Latin original · 40 verses · some words can be tapped for a gloss · long chapter, split into parts; this part covers 5:2350–5:2389 (4615 verses in all)
Tullius, the greatest master of Roman eloquence, says: 'He never uttered any word that he would wish to recall.' And although this praise may seem most illustrious, yet it is more credible of an excessive fool than of a perfect wise man. For even those whom the common people call idiots — the more they dissent from common sense and are the more absurd and insipid — the more they utter no word that they would wish to recall, because to repent of an ill or foolish or unfitting saying belongs assuredly to men of sense.
But if it be taken in a good sense, so that we believe there was someone such that, while he spoke all things wisely, he never uttered any word that he would wish to recall, this is rather to be believed, with most wholesome piety, of the men of God who spoke moved by the Holy Spirit, than of him whom Cicero thus praises. From this excellence I am so far removed that, if I shall produce no word that I would wish to recall, I should be more like a fool than a wise man. For those writings indeed are most worthy of the highest authority whose author uttered no word — not that he would wish to recall, but that he ought to recall. Whoever has not yet attained this, let him hold the second rank of modesty, since he could not hold the first of wisdom;
since he could not carefully say all things not to be repented of, let him repent of those things which he has come to know ought not to have been said. Since therefore — not, as certain of my dearest friends think, no words, or few, but rather perhaps more than even the slanderers suppose — I have said words which I would rather recall if I could, that Tullian saying does not flatter me, in which it was said, 'He never uttered any word that he would wish to recall,' but plainly that Horatian sentence pains me: 'A word once sent forth knows not how to return.' Hence it is that I hold back longer than you wish and bear the books of most perilous questions — namely on Genesis and on the Trinity — so that, if they cannot but have some things that may be deservedly reprehended, these may at least be fewer than they might be
than if they were published too inconsiderately with headlong haste. For you — as your letter indicates, for this my holy brother and fellow-bishop Florentius also wrote to me — for this reason urge that they be published: that they may be defended by me while I live in this flesh, when perhaps in certain points they begin to be accused, whether by biting enemies or even by friends of too little understanding. And this you doubtless say for the reason that you think there is nothing in them that could by true reasoning be blamed; otherwise you would exhort me not to their publication but rather to a more diligent emendation.
But I look rather to true judges, severe with truth, among whom I wish to place first even myself, so that to those others there may come to be reprehended only those things which could by no means be seen by me, however diligently I search. This being so, let those, however, who think that I have laid down something as it were certain and fixed about the human soul — either that it comes from the parents by propagation, or that it sinned in the acts of a higher and heavenly life, so that it deserved to be enclosed in corruptible flesh — carefully attend to this, which was so set down by me in the third book On Free Will, when I was treating of the rational substance, that I said:
'But in the lower, that is, earthly bodies, after sin, being set in order, it rules its body, not in every way at its will, but as the laws of the universe allow.' Let those diligently attend to this who think that I have as it were established and fixed something certain about the human soul, either that it comes from the parents by propagation, or that in the acts of a higher and heavenly life it sinned, so as to deserve to be enclosed in corruptible flesh; and let them see that the words were so weighed by me that, retaining what I hold as certain — that after the sin of the first man the rest of men were born and are being born in the flesh of sin, for the healing of which came, in the Lord, the likeness of the flesh of sin — everything might so sound as to prejudge none of those four opinions which I afterwards set out and distinguished, confirming none of them but for the time, in what I was doing, determining the matter with the discussion of them set aside, so that, whichever of them were true, God without doubt should be praised.
For whether all souls are propagated from that one, or are made severally in each individual, or, created outside, are sent into bodies, or of their own accord plunge into bodies, without doubt this rational creature — that is, the nature of the human soul in the lower, that is, earthly bodies — being set in order after sin, rules its body not in every way at its will, for the time being; and it is agreed that this is the sin of the first man. For it was not said, 'After its own sin,' or 'After it sinned,' but it was said, 'After sin,' so that, whatever afterwards, if it could be, reason with the matter discussed might declare — whether its own sin or the sin of the parent of its flesh — that might rightly be understood which was said:
'After sin, being set in order in the lower bodies, it rules its body not in every way at its will,' because both the flesh lusts against the spirit, and we groan being burdened, and the body which is corrupted weighs down the soul, and — who could recount all the discomforts of carnal weakness? which assuredly will not exist when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, so that the mortal may be swallowed up by life. Then, accordingly, the spiritual body will rule in every way at its will. But now, not in every way, but as the laws of the universe allow, by which it is established that bodies which have arisen should perish and things grown should grow old. For the soul of that first man, before sin, even though not yet a spiritual body, nevertheless ruled its animal body at will.
But after sin — that is, after sin had been committed in that flesh, from which thereafter the flesh of sin would be propagated — the rational soul is so set in order in the lower bodies that it does not rule its body in every way at its will. But if they do not yet acquiesce in the case of little ones, who have as yet committed no sins of their own, that it is nevertheless already the flesh of sin — because for the healing of this too, when they are baptized, that likeness of the flesh of sin is a necessary medicine — not even so have they anything to be angry at in these our words. For it is agreed, unless I am mistaken, that this same flesh, even if it is weak not by fault but by nature, nevertheless began to be born after sin, because Adam was neither so created nor begot anyone before sin.
Let them therefore seek other things which they may rightly reprehend, not only in those things published too hastily, but even in these very books of mine On Free Will. For I do not deny that they will find such things, whereby they may confer a benefit on me too, since, if those things cannot be corrected because they have already gone into the hands of many, I at least can correct what still lives in me. But let those alone reprehend these words, so cautiously set down by me that I might prescribe to no one of the four opinions or reasonings about the origin of the soul — those alone, I say, who think that this very hesitation of mine about so obscure a matter is to be reprehended.
Against these I do not defend myself, holding that I do rightly to hesitate in this question, since I do not doubt at all that the soul is immortal—yet not as God is, who alone possesses immortality, but immortal in a certain way proper to its own kind—and that it is a creature, not the substance of the Creator; and whatever else concerning its nature I hold with the fullest certainty. But because the obscurity of that most shadowy question about the soul's origin compels me to hesitate, let them rather stretch out a hand to me, who confess and, whatever it may be, desire to know; and let them teach me, if they can, or show me, if concerning this matter they have either learned anything by sure reasoning or believed it on the plainest divine utterance.
For if reasoning is offered against the authority of the divine Scriptures, however keen it may be, it deceives by a mere semblance of truth; for true it cannot be. Again, if against most manifest and certain reasoning the authority of the holy Scriptures is set up, as it were, in opposition, he who does this does not understand, and it is not the meaning of those Scriptures—into which he could not penetrate—but rather his own that he sets against the truth; and he opposes not what he finds in them, but what he finds in himself as though on their behalf. For example, attend carefully to what I shall say. It is written near the end of the book called Ecclesiastes, when Scripture was speaking of the dissolution of man which comes about through this death, by which the soul is severed from the body:
«And the dust shall return into the earth as it was, and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.» The sense of this authoritative text is beyond doubt certain, and deceives no one by any falsehood; but suppose someone should wish to interpret it in such a way as thereby to establish a propagation of souls—namely, that from that one soul which God gave to the first man all the rest come.
and should try to buttress it, there seems to favor him what is there said of the flesh under the name of dust—for surely in this place «dust» and «spirit» are understood as nothing other than flesh and soul—so that in this way he may affirm that the soul returns to God in the sense that it is from the transmitted line of that soul which God gave to the first man, just as the flesh is turned into earth, since it too is from the transmitted line of that flesh which in the first man was made from earth; and thus he may contend that from this, which is most well known concerning the flesh, we ought to believe that which concerning the soul is hidden. For concerning the transmission of the flesh there is no doubt, but concerning that of the soul there is doubt.
But both are so set down in this testimony that individual things are, as it were, rendered to individual things by a like account: namely, that the flesh be turned into earth as it was—for from thence it was taken, when the first man was made—and that the spirit return to God who gave it, when He breathed into the face of the man whom He had formed the breath of life, and man was made into a living soul, so that thereafter from each of the two the propagation of each might run its course. Nevertheless, even if that is true, that God gives souls not propagated from that one but created elsewhere, each severally to each, still what is said—«the spirit shall return unto God who gave it»—is congruous also with this opinion.
Only the two remaining opinions therefore seem to be excluded, because, if souls proper to each were made in individual men when they are created, it is thought that it ought not to have been said «the spirit shall return unto God who gave it», but «unto God who made it»; for «gave» sounds as though what could be given already existed apart. Then, as to what is said, «Let it return unto God», they press and urge with the word, saying: How shall it return where it never was before? For they assert that it ought rather to have been said, «let it go to God», or «let it proceed» or «let it pass to God», than «let it return to God», if that spirit is to be believed never to have been there before. Likewise, as to how souls slip of their own accord into the body, since it is written:
«He gave it», it is not so easy to explain. And through this, as I have said, those two opinions labor under the words of this testimony: the one, by which single souls are thought to be made in their several bodies, the other, by which they are thought to plunge of their own accord into bodies. But to those other two—whether they come from the transmitted line of that one, or, having been already created beforehand and established with God, are given to individual bodies—these words are fitted without difficulty.
And yet, if the maintainers of that opinion by which souls are believed to be made in their several bodies affirm that it is thus said of the spirit—which stands here for the soul, «He gave it»—in the way in which it is rightly said that God gave us eyes or ears or hands or anything else; which members surely He had not already made outside and kept stored up somewhere, to give when they were needed, that is, to add and join on, but there in the body He made them, to which He is said to have given them: then I do not see what is to be answered to them, unless perhaps either other testimonies be brought forward, or some sure reasoning, whereby that opinion may be refuted. And likewise those who think that souls flow down into bodies of their own accord thus take the saying, «God gave it», in the way in which it is said:
«God gave them up unto the lust of their heart.» Accordingly, one word is left, that which was said, «Let it return unto God», concerning how «return» can be taken where it was not before, if souls are made each in its own body—by which one word alone one of those four opinions is straitened. But not even on account of this one word do I rashly judge that that opinion is to be refuted, lest perhaps it can be shown by some manner of speech, such as holy Scripture is wont to use, that this too could rightly be said, so that the created spirit is understood to return to God as to the Author by whom it was created, not as to Him with whom it first was.
I have written these things for this reason: that whoever wishes to establish and defend any one of those four opinions concerning the soul may bring forward such proofs either from the Scriptures received into ecclesiastical authority, which cannot be taken otherwise—as is the fact that God made man—or by reasoning so certain that either no contradiction exists, or any that arises is deservedly judged akin to madness; as if someone should say that no one can either know truth or be deceived except a living being; for, in order that we may see how true this is, the authority of the Scriptures is not necessary, but common sense itself proclaims by evident reasoning that it is so true that whoever contradicts it is held most demented.
If anyone can furnish this in that most obscure question concerning the soul, let him aid my inexperience; but if he cannot, let him not blame my hesitation. But concerning the virginity of holy Mary, if what I have written does not persuade that it could have come to pass, then all things must be denied which have marvelously happened in bodies. But if it is disbelieved for the reason that it was done but once, ask of the friend whom this still troubles whether nothing is found in secular writings which was both done but once and yet is believed—not by fabulous vanity but, as they suppose, by historical faith; ask, I beseech you. For if he shall deny that any such thing is found in those writings, he must be admonished;
but if he shall have confessed it, the question is resolved. CXLIV. To the honorable lords and, for their merit, to be received, most dear and most longed-for brethren, the men of Cirta in every rank of honor, Augustine the bishop. If that which grievously saddened us in your city has been taken away; if the hardness of the human heart, resisting the most manifest and in a manner public truth, has been overcome by the power of that same truth; if the sweetness of peace is savored, and the charity of unity no longer beats back wounded eyes but enlightens and enlivens sound ones—these are not our works but God's; nor would I ascribe them at all to human resources, not even if, when we were among you, so great a conversion of the multitude had come about while we were speaking and exhorting.
This is what He does and accomplishes, who through His ministers admonishes outwardly by the signs of things, but by the things themselves teaches inwardly through Himself. Nor ought we on that account to be moved more sluggishly to visit you, since whatever praiseworthy thing has been wrought in you was wrought not by us but by Him who alone does wonders. For we ought to hasten far more eagerly to behold divine works than our own, because we too, if we are anything good, are His work, not men's; whence the Apostle said: «Neither is he that planteth anything, nor he that watereth, but God that giveth the increase.»
Xenocrates, as you write and as we also recall from those writings, by discoursing on the fruit of temperance suddenly converted Polemon—not only a drunkard but at that very time drunk—to another way of life. Although, therefore, he was, as you have prudently and truly understood, not gained for God but only freed from the dominion of luxury, nevertheless not even that very thing which was made better in him would I ascribe to human work but to divine. For of the body itself, which is our lowest part, if there are any good things—such as beauty and strength and health and anything of that kind—they are not save from God the Creator and Perfecter of nature; how much more can no other bestow the goods of the soul!
For what more proud or ungrateful thing can human folly conceive than if it should think that, while God makes man beautiful in flesh, man is made chaste in soul by man? This is thus written in the book of Christian wisdom: «When I knew,» it says, «that no one can be continent unless God grant it, this very thing was of wisdom, to know whose gift it was.» Polemon therefore, if from being dissolute he had been made continent and had so known whose gift it was, that, casting away the superstitions of the nations, he might piously worship Him, would have proved himself not only continent but also truly wise and salubriously religious—which would have availed him not only for the honor of the present life but also for the immortality of the life to come.
How much less, therefore, ought I to arrogate to myself this conversion of yours or of your people, which you have just now reported to us, which was beyond doubt wrought divinely—I neither speaking nor even present—in those in whom it was truly wrought! This therefore above all acknowledge, this piously and humbly consider. To God, brethren, to God give thanks; fear God, lest you fall away; love Him, that you may make progress. But if as yet the love of man secretly divides some, and the fear of man deceptively gathers them, let such as these observe that God, to whom the human conscience is naked, they neither deceive as witness nor escape as judge.
But if anything concerning the question of unity itself moves them, out of solicitude for their own salvation, let them, as far as I judge, wrest from themselves this most just conclusion: that concerning the Catholic Church—that is, the Church spread throughout the whole world—they should rather believe what the divine Scriptures say, not what human tongues malign. But concerning that dissension itself which has arisen among men—who, whatever sort they may have been, surely do not prejudice the promises of God, who said to Abraham:
«In thy seed shall all nations be blessed»—which was believed when it was heard foretold, and is denied when it is seen fulfilled—let them nevertheless meanwhile consider this most brief and, unless I am mistaken, most invincible point: that either this case was pleaded in the ecclesiastical judgment overseas, or it was not pleaded. If it was not pleaded there, the society of Christ throughout all the overseas nations is innocent, in whose communion we rejoice, and therefore they are separated by a sacrilegious rupture from those innocent ones. But if this case was indeed pleaded there, who does not understand, who does not perceive, who does not see that those were vanquished in it whose communion has thence been separated?
Let them therefore choose which they prefer to believe: what the ecclesiastical judges pronounced, or what the vanquished litigants murmur. Against this argument, most brief to state and most easy to understand, attend diligently, according to your prudence, how nothing sober can be answered; and yet the wicked Polemon is more readily overturned from the drunkenness of inveterate error. Grant pardon to a letter perhaps more prolix than agreeable, yet, as I judge, more useful than pleasant, more profitable than flattering, honorable lords and, for your merit, to be received, most dear and most longed-for brethren. But as for our coming to you, may God fulfill the desire of us both.
For with what ardor of charity we are kindled to visit you, we cannot unfold in words, but that you kindly believe it we do not in the least doubt. CXLV. To his lord, the holy and desirable brother Anastasius, Augustine, greeting in the Lord. A most trustworthy occasion for greeting your sincerity has presented itself in the honorable servants of God, our brothers Lupicinus and Concordialis, through whom, even if I were not writing, your charity could learn all that is being done among us. For I know
how much you love us in Christ, since you too know how much you are in turn loved by us in Him; and therefore I did not doubt that you could have been saddened if you had seen those men without any letter from me—men whom, as having set out from us and being joined to us in such great intimacy, you could not fail to know—at the same time also because I was a debtor of a reply. For, from the time I received your letter, I do not know whether I have replied except now for the first time; for we are so bound and stretched by such great cares that even this I do not know.
But how it fares with you, and whether the Lord has granted you any repose—as much as is possible on this earth—we very much desire to know; for, if one member is glorified, all the members rejoice with it, and thus it very often happens that, while we think of some of our brethren settled in however small a repose, we in the midst of our own anxieties are refreshed in no small part, as though we too lived more quietly and tranquilly in them. Although even when troubles multiply in the frailty of this life, they compel us to desire the eternal repose. For this world is more dangerous when it flatters than when it troubles, and more to be guarded against when it entices to be loved than when it warns and compels to be despised.
For since all that is in it is the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the ambition of the world, often even to those who prefer to such things the spiritual, the invisible, the eternal, there insinuates itself an affection for earthly sweetness, and its own delights accompany our duties. For the more the things to come are better for charity, the more the things present are more violent for weakness. And would that those who have learned to see and groan over these things might merit to conquer and escape them! This the human will in no way fulfills without the grace of God, for it is not even to be called free so long as it is subject to conquering and binding desires; for by whatever one is overcome, to this also is he delivered as a slave, and:
«If the Son shall make you free,» says the Son of God Himself, «then shall ye be free indeed.» The Law therefore, by teaching and commanding what cannot be fulfilled without grace, demonstrates to man his own weakness, so that the demonstrated weakness may seek a Savior, by whom the healed will may be able to do what the weak one could not. The Law therefore leads to faith, faith obtains the Spirit more abundantly, the Spirit pours forth charity, charity fulfills the Law. Therefore the Law is called a schoolmaster, under whose most threatening severity whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. But how shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed?
Accordingly, lest the letter without the spirit should kill, the quickening spirit is given to those who believe and call upon Him, and indeed the charity of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who is given to us, so that there may come to pass what the same Apostle says: «Charity is the fullness of the Law.» Thus the Law is good to him who uses it lawfully; and he uses it lawfully who, understanding why it was given, through its threatening flees to the liberating grace.
To this grace, by which the ungodly is justified, whoever, ungrateful, trusts in his own strength as if to fulfill the Law—being ignorant of God's righteousness and wishing to establish his own—is not subject to the righteousness of God; and through this the Law becomes to him not a help toward acquittal but a bond of crime, not because the Law is evil, but because sin, as it is written, works death by that which is good in such men; for through the commandment he sins the more grievously who through the commandment knows how evil is that which he commits. But he vainly thinks himself a conqueror of sin who does not sin through fear of punishment, because, even if the business of evil desire is not fulfilled outwardly, yet that evil desire itself is within an enemy.
And who is found innocent before God, who wishes to do what is forbidden, if you take away that which is feared? And through this, in the very will he is guilty who wishes to do what is not lawful to be done, but does not do it for this reason, that it cannot be done with impunity. For, as far as in him lies, he would prefer that there were no justice forbidding and punishing sins; and surely, if he would prefer there to be no justice, who would doubt that, if he could, he would abolish it? And through this, how is he just, such an enemy of justice, that, if the power were given, he would abolish it commanding, lest he should bear it threatening or judging? He therefore is an enemy of justice who does not sin through fear of punishment; but he will be its friend, if he does not sin through love of it; for then will he truly fear to sin.
For he who dreads hell fears not to sin but to burn; but he fears to sin who hates sin itself as he hates hell. This is the chaste fear of the Lord, enduring for ever and ever; for that fear of punishment has torment and is not in charity, and perfect charity casts it out. Moreover, each one hates sin as much as he loves justice, which he will not be able to do by the Law terrifying through the letter, but by the Spirit healing through grace. Then comes to pass what the Apostle admonishes: «I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh; for as ye have yielded your members to serve uncleanness and iniquity unto iniquity, so now yield your members to serve righteousness unto sanctification.»
For what is «as that, so also this» but: just as no fear compelled you to sin, but the very lust and pleasure of sin, so let no dread of punishment urge you to live justly, but let the delight and charity of justice lead you? And this indeed, as far as it seems to me, is not yet perfect but in a certain manner grown-up justice. For not in vain would he premise, «I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh,» unless it were that something more had to be said, if they could already bear it. For more of servitude is owed to justice than men are wont to render to sin.
For punishment of the body, even if not from the will, yet recalls one from the deed of sin; nor easily is there anyone who would openly commit that whereby he might obtain an unlawful and unclean pleasure, if it were certain that the torments of vengeance would immediately follow. But justice is so to be loved that not even punishments of the body ought to restrain us from its works, and that among the very hands of cruel enemies our works may shine before men, so that they to whom they can be pleasing may glorify our Father who is in heaven. Hence it is that that most valiant lover of justice cries out: «Who shall separate us from the charity of Christ? Tribulation? or distress? or persecution? or famine? or nakedness? or peril? or the sword? As it is written: