in baptism in the baptizer,
as to say, " For everything consists of an
origin and root; and if anything has not a
head, it is nothing." Since then Petilianus
had said this, not wishing anything to be un-
derstood by the origin and root and head of
baptizing a man, except the man by whom he
might be baptized, I made a comment, and
said " We ask, therefore, in a case where tlie
faithlessness of the baptizer is undetected, if
then the man whom he baptizes receives faith
and not guilt? if then the baptizer is not his
origin and root and head, who is it from wliom
he receives faith? where is the origin from
which he springs ? where is the root of which

he is a shoot ? where the head which is his
starting-point ? Can it be that, when he who
is baptized is unaware of the faitiilessness of
his baptizer, it is then Christ who is tiie origin
and root and head?" This therefore I say
and exclaim now also, as I did there as well:
" Alas for human rashness and conceit !
Why do you not allow that it is always Christ
who gives faith, for the purpose of making a
man a Christian by giving it? Why do you
not allow that Christ is always the origin of
the Christian, that the Christian always plants
his root in Christ, that Christ is the Head of
the Christian ? Will it then be urged that,
even where spiritual grace is dispensed to
those that believe by the hands of a holy and
faithful minister, it is still not the minister
himself who justifies, but that One of wi^om
it is said, ' He justineth the ungodly'?' But
unless we admit this, either the Apostle Paul
was the head and origin of those whom he
had planted, or A polios the root of those
whom he had watered, rather than He who
had given tliem faith in believing; whereas
the same Paul says, ' I have planted, Apollos
watered; but God gave the increase. So that
neither is he that planteth anything, neither
he that watereth; but God that giveth the in-
crease."^ Nor was the apostle himself their
root, but rather He who says, ' I am the vine,
ye are the branches. '^ How, too, could he
be their head, when he says that ' we, being
many, are one body in Christ." '* and ex-
pressly declares in many passages that Ciinst
Himself is the Head of the whole body?
Wherefore, \vhether a man receives the sac-
rament of baptism from a faithful or a faith-
less minister, his whole hope is in Christ, that
he fall not under the condemnation, that
' Cursed is he that placeth his hope in man!" ' =

Chap. 43. — 52. These things, I think, I
put with clearness and truth in my former
epistle, when I made answer to Petilianus.
These things I have also now quoted, intima-
ting and commendmg to you the truth that
our faith rests on something else altogether
than man, and that we believe that tne Lord
Christ is the cleanser and the justifier of men
that believe in Him that justifieth the un-
godly, that their faith may be counted unto
them for righteousness, whether the man who
administers the baptism be righteous, or such
an impious and deceitful man as the Holy
Spirit flees. Then I went on to point out
j what absurdity would follow were it otherwise,
and I said, as I say now: " Otherwise, if each
man is born again in spiritual grace of the

• Krmi. iv. 5.
4 Kum. xii. $.

3 1 Cor. iii. 6, 7.
5 Book I. c. s, 6.

3 John XV. 5

6i8

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book III.

same sort as he by whom he is baptized, and
if, when he who baptizes him is manifestly a
good man, then he himself gives faith, he is
himself the origin and root and head of him
who is being born; whilst, when the baptizer
is faithless without its being known, then the
baptized person receives faith from Christ,
then he derives his origin from Christ, then
he is rooted in Christ, then he boasts in Christ
as his head; in that case all who are baptized
should wish that they might have faithless
baptizers, and be ignorant of their faithless-
ness. For however good their baptizers might
have been, Christ is certainly beyond compari-
son better stili, and He will then be the Head
of the baptized if the faithlessness of the
baptizer shall escape detection. But if it be
perfect madness to hold such a view (for it is
Christ always that justifieth the ungodly, by
changing his ungodliness into Christianity; it
is from Christ always that faith is received;
Christ is always the origin of the regenerate,
and the Head of the Church), what weight
then will those words have, which thoughtless
readers value by their sound, without inquir-
ing what their inner meaning is?'"' This
much I said at that time; this is written in
my epistle.

Chap. 44. — 53. Then a little after, as he
had said, " This being so, brethren, what
perversity must that be, tliat he who is guilty
by reason of his own faults should make an-
other free from guilt, whereas the Lord Jesus
Christ says, ' Every good tree bringeth forth
good fruit, but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil
fruit: do men gather grapes of thorns?- and
again, 'A good man, out of the good treasure
of the heart, bringeth forth good things: and
an evil man, out of the evil treasure, bringeth
forth evil things,' "^ — by which words Peti-
lianus showed with sufificient clearness, that
the man who baptizes is to be looked on as
the tree, and he who is baptized as the fruit:
to this I had answered. If the good tree is the
good baptizer, and his good fruit he whom he
has baptized, then any one who has been bap-
tized by a bad man, even if his w-ickedness be
not manifest, cannot by any possibility be
good, for he is sprung from an evil tree.
For a good tree -is one thing; a tree whose
quality is concealed, but yet bad, is another.
What else did I wish to be understood by
those words, except what I had stated a little
above, that the tree and its fruit do not rep-
resent him that baptizes and him that is bap-
tized; but that the man ought to be received
as signified by the tree, his works and his life

I Book I. c. 6, 7.

Matt, vii. 17, 16.

3 Matt. xii. 35.

by the fruit, which are always good in the
good man, and evil in the evil man, lest this
absurdity should follow, that a man should be
bad when baptized by a bad man, even
though his wickedness were concealed, beinsf.
as it were, the fruit of a tree whose quality
was unknown, but yet bad ? To which he has
answered nothing whatsoever.

Chap. 45. — 54. But that neither he nor
any one of you might sa)' that, when any one
of concealed bad character is the baptizer,
then he whom he baptizes is not his fruit, but
the fruit of Christ, I went on immediately to
point out what a foolish error is consequent
also on that opinion; and I repeated, though
in other words, what I had said shortly before:
If, when the quality of the tree is concealed,
but evil, any one who may have been baptiz-
ed by it is born, not of it but of Christ, then
they are justified with greater holiness who
are baptized by wicked men, whose wicked-
ness is concealed, than they who are baptized
by men that are genuinely and manifestly
good.'* Petilianus then, being hemmed in by
these embarrassing straits, said nothing about
the earlier part on which these remarks de-
pended, and in his answer so quoted this ab-
surd consequence of his error as though I
had stated it as my own opinion, whereas it
was really stated in order that he might per-
ceive the amount of evil consequent on his
opinion, and so be forced to alter it. Impos-
ing, therefore, this deceit on those who hear
and read his words, and never for a moment
supposing that what we have written could be
read, he begins a vehement and petulant in-
vective against me, as though I had thought
that all who are baptized ought to wish that
they might have as their baptizers men who
are faithless, without knowing this themselves,
since, however good the men might be whom
they had to baptize them, Christ is incom-
parably better, who will then be the head of
the person baptized, if the faithless baptizer
conceal his true character. As though, too,
I had thought that those were justified with
greater holiness who are baptized by evil men,
whose character is concealed, than those who
are baptized by men that are genuinely and
manifestly good; when this marvellous piece
of madness was only mentioned by me as
following necessarily on the opinion of those
who think with Petilianus, that a man, when
baptized, bears the same relation to his bap-
tizer as fruit does to the tree from which it
springs, — good fruit springing from a good
tree, evil fruit from an evil tree, — seeing that

4 See Book I. cc. 7, 8, 8, 9.

Chap. XLVI.] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

619

I they, when they are bidden by me to answer
I whose fruit they think a man that is baptized
j to be when he is baptized by one of secretly
' bad character, since they do not venture to
rebaptize him, are compelled to answer, that
: then he is not the fruit of that man of secretly
bad character, but that he is the fruit of
Christ. And so they are followed by aconse-
I (juence contrary to their inclination, which
lone but a madman would entertain, — that if
.. man is the fruit of his baptizer when he is
liaptized by one that is genuinely and mani-
festly good, but when he is baptized by one
if secretly bad character, he is then not his
ruit, but the fruit of Christ, — it cannot but
follow that they are justified with greater holi-
ness who are baptized by men of secretly bad
character, than those who are baptized by
men who are genuinely and manifestly good.

Chap. 46. — 55. Now,

seemg

that when

Petilianus attributes this to me as though it
were my opinion, he makes it an occasion for
a serious and vehement invective against me,
he at any rate shows, by the very force of his
indignation, how great a sin it is in his opin-
ion to entertain such views; and, accordingly,
whatever he has wished it to appear that he
said against me for holding this opinion will
be found to have been really said against him-
self, who is proved to entertain the view.
For he shows herein by how great force on
the side of truth he is overcome, when he
cannot find any other door of escape except
to pretend that it was I who entertained the
views which really are his own. Just as if
those v/hom the apostle confutes for maintain-
ing that there was no resurrection from the
dead, were to wish to bring an accusation
against the same apostle, on the ground that
he said, "Then is Christ not risen," and to
maintain that the preaching of the apostle was
vain, and the faith of those who believed in it
was also vain, and that false witnesses were
found against God in those who had said that
He raised up Christ from the dead. This is
what Petilianus wished to do to me, never
expecting that any one could read what I had
Vv'ritten, which he could not answer, though
very anxious that men should believe him to
have answered it. But just as, if any one had
done this to the apostle, the whole calumni-
ous accusation would have recoiled on the
head of those who made it so soon as the en-
tire passage in his epistle was read, and the
preceding words restored, on which any one
who reads them must perceive that those
which I have quoted depend, in the same
way, so soon as the preceding words of my
epistle are restored, the accusation which

Petilianus brings against me is cnst back wit!i
all tlie greater force upon his own head, from
which he had striven to remove it.

56. For the apostle, in confuting those who
denied that there was any resurrection of the
dead, corrects their view by showing the ab-
surdity which follows those who entertain this
view, however loth they may be to admit the
consequence, in order that, while they shrink
in abhorrence from what is impious to say,
they m.ay correct what they have ventured to
believe. His argument continues thus: "But
if there be no resurrection of the dead, then
is Christ not risen: and if Christ be not risen,
then is our preaching vain, and your faith is
also vain. Yea, and we are found false wit-
nesses of God: because we have testified of
God that He raised up Christ; whom He rais-
ed not up, if so be that the dead rise not."'
in order that, while they fear to say that Christ
had not risen, with the other wicked and ac-
cursed conclusions which follow from such a
statement, they may correct what they said in
a spirit of folly and infidelity, that there is no
resurrection of the dead. If, therefore, you
take away what stands at the head of this
argument, "7/" there be no resurrection of the
dead," the rest is spoken amiss, and yet must
be ascribed to the apostle. But if you restore
the supposition on which the rest depends,
and place as the hypothesis from which you
start, "There is no resurrection of the dead,"
then the conclusion will follow rightly, "Then
is Christ not risen, and our preaching is vain,
and your faith is also vain,'' with all the rest
that is appended to it. And all these state-
ments of the apostle are wise and good, since
whatever evil they have in them is to be im-
puted to those who denied the resurrection of
the dead. In the same manner also, in my
epistle, take away my supposition. If every
one is born again in spiritual gr.-;ce of the
same character as he by whom he is baptized,
and if, when the man who baptizes is genu-
inely and manifestly good, he does of himself
give faith, he is the origin and root and head
of him who is being born again; but when the
baptizer is a wicked man, and undetected in
his wickedness, then each man who is bap-
tized receives his faith from Christ, derives
his origin from Christ, is rooted in Christ,
makes his boast in Christ as his Head: — take
away, I say, this hypothesis, on which all
that follows depends, and there remains a
saying of the worst description which must
fairly be ascribed to me, viz., that all who are
baptized should desire that they should have
i faithless men to baptize them, and be igno-
j^ __

I I I Cor. XV. 13-ij.

620

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book III.

rant of their faithlessness. For however good
men they may have to baptize them, Christ is
incomparably better, who will then be the
Head of the baptized, if the baptizer be a
faithless man, but undetected.' But let the
statements that you make be restored, and
then it will forthwith be found that this which
depends upon it and follows in close connec-
tion from it is not my sentiment, and that any
evil which it contains is retorted on the opin-
ion which you maintain. In like manner,
take away the supposition, If the good bap-
tizer is the good tree, so that he whom he has
baptized is his good fruit, and if, when the
character of an evil tree is concealed, then any
one that has been baptized by it is born, not
of it, but of Christ,^take away this hypothe-
sis, which you were compelled to confess had
its origin in your sect and in the letter of
Petilianus, and the mad conclusion which fol-
lows from it will be mine, to be ascribed to
me alone, Then they are justified with greater
holiness who are baptized by undetected evil
men, than they who are baptized by men that
are genuinely and manifestly good."" But
restore the hypothesis on which this depends,
and you will at once see both that I have
been right in making this statement for your
correction, and that all that with good reason
displeases you in this opinion has recoiled
upon your own head.

Chap. 47 — 57, Furthermore, in like man-
ner as those who denied the resurrection of
the dead could in no way defend themselves
from the evil consequences which the apostle
proved to follow from their premises, in order
to refute their error, saying, "Then is not
Christ raised," with the other conclusions of
similar atrocity, unless they changed their
opinions, and acknowledged that there was a
resurrection of the dead; so is it necessary
that you should change your opinion, and
cease to rest on man the hope of those who
are baptized, if you do not wish to have im-
puted to you what we say for your refutation
and correction, that they are justified with
greater holiness who are baptized by unde-
tected evil men than those that are baptized
by men that are genuinely and manifestly
good. For if you make your first assertion,
see what I say, unless some one shall sup-
press this a second time, and miake out that I
have entertained the opinion which I quote
for your refutation and correction. See what
I lay down as my premiss, from which hangs
the statement which I shall subsequently
make: If you rest the hope of those who are

■ to be baptized on the man by whom they are
baptized, and if you maintain, as Petilianus
wrote, that the man who baptizes is the origin
and root and head of him that is baptized; if
you receive as the good tree the good man
who baptizes, and as his good fruit the man
who has been baptized by him; then you put
it into our heads to ask from what oriarin he
springs, from what root he shoots up, to what
head he is joined, from what tree he is born,
who is baptized by an undetected bad man ?
For to this inquiry belongs also the following,
to which I have over and over again main-
tained that Petilianus has given no reply: By
what means is a man to be cleansed who re-
ceives baptism while he is ignorant of the
stain upon the conscience of him that gives
but not in holiness ? for this conscience of him
that gives, or of him that gives in holiness,
Petilianus wishes to be the origin, root, head,
seed, tree from which the sanctification of the
baptized has its existence, — springs, begins,
sprouts forth, is born.

Chap. 48. — 58. When we ask, therefore,
by what means the man is to be cleansed
whom you do not baptize again in your com-
munion, even when it has been made clear
that he has been baptized by some one who,
on account of some concealed iniquity, did
not at the time possess the conscience of one
that gives in holiness, what answer do you
intend to make, except that he is cleansed by
Christ or by God, although, indeed, Christ is
Himself God over all, blessed for ever,^ or
b}' the Holy Spirit, since He too is Himself
God, because this Trinity of Persons is one
God ? Whence Peter, after saying to a man,
"Thou hast dared to lie to the Holy Ghost,"
immediately went on to add what was the
nature of the Holy Ghost, saying, "Thou hast
not lied unto men, but unto God."'^ Lastly,
even if you were to say that he was cleansed
and purified by an angel when he is unac-
quainted with the pollution in the conscience
of him that gives but not in holiness, take
notice that it is said of the saints, when they
shall have risen to eternal life, that they shall
then be equal to the angels of God.^ Any
one, therefore, that is cleansed even by an
angel is cleansed with greater holiness than
if he were cleansed by any kind of conscience
of man. Why then are you unwilling that it
should be said to you, If cleansing is wrought
by the hands of a man when he is genuinely
and manifestly good; but when the man is
evil, but undetected in his wickedness, then
since he has not the conscience of one that

' See Book I. c. 6, 7.

■ See Book I.

c. 8, 9.

3 Rom. ix. ^.

4 Acts V. 3, 4.

5 Matt. .\xii. 30.

Chap. L.]

THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

621

gives in holiness, it is no longer he, but God, |
or an angel, that cleanses; therefore they who |
are baptized by undetected evil men are justi- 1
fied with greater holiness than those who are 1
baptized by men that are genuinely and mani- '
festly good ? And if this opinion is displeas- j
ing to you, as in reality it ought to be dis-
pleasing to every one, then take away the
source from which it springs, correct the
premiss to which it is indissolubly bound; for
if these do not precede as hypotheses, the
other will not follow as a consequence.

Chap. 49. — 59. Do not therefore any long-
er say, "The conscience of one that gives in
holiness is what we look for to cleanse the
conscience of the recipient," lest you be
asked. When a stain on the conscience of the
giver is concealed, who cleanses the consci-
ence of the recipient ? And when you shall
have answered, Either God or an angel (since
there is no other answer which you possibly
can make), tiien should follow a consequence
whereby you would be confounded: Those
then are justified with greater holiness who
are baptized by undetected evil men, so as to
be cleansed by God or by an angel, than
those who are baptized by men who are genu-
inely and manifestly good, who cannot be
compared with God or with the angels. But
prevail upon yourselves to say what is said by
Truth and by the Catholic Church, that not
only when the minister of baptism is evil, but
also when he is holy and good, hope is still
not to be placed in man, but in Him that justi-
fieth the ungodly, in whom if any man believe,
his faith is counted for righteousness.' For
when we say, Christ baptizes, we do not mean
by a visible ministry, as Petihanus believes,
or would have men think that he believes, to
be our meaning, but by a hidden grace, by a
hidden power in the Holy Spirit, as it is said
of Him by John the Baptist, "The same is
He which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost." ^
Nor has He, as Petilianus says, now ceased to
baptize; but He still does it, not by any min-
istry of the body, but by the invisible working
of His majesty. For in that we say, He
Himself baptizes, we do not mean. He Him-
self holds and dips in the water the bodies of
the believers; but He Himself invisibly
cleanses, and that He does to the whole Church
without exception. Nor, indeed, may we
refuse to believe the words of the Apostle
Paul, who says concerning Him, "Husbands,
love your wives, even as Chris: also loved the
Church, and gave Himself for it, that He
might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing

of water by the word." ' Here you see that
Christ sanctifies; here you see that Christ also
Himself washes, Himself purifies with the
self-same washincf of water by the word,
wherein the ministers are seen to do their
work in the body. Let no one, therefore,
claim unto himself what is of God. Tnc hope
of men is only sure wlien it is fixed on Him
who cannot deceive, since "Cursed be every
one that trusteth in man," ■» and "Blessed is
that man that maketh the Lord His trust." '
For the faithful steward shall receive as his
reward eternal life; but the unfaithful steward,
when he dispenses his lord's provisions to his
fellow-servants, must in no wise be conceived
to make the provisions useless by his own
unfaithfulness. For the Lord says, "What-
soever they bid you observe, that observe and
do; but do not ye after their works."' And
this is therefore the injunction that is given
us against evil stewards, that the good t.iings
of God should be received at their hands, but
that we should beware of their own evil life,
by reason of its unlikeness to what they thus
dispense.

Chap. 50. — 60. But if it is clear that Peti-
lianus has made no answer to those first words
of my epistle, and t'nat, when he has endeav-
ored to make an answer, he has shown all the
more clearly how incapable he was of answer-
ing, what shall I say in respect of those por-
tions of my writings which he has not even
attempted to answer, on which he has not
touched at all? And yet if any one shall be
willing to review their character, having in his
possession both my writings and those of
Petilianus, I think he will understand by what
confirmation they are supported. And t'nat
I may show you this as shortly as I can, I
would beg you to call to mind the proofs that
were advanced from holy Scripture, or refresh
your memory by reading both what he has
brought forward as against me, and what I
have brought forward in my answer as against
you, and see how I have shown that the pas-
sages which he has brought forward are an-
tagonistic not to me, but rather to yourselves;
whilst he has altogether failed to touch those
which I brought forward as especially neces-
sary, and in that one passage of the apostle
which he has endeavored to make use of as
though it favored him, you will see how he
found himself without the means of making
his escape.

61. For the portion of this epistle which he
wrote to his adherents — from the beginning
down to the passage in which he says, "This

I Rom.

■ John i. 33.

3 Eph. V. 2";, :6.
5 Ps. >1. 4-

* ler. xvii. 5.
6']Mutt. xxiii. 3.

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[r.ooK III.

is the commandment of the Lord to us, 'When
they persecute you in this city, flee ye into
another;' ' and if they persecute you in that
also, flee ye to a third" — came first into my
hands, and to it I made a reply; and when
this reply of ours had fallen, in turn, into his
hands, he wrote in answer to it this which I
am now refuting, showing that he has made
no reply to mine. In that first portion, there-
fore, of his writings to which I first replied,
these are the passages of Scripture which he
conceives to be opposed to us: "Every good
tree bringeth forth good fruit, but a corrupt
tree bringeth forth evil fruit. Do men gather
grapes of thorns?"^ And again: "A good
man, out of the good treasure of his heart,
bringeth forth good things; and an evil man,
out of the evil treasure, bringeth forth evil
things. "3 And again: "When a man is bap-
tized by one that is dead, his washing profit-
eth him nothing."'' From these passages he
is anxious to show that the man who is bap-
tized is made to partake of the character of
him by whom he is baptized ; I, on the other
hand, have shown in what sense these pas-
sages should be received, and that they could
in no wise aid his view. But as for the other
expressions which he has used against evil
and accursed men, I have sufficiently shown
that they are applicable to the Lord's wheat,
dispersed, as was foretold and promised,
throughout the world, and that they might
rather be used by us against you. Examine
them again, and you will find it so.

62. But the passages which I have advanc-
ed to assert the truth of the Catholic Church,
are the following: As regards the question of
baptism, that our being born again, cleansed,
justified by the grace of God, should not be
ascribed to the man who administered the
sacrament, I quoted these: "It is better to
trust in the Lord than to put confidence in
man:" s and "Cursed beevery one that trust-
eth inman;''^ and that, "Salvation belongeth
unto the Lord;" ? and that, "Vain is the help
of man;''® and that, "Neither is he that
planteth anything, neither he that watereth,
but God that giveth the increase;" ^ and that
He in whom men believe justifieth the ungod-
ly, that his faith may be counted to him for
righteousness.'" But in behalf of the unity of
the Church itself, which is spread abroad
throughout all the world, with which you do
not hold communion, I urged that the follow-
ing passages were prophesied of Christ: that
"He shall have dominion also from sea to

' Matt. X. 23.

4 Ecclus. xxxiv.

5 Ps. cxviii. 8.

SPS. Ix. II.

= Matt. vii. 17, 16.
. See Book I. c. Q,
* Jer. xvii. 5.
9 I Cor. iii. 7.

3 Matt. xii. 35.'

7 Ps. iii. 8.
10 Rom. iv. 5.

sea, and from the river unto the ends of the
earth;" " and, "I shall give Thee the heathen
for Thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts
of the earth for Thy possession;"'- and that
the covenant of God m.ade with Abraham may
be quoted in behalf of our, that is, of the
Catholic communion, in which it is written,
"In thy seed shall all nations of the earth be
blessed;"'^ y/hich seed the apostle interprets,
saying, "And to thy seed, which is Christ."'-*
Whence it is evident that in Christ not only
Africans or Africa, but all the nations
through which the Catholic Church is spread
abroad,- should receive the blessing which was
promised so long before. And that the chaff
is to be with the wheat even to the time of the
last winnowing, that no one may excuse the
sacrilege of his own separation from the
Church by calumnious accusations of other
men's offenses, if he shall have left or desert-
ed the communion of all nations; and to show
that the society of Christians may not be
divided on account of evil ministers, that is,
evil rulers in the Church, I further quoted
the passage, "All whatsoever they bid you
observe, that observe and do; but do not ye
after their works; for they say and do not."'s
With regard to these passages of holy Script-
ure which I advanced to prove my points, he
neither showed how they ought to be other-
wise interpreted, so as to prove that they
neither made for us nor against you, nor was
he willing to touch them in any way. Nay,
his whole object was could it have been
achieved, that by the tumultuous outpouring
of his abuse, it might never occur to any one
at all, who after reading my epistle might have
been willing to read his as well, that these
things had been said by me

Chap. 51. — 6^. Next, listen fOx a short
time to the kind of way in which he has tried
to use, in his own behalf, the passages which
I had advanced from the writings of the
Apostle Paul. "For you asserted," he says,
"that the Apostle Paul finds fault with those
who used to say that they were of the Apostle
Paul, saying, 'Was Paul crucified for you ? or
were ye baptized in the name of Paul ? ' '*
Wherefore, if they were in error, and would
have perished had they not been corrected,
because they wished to be of Paul, what
hope can there possibly be for those who have
wished to be of Donatus ? For this is their
sole object, that the origin, and root, and
head of him that is baptized should be none
other than he by whom he is baptized."'^

" Ps. Ixxii. 8. i^Ps. ii. 8.

14 Gal. iii. 16. 15 Matt, xxiii. 3.

I" See Book I. cc. 3, 4, 4. 5.

13 Gen. xxii. 18.
16 I Cor. i. 13.

Chap. Lll.] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAX, THE DONATIST.

These words, and this confirmation from the
writings of the apostle, he has quoted from
my epistle, and he has proposed to himself
the task of refuting them. Go on then, I beg
of you, to see how he has fulfilled the task.
For he says, "This assertion is meaningless,
and inflated, and childish, and foolish, and
something very far from a true exposition of
our faith. For you would only be right in
asserting this, if we were to say, We have
been baptized in the name of Donatus, or
Donatus was crucified for us, or we have been
baptized in our own name. But since such
things as this neither have been said nor are
said by us, — seeing that we follow the formula
of the holy Trinity, — it is clear that you are
mad to bring such accusations against us. Or
if you think that we have been baptized in the
name of Donatus, or in our own name, you
are miserably deceived, and at the same time
confess in your sacrilege that you on your
part defile your wretched selves in the name
of CEecilianus." This is the answer which
Petilianus has made to those arguments of
mine, not supposing — or rather making a noise
that no one might suppose — that he has
made no answer ai all which could bear in any
way upon the question which is under dis-
cussion. For who could fail to see that this
witness of the apostle has been adduced by
us with all the more propriety, in that you do
not say that you were baptized in the name
of Donatus, or that Donatus was crucified for
you, and )'et separate yourselves from the
communion of the Catholic Church out of
respect to the party of Donatus; as also those
whom Paul was rebuking certainly did not say
that they had been baptized in the name of
Paul, or that Paul has been crucified for them,
and yet they were making a schism in the
name of Paul. As therefore in their case, for
whom Christ, not Paul, was crucified, and who
v.-ere baptized in the name of Christ, not of
Paul, and who yet said, "I am of Paul," the
rebuke is used with all the more propriety,
"Was Paul crucified for^you ? or were ye bap-
tized in the name of Paul ?" to make them
cling to Him who was crucified for them, and
in whose name they were baptized, and not
be guilty of division in the name of Paul; so
in your case, also, the rebuke, Was Donatus
crucified for you ? or were ye baptized in the
name of Donatus ? is used all the more ap-
positely, because you do not say, We were
baptized in the name of Donatus, and yet
desire to be of the party of Donatus. For
you know that it was Christ who was crucified
for you, and Christ in whose name you were
baptized; and yet, out of respect to the name
and party of Donatus, you show such obstinacy

in fighting against the unity of Christ, who
was crucified for you, and in whose name you
were baptized.

Chap. 52. — 64. But if you wish to see that
the object of Petilianus in his writings really
was to prove "that the origin, and root, and
head of him that is baptized is none other
than he by whom he is baptized," and that
this has not been asserted by me without
meaning, or childishly, or foolishly, review
the begmning of the e[)istle itself to which I
made my reply, or rather pay careful atten-
tion to me as I quote it. The conscience,"
he says, "of one that gives in holiness is
what we look for to cleanse the conscience of
the recipient; for he who has received his
faith from one that is faithless, receives not
faith but guilt." And as though some one
had said to him, Whence do you derive your
proof of this? he goes on to say, "For every-
thing has its existence from a source and root;
and if anything has not a head, it is nothing;
nor does anything well confer a new birth,
unless it be born again of good seed. And
this being so, brethren, what i)er\'ersity must
it be to maintain that he who is guilty by
reason of his own offenses should make an-
other free from guilt; whereas our Lord
Jesus Christ says, 'A good tree bringeth forth
good fruit: do men gather grapes of thorns ?'
And again, 'A good man, out of the good
treasure of his heart, bringeth forth good
things; and an evil man, out of the evil treas-
ure, bringeth forth evil things.' And again,
'When a man is baptized by one that is dead,
his washing profiteth him nothing.'" You
see to what end all these things tend, viz.,
that the conscience of him that gives in holi-
ness (lest any one, by receiving his faith from
one that is faithless, should receive not faith
but guilt) should be itself the origin, and root,
and head, and seed of him that is baptized.
For, wishing to prove that the conscience of
one that gives in lioliness is what we look for
to cleanse the conscience of the recipient, and
til t he receives not faith but guilt, who wit-
tingly receives his faith from one that is faith-
less, he has added immediately afterwards,
"For everything has its existence from a
source and root; and if anything has not a
head, it is nothing; nor does anything well
confer a new birth, unless it be born again of
good seed." And for fear that any one
siiould be so dull as still not to understand
that in each case he is speaking of the man
by whom a person is baptized, he explains
this afterwards, and says, "This being so,
bretliren, what perversity must it be to main-
tain that he wlio is guilty by reason of his own

624

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book III.

offenses should make another free from guilt;
wMereas our Lord Jesus Christ says, 'A good
tree bringeth forth good fruit: do men gather
grapes of thorns?'" And lest, by some in-
credible stupidity of understanding, the hearer
or seer should be blind enough not to see
that he is speaking of the man that baptizes,
he adds another passage, where he actually
specifies the man. "And again," he says,
" 'A good man, out of the good treasure of
his heart, bringeth forth good things; and an
evil man, out of the evil treasure, bringeth
forth evil things;' and again, 'When a man is
baptized by one that is dead, his washing pro-
fiteth him nothing.'" Certainly it is now
plain, certainly he needs no longer any in-
terpreter, or disputant, or demonstrator, to
show that the object of his party is to prove
that the origin, and root, and head of him
that is baptized is none other than he by whom
he is baptized. And yet, being overwhelmed
by the force of truth, and as though forget-
ful of what he had said before, Petilianus ac-
knowledges afterwards to me that Christ is
the origin and root of them that are regener-
ate, and the Head of the Church, and not any
one that may happen to be the dispenser and
minister of baptism. For having said that
the apostles used to baptize in the name of
Christ, and set forth Christ as the founda-
tion of their faith, to make men Christians,
and being fain to prove this, too, by passages
and examples from holy Scripture, just as
though we were denying it, he says, "Where
is now that voice, from which issued the noise
of those minute and constant petty question-
ings, wherein, in the spirit of envy and self-
conceit, you uttered many involved sayings
about Christ, and for Christ, and in Christ, in
opposition to the rashness and haughtiness of
men? Lo, Christ is the origin, Christ is the
head, Christ is the root of the Christian."
When, therefore, I heard this, what could I
do but give thanks to Christ, who had com-
pelled the man to make confession ? All
those things, therefore, are false which he
said in the beginning of his epistle, when he
wished to persuade us that the conscience of
one that gives in holiness must be looked for
to cleanse the conscience of the recipient; and
that when one has wittingly received his faith
from one that is faithless he receives not faith
but guilt. For, wishing as it were to show clear-
ly how much rested in the man that baptizes,
he had added what he seems to think most
weighty proofs, saying "For everything has its
existence from a source and root; and if any-
thing has not a head, it is nothing." But after-
wards, when he says what we also say, " Lo,
Christ is the origin, Christ is the head, Christ

is the root of the Christian," he wipes out
what he had said before, "that the conscience
of one that gives in holiness is the origin, and
root, and head of the recipient." The truth,
therefore, has prevailed, so that the man who
is desirous to receive the baptism of Christ
should not rest his hope upon the man who
administers the sacrament, but should ap-
proach in all security to Christ Himself, as
to the source which is not changed, to the
root which is not plucked up, to the head
which is not cast down.

Chap. 53. — 65. Then who is there that
could fail to perceive from what a vein of
conceit it proceeds, that in explaining as it
were the declaration of the apostle, he says,
" He who said, ' I planted, ApoUos watered,
but God gave the increase,' surely meant
nothing else than this, that ' I made a man a
catechumen in Christ, Apollo baptized him;
God confirmed what we had done ?' " Why
then did not Petilianus add what the apostle
added, and I especially took pains to quote,
" So then neither is he that planteth anything,
neither he that watereth; but God that giveth
the increase"?' And if he be willing to inter-
pret this on the same principle as what he has
set down above, it follows beyond all doubt,
that neither is he that baptizeth anything but
God that giveth the increase. For what mat-
ter does it make in reference to the question
now before us, in what sense it has been
said, "I planted, Apollos watered." —
whether it is really to be taken as equivalent
to his saying, " I made a catechumen, Apollos
baptized him;" or whether there be any other
truer and more congruous understanding of
it ? — for in the mean time, according to his
own interpretation of the words, neither is he
that makes the catechumen anything, neither
he that baptizes, but God that gives the in-
crease. But there is a great difference be-
tween confirming what another does, and do-
ing anything oneself. For He who gives the
increase does not confirm a tree or a vine,
but creates it. For by that increase it comes
to pass that even a piece of wood planted in
the ground produces and establishes a root;
by that increase it comes to pass that a seed
cast into the earth puts forth a shoot. But
why should we make a longer dissertation on
this point? It is enough that, according to
Petilianus himself, neither he that maketh a
catechum.en, nor he that baptizes, is any-
thing, but God that gives the increase. But
when would Petilianus say this, so that we
should understand that he meant, Neither is

I I Cor. iii. 6, 7,

Chap. LV.]

THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

625

Donatus of Carthage anything, neither Janu-
arius, neither Petilianus ? When would the
swelUng of his pride permit him to say this,
which now causes the man to think himself to
be something, when he is nothing, deceiving
himself?'

Chap. 54. — 66. Finally, again, a little after-
wards, when he resolved and was firmly pur-
posed, as it were, to reconsider once more
the words of the apostle which he had brought
up against him, he was unwilling to set down
this that I had said, preferring something else
in which by some means or other the swelling
of human pride might find means to breathe.
" For to reconsider," he says, "those words
of the apostle, on which you founded an argu-
ment against us; he said, 'What is Apollos,
what is Paul, save only ministers of Him in
whom ye have believed ?'^ What else, for ex-
ample, does he say to all of us than this.
What is Donatus of Carthage, what is Janu-
arius, what is Petilianus, save only ministers
of Him in whom ye have believed?" I did
not bring forward this passage of the apostle,
but I did bring forward that which he has
been unwilling to quote, " Neither he that
planteth is anything, neither he that water-
eth; but God that giveth the increase." But
Petilianus was willing to insert those words of
the apostle, in which he asks what is Paul,
and what is Apollos, and answers that " They
are ministers of Him in whom ye have be-
lieved." This the muscles of the heretic's neck
could bear; but he was wholly unable to en-
dure the other, in which the apostle did not ask
and answer what he was, but said that he was
nothing. But now I am willing to ask whether
it be true that the minister of Christ is noth-
ing. Who will say so much as this ? In what
sense, therefore, is it true that "Neither is
\\e that planteth anything, neither he that
watereth, but God that giveth the increase,"
except that he who is something in one point
of view may be nothing in another ? For min-
istering and dispensing the word and sacra-
ment he is something, but for purifying and
justifying he is nothing, seeing that this is
not accomplished in the inner man, except by
Him by whom the whole man was created,
and who while He remained God was made
man, — by Him, that is, of whom it was said,
" Purifying their hearts by faith;" ^ and " To
him that believeth on Him that justifieth the
ungodly."* And this testimony Petilianus
has been willing to set forth in my words,
whilst in his own he has neither handled it,
nor even touched it.

Chap. 55. — 67. A minister, therefore, that
is a dispenser of the word and sacrament of
the gospel, if he is a good man, becomes a
fellow-partner in the working of the gospel;
but if he is a bad man, he does not therefore
cease to be a dispenser of the gospel. For if
he is good, he does it of his own free will;
but if he is a bad man, — that is, one who
seeks his own and not the things of Jesus
Christ, — he does it unwillingly, for the sake
of other things which he is seeking after.
See, however, what the same apostle has said:
" For if I do this thing willingly," he says, "I
have a reward; but if against my will, a dispen-
sation of the gospel is committed unto me; "^
as though he were to say. If I, being good,
announce what is good, I attain unto it also
myself; but if, being evil, I announce it, yet
I announce what is good. For has he in any
way said. If I do it against my will, then shall
I not be a dispenser of the gospel.'' Peter
and the other disciples announce the good
tidings, as being good themselves. Judas did
it against his will, but yet, when he was sent,
he announced it in common with the rest.
They have a reward; to him a dispensation
of the gospel was committed. But tliey who
received the gospel at the mouth of all those
witnesses, could not be cleansed and justified
by him that planted, or by him that watered,
but by Him alone that gives the increase. For
neither are we going to say that Judas did
not baptize, seeing that he was still among
the disciples when that which is written was
being accomplished, " Jesus Himself baptized
not, but His disciples."* Are we to suppose
that, because he had not betrayed Christ,
therefore he who had the bag, and bare what
was put therein,7was still enabled to dispense
grace without prejudice to those who ijeceived
it, though he could not be an upright guar-
dian of the money entrusted to his care ? Or
if he did not baptize, at any rate we must ac-
knowledge that he preached the gospel. But
if you consider this a trifling function, and of
no importance, see what you must think of
the Apostle Paul himself, who said, "For
Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach
the gospel."^ To this we may add, that ac-
cording to this, Apollos begins to be more
important, who watered by baptizing, than
Paul, who planted by preaching the gospel,
though Paul claims to himself the relation
of father towards the Corinthians in virtue of
this very act, and does not grant this title to

those who came to them after him. For he
Though ye have ten thousand instnic-

' Gal. vi. 3.

- Ministri ejus cui crcdidistis. See i Cor.

3 Acts XV. 9. 4 Rom. iv. 5.

111. 4,

says

tors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers;

5 I Cor. i.x. 17.
7 John xii. 6.

6 John iv. 2.
8 I Cor. i. 17,

626

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book III.

for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through
the gospel." ' He says, "I have begotten you"
to the same men to whom he says in another
phice, " I thank God that I baptized none of
you but Crispus and Gains, and I baptized
also the household of Stephanus."= He had
begotten them, therefore, not through himself,
but through the gospel. And even though he
had been seeking his own, and not the things
of Jesus Christ, and had been doing this un-
willingly, so as to receive no reward for him-
self, yet he would have been dispensing the
treasure of the Lord; and this, though evil
himself, he would not have been making evil
or useless to those who received it well.

Chap. 56, — 68. And if this is rightly
said of the gospel, with how much greater
certainty should it be said of baptism, which
belongs to the gospel in such wise, that with-
out it no one can reach the kingdom of heaven,
and with it only if to the sacrament be added
righteousness? For He who said, "Except
a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he
cannot enter into the kingdom of God," ^ said
Himself also, " Except your righteousness
shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes
and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into
the kingdom of heaven."-* The form of the
sacrament is given through baptism, the form
of righteousness through the gospel. Neither
one without the other leads to the kingdom
of heaven. Yet even men of inferior learning
can baptize perfectly, but to preach the gospel
perfectly is a task of much greater difficulty
and rarity. Therefore the teacher of the
Gentiles, that was superior in excellence to
the majority, was sent to preach the gospel,
not to baptize; because the latter could be
done by many, the former only by a few, of
whom he was chief. And yet we read that
he said in certain places, " My gospel; " ^ but
he never called baptism either his, or any
one's else by whom it was administered. For
that baptism alone which John gave is called
John's baptism.*^ This that man received as
the special pledge of his ministry, that the
prepai'atory sacrament of washing should
even be called by the name of him by whom
it' was administered; whereas the baptism
which the disciples of Christ administered
was never called by the name of any one of
them, that it should be understood to be His
alone of whom it is said, "Christ loved the
Church, and gave Himself for it, that He
might sanctify and cleanse it with the wash-
ing of water by the word." ' If, therefore.

■^ I Cor. iv. 15.
4 Matt. V. 20.

7 Kph. V. 25, 26.

" I Cor. i. 14, 16.
5 2 Tim. ii. 8.

3 John iii. 5.
* Acts xi.\. 3.

the gospel, which is Christ's, but so that a
minister also may call it his in virtue of his
office of administering it, can be received by
a man even at the hands of an evil minister
without danger to himself, if he does accord-
ing to what he says, and not after the exam-
ple of what he does, how much more may any
one who comes in good faith to Christ receive
without fear of contagion from an evil min-
ister the baptism of Christ, which none of the
apostles so administered as to dare to call
it his own ?

Chap. 57. — 69. Furthermore, if, while I
have continued without intermission to prove
how entirely the passages of Scripture which
Petilianus has quoted against us have failed
to hurt our cause, he himself has in some
cases not touched at all what I have quoted,
and partly, when he has endeavored to handle
them, has shown that the only thing that he
could do was to fail in finding an escape from
them, you require no long exhortation or ad-
vice in order to see what you ought to main-
tain, and what you should avoid. But it may
be that this has been the kind of show that
he has made in dealing with the testimony of
holy Scripture, but that he has not been with-
out force in the case of the documentary evi-
dence found in the records of the schism it-
self. Let us then see in the case of these
too, though it is superfluous to inquire into
them after testimony from the word of God,
what he has quoted, or what he has proved.
For, after pouring forth a violent invective
against tradiiors, and quoting loudly man)'
passages against them from the holy books
themselves, he yet said nothing which could
prove his opponents to be traditors. But I
quoted the case of Silvanus of Cirta, who held
his own see some little time before himself,
who was expressly declared in the Municipal
Chronicles to have been a traditor while he
was yet a sub-deacon. Against this fact he
did not venture to whisper a syllable. And
yet you cannot fail to see how strong the
pressure was which must have been urging
him to reply, that he might show a man, who
was his predecessor, not only one of his party,
but a partner, so to speak, in his see, to have
been innocent of the crime of delivering up
the sacred books, especially as you rest the
whole strength of your cause on the fact that
you give the name of traditor to all whom you
either pretend or believe to have been the suc-
cessors of traditors in the path of their com-
munion. Although, then, the very exigencies
of your cause would seem to compel him to un-
dertake the defence of a citizen even of Rus-
sicadia, or Calama, or any other city of your

Chap. LVIIL] THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN, THE DONATIST.

627

party, whom I should declare to be a traditor,
on the authority of the Municipal Chronicles,
yet he did not open his mouth even in defense
of his own predecessor. For what reason, ex-
cept that he could not find any mist dark
enough to deceive the minds of even the slow-
est and sleepiest of men ? For what could he
have said, except that the charges brought
against Silvanus were false ? But we quote
the words of the Chronicles, both as to the
date of the fact, and as to the time of the in-
formation laid before Zenophilus the ex-con-
sul.' And how could he resist this evidence,
being encompassed on every side by the most
excellent cause of the Catholics, while yours
was bad as bad could be ? For which reason
I quote these words from my epistle to which
he would fain be thought to have replied in
this which I am now refuting, that you may
see for yourselves how impregnable the posi-
tion must be against which he has been able
to find no safer weapon than silence.

Chap. 58. — 70. For when he quoted a
passage from the gospel as making against
us, where our Lord says, " They will come to
you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are
ravening wolves; ye shall know them by their
fruits,"- — I answered and said, " Then let us
consider their fruits;" and then I at once
wanton to add the foUowmg words: "You
bring up against them their delivery of the
sacred books. This very charge we urge with
greater probability against their accusers
themselves. And not to carry our search too
far: in the same city of Constantina, your
predecessors ordained Silvanus bishop at the
very outset of his schism. He, while he was
still a sub-deacon, was most unmistakably
entered as a traditor in the archives of the
city. If you, on your side, bring forward
documents against our predecessors, all that
we ask is equal terms, that we should either
believe both to be true, or both to be false.
If both are true, you are unquestionably
guilty of schism, who have pretended that
you avoid offenses in the communion of the
whole world, though these were common
among you in your own fragmentary sect.
But again, if both are false, you are unques-
tionably guilty of schism, who, on account of
the false charges of traditors, are staining
yourselves with the heinous offense of sever-
ance from the Church. But if vve have some-
thing to urge in accusation, while you have
nothing, or if our charges are true, while
yours are false, it is no longer matter of dis-
cussion how thoroughly your mouths are

' See Book III. c. Cresconium, cc. 27, 28, 31, 32.
2 Matt. vii. 15, 16.

closed. What if the holy and true Church of
Christ were to convince and overcome you,
even if we held no documents in support of
our cause, or only such as were false, while
you had possession of some genuine proof of
delivery of the sacred books, what would then
remain for you, except that, if you would,
you should show your love of peace, or other-
wise should hold your tongues ? For what-
ever in that case you might bring forward in
evidence, I should be able to say with the
greatest ease and with the most perfect truth,
that then you are bound to prove as much to
the full and Catholic unity of the Church,
already spread abroad and established
throughout so many nations, to the end that
you should remain within, and that those
whom you convict should be expelled. And
if you have endeavored to do this, certainly
you have not been able to make good your
proof; and, beingvanquished or enraged, you
have separated yourselves, with all the hein-
ous guilt of sacrilege, from the guiltless men
who could not condemn on insufficient proof.
But if you have not even endeavored to do
this, then with most accursed and unnatural
blindness you have cut yourselves off from
the wheat of Christ, which grows throughout
His whole fields, that is, throughout the whole
world until the end, because you have taken
offense at a few tares in Africa.'' ^ To this,
which I have quoted from my former epistle,
Petilianus has made no answer whatsoever.
And, at all events, you see that in these few
words is comprised the whole question which
is at issue between us. For what should he
endeavor to say, when, whatever course he
chose, he was sure to be defeated ?

71. For when documents are brought for-
ward relating to tiie traditors, both by us
against the men of your party, and by you
against the men of our party, (if indeed any
really are brought forward on your side, for
to this very day we are left in total ignorance
of them; nor indeed can we believe that Pe-
tilianus would have omitted to insert them in
his letter, seeing that he has taken so much
pains to secure the quotation and insertion of
those portions of the Chronicles which bear
on the matter in opposition to me), — but still,
as I began to say, if such documents are
brought forward both by us and by you, —
documents of whose existence we are wholly
ignorant to this very day, — surely you must
acknowledge that either both are true, or both
false, or ours true and yours false, or yours
true and ours false; for there is no further
alternative that can be suggested.

3 See Book I. cc. 21, 22, 23, 24.

62S

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Book III.

Chap. 59. — But according to all these four
hypothese"s, the truth is on the side of the
communion of the Catholic Church. For if
both are true, then you certainly should not
have deserted the communion of the whole
world on account of men such as you too had
among yourselves. But if both are false, you
should have guarded against the guilt of most
accursed division, which had not even any
pretext to allege of any delivery of the sacred
books. If ours are true and yours are false,
you have long been without anything to say
for yourselves. If yours are true and ours are
false, we have been liable to be deceived, in
common with the whole world, not about the
truth of the faith, but about the unrighteous-
ness of men. For the seed of Abraham, dis-
persed throughout the world, was bound to
pay attention, not to what you said you knew,
but to what you proved to the judges.
Whence have we any knowledge of what was
done by those men who were accused by your
ancestors, even if the allegations made against
them were true, so long as they were held to
be not true but false, either by the judges who
took cognizance of the case, or at least by
the general body of the Church dispersed
throughout the world, which was only bound
to pay heed to the sentence of the judges ?
God does not necessarily pardon any human
guilt that others in the weakness of human
judgment fail to discover; yet I maintain that
no one is rightly deemed guilty for having
believed a man to be innocent who was not
convicted. How then do you prove the world
to be guilty, merely because it did not know
what possibly was really guilt in the Africans,

— its ignorance arising either from the fact
that no one reported the sin to it, or from its
having given credence, in respect of the in-
formation which was given, rather to the
judges who took cognizance of the case, than
to the murmurers who were defeated ? So far
then, Petilianus deserves all praise, in that,
when he saw that on this point I was absolute-
ly impregnable, he passed it by in silence.
Yet he does not deserve praise for his at-
tempts to obscure in a mist of words other
points which were equally impregnable,
which yet he thought could be obscured; or
for having put me in the place of his cause,
when the cause left him nothing to say; while
even about myself he could say nothing ex-
cept what was either altogether false, or un-
deserving of any blame, or without any bear-
ing whatsoever upon me. But, in the mean-
time, are you, whom I have made judges ;|
between Petilianus and myself, possessed of
discrimination enough to decide in any de-
gree between what is true and what is false,
between what is mere empty swelling and what
is solid, between what is troubled and what is
calm, between inflammation and soundness,
between divine predictions and human as-
sumptions, between bringing an accusation
and establishing it, between proofs and fic-
tions, between pleading a cause and leading
one away from it ? If you have such power
of discrimination, well and good; but if you
have it not, we shall not repent of having be-
stowed our pains on you, for even though your
heart be not converted unto peace, yet our
peace shall return unto ourselves.

ST. AUGUSTIN:

A TREATISE CONCERNING

THE CORRECTION OF THE DONATISTS

[DE CORRECTIONE DONATISTARUM. LIBER SEU EPISTOLA CLXXXV.]

CIRCA A.D. 417.

TRANSLATED BY THE

REV. J. R. KING, M.A.,

VICAR OF ST PETER^S IN THE EAST, OXFORD; AND LATE FEl.LOW AND TUTOR OF

MERTON COLLEGE, OXFORD.

CONTEXTS ON A TREATISE CONCERNING THE CORRECTION

OF THE DONATISTS.

PAGE

A Letter of Augustin to Boniface, who, as we learn from Epistle 220, was Tribune, and afterwards
Count in Africa. In it Augustin shows that the heresy of the Donatists has nothing in common
with that of Arius ; and points out the moderation with which it was possible to recall the heretics
to the communion of the Church through awe of the imperial laws. He adds remarks concerning
the savage conduct of the Donatists and Circumcelliones. concluding with a discussion of the unpar-
donable nature of the sin against the Holy Ghost 633

A TREATISE

CONCERNING

THE CORRECTION OF THE DONATISTS;

OR epistlp: CLXXXV.'

A LETTER OF AUGUSTIX = TO BONIFACE, WHO, AS WE LEARN FROM EPISTLE 220, WAS TRIBUNE,
AND AFTERWARDS COUNT IN AFRICA. IN IT AUGUSTIN SHOWS THAT THE HERESY OF
THE DONATISTS HAS NOTHING IN COMMON WITH THAT OF ARIUS ; AND POINTS OUT THE
MODERATION WITH WHICH IT WAS POSSIBLE TO RECALL THE HERETICS TO THE COM-
MUNION OF THE CHURCH THROUGH AWE OF THE IMPERIAL LAWS. HE ADDS REMARKS
CONCERNING THE SAVAGE CONDUCT OF THE DONATISTS AND CIRCUMCELLIONES, CON-
CLUDING WITH A DISCUSSION OF THE UNPARDONABLE NATURE OF THE SIN AGAINST
THE HOLY GHOST. 3

Chap. i. — i. I must express my satisfac-
tion, and congratulations, and admiration,
my son Boniface,'* in that, amid all the cares
of wars and arms, you are eagerly anxious to
know concerning the things tliat are of God.
From hence it is clear that in you it is actually
a part of your military valor to serve in truth
the faith which is in Christ. To place, there-
fore, briefly before your Grace the difference
between the errors of the Arians and the Do-
natists, the Arians say that the Father, the
Son, and the Holy Ghost are different in sub-
stance; whereas the Donatists do not say this,
but acknowledge the unity of substance in the
Trinity. And if some even of them have

1 Written c. 417.

2 In Book II. c. xlviii. of his Retractations, Augustin says:
"About the same time " (as that at which he wrote his treatise
De Gi-stis Pelagii, i. e. about the year 417), " I wrote also a treat-
ise De Correctionc Doiuitistaruiii, for the sake of those who were
not wilhng that the Donatists should be subjected to the correc-
tion of the imperial laws. This treatise begins with the words
" Laiido. et gratii/or, et adtniror." This letter in the old edi-
tions was No. 50, — the letter which is now No. 4 in the appendix
(Benedictine) being formerly No. 185.

3 He handles the same thought in E/^ 03.

4 The correspondence between Augustin and Boniface is lim-
ited to Ep/'. 185, 189 and 220. The sixteen smaller letters are
spurious. For note to Boniface and translations of 189 and
and 220, see vol. i of this series, pp. 552 and 573.

said that the Son was inferior to the Father,
yet they have not denied that He is of the
same substance; whilst the greater part of
them declare that they hold entirely the same
belief regarding the Father and the Son and
the Holy Ghost as is held by the Catholic
Church. Nor is this the actual question in
dispute with them; but they carry on their
unhappy strife solely on the question of com-
munion, and in the perversity of their error
maintain rebellious hostility against the unity
of Christ. But sometimes, as we have heard,
some of tliem. wishing to conciliate the Goths,
since they see tliat they are not without a cer-
tain amount of power, profess to entertain the
same belief as they. But they are refuted
by the authority of their own leaders; for
Donatus himself, of whose party they boast
themselves to be. is never said to have held
this belief.

2. Let not, however, things like these dis-
turb thee, my beloved son. For it is foretold
to us tliat there must needs be heresies and
stumbling-blocks, that we may be instructed
among our enemies; and that so both our

634

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. I.

faith and our love may be the more approved,
— our faith, namely, that we should not be
deceived by them; and our love, that we
should take the utmost pains we can to correct
the erring ones themselves; not only watching
that they should do no injury to the weak,
and that they should be delivered from their
wicked error, but also praying for them, that
God would open their understanding, and
that they might comprehend the Scriptures.
For in the sacred books, where the Lord
Christ is made manifest, there is also His
Church declared; but they, with wondrous
blindness, while they would know nothing of
Christ Himself save what is revealed in the
Scriptures, yet form their notion of His
Church from the vanity of human falsehood,
instead of learning what it is on the authority
of the sacred books.

3. They recognize Christ together with us
in that which is written, " They pierced my
hands and my feet. They can tell all my
bones: they look and stare upon me. They
part my garments among them, and cast lots
upon my vesture;" and yet they refuse to rec-
ognize the Church in that which follows shortly
after: "All the ends of the world shall re-
member, and turn unto the Lord; and all the
kindreds of the nations shall worship before
Thee. For the kingdom is the Lord's; and
He is the Governor among the nations.'''
They recognize Christ together with us in
that which is written, " The Lord hath said
unto me, Thou art my Son, this day have I
begotten Thee;" and they will not recognize
the Church in that which follows: "Ask of
me, and I shall give Thee the heathen for
Thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of
the earth for Thy possession."- They rec-
ognize Christ together with us in that which
the Lord Himself says in the gospel, " Thus
it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from
the dead the third day; " and they will not
recognize the Church in that which follows:
" And that repentance and remission of sins
should be preached in His name among all
nations, beginning at Jerusalem." ^ And
the testimonies in the sacred books are with-
out number, all of which it has not been nec-
essary for me to crowd together into this book.
And in all of them, as the Lord Christ is made
manifest, whether in accordance with His
Godhead, in which He is equal to the Father,
so that, " In the beginning was the Word, and
the Word was with God, and the Word was
God;" or according to the humility of the
flesh which He took upon Him, whereby
" the Wc rd was made flesh and dwelt among

' P?. xxii. 16-18, 2,, 28

' Ps. ii.

3 Luke xxiv. 46, J7.

us;""* so is His Church made manifest, not in
Africa alone, as they most impudently ven-
ture in the madness of their vanity to assert,
but spread abroad taroughout the world.

A. For they prefer to the testimonies of
Holy Writ their own contentions, because, in
the case of Cascilianus, formerly a bishop of
the Church of Carthage, against whom they
brought charges which they were and are un-
able to substantiate, they separated themselves
from the Catholic C^hurchi, — that is, from the
unity of all nations. Ali*^^!iOugh, even if the
charges had been true whd'ch were brought by
them against Caecilianus, and could at length
be proved to us, yet, though we might pro-
nounce an anathema upon him even in the
grave, 5 we are still bound not for the sake of
any man to leave the Church, which rests for its
foundation on divine witness, and is not the
figment of litigious opinions, seeing that it
is better to trust in the Lord than to put
confidence in man.^ For we cannot allow
that if Ciecilianus had erred, — a supposition
which I make without prejudice to his integ-
rity,— Christ should therefore have forfeited
His inheritance. It is easy for a man to be-
lieve of his fellow-men either what is true or
what is false; but it marks abandoned impu-
dence to desire to condemn the communion
of the whole world on account of charges al-
leged against a man, of which you cannot es-
tablish the truth in the face of the world.

5. Whether Caecilianus was ordained by
men who had delivered up the sacred books,
I do not know. I did not see it, I heard it
only from his enemies. It is not declared to
me in the law of God, or in the utterances
of the prophets, or in the holy poetry of the
Psalms, or in the writings of any one of
Christ's apostles, or in the eloquence of Christ
Himself. But the evidence of all the several
scriptures with one accord proclaims the
Church spread abroad throughout the world,
with which the faction of Donatus does not
hold communion. The law of God declared,
" In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth
be blessed." ^ The Lord said by the mouth
of His prophet, " From the rising of the sun,
even unto the going down of the same, a
pure sacrifice shall be offered unto my name:
for my name shall be great among the hea-
then." ® The Lord said through the Psalm-
ist, " He shall have dominion also from sea
to sea, and from the river unto the ends of
the earth." ^ The Lord said by His apostle,

John i. I,
This epis

5 I'his epistle was produced in the fifth conference of the fifth
ecumenical Synod (553), when the point was under debate whether
'I'heodorus of iMopsuesta could be condemned after his death.

6 Ps. cxviii. 8. 7 C^en. xxvi. 4.
8 Mai. 1. II. 9 Ps. Ixxii. 8.

Chap. II.]

THE CORRECTION OF THE DOXATISTS.

635

" The gospel is come unto you, as it is in all
the world, and bringeth forth fruit." ' The
Son of God said with His own mouth, " Ye
shall be witnesses unto me, both in Jerusa-
lem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and
even unto the uttermost part of the earth." =*
Csecilianus, the bishop of the Church of Car-
thacre, is accused with the contentiousness of
men; the Church of Christ, established among
all nations, is recommended by the voice of
God. Mere piety, truth, and love forbid us
to receive against Caecilianus the testimony
of men whom we do not find in the Church,
which has the testimony of God; for those
who do not follow the testimony of God have
forfeited the weight which otherwise would
attach to their testimony as men.

Chap. 2. — 6. I would add, moreover, that
they themselves, by making it the subject of
an accusation, referred the case of Csecilianus
to the decision of the Emiperor Constantine;
and that, even after the bishops had pro-
nounced their judgment,- finding that they
could not crush Csecilianus, they brought
him in person before the above-named em-
peror for trial, in the most determined spirit
of persecution. And so they were themselves
the first to do what they censure in us, in
order that they may deceive the unlearned,
saying that Christians ought not to demand,
any assistance from Christian emperors
against the enemies of Christ. And this, too,
they did not dare to deny in the conference
which we held at the same time in Carthage:
nay, they even venture to make it a matter of
boastinof that their fathers had laid a criminal
indictment against Csecilianus before the em-
peror; adding furthermore a lie, to the effect
that they had there worsted him, and procured
his condemnation. How then can tiiey be
otherwise than persecutors, seeing that when
they persecuted Csecilianus by their accusa-
tions, and were overcome by him, they sought
to claim false glory for themselves by a most
shameless life; not only considering it no re-
proach, but glorying in it as conducive to their
praise, if they could prove that Csecilianus had
been condemned on the accusation of their
fathers ? But in regard to the manner in
which they were overcome at every turn in
the conference itself, seeing that the records
are exceedingly voluminous, and it would be
a serious matter to have them read to you
while you are occupied in other matters that
are essential to the peace of Rome, perhaps
it may be possible to have a digest* of them

' Co!, i. 6. = -Acts i. 8.

3 In the Councils at Rome and Aries.

4 This digest will be found in the 9th volume of Benedictine

read to you, which I believe to be in the pos-
session of my brother and fellow-bishop Op-
tatus; or if he has not a copy, he might easily
procure one from the church at Sitifa; for I
can well believe that even that volume will
prove wearisome enough to you from its
lengthiness, amid the burden of your many
cares.

7. For the Donatists met with the same
fate as the accusers of the holy Daniel. s For
as the lions were turned against them, so the
laws by which they had proposed to crush an
innocent victim were turned against the Do-
natists ; save that, through the mercy of Christ,
the laws which seemed to be opposed to them
are in reality their truest friends; for through
their operation many of them have been, and
are daily being reformed, and return God
thanks that they are reformed, and delivered
from their ruinous madness. And those who
used to hate are now filled with love; and
now that they have recovered their right minds,
they congratulate themselves that these most
wholesome laws were brought to bear against
them, with as much fervency as in their mad-
ness they detested them; and are filled with
the same spirit of ardent lo^^e towards those
who yet remain as ourselves, desiring that we
should strive in like manner that those with
whom they had been like to perish might be
saved. For both the physician is irksome to
the raging madman, and a father to his un-
disciplined son, — the former because of the
restraint, the latter because of the chastise-
ment which he inflicts; yet both are acting in
love. But if they were to neglect their charge,
and allow them to perish, this mistaken kind-
ness would more truly be accounted cruelty.
For if the horse and mule, which have no un-
derstanding, resist with all the force of bites
and kicks the efforts of the men who treat
their wounds in order to cure them; and yet
the men, though they are often exposed to
danger from their teeth and heels, and some-
times meet with actual hurt, nevertheless do
not desert them till they restore them to
health through the pain and annoyance which
the healing process gives, —how much more
should man refuse to desert his fellow-man,
or brother to desert his brother, lest he should
perish everlastingly, being himself now able
to comprehend the vastness of the boon ac-
corded to himself in his reformation, at the
very time that he complained of suffering per-
secution ?

8. As then the apostle says, *' As we have
therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all

edition of Aufrustin's Works. Bm'iculus collntionis cum Dona-
tiiiis, p. 371 sqq., reproduced in Migne 613 sqq.
5 Dan. vi. 24.

656

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. II.

men, not being weary in well-doing," ' so let
all be called to salvation, let all be recalled
from the path of destruction, — those who may,
by the sermons of Catholic preachers; those
who may, by the edicts of Catholic princes;
some through those who obey the warnings of
God, some through those who obey the em-
peror's commands. For, moreover, when em-
perors enact bad laws on the side of falsehood
as against the truth, those who hold a right
faith are approved, and, if they persevere,
are crowned; but when the emperors enact
good laws on behalf of the truth against false-
hood, then those who rage against them are
put in fear, and those who understand are
reformed. Whosoever, therefore, refuses to
obey the laws of the emperors which are en-
acted against the truth of God, wins for him-
self a great reward; but whosoever refuses
to obey the laws of the emperors which are
enacted in behalf of truth, wins for himself
great condemnation. For in the times, too,
of the prophets, the kings who, in dealing
with the people of God, did not prohibit nor
annul the ordinances which were issued con-
trary to God's commands, are all of them
censured; and those who did prohibit and
annul them are praised as deserving more
than other men. And king Nebuchadnezzar,
when he was a servant of idols, enacted an
impious law that a certain idol should be wor-
shipped; but those who refused to obey his
impious command acted piously and faithfully.
And the very same king, when converted by
a miracle from God, enacted a pious and
praiseworthy law on behalf of the truth, that
every one who should speak anything amiss
against the true God, the God of Shadrach,
Meshach, and Abednego, should perish ut-
terly, with all his house.'' If any persons dis-
obeyed this law, and justl)' suffered the pen-
alty imposed, they might have said what
these men say, that they were righteous be-
cause they suffered persecution through the
law enacted by the king: and this they cer-
tainly would have said, had they been as
m.ad as these who make divisions between the
members of Christ, and spurn the sacraments
of Christ, and take credit for being persecut-
ed, because they are prevented from doing
such things by the laws which the emperors
have passed to preserve the unity of Christ;
and boast falsely of their innocence, and seek
from men the glory of martyrdom, which
they cannot receive from our Lord.

9. But true martyrs are such as those of
whom the Lord says, "Blessed are they whic'.i
are persecuted for righteousness' sake."^ It

' Gal. vi. Q, 10.

2 Dan. iii. 5, 29.

3 Matt. V. I

is not, therefore, those who suffer persecu-
tion for their unrighteousness, and for the
divisions which they impiously introduce into
Christian unity, but those who suffer for
righteousness' sake, that are truly martyrs.
For Hagar also suffered persecution at the
hands of Sarah;'' and in that case she who
persecuted was righteous, ajid she unrighte-
ous who suffered persecution. Are we to
compare with this persecution which Hagar
suffered the case of holy David, who was
persecuted by unrighteous Saul ? ^ Surely
there is an essential difference, not in respect
of his suffering, but because he suffered for
righteousness' sake. And the Lord Him-
self was crucified with two thieves;* but those
who were joined in their suffering were sepa-
rated by the difference of its cause. Accord-
ingly, in the psalm, we must interpret of the
true martyrs, who wish to be distinguished
from false martyrs, the verse in which it is
said, "Judge me, O Lord, and distinguish^
my cause from an ungodly nation."^ He
does not say, Distinguish my punishment,
but "Distinguish my cause." For the punish-
ment of the impious may be the same; but
the cause of the martyrs is always different.
To whose mouth also the words are suitable,
"They persecute me wrongfully; help Thou
me;"3 in which the Psalmist claimed to have
a right to be helped in righteousness, because
his adversaries persecuted him wrongfully;
for if they had been right in persecuting him,
he would have deserved not help, but correc-
tion.

10. But if they think that no one can be
justified in using violence,- — as they said in
the course of the conference that the true
Church must necessarily be the one which
suffers persecution, not the one inflicting it, —
in that case I no longer urge what I observed
above; because, if the matter stand as they
maintain that it does, then C^cilianus must
have belonged to the true Church, seeing that
their fathers persecuted him, by pressing his
accusation even to the tribunal of the emperor
himself. For we maintain that he belonged
to the true Church, not merely because he
suffered persecution, but because he suffered
it for righteousness' sake: but that they were
alienated from the Church, not merely because
they persecuted, but because they did so in
unrighteousness. This, then, is our position.
But if they make no inquiry into the causes for
which each person inflicts persecution, or for
which he suffers it, but think that it is a suffici-
ent sign cf a true Christian that he does not

4 Gen. xv\. 6. 5 i Sam. xviii.. xix.,etc. * Luke x.xiii. 33.
1 Discertie cansain iiteaji:. The Eng. Vers, has, "plead ray
cause against an ungodly nation."
8 Ps. xliii. I. 9 Ps. cxix. 86.

:hap. III.]

THE CORRECTION OF THE DONATISTS.

637

inflict persecution, but suffers it, then beyond
all question they include Ca;cilianus in that
definition, who did not inflict, but suffered
persecution; and they equally exclude their
own fathers from the definition, for they in-
flicted, but did not suffer it.

II. But this, I say, I forbear to urge. Yet
one point I must press: If the true Church is
the one which actually suffers persecution, not
the one which inflicts it, let them ask the
apostle of what Church Sarah was a type,
when she inflicted persecution on her hand-
maid. For he declares that the free mother
of us all, the heavenly Jerusalem, that is to
say, the true Church of God, was prefigured
in that woman who cruelly entreated her hand-
maid.' But if we investigate the story further,
we shall find that the handmaid rather perse-
cuted Sarah by her haughtiness, than Sarah the
handmaid by her severity: for the handmaid
was doing wrong to her mistress; the mistress
only imposed on her a proper discipline in her
haughtiness. Again I ask, if good and holy
men never inflict persecution upon any one,
but only suffer it, whose words they think
that those are in the psalm where we read, "I
have pursued mine enemies, and overtaken
them; neither did I turn again till they were
consumed?"- If, therefore, we wish either
to declare or to recognize the truth, there is
a persecution of unrighteousness, which the
impious inflict upon the Church of Christ;
and there is a righteous persecution, which the
Church of Christ inflicts upon the impious.
She therefore is blessed in suffering persecu-
tion for righteousness' sake; but they are
miserable, suffering persecution for unrighte-
ousness. Moreover, she persecutes in the
spirit of love, they in the spirit of wrath; she
that she may correct, they that they may
overthrow: she that she may recall from
error, they that they may drive headlong into
error. Finally, she persecutes her enemies
and arrests them, until they become weary in
their vain opinions, so that they should make
advance in the truth; but they, returning evil
for good, because we take measures for their
good, to secure their eternal salvation, en-
deavor even to strip us of our temporal safety,
being so in love with murder, that they com-
mit it on their own persons, when they can-
not find victims in any others. For in pro-
portion as the Christian charity of the Church
endeavors to deliver them from that destruc-
tion, so that none of them should die, so their
madness endeavors either to slay us, that
they may feed the lust of their own cruelty,
or even to kill themselves, that they may not

' Gal. iv. 22-31.

2PS.

xviu. 37.

seem to have lost the power of putting men
to death.

Chap. 3. — 12. But those who are unac-
quainted with their habits think that they only
kill themselves now that all the mass of the
people are freed from the fearful madness of
their usurped dominion, in virtue of the laws
which have been passed for the preservation
of unity. But those who know what they
were accustomed to do before the passing of
the laws, do not wonder at their deaths, but
call to mind their character; and especially
how vast crowds of them used to come in pro-
cession to the most frequented ceremonies of
the pagans, while the worship of idols still
continued, — not with the view of breaking the
idols, but that they might be put to death by
those who worshipped them. For if they had
sought to break the idols under the sanction
of legitimate authority, they might, in case
of anything happening to them, have had
some shadow of a claim to be considered
martyrs; but their only object in coming was,
that while the idols remained uninjured, they
themselves might meet with death. For it was
the general custom of the strongest youths
among the worshippers of idols, for each of
them to offer in sacrifice to the idols themselves
any victims that he might have slain. Some
went so far as to offer themselves for slaughter
to any travellers whom they met with arms,
using violent threats that they would murder
them if they failed to meet with death at
their hands. Sometimes, too, they extorted
with violence from any passing judge that
they should be put to death by the execu-
tioners, or by the officer of his court. And
hence we have a story, that a certain judge
played a trick upon them, by ordering them
to be bound and led away, as though for exe-
cution, and so escaped their violence, without
injury to himself or them. Again, it was
their daily sport to kill themselves, by throw-
ing themselves over precipices, or into the
water, or into the fire. For the devil taught
them these three modes of suicide, so that,
when they wished to die, and could not find
any one whom they could terrify into slaying
them with his sword, they threw themselves
over the rocks, or committed themselves to
the fire or the eddying pool. But who can be
thouglit to have taught them this, having
gained possession of their hearts, but he who
actually suggested to our Saviour Himself
as a duty sanctioned by the law, that He
should throw Himself down from a pinnacle
of the temple?-' And his suggestion they

3 Luke iv. 9.

638

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. IV.

would surely have thrust far from them, had
they carried Christ, as their Master, in their
hearts. But since they have rather given
place within them to the devil, they either
perish like the herd of swine, whom the legion
of devils drove down from the hill-side into
the sea,' or, being rescued from that destruc-
tion, and gathered together in the loving
bosom of our Catholic Mother, they are de-
livered just as the boy was delivered by our
Lord, whom his father brought to be healed
of the devil, saying that ofttimes he was wont
to fall into the fire, and oft into the water.=

13. Whence it appears that great mercy is
shown towards them, when by the force of
those very imperial laws they are in the first
nistance rescued against their will from that
sect in which, through the teaching of lying
devils, they learned those evil doctrines, so
that afterwards they might be made whole in
the Catholic Church, becoming accustomed
to the good teaching and example which they
find in it. For many of the men whom we
now admire in the unity of Christ, for the
pious fervor of their faith, and for their
charity, give thanks to God with great joy
that they are no longer in that error which led
them to mistake those evil things for good,
— which thanks they would not now be offer-
ing willingly, had they not first, even against
their will, been severed from that impious
association. And what are we to say of those
who confess to us, as some do every day,
that even in the olden days they had long
been wishing to be Catholics; but they were
living among men among whom those who
wished to be Catholics could not be so through
the infirmity cf fear, seeing that if any one
there said a single word in favor of the
Catholic Church, he and his house were utter-
ly destroyed at once ? Who is mad enough
to deny that it was right that assistance
should have been given through the imperial
decrees, that they might be delivered from
so great an evil, whilst those whom they used
to fear are compelled in turn to fear, and are
either themselves corrected through the same
terror, or, at any rate, whilst they pretend to
be corrected, they abstain from further perse-
cution of those who really are, to whom they
formerly were objects of continual dread ?

14. But if they have chosen to destroy
themselves, in order to prevent the deliver-
ance of those who had a right to be delivered,
and have sought in this way to alarm the
pious hearts of the deliverers, so that in their
apprehension that some few abandoned men
might perish, they should allow others to lose

I Mark v. 13.

2 Matt. xvii. 14.

the opportunity of deliverance from destruc-
tion, who were either already unwilling to per-
ish, or might have been saved from it by the
employment of compulsion; what is in this
case the function of Christian charity, especi-
ally when we consider that those who utter
threats of their own violent and voluntary
deaths are very few in number in comparison
with the nations that are to be delivered ?
What then is tne function of brotherly love ?
Does it, because it fears the shortlived fires
of the furnace for a few, therefore abandon
all to the eternal fires of hell ? and does it
leave so many, who are either already desir-
ous, or hereafter are not

strong enough

pass to life eternal, to perish everlastingly,
while taking precautions that some few should
not perish by their own hand, who are only
living to be a hindrance in the way of the
salvation of others, whom they will not permit
to live in accordance with the doctrines of
Christ, in the hopes that some day or other
they may teach them too to hasten their
death by their own hand, in the manner which
now causes them themselves to be a terror to
their neighbors, in accordance with the cus-
tom inculcated by their devilish tenets ? or
does it rather save all whom it can, even
though those whom it cannot save should per-
ish in their own infatuation? For it ardently
desires that all should live, but it more es-
pecially labors that not all should die. But
thanks be to the Lord, that both amongst us
— not indeed everywhere, but in the great
majority of places — and also in the other parts
of Africa, the peace of the Catholic Church
both has gained and is gaining ground, with-
out any of these madmen being killed. But
those deplorable deeds are done in places
where there is an utterly furious and useless
set of men, who were given to such deeds
even in the days of old.

Chap. 4. — 15. And indeed, before those
laws were put in force by the emperors of the
Catholic faith, the doctrine of the peace and
unity of Christ was beginning by degrees to
gain ground, and men were coming over to it
even from the faction of Donatus, in propor-
tion as each learned more, and became more
willing, and more master of his own actions;
although, at the same time, among the Dona-
tists herds of abandoned men were disturb-
ing the peace of the innocent for one reason
or another in the spirit of the most reckless
madness. What master was there who was
not compelled to live in dread of his own ser-
vant, if he had put himself under the guard-
ianship of the Donatists ? Who dared even
threaten one who sought his ruin with pun-

Chap. IV.]

THE CORRECTION OF THE DONATISTS.

639

ishment ? Who dared to exact payment of a
debt from one who consumed his stores, or
from, any debtor whatsoever, that sought their
assistance or protection ? Under the threat
of beating, and burning, and immediate death,
all documents compromising the worst of
slaves were destroyed, that they might depart
in freedom. Notes of hand that had been
extracted from debtors were returned to
them. Any one who had shown a contempt
for their hard words were compelled by harder
blows to do what they desired. The houses
of innocent persons who had offended them
were either razed to the ground or burned.
Certain heads of families of honorable paren-
tage, and brought up with a good education,
were carried away half dead after their deeds
of violence, or bound to the mill, and com-
pelled by blows to turn it round, after the
fashion of the meanest beasts of burden.
For what assistance from the laws rendered
by the civil powers was ever of any avail
against them ? What official ever ventured
so much as to breathe in their presence?
What agents ever exacted payment of a debt
which they had been unwilling to discharge?
Who ever endeavored to avenge those who
were put to death in their massacres ? Ex-
cept, indeed, that their own madness took
revenge on them, when some, by provoking
against themselves the swords of men, whom
they obliged to kill them under fear of instant
death, others by throwing themselves over
sundry precipices, others by waters, others by
fire, gave themselves over on the several oc-
casions to a voluntar}' death, and gave up
their lives as offerings to the dead by punish-
ments inflicted with their own hands upon
themselves.

16. These deeds were looked upon with hor-
ror by many who were firmly rooted in the
same superstitious heresy; and accordingly,
when they supposed that it was sufiicient to
establish their innocence that they were ill
contented with such conduct, it was urged
against them by the Catholics: If these evil
deeds do not pollute your innocence, how then
do you maintain that the whole Christian world
has been polluted by the alleged sin of
Csecilianus, which are either altogether cal-
umnies, or at least not proved against him ?
How come you, by a deed of gross impiety,
to separate yourselves from the unity of the
Catholic Church, as from the threshing-floor
of the Lord, which must needs contain, up to
the time of the final winnowing, both corn
which is to be stored in the garner, and chaff
that is to be burned up with fire?' And thus

I Matt. lii. 12.

some were so convinced by argument as to
come over to the unity of the Catholic Church,
being prepared even to meet the hostility of
abandoned men; whilst the greater number,
though equally convinced, and though desir-
ous to do the same, yet dared not make ene-
mies of these men, who were so unbridled in
their violence, seeing that some who had come
over to us experienced the greatest cruelty at
their hands.

17. To this we may add, that in Carthage
itself some of the bishops of the same party,
making a schism among themselves, and
dividing the party of Donatus among the lower
orders of the Carthaginian people, ordained
as bishop against bishop a certain deacon
named Maximianus, who could not brook the
control of his own diocesan. And as this
displeased the greater part of them, they con-
demned the aforesaid Maximianus, with twelve
others who had been present at his ordina-
tion, but gave the rest that were associated in
the same schism a chance of returning to their
communion on an appointed day. But after-
wards some of these twelve, and certain others
of those who had had the time of grace allowed
to them, but had only returned after the day
appointed, were received by them without de-
gradation from their orders; and they did not
venture to baptize a second time those whom
the condemned ministers had baptized outside
the pale of their communion. This action of
theirs at once made strongl}^ against them
in favor of the Catholic party, so that their
mouths were wiiolly closed. And on the
matter being diligently spread abroad, as was
only right, in order to cure men's souls of the
evils of schism, and when it was shown in
every possible direction l)y the sermons and
discussions of the Catholic divines, that to
maintain the peace of Donatus they had not
only received back those whom they had
condemned, with full recognition of their
orders, but had even been afraid to declare
that baptism to be void which had been ad-
ministered outside their Church by men whom
they had condemned or even suspended;
whilst, in violation of the peace of Christ, tliey
cast in the teeth of all the world the stain
conveyed by contact with some sinners, it
matters little with whom, and declared bap-
tism to be consequently void which had been
administered even in the very Churciies
whence the gospel itself had come to Africa;
— seeing all this, very many began to be con-
founded, and blushing before what tiiey saw
to be mostly manifest truth, they submitted
to correction in greater numbers than was
their wont; and men began to breathe with a
somewhat freer sense of liberty from their

640

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. V,

cruelty, and that to a considerably greater
extent in every direction.

18. Then indeed they blazed forth with
such fury, and were so excited by the goad-
ings of hatred, that scarcely any churches of
our communion could be safe against their
treachery and violence and most undisguised
robberies; scarcely any road secure by which
men could travel to preach the peace of the
Catholic Church in opposition to their mad-
ness, and convict the rashness of their folly
by the clear enunciation of the truth. They
went so far, besides, in proposing hard terms
of reconciliation, not only to the laity or to
any of the clergy, but even in a measure to
certain of the Catholic bishops. For the
only alternative offered was to hold their
tongues about the truth, or to endure their
savage fury. But if they did not speak about
the truth, not only was it impossible for any
one to be delivered by their silence, but many
were even sure to be destroyed by their sub-
mitting to be led astray; while if, by their
preaching the truth, the rage of the Donatists
was again provoked to vent its madness,
though some would be delivered, and those
who were already on our side would be
strengthened, yet the weak would again be
deterred by fear from following the truth.
When the Church, therefore, was reduced to
these straits in its affliction, any one who
thinks that anything was to be endured, rather
than that the assistance of God, to be ren-
dered through the agency of Christian em-
perors, should be sought, does not suffi-
ciently observe that no good account could
possibly be rendered for neglect of this pre-
caution.

Chap. 5. — 19. But as to the argument of
those men who are unwilling that their im-
pious deeds should be checked by the enact-
ment of righteous laws, when they say that
the apostles never sought such measures from
the kings of the earth, they do not consider
the different character of that age, and that
everything comes in its own season. For
what emperor had as yet believed in Christ,
so as to serve Him in the cause of piety by
enacting laws against impiety, when as yet
the declaration of the prophet was only in the
course of its fulfillment, "Why do the heathen
rage, and the people imagine a vain thing ?
The kings of the earth set themselves, and
their rulers take counsel together, against the
Lord, and against His Anointed; " and there
was as yet no sign of that which is spoken a
little later in the same psalm: " Be wise now,
therefore, O ye kings; be instructed, ye judges
of the earth. Serve the Lord with 'fear, and

rejoice with trembling."' How then are
kings to serve the Lord with fear, except by
preventing and chastising with religious se-
verity all those acts which are done in oppo-
sition to the commandments of the Lord ?
For a man serves God in one way in that he
is man, in another way in that he is also king.
In that he is man, he serves Him by living
faithfully; but in that he is also king, he
serves Him by enforcing with suitable rigor
such laws as ordain what is rio^hteous, and
punish what is the reverse. Even as Heze-
kiah served Him, by destroying the groves
and the temples of the idols, and the high
places which had been built in violation of the
commandments of God;= or even as Josiah
served Him, by doing the same things in his
turn;3 or as the king of the Ninevites served
Him, by compelling all the men of his city to
make satisfaction to the Lord;-* or as Darius
served Him, by giving the idol into the power
of Daniel to be broken, and by casting his ene-
mies into the den of lions; ^ or as Nebuchad-
nezzar served Him, of whom I have spoken
before, by issuing a terrible law to prevent
any of his subjects from blaspheming God.^
Li this way, therefore, kings can serve the
Lord, even in so far as they are kings, when
they do in His service what they could not
do were they not kings.

2C. Seeing, then, that the kings of the earth
were not yet serving the Lord in the time of the
apostles, but were still imagining vain things
against the Lord and against His Anointed,
that all might be fulfilled which was spoken
by the prophets, it must be granted that at that
time acts of impiety could not possibly be pre-
vented by the laws, but were rather performed
under their sanction. For the order of events
was then so rolling on, that even the Jews
were killing those who preached Christ, think-
ing that they did God service in so doing,
just as Christ had foretold,'' and the heathen
were raging against the Christians, and the
patience of the martyrs was overcoming them
all. But so soon as the fulfillment began of
what is written in a later psalm, " All kings
shall fall down before Him; all nations shall
serve Him," ^ what sober-minded man could
say to the kings, " Let not any thought
trouble you within your kingdom as to who
restrains or attacks the Church of your Lord;
deem it not a matter in which you should be
concerned, which of your subjects may choose
to be religious or sacrilegious," seeing that
you cannot say to them, " Deem it no concern
of yours which of your subjects may choose

' Ps. ii. I, 2, 10, II.
•1 Jonah iii. 6-9.
6 Dan. iii. 29.

- 2 Kings xviii. 4. 3 2 Kings xxiii. 4, 5.

5 Eel and Drag. vv. 22, 42.

7 John xvi. 1. 8 Ps. Ixxii. u.

Chap. VI.]

THE CORRECTION OF THE DONAT[STS.

641

to be chaste, or which unchaste ? '" For wliy,
when free-will is given by God toman, should
adulteries be punished by the laws, and sacri-
lege allowed ? Is it a lighter matter that a
soul should not keep faith with God, than
that a woman should be faithless to her hus-
band ? Or if those faults v/hich are committed
not in contempt but in ignorance of religious
truth are to bfe visited with lighter punish-
ment, are they therefore to be neglected alto-
getiier ?

Chap. 6. — 21. It is indeed better (as no
one ever could deny) that men should be led
to worship God by teaching, than that they
should be driven to it by fear of punishment
or pain; but it does not follow that because
the former course produces the better men,
therefore those who do not yield to it should
be neglected. For many have found advan-
tage (as we have proved, and are daily prov-
ing by actual experiment), in being first com-
pelled by fear or pain, so that they might
afterwards be influenced by teaching, or
might follow out in act what they had already
learned in word. Some, indeed, set before
us the sentiments of a certain secular aut-hor,
who said,

" 'Tis well, I ween, by shame the young to train,
And dread of meanness, rather than by pain." '

This is unquestionably true. But while
those are better who are guided aright by love,
those are certainly more numerous who are
corrected by fear. For, to answer these per-
sons out of their own author, we find him
saying in another place,

" Unless by pain and suffering thou art taught,
Thou canst not guide thyself aright in aught." ^

But, moreover, holy Scripture has both said
concerning the former better class, " There
is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out
fear; " ^ and also concerning the latter lower
class, which furnishes the majority, "A serv-
ant will not be corrected bywords; for though
he understand, he will not answer." * In say-
ing, '' He will not be corrected by words,"
he did not order him to be left to himself,
but implied an admonition as to the means
whereby he ought to be corrected; otherwise
he would not have said, " He will not be cor-
rected by words," but without any qualifica-
tion, "He will not be corrected." For in
another place he says that not only the serv-
ant, but also the undisciplined son, must be

1 Ter. Adelph. act I.sc. i. 32, ■>,■},.

2 This is not found in the extant plays of Terence.

3 I John iv. 18. •< l^rov. .-cxix. 19.

corrected with stripes, and that witn great
fruits as the result; for he says, " Thou shalt
beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his
soul from hell; " s and elsewhere he says, " He
that spareth the rod hateth his son. ""^ For,
give us a man who with riglit faith and true
understanding can say with all the energy of
his heart, " My soul thirsteth for God, for the
living God: when shall I come and appear
before God?"' and for such an one there is
no need of the terror of hell, to say nothing
of temporal punishments or imperial laws, see-
ing that with him it is so indispensable a bless-
ing to cleave unto the Lord, that he not only
dreads being parted from that happiness as a
heavy punishment, but can scarcely even bear
delay in its attainment. But yet, before the
good sons can say they have " a desire to de-
part, and to be with Christ,"* many must
first be recalled to tiieir Lord by the stripes
of temporal scourging, like evil slaves, and in
some degree like good-for-nothing fugitives.
22. For who can possibly love us more
than Christ, who laid down His life for His
sheep?' And yet, after calling Peter and t!ie
other apostles by His words alone, wlien He
came to summon Paul, wlio was before called
Saul, subsequently the powerful builder of
His Church, but orignially its cruel persecu-
tor. He not only constrained him with His
voice, but even dashed him to the earth with
His power; and that He might forcibly bring
one who was raging amid the darkness of in-
fidelity to desire tlie light of the heart, He
first struck him with physical blindness of the
eyes. If that punishment had not been in-
flicted, he would not afterwards have been
healed by it; and since he had been wont to
see nothing with his eyes open, if they had
remained unharmed, the Scripture would not
tell us that at the imposition of Ananias'
hands, in order that their siglit might be re-
stored, there fell from them as it had been
scales, by which the sight had been obscured.'"
Where is what the Donatists were wont to cry:
Man is at liberty to believe or not believe ?
Towards whom did Christ use violence?
Whom did He compel ? Here they have the
Apostle Paul. Let them recognize in his case
Christ first compelling, and afterwards teach-
ing; first striking, and afterwards consoling.
For it is wonderful how he wiio entered the
service of the gospel in the first instance un-
der the compulsion of bodily punishment,
afterwards labored more in the gosjiel than
all they who were called by word only; " and
he who was compelled by the greater intlu-

5 Prov. xxiii. 14.
8 Phil. i. 23.
" I Cor. XV. 10.

" Prov. xiii. 34.
9 John X. 15.

7 Ps. xlii. 1.
'"Acts ix. 1-18.

642

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. VII. •^.

ence of fear to love, displayed that perfect
love which casts out fear.

23. Why, therefore, should not the Church
use force in compelling her lost sons to re-
turn, if the lost sons compelled others to their
destruction? Although even men who have
not been compelled, but only led astray, are
received by tlieir loving mother with more
affection if they are recalled to her bosom
through the enforcement of terrible but salu-
tary laws, and are the objects of far more
deep congratulation than those whom she had
never lost. Is it not a part of the care of the
shepherd, when any sheep have left the flock,
even tliough not violently forced away, but
led astray by tender words and coaxing
blandishments, to bring them back to the fold
of his master when he has found them, by
the fear or even the pain of the whip, if they
show symptoms of resistance; especially since,
if they multiply with growing abundance
among the fugitive slaves and robbers, he
has the more right in that the mark of the
master is recognized on them, which is not
outraged in those whom we receive but do not
rebaptize ? For the wandering of the sheep
is to be corrected in such wise that the mark
of the Reedemer should not be destroyed on it.
For even if any one is marked with the royal
stamp by a deserter who is marked with it
himself, and the two receive forgiveness,^
and the one returns to his service, and the
other begins to be in the service in which he
had no part before, that mark is not effaced
in either of the two, but rather it is recognized
in both of them, and approved with the honor
which is due to it because it is the king's.
Since then they cannot show that the destina-
tion is bad to which they are compelled, they
maintain that they ought to be compelled by
force even to what is good. But we have
shown that Paul was compelled by Christ;
therefore the Church, in trying to compel the
Donatists, is following the example of her
Lord, though in the first instance she waited
in the hopes of needing to compel no one,
that the prediction of the prophet might be
fulfilled concerning the faith of kings and
peoples.

24. For in this sense also we may inter-
pret without absurdity the declaration of the
blessed Apostle Paul, when he says, " Hav-
ing in a readiness to revenge all disobedience,
when your obedience is fulfilled."^ Whence
also the Lord Himself bids the guests in the
first instance to be invited to His great sup-
per, and afterwards compelled; for on His

I Accipinnt : sc. the baptizer and the baptized ; and so the MSS.
The common reading is " acL!j)icit."
- 2 Cor. .\. 6.

servants making answer to Him, " Lord, it is
done as Thou hast commanded, and yet there
is room," He said to them, " Go out into the
highways and hedges, and compel them to
come in. "3 \n those, therefore, who were
first brought in with gentleness, the former
obedience is fulfilled; but in those who were
compelled, the disobedience is avenged. For
what else is the meaning of " Compel them
to come in," after it had previously said,
"Bring in," and the answer had been made,
" Lord, it is done as Thou commanded, and
yet there is room " ? If He had wished it to
be understood that they were to be compelled
by the terrifying force of miracles, many
divine miracles were rather wrought in the
sight of those who were first called, especially
in the sight of the Jews, of whom it was said,
" The Jews require a sign; " " and, moreover,
among the Gentiles themselves the gospel
was so commended by miracles in the time of
the apostles, that had these been the means
by which they were ordered to be compelled,
we might rather have had good grounds for
supposing, as I said before, that it was the
earlier guests who were compelled. Where-
fore, if the power which the Church has re-
ceived by divine appointment in its due sea-
son, through the religious character and the
faith of kings, be the instrument by which
those who are found in the highways and
hedges — that is, in heresies and schisms —
are compelled to come in, then let them not
find fault with being compelled, but consider
whether they be so compelled. The supper
of the Lord is the unity of the body of Christ,
not only in the sacrament of the altar, but
also in the bond of peace. Of the Donatists
themselves, indeed, we can say that they com-
pel no man to any good thing; for whomso-
ever they compel, they compel to nothing else
but evil.

Chap. 7. — 25. However, before those laws
were sent into Africa by which men are com-
pelled to come in to the sacred Supper, it
seemed to certain of the brethren, of whom I
was one, that although the madness of the
Donatists was raging in every direction, yet
we should not ask of the emperors to ordain
that heresy should absolutely cease to be, by
sanctioning a punishment to be inflicted on
all who wished to live in it; but that they
should rather content themselves with ordain-
ing that those who either preached the Catholic
truth with their voice, or established it by
their study, should no longer be exposed to
the furious violence of the heretics. And

3 Luke xiv. 22, 23.

4 I Cor. i. 22.

Chap. VII.]

THE CORRECTION OF THE DONATISTS.

64:

this they thought might in some measure be
effected, if they would take the law which The-
odosius, of pious memory, enacted generally
against heretics of all kinds, to the effect that
any heretical bishop or clergyman, being
found ni any place, should be fined ten
pounds of gold, and confirm it in more express
terms against the Donatists, who denied that
they were heretics; but with such reservations,
that the fine should not be iaflicted upon all
of them, but only in tliose districts where the
Catholic Church suffered any violence from
their clergy, or from the Circumcelliones, or
at the hands of any of their people; so that,
after a formal complaint had been made by
the Catholics who had suffered the violence,
tiie bishops or other ministers should forth-
with be obliged, under the commission given
to the officers, to pay the fine. For we
thought that in this way, if they were terrified,
and no longer dared do anything of the sort,
the Catholic truth might be freely taught and
held under such conditions, that while no one
was compelled to it, any one might follow it
who was anxious to do so without intimidation,
so that we might not have false and pretended
Catholics. And although a different view
was held by other brethren, who either were
more advanced in years, or had experience of
many states and places where we saw the true
Catholic Church firmly established, which had,
however, been planted and confirmed by God's
great goodness at a time when men were com-
pelled to come in to the Catholic communion
by the laws of previous emperors, yet we car-
ried our point, to the effect that the measure
which I have described above should be
sought in preference from the emperors: it
was decreed in our council,' and envoys were
sent to the court of the Count.

26. But God in His great mercy, knowing
how necessary was the terror inspired by these
laws, and a kind of medicinal inconvenience
for the cold and wicked hearts of many men,
and for that hardness of heart which cannot
be softened by words, but yet admits of soft-
ening through the agency of some little severi-
ty of discipline, brought it about that our en-
voys could not obtain what they had under-
taken to ask. For our arrival had already
been anticipated by the serious complaints of
certain bishops from other districts, who had
suffered much ill-treatment at the hands of
the Donatists themselves, and had been thrust
out from their sees; and, in particular, the
attempt to murder Maximianus, the Cathohc
bishop of the Church of Bagai, under circum-
stances of incredible atrocity, had caused

I That of Carthage, held June 26 (more correctly, probably
June 15^1 or i6th), 401.

measures to be taken which left our deputa-
tion nothing to do. For a law had already
been published, that the heresy of the Dona-
tists, being of so savage a description that
mercy towards it really involved greater cruel-
ty than its very madness wrought, should for
the future be prevented not only from being
violent, but from existing with impunity at
all; but yet no capital punisliment was im-
posed upon it, that even in dealing with those
who were unworthy. Christian gentleness
might be observed, but a pecuniary fine
was ordained, and sentence of exile was
pronounced against their bishops or minis-
ters.

27. With regard to the aforesaid bishop of
Bagai, in consequence of his claim being al-
lowed in the ordinary courts, after each party
had been heard in turn, in a basilica- of which
the Donatists had taken possession, as being
the property of the Catholics, they rushed
upon him as he was standing at the altar, wit'.i
fearful violence and cruel fury, beat him sav-
agely with cudgels and weapons of every kind,
and at last with the very boards of tlie broken
altar. They also wounded him with a dag-
ger in the groin so severely, that the effusion
of blood would have soon put an end to his
life, had not their further cruelty proved of
service for its preservation; for, as they were
dragging him along the ground thus severely
wounded, the dust forced into the spouting
vein stanched the blood, whose effusion was
rapidly on the way to cause his death. Then,
when they had at length abandoned him,
some of our party tried to carry him off with
psalms; but his enemies, inflamed with even
greater rage, tore him from the hands of those
who were carrying him, inflicting grievous pun-
ishment on the Catholics, whom they put lo
flight, being far superior to them in numbers,
and easily inspiring terror by their violence.
Finally, they threw him into a certain ele-
vated tower, thinking that he was by this time
dead, though in fact he still breathed. Light-
ing then on a soft heap of earth, and being
espied by the light of a lamp by some men
who were passing by at night, he was recog-
nized and picked up, and being carried to a
religious house, by dint of great care, was re-
stored in a few days from his state of almost
hopeless danger. Rumor, however, had car-
ried the tidings even across the sea that he
had been killed by the violence of the Donat-
ists; and when afterwards he himself went
abroad, and was most unexpectedly seen to
be alive, he showed, by the number, the se-
verity, and the freshness of his wounds, how

' The basilica of Fundus Calvianensis. See C. CrescoH. iii.

t. 43-

644

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. VII.

fully rumor had been iustified in bringing tid-
ings of his death.

28. He sought assistance, therefore, from
the Christian emperor, not so much with any
'desire of revenging himself, as with the
view of defending the Churcli entrusted to
his charge. And if he had omitted to do
this, he would have deserved not to be
praised for his forbearance, but to be blamed
for negligence. For neither was the Apostle
Paul taking precautions on behalf of his own
transitory life, but for the Church of God,
when he caused the plot of those who had
conspired to slay him to be made known to
the Roman captain, the effect of which v/as,
that he was conducted by an escort of armed
soldiers to the place where they proposed to
send him, that he might escape the ambush
of his foes.' Nor did he for a moment hesi-
tate to invoke the protection of the Roman
laws, proclaiming that he was a Roman citi-
zen, who at that time could not be scourged;^
and again, that he might not be delivered to
the Jews who sought to kill him, he appealed
to C£esar,3 — a Roman emperor, indeed, but
not a Christian. And by this he showed
sufficiently plainly what was afterwards to be
the duty of the ministers of Christ, when in
the midst of the dangers of the Church they
found the emperors Christians. And hence,
therefore, it came about that a religious and
pious emperor, when such matters were
brought to his knowledge, thought it well, by
the enactment of most pious laws, entirely to
correct the error of this great impiety, and
to bring those who bore the standards of
Christ against the cause of Christ into the
unity of the Catholic Church, even by terror
and compulsion, rather than merely to take
away their power of doing violence, and to
leave them the freedom of going astray, and
perishing in their errc".

29. Presentl)!', when the laws themselves
arrived in Africa, in the first place those who
were already seeking an opportunity for doing
so, or were afraid of the raging madness of
the Donatists, or were previously deterred by
a feeling of unwillingness to offend their
friends, at once came over to the Church.
Many, too, who were only restrained by the
force of custom handed down in their homes
from their parents, but had never before con-
sidered what was the groundwork of the
heresy itself, — had never, indeed, wished to
investigate and contemplate its nature, — be-
ginning now to use their observation, and
finding nothing in it that could compensate
for such serious loss as they were called upon

' Acts xxili. 17-32.

Acts x.xii. 25.

3 Acts XXV. II.

to suffer, became Catholics without any diffi-
culty; for, having been made careless by se-
curity, they were now instructed by anxiety.
But when all these had set the example, it
was followed by many who were less qualified
of themselves to understand what was the
difference between the error of the Donatists
and Catholic truth.

30. Accordingly, when the great masses of
the people had been received by the true
mother with rejoicing into her bosom, there
remained outside cruel crowds, persevering
with unhappy animosity in that madness.
Even of these the greater number communi-
cated in feigned reconciliation, and others es-
caped notice from the scantiness of their
numbers. But those who feigned conformity,
becoming by degrees accustomed to our com-
munion, and hearing the preaching of the
truth, especially after the conference and dis-
putation which took place between us and
their bishops at Carthage, were to a great ex-
tent brought to a right belief. Yet in certain
places, where a more obstinate and implaca-
ble body prevailed, whom the smaller number
that entertained better views about commu-
nion with us could not resist, or where .the
masses were under the influence of a few more
powerful leaders, whom they followed in a
wrong direction, our difficulties continued
somewhat longer. Of these places there are
a few in which trouble still exists, in the
course of which the Catholics, and especially
the bishops and clergy, have suffered many
terrible hardships, which it would take too
long to go through in detail, seeing that some
of them had their eyes put out, and one bish-
op his hands and tongue cut off, while some
were actually murdered. 1 say nothing of
massacres of the most cruel description, and
robberies of houses, committed in nocturnal
burglaries, with the burnmg not only of pri-
vate houses, but even of churches, — some
being found abandoned enough to cast the
sacred bboks into the flames.

31. But we were consoled for the suffering
inflicted on us by these evils, by the fruit
which resulted from them. For wherever
such deeds were committed by unbelievers,
there Christian unity has advanced with
greater fervency and perfection, and the Lord
is praised with greater earnestness for having
deigned to grant that His servants might win
their brethren by their sufterings, and rfiight
gather together into the peace of eternal sal-
vation through His blood His sheep who were
dispersed abroad in deadly error. The Lord
is powerful and full of compassion, to whom
we daily pray that He will give repentance to
the rest as well, that they may recover them-

the
coi

Chap. VI 1 1.]

THE CORRECTION OF THE DONATISTS.

645

selves out of the snare of the devil, by whom
they are taken captive at his will,' though
now they only seek materials for calumniating
us, and returning to us evil for good; be-
cause they have not the knowledge to make
them understand what feelings and love we
continue to have towards them, and how we are
anxious, in accordance with the injunction of
the Lord, given to His pastors by the mouth
of tlie prophet Ezekiel, to bring again that
which was driven away, and to seek that
which was lost.'

Chap. 8. — 32. But the}', as we have some-
times said before in other places, do not
charge themselves with what they do to us;
while, on the other hand, they charge us with
what they do to themselves. For which of
our party is there who would desire, I do not
say that one of them should perish, but
should even lose any of his possessions ? But
if the house of David could not earn peace on
any other terms except that Absalom his son
should have been slain in the war which he
was waging against his father, although he
had most carefully given strict injunctions to
his followers that they should use their ut-
most endeavors to preserve him alive and
safe, that his paternal affection might be able
to pardon him on his repentance, what re-
mained for him except to weep for the son
that he had lost, and to console himself in his
sorrow by reflecting on the acquisition of
peace for his kingdom P^ The same, then,
is the case with the Catholic Church, our
mother; for when war is waged against her
by men who are certainly different from sons,
since it must be acknowledged that from the
great tree, which by the spreading of its
branches is extended over all the world, this
little branch in Africa is broken off, whilst
she is willing in her love to give them birth,
that they may return to the root, without
which they cannot have the true life, at the
same time if she collects the remainder in so
large a number by the loss of some, she
soothes and cures the sorrow of her maternal
heart by the thoughts of the deliverance of
such mighty nations; especially when she
considers tliat those who are lost perish by a
death which they brought upon themselves,
and not, like Absalom, by the fortune of war.
And if you were to see the joy of those who
are delivered in the peace of Christ, their
crowded assemblies, their eager zeal, the
gladsomeness with which they flock together,
both to hear and sing hymns, and to be in-
structed in the word of God; the great grief

' 2 Tim. ii. 26.

= Ezek. xxxiv.

^ 2 Sam. xviii., xxii.

with which many of them recall to mind their
former error, tlie joy with which they come
to the consideration of the truth which they
have learneil, with the indignation and de-
testation which they feel towards tueir lyin^*
teachers, now that they have found out what
falsehoods they disseminated concerning our
sacraments; and how many of them, more-
over, acknowledge that they long ago desired
to be Catholics, but dared not take the step
in the midst of men of such violence, — if, I
say, you were to see the congregations of
these nations delivered from such perdition,
then you would say that it would have been
the extreme of cruelty, if, in the fear that
certain desperate men, in number not to be
compared with the multitudes of those who
were rescued, might be burned in fires which
they voluntarily kindled for themselves, these
others had been left to be lost for ever, and
to be tortured in fires which shall not be
quenched.

^2. For if two men were dwelling together
in one house, which we knew with absolute
certainty to be upon the point of falling
down, and they were unwilling to believe us
when we warned them of the danger, and
persisted in remaining in the house; if it were
in our power to rescue them, even against
their will, and we were afterwards to show
them the ruin threatening their house, so tiiat
they should not dare to return again within
its reach, I think that if we abstained from
doing it, we should well deserve the charge
of cruelty. And further, if one of them
should say to us. Since you have entered the
house to save our lives, I shall forthwith kill
myself; while the other was not indeed will-
ing to come forth from the house, nor to be
rescued, but yet had not the hardihood to kill
himself: which alternative should we choose,
— to leave both of them to be ovenvhelmed
in the ruin, or that, while one at any rate was
delivered by our merciful efforts, the other
should perish by no fault of ours, but rather
by his own ? No one is so unhappy as not to
find it easy enough to decide what should be
done in such a case. And I have proposed
the question of two individuals, — one, that is
to say, who is lost, and one who is delivered;
what then must we tliink of the case where
some few are lost, and an innumerable multi-
tude of nations are delivered ? For there are
actually not so many persons who thus perish
of their own free will, as there are estates,
villages, streets, fortresses, municipal towns,
cities, that are delivered by the laws under
consideration from that fatal and eternal de-
struction.

34. But if we were to consider the matter

646

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. IX.

under discussion with yet greater care, I think
that if there were a large number of persons
in the house which was going to fall, and any
, single one of them could be saved, and when
we endeavored to effect his rescue, the others
were to kill themselves by jumping out of
the windows, we should console ourselves in
our grief for the loss of the rest by the
thoughts of the safety of the one; and we
should not allow all to perish without a single
rescue, in the fear lest the remainder should
destroy themselves. What then should we
think of the work of mercy to which we ought
to apply ourselves, in order that men may at-
tain eternal life and escape eternal punish-
ment, if true reason and benevolence compel
us to give such aid to men, in order to secure
for them a safety which is not only temporal,
but very short, — for the brief space of their
life on earth ?

Chap. 9. — 35. As to the charge that they
bring against us, that we covet and plunder
their possessions, I would that they would
become Catholics, and possess in peace and
love with us, not only what they call theirs,
but also what confessedly belongs to us. But
they are so blinded with the desire of utter-
ing calumnies, that they do not observe how
inconsistent their statements are with one
another. At any rate, they assert, and seem
to make it a subject of most invidious com-
plaint among themselves, that we constrain
them to come in to our communion by the
violent authority of the laws, — which we cer-
tainly should not do by any means, if we
wished to gain possession of their property.
What avaricious man ever wished for another
to share his possessions ? Who that was in-
flamed with the desire of empire, or elated by
the pride of its possession, ever wished to
have a partner ? Let them at any rate look
on those very men who once belonged to
them, but now are our brethren joined to us
by the bond of fraternal affection, and see
how they hold not only what they used to
have, but also what was ours, which they did
not have before; which yet, if we are living
as poor in fellowship with poor, belongs to us
and them alike; whilst, if we possess of our
private means enough for our wants, it is no
longer ours, inasmuch as we do not commit
so infamous an act of usurpation as to claim
for our own the property of the poor, for
whom we are in some sense the trustees.

36. Everything, therefore, that was held
in the name of the churches of the party of
Donatus, was ordered by the Christian em-
perors, in their pious laws, to pass to the
Catholic Church, with the possession of the

buildings themselves.' Seeing, then, that
there are with us poor members of those said
churches who used to be maintained by these
same paltry possessions, let them rather cease
themselves to covet what belongs to others
whilst they remain outside, and so let them
enter within the bond of unity, that we may
all alike administer, not only the property
which they call their own, but also with it what
is asserted to be ours. For it is written "All
are yours; and ye are Christ's; and Christ is
God's. "^ Under Him as our Head, let us all
be one in His one body; and in all such mat-
ters as you speak of, let us follow the exam-
ple which is recorded in the Acts of the Apos-
tles: "They were of one heart and of one
soul: neither said any of them that aught of
the things which he possessed was his own;
but they had all things common. "^ Let us
love what we sing: " Behold, how good and
how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell to-
gether in unity !"'* that so they may know, by
their own experience, with what perfect truth
their mother, the Catholic Church, calls out
to them what the blessed apostle writes to the
Corinthians: " I seek not yours, but you.''^

37. But if we consider what is said in the
Book of Wisdom, " Therefore the righteous
spoiled the ungodly;"* and also what is said
in the Proverbs, " The wealth of the sinner is
laid up for the just;"'' then we shall see that
the question is not, who are in possession of
the property of the heretics ? but who are in
the society of the just ? We know, indeed,
that the Donatists arrogate to themselves such
a store of justice, that they boast not only
that they possess it, but that they also bestow
it upon other men. For they say that an"
one whom they have baptized is justified by
them, after wiiich there is nothing left foi*
them but to say to rhe person who is baptized
by them, that he must needs believe on him
who has administered the sacrament; for
why should he not do so, when the apos-
tle savs, "To him that believeth on Him

faith is
Let him be-
lieve, therefore, upon the man by whom he
is baptized, if it be none else that justifies
him. that his faith may be counted for
righteousness. But I think that even they
themselves would look with horror on them-
selves, if they ventured for a moment to en-
tertain such thoughts as these. For there is
none that is just and able to justify, save
God aione. But the same might be said of

1 C<'d. Thi'od. Lih. xvi. tit. v., de Hcereticis, 52.

2 I Cor. iii. 22, 23. 3 Acts iv. 32. 4 Ps. cxxxiii. i.
S 2 Cor. xii. 14. 6 Wisd. x. 20. 7 Prov. xiii. 22.
8 Rom. iv. 5.

that justifieth
counted for

the

that believeth
ungodly, his

righteousness ? " ^

Chap. IX. 1

THE CORRECTION OF THE DOXATISTS.

647

them that the apostle says of the Jews, that
" behig ignorant of God's righteousness, and
going a bout to estabhsh their own righteous-
ness, they have not submitted themselves
unto the righteousness of God." '

38. But far be it from us that any one of
our number should call himself in such wise
just, that he should either go about to es-
tablish his own righteousness, as though it
were conferred upon him by himself, whereas
it is said to him, ''For what hast thou that
thou didst not receive ?" ^ or venture to boast
himself as being without sin in this world, as
the Donatists themselves declared in our con-
ference that they were members of a Church
which has already neither spot nor wrinkle,
nor any such thing, ^ — not knowing that this
is only fulfilled in those individuals who de-
part out of this body immediately after bap-
tism, or after the forgiveness of sins, for which
we make petition in our prayers; but that
for the Church, as a whole, the time will not
come when it shall be altogether without spot
or wrinkle, or any such thing, till the day
when we shall hear the words, "O death,
where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy
victory? The sting of death is sin." ■*

39. But in this life, when the corruptible
body presseth down the soul,^ if their Church
is already of such a character as they main-
tain, they would not utter unto God the prayer
which our Lord has taught us to employ:
" Forgive us our debts." * For since all sins
have been remitted in baptism, why does the
Church make this petition, if already, even in
this life, it has neither spot nor wrinkle, nor
any such thing ? They would also have a
right to despise the warning of the Apostle
John, when he cries out in his epistle, " If
we say that we have no sin, we deceive our-
selves, and the truth is not in us. But if we
confess our sins, He is faithful and just to
forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all
unrighteousness." ^ On account of this hope,
the universal Church utters the petition,
" Forgive us our debts," that when He sees
that we are not vainglorious, but ready to
confess our sins, He may cleanse us from all
unrighteousness, and that so the Lord Jesus
Christ may show to Himself in that day a
glorious Church, not having spot or wrinkle,
or any such thing, which now He cleanses with
the washing of water in the word: because, on
the one hand, there is nothing that remains
behind in baptism to hinder the forgiveness
of every bygone sin (so long, that is, as bap-
tism is not received to no effect without the

' Rom. X. 3.

4 I C-or. XV. 55, 56.

7 I John i. 8, 9.

= I Cor. iv. 7.
5 Wisd. ix. 15.

3 Eph. V. 27.
* Matt. vi. 12.

Church, but is either administered within
the Church, or, at least, if it has been already
administered without, the recipient does not
remain outside with it); and, on the other
hand, whatever pollution of sin, of whatsoever
kind, is contracted through the weakness of
human nature by those who live here after
baptism, is cleansed away in virtue of the
same laver's efficacy. For neither is it of
any avail for one who has not been baptized
to say, " Forgive us our debts."

40. Accordingly, He so now cleanses His
Church by the washing of water in the word,
that He may hereafter show it to Himself as
not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing,
— altogether beautiful, that is to say, and in
absolute perfection, when death shall be
"swallowed up in victory." ® Now, therefore,
in so far as the life is flourishing within us
that proceeds from our being born of God,
living by faith, so far we are righteous; but in
so far as we drajj along; with us the traces of
our mortal nature as derived from Adam, so
far we cannot be free from sin. For there is
truth both in the statement that " whosoever
is born of God doth not commit sin," 'and
also in the former statement, that " if we say
that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and
the truth is not in us." '° The Lord Jesus,
therefore, is both righteous and able to justify;
but we are justified freely by no other grace
than His." For there is nothing that justifi-
eth save His body, which is the Churcli; and
therefore, if tlie body of Christ bears off the
spoils of the unrighteous, and the riches of
the unrighteous are laid up in store as treas-
ures for the body of Christ, the unrighteous
ought not therefore to remain outside, but
rather to enter within, that so they may be
justified.

41. Whence also we may be sure that what
is written concerning the day of judgment,
"Then shall the righteous man stand in great
boldness before the face of such as have
afflicted him, and made no account of his
labors," '- is not to be taken in such a sense
as that the Canaanite shall stand before the
face of Israel, though Israel made no account
of the labors of the Canaanite; but only as
that Naboth shall stand before the face of
Ahab, since Ahab made no account of the
labors of Naboth, since the Canaanite was
unrighteous, while Naboth was a rigiueous
man. In the same way the heathen shall not
stand before the face of the Christian, who
made no account of his labors, when the tem-
ples of the idols were plundered and de-
stroyed; but the Christian shall stand before

8 I Cor. XV. 54.
" Rom. iii. 24.

9 I John iii. 9.
" Wisd. V. I.

'" I John i. 8.

648

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[CliAT. X.

the face of the heathen, who made no account
of liis labors, when the bodies of the martyrs
were laid low in death. In the same way,
therefore, the heretic shall not stand in the
face of tlie Catholic, who made no account of
his labors, when the laws of the Catholic em-
perors were put in force; but the Catholic
shall stand in the face of the heretic, who
made no account of his labors when the mad-
ness of the ungodly Circumcelliones was al-
lowed to have its way. For the passage of
Scripture decides the question in itself, see-
ing that it does not say, Then shall men stand,
but " Then shall the righteous stand;*' and
they shall stand "in great boldness," because
they stand in the power of a good conscience.
42. But in this world no one is righteous
by his own righteousness, — that is, as though
it were wrought by himself and for himself;
but as the apostle says, "According as God
hath dealt to every man the measure of
faith." But then he goes on to add the fol-
lowing: " For as we have many members in
one body, and all members have not the
same office; so we, being many, are one
body in Christ." ' And according to this doc-
trine, no one can be righteous so long as he
is separated from the unity of this body. For
in the same manner as if a limb be cut off
from the body of a living man, it cannot any
longer retain the spirit of life; so the man
who is cut off from the body of Christ, who is
righteous, can in no wise retain the spirit of
righteousness, even if he retain the form of
membership which he received when in the
body. Let them therefore come into the
framework of this body, and so possess their
own labors, not through the lust of lordship,
but through the godliness of using them
aright. But we, as has been said before,
cleanse our wills from the pollution of this
concupiscence, even in the judgment of any
enemy you please to name as judge, seeing
that we use our utmost efforts in entreating
the very men of whose labors we avail our-
selves to enjoy with us, within the society of
the Catholic Church, the fruits both of their
labors and of our own.

Chap. 10. — 43. But this, they say, is the
very thing which disquiets us, — ^If we are
unrighteous, wherefore do you seek our com-
pany ? To which question we answer. We
seek the company of you who are unrighteous,
that you may not remain unrighteous; we seek
for you who are lost, that we may rejoice over
you as soon as you are found, saying. This
our brother was dead, and is alive again; and

' Rom. xii. 3-5.

was lost, and is found. ° Why, then, he says,
do you not baptize me, that you might wash
me from my sins? I reply: Because I do
not do despite to the stamp of the monarch,
when I correct the ill-doing oi a deserter.
Why, he says, do I not even do penance in
your body ? Nay truly, except you have done
penance, you cannot be saved; for how shall
you rejoice that you have been reformed, un-
less you first grieve that you had been astray ?
What, then, he says, do we receive with you,
wiien we come over to your side ? I answer.
You do not indeed receive baptism, which
was able to exist in you outside the framework
of the body of Christ, although it could not
profit you; but you receive the unity of the
Spirit in the bond of peace, ^ without which no
one can see God: and you receive charity,
which, as it is written, " shall cover the multi-
tude of sins." ■* And in regard to this great
blessmg, without which we have the apostle's
testimony that neither the tongues of men or
of angels, nor the understanding of all mys-
teries, nor the gift of prophecy, nor faith so
great as to be able to remove mountains, nor
the bestowal of all one's goods to feed the
poor, nor giving one's body to be burned, can
profit anything; s if, I say, you think this
mighty blessing to be worthless or of trifling
value, you are deservedly but miserably
astray; and deservedly you must necessarily
perish, unless you come over to Catholic unity.
44. If, then, they say, it is necessary that
we should repent of having been outside, and
hostile to the Church, if we would gain salva-
tion, how comes it that after the repentance
which you exact from us we still continue to
be clergy, or it may be even bishops in your
body ? This would not be the case, as in-
deed, in simple truth, we must confess it
should not be the case, were it not that the
evil is cured by the compensating power of
peace itself. But let them give themselves
this lesson, and most especially let those feel
sorrow in their hearts, who are lying in this
deep death of severance from the Church,
that they may recover their life even by this
sort of wound inflicted on our Catholic mother
Church. For when the bough that has been
cut off is grafted in, a new wound is made in
the tree, to admit of its reception, that life
may be given to the branch which was perish-
ing for lack of the life that is furnished by
the root. But when the newly-received branch
has become identified with the stock in which
it is received, the result is both vigor and
fruit; luit if they do not become identified,
the engrafted bough withers, but the life of

2 Luke XV. 32.
4 I Pet. iv. 8.

3 Eph. iv. 3.
5 I Cor. xiii.

Chap. X.]

THE CORRECTION OF THE DONATISTS.

649

the tree continues unimpaired. For there is
further a mode of grafting of such a kind,
that without cutting away any branch that is
witiiin, the branch that is foreign to tiie tree
is inserted, not indeed without a wound, but
with the slightest possible wound inflicted on
the tree. In lilce manner, then, when they
come to the root which exists in the Cathohc
Church, without being deprived of any posi-
tion which belongs to them as clergy or
bishops after ever so deep repentance of their
error, there is a kind of wound inflicted as it
were upon the bark of the mother tree, break-
ing in upon the strictness of her discipline;
but since neither he that planteth is anything,
neither he that watereth,' so soon as by
prayers poured forth to the mercy of God
peace is secured tnrough the union of the
engrafted boughs with tne parent stock, char-
ity then covers the multitude of sins.

45. For although it was made an ordinance
in the Church, that no one who had been
called upon to do penance for any offense
should be admitted into holy orders, or return
to or continue in the body of the clergy,^ this
was done not to cause despair of any indul-
gence being granted, but merely to maintain
a rigorous discipline; otherwise an argument
will be raised against the keys that were given
to the Church, of which we have the testimo-
ny of Scripture: "Whatsoever thou shalt
loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.^' ^
But lest It should so happen that, after the
detection of offenses, a heart swelling with the
hope of ecclesiastical preferment might do
penance in a spirit of pride, it was determined,
with great seventy, that after doing penance
for any mortal sin, no one should be admitted
to the number of the clergy, in order that,
when all hope of temporal preferment was
done away, the medicine of humility might
be endowed with greater strength and truth.
For even the holy David did penance for
deadly sin, and yet was not degraded from
his office. And we know that the blessed
Peter, after shedding the bitterest of tears,
repented that he had denied his Lord, and yet
remained an apostle. But we must not there-
fore be induced to think that the care of those
in later times was in any way superfluous,
who, when there was no risk of endangering
salvation, added something to humiliation,
in order that the salvation might be more
thoroughly protected, — having, I suppose, ex-
perienced a feigned repentance on the part of

* I. Cor. iii. 7.

2 Pope Innocent I., in his 6th Epistle to Agapitus, Macedonius,
and Maurianiis, bishops of Apulia, writes to the effect that "canons
had been passed at Nica;a. excluding penitents from even the low-
est orders of the ministry ' (can. 10).

3 Matt. .\vi. 19.

some who were influenced by the desire of the
power attaching to ofifice. For experience in
many diseases necessarily brings in the in-
vention of many remedies. But in cases of
this kind, when, owing to the serious rup-
tures of dissensions in the Church, it is no
longer a question of danger to this or that
particular individual, but whole nations are
lying in ruin, it is right to yield a little from
our severity, that true charity may give her
aid in healing the more serious evils.

46. Let them therefore feel bitter grief for
their detestable error of the past, as Peter
did for his fear that led him into falsehood,
and let them come to the true Church of
Christ, that is, to the Catholic Church our
mother; let them be in it clergy, let them be
bisiiops unto its profit, as they have been
hitnerio in enmity against it. We feel no
jealousy towards them, nay, we embrace them;
we wish, we advise, we even compel those to
come in whom we find in the highways and
hedges, although we fail as yet in persuading
some of them that we are seeking not their
property, but themselves. The Apostle Peter,
when he denied his Saviour, and wept, and
did not cease to be an apostle, nad not as yet
received the Holy Spirit that was promised;
but much more have these men not received
Him, when, being severed from the frame-
work of the body, which is alone enlivened by
the Holy Spirit, they have usurped the sacra-
ments of the Church outside the Church and
in hostility to the Church, and have fought
against us in a kind of civil war, witii our
own arms and our own standards raised in
opposition to us. Let them come; let peace
be concluded in the virtue of Jerusalem, wliich
virtue is Christian charity, — to which holy
city it is said, " Peace be in thy virtue, and
plenteousness within thy palaces." Let
them not exalt themselves against the solici-
tude of their mother, which she both has en-
tertained and does entertain with the object
of gathering within her bosom themselves,
and all the mighty nations whom they are, or
recently were, deceiving; let them not be
puffed up with pride, that she receives them
in such wise; let them not attribute to the
evil of their own exaltation the good which
she on her part does in order to make peace.

47. So it has been her wont to come to the
aid of multitudes who were i)erisinng througii
schisms and heresies. This displeased Lu-
cifer,5when it was carried out in receiving
and liealing those who had perished beneath
the poison of the Arian heresy; and, being
displeased at it, he fell into the darkness of

* Ps. cx.xii. 7 ; cp. Hicron.

S Bishop of Calaris. Cp. De Agone Christiant\ r. xxx. ^.1.

650

THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.

[Chap. XI.

schism, losing the light of Christian charity.
In accordance with this principle, tlie Church
of Africa has recognized the Uonatists from
the very beginning, obeying herein the de-
cree of the bishops who gave sentence in the
Church at Rome between Caecilianus and the
party of Donatus; and having condemned one
bishop named Donatus,' who was proved to
have been the author of the schism, they de-
termined that the others should be received,
after correction, with full recognition of their
orders even if they had been ordained out-
side the Church, — not that they could have
the Holy Spirit even outside the unity of the
body of Christ, but, in the first place, for the
sake of those whom it was possible they
might deceive while they remained outside,
and prevent from obtaining that gift; and,
secondly, that their own weakness also being
mercifully received within, might thus be
rendered capable of cure, no obstinacy any
longer standing in the way to close their eyes
against the evidence of truth. For what
other intention could have given rise to their
own conduct, when they received with full
recognition of their orders the followers of
Maximianus, whom they had condemned as
guilty of sacrilegious schism, as their coun-
cil^ shows, and to fill whose places they had
already ordaired other men, when they saw
that the people did not depart from their
company, that all might not be involved in
ruin? And on what other ground did they
neither speak against nor question the valid-
ity of the baptism which had been adminis-
tered outside by men whom they had con-
demned ? Why, then, do they wonder, why
do they complain, and make it the subject of
their calumnies, that we receive them in such
wise to promote the true peace of Christ,
while yet they do not remember what they
themselves have done to promote the false
peace of Donatus, which is opposed to Christ ?
For if this act of theirs be borne in mind, and
intelligently used in argument against them,
they will have no answer whatsoever that
they can make.

Chap. ii. — 48. But as to what they say,
arguing as follows: If we have sinned against
the Holy Ghost, in that we have treated your
baptism with contempt, why is it that you
seek us, seeing that we cannot possibly re-
ceive remission of this sin, as the Lord says,
"Whosoever speaketh against the Holy
Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in
this world, neither in the world to come ? " ^ —
they do not perceive that according to their

I The Bishop of Casse Nigrse.
3 Matt. xii. 32.

' The Council of Bagai.

interpretation of the passage none can be de-
livered. For who is there that does not speak
against the Holy Ghost and sin against him,
whether we take the case of one who is not
yet a Christian, or of one who shares in the
heresy of Arius, or of Eunomius, or of Mace-
donius, who all say that He is a creature; or
of Photinus, who denies that He has any sub-
stance at all, saying that there is only one God,
the Father; or of any of the other heretics,
whom it would now take too long a time to
mention in detail? Are none, therefore, of
these to be delivered ? Or if the Jews them-
selves, against whom the Lord directed His
reproach, were to believe in Him, would they
not be allowed to be baptized ? for the Saviour
does not say, Shall be forgiven in baptism.;
but " Shall not be forgiven, neither in this
world, neither in the world to come."

49. Let them understand, therefore, that it
is not every sin, but only some sin, against
the Holy Ghost which is incapable of forgive-
ness. For just as v/hen our Lord said, " If
I had not come and spoken unto them, they
had not had sin,'^'* it is clear that He did not
wish it to be understood that they would have
been free from all sin, since they were filled
with many grievous sins, but that they would
have been free from some special sin, the
absence of which would have left them in a
position to receive remission of all the sins
which yet remained in them, viz., the sin of
not believing in Him when He came to them;
for they could not have had this sin, had He
not come. In like manner, also, when He
said, " Whosoever sinneth against the Holy
Ghost,"' or, " Whosoever speaketh against the
Holy Ghost;" it is clear that He does not
refer to every sin of whatsoever kind against
the Holy Ghost, in word or deed, but would
have us understand some special and peculiar
sin. But this is the hardness of heart even
to the end of this life, which leads a man to
refuse to accept remission of his sins in the
unity of the body of Christ, to which life is
given by the Holy Ghost. For when He had
said to His disciples, " Receive the Holy
Ghost,'' He immediately added, " Whose-
soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto
them; and whosesoever sins ye retain, they
are retained. "^ Whosoever therefore has re-
sisted or fought against this gift of the grace
of God, or has been estranged from it in
any way whatever to the end of this mortal
life, shall not receive the remission of that
sin, either in this world, or in the world to
come, seeing that it is so great a sin that
in it is included every sin; but it cannot

4 John XV, 22.

5 John XX. 22, 23.

Chap. XI.]

THE CORRECTION OF THE DONATISTS.

6:^1

be proved to have been committed by any-
one, till he has passed away from life. But
so long as he lives here, "the goodness of
God,'' as the apostle says, " is leading him
to repentance;" but if he deliberately, with
the utmost perseverance in iniquity, as the
apostle adds in the succeeding verse, "after
his hardness and impenitent heart, treasures
up unto himself wrath against the day of
wrath and revelation of the righteous judg-
ment of God," ' he shall not receive forgive-
ness, neither in this world, neither in that
which is to come.

50. But those with whom we are arguing,
or about whom we are arguing, are not to be
despaired of, for they are yet in the body;
but they cannot seek the Holy Spirit, except
in the body of Christ, of which they possess
the outward sign outside the Church, but they
do not possess the actual reality iiself within
the Church of which that is the outward sign,
and therefore they eat and drink damnation
to themselves.^ For there is but one bread
which is the sacrament of unity, seeing that,
as the apostle says, "We, being many, are
one bread, and one body."^ Furthermore,
the Catholic Church alone is the body of
Christ, of which He is the Head and Saviour
of His body/ Outside this body the Holy
Spirit giveth life to no one, seeing that, as
the apostle says himself, " The love of Ciod
is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy

Ghost which is given unto us; "5 but he is
not a partaker of the divine love who is the
enemy of unity. Therefore they have not
the Holy Ghost who are outside the Church;
for it is written of them, "They separate
themselves, being sensual, having not the
Spirit."* But neither does he receive it who
is insincerely in the Church, since this is also
the intent of what is written: " For the Holy
Spirit of discipline will flee deceit. "' If any
one, therefore, wishes to receive the Holy
Spirit, let him beware of continuing in aliena-
tion from the Church, let him beware of enter-
ing it in the spirit of dissimulation; or if he
has already entered it in such wise, let him
beware of persisting in such dissimulation, in
order that he may truly and indeed become
united with the tree of life.

51. I have despatched to you a somewhat
lengthy epistle, which may prove burdensome
among 5^our many occupations. If, therefore,
it may be read to you even in portions, the
Lord will grant you understanding, that you
may have some answer which you can make
for the correction and healing of those men
who are commended to you as to a faitiiful
son by our mother the Church, that you may
correct and heal them, by the aid of the Lord
wherever you can, and howsoever you can,
either by speaking and replying to them in
your own person, or by bringing them into
communication with the doctors of the Church.

I Rom. ii. 4, 5.
4 Eph. V. 23.

I Cor. -xi. 29.

3 1 Cor. X. 17.

S Rom. V.5.

* Jude 19.

7 Wisd. i. 5.

INDEXES

THE ANTI-MANICH.^AN WRITINGS.

INDEX OF SUBJECTS.

Abominations alleged to have been
practised by the Manichreans,
the legitimate result of Mani's
own writings, 363 sq.

Abraham defended against Faustus,
284 etc. ; and Hagar, 284 ; his
denial of his wife, 285 ; the pro-
phetic and typical character of,
287.

Abraham and Isaac, types, 191.

Abstemiousness on the part of Catho-
lic ascetics, motives of, 61.

Abstinence from meats and drinks,
60 etc. ; of the Manichaeans, 76
etc.; reasons for, 77 etc., 78
etc. ; view of Faustus respecting,
328 etc. ; refutation of Faustus
on the question of, 330 etc.

Actions, how to be judged, 76.

Adam and Eve, Mani's account of,
134 sq. ; types, 1S6.

Adam fell, not because the tree was
evil, but because obeilience to
God was something better than
the fruit, 35S sq.

Adas, a ManichLcan writer, 33.

Adimantus and his doctrine referred
to, 170, 232, 233.

Adoneus, 218

Adoption, symbolism of, and its ap-
plication to the genealogy of
Christ, 159, 160.

Agapius, a Manichoean writer, 33.

Albiruni's Chronology of Ancient iVa-
tions, referred to, 3, 9.

Alexander of Lycopolis, treatise of,
on the Tenets of the Manich-
(sans, referred to. 3.

Al-Sharastani's History of Religions
Parties, referred to, 3.

Anathemas more suitable than argu-
ments for Manichiean contra-
dictions, 268.

Anchorites and Ccenobites, the — the
continence of, set off against
the continence of the .Manichae-
ans, 59 etc.

Angel, the, wrestling with Jacob,
191 sq.

Animal food, inconsistency of the
Manichaaans inabstainin"; from,
82. "

Animal sacrifices, why no longer
binding on Christians, 169 sq.

Animals, the power ascribed to, by
the Manichjeans. 26S.

Anthropology of the Manichaeans,
12.

Anthropomorphisms of the Old Tes-
tament, ridiculed by Faustus and
explained by Augustin, 319 sq.

Anthropomorphites, the, not so bad
as the Manichceans, 139.

Aphthonius, a Manicha-an writer,

33-

Apocryphal books quoted by Augus-
tin as if canonical, 49; Augus-
tin's predilection for, 250.

Appetites, legitimate use of, 284.

Arcadius Augustus, Consol, 113.

Archelaus, Acta DisptUationis, refer-
red to, 4, 7, 8, 22.

Aristocritus, Theosophy of, 33.

Ark, the, of Noah, its typical signi-
fication, 1 88 sq. ; the raven and
dove sent out of, 189 sq.; how
Noah and his family entered and
left, 191 ; and baptism, 243 sq.

Asceticism, Catholic, 59 sq.

Ascetics, Catholic, 166.

-Athenian female criminals, 72 sq.

Atlas, 255.

Augustin, how he was ensnared by
the Manichaeans, 24 sq. ; how
he escaped through Greek phi-
losophy, 25 ; how he found in
Neo-1'latonism the solution of
the great problems that had
hitherto baffled him, 25 sq.;
how he used Neo-Platonism
against Manichxism, 26 sq. :
his perverse hermencutical me-
thods, 28 ; conhrme<l in Mani-
ch.neism by his easy victories
over ignorant Christians, loi ;
recounts his experience in Mani-
chrean error, and expresses his
sympathy with the deluded

Manichreans, 129 sq. ; dissatis-
faction of. with his anti-Mani-
chrean statements about free
will, sin, etc., 96, ro2, ft passim.

Authority, ecclesiastical, position
assigned to by Augustin, 130,
I3I.

Authority, the, of Scripture. 339.

Authorship of books, how ascer-
tained, 343.

Baiu'i.on, the captivity in, and re-
turn from, 194.

Babylonian religion, ancient, dual-
istic elements in, 6 sq. ; relation
of, to Manichx'ism, 19 sq.

Bahraim, king of Persia, slays Mani,
8.

Baptism and the ark, 243 sq.

Barhebraeus' Historia Dynastmntm^
referred to. 3.

Baur on the relation of Buddhism to
Manichitism, 20, 21.

Baur's treatise on Manichceism, re-
ferred to, 4t 16, 20, 158, 253.

Beausbbre's work on Manichaism
referred to, 4, 31, 32, 33. 34.

Beauty, the, of the universe, a result
of the corruption and destruction
of inferior things. 352 sq.

Bema. the, of Manicha-us, 132 sq.

Bersabee, Uriah's wife, a type,
307 sq.

Bilhah and Zilpah, 293.

Bindemann's treatise on Augustin,
referred to. 29, 35.

Biological blunders. 172.

Birth of Jesus, the, the absurd
statement of Faustus respect-
ing, 257 sq.

Blasphemies, Manichaan. concern-
ing the nature of Goil. 360 si].

Blood, abstinence from, 336.

Blunders of school-boys illustrative
of Manichivan errors about Got!,
2S2 sq.

Bodies of saints, nothing disgraceful
in. 327.

Body, of our neighbor, duty of doing

656

THE ANTI-MANICH^AN WRITINGS: INDEX OF SUBJECTS.

good to tlic, 55; the human,
man's heaviest bond, 53; God's
handiwork, 267 sq.; and soul,

the. 43-

Bohring-er quoted, 32. 36.

Breast, the, Manicha;an symbol of.
86, etc.

Broad us on Matthe-v, referred to,
161.

Buddhism, relation of to Manicha;-
ism, 20 sq.

Buddhist monks and the Elect of
the ManichcCans, 21.

Burton on the Heresies of the Apos-
tolic Age referred to, 31.

Caiapmas, his prophecy, 22S.

Cain, Abel's offering preferred to
the offering of, 1S5, 186; coun-
selled by God, r86; questioned
by God respecting Abel, 135;
cursed 135, 136; a mourner and
an abject, 187; the mark set on,
187.

Calderwood's Mind attd BraitJ^ re-
ferred to, 137.

Calf, the golden — significance of the
grinding to powder, and burning
of, 310.

Captivity, the, of the Jews, 194. 195.

Carpenter's Mental Physiology, re-
ferred to, 137.

Cataphrygians, 338.

Cave, on the writing of Faustus crit-
icized by Augustin, 34.

Chambers on Hermes Trismegistus,
cited, 200.

Christ, the birth of, denied by the
Manichteans, — but defended.
177, 178, 179, i8o, 181-183;
knowing, after the flesh, what it
means, ibid.; types of, 186 etc.,
190 etc.; prophecies of, 196 etc. ;
plain prophecies of, 197; the
death of, real, 209; did Moses
write of? 220 etc., 221 etc.;
what Piloses wrote of, 222 etc.;
the Prophet like to Moses, 225;
never sought to turn Israel from
their God, 229; broke no com-
mand, 229; Manichcean notions
of, 253 sq.; the power and wis-
dom of, 255; curious statement
of Faustus r-especting. 257-etc. ;
why descended from Zara of Ta-
mar, 296; Son of David and
Son of God, 314 sq. ; son of
Mary — Faustus' objections re-
futed, 316 etc. [beey^j-;/j-.]

Christians, the Church not to be
blamed for bad, 60 sq.; semi
and pseudo. 156; why Jewish
laws are not observed by, 242
etc.; Jewish and Gentile, their
relation respectively to the law,
244 sq. ; observe the moral pre-
cepts of the law, 246; the mor-
als of, 263 sq.

Christianity. Manichsean objections
to, 22 sq. ; relation of Manichse-
ism to 22 sq.

Church, the Catholic, the perfect
truth is to be found only in, 50;

the teacher of wisdom, 58; con-
spicuously visible, 204 ; the,
identified by Augustin with
Christianity, and apostrophised,
58, 62.

Chwolson on the Saheans and Sabe-
anisni, referred to, 5.

Cicero quoted, 271.

Circumcision, a prophecy of Christ.
134 ; why Christians do not
practice, 242.

Clean and unclean food, 170, 172.

Clement of Alexandria mentioned,
69.

Clergy, praise of the, 60.

Cloud and pillar of fire, types, 193.

Ccenobites and Anchorites, their ab-
stinence as compared with that
of the Manichreans, 59 etc., 60
etc.

Common report, 201.

Compassionate, 55.

Compassion regarded by fools as de-
grading, 56.

Constantius, a reformed Manich^an.
165.

Contrary nature urged by Fortuna-
tus as the source of sin, 120 sq.

Corporeal natures all from God, 96.

Corruption, 71; counteracted by
God, 71; evil is, 147; the source
of, 147; comes from nothing,
149; what it tends to. 149; is
by God's permission, and comes
from us, 150; voluntary and
penal, 352.

Cosmogony of the Manichfeans, 11.

Covetousness the root of all evils, 51.

Cow dung used as fuel, 81.

Creating and forming, difference be-
tween, 71.

Creature of (jod, none evil', but to
abuse a crc.tiire of God is evil,

359-

Creatures made of nothing, 356 sq.

Criticism, biblical, the true, 178; un-
fair, of Faustus, 314 ; subject-
ive, of the Manichreans, 57 sq.

Critics, childish, severely censured,
282.

Cruelty imputed by the Manichseans
to the God of the Old Testa-
ment, 27(3 sq. ; of the Manichse-
ans in refusing to give food to
others than the Elect, and in
compelling children belonging
to their own sect to eat immod-
erately, 83.

Cultus of the Manich;Tans, 14.

Cunningham's Hnlsean Lectures, re-
ferred to, 5. 29, 58.

Cunningham on the relation of Bud-
dhism to Manicheeism, 21.

" Cursed is every one that hangeth
on a tree," 207 sq.

Curses, prophetic. 22S.

Cyprian referred to, 165.

Cyril of Jerusalem on the ISIanichns-
■ ans, referred to, 4.

Daniel's representation of the Son

of Man, 197.
Darkness, the Manichsean kingdom

of, 136; five natures in the. 142;
refutation of the theory of, 142,
143; the -M.-michLvan race of,
171.

Darmstetter's Introduction to the
Zend-Avesta, and article in the
Contemporary Kevieiu, referred
to, 17, 18.

David, his virtues and his faults,
297 sq. ; and Saul, 29S ; pro
phetic significance of the sin of,

307.
Death, the effect of sin, 208 ; of

Christ, the, a real death, 209;

without birth a possibility on

the part of Christ, 320 sq.
Decalogue, the, against the Mani-

chjeans, 215 etc.
Deities, false, 215.
Demons have no power apart from

God, yet they have been made

evil, not bv God, but by sinning,

..358.
Diligence and piety both necessary

for finding the truth, 41.
Discipline, 56; what it implies, 56.
Disputations of Augustin with the

Manichceans, 34.
Divorce, a bill of, 249 sq. ; the law

of Christ respecting, 251.
Docetism. 326 sq. ; the, of Faustus,

323, 326 sq.
Dorner, A., his work on Augustin

referred to, 26.
Dualism, 264 sq. ; in the ancient

Babylonian religion, 6 sq.

E.'VTI G, on the part of the Elect, a
means of liberating the divine
substance imprisoned in vege-
tables and fruits, 85.

Eclecticism with reference to the
Old Testament, attributed by
Faustus to the Catholics, 332
sq.

Edessa, Chroincleof, referred to, 31.

Egyptian, Moses killing the, 309.

Egyptians, spoiling the, 299 sq.,

' 309-

Elect, secrecy of the rites of the,
114 ; Augustin's suggestion of
shameful practices on the part
of, 114.

Elijah, fed by ravens, etc., 194 ; the
translation of — Faustus' objec-
tion to, answered, 320 sq., 322.

Elisha, the miracles of, 194.

Enoch, 1S8.

Ephraem Syrus, writings of, referred

to, 3-

Epiphanius on the Manichseans, re-
ferred to, 4, 31.

Er and Onan, sons of Tamar, types,
306.

Eschatology of the Manichaeans, 15.

Esnig, against Marcion and Zdani,
referred to, 3.

Esoteric doctrines among the Mani-
chaeans, 33.

Ethics of the Manichaeans, 16.

Eusebius on the Manichaeans, re-
ferred to, 4, 8, 31.

Eutvchius' Annates, referred to, 3.

THE ANTI-MANICH^AN WRITINGS: INDEX OF SUBJECTS. 65;

Evangelists, the authority of the,

174-

Everlasting- punishment inconsistent
with Augustin's view of evil,
70.

Evidence, the use of, 198.

Evil beings may entice to sin without
themselves sinning, 106.

Evil, corruption of measure, form,
and order, 352 ; did God insti-
tute it? 119 sq.; negativity of, 70
etc. ; simply defect of good, and
so not of God, 100 sq.; what?
first answer, 69 ; second answer,
70 ; third answer, 71 ; not a
substance but a disagreement
hostile to substance, 72 etc.;
Manichcean fictions about, 73,
etc. ; is corruption, 147 ; the
source of, 147 ; origin of, 281
sq.

Evil and good, 270 sq.

Evils attributed by the Manicha-ans
to the nature of God, before
the supposed commingling with
evil, 361 sq.; in what sense
from God, 149.

Existence, true, belongs to God
alone, 354 sq.

Exodus, the, of Israel from Eg)'pt,
a type, 192.

" Eye for an Eye," etc., 248 sq.

FABRicrus' Bibliotheca Grczca, re-
ferred to, 33.

Faith, confounded with orthodox
doctrine by Augustin, 164 ; the
Catholic, proofs of, 130.

Fallaciousness of Mani's pretensions,

135 sq.

Faustus the Manichcean, who, 155 ;
his praise of himself, 159 ; the
hypocrisy of, 165 ; w'ould fail
to satisfy an inquirer, 205, 206 ;
his logic, 230 ; his Docetism,
323, 326 sq.

Fihrist, Kitab al, referred to, 3, 7,
8, et passim, cited 9 sq., 21.

Firdausi's Shalmameh, referred to, 3.

First man, the, of the Manichneans,
157 ; different from Paul's, 157,
178, 179.

Flesh, unclean on account of its
mixture with the race of dark-
ness, 171 ; why the use of, is
prohibited by the Manichseans,
79 ; as clean as fruits, 172.

Flesh, knowing Christ after the
— refutation of Faustus respect-
ing the question, 177 sq., 180,
181, 182.

Flood, the, its symbolic import, 189.

Fluegel on Mani, referred to, 5.

Fly, the soul of a, more excellent
than light, 97.

Food, distinction in, why Christians
do not practice, 242 ; reasons
for abstaining from certain
kinds of, 77 ; clean and unclean,
170 ; various kinds of, prohibi-
ted in the Old Testament, 335
sq. ; the laws of Moses and of
Christ respecting, 232.

Forgiveness, taught in the Old Tes-
tament, 250 sq.

Form, an element of the good, 352
sq.

Fortitude, 53 ; Scripture precepts re-
specting, and examples of, 53.

Fortunatus, the Manich^an, dispu-
tation against, 109 sq. ; con-
founded, 123.

Free choice belonging to man before
the fall, 122.

Fulfilling the law, what it means,
236 etc., 241 etc.

Fulfillment of prophecy by Christ,
239 sq.

Fundi! imittal Epistle of A/aui quot-
ed, 22; criticised by Augustin,
125 sq. ; quoted, 361 sq.

G.A.T.\KER on the significance of
Mani's name, 31.

Genealogy of Christ, objections of
Faustus the Manichcean to, and
reply, 159 sq., 173 etc.

Gentiles, the, never under the Jewish
law, 245 etc. ; Christians accu-
sed of retaining the manners of,
263.

Genuineness of the New Testament
writings, how ascertained, 343.

Gifts, spiritual, 267.

Glorification of Christ, the, 134.

God, following, 44; the knowledge
of, whence obtained, 44; the
chief good, 44; what the Church
teaches about, 45,46; the one ob-
ject of love, 46, 51 ; nothing bet-
ter than. 46; nothing can sep-
arate us from, 47; we are invit-
ed to, by love, 47; we are joined
inseparably to, by Christ and
His Spirit, 47, we cleave to, by
love, 48 ; absurd Manichcean
notions about, 79 etc., 139; has
no extension, 138 ; alone per-
fectly good. 147; nature made
by, 149; in what sense evils are
from, 149; the belief in one, part
of the original truth, 261; the
same who punishes and blesses,
174; the works of, 266 etc. ; the
eternal light, and the source of
light, 274 etc.; astonished,
275; Old Testament representa-
tions of, vindicated, 275 sq. ;
jealous, 277 sq. ; the omnipo-
tence of, 322; the, of the Jews,
how Faustus speaks of, 237,
273; and Hyle, of the Mani-
chcTians, 264 sq., 272, 279 sq.,
311 sq. ; of this world, the, 264,
268; declared by Augustin to
be incorruptible, impenetrable
and incontaminable. against the
Manichceans, 113 sq.; the au-
thor of whatever is, 99; cannot
suffer harm, 353, 359; if He
could suffer no injury, why did
He send us hither ? 122; is He
pressed by necessity .•• 123; Man-
icha.'an view of the mingling of
the substance of with evil ex-
pounded by Fortunatus and re-

futed by Augustin, 116 sq.; not
defiled by our sins, 357; un-
changeable, 356.

Godliness, form of without the pow-
er, 243 sq.

Good, the chief, two conditions of,
42, 43; God the. 46, 69; a two-
fold, 70; exhortation to seek the,
150; and evil, 270 sq.; doing, to
our neighbor, 55, 56; nature of,
351 sq. ; present even in bodies
that in comparison with better
things are popularly accounted
evil, 353 sq.; the highest, God,
351 sq.; things fromCJod alone,
353, 357; things put by the Man-
ichceans in the nature of evil,
143 sq., 359 sq.

Gospel, the, on what authority Au-
gustin received, 131 ; what —
refutations of Manichaeism re-
specting, 156, 157.

Gospels, the harmony of, 343 sq.

Habit, the pernicious power of, 121.

Hagar and Sarah, 284.

Hand, the, as a Manichaan symbol,
83 etc.

Happiness, true, 42 etc.

Hardouins Councils, referred to, 4.

Harmony, the, of the Old and New
Testaments, 44, 49, 55, 56; of
the Gospels, 343 sq.

Harnack on the Acta Disputationis,
referred to, 4 ; Art. on Mani-
c/uristn, referred to, 5, 17; quot-
ed, 24; on the relation of Bud-
dhism to Manichceism, 21.

Hebrew prophecy, 201.

Hebrews and Fagans, the difference
between the worship of, 263.

Hefele's Councils, referred to, 4.

Heraclides, a Manichcean writer, 33.

Heretics, better to restore than to
destroy, 129.

Hermes Trismegistus, 200, 205.

Hervey's work on Genealogies re-
ferred to, i6r.

Hidden meanings the sweetest, 188.

Hierax, Commentary of mentioned,

33-
Holy Spirit, Manichcvan view of

criticised by Augustin, 257 sq.;

the, when sent, 133; twice giv-
en, 134.
Hormizdas, king of Persia, 32.
Hosea. commanded to take to him a

"wife of whoredoms." 304,

308.
Hyde on the significance of Mani's

name, 31.
I/yle, 253, 259; and God, 264 sq.,

271 sq. ; Faustus' view of, 253;

not evil, 354.

Idolatry, the result of apostacy,
261; did the Jews practice it?
263.

Immoral practices of the Manich.-v-
ans, 87 sq., 362 sq.

Incarnation, the Apostle Paul on,
177 sq.; of Christ, the. objec-
tion of Faustus to. 15;), 316.

658 THE ANTI-MANICH^AN WRITINGS: INDEX OF SUBJECTS.

Indirect construction, instances of,

235.
Indulgences, Manichttan, 166 sq.,

330.

Infants, sinfulness of. thoujjht to be
inconsistent with Augustin's
definition of sin, 104.

Infinity of God, the, questions
about, 320.

Inquirer, the heathen, how answered
and instructed, 201-203; a diffi-
culty of, met, 203; satisfied, 205.

Inquisiti'veness condemned in Scrip-
ture, 52

Iras, 293.

Isaac and Rebecca, 289.

Jacok, sets up a stone for a memor-
ial pillar, igi; his vision of the
ladder, 192 ; his polygamy,

289 sq.; his wives, and the typ-
ical or symbolical meaning of,

290 sq.

Jericho, the capture of, 193.

Jesus, hanging from every tree, 257;
was He born of Mary? — cavils
of Faustus, 312 etc.; both Son
of David and Son of God —
Faustus refuted, 314 etc. ; did
He die ? — objections of Faustus
refuted, 320 sq.; was He born?
— reply to Faustus, 324; both
the birth and death of, real, not
illusory, 326 sq. [See Christ.']

Jesus patabilis, 158, 253.

Jewish books, learning the Christian
faith from, 227; laws and ob-
servances— why Christians do
not observe, 242 etc. ; observed
by Jewish, but not by Gentile
Christians, 244 sq.

Jews, the, typified by Cain, 186-188;
their unlDclief foretold, 203, 204.

Joachim, a priest, alleged by Faustus
to be the father of the Virgin
Mary, 313 sq., 315 sq.

John of i)amascus on the Manichas-
ans, referred to, 4.

John the Baptist, 307.

Joseph, a type, 192.

Joshua and Jesus, 226.

Journal of the Asiatic Society re-
ferred to, 3.

Judah, the blessing of, its prophetic
import, 196; the incest of, with
Tamar, 295; and Judas, 296 ;
the prophetic significance of his
incest with Tamar, 305 etc.

Judaism, relation of Manichoeism to,
21 sq.

Judges, types in the book of, 194.

Justice towards God, 54.

Kcssler's list of Mani's writings,
referred to, 32 ; on the relation
of Buddhism to Manichteism,
21; works of, on Manichreism,
referred to, 5.

•' Kingdom of Heaven," 252.

TCingdom of light, the Manichsean,
135 etc., 138.

Ladder, Jacob's vision of the, 192.

I.ardner referred to, 33, 34, 35, 36.

Latria, 262.

Law, the, not for Gentiles, 175 sq.;
always good, 21S; the, and
grace, 217 ; and the prophets,
Jesus came not to destroy, but
to fulfill — genuineness of the
words, 234 etc. ; why Christians
do not keep the, 192; Faustus'
explanation of the words,
239 etc. ; reply, to Faustus re-
specting, 241 etc., 242 etc.; and
Judaism, distinguished between
by Faustus, 272 etc. ; the eter-
nal, 284.

Leah and Rachel, 290 sq.

Lenormant's Ancient History, quot-
ed, 17 ; Chaldean Magic, re-
ferred to, 6.

Lex talionis, the, 24S sq.

" Life, thy, thou shalt see hanging,"
etc., 227.

Light, God is, and the source of,
274 sq. ; the Manichaean king-
dom of, 135 etc., 138.

Loesche on Augustin's indebtedness
to Plotinus referred to, 26.

Logic, the, of Faustus, 229, 230.

Lord's day, the, and Sunday, 238.

Lot, and his daughters, 287 sq. ; not
equal to Abraham, Isaac or Ja-
cob, 294 sq.

Love, to God, 44; we are united to
God by, 47, 48 ; the fourfold
division of, 48; the guiding in-
fluence of, 50; of ourselves and
of our neighbor, 55; the teach-
ing of the Old Testament as
well as of the New, 56 sq. ; to
enemies, 248 sq.

Love-feasts, 2G1.

Loving and hating, 248.

Maccaef.es, heroism of. to be imi-
tated by Christians, 244.

Man, what? 42; the chief good of,
43 ; wholly created by God —
refutation of Faustus respecting,
316 sq.; fleshly and spiritual,
316 sq.

Mandosism, relation of to Manichie-
ism, and to the old Babylonian
religious system, 19 sq.

Mandrakes, description of, and the
supposed virtues and typical im-
port of, explained. 293 sq.

Mani, sketch of, S sq. ; theology of.
9 sq. ; cosmogony of, \u sq. ;
anthropology of, 12 sq. ; sote-
riology of, 13 sq.; cultus of,
14 sq.; eschatology of, 15 sq. ;
ethics of, 16 ; tlie exaltation of,
by his followers above Christ,
shown by the attention which
they bestow ui)on the anniver-
sary of his martyrdom, and their
neglect of the anniversary of
Christ's death and resurrection,
132 sq.; name of, etymology of,
247 ; claims to be an apostle —
the claim refuted, 130, 131 etc.,
200 ; why he called himself an
apostle, 131 ; in what sense his

followers believed him to be the
Holy Spirit, 132 ; the festival
of the birthday of, 132 ; promi-
ses truth but fails to fulfill his
word, 134 ; wild fancies of, 134,
135 ; the two substances of his
kingdom of light, 135 ; promi-
ses knowledge, 135, 136 ; his
absurd fancy of a land and race
of darkness, 136 ; refutation of
his absurd ideas of two territo-
ries, 138, etc.; the number of
natures in the system of, 140
etc.; his five natures in the
region of darkness — refutation
of the fiction, 142, 143 ; sworn
by, 247 ; derivation of the name,
247 ; which is, he or Matthew
to be believed ? 325 ; versus the
apostles, 331.
Manichcean god, the, weak or cruel,

159-

Manichseism, how it attracted
Christians, 23 sq. ; later, sketch
of, 29 ; explained by Faustus,
252 etc. ; exposed, 254 etc.

Manichoeans, and not Catholics,
obedient to the precepts of the
gospel, maintained by Faustus
and denied by Augustin, 162 sq. ;
the, two tricks of, for catching
the unwary, 41 ; the two gods
of, 45; fictions of, about things
good and evil, 63 etc.; three
moral symbols devised bv,
74 etc., 83 etc., 86 etc. ; fables
of, about God, 75 ; the absti-
nence of, 76; why they prohibit
the use of flesh, 79 etc. ; absurd
tenets of, relating to God,
79 etc. ; views of, relating to
souls, 82; notions of, respecting
marriage, 86; serious charges of
immorality brought against,
86-89; to be gently dealt with,
129; their kingdom of darkness,
136, 142, 143; worse than the
Anthropomorphists, 139 ; the
first man of, 157; their perverse
method of dealing with Script-
ure, evidence in controversy,
178; the idolatry of, 210; im-
peached of great errors and sins,
214 etc.; the Decalogue against,
216 etc.; beguiled by the
serpent, 218, 219 ; are tares,
238 ; the oath used by, 247 ;
tiie worship of, 255 sq., 260;
the trinity of, 252, 258 ; the two
principles of, 270 etc. ; the God
of, 279 sq., 311 sq. ; apocryphal
gospels of, 303 sq.

Mansi's Councils referred to, 4.

Marcel, Mani's letter to, 33.

Mark, the, set on Cain, 187.

Marriage allowed to the baptized by
the apostles, 62, 63 ; among the
Manichoeans, 86, 87 ; with
sisters, 286.

Married life, continence in, 58.

Marry, forbidding to, 328 etc. ,330 etc.

Martyrs, honors paid to, 261 sq. ;
the numbers of, 301 sq.

THE ANTI-MANICH.^AN WRITINGS: INDEX OF SUBJECTS. 659

Mary, the Virgin, did she belong to
the tribe of Judah ? — assertion
of Faustus, and refutation of
the same, 313 sq.

Material substances not evil, but
only seemingly so from their
lack of adaptation to certain
constitutions and circumstances,
72 sq.

Mattarians, a Manichcean sect, 165.

Matthew, the call of, 234 sq. ; the
genuineness of the Gospel of,
325 ; or Manich?eus which to
be believed, 325 sq.

Means, the use of, 286 sq.

Meats and drinks, abstinence from,
or the reverse, 60, 61, 330.

Measure, an element of the good,
352 sq. ; belongs to things re-
garded as immoderately small
or great, 355 ; in a sense, suit-
able to God himself, 355.

Menoch, Mani's letter to, 33.

Memory, 137.

Milman's History of Christianity,
referred to, 31.

Mind, is it diffused throughout the
entire nervous system? 137;
has no material extension, 13S ;
the, degraded by departing from
God, 47.

Miracle and nature, 321 sq.

Moral precepts of the Old Testa-
ment observed by Christians,
symbolical precepts, not, 177.

]\Ioralityof the law and the prophets,
272 sq.

Months, origin of the names of, 238.

Morals, the, of the Christians, 263.

Moses, the rod of, a type, 192 ; cen-
sured by Faustus for using the
word ' cursed," and defended,
207, 208 etc. ; did he write of
Christ? 219 etc., 221 etc.; is
his law pure paganism ? 222
etc. ; what he wrote of Christ,
222, 224 etc., 225 etc.; like to
Christ, 225 ; defended against
Faustus, 225, 232 ; his virtues,
298 ; slays the Egf)'ptian, 299,
309 ; spoils the Egyptians, 300,
309 ; slaughters the idolatrous
Israelites, 304, 310 ; burns and
grinds to powder the golden
calf, 310.

Mouth, the, the value of the Mani-
chcean symbol of, 74, etc.

Mozley's /Ruling Ideas in Early
Ages, referred to, 5, 51, 107 ;
quoted, 28.

Mugtasila, a Babylonian sect with
which Mani was connected, 8.

Miiller, Ma.x, his Sacred Books of
the East, referred to, 20.

Murder, the Manichseans guilty of,
in cutting plants, 169.

Mythology of the Pagans compared
with that of the Manichteans,
55 sq.

Natuke, so far as it is nature, not
evil, 354 ; every, as such, good,
136 ; cannot be without good.

146 ; corruption is not, 147 ;
made by God, 148 ; and mira-
cle, 321 sq.

Natures corruptible, because made
of nothing, 353.

Nazareans, 240, 246.

Neander on the relation of Bud-
dhism to Manichoiism, referred
to, 20.

Negativity of evil, 150.

Neighbor, the love of, 54 sq. ; doing
good to, 55 sq.

Neo-Platonism, dependence of Au-
gustin on, 25 sq., 48, 150.

New Testament, the Manichrean
treatment of the, 332, 335.

Nirvana, 20, 21.

Noah, and the ark, 188 sq. ; age of,
at the flood, 1S9 ; God's coven-
ant with, 190 ; his drunkenness,
190 ; conduct of the sons of,
190.

Non-resistance, 249.

Obedience to the gospel, the Mani-
chaan representation of, 162
etc. ; reply to Faustus' state-
ment respecting, 163 etc.; un-
availing without faiih. 164.

Oblasinski on the Acta-Disputa-
tionis, referred to, 4.

Old man, the, and the new, 51.

Old Testament, the, and the New,
the harmony of , 45 etc., 49 etc. ,
56, 57, 301 sq. ; Faustus" objec-
tions to, and charges against
answered, 161 etc., 167 etc.,
175, 176 etc., 211 etc., 212 etc.,
273 sq., 277 etc., 332 etc., 334
etc. ; the functions of, 335 ; the
typical nature of, 335.

Olive tree, the good, 176.

Omnipotence of God, the, 322.

Onlv-begotten, the, of God, 148.

Ophitic Gnosticism, relation of to
the old Babylonian religion and
its later sects, 19.

Order an element of the good, 352 sq.

Origin of evil, the, 2S1 sq.

Orpheus, 200, 205.

Paganism, imputed to the Catholics
by Faustus, 253 ; the charge of,
retorted, 254 etc.; Christians
vindicated from the charge of,
261, 263.

Pain only in good natures, 355.

Paraclete, the claim of Mani, born
of ordinar\- generation, to be
the, inconsistent with the .Mani-
chrean objection to the birth of
Christ from the Virgin, 132 ;
Manichaus not the apostle of
the, 131 ; when sent forth, 133 ;
the mission of the, 337 ; the
promise of, refers not to Mani-
chreus, 338 ; sent immediately
after the resurrection of Jesus,

33S. ^ ^ .

Partridge, the, a type of heretics,

204.
Passover, the, 193.

I " Patience of Israel, the," 205.

Patriarchs, the, with all their faults,
superior totheManichivaa Elect,
and even the Manichaean god,
282 ; Faustus' opinion of, 340 ;
defended against the attacks of
Faustus, 342.

Paul and Circumcision, 245; did he
change his opinions respecting
Christ ? 177 sq. ; harmony of
his teaching, 180 sq.; the nat-
ural fierce energy of, made use
of by God, 299.

Paul and Thecla, the apocryphal
book of, referred to, 329.

Paulinus of Nola mentioned, 62.

Pelagian controversy more congenial
to Augustin's mind than the
Manichaean, 35.

Pelagians use Augustin's anti-Mani-
chiean utterances against him,
102, 103 el passim.

Pentecost, 307.

Perfection not attainable in this life,

58.

Periods r>f the world, si.x, 1S5 sq.

Peter, 299.

Petrus Siculus on the Manichxans,
referred to, 4.

Philo, his interpretation of Scripture,
195.

Photius on the Manichaeans, refer-
red to, 4.

Plants, Manichrean view of the
sacredness of the life of, S4.

Poets, pagan, fictions of, more re-
spectable than those of the
Manichnsans, 214 sq.

Polygamy, 2 89, 290.

Possidius' Life of Augustin, refer-
red to, 34.

Power to do harm from God alcne,

358.

Prayer of Augustin for the conver-
sion of the Manichafans. 107.

Pride the cause of Manichaan error,
281.

Principles, the two, of Manichnean-
ism, 270.

Procreation of children regarded as
one of the greatest of evils by
the Manichaans, 86 sq.

Property allowed to believers by the
apostles, 62.

Prophecies of Christ, 1S3, 196, 197 ;
the fulfillment of, its evidential
power, 201.

Prophecy, Hebrew, 199, 200.

Prophecy, relation of Christ to, 235
sq.

Prophet, the. like unto Moses, 224 sq.

Prophets, the Hebrew, and their
prophecies respecting Christ,
defended against the assaults of
Faustus, 183, etc.; 198, 199.

Prostitution condemned by divine
and eternal law, 295.

Prudence, 54.

Punishment and forgiveness of sins
prerogatives of God, 357 sq.

Punishment constituted for the sin-
ning nature that it may be
rightly ordered, 353.

66o

THE ANTI-MANICH^.AN WRITINGS: INDEX OF SUBJECTS.

"Pure, all things pure to the,"
330 sq.

Pusey's statements about Mani re-
ferred to, 31.

Ractiei. and I.eah, 290-295.
Rationalism of the Manichasans, 134.
Raven and the dove, the, sent forth

from the ark, iSg.
Reason, the weakness of, in relation

to God, 44.
Record of faith, the, 206.
Religious life of the Manichaeans

described by Faustus, 163.
Repentance, the utility of, proves

that the souls are not by nature

evil, 106.
Report, common, 201.
Resurrection of the dead, the, 179.
Rod of Moses, the, a type, 192.
Rufinus, Consol, 113.

Sabbath, the Jewish, 168, 169, 230,
231 ; why not binding on Chris-
tians, 243.

Sabeahism, relation of to Manicha;-
ism and to the old Babylonian
religion, 19.

Sacraments, the, of the Old Testa-
ment, 544 ; of the Old Testa-
ment and the New, 244 sq. ; re-
lation of Gentile and Jewish
Christians to the Old, 245 sq.

Sacrifice, the true one, and imita-
tions of, 260.

Sacrifices of the Old Testament, 169,
170; typical, 238, 277.

Sadder, the book, cited, 16.

Sallust, referred to, 76.

Samson and the lion, 193 sq.

Sapor, King of Persia, 32.

Sarah, her conduct towards Hagar,
284 ; Abraham's denial of, as his
wife, 285 ; and Abraham, types,
2S6, etc.

Sassanian inscriptions, 9.

Saturn, the fetters of, 238.

Saul, 296 sq.

Schaff's History referred to, 3.

Schism, as explained by Faustus, 253,
235.

Schneckenburger's criticism of Baur,

. 5-

Scriptural authority, 180.

Scriptures, the, authority of, 57, 239;
Manichcean mode of dealing
with, in controversy, 178 ; and
other good books, iBo ; the re-
cord of faith, 206; how the
record of the deeds of evil men
in, is to be regarded, 295 sq. ;
the principle of interpretation
to be applied to, 310 sq.; all,
profitable, 311 ; Faustus would
subject the, to himself, not be
subject to, 339 ; the genuineness
of, 342 sq.

Sect and schism, 253.

Secundinus, Augustin's estimate of
his reply to the letter of, 35.

Seed, vegetable and animal, the
nature of God in, liberated by
being eaten by the Elect, 363 sq.

Shew-bread, 194.

Self-denial, Catholic, 165, 166.

Semi-Christians and pseudo-Chris-
tians, 156.

Sensible objects, not to be loved, 51,
52.

Serpent, the brazen, 193.

Sibylline books, 200, 205,

Signacula, the three, 16, 74 sq.

Simon Magus, 243, 290.

Sin only from the will, loi sq. ; defi-
nition of, 103 ; not apart from
freewill, 120 sq.; the relation
of Adam's posterity to, 121 ;
what is it? 283; not from God,
but from the will of those sin-
ning, 357 ; net the striving for
an evil nature, but the desertion
of a better, 358.

Socrates' Histoiy referred to, 31.

Solomon, 304.

Son of God begotten, not made, 356 ;
of David and Son of God, Christ
the, denied by Faustus, 313,
etc. ; proved against Faustus,
314, etc.

Soteriology of the Manichreans,

13-

Soul, the chief good of man, 43 ;
obtains virtue by following after
God, 44 ; of our neighbor, duty
of doing good to the, 56 ; sin-
ned and therefore is miserable,
122; the, nature of the rational,
148; has no material form, and
is present in every part of the
body, 136, 137 ; has no material
extension, 138 ; and body, 43 ;
virtue gives perfection to, 43.

Souls, absurd Manichcean notions
respecting, 82 etc., 83 etc.;
two, treatise on, 95 sq.; can
have their existence from God
alone, 95 sq. ; that are called
evil by the Manichteans, being
capable of intellectual percep-
tion, are better than any object
of perception, 96 sq. ; supposed
complaint of against the Alani-
chcean God for involving them,
in endless misery, without ne-
cessity, and apart from their
own will, 117 sq., 120.

Spontaneous generation, supposed
cases of, 85.

Star of the Magi, the, 157, 158.

Stars, Manich^an superstition re-
garding the, 158.

Stercutio, a Roman demi-god, 72.

Stokes' art. Manes and Matiichicans^
referred to, 5, 29.

Subjective method of dealing with
Scripture practiced by the Mani-
chseans, 178.

Sulpicius Severus mentioned, 62.

Sun worship on the part of the
Manichreans, denied by Faus-
tus, 252 sq,; the, Manichrean
worship of, explained by Faus-
tus, 252, etc.; absurd statements
of Faustus exposed, 254.

Sunday, and the Lord's day, 238.

Swearing, 247 sq.

Symbolical nature of the Old Testa-
ment, 167 sq.

Symbolic precepts of the Old Testa-
ment, 167, 168.

Symbols, three moral, devised by
the Manichieans, 74 etc., 83
etc., 86 etc.; material, visible
speech, 244.

Tahi.ks of stone, the, 213, 214.
Tamar and Judah, 295 sq.; a type,

306 sq.
Teacher, the Great, 147.
Temperance, the duties of, 51.
Thecla, Paul and, 329.
Theodicy of Augustin incomplete,

282.
Theology of the Manichreans, 10.
" Thieves and Robbers," all who

came before me are — who ? 223.
Thomas, how taught by Jesus, 234;

apocryphal story of, 304.
Tiele's Outlines of the Uistoiy of

Religion, quoted, 17.
Titus of Bostra on the Manichseans,

referred to, 4.
Trechsel on the Canon, Criticism,

and Exegesis of the Mani-

chaans, referred to, 5.
Trinity, the, 49 ; absurd views of

Faustus respecting, 252, 258 ;

Fortunatus' profession of belief

in, 114.
Truth, how to be sought, 130.
Turanian dualism, 6.
Turkestan, the refuge of Mani, 32.
Turpitudes in God imagined by the

Manichaeans, 362 sq.
Two men, the witness of, 223.
Two territories, Manichtean theory

of, refuted, 138.
Type and testimony, 173.
Types, Adam and Eve, 186; Cain

and Abel, 186; the ark, 188; the

flood, 189; the raven and dove,

igo; Noah's drunkenness, 190;

Noah's sons, 190; Abraham and

Isaac, 191; the angel wrestling

with Jacob, 191; Jacob's stone,

191 ; Jacob's ladder, 192 ; Jo-
seph, 192 ; the rod of Moses,

192 ; the Exodus, 192 ; in the
wilderness, 193 ; the conquest
of Jericho, 193; events during
the time of the Judges, 193;
events in the time of the Kings,
194 ; the Church, in captivity,
and the return from captivity,
194, 195 ; must be acknowl-
edged, 195; sacrifices, 236; oth-
er observances besides sacrific-
es, 242 ; fulfilled in Christ, 242
etc. ; actions and persons, 305 ;
Judah's incest, 305 etc. ; Tamar,
Er, and Onan, 306 sq. ; David's
crime, 307 ; Solomon, 308 ;
various, 335 sq.

Typical actions, it is of no conse-
quence whether they are good
or bad, 305.

Unclean and clean food, 170, 172.
Uriah the Hittite, 308;

THE ANTI-MANICHJRAN WRITINGS: INDEX OF SUBJECTS.

661

Vanity of the world, the, 52

Varanes, king of Persia, 32.

Vices, as objects of intellectual appre-
hension, better than light which
is perceived by sense, g7 sq.

Virginity, I'agan and Christian, 262.

Virtue, Augustin's use of the word,
46 ; gives perfection to the
soul, 44 ; the fourfold division
48, 54-

Wars the real evils of, 301 sq. ;

ordered by God, 301 sq.
Wegnern on Maiiicluean Indul-

geuces, referred to, 5.
Wilderness, the, typical occurrences

in, 193.

Wilson, of Bombay, on the Parsis,

referred to, 36.
Williams, Monier, Indian Wisdom,

quoted, 5.
Wine, the old and the new, 81 ; the

Manicha;an and the Catholic

views of, 258.
Wisdom, 50 ; identified with Christ,

50 etc.
Witness, the, of two men, 223.
Words, on what the value of de-
pends, 306.
Works of (led, the, 266.
World, the, to be despised, 51, 52 ;

the vanity of, 52.
World-bearer of the Manichaeans,

255-

Youths and maidens sent by ( 'lod
to entice the female and male
princes of darkness — immoral
tendency of such fables, 254,
362 sq.

Zacagni's Collectanea, referred to,

34-
Zend-Avesta, quoted, iS.
Zilpah and Bilhah, 293.
Zittwitz on the Acta Disputation! s.

referred to, 4.
Zodiac, connection of the Mani-

ch?ean worship with, 14.
Zoroastrianism, relation of to Mani-

chaism, 16 sq.

THE ANTI-MANICH^AN WRITINGS.

INDEX OF TFXrS.

PAGE

rAGE

PAGE

PAGF.

Gen. i. 2

274

Ex. xxiii. 20, 21

. 226

Ps. xvi. 10. .

• 355

Song of Sol. iv. 15 .

307

i- 31

332

xxxi. 13 .

• 333

xviii. 28 .

■ 274

Isa. i. 3 ....

203

ii. 7

318

xxxii. 32 .

• 304

xviii. 43 .

• 307

i. 18 . . . .

196

ii. 9

359

Lev. xix. 18 .

• 57

xix. 6 .

. 310

ii. 17-20 . .

203

ii: 3-

179

xxi. .

• 173

xxii. .

• 197

vi. 3 . . .

198

iii. 19

,.122

xxiii.

• 333

XXX. 6, 7 .

. 188

vi. 10 . . .

203

iii. 21

306

Num. ix. 10-12

. 225

XXX. II, 12

• 195

vii. 9 . . 162, 19S,

iv. 4

277

xiii. 9 .

. 226

xxxi. 19 .

. 213

292

ix. 6

336

xiv. 6 .

. 226

xxxiv. 5 .

• 344

vii. 14.

118

xi. 31 . .

2S6

XV. 35 .

■ 334

XXX vi. 6 .

. 261;

viii. 20

275

xii. 3 . . .

285

Deut. iv. 6. .

■ 215

XXX vi. 11 .

. 1S8

xi. 2, 3 . .

189

xii. 8 . . .

. 286

iv. 24 .

. . 58

xxxvii. 23.

■ 155

xi. 10 . . .

200

xii. 13

• 273

vi. 4 .

. . 50

xii. 4 . .

. 186

xxix. 13 .

293

XV. 3, 4 . .

285

vi. 5 .

45, 57

xliv. 22 .

• 45

xlv. 7 . . .

xvi. 2-4 . .

273

vi. 13 .

xlv. 7 . .

. 149, 202

xlv. 23, 24

xvii. 9-14 .

221

xii. 32 .

• . 234

.xlv. 10-17

. 219

Hi. 7 • • .

335

xvii. 14 .

334

xiii. 5 .

. . 221

1. 23 . .

. 262

liii. . . .

197

xix. 33-35 .

273

xviii. 15

220, 224

Ii. 10 . .

. 252

Ivi. 4, 5 . .

211

XX. 2 . .

273

xix. 15 .

. 223

Ii. 17 . .

• 365

Ixv. 2 . . .

203

xxii. iS .

196

xxi. 23 .

• 207, 334

Ivii. 4 . .

• 197

Jer. XII. . .

202

xxiv. 2 . . .

196

xxiv. I .

• 249

Ixvi. 9

. 188 ] xvi. i()-2i .

202

xxvi. 4 .

196

XXV. 5-10 .

208, 333,

Ixxii. 10 .

. 202

xvii. 5-8 . .

202

xxvi. 7 . .27

3.289

334

Ixxii. II .

. 302

xvii. 9 . . 2C

)3. 288

xxvii. 40

305

xxvii. 15

. 241

l.Kxiii. 28 .

49. 149

xvii. 14 .

206

xxviii. 11-18

192

xxviii. 16

227

Ixxix. 9 .

. . 260

xviii. 12 .

204

.\xviii. 14

196

xxviii. 66

220

Ixxxiv. 4 .

. 219

xxxi. 31, 32 .

335

,\xix. 26 .

292

I Sam. xiv.

297

Ixxxix. 8 .

• 49

xxxi. 32 .

238

xxix. XXX. .

273

XV. 24

298

ci. I . .

. . 265

Lam. iii. 30 . .

250

XXX. I

293

xxiv., XXV

297

cii. 27 . .

. 356

Ezek. ix. i.

205

XXX. 15 .

294

xxviii. 3

297

ciii. 8 . .

• . 364

xi. 19 . .21

4.238

XXX. 16 .

294

2 Sam. xi. 4, 15

274

cxvi. 15 .

xvi. 52 . .

296

xxxviii. .

273

xii.

297

cxviii. 16.

. 252

xviii. 21

• 365

xxxix. 17

292

xvi.

297

cxviii. 22 .

• 309

xxxiii. II .

364

xlix. r, 2, 8-12

196

I Kings xi. 1-3

. 274

cxix. 83 .

. 192

Dan. i. 12 . . .3:

•8. 331

xlix. 8-12 .

295

2 Kings ii. 11 .

■ 323

cxx. 6 . .

• 251

ii 34. 35 •

. 204

xlix. 10 .

306

Job i. 2 . . .

cxx. 7 . .

. 205

iii. 72 . .

354

Ex. ii. 12 . . .

274

i. ii.

35S

cxlviii. I .

. 219

vi.

262

iii. 14 . . .

355

ii. 10 . .

276

cxlviii. 5 .

"6.357

vii. 13. 14 •

•97

iii. 21, 22. .

299

vii. 4 .

303

I'rov. iii. 12

. . 276

ix. 24 . .

JO()

xi. 2 .

299

xxxiv. 30 .

. 358

viii. 15 .

• 358

ix. 24-27 .

197

xii.

333

I's. ii. 7, 8. .

202

xvi. 32 .

53. 250

X. 2, 3 . .

328

xii. 3-5 • •

296

ii. 8, 9. .

197

xxi. 20 .

. 171

IIos. i. 2 . . .

. 304

xii. 35, 36 .

274

iv. 4 . .

310

xxv. 21 .

. 250

i. 2, 3 . .

274

xvii. 9

274

iv. 6 . .

XXX. 30 .

196

i. 2; ii. 1 .

ViS

xix.-xxxi.

336

vi. 7 . .

250

Eccl. i. 2, 3 .

xiii. II .

358

XX. 17. . .

250

xii. 3 . .

252

Song of Sol. i. 7

. 287

xiii. 14 . .

xxi. 24

249

xiii. 4 .

188

ii. 2

. 205

I lab. ii. 4 . . .

231

xxiii. I

I . .

313

xvi. 8 .

188

iv. 2

• 3^^7

Hag. i. 1 . . .

3»3

664

THE ANTI-MANICHyEAN WRITINGS: INDEX OF TEXTS.

PAGE

Hag. ii. 8 . . . . 307
Mai. iv. 2 . . . . 130

APOCRYPHA.

Wis. i. 5 . .
i. 13 . .
i. 16 . .
ii. 18-21
ii. 24. .

iii. 1-5 ■
V. 16, 17
vi. 12-20
vi. 22
vi. 23 .
vii. 24, 25
vii. 27 .
vii. 36 .
viii. I, 4, 7
viii. 3 .
ix. 9 .
ix. 15. .
ix. 17. .
ix. 17-19
xi. 14. .
xi. 21.
xi. 21, xii. :
xii. 2 .
xiv. 15 .
Eccles. i. 33 .

ii- 4. 5
xix. I .
xxvii. 6
xxviii. I-
xxviii. 21

Tob. ii. I . .
viii. 9

Bar. iii. 37, 38

1 Mace. vii. 28

2 Mace. vii.

49
26S
2f)S
198
268

. 252

• 50
. 252

• 293

168, 357

• 356

• 274

■ 49

. 49

303, 337

• 49
. 268

266, 355

• 251

• 365

• 277
. 292

• 54

• 54
. 251
. 250

• 307
. 286

• 197

• 357
53. 244

NEW TESTAMENT.

Matt. i. 23 .
i. 25.
ii. II.
ii. 14.
ii. 16.
iii. 4.
iii. 7 .
iii. 10
iii. 13
iii. 17
iv. 2 .

V. 3-9
V. 3-10
V. 3-11
V. 4 .
V. S .
V. 14.
V. 17-20
V. 21-44
V. 24.
V. 27, 28
V. 31. 32
V. 33, 34
V. 38, 39
V. 39 •
V. 44. 48
V. 45 248
vi. 12
vi. 24
vii. 6.

• 314
323. 327

• 327
. 286

296
232

• 307
120, 194

. 62

183, 314

• 324
292

. 163

162

. 226

150. 275

204, 225

. 236

. 24c

. 222

• 247

• 249

• 249
. 246

248, 301

• 251
341, 364

260

54, 213

Matt. vii. 7.

vii. 13 .
vii. 21 .
vii. 24-27
viii. 4
viii. 5-13
viii. 9-10
viii. 10 .
viii. 10-12
viii. II .
viii. 20 .
viii. 22 .
viii. 24 .
viii. 31, 32
viii. 32 .
ix. 9 .
ix, 12, 13
ix. 13 .
ix. 16
X. 2-4 .
X. 14, 15
X. 16,28, 30
X. 23. .
X. 25. .
X. 26.
X. 28. .
X. 38-42
X. 39. .
xi. 2-6 .
xi. II .
xi. 12 .
xi. 18, 19
xi. 19
xi. 27
xi. 28, 29
xii. 7.
xii. 30 .
xii. 35 .
xii. 46 .
xii. 48 .
xii. 48-50
xiii. 24-43
xiii. 29, 30
xiii. 30 .
xiii. 52 .

PACE

50, 51. 278

336
163

309

222

341. 344

?0I

xni. 57 .
xiv. 30 .

XV. 2

XV. 3-6 .
.\v. II. 61,
XV. 13 .
XV. 16-20
xvi. 7
xvi. II .
xvi. 22, 23
xvi. 23 .
xvii. 5 .
xix. 4-6
xix. 6
xix. 7, 8,
xix. 12 .
xix. 21 .
xix. 29 .
xxi. 19 .
xxi. 31 .
xxii. 10.
xxii. 11-15
xxii. 21 .
xxii. 23-38
xxii. 31, 32
xxii. 37
xxii. 37-39

275
229

340

290

324
300

84, 170

234
186

237
175
131
276
2, 302
286

222

149, 211

166

276

162

307

248

232
236

49
243
1, 260
189
121
286
174
287
62
300
205
162, 175,
213
. 226
. 225

• 77
. 229

237, 336
116, 120

• 233
. 163
. 170

226, 323

• 175
358. 315

. 251

• 295
. 251

228, 329

. 163

162

84, 282

• 304
296
276

. 301
. 252
. 229

• 45
57

Matt. xxii. 37-40
xxii. 39
xxii. 40
xxii. 42-44
xxiii. 2, 3
xxiii. 3,

xxiii. 9 .
xxiii. 15,

I'AGE
41

■ • 55
57, 239
200
. 232
236, 293,
305
174- 287
221, 232,
237

V.\'Ai

John i. 17 . 241, 242, 246

xxiii. 23, 24
xxiii. 34
xxiii. 35 .
xxiv. 15
xxiv. 24, 25
XXV. 35. .
XXV. 41 .
xxvi. 28
xxvi. 37
xxvi. 52, 53
xxvi. 57, 52
xxvi. 75 .
xxvii. 34 .
xxviii. 19, 20
xxxvi. 31-35

Mark i. i .

iii. 13-19

iii. 32

X. 18.
Luke i. 33 .

i- 35-
i. 44.
ii. 7 •
ii. 14

ii- 33
iii. 14
iii. 22, 23
V. 14 .
vi. 13-18
vii. 2-10
viii. 43-46
viii. 44. 45
ix. 62 .
xi. 8 . .
xi. 20
xii. 4
xii. 49, 58
xiii. 24-29
xvi. 16 .
xvi. 23 .
xvi. 27-31
xvii. 28 .
.xvii. 32 .
xviii. 8 .
XX. 37, 38
XX. 35-38
xxii. 42, 51
xxiii. 12
xxiii. 43
xxiv. 7 .
xxiv. 39
xxiv. 44
xxiv. 46, 47
John i. 1 .
i- 1-5
i- 3 - 99
i. 6 .

i- 7 -

i. 9 .

i. II .

i. 12 .

i. 14 .

233
240
302

197
20 1
163

358
244

324
302
299

307

306

163

69-75.

358
313
131

327
359
355
225

307

327

301

313
170

131
I, 344
344
276
288
336
193
149
310

342
242

343
1 84
298
288
236
229

3'->3
302

307
341
323
181
161, 184

• 307
203, 295

174, 356
115, 323
307
236

99
100

160

148, 244

1. 29
i- 34 -
i- 47-51
ii. 17-
ii. 19 .
iii. 3 .
iii. 6 .
iii. 14
iii. 14, 15
iv. 13, 14

V. 25 .

V. 25-27
V. 36.

V. 39-
V. 46 .

193. 225
49

VI. 53 -
vi- 54
vi. 70, 71
vii. 10-30
vii. 39 .
viii. 3-1 1
viii. 6-8 .
viii. 13-18
viii. 13, 17, I

192
276
222

317
118

193
164

307
221
236
164

307
252
1S4, 223, 235,
241
186
205

viii. 34, 36
viii. 36 .
* viii. 39, 56
viii. 44, 47
ix.

ix. 31
ix. 39
X. iS.
X. 30.

X. 38 .

XI. 49, 51
xi. 50, 51
xii. 35
xii. 41
xiii. 34
xiii. 35
xiv. 3
xiv. 6

xiv. 8
xiv. 9
xiv. 16
xiv. 17
xiv. 26
XV. 1-3
XV. 10
XV. 14
XV. 18

XV. 22

xvi. 28
xvi. 33
xvii. 3
xviii. 1 1
xviii. 20
xix. 4-6
xix. 1 1
xix. 15
xix. 18
xix. 28
xix. 36
xix. 38

XX. 22

XX. 28
xxi. 20-24
xxi. 25 .

296

286

134, 338

340

282

183

220,

223

18&

75
342

99
321
186
265
123
. 356
1S3
22S
306

54
235
250
236
226
48, 49. 227,

95
114
203
131
87, 338
334
278
163
163

87
121

183

193

54. loi

302

356
297
279
go6

34
324
T93
257
134
327
235
235

THE ANTI-MANICH^AN WRITINGS: INDEX Ot

' TEXTS.

665

PAGE

TAC-

PAGE

IA<,H

Acts i. 1-8 .... 133

Rom. viii. 36 . . . 45

I Cor. viii. 4 . . . 78

2 Cor. xiii. 3 .

. • 326

i. 14 . .

. 164

viii. 38, 39.

viii. 6 . . . 100

xiii. 4 .

. . 187

i. 26 . .

• 131

ix. 1-5 .

184

viii. 8 . . . 61

Gal. i. 8 . .

• • 340

ii. .

• 337

ix. 4. 5 • •

160

ix. 9, 10 . . 173

i. 8. 9. I

57, 164, 326

ii. 1-13 .

• 133

ix. 5 . .

225

X. 1-4 . . . 192

i. 9 .2

07. 235, 338

viii. 13 .

• 305

ix. 6-S .

184

X. 4. . . . 225

i. 10 . .

• . 52

viii. 18-20

. 290

ix. 14, 15

265

x. 6. 168, 230, 238

i. 15, 16 .

. . 318

ix.

• 131

ix. 20 .

123

X. 6, II . . 161

i. 22 .

• • 309

ix. 25

. 286

ix. 23-26

309

X. 10, 6 . . 195

ii. 14 . •

. . 298

X. 11-15 . .

• 332

X. 9 . .

232

X. II . . 169, 173,

ii. 20 .

. . 226

X. 13 . .

310

X. 14, 15

198

^75. 335

iii. 6-3 .

. . 198

XV. 6-1 1 .

. 245

X. 21

203

X. 19-25, 28 . 79

iii. 8 . .

. . 229

XV. 29. .

■ 336

xi. I . .

118

X. 20, 254, 277, 336

iii. 10. .

. 187, 208

xvii. 28 .

277,410

xi. 5 .

194

X. 30 . . . 261

iii. 16. .

. . 185

Rom. i. 1-3, 118

183, 212

xi. 8 .

203

xi. I . . . 79

iii. 19. .

. . 217

i. 2, 3 .

. 200

xi. 17-24

265

xi. 5 . . . 179

iii. 21, 22

. . 242

i. 3 • •

• 177

xi. 22 .

358

xi. II, 12 . 100, 318

iii. 23 .

• • 244

i. 9 . .

. 248

xi. 23 .

265

xi. 19, 50, 191, 213

iii. 23, 25

. . 242

i. 14. .

. 230

xi. 24 .

321

xi. 21, 22 . . 276

iii. 27, 28

..38

i. 17. .

231. 244

xi. 33 •

357

xii. 1-26 . . 267

iii. 29

• 30<9, 335

i. 20-23 .

. 261

xi. 34 .

299

xii. 18 . . . 318

iv. 4 .

. • 315

i. 21 . .

. 183

xi. 36, 48, 50

100,

xii. 22-25 ■ • 327

iv. 4, 5 .

60, 179, I >4

i. 21-23

. 310

357

xii. 26, i3, 24, 25,

iv. 9 .

• . 175

i. 24, 25, 28 . 265

xii. I . . 222, 263

280, 357

iv. 19.

• • 3 ' 7

i. 25 . 54, 210, 238,

xii. 2

• 52

xii. 28 . . . 242

iv. 22-24.

. . 291

261, 313, 359

xii. 20 .

. 250

xiii. 3 . . . 164

v. 2 .

• . 245

i. 28. . . 204, 268

xiii. I .

301, 358

xiii. 9 . . . 215

V. 6 .

. 246. 250

i. 30. .

. 248

xiii. 8 .

. 250

xiii. 9, 10 . . 338

V. 12 .

. . 228

ii. 4-6 .

357, 365

xiii. 9, 10

. 214

xiii. II . . 178, 183

V. 13 .

• 75, 122

ii. 12

232, 276

• xiii. 10, 55

. 236

xiii. 12 . . . 338

V. 17 .

. . 121

ii. 14, 15

• 239

xiii. 14 .

• 77

XV. 3, 4, 12 . 179

vi. 3 •

. . 263

ii. 21, 22

• 293

xiv. and xv

1-3. 78

XV. II . . . 157

Eph. i. 5 .

. . 123

ii. 26

• 358

-xiv. 2-21

. 6i

XV. 21, 49. . 121

ii. i-iS

. . 117

iii. 5 • •

. 265

xiv. 21 .

• 77

XV. 22 . . . 51

ii. 2 .

. . 358

iii. 12 .

. 184

XV. 4

173, 207

XV. 33 . . . 268

ii. 11-22

• 309. 336

iii. 13 .

. 258

XV. 8

. 242

XV. 33-35 • • 318

ii. 12, 19

, 20 . 191

iii. 21 .

. 185

xvi. 27 .

• 359

XV. 35-53 • • 179

ii. 14 .

. . 302

iv. 3 . .

• 343

I Cor. i. 3 .

• 115

XV. 40 . . . 210

!!!■ " •

■ ■ 51

iv. II .

2'^2

i. 19, 20

• 241

XV. 47 . . 164, 319

111. 14-if

) . . 51

iv. II, 12

• 199

i- 23, 24, 4

8 . ■.26

XV. 47-49 • • 157

iv. 2. 3

. . 307

iv. 15 .

■ 217

i- 23, 35

. 190

XV. 50-53 .118, 198

iv. 2-7

. . 1S2

iv. 17 .

• 356

i. 24, 49

. 253

XV. 50-59 . . 231

iv. 3 .

189

iv. 25 .

164, 232

ii. 8. .

. . 204

XV. 54, 55- • 59

iv. II

240

V. 3. 4 •

• 53

ii. 13 .

• 335

XV. 56 . . . 59

iv. 22—2

\ ■ ■ ?il

V. 5 . . 4S, 49, 18S,

ii. 14 .

• 339

2 Cor. i. 4 . . . . 268

v.'e". "

. . 1 -• I

236, 33S

ii. 15 •

. 100

i. 20 ... 185

v. 8 .

. • 275

V. 8-10 ... 358

iii. 1-3 .

. 192

i. 23 ... 248

V. 12 .

J 00

V. 12

. 318

iii. 9

. 156

ii. 3- • • ■ 338

v. 28, 29

. . 207

V. 12, 19

• 303

iii. 17 . 140, 204,

iii. 2, 3 . . 213

V. 31. 32

. ISO, 287

V. 14 .

. 186

222, 259

iii. 5, 6. . . 212

vi. 13.

• . • 353

V. ig .

. 121

iii. 21 . . . 206

iii. 6 . . . 241

vi. IS.

. . ■ 335

V. 20

217, 241

iv. 10 .

. 226

iii. 15, 16 . . 184

Phil. i. 8 .

. . . 24S

vi. 4. .

■ 243

iv. 15 •

318, 335

iii. 16 . . . 195

i. iS .

. . . 203

vi. 6 .

20S, 211

iv. 16 .

• 305

iv. 4 . . . 264

ii. 5-8

. . . 115

vi. 9 .

. 181

V. I .

. 296

iv. 6 . . . 274

ii. 6 . 1

60, 203, 315

vii. 2, 3 .

. . 212

V. 5. .

• 304

iv. 16 . . 52, 63

ii. 6, 7

. . . 186

vii. 5

. . 1S2

V. 6. .

• 54

iv. 18 . . 52, loi

ii. 9-11

. . 302

vii. 7 .

. . 250

V. 7 . .

. • 243

V. 13 . . . 293

iii. 8 .

. • • .'32

vii. 7-13

. . 217

V. 8. .

. . 336

V. 13-15 . . 192

iii. 13

. . . 2»3

vii. 12, 13

. . 241

vi. 7.4.

. 166

V. 14-1S . . 182

iii. 15

. . . 180

vii. 24, 25

.121, 303

vi. 11-20

. . 63

V. 16 . . . 178

iii. 19

. . . 170

viii. 2 .

. 122, 230

vi. 12 .

. 61

V. 17 . . . 243

iv. 1 .

• • • 293

viii. 3 .

. . 208

vi. 13 .

. . 61

V. 21 . . 209, 211

Col. ii. 5 .

. . . 156

viii. 3. 4

. 242

vi. 19 .

• . 259

vi. 11 . . . 188

ii. 8 .

. . . 52

viii. 8, 9

. 182

vii. 1-7.

. . 63

vii. 5 • • • 293

ii. 15 .

. . . 231

viii. 10, II

• • 319

vii. 3 .

. . 291

i.x. 7 . . . 194

ii. 16, 17

. 1 63, 231

viii. 20 .

. . 48

vii. 4 .

. 284. 291

X. 12 . . . 290

335

viii. 23 .

. . 181

vii. 5, 6

. 166, 330

xi. 2, 3. 213. 2l3,

ii. 17 .

. . . 238

viii. 20 .

• • 55

vii. 14 .

. . 63

290

iii. 1, 2

. . . iSi

viii. 20, 35

• • 45

vii. 31 .

. 62

xi. 3. . . . 268

iii. 5 •

. . . 310

Rom. viii. 29 .

. 48, 49

vii. 36 .

. 338

xi. 23 . . . 293

iii. 0, 10

. . . 51

viii. 30 .

. . 307

vii. 38 .

• 330

xii. 7 . . . 358

iii. 9-: I

• . • 317

viii. 32 .

. . 276

viii. I .

■ 217

xii. 7-9. . . 279

iii. ID .

. . . I SO

666

THE ANTI-MANICH.+:AN WRITINGS: INDEX OF TEXTS.

r \GE

PAGE

Col. iii. 25

• 359

I Tim.

iv. 3, 4

. . 261

2 Tim. iii. 8 .

. . 204

I Pet. iii. 17 .

• • 279

1 'J'hess. iii. 10

. 156

iv. 3-5

• • 330

iv. 4 .

• 157, 215

iii. 21

■ 244

2 'I'hess. i. 5 .

■ 279

iv. 4 121

210, 358

iv. 14 .

. 228

iv. 17, iS

276, 279

I 'I'im. i. 5. .

. . 164

iv. 8 .

. . 61

Tit. i. 12 . .

• 239

2 Pet. ii. 4. .

■ 358

i. 8. .

. 288

V. C .

. 96, 100

i. 15 . 61,

168, 170,

I John i. 5 .

• 274

i. 15 .

. 225

V. 23 .

. . 61

233

, 320

i. 9. .

I2g

i. 17 .179

.271,356

vi. 4 .

• • 243

i. 16 . .

• 331

ii. 1, 2.

. 242

i. 20 .

279. 304

vi. 10 .

. 51, 120

iii. 5 • •

181

ii.- 15 .

ii. 1-4.

• 194

vi. 16 .

■ 253- 359

Heb. i. 3 . .

iii. 2 .

283, 33^

ii. 5 .

. 225

2 Tim.

ii. S .

157, 164.

iii. 5- •

2gS

iii. 15 .

• 247

iii. 7 •

• 294

179. 315

James i. 17

356

iv. 3 .

. 164

iv. 1-3

. 328

ii. 16-18

. . 162

iv. i:; .

266

v. 20 . .

. 164

iv. 1-4 ■

. 219

ii. 24, 25

. . 120

I Pet. ii. 4-8 .

214

Rev. iii. 19

. 276

iv. 2 .

. 260

iii. 5 •

• • 243

ii. 9, 10

303

xix. 10 .

. 262

THE ANTI-DONATIST WRITINGS.

INDEX OF SUBJFXTS.

AARON, 469, 591-593-

Aaron's sons, 444.

Abel, 422.

Abiram, 444. 528.

Abitini (.Avitini), 507.

Abraham, 422, 461, 527, 534, 537,

552, 56?, 579, 622, 628.
Abraham's seed, 534, 535, 53S, 547,

54S, 550.
Absalom, 645.
Absentius. 520.
Academics, 606, 607.
Acesius. 440.
Adam, 421, 647.

Adelphius, bp. of Thasbalte, 497.
Adrumetum (Hadrumetum), 4S4.
Africa, 426, 431, 433. 436, 437, 450,

483, 496, 526, 527, 528, 531, 543,

545. 550, 555, 577, 59i, 595, 598.

600, 608, 622, 627, 638, 642, 644,
645, 650.

African, 524, 544, 588, 595, 608, 609,

615, 622, 62S.
Africa Proconsularis, 505, 506, 507.
Aggya (Aggiva, Aga), 507.
Agrippinus, bp. of Carthage, 425,430,

431, 432, 436, 437, 440, 446, 450.
Ahab, 578, 647.
Alleluia (Liturgical). 570.
Amen (Liturgical), 570.
Amnittcura (Bamacorra), 496.
Anastasius, bp. of Rome, 561.
Ammedcra, 496.
Antichrist, 445, 456, 485. 488, 493,

504, 507, 510.
Antonianus, 449.
Apollos, 521, 552,617, 624, 625.
Archives, 524, 527, 538. 579, 581,

608, 615, 626, 627.
Arianism, 581, 649.
Arians, 633.
Arius, 442, 633, 650.
Aries, 487.
Asher, 421.

Assuras(Assavre), 433, 507, 523, 524.
Augustin, 411, 425, 438, 460, 472,

473, 475- 476. 487. 490. 492. 493-
519, 522, 530, 539, 584, 596, 600,

601, 603 604, 608, 616, 619, 621,

651.
Aurasius, Mt., 484.

Aurelius, bp. of Chullabi. 501, 509.

Aurelius, bp. of Utica, 501.

Ausafa, 508.

Ausuaga, 503.

Aymnius, bp. of Ausuaga, 503.

Baui^, 489.

Bagai (see Council of), 643.

Banto, 608.

Baptism :

can be given outside, 411, 412,
424.

apostates retain, 411, 412.

retained by schismatics and her-
etics, 412, 446, 489, 502, 512.

profit of, only in the Church,

413. 441, 447. 50<p. 514. 527;
rightly received only in Catholic

Church, 413, 483, 484. 488,

489. 505, 647.
exists, but not rightly received

among Donatists, 413.
sin of receiving it outside, 414.
each Donatist sect claims the

true, 415.
relation to sonship, 417.
relation to remission of sins,

419. 440, 441, 450.

grace of may continue with con-
stant sin, 420.

temporary experience of grace
by wicked, 420.

in view of death, 420.

not property of man, but Christ,
424, 438, 440, 454, 4S4. 501.
502, 545, 550, 554, 613, 615.

universal administration and re-
ception, 430.

required by the Church for ad-
mission to her altar, 434.

unbaptized left to the mercy of
God, 434.

water of, not polluted by man,

439. 440, 473-
relation of doctrinal belief to,

441. 442, 457. 458.
made valid by the formula, 442,

495. 530-
not corrui)tible by men, 447.
as administered by the evil within

and without, 44S, 4S3, 4S5.

Baptism:

distinction between rite and

grace of, 448, 449-462. 472.

474, 475. 476, 505. 507. 5i<J-

532.
relation of the bad within and

the bad without, to, 451-460.
relation of character of minis-

trant and recipient to, 453,

456. 457, 474, 481. 490. 5o(>.

520, 521, 522, 531, 551, 554.

590. 595, 601, 602, 622.
formula of, 449, 456, 487, 495,

545, 550. 591. 616, 620, 623.
for salvation within the Church,

for judgment without, 453,

454, 4S0, 507.

martyr, 458, 542, 543.
water of. not adulterous among

heretics, 45S.
penitent thief not baptized with

water, 460, 461, 462.
infant, 461, 462, 589.
exists outside of unity, 464.
not invalidated by heretics, 464.
not justly or lawfully possessed

by heretics, 466, 504.
equality of, 469.
not to be repeated, 469.
the same everywhere, 470.
Noachic, 477, 47S.
untruth of among heretics, 4S4,

485. 503-

rite not lost by sin, 486.

threefold nature of, 4S7, 488.

unsanctified water of, 491.

by the dead, 494, 523.

water of compared with rivers of
I'aradisf, 501.

asonc,nott\vo,503. 50S. 545, ^.\().

necklace of the Bridegroom, 503.

Marcion's, 504.

lawfully ^ivcn only in the
Church, 503, 508.

validity <>f mock, 512, 513.

validity of all, 513.

as to way of cleansing one ignor-
antly polluted, 520.

by wicked ministrant most desir-
able according to l>onatists,
522, 523, 619, 6211, 621.

66S

THE ANTI-DONATIST WRITINGS: INDEX OF SUBJECTS.

Baptism;

Christ alone given of g:race, 531.
relation to origin, head and root,

531, 617, 622. 623, 624.
truth or falsity of Catholic, 545,

546, 547-
meaning of formula, 550. 551.
three grades of consecration,

547-550.
water of guilty, abandoned by

the Holy Spirit, 589.
recognition of Donatist, 595.
how cleanse one baptized by a
defiled but unknown con-
science ? 604 sqq.
ministrant to be examined. 609.
if dependent on man, is a glory-
ing in man, 609, 610.
perished from the world through

the tniditors, 616.
requires both the rite and the

gospel, 626.
man not the justifier, but God
646.
Barjesus, 616.
Basilica, 433, 525, 540, 564, 579,

582, 615. 643.
Beatitudes, 565-567.
Bede, 427.
Biita, 483.
Bingham, 460.

Bizica Lucana (see Buslaceni).
Bobba (Obba), 503.
Boniface, 633, 635, 651.
Bulla (Vulla), 506.
Burug (Buruc, Borca), 494.
Buslacene (Cussaceni, Bizica I.ucana,

Byzacium), 439, 507.
Byzacium (Byzacene) the ecclesiasti-
cal province, 487, 493, 495, 497,
499, 501, 502, 503, 504, 505, 507,
508, 509.
Byzacium, the capital (see Buslacene).

Cabarsussum, 433.

Caecilian, 534, 536, 545, 578, 598,

608, 623, 634, 635, 636, 637, 639.
Csecilius, bp. of Bilta, 4S3.
Caiaphas, 547.
Cain, 422.
Calama, 588, 626.
Caldonius, 473.
Canaanite, 647.
Canon, as to holy orders of penitents,

649.
Capse. 507.
Caracalla, 578.
Carneades, 606.
Cartenna, 572.
Carthage, 412, 426, 433, 510, 578,

634- 635, 639.
Cassianus, 586, 587.
Cassius, bp. of Macomades, 492, 493.
Castus, bp. of Sicca, 438.
Castra Galbse, 486.
Catechumen, 441, 459, 460, 624.
Catholic :

he is, who intended to be though

baptized outside, 413.
denial of remission to Donatist

baptism. 419.
some things not Catholic within
the Cliurch, 508.

Catholic:

traditors 500, 506, 527, 532,

535, 538. 541, 542, 547, 548,

552, 563, 569. 574, 5S9, 591.

594, 599, 626.

persecutors 527, 534, 535, 536,

537. 539, 541, 566, 568, 570,

571, 587-
ordination denied b\' Donatists,

538.

meaning of, 554, 555.

spiritual adultery of, 563.

covetousness, 564, 587, 588, 646.

recognition of Donatist ordina-
tion, 648.

relation to Cyprian, 411, 436.

commendation of good in all
outside and correction of dif-
ferences, 420.

denial of baptism as Donatist
property, 421.

Donatists deny to have bap-
tism, 465, 525, 527.

restoration of errant by imposi-
tion of hands, 492.

prays for Donatist, 519.

dead through traditors, 525,

532, 533-

charges Donatist with schism
only, 528.

is a betrayer and deceiver, 538.

is apostate and rejected, 539.

should imitate Saul, the perse-
cutor, 541.

is without peace, 542.

is defiled through traditors,

544. 589-
gives martyr baptism to the

Donatists, 542.
baptism only an imitation, 547.
seeks conversion of Donatists,

554-
accused of falsehood, 563.
is a violator of God's laws, 564,

565.
uses only the sword of the Spirit,

566, 567.
accused of Phariseeism, 567.
is without charity, 569.
denies being traditor, 585.
does not order the use of civil

power, 585. _
receives Donatists by fellowship,

595-
recognized Donatists from out-
set, 650.
Cedias, 488.

Charity, as note of the Church, 417,
423, 424, 425, 426, 443, 444, 445,
452, 458, 4S1, 482, 499, 500, 511,
562, 569, 570.
Chrism, sacrament of, 592.
Christ :

as baptizing with the Spirit, 504.
significance of His life, 553.
sole object of faith, 617.
(see under Baptism, Church, etc.)
Christian, regenerate yet sinful, 647.
Chullabi (Cululi), 509.
Church :

the fruitful root, 405.
recognizes what is good outside,
416, 446, 498, 504, 547.

Church:

the heaier, 416.
one only and Catholic, 417.
alone possesses effects of bap-
tism, 419, 420.
characters illustrating it, 421.
antiquity of, 421.
historical struggle between car-
nal and spiritual, 421.
mother of the good, 422.
African, 423, 650.
statutes of universal, 426.
purism, 429, 476, 502, 542.
admits rebaptized after penance,

434-
perpetuity, 436.
alone binds and looses, 443.
no gifts outside of, 444.
commixture, 4:7, 448, 452, 455,

456, 477, 485, 490, 492, 511,

546, 555, 570. 598, 627.
compared with Paradise, 447.
bad outside of, and bad inside

distinguished, 451-455, 460.
the great house, 455, 511, 512.
wicked, although members, have

no part in, 458.
Roman, 475. 561.
true membership figuratively set

forth, 477, 490, 493, 502, 503,

509, 51 1-.

true purgation of, 479, 480.

holy, 480.

contamination theory, 500, 501,
506, 513, 514, 543, 544, 550,
551, 555, 556, 614, 615.

l^iide of Christ, 506.

built on the rock, 507, 508, 595.

the body of Christ, 511.

not hidden, 548, 549,

Ephesian, 561.

Jerusalem, 561.

where to be found, 562.

owner of all property, 564, 644.

the Head of. 617.

purification of, gradual, 647.

dispenser of justification by
Christ, 647.

(See under Baptism, Catholic
Charity, Peace, Toleration,
Unity, Universality.)
Cibaliana (Cybaliana), 505.
Cicero, 606.
Circumcelliones, 528, 537, 540, 541,

555, 559, 565, 570, 573. 574, 575,
576, 5S0, 582, 586, 633, 637, 638,
639. 640, 643, 648.
Cirta (see Constantina), 519, 626.
Clarus, bp. of Mascula, 509.
Clergy :

many reprobate, 510, 511.
orders among, 614.
corrupt morals among, 615.
relation to sacraments, 625, 626.
Commixture (see Church).
Conference, of Carthage, 4S8, 635,

644, 647.
Confessions of Augustin, 604.

of Milan, 432.
Conscience, freedom of, 572, 573,

574-
Constantina (see Cirta), 4S7, 520,
527, 588, 615, 627.

THE ANTI-DONATIST WRITINGS: INDEX OF SUBJECTS.

669

Constantine, emperor, 440, 4S7, 580,

5S1, 582, 587, 6o3. 635.
Constantius, emperor, 579. 582.
Contamination (see Church).
Conversions, 645.
Cornelius, the centurion, 416, 460,

434. 541-
Correction :

vindicated, 526, 571-575. 583.
5S4, 635 sqq., 639, 640.

merciful intent of, 587, 588.

Scripture proofs, 636, 637, 642.

difference of view among Catho-
lics at first, 642, 643.

intended to restrain violent Don-
atists, 643.

without capital punishment, 643.

many conversions, 644.

duty of, for salvation, ()45, 646.

seeks to bring back those who
have stamp of King, 64S.

aims to impart life, 648.

the treatise on, 651.

(see Persecution.)

Council :

African, 416, 439, 450.

Aries, 431, 432, 442, 580, 636.

authority of, 427.

of Bagai, 412, 415, 430, 432,
433. 437. 523. 524. 525, 526,
532, 533, 557. 561, 613, 615,
650.

Cabarsussis, 412.

of Carthage, Agrippinus, Cyp-
rian, etc , 425, 426, 427. 429,
431, 432, 436, 437, 438, 450,
460, 478, 479, 481, 499, 506,
612, 643.

Cirta, 487.

Constantinople, 5thoecum., 634.

Donatist traditor, 500.

Hippo, 604.

Milevis, 486.

Nice, 423. 427, 430, 431, 432,
436, 439, 440, 449, 450, 465,
471, 472, 474, 479, 480, 4S3,

496, 505, 507. 513-
Plenary, of whole world, 416.
Rome, 580, 635, 650.
Sirmium, 457.

Covenant :

old and new, 421, 422.

Crescens, bp. of Cirta, 487.

Cretan prophet, 547.

Crispinus, bp. of Calama, 573, 5S8.

Cuiculi, 508.

Cussaceni (see Buslacene).

Custom, 430, 507, 509.
(see Rebaptism.)

Cutzupitani (Cutzupitoe), 595.

Cyprian, bp. of Carthage, 411, 423,
424, 425, 426, 427. 428, 429. 430,
431, 432, 434. 436, 437, 438, 439.
440, 443. 444. 445. 446, 447, 448,
449, 450, 451. 452, 454, 455. 45^),
458, 459, 463, 464. 465. 468, 471,
472, 473. 474, 475. 476, 477. 478,
479, 480, 481, 483. 4S4, 485- 487,
489, 491, 492. 495. 496. 497, 498,
499, 500, 501, 502, 503. 504, 505.
506, 507. 508, 5". 512, 513, 514-

Cyprian, bp. of Chubursicubur, 613.

Daniel, 447, 555, 577, 534, 585,

593, 635. ^40.
Darius, 640.
Dathan, 422, 444, 528.
Dativus, bp. of Badia;, 489.
David, 54S, 558, 560, 591, 612,

645, 649.
Decius, emperor, 578, 5S1.
Demetrius, bp. of Lesser Leptis, 497.
Diagoras, 606.
Digest of acts of the conference,

635- _
Diocletian, emperor, 57S, 581.
Dionysiana, 503.

Discipline, necessity of, 598, 599.
Domitian, emperor, 578, 581.
Donatists:

appeal to Cyprian, 411, 427,

428, 432.
points of agreement and dis-
agreement with Catholics, 412.
guilty of schism and separation.
413, 414, 500, 520, 527, 534,
538, 545, 548, 568, 583, 586,

558, 628.

can confer baptism but not

rightly, 414.
internal schisms, 415, 433.
the genuine, 415.
refuted by receiving Maximi-

anists, 415, 433, 437, 529,

615, 650.
claims to be the Catholic Church,

41S, 556, 557- 563. 564-

claim power of remission, 418.

wrong to condemn unknown
sins, 421.

lack charity, 421.

theory of the perishing of the
church, 42S, 429, 430, 463.

no communion with apostolic
churches, 428, 530, 561.

traditors, 429, 626, 627.

no ground for separation, 429.

their self-will, 429, 430, 432.

rebaptism refuted by recogniz-
ing Ma.ximianist baptism, 430,
465, 466, 523, 524.

contamination theory refuted,

432. 437. 513, 514-
exhorted to return, 433-435.
theory of purism, 437, 524, 527,

530, 531, 538, 555. 556, 558.

559. 589. 592. 593, 594. 647-
appeal to the state, 437, 563,

573- 579, 643-
traditor charge unproved, 437,

524, 534. 535-

cause vacated by non-rebaptism
of returning heretics, 463.

leaders written to by Augustin,
519.

are persecutors, 523, 525, 528,
537. 538, 540, 541, 562, 563,
575, 576, 635, 640, 642, 643,
644.

charge that Catholics are dead
refuted by .Maxirtiianist re-
turn, 525, 532.

not in communion with univer-
sal church, 526, 562.

conceal their books from Catho-
lics, 526.

Donatists:

are slanderers, 527, 536, 548.

5S9. 635-

shun debate, 530.

deny the .Scriptures, 533.

as martyrs, 533, 534, 543, 560,
567, 575. 576, 577. 637, 638,
645.

affect prophecv, 536.

deny Catholic ordination, 538.

are limited in numbers and
place, 538, 555, 557, 558.

recognize baptism as given by
Optatus, 546.

require absolute purity of priest-
hood, 547. 593, 594.

protest against Catholic seeking,
554-

contemn Catholic baptism as
Judas's baptism, 557.

views of Catholic priesthood,
560.

condemn all nations unjustly,
566.

profess to love the Catholics, 569.

claim to be followers of the per-
secuted Apostle, 569.

violate parables, 570, 597, 598.

are heretics, 569, 585.

accuse world of being the tares,

577- _
complain falsely about persecu-
tion, 585.
appeal to Julian, 5S6, 587.
charged with covetousness, 588.
in Rome, 595.
in .Spain 595.

ready to listen to slanders, 602.
use regular formula, 623.
as to belief in the Trinity, 633.
history of their schism, 634, 635.
reject the baptism of apostolic

churches, 639.
receive wholesome compulsion,

642.
deny their own acts, 645.
Donatulus, bp. of Capse, 507.
Donatus, bp. of Carthage, 411, 413,
414, 415, 416, 417, 425, 420,
432, 433, 436, 500. 521. 524,
526, 528, 536, 537, 53S. 541,
555. 563, 5f>7. 57^\ 574. 5S7.
58S, 595. 59^'- 59^, 600, 602,
608, 622, 623, 625, 633, 634,
63S, 639, 64G, 650.
Donatus, bp. of Casx- Nigra;, 650.
bp. of Cibaliana, 505.
the martyr, 5 78.

Egypt, 447, 501, 502, 604.

Elijah, 468, 540, 579.

Emeritus, 572.

Enoch, 422.

Envy, Cyprian's treatise, 451, 452.

Esau, 418, 421, 422, 470.

Eucharist, 4S3, 543.

Eucratius, bp. of 1 heni. 495.

Eugenius, bp. of .\nimedera, 496.

I-'.unomius, 442. 650.

I-^uphrates, 490.

Kusebius, 573.

Exorcism, 483, 496, 497, 562.

Ezekicl, 446, 593.

670 THE ANTI-DONATIST WRITINGS: INDEX OF SUBJECTS.

Faustinus, 573.

Holy Spirit:

Lactantius, 606.

Faustus, bp. of Timida Regia, 505.

flees deceit, 475, 546, 610, 61 r

Lamasba, 508.

Felicianus, bp. of Miisti, 412, 415,

613.

Lambnese, 486, 493.

433. 466, 523. 525, 532, 561. 573,

sm against, 564, 565, 633, 650,

Fares, 492.

615.

651.

Law, of God as known by Satan

,560.

Felix, bp. of Ammacura, 496.

abandons water of the guilty.

Laws, imperial, 526, 559, 642,

646.

bp. of Bagai, 488.

589-

new, 644.

bp. of Buslacene, 439, 507.

sign but not reality outside of

proconsular, 525.

bp. of Gurgites, 508.

the Church, 651.

of Theodosius, 643.

bp. of Marazana, 503.

Honoratus, bp. of Tucca, 439, 509.

Leah, 422.

bp. of Migirpa, 485.

Honorius, bp. of Milevis, 615.

Leptis, lesser, 497.

bp. of Uthina, 494.

Horreas Celiac (Cselire), 507.

magna, 510.

Firmiani, 572, 573.

Ilortensianus, bp. of Lares, 492.

Liberalis, 474.

Firmus, 574.

Hostanes, 498.

Libosus, bp. of Vaga, 439, 495

Foreknowledge, 448, 478.

Litteus, bp. of Gemelli, 510.

Foreordination, 448.

Iambus, bp. of Germaniciana, 502.

Liturgy, Alleluia, q. v.

Forgiveness, 501.

Imposition of hands, Holy Spirit

amen, q. v.

(See Remission of Sins under

given by, 442.

consecration of water, 547,

548.

Baptism.)

Iren?eus. bp. of Ululi, 505.

chant, 546.

Fortunatus, 58S, 615.

Isaac, 421, 422, 461.

Gothic, 584.

Fortunatus, Catholic bp. of Con-

Isaiah, 612.

Lord's prayer, 422, 561,

591,

stantina, 520.

Ishmael, 418, 421, 422.

647.

bp. of Thuccabori, 489.

Israel, 647.

Lotophagitis, 487.

Furius, 606.

Lucianus, bp. of Rucuma, 502.

Furni, 505.

Jacob, 421, 422.

Lucifer, bp. of Calaris, 649.

Jacob's sons, 418.

Lucilla, 595.

Garra (see Gor).

Jader, bp. of Midila, 502.

Lucius, bp. of Ausafa, 508.

Garriana, 501.

James, head of the church at Jeru-

bp. of Castra Galbae, 486.

Gaul, 615.

salem, 561.

bp. of Membresa, 506.

Gazaufala (Gazophyla), 509.

Januarius, 573, 625.

bp. of Thebaste, 496.

Gemelli, 510.

bp. of Lambasse, 486, 493.

Geminius, bp. of Furni, 505.

bp. of Muzuli, 497.

Macarians, 555, 556, 55S.

Gerba, 4S7.

bp. of Vicus Csesaris, 493.

Macarius, 536, 555, 556, 558,

578,

Germaniciana nova, 502.

Jeremiah, 442, 590, 612.

580, 582, 583, 608.

Geta, 578, 581.

Jezebel, 577.

Maccabees, 533, 534, 577, 580.

Gildo, 433, 523, 543, 546, 550, 554,

Job, 560, 593.

Macedonius, 650.

573, 583, 589-

John, 419, 473, 4S3, 4S8, 509, 510,

Macomades, 492.

Gor (Gorduba), Garra, 501.

547, 593. 594, f'i2.

Mactaris (Macthari), 499.

Gorduba (see Gor).

as head of the church at Ephe-

Magnus, 482, 510.

Gurgites, 508.

sus, 561.

Manichreans, 528, 601, 604, 608.

Gyrnmarcelli (see Marcellianus).

the Baptist, 461, 469, 470, 530,

Manichaeus, 528, 539.

542, 549, 550, 553, 578, 610,

Maranus, 484.

Hadrumetum, 507.

612, 613, 626.

Marazana, 503.

Hagar, 422, 636, 637.

John's baptism, 461, 462, 463, 468,

Marcelliana (Gyrnmarcelli), 507

Ham, 422.

469, 470, 626.

Marcellinus, 578.

Hearers (among Manichiieans), 604.

Christ's submission to, 467.

Marcellus, bp. of Zama. 504, 505.

Heathen, 64S.

repeated by Apostles, 551, 552.

Marcianus, bp. of Aries, 4S7.

Heliogabalus, 578.

different from Christ's, 553, 554.

Marcion, 442, 504.

Heresy:

Josiah, 640.

Marcionist, 504.

has none of the notes of the

Jubaianus, 426, 432, 434, 436, 437,

Marculus, 536, 541, 576.

Church, 493,

438, 439, 440, 444, 446, 447,

Marcus, bp. of Mactaris, 499, 500.

in relation to forgiveness, 501.

462, 463, 481, 482, 487, 510,

Martyrdom, 458. 460, 543.

no power to loose or bind, 503.

511-

(See under Baptism and Donatists.)

adultery, 503.

Judas, the betrayer, 422, 466, 506.

Mascezel, 433.

synagogue of Satan, 506.

533, 535. 539, 542. 543. 556,

Mascula, 509.

of the Devil, 506.

557, 559. 560, 593, 613.

Massylii, 487.

Antichrist, 507.

Julian, emperor, 573, 5S0, 581, 582,

Matthias, 533, 539.

has baptism but to destruction,

587.

Mauritania Caesariensis, 426,

472,

509.

Julianus, bp. of Telepte, 505.

484. 488, 497, 501, 503,

506,

necessary, 633, 634.

bp. of Marcelliana, 507.

507, 572, 573-

Hermes Trismegistus, 498.

Junius, 474.

Maximian, emperor, 578, 581.

Hezekiah, 640.

Junius, bp. of Neapolis, 5 to.

Maximianists 412, 415, 430,

432,

Hippo, 519, 573, 588.

Justification, obtained only in the

433, 437, 465, 513, 523,

524,

Hippo Diarrhytus (Hippozaritus),

church, 647.

525, 526, 528, 529, 532,

538,

508.

540, 542, 557, 558, 563,

564,

Hippo Regius, 488.

King, defender of the faith, 578.

573, 613, 615, 639, 650.

Hippozaritus (see Hippo Diarrhytus)

helper of church, 579, 580.

Maximianus, 412, 415, 430,

432,

HoHness, relation to innocence, 559,

as persecutor and corrector,

433, 523, 525, 532, 538,

557.

560.

584, 585.

558, 563, 564, 573, 613,

615,

Holy Spirit:

coerces as part of loyalty to

639, 650.

of discipline, 419.

Christ, 640.

Catholic bp. of Bagai, 643

received only in the Church,

of Nineveh, 640.

Maximus, 473, 474.

442, 443, 475, 548, 650.

Korah, 444, 528.

emperor, 608.

THE ANTI-DONATIST WRITINGS: INDEX OF SUBJECTS.

671

Megalius, bp. of Calama, 604.

Membresa, 506.

Meninx, 487.

.Mensurius, 578, 608.

Mesopotamia, 447.

Messianus, 608.

Midila (Midili), 502.

Migirpa (Misgirpa), 483.

Milan, 432, 608.

Mileum (Milevis, Mileve), 488.

Miracles, 443, 562.

Monasticism, 616.

Monnulus, bp. of Girba, 487.

Montenses, 595.

Mopsuesta, 634.

Moses, 421, 55c, 590.

Moses's son, 461.

Musti, 433, 466. 523, 524, 525

Muzuli (.\luzuca,>, 497.

Naboth, 647.

Natalis, bp. of Oea, 510.

Natalitia, 543.

Nathanael, 444.

Nazarenes, 499.

Neapolis, 510.

Neapolitanus, sinus, 484.

Nebuchadnezzar, 583, 584, 636,

640.
Nemesianus, bp. of Tubuniv, 484,

485.
Xero, emperor, 578, 581
Nicodemus, 434.
Nicolaus, 453.

Nicomedes, bp. of Segermi, 4S7.
Noah, 422, 477, 593.
Nova, 506.
Novatian, 440, 487.
Novatus, bp. of Thamugadis, 484.
Numidia, 426, 431, 433, 484, 486,

487. 488, 489, 492, 494, 496,

502, 504, 505, 507, 508, 509,

510. 524-

Obba (see Bobba).

Octavus, 509.

Optatus, a bishop of Augustin's day,

635-

bp. of Milevis, 433,^ 578.
bp. of Thamugadis (Gildoni-
anus), 433, 523. 524. 525,
528, 531, 543, 544; 545. 546.
550, 551, 554. 555, 557, 567,
573. 583. 589. 591. 616.

Paraclete (Petilian), 519.

Paradise, 447, 49". 49C'> 501- 502,
536.

Parmenian, 411.

Passover, 553.

Paul, 418, 425, 426, 439, 441, 445,
450, 451, 452, 454, 455, 458,
459, 467, 469, 480, 483, 484,
497, 499, 503. 504, 505, 511.
521. 529. 530, 541, 547, 552,
554, 562, 563, 569, 581, 593,
598, 604, 609, 617, 619, 622,
623, 624, 625, 626, 641, 642,
644.

Paul, bp. of Bobba, 503.

Peace as note of the church, 426,
444, 491, 538, 633.

Pelagianus, bp. of Luperciana, 502.

Persecution, suffering of, as note of
the church :

what constitutes, 540.

done by the chaff in the church,

541.

God opposed to, 571, 575.

kings as inflicting, 577.

a putting confidence in man,

586.
church should suffer not inflict,

636.
apostles did not inflict, 640.
opposed to liberty of belief, 641.
(See under Catholic Church, Cor-
rection, Donatist.)
Persians, 582.

Peter, 425, 426. 427, 434, 439, 443,

447, 450, 454, 460. 480, 499,

505, 540, 556, 576, 587, 613,

641, 649.

Peter, bp. of Diarrhytus, 508.

Petilian, bp. of Cirta, 519, 520, 530,

539. 545. 556, 593. 595. 59^,

604, 614, 621.
Pharaoh, 579.

Pharisees, 454, 561, 563, 568
Philip, 434, 532, 559, 612.
Philus, L. Furius, 606.
Photinus, 457, 650.
Pilate, 547, 578.
Pilus, 606.
Plato, 498.

Polianus, bp. of Mileum, 48S.
Polycarp, bp. of Adrumetum, 484.
Pompeius, 463, 474, 475, 482, 504.
Pomponius, bp. of Dionysiana, 503.
Puntius, 580, 5 86, 587.
Possidius, 596, 604.
Praetextatus, bp. of Musti, 412, 433,

466, 523, 525, 615.
Priesthood :

righteousness as well as office

necessary, 547.
Donatist, 593.
Primacy:

apostolic superior to episcopal,

426.
in Peter, 426, 480, 499, 561.
Primian, 412, 416, 433, 466, 523,

524, 525, 541, 613.
Privatianus, bp. of Sufetula, 491, 492.
Protagoras, 606.

Pudentianus, bp. of Cuiculi, 508.
Punic, 502.
Pusillus, bp. of Lamasba, 508.

QuiDiAS (Quiza), 488.
Quietus, bp. of Burug, 494.
Quintus, 425, 463, 472, 474, 482.

bp. of .•\ggya, 507.
Quodvultdeus, 611.

Rachel, 422.
Rebaptism :

impious to rebaptize those in
unity, 412, 464

catholics oppose in every case,
412, 413, 419.

established in .\frica by councils
and by influence of Agrippi-
nus and Cyprian, 423. 423,
426, 429, 431, 440, 450, 4(^(),

479. 483 sqq.

Rebaptism:

plenary council (Nice) opposes.
427, 430. 431, 449, 465, 479,
4S0, 483, 4.J7, 505, 507.

Maxinii.inists received without,
430. 433. 526, 613. 615.

Cyprians mistake (see Cyprian),

430, 431-

opposed by custom and tradition,

431, 436, 438 sqq., 449, 430,
463, 472, 475. 479, 483, 495,
500, 506.

fate of those who returned to the

church but were not rebap-

tized, 438, 464.
catholics, falling intoheresv, ami

returning, were not rebaptizcd,

440, 487, 507.
No\atian rebaptized Catholics,

440.
rc!;ition to imposition of hands,

444-

as to the bad within and the bad
without, 449, 430, 473, 488,
489, 493, 494, 502-310, 313.

disliked by schismatics them-
selves, 465.

natural shrinking from, 465.

to be denied even to those de-
serving it, 465.

argument for, from rebaptism of
John's disciples, 468, 470.

opposed by Stephen, 476.

only for heretics outside who re-
turn, 487.

relation to purism, 489, 502,

necessary, because heretics do
not possess and cannot give
the Holy Ghost, 489.

based on commixture, 492.

question between truth and cus-
tom, 495, 496, 509.

based on charactfir of ministrant,

494. 531-
on the ground of the one water,

496, 497.
on bases of unity of God and the

Church, 497, 502, 503, 507,

508.
necessary, because heretics are

worse tiian heathen, 497, 498.
relation to forgiveness, 301.
relation to non-fellowship, 502,

504, 509. 510.
necessary, that heretics may not

do unlawful things, 504.
relation to doctrine, 504, 307.
rite and grace to be distinguished,

508.
necessary, that heretics may not

condemn the church at the

judgment, 509.
the way to true comnumion, 510.
relation to origin, root and head,

521, 33'-
is sin against baptism as Christ s,

546, 595-
Circumceliiones are not subjected
to, 568.
Rebecca, 422.
Remission of sins, (see under l?ap-

tism, ami Rci>.iptism).
Resurrection, 611).

672

THE ANTI-DONATIST WRITINGS: INDEX OF SUBJECTS.

Rogatianus, 586, 5S7.
bp. of Nova, 506.
Rogatus, bp. of Cartenna, 572.
Romanus, 60S.
Rome, 595, 635.
Rucuma, 502.
Kusiccade (Rusicadia), 507, 626.

S.'VBKATI, 510.
Sacraments:

not man's but Christ's, 439, 454.

fruit of, not outside of the
Church, 443, 615, 616.

not polluted, 455.

celebrant does not affect recipi-
ent of, 455.

as rite and as grace, 479.

of Old and New Testament,

552, 553.
Salvianus, bp. of Gazaufala, 509.
Sarah, 422, 636, 637.
Satambei (see Thambei).
Satan, 534, 535, 536, 53S._
Satius (Sattius) bp. of Sicilibba, 501.
Saturn, 532.
Saturninus, 473, 474.

bp. of Abitini, 507.

bp. of Tucca, 504.

bp. of Victoriana, 504
Saul (see Paul).
Schism:

Scripture warnings against, 418.

Scripture persons illustrating,
418.

is hatred of the brethren, 419.

the evil in the Church, belongs
to, 422.

the mother of the bad, 422.

severe punishment of, 417, 429,

444-
compared to adultery, 445, 446.
no salvation for, 465, 545.
sacrilege, 505.
warnings against, 599.
Scripture, misquoted by Donatists,

564, 565-
Secundianus, bp. of Thambei, 509.
Secundinus, bp. of Carpis, 493.

bp. of Cedias, 488.
Sedatus, bp. of Turburbo, 490.
Segermi, 487.
Separation (see Schism).
Seranus, 573.
Severus, emperor, 57S.
Sicca, 438, 495.
Siciliba, 501.
Silvanus, 527, 578, 626, 627.

Simeon, 568.

Simon Magus, baptism of, 417,

418, 419, 422, 443, 453, 460, 4S5,
527, 532, 541, 558, 590, 6i2, 616.
Sirmium, 457.
Sitifa, 635.
Sodom, 415.
.Sodomities, 498.
.Solomon, 484, 494.
Spain, 595.
Splendonius, 615.
Stephen, bp. of Rome, 411, 474,

475, 476, 487, 504.
Successus, bp. of Abbir Germaniciana,

489, 490.
Sufes, 491, 492.
Sufetula, 491.
Susannah, 543.
Synod, African, 563.

Cabarsussum, 433.
Syrtis, Lesser, 487.

Taurinus, 608.

Telepte (Thelepte), 505.

Tenax, bp. of Horrea Celias, 507.

Terrence, 606, 641.

Tertullus, 604.

Thabaca, 494.

Thamogade (Thamugadis), 433, 484.

Thambei (Thambi, Satambei), 509.

Thapsus, 507.

Tharassa, 439, 505.

Thasbalte (Thasvalthe), 497.

Thebaste (Thebeste), 496.

Theni, 495.

Theogenes, bp. of Hippo Regius,

488.
Therapius, bp. of Bulla, 506.
The Three Children, 584, 585, 636
Theodorus of Mopsuesta, 634.
Theodosius, 433, 642.
Thibari (Tabora), 497.
Thubursicubur, 613.
Thuccabori (Tucca Terebrinthina),

489.
Tichonius (Tychonius), 411.
Timida Regia, 505.
Timothy, 569, 593.
Tingitana, 503.
Tinisa (Thinisa), 503.
Toleration, as a note of the Church,

426,428,432, 437, 471, 482, 489,

502, 503, 504, 505, 507, 510, 513,

525, 569, 598.
Tradition, value of apostolic, 430.
Traditor (see under Catholic and
Donatists), 500, 501, 506, 599.

Trajan, emperor, 484, 578, 581.
Trinity (see formula of, under Bap-
tism), 495, 550.
TripoHs, 487, 497, 510.
Tubunre, 484, 485.
Tucca (Thucca), 439, 502, 509.

Ululi (Ullita, Vallita), 515.
Unity as a note of the Church :

doctrine of, 416, 528, 627, 646.
exemplified by Cyprian, 423,
424, 426, 428, 434, 436, 474,
480, 506.
exemplified by Peter, 426.
the one Dove, 443.
exemplified by Stephen, bp. of

Rome, 475.
not to be broken, 552.
would embrace the Donatists,

566.
no righteousness outside of, 64S.
Universality as a note of the Church,
414,506,524, 527, 533, 534, 537,

538.547,548, 554, 555, 556, 557.

568, 574, 575, 583, 598, 599, 600,

622,627, 628,634, 635.
Ursacius, 578, 582, 583.
Urthina, 494.

Vaga, 439, 495
Valens, emperor, 5S1.
Valentinus, 442, 504.
Valerian, emperor, 578, 581.
Vallita (see Ululi).
Varius (Heliogabalus), 578.
Venantius, bp. of Tinisa, 503.
Verulus, bp. of Rusiccade, 507.
Veterans, German, 502.
Victor, bp. of Assuras, 507.

bp. of Gor, 501.

bp. of Octavus, 509.
Victoriana, 504.

Victoricus, bp. of Thabraca, 494.
Vicus Cassaris, 493.
Vincentius, bp. of Cartenna, 572.

bp. of Thibari, 497.
Vulla (see Bulla).

Worship, is as character of worship-
per, 561.

ZACHARI.A.S, 4q8, 536.
Zenophilus, 578, 627.
Zeugitana, 426, 4S3, 489, 490, 493,
494, 495, 502, 505, 506, 507, 508,

524-
Zosimus, bp. of Tharassa, 439, 505.

THE ANTI-DONATIST WRITINGS.

INDEX OF TEXTS.

OLD TESTAMENT.

PAGE

Gen. i. 2 . . . . 4S4

i. 4 . . . . 502

ii. 8-14 ... 447

vi. 3 • • • • 539

ix. 5 • . • • 5S3

XV. 10 . . . 422

.xvi. 6 . . . 636

xvii. 9—14 . . 461

XX. .... 579

xxi. 10 . . . 41S

xxii. 18 . 527. 534,

537. 552, 555-
565, 622
XXV. 24 .
XXV. 29-34
xxvi. 4 .
xxvi. II .
XXX. 3
xxxix., xli.
xlii. 15 .
xlvii.
Ex. ii. 10 .
iv. 24-26.
XX. 13, 15
XX. 13-17
xxxii. .
xxxii. 2S-32
Lev. X. I, 2 .

xvi. .
Num. xvi. . 417,
xvi. 31-35
.xvii. 8 .
Deut. iv. 24 .
xix. 21 .

1 Sam. ii. 25 .

x. 6, 10
xvii. 51
xviii., xix.
xviii. 10
xix. 23
xxvii. .

2 Sam. xii. 12

xviii., xxi
I Kings iii. 26
xviii.
xviii. 21
xviii. 44-40
xxi. .

418
470
634
579
418

579

579
573
579
461

487
564

7, 429
575
444
594

9. 444
524
469

444
577
593
443
523
, etc. 636

417
475
579
549

645
491
540
502

579

578

2 K

Job
Ps.

mgs IV. 13
xviii. 4
xxiii. 4

ii- 3. 4-

xiv. 4, 5

i. I. .

ii. .

ii. I, 2, 10, II

11.

ii.

5S3
524, 534,

9 •
10-12

8 .

I .

■. I .

• 3 •

■• 5 ■
5-7
5-8
6 .

ii.

iii.

xi.

xiv

.\iv

xiv

xiv. 13

XV. 5 .

xvi. 5 .

xviii. 37

xix. 3-6

xi.x. 4 .

xxii. 16-18

.xxii. 16-1S, 2

.xxii. 27 .

xxii. 27, 28

xxiii. .

xxvi. I

x.xvi. S

Xxvii. 14

XXXV. 12

xl. 4 .

xl. 5 .

xlii. 2 .

xliii. I.

xlvi. 9.

1. 14 .

1. 16,

1. iS .

Ii. 5 •
111. 3 .
Ivi. II
ivii. 4 .

579
640

640

560
589
558
560
57S
640

634

556,

622

• 455
. 583

521, 622

600

. 606

424. 561

■ 536
. 526

• 537
529, 53^)

• 477

• 452
. 556
. 637

• 549
557
533
634
556
533
558
600
512
598
495
621

477
641
636

5('7
575
5'U
543
5 89
596
600
589

537.

.28
537.

4-
10

15
32,

Ps. Ivii. II

Iviii. I. .

I.x. II . .

Ixi. 2, 3 .

Ixii. I, 2 .

Ixiii. II .

Ixviii. 6 .
I.x.xii. 8.

l.xxii. II .

Ixxiii. iS .

Ixxiii. 26 .

Ixxxiii. 16

Ixxxiv.

Ixxxvi.

Ixx.xi.x. 32, 33

xciii. I

xcvi. I

ci. 5 •

cv. 15 .

cv. 44 .

cix. 8, 9

cxiii. 3.

cxviii. 3 52

cxviii. 8, 9

cxix, 28

cxix. 42

cxix. 86

cxi.x. 122

c.xx. 6, 7

cxx. 7

cxxii. I

cxxii. 7

cxxxii. 9

cxxxiii.

cxxxii i. I

cx.xxix. 16

cxli. 5. 566

cxliii. 11-15

cxliv. 9 .

cxiiv. II-15
Prov. ii. 22 .
ix. 12
i.x. 18 .
xiii. 22 .
xiii. 24 .
xiv. 9
xiv. 28 .

PAGE
600

• 430
521, 622

414. 595

. 610

526

511, 512
524. 563.

622, 634
640
423
556
529

512
597
432
456

591
558
571
540
557
533
575
622, 634
586, 589

• 477

• 557
. 636

• 557

• 576
. 520

• 512
. 649

• 547

• 591
. 646

422

6X2

493

558
493
556

591,

555.

484, 485

. 484

. 646

641

. 4S6

Prov. xviii. i
xviii. 21
xxiii. 14
xxvii. 6
xxix. 19

'■ 3 •

ii. 2 .
iv. 12
iv. 12, 13

Cant.

VI. 8,
vi. 9

448, 453,
Isa. ii. iS .
xxix. 13
xlvi. 8
Iviii. I
Ixvi. 3
l.xvi. 24
Jer. ii. 21 .
viii. II
XV. 15, 18
XV. 18

xvii. 5 521,
5.97. 609,
-xxxvi.
Ezek. xiv. 14 .

xvi. 17-19
xvi. 51 .
xxiii. II
xxxiv. 4
Dan. ii.-vi.

ii- 35
iii.

iii.-vi.
iii. 5. 29
iii. 29
iv. 2, 3
vi.

445

579
641

591
641

600

477
496
47G, 480,

5'i
. . 480

418, 443,

495, 511

583
51)9

554
526
561
548
493
5^-7
590
442, 612
531. 589-

621,

16
24

Hos.

ii.

ii. 5 .

ii. 5-8

ix. 4 .
yon;ih iii. ()-9
Zech. xiii. 2
.Mal. i. 2, \

555.
577.

44^',

622
429

593
446

49S
432

f'45
584
567
584
5 So
636
640
584
577
593
(>35
593
«;io

444

458

5'"
(.40

5^3
41S

6/4

THE ANTI-DONATIST WRITINGS: INDEX OF TEXTS.

i'AGK

I'AGE

PAGE

PACK

Mai

i. II . • 575. f>34

Matt. x. 16, 2S . . 540

Mark iii. 23 . . . 528

John XV. 2 . . 423, 472

iii. I .... 553

X. 23 . . 539, 622

V. 13 ... 638

XV. 3, 4 . . . 542

AVis

1. i. 5 419, 475, 485,

X. 25 . . . 600

viii. 4 . . . 590

XV. 5 . . 521, 617

546, 610, 611,

X. 28 . . . 589

ix. 38 . . 475, 508

XV. 15 . . . 469

613, 651

.xi. 9, II . . 553

ix 38, 39 . . 416

XV. 22 . . . 650

i. II ... 537

xi. II . . . 467

X. 35-39 • • 542

xvi. 2 577, 581, 640

ii. 24, 25 451, 452

xi. 24 415, 459, 498

xiii. 21 . . . 456

xvii. 12 . . . 532

iii. 6 ... 555

xii. 30 416,454,458,

xvi. 15-18 . . 497

xviii. 10, II . 576

V. I. . . . 647

488, 493

Luke i. II, 13 . . 498

-xix. II . . . 547

ix. 15 479, 499, 647

xii. 31, 32 . . 565

ii. 14 . . . 451

XX. 19, 21 . . 538

X. 20 . . . 646

xii. 32 . . . 650

iv. 9 . . . . 637

XX. 21-23 . • 443

xii. 10 . . . 432

xii. 35 . 522, 531,

VI. 35 . • ■ 603

XX, 22 . 548, 549

xii. 23 . . . 540

618, 622

vi. 37 • • • 490

XX. 22, 23 . . 650

EccI

us. iii. 1 8. . . 43S

xii. 45 . . . 532

viii. 15 . 453, 512

XX. 23 . 418, 474,

XV. 16, 17 . 574

xiii. 17 . . . 553

viii. 28 . . . 613

479,481, 486.

XXX. 23 . . 456

xiii. 23 . . 453, 512

ix. 49, 50 454, 571

503

xxxiv. 25 494,

xiii. 24-30 555, 59S

ix. 50 . . . 416

Acts i. 5 .... 550

531, 622

xiii. 24-30, 36-43

X. 20 ... 562

i. 7, 8 . . . 554

xxxiv. 30. . 522

545

xiv. 22, 23 . . 642

1. 8 557, 562, 565,

2 M

ic. vii. . . . 577

xiii. 28, 25 . 452

.XV. 32 . 554, 648

575, 5S6, 5SS,

vii. 9 • • • 533

xiii. 29 . . 452, 491

xvii. 14 . . . 498

635

Bel.

ukI Drag. 22, 42 640

xiii. 38, 39. 30 570

xxiii. 33 . . . 636

i. 15, ii. 4, X. 44 551

xiii. 47, 48 . 597

xxiii. 34. . . 603

ii. 2-4 ... 548

NEW TESTAMENT.

xiv. 8, 9 . . 578

xxiii. 40, 43 . 426

iv. 32. . . . 646

XV. 14 . . 4S8, 510

xxiii. 43. . . 460

iv- 3^-35 • , 592

Matt

. ii. 16 . . . 577

xvi. 16 . . . 613

xxiv. 36, 45-47 566

v. 3, 4 . . . 620

iii. 6, 13 . . 461

xvi. 18 425, 511, 595

xxiv. 39, 46, 47 568

V. 29 . . . . 574

iii. 7 . . . 610

xvi. 18, 19 447, 509

xxiv. 44-47- - 537

viii. 5-27 . . 444

iii. II. 468, 548, 549

xvi. 19 443, 511,649

xxiv. 46, 47 . 534,

viii. 9-24 . .453

iii. 12. 545, 597, 639

xvi. 25 . . . 588

574, 634

viii. 13 . 417, 443,

iii. 13 . . . 467

xvi. 26 . . . 587

xxiv. 47. 586, 592

485, 590

iii. 14

. . 469

xvii. 14. . . 638

John i. 1-4 . . . 634

viii. 13, 18, 19 460,

iii. 16

. . 468

xviii. 17 . 497, 512

i. 16 . . . . 467

532

iv. 5-7

. . 560

xviii. 19 . . 433

i. 22 . . . . 610

viii. 13, 21 . . 418

iv. 6, 7

• • 575

xviii. 23-35 • 420

i- 27 . . . . 467

viii. 36 . . . 612

V. 3 .

. 588

xix. 21 . . . 592

i. 29 . . . . 468

ix. 1-18 . . . 641

V. 3~9

. 566

xix. 29 . . . 588

i. 32, 33. . . 469

ix. 3-5 . . . 462

v. 9.

• 550

xxi. 25 . . . 553

i. 33 438, 454, 468,

ix. 4 . . . . 474

V. 10 543, 567, 574,

xxi. 43 . . 557, 564

469, 492, 495,

ix. 4, 5 . - - 540

636

xxii. 30 . . 428, 620

504, 522, 530,

ix. 4-1S . . . 541

V. 10-12 . . 600

xxii. 39 . . . 566

621

X 416

V. 12 .

. 600

xxiii. 2, 3. 454, 561,

i. 47 . . . . 444

X. 4, 5 . . . 460

V. 13 .

. 486

564, 601

ii. 15-17 . . 535

X. 44 . . . . 460

V. 14 .

. 548

xxiii. 3 . 479, 522,

iii. 5 434, 460, 484,

XV. 9 . . . . 625

V. 17 . .

. 445

531, 597,

485, 626

xvii. 23, 27, 2S 547

V. 19, 20

■ 564

621, 622

iii. 6 . . 4S4, 485

xvii. 28 . . . 498

V. 20 .

460, 626

xxiii. 13, 15, 23, 24,

iii. 27 467, 505, 547

-xix. 1-7 . . . 552

V. 39 . .

540, 577

27, 28 . . 567

iv. 2 . . . . 625

xix. 3 . • . 626

vi. 10 .

. 561

xxiii. 33-35 . 536

iv. 24 . . . 484

xix. 3-5 . 467, 468

vi. 12 .

• 647

xxiii. 34 . . 526

vi. 44 • - • 573

xxii. 25 . 563, 644

vi- 14, 15

• 490

xxiv. 13 . . 456

vi. 51 . . . 511

x.xiii. 12-33 • 581,

vi. 15 474,489,495,

xxiv. 23 . 414, 538

vii. 24 . . . 430

586

502

XXV. 32, 33 . 597

viii. 44 . . . 535

xxiii. 17-32. . 644

vi. 24 . . . 507

xxv. 34, 41 . 544

ix. 21 . . . 462

xxiv. i. . . . 604

vii. 3 ... 579

XXV. 41. .456,459,

ix. 31 . 473, 506

xxv. II . . . 644

vii. 15 414, 430, 526

539

x. 15 . . . . 641

Rom. i. 32. . . . 594

vii. 15, iC> 538. 569,

xxv. 45 . . . 474

X. 27. . . . 568

ii. I. . . . 475

627

xxvi. J 7 . . 553

X. 37- - . . 535

ii. 4 - - 444. 456

vii. 16 . . . 527

xxvi. 26-29 ■ 511

xi. 51 417, 547, 556

ii- 4, 5 - ■ . 651

vii. 17, 16 522, 531,

xxvi. 52 . . 576

xii. 6. . . . 625

ii. 21 . 452, 475

618, 622

xxvi. 69-75 . 426

xii. 24 . . . 577

ii. 29 . . . 477

vii. 21 . . . 561

xxvii. 4, 5 . . 532

xii. 43 . . . 433

iii. 3. 4 . • 503

vii. 22, 23 488, 562

xxvii. 24 . . 578

xiii. 4-5. . . 467

iii. 17 . 424, 428

bis.,

xxvii. 24-26 . 578

xiii. 10 . 434. 545

iii. 24 . . . 647

vii. 23. 448, 456 /;w.,

xxvii. 26 . . 577

xiii. 10, II . . 542

iii. 26 . . . 538

492, 504

xxviii. 18, 19 . 486

xiii. 27 . . . 467

iv. 3. • • • 537

vii. 24 . . . 490

xxviii. 19 418, 442,

xiii. 34 . . . 423

iv. 5 521. 531, 538,

vii. 24, 26. . 490

487, 495,

xiii. 34, 35 444, 569

614 bis., 617, 621,

vii. 24-27 . . 502

497> 545

xiv. 6 . . 439, 495

622, 625, 646

vii. 26 , . . 595

xxviii. 19, 20 . 550

xiv. 21 . . . 444

iv. II, 3 . . 461

viii. 21, 22 . 532

Mark i. 2 . . . . 553

xiv. 27 . . . 542

iv. 25, 5 . . 522

viii. 29 . . . 613

i- 7 • . . . 553

XV. I, 2 . . . 423

v. 5 . . . . 651

x. 16

. , 568

1. 24. . . 417, 613

XV. 1-5 . . . 445

vi. 9 • • 522, 532

THE ANTI-DON ATIST WRITINGS: INDEX OF TEXTS.

6/5

PAGE

PAGE s

PAGE

PACE

Kom.

vi. 23 .

• 494 1

I Cor. ix. 15 . . . 469

Gal. V. 17 . . . . 566

I Thes. V. 14, 15 . 598

viii. 6 .

488, 494

ix. 17 . . . 625

v. 19-21. 458,470,485

I Tim. i. 5. 443. 467, 479.

viii. 17 .

534

X. I, 2 . . . 552

^'^■, 514, 592, 595

510

viii. 24 .

468

X. II . . . 418

V. 21 . . . . 497

i- 7 ... 542

viii. 28 .

477

X. 13 . . . 428

V. 22, 23 . . . 423

i. 8. . 46O. 562

ix. 5 • •

620

X. 17 . . . 651

vi. I . . . . 477

i. 13. . 449, 450

X. 3 • .

647

xi I ... 569

VI. 2, 3 . . . 599

i. 20 . . . 535

X. 4 . .

467

xi. 16 . . 452, 471

VI. 3 . . . . 625

iii. 10 .

. Oio

X. 10 .

460

xi. 19 . . . 569

vi. 4 . . . . 558

iv. I, 2 .

■ 446

xi. 13 .

469

xi. 29. 467, 559,651

vi. 4, 5 . . . 599

iv. 14 . .

• 594

xii. 3-5 .

648

xii II . . . 443

vi- 5 ■ 544, 552, 586,

v. 6 . .

494. 532

xii. 5

617

xii. 31, xiii. i . 423

615

v. 22 . .

502, 594

xiii. I .

547

xiii. 1, 2 . . 417

vi. 9, 10 . . . 636

2 Tim. ii. 8 . .

469, 626

xiii. 2, .

•

540

xiii. 1,3 . 442, 648

Eph. ii. 6 . . 414, 468

ii. 16-21 .

• 445

xiii. 4 .

572

xiii. 1-8 . . 570

ii. 14. . . . 567

ii. 17 . .

• 454

xiii. 10 .

445

xiii. 2. 417, 513, 562

iii. 4 . . . . 469

ii. 17-20 .

• 455

xiv. 4 .

9. 432

xiii. 3. 423, 458, 588

iv. 1-3 .. . 567

ii. 19 . 456, 477,

xiv. 6 .

448

xiii. 5 • • ■ 453

iv. 2, 3. 417, 423,

598

xiv .12, 13

599

xiii. 6 . . . 572

482, 512,

11. 20. 455, 512/'/^.,

xiv. 14 .

544

xiv. 29, 30. . 431

570. 599

597

I Coi

. i. 10-13

418

XV. 9 • • • 539

iv. 3 429, 489, 648

li. 21 . . . 456

i. 12, 13

556, 598

XV. 12 . . . 476

iv. 3-6 . . . . 484

ii. 24 .

449, 476

i. 12-15

• 469

XV. 13-15 . . 619

iv. 4. 5 • • • 483

ii. 24, 25 .

. 562

i. 13 441,476, 521,

XV. 32 . . 476. 488

iv. 4-6 . 476, 507

ii. 26 .

• 645

622

XV. 32, 33, 12 454

iv. 5 503, 546, 549

iv. 2 .

433, 567

i. 14, 16 . . 626

XV. 33, 32 . . 503

iv. 14 . , . 441

Tit. i. 7 . .

• 444

i. 17 .

. 625

XV. 46 . . . 421

v. 5. 449 iis., 450,

i. 12, 13 .

■ 547

i. 22

. . 642

XV. 54 . . . 647

452, 454

i. 15 • •

. 561

i. 27 .

• 471

XV. 55, 56. . 647

V. 5. 6 . . . 458

i. 16 . .

. 447

i- 30, 31

. . 600

2 Cor. i. II . . . 594

V. S . . . . 602

iii. II . .

• 475

ii. 6-8 .

• • 577

ii. 15 . . 496, 508

V. 23. . . . 651

Heb. ix. 7 . .

• 504

ii. 14 421

441, 457

ii. 15, 16 . . 44X

V. 25, 26 . . 621

xii. 8.

• • 492

ii. 15 •

. . 443

iv. 16 . . . 457

V. 20, 27 . . 448

James i. 17

• • 597

iii. 1-3 .

• • 441

vi. 7, 8. . . 602

V. 27 444, 453, 470,

"l Pet. ii. 20 .

• 574, 5^7

iii. 1-4 .

. . 418

vi. 10 . . . 58S

476, 477, 480,

iii. 15 .

■ . 540

iii. 3

• • 457

vi. 14 . . . 455

503, 511, 647

iii. 20, 21

. • 477

iii. 4, 5

. . 625

vi. 14, 15 . . 556

V. 29. . . . 566

iii. 21 .

. 447. 601

iii. 6, 7 521, 617,

vi. 16 449, 475, 503

vi. 12 ... 602

iv. 8. 423, 434, 490,

624

vii. 5 . . 569, 590

Phil. i. 15, 16. . . 455

043

iii. 7 599, 622, 649

X. 6 . . . . 642

i. 15, 17. . . 511

I John i. 8. . . 593, 647

iii. 17 . . . 512

xi. 2, 3. . . 599

i. 15-18. 452, 571

i. 8. 9. . . 647

iii. 21 . . . 609

xi. 3 . . . 503

i. 16 . . . . 422

ii. 1,2. . . 594

iii. 21 and i. 31 614

xi. 14, 15 . . 538

i. 17, 18. . . 531

ii. 9 . 455, 473.

iii. 21, 23 . . 597

xi. 20, 23 . . 577

i. 18 451, 454. 5"

474. 4S6

iii. 22, 23 . . 646

xi. 26 . . 539, 569

i. 23 . . . . 641

ii. II . . . 419

iv. 1-6 . . . 597

xi. 29 . . . 590

ii. 20, 21 . . 569

ii. 18 . . . 48S

iv. 3

• ■ • 559

xii. 14 . . . 646

ii. 21. . 453, 531

ii. 19 . 445. 474.

iv. 7

• • 597. 647

Gal. i. 8. . . . 570, 599

iii. 5, 6 . . . 581

512, 513, 555

iv. 15

. . 531, 626

i. 20 . . . . 426

iii. 15. 42S. 442, 454,

iii. 9 . . . 647

iv. 16

• . . 597

ii. II . . . 499, 505

464, 477, 479.

iii. 15 . 473, 4S3,

V- 5-

• 535

ii. 11-14 ... 439

482, 489, 491,

489, 541. 575

V. II

. 510

ii. 14 426, 450, 454,

496, 506, 513

iv. I ... 612

vi. 3

• 539

480

iii. 16 . . . 428

iv. 16 .

. ■ 599

vi. 9, 10 .

■ 459

iii. 16 . . . 527, 622

Col. i. 6 .... 635

iv. iS .

. . 641

vi. 10 449,452,458,

iii. 27. 419, 475, 557

i. 18 . . . 592

2 John 10, II .

■ • 509

475. 544

iii. 29 .... 534

i. 23 . . . . 591

Jude 19. . .

. . 651

vi. 18 . . . 565

iv 421

iii. 5 .... 449

Rev. ii. 6 . .

■ • 453

viii. II

■ 599

iv. 22-31 . . . 637

iv. 2-4 .. . 593

1 xvii. 15.44

2, 590, 6l2

BiHL'i^ii

^t*-ti—\^ *

MAR 1 8 mZ

PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE
CARDS OR SLIPS FROM THIS POCKET

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO LIBRARY

ER
60

1886
V.4
cop. 2

A Select library of the Nicene
and post-Nicene fathers of
the Christian church

1
9

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "A Select library of the Nicene and post-Nicene fathers of the Christian church"

See other formats