OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume IV/Manichaean Controversy/On the Morals of the Catholic Church/Argument

Of the Morals of the Catholic Church.
[De Moribus Ecclesiæ Catholicæ]. 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 neighbor. In the Catholic Church we find examples of continence and of true Christian conduct.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Written in the year 388. In his Retractations (i. 7) Augustin says: "When I was at Rome after my baptism, and could not bear in silence the vaunting of the Manichæans about their pretended and misleading continence or abstinence, in which, to deceive the inexperienced, they claim superiority over true Christians, 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 Manichæans."
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume IV/Manichaean Controversy/On Two Souls/Chapter 9

Chapter 9.—Augustin Deceived by Familiarity with the Manichæans, and by the Succession of Victories Over Ignorant Christians Reported by Them. The Manichæans are Likewise 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 noxiously 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 become 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. Accordingly from their speeches ardor in disputations was daily increased, from success in disputations love for them [the Manichæans]. 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 cautiously, 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 spiritual. It did not belong to age, nor to discipline, 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 judgment of all men nature itself by the laws of the most High God has established?

## Footnotes

* ↑ Nothing is more certain than that Christianity has suffered more at the hands of injudicious and ignorant 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 encouraged and confirmed in his errors by the inability of his opponents, so 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.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume IV/Manichaean Controversy/On the Morals of the Catholic Church
## Contents

* Title Page
* Argument
* Chapter 1
* Chapter 2
* Chapter 3
* Chapter 4
* Chapter 5
* Chapter 6
* Chapter 7
* Chapter 8
* Chapter 9
* Chapter 10
* Chapter 11
* Chapter 12
* Chapter 13
* Chapter 14
* Chapter 15
* Chapter 16
* Chapter 17
* Chapter 18
* Chapter 19
* Chapter 20
* Chapter 21
* Chapter 22
* Chapter 23
* Chapter 24
* Chapter 25
* Chapter 26
* Chapter 27
* Chapter 28
* Chapter 29
* Chapter 30
* Chapter 31
* Chapter 32
* Chapter 33
* Chapter 34
* Chapter 35
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume IV/Manichaean Controversy/On Two Souls/Chapter 5

Chapter 5.—How Vicious Souls, However Worthy of Condemnation They May Be, Excel the Light Which is Praiseworthy in Its Kind.
Certainly nobody doubts that whatever is 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 experience bodily sensations, and that 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 injustice 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 outrank 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 approved tailor, that I should think him incomparably superior. But I praise the tailor because he is thoroughly skilled in his own craft, while I rightly blame the lawyer because 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 injustice judge these to be most worthy of condemnation. 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 acknowledged to be creatures of God.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume IV/Manichaean Controversy/On Two Souls/Title Page

St. AUGUSTIN:
on two souls,
against the manichæans.
[de duabus animabus contra manichæos].
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.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume IV/Manichaean Controversy/On Two Souls/Chapter 4

Chapter 4.—Even the Soul of a Fly 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 numerical order when it is running, what regulates 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.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Neither Augustin nor the Manichæans seem to have recognized the distinction in kind between the human soul and animal life.—A.H.N.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume V/Dedication of Volume II. Of the Edinburgh Edition

Dedication of Volume II. Of the Edinburgh Edition.
TO The Rev. C. T. Wilkinson, M.A.,
Vicar OF ST. Andrews With Pennycross, Plymouth.
My Dear Vicar,—I have great pleasure in associating your name with my own in this volume. We are officially connected in the sacred ministry of the Church, and I think I may, not unsuitably, extend our relations in this little effort to strengthen the defences of the great doctrine of Grace committed to our care and advocacy. Never was this portion of revealed truth more formidably assailed than at the present day. Rationalism, as its primary dogma, asserts the perfectibility of our nature, out of its own resources; and with a versatility and power of argument and illustration, which gathers help from every quarter in literature and philosophy, it opposes “the truth as it is in Jesus.” This truth, which implies, as its cardinal points, the ruin of man’s nature in the sin of the first Adam, and its recovery in the obedience of the second Adam, is vindicated with admirable method and convincing force in the Anti-Pelagian treatises of the great Doctor of the Western Church. Some of these treatises appear for the first time in our language in this volume; and you will, I am sure, admire the acuteness with which Saint Augustin tracks out and refutes the sophistries of the rationalists of his own day, as well as the profound knowledge and earnest charity with which he enforces and recommends the Catholic verity.
In identifying you thus far with myself in this undertaking, I not only gratify my own feelings of sincere friendship, but with a confidence which I believe I do not over-estimate, I assume, what I highly prize, your agreement with me in accepting and furthering the principles set forth in this volume.
With sincere sympathy for you in your important work at Plymouth, and best wishes for the divine blessing upon it, believe me, yours very faithfully,
Peter Holmes.
Mannamead, Plymouth, June 24, 1874.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume V/Concerning Man's Perfection in Righteousness/Chapter 9

(8.) The Eighth Breviate.
VIII. “Again, this question must be asked,” he says, “how God wishes man to be,—with sin, or without sin? Beyond doubt, He does not wish him to be with sin. We must reflect how great would be the impious blasphemy for it to be said that man has it in his power to be with sin, which God does not wish; and for it to be denied that he has it in his power to be without sin, which God wishes: just as if God had created any man for such a result as this,—that he should be able to be what He would not have him, and unable to be what He would have him; and that he should lead an existence contrary to His will, rather than one which should be in accordance therewith.” This has been in fact already answered; but I see that it is necessary for me to make here an additional remark, that we are saved by hope. “But hope that is seen is not hope; for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for? But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it.” Full righteousness, therefore, will only then be reached, when fulness of health is attained; and this fulness of health shall be when there is fulness of love, for “love is the fulfilling of the law;” and then shall come fulness of love, when “we shall see Him even as He is.” Nor will any addition to love be possible more, when faith shall have reached the fruition of sight.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Rom. viii. 24, 25.
* ↑ Rom. xiii. 10.
* ↑ 1 John iii. 2.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume V/Dedication of Volume I. Of the Edinburgh Edition

Dedication of Volume I. Of the Edinburgh Edition.
TO The Right Reverend The Lord Bishop OF Exeter.
My Dear Lord,—I gladly avail myself of your permission to dedicate this volume to you. In the course of a professional life of nearly the third of a century, which has not been idly spent, I have never failed to find pleasure in theological pursuits. In the intervals of most pressing labour, these have often tended to refresh and comfort one’s wearied spirit. If this confession of my own experience should have any weight with any one in our sacred calling to combine the hard work which we owe to others while ministering to their wants, with “that diligent attendance to reading” which we require for ourselves, to inform our minds and refresh our spirits, I shall have accomplished my only purpose in making it. Your Lordship, I am sure, will entirely approve of such a combination of employments in your clergy. I well remember your recommendation of theological study to us at the opening of Bishop Phillpott’s Library at Truro; and how you counselled us the more earnestly to pursue it, from the danger there is, in these busy times, of merging the acquisition of sacred learning in the active labours of our holy vocation. That the divine blessing may crown the work which you are so diligently prosecuting in the several functions of your high office, is the earnest wish, my dear Lord, of your faithful servant,
Peter Holmes.
Mannamead, Plymouth, March 10, 1872.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume V/Concerning Man's Perfection in Righteousness/Chapter 7

(6.) The Sixth Breviate.
VI. “Again,” he says, “we have to inquire whether man is commanded to be without sin; for either he is not able, and then he is not commanded; or else because he is commanded, he is able. For why should that be commanded which cannot at all be done?” The answer is, that man is most wisely commanded to walk with right steps, on purpose that, when he has discovered his own inability to do even this, he may seek the remedy which is provided for the inward man to cure the lameness of sin, even the grace of God, through our Lord Jesus Christ.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume V/Concerning Man's Perfection in Righteousness/Title Page

a treatise concerning man’s perfection in righteousness.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume V/Credits

SAINT AUGUSTIN’S ANTI-PELAGIAN WORKS.
translated by
PETER HOLMES, D.D., F.R.A.S.,
DOMESTIC CHAPLAIN TO THE RIGHT HONORABLE THE COUNTESS OF ROTHES,
AND CURATE OF PENNYCROSS, PLYMOUTH;
and
REV. ROBERT ERNEST WALLIS, Ph.d.,
INCUMBENT OF CHRIST CHURCH, COXLEY, SOMERSET.
THE TRANSLATION REVISED, AND AN INTRODUCTION PREFIXED, BY
BENJAMIN B. WARFIELD, D.D.,
PROFESSOR IN THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY AT PRINCETON, N.J.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume V/Introductory Essay

introductory essay on augustin and the pelagian controversy.
by professor benjamin b. warfield, D.D.

## Contents

* A Select Bibliography of the Pelagian Controversy
* Introductory Essay
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume V/Concerning Man's Perfection in Righteousness/Chapter 8

(7.) The Seventh Breviate.
VII. “The next question we shall have to propose,” he says, “is, whether God wishes that man be without sin. Beyond doubt God wishes it; and no doubt he has the ability. For who is so foolhardy as to hesitate to believe that to be possible, which he has no doubt about God’s wishing?” This is the answer. If God wished not that man should be without sin, He would not have sent His Son without sin, to heal men of their sins. This takes place in believers who are being renewed day by day, until their righteousness becomes perfect, like fully restored health.

## Footnotes

* ↑ 2 Cor. iv. 16.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume V/Contents

Contents.
__________
preface to the american edition.
prefatory note by the american reviser.
introduction to augustin’s anti-pelagian writings. By the Rev. Professor B.B. Warfield, D.D.
dedication of vol. i. of edinburgh edition.
dedication of vol. ii. of edinburgh edition.
preface to vol. i. of edinburgh edition.
preface to vol. ii. of edinburgh edition.
“on the merits and remission of sins, and on the baptism of infants.”
Three Books. Written A.D. 412.
(De Peccatorum Meritis et Remissione, et de Baptismo Parvulorum.)
Extract from Augustin’s “Retractations” on “De Peccatorum Meritis,” etc.
The Treatise itself.
“on the spirit and the letter.” One Book. Written A.D. 412.
(De Spiritu et Litterâ.)
Extract from Augustin’s “Retractations” on “De Spiritu et litterâ.”
The Treatise itself.
“on nature and grace.” One Book. Written A.D. 415.
(De Naturâ et Gratiâ, contra Pelagium.)
Extract from Augustin’s “Retractations” on “De Naturâ et Gratiâ.”
Introductory Note.
The Treatise itself.
“on man’s perfection in righteousness.” One Book. Written about the end of 415.
(De Perfectione Justiciæ Hominis.)
Preface to the treatise.
The Treatise itself.
“on the proceedings of pelagius.” One Book. Written early in 417.
(De Gestis Pelagii.)
Extract from Augustin’s “Retractations” on “De Gestis Pelagii.”
Preface to the treatise.
The Treatise itself.
“on the grace of christ, and on original sin.” Two Books. Written in 418.
(De Gratiâ Christi, et de Peccato Originali, contra Pelagium.)
Extract from Augustin’s “Retractations” on “De Gratiâ Christi,” and “De Peccato Originali.”
Book I. On the Grace of Christ.
Book ii. On Original Sin.
“on marriage and concupiscence.” Two Books. Written early in 419 and 420.
(De Nuptiis et Concupiscientiâ.)
Extract from Augustin’s “Retractations” on “De Nuptiis et Concupiscientiâ.”
Advertisement to the Reader.
A Letter from Augustin to the Count Valerius.
Book I.
Preliminary Notes to the Second Book.
Book ii.
“on the soul and its origin.” Four Books. Written late in 419.
(De Animâ et ejus Origine.)
Extract from Augustin’s “Retractations” on “De Animâ et ejus Origine.”
Advertisement to the Reader.
Book I. Addressed to Renatus.
Book ii. Addressed to the Presbyter Peter.
Book III. Addressed to Vincentius Victor.
Book IV. Addressed to Vincentius Victor.
(Contra Duas Epistolas Pelagianorum.)
Extract from Augustin’s “Retractations” on “Contra Duas Epistolas Pelagianorum.”
Book I.
Book ii.
Book III.
Book IV.
“on grace and free will.” One Book. Written in 426 or 427.
(De Gratiâ et Libero Arbitrio.)
Extract from Augustin’s “Retractations” on “De Gratiâ et Libero Arbitrio.”
Two Letters from Augustin to Valentinus and the Monks of Adrumetum, and forwarded with the Following Treatise.
The Treatise itself.
(De Correptione et Gratiâ.)
Extract from Augustin’s “Retractations” on “De Correptione et Gratiâ.”
The Treatise itself.
(De Prædestinatione Sanctorum.)
(De Dono Perseverantiæ.)
Note.—The treatises marked wth an asterisk above were translated by Dr. Wallis; the others by Dr. Holmes.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Lives of Illustrious Men/Gennadius/Macarius the monk

Chapter X.
Macarius, the Egyptian monk, distinguished for his miracles and virtues, wrote one letter which was addressed to the younger men of his profession. In this he taught them that he could serve God perfectly who, knowing the condition of his creation, should devote himself to all labours, and by wrestling against every thing which is agreeable in this life, and at the same time imploring the aid of God would attain also to natural purity and obtain continence, as a well merited gift of nature.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Born about 300, died 390 (391).
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Lives of Illustrious Men/Gennadius/Macrobius the presbyter

Chapter V.
Macrobius the Presbyter was likewise as I learned from the writings of Optatus, afterwards secretly bishop of the Donatians in Rome. He wrote, having been up to this time a presbyter in the church of God, a work To confessors and virgins, a work of ethics indeed, but of very necessary doctrine as well and fortified with sentiments well fitted for the preservation of chastity. He was distinguished first in our party in Africa and afterwards in his own, that is among the Donatians or Montanists at Rome.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Bishop about 370.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Lives of Illustrious Men/Gennadius/Maximus the bishop

Chapter XLI.
Maximus, bishop of the church at Turin, a man fairly industrious in the study of the Holy Scripture, and good at teaching the people extemporaneously, composed treatises In praise of the apostles and John the Baptist, and a Homily on all the martyrs. Moreover he wrote many acute comments on passages from the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles. He wrote also two treatises, On the life of Saint Eusebius, bishop of Vercelli, and confessor, and On Saint Cyprian, and published a monograph On the grace of baptism. I have read his On avarice, On hospitality, On the eclipse of the moon, On almsgiving, On the saying in Isaiah, Your winedealers mix wine with water, On Our Lord’s Passion, A general treatise On fasting by the servants of God, On the quadragesimal fast in particular, and That there should be no jesting on fast day, On Judas, the betrayer, On Our Lord’s cross, On His sepulchre, On His resurrection, On the accusation and trial of Our Lord before Pontius Pilate, On the Kalends of January, a homily On the day of Our Lord’s Nativity, also homilies On Epiphany, On the Passover, On Pentecost, many also, On having no fear of carnal Foes, On giving thanks after meat, On the repentance of the Ninivites, and other homilies of his, published on various occasions, whose names I do not remember. He died in the reign of Honorius and Theodosius the younger.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Maximus of Vercelli, bishop of Turin about 415, died 466–470.
* ↑ omit life A 30 a.
* ↑ published T 30 21 Her.; delivered A 25 31 a e.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Lives of Illustrious Men/Gennadius/John the presbyter

Chapter XCIII.
John of Antioch first grammarian, and then Presbyter, wrote against those who assert that Christ is to be adored in one substance only and do not admit that two natures are to be recognized in Christ. He taught according to the Scriptural account that in Him God and man exist in one person, and not the flesh and the Word in one nature.
He likewise attacked certain sentiments of Cyril, bishop of Alexandria, unwisely delivered by Cyril against Nestorius, which now are an encouragement and give strength to the Timotheans. He is said to be still living and preaching.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Flourished 477–495.
* ↑ unwisely T 25 30 31 e; unwisely saying A? a?
* ↑ Timotheans A T 25 30 31 a e 21 etc; add which is absurd Fabr. Migne, Her.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Lives of Illustrious Men/Gennadius/Julius, bishop of Rome

Chapter II.
Julius, bishop of Rome, wrote to one Dionysius a single epistle On the incarnation of Our Lord, which at that time was regarded as useful against those who asserted that, as by incarnation there were two persons in Christ, so also there were two natures, but now this too is regarded as injurious for it nourishes the Eutychian and Timothean heresies.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Bishop (Pope) 337, died 352.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Lives of Illustrious Men/Gennadius/Leo the bishop

Chapter LXXI.
Leo, bishop of Rome, wrote a letter to Flavianus, bishop of the church at Constantinople, against Eutyches the presbyter, who at that time, on account of his ambition for the episcopate was trying to introduce novelties into the church. In this he advises Flavianus, if Eutyches confesses his error and promises amendment, to receive him, but if he should persist in the course he had entered on, that he should be condemned together with his heresy. He likewise teaches in this epistle and confirms by divine testimony that as the Lord Jesus Christ is to be considered the true son of the Divine Father, so likewise he is to be considered true man with human nature, that is, that he derived a body of flesh from the flesh of the virgin and not as Eutyches asserted, that he showed a body from heaven. He died in the reign of Leo and Majorianus.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Leo the Great, Bishop (Pope) 440, died 461.
* ↑ bishop: A 30 31 e have pontiff.
* ↑ T and 21 add after heaven “and he addressed another letter on this same subject to the Emperor Leo in whose reign also he died.”