Letters & Polemics (CSEL) 5 part 61/118

‹For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are counted as sheep for the slaughter.› But in all these things we more than conquer through Him that loved us. For I am sure that neither death, nor life, nor angel, nor principality, nor things present, nor things to come, nor power, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the charity of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.» See how he says, not just anyhow, «Who shall separate us from Christ?», but, showing whereby we cleave to Christ, «Who,» he says, «shall separate us from the charity of Christ?» It is therefore by the charity of Christ, not by fear of punishment, that we cleave to Him.

Then, having enumerated those things which seem to have violence yet do not have the power of separating, he thus concluded, so as to call the same the charity of God which he had called Christ's. And what is «the charity of Christ» but the charity of justice? For of Him it is said: «Who was made unto us wisdom from God, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption,» so that, as it is written, «he that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.» As therefore that man is most wicked whom not even bodily punishments deter from the filthy works of sordid pleasure, so that man is most just who is not recalled even by the terror of bodily punishments from the holy works of most luminous charity.

Which charity of God—as must be held in perpetual meditation—is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who is given to us, so that «he that glorieth may glory in the Lord.» When therefore we feel ourselves poor and needy of this charity, by which the Law is most truly fulfilled, we ought not out of our own poverty

to exact His riches, but by praying to ask, to seek, to knock, so that He with whom is the fountain of life may grant us to be inebriated by the abundance of His house and to drink of the torrent of His pleasure, whereby, flooded and enlivened, we may not only not be swallowed up by sadness but even glory in tribulations, knowing that tribulation works patience, and patience probation, and probation hope, and hope maketh not ashamed—not because we can do this by ourselves, but because the charity of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who is given to us.

It has delighted me at least to speak with you through a letter, which I could not do when you were present—and this not on your account, who, being not high-minded, consent to the lowly, but on account of certain persons who too much arrogate to human will, which they think, once the Law is given, can suffice of itself for fulfilling it, with no grace of holy inspiration aiding it above the teaching of the Law. Through whose disputation it is persuaded to the wretched and needy weakness of men that we ought not even to pray that we enter not into temptation—not because they dare to say this openly, but their opinion, willing or unwilling, assuredly follows to this. For to what end is it said to us: «Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation»?

To what end also, according to this exhortation, when He taught us to pray, did He enjoin that we should say, «Lead us not into temptation,» if this is not fulfilled by the aid of divine grace, but the whole of it is in the choice of the human will? What more? Salute the brethren who are with you, and pray for us, that we may be saved according to that salvation of which it is said: «They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick; I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.» Pray therefore for us, that we may be righteous—which indeed a man cannot be unless he both know and will; and there will straightway be one who has fully willed; but this very thing will not be in him unless he be healed and aided by the grace of the Spirit, that he may be able. CXLVI. To his most beloved and most longed-for lord and brother,

Pelagius, Augustine, greeting in the Lord. I give very great thanks that you have deigned to gladden me with your letter and to make me certain of your welfare. May the Lord repay you good things, by which you may always be good, and may you live with Him eternally in eternity, most beloved and most longed-for lord and brother. But as for me, although I do not recognize in myself the praises of me which your letter of benevolence contains, yet I cannot be ungrateful toward the benevolent disposition of your mind toward my littleness—at the same time admonishing you that you should rather pray for me, that I may be made by the Lord such as you already judge me to be. [And in another hand:] Mindful of us, may you please the Lord unharmed, most beloved and most longed-for lord and brother. CXLVII. THE BOOK ON SEEING GOD.

Mindful of the debt which arose from your petition and my promise, O religious handmaid of God, Paulina, I ought not to be negligent also of its discharge. For when you had asked that I should write to you at some length and copiously concerning the invisible God, whether He can be seen through the bodily eyes, I could not refuse, lest I offend your holy zeal; but I put off the promise, either on account of my other occupations, or because that was demanded of me on which it behooved to reflect somewhat longer.

But since it was so great a matter, which was made more difficult by pondering—not so much what should be thought or said about it, as in what manner it should be made persuasive to those who thought differently—I judged that at length an end should be put to the delay, hoping that the divine aid would be more present to me writing than deferring. Wherefore it seems to me first that a manner of living avails more in this inquiry than a manner of speaking. For those who have learned of the Lord Jesus Christ to be meek and lowly in heart make more progress by thinking and praying than by reading and hearing. Nor on that account, however, will the discourse cease to play its parts, but, when the planter and the waterer have performed the office of their duty, the rest they leave to Him who gives the increase;

for He indeed formed the very planter and waterer. According to the inner man, therefore, receive the words of understanding. For he is renewed day by day, even when this outer man is corrupted, whether by the chastisement of abstinence, or by some sickly condition, or by any chance, or certainly—which is necessary even for those who long live with a sound body—by the very advance of age. Lift up therefore the spirit of your mind, which is renewed in the knowledge of Him, according to the image of Him who created it, where by faith Christ dwells in you, where there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, where you will not die when you begin to be released from the body, because neither there have you withered, though you are heavy with years.

Fix that inner attention of yours upright and see what I am saying. I do not wish you to follow my authority, so as to think you must believe something merely because it is said by me; but either believe the canonical Scriptures, if you do not yet see how a thing is true, or believe the Truth that demonstrates it inwardly, so that you may plainly see this. For the sake of example I shall say something by which you may be more surely prepared for these matters, and precisely from that source from which the labor of disputing has been set before us in this very work. We believe that God is seen now; but is it because we have seen Him either through the eyes of the body, as we see this sun, or by the gaze of the mind, as each person inwardly sees himself living, sees himself willing, sees himself seeking, sees himself knowing, sees himself not knowing?

You yourself, then, upon reading these lines, recall that you have indeed seen the sun through the eyes of the body, and you can even see it at once, if it is that time of day and you are in such a place where, on that side, the sky lies open to your eyes right up to the sun for beholding. But for seeing those things which I said are perceived by the mind—that is, that you are alive, that you wish to see God, that you seek this, that you know that you live and will and seek, though you do not know in what manner God is seen—for seeing all these things, I say, you employ neither the eyes of the body nor an interval of space through which the gaze must be directed in order to reach and discern them, nor do you perceive or seek such. Thus you see your own life, your will, your inquiry, your knowledge, your ignorance—for that vision too is not to be despised, whereby you see what you do not know.

Thus, I say, you see all these things in such a way that you see them in yourself, you have them within you, and without any outlines of figures or brilliance of colors you behold them the more clearly and surely, the more simply and inwardly. Since, therefore, we now see God neither with the eyes of the body as we see bodies, whether heavenly or earthly, nor with the gaze of the mind as we see those things such as I have mentioned, which you most surely behold within yourself, why do we believe that He is seen, unless because we lend faith to Scripture, where it is read: 'Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God,' and whatever else has been written to this same purport by the same divine authority—which we count it wicked not to believe, and yet doubt not in the least that to believe it is an act of piety?

Hold fast, therefore, to this distinction: that if, in my discussion, I call anything to your attention which you see with the eyes of the flesh or perceive with any other of its senses, or recall having so perceived—as colors, sounds, smells, tastes, degrees of heat are perceived, and whatever else we perceive through the body by seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching—or which you see with the gaze of the mind, as you see your life, your will, your thought, your memory, your understanding, your knowledge, your faith, and whatever else you behold with the mind and do not doubt to be so, not merely by believing but by plainly seeing—this you should judge me to have shown you.

But what I have not shown in such a way that it is held to be seen and perceived by the sense of body or of mind, and yet I have said something which must necessarily be either true or false, but which is seen by neither of those two kinds—there it remains only to be believed or not believed. But if it is confirmed by the clear authority of the divine Scriptures—that is, of those which are called canonical in the Church—it must be believed without any doubt. As for other witnesses or testimonies by which one is persuaded that something ought to be believed, you may be free to believe them or not, according as you weigh how much or how little weight they have for producing faith.

For if we had believed nothing at all of those things which we have not seen—that is, which we have not perceived as present in actual appearance, whether by mind or by body—nor learned from the holy Scriptures by reading or hearing, whence should we know that there are cities where we have never been, or that Rome was founded by Romulus, or, to speak of more recent matters, that Constantinople was founded by Constantine? Whence, finally, should we know who our parents were that begot us, or from what fathers, grandfathers, and ancestors we were born?

For although we know very many such things, yet we have learned them neither as present to any sense, like the sun, nor like the will of our own soul, nor by the authority of the canonical utterances, as that Adam was the first man, or that Christ was born in the flesh and suffered and rose again; rather we learned them from others reporting, about whose testimony, at least in this kind of matter, we have judged that there ought to be the least doubt. And if in these we are somewhere deceived by believing either that a thing is so which is not so, or that it is not so which is so, we judge there to be no danger, provided it be not against that faith by which piety is formed.

This preface of mine does not yet examine the question proposed, but prepares you and others who are going to read these things as to what kind of judges you ought to be, whether of my writings or of anyone's, lest you either suppose you know what you do not know, or rashly believe what you have neither perceived by the senses of the body nor by the contemplation of the mind in the evidence of the very thing which is to be known, nor learned from the authority of the canonical Scriptures ought to be believed, even if it was not present to the senses of your mind or body. Have we now, then, come to the matter? Or is the reader still to be instructed? For some think that this very thing which we call 'believing,' when a true thing is believed, is nothing else than to contemplate it with the mind.

But if that is so, this preface of ours is mistaken, in which we distinguished that it is one thing to perceive something through the body—as the sun in the sky and a mountain, tree, or any body whatever on earth—and another to perceive by the gaze of the mind a thing no less evident, as our will is inwardly beheld by our very selves when we will something, or our thought when we think, or our memory when we remember, or some such thing in the soul without a body; and yet another to believe what is neither present to the sight of the body or mind nor recalled to have been present—as that Adam was created without parents, and that Christ was born of a Virgin, suffered, and rose again.

For these things also were done bodily and could certainly have been seen through the body, had we been present then, though they are not present now, as this light is present which is discerned by the eyes, or the will by which we now will something, which is beheld by the mind. But since this distinction is not false, that preface surely lacked something in that the difference between believing and beholding something present with the mind—lest they be thought in every way one and the same—had been marked out with too little clarity of expression. What, then, shall we say? Is it enough that we say the difference between seeing and believing is this, that things present are seen, things absent are believed?

Perhaps it is quite sufficient, if in this place we understand by 'present' those things which are at hand to the senses, whether of the mind or of the body, from which indeed the term 'present' (things standing before) is derived. For thus do I plainly see this light by the sense of the body, and thus my own will, because it is at hand to the senses of my mind and is present to me within. But if someone indicate to me his will, whose face and voice are present to me, yet because that very will which he indicates lies hidden from the sense of my body and mind, I believe, I do not see; or, if I judge that he is lying, I do not believe, even though perchance it is as he says. Therefore those things are believed which are absent from our senses, if the testimony offered for them seems trustworthy;

but those things are seen which are at hand—whence they are also called 'present'—to the senses either of the mind or of the body. For although there are five senses of the body—of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching—sight indeed is attributed chiefly to the eyes among them, yet we use this word for the others too. For we not only say 'See what shines,' but also 'See what sounds,' 'See what smells,' 'See what tastes,' 'See what is hot.' Nor, because I said that those things are believed which are absent from our senses, is it to be so taken that they are reckoned among those which we once saw and retain having seen and are certain of, although they are not now at hand when they are recalled by us;

for these are reckoned not among things believed but among things seen, and therefore they are known—not because we placed faith in other witnesses, but because we remember beyond doubt that we ourselves saw them, and we know it. Our knowledge, then, is composed of things seen and things believed. But in those which we have seen or do see, we ourselves are the witnesses; in those, however, which we believe, we are moved to faith by other witnesses, when for those things which we neither remember having seen nor do see, signs are given, whether in words or in letters or in any documents whatsoever, by seeing which the unseen things are believed. And not without reason do we say that we know not only those things which we have seen or do see, but also those which we believe, moved by testimonies or witnesses suitable to each matter.

Furthermore, if we are not incongruously said to know even that which we most certainly believe, from this it has come about that even things rightly believed, though they are not present to our senses, we are said to see with the mind. For knowledge is attributed to the mind, whether it retain something perceived and known through the senses of the body or through the soul itself; and faith itself is certainly seen by the mind, although that is believed by faith which is not seen. Whence the Apostle Peter says: 'On whom, though now you see Him not, you believe,' and the Lord Himself: 'Blessed are they who have not seen and have believed.' When, therefore, it is said to a man, 'Believe that Christ rose from the dead,' if he believes, attend to what he sees, attend to what he believes, and distinguish both.

He sees the man whose voice he hears, and that very voice is reckoned among things seen bodily, according to what we said above. These are two: the witness and the testimony, of which the one pertains to the eyes, the other to the ears. But this witness he perhaps confirms by the authority of other testimonies—namely of the divine Scriptures or of any others by which he was moved to faith. Scriptures pertain to the sight of the body: of the eyes, if he reads them, or of the ears, if he heard them. But he sees with the mind whatever he has understood to be signified by the shapes of letters or by sounds; he sees his own faith, by which he answers that he believes without hesitation; he sees the thought by which he considers what benefit it can bring him that he believes;

he sees the will by which he approached to embrace religion; he sees also a certain image of the resurrection itself formed in his soul, without which cannot be understood whatever is said to have been done bodily, whether it be believed or not believed. But, as I think, you distinguish in what manner he sees his own faith, by which he believes, and in what manner he sees that image of the resurrection formed in his soul, which, if he hears this, even he who does not believe sees. All these things, therefore, he sees partly by the body, partly by the mind. But the will of him from whom he hears in order to believe, and the resurrection of Christ itself, he does not see, but believes; and yet he is said to see it by a certain gaze of the mind, more according to the faith in the testimonies than according to the presence of the things believed.

For those things which he sees are at hand to the senses of the mind or of the body; but those which he believes are absent from the senses both of the mind and of the body—although the will of him from whom he hears in order to believe is not past, but remains in the speaker. This will, in his very self, the one who speaks sees; but he who hears does not see it, but believes it. The resurrection of Christ, however, is past, which not even those men saw who were then alive; for those who saw Christ living, whom they had seen dying, yet did not see the resurrection itself when it happened, but most certainly believed it by seeing and touching alive Him whom they had known dead.

We believe the whole: both that He rose again, and that He was then seen and handled by men, and that He now lives in heaven and dies no more, and death has no more dominion over Him. But the thing itself is present neither to the senses of our body, as this sky and earth are present, nor to the gaze of our mind, as faith itself is present, by which we believe this. But now, I think, you have recognized sufficiently from this my preface what it is to see, whether by mind or by body, and what differs from these—to believe, which indeed is done by the mind and is seen by the mind, since our faith is conspicuous to our mind.

But nevertheless, what is believed by that same faith is absent even from the sight of our body—as the body in which Christ rose again is absent—and from the sight of another's mind—as your faith is absent from the sight of my mind, although I believe it to be in you, since I do not see it with the body (which neither can you) nor with the mind (which you can, as I see my own, which you cannot). For no one knows what goes on in a man except the spirit of the man which is in him, until the Lord come, who will both illuminate the hidden things of darkness and make manifest the thoughts of the heart, so that each may see not only his own but also those of others.

For according to this the Apostle said that no one knows what goes on in a man except the spirit of the man which is in him, according to what we see in ourselves; for according to that which we believe and do not see, we both know that there are many faithful, and are ourselves known to many. If, then, these matters are now distinguished, let us come to the case. We know that God can be seen, since it is written: 'Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.' Or ought I perhaps not to have said 'we know' but 'we believe,' since we have never at any time seen God either with the body, as this light, nor with the mind, as the very faith within us by which we believe it, but only because it is written in that Scripture whose faithful we are, that it is true we doubt not in the least?

Yet the Apostle John, when he said something of this kind, says: 'We know that, when He shall appear, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.' Behold, he said that he knew what had not yet been done, and which he had come to know not by seeing but by believing. Rightly, therefore, we said, 'We know that God can be seen,' although we have not seen Him, but have believed the divine authority contained in the sacred books. What, then, is it that the same authority says: 'No one has ever seen God'? Or perhaps the answer is that those testimonies are about seeing God, not about One seen? For 'they shall see God' is said, not 'they have seen,' and not 'we have seen' but 'we shall see Him as He is.' Accordingly, to these sayings there is nothing contrary in: 'No one has ever seen God.'

For they shall see Him whom they have not seen, who as pure in heart have willed to be sons of God. What, then, is: 'I have seen God face to face, and my soul was saved'? Or is this too not contrary to what was said: 'No one has ever seen God'? And that which is written of Moses, that he spoke with God face to face, as one speaks to his friend; and that which the prophet Isaiah, speaking of himself, says: 'I saw the Lord of Sabaoth sitting on a throne,' and whatever other similar testimonies are wont to be brought forth from the same authority—how are they not contrary to the statement in which it was said: 'No one has ever seen God'? And indeed the Gospel itself may be thought to be contrary to itself.

For how is it true, what is said in it: 'He who has seen Me has seen the Father also,' if no one has ever seen God? How is it true: 'Their angels always see the face of My Father,' if no one has ever seen God? By what rule of understanding, then, shall we prove that these seemingly contrary and conflicting statements are neither contrary nor conflicting? For it can in no way come about that this authority of the Scriptures should lie in any part. If we say that in what is written, 'No one has ever seen God,' only men are to be understood, just as it was also said, 'No one knows what goes on in a man except the spirit of the man which is in him'—'no one' certainly, but 'of men';

for neither can this be taken as said of God, since it is written of Christ that there was no need for anyone to bear Him testimony concerning man, for He Himself knew what was in man; for the Apostle, explaining this more plainly, says: 'Whom no one of men has seen nor can see'—if, then, it was so said, 'No one has ever seen God,' as if it were said, 'No one of men,' thus far that question will seem solved, so that it is not contrary to this statement what the Lord says: 'Their angels always see the face of My Father'—namely, that we may believe the angels to see God, whom no one of men has ever seen.

In what manner, then, did Abraham see God, and Isaac, Jacob, Job, Moses, Micaiah, Isaiah, and any others there are of whom the most truthful Scripture testifies that they saw God, if no one of men has ever seen God nor can see Him? Although some, wishing to prove that even the impious will see God, think that God was seen even by the devil himself, so taking what is written in the book of Job, that the devil too came with the angels into the sight of God—so that now this too comes into question: how it was said, 'Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God,' and that other, 'Follow peace with all men and holiness, without which no one shall be able to see God.'

For I greatly marvel if they go so far, who think the impious will see God and that God was seen by the devil, as to assert that these are also pure in heart and follow peace and holiness with all men. Now as for what the Lord says, 'He who has seen Me has seen the Father also,' if considered a little more attentively, it may be seen not to be contrary to what He said, 'No one has ever seen God.' For He did not say, 'Because you have seen Me, you have seen the Father also,' but by saying, 'He who has seen Me has seen the Father also,' He wished to show the unity of substance of the Father and the Son, lest they be thought to be in any way unlike each other. And through this, since it was truly said:

'He who has seen Me has seen the Father also,' surely, since no one of men has ever seen God, neither is anyone to be thought to have seen the Father nor the Son, according to that whereby the Son is God and is with the Father one God; for according to that whereby He is man, He was certainly seen on earth and conversed with men. But it is a great question how it is not contrary that so many of the ancients saw God, if no one has ever seen God, whom no one of men has seen nor can see. You see what a difficult question you have set before me, whence you wished me to write something at length and copiously, on the occasion of my brief letter, which seemed to you needing to be more carefully and fully unfolded.

Are you willing, then, to attend to what I have meanwhile found among others—distinguished expositors of the divine Scriptures—concerning what they thought about the vision of God, in case perhaps they may satisfy your desire, though you may perhaps know them already? Attend then to these few things, if it please you. When blessed Ambrose, bishop of Milan, expounding the Gospel, had come to that place where the angel appeared in the temple to Zacharias the priest, from this occasion see how many and what things he discoursed even concerning the vision of God. 'Not without reason,' he says, 'is the angel seen in the temple, because the coming of the true Priest was already being announced, and the heavenly sacrifice was being prepared, in which angels should minister. And it is well said that he appeared to one who suddenly beheld him.'

'This the divine Scripture is wont to hold particularly, whether concerning angels or concerning God, that what cannot be foreseen is said to appear. For so you have it: God appeared to Abraham at the oak of Mamre. For he who is not beforehand perceived, but is seen by a sudden sight, is recorded to appear. For sensible things are not seen in like manner, and He whose being seen lies in His will, and whose nature it is not to be seen, is of His will seen. For if He wills not, He is not seen; if He wills, He is seen. For God appeared to Abraham because He willed; to others, because He willed not, He did not appear. It was seen also by Stephen, when he was being stoned by the people, that heaven was opened; Jesus too was seen standing at the right hand of God, and was not seen by the people;'