These things being so, there is a measure of divine, or angelic, or even human glory, as Alcimus Avitus, bishop of Vienne, says in his dialogue where he speaks with King Gundobad: Yet as to this—that, excluding the Father and the Son from the equality of heavenly glory, just as you do a creature of the angelic order, you unlawfully hold up against me a certain envy of honour paid to the supernal powers, saying: 'Therefore we ought to bear glory to the angels and archangels also, and to whatever things are in the heights'—although it in no way pertains to the case, yet for the present I do not altogether so refuse, as though we feared to bear glory to a sublime and excellent creature.
For there is a measure of divine, of angelic, and also of human glory, which we find in many places of the Scriptures ascribed both to the merits of the saints and to the summits of kings, without the vice of flattery. For what is the chief glory among men, this glory is to all His saints; and in the Gospel the Lord says that not even Solomon in all his glory was so clothed as the little flower of the lily in its natural beauty (Matt. VI, 29). (Agobard, likewise, in his book against the law of Gundobad.) What this venerable and holy man answered the oft-named Gundobad concerning the aforesaid contests, let your kindness hear, if it please. When there was discourse between the two about these matters, and blessed Avitus was rebuking such contests, Gundobad answered him:
What of the fact that among kingdoms and nations, and even often among individual persons, causes to be decided are committed to battles by divine judgment, and that victory falls chiefly to the one to whom justice belongs? To which blessed Avitus replied, saying: If kingdoms and nations, I say, sought a divine judgment, they would first dread that which is written, as the Psalmist says: Scatter the nations that desire wars (Ps. LXVII, 51). And they would love that which is likewise said: Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord (Rom. XII, 19).
Or does the supernal equity perhaps not judge the movements of causes without darts and swords, when often, as we see, the party either justly holding its own, or justly demanding what is just, labours in battles, and either the superior force of the unjust party, or a stealthy underhand encroachment prevails?