NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal
Treatises; Moral Treatises
byPhilip Schaff

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

Table of Contents
About This Book. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. ii
Title Page.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 1
Preface.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 2
Contents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 4
Doctrinal Treatises of St. Augustin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 6
On the Holy Trinity.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 6
Introductory Essay.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 6
Translator’s Preface.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 15
The unity and equality of the Trinity are demonstrated out of the
Scriptures; and the true interpretation is given of those texts which are
wrongly alleged against the equality of the Son.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 18
This Work is Written Against Those Who Sophistically Assail the Faithof the Trinity, Through Misuse of Reason. They Who Dispute Concerning
God Err from a Threefold Cause. Holy Scripture, Removing What isFalse, Leads Us on by Degrees to Things Divine. What True Immortality
is. We are Nourished by Faith, that We May Be Enabled to Apprehend
Things Divine.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 18
In What Manner This Work Proposes to Discourse Concerning the
Trinity.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 20
What Augustin Requests from His Readers. The Errors of Readers Dullof Comprehension Not to Be Ascribed to the Author.. . . . . . . . . . . p. 21
What the Doctrine of the Catholic Faith is Concerning the Trinity.. . . . p. 23
Of Difficulties Concerning the Trinity: in What Manner Three are One
God, and How, Working Indivisibly, They Yet Perform Some Things
Severally.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 23
That the Son is Very God, of the Same Substance with the Father. Not
Only the Father, But the Trinity, is Affirmed to Be Immortal. All Things
are Not from the Father Alone, But Also from the Son. That the Holy
Spirit is Very God, Equal with the Father and the Son.. . . . . . . . . . p. 24
In What Manner the Son is Less Than the Father, and Than
Himself.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 28
The Texts of Scripture Explained Respecting the Subjection of the Son
to the Father, Which Have Been Misunderstood. Christ Will Not So Give
Up the Kingdom to the Father, as to Take It Away from Himself. Thep. 29

iii

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

Beholding Him is the Promised End of All Actions. The Holy Spirit isSufficient to Our Blessedness Equally with the Father.. . . . . . . . . .
All are Sometimes Understood in One Person.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 33
In What Manner Christ Shall Deliver Up the Kingdom to God, Even the
Father. The Kingdom Having Been Delivered to God, Even the Father,
Christ Will Not Then Make Intercession for Us.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 34
By What Rule in the Scriptures It is Understood that the Son is Now
Equal and Now Less.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 37
In What Manner the Son is Said Not to Know the Day and the Hour
Which the Father Knows. Some Things Said of Christ According to theForm of God, Other Things According to the Form of a Servant. In What
Way It is of Christ to Give the Kingdom, in What Not of Christ. Christ
Will Both Judge and Not Judge.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 38
Diverse Things are Spoken Concerning the Same Christ, on Accountof the Diverse Natures of the One Hypostasis [Theanthropic Person].
Why It is Said that the Father Will Not Judge, But Has Given Judgmentto the Son.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 42
The equality of the Trinity maintained against objections drawn from those
texts which speak of the sending of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.. . . . p. 47
Preface.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 47
There is a Double Rule for Understanding the Scriptural Modes of
Speech Concerning the Son of God. These Modes of Speech are of aThreefold Kind.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 48
That Some Ways of Speaking Concerning the Son are to Be Understood
According to Either Rule.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 50
Some Things Concerning the Holy Spirit are to Be Understood According
to the One Rule Only.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 50
The Glorification of the Son by the Father Does Not Prove
Inequality.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 51
The Son and Holy Spirit are Not Therefore Less Because Sent. The
Son is Sent Also by Himself. Of the Sending of the Holy Spirit.. . . . . p. 52
The Creature is Not So Taken by the Holy Spirit as Flesh is by theWord.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 54
A Doubt Raised About Divine Appearances.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 56
The Entire Trinity Invisible.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 57
Against Those Who Believed the Father Only to Be Immortal andInvisible. The Truth to Be Sought by Peaceful Study.. . . . . . . . . . . p. 58
Whether God the Trinity Indiscriminately Appeared to the Fathers, or
Any One Person of the Trinity. The Appearing of God to Adam. Of theSame Appearance. The Vision to Abraham.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 59
iv

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

Of the Same Appearance.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 62
The Appearance to Lot is Examined.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 62
The Appearance in the Bush.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 64
Of the Appearance in the Pillar of Cloud and of Fire.. . . . . . . . . . . p. 65
Of the Appearance on Sinai. Whether the Trinity Spake in that
Appearance or Some One Person Specially.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 65
In What Manner Moses Saw God.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 67
How the Back Parts of God Were Seen. The Faith of the Resurrectionof Christ. The Catholic Church Only is the Place from Whence the Back
Parts of God are Seen. The Back Parts of God Were Seen by the
Israelites. It is a Rash Opinion to Think that God the Father Only Was
Never Seen by the Fathers.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 68
The Vision of Daniel.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 71
The appearances of God to the Old Testament saints are
discussed.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 73
Preface.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 73
What is to Be Said Thereupon.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 75
The Will of God is the Higher Cause of All Corporeal Change. This isShown by an Example.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 76
Of the Same Argument.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 77
God Uses All Creatures as He Will, and Makes Visible Things for the
Manifestation of Himself.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 78
Why Miracles are Not Usual Works.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 79
Diversity Alone Makes a Miracle.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 80
Great Miracles Wrought by Magic Arts.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 81
God Alone Creates Those Things Which are Changed by MagicA r t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 81
The Original Cause of All Things is from God.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 83
In How Many Ways the Creature is to Be Taken by Way of Sign. The
Eucharist.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 85
The Essence of God Never Appeared in Itself. Divine Appearances to
the Fathers Wrought by the Ministry of Angels. An Objection Drawnfrom the Mode of Speech Removed. That the Appearing of God to
Abraham Himself, Just as that to Moses, Was Wrought by Angels. The
Same Thing is Proved by the Law Being Given to Moses by Angels.
What Has Been Said in This Book, and What Remains to Be Said in
the Next.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 88
Augustin explains for what the Son of God was sent; but, however, that
the Son of God, although made less by being sent, is not therefore lessp. 92v

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

because the Father sent Him; nor yet the Holy Spirit less because both
the Father sent Him and the Son.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Preface.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 93
We are Made Perfect by Acknowledgement of Our Own Weakness.
The Incarnate Word Dispels Our Darkness.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 94
How We are Rendered Apt for the Perception of Truth Through the
Incarnate Word.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 95
The One Death and Resurrection of The Body of Christ Harmonizes
with Our Double Death and Resurrection of Body and Soul, to the Effectof Salvation. In What Way the Single Death of Christ is Bestowed Upon
Our Double Death.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 96
The Ratio of the Single to the Double Comes from the Perfection of the
Senary Number. The Perfection of The Senary Number is Commended
in the Scriptures. The Year Abounds in The Senary Number.. . . . . . p. 99
The Number Six is Also Commended in the Building Up of the Body of
Christ and of the Temple at Jerusalem.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 100
The Three Days of the Resurrection, in Which Also the Ratio of Single
to Double is Apparent.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 101
In What Manner We are Gathered from Many into One Through One
Mediator.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 102
In What Manner Christ Wills that All Shall Be One in Himself.. . . . . . p. 102
The Same Argument Continued.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 103
As Christ is the Mediator of Life, So the Devil is the Mediator of
Death.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 104
Miracles Which are Done by Demons are to Be Spurned.. . . . . . . . p. 104
The Devil the Mediator of Death, Christ of Life.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 105
The Death of Christ Voluntary. How the Mediator of Life Subdued theMediator of Death. How the Devil Leads His Own to Despise the Deathof Christ.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 106
Christ the Most Perfect Victim for Cleansing Our Faults. In Every
Sacrifice Four Things are to Be Considered.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 108
They are Proud Who Think They are Able, by Their Own Righteousness,
to Be Cleansed So as to See God.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 109
The Old Philosophers are Not to Be Consulted Concerning the
Resurrection and Concerning Things to Come.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 109
In How Many Ways Things Future are Foreknown. Neither Philosophers,
Nor Those Who Were Distinguished Among the Ancients, are to Be
Consulted Concerning the Resurrection of the Dead.. . . . . . . . . . . p. 110
The Son of God Became Incarnate in Order that We Being Cleansed
by Faith May Be Raised to the Unchangeable Truth.. . . . . . . . . . . p. 111
vi

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

In What Manner the Son Was Sent and Proclaimed Beforehand. Howin the Sending of His Birth in the Flesh He Was Made Less Without
Detriment to His Equality with the Father.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 112
The Sender and the Sent Equal. Why the Son is Said to Be Sent by the
Father. Of the Mission of the Holy Spirit. How and by Whom He Was
Sent. The Father the Beginning of the Whole Godhead.. . . . . . . . . p. 114
Of the Sensible Showing of the Holy Spirit, and of the Coeternity of the
Trinity. What Has Been Said, and What Remains to Be Said.. . . . . . p. 117
He proceeds to refute those arguments which the heretics put forward,
not out of the Scriptures, but from their own conceptions. And first herefutes the objection, that to beget and to be begotten, or that to be
begotten and not-begotten, being different, are therefore different
substances, and shows that these things are spoken of God relatively,
and not according to substance.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 119
What the Author Entreats from God, What from the Reader. In God
Nothing is to Be Thought Corporeal or Changeable.. . . . . . . . . . . . p. 119
God the Only Unchangeable Essence.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 120
The Argument of the Arians is Refuted, Which is Drawn from the Words
Begotten and Unbegotten.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 121
The Accidental Always Implies Some Change in the Thing.. . . . . . . p. 122
Nothing is Spoken of God According to Accident, But According to
Substance or According to Relation.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 122
Reply is Made to the Cavils of the Heretics in Respect to the Same
Words Begotten and Unbegotten.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 123
The Addition of a Negative Does Not Change the Predicament.. . . . . p. 124
Whatever is Spoken of God According to Substance, is Spoken of Each
Person Severally, and Together of the Trinity Itself. One Essence inGod, and Three, in Greek, Hypostases, in Latin, Persons.. . . . . . . . p. 125
The Three Persons Not Properly So Called [in a Human Sense].. . . . p. 127
Those Things Which Belong Absolutely to God as an Essence, are
Spoken of the Trinity in the Singular, Not in the Plural.. . . . . . . . . . p. 127
What is Said Relatively in the Trinity.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 128
In Relative Things that are Reciprocal, Names are Sometimes
Wanting.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 129
How the Word Beginning (Principium) is Spoken Relatively in the
Trinity.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 129
The Father and the Son the Only Beginning (Principium) of the Holy
Spirit.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 130
Whether the Holy Spirit Was a Gift Before as Well as After He Was
G i v e n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 131
vii

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

What is Said of God in Time, is Said Relatively, Not Accidentally.. . . . p. 132
In reply to the argument alleged against the equality of the Son from theapostle’s words, saying that Christ is the ‘power of God and the wisdomof God,’ he propounds the question whether the Father Himself is not
wisdom. But deferring for a while the answer to this, he adduces further
proof of the unity and equality of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit;and that God ought to be said and believed to be a Trinity, not triple(triplicem). And he adds an explanation of the saying of Hilary—Eternity
in the Father, Appearance in the Image, and Use in the Gift.. . . . . . . p. 133
The Son, According to the Apostle, is the Power and Wisdom of the
Father. Hence the Reasoning of the Catholics Against the Earlier Arians.
A Difficulty is Raised, Whether the Father is Not Wisdom Himself, But
Only the Father of Wisdom.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 134
What is Said of the Father and Son Together, and What Not.. . . . . . p. 135
That the Unity of the Essence of the Father and the Son is to Be
Gathered from the Words, ‘We are One.’ The Son is Equal to the Father
Both in Wisdom and in All Other Things.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 136
The Same Argument Continued.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 137
The Holy Spirit Also is Equal to the Father and the Son in All
Things.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 138
How God is a Substance Both Simple and Manifold.. . . . . . . . . . . p. 139
God is a Trinity, But Not Triple (Triplex).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 139
No Addition Can Be Made to the Nature of God.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 140
Whether One or the Three Persons Together are Called the Only
God.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 141
Of the Attributes Assigned by Hilary to Each Person. The Trinity is
Represented in Things that are Made.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 142
He resolves the question he had deferred, and teaches us that the Father,
the Son, and the Holy Spirit is one power and one wisdom, no otherwise
than one God and one essence. And he then inquires how it is that, in
speaking of God, the Latins say, One essence, three persons; but the
Greeks, One essence, three substances or hypostases.. . . . . . . . . . p. 143
Augustin Returns to the Question, Whether Each Person of the Trinity
by Itself is Wisdom. With What Difficulty, or in What Way, the Proposed
Question is to Be Solved.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 143
The Father and the Son are Together One Wisdom, as One Essence,
Although Not Together One Word.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 147
Why the Son Chiefly is Intimated in the Scriptures by the Name of
Wisdom, While Both the Father and the Holy Spirit are Wisdom. Thatp. 147

viii

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

the Holy Spirit, Together with the Father and the Son, is One
Wisdom.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
How It Was Brought About that the Greeks Speak of Three Hypostases,
the Latins of Three Persons. Scripture Nowhere Speaks of Three
Persons in One God.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 150
In God, Substance is Spoken Improperly, Essence Properly.. . . . . . p. 153
Why We Do Not in the Trinity Speak of One Person, and Three
Essences. What He Ought to Believe Concerning the Trinity Who Does
Not Receive What is Said Above. Man is Both After the Image, and is
the Image of God.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 153
He advances reasons to show not only that the Father is not greater thanthe Son, but that neither are both together anything greater than the Holy
Spirit, nor any two together in the same Trinity anything greater than one,nor all three together anything greater than each singly. He also intimatesthat the nature of God may be understood from our understanding oftruth, from our knowledge of the supreme good, and from our implanted
love of righteousness; but above all, that our knowledge of God is to besought through love, in which he notices a trio of things which contains
a trace of the Trinity.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 157
Preface.—The Conclusion of What Has Been Said Above. The Rule to
Be Observed in the More Difficult Questions of the Faith.. . . . . . . . p. 157
It is Shown by Reason that in God Three are Not Anything Greater Than
One Person.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 158
Every Corporeal Conception Must Be Rejected, in Order that It May Be
Understood How God is Truth.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 159
How God May Be Known to Be the Chief Good. The Mind Does Not
Become Good Unless by Turning to God.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 160
God Must First Be Known by an Unerring Faith, that He May Be
Loved.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 161
How the Trinity May Be Loved Though Unknown.. . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 162
How the Man Not Yet Righteous Can Know the Righteous Man WhomHe Loves.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 164
Of True Love, by Which We Arrive at the Knowledge of the Trinity. God
is to Be Sought, Not Outwardly, by Seeking to Do Wonderful Things
with the Angels, But Inwardly, by Imitating the Piety of GoodAngels.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 167
That He Who Loves His Brother, Loves God; Because He Loves Love
Itself, Which is of God, and is God.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 168
Our Love of the Righteous is Kindled from Love Itself of the
Unchangeable Form of Righteousness.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 169
ix

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

There are Three Things in Love, as It Were a Trace of the Trinity.. . . . p. 170
He instructs us that there is a kind of trinity discernible in man, who is theimage of God, viz. the mind, and the knowledge by which the mind knows
itself, and the love wherewith it loves both itself and its own knowledge;
these three being mutually equal and of one essence.. . . . . . . . . . . p. 171
In What Way We Must Inquire Concerning the Trinity.. . . . . . . . . . p. 171
The Three Things Which are Found in Love Must Be Considered.. . . p. 172
The Image of the Trinity in the Mind of Man Who Knows Himself andLoves Himself. The Mind Knows Itself Through Itself.. . . . . . . . . . . p. 174
The Three are One, and Also Equal, Viz. The Mind Itself, and the Love,and the Knowledge of It. That the Same Three Exist Substantially, and
are Predicated Relatively. That the Same Three are Inseparable. That
the Same Three are Not Joined and Commingled Like Parts, But that
They are of One Essence, and are Relatives.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 174
That These Three are Several in Themselves, and Mutually All in
All.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 176
There is One Knowledge of the Thing in the Thing Itself, and Anotherin Eternal Truth Itself. That Corporeal Things, Too, are to Be Judged
the Rules of Eternal Truth.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 177
We Conceive and Beget the Word Within, from the Things We Have
Beheld in the Eternal Truth. The Word, Whether of the Creature or of
the Creator, is Conceived by Love.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 179
In What Desire and Love Differ.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 179
In the Love of Spiritual Things the Word Born is the Same as the Word
Conceived. It is Otherwise in the Love of Carnal Things.. . . . . . . . . p. 180
Whether Only Knowledge that is Loved is the Word of the Mind.. . . . . p. 180
That the Image or Begotten Word of the Mind that Knows Itself is Equal
to the Mind Itself.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 181
Why Love is Not the Offspring of the Mind, as Knowledge is So. The
Solution of the Question. The Mind with the Knowledge of Itself and theLove of Itself is the Image of the Trinity.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 182
That there is yet another and a more manifest trinity to be found in themind of man, viz. in his memory, understanding, and will.. . . . . . . . . p. 184
The Love of the Studious Mind, that Is, of One Desirous to Know, is Not
the Love of a Thing Which It Does Not Know.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 184
No One at All Loves Things Unknown.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 187
That When the Mind Loves Itself, It is Not Unknown to Itself.. . . . . . p. 187
How the Mind Knows Itself, Not in Part, But as a Whole.. . . . . . . . . p. 188
Why the Soul is Enjoined to Know Itself. Whence Come the Errors of
the Mind Concerning Its Own Substance.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 189
x

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

The Opinion Which the Mind Has of Itself is Deceitful.. . . . . . . . . . p. 190
The Opinions of Philosophers Respecting the Substance of the Soul.
The Error of Those Who are of Opinion that the Soul is Corporeal, Does
Not Arise from Defective Knowledge of the Soul, But from Their Adding
There to Something Foreign to It. What is Meant by Finding.. . . . . . p. 190
How the Soul Inquires into Itself. Whence Comes the Error of the Soul
Concerning Itself.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 192
The Mind Knows Itself, by the Very Act of Understanding the Precept
to Know Itself.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 192
Every Mind Knows Certainly Three Things Concerning Itself—That It
Understands, that It Is, and that It Lives.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 193
In Memory, Understanding [or Intelligence], and Will, We Have to Note
Ability, Learning, and Use. Memory, Understanding, and Will are One
Essentially, and Three Relatively.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 195
The Mind is an Image of the Trinity in Its Own Memory, andUnderstanding, and Will.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 196
That even in the outer man some traces of a trinity may be detected, ase.g., in the bodily sight, and in the recollection of objects seen with thebodily sight.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 197
A Trace of the Trinity Also In the Outer Man.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 197
A Certain Trinity in the Sight. That There are Three Things in Sight,
Which Differ in Their Own Nature. In What Manner from a Visible Thing
Vision is Produced, or the Image of that Thing Which is Seen. The
Matter is Shown More Clearly by an Example. How These Three
Combine in One.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 198
The Unity of the Three Takes Place in Thought, Viz. Of Memory, of
Ternal Vision,and of Will Combining Both.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 201
How This Unity Comes to Pass.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 202
The Trinity of the Outer Man, or of External Vision, is Not an Image ofGod. The Likeness of God is Desired Even in Sins. In External Vision
the Form of the Corporeal Thing is as It Were the Parent, Vision the
Offspring; But the Will that Unites These Suggests the Holy Spirit.. . . p. 203
Of What Kind We are to Reckon the Rest (Requies), and End (Finis),of the Will in Vision.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 204
There is Another Trinity in the Memory of Him Who Thinks Over Again
What He Has Seen.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 205
Different Modes of Conceiving.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 207
Species is Produced by Species in Succession.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 209
The Imagination Also Adds Even to Things We Have Not Seen, ThoseThings Which We Have Seen Elsewhere.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 210
xi

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

Number, Weight, Measure.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 211
After premising the difference between wisdom and knowledge, he points
out a kind of trinity in that which is properly called knowledge; but one
which, although we have reached in it the inner man, is not yet to becalled the image of God.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 211
Of What Kind are the Outer and the Inner Man.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 212
Man Alone of Animate Creatures Perceives the Eternal Reasons ofThings Pertaining to the Body.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 212
The Higher Reason Which Belongs to Contemplation, and the Lower
Which Belongs to Action, are in One Mind.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 213
The Trinity and the Image of God is in that Part of the Mind Alone Which
Belongs to the Contemplation of Eternal Things.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 213
The Opinion Which Devises an Image of the Trinity in the Marriage ofMale and Female, and in Their Offspring.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 214
Why This Opinion is to Be Rejected.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 215
How Man is the Image of God. Whether the Woman is Not Also the
Image of God. How the Saying of the Apostle, that the Man is the Imageof God, But the Woman is the Glory of the Man, is to Be Understood
Figuratively and Mystically.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 217
Turning Aside from the Image of God.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 219
The Same Argument is Continued.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 219
The Lowest Degradation Reached by Degrees.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 220
The Image of the Beast in Man.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 220
There is a Kind of Hidden Wedlock in the Inner Man. Unlawful Pleasuresof the Thoughts.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 221
The Opinion of Those Who Have Thought that the Mind Was Signified
by the Man, the Bodily Sense by the Woman.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 223
What is the Difference Between Wisdom and Knowledge. The Worshipof God is the Love of Him. How the Intellectual Cognizance of Eternal
Things Comes to Pass Through Wisdom.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 224
In Opposition to the Reminiscence of Plato and Pythagoras. Pythagoras
the Samian. Of the Difference Between Wisdom and Knowledge, andof Seeking the Trinity in the Knowledge of Temporal Things.. . . . . . p. 225
He expounds this trinity that he has found in knowledge by commending
Christian faith.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 227
The Attempt is Made to Distinguish Out of the Scriptures the Offices of
Wisdom and of Knowledge. That in the Beginning of John Some Things
that are Said Belong to Wisdom, Some to Knowledge. Some Things
There are Only Known by the Help of Faith. How We See the Faith thatp. 227

xii

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

is in Us. In the Same Narrative of John, Some Things are Known by
the Sense of the Body, Others Only by the Reason of the Mind.. . . . .
Faith a Thing of the Heart, Not of the Body; How It is Common and One
and the Same in All Believers. The Faith of Believers is One, No
Otherwise than the Will of Those Who Will is One.. . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 230
Some Desires Being the Same in All, are Known to Each. The Poet
Ennius.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 231
The Will to Possess Blessedness is One in All, But the Variety of Wills
is Very Great Concerning that Blessedness Itself.. . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 232
Of the Same Thing.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 233
Why, When All Will to Be Blessed, that is Rather Chosen by Which One
Withdraws from Being So.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 234
Faith is Necessary, that Man May at Some Time Be Blessed, Which
He Will Only Attain in the Future Life. The Blessedness of Proud
Philosophers Ridiculous and Pitiable.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 235
Blessedness Cannot Exist Without Immortality.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 236
We Say that Future Blessedness is Truly Eternal, Not Through Human
Reasonings, But by the Help of Faith. The Immortality of Blessedness
Becomes Credible from the Incarnation of the Son of God.. . . . . . . p. 237
There Was No Other More Suitable Way of Freeing Man from the Miseryof Mortality Than The Incarnation of the Word. The Merits Which are
Called Ours are the Gifts of God.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 238
A Difficulty, How We are Justitified in the Blood of the Son of
God.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 239
All, on Account of the Sin of Adam, Were Delivered into the Power ofthe Devil.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 240
Man Was to Be Rescued from the Power of the Devil, Not by Power,
But by Righteousness.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 241
The Unobligated Death of Christ Has Freed Those Who Were Liable
to Death.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 242
Of the Same Subject.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 243
The Remains of Death and the Evil Things of the World Turn to Goodfor the Elect. How Fitly the Death of Christ Was Chosen, that We Might
Be Justified in His Blood. What the Anger of God is.. . . . . . . . . . . . p. 244
Other Advantages of the Incarnation.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 246
Why the Son of God Took Man Upon Himself from the Race of Adam,and from a Virgin.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 247
What in the Incarnate Word Belongs to Knowledge, What to
Wisdom.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 248

xiii

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

What Has Been Treated of in This Book. How We Have Reached by
Steps to a Certain Trinity, Which is Found in Practical Knowledge andTrue Faith.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 249
He speaks of the true wisdom of man, viz. that by which he remembers,
understands, and loves God; and shows that it is in this very thing thatthe mind of man is the image of God, although his mind, which is here
renewed in the knowledge of God, will only then be made the perfectlikeness of God in that image when there shall be a perfect sight ofGod.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 251
What the Wisdom is of Which We are Here to Treat. Whence the Nameof Philosopher Arose. What Has Been Already Said Concerning theDistinction of Knowledge and Wisdom.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 251
There is a Kind of Trinity in the Holding, Contemplating, and Loving ofFaith Temporal, But One that Does Not Yet Attain to Being Properly an
Image of God.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 253
A Difficulty Removed, Which Lies in the Way of What Has Just Been
S a i d . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 254
The Image of God is to Be Sought in the Immortality of the Rational
Soul. How a Trinity is Demonstrated in the Mind.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 255
Whether the Mind of Infants Knows Itself.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 256
How a Kind of Trinity Exists in the Mind Thinking of Itself. What is thePart of Thought in This Trinity.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 257
The Thing is Made Plain by an Example. In What Way the Matter isHandled in Order to Help the Reader.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 258
The Trinity Which is the Image of God is Now to Be Sought in the
Noblest Part of the Mind.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 259
Whether Justice and the Other Virtues Cease to Exist in the FutureLife.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 261
How a Trinity is Produced by the Mind Remembering, Understanding,and Loving Itself.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 262
Whether Memory is Also of Things Present.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 262
The Trinity in the Mind is the Image of God, in that It Remembers,
Understands, and Loves God, Which to Do is Wisdom.. . . . . . . . . . p. 263
How Any One Can Forget and Remember God.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 264
The Mind Loves God in Rightly Loving Itself; And If It Love Not God, It
Must Be Said to Hate Itself. Even a Weak and Erring Mind is Always
Strong in Remembering, Understanding, and Loving Itself. Let It Be
Turned to God, that It May Be Blessed by Remembering, Understanding,and Loving Him.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 265

xiv

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

Although the Soul Hopes for Blessedness, Yet It Does Not Remember
Lost Blessedness, But Remembers God and the Rules ofRighteousness. The Unchangeable Rules of Right Living are Known
Even to the Ungodly.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 267
How the Image of God is Formed Anew in Man.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 268
How the Image of God in the Mind is Renewed Until the Likeness of
God is Perfected in It in Blessedness.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 270
Whether the Sentence of John is to Be Understood of Our Future
Likeness with the Son of God in the Immortality Itself Also of the
Body.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 271
John is Rather to Be Understood of Our Perfect Likeness with the Trinity
in Life Eternal. Wisdom is Perfected in Happiness.. . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 272
He embraces in a brief compendium the contents of the previous books;
and finally shows that the Trinity, in the perfect sight of which consists
the blessed life that is promised us, is here seen by us as in a glass andin an enigma, so long as it is seen through that image of God which weourselves are.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 273
God is Above the Mind.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 273
God, Although Incomprehensible, is Ever to Be Sought. The Traces of
the Trinity are Not Vainly Sought in the Creature.. . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 274
A Brief Recapitulation of All the Previous Books.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 275
What Universal Nature Teaches Us Concerning God.. . . . . . . . . . . p. 277
How Difficult It is to Demonstrate the Trinity by Natural Reason.. . . . . p. 278
How There is a Trinity in the Very Simplicity of God. Whether and How
the Trinity that is God is Manifested from the Trinities Which Have Been
Shown to Be in Men.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 279
That It is Not Easy to Discover the Trinity that is God from the Trinities
We Have Spoken of.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 281
How the Apostle Says that God is Now Seen by Us Through aGlass.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 283
Of the Term ‘Enigma,’ And of Tropical Modes of Speech.. . . . . . . . p. 284
Concerning the Word of the Mind, in Which We See the Word of God,as in a Glass and an Enigma.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 286
The Likeness of the Divine Word, Such as It Is, is to Be Sought, Not in
Our Own Outer and Sensible Word, But in the Inner and Mental One.
There is the Greatest Possible Unlikeness Between Our Word andKnowledge and the Divine Word and Knowledge.. . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 288
The Academic Philosophy.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 290
Still Further of the Difference Between the Knowledge and Word of Our
Mind, and the Knowledge and Word of God.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 292
xv

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

The Word of God is in All Things Equal to the Father, from Whom It
i s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 293
How Great is the Unlikeness Between Our Word and the Divine Word.
Our Word Cannot Be or Be Called Eternal.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 294
Our Word is Never to Be Equalled to the Divine Word, Not Even When
We Shall Be Like God.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 295
How the Holy Spirit is Called Love, and Whether He Alone is So Called.
That the Holy Spirit is in the Scriptures Properly Called by the Name ofLove.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 296
No Gift of God is More Excellent Than Love.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 299
The Holy Spirit is Called the Gift of God in the Scriptures. By the Giftof the Holy Spirit is Meant the Gift Which is the Holy Spirit. The Holy
Spirit is Specially Called Love, Although Not Only the Holy Spirit in the
Trinity is Love.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 300
Against Eunomius, Saying that the Son of God is the Son, Not of His
Nature, But of His Will. Epilogue to What Has Been Said Already.. . . . p. 303
Of the Likeness of the Father and of the Son Alleged to Be in Our
Memory and Understanding. Of the Likeness of the Holy Spirit in Our
Will or Love.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 304
How Great the Unlikeness is Between the Image of the Trinity Which
We Have Found in Ourselves, and the Trinity Itself.. . . . . . . . . . . . p. 305
Augustin Dwells Still Further on the Disparity Between the Trinity Whichis in Man, and the Trinity Which is God. The Trinity is Now Seen Througha Glass by the Help of Faith, that It May Hereafter Be More ClearlySeen in the Promised Sight Face to Face.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 306
The Infirmity of the Human Mind.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 307
The Question Why the Holy Spirit is Not Begotten, and How He
Proceeds from the Father and the Son, Will Only Be Understood WhenWe are in Bliss.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 308
The Holy Spirit Twice Given by Christ. The Procession of the Holy Spirit
from the Father and from the Son is Apart from Time, Nor Can He Be
Called the Son of Both.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 309
What It is that Suffices Here to Solve the Question Why the Spirit is Not
Said to Be Begotten, and Why the Father Alone is Unbegotten. What
They Ought to Do Who Do Not Understand These Things.. . . . . . . p. 312
The Conclusion of the Book with a Prayer, and an Apology for Multitude
of Words.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 314
The Enchiridion.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 315
Introductory Notice.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 316
Argument.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 317
xvi

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

The Author Desires the Gift of True Wisdom for Laurentius.. . . . . . . . p. 317
The Fear of God is Man’s True Wisdom.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 317
God is to Be Worshipped Through Faith, Hope, and Love.. . . . . . . . . p. 318
The Questions Propounded by Laurentius.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 318
Brief Answers to These Questions.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 319
Controversy Out of Place in a Handbook Like the Present.. . . . . . . . p. 319
The Creed and the Lord’s Prayer Demand the Exercise of Faith, Hope,and Love.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 319
The Distinction Between Faith and Hope, and the Mutual Dependenceof Faith, Hope, and Love.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 320
What We are to Believe. In Regard to Nature It is Not Necessary for the
Christian to Know More Than that the Goodness of the Creator is the
Cause of All Things.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 321
The Supremely Good Creator Made All Things Good.. . . . . . . . . . . . p. 321
What is Called Evil in the Universe is But the Absence of Good.. . . . . p. 322
All Beings Were Made Good, But Not Being Made Perfectly Good, areLiable to Corruption.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 322
There Can Be No Evil Where There is No Good; And an Evil Man is an
Evil Good.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 323
Good and Evil are an Exception to the Rule that Contrary Attributes
Cannot Be Predicated of the Same Subject. Evil Springs Up in What is
Good, and Cannot Exist Except in What is Good.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 323
The Preceding Argument is in No Wise Inconsistent with the Saying of
Our Lord: ‘A Good Tree Cannot Bring Forth Evil Fruit.’. . . . . . . . . . . p. 324
It is Not Essential to Man’s Happiness that He Should Know the Causesof Physical Convulsions; But It Is, that He Should Know the Causes ofGood and Evil.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 324
The Nature of Error. All Error is Not Hurtful, Though It is Man’s Duty as
Far as Possible to Avoid It.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 325
It is Never Allowable to Tell a Lie; But Lies Differ Very Much in Guilt,
According to the Intention and the Subject.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 326
Men’s Errors Vary Very Much in the Magnitude of the Evils They Produce;
But Yet Every Error is in Itself an Evil.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 327
Every Error is Not a Sin. An Examination of the Opinion of the Academic
Philosophers, that to Avoid Error We Should in All Cases Suspend
Belief.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 328
Error, Though Not Always a Sin, is Always an Evil.. . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 329
A Lie is Not Allowable, Even to Save Another from Injury.. . . . . . . . . p. 329
Summary of the Results of the Preceding Discussion.. . . . . . . . . . . p. 330
The Secondary Causes of Evil are Ignorance and Lust.. . . . . . . . . . p. 330
xvii

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

God’s Judgments Upon Fallen Men and Angels. The Death of the Body
is Man’s Peculiar Punishment.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 331
Through Adam’s Sin His Whole Posterity Were Corrupted, and Were
Born Under the Penalty of Death, Which He Had Incurred.. . . . . . . . p. 331
The State of Misery to Which Adam’s Sin Reduced Mankind, and the
Restoration Effected Through the Mercy of God.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 331
When the Rebellious Angels Were Cast Out, the Rest Remained in the
Enjoyment of Eternal Happiness with God.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 332
The Restored Part of Humanity Shall, in Accordance with the Promisesof God, Succeed to the Place Which the Rebellious Angels Lost.. . . . . p. 332
Men are Not Saved by Good Works, Nor by the Free Determination of
Their Own Will, But by the Grace of God Through Faith.. . . . . . . . . . p. 333
Faith Itself is the Gift of God; And Good Works Will Not Be Wanting in
Those Who Believe.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 334
The Freedom of the Will is Also the Gift of God, for God Worketh in Us
Both to Will and to Do.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 334
Men, Being by Nature the Children of Wrath, Needed a Mediator. In What
Sense God is Said to Be Angry.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 335
The Ineffable Mystery of the Birth of Christ the Mediator Through the
Virgin Mary.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 336
Jesus Christ, Being the Only Son of God, is at the Same Time
Man.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 336
The Grace of God is Clearly and Remarkably Displayed in Raising the
Man Christ Jesus to the Dignity of the Son of God.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 337
The Same Grace is Further Clearly Manifested in This, that the Birth ofChrist According to the Flesh is of the Holy Ghost.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 338
Jesus Christ, According to the Flesh, Was Not Born of the Holy Spirit in
Such a Sense that the Holy Spirit is His Father.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 338
Not Everything that is Born of Another is to Be Called a Son of that
Other.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 339
Christ’s Birth Through the Holy Spirit Manifests to Us the Grace ofGod.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 339
Christ, Who Was Himself Free from Sin, Was Made Sin for Us, that We
Might Be Reconciled to God.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 340
The Sacrament of Baptism Indicates Our Death with Christ to Sin, and
Our Resurrection with Him to Newness of Life.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 340
Baptism and the Grace Which It Typifies are Open to All, Both Infantsand Adults.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 341
In Speaking of Sin, the Singular Number is Often Put for the Plural, and
the Plural for the Singular.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 341
xviii

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

In Adam’s First Sin, Many Kinds of Sin Were Involved.. . . . . . . . . . . p. 341
It is Probable that Children are Involved in the Guilt Not Only of the First
Pair, But of Their Own Immediate Parents.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 342
It is Difficult to Decide Whether the Sins of a Man’s Other Progenitors
are Imputed to Him.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 342
The Guilt of the First Sin is So Great that It Can Be Washed Away Onlyin the Blood of the Mediator, Jesus Christ.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 343
Christ Was Not Regenerated in the Baptism of John, But Submitted to It
to Give Us an Example of Humility, Just as He Submitted to Death, Not
as the Punishment of Sin, But to Take Away the Sin of the World.. . . . . p. 343
Christ Took Away Not Only the One Original Sin, But All the Other Sins
that Have Been Added to It.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 344
All Men Born of Adam are Under Condemnation, and Only If New Bornin Christ are Freed from Condemnation.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 344
In Baptism, Which is the Similitude of the Death and Resurrection of
Christ, All, Both Infants and Adults, Die to Sin that They May Walk in
Newness of Life.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 344
Christ’s Cross and Burial, Resurrection, Ascension, and Sitting Down at
the Right Hand of God, are Images of the Christian Life.. . . . . . . . . . p. 345
Christ’s Second Coming Does Not Belong to the Past, But Will Take
Place at the End of the World.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 346
The Expression, ‘Christ Shall Judge the Quick and the Dead,’ May Be
Understood in Either of Two Senses.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 346
The Holy Spirit and the Church. The Church is the Temple of God.. . . . p. 347
The Condition of the Church in Heaven.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 348
We Have No Certain Knowledge of the Organization of the Angelic
Society.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 348
The Bodies Assumed by Angels Raise a Very Difficult, and Not Very
Useful, Subject of Discussion.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 348
It is More Necessary to Be Able to Detect the Wiles of Satan When He
Transforms Himself into an Angel of Light.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 349
The Church on Earth Has Been Redeemed from Sin by the Blood of aMediator.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 349
By the Sacrifice of Christ All Things are Restored, and Peace is Made
Between Earth and Heaven.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 350
The Peace of God, Which Reigneth in Heaven, Passeth All
Understanding.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 350
Pardon of Sin Extends Over the Whole Mortal Life of the Saints, Which,Though Free from Crime, is Not Free from Sin.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 351

xix

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

God Pardons Sins, But on Condition of Penitence, Certain Times for
Which Have Been Fixed by the Law of the Church.. . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 352
The Pardon of Sin Has Reference Chiefly to the Future Judgment.. . . . p. 352
Faith Without Works is Dead, and Cannot Save a Man.. . . . . . . . . . p. 353
The True Sense of the Passage I Cor. III. 11–15 About Those Who are
Saved, Yet So as by Fire.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 353
It is Not Impossible that Some Believers May Pass Through a Purgatorial
Fire in the Future Life.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 354
Almsgiving Will Not Atone for Sin Unless the Life Be Changed.. . . . . p. 355
The Daily Prayer of the Believer Makes Satisfaction for the Trivial Sins
that Daily Stain His Life.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 355
There are Many Kinds of Alms, the Giving of Which Assists to Procure
Pardon for Our Sins.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 356
The Greatest of All Alms is to Forgive Our Debtors and to Love Our
Enemies.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 356
God Does Not Pardon the Sins of Those Who Do Not from the Heart
Forgive Others.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 357
The Wicked and the Unbelieving are Not Made Clean by the Giving ofAlms, Except They Be Born Again.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 357
To Give Alms Aright, We Should Begin with Ourselves, and Have Pity
Upon Our Own Souls.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 358
If We Would Give Alms to Ourselves, We Must Flee Iniquity; For He Who
Loveth Iniquity Hateth His Soul.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 359
What Sins are Trivial and What Heinous is a Matter for God’s
Judgment.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 359
Sins Which Appear Very Trifling, are Sometimes in Reality Very
Serious.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 360
Sins, However Great and Detestable, Seem Trivial When We are
Accustomed to Them.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 361
There are Two Causes of Sin, Ignorance and Weakness; And We Need
Divine Help to Overcome Both.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 362
The Mercy of God is Necessary to True Repentance.. . . . . . . . . . . . p. 362
The Man Who Despises the Mercy of God is Guilty of the Sin Against theHoly Ghost.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 362
The Resurrection of the Body Gives Rise to Numerous Questions.. . . . p. 363
The Case of Abortive Conceptions.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 363
If They Have Ever Lived, They Must of Course Have Died, and Therefore
Shall Have a Share in the Resurrection of the Dead.. . . . . . . . . . . . p. 363
The Case of Monstrous Births.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 364
The Material of the Body Never Perishes.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 364
xx

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

But This Material May Be Differently Arranged in the Resurrection
Body.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 364
If There Be Differences and Inequalities Among the Bodies of Those Who
Rise Again, There Shall Be Nothing Offensive or Disproportionate inAny.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 365
The Bodies of the Saints Shall at The Resurrection Be Spiritual
Bodies.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 365
The Resurrection of the Lost.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 366
Both the First and the Second Deaths are the Consequence of Sin.
Punishment is Proportioned to Guilt.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 366
The Saints Shall Know More Fully in the Next World the Benefits They
Have Received by Grace.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 367
God’s Judgments Shall Then Be Explained.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 367
The Omnipotent God Does Well Even in the Permission of Evil.. . . . . p. 368
In What Sense Does the Apostle Say that ’God Will Have All Men to Be
Saved,’ When, as a Matter of Fact, All are Not Saved?. . . . . . . . . . . p. 368
Predestination to Eternal Life is Wholly of God’s Free Grace.. . . . . . . p. 368
As God’s Mercy is Free, So His Judgments are Just, and Cannot Be
Gainsaid.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 370
The Will of God is Never Defeated, Though Much is Done that is Contrary
to His Will.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 371
The Will of God, Which is Always Good, is Sometimes Fulfilled Throughthe Evil Will of Man.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 371
The Will of the Omnipotent God is Never Defeated, and is Never
Evil.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 372
Interpretation of the Expression in I Tim. II. 4: ‘Who Will Have All Men to
Be Saved.’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 372
God, Foreknowing the Sin of the First Man, Ordered His Own Purposes
Accordingly.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 373
Man Was So Created as to Be Able to Choose Either Good or Evil: in
the Future Life, the Choice of Evil Will Be Impossible.. . . . . . . . . . . . p. 373
The Grace of God Was Necessary to Man’s Salvation Before the Fall as
Well as After It.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 374
Eternal Life, Though the Reward of Good Works, is Itself the Gift of
God.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 374
A Mediator Was Necessary to Reconcile Us to God; And Unless ThisMediator Had Been God, He Could Not Have Been Our Redeemer.. . . p. 375
The State of the Soul During the Interval Between Death and the
Resurrection.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 376

xxi

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

The Benefit to the Souls of the Dead from the Sacraments and Alms of
Their Living Friends.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 376
After the Resurrection There Shall Be Two Distinct Kingdoms, One of
Eternal Happiness, the Other of Eternal Misery.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 376
There is No Ground in Scripture for the Opinion of Those Who Deny the
Eternity of Future Punishments.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 377
The Death of the Wicked Shall Be Eternal in the Same Sense as the Lifeof the Saints.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 378
Having Dealt with Faith, We Now Come to Speak of Hope. Everythingthat Pertains to Hope is Embraced in the Lord’s Prayer.. . . . . . . . . . p. 378
The Seven Petitions of the Lord’s Prayer, According to Matthew.. . . . . p. 378
Luke Expresses the Substance of These Seven Petitions More Briefly in
Five.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 379
Love, Which is Greater Than Faith and Hope, is Shed Abroad in Our
Hearts by the Holy Ghost.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 379
The Four Stages of the Christian’s Life, and the Four Corresponding
Stages of the Church’s History.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 380
The Grace of Regeneration Washes Away All Past Sin and All Original
Guilt.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 381
Death Cannot Injure Those Who Have Received the Grace ofRegeneration.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 381
Love is the End of All the Commandments, and God Himself isLove.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 381
Conclusion.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 382
On the Catechising of the Uninstructed.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 382
Introductory Notice.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 383
How Augustin Writes in Answer to a Favor Asked by a Deacon ofCarthage.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 383
How It Often Happens that a Discourse Which Gives Pleasure to the
Hearer is Distasteful to the Speaker; And What Explanation is to Be
Offered of that Fact.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 384
Of the Full Narration to Be Employed in Catechising.. . . . . . . . . . . . p. 386
That the Great Reason for the Advent of Christ Was the Commendationof Love.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 388
That the Person Who Comes for Catechetical Instruction is to Be
Examined with Respect to His Views, on Desiring to Become a
Christian.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 390
Of the Way to Commence the Catechetical Instruction, and of the
Narration of Facts from the History of the World’s Creation on to thePresent Times of the Church.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 392
xxii

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

Of the Exposition of the Resurrection, the Judgment, and Other Subjects,
Which Should Follow This Narration.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 393
Of the Method to Be Pursued in Catechising Those Who Have Had a
Liberal Education.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 394
Of the Method in Which Grammarians and Professional Speakers are to
Be Dealt with.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 396
Of the Attainment of Cheerfulness in the Duty of Catechising, and of
Various Causes Producing Weariness in the Catechumen.. . . . . . . . p. 397
Of the Remedy for the Second Source of Weariness.. . . . . . . . . . . . p. 399
Of the Remedy for the Third Source of Weariness.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 401
Of the Remedy for the Fourth Source of Weariness.. . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 402
Of the Remedy Against the Fifth and Sixth Sources of Weariness.. . . . p. 404
Of the Method in Which Our Address Should Be Adapted to Different
Classes of Hearers.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 406
A Specimen of a Catechetical Address; And First, the Case of a
Catechumen with Worthy Views.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 407
The Specimen of Catechetical Discourse Continued, in Reference
Specially to the Reproval of False Aims on the Catechumen’s Part.. . . . p. 409
Of What is to Be Believed on the Subject of the Creation of Man andOther Objects.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 411
Of the Co-Existence of Good and Evil in the Church, and Their Final
Separation.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 412
Of Israel’s Bondage in Egypt, Their Deliverance, and Their Passage
Through the Red Sea.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 414
Of the Babylonish Captivity, and the Things Signified Thereby.. . . . . . p. 416
Of the Six Ages of the World.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 417
Of the Mission of the Holy Ghost Fifty Days After Christ’s
Resurrection.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 419
Of the Church in Its Likeness to a Vine Sprouting and Suffering
Pruning.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 421
Of Constancy in the Faith of the Resurrection.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 422
Of the Formal Admission of the Catechumen, and of the Signs Therein
Made Use of.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 425
Of the Prophecies of the Old Testament in Their Visible Fulfillment in the
Church.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 426
A Treatise on Faith and the Creed.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 429
Introductory Notice.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 429
Of the Origin and Object of the Composition.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 431
Of God and His Exclusive Eternity.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 432
Of the Son of God, and His Peculiar Designation as the Word.. . . . . . p. 433
xxiii

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

Of the Son of God as Neither Made by the Father Nor Less Than the
Father, and of His Incarnation.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 435
Of Christ’s Passion, Burial, and Resurrection.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 438
Of Christ’s Ascension into Heaven.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 439
Of Christ’s Session at the Father’s Right Hand.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 440
Of Christ’s Coming to Judgment.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 440
Of the Holy Spirit and the Mystery of the Trinity.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 441
Of the Catholic Church, the Remission of Sins, and the Resurrection of
the Flesh.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 446
Concerning Faith of Things Not Seen.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 449
Section 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 449
Section 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 450
Section 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 450
Section 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 451
Section 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 452
Section 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 453
Section 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 454
Section 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 456
Section 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 456
Section 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 457
Section 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 458
On the Profit of Believing.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 458
Translator’s Preface.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 458
Section 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 459
Section 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 459
Section 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 460
Section 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 461
Section 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 462
Section 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 462
Section 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 462
Section 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 463
Section 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 464
Section 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 465
Section 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 466
Section 12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 467
Section 13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 467
Section 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 468
Section 15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 469
Section 16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 469
Section 17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 470
xxiv

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

Section 18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 471
Section 19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 471
Section 20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 471
Section 21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 472
Section 22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 473
Section 23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 473
Section 24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 474
Section 25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 475
Section 26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 477
Section 27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 477
Section 28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 478
Section 29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 479
Section 30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 479
Section 31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 480
Section 32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 481
Section 33. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 482
Section 34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 482
Section 35. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 483
Section 36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 484
On the Creed.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 485
Section 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 486
Section 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 486
Section 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 487
Section 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 487
Section 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 488
Section 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 488
Section 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 489
Section 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 489
Section 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 490
Section 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 490
Section 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 492
Section 12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 493
Section 13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 493
Section 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 494
Section 15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 494
Section 16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 494
Section 17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 495
Moral Treatises of St. Augustin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 496
On Continence.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 496
Section 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 496
xxv

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

Section 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 496
Section 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 497
Section 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 497
Section 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 498
Section 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 499
Section 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 499
Section 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 500
Section 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 501
Section 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 502
Section 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 502
Section 12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 503
Section 13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 503
Section 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 504
Section 15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 505
Section 16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 505
Section 17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 506
Section 18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 506
Section 19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 507
Section 20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 508
Section 21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 509
Section 22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 509
Section 23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 510
Section 24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 511
Section 25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 512
Section 26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 513
Section 27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 514
Section 28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 514
Section 29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 515
Section 30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 516
Section 31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 517
Section 32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 517
On the Good of Marriage.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 518
Translator’s Preface.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 518
Section 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 519
Section 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 519
Section 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 520
Section 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 521
Section 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 522
Section 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 522
Section 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 523
xxvi

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

Section 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 524
Section 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 525
Section 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 526
Section 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 526
Section 12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 527
Section 13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 527
Section 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 528
Section 15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 529
Section 16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 529
Section 17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 530
Section 18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 531
Section 19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 531
Section 20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 532
Section 21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 532
Section 22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 533
Section 23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 534
Section 24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 534
Section 25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 535
Section 26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 535
Section 27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 536
Section 28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 537
Section 29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 537
Section 30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 538
Section 31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 538
Section 32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 539
Section 33. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 540
Section 34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 540
Section 35. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 540
Of Holy Virginity.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 541
Translator’s Preface.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 541
Section 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 541
Section 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 542
Section 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 542
Section 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 543
Section 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 543
Section 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 543
Section 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 544
Section 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 545
Section 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 545
Section 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 545
xxvii

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

Section 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 546
Section 12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 546
Section 13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 546
Section 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 547
Section 15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 547
Section 16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 548
Section 17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 549
Section 18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 549
Section 19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 550
Section 20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 550
Section 21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 551
Section 22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 552
Section 23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 552
Section 24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 553
Section 25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 554
Section 26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 554
Section 27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 555
Section 28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 556
Section 29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 556
Section 30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 557
Section 31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 557
Section 32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 558
Section 33. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 559
Section 34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 560
Section 35. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 560
Section 36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 561
Section 37. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 562
Section 38. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 562
Section 39. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 563
Section 40. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 564
Section 41. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 565
Section 42. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 566
Section 43. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 567
Section 44. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 567
Section 45. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 567
Section 46. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 568
Section 47. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 569
Section 48. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 570
Section 49. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 570
Section 50. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 571
xxviiiNPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

Section 51. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 571
Section 52. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 571
Section 53. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 572
Section 54. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 573
Section 55. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 573
Section 56. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 573
Section 57. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 574
On the Good of Widowhood.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 574
Translator’s Preface.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 574
Section 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 575
Section 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 575
Section 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 575
Section 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 576
Section 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 576
Section 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 577
Section 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 577
Section 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 578
Section 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 579
Section 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 579
Section 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 580
Section 12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 581
Section 13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 582
Section 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 582
Section 15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 583
Section 16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 583
Section 17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 584
Section 18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 585
Section 19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 585
Section 20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 586
Section 21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 587
Section 22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 588
Section 23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 589
Section 24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 589
Section 25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 590
Section 26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 591
Section 27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 592
Section 28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 593
Section 29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 594
On Lying.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 594
Translator’s Preface.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 594
xxix

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

Section 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 595
Section 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 595
Section 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 595
Section 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 596
Section 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 598
Section 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 598
Section 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 599
Section 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 599
Section 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 601
Section 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 602
Section 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 603
Section 12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 604
Section 13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 604
Section 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 605
Section 15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 606
Section 16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 606
Section 17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 607
Section 18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 607
Section 19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 608
Section 20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 608
Section 21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 609
Section 22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 609
Section 23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 610
Section 24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 611
Section 25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 611
Section 26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 612
Section 27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 613
Section 28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 613
Section 29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 614
Section 30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 614
Section 31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 614
Section 32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 615
Section 33. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 616
Section 34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 616
Section 35. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 617
Section 36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 618
Section 37. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 618
Section 38. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 619
Section 39. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 620
Section 40. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 620
xxx

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

Section 41. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 621
Section 42. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 622
Section 43. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 623
Against Lying.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 623
Translator’s Preface.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 623
Section 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 624
Section 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 625
Section 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 625
Section 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 626
Section 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 627
Section 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 628
Section 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 628
Section 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 628
Section 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 629
Section 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 630
Section 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 630
Section 12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 630
Section 13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 631
Section 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 631
Section 15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 632
Section 16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 632
Section 17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 632
Section 18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 633
Section 19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 634
Section 20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 635
Section 21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 636
Section 22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 636
Section 23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 637
Section 24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 638
Section 25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 640
Section 26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 640
Section 27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 642
Section 28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 642
Section 29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 643
Section 30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 644
Section 31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 644
Section 32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 645
Section 33. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 645
Section 34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 646
Section 35. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 647
xxxi

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

Section 36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 648
Section 37. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 648
Section 38. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 649
Section 39. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 650
Section 40. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 650
Section 41. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 651
Of the Work of Monks.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 652
Translator’s Preface.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 652
Section 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 653
Section 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 653
Section 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 654
Section 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 655
Section 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 656
Section 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 656
Section 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 657
Section 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 658
Section 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 659
Section 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 659
Section 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 660
Section 12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 661
Section 13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 662
Section 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 663
Section 15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 664
Section 16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 664
Section 17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 666
Section 18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 667
Section 19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 668
Section 20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 668
Section 21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 669
Section 22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 670
Section 23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 670
Section 24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 671
Section 25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 671
Section 26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 672
Section 27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 673
Section 28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 673
Section 29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 674
Section 30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 674
Section 31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 675
Section 32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 675
xxxii

NPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

Section 33. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 676
Section 34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 677
Section 35. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 678
Section 36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 679
Section 37. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 679
Section 38. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 681
Section 39. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 681
Section 40. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 682
Section 41. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 684
On Patience.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 684
Translator’s Preface.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 685
Section 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 685
Section 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 685
Section 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 686
Section 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 686
Section 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 687
Section 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 687
Section 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 687
Section 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 688
Section 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 689
Section 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 690
Section 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 690
Section 12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 691
Section 13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 692
Section 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 692
Section 15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 693
Section 16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 693
Section 17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 694
Section 18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 695
Section 19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 695
Section 20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 695
Section 21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 696
Section 22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 696
Section 23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 697
Section 24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 697
Section 25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 698
Section 26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 698
On Care to Be Had for the Dead.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 699
Translator’s Preface.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 699
Section 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 699
xxxiiiNPNF1-03. On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises;
Moral Treatises

Philip Schaff

Section 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 700
Section 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 700
Section 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 701
Section 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 702
Section 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 703
Section 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 704
Section 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 705
Section 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 705
Section 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 706
Section 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 707
Section 12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 707
Section 13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 708
Section 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 709
Section 15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 709
Section 16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 711
Section 17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 712
Section 18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 712
Section 19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 713
Section 20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 714
Section 21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 714
Section 22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 716
Section 23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 716
Indexes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 717
Index of Scripture References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 717
Greek Words and Phrases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 736
Index of Pages of the Print Edition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 739
Indexes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 741
Index of Scripture References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 741
Greek Words and Phrases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 751
Index of Pages of the Print Edition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 752

xxxiv

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

A SELECT LIBRARY
OF THENICENE AND
POST-NICENE FATHERSOF

THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.
EDITED BY
PHILIP SCHAFF, D.D., LL.D.,
PROFESSOR IN THE UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, NEW YORK,
IN CONNECTION WITH A NUMBER OF PATRISTIC SCHOLARS OF EUROPE AND
AMERICA.
VOLUME III

ON THE HOLY TRINITY
DOCTRINAL TREATISESMORAL TREATISES
T&T CLARKEDINBURGH__________________________________________________
WM. B. EERDMANS PUBLISHING COMPANY
GRAND RAPIDS, MICHIGANNPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Preface.
————————————
This third volume contains the most important doctrinal and moral treatises of St. Augustin,
and presents a pretty complete view of his dogmatics and ethics.
The most weighty of the doctrinal treatises is that on the Holy Trinity. The Latin original (DeTrinitate contra Arianos libri quindecim) is contained in the 8th volume of the Benedictine edition.
It is the most elaborate, and probably also the ablest and profoundest patristic discussion of thiscentral doctrine of the Christian religion, unless we except the Orations against the Arians, by
Athanasius, “the Father of Orthodoxy,” who devoted his life to the defense of the Divinity of Christ.
Augustin, owing to his defective knowledge of Greek, wrote his work independently of the previous
treatises of the Eastern Church on that subject. He bestowed more time and care upon it than on
any other book, except the City of God.
The value of the present translation, which first appeared in Mr. Clark’s edition, 1873, has beenmuch increased by the revision, the introductory essay, and the critical notes of a distinguished
American divine, who is in full sympathy with St. Augustin, and thoroughly at home in the historyof this dogma. I could not have intrusted it to abler hands than those of my friend and colleague,
Dr. Shedd.
The moral treatises (contained in the 6th volume of the Benedictine edition) were first translated
for the Oxford Library of the Fathers (1847). They contain much that will instruct and interest thereader; while some views will appear strange to those who fail to distinguish between different
ages and different types of virtue and piety. Augustin shared with the Greek and Latin fathers theascetic preference for voluntary celibacy and poverty. He accepted the distinction which dates fromthe second century, between two kinds of morality: a lower morality of the common people, which
consists in keeping the ten commandments; and a higher sanctity of the elect few, which observes,in addition, the evangelical counsels, so called, or the monastic virtues. He practiced this doctrine
after his conversion. He ought to have married the mother of his son; but in devoting himself tothe priesthood, he felt it his duty to remain unmarried, according to the prevailing spirit of thechurch in his age. His teacher, Ambrose, and his older contemporary, Jerome, went still further inthe enthusiastic praise of single life. We must admire their power of self-denial and undivided
consecration, though we may dissent from their theory.1
The asceticism of the early church was a reaction against the awful sexual corruption ofsurrounding heathenism, and with all its excesses it accomplished a great deal of good. It prepared
the way for Christian family life. The fathers appealed to the example of Christ, who in this respect,as the Son of God, stood above ordinary human relations, and the advice of St. Paul, which wasgiven in view of “the present distress,” in times of persecution. They deemed single life better1

On the ascetic tendencies of the second and third centuries, and the gradual introduction of clerical celibacy (whichbegan with a decree of Bishop Siricius of Rome, 385), see Schaff, Church Hist., vol. ii. 367–414, and vol. iii. 242–250.

2

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

adapted to the undivided service of Christ and his church than the married state with its unavoidable
secular cares (1 Cor. vii. 25 sqq.). Augustin expresses this view when he says, on Virginity, § 27:“Therefore go on, Saints of God, boys and girls, males and females, unmarried men and women;
go on and persevere unto the end. Praise more sweetly the Lord, whom ye think on more richly;
hope more happily in Him, whom ye serve more earnestly; love more ardently Him, whom yeplease more attentively. With loins girded, and lamps burning, wait for the Lord, when He returns
from the marriage. Ye shall bring unto the marriage of the Lamb a new song, which ye shall singon your harps.”
The Reformation has abolished the system of monasticism and clerical celibacy, and substituted
for it, as the normal condition for the clergy as well as the laity, the purity, chastity and beauty offamily life, instituted by God in Paradise and sanctioned by our Saviour’s presence at the wedding
at Cana.
New York, March, 1887.

3

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

CONTENTS.
__________
Preface.
I.

DOCTRINAL TREATISES OF ST. AUGUSTIN.
On the Holy Trinity
Translated by the Rev. Arthur West Haddan, B.D.
Revised and annotate, together with an introductory essay, by
the Rev. Professor W. G. T. Shedd, D.D.
The Enchiridion
Translated by Professor J. F. Shaw.
On the Catechising of the Uninstructed.
Translated by the Rev. Professor S. D. F. Salmond, D.D.
Concerning Faith of Things not Seen.
Translated by the Rev. C. L. Cornish, M.A.
On the Profit of Believing.
Translated by the Rev. C. L. Cornish, M.A.
On the Creed: A Sermon to Catechumens.
Translated by the Rev. H. Brown, M.A.

II. MORAL TREATISES OF ST. AUGUSTIN.
Of Continence.
Translated by the Rev. C. L. Cornish, M.A.
On the Good of Marriage.
Translated by the Rev. C. L. Cornish, M.A.
Of Holy Virginity.
Translated by the Rev. C. L. Cornish, M.A.
On the Good of Widowhood.
Translated by the Rev. C. L. Cornish, M.A.
On Lying.
Translated by the Rev. H. Browne, M.A.
To Consentius: Against Lying.
Translated by the Rev. H. Browne, M.A.
Of the Work of Monks.

4

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Translated by the Rev. H. Browne, M.A.
On Patience.
Translated by the Rev. H. Browne, M.A.
On Care to be Had for the Dead.
Translated by the Rev. H. Browne, M.A.
Index to On the Holy Trinity.
Index to Fifteen Doctrinal and Moral Treatises.

5

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

ST. AUGUSTIN:

ON THE TRINITY[DE TRINITATE, LIBRI XV.]TRANSLATED BY THE
REV. ARTHUR WEST HADDAN, B.D.,
HON. CANON OF WORCHESTER, AND RECTOR OF BARTON-ON-THE-HEATH,WARWICKSHIRE.
REVISED AND ANNOTATED, WITH AN INTRODUCTORY ESSAY,BY
WILLIAM G. T. SHEDD, D.D.,
ROOSEVELT PROFESSOR OF SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY IN UNION THEOLOGICALSEMINARY, NEW YORK.

Introductory Essay.
By William G. T. Shedd, D.D.
The doctrine of the Divine Unity is a truth of natural religion; the doctrine of the Trinity is atruth of revealed religion. The various systems of natural theism present arguments for the Divine
existence, unity, and attributes, but proceed no further. They do not assert and endeavor todemonstrate that the Supreme Being is three persons in one essence. It is because this doctrine is
not discoverable by human reason, that the Christian church has been somewhat shy of attempts
to construct it analytically; or even to defend it upon grounds of reason. The keen Dr. South expresses
the common sentiment, when he remarks that “as he that denies this fundamental article of theChristian religion may lose his soul, so he that much strives to understand it may lose his wits.”
Yet all the truths of revelation, like those of natural religion, have in them the element of reason,
and are capable of a rational defense. At the very least their self-consistence can be shown, andobjections to them can be answered. And this is a rational process. For one of the surest
characteristics of reason is, freedom from self contradiction, and consonance with acknowledged
truths in other provinces of human inquiry and belief.

6

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

It is a remarkable fact, that the earlier forms of Trinitarianism are among the most metaphysicaland speculative of any in dogmatic history. The controversy with the Arian and the Semi-Arian,brought out a statement and defense of the truth, not only upon scriptural but ontological grounds.
Such a powerful dialectician as Athanasius, while thoroughly and intensely scriptural—whilestarting from the text of scripture, and subjecting it to a rigorous exegesis—did not hesitate topursue the Arian and Semi-Arian dialectics to its most recondite fallacy in its subtlest recesses. If
any one doubts this, let him read the four Orations of Athanasius, and his defence of the Nicene
Decrees. In some sections of Christendom, it has been contended that the doctrine of the Trinity
should be received without any attempt at all to establish its rationality and intrinsic necessity. In
this case, the tenets of eternal generation and procession have been regarded as going beyond the
Scripture data, and if not positively rejected, have been thought to hinder rather than assist faith in
three divine persons and one God. But the history of opinions shows that such sections of the church
have not proved to be the strongest defenders of the Scripture statement, nor the most successful
in keeping clear of the Sabellian, Arian, or even Socinian departure from it.
Those churches which have followed Scripture most implicitly, and have most feared humanspeculation, are the very churches which have inserted into their creeds the most highly analytic
statement that has yet been made of the doctrine of the Trinity. The Nicene Trinitarianism isincorporated into nearly all the symbols of modern Christendom; and this specifies, particularly,
the tenets of eternal generation and procession with their corollaries. The English Church, to whose
great divines, Hooker, Bull, Waterland, and Pearson, scientific Trinitarianism owes a very lucid
and careful statement, has added the Athanasian creed to the Nicene. The Presbyterian churches,
distinguished for the closeness of their adherence to the simple Scripture, yet call upon theirmembership to confess, that “in the unity of the Godhead there be three persons, of one substance,
power, and eternity; God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. The Father is of none,
neither begotten nor proceeding; the Son is eternally begotten of the Father; the Holy Ghost eternallyproceeding from the Father and the Son.”2
The treatise of Augustin upon the Trinity, which is here made accessible to the English reader,
is one of the ablest produced in the patristic age. The author devoted nearly thirty years of his
matured life to its composition (A.D. 400 to 428). He was continually touching and retouching it,
and would have delayed its publication longer than he did, had a copy not been obtained
surreptitiously and published. He seems to have derived little assistance from others; for although
the great Greek Trinitarians—Athanasius, the two Gregories, and Basil—had published theirtreatises, yet he informs us that his knowledge of Greek, though sufficient for understanding theexegetical and practical writings of his brethren of the Greek Church, was not adequate to the bestuse of their dialectical and metaphysical compositions.3 Accordingly, there is no trace in this work2
3

Westminster Confession, II. iii.
That Augustin had considerable acquaintance with Greek is proved by his many references and citations throughout his
writings. In this work, see XII. vii. 11; XII. xiv. 22; XIII. x. 14; XIV. i. 1; XV. ix. 15. His statement in III. i. 1, is, that he was“not so familiar with the Greek tongue (Græcæ linguæ non sit nobis tantus habitus), as to be able to read and understand thebooks that treat of such [metaphysical] topics.” In V. viii. 10, he remarks that he does not comprehend the distinction which
the Greek Trinitarians make between
and; which shows that he had not read the work of Gregory of Nyssa, in which
it is defined with great clearness. One may have a good knowledge of a language for general purposes, and yet be unfamiliar
with its philosophical nomenclature.

7

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffof the writings of the Greek Trinitarians, though a substantial agreement with them. The only
Trinitarian author to whom he alludes is Hilary—a highly acute and abstruse Trinitarian.
In his general position, Augustin agrees with the Nicene creed; but laying more emphasis upon
the consubstantiality of the persons, and definitely asserting the procession of the Spirit from theFather and Son. Some dogmatic historians seem to imply that he differed materially from the Nicene
doctrine on the point of subordination. Hagenbach (Smith’s Ed. § 95) asserts that “Augustin
completely purified the dogma of the Trinity from the older vestiges of subordination;” and adds
that “such vestiges are unquestionably to be found in the most orthodox Fathers, not only in the
East but also in the West.” He cites Hilary and Athanasius as examples, and quotes the remark ofGieseler, that “the idea of a subordination lies at the basis of such declarations.” Neander (II. 470,
Note 2) says that Augustin “kept at a distance everything that bordered on subordinationism.” Thesestatements are certainly too sweeping and unqualified. There are three kinds of subordination: thefilial or trinitarian; the theanthropic; and the Arian. The first is taught, and the second implied, in
the Nicene creed. The last is denied and excluded. Accordingly, dogmatic historians like Petavius,
Bull, Waterland, and Pearson, contend that the Nicene creed, in affirming the filial, but denying
the Arian subordination; in teaching subordination as to person and relationship, but denying it as
to essence; enunciates a revealed truth, and that this is endorsed by all the Trinitarian fathers, Easternand Western. And there certainly can be no doubt that Augustin held this view. He maintains, over
and over again, that Sonship as a relationship is second and subordinate to Fatherhood; that whilea Divine Father and a Divine Son must necessarily be of the very same nature and grade of being,
like a human father and a human son, yet the latter issues from the former, not the former from thelatter. Augustin’s phraseology on this point is as positive as that of Athanasius, and in some respects
even more bold and capable of misinterpretation. He denominates the Father the “beginning”(principium) of the Son, and the Father and Son the “beginning” (principium) of the Holy Spirit.
“The Father is the beginning of the whole divinity, or if it is better so expressed, deity.” IV. xx. 29.
“In their mutual relation to one another in the Trinity itself, if the begetter is a beginning (principium)in relation to that which he begets, the Father is a beginning in relation to the Son, because he begets
Him.” V. xiv. 15. Since the Holy Spirit proceeds from both Father and Son, “the Father and Son
are a beginning (principium) of the Holy Spirit, not two beginnings.” V. xiv. 15. Compare also V.
xiii.; X. iv.; and annotations pp. Augustin employs this term “beginning” only in relation to theperson, not to the essence. There is no “beginning,” or source, when the essence itself is spoken
of. Consequently, the “subordination” (implied in a “beginning” by generation and spiration) is not
the Arian subordination, as to essence, but the trinitarian subordination, as to person and relation.4
Augustin starts with the assumption that man was made in the image of the triune God, the Godof revelation; not in the image of the God of natural religion, or the untriune deity of the nations.
Consequently, it is to be expected that a trinitarian analogue can be found in his mental constitution.
If man is God’s image, he will show traces of it in every respect. All acknowledge that the Divine
unity, and all the communicable attributes, have their finite correspondents in the unity and attributesof the human mind. But the Latin father goes further than this. This, in his view, is not the wholeof the Divine image. When God says, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness” (Gen.
i. 26), Augustin understands these words to be spoken by the Trinity, and of the Trinity—by and4

For an analysis of Augustin’s Trinitarianism, see Bauv: Dreieinigkeitslehre I. 828–885; Gangauf: Des Augustinus
speculative Lehre von Gott dem Dreieinigen; Schaff: History, iii. 684 sq.

8NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffof the true God, the God of revelation: the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, one God. He denies that
this is merely the pluralis excellentiæ, and that the meaning of these words would be expressed bya change of the plural to the singular, and to the reading, “Let me make man in my image, after mylikeness.” “For if the Father alone had made man without the Son, it would not have been written,‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.’” City of God XVI. vi.; Trinity I. vii. 14. In
Augustin’s opinion, the Old Testament declaration that God is a unity, does not exclude the New
Testament declaration that he is a trinity. “For” says he, “that which is written, ‘Hear O Israel: theLord our God is one Lord’ ought certainly not to be understood as if the Son were excepted, or theHoly Spirit were excepted; which one Lord our God we rightly call our Father, as regenerating us
by his grace.” Trinity V. xi. 12. How far Moses understood the full meaning of the Divine
communication and instruction, is one thing. Who it really and actually was that made thecommunication to him, is another. Even if we assume, though with insufficient reason for so doing,that Moses himself had no intimation of the Trinity, it does not follow that it was not the Trinitythat inspired him, and all the Hebrew prophets. The apostle Peter teaches that the Old Testament
inspiration was a Trinitarian inspiration, when he says that “the prophets who prophesied of thegrace that should come, searched what the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it
testified beforehand of the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.” (1 Pet. i. 10, 11).
In asserting, however, that an image of the Trinity exists in man’s nature, Augustin is careful
to observe that it is utterly imperfect and inadequate. He has no thought or expectation of clearing
up the mystery by any analogy whatever. He often gives expression to his sense of the inscrutability
and incomprehensibility of the Supreme Being, in language of the most lowly and awe-struck
adoration. “I pray to our Lord God himself, of whom we ought always to think, and yet of whom
we are not able to think worthily, and whom no speech is sufficient to declare, that He will grantme both help for understanding and explaining that which I design, and pardon if in anything I
offend.” V. i. 1. “O Lord the one God, God the Trinity, whatever I have said in these books that isof Thine, may they acknowledge who are Thine; if anything of my own, may it be pardoned bothby Thee and by those who are Thine. Amen.” XV. xxviii.
Augustin’s method in this work is (1.) The exegetical; (2.) The rational. He first deduces thedoctrine of the Trinity from Scripture, by a careful collation and combination of the texts, and thendefends it against objections, and illustrates it by the analogies which he finds in nature generally,
and in the human mind particularly. The Scripture argument is contained in the first seven books;
the rational in the last eight. The first part is, of course, the most valuable of the two. Though thereader may not be able to agree with Augustin in his interpretation of some Scripture passages,
particularly some which he cites from the Old Testament, he will certainly be impressed by thedepth, acumen, and accuracy with which the Latin father reaches and exhausts the meaning of theacknowledged trinitarian texts. Augustin lived in an age when the Scriptures and the Greek andRoman classics were nearly all that the student had, upon which to expend his intellectual force.
There was considerable metaphysics, it is true, but no physics, and little mathematics. There wasconsequently a more undivided and exclusive attention bestowed upon revealed religion as embodied
in the Scriptures, and upon ethics and natural religion as contained in the classics, than has everbeen bestowed by any subsequent period in Christendom. One result was that scripture was
expounded by scripture; things spiritual by things spiritual. This appears in the exegetical part ofthis treatise. Augustin reasons out of the Scriptures; not out of metaphysics or physics.

9

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

The second, or speculative division of the work, is that which will be most foreign to the thinkingof some trinitarians. In it they will find what seems to them to be a philosophy, rather than aninterpretation of the word of God. We shall, therefore, in this introductory essay, specify some of
the advantages, as it seems to us, of the general method of defending and illustrating the doctrineof the Trinity employed by Augustin and the patristic Trinitarians.
1. Fuller justice is done to Scripture by this method. Revelation denominates the first trinitarian
person the Father, the second the Son, the third the Spirit. These terms are literal, not metaphorical;
because the relations denoted by them are eternally in the essence. Scripture clearly teaches that
the Father is such from eternity. Consequently, “paternity” (implied in the name Father) can nomore be ascribed to the first person of the Godhead in a figurative sense, than eternity can be. For
a person that is a father must be so in relation to a son. No son, no father. Consequently, an eternal
Father implies an eternal Son. And the same reasoning holds true of the relation of the Father and
Son to the Spirit. The terms Father, Son, and Spirit, in the baptismal formula and the apostolic
benediction, must designate primary and eternal distinctions. The rite that initiates into the kingdomof God, certainly would not be administered in three names that denote only assumed and temporal
relations of God; nor would blessings for time and eternity be invoked from God under suchsecondary names.
Hence, these trinal names given to God in the baptismal formula and the apostolic benediction,
actually force upon the trinitarian theologian, the ideas of paternity, generation, filiation, spiration,and procession. He cannot reflect upon the implication of these names without forming these ideas,
and finding himself necessitated to concede their literal validity and objective reality. He cannot
say that the first person is the Father, and then deny that he “begets.” He cannot say that the second
person is the Son, and then deny that he is “begotten.” He cannot say that the third person is theSpirit, and then deny that he “proceeds” by “spiration” (spiritus quia spiratus) from the Father andSon. When therefore Augustin, like the primitive fathers generally, endeavors to illustrate this
eternal, necessary, and constitutional energizing and activity (opera ad intra) in the Divine Essence,
whereby the Son issues from the Father and the Spirit from Father and Son, by the emanation ofsunbeam from sun, light from light, river from fountain, thought from mind, word fromthought—when the ternaries from nature and the human mind are introduced to elucidate theTrinity—nothing more is done than when by other well-known and commonly adopted analogies
the Divine unity, or omniscence, or omnipresence, is sought to be illustrated. There is no analogy
taken from the finite that will clear up the mystery of the infinite—whether it be the mystery of theeternity of God, or that of his trinity. But, at the same time, by the use of these analogies the mind
is kept close up to the Biblical term or statement, and is not allowed to content itself with only ahalf-way understanding of it. Such a method brings thoroughness and clearness into the interpretationof the Word of God.
2. A second advantage in this method is, that it shows the doctrine of the Trinity to be inseparablefrom that of the Unity of God. The Deistical conception of the Divine unity is wholly different
from the Christian. The former is that of natural religion, formed by the unassisted human mind inits reflection upon the Supreme Being. The latter is that of revealed religion, given to the humanmind by inspiration. The Deistical unity is mere singleness. The Christian unity is a trinality. The
former is a unit. The latter a true unity, and union. The former is meagre, having few contents. The
latter is a plenitude—what St. Paul denominates “the fullness of the Godhead” ( μ).
Coloss. i. 9.
10NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

It follows, consequently, that the Divine unity cannot be discussed by itself without reference
to trinality, as the Deist and the Socinian endeavor to do.5 Trinality belongs as necessarily andintrinsically to the Divine unity as eternity does to the Divine essence. “If,” says Athanasius (Oration
I. 17) “there was not a Blessed Trinity from eternity, but only a unity existed first, which at length
became a Trinity, it follows that the Holy Trinity must have been at one time imperfect, and at
another time entire: imperfect until the Son came to be created, as the Arians maintain, and thenentire afterwards.” If we follow the teachings of Revelation, and adopt the revealed idea of God,
we may not discuss mere and simple unity, nor mere and simple trinality; but we must discuss unity
in trinality, and trinality in unity. We may not think of a monad which originally, and in the order
either of nature or of time, is not trinal, but becomes so. The instant there is a monad, there is a
triad; the instant there is a unity, there are Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Christian Trinity is notthat of Sabellius: namely, an original untrinal monad that subsequently, in the order of nature if
not of time, becomes a triad; whereby four factors are introduced into the problem. God is not one
and three, but one in three. There is no primary monad, as such, and without trinality, to which thethree distinctions are secondary adjuncts. The monad, or essence, never exists in and by itself as
untrinalized, as in the Sabellian scheme. It exists only as in the three Persons; only as trinalized.
The Essence, consequently, is not prior to the Persons, either in the order of nature or of time, nor
subsequent to them, but simultaneously and eternally in and with them.
The Primitive church took this ground with confidence. Unity and trinality were inseparable intheir view. The term God meant for them the Trinity. A “theologian,” in their nomenclature, wasa trinitarian. They called the Apostle John, because he was enlightened by the Holy Spirit
to make fuller disclosures, in the preface to his Gospel, concerning the deity of the Logos and thedoctrine of the Trinity, than were the other evangelists. And they gave the same epithet to Gregory
Nazianzum, because of the acumen and insight of his trinitarian treatises. This work of Augustin
adopts the same position, and defends it with an ability second to none.
3. A third advantage of this method of illustrating the doctrine of the Trinity is, that it goes toshow that the personality of God depends upon the trinality of the Divine Essence—that if there
are no interior distinctions in the Infinite Being, he cannot be self-contemplative, self-cognitive,
or self-communing.
This is an important and valuable feature of the method in question, when viewed in its bearing
upon the modern assertion that an Infinite Being cannot be personal. This treatise of Augustin does
not develope the problem upon this point, but it leads to it. In illustrating the Trinity by the ternaries
in nature, and especially in the human mind, he aims only to show that trinality of a certain kind
does not conflict with unity of a certain kind. Memory, understanding, and will are three faculties,
yet one soul. Augustin is content with elucidating the Divine unity by such illustrations. The
elucidation of the Divine personality by them, was not attempted in his day nor in the Mediæval
and Reformation churches. The conflict with pantheism forced this point upon the attention of theModern church.
At the same time, these Christian fathers who took the problem of the Trinity into the centreof the Divine essence, and endeavored to show its necessary grounds there, prepared the way for

5

The Mohammedan conception of the Divine Unity, also, is deistic. In energetically rejecting the doctrine of the Trinity,
the Mohammedan is the Oriental Unitarian.

11

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

showing, by the same method, that trinality is not only consistent with personality, but is actuallyindispensable to it. In a brief essay like this, only the briefest hints can be indicated.
If God is personal, he is self-conscious. Self-consciousness is, (1), the power which a rational
spirit, or mind, has of making itself its own object; and, (2), of knowing that it has done so. If thefirst step is taken, and not the second, there is no self-consciousness. For the subject would notknow that the object is the self. And the second step cannot be taken, if the first has not been. These
two acts of a rational spirit, or mind, involve three distinctions in it, or three modes of it. The wholemind as a subject contemplates the very same whole mind as an object. Here are two distinctions,or modes of one mind. And the very same whole mind perceives that the contemplating subject
and the contemplated object are one and the same essence or being. Here are three modes of one
mind, each distinct from the others, yet all three going to make up the one self-conscious spirit.
Unless there were these three distinctions, there would be no self-knowledge. Mere singleness, amere subject without an object, is incompatible with self-consciousness.
In denying distinctions in the Divine Essence, while asserting its personality, Deism, with
Socinianism and Mohammedanism, contends that God can be self-knowing and self-communing
as a single subject without an object. The controversy, consequently, is as much between the deist
and the psychologist, as it is between him and the trinitarian. It is as much a question whether hisview of personality and self-consciousness is correct, as whether his interpretation of Scripture is.
For the dispute involves the necessary conditions of personality. If a true psychology does not
require trinality in a spiritual essence in order to its own self-contemplation, and self-knowledge,
and self-communion, then the deist is correct; but if it does, then he is in error. That the study ofself-consciousness in modern metaphysics has favored trinitarianism, is unquestionable. Even the
spurious trinitarianism which has grown up in the schools of the later pantheism goes to show, thata trinal constitution is requisite in an essence, in order to explain self-consciousness, and thatabsolute singleness, or the absence of all interior distinctions, renders the problem insoluble.6
But the authority of Scripture is higher than that of psychology, and settles the matter. Revelationunquestionably discloses a deity who is “blessed forever;” whose blessedness is independent of
the universe which he has made from nonentity, and who must therefore find all the conditions of
blessedness within himself alone. He is blessed from eternity, in his own self-contemplation andself-communion. He does not need the universe in order that he may have an object which he canknow, which he can love, and over which he can rejoice. “The Father knoweth the Son,” from all
eternity (Matt. xi. 27); and “loveth the Son,” from all eternity (John iii. 35); and “glorifieth theSon,” from all eternity (John xvii. 5). Prior to creation, the Eternal Wisdom “was by Him as one
brought up with Him, and was daily His delight, rejoicing always before Him” (Prov. viii. 30); andthe Eternal Word “was in the beginning with God” (John i. 2); and “the Only Begotten Son (or God
Only Begotten, as the uncials read) was eternally in the bosom of the Father” (John i. 18).
Here is society within the Essence, and wholly independent of the universe; and communionand blessedness resulting therefrom. But this is impossible to an essence without personal
distinctions. Not the singular Unit of the deist, but the plural Unity of the trinitarian, explains this.
A subject without an object could not know. What is there to be known? Could not love. What isthere to be loved? Could not rejoice. What is there to rejoice over? And the object cannot be the6“That view of the divine nature which makes it inconsistent with the Incarnation and Trinity is philosophically imperfect,
as well as scripturally incorrect.” H. B. Smith: Faith and Philosophy, p. 191.

12

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

universe. The infinite and eternal object of God’s infinite and eternal knowledge, love, and joy,cannot be his creation: because this is neither eternal, nor infinite. There was a time when theuniverse was not; and if God’s self-consciousness and blessedness depends upon the universe, there
was a time when God was neither self-conscious nor blessed. The objective God for the subjective
God must, therefore, be very God of very God, begotten not made, the eternal Son of the eternal
Father.
The same line of reasoning applies to the third trinitarian person, but there is no need of going
through with it. The history of opinion shows, that if the first two eternal distinctions are conceded,
there is no denial of the reality and eternity of the third.7
The analogue derived from the nature of finite personality and self-consciousness has one great
advantage—namely, that it illustrates the independence of the Divine personality andself-consciousness. The later pantheism (not the earlier of Spinoza) constructs a kind of trinity, but
it is dependent upon the universe. God distinguishes Himself from the world, and thereby finds
the object required for the subject. But this implies either that the world is eternal, or else, that God
is not eternally self-conscious. The Christian trinitarianism, on the contrary, finds all the media andconditions of self-consciousness within the Divine Essence. God distinguishes himself from himself,
not from the universe. The eternal Father beholds himself in the eternal Son, his alter ego, the“express image of his own person” (Heb. i. 3). God does not struggle gradually into
self-consciousness, as in the Hegelian scheme, by the help of the universe. Before that universe
was in existence, and in the solitude of his own eternity and self-sufficiency, he had within his own
essence all the media and conditions of self-consciousness. And after the worlds were called into
being, the Divine personality remained the same immutable and infinite self-knowledge, unaffectedby anything in his handiwork.
“O Light Eterne, sole in thyself that dwellest,Sole knowest thyself, and known unto thyself,
And knowing, lovest and smilest on thyself!”—Dante: Paradise xxxiii. 125.
While, however, this analogue from the conditions of finite personality approaches nearer tothe eternal distinctions in the Godhead than does that ternary which Augustin employs—namely,
memory, understanding, and will—yet like all finite analogies to the Infinite it is inadequate. For
the subject-ego, object-ego, and ego-percipient, are not so essentially distinct and completely
objective to each other, as are the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. They cannot employ the personalpronouns in reference to each other. They cannot reciprocally perform acts and discharge functions
towards each other, like the Divine Three. Revelation is explicit upon this point. It specifies at least
the following twelve actions and relations, that incontestably prove the conscious distinctness andmutual objectivity of the persons of the Trinity. One divine person loves another (John iii. 35);dwells in another (John xiv. 10, 11); knows another (Matt. xi. 27); sends another (Gen. xvi. 7);
suffers from another (Zech. xiii. 7–13); addresses another (Heb. i. 8); is the way to another (John7

Upon the necessary conditions of self consciousness in God, see Müller: On Sin, II. 136 sq. (Urwick’s Trans ); Dorner:
Christian Doctrine, I. 412–465; Christlieb: Modern Doubt, Lecture III.; Kurtz: Sacred History, § 2; Billroth: Religions Philosophie,§ 89, 90; Wilberforce: Incarnation, Chapter III; Kidd: On the Trinity, with Candlish’s Introduction; Shedd: History of Doctrine,
I. 365–368.

13

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

xiv. 6); speaks of another (Luke iii. 22); glorifies another (John xvii. 5); confers with another (Gen.
i. 26; xi. 7); plans with another (Is. ix. 6); rewards another (Phil. ii. 5–11; Heb. ii. 9).
Such are some of the salient features of this important treatise upon the Trinity. It has its defects;
but they pertain to the form more than to the matter; to arrangement and style more than to dogma.
Literary excellence is not the forte of the patristic writers. Hardly any of them are literary artists.
Lactantius among the Latins, and Chrysostom among the Greeks, are almost the only fathers thathave rhetorical grace. And none of them approach the beauty of the classic writers, as seen in theharmonious flow and diction of Plato, and the exquisite finish of Horace and Catullus.
Augustin is prolix, repetitious, and sometimes leaves his theme to discuss cognate but distantly
related subjects. This appears more in the last eight chapters, which are speculative, than in the firstseven, which are scriptural. The material in this second division is capable of considerable
compression. The author frequently employs two illustrations when one would suffice, and threeor more when two are enough. He discusses many themes which are not strictly trinitarian.
Yet the patient student will derive some benefit from this discursiveness. He will find, forexample, in this treatise on the Trinity, an able examination of the subject of miracles (Book III);of creation ex nihilo (III. ix); of vicarious atonement (IV. vii-xiv); of the faculty of memory (XI.
x); and, incidentally, many other high themes are touched upon. Before such a contemplative
intellect as that of Augustin, all truth lay spread out like the ocean, with no limits and no separatingchasms. Everything is connected and fluid. Consequently, one doctrine inevitably leads to andmerges in another, and the eager and intense inquirer rushes forward, and outward, and upward,
and downward, in every direction. The only aim is to see all that can be seen, and state all that canbe stated. The neglect of the form, and the anxiety after the substance, contribute to thediscursiveness. Caring little for proportion in method, and nothing for elegance in diction, thewriter, though bringing forth a vast amount of truth, does it at the expense of clearness, conciseness,and grace. Such is the case with the North African father—one of the most voluminous and prolix
of authors, yet one of the most original, suggestive, and fertilizing of any.
And this particular treatise is perhaps as pregnant and suggestive as any that Augustin, or any
other theologian, ever composed. The doctrine of the Trinity is the most immense of all the doctrinesof religion. It is the foundation of theology. Christianity, in the last analysis, is Trinitarianism. Takeout of the New Testament the persons of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and there is no
God left. Take out of the Christian consciousness the thoughts and affections that relate to the
Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and there is no Christian consciousness left. The Trinity is theconstitutive idea of the evangelical theology, and the formative idea of the evangelical experience.
The immensity of the doctrine makes it of necessity a mystery; but a mystery which like night
enfolds in its unfathomed depths the bright stars—points of light, compared with which there is nolight so keen and so glittering. Mysterious as it is, the Trinity of Divine Revelation is the doctrinethat holds in it all the hope of man; for it holds within it the infinite pity of the Incarnation and theinfinite mercy of the Redemption.
And it shares its mysteriousness with the doctrine of the Divine Eternity. It is difficult to saywhich is most baffling to human comprehension, the all-comprehending, simultaneous, successionlessconsciousness of the Infinite One, or his trinal personality. Yet no theist rejects the doctrine of theDivine eternity because of its mystery. The two doctrines are antithetic and correlative. On one of
the Northern rivers that flows through a narrow chasm whose depth no plummet has sounded, there
stand two cliffs fronting each other, shooting their pinnacles into the blue ether, and sending their
14

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffroots down to the foundations of the earth. They have named them Trinity and Eternity. So stand,antithetic and confronting, in the Christian scheme, the trinity and eternity of God.
The translation of this treatise is the work of the Rev. Arthur West Haddan, Hon. Canon ofWorcester, who, according to a note of the publisher, died while it was passing through the press.
It has been compared with the original, and a considerable number of alterations made. The treatise
is exceedingly difficult to render into English—probably the most so of any in the author’s writings.
The changes in some instances were necessary from a misconception of the original; but more often
for the purpose of making the meaning of the translator himself more clear. It is believed that acomparison between the original and revised translation will show that the latter is the more
intelligible. At the same time, the reviser would not be too confident that in every instance the exact
meaning of Augustin has been expressed, by either the translator or reviser.
The annotations of the reviser upon important points in the treatise, it is hoped, will assist thereader in understanding Augustin’s reasoning, and also throw some light upon the doctrine of the
Trinity.
William G. T. Shedd.
New York, Feb. 1, 1887.

Translator’s Preface.
————————————The history of St. Augustin’s treatise on the Trinity, as gathered by Tillemont and others fromhis own allusions to it, may be briefly given. It is placed by him in his Retractations among theworks written (which in the present case, it appears, must mean begun) in A.D. 400. In letters of
A.D. 410, 414, and at the end of A.D. 415 (Ad Consentium, Ep. 120, and two Ad Evodium, Epp.
162, 169), it is referred to as still unfinished and unpublished. But a letter of A.D. 412 (AdMarcellinum, Ep. 143) intimates that friends were at that time importuning him, although without
success, to complete and publish it. And the letter to Aurelius, which was sent to that bishop withthe treatise itself when actually completed, informs us that a portion of it, while it was still unrevised
and incomplete, was in fact surreptitiously made public,—a proceeding which the letters above
cited postpone apparently until at least after A.D. 415. It was certainly still in hand in A.D. 416,
inasmuch as in Book XIII. a quotation occurs from the 12th Book of the De Civitate Dei; andanother quotation in Book XV., from the 90th lecture on St. John, indicates most probably a dateof at least a year later, viz. A.D. 417. The Retractations, which refer to it, are usually dated notlater than A.D. 428. The letter to Bishop Aurelius also informs us that the work was many years
in progress, and was begun in St. Augustin’s early manhood, and finished in his old age. We may
infer from this evidence that it was written by him between A.D. 400, when he was forty-six years
old, and had been Bishop of Hippo about four years, and A.D. 428 at the latest; but probably it was
published ten or twelve years before this date. He writes of it, indeed, himself, as if the “nonum
prematur in annum” very inadequately represented the amount of deliberate and patient thought
15

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

which a subject so profound and so sacred demanded, and which he had striven to give to it; andas if, even at the very last, he shrank from publishing his work, and was only driven to do so inorder to remedy the mischief of its partial and unauthorized publication.
His motive for writing on the subject may be learned from the treatise itself. It was not directedagainst any individual antagonist, or occasioned by any particular controversial emergency. In fact,
his labors upon it were, he says, continually interrupted by the distraction of such controversies.
Certain ingenious and subtle theories respecting types or resemblances of the Holy Trinity, traceablein human nature as being the image of God, seemed to him to supply, not indeed a logical proof,
but a strong rational presumption, of the truth of the doctrine itself; and thus to make it incumbent
upon him to expound and unfold them in order to meet rationalizing objectors upon (so to say) theirown ground. He is careful not to deal with these analogies or images as if they either constituted apurely argumentative proof or exhausted the full meaning of the doctrine, upon both whichassumptions such speculations have at all times been the fruitful parent both of presumptious
theorizing and of grievous heresy. But he nevertheless employs them more affirmatively than would
perhaps have been the case. While modern theologians would argue negatively, from the triplicity
of independent faculties,—united, nevertheless, in the unity of a single human person,—that any
presumption of reason against the Trinity of persons in the Godhead is thereby, if not removed, atleast materially and enormously lessened, St. Augustin seems to argue positively from analogous
grounds, as though they constituted a direct intimation of the doctrine itself. But he takes especial
pains, at the same time, to dwell upon the incapacity of human thought to fathom the depths of thenature of God; and he carefully prefaces his reasonings by a statement of the Scripture evidenceof the catholic doctrine as a matter of faith and not of reason, and by an explanation of difficult
texts upon the subject. One of the most valuable portions, indeed, of the treatise is the eloquent andprofound exposition given in this part of it of the rule of interpretation to be applied to Scripture
language respecting the person of our Lord. It should be noticed, however, that a large proportionof St. Augustin’s scriptural exegesis is founded upon a close verbal exposition of the old Latin
version, and is frequently not borne out by the original text. And the rule followed in rendering
Scripture texts in the present translation has been, accordingly, wherever the argument in the context
rests upon the variations of the old Latin, there to translate the words as St. Augustin gives them,while adhering otherwise to the language of the authorized English version. The reader’s attention
may allowably be drawn to the language of Book V. c.x., and to its close resemblance to some of
the most remarkable phrases of the Athanasian Creed, and again to the striking passage respecting
miracles in Book III. c.v., and to that upon the nature of God at the beginning of Book V.; the last
named of which seems to have suggested one of the profoundest passages in the profoundest of
Dr. Newman’s University Sermons (p. 353, ed. 1843). It may be added, that the writings of the
Greek Fathers on the subject were, if not wholly unknown, yet unfamiliar to Augustin, who quotes
directly only the Latin work of Hilary of Poictiers.
It remains to say, that the translation here printed was made about four years since by a friendof the writer of this preface, and that the latter’s share in the work has been that of thoroughly
revising and correcting it, and of seeing it through the press. He is therefore answerable for thework as now published.
A. W. Haddan.
Nov. 5, 1872.

16

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff————————————In the Retractations (ii. 15) Augustin speaks of this work in the following terms:—“I spent some years in writing fifteen books concerning the Trinity, which is God. When,however, I had not yet finished the thirteenth Book, and some who were exceedingly anxious tohave the work were kept waiting longer than they could bear, it was stolen from me in a less correctstate than it either could or would have been had it appeared when I intended. And as soon as I
discovered this, having other copies of it, I had determined at first not to publish it myself, but tomention what had happened in the matter in some other work; but at the urgent request of brethren,whom I could not refuse, I corrected it as much as I thought fit, and finished and published it, withthe addition, at the beginning, of a letter that I had written to the venerable Aurelius, Bishop of
Carthage, in which I set forth, in the way of prologue, what had happened, what I had intended to
do of myself, and what love of my brethren had forced me to do.”The letter to which he here alludes is the following:—“To the most blessed Lord, whom he reveres with most sincere love, to his holy brother andfellow-priest, Pope Aurelius, Augustin sends health in the Lord.
“I began as a very young man, and have published in my old age, some books concerning the
Trinity, who is the supreme and true God. I had in truth laid the work aside, upon discovering thatit had been prematurely, or rather surreptitiously, stolen from me before I had completed it, andbefore I had revised and put the finishing touches to it, as had been my intention. For I had notdesigned to publish the Books one by one, but all together, inasmuch as the progress of the inquiry
led me to add the later ones to those which precede them. When, therefore, these people had hindered
the fulfillment of my purpose (in that some of them had obtained access to the work before I
intended), I had given over dictating it, with the idea of making my complaint public in some otherwork that I might write, in order that whoso could might know that the Books had not been publishedby myself, but had been taken away from my possession before they were in my own judgment fit
for publication. Compelled, however, by the eager demands of many of my brethren, and above
all by your command, I have taken the pains, by God’s help, to complete the work, laborious as itis; and as now corrected (not as I wished, but as I could, lest the Books should differ very widelyfrom those which had surreptitiously got into people’s hands), I have sent them to your Reverenceby my very dear son and fellow-deacon, and have allowed them to be heard, copied, and read by
every one that pleases. Doubtless, if I could have fulfilled my original intention, although theywould have contained the same sentiments, they would have been worked out much more thoroughly
and clearly, so far as the difficulty of unfolding so profound a subject, and so far, too, as my own
powers, might have allowed. There are some persons, however, who have the first four, or rather
five, Books without the prefaces, and the twelfth with no small part of its later chapters omitted.
But these, if they please and can, will amend the whole, if they become acquainted with the present
edition. At any rate, I have to request that you will order this letter to be prefixed separately, but
at the beginning of the Books. Farewell. Pray for me.”17

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

The

FIFTEEN BOOKS OF AURELIUS AUGUSTINUS,BISHOP OF HIPPO,

ON THE TRINITY_________

Book I.
————————————In which the unity and equality of the supreme Trinity is established from the sacred Scriptures,and some texts alleged against the equality of the Son are explained.
Chapter 1.—This Work is Written Against Those Who Sophistically Assail the Faith of the Trinity,
Through Misuse of Reason. They Who Dispute Concerning God Err from a Threefold Cause.
Holy Scripture, Removing What is False, Leads Us on by Degrees to Things Divine. What True
Immortality is. We are Nourished by Faith, that We May Be Enabled to Apprehend Things
Divine.
1. The following dissertation concerning the Trinity, as the reader ought to be informed, hasbeen written in order to guard against the sophistries of those who disdain to begin with faith, andare deceived by a crude and perverse love of reason. Now one class of such men endeavor to transfer
to things incorporeal and spiritual the ideas they have formed, whether through experience of thebodily senses, or by natural human wit and diligent quickness, or by the aid of art, from things
corporeal; so as to seek to measure and conceive of the former by the latter. Others, again, frame
whatever sentiments they may have concerning God according to the nature or affections of thehuman mind; and through this error they govern their discourse, in disputing concerning God, by
distorted and fallacious rules. While yet a third class strive indeed to transcend the whole creation,
which doubtless is changeable, in order to raise their thought to the unchangeable substance, which
is God; but being weighed down by the burden of mortality, whilst they both would seem to knowwhat they do not, and cannot know what they would, preclude themselves from entering the very
path of understanding, by an over-bold affirmation of their own presumptuous judgments; choosing
rather not to correct their own opinion when it is perverse, than to change that which they haveonce defended. And, indeed, this is the common disease of all the three classes which I havementioned,—viz., both of those who frame their thoughts of God according to things corporeal,
18

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

and of those who do so according to the spiritual creature, such as is the soul; and of those whoneither regard the body nor the spiritual creature, and yet think falsely about God; and are indeed
so much the further from the truth, that nothing can be found answering to their conceptions, either
in the body, or in the made or created spirit, or in the Creator Himself. For he who thinks, forinstance, that God is white or red, is in error; and yet these things are found in the body. Again, he
who thinks of God as now forgetting and now remembering, or anything of the same kind, is none
the less in error; and yet these things are found in the mind. But he who thinks that God is of such
power as to have generated Himself, is so much the more in error, because not only does God not
so exist, but neither does the spiritual nor the bodily creature; for there is nothing whatever thatgenerates its own existence.8
2. In order, therefore, that the human mind might be purged from falsities of this kind, Holy
Scripture, which suits itself to babes has not avoided words drawn from any class of things reallyexisting, through which, as by nourishment, our understanding might rise gradually to things divine
and transcendent. For, in speaking of God, it has both used words taken from things corporeal, as
when it says, “Hide me under the shadow of Thy wings;”9 and it has borrowed many things fromthe spiritual creature, whereby to signify that which indeed is not so, but must needs so be said: as,for instance, “I the Lord thy God am a jealous God;”10 and, “It repenteth me that I have mademan.”11 But it has drawn no words whatever, whereby to frame either figures of speech or enigmaticsayings, from things which do not exist at all. And hence it is that they who are shut out from thetruth by that third kind of error are more mischievously and emptily vain than their fellows; in thatthey surmise respecting God, what can neither be found in Himself nor in any creature. For divine
Scripture is wont to frame, as it were, allurements for children from the things which are found in
the creature; whereby, according to their measure, and as it were by steps, the affections of the
weak may be moved to seek those things that are above, and to leave those things that are below.
But the same Scripture rarely employs those things which are spoken properly of God, and are notfound in any creature; as, for instance, that which was said to Moses, “I am that I am;” and, “I Am
hath sent me to you.”12 For since both body and soul also are said in some sense to be, Holy
Scripture certainly would not so express itself unless it meant to be understood in some special
sense of the term. So, too, that which the Apostle says, “Who only hath immortality.”13 Since thesoul also both is said to be, and is, in a certain manner immortal, Scripture would not say “onlyhath,” unless because true immortality is unchangeableness; which no creature can possess, since
it belongs to the creator alone.14 So also James says, “Every good gift and every perfect gift is fromabove, and cometh down from the Father of Lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow

8[Augustin here puts generare for creare—which is rarely the case with him, since the distinction between generationand creation is of the highest importance in discussing the doctrine of the Trinity. His thought here is, that God does not bringhimself into being, because he always is. Some have defined God as the Self-caused: causa sui. But the category of cause andeffect is inapplicable to the Infinite Being.—W.G.T.S.]
9
Ps. xvii. 8.
10
Ex. xx. 5.
11Gen. vi. 7.
12
Ex. iii. 14.
13
1 Tim. vi. 16.
14[God’s being is necessary; that of the creature is contingent. Hence the name I Am, or Jehovah,—which denotes thisdifference. God alone has immortality a parte ante, as well as a parte post.—W.G.T.S.]

19

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffof turning.”15 So also David, “Thou shall change them, and they shall be changed; but Thou art thesame.”16
3. Further, it is difficult to contemplate and fully know the substance of God; who fashions
things changeable, yet without any change in Himself, and creates things temporal, yet without any
temporal movement in Himself. And it is necessary, therefore, to purge our minds, in order to beable to see ineffably that which is ineffable; whereto not having yet attained, we are to be nourishedby faith, and led by such ways as are more suited to our capacity, that we may be rendered apt andable to comprehend it. And hence the Apostle says, that “in Christ indeed are hid all the treasuresof wisdom and knowledge;”17 and yet has commended Him to us, as to babes in Christ, who,
although already born again by His grace, yet are still carnal and psychical, not by that divine virtue
wherein He is equal to the Father, but by that human infirmity whereby He was crucified. For hesays, “I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ and Him crucified;”18 andthen he continues, “And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling.” And alittle after he says to them, “And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto
carnal,19 even as unto babes in Christ. I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto yewere not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.”20 There are some who are angry at languageof this kind, and think it is used in slight to themselves, and for the most part prefer rather to believethat they who so speak to them have nothing to say, than that they themselves cannot understandwhat they have said. And sometimes, indeed, we do allege to them, not certainly that account of
the case which they seek in their inquiries about God,—because neither can they themselves receiveit, nor can we perhaps either apprehend or express it,—but such an account of it as to demonstrate
to them how incapable and utterly unfit they are to understand that which they require of us. But
they, on their parts, because they do not hear what they desire, think that we are either playing themfalse in order to conceal our own ignorance, or speaking in malice because we grudge themknowledge; and so go away indignant and perturbed.

Chapter 2.—In What Manner This Work Proposes to Discourse Concerning the Trinity.
4. Wherefore, our Lord God helping, we will undertake to render, as far as we are able, thatvery account which they so importunately demand: viz., that the Trinity is the one and only andtrue God, and also how the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are rightly said, believed, understood,
to be of one and the same substance or essence; in such wise that they may not fancy themselves

15

Jas. i. 17.
Ps. cii. 26, 27.
17Col. ii. 3.
18
1 Cor. ii. 2, 3.
19[St. Paul, in this place, denominates imperfect but true believers “carnal,” in a relative sense, only. They are comparatively
carnal, when contrasted with the law of God, which is absolutely and perfectly spiritual. (Rom. vii. 14.) They do not, however,
belong to the class of carnal or natural men, in distinction from spiritual. The persons whom the Apostle here denominates“carnal,” are “babes in Christ.”—W.G.T.S.]
20
1 Cor. iii. 1, 2.
16

20

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

mocked by excuses on our part, but may find by actual trial, both that the highest good is that which
is discerned by the most purified minds, and that for this reason it cannot be discerned or understoodby themselves, because the eye of the human mind, being weak, is dazzled in that so transcendent
light, unless it be invigorated by the nourishment of the righteousness of faith. First, however, wemust demonstrate, according to the authority of the Holy Scriptures, whether the faith be so. Then,
if God be willing and aid us, we may perhaps at least so far serve these talkative arguers—more
puffed up than capable, and therefore laboring under the more dangerous disease—as to enable
them to find something which they are not able to doubt, that so, in that case where they cannot
find the like, they may be led to lay the fault to their own minds, rather than to the truth itself or to
our reasonings; and thus, if there be anything in them of either love or fear towards God, they may
return and begin from faith in due order: perceiving at length how healthful a medicine has been
provided for the faithful in the holy Church, whereby a heedful piety, healing the feebleness of themind, may render it able to perceive the unchangeable truth, and hinder it from falling headlong,through disorderly rashness, into pestilent and false opinion. Neither will I myself shrink frominquiry, if I am anywhere in doubt; nor be ashamed to learn, if I am anywhere in error.

Chapter 3.—What Augustin Requests from His Readers. The Errors of Readers Dull ofComprehension Not to Be Ascribed to the Author.
5. Further let me ask of my reader, wherever, alike with myself, he is certain, there to go on
with me; wherever, alike with myself, he hesitates, there to join with me in inquiring; wherever herecognizes himself to be in error, there to return to me; wherever he recognizes me to be so, there
to call me back: so that we may enter together upon the path of charity, and advance towards Himof whom it is said, “Seek His face evermore.”21 And I would make this pious and safe agreement,in the presence of our Lord God, with all who read my writings, as well in all other cases as, above
all, in the case of those which inquire into the unity of the Trinity, of the Father and the Son andthe Holy Spirit; because in no other subject is error more dangerous, or inquiry more laborious, orthe discovery of truth more profitable. If, then, any reader shall say, This is not well said, because
I do not understand it; such an one finds fault with my language, not with my faith: and it mightperhaps in very truth have been put more clearly; yet no man ever so spoke as to be understood in
all things by all men. Let him, therefore, who finds this fault with my discourse, see whether hecan understand other men who have handled similar subjects and questions, when he does notunderstand me: and if he can, let him put down my book, or even, if he pleases, throw it away; andlet him spend labor and time rather on those whom he understands.22 Yet let him not think on that
account that I ought to have been silent, because I have not been able to express myself so smoothly

21
22

Ps. cv. 4.
[This request of Augustin to his reader, involves an admirable rule for authorship generally—the desire, namely, thattruth be attained, be it through himself or through others. Milton teaches the same, when he says that the author must “study
and love learning for itself, not for lucre, or any other end, but the service of God and of truth, and perhaps that lasting fameand perpetuity of praise, which God and good men have consented shall be the reward of those whose published labors advancethe good of mankind.”—W.G.T.S.]

21

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffand clearly to him as those do whom he understands. For neither do all things, which all men havewritten, come into the hands of all. And possibly some, who are capable of understanding eventhese our writings, may not find those more lucid works, and may meet with ours only. And therefore
it is useful that many persons should write many books, differing in style but not in faith, concerning
even the same questions, that the matter itself may reach the greatest number—some in one way,some in another. But if he who complains that he has not understood these things has never beenable to comprehend any careful and exact reasonings at all upon such subjects, let him in that casedeal with himself by resolution and study, that he may know better; not with me by quarrellings
and wranglings, that I may hold my peace. Let him, again, who says, when he reads my book,
Certainly I understand what is said, but it is not true, assert, if he pleases, his own opinion, andrefute mine if he is able. And if he do this with charity and truth, and take the pains to make it
known to me (if I am still alive), I shall then receive the most abundant fruit of this my labor. And
if he cannot inform myself, most willing and glad should I be that he should inform those whom
he can. Yet, for my part, “I meditate in the law of the Lord,”23 if not “day and night,” at least such
short times as I can; and I commit my meditations to writing, lest they should escape me throughforgetfulness; hoping by the mercy of God that He will make me hold steadfastly all truths of which
I feel certain; “but if in anything I be otherwise minded, that He will himself reveal even this tome,”24 whether through secret inspiration and admonition, or through His own plain utterances, or
through the reasonings of my brethren. This I pray for, and this my trust and desire I commit toHim, who is sufficiently able to keep those things which He has given me, and to render thosewhich He has promised.
6. I expect, indeed, that some, who are more dull of understanding, will imagine that in someparts of my books I have held sentiments which I have not held, or have not held those which I
have. But their error, as none can be ignorant, ought not to be attributed to me, if they have deviatedinto false doctrine through following my steps without apprehending me, whilst I am compelled
to pick my way through a hard and obscure subject: seeing that neither can any one, in any way,rightly ascribe the numerous and various errors of heretics to the holy testimonies themselves ofthe divine books; although all of them endeavor to defend out of those same Scriptures their own
false and erroneous opinions. The law of Christ, that is, charity, admonishes me clearly, andcommands me with a sweet constraint, that when men think that I have held in my books something
false which I have not held, and that same falsehood displeases one and pleases another, I should
prefer to be blamed by him who reprehends the falsehood, rather than praised by him who praises
it. For although I, who never held the error, am not rightly blamed by the former, yet the error itself
is rightly censured; whilst by the latter neither am I rightly praised, who am thought to have heldthat which the truth censures, nor the sentiment itself, which the truth also censures. Let us therefore
essay the work which we have undertaken in the name of the Lord.

23
24

Ps. i. 2.
Phil. iii. 15.

22

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 4.—What the Doctrine of the Catholic Faith is Concerning the Trinity.
7. All those Catholic expounders of the divine Scriptures, both Old and New, whom I havebeen able to read, who have written before me concerning the Trinity, Who is God, have purposed
to teach, according to the Scriptures, this doctrine, that the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit
intimate a divine unity of one and the same substance in an indivisible equality;25 and therefore
that they are not three Gods, but one God: although the Father hath begotten the Son, and so He
who is the Father is not the Son; and the Son is begotten by the Father, and so He who is the Son
is not the Father; and the Holy Spirit is neither the Father nor the Son, but only the Spirit of the
Father and of the Son, Himself also co-equal with the Father and the Son, and pertaining to theunity of the Trinity. Yet not that this Trinity was born of the Virgin Mary, and crucified underPontius Pilate, and buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven, but only theSon. Nor, again, that this Trinity descended in the form of a dove upon Jesus when He was baptized;26
nor that, on the day of Pentecost, after the ascension of the Lord, when “there came a sound fromheaven, as of a rushing mighty wind,”27 the same Trinity “sat upon each of them with cloven tongues
like as of fire,” but only the Holy Spirit. Nor yet that this Trinity said from heaven, “Thou art mySon,”28 whether when He was baptized by John, or when the three disciples were with Him in themount,29 or when the voice sounded, saying, “I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again;”30
but that it was a word of the Father only, spoken to the Son; although the Father, and the Son, andthe Holy Spirit, as they are indivisible, so work indivisibly.31 This is also my faith, since it is the
Catholic faith.

Chapter 5.—Of Difficulties Concerning the Trinity: in What Manner Three are One God, and How,
Working Indivisibly, They Yet Perform Some Things Severally.
8. Some persons, however, find a difficulty in this faith; when they hear that the Father is God,and the Son God, and the Holy Spirit God, and yet that this Trinity is not three Gods, but one God;
25

[Augustin teaches the Nicene doctrine of a numerical unity of essence in distinction from a specific unity. The latter isthat of mankind. In this case there is division of substance—part after part of the specific nature being separated and formed,
by propagation, into individuals. No human individual contains the whole specific nature. But in the case of the numerical unityof the Trinity, there is no division of essence. The whole divine nature is in each divine person. The three divine persons do notconstitute a species—that is, three divine individuals made by the division and distribution of one common divine nature—but
are three modes or “forms” (Phil. ii. 6) of one undivided substance, numerically and identically the same in each.—W.G.T.S.]
26
Matt. iii. 16.
27
Acts ii. 2, 4.
28Mark i. 11.
29
Matt. xvii. 5.
30John xii. 28.
31[The term Trinity denotes the Divine essence in all three modes. The term Father (or Son, or Spirit) denotes the essence
in only one mode. Consequently, there is something in the Trinity that cannot be attributed to any one of the Persons, as such;and something in a Person that cannot be attributed to the Trinity, as such. Trinality cannot be ascribed to the first Person;
paternity cannot be ascribed to the Trinity.—W.G.T.S.]

23

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

and they ask how they are to understand this: especially when it is said that the Trinity works
indivisibly in everything that God works, and yet that a certain voice of the Father spoke, which is
not the voice of the Son; and that none except the Son was born in the flesh, and suffered, and rose
again, and ascended into heaven; and that none except the Holy Spirit came in the form of a dove.
They wish to understand how the Trinity uttered that voice which was only of the Father; and how
the same Trinity created that flesh in which the Son only was born of the Virgin; and how the verysame Trinity itself wrought that form of a dove, in which the Holy Spirit only appeared. Yet,otherwise, the Trinity does not work indivisibly, but the Father does some things, the Son otherthings, and the Holy Spirit yet others: or else, if they do some things together, some severally, thenthe Trinity is not indivisible. It is a difficulty, too, to them, in what manner the Holy Spirit is in the
Trinity, whom neither the Father nor the Son, nor both, have begotten, although He is the Spirit
both of the Father and of the Son. Since, then, men weary us with asking such questions, let us
unfold to them, as we are able, whatever wisdom God’s gift has bestowed upon our weakness on
this subject; neither “let us go on our way with consuming envy.”32 Should we say that we are notaccustomed to think about such things, it would not be true; yet if we acknowledge that such subjects
commonly dwell in our thoughts, carried away as we are by the love of investigating the truth, thenthey require of us, by the law of charity, to make known to them what we have herein been able tofind out. “Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect” (for, if the Apostle
Paul, how much more must I, who lie far beneath his feet, count myself not to have apprehended!);but, according to my measure, “if I forget those things that are behind, and reach forth unto those
things which are before, and press towards the mark for the prize of the high calling,”33 I am
requested to disclose so much of the road as I have already passed, and the point to which I havereached, whence the course yet remains to bring me to the end. And those make the request, whoma generous charity compels me to serve. Needs must too, and God will grant that, in supplying themwith matter to read, I shall profit myself also; and that, in seeking to reply to their inquiries, I shallmyself likewise find that for which I was inquiring. Accordingly I have undertaken the task, by thebidding and help of the Lord my God, not so much of discoursing with authority respecting things
I know already, as of learning those things by piously discoursing of them.

Chapter 6.—That the Son is Very God, of the Same Substance with the Father. Not Only the Father,
But the Trinity, is Affirmed to Be Immortal. All Things are Not from the Father Alone, But
Also from the Son. That the Holy Spirit is Very God, Equal with the Father and the Son.
9. They who have said that our Lord Jesus Christ is not God, or not very God, or not with the
Father the One and only God, or not truly immortal because changeable, are proved wrong by themost plain and unanimous voice of divine testimonies; as, for instance, “In the beginning was theWord, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” For it is plain that we are to take theWord of God to be the only Son of God, of whom it is afterwards said, “And the Word was made32
33

Wisd. vi. 23.
Phil. iii. 12–14.

24

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

flesh, and dwelt among us,” on account of that birth of His incarnation, which was wrought in timeof the Virgin. But herein is declared, not only that He is God, but also that He is of the same
substance with the Father; because, after saying, “And the Word was God,” it is said also, “Thesame was in the beginning with God: all things were made by Him, and without Him was notanything made.”34 Not simply “all things;” but only all things that were made, that is; the wholecreature. From which it appears clearly, that He Himself was not made, by whom all things were
made. And if He was not made, then He is not a creature; but if He is not a creature, then He is of
the same substance with the Father. For all substance that is not God is creature; and all that is notcreature is God.35 And if the Son is not of the same substance with the Father, then He is a substancethat was made: and if He is a substance that was made, then all things were not made by Him; but“all things were made by Him,” therefore He is of one and the same substance with the Father. And
so He is not only God, but also very God. And the same John most expressly affirms this in his
epistle: “For we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we
may know the true God, and that we may be in His true Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, andeternal life.”36
10. Hence also it follows by consequence, that the Apostle Paul did not say, “Who alone has
immortality,” of the Father merely; but of the One and only God, which is the Trinity itself. For
that which is itself eternal life is not mortal according to any changeableness; and hence the Sonof God, because “He is Eternal Life,” is also Himself understood with the Father, where it is said,“Who only hath immortality.” For we, too, are made partakers of this eternal life, and become, in
our own measure, immortal. But the eternal life itself, of which we are made partakers, is one thing;
we ourselves, who, by partaking of it, shall live eternally, are another. For if He had said, “Whomin His own time the Father will show, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings,
and Lord of lords; who only hath immortality;” not even so would it be necessarily understood that
the Son is excluded. For neither has the Son separated the Father from Himself, because He Himself,
speaking elsewhere with the voice of wisdom (for He Himself is the Wisdom of God),37 says, “I
alone compassed the circuit of heaven.”38 And therefore so much the more is it not necessary thatthe words, “Who hath immortality,” should be understood of the Father alone, omitting the Son;
when they are said thus: “That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until theappearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: whom in His own time He will show, who is the blessed andonly Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; who only hath immortality, dwelling in thelight which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honor
and power everlasting. Amen.”39 In which words neither is the Father specially named, nor the Son,nor the Holy Spirit; but the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; thatis, the One and only and true God, the Trinity itself.

34

John i. 1, 14, 2, 3.
[Augustin here postulates the theistic doctrines of two substances—infinite and finite; in contradiction to the postulateof pantheism, that there is only one substance—the infinite.—W.G.T.S.]
36
1 John v. 20.
37
1 Cor. i. 24.
38
Ecclus. xxiv. 5.
39
1 Tim. vi. 14–16.
35

25

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

11. But perhaps what follows may interfere with this meaning; because it is said, “Whom no
man hath seen, nor can see:” although this may also be taken as belonging to Christ according to
His divinity, which the Jews did not see, who yet saw and crucified Him in the flesh; whereas His
divinity can in no wise be seen by human sight, but is seen with that sight with which they who see
are no longer men, but beyond men. Rightly, therefore, is God Himself, the Trinity, understood tobe the “blessed and only Potentate,” who “shows the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in His own
time.” For the words, “Who only hath immortality,” are said in the same way as it is said, “Whoonly doeth wondrous things.”40 And I should be glad to know of whom they take these words tobe said. If only of the Father, how then is that true which the Son Himself says, “For what things
soever the Father doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise?” Is there any, among wonderful works,
more wonderful than to raise up and quicken the dead? Yet the same Son saith, “As the Father
raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them, even so the Son quickeneth whom He will.”41 How, then,does the Father alone “do wondrous things,” when these words allow us to understand neither the
Father only, nor the Son only, but assuredly the one only true God, that is, the Father, and the Son,and the Holy Spirit?42
12. Also, when the same apostle says, “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,”43
who can doubt that he speaks of all things which are created; as does John, when he says, “Allthings were made by Him”? I ask, therefore, of whom he speaks in another place: “For of Him,and through Him, and in Him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.”44 For if of the
Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, so as to assign each clause severally to each person: ofHim, that is to say, of the Father; through Him, that is to say, through the Son; in Him, that is tosay, in the Holy Spirit,—it is manifest that the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit is one God,
inasmuch as the words continue in the singular number, “To whom45 be glory for ever.” For at the
beginning of the passage he does not say, “O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom andknowledge” of the Father, or of the Son, or of the Holy Spirit, but “of the wisdom and knowledge
of God!” “How unsearchable are His judgments, and His ways past finding out! For who hathknown the mind of the Lord? or who hath been His counsellor? Or who hath first given to Him andit shall be recompensed unto him again? For of Him, and through Him, and in Him, are all things:
to whom be glory for ever. Amen.”46 But if they will have this to be understood only of the Father,
then in what way are all things by the Father, as is said here; and all things by the Son, as where itis said to the Corinthians, “And one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things,”47 and as in theGospel of John, “All things were made by Him?” For if some things were made by the Father, andsome by the Son, then all things were not made by the Father, nor all things by the Son; but if all
40

Ps. lxxii. 18.
John v. 19, 21.
42[Nothing is more important, in order to a correct interpretation of the New Testament, than a correct explanation of theterm God. Sometimes it denotes the Trinity, and sometimes a person of the Trinity. The context always shows which it is. The
examples given here by Augustin are only a few out of many.—W.G.T.S.]
43
1 Cor. viii. 6.
44
Rom. xi. 36.
45
Ipsi.
46
Rom. xi. 33–36.
47
1 Cor. viii. 6.
41

26

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

things were made by the Father, and all things by the Son, then the same things were made by the
Father and by the Son. The Son, therefore, is equal with the Father, and the working of the Father
and the Son is indivisible. Because if the Father made even the Son, whom certainly the Son Himself
did not make, then all things were not made by the Son; but all things were made by the Son:
therefore He Himself was not made, that with the Father He might make all things that were made.
And the apostle has not refrained from using the very word itself, but has said most expressly,“Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God;”48 using here thename of God specially of the Father;49 as elsewhere, “But the head of Christ is God.”50
13. Similar evidence has been collected also concerning the Holy Spirit, of which those whohave discussed the subject before ourselves have most fully availed themselves, that He too is God,and not a creature. But if not a creature, then not only God (for men likewise are called gods51),
but also very God; and therefore absolutely equal with the Father and the Son, and in the unity of
the Trinity consubstantial and co-eternal. But that the Holy Spirit is not a creature is made quite
plain by that passage above all others, where we are commanded not to serve the creature, but theCreator;52 not in the sense in which we are commanded to “serve” one another by love,53 which isin Greek, but in that in which God alone is served, which is in Greek. From whence
they are called idolaters who tender that service to images which is due to God. For it is this service
concerning which it is said, “Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve.”54
For this is found also more distinctly in the Greek Scriptures, which have
. Now if we areforbidden to serve the creature with such a service, seeing that it is written, “Thou shalt worship
the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve” (and hence, too, the apostle repudiates those who
worship and serve the creature more than the Creator), then assuredly the Holy Spirit is not acreature, to whom such a service is paid by all the saints; as says the apostle, “For we are thecircumcision, which serve the Spirit of God,”55 which is in the Greek. For even most Latin
copies also have it thus, “We who serve the Spirit of God;” but all Greek ones, or almost all, have48

Phil. ii. 6.
[It is not generally safe to differ from Augustin in trinitarian exegesis. But in Phil. ii. 6 “God” must surely denote the Divine
Essence, not the first Person of the Essence. St. Paul describes “Christ Jesus” as “subsisting” (ὑπ€ρχων) originally, that is prior
to incarnation, “in a form of God”(ἐν μορφῆ θεοῦ), and because he so subsisted, as being “equal with God.” The word μορφῆ
is anarthrous in the text: a form, not the form, as the A.V and R.V. render. St. Paul refers to one of three “forms” of God—namely,that particular form of Sonship, which is peculiar to the second person of the Godhead. Had the apostle employed the article
with μορφῆ, the implication would be that there is only one “form of God”—that is, only one person in the Divine Essence.
If then θεοῦ, in this place, denotes the Father, as Augustin says, St. Paul would teach that the Logos subsisted “in a formof the Father,” which would imply that the Father had more than one “form,” or else (if μορφῆ be rendered with the article)
that the Logos subsisted in the “form” of the Father, neither of which is true. But if “God,” in this place, denotes the Divine
Essence, then St. Paul teaches that the unincarnate Logos subsisted in a particular “form” of the Essence—the Father and Spirit
subsisting in other “forms” of it.
The student will observe that Augustin is careful to teach that the Logos, when he took on him “a form of a servant,”
did not lay aside “a form of God.” He understands the kenosis (ἐκ™νωσε) to be, the humbling of the divinity by its union withthe humanity, not the exinanition of it in the extremest sense of entirely divesting himself of the divinity, nor the less extreme
sense of a total non-use of it during the humiliation.—W.G.T.S.]
50
1 Cor. xi. 3.
51
Ps. lxxxii. 6.
52
Rom. i. 25.
53
Gal. v. 13.
54
Deut. vi. 13.
55
Phil. iii. 3 (Vulgate, etc.).
49

27

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

it so. Although in some Latin copies we find, not “We worship the Spirit of God,” but, “We worship
God in the Spirit.” But let those who err in this case, and refuse to give up to the more weighty
authority, tell us whether they find this text also varied in the mss.: “Know ye not that your bodyis the temple of the Holy Ghost, which is in you, which ye have of God?” Yet what can be more
senseless or more profane, than that any one should dare to say that the members of Christ are thetemple of one who, in their opinion, is a creature inferior to Christ? For the apostle says in anotherplace, “Your bodies are members of Christ.” But if the members of Christ are also the temple ofthe Holy Spirit, then the Holy Spirit is not a creature; because we must needs owe to Him, of whom
our body is the temple, that service wherewith God only is to be served, which in Greek is called. And accordingly the apostle says, “Therefore glorify God in your body.”56

Chapter 7.—In What Manner the Son is Less Than the Father, and Than Himself.
14. In these and like testimonies of the divine Scriptures, by free use of which, as I have said,
our predecessors exploded such sophistries or errors of the heretics, the unity and equality of the
Trinity are intimated to our faith. But because, on account of the incarnation of the Word of God
for the working out of our salvation, that the man Christ Jesus might be the Mediator between God
and men,57 many things are so said in the sacred books as to signify, or even most expressly declare,
the Father to be greater than the Son; men have erred through a want of careful examination orconsideration of the whole tenor of the Scriptures, and have endeavored to transfer those things
which are said of Jesus Christ according to the flesh, to that substance of His which was eternal
before the incarnation, and is eternal. They say, for instance, that the Son is less than the Father,because it is written that the Lord Himself said, “My Father is greater than I.”58 But the truth showsthat after the same sense the Son is less also than Himself; for how was He not made less also thanHimself, who “emptied59 Himself, and took upon Him the form of a servant?” For He did not sotake the form of a servant as that He should lose the form of God, in which He was equal to the
Father. If, then, the form of a servant was so taken that the form of God was not lost, since both in
the form of a servant and in the form of God He Himself is the same only-begotten Son of God theFather, in the form of God equal to the Father, in the form of a servant the Mediator between God
and men, the man Christ Jesus; is there any one who cannot perceive that He Himself in the formof God is also greater than Himself, but yet likewise in the form of a servant less than Himself?
And not, therefore, without cause the Scripture says both the one and the other, both that the Son
is equal to the Father, and that the Father is greater than the Son. For there is no confusion when
the former is understood as on account of the form of God, and the latter as on account of the formof a servant. And, in truth, this rule for clearing the question through all the sacred Scriptures is set
forth in one chapter of an epistle of the Apostle Paul, where this distinction is commended to us

56
57
58
59

1 Cor. vi. 19, 15, 20.
1 Tim. ii. 5.
John xiv. 28.
Exinanivit.

28

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

plainly enough. For he says, “Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equalwith God; but emptied Himself, and took upon Him the form of a servant, and was made in thelikeness of men: and was found in fashion60 as a man.”61 The Son of God, then, is equal to God theFather in nature, but less in “fashion.”62 For in the form of a servant which He took He is less thanthe Father; but in the form of God, in which also He was before He took the form of a servant, He
is equal to the Father. In the form of God He is the Word, “by whom all things are made;”63 but inthe form of a servant He was “made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were
under the law.”64 In like manner, in the form of God He made man; in the form of a servant He
was made man. For if the Father alone had made man without the Son, it would not have been
written, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.”65 Therefore, because the form of God
took the form of a servant, both is God and both is man; but both God, on account of God whotakes; and both man, on account of man who is taken. For neither by that taking is the one of themturned and changed into the other: the Divinity is not changed into the creature, so as to cease to
be Divinity; nor the creature into Divinity, so as to cease to be creature.

Chapter 8.—The Texts of Scripture Explained Respecting the Subjection of the Son to the Father,
Which Have Been Misunderstood. Christ Will Not So Give Up the Kingdom to the Father, as
to Take It Away from Himself. The Beholding Him is the Promised End of All Actions. The
Holy Spirit is Sufficient to Our Blessedness Equally with the Father.
15. As for that which the apostle says, “And when all things shall be subdued unto Him, thenshall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him that put all things under Him:” either the text has
been so turned, lest any one should think that the “fashion”66 of Christ, which He took according
to the human creature, was to be transformed hereafter into the Divinity, or (to express it more
precisely) the Godhead itself, who is not a creature, but is the unity of the Trinity,—a natureincorporeal, and unchangeable, and consubstantial, and co-eternal with itself; or if any one contends,
as some have thought, that the text, “Then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him that put
all things under Him,” is so turned in order that one may believe that very “subjection” to be achange and conversion hereafter of the creature into the substance or essence itself of the Creator,that is, that that which had been the substance of a creature shall become the substance of theCreator;—such an one at any rate admits this, of which in truth there is no possible doubt, that thishad not yet taken place, when the Lord said, “My Father is greater than I.” For He said this not
only before He ascended into heaven, but also before He had suffered, and had risen from the dead.
But they who think that the human nature in Him is to be changed and converted into the substance
60
61
62
63
64
65
66

Habitu.
Phil. ii. 6, 7.
Habitu.
John i. 3.
Gal. iv. 4, 5.
Gen. i. 26.
Habitum.

29

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffof the Godhead, and that it was so said, “Then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him that
put all things under Him,”—as if to say, Then also the Son of man Himself, and the human naturetaken by the Word of God, shall be changed into the nature of Him who put all things under
Him,—must also think that this will then take place, when, after the day of judgment, “He shallhave delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father.” And hence even still, according to thisopinion, the Father is greater than that form of a servant which was taken of the Virgin. But if someaffirm even further, that the man Christ Jesus has already been changed into the substance of God,at least they cannot deny that the human nature still remained, when He said before His passion,“For my Father is greater than I;” whence there is no question that it was said in this sense, that the
Father is greater than the form of a servant, to whom in the form of God the Son is equal. Nor let
any one, hearing what the apostle says, “But when He saith all things are put under Him, it ismanifest that He is excepted which did put all things under Him,”67 think the words, that He hathput all things under the Son, to be so understood of the Father, as that He should not think that the
Son Himself put all things under Himself. For this the apostle plainly declares, when he says to thePhilippians, “For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, theLord Jesus Christ: who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto His glorious
body, according to the working whereby He is able even to subdue68 all things unto Himself.”69
For the working of the Father and of the Son is indivisible. Otherwise, neither hath the Father
Himself put all things under Himself, but the Son hath put all things under Him, who delivers the
kingdom to Him, and puts down all rule and all authority and power. For these words are spokenof the Son: “When He shall have delivered up,” says the apostle, “the kingdom to God, even the
Father; when He shall have put down70 all rule, and all authority, and all power.” For the same thatputs down, also makes subject.
16. Neither may we think that Christ shall so give up the kingdom to God, even the Father, asthat He shall take it away from Himself. For some vain talkers have thought even this. For when
it is said, “He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father,” He Himself is not
excluded; because He is one God together with the Father. But that word “until” deceives those
who are careless readers of the divine Scriptures, but eager for controversies. For the text continues,“For He must reign, until He hath put all enemies under His feet;”71 as though, when He had so put
them, He would no more reign. Neither do they perceive that this is said in the same way as that
other text, “His heart is established: He shall not be afraid, until He see His desire upon His
enemies.”72 For He will not then be afraid when He has seen it. What then means, “When He shallhave delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father,” as though God and the Father has not the
kingdom now? But because He is hereafter to bring all the just, over whom now, living by faith,
the Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, reigns, to that sight which the sameapostle calls “face to face;”73 therefore the words, “When He shall have delivered up the kingdom

67
68
69
70
71
72
73

1 Cor. xv. 28, 24, 27.
Subjicere.
Phil. iii. 20, 21.
Evacuaverit.
1 Cor. xv. 24, 25.
Ps. cxii. 8.
1 Cor. xiii. 12.

30

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

to God, even the Father,” are as much as to say, When He shall have brought believers to thecontemplation of God, even the Father. For He says, “All things are delivered unto me of my Father:and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son,and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal Him.”74 The Father will then be revealed by the Son,
“when He shall have put down all rule, and all authority, and all power;” that is, in such wise that
there shall be no more need of any economy of similitudes, by means of angelic rulers, andauthorities, and powers. Of whom that is not unfitly understood, which is said in the Song of Songs
to the bride, “We will make thee borders75 of gold, with studs of silver, while the King sitteth at
His table;”76 that is, as long as Christ is in His secret place: since “your life is hid with Christ in
God; when Christ, who is our77 life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with Him in glory.”78
Before which time, “we see now through a glass, in an enigma,” that is, in similitudes, “but thenface to face.”79
17. For this contemplation is held forth to us as the end of all actions, and the everlasting fullnessof joy. For “we are the sons of God; and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that,when He shall appear, we shall be like Him; for we shall see Him as He is.”80 For that which He
said to His servant Moses, “I am that I am; thus shalt thou say to the children of Israel, I Am hathsent me to you;”81 this it is which we shall contemplate when we shall live in eternity. For so it issaid, “And this is life eternal, that they might know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whomThou hast sent.”82 This shall be when the Lord shall have come, and “shall have brought to lightthe hidden things of darkness;”83 when the darkness of this present mortality and corruption shallhave passed away. Then will be our morning, which is spoken of in the Psalm, “In the morning
will I direct my prayer unto Thee, and will contemplate Thee.”84 Of this contemplation I understandit to be said, “When He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father;” that is, when
He shall have brought the just, over whom now, living by faith, the Mediator between God andman, the man Christ Jesus, reigns, to the contemplation of God, even the Father. If herein I am
foolish, let him who knows better correct me; to me at least the case seems as I have said.85 For weshall not seek anything else, when we shall have come to the contemplation of Him. But that
contemplation is not yet, so long as our joy is in hope. For “hope that is seen is not hope: for whata man seeth, why doth he yet hope for? But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience74

Matt. xi. 27.
Similitudines.
76
In recubitu. Cant. i. 11; see LXX.
77
Vestra.
78
Col. iii. 3, 4.
79
1 Cor. xiii. 12.
80
1 John iii. 2.
81
Ex. iii 14.
82
John xvii. 3.
83
1 Cor. iv. 5.
84
Ps. v. 5.
85[The common explanation is better, which regards the “kingdom” that is to be delivered up, to be the mediatorialcommission. When Christ shall have finished his work of redeeming men, he no longer discharges the office of a mediator. It
seems incongruous to denominate the beatific vision of God by the redeemed, a surrender of a kingdom. In I. x. 21, Augustin
says that when the Redeemer brings the redeemed from faith to sight, “He is said to ‘deliver up the kingdom to God, even the
Father.’ ”—W.G.T.S.]
75

31

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

wait for it,”86 viz. “as long as the King sitteth at His table.”87 Then will take place that which is
written, “In Thy presence is fullness of joy.”88 Nothing more than that joy will be required; because
there will be nothing more than can be required. For the Father will be manifested to us, and thatwill suffice for us. And this much Philip had well understood, so that he said to the Lord, “Showus the Father, and it sufficeth us.” But he had not yet understood that he himself was able to say
this very same thing in this way also: Lord, show Thyself to us, and it sufficeth us. For, that hemight understand this, the Lord replied to him, “Have I been so long time with you, and yet hastthou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father.” But because He intended
him, before he could see this, to live by faith, He went on to say, “Believest thou not that I am in
the Father, and the Father in me?”89 For “while we are at home in the body, we are absent from theLord: for we walk by faith, not by sight.”90 For contemplation is the recompense of faith, for which
recompense our hearts are purified by faith; as it is written, “Purifying their hearts by faith.”91 And
that our hearts are to be purified for this contemplation, is proved above all by this text, “Blessed
are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.”92 And that this is life eternal, God says in the Psalm,“With long life will I satisfy him, and show him my salvation.”93 Whether, therefore, we hear,
Show us the Son; or whether we hear, Show us the Father; it is even all one, since neither can be
manifested without the other. For they are one, as He also Himself says, “My Father and I areone.”94 Finally, on account of this very indivisibility, it suffices that sometimes the Father alone,or the Son alone, should be named, as hereafter to fill us with the joy of His countenance.
18. Neither is the Spirit of either thence excluded, that is, the Spirit of the Father and of theSon; which Holy Spirit is specially called “the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive.”95
For to have the fruition of God the Trinity, after whose image we are made, is indeed the fullnessof our joy, than which there is no greater. On this account the Holy Spirit is sometimes spoken of
as if He alone sufficed to our blessedness: and He does alone so suffice, because He cannot be
divided from the Father and the Son; as the Father alone is sufficient, because He cannot be divided
from the Son and the Holy Spirit; and the Son alone is sufficient because He cannot be divided
from the Father and the Holy Spirit. For what does He mean by saying, “If ye love me, keep mycommandments; and I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter, that He may
abide with you for ever; even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive,”96 that is, thelovers of the world? For “the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God.”97 But it
may perhaps seem, further, as if the words, “And I will pray the Father, and He shall give youanother Comforter,” were so said as if the Son alone were not sufficient. And that place so speaks
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97

Rom. viii. 24, 25.
Cant. i. 12.
Ps. xvi. 11.
John xiv. 8, 10.
2 Cor. v. 6, 7.
Acts xv. 9.
Matt. v. 8.
Ps. xci. 16.
John x. 30.
John xiv. 17.
John xiv. 15–17.
1 Cor. ii. 14.

32

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffof the Spirit, as if He alone were altogether sufficient: “When He, the Spirit of truth, is come, He
will guide you into all truth.”98 Pray, therefore, is the Son here excluded, as if He did not teach alltruth, or as if the Holy Spirit were to fill up that which the Son could not fully teach? Let them say
then, if it pleases them, that the Holy Spirit is greater than the Son, whom they are wont to call less.
Or is it, forsooth, because it is not said, He alone,—or, No one else except Himself—will guideyou into all truth, that they allow that the Son also may be believed to teach together with Him? Inthat case the apostle has excluded the Son from knowing those things which are of God, where hesays, “Even so the things of God knoweth no one, but the Spirit of God:”99 so that these perverse
men might, upon this ground, go on to say that none but the Holy Spirit teaches even the Son thethings of God, as the greater teaches the less; to whom the Son Himself ascribes so much as to say,“But because I have said these things unto you, sorrow hath filled your heart. Nevertheless I tell
you the truth; it is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will notcome unto you.”100

Chapter 9.—All are Sometimes Understood in One Person.
But this is said, not on account of any inequality of the Word of God and of the Holy Spirit,
but as though the presence of the Son of man with them would be a hindrance to the coming ofHim, who was not less, because He did not “empty Himself, taking upon Him the form of aservant,”101 as the Son did. It was necessary, then, that the form of a servant should be taken awayfrom their eyes, because, through gazing upon it, they thought that alone which they saw to be
Christ. Hence also is that which is said, “If ye loved me, ye would rejoice because I said, ‘I go unto
the Father; for my Father is greater than I:’”102 that is, on that account it is necessary for me to go
to the Father, because, whilst you see me thus, you hold me to be less than the Father through thatwhich you see; and so, being taken up with the creature and the “fashion” which I have taken uponme, you do not perceive the equality which I have with the Father. Hence, too, is this: “Touch menot; for I am not yet ascended to my Father.”103 For touch, as it were, puts a limit to their conception,and He therefore would not have the thought of the heart, directed towards Himself, to be so limited
as that He should be held to be only that which He seemed to be. But the “ascension to the Father”
meant, so to appear as He is equal to the Father, that the limit of the sight which sufficeth us might
be attained there. Sometimes also it is said of the Son alone, that He himself sufficeth, and thewhole reward of our love and longing is held forth as in the sight of Him. For so it is said, “He thathath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me; and he that loveth me shall be
loved of my Father; and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.”104 Pray, because He has
98
99
100
101
102
103
104

John xvi. 13.
1 Cor. ii. 11.
John xvi. 6, 7.
Phil. ii. 7.
John xiv. 28.
John xx. 17.
John xiv. 21.

33

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

not here said, And I will show the Father also to him, has He therefore excluded the Father? On
the contrary, because it is true, “I and my Father are one,” when the Father is manifested, the Sonalso, who is in Him, is manifested; and when the Son is manifested, the Father also, who is in Him,is manifested. As, therefore, when it is said, “And I will manifest myself to him,” it is understoodthat He manifests also the Father; so likewise in that which is said, “When He shall have delivered
up the kingdom to God, even the Father,” it is understood that He does not take it away from
Himself; since, when He shall bring believers to the contemplation of God, even the Father, doubtless
He will bring them to the contemplation of Himself, who has said, “And I will manifest myself tohim.” And so, consequently, when Judas had said to Him, “Lord, how is it that Thou wilt manifest
Thyself unto us, and not unto the world?” Jesus answered and said to him, “If a man love me, hewill keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abodewith him.”105 Behold, that He manifests not only Himself to him by whom He is loved, because
He comes to him together with the Father, and abides with him.
19. Will it perhaps be thought, that when the Father and the Son make their abode with him
who loves them, the Holy Spirit is excluded from that abode? What, then, is that which is said
above of the Holy Spirit: “Whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth Him not: but ye know
Him; for He abideth with you, and is in you”? He, therefore, is not excluded from that abode, ofwhom it is said, “He abideth with you, and is in you;” unless, perhaps, any one be so senseless as
to think, that when the Father and the Son have come that they may make their abode with him
who loves them, the Holy Spirit will depart thence, and (as it were) give place to those who are
greater. But the Scripture itself meets this carnal idea; for it says a little above: “I will pray the
Father, and He shall give you another Comforter, that He may abide with you for ever.”106 He will
not therefore depart when the Father and the Son come, but will be in the same abode with them
eternally; because neither will He come without them, nor they without Him. But in order to intimate
the Trinity, some things are separately affirmed, the Persons being also each severally named; andyet are not to be understood as though the other Persons were excluded, on account of the unity ofthe same Trinity and the One substance and Godhead of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy
Spirit.107

Chapter 10.—In What Manner Christ Shall Deliver Up the Kingdom to God, Even the Father. The
Kingdom Having Been Delivered to God, Even the Father, Christ Will Not Then Make
Intercession for Us.

105

John xiv. 22, 23.
John xiv. 16–23.
107[An act belonging eminently and officially to a particular trinitarian person is not performed to the total exclusion of theother persons, because of the numerical unity of essence. The whole undivided essence is in each person; consequently, what
the essence in one of its personal modes, or forms, does officially and eminently, is participated in by the essence in its othermodes or forms. Hence the interchange of persons in Scripture. Though creation is officially the Father’s work, yet the Soncreates (Col. i. 16; Heb. i. 3). The name Saviour is given to the Father (1 Tim. i. 1). Judgment belongs officially to the Son(John v. 22; Matt xxv. 31); yet the Father judgeth (1 Pet. i. 17). The Father raises Christ (Acts xiii. 30); yet Christ raises himself(John x. 18; Acts x. 41; Rom. xiv. 9).—W.G.T.S.]
106

34

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

20. Our Lord Jesus Christ, therefore, will so deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father,
Himself not being thence excluded, nor the Holy Spirit, when He shall bring believers to thecontemplation of God, wherein is the end of all good actions, and everlasting rest, and joy which
never will be taken from us. For He signifies this in that which He says: “I will see you again, andyour heart shall rejoice; and your joy no man taketh from you.”108 Mary, sitting at the feet of theLord, and earnestly listening to His word, foreshowed a similitude of this joy; resting as she didfrom all business, and intent upon the truth, according to that manner of which this life is capable,
by which, however, to prefigure that which shall be for eternity. For while Martha, her sister, wascumbered about necessary business, which, although good and useful, yet, when rest shall havesucceeded, is to pass away, she herself was resting in the word of the Lord. And so the Lord replied
to Martha, when she complained that her sister did not help her: “Mary hath chosen the best part,which shall not be taken away from her.”109 He did not say that Martha was acting a bad part; butthat “best part that shall not be taken away.” For that part which is occupied in the ministering toa need shall be “taken away” when the need itself has passed away. Since the reward of a goodwork that will pass away is rest that will not pass away. In that contemplation, therefore, God willbe all in all; because nothing else but Himself will be required, but it will be sufficient to beenlightened by and to enjoy Him alone. And so he in whom “the Spirit maketh intercession withgroanings which cannot be uttered,”110 says, “One thing have I desired of the Lord, that I will seek
after; that I may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life, to contemplate the beautyof the Lord.”111 For we shall then contemplate God, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,when the Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, shall have delivered up the kingdom
to God, even the Father, so as no longer to make intercession for us, as our Mediator and Priest,
Son of God and Son of man;112 but that He Himself too, in so far as He is a Priest that has taken
the form of a servant for us, shall be put under Him who has put all things under Him, and underwhom He has put all things: so that, in so far as He is God, He with Him will have put us under
Himself; in so far as He is a Priest, He with us will be put under Him.113 And therefore as the[incarnate] Son is both God and man, it is rather to be said that the manhood in the Son is anothersubstance [from the Son], than that the Son in the Father [is another substance from the Father];just as the carnal nature of my soul is more another substance in relation to my soul itself, although
in one and the same man, than the soul of another man is in relation to my soul.114

108

John xvi. 22.
Luke x. 30–42.
110
Rom. viii. 26.
111
Ps. xxvii. 4.
112[The redeemed must forever stand in the relation of redeemed sinners to their Redeemer. Thus standing, they will foreverneed Christ’s sacrifice and intercession in respect to their past sins in this earthly state. But as in the heavenly state they are
sinless, and are incurring no new guilt, it is true that they do not require the fresh application of atoning blood for new sins, nor
Christ’s intercession for such. This is probably what Augustin means by saying that Christ “no longer makes intercession forus,” when he has delivered up the kingdom to God. When the Mediator has surrendered his commission, he ceases to redeem
sinners from death, while yet he continues forever to be the Head of those whom he has redeemed, and their High Priest forever,after the order of Melchizedek (Heb. vii. 17.)—W.G.T.S.]
113
1 Cor. xv. 24–28.
114[The animal soul is different in kind from the rational soul though both constitute one person; while the rational soul ofa man is the same in kind with that of another man. Similarly, says Augustin, there is a difference in kind between the human
109

35

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

21. When, therefore, He “shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father,”—that
is, when He shall have brought those who believe and live by faith, for whom now as Mediator He
maketh intercession, to that contemplation, for the obtaining of which we sigh and groan, and whenlabor and groaning shall have passed away,—then, since the kingdom will have been delivered up
to God, even the Father, He will no more make intercession for us. And this He signifies, when He
says: “These things have I spoken unto you in similitudes;115 but the time cometh when I shall no
more speak unto you in similitudes,116 but I shall declare117 to you plainly of the Father:” that is,they will not then be “similitudes,” when the sight shall be “face to face.” For this it is which He
says, “But I will declare to you plainly of the Father;” as if He said I will plainly show you theFather. For He says, I will “declare” to you, because He is His word. For He goes on to say, “At
that day ye shall ask in my name; and I say not unto you, that I will pray the Father for you: for the
Father Himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God.
I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go to the
Father.”118 What is meant by “I came forth from the Father,” unless this, that I have not appearedin that form in which I am equal to the Father, but otherwise, that is, as less than the Father, in thecreature which I have taken upon me? And what is meant by “I am come into the world,” unless
this, that I have manifested to the eyes even of sinners who love this world, the form of a servant
which I took, making myself of no reputation? And what is meant by “Again, I leave the world,”
unless this, that I take away from the sight of the lovers of this world that which they have seen?
And what is meant by “I go to the Father,” unless this, that I teach those who are my faithful ones
to understand me in that being in which I am equal to the Father? Those who believe this will bethought worthy of being brought by faith to sight, that is, to that very sight, in bringing them towhich He is said to “deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father.” For His faithful ones, whom
He has redeemed with His blood, are called His kingdom, for whom He now intercedes; but then,making them to abide in Himself there, where He is equal to the Father, He will no longer pray the
Father for them. “For,” He says, “the Father Himself loveth you.” For indeed He “prays,” in so far
as He is less than the Father; but as He is equal with the Father, He with the Father grants. Wherefore
He certainly does not exclude Himself from that which He says, “The Father Himself loveth you;”but He means it to be understood after that manner which I have above spoken of, and sufficiently
intimated,—namely, that for the most part each Person of the Trinity is so named, that the other
Persons also may be understood. Accordingly, “For the Father Himself loveth you,” is so said thatby consequence both the Son and the Holy Spirit also may be understood: not that He does not now
love us, who spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all;119 but God loves us, such as
we shall be, not such as we are, for such as they are whom He loves, such are they whom He keeps
eternally; which shall then be, when He who now maketh intercession for us shall have “delivered
up the kingdom to God, even the Father,” so as no longer to ask the Father, because the Father

nature and the divine nature of Christ, though constituting one theanthropic person, while the divine nature of the Son is thesame in substance with that of the Father, though constituting two different persons, the Father and Son.—W.G.T.S.]
115
Proverbs—A.V.
116
Proverbs—A.V.
117
Show—A.V.
118
John xvi. 25–28.
119
Rom. viii. 32.

36

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Himself loveth us. But for what deserving, except of faith, by which we believe before we see thatwhich is promised? For by this faith we shall arrive at sight; so that He may love us, being such,as He loves us in order that we may become; and not such, as He hates us because we are, andexhorts and enables us to wish not to be always.

Chapter 11.—By What Rule in the Scriptures It is Understood that the Son is Now Equal and Now
Less.
22. Wherefore, having mastered this rule for interpreting the Scriptures concerning the Son ofGod, that we are to distinguish in them what relates to the form of God, in which He is equal to the
Father, and what to the form of a servant which He took, in which He is less than the Father; weshall not be disquieted by apparently contrary and mutually repugnant sayings of the sacred books.
For both the Son and the Holy Spirit, according to the form of God, are equal to the Father, because
neither of them is a creature, as we have already shown: but according to the form of a servant He
is less than the Father, because He Himself has said, “My Father is greater than I;”120 and He isless than Himself, because it is said of Him, He emptied Himself;”121 and He is less than the Holy
Spirit, because He Himself says, “Whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be
forgiven him; but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven Him.”122
And in the Spirit too He wrought miracles, saying: “But if I with the Spirit of God cast out devils,
no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you.”123 And in Isaiah He says,—in the lesson which
He Himself read in the synagogue, and showed without a scruple of doubt to be fulfilled concerning
Himself,—“The Spirit of the Lord God,” He says, “is upon me: because He hath anointed me topreach good tidings unto the meek He hath sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives,”124 etc.: forthe doing of which things He therefore declares Himself to be “sent,” because the Spirit of God isupon Him. According to the form of God, all things were made by Him;125 according to the formof a servant, He was Himself made of a woman, made under the law.126 According to the form ofGod, He and the Father are one;127 according to the form of a servant, He came not to do His own
will, but the will of Him that sent Him.128 According to the form of God, “As the Father hath lifein Himself, so hath He given to the Son to have life in Himself;”129 according to the form of a120

John xiv. 28.
Phil. ii. 7.
122
Matt. xii. 32.
123
Matt. xii. 28.
124
Isa. lxi. 1; Luke iv. 18, 19.
125John i. 3.
126
Gal. iv. 4.
127John x. 30.
128John vi. 38.
129
John v. 26. [In communicating the Divine Essence to the Son, in eternal generation, the essence is communicated withall its attributes. Self existence is one of these attributes. In this way, the Father “gives to the Son to have life in himself,” when
he makes common (κοινωνεῖν), between Himself and the Son, the one Divine Essence.—W.G.T.S.]
121

37

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

servant, His “soul is sorrowful even unto death;” and, “O my Father,” He says, “if it be possible,
let this cup pass from me.”130 According to the form of God, “He is the True God, and eternal
life;”131 according to the form of a servant, “He became obedient unto death, even the death of thecross.”132—23. According to the form of God, all things that the Father hath are His,133 and “Allmine,” He says, “are Thine, and Thine are mine;”134 according to the form of a servant, the doctrine
is not His own, but His that sent Him.135

Chapter 12.—In What Manner the Son is Said Not to Know the Day and the Hour Which the Father
Knows. Some Things Said of Christ According to the Form of God, Other Things According
to the Form of a Servant. In What Way It is of Christ to Give the Kingdom, in What Not of
Christ. Christ Will Both Judge and Not Judge.
Again, “Of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven;neither the Son, but the Father.”136 For He is ignorant of this, as making others ignorant; that is,in that He did not so know as at that time to show His disciples:137 as it was said to Abraham, “Now
I know that thou fearest God,”138 that is, now I have caused thee to know it; because he himself,
being tried in that temptation, became known to himself. For He was certainly going to tell thissame thing to His disciples at the fitting time; speaking of which yet future as if past, He says,“Henceforth I call you not servants, but friends; for the servant knoweth not what his Lord doeth:
but I have called you friends; for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known untoyou;”139 which He had not yet done, but spoke as though He had already done it, because He
certainly would do it. For He says to the disciples themselves, “I have yet many things to say untoyou; but ye cannot bear them now.”140 Among which is to be understood also, “Of the day andhour.” For the apostle also says, “I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ,and Him crucified;”141 because he was speaking to those who were not able to receive higher things
concerning the Godhead of Christ. To whom also a little while after he says, “I could not speak

130

Matt. xxvi. 38, 39.
1 John v. 20.
132
Phil. ii. 8.
133John xvii. 15.
134
John xvii. 10.
135John vii. 16.
136
Mark xiii. 32.
137[The more common explanation of this text in modern exegesis makes the ignorance to be literal, and referable solely
to the human nature of our Lord, not to his person as a whole. Augustin’s explanation, which Bengel, on Mark xiii. 32, is inclined
to favor, escapes the difficulty that arises from a seeming division of the one theanthopic person into two portions, one of whichknows, and the other does not. Yet this same difficulty besets the fact of a growth in knowledge, which is plainly taught in Lukei. 80. In this case, the increase in wisdom must relate to the humanity alone.—W.G.T.S.]
138
Gen. xxii. 12.
139
John xv. 15.
140John xvi. 12.
141
1 Cor. ii. 2.
131

38

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal.”142 He was “ignorant,” therefore, among them of thatwhich they were not able to know from him. And that only he said that he knew, which it was fittingthat they should know from him. In short, he knew among the perfect what he knew not among
babes; for he there says: “We speak wisdom among them that are perfect.”143 For a man is said not
to know what he hides, after that kind of speech, after which a ditch is called blind which is hidden.
For the Scriptures do not use any other kind of speech than may be found in use among men, because
they speak to men.
24. According to the form of God, it is said “Before all the hills He begat me,”144 that is, before
all the loftinesses of things created and, “Before the dawn I begat Thee,”145 that is, before all times
and temporal things: but according to the form of a servant, it is said, “The Lord created me in the
beginning of His ways.”146 Because, according to the form of God, He said, “I am the truth;” andaccording to the form of a servant, “I am the way.”147 For, because He Himself, being thefirst-begotten of the dead,148 made a passage to the kingdom of God to life eternal for His Church,
to which He is so the Head as to make the body also immortal, therefore He was “created in the
beginning of the ways” of God in His work. For, according to the form of God, He is the beginning,149
that also speaketh unto us, in which “beginning” God created the heaven and the earth;150 but
according to the form of a servant, “He is a bridegroom coming out of His chamber.”151 According
to the form of God, “He is the first-born of every creature, and He is before all things and by him
all things consist;” according to the form of a servant, “He is the head of the body, the Church.”152
According to the form of God, “He is the Lord of glory.”153 From which it is evident that He Himself
glorifies His saints: for, “Whom He did predestinate, them He also called; and whom He called,them He also justified; and whom He justified, them He also glorified.”154 Of Him accordingly it
is said, that He justifieth the ungodly;155 of Him it is said, that He is just and a justifier.156 If,
therefore, He has also glorified those whom He has justified, He who justifies, Himself also glorifies;
who is, as I have said, the Lord of glory. Yet, according to the form of a servant, He replied to His
disciples, when inquiring about their own glorification: “To sit on my right hand and on my left is
not mine to give, but [it shall be given to them] for whom it is prepared by my Father.”157

142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157

1 Cor. iii. 1.
1 Cor. ii. 6.
Prov. viii. 25.
Ps. cx. 3. Vulgate.
Prov. viii. 22.
John xiv. 6.
Apoc. i. 5.
John viii. 25.
Gen. i. 1.
Ps. xix. 5.
Col. i. 15, 17, 18.
1 Cor. ii. 8.
Rom. viii. 30.
Rom. iv. 5.
Rom. iii. 26.
Matt. xx. 23.

39

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

25. But that which is prepared by His Father is prepared also by the Son Himself, because He
and the Father are one.158 For we have already shown, by many modes of speech in the divine
Scriptures, that, in this Trinity, what is said of each is also said of all, on account of the indivisible
working of the one and same substance. As He also says of the Holy Spirit, “If I depart, I will send
Him unto you.”159 He did not say, We will send; but in such way as if the Son only should sendHim, and not the Father; while yet He says in another place, “These things have I spoken unto you,being yet present with you; but the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will sendin my name, He shall teach you all things.”160 Here again it is so said as if the Son also would notsend Him, but the Father only. As therefore in these texts, so also where He says, “But for themfor whom it is prepared by my Father,” He meant it to be understood that He Himself, with the
Father, prepares seats of glory for those for whom He will. But some one may say: There, when
He spoke of the Holy Spirit, He so says that He Himself will send Him, as not to deny that the
Father will send Him; and in the other place, He so says that the Father will send Him, as not todeny that He will do so Himself; but here He expressly says, “It is not mine to give,” and so goeson to say that these things are prepared by the Father. But this is the very thing which we havealready laid down to be said according to the form of a servant: viz., that we are so to understand“It is not mine to give,” as if it were said, This is not in the power of man to give; that so He may
be understood to give it through that wherein He is God equal to the Father. “It is not mine,” Hesays, “to give;” that is, I do not give these things by human power, but “to those for whom it isprepared by my Father;” but then take care you understand also, that if “all things which the Father
hath are mine,”161 then this certainly is mine also, and I with the Father have prepared these things.
26. For I ask again, in what manner this is said, “If any man hear not my words, I will not judge
him?”162 For perhaps He has said here, “I will not judge him,” in the same sense as there, “It is notmine to give.” But what follows here? “I came not,” He says, “to judge the world, but to save theworld;” and then He adds, “He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth
him.” Now here we should understand the Father, unless He had added, “The word that I havespoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.” Well, then, will neither the Son judge, because
He says, “I will not judge him,” nor the Father, but the word which the Son hath spoken? Nay, buthear what yet follows: “For I,” He says, “have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me,
He gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak; and I know that His
commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me,
so I speak.” If therefore the Son judges not, but “the word which the Son hath spoken;” and theword which the Son hath spoken therefore judges, because the Son “hath not spoken of Himself,
but the Father who sent Him gave Him a commandment what He should say, and what He should
speak:” then the Father assuredly judges, whose word it is which the Son hath spoken; and the same
Son Himself is the very Word of the Father. For the commandment of the Father is not one thing,
and the word of the Father another; for He hath called it both a word and a commandment. Let us
see, therefore, whether perchance, when He says, “I have not spoken of myself,” He meant to be
158
159
160
161
162

John x. 30.
John xvi. 7.
John xiv. 25, 26.
John xvi. 15.
John xii. 47–50.

40

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

understood thus,—I am not born of myself. For if He speaks the word of the Father, then He speaks
Himself,163 because He is Himself the Word of the Father. For ordinarily He says, “The Father gave
to me;” by which He means it to be understood that the Father begat Him: not that He gave anything
to Him, already existing and not possessing it; but that the very meaning of, To have given that He
might have, is, To have begotten that He might be. For it is not, as with the creature so with the
Son of God before the incarnation and before He took upon Him our flesh, the Only-begotten bywhom all things were made; that He is one thing, and has another: but He is in such way as to bewhat He has. And this is said more plainly, if any one is fit to receive it, in that place where He
says: “For as the Father hath life in Himself, so hath He given to the Son to have life in Himself.”164
For He did not give to Him, already existing and not having life, that He should have life in Himself;inasmuch as, in that He is, He is life. Therefore “He gave to the Son to have life in Himself” means,
He begat the Son to be unchangeable life, which is life eternal. Since, therefore, the Word of God
is the Son of God, and the Son of God is “the true God and eternal life,”165 as John says in his
Epistle; so here, what else are we to acknowledge when the Lord says, “The word which I havespoken, the same shall judge him at the last day,”166 and calls that very word the word of the Father
and the commandment of the Father, and that very commandment everlasting life?” “And I know,”
He says, “that His commandment is life everlasting.”
27. I ask, therefore, how we are to understand, “I will not judge him; but the Word which I havespoken shall judge him:” which appears from what follows to be so said, as if He would say, I will
not judge; but the Word of the Father will judge. But the Word of the Father is the Son of God
Himself. Is it to be so understood: I will not judge, but I will judge? How can this be true, unlessin this way: viz., I will not judge by human power, because I am the Son of man; but I will judge
by the power of the Word, because I am the Son of God? Or if it still seems contradictory andinconsistent to say, I will not judge, but I will judge; what shall we say of that place where He says,“My doctrine is not mine?” How “mine,” when “not mine?” For He did not say, This doctrine is
not mine, but “My doctrine is not mine:” that which He called His own, the same He called not His
own. How can this be true, unless He has called it His own in one relation; not His own, in another?
According to the form of God, His own; according to the form of a servant, not His own. For when
He says, “It is not mine, but His that sent me,”167 He makes us recur to the Word itself. For thedoctrine of the Father is the Word of the Father, which is the Only Son. And what, too, does thatmean, “He that believeth on me, believeth not on me?”168 How believe on Him, yet not believe on
Him? How can so opposite and inconsistent a thing be understood—“Whoso believeth on me,” Hesays, “believeth not on me, but on Him that sent me;”—unless you so understand it, Whoso believeth
on me believeth not on that which he sees, lest our hope should be in the creature; but on Him who
took the creature, whereby He might appear to human eyes, and so might cleanse our hearts byfaith, to contemplate Himself as equal to the Father? So that in turning the attention of believers to
the Father, and saying, “Believeth not on me, but on Him that sent me,” He certainly did not mean
163
164
165
166
167
168

Seipsum loquitur.
John v. 26.
1 John v. 20.
John xii. 48.
John vii. 16.
John xii. 44.

41

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Himself to be separated from the Father, that is, from Him that sent Him; but that men might sobelieve on Himself, as they believe on the Father, to whom He is equal. And this He says in express
terms in another place, “Ye believe in God, believe also in me:”169 that is, in the same way as you
believe in God, so also believe in me; because I and the Father are One God. As therefore, here,
He has as it were withdrawn the faith of men from Himself, and transferred it to the Father, by
saying, “Believeth not on me, but on Him that sent me,” from whom nevertheless He certainly did
not separate Himself; so also, when He says, “It is not mine to give, but [it shall be given to them]for whom it is prepared by my Father,” it is I think plain in what relation both are to be taken. For
that other also is of the same kind, “I will not judge;” whereas He Himself shall judge the quickand dead.170 But because He will not do so by human power, therefore, reverting to the Godhead,He raises the hearts of men upwards; which to lift up, He Himself came down.

Chapter 13.—Diverse Things are Spoken Concerning the Same Christ, on Account of the Diverse
Natures of the One Hypostasis [Theanthropic Person]. Why It is Said that the Father Will Not
Judge, But Has Given Judgment to the Son.
28. Yet unless the very same were the Son of man on account of the form of a servant which
He took, who is the Son of God on account of the form of God in which He is; Paul the apostle
would not say of the princes of this world, “For had they known it, they would not have crucified
the Lord of glory.”171 For He was crucified after the form of a servant, and yet “the Lord of glory”
was crucified. For that “taking” was such as to make God man, and man God. Yet what is said on
account of what, and what according to what, the thoughtful, diligent, and pious reader discerns
for himself, the Lord being his helper. For instance, we have said that He glorifies His own, as
being God, and certainly then as being the Lord of glory; and yet the Lord of glory was crucified,because even God is rightly said to have been crucified, not after the power of the divinity, but
after the weakness of the flesh:172 just as we say, that He judges as God, that is, by divine power,
not by human; and yet the man Himself will judge, just as the Lord of glory was crucified: for so
He expressly says, “When the Son of man shall come in His glory, and all the holy angels with
Him, and before Him shall be gathered all nations;”173 and the rest that is foretold of the future
judgment in that place even to the last sentence. And the Jews, inasmuch as they will be punishedin that judgment for persisting in their wickedness, as it is elsewhere written, “shall look upon Him
whom they have pierced.”174 For whereas both good and bad shall see the Judge of the quick anddead, without doubt the bad will not be able to see Him, except after the form in which He is theSon of man; but yet in the glory wherein He will judge, not in the lowliness wherein He was judged.
But the ungodly without doubt will not see that form of God in which He is equal to the Father.
169
170
171
172
173
174

John xiv. 1.
2 Tim. iv. 1.
1 Cor. ii. 8.
2 Cor. xiii. 4.
Matt. xxv. 31, 32.
Zech. xii. 10.

42

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

For they are not pure in heart; and “Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.”175 And
that sight is face to face,176 the very sight that is promised as the highest reward to the just, andwhich will then take place when He “shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father;”and in this “kingdom” He means the sight of His own form also to be understood, the whole creature
being made subject to God, including that wherein the Son of God was made the Son of man.
Because, according to this creature, “The Son also Himself shall be subject unto Him, that put all
things under Him, that God may be all in all.”177 Otherwise if the Son of God, judging in the form
in which He is equal to the Father, shall appear when He judges to the ungodly also; what becomesof that which He promises, as some great thing, to him who loves Him, saying, “And I will love
him, and will manifest myself to him?”178 Wherefore He will judge as the Son of man, yet not byhuman power, but by that whereby He is the Son of God; and on the other hand, He will judge as
the Son of God, yet not appearing in that [unincarnate] form in which He is God equal to the Father,but in that [incarnate form] in which He is the Son of man.179
29. Therefore both ways of speaking may be used; the Son of man will judge, and, the Son of
man will not judge: since the Son of man will judge, that the text may be true which says, “Whenthe Son of man shall come, then before Him shall be gathered all nations;” and the Son of man will
not judge, that the text may be true which says, “I will not judge him;”180 and, “I seek not mineown glory: there is One that seeketh and judgeth.”181 For in respect to this, that in the judgment,
not the form of God, but the form of the Son of man will appear, the Father Himself will not judge;
for according to this it is said, “For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment
unto the Son.” Whether this is said after that mode of speech which we have mentioned above,
where it is said, “So hath He given to the Son to have life in Himself,”182 that it should signify that
so He begat the Son; or, whether after that of which the apostle speaks, saying, “Wherefore God
also hath highly exalted Him, and given Him a name which is above every name:”—(For this issaid of the Son of man, in respect to whom the Son of God was raised from the dead; since He,
being in the form of God equal to the Father, wherefrom He “emptied” Himself by taking the formof a servant, both acts and suffers, and receives, in that same form of a servant, what the apostle
goes on to mention: “He humbled Himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of thecross; wherefore God also hath highly exalted Him, and given Him a name which is above every
name; that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth,and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, in the175

Matt. v. 8.
1 Cor. xiii. 12.
177
1 Cor. xv. 24–28.
178
John xiv. 21.
179[Augustin in this discussion, sometimes employs the phrase “Son of man” to denote the human nature of Christ, indistinction from the divine. But in Scripture and in trinitarian theology generally, this phrase properly denotes the whole
theanthropic person under a human title—just as “man”, (1 Tim. ii. 5), “last Adam” (1 Cor. xv. 45), and “second man” (1 Cor.
xv. 47), denote not the human nature, but the whole divine-human person under a human title. Strictly used, the phrase “Sonof man” does not designate the difference between the divine and human natures in the theanthropos, but between the personof the un-incarnate and that of the incarnate Logos. Augustin’s meaning is, that the Son of God will judge men at the last day,not in his original “form of God,” but as this is united with human nature—as the Son of man.—W.G.T.S.]
180
John xii. 47.
181
John viii. 50.
182
John v. 22, 26.
176

43

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Glory of God the Father:”183—whether then the words, “He hath committed all judgment unto theSon,” are said according to this or that mode of speech; it sufficiently appears from this place, that
if they were said according to that sense in which it is said, “He hath given to the Son to have lifein Himself,” it certainly would not be said, “The Father judgeth no man.” For in respect to this,that the Father hath begotten the Son equal to Himself, He judges with Him. Therefore it is inrespect to this that it is said, that in the judgment, not the form of God, but the form of the Son of
man will appear. Not that He will not judge, who hath committed all judgment unto the Son, since
the Son saith of Him, “There is One that seeketh and judgeth:” but it is so said, “The Father judgeth
no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son;” as if it were said, No one will see theFather in the judgment of the quick and the dead, but all will see the Son: because He is also the
Son of man, so that He can be seen even by the ungodly, since they too shall see Him whom they
have pierced.
30. Lest, however, we may seem to conjecture this rather than to prove it clearly, let us produce
a certain and plain sentence of the Lord Himself, by which we may show that this was the cause
why He said, “The Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son,” viz.
because He will appear as Judge in the form of the Son of man, which is not the form of the Father,but of the Son; nor yet that form of the Son in which He is equal to the Father, but that in which
He is less than the Father; in order that, in the judgment, He may be visible both to the good andto the bad. For a little while after He says, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word,and believeth on Him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation;
but shall pass184 from death unto life.” Now this life eternal is that sight which does not belong to
the bad. Then follows, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when thedead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and they that hear shall live.”185 And this is proper tothe godly, who so hear of His incarnation, as to believe that He is the Son of God, that is, who soreceive Him, as made for their sakes less than the Father, in the form of a servant, that they believe
Him equal to the Father, in the form of God. And thereupon He continues, enforcing this very point,“For as the Father hath life in Himself, so hath He given to the Son to have life in Himself.” And
then He comes to the sight of His own glory, in which He shall come to judgment; which sight will
be common to the ungodly and to the just. For He goes on to say, “And hath given Him authority
to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of man.”186 I think nothing can be more clear. For
inasmuch as the Son of God is equal to the Father, He does not receive this power of executing
judgment, but He has it with the Father in secret; but He receives it, so that the good and the bad
may see Him judging, inasmuch as He is the Son of man. Since the sight of the Son of man will beshown to the bad also: for the sight of the form of God will not be shown except to the pure inheart, for they shall see God; that is, to the godly only, to whose love He promises this very thing,that He will show Himself to them. And see, accordingly, what follows: “Marvel not at this,” Hesays. Why does He forbid us to marvel, unless it be that, in truth, every one marvels who does notunderstand, that therefore He said the Father gave Him power also to execute judgment, because
He is the Son of man; whereas, it might rather have been anticipated that He would say, since He
183
184
185
186

Phil. ii. 8–11.
Transiit in Vulg.; and so in the Greek.
John v. 24, 25.
John v. 25, 26.

44

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

is the Son of God? But because the wicked are not able to see the Son of God as He is in the formof God equal to the Father, but yet it is necessary that both the just and the wicked should see theJudge of the quick and dead, when they will be judged in His presence; “Marvel not at this,” Hesays, “for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear His voice, and shallcome forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil,
unto the resurrection of damnation.”187 For this purpose, then, it was necessary that He should
therefore receive that power, because He is the Son of man, in order that all in rising again might
see Him in the form in which He can be seen by all, but by some to damnation, by others to life
eternal. And what is life eternal, unless that sight which is not granted to the ungodly? “That theymight know Thee,” He says, “the One true God, and Jesus Christ, whom Thou hast sent.”188 And
how are they to know Jesus Christ Himself also, unless as the One true God, who will show Himself
to them; not as He will show Himself, in the form of the Son of man, to those also that shall bepunished?189
31. He is “good,” according to that sight, according to which God appears to the pure in heart;for “truly God is good unto Israel even to such as are of a clean heart.”190 But when the wicked
shall see the Judge, He will not seem good to them; because they will not rejoice in their heart tosee Him, but all “kindreds of the earth shall then wail because of Him,”191 namely, as being reckoned
in the number of all the wicked and unbelievers. On this account also He replied to him, who had
called Him Good Master, when seeking advice of Him how he might attain eternal life, “Why askest
thou me about good?192 there is none good but One, that is, God.”193 And yet the Lord Himself, in
another place, calls man good: “A good man,” He says, “out of the good treasure of his heart,bringeth forth good things: and an evil man, out of the evil treasure of his heart, bringeth forth evil
things.”194 But because that man was seeking eternal life, and eternal life consists in that
contemplation in which God is seen, not for punishment, but for everlasting joy; and because he
did not understand with whom he was speaking, and thought Him to be only the Son of man:195
Why, He says, askest thou me about good? that is, with respect to that form which thou seest, whyaskest thou about good, and callest me, according to what thou seest, Good Master? This is theform of the Son of man, the form which has been taken, the form that will appear in judgment, not187John v. 22–29.
John xvii. 3.
189[Augustin here seems to teach that the phenomenal appearance of Christ to the redeemed in heaven will be different
from that to all men in the day of judgment. He says that he will show himself to the former “in the form of God;” to the latter,“in the form of the Son of man.” But, surely, it is one and the same God-man who sits on the judgment throne, and the heavenly
throne. His appearance must be the same in both instances: namely, that of God incarnate. The effect of his phenomenal
appearance upon the believer will, indeed, be very different from that upon the unbeliever. For the wicked, this vision of God
incarnate will be one of terror; for the redeemed one of joy.—W.G.T.S.]
190
Ps. lxxiii. 1.
191
Apoc. i. 7.
192[Augustin’s reading of this text is that of the uncials; and in that form which omits the article with ἀγαδου.—W.G.T.S.]
193
Matt. xix. 17.
194
Matt. xii. 35.
195[That is, a mere man. Augustin here, as in some other places, employs the phrase “Son of man” to denote the humannature by itself—not the divine and human natures united in one person, and designated by this human title. The latter is the
Scripture usage. As “Immanuel” does not properly denote the divine nature, but the union of divinity and humanity, so “Sonof man” does not properly denote the human nature, but the union of divinity and humanity.—W.G.T.S.]
188

45

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

only to the righteous, but also to the ungodly; and the sight of this form will not be for good tothose who are wicked. But there is a sight of that form of mine, in which when I was, I thought it
not robbery to be equal with God: but in order to take this form I emptied myself.196 That one God,
therefore, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, who will not appear, except for joy whichcannot be taken away from the just; for which future joy he sighs, who says, “One thing have I
desired of the Lord, that will I seek after; that I may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of
my life, to behold the beauty of the Lord:”197 that one God, therefore, Himself, I say, is alone good,for this reason, that no one sees Him for sorrow and wailing, but only for salvation and true joy. If
you understand me after this latter form, then I am good; but if according to that former only, thenwhy askest thou me about good? If thou art among those who “shall look upon Him whom they
have pierced,”198 that very sight itself will be evil to them, because it will be penal. That after thismeaning, then, the Lord said, “Why askest thou me about good? there is none good but One, that
is, God,” is probable upon those proofs which I have alleged, because that sight of God, whereby
we shall contemplate the substance of God unchangeable and invisible to human eyes (which ispromised to the saints alone; which the Apostle Paul speaks of, as “face to face;”199 and of which
the Apostle John says, “We shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is;”200 and of which it issaid, “One thing have I desired of the Lord, that I may behold the beauty of the Lord,” and of which
the Lord Himself says, “I will both love him, and will manifest myself to him;”201 and on accountof which alone we cleanse our hearts by faith, that we may be those “pure in heart who are blessed
for they shall see God:”202 and whatever else is spoken of that sight: which whosoever turns theeye of love to seek it, may find most copiously scattered through all the Scriptures),—that sightalone, I say, is our chief good, for the attaining of which we are directed to do whatever we doaright. But that sight of the Son of man which is foretold, when all nations shall be gathered before
Him, and shall say to Him, “Lord, when saw we Thee an hungered, or thirsty, etc.?” will neither
be a good to the ungodly, who shall be sent into everlasting fire, nor the chief good to the righteous.
For He still goes on to call these to the kingdom which has been prepared for them from thefoundation of the world. For, as He will say to those, “Depart into everlasting fire;” so to these,“Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you.” And as those will go into
everlasting burning; so the righteous will go into life eternal. But what is life eternal, except “thatthey may know Thee,” He says, “the One true God, and Jesus Christ, whom Thou hast sent?”203
but know Him now in that glory of which He says to the Father, “Which I had with Thee before
the world was.”204 For then He will deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father,205 that thegood servant may enter into the joy of his Lord,206 and that He may hide those whom God keeps
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206

Phil. ii. 6, 7.
Ps. xxvii. 4.
Zech. xii. 10.
1 Cor. xiii. 12.
1 John iii. 2.
John xiv. 21.
Matt. v. 8.
Matt. xxv. 37, 41, 34.
John xvii. 3–5.
1 Cor. xv. 24.
Matt. xxv. 21, 23.

46

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

in the hiding of His countenance from the confusion of men, namely, of those men who shall thenbe confounded by hearing this sentence; of which evil hearing “the righteous man shall not be
afraid”207 if only he be kept in “the tabernacle,” that is, in the true faith of the Catholic Church,from “the strife of tongues,”208 that is, from the sophistries of heretics. But if there is any otherexplanation of the words of the Lord, where He says, “Why asketh thou me about good? there isnone good, but One, that is, God;” provided only that the substance of the Father be not therefore
believed to be of greater goodness than that of the Son, according to which He is the Word bywhom all things were made; and if there is nothing in it abhorrent from sound doctrine; let us
securely use it, and not one explanation only, but as many as we are able to find. For so much themore powerfully are the heretics proved wrong, the more outlets are open for avoiding their snares.
But let us now start afresh, and address ourselves to the consideration of that which still remains.

Book II.
————————————
Augustin pursues his defense of the equality of the Trinity; and in treating of the sending of the Son
and of the Holy Spirit, and of the various appearances of God, demonstrates that He who issent is not therefore less than He who sends, because the one has sent, the other has been sent;
but that the Trinity, being in all things equal, and alike in its own nature unchangeable andinvisible and omnipresent, works indivisibly in each sending or appearance.
Preface.
When men seek to know God, and bend their minds according to the capacity of human weakness
to the understanding of the Trinity; learning, as they must, by experience, the wearisome difficultiesof the task, whether from the sight itself of the mind striving to gaze upon light unapproachable,or, indeed, from the manifold and various modes of speech employed in the sacred writings (wherein,
as it seems to me, the mind is nothing else but roughly exercised, in order that it may find sweetness
when glorified by the grace of Christ);—such men, I say, when they have dispelled every ambiguity,and arrived at something certain, ought of all others most easily to make allowance for those who
err in the investigation of so deep a secret. But there are two things most hard to bear with, in thecase of those who are in error: hasty assumption before the truth is made plain; and, when it has
been made plain, defence of the falsehood thus hastily assumed. From which two faults, inimicalas they are to the finding out of the truth, and to the handling of the divine and sacred books, should
God, as I pray and hope, defend and protect me with the shield of His good will,209 and with the
207
208
209

Ps. cxii. 7.
Ps. xxxi. 21.
Ps. v. 12.

47

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

grace of His mercy, I will not be slow to search out the substance of God, whether through His
Scripture or through the creature. For both of these are set forth for our contemplation to this end,
that He may Himself be sought, and Himself be loved, who inspired the one, and created the other.
Nor shall I be afraid of giving my opinion, in which I shall more desire to be examined by the
upright, than fear to be carped at by the perverse. For charity, most excellent and unassuming,
gratefully accepts the dovelike eye; but for the dog’s tooth nothing remains, save either to shun itby the most cautious humility, or to blunt it by the most solid truth; and far rather would I be
censured by any one whatsoever, than be praised by either the erring or the flatterer. For the loverof truth need fear no one’s censure. For he that censures, must needs be either enemy or friend.
And if an enemy reviles, he must be borne with: but a friend, if he errs, must be taught; if he teaches,
listened to. But if one who errs praises you, he confirms your error; if one who flatters, he seduces
you into error. “Let the righteous,” therefore, “smite me, it shall be a kindness; and let him reproveme; but the oil of the sinner shall not anoint my head.”210

Chapter 1.—There is a Double Rule for Understanding the Scriptural Modes of Speech Concerning
the Son of God. These Modes of Speech are of a Threefold Kind.
2. Wherefore, although we hold most firmly, concerning our Lord Jesus Christ, what may becalled the canonical rule, as it is both disseminated through the Scriptures, and has been demonstrated
by learned and Catholic handlers of the same Scriptures, namely, that the Son of God is both understood to be equal to the Father according to the form of God in which He is, and less than the Father
according to the form of a servant which He took;211 in which form He was found to be not only
less than the Father, but also less than the Holy Spirit; and not only so, but less even thanHimself,—not than Himself who was, but than Himself who is; because, by taking the form of aservant, He did not lose the form of God, as the testimonies of the Scriptures taught us, to which
we have referred in the former book: yet there are some things in the sacred text so put as to leave
it ambiguous to which rule they are rather to be referred; whether to that by which we understandthe Son as less, in that He has taken upon Him the creature, or to that by which we understand that
the Son is not indeed less than, but equal to the Father, but yet that He is from Him, God of God,
Light of light. For we call the Son God of God; but the Father, God only; not of God. Whence it isplain that the Son has another of whom He is, and to whom He is Son; but that the Father has not
a Son of whom He is, but only to whom He is father. For every son is what he is, of his father, andis son to his father; but no father is what he is, of his son, but is father to his son.212
210

Ps. cxli. 5.
Phil. ii. 6, 7.
212[Augustin here brings to view both the trinitarian and the theanthropic or mediatorial subordination. The former is thestatus of Sonship. God the Son is God of God. Sonship as a relation is subordinate to paternity. But a son must be of the same
grade of being, and of the same nature with his father. A human son and a human father are alike and equally human. And a
Divine Son and a Divine father are alike and equally divine. The theanthropic or mediatorial subordination is the status of
humiliation, by reason of the incarnation. In the words of Augustin, it is “that by which we understand the Son as less, in that
he has taken upon Him the creature.” The subordination in this case is that of voluntary condescension, for the purpose ofredeeming sinful man.—W.G.T.S.]
211

48

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

3. Some things, then, are so put in the Scriptures concerning the Father and the Son, as tointimate the unity and equality of their substance; as, for instance, “I and the Father are one;”213
and, “Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God;”214 and whateverother texts there are of the kind. And some, again, are so put that they show the Son as less on
account of the form of a servant, that is, of His having taken upon Him the creature of a changeable
and human substance; as, for instance, that which says, “For my Father is greater than I;”215 and,“The Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son.” For a little after hegoes on to say, “And hath given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son ofman.” And further, some are so put, as to show Him at that time neither as less nor as equal, but
only to intimate that He is of the Father; as, for instance, that which says, “For as the Father hathlife in Himself, so hath He given to the Son to have life in Himself;” and that other: “The Son can
do nothing of Himself, but what He seeth the Father do.”216 For if we shall take this to be therefore
so said, because the Son is less in the form taken from the creature, it will follow that the Father
must have walked on the water, or opened the eyes with clay and spittle of some other one born
blind, and have done the other things which the Son appearing in the flesh did among men, before
the Son did them;217 in order that He might be able to do those things, who said that the Son was
not able to do anything of Himself, except what He hath seen the Father do. Yet who, even though
he were mad, would think this? It remains, therefore, that these texts are so expressed, because thelife of the Son is unchangeable as that of the Father is, and yet He is of the Father; and the workingof the Father and of the Son is indivisible, and yet so to work is given to the Son from Him of whom
He Himself is, that is, from the Father; and the Son so sees the Father, as that He is the Son in thevery seeing Him. For to be of the Father, that is, to be born of the Father, is to Him nothing elsethan to see the Father; and to see Him working, is nothing else than to work with Him: but therefore
not from Himself, because He is not from Himself. And, therefore, those things which “He sees
the Father do, these also doeth the Son likewise,” because He is of the Father. For He neither does
other things in like manner, as a painter paints other pictures, in the same way as he sees others tohave been painted by another man; nor the same things in a different manner, as the body expresses
the same letters, which the mind has thought; but “whatsoever things,” saith He, “the Father doeth,
these same things also doeth the Son likewise.”218 He has said both “these same things,” and“likewise;” and hence the working of both the Father and the Son is indivisible and equal, but it isfrom the Father to the Son. Therefore the Son cannot do anything of Himself, except what He seeth
the Father do. From this rule, then, whereby the Scriptures so speak as to mean, not to set forth one
as less than another, but only to show which is of which, some have drawn this meaning, as if theSon were said to be less. And some among ourselves who are more unlearned and least instructedin these things, endeavoring to take these texts according to the form of a servant, and so
misinterpreting them, are troubled. And to prevent this, the rule in question is to be observed

213
214
215
216
217
218

John x. 30.
Phil. ii. 6.
John xiv. 28.
John v. 22, 27, 26, 19.
Matt. xiv. 26, and John ix. 6, 7.
John v. 19.

49

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

whereby the Son is not less, but it is simply intimated that He is of the Father, in which words not
His inequality but His birth is declared.

Chapter 2.—That Some Ways of Speaking Concerning the Son are to Be Understood According
to Either Rule.
4. There are, then, some things in the sacred books, as I began by saying, so put, that it isdoubtful to which they are to be referred: whether to that rule whereby the Son is less on accountof His having taken the creature; or whether to that whereby it is intimated that although equal, yet
He is of the Father. And in my opinion, if this is in such way doubtful, that which it really is canneither be explained nor discerned, then such passages may without danger be understood according
to either rule, as that, for instance, “My doctrine is not mine, but His that sent me.”219 For this may
both be taken according to the form of a servant, as we have already treated it in the former book;220or according to the form of God, in which He is in such way equal to the Father, that He is yet of
the Father. For according to the form of God, as the Son is not one and His life another, but the life
itself is the Son; so the Son is not one and His doctrine another, but the doctrine itself is the Son.
And hence, as the text, “He hath given life to the Son,” is no otherwise to be understood than, He
hath begotten the Son, who is life; so also when it is said, He hath given doctrine to the Son, it may
be rightly understood to mean, He hath begotten the Son, who is doctrine so that, when it is said,“My doctrine is not mine, but His who sent me,” it is so to be understood as if it were, I am notfrom myself, but from Him who sent me.

Chapter 3.—Some Things Concerning the Holy Spirit are to Be Understood According to the One
Rule Only.
5. For even of the Holy Spirit, of whom it is not said, “He emptied Himself, and took upon Him
the form of a servant;” yet the Lord Himself says, “Howbeit, when He the Spirit of Truth is come,He will guide you into all truth. For He shall not speak of Himself, but whatsoever He shall hearthat shall He speak; and He will show you things to come. He shall glorify me; for He shall receiveof mine, and shall show it unto you.” And except He had immediately gone on to say after this,“All things that the Father hath are mine; therefore said I, that He shall take of mine, and shall show
it unto you;”221 it might, perhaps, have been believed that the Holy Spirit was so born of Christ, as
Christ is of the Father. Since He had said of Himself, “My doctrine is not mine, but His that sentme;” but of the Holy Spirit, “For He shall not speak of Himself, but whatsoever he shall hear, thatshall He speak;” and, “For He shall receive of mine, and shall show it unto you.” But because He
219
220
221

John vii. 16.
See above, Book I. c. 12.
John xvi. 13–15.

50

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

has rendered the reason why He said, “He shall receive of mine” (for He says, “All things that the
Father hath are mine; therefore said I, that He shall take of mine”); it remains that the Holy Spirit
be understood to have of that which is the Father’s, as the Son also hath. And how can this be,
unless according to that which we have said above, “But when the Comforter is come, whom I will
send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth which proceedeth from the Father, He shalltestify of me”?222 He is said, therefore, not to speak of Himself, in that He proceedeth from theFather; and as it does not follow that the Son is less because He said, “The Son can do nothing ofHimself, but what He seeth the Father do” (for He has not said this according to the form of aservant, but according to the form of God, as we have already shown, and these words do not set
Him forth as less than, but as of the Father), so it is not brought to pass that the Holy Spirit is less,because it is said of Him, “For He shall not speak of Himself, but whatsoever He shall hear, thatshall He speak;” for the words belong to Him as proceeding from the Father. But whereas both the
Son is of the Father, and the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father, why both are not called sons,and both not said to be begotten, but the former is called the one only-begotten Son, and the latter,viz. the Holy Spirit, neither son nor begotten, because if begotten, then certainly a son, we will
discuss in another place, if God shall grant, and so far as He shall grant.223

Chapter 4.—The Glorification of the Son by the Father Does Not Prove Inequality.
6. But here also let them wake up if they can, who have thought this, too, to be a testimony on
their side, to show that the Father is greater than the Son, because the Son hath said, “Father, glorifyme.” Why, the Holy Spirit also glorifies Him. Pray, is the Spirit, too, greater than He? Moreover,
if on that account the Holy Spirit glorifies the Son, because He shall receive of that which is the
Son’s, and shall therefore receive of that which is the Son’s because all things that the Father has
are the Son’s also; it is evident that when the Holy Spirit glorifies the Son, the Father glorifies theSon. Whence it may be perceived that all things that the Father hath are not only of the Son, butalso of the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit is able to glorify the Son, whom the Father glorifies.
But if he who glorifies is greater than he whom he glorifies, let them allow that those are equal
who mutually glorify each other. But it is written, also, that the Son glorifies the Father; for He
says, “I have glorified Thee on the earth.”224 Truly let them beware lest the Holy Spirit be thought
greater than both, because He glorifies the Son whom the Father glorifies, while it is not writtenthat He Himself is glorified either by the Father or by the Son.

222
223
224

John xv. 26.
Below, Bk. XV. c. 25.
John xvii. 1, 4.

51

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 5.—The Son and Holy Spirit are Not Therefore Less Because Sent. The Son is Sent Also
by Himself. Of the Sending of the Holy Spirit.
7. But being proved wrong so far, men betake themselves to saying, that he who sends is greaterthan he who is sent: therefore the Father is greater than the Son, because the Son continually speaksof Himself as being sent by the Father; and the Father is also greater than the Holy Spirit, because
Jesus has said of the Spirit, “Whom the Father will send in my name;”225 and the Holy Spirit is lessthan both, because both the Father sends Him, as we have said, and the Son, when He says, “But
if I depart, I will send Him unto you.” I first ask, then, in this inquiry, whence and whither the Son
was sent. “I,” He says, “came forth from the Father, and am come into the world.”226 Therefore, tobe sent, is to come forth forth from the Father, and to come into the world. What, then, is that which
the same evangelist says concerning Him, “He was in the world, and the world was made by Him,and the world knew Him not;” and then he adds, “He came unto His own?”227 Certainly He wassent thither, whither He came; but if He was sent into the world, because He came forth from theFather, then He both came into the world and was in the world. He was sent therefore thither, where
He already was. For consider that, too, which is written in the prophet, that God said, “Do not I fillheaven and earth?”228 If this is said of the Son (for some will have it understood that the Son Himself
spoke either by the prophets or in the prophets), whither was He sent except to the place where He
already was? For He who says, “I fill heaven and earth,” was everywhere. But if it is said of the
Father, where could He be without His own word and without His own wisdom, which “reachethfrom one end to another mightily, and sweetly ordereth all things?”229 But He cannot be anywhere
without His own Spirit. Therefore, if God is everywhere, His Spirit also is everywhere. Therefore,
the Holy Spirit, too, was sent thither, where He already was. For he, too, who finds no place towhich he might go from the presence of God, and who says, “If I ascend up into heaven, Thou art
there; if I shall go down into hell, behold, Thou art there;” wishing it to be understood that God ispresent everywhere, named in the previous verse His Spirit; for He says,” Whither shall I go fromThy Spirit? or whither shall I flee from Thy presence?”230
8. For this reason, then, if both the Son and the Holy Spirit are sent thither where they were,
we must inquire, how that sending, whether of the Son or of the Holy Spirit, is to be understood;
for of the Father alone, we nowhere read that He is sent. Now, of the Son, the apostle writes thus:“But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, madeunder the law, to redeem them that were under the law.”231 “He sent,” he says, “His Son, made ofa woman.” And by this term, woman,232 what Catholic does not know that he did not wish to signify
the privation of virginity; but, according to a Hebraism, the difference of sex? When, therefore, he

225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232

John xiv. 26.
John xvi. 7, 28.
John i. 10, 11.
Jer. xxiii. 24.
Wisd. viii. 1.
Ps. cxxxix. 8, 7.
Gal. iv. 4, 5.
Mulier.

52

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

says, “God sent His Son, made of a woman,” he sufficiently shows that the Son was “sent” in thisvery way, in that He was “made of a woman.” Therefore, in that He was born of God, He was in
the world; but in that He was born of Mary, He was sent and came into the world. Moreover, He
could not be sent by the Father without the Holy Spirit, not only because the Father, when He sentHim, that is, when He made Him of a woman, is certainly understood not to have so made Him
without His own Spirit; but also because it is most plainly and expressly said in the Gospel inanswer to the Virgin Mary, when she asked of the angel, “How shall this be?” “The Holy Ghost
shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee.”233 And Matthew says,“She was found with child of the Holy Ghost.”234 Although, too, in the prophet Isaiah, Christ
Himself is understood to say of His own future advent, “And now the Lord God and His Spirit hathsent me.”235
9. Perhaps some one may wish to drive us to say, that the Son is sent also by Himself, because
the conception and childbirth of Mary is the working of the Trinity, by whose act of creating allthings are created. And how, he will go on to say, has the Father sent Him, if He sent Himself? To
whom I answer first, by asking him to tell me, if he can, in what manner the Father hath sanctified
Him, if He hath sanctified Himself? For the same Lord says both; “Say ye of Him,” He says, “whomthe Father hath sanctified and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest, because I said, I am the Sonof God;”236 while in another place He says, “And for their sake I sanctify myself.”237 I ask, also, in
what manner the Father delivered Him, if He delivered Himself? For the Apostle Paul says both:“Who,” he says, “spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all;”238 while elsewhere hesays of the Saviour Himself, “Who loved me, and delivered Himself for me.”239 He will reply, I
suppose, if he has a right sense in these things, Because the will of the Father and the Son is one,and their working indivisible. In like manner, then, let him understand the incarnation and nativityof the Virgin, wherein the Son is understood as sent, to have been wrought by one and the same
operation of the Father and of the Son indivisibly; the Holy Spirit certainly not being thence excluded,of whom it is expressly said, “She was found with child by the Holy Ghost.” For perhaps ourmeaning will be more plainly unfolded, if we ask in what manner God sent His Son. He commandedthat He should come, and He, complying with the commandment, came. Did He then request, or
did He only suggest? But whichever of these it was, certainly it was done by a word, and the Wordof God is the Son of God Himself. Wherefore, since the Father sent Him by a word, His being sent
was the work of both the Father and His Word; therefore the same Son was sent by the Father andthe Son, because the Son Himself is the Word of the Father. For who would embrace so impious
an opinion as to think the Father to have uttered a word in time, in order that the eternal Son might
thereby be sent and might appear in the flesh in the fullness of time? But assuredly it was in that
Word of God itself which was in the beginning with God and was God, namely, in the wisdom
itself of God, apart from time, at what time that wisdom must needs appear in the flesh. Therefore,

233
234
235
236
237
238
239

Luke i. 34, 35.
Matt. i. 18.
Isa. xlviii. 16.
John x. 36.
John xvii. 19.
Rom. viii. 32.
Gal. ii. 20.

53

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

since without any commencement of time, the Word was in the beginning, and the Word was with
God, and the Word was God, it was in the Word itself without any time, at what time the Word
was to be made flesh and dwell among us.240 And when this fullness of time had come, “God sent
His Son, made of a woman,”241 that is, made in time, that the Incarnate Word might appear to men;while it was in that Word Himself, apart from time, at what time this was to be done; for the orderof times is in the eternal wisdom of God without time. Since, then, that the Son should appear in
the flesh was wrought by both the Father and the Son, it is fitly said that He who appeared in thatflesh was sent, and that He who did not appear in it, sent Him; because those things which aretransacted outwardly before the bodily eyes have their existence from the inward structure (apparatu)
of the spiritual nature, and on that account are fitly said to be sent. Further, that form of man which
He took is the person of the Son, not also of the Father; on which account the invisible Father,
together with the Son, who with the Father is invisible, is said to have sent the same Son by making
Him visible. But if He became visible in such way as to cease to be invisible with the Father, thatis, if the substance of the invisible Word were turned by a change and transition into a visible
creature, then the Son would be so understood to be sent by the Father, that He would be found to
be only sent; not also, with the Father, sending. But since He so took the form of a servant, as thatthe unchangeable form of God remained, it is clear that that which became apparent in the Son was
done by the Father and the Son not being apparent; that is, that by the invisible Father, with theinvisible Son, the same Son Himself was sent so as to be visible. Why, therefore, does He say,
“Neither came I of myself?” This, we may now say, is said according to the form of a servant, inthe same way as it is said, “I judge no man.”242
10. If, therefore, He is said to be sent, in so far as He appeared outwardly in the bodily creature,
who inwardly in His spiritual nature is always hidden from the eyes of mortals, it is now easy tounderstand also of the Holy Spirit why He too is said to be sent. For in due time a certain outward
appearance of the creature was wrought, wherein the Holy Spirit might be visibly shown; whether
when He descended upon the Lord Himself in a bodily shape as a dove,243 or when, ten days having
past since His ascension, on the day of Pentecost a sound came suddenly from heaven as of a rushingmighty wind, and cloven tongues like as of fire were seen upon them, and it sat upon each of them.244
This operation, visibly exhibited, and presented to mortal eyes, is called the sending of the Holy
Spirit; not that His very substance appeared, in which He himself also is invisible and unchangeable,
like the Father and the Son, but that the hearts of men, touched by things seen outwardly, might beturned from the manifestation in time of Him as coming to His hidden eternity as ever present.

Chapter 6.—The Creature is Not So Taken by the Holy Spirit as Flesh is by the Word.

240
241
242
243
244

John i. 1, 2, 14.
Gal. iv. 4.
John viii. 42, 15.
Matt. iii. 16.
Acts ii. 2–4.

54

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

11. It is, then, for this reason nowhere written, that the Father is greater than the Holy Spirit,or that the Holy Spirit is less than God the Father, because the creature in which the Holy Spirit
was to appear was not taken in the same way as the Son of man was taken, as the form in which
the person of the Word of God Himself should be set forth not that He might possess the word ofGod, as other holy and wise men have possessed it, but “above His fellows;”245 not certainly that
He possessed the word more than they, so as to be of more surpassing wisdom than the rest were,
but that He was the very Word Himself. For the word in the flesh is one thing, and the Word madeflesh is another; i.e. the word in man is one thing, the Word that is man is another. For flesh is put
for man, where it is said, “The Word was made flesh;”246 and again, “And all flesh shall see thesalvation of God.”247 For it does not mean flesh without soul and without mind; but “all flesh,” isthe same as if it were said, every man. The creature, then, in which the Holy Spirit should appear,
was not so taken, as that flesh and human form were taken, of the Virgin Mary. For the Spirit did
not beatify the dove, or the wind, or the fire, and join them for ever to Himself and to His personin unity and “fashion.”248 Nor, again, is the nature of the Holy Spirit mutable and changeable; sothat these things were not made of the creature, but He himself was turned and changed first into
one and then into another, as water is changed into ice. But these things appeared at the seasons at
which they ought to have appeared, the creature serving the Creator, and being changed andconverted at the command of Him who remains immutably in Himself, in order to signify andmanifest Him in such way as it was fit He should be signified and manifested to mortal men.
Accordingly, although that dove is called the Spirit;249 and in speaking of that fire, “There appeared
unto them,” he says, “cloven tongues, like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them; and they began
to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance;250 in order to show that the Spirit
was manifested by that fire, as by the dove; yet we cannot call the Holy Spirit both God and a dove,or both God and fire, in the same way as we call the Son both God and man; nor as we call the Son
the Lamb of God; which not only John the Baptist says, “Behold the Lamb of God,”251 but also
John the Evangelist sees the Lamb slain in the Apocalypse.252 For that prophetic vision was notshown to bodily eyes through bodily forms, but in the spirit through spiritual images of bodily
things. But whosoever saw that dove and that fire, saw them with their eyes. Although it may
perhaps be disputed concerning the fire, whether it was seen by the eyes or in the spirit, on accountof the form of the sentence. For the text does not say, They saw cloven tongues like fire, but, “Thereappeared to them.” But we are not wont to say with the same meaning, It appeared to me; as wesay, I saw. And in those spiritual visions of corporeal images the usual expressions are, both, It
appeared to me; and, I saw: but in those things which are shown to the eyes through express corporeal
245

Heb. i. 9.
John i. 14.
247
Luke iii. 6.
248[The reference is to σχήμα, in Phil. ii. 8—the term chosen by St. Paul to describe the “likeness of men,” which the second
trinitarian person assumed. The variety in the terms by which St. Paul describes the incarnation is very striking. The person
incarnated subsists first in a “form of God;” he then takes along with this (still retaining this) a “form of a servant;” which formof a servant is a “likeness of men;” which likeness of men is a “scheme” (A.V. “fashion”) or external form of a man.—W.G.T.S.]
249
Matt. iii. 16.
250
Acts ii. 3, 4.
251John i. 29.
252
Apoc. v. 6.
246

55

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

forms, the common expression is not, It appeared to me; but, I saw. There may, therefore, be aquestion raised respecting that fire, how it was seen; whether within in the spirit as it were outwardly,or really outwardly before the eyes of the flesh. But of that dove, which is said to have descended
in a bodily form, no one ever doubted that it was seen by the eyes. Nor, again, as we call the Sona Rock (for it is written, “And that Rock was Christ”253), can we so call the Spirit a dove or fire.
For that rock was a thing already created, and after the mode of its action was called by the nameof Christ, whom it signified; like the stone placed under Jacob’s head, and also anointed, which hetook in order to signify the Lord;254 or as Isaac was Christ, when he carried the wood for the sacrificeof himself.255 A particular significative action was added to those already existing things; they did
not, as that dove and fire, suddenly come into being in order simply so to signify. The dove andthe fire, indeed, seem to me more like that flame which appeared to Moses in the bush,256 or thatpillar which the people followed in the wilderness,257 or the thunders and lightnings which camewhen the Law was given in the mount.258 For the corporeal form of these things came into being
for the very purpose, that it might signify something, and then pass away.259

Chapter 7.—A Doubt Raised About Divine Appearances.
12. The Holy Spirit, then, is also said to be sent, on account of these corporeal forms whichcame into existence in time, in order to signify and manifest Him, as He must needs be manifested,to human senses; yet He is not said to be less than the Father, as the Son, because He was in theform of a servant, is said to be; because that form of a servant inhered in the unity of the person of
the Son, but those corporeal forms appeared for a time, in order to show what was necessary to beshown, and then ceased to be. Why, then, is not the Father also said to be sent, through those
corporeal forms, the fire of the bush, and the pillar of cloud or of fire, and the lightnings in themount, and whatever other things of the kind appeared at that time, when (as we have learned from
Scripture testimony) He spake face to face with the fathers, if He Himself was manifested by thosemodes and forms of the creature, as exhibited and presented corporeally to human sight? But if theSon was manifested by them, why is He said to be sent so long after, when He was made of awoman, as the apostle says, “But when the fullness of time was come, God sent forth His Son,made of a woman,”260 seeing that He was sent also before, when He appeared to the fathers by
253

1 Cor. x. 4.
Gen. xxviii. 18.
255
Gen. xxii. 6.
256
Ex. iii. 2.
257
Ex. xiii. 21, 22.
258
Ex. xix. 16.
259[A theophany, though a harbinger of the incarnation, differs from it, by not effecting a hypostatical or personal union
between God and the creature. When the Holy Spirit appeared in the form of a dove, he did not unite himself with it. The dove
did not constitute an integral part of the divine person who employed it. Nor did the illuminated vapor in the theophany of theShekinah. But when the Logos appeared in the form of a man, he united himself with it, so that it became a constituent part ofhis person. A theophany, as Augustin notices, is temporary and transient. The incarnation is perpetual.—W.G.T.S.]
260
Gal. iv. 4.
254

56

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

those changeable forms of the creature? Or if He cannot rightly be said to be sent, unless when the
Word was made flesh, why is the Holy Spirit said to be sent, of whom no such incarnation wasever wrought? But if by those visible things, which are put before us in the Law and in the prophets,neither the Father nor the Son but the Holy Spirit was manifested, why also is He said to be sent
now, when He was sent also before after these modes?
13. In the perplexity of this inquiry, the Lord helping us, we must ask, first, whether the Father,or the Son, or the Holy Spirit; or whether, sometimes the Father, sometimes the Son, sometimes
the Holy Spirit; or whether it was without any distinction of persons, in such way as the one andonly God is spoken of, that is, that the Trinity itself appeared to the Fathers by those forms of thecreature. Next, whichever of these alternatives shall have been found or thought true, whether forthis purpose only the creature was fashioned, wherein God, as He judged it suitable at that time,should be shown to human sight; or whether angels, who already existed, were so sent, as to speakin the person of God, taking a corporeal form from the corporeal creature, for the purpose of theirministry, as each had need; or else, according to the power the Creator has given them, changing
and converting their own body itself, to which they are not subject, but govern it as subject tothemselves, into whatever appearances they would that were suited and apt to their several actions.
Lastly, we shall discern that which it was our purpose to ask, viz. whether the Son and the Holy
Spirit were also sent before; and, if they were so sent, what difference there is between that sending,and the one which we read of in the Gospel; or whether in truth neither of them were sent, except
when either the Son was made of the Virgin Mary, or the Holy Spirit appeared in a visible form,
whether in the dove or in tongues of fire.

Chapter 8.—The Entire Trinity Invisible.
14. Let us therefore say nothing of those who, with an over carnal mind, have thought the natureof the Word of God, and the Wisdom, which, “remaining in herself, maketh all things new,”261
whom we call the only Son of God, not only to be changeable, but also to be visible. For these,with more audacity than religion, bring a very dull heart to the inquiry into divine things. For
whereas the soul is a spiritual substance, and whereas itself also was made, yet could not be madeby any other than by Him by whom all things were made, and without whom nothing is made,262
it, although changeable, is yet not visible; and this they have believed to be the case with the Word
Himself and with the Wisdom of God itself, by which the soul was made; whereas this Wisdom is
not only invisible, as the soul also is, but likewise unchangeable, which the soul is not. It is in truth
the same unchangeableness in it, which is referred to when it was said, “Remaining in herself she
maketh all things new.” Yet these people, endeavoring, as it were, to prop up their error in its fallby testimonies of the divine Scriptures, adduce the words of the Apostle Paul; and take that, whichis said of the one only God, in whom the Trinity itself is understood, to be said only of the Father,and neither of the Son nor of the Holy Spirit: “Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the

261
262

Wisd. vii. 27.
John i. 3.

57

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

only wise God, be honor and glory for ever and ever;”263 and that other passage, “The blessed andonly Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; who only hath immortality, dwelling in thelight which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see.”264 How these passages
are to be understood, I think we have already discoursed sufficiently.265

Chapter 9.—Against Those Who Believed the Father Only to Be Immortal and Invisible. The Truth
to Be Sought by Peaceful Study.
15. But they who will have these texts understood only of the Father, and not of the Son or theHoly Spirit, declare the Son to be visible, not by having taken flesh of the Virgin, but aforetime
also in Himself. For He Himself, they say, appeared to the eyes of the Fathers. And if you say tothem, In whatever manner, then, the Son is visible in Himself, in that manner also He is mortal inHimself; so that it plainly follows that you would have this saying also understood only of the
Father, viz., “Who only hath immortality;” for if the Son is mortal from having taken upon Him
our flesh, then allow that it is on account of this flesh that He is also visible: they reply, that it is
not on account of this flesh that they say that the Son is mortal; but that, just as He was also before
visible, so He was also before mortal. For if they say the Son is mortal from having taken our flesh,then it is not the Father alone without the Son who hath immortality; because His Word also has
immortality, by which all things were made. For He did not therefore lose His immortality, because
He took mortal flesh; seeing that it could not happen even to the human soul, that it should die withthe body, when the Lord Himself says, “Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill
the soul.”266 Or, forsooth, also the Holy Spirit took flesh: concerning whom certainly they will,
without doubt, be troubled to say—if the Son is mortal on account of taking our flesh—in whatmanner they understand that the Father only has immortality without the Son and the Holy Spirit,since, indeed, the Holy Spirit did not take our flesh; and if He has not immortality, then the Son is
not mortal on account of taking our flesh; but if the Holy Spirit has immortality, then it is not said
only of the Father, “Who only hath immortality.” And therefore they think they are able to provethat the Son in Himself was mortal also before the incarnation, because changeableness itself is
not unfitly called mortality, according to which the soul also is said to die; not because it is changed
and turned into body, or into some substance other than itself, but because, whatever in its own
selfsame substance is now after another mode than it once was, is discovered to be mortal, in so
far as it has ceased to be what it was. Because then, say they, before the Son of God was born of
the Virgin Mary, He Himself appeared to our fathers, not in one and the same form only, but inmany forms; first in one form, then in another; He is both visible in Himself, because His substancewas visible to mortal eyes, when He had not yet taken our flesh, and mortal, inasmuch as He ischangeable. And so also the Holy Spirit, who appeared at one time as a dove, and another time as263

1 Tim. i. 17.
1 Tim. vi. 15, 16.
265[For an example of the manner in which the patristic writers present the doctrine of the divine invisibility, see Irenæus,Adv. Hæreses, IV. xx.—W.G.T.S.]
266
Matt. x. 28.
264

58

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

fire. Whence, they say, the following texts do not belong to the Trinity, but singularly and properly
to the Father only: “Now unto the King eternal, immortal, and invisible, the only wise God;” and,
“Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man
hath seen, nor can see.”
16. Passing by, then, these reasoners, who are unable to know the substance even of the soul,
which is invisible, and therefore are very far indeed from knowing that the substance of the one
and only God, that is, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, remains ever not only invisible,
but also unchangeable, and that hence it possesses true and real immortality; let us, who deny that
God, whether the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit, ever appeared to bodily eyes, unless throughthe corporeal creature made subject to His own power; let us, I say—ready to be corrected, if weare reproved in a fraternal and upright spirit, ready to be so, even if carped at by an enemy, so thathe speak the truth—in catholic peace and with peaceful study inquire, whether God indiscriminately
appeared to our fathers before Christ came in the flesh, or whether it was any one person of the
Trinity, or whether severally, as it were by turns.

Chapter 10—Whether God the Trinity Indiscriminately Appeared to the Fathers, or Any One Personof the Trinity. The Appearing of God to Adam. Of the Same Appearance. The Vision to
Abraham.
17. And first, in that which is written in Genesis, viz., that God spake with man whom He hadformed out of the dust; if we set apart the figurative meaning, and treat it so as to place faith in the
narrative even in the letter, it should appear that God then spake with man in the appearance of aman. This is not indeed expressly laid down in the book, but the general tenor of its reading sounds
in this sense, especially in that which is written, that Adam heard the voice of the Lord God, walking
in the garden in the cool of the evening, and hid himself among the trees of the garden; and when
God said, “Adam, where art thou?”267 replied, “I heard Thy voice, and I was afraid because I was
naked, and I hid myself from Thy face.” For I do not see how such a walking and conversation of
God can be understood literally, except He appeared as a man. For it can neither be said that a voice
only of God was framed, when God is said to have walked, or that He who was walking in a place
was not visible; while Adam, too, says that he hid himself from the face of God. Who then was
He? Whether the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit? Whether altogether indiscriminately did
God the Trinity Himself speak to man in the form of man? The context, indeed, itself of the Scripture
nowhere, it should seem, indicates a change from person to person; but He seems still to speak to
the first man, who said, “Let there be light,” and, “Let there be a firmament,” and so on througheach of those days; whom we usually take to be God the Father, making by a word whatever He
willed to make. For He made all things by His word, which Word we know, by the right rule offaith, to be His only Son. If, therefore, God the Father spake to the first man, and Himself waswalking in the garden in the cool of the evening, and if it was from His face that the sinner hid
himself amongst the trees of the garden, why are we not to go on to understand that it was He also

267

Gen. iii. 8–10.

59

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

who appeared to Abraham and to Moses, and to whom He would, and how He would, through thechangeable and visible creature, subjected to Himself, while He Himself remains in Himself andin His own substance, in which He is unchangeable and invisible? But, possibly, it might be that
the Scripture passed over in a hidden way from person to person, and while it had related that the
Father said “Let there be light,” and the rest which it mentioned Him to have done by the Word,
went on to indicate the Son as speaking to the first man; not unfolding this openly, but intimating
it to be understood by those who could understand it.
18. Let him, then, who has the strength whereby he can penetrate this secret with his mind’seye, so that to him it appears clearly, either that the Father also is able, or that only the Son andHoly Spirit are able, to appear to human eyes through a visible creature; let him, I say, proceed to
examine these things if he can, or even to express and handle them in words; but the thing itself,
so far as concerns this testimony of Scripture, where God spake with man, is, in my judgment, notdiscoverable, because it does not evidently appear even whether Adam usually saw God with theeyes of his body; especially as it is a great question what manner of eyes it was that were opened
when they tasted the forbidden fruit;268 for before they had tasted, these eyes were closed. Yet I
would not rashly assert, even if that scripture implies Paradise to have been a material place, that
God could not have walked there in any way except in some bodily form. For it might be said, that
only words were framed for the man to hear, without seeing any form. Neither, because it is written,“Adam hid himself from the face of God,” does it follow forthwith that he usually saw His face.
For what if he himself indeed could not see, but feared to be himself seen by Him whose voice he
had heard, and had felt His presence as he walked? For Cain, too, said to God, “From Thy face I
will hide myself;”269 yet we are not therefore compelled to admit that he was wont to behold theface of God with his bodily eyes in any visible form, although he had heard the voice of God
questioning and speaking with him of his sin. But what manner of speech it was that God thenuttered to the outward ears of men, especially in speaking to the first man, it is both difficult to
discover, and we have not undertaken to say in this discourse. But if words alone and sounds were
wrought, by which to bring about some sensible presence of God to those first men, I do not know
why I should not there understand the person of God the Father, seeing that His person is manifested
also in that voice, when Jesus appeared in glory on the mount before the three disciples;270 and inthat when the dove descended upon Him at His baptism;271 and in that where He cried to the Father
concerning His own glorification and it was answered Him, “I have both glorified, and will glorify
again.”272 Not that the voice could be wrought without the work of the Son and of the Holy Spirit(since the Trinity works indivisibly), but that such a voice was wrought as to manifest the personof the Father only; just as the Trinity wrought that human form from the Virgin Mary, yet it is the
person of the Son alone; for the invisible Trinity wrought the visible person of the Son alone. Neither
does anything forbid us, not only to understand those words spoken to Adam as spoken by the
Trinity, but also to take them as manifesting the person of that Trinity. For we are compelled to

268
269
270
271
272

Gen. iii. 7.
Gen. iv. 14.
Matt. xvii. 5.
Matt. iii. 17.
John xii. 28.

60

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

understand of the Father only, that which is said, “This is my beloved Son.”273 For Jesus can neither
be believed nor understood to be the Son of the Holy Spirit, or even His own Son. And where thevoice uttered, “I have both glorified, and will glorify again,” we confess it was only the person of
the Father; since it is the answer to that word of the Lord, in which He had said, “Father, glorify
thy Son,” which He could not say except to God the Father only, and not also to the Holy Spirit,whose Son He was not. But here, where it is written, “And the Lord God said to Adam,” no reason
can be given why the Trinity itself should not be understood.
19. Likewise, also, in that which is written, “Now the Lord had said unto Abraham, Get theeout of thy country, and from thy kindred, and thy father’s house,” it is not clear whether a voicealone came to the ears of Abraham, or whether anything also appeared to his eyes. But a little while
after, it is somewhat more clearly said, “And the Lord appeared unto Abraham, and said, Unto thy
seed will I give this land.”274 But neither there is it expressly said in what form God appeared tohim, or whether the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit appeared to him. Unless, perhaps, they
think that it was the Son who appeared to Abraham, because it is not written, God appeared to him,
but “the Lord appeared to him.” For the Son seems to be called the Lord as though the name wasappropriated to Him; as e.g. the apostle says, “For though there be that are called gods, whether inheaven or in earth, (as there be gods many and lords many,) but to us there is but one God, theFather, of whom are all things, and we in Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things,
and we by Him.”275 But since it is found that God the Father also is called Lord in many places,—for
instance, “The Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten Thee;”276 andagain, “The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou at my right hand;”277 since also the Holy Spirit isfound to be called Lord, as where the apostle says, “Now the Lord is that Spirit;” and then, lest any
one should think the Son to be signified, and to be called the Spirit on account of His incorporeal
substance, has gone on to say, “And where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty;”278 and no one
ever doubted the Spirit of the Lord to be the Holy Spirit: therefore, neither here does it appear
plainly whether it was any person of the Trinity that appeared to Abraham, or God Himself the
Trinity, of which one God it is said, “Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God, and Him only shall thouserve.”279 But under the oak at Mamre he saw three men, whom he invited, and hospitably received,
and ministered to them as they feasted. Yet Scripture at the beginning of that narrative does not
say, three men appeared to him, but, “The Lord appeared to him.” And then, setting forth in dueorder after what manner the Lord appeared to him, it has added the account of the three men, whom
Abraham invites to his hospitality in the plural number, and afterwards speaks to them in the singularnumber as one; and as one He promises him a son by Sara, viz. the one whom the Scripture calls
Lord, as in the beginning of the same narrative, “The Lord,” it says, “appeared to Abraham.” Heinvites them then, and washes their feet, and leads them forth at their departure, as though they

273
274
275
276
277
278
279

Matt. iii. 17.
Gen. xii. 1, 7.
1 Cor viii. 5, 6.
Ps. ii. 7.
Ps. cx. 1.
2 Cor. iii. 17.
Deut. vi. 13.

61

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

were men; but he speaks as with the Lord God, whether when a son is promised to him, or when
the destruction is shown to him that was impending over Sodom.280

Chapter 11.—Of the Same Appearance.
20. That place of Scripture demands neither a slight nor a passing consideration. For if one man
had appeared, what else would those at once cry out, who say that the Son was visible also in His
own substance before He was born of the Virgin, but that it was Himself? since it is said, they say,of the Father, “To the only invisible God.”281 And yet, I could still go on to demand, in what manner“He was found in fashion as a man,” before He had taken our flesh, seeing that his feet were washed,
and that He fed upon earthly food? How could that be, when He was still “in the form of God, andthought it not robbery to be equal with God?”282 For, pray, had He already “emptied Himself, taking
upon Him the form of a servant, and made in the likeness of men, and found in fashion as a man?”when we know when it was that He did this through His birth of the Virgin. How, then, before He
had done this, did He appear as one man to Abraham? or, was not that form a reality? I could put
these questions, if it had been one man that appeared to Abraham, and if that one were believed tobe the Son of God. But since three men appeared, and no one of them is said to be greater than therest either in form, or age, or power, why should we not here understand, as visibly intimated by
the visible creature, the equality of the Trinity, and one and the same substance in three persons?283
21. For, lest any one should think that one among the three is in this way intimated to have been
the greater, and that this one is to be understood to have been the Lord, the Son of God, while theother two were His angels; because, whereas three appeared, Abraham there speaks to one as the
Lord: Holy Scripture has not forgotten to anticipate, by a contradiction, such future cogitations andopinions, when a little while after it says that two angels came to Lot, among whom that just man
also, who deserved to be freed from the burning of Sodom, speaks to one as to the Lord. For so
Scripture goes on to say, “And the Lord went His way, as soon as He left communing with Abraham;and Abraham returned to his place.”284

Chapter 12.—The Appearance to Lot is Examined.

280

Gen. xviii.
1 Tim. i. 17.
282
Phil. ii. 6, 7.
283[The theophanies of the Pentateuch are trinitarian in their implication. They involve distinctions in God—God sending,and God sent; God speaking of God, and God speaking to God. The trinitarianism of the Old Testament has been lost sight ofto some extent in the modern construction of the doctrine. The patristic, mediæval, and reformation theologies worked this veinwith thoroughness, and the analysis of Augustin in this reference is worthy of careful study.—W.G.T.S.]
284
Gen. xviii. 33.
281

62

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff“But there came two angels to Sodom at even.” Here, what I have begun to set forth must be
considered more attentively. Certainly Abraham was speaking with three, and called that one, inthe singular number, the Lord. Perhaps, some one may say, he recognized one of the three to be
the Lord, but the other two His angels. What, then, does that mean which Scripture goes on to say,“And the Lord went His way, as soon as He had left communing with Abraham; and Abraham
returned to his place: and there came two angels to Sodom at even?” Are we to suppose that theone who, among the three, was recognized as the Lord, had departed, and had sent the two angels
that were with Him to destroy Sodom? Let us see, then, what follows. “There came,” it is said,“two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them, rose up to
meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground; and he said, Behold now, mylords, turn in, I pray you, into your servant’s house.” Here it is clear, both that there were twoangels, and that in the plural number they were invited to partake of hospitality, and that they were
honorably designated lords, when they perchance were thought to be men.
22. Yet, again, it is objected that except they were known to be angels of God, Lot would nothave bowed himself with his face to the ground. Why, then, is both hospitality and food offered tothem, as though they wanted such human succor? But whatever may here lie hid, let us now pursuethat which we have undertaken. Two appear; both are called angels; they are invited plurally; hespeaks as with two plurally, until the departure from Sodom. And then Scripture goes on to say,“And it came to pass, when they had brought them forth abroad, that they said, Escape for thy life;
look not behind thee, neither stay thou in all the plain; escape to the mountain, and there thou shalt
be saved,285 lest thou be consumed. And Lot said unto them, Oh! not so, my lord: behold now, thy
servant hath found grace in thy sight,”286 etc. What is meant by his saying to them, “Oh! not so,
my lord,” if He who was the Lord had already departed, and had sent the angels? Why is it said,“Oh! not so, my lord,” and not, “Oh! not so, my lords?” Or if he wished to speak to one of them,
why does Scripture say, “But Lot said to them, Oh! not so, my lord: behold now, thy servant hathfound grace in thy sight,” etc.? Are we here, too, to understand two persons in the plural number,
but when the two are addressed as one, then the one Lord God of one substance? But which two
persons do we here understand?—of the Father and of the Son, or of the Father and of the Holy
Spirit, or of the Son and of the Holy Spirit? The last, perhaps, is the more suitable; for they said ofthemselves that they were sent, which is that which we say of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. For
we find nowhere in the Scriptures that the Father was sent.287

285This clause is not in the Hebrew.
Gen. xix. 1–19.
287[It is difficult to determine the details of this theophany, beyond all doubt: namely, whether the “Jehovah” who “wenthis way as soon as he had left communing with Abraham.” (Gen. xviii. 33) joins the “two angels” that “came to Sodom at even”(Gen xix. 1); or whether one of these “two angels” is Jehovah himself. One or the other supposition must be made; because aperson is addressed by Lot as God (Gen. xix. 18–20), and speaks to Lot as God (Gen. xix. 21, 22), and acts as God (Gen. xix.
24). The Masorite marking of the word “lords” in Gen. xix. 2, as “profane,” i.e., to be taken in the human sense, would favor
the first supposition. The interchange of the singular and plural, in the whole narrative is very striking. “It came to pass, when
they had brought them forth abroad, that he said, escape for thy life. And Lot said unto them. Oh not so, my Lord: behold now,
thy servant hath found grace in thy sight. And he said unto him, see I have accepted thee; I will not overthrow the city of whichthou hast spoken.” (Gen. xix. 17–21.)—W.G.T.S.]
286

63

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 13.—The Appearance in the Bush.
23. But when Moses was sent to lead the children of Israel out of Egypt, it is written that the
Lord appeared to him thus: “Now Moses kept the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the priest of
Midian: and he led the flock to the back side of the desert, and came to the mountain of God, evento Horeb. And the Angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a flame of fire, out of the midst of abush; and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed. And
Moses said, I will now turn aside, and see this great sight, why the bush is not burnt. And when the
Lord saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, I
am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.”288 He is
here also first called the Angel of the Lord, and then God. Was an angel, then, the God of Abraham,
and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? Therefore He may be rightly understood to be theSaviour Himself, of whom the apostle says, “Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning
the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever.”289 He, therefore, “who is over all,God blessed for ever,” is not unreasonably here understood also to be Himself the God of Abraham,
the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. But why is He previously called the Angel of the Lord,
when He appeared in a flame of fire out of the bush? Was it because it was one of many angels,
who by an economy [or arrangement] bare the person of his Lord? or was something of the creatureassumed by Him in order to bring about a visible appearance for the business in hand, and thatwords might thence be audibly uttered, whereby the presence of the Lord might be shown, in such
way as was fitting, to the corporeal senses of man, by means of the creature made subject? For if
he was one of the angels, who could easily affirm whether it was the person of the Son which was
imposed upon him to announce, or that of the Holy Spirit, or that of God the Father, or altogetherof the Trinity itself, who is the one and only God, in order that he might say, “I am the God of
Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?” For we cannot say that the Son of God is
the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, and that the Father is not; norwill any one dare to deny that either the Holy Spirit, or the Trinity itself, whom we believe andunderstand to be the one God, is the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.
For he who is not God, is not the God of those fathers. Furthermore, if not only the Father is God,as all, even heretics, admit; but also the Son, which, whether they will or not, they are compelled
to acknowledge, since the apostle says, “Who is over all, God blessed for ever;” and the Holy Spirit,since the same apostle says, “Therefore glorify God in your body;” when he had said above, “Knowye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost, which is in you, which ye have of God?”290
and these three are one God, as catholic soundness believes: it is not sufficiently apparent which
person of the Trinity that angel bare, if he was one of the rest of the angels, and whether any person,
and not rather that of the Trinity itself. But if the creature was assumed for the purpose of thebusiness in hand, whereby both to appear to human eyes, and to sound in human ears, and to becalled the Angel of the Lord, and the Lord, and God; then cannot God here be understood to be theFather, but either the Son or the Holy Spirit. Although I cannot call to mind that the Holy Spirit is
288
289
290

Ex. iii. 1–6.
Rom. ix. 5.
1 Cor. vi. 20, 19.

64

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

anywhere else called an angel, which yet may be understood from His work; for it is said of Him,
“And He will show you291 things to come;”292 and “angel” in Greek is certainly equivalent to“messenger”293 in Latin: but we read most evidently of the Lord Jesus Christ in the prophet, that
He is called “the Angel of Great Counsel,”294 while both the Holy Spirit and the Son of God is God
and Lord of the angels.

Chapter 14.—Of the Appearance in the Pillar of Cloud and of Fire.
24. Also in the going forth of the children of Israel from Egypt it is written, “And the Lord went
before them, by day in a pillar of cloud to lead them the way, and by night in a pillar of fire. He
took not away the pillar of the cloud by day, nor the pillar of fire by night, from before the people.”295
Who here, too, would doubt that God appeared to the eyes of mortal men by the corporeal creature
made subject to Him, and not by His own substance? But it is not similarly apparent whether the
Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit, or the Trinity itself, the one God. Nor is this distinguishedthere either, in my judgment, where it is written, “The glory of the Lord appeared in the cloud, andthe Lord spake unto Moses, saying, I have heard the murmurings of the children of Israel,”296 etc.

Chapter 15.—Of the Appearance on Sinai. Whether the Trinity Spake in that Appearance or SomeOne Person Specially.
25. But now of the clouds, and voices, and lightnings, and the trumpet, and the smoke on Mount
Sinai, when it was said, “And Mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke, because the Lord descended
upon it in fire, and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace; and all the people thatwas in the camp trembled; and when the voice of the trumpet sounded long and waxed louder andlouder, Moses spake, and God answered him by a voice.”297 And a little after, when the Law had
been given in the ten commandments, it follows in the text, “And all the people saw the thunderings,
and the lightnings, and the noise of the trumpet, and the mountain smoking.” And a little after,“And [when the people saw it,] they removed and stood afar off, and Moses drew near unto thethick darkness298 where God was, and the Lord said unto Moses,”299 etc. What shall I say about
this, save that no one can be so insane as to believe the smoke, and the fire, and the cloud, and the
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299

Annuntiabit.
John xvi. 13.
Nuntius.
Isa. ix. 6.
Ex. iii. 21, 22.
Ex. xvi. 10–12.
Ex. xix. 18, 19.
Nebulam.
Ex. xx. 18, 21.

65

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

darkness, and whatever there was of the kind, to be the substance of the word and wisdom of God
which is Christ, or of the Holy Spirit? For not even the Arians ever dared to say that they were thesubstance of God the Father. All these things, then, were wrought through the creature serving theCreator, and were presented in a suitable economy (dispensatio) to human senses; unless, perhaps,
because it is said, “And Moses drew near to the cloud where God was,” carnal thoughts must needs
suppose that the cloud was indeed seen by the people, but that within the cloud Moses with theeyes of the flesh saw the Son of God, whom doting heretics will have to be seen in His own
substance. Forsooth, Moses may have seen Him with the eyes of the flesh, if not only the wisdomof God which is Christ, but even that of any man you please and howsoever wise, can be seen withthe eyes of the flesh; or if, because it is written of the elders of Israel, that “they saw the place where
the God of Israel had stood,” and that “there was under His feet as it were a paved work of a sapphirestone, and as it were the body of heaven in his clearness,”300 therefore we are to believe that theword and wisdom of God in His own substance stood within the space of an earthly place, who
indeed “reacheth firmly from end to end, and sweetly ordereth all things;”301 and that the Word ofGod, by whom all things were made,302 is in such wise changeable, as now to contract, now to
expand Himself; (may the Lord cleanse the hearts of His faithful ones from such thoughts!) But
indeed all these visible and sensible things are, as we have often said, exhibited through the creature
made subject in order to signify the invisible and intelligible God, not only the Father, but also the
Son and the Holy Spirit, “of whom are all things, and through whom are all things, and in whom
are all things;”303 although “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.”304
26. But as far as concerns our present undertaking, neither on Mount Sinai do I see how it
appears, by all those things which were fearfully displayed to the senses of mortal men, whether
God the Trinity spake, or the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit severally. But if it is allowable,
without rash assertion, to venture upon a modest and hesitating conjecture from this passage, if it
is possible to understand it of one person of the Trinity, why do we not rather understand the Holy
Spirit to be spoken of, since the Law itself also, which was given there, is said to have been written
upon tables of stone with the finger of God,305 by which name we know the Holy Spirit to besignified in the Gospel.306 And fifty days are numbered from the slaying of the lamb and thecelebration of the Passover until the day in which these things began to be done in Mount Sinai;
just as after the passion of our Lord fifty days are numbered from His resurrection, and then camethe Holy Spirit which the Son of God had promised. And in that very coming of His, which weread of in the Acts of the Apostles, there appeared cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat uponeach of them:307 which agrees with Exodus, where it is written, “And Mount Sinai was altogether
on a smoke, because the Lord descended upon it in fire;” and a little after, “And the sight of the

300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307

Ex. xxiv. 10.
Wisd. viii. 1.
John i. 3.
Rom. xi. 36.
Rom. i. 20.
Ex. xxi. 18.
Luke xi. 20.
Acts. ii. 1–4.

66

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

glory of the Lord,” he says, “was like devouring fire on the top of the mount in the eyes of thechildren of Israel.”308 Or if these things were therefore wrought because neither the Father nor the
Son could be there presented in that mode without the Holy Spirit, by whom the Law itself mustneeds be written; then we know doubtless that God appeared there, not by His own substance,
which remains invisible and unchangeable, but by the appearance above mentioned of the creature;
but that some special person of the Trinity appeared, distinguished by a proper mark, as far as mycapacity of understanding reaches, we do not see.

Chapter 16.—In What Manner Moses Saw God.
26. There is yet another difficulty which troubles most people, viz. that it is written, “And the
Lord spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend;” whereas a little after, thesame Moses says, “Now therefore, I pray Thee, if I have found grace in Thy sight, show me now
Thyself plainly, that I may see Thee, that I may find grace in Thy sight, and that I may consider
that this nation is Thy people;” and a little after Moses again said to the Lord, “Show me Thy glory.”
What means this then, that in everything which was done, as above said, God was thought to haveappeared by His own substance; whence the Son of God has been believed by these miserable
people to be visible not by the creature, but by Himself; and that Moses, entering into the cloud,appeared to have had this very object in entering, that a cloudy darkness indeed might be shown
to the eyes of the people, but that Moses within might hear the words of God, as though he beheld
His face; and, as it is said, “And the Lord spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto
his friend;” and yet, behold, the same Moses says, “If I have found grace in Thy sight, show me
Thyself plainly?” Assuredly he knew that he saw corporeally, and he sought the true sight of God
spiritually. And that mode of speech accordingly which was wrought in words, was so modified,
as if it were of a friend speaking to a friend. Yet who sees God the Father with the eyes of the body?
And that Word, which was in the beginning, the Word which was with God, the Word which was
God, by which all things were made,309—who sees Him with the eyes of the body? And the spiritof wisdom, again, who sees with the eyes of the body? Yet what is, “Show me now Thyself plainly,that I may see Thee,” unless, Show me Thy substance? But if Moses had not said this, we mustindeed have borne with those foolish people as we could, who think that the substance of God wasmade visible to his eyes through those things which, as above mentioned, were said or done. But
when it is here demonstrated most evidently that this was not granted to him, even though he desiredit; who will dare to say, that by the like forms which had appeared visibly to him also, not thecreature serving God, but that itself which is God, appeared to the eyes of a mortal man?
28. Add, too, that which the Lord afterward said to Moses, “Thou canst not see my face: forthere shall no man see my face, and live. And the Lord said, Behold, there is a place by me, andthou shall stand upon a rock: and it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put

308
309

Ex. xxiv. 17.
John i. 1, 3.

67

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

thee into a watch-tower310 of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand while I pass by: and I willtake away my hand, and thou shalt see my back parts; but my face shall not be seen.”311

Chapter 17.—How the Back Parts of God Were Seen. The Faith of the Resurrection of Christ. The
Catholic Church Only is the Place from Whence the Back Parts of God are Seen. The Back
Parts of God Were Seen by the Israelites. It is a Rash Opinion to Think that God the Father
Only Was Never Seen by the Fathers.
Not unfitly is it commonly understood to be prefigured from the person of our Lord Jesus Christ,that His “back parts” are to be taken to be His flesh, in which He was born of the Virgin, and died,and rose again; whether they are called back parts312 on account of the posteriority of mortality, or
because it was almost in the end of the world, that is, at a late period,313 that He deigned to take it:
but that His “face” was that form of God, in which He “thought it not robbery to be equal with
God,”314 which no one certainly can see and live; whether because after this life, in which we areabsent from the Lord,315 and where the corruptible body presseth down the soul,316 we shall see“face to face,”317 as the apostle says—(for it is said in the Psalms, of this life, “Verily every man
living is altogether vanity;”318 and again, “For in Thy sight shall no man living be justified;”319 andin this life also, according to John, “It doth not yet appear what we shall be, but we know,” he says,“that when He shall appear, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is,”320 which hecertainly intended to be understood as after this life, when we shall have paid the debt of death,and shall have received the promise of the resurrection);—or whether that even now, in whatever
degree we spiritually understand the wisdom of God, by which all things were made, in that same
degree we die to carnal affections, so that, considering this world dead to us, we also ourselves dieto this world, and say what the apostle says, “The world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.”321
For it was of this death that he also says, “Wherefore, if ye be dead with Christ, why as thoughliving in the world are ye subject to ordinances?”322 Not therefore without cause will no one beable to see the “face,” that is, the manifestation itself of the wisdom of God, and live. For it is thisvery appearance, for the contemplation of which every one sighs who strives to love God with all
310

Clift—A.V. Spelunca is one reading in S. Aug., but the Benedictines read specula = watch-tower, which the context
proves to be certainly right.
311
Ex. xxxiii. 11–23.
312
Posteriora.
313
Posterius.
314
Phil. ii. 6.
315
2 Cor. v. 6.
316
Wisd. ix. 15.
317
1 Cor. xiii. 12.
318
Ps. xxxix. 5.
319
Ps. cxliii. 2.
320
1 John iii. 2.
321
Gal. vi. 14.
322
Col. ii. 20. Viventes de hoc mundo decernitis.

68

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

his heart, and with all his soul, and with all his mind; to the contemplation of which, he who loves
his neighbor, too, as himself builds up his neighbor also as far as he may; on which two
commandments hang all the law and the prophets.323 And this is signified also in Moses himself.
For when he had said, on account of the love of God with which he was specially inflamed, “If I
have found grace in thy sight, show me now Thyself plainly, that I may find grace in Thy sight;”
he immediately subjoined, on account of the love also of his neighbor, “And that I may know that
this nation is Thy people.” It is therefore that “appearance” which hurries away every rational soulwith the desire of it, and the more ardently the more pure that soul is; and it is the more pure themore it rises to spiritual things; and it rises the more to spiritual things the more it dies to carnalthings. But whilst we are absent from the Lord, and walk by faith, not by sight,324 we ought to see
the “back parts” of Christ, that is His flesh, by that very faith, that is, standing on the solid foundationof faith, which the rock signifies,325 and beholding it from such a safe watch-tower, namely in the
Catholic Church, of which it is said, “And upon this rock I will build my Church.”326 For so muchthe more certainly we love that face of Christ, which we earnestly desire to see, as we recognize
in His back parts how much first Christ loved us.
29. But in the flesh itself, the faith in His resurrection saves and justifies us. For, “If thou shalt
believe,” he says, “in thine heart, that God hath raised Him from the dead, thou shalt be saved;”327
and again, “Who was delivered,” he says, “for our offenses, and was raised again for ourjustification.”328 So that the reward of our faith is the resurrection of the body of our Lord.329 For
even His enemies believe that that flesh died on the cross of His passion, but they do not believe
it to have risen again. Which we believing most firmly, gaze upon it as from the solidity of a rock:whence we wait with certain hope for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body;330 because
we hope for that in the members of Christ, that is, in ourselves, which by a sound faith we
acknowledge to be perfect in Him as in our Head. Thence it is that He would not have His backparts seen, unless as He passed by, that His resurrection may be believed. For that which is Pascha
in Hebrew, is translated Passover.331 Whence John the Evangelist also says, “Before the feast of
the Passover, when Jesus knew that His hour was come, that He should pass out of this world unto
the Father.”332
30. But they who believe this, but believe it not in the Catholic Church, but in some schism orin heresy, do not see the back parts of the Lord from “the place that is by Him.” For what does that

323

Matt. xxii. 37–40.
2 Cor. v. 6, 7.
325[Augustin here gives the Protestant interpretation of the word “rock,” in the passage, “on this rock I will build mychurch.”—W.G.T.S.]
326
Matt. xvi. 18.
327
Rom. x. 9.
328
Rom. iv. 25.
329[The meaning seems to be, that the vivid realization that Christ’s body rose from the dead is the reward of a Christian’s
faith. The unbeliever has no such reward.—W.G.T.S.]
330
Rom. viii. 23.
331
Transitus = passing by.
332
John xiii. 1.
324

69NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

mean which the Lord says, “Behold, there is a place by me, and thou shalt stand upon a rock?”
What earthly place is “by” the Lord, unless that is “by Him” which touches Him spiritually? For
what place is not “by” the Lord, who “reacheth from one end to another mightily, and sweetly dothorder all things,”333 and of whom it is said, “Heaven is His throne, and earth is His footstool;” andwho said, “Where is the house that ye build unto me, and where is the place of my rest? For has
not my hand made all those things?”334 But manifestly the Catholic Church itself is understood tobe “the place by Him,” wherein one stands upon a rock, where he healthfully sees the “Pascha
Domini,” that is, the “Passing by”335 of the Lord, and His back parts, that is, His body, who believes
in His resurrection. “And thou shalt stand,” He says, “upon a rock while my glory passeth by.” For
in reality, immediately after the majesty of the Lord had passed by in the glorification of the Lord,
in which He rose again and ascended to the Father, we stood firm upon the rock. And Peter himself
then stood firm, so that he preached Him with confidence, whom, before he stood firm, he hadthrice from fear denied;336 although, indeed, already before placed in predestination upon thewatch-tower of the rock, but with the hand of the Lord still held over him that he might not see.
For he was to see His back parts, and the Lord had not yet “passed by,” namely, from death to life;
He had not yet been glorified by the resurrection.
31. For as to that, too, which follows in Exodus, “I will cover thee with mine hand while I passby, and I will take away my hand and thou shalt see my back parts;” many Israelites, of whom
Moses was then a figure, believed in the Lord after His resurrection, as if His hand had been taken
off from their eyes, and they now saw His back parts. And hence the evangelist also mentions thatprophesy of Isaiah, “Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut theireyes.”337 Lastly, in the Psalm, that is not unreasonably understood to be said in their person, “Forday and night Thy hand was heavy upon me.” “By day,” perhaps, when He performed manifest
miracles, yet was not acknowledged by them; but “by night,” when He died in suffering, when they
thought still more certainly that, like any one among men, He was cut off and brought to an end.
But since, when He had already passed by, so that His back parts were seen, upon the preaching
to them by the Apostle Peter that it behoved Christ to suffer and rise again, they were pricked intheir hearts with the grief of repentance,338 that that might come to pass among the baptized whichis said in the beginning of that Psalm, “Blessed are they whose transgressions are forgiven, andwhose sins are covered;” therefore, after it had been said, “Thy hand is heavy upon me,” the Lord,
as it were, passing by, so that now He removed His hand, and His back parts were seen, there
follows the voice of one who grieves and confesses and receives remission of sins by faith in theresurrection of the Lord: “My moisture,” he says, “is turned into the drought of summer. I
acknowledged my sin unto Thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess mytransgressions unto the Lord, and Thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin.”339 For we ought not tobe so wrapped up in the darkness of the flesh, as to think the face indeed of God to be invisible,

333
334
335
336
337
338
339

Wisd. viii. 1.
Isa. lxvi. 1, 2.
Transitus.
Matt. xxvi. 70–74.
Isa. vi. 10; Matt. xiii. 15.
Acts ii. 37, 41.
Ps. xxxii. 4, 5.

70

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

but His back visible, since both appeared visibly in the form of a servant; but far be it from us tothink anything of the kind in the form of God; far be it from us to think that the Word of God andthe Wisdom of God has a face on one side, and on the other a back, as a human body has, or is at
all changed either in place or time by any appearance or motion.340
32. Wherefore, if in those words which were spoken in Exodus, and in all those corporeal
appearances, the Lord Jesus Christ was manifested; or if in some cases Christ was manifested, as
the consideration of this passage persuades us, in others the Holy Spirit, as that which we have said
above admonishes us; at any rate no such result follows, as that God the Father never appeared inany such form to the Fathers. For many such appearances happened in those times, without either
the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit being expressly named and designated in them; but yetwith some intimations given through certain very probable interpretations, so that it would be too
rash to say that God the Father never appeared by any visible forms to the fathers or the prophets.
For they gave birth to this opinion who were not able to understand in respect to the unity of the
Trinity such texts as, “Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God;”341 and,
“Whom no man hath seen, nor can see.”342 Which texts are understood by a sound faith in that
substance itself, the highest, and in the highest degree divine and unchangeable, whereby both the
Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit is the one and only God. But those visions were wrought
through the changeable creature, made subject to the unchangeable God, and did not manifest God
properly as He is, but by intimations such as suited the causes and times of the several circumstances.

Chapter 18.—The Vision of Daniel.
33.343 I do not know in what manner these men understand that the Ancient of Days appeared
to Daniel, from whom the Son of man, which He deigned to be for our sakes, is understood to havereceived the kingdom; namely, from Him who says to Him in the Psalms, “Thou art my Son; thisday have I begotten Thee; ask of me, and I shall give Thee the heathen for Thine inheritance;”344
and who has “put all things under His feet.”345 If, however, both the Father giving the kingdom,
and the Son receiving it, appeared to Daniel in bodily form, how can those men say that the Father
never appeared to the prophets, and, therefore, that He only ought to be understood to be invisible
whom no man has seen, nor can see? For Daniel has told us thus: “I beheld,” he says, “till thethrones were set,346 and the Ancient of Days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the340[This explanation of the “back parts” of Christ to mean his resurrection, and of “the place that is by him,” to mean the
church, is an example of the fanciful exegesis into which Augustin, with the fathers generally, sometimes falls. The reasoning,
here, unlike that in the preceding chapter, is not from the immediate context, and hence extraneous matter is read into thetext.—W.G.T.S.]
341
1 Tim. i. 17.
342
1 Tim. vi. 16.
343[The original has an awkward anacoluthon in the opening sentence of this chapter, which has been removed by omitting“quamquam,” and substituting “autem” for “ergo.”—W.G.T.S.]
344
Ps. ii. 7, 8.
345
Ps. viii. 8.
346
Cast down—A.V.

71

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

hair of His head like the pure wool: His throne was like the fiery flame, and His wheels as burning
fire; a fiery stream issued and came forth from before Him: thousand thousands ministered unto
Him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him: the judgment was set, and the books
were opened,” etc. And a little after, “I saw,” he says, “in the night visions, and behold, one likethe Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of Days, and they brought
Him near before Him. And there was given Him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all
peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him: His dominion is an everlasting dominion, whichshall not pass away, and His kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.”347 Behold the Father
giving, and the Son receiving, an eternal kingdom; and both are in the sight of him who prophesies,
in a visible form. It is not, therefore, unsuitably believed that God the Father also was wont toappear in that manner to mortals.
34. Unless, perhaps, some one shall say, that the Father is therefore not visible, because He
appeared within the sight of one who was dreaming; but that therefore the Son and the Holy Spirit
are visible, because Moses saw all those things being awake; as if, forsooth, Moses saw the Word
and the Wisdom of God with fleshly eyes, or that even the human spirit which quickens that flesh
can be seen, or even that corporeal thing which is called wind;—how much less can that Spirit of
God be seen, who transcends the minds of all men, and of angels, by the ineffable excellence ofthe divine substance? Or can any one fall headlong into such an error as to dare to say, that the Son
and the Holy Spirit are visible also to men who are awake, but that the Father is not visible except
to those who dream? How, then, do they understand that of the Father alone, “Whom no man hathseen, nor can see.”? When men sleep, are they then not men? Or cannot He, who can fashion thelikeness of a body to signify Himself through the visions of dreamers, also fashion that same bodily
creature to signify Himself to the eyes of those who are awake? Whereas His own very substance,
whereby He Himself is that which He is, cannot be shown by any bodily likeness to one who sleeps,
or by any bodily appearance to one who is awake; but this not of the Father only, but also of the
Son and of the Holy Spirit. And certainly, as to those who are moved by the visions of waking men
to believe that not the Father, but only the Son, or the Holy Spirit, appeared to the corporeal sightof men,—to omit the great extent of the sacred pages, and their manifold interpretation, such thatno one of sound reason ought to affirm that the person of the Father was nowhere shown to theeyes of waking men by any corporeal appearance;—but, as I said, to omit this, what do they sayof our father Abraham, who was certainly awake and ministering, when, after Scripture had premised,“The Lord appeared unto Abraham,” not one, or two, but three men appeared to him; no one ofwhom is said to have stood prominently above the others, no one more than the others to haveshone with greater glory, or to have acted more authoritatively?348
35. Wherefore, since in that our threefold division we determined to inquire,349 first, whether
the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit; or whether sometimes the Father, sometimes the Son,sometimes the Holy Spirit; or whether, without any distinction of persons, as it is said, the one andonly God, that is, the Trinity itself, appeared to the fathers through those forms of the creature: now
that we have examined, so far as appeared to be sufficient what places of the Holy Scriptures we
could, a modest and cautious consideration of divine mysteries leads, as far as I can judge, to no
347
348
349

Dan. vii. 9–14.
Gen. xviii. 1.
See above, chap. vii.

72

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

other conclusion, unless that we may not rashly affirm which person of the Trinity appeared to thisor that of the fathers or the prophets in some body or likeness of body, unless when the context
attaches to the narrative some probable intimations on the subject. For the nature itself, or substance,or essence, or by whatever other name that very thing, which is God, whatever it be, is to be called,cannot be seen corporeally: but we must believe that by means of the creature made subject to Him,
not only the Son, or the Holy Spirit, but also the Father, may have given intimations of Himself tomortal senses by a corporeal form or likeness. And since the case stands thus, that this second bookmay not extend to an immoderate length, let us consider what remains in those which follow.

Book III.
————————————The question is discussed with respect to the appearances of God spoken of in the previous book,which were made under bodily forms, whether only a creature was formed, for the purpose of
manifesting God to human sight in such way as He at each time judged fitting; or whetherangels, already existing, were so sent as to speak in the person of God; and this, either byassuming a bodily appearance from the bodily creature, or by changing their own bodies into
whatever forms they would, suitable to the particular action, according to the power given tothem by the Creator; while the essence itself of God was never seen in itself.
Preface.—Why Augustin Writes of the Trinity. What He Claims from Readers. What Has Been
Said in the Previous Book.
1. I Would have them believe, who are willing to do so, that I had rather bestow labor in reading,than in dictating what others may read. But let those who will not believe this, but are both able
and willing to make the trial, grant me whatever answers may be gathered from reading, either tomy own inquiries, or to those interrogations of others, which for the character I bear in the serviceof Christ, and for the zeal with which I burn that our faith may be fortified against the error of
carnal and natural men,350 I must needs bear with; and then let them see how easily I would refrainfrom this labor, and with how much even of joy I would give my pen a holiday. But if what wehave read upon these subjects is either not sufficiently set forth, or is not to be found at all, or at
any rate cannot easily be found by us, in the Latin tongue, while we are not so familiar with the
Greek tongue as to be found in any way competent to read and understand therein the books thattreat of such topics, in which class of writings, to judge by the little which has been translated for

350[The English translator renders “animalium” by “psychical,” to agree with ψυχικός in 1 Cor. ii. 14. The rendering“natural” of the A.V. is more familiar.—W.G.T.S.]

73

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffus, I do not doubt that everything is contained that we can profitably seek;351 while yet I cannot
resist my brethren when they exact of me, by that law by which I am made their servant, that I
should minister above all to their praiseworthy studies in Christ by my tongue and by my pen, of
which two yoked together in me, Love is the charioteer; and while I myself confess that I have by
writing learned many things which I did not know: if this be so, then this my labor ought not toseem superfluous to any idle, or to any very learned reader; while it is needful in no small part, tomany who are busy, and to many who are unlearned,and among these last to myself. Supported,
then, very greatly, and aided by the writings we have already read of others on this subject, I haveundertaken to inquire into and to discuss, whatever it seems to my judgment can be reverently
inquired into and discussed, concerning the Trinity, the one supreme and supremely good God; He
himself exhorting me to the inquiry, and helping me in the discussion of it; in order that, if there
are no other writings of the kind, there may be something for those to have and read who are willingand capable; but if any exist already, then it may be so much the easier to find some such writings,
the more there are of the kind in existence.
2. Assuredly, as in all my writings I desire not only a pious reader, but also a free corrector, so
I especially desire this in the present inquiry, which is so important that I would there were as manyinquirers as there are objectors. But as I do not wish my reader to be bound down to me, so I do
not wish my corrector to be bound down to himself. Let not the former love me more than thecatholic faith, let not the latter love himself more than the catholic verity. As I say to the former,
Do not be willing to yield to my writings as to the canonical Scriptures; but in these, when thouhast discovered even what thou didst not previously believe, believe it unhesitatingly; while inthose, unless thou hast understood with certainty what thou didst not before hold as certain, be
unwilling to hold it fast: so I say to the latter, Do not be willing to amend my writings by thine own
opinion or disputation, but from the divine text, or by unanswerable reason. If thou apprehendest
anything of truth in them, its being there does not make it mine, but by understanding and loving
it, let it be both thine and mine; but if thou convictest anything of falsehood, though it have once
been mine, in that I was guilty of the error, yet now by avoiding it let it be neither thine nor mine.
3. Let this third book, then, take its beginning at the point to which the second had reached. For
after we had arrived at this, that we desired to show that the Son was not therefore less than the
Father, because the Father sent and the Son was sent; nor the Holy Spirit therefore less than both,because we read in the Gospel that He was sent both by the one and by the other; we undertook
then to inquire, since the Son was sent thither, where He already was, for He came into the world,and “was in the world;”352 since also the Holy Spirit was sent thither, where He already was, for“the Spirit of the Lord filleth the world, and that which containeth all things hath knowledge of thevoice;”353 whether the Lord was therefore “sent” because He was born in the flesh so as to be nolonger hidden, and, as it were, came forth from the bosom of the Father, and appeared to the eyes
351

[This is an important passage with reference to Augustin’s learning. From it, it would appear that he had not read the
Greek Trinitarians in the original, and that only “a little” of these had been translated, at the time when he was composing thistreatise. As this was from A.D. 400 to A.D. 416—, the treatises of Athanasius (d. 373), Basil (d. 379), Gregory of Nyssa (d.
400?), and Gregory of Nazianzum (d. 390?) had been composed and were current in the Eastern church. That Augustin thought
out this profound scheme of the doctrine of the Trinity by the close study of Scripture alone, and unassisted by the equally
profound trinitarianism of the Greek church, is an evidence of the depth and strength of his remarkable intellect.—W.G.T.S.]
352
John i. 10.
353
Wisd. i. 7.

74

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffof men in the form of a servant; and the Holy Spirit also was therefore “sent,” because He too wasseen as a dove in a corporeal form,354 and in cloven tongues, like as of fire;355 so that, to be sent,
when spoken of them, means to go forth to the sight of mortals in some corporeal form from aspiritual hiding-place; which, because the Father did not, He is said only to have sent, not also to
be sent. Our next inquiry was, Why the Father also is not sometimes said to be sent, if He Himself
was manifested through those corporeal forms which appeared to the eyes of the ancients. But if
the Son was manifested at these times, why should He be said to be “sent” so long after, when the
fullness of time was come that He should be born of a woman;356 since, indeed, He was sent before
also, viz., when He appeared corporeally in those forms? Or if He were not rightly said to be “sent,”
except when the Word was made flesh;357 why should the Holy Spirit be read of as “sent,” of whomsuch an incarnation never took place? But if neither the Father, nor the Son, but the Holy Spirit
was manifested through these ancient appearances; why should He too be said to be “sent” now,
when He was also sent before in these various manners? Next we subdivided the subject, that it
might be handled most carefully, and we made the question threefold, of which one part was
explained in the second book, and two remain, which I shall next proceed to discuss. For we havealready inquired and determined, that not only the Father, nor only the Son, nor only the Holy Spirit
appeared in those ancient corporeal forms and visions, but either indifferently the Lord God, who
is understood to be the Trinity itself, or some one person of the Trinity, whichever the text of thenarrative might signify, through intimations supplied by the context.

Chapter 1.—What is to Be Said Thereupon.
4. Let us, then, continue our inquiry now in order. For under the second head in that division
the question occurred, whether the creature was formed for that work only, wherein God, in such
way as He then judged it to be fitting, might be manifested to human sight; or whether angels, whoalready existed, were so sent as to speak in the person of God, assuming a corporeal appearance
from the corporeal creature for the purpose of their ministry; or else changing and turning theirown body itself, to which they are not subject, but govern it as subject to themselves, into whateverforms they would, that were appropriate and fit for their actions, according to the power given tothem by the Creator. And when this part of the question shall have been investigated, so far as God
permit, then, lastly, we shall have to see to that question with which we started, viz., whether the
Son and the Holy Spirit were also “sent” before; and if it be so, then what difference there is between
that sending and the one of which we read in the Gospel; or whether neither of them were sent,
except when either the Son was made of the Virgin Mary, or when the Holy Spirit appeared in avisible form, whether as a dove or in tongues of fire.358

354
355
356
357
358

Matt. iii. 16.
Acts ii. 3.
Gal. iv. 4.
John i. 14.
See above, Book ii. chap. vii. n. 13.

75

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

5. I confess, however, that it reaches further than my purpose can carry me to inquire whether
the angels, secretly working by the spiritual quality of their body abiding still in them, assume
somewhat from the inferior and more bodily elements, which, being fitted to themselves, they may
change and turn like a garment into any corporeal appearances they will, and those appearances
themselves also real, as real water was changed by our Lord into real wine;359 or whether theytransform their own bodies themselves into that which they would, suitably to the particular act.
But it does not signify to the present question which of these it is. And although I be not able tounderstand these things by actual experience, seeing that I am a man, as the angels do who do thesethings, and know them better than I know them, viz., how far my body is changeable by the operationof my will; whether it be by my own experience of myself, or by that which I have gathered fromothers; yet it is not necessary here to say which of these alternatives I am to believe upon theauthority of the divine Scriptures, lest I be compelled to prove it, and so my discourse become toolong upon a subject which does not concern the present question.
6. Our present inquiry then is, whether the angels were then the agents both in showing thosebodily appearances to the eyes of men and in sounding those words in their ears when the sensible
creature itself, serving the Creator at His beck, was turned for the time into whatever was needful;as it is written in the book of Wisdom, “For the creature serveth Thee, who art the Maker, increaseth
his strength against the unrighteous for their punishment, and abateth his strength for the benefitof such as put their trust in Thee. Therefore, even then was it altered into all fashions, and wasobedient to Thy grace, that nourisheth all things according to the desire of them that longed forThee.”360 For the power of the will of God reaches through the spiritual creature even to visible
and sensible effects of the corporeal creature. For where does not the wisdom of the omnipotent
God work that which He wills, which “reacheth from one end to another mightily, and sweetly dothorder all things”?361

Chapter 2.—The Will of God is the Higher Cause of All Corporeal Change. This is Shown by an
Example.
7. But there is one kind of natural order in the conversion and changeableness of bodies, which,although itself also serves the bidding of God, yet by reason of its unbroken continuity has ceased
to cause wonder; as is the case, for instance, with those things which are changed either in very
short, or at any rate not long, intervals of time, in heaven, or earth, or sea; whether it be in rising,or in setting, or in change of appearance from time to time; while there are other things, which,although arising from that same order, yet are less familiar on account of longer intervals of time.
And these things, although the many stupidly wonder at them, yet are understood by those who
inquire into this present world, and in the progress of generations become so much the less wonderful,as they are the more often repeated and known by more people. Such are the eclipses of the sun

359
360
361

John ii. 9.
Wisd. xvi. 24, 25.
Wisd. viii. 1.

76

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

and moon, and some kinds of stars, appearing seldom, and earthquakes, and unnatural births ofliving creatures, and other similar things; of which not one takes place without the will of God;yet, that it is so, is to most people not apparent. And so the vanity of philosophers has found license
to assign these things also to other causes, true causes perhaps, but proximate ones, while they are
not able to see at all the cause that is higher than all others, that is, the will of God; or again to false
causes, and to such as are not even put forward out of any diligent investigation of corporeal thingsand motions, but from their own guess and error.
8. I will bring forward an example, if I can, that this may be plainer. There is, we know, in thehuman body, a certain bulk of flesh and an outward form, and an arrangement and distraction oflimbs, and a temperament of health; and a soul breathed into it governs this body, and that soul arational one; which, therefore, although changeable, yet can be partaker of that unchangeable
wisdom, so that “it may partake of that which is in and of itself;”362 as it is written in the Psalm
concerning all saints, of whom as of living stones is built that Jerusalem which is the mother of us
all, eternal in the heavens. For so it is sung, “Jerusalem is builded as a city, that is partaker of thatwhich is in and of itself.”363 For “in and of itself,” in that place, is understood of that chiefest andunchangeable good, which is God, and of His own wisdom and will. To whom is sung in anotherplace, “Thou shalt change them, and they shall be changed; but Thou art the same.”364

Chapter 3.—Of the Same Argument.
Let us take, then, the case of a wise man, such that his rational soul is already partaker of theunchangeable and eternal truth, so that he consults it about all his actions, nor does anything at all,which he does not by it know ought to be done, in order that by being subject to it and obeying it
he may do rightly. Suppose now that this man, upon counsel with the highest reason of the divinerighteousness, which he hears with the ear of his heart in secret, and by its bidding, should weary
his body by toil in some office of mercy, and should contract an illness; and upon consulting thephysicians, were to be told by one that the cause of the disease was overmuch dryness of the body,but by another that it was overmuch moisture; one of the two no doubt would allege the true cause
and the other would err, but both would pronounce concerning proximate causes only, that is,
corporeal ones. But if the cause of that dryness were to be inquired into, and found to be theself-imposed toil, then we should have come to a yet higher cause, which proceeds from the soulso as to affect the body which the soul governs. Yet neither would this be the first cause, for that
doubtless was a higher cause still, and lay in the unchangeable wisdom itself, by serving which in
362[The original is: “ut sit participatio ejus in idipsum.” The English translator renders: “So that it may partake thereof in
itself.” The thought of Augustin is, that the believing soul though mutable partakes of the immutable; and he designates theimmutable as the in idipsum: the self-existent. In that striking passage in the Confessions, in which he describes the spiritualand extatic meditations of himself and his mother, as they looked out upon the Mediterranean from the windows at Ostia—ascene well known from Ary Schefer’s painting—he denominates God the idipsum: the “self same” (Confessions IX. x). Augustin
refers to the same absolute immutability of God, in this place. By faith, man is “a partaker of a divine nature,” (2 Pet. i.
4.)—W.G.T.S.]
363
Ps. cxxii. 3. Vulg.
364
Ps. cii. 26, 27.

77

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

love, and by obeying its ineffable commands, the soul of the wise man had undertaken that
self-imposed toil; and so nothing else but the will of God would be found most truly to be the firstcause of that illness. But suppose now in that office of pious toil this wise man had employed thehelp of others to co-operate in the good work, who did not serve God with the same will as himself,
but either desired to attain the reward of their own carnal desires, or shunned merely carnal
unpleasantnesses;—suppose, too, he had employed beasts of burden, if the completion of the workrequired such a provision, which beasts of burden would be certainly irrational animals, and would
not therefore move their limbs under their burdens because they at all thought of that good work,
but from the natural appetite of their own liking, and for the avoiding of annoyance;—suppose,
lastly, he had employed bodily things themselves that lack all sense, but were necessary for thatwork, as e.g. corn, and wine, and oils, clothes, or money, or a book, or anything of thekind;—certainly, in all these bodily things thus employed in this work, whether animate or inanimate,
whatever took place of movement, of wear and tear, of reparation, of destruction, of renewal or ofchange in one way or another, as places and times affected them; pray, could there be, I say, anyother cause of all these visible and changeable facts, except the invisible and unchangeable will ofGod, using all these, both bad and irrational souls, and lastly bodies, whether such as were inspired
and animated by those souls, or such as lacked all sense, by means of that upright soul as the seatof His wisdom, since primarily that good and holy soul itself employed them, which His wisdom
had subjected to itself in a pious and religious obedience?

Chapter 4.—God Uses All Creatures as He Will, and Makes Visible Things for the Manifestationof Himself.
9. What, then, we have alleged by way of example of a single wise man, although of one still
bearing a mortal body and still seeing only in part, may be allowably extended also to a family,
where there is a society of such men, or to a city, or even to the whole world, if the chief rule andgovernment of human affairs were in the hands of the wise, and of those who were piously andperfectly subject to God; but because this is not the case as yet (for it behoves us first to be exercisedin this our pilgrimage after mortal fashion, and to be taught with stripes by force of gentleness andpatience), let us turn our thoughts to that country itself that is above and heavenly, from which wehere are pilgrims. For there the will of God, “who maketh His angels spirits, and His ministers aflaming fire,”365 presiding among spirits which are joined in perfect peace and friendship, andcombined in one will by a kind of spiritual fire of charity, as it were in an elevated and holy andsecret seat, as in its own house and in its own temple, thence diffuses itself through all things bycertain most perfectly ordered movements of the creature; first spiritual, then corporeal; and uses
all according to the unchangeable pleasure of its own purpose, whether incorporeal things or things
corporeal, whether rational or irrational spirits, whether good by His grace or evil through theirown will. But as the more gross and inferior bodies are governed in due order by the more subtle
and powerful ones, so all bodies are governed by the living spirit; and the living spirit devoid of365

Ps. civ. 4.

78

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

reason, by the reasonable living spirit; and the reasonable living spirit that makes default and sins,by the living and reasonable spirit that is pious and just; and that by God Himself, and so theuniversal creature by its Creator, from whom and through whom and in whom it is also created andestablished.366 And so it comes to pass that the will of God is the first and the highest cause of all
corporeal appearances and motions. For nothing is done visibly or sensibly, unless either by commandor permission from the interior palace, invisible and intelligible, of the supreme Governor, according
to the unspeakable justice of rewards and punishments, of favor and retribution, in that far-reaching
and boundless commonwealth of the whole creature.
10. If, therefore, the Apostle Paul, although he still bare the burden of the body, which is subject
to corruption and presseth down the soul,367 and although he still saw only in part and in an enigma,368
wishing to depart and be with Christ,369 and groaning within himself, waiting for the adoption, towit, the redemption of his body,370 yet was able to preach the Lord Jesus Christ significantly, in
one way by his tongue, in another by epistle, in another by the sacrament of His body and blood(since, certainly, we do not call either the tongue of the apostle, or the parchments, or the ink, or
the significant sounds which his tongue uttered, or the alphabetical signs written on skins, the bodyand blood of Christ; but that only which we take of the fruits of the earth and consecrate by mystic
prayer, and then receive duly to our spiritual health in memory of the passion of our Lord for us:
and this, although it is brought by the hands of men to that visible form, yet is not sanctified to
become so great a sacrament, except by the spirit of God working invisibly; since God works
everything that is done in that work through corporeal movements, by setting in motion primarily
the invisible things of His servants, whether the souls of men, or the services of hidden spirits
subject to Himself): what wonder if also in the creature of heaven and earth, of sea and air, God
works the sensible and visible things which He wills, in order to signify and manifest Himself inthem, as He Himself knows it to be fitting, without any appearing of His very substance itself,
whereby He is, which is altogether unchangeable, and more inwardly and secretly exalted than all
spirits whom He has created?

Chapter 5.—Why Miracles are Not Usual Works.
11. For since the divine power administers the whole spiritual and corporeal creature, the watersof the sea are summoned and poured out upon the face of the earth on certain days of every year.
But when this was done at the prayer of the holy Elijah; because so continued and long a course offair weather had gone before, that men were famished; and because at that very hour, in which theservant of God prayed, the air itself had not, by any moist aspect, put forth signs of the coming
rain; the divine power was apparent in the great and rapid showers that followed, and by which

366
367
368
369
370

Col. i. 16.
Wisd. ix. 15.
1 Cor. xiii. 12.
Phil. i. 23.
Rom. viii. 23.

79

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffthat miracle was granted and dispensed.371 In like manner, God works ordinarily through thunders
and lightnings: but because these were wrought in an unusual manner on Mount Sinai, and thosesounds were not uttered with a confused noise, but so that it appeared by most sure proofs thatcertain intimations were given by them, they were miracles.372 Who draws up the sap through theroot of the vine to the bunch of grapes, and makes the wine, except God; who, while man plants
and waters, Himself giveth the increase?373 But when, at the command of the Lord, the water was
turned into wine with an extraordinary quickness, the divine power was made manifest, by theconfession even of the foolish.374 Who ordinarily clothes the trees with leaves and flowers except
God? Yet, when the rod of Aaron the priest blossomed, the Godhead in some way conversed withdoubting humanity.375 Again, the earthy matter certainly serves in common to the production andformation both of all kinds of wood and of the flesh of all animals: and who makes these things,
but He who said, Let the earth bring them forth;376 and who governs and guides by the same wordof His, those things which He has created? Yet, when He changed the same matter out of the rodof Moses into the flesh of a serpent, immediately and quickly, that change, which was unusual,although of a thing which was changeable, was a miracle.377 But who is it that gives life to every
living thing at its birth, unless He who gave life to that serpent also for the moment, as there wasneed.378

Chapter 6.—Diversity Alone Makes a Miracle.
And who is it that restored to the corpses their proper souls when the dead rose again,379 unless
He who gives life to the flesh in the mother’s womb, in order that they may come into being who
yet are to die? But when such things happen in a continuous kind of river of ever-flowing succession,passing from the hidden to the visible, and from the visible to the hidden, by a regular and beaten
track, then they are called natural; when, for the admonition of men, they are thrust in by an unusualchangeableness, then they are called miracles.

371

1 Kings xviii. 45.
Ex. xix. 6.
373
1 Cor. iii. 7.
374
John ii. 9.
375
Num. xvii. 8.
376
Gen. i. 24.
377
Ex. iv. 3.
378[One chief reason why a miracle is incredible for the skeptic, is the difficulty of working it. If the miracle were easy of
execution for man—who for the skeptic is the measure of power—his disbelief of it would disappear. In reference to thisobjection, Augustin calls attention to the fact, that so far as difficulty of performance is concerned, the products of nature are
as impossible to man as supernatural products. Aaron could no more have made an almond rod blossom and fructuate on analmond tree, than off it. That a miracle is difficult to be wrought is, consequently, no good reason for disbelieving its
reality.—W.G.T.S.]
379
Ezek. xxxvii. 1–10.
372

80

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 7.—Great Miracles Wrought by Magic Arts.
12. I see here what may occur to a weak judgment, namely, why such miracles are wrought
also by magic arts; for the wise men of Pharaoh likewise made serpents, and did other like things.
Yet it is still more a matter of wonder, how it was that the power of those magicians, which wasable to make serpents, when it came to very small flies, failed altogether. For the lice, by which
third plague the proud people of Egypt were smitten, are very short-lived little flies; yet there
certainly the magicians failed, saying, “This is the finger of God.”380 And hence it is given us tounderstand that not even those angels and powers of the air that transgressed, who have been thrust
down into that lowest darkness, as into a peculiar prison, from their habitation in that lofty ethereal
purity, through whom magic arts have whatever power they have, can do anything except by power
given from above. Now that power is given either to deceive the deceitful, as it was given against
the Egyptians, and against the magicians also themselves, in order that in the seducing of thosespirits they might seem admirable by whom they were wrought, but to be condemned by the truthof God; or for the admonishing of the faithful, lest they should desire to do anything of the kind as
though it were a great thing, for which reason they have been handed down to us also by the authorityof Scripture; or lastly, for the exercising, proving, and manifesting of the patience of the righteous.
For it was not by any small power of visible miracles that Job lost all that he had, and both hischildren and his bodily health itself.381

Chapter 8.—God Alone Creates Those Things Which are Changed by Magic Art.
13. Yet it is not on this account to be thought that the matter of visible things is subservient tothe bidding of those wicked angels; but rather to that of God, by whom this power is given, just so
far as He, who is unchangeable, determines in His lofty and spiritual abode to give it. For waterand fire and earth are subservient even to wicked men, who are condemned to the mines, in orderthat they may do therewith what they will, but only so far as is permitted. Nor, in truth, are thoseevil angels to be called creators, because by their means the magicians, withstanding the servant
of God, made frogs and serpents; for it was not they who created them. But, in truth, some hidden
seeds of all things that are born corporeally and visibly, are concealed in the corporeal elements ofthis world. For those seeds that are visible now to our eyes from fruits and living things, are quitedistinct from the hidden seeds of those former seeds; from which, at the bidding of the Creator, thewater produced the first swimming creatures and fowl, and the earth the first buds after their kind,and the first living creatures after their kind.382 For neither at that time were those seeds so drawn
forth into products of their several kinds, as that the power of production was exhausted in those
products; but oftentimes, suitable combinations of circumstances are wanting, whereby they may

380
381
382

Ex. vii. and viii.
Job i. and ii.
Gen. i. 20–25.

81

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

be enabled to burst forth and complete their species. For, consider, the very least shoot is a seed;
for, if fitly consigned to the earth, it produces a tree. But of this shoot there is a yet more subtle
seed in some grain of the same species, and this is visible even to us. But of this grain also there isfurther still a seed, which, although we are unable to see it with our eyes, yet we can conjecture its
existence from our reason; because, except there were some such power in those elements, there
would not so frequently be produced from the earth things which had not been sown there; nor yet
so many animals, without any previous commixture of male and female; whether on the land, orin the water, which yet grow, and by commingling bring forth others, while themselves sprang up
without any union of parents. And certainly bees do not conceive the seeds of their young bycommixture, but gather them as they lie scattered over the earth with their mouth.383 For the Creatorof these invisible seeds is the Creator of all things Himself; since whatever comes forth to our sightby being born, receives the first beginnings of its course from hidden seeds, and takes the successive
increments of its proper size and its distinctive forms from these as it were original rules. As
therefore we do not call parents the creators of men, nor farmers the creators of corn,—although it
is by the outward application of their actions that the power384 of God operates within for the creatingthese things;—so it is not right to think not only the bad but even the good angels to be creators,
if, through the subtilty of their perception and body, they know the seeds of things which to us are
more hidden, and scatter them secretly through fit temperings of the elements, and so furnish
opportunities of producing things, and of accelerating their increase. But neither do the good angels
do these things, except as far as God commands, nor do the evil ones do them wrongfully, except
as far as He righteously permits. For the malignity of the wicked one makes his own will wrongful;but the power to do so, he receives rightfully, whether for his own punishment, or, in the case ofothers, for the punishment of the wicked, or for the praise of the good.
14. Accordingly, the Apostle Paul, distinguishing God’s creating and forming within, from theoperations of the creature which are applied from without, and drawing a similitude from agriculture,says, “I planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.”385 As, therefore, in the case of
spiritual life itself, no one except God can work righteousness in our minds, yet men also are able
to preach the gospel as an outward means, not only the good in sincerity, but also the evil inpretence;386 so in the creation of visible things it is God that works from within; but the exterior
operations, whether of good or bad, of angels or men, or even of any kind of animal, according to
His own absolute power, and to the distribution of faculties, and the several appetites for things
pleasant, which He Himself has imparted, are applied by Him to that nature of things wherein He
383[Augustin is not alone in his belief that the bee is an exception to the dictum; omne animal ex ovo. As late as 1744,
Thorley, an English “scientist,” said that “the manner in which bees propagate their species is entirely hid from the eyes of allmen; and the most strict, diligent, and curious observers and inquisitors have not been able to discover it. It is a secret, and willremain a mystery. Dr. Butler says that they do not copulate as other living creatures do.” (Thorley: Melisselogia. Section viii.)
The observations of Huber and others have disproved this opinion. Some infer that ignorance of physics proves ignorance ofphilosophy and theology. The difference between matter and mind is so great, that erroneous opinions in one province arecompatible with correct ones in the other. It does not follow that because Augustin had wrong notions about bees, and noknowledge at all of the steam engine and telegraph, his knowledge of God and the soul was inferior to that of a modernmaterialist.—W.G.T.S.]
384[The English translator renders “virtus” in its secondary sense of “goodness.” Augustin employs it here, in its primarysense of “energy,” “force.”—W.G.T.S.]
385
1 Cor. iii. 6.
386
Phil. i. 18.

82

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

creates all things, in like manner as agriculture is to the soil. Wherefore I can no more call the badangels, evoked by magic arts, the creators of the frogs and serpents, than I can say that bad men
were creators of the corn crop, which I see to have sprung up through their labor.
15. Just as Jacob, again, was not the creator of the colors in the flocks, because he placed thevarious colored rods for the several mothers, as they drank, to look at in conceiving.387 Yet neither
were the cattle themselves creators of the variety of their own offspring, because the variegatedimage, impressed through their eyes by the sight of the varied rods, clave to their soul, but could
affect the body that was animated by the spirit thus affected only through sympathy with thiscommingling, so far as to stain with color the tender beginnings of their offspring. For that they
are so affected from themselves, whether the soul from the body, or the body from the soul, arises
in truth from suitable reasons, which immutably exist in that highest wisdom of God Himself, which
no extent of place contains; and which, while it is itself unchangeable, yet quits not one even of
those things which are changeable, because there is not one of them that is not created by itself.
For it was the unchangeable and invisible reason of the wisdom of God, by which all things are
created, which caused not rods, but cattle, to be born from cattle; but that the color of the cattle
conceived should be in any degree influenced by the variety of the rods, came to pass through thesoul of the pregnant cattle being affected through their eyes from without, and so according to its
own measure drawing inwardly within itself the rule of formation, which it received from theinnermost power of its own Creator. How great, however, may be the power of the soul in affecting
and changing corporeal substance (although certainly it cannot be called the creator of the body,
because every cause of changeable and sensible substance, and all its measure and number andweight, by which are brought to pass both its being at all and its being of such and such a nature,arise from the intelligible and unchangeable life, which is above all things, and which reaches evento the most distant and earthly things), is a very copious subject, and one not now necessary. But
I thought the act of Jacob about the cattle should be noticed, for this reason, viz. in order that it
might be perceived that, if the man who thus placed those rods cannot be called the creator of thecolors in the lambs and kids; nor yet even the souls themselves of the mothers, which colored theseeds conceived in the flesh by the image of variegated color, conceived through the eyes of thebody, so far as nature permitted it; much less can it be said that the creators of the frogs and serpentswere the bad angels, through whom the magicians of Pharaoh then made them.

Chapter 9.—The Original Cause of All Things is from God.
16. For it is one thing to make and administer the creature from the innermost and highest
turning-point of causation, which He alone does who is God the Creator; but quite another thing
to apply some operation from without in proportion to the strength and faculties assigned to each
by Him, so that what is created may come forth into being at this time or at that, and in this or thatway. For all these things in the way of original and beginning have already been created in a kind

387

Gen. xxx. 41.

83

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffof texture of the elements, but they come forth when they get the opportunity.388 For as mothers
are pregnant with young, so the world itself is pregnant with the causes of things that are born;which are not created in it, except from that highest essence, where nothing either springs up ordies, either begins to be or ceases. But the applying from without of adventitious causes, which,although they are not natural, yet are to be applied according to nature, in order that those things
which are contained and hidden in the secret bosom of nature may break forth and be outwardly
created in some way by the unfolding of the proper measures and numbers and weights which they
have received in secret from Him “who has ordered all things in measure and number and weight:”389
this is not only in the power of bad angels, but also of bad men, as I have shown above by theexample of agriculture.
17. But lest the somewhat different condition of animals should trouble any one, in that they
have the breath of life with the sense of desiring those things that are according to nature, and of
avoiding those things that are contrary to it; we must consider also, how many men there are whoknow from what herbs or flesh, or from what juices or liquids you please, of whatever sort, whether
so placed or so buried, or so bruised or so mixed, this or that animal is commonly born; yet who
can be so foolish as to dare to call himself the creator of these animals? Is it, therefore, to be
wondered at, if just as any, the most worthless of men, can know whence such or such worms andflies are produced; so the evil angels in proportion to the subtlety of their perceptions discern inthe more hidden seeds of the elements whence frogs and serpents are produced, and so throughcertain and known opportune combinations applying these seeds by secret movements, cause them
to be created, but do not create them? Only men do not marvel at those things that are usually doneby men. But if any one chance to wonder at the quickness of those growths, in that those living
beings were so quickly made, let him consider how even this may be brought about by men inproportion to the measure of human capability. For whence is it that the same bodies generate
worms more quickly in summer than in winter, or in hotter than in colder places? Only these things
are applied by men with so much the more difficulty, in proportion as their earthly and sluggish
members are wanting in subtlety of perception, and in rapidity of bodily motion. And hence it arisesthat in the case of any kind of angels, in proportion as it is easier for them to draw out the proximate
causes from the elements, so much the more marvellous is their rapidity in works of this kind.
18. But He only is the creator who is the chief former of these things. Neither can any one bethis, unless He with whom primarily rests the measure, number, and weight of all things existing;and He is God the one Creator, by whose unspeakable power it comes to pass, also, that what theseangels were able to do if they were permitted, they are therefore not able to do because they are
not permitted. For there is no other reason why they who made frogs and serpents were not able to388[This is the same as the theological distinction between substances and their modifications. “The former,” says Howe,“are the proper object of creation strictly taken; the modifications of things are not properly created, in the strictest sense ofcreation, but are educed and brought forth out of those substantial things that were themselves created, or made out of
nothing.”—Germs are originated ex nihilo, and fall under creation proper; their evolution and development takes place according
to the nature and inherent force of the germ, and falls under providence, in distinction from creation. See the writer’s Theological
Essays, 133–137.—W.G.T.S.]
389
Wisd. xi. 20.

84

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

make the most minute flies, unless because the greater power of God was present prohibiting them,through the Holy Spirit; which even the magicians themselves confessed, saying, “This is the finger
of God.”390 But what they are able to do by nature, yet cannot do, because they are prohibited; andwhat the very condition of their nature itself does not suffer them to do; it is difficult, nay, impossible,
for man to search out, unless through that gift of God which the apostle mentions when he says,“To another the discerning of spirits.”391 For we know that a man can walk, yet that he cannot do
so if he is not permitted; but that he cannot fly, even if he be permitted. So those angels, also, areable to do certain things if they are permitted by more powerful angels, according to the supremecommandment of God; but cannot do certain other things, not even if they are permitted by them;because He does not permit from whom they have received such and such a measure of natural
powers: who, even by His angels, does not usually permit what He has given them power to beable to do.
19. Excepting, therefore, those corporeal things which are done in the order of nature in aperfectly usual series of times, as e.g., the rising and setting of the stars, the generations and deathsof animals, the innumerable diversities of seeds and buds, the vapors and the clouds, the snow andthe rain, the lightnings and the thunder, the thunderbolts and the hail, the winds and the fire, coldand heat, and all like things; excepting also those which in the same order of nature occur rarely,
such as eclipses, unusual appearances of stars, and monsters, and earthquakes, and such like;—allthese, I say, are to be excepted, of which indeed the first and chief cause is only the will of God;whence also in the Psalm, when some things of this kind had been mentioned, “Fire and hail, snow
and vapor, stormy wind,” lest any one should think those to be brought about either by chance or
only from corporeal causes, or even from such as are spiritual, but exist apart from the will of God,
it is added immediately, “fulfilling His word.”392

Chapter 10.—In How Many Ways the Creature is to Be Taken by Way of Sign. The Eucharist.
Excepting, therefore, all these things as I just now said, there are some also of another kind;which, although from the same corporeal substance, are yet brought within reach of our senses inorder to announce something from God, and these are properly called miracles and signs; yet is not
the person of God Himself assumed in all things which are announced to us by the Lord God. When,however, that person is assumed, it is sometimes made manifest as an angel; sometimes in thatform which is not an angel in his own proper being, although it is ordered and ministered by anangel. Again, when it is assumed in that form which is not an angel in his own proper being;sometimes in this case it is a body itself already existing, assumed after some kind of change, inorder to make that message manifest; sometimes it is one that comes into being for the purpose,and that being accomplished, is discarded. Just as, also, when men are the messengers, sometimes
they speak the words of God in their own person, as when it is premised, “The Lord said,” or, “Thus

390
391
392

Ex. vii. 12, and viii. 7, 18, 19.
1 Cor. xii. 10.
Ps. cxlviii. 8.

85

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

saith the Lord,”393 or any other such phrase, but sometimes without any such prefix, they take uponthemselves the very person of God, as e.g.: “I will instruct thee, and teach thee in the way whereinthou shalt go:”394 so, not only in word, but also in act, the signifying of the person of God is imposed
upon the prophet, in order that he may bear that person in the ministering of the prophecy; just as
he, for instance, bore that person who divided his garment into twelve parts, and gave ten of themto the servant of King Solomon, to the future king of Israel.395 Sometimes, also, a thing which was
not a prophet in his own proper self, and which existed already among earthly things, was assumed
in order to signify this; as Jacob, when he had seen the dream, upon waking up did with the stone,
which when asleep he had under his head.396 Sometimes a thing is made in the same kind, for themere purpose; so as either to continue a little while in existence, as that brazen serpent was able todo which was lifted up in the wilderness,397 and as written records are able to do likewise; or so as
to pass away after having accomplished its ministry, as the bread made for the purpose is consumed
in the receiving of the sacrament.
20. But because these things are known to men, in that they are done by men, they may wellmeet with reverence as being holy things, but they cannot cause wonder as being miracles. And
therefore those things which are done by angels are the more wonderful to us, in that they are moredifficult and more known; but they are known and easy to them as being their own actions. Anangel speaks in the person of God to man, saying, “I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac,and the God of Jacob;” the Scripture having said just before, “The angel of the Lord appeared tohim.”398 And a man also speaks in the person of God, saying, “Hear, O my people, and I will testify
unto thee, O Israel: I am the Lord thy God.”399 A rod was taken to serve as a sign, and was changed
into a serpent by angelical power;400 but although that power is wanting to man, yet a stone wastaken also by man for a similar sign.401 There is a wide difference between the deed of the angeland the deed of the man. The former is both to be wondered at and to be understood, the latter only
to be understood. That which is understood from both, is perhaps one and the same; but those thingsfrom which it is understood, are different. Just as if the name of God were written both in gold andin ink; the former would be the more precious, the latter the more worthless; yet that which issignified in both is one and the same. And although the serpent that came from Moses’ rod signified
the same thing as Jacob’s stone, yet Jacob’s stone signified something better than did the serpentsof the magicians. For as the anointing of the stone signified Christ in the flesh, in which He wasanointed with the oil of gladness above His fellows;402 so the rod of Moses, turned into a serpent,signified Christ Himself made obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.403 Whence it is

393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403

Jer. xxxi. 1, 2.
Ps. xxxii. 8.
1 Kings xi. 30, 31.
Gen. xxviii. 18.
Num. xxi. 9.
Ex. iii. 6, 2.
Ps. lxxxi. 8, 10.
Ex. vii. 10.
Gen. xxviii. 18.
Ps. xlv. 7.
Phil. ii. 9.

86

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

said, “And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted
up, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life;”404 just as bygazing on that serpent which was lifted up in the wilderness, they did not perish by the bites of theserpents. For “our old man is crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be destroyed.”405 For
by the serpent death is understood, which was wrought by the serpent in paradise,406 the mode ofspeech expressing the effect by the efficient. Therefore the rod passed into the serpent, Christ into
death; and the serpent again into the rod, whole Christ with His body into the resurrection; which
body is the Church;407 and this shall be in the end of time, signified by the tail, which Moses held,in order that it might return into a rod.408 But the serpents of the magicians, like those who are deadin the world, unless by believing in Christ they shall have been as it were swallowed up by,409 andhave entered into, His body, will not be able to rise again in Him. Jacob’s stone, therefore, as I said,
signified something better than did the serpents of the magicians; yet the deed of the magicians
was much more wonderful. But these things in this way are no hindrance to the understanding of
the matter; just as if the name of a man were written in gold, and that of God in ink.
21. What man, again, knows how the angels made or took those clouds and fires in order tosignify the message they were bearing, even if we supposed that the Lord or the Holy Spirit was
manifested in those corporeal forms? Just as infants do not know of that which is placed upon thealtar and consumed after the performance of the holy celebration, whence or in what manner it ismade, or whence it is taken for religious use. And if they were never to learn from their own
experience or that of others, and never to see that species of thing except during the celebration of
the sacrament, when it is being offered and given; and if it were told them by the most weighty
authority whose body and blood it is; they will believe nothing else, except that the Lord absolutely
appeared in this form to the eyes of mortals, and that that liquid actually flowed from the piercingof a side410 which resembled this. But it is certainly a useful caution to myself, that I should remember
what my own powers are, and admonish my brethren that they also remember what theirs are, lest
human infirmity pass on beyond what is safe. For how the angels do these things, or rather, how
God does these things by His angels, and how far He wills them to be done even by the bad angels,
whether by permitting, or commanding, or compelling, from the hidden seat of His own supreme
power; this I can neither penetrate by the sight of the eyes, nor make clear by assurance of reason,nor be carried on to comprehend it by reach of intellect, so as to speak thereupon to all questions
that may be asked respecting these matters, as certainly as if I were an angel, or a prophet, or an
apostle. “For the thoughts of mortal men are miserable, and our devices are but uncertain. For thecorruptible body presseth down the soul, and the earthly tabernacle weigheth down the mind, thatmuseth upon many things. And hardly do we guess aright at things that are upon earth, and withlabor do we find the things that are before us; but the things that are in heaven, who hath searchedout?” But because it goes on to say, “And Thy counsel who hath known, except Thou give wisdom,

404
405
406
407
408
409
410

John iii. 14, 15.
Rom. vi. 6.
Gen. iii.
Col. i. 24.
Ex. iv. 4.
Ex. vii. 12.
John xix. 34.

87

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

and send Thy Holy Spirit from above;”411 therefore we refrain indeed from searching out the things
which are in heaven, under which kind are contained both angelical bodies according to their properdignity, and any corporeal action of those bodies; yet, according to the Spirit of God sent to us fromabove, and to His grace imparted to our minds, I dare to say confidently, that neither God the Father,nor His Word, nor His Spirit, which is the one God, is in any way changeable in regard to thatwhich He is, and whereby He is that which He is; and much less is in this regard visible. Since
there are no doubt some things changeable, yet not visible, as are our thoughts, and memories, andwills, and the whole incorporeal creature; but there is nothing that is visible that is not alsochangeable.

Chapter 11.—The Essence of God Never Appeared in Itself. Divine Appearances to the Fathers
Wrought by the Ministry of Angels. An Objection Drawn from the Mode of Speech Removed.
That the Appearing of God to Abraham Himself, Just as that to Moses, Was Wrought by Angels.
The Same Thing is Proved by the Law Being Given to Moses by Angels. What Has Been Saidin This Book, and What Remains to Be Said in the Next.
Wherefore the substance, or, if it is better so to say, the essence of God,412 wherein we
understand, in proportion to our measure, in however small a degree, the Father, the Son, and theHoly Spirit, since it is in no way changeable, can in no way in its proper self be visible.
22. It is manifest, accordingly, that all those appearances to the fathers, when God was presented
to them according to His own dispensation, suitable to the times, were wrought through the creature.
And if we cannot discern in what manner He wrought them by ministry of angels, yet we say thatthey were wrought by angels; but not from our own power of discernment, lest we should seem toany one to be wise beyond our measure, whereas we are wise so as to think soberly, as God hathdealt to us the measure of faith;413 and we believe, and therefore speak.414 For the authority is extantof the divine Scriptures, from which our reason ought not to turn aside; nor by leaving the solid
support of the divine utterance, to fall headlong over the precipice of its own surmisings, in matterswherein neither the perceptions of the body rule, nor the clear reason of the truth shines forth. Now,certainly, it is written most clearly in the Epistle to the Hebrews, when the dispensation of the New
Testament was to be distinguished from the dispensation of the Old, according to the fitness ofages and of times, that not only those visible things, but also the word itself, was wrought by angels.
For it is said thus: “But to which of the angels said He at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I
make thine enemies thy footstool? Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister forthem who shall be heirs of salvation?”415 Whence it appears that all those things were not only

411

Wisd. ix. 14–17.
[“Substance,” from sub stans, is a passive term, denoting latent and potential being. “Essence,” from esse, is an active
term, denoting energetic being. The schoolmen, as Augustin does here, preferred the latter term to the former, though employing
both to designate the divine nature.—W.G.T.S.]
413
Rom. xii. 3.
414
2 Cor. iv. 13.
415
Heb. i. 13, 14.
412

88

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

wrought by angels, but wrought also on our account, that is, on account of the people of God, towhom is promised the inheritance of eternal life. As it is written also to the Corinthians, “Now allthese things happened unto them in a figure: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom
the ends of the world are come.”416 And then, demonstrating by plain consequence that as at thattime the word was spoken by the angels, so now by the Son; “Therefore,” he says, “we ought togive the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest at any time we should let themslip. For if the word spoken by angels was steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience
received a just recompense of reward; how shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation?” And
then, as though you asked, What salvation?—in order to show that he is now speaking of the New
Testament, that is, of the word which was spoken not by angels, but by the Lord, he says, “Whichat the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard Him;
God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and giftsof the Holy Ghost, according to His own will.”417
23. But some one may say, Why then is it written, “The Lord said to Moses;” and not, rather,
The angel said to Moses? Because, when the crier proclaims the words of the judge, it is not usually
written in the record, so and so the crier said, but so and so the judge. In like manner also, when
the holy prophet speaks, although we say, The prophet said, we mean nothing else to be understoodthan that the Lord said; and if we were to say, The Lord said, we should not put the prophet aside,
but only intimate who spake by him. And, indeed, these Scriptures often reveal the angel to be theLord, of whose speaking it is from time to time said, “the Lord said,” as we have shown already.
But on account of those who, since the Scripture in that place specifies an angel, will have the Sonof God Himself and in Himself to be understood, because He is called an angel by the prophet, as
announcing the will of His Father and of Himself; I have therefore thought fit to produce a plainer
testimony from this epistle, where it is not said by an angel, but “by angels.”
24. For Stephen, too, in the Acts of the Apostles, relates these things in that manner in which
they are also written in the Old Testament: “Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken,” he says; “TheGod of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia.”418 But lest any
one should think that the God of glory appeared then to the eyes of any mortal in that which He isin Himself, he goes on to say that an angel appeared to Moses. “Then fled Moses,” he says, “at thatsaying, and was a stranger in the land of Midian, where he begat two sons. And when forty years
were expired, there appeared to him in the wilderness of mount Sinai an angel of the Lord in aflame of fire in a bush. When Moses saw it, he wondered at the sight: and as he drew near to behold
it, the voice of the Lord came unto him, saying, I am the God of thy fathers, the God of Abraham,
and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. Then Moses trembled, and durst not behold. Then said
the Lord to him, Put off thy shoes from thy feet,”419 etc. Here, certainly, he speaks both of angeland of Lord; and of the same as the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob;
as is written in Genesis.
25. Can there be any one who will say that the Lord appeared to Moses by an angel, but to
Abraham by Himself? Let us not answer this question from Stephen, but from the book itself,
416
417
418
419

1 Cor. x. 11.
Heb. ii. 1–4.
Acts vii. 2.
Ex. ii. 15 and iii. 7, and Acts vii. 29–33.

89

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

whence Stephen took his narrative. For, pray, because it is written, “And the Lord God said unto
Abraham;”420 and a little after, “And the Lord God appeared unto Abraham;”421 were these things,
for this reason, not done by angels? Whereas it is said in like manner in another place, “And the
Lord appeared to him in the plains of Mamre, as he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day;” andyet it is added immediately, “And he lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him:”422of whom we have already spoken. For how will these people, who either will not rise from thewords to the meaning, or easily throw themselves down from the meaning to the words,—how, I
say, will they be able to explain that God was seen in three men, except they confess that they wereangels, as that which follows also shows? Because it is not said an angel spoke or appeared to him,
will they therefore venture to say that the vision and voice granted to Moses was wrought by anangel because it is so written, but that God appeared and spake in His own substance to Abraham
because there is no mention made of an angel? What of the fact, that even in respect to Abrahaman angel is not left unmentioned? For when his son was ordered to be offered up as a sacrifice, weread thus: “And it came to pass after these things that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him,
Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am. And He said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac,
whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt-offering
upon one of the mountains that I will tell thee of.” Certainly God is here mentioned, not an angel.
But a little afterwards Scripture hath it thus: “And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took theknife to slay his son. And the angel of the Lord called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham,
Abraham: and he said, Here am I. And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou
anything unto him.” What can be answered to this? Will they say that God commanded that Isaacshould be slain, and that an angel forbade it? and further, that the father himself, in opposition to
the decree of God, who had commanded that he should be slain, obeyed the angel, who had bidden
him spare him? Such an interpretation is to be rejected as absurd. Yet not even for it, gross andabject as it is, does Scripture leave any room, for it immediately adds: “For now I know that thoufearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son, on account of me.”423 What is“on account of me,” except on account of Him who had commanded him to be slain? Was then the
God of Abraham the same as the angel, or was it not rather God by an angel? Consider what follows.
Here, certainly, already an angel has been most clearly spoken of; yet notice the context: “And
Abraham lifted up his eyes, and looked, and behold behind him a ram caught in a thicket by hishorns: and Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt-offering in the stead of
his son. And Abraham called the name of that place, The Lord saw:424 as it is said to this day, In
the mount the Lord was seen.”425 Just as that which a little before God said by an angel, “For now
I know that thou fearest God;” not because it was to be understood that God then came to know,
but that He brought it to pass that through God Abraham himself came to know what strength ofheart he had to obey God, even to the sacrificing of his only son: after that mode of speech in which
the effect is signified by the efficient,—as cold is said to be sluggish, because it makes men sluggish;

420
421
422
423
424
425

Gen. xii. 1.
Gen. xvii. 1.
Gen. xviii. 1, 2.
Propter me.
Dominus vidit.
Dominus visus est.

90

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

so that He was therefore said to know, because He had made Abraham himself to know, who mightwell have not discerned the firmness of his own faith, had it not been proved by such a trial. So
here, too, Abraham called the name of the place “The Lord saw,” that is, caused Himself to be seen.
For he goes on immediately to say, “As it is said to this day, In the mount the Lord was seen.” Hereyou see the same angel is called Lord: wherefore, unless because the Lord spake by the angel? But
if we pass on to that which follows, the angel altogether speaks as a prophet, and reveals expressly
that God is speaking by the angel. “And the angel of the Lord,” he says, “called unto Abraham outof heaven the second time, and said, By myself I have sworn, saith the Lord; for because thou hastdone this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son, on account of me,”426 etc. Certainly
these words, viz. that he by whom the Lord speaks should say, “Thus saith the Lord,” are commonlyused by the prophets also. Does the Son of God say of the Father, “The Lord saith,” while He
Himself is that Angel of the Father? What then? Do they not see how hard pressed they are about
these three men who appeared to Abraham, when it had been said before, “The Lord appeared tohim?” Were they not angels because they are called men? Let them read Daniel, saying, “Behold
the man Gabriel.”427
26. But why do we delay any longer to stop their mouths by another most clear and most weighty
proof, where not an angel in the singular nor men in the plural are spoken of, but simply angels;by whom not any particular word was wrought, but the Law itself is most distinctly declared to begiven; which certainly none of the faithful doubts that God gave to Moses for the control of thechildren of Israel, or yet, that it was given by angels. So Stephen speaks: “Ye stiff-necked,” hesays, “and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did,so do ye. Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them whichshowed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers andmurderers: who have received the Law by the disposition of angels,428 and have not kept it.”429
What is more evident than this? What more strong than such an authority? The Law, indeed, wasgiven to that people by the disposition of angels; but the advent of our Lord Jesus Christ was by itprepared and pre-announced; and He Himself, as the Word of God, was in some wonderful andunspeakable manner in the angels, by whose disposition the Law itself was given. And hence He
said in the Gospel, “For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.”430
Therefore then the Lord was speaking by the angels; and the son of God, who was to be the Mediatorof God and men, from the seed of Abraham, was preparing His own advent by the angels, that He
might find some by whom He would be received, confessing themselves guilty, whom the Lawunfulfilled had made transgressors. And hence the apostle also says to the Galatians, “Wherefore
then serveth the Law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom
the promise was made, which [seed] was ordered431 through angels in the hand of a mediator;”432
that is, ordered through angels in His own hand. For He was not born in limitation, but in power.

426
427
428
429
430
431
432

Gen. xxii.
Dan. ix. 21.
In edictis angelorum.
Acts vii. 51–53.
John v. 46.
Dispositum.
Gal. iii. 19.

91

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

But you learn in another place that he does not mean any one of the angels as a mediator, but the
Lord Jesus Christ Himself, in so far as He deigned to be made man: “For there is one God,” hesays, “and one Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus.”433 Hence that passover inthe killing of the lamb:434 hence all those things which are figuratively spoken in the Law, of Christ
to come in the flesh, and to suffer, but also to rise again, which Law was given by the dispositionof angels; in which angels, were certainly the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit; and in which,sometimes the Father, sometimes the Son, sometimes the Holy Spirit, and sometimes God, without
any distinction of person, was figuratively signified by them, although appearing in visible andsensible forms, yet by His own creature, not by His substance, in order to the seeing of which,hearts are cleansed through all those things which are seen by the eyes and heard by the ears.
27. But now, as I think, that which we had undertaken to show in this book has been sufficiently
discussed and demonstrated, according to our capacity; and it has been established, both by probablereason, so far as a man, or rather, so far as I am able, and by strength of authority, so far as thedivine declarations from the Holy Scriptures have been made clear, that those words and bodily
appearances which were given to these ancient fathers of ours before the incarnation of the Saviour,when God was said to appear, were wrought by angels: whether themselves speaking or doing
something in the person of God, as we have shown that the prophets also were wont to do, or
assuming from the creature that which they themselves were not, wherein God might be shown ina figure to men; which manner of showing also, Scripture teaches by many examples, that theprophets, too, did not omit. It remains, therefore, now for us to consider,—since both in the Lord
as born of a virgin, and in the Holy Spirit descending in a corporeal form like a dove,435 and in the
tongues like as of fire, which appeared with a sound from heaven on the day of Pentecost, after the
ascension of the Lord,436 it was not the Word of God Himself by His own substance, in which He
is equal and eternal with the Father, nor the Spirit of the Father and of the Son by His own substance,
in which He Himself also is equal and co-eternal with both, but assuredly a creature, such as could
be formed and exist in these fashions, which appeared to corporeal and mortal senses,—it remains,
I say, to consider what difference there is between these manifestations and those which were properto the Son of God and to the Holy Spirit, although wrought by the visible creature;437 which subject
we shall more conveniently begin in another book.

Book IV.
————————————

433

1 Tim. ii. 5.
Ex. xii.
435
Matt. iii. 16.
436
Acts ii. 1–4.
437
[The reference here is to the difference between a theophany, and an incarnation; already alluded to, in the note on p.
149.—W.G.T.S.]
434

92

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Explains for what the Son of God was sent, viz, that by Christ’s dying for sinners, we were to beconvinced how great is God’s love for us, and also what manner of men we are whom He loved.
That the Word came in the flesh, to the purpose also of enabling us to be so cleansed as tocontemplate and cleave to God. That our double death was abolished by His death, being one
and single. And hereupon is discussed, how the single of our Saviour harmonizes to salvation
with our double; and the perfection is treated at length of the senary number, to which the ratio
itself of single to double is reducible. That all are gathered together from many into one by the
one Mediator of life, viz. Christ, through Whom alone is wrought the true cleansing of the soul.
Further it is demonstrated that the Son of God, although made less by being sent, on accountof the form of a servant which He took, is not therefore less than the Father according to theform of God, because He was sent by Himself: and that the same account is to be given of thesending of the Holy Spirit.
Preface.—The Knowledge of God is to Be Sought from God.
1. Theknowledge of things terrestrial and celestial is commonly thought much of by men. Yet
those doubtless judge better who prefer to that knowledge, the knowledge of themselves; and thatmind is more praiseworthy which knows even its own weakness, than that which, without regard
to this, searches out, and even comes to know, the ways of the stars, or which holds fast suchknowledge already acquired, while ignorant of the way by which itself to enter into its own proper
health and strength. But if any one has already become awake towards God, kindled by the warmthof the Holy Spirit, and in the love of God has become vile in his own eyes; and through wishing,
yet not having strength to come in unto Him, and through the light He gives, has given heed tohimself, and has found himself, and has learned that his own filthiness cannot mingle with His
purity; and feels it sweet to weep and to entreat Him, that again and again He will have compassion,
until he have put off all his wretchedness; and to pray confidently, as having already received offree gift the pledge of salvation through his only Saviour and Enlightener of man:—such an one,so acting, and so lamenting, knowledge does not puff up, because charity edifieth;438 for he has
preferred knowledge to knowledge, he has preferred to know his own weakness, rather than toknow the walls of the world, the foundations of the earth, and the pinnacles of heaven. And byobtaining this knowledge, he has obtained also sorrow;439 but sorrow for straying away from thedesire of reaching his own proper country, and the Creator of it, his own blessed God. And if among
men such as these, in the family of Thy Christ, O Lord my God, I groan among Thy poor, give meout of Thy bread to answer men who do not hunger and thirst after righteousness, but are sated andabound.440 But it is the vain image of those things that has sated them, not Thy truth, which they
have repelled and shrunk from, and so fall into their own vanity. I certainly know how many figments
the human heart gives birth to. And what is my own heart but a human heart? But I pray the Godof my heart, that I may not vomit forth (eructuem) into these writings any of these figments forsolid truths, but that there may pass into them only what the breath of His truth has breathed into
438
439
440

1 Cor. viii. 1.
Eccles. i. 18.
Matt. v. 6.

93

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffme; cast out though I am from the sight of His eyes,441 and striving from afar to return by the way
which the divinity of His only-begotten Son has made by His humanity. And this truth, changeable
though I am, I so far drink in, as far as in it I see nothing changeable: neither in place and time, as
is the case with bodies; nor in time alone, and in a certain sense place, as with the thoughts of ourown spirits; nor in time alone, and not even in any semblance of place, as with some of the reasoningsof our own minds. For the essence of God, whereby He is, has altogether nothing changeable,neither in eternity, nor in truth, nor in will; since there truth is eternal, love eternal; and there loveis true, eternity true; and there eternity is loved, and truth is loved.

Chapter 1.—We are Made Perfect by Acknowledgement of Our Own Weakness. The Incarnate
Word Dispels Our Darkness.
2. But since we are exiled from the unchangeable joy, yet neither cut off nor torn away from it
so that we should not seek eternity, truth, blessedness, even in those changeable and temporal things(for we wish neither to die, nor to be deceived, nor to be troubled); visions have been sent to us
from heaven suitable to our state of pilgrimage, in order to remind us that what we seek is not here,
but that from this pilgrimage we must return thither, whence unless we originated we should nothere seek these things. And first we have had to be persuaded how much God loved us, lest fromdespair we should not dare to look up to Him. And we needed to be shown also what manner ofmen we are whom He loved, lest being proud, as if of our own merits, we should recede the morefrom Him, and fail the more in our own strength. And hence He so dealt with us, that we might therather profit by His strength, and that so in the weakness of humility the virtue of charity might beperfected. And this is intimated in the Psalm, where it is said, “Thou, O God, didst send a
spontaneous rain, whereby Thou didst make Thine inheritance perfect, when it was weary.”442 For
by “spontaneous rain” nothing else is meant than grace, not rendered to merit, but given freely,443
whence also it is called grace; for He gave it, not because we were worthy, but because He willed.
And knowing this, we shall not trust in ourselves; and this is to be made “weak.” But He Himself
makes us perfect, who says also to the Apostle Paul, “My grace is sufficient for thee, for my strength
is made perfect in weakness.”444 Man, then, was to be persuaded how much God loved us, and whatmanner of men we were whom He loved; the former, lest we should despair; the latter, lest weshould be proud. And this most necessary topic the apostle thus explains: “But God commendeth,”he says, “His love towards us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much morethen, being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. For if, when
we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son; much more, being reconciled,
we shall be saved by His life.”445 Also in another place: “What,” he says, “shall we then say to

441
442
443
444
445

Ps. xxxi. 22.
Ps. lxviii. 9.—Pluviam voluntariam.
Gratis.
2 Cor. xii. 9.
Rom. v. 8–10—Donavit.

94

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

these things? If God be for us, who can be against us? He that spared not His own Son, but delivered
Him up for us all, how has He not with Him also freely given us all things?”446 Now that which isdeclared to us as already done, was shown also to the ancient righteous as about to be done; thatthrough the same faith they themselves also might be humbled, and so made weak; and might bemade weak, and so perfected.
3. Because therefore the Word of God is One, by which all things were made, which is theunchangeable truth, all things are simultaneously therein, potentially and unchangeably; not only
those things which are now in this whole creation, but also those which have been and those whichshall be. And therein they neither have been, nor shall be, but only are; and all things are life, andall things are one; or rather it is one being and one life. For all things were so made by Him, thatwhatsoever was made in them was not made in Him, but was life in Him. Since, “in the beginning,”
the Word was not made, but “the Word was with God, and the Word was God, and all things weremade by Him;” neither had all things been made by Him, unless He had Himself been before allthings and not made. But in those things which were made by Him, even body, which is not life,
would not have been made by Him, except it had been life in Him before it was made. For “thatwhich was made was already life in Him;” and not life of any kind soever: for the soul also is thelife of the body, but this too is made, for it is changeable; and by what was it made, except by theunchangeable Word of God? For “all things were made by Him; and without Him was not anything
made that was made.” “What, therefore, was made was already life in Him;” and not any kind oflife, but “the life [which] was the light of men;” the light certainly of rational minds, by which men
differ from beasts, and therefore are men. Therefore not corporeal light, which is the light of theflesh, whether it shine from heaven, or whether it be lighted by earthly fires; nor that of humanflesh only, but also that of beasts, and down even to the minutest of worms. For all these things seethat light: but that life was the light of men; nor is it far from any one of us, for in it “we live, andmove, and have our being.”447

Chapter 2.—How We are Rendered Apt for the Perception of Truth Through the Incarnate Word.
4. But “the light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not.” Now the “darkness”
is the foolish minds of men, made blind by vicious desires and unbelief. And that the Word, bywhom all things were made, might care for these and heal them, “The Word was made flesh, anddwelt among us.” For our enlightening is the partaking of the Word, namely, of that life which is
the light of men. But for this partaking we were utterly unfit, and fell short of it, on account of theuncleanness of sins. Therefore we were to be cleansed. And further, the one cleansing of theunrighteous and of the proud is the blood of the Righteous One, and the humbling of God Himself;448
that we might be cleansed through Him, made as He was what we are by nature, and what we are
not by sin, that we might contemplate God, which by nature we are not. For by nature we are not

446
447
448

Rom. viii. 31, 32.
Acts xvii. 27, 28.
John i. 1, 14.

95

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

God: by nature we are men, by sin we are not righteous. Wherefore God, made a righteous man,interceded with God for man the sinner. For the sinner is not congruous to the righteous, but man
is congruous to man. By joining therefore to us the likeness of His humanity, He took away theunlikeness of our unrighteousness; and by being made partaker of our mortality, He made us
partakers of His divinity. For the death of the sinner springing from the necessity of comdemnation
is deservedly abolished by the death of the Righteous One springing from the free choice of His
compassion, while His single [death and resurrection] answers to our double [death andresurrection].449 For this congruity, or suitableness, or concord, or consonance, or whatever more
appropriate word there may be, whereby one is [united] to two, is of great weight in all compacting,or better, perhaps, co-adaptation, of the creature. For (as it just occurs to me) what I mean is preciselythat co-adaptation which the Greeks call ƒ μ . However this is not the place to set forth the powerof that consonance of single to double which is found especially in us, and which is naturally so
implanted in us (and by whom, except by Him who created us?), that not even the ignorant can failto perceive it, whether when singing themselves or hearing others. For by this it is that treble andbass voices are in harmony, so that any one who in his note departs from it, offends extremely, notonly trained skill, of which the most part of men are devoid, but the very sense of hearing. To
demonstrate this, needs no doubt a long discourse; but any one who knows it, may make it plain
to the very ear in a rightly ordered monochord.

Chapter 3.—The One Death and Resurrection of The Body of Christ Harmonizes with Our Double
Death and Resurrection of Body and Soul, to the Effect of Salvation. In What Way the Single
Death of Christ is Bestowed Upon Our Double Death.
5. But for our present need we must discuss, so far as God gives us power, in what manner the
single of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ answers to, and is, so to say, in harmony with ourdouble to the effect of salvation. We certainly, as no Christian doubts, are dead both in soul andbody: in soul, because of sin; in body, because of the punishment of sin, and through this also inbody because of sin. And to both these parts of ourselves, that is, both to soul and to body, there
was need both of a medicine and of resurrection, that what had been changed for the worse might
be renewed for the better. Now the death of the soul is ungodliness, and the death of the body is
corruptibility, through which comes also a departure of the soul from the body. For as the soul dieswhen God leaves it, so the body dies when the soul leaves it; whereby the former becomes foolish,
the latter lifeless. For the soul is raised up again by repentance, and the renewing of life is begunin the body still mortal by faith, by which men believe on Him who justifies the ungodly;450 and it
is increased and strengthened by good habits from day to day, as the inner man is renewed more
and more.451 But the body, being as it were the outward man, the longer this life lasts is so muchthe more corrupted, either by age or by disease, or by various afflictions, until it come to that last

449
450
451

[This singleness and doubleness is explained in chapter 3.—W.G.T.S.]
Rom. iv. 5.
2 Cor. iv. 16.

96

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

affliction which all call death. And its resurrection is delayed until the end; when also our justification
itself shall be perfected ineffably. For then we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.452
But now, so long as the corruptible body presseth down the soul,453 and human life upon earth is
all temptation,454 in His sight shall no man living be justified,455 in comparison of the righteousness
in which we shall be made equal with the angels, and of the glory which shall be revealed in us.
But why mention more proofs respecting the difference between the death of the soul and the deathof the body, when the Lord in one sentence of the Gospel has made either death easily distinguishable
by any one from the other, where He says, “Let the dead bury their dead”?456 For burial was thefitting disposal of a dead body. But by those who were to bury it He meant those who were deadin soul by the impiety of unbelief, such, namely, as are awakened when it is said, “Awake thou thatsleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light.”457 And there is a death which
the apostle denounces, saying of the widow, “But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she
liveth.”458 Therefore the soul, which was before ungodly and is now godly, is said to have comealive again from the dead and to live, on account of the righteousness of faith. But the body is not
only said to be about to die, on account of that departure of the soul which will be; but on accountof the great infirmity of flesh and blood it is even said to be now dead, in a certain place in the
Scriptures, namely, where the apostle says, that “the body is dead because of sin, but the spirit islife because of righteousness.”459 Now this life is wrought by faith, “since the just shall live byfaith.”460 But what follows? “But if the spirit of Him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell inyou, He that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by His Spirit
which dwelleth in you.”461
6. Therefore on this double death of ours our Saviour bestowed His own single death; and tocause both our resurrections, He appointed beforehand and set forth in mystery and type His own
one resurrection. For He was not a sinner or ungodly, that, as though dead in spirit, He should need
to be renewed in the inner man, and to be recalled as it were to the life of righteousness byrepentance; but being clothed in mortal flesh, and in that alone dying, in that alone rising again, inthat alone did He answer to both for us; since in it was wrought a mystery as regards the inner man,and a type as regards the outer. For it was in a mystery as regards our inner man, so as to signify
the death of our soul, that those words were uttered, not only in the Psalm, but also on the cross:“My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me?”462 To which words the apostle agrees, saying,“Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be destroyed,that henceforth we should not serve sin;” since by the crucifixion of the inner man are understood
the pains of repentance, and a certain wholesome agony of self-control, by which death the death
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462

1 John iii. 1.
Wisd. ix. 15.
Job. vii. 1.
Ps. cxliii. 2.
Matt. viii. 22.
Eph. v. 14.
1 Tim. v. 6.
Rom. viii. 10.
Rom. i. 17.
Rom. viii. 10, 11.
Ps. xxii. 1, and Matt. xxvii. 46.

97

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

of ungodliness is destroyed, and in which death God has left us. And so the body of sin is destroyed
through such a cross, that now we should not yield our members as instruments of unrighteousness
unto sin.463 Because, if even the inner man certainly is renewed day by day,464 yet undoubtedly it
is old before it is renewed. For that is done inwardly of which the same apostle speaks: “Put off
the old man, and put on the new;” which he goes on to explain by saying, “Wherefore, putting away
lying, speak every man truth.”465 But where is lying put away, unless inwardly, that he who speaketh
the truth from his heart may inhabit the holy hill of God?466 But the resurrection of the body of theLord is shown to belong to the mystery of our own inner resurrection, where, after He had risen,
He says to the woman, “Touch me not, for I am not yet ascended to my Father;”467 with whichmystery the apostle’s words agree, where he says, “If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things
which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God; set your thoughts468 on things
above.”469 For not to touch Christ, unless when He had ascended to the Father, means not to havethoughts470 of Christ after a fleshly manner. Again, the death of the flesh of our Lord contains atype of the death of our outer man, since it is by such suffering most of all that He exhorts His
servants that they should not fear those who kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul.471
Wherefore the apostle says, “That I may fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in
my flesh.”472 And the resurrection of the body of the Lord is found to contain a type of theresurrection of our outward man, because He says to His disciples, “Handle me, and see; for a spirit
hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.”473 And one of the disciples also, handling His scars,
exclaimed, “My Lord and my God!”474 And whereas the entire integrity of that flesh was apparent,
this was shown in that which He had said when exhorting His disciples: “There shall not a hair ofyour head perish.”475 For how comes it that first is said, “Touch me not, for I am not yet ascended
to my Father;”476 and how comes it that before He ascends to the Father, He actually is touched by
the disciples: unless because in the former the mystery of the inner man was intimated, in the lattera type was given of the outer man? Or can any one possibly be so without understanding, and soturned away from the truth, as to dare to say that He was touched by men before He ascended, but
by women when He had ascended? It was on account of this type, which went before in the Lord,of our future resurrection in the body, that the apostle says, “Christ the first-fruits; afterward theythat are Christ’s.”477 For it was the resurrection of the body to which this place refers, on account
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477

Rom. vi. 6, 13.
2 Cor. iv. 16.
Eph. iv. 22–25.
Ps. xv. 1, 3.
John xx. 17.
Sapite.
Col. iii. 1, 2.
Sapere.
Matt. x. 28.
Col. i. 24.
Luke xxiv. 39.
John xx. 28.
Luke xxi. 18.
John xx. 17.
1 Cor. xv. 23.

98

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffof which he also says, “Who has changed our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto His
glorious body.”478 The one death therefore of our Saviour brought salvation to our double death,and His one resurrection wrought for us two resurrections; since His body in both cases, that is,both in His death and in His resurrection, was ministered to us by a kind of healing suitableness,both as a mystery of the inner man, and as a type of the outer.

Chapter 4.—The Ratio of the Single to the Double Comes from the Perfection of the Senary Number.
The Perfection of The Senary Number is Commended in the Scriptures. The Year Abounds in
The Senary Number.
7. Now this ratio of the single to the double arises, no doubt, from the ternary number, since
one added to two makes three; but the whole which these make reaches to the senary, for one andtwo and three make six. And this number is on that account called perfect, because it is completed
in its own parts: for it has these three, sixth, third, and half; nor is there any other part found in it,
which we can call an aliquot part. The sixth part of it, then, is one; the third part, two; the half,
three. But one and two and three complete the same six. And Holy Scripture commends to us theperfection of this number, especially in this, that God finished His works in six days, and on thesixth day man was made in the image of God.479 And the Son of God came and was made the Sonof man, that He might re-create us after the image of God, in the sixth age of the human race. For
that is now the present age, whether a thousand years apiece are assigned to each age, or whether
we trace out memorable and remarkable epochs or turning-points of time in the divine Scriptures,
so that the first age is to be found from Adam until Noah, and the second thence onwards to Abraham,
and then next, after the division of Matthew the evangelist, from Abraham to David, from Davidto the carrying away to Babylon, and from thence to the travail of the Virgin,480 which three ages
joined to those other two make five. Accordingly, the nativity of the Lord began the sixth, which
is now going onwards until the hidden end of time. We recognize also in this senary number a kindof figure of time, in that threefold mode of division, by which we compute one portion of time
before the Law; a second, under the Law; a third, under grace. In which last time we have received
the sacrament of renewal, that we may be renewed also in the end of time, in every part, by the
resurrection of the flesh, and so may be made whole from our entire infirmity, not only of soul, butalso of body. And thence that woman is understood to be a type of the church, who was made whole
and upright by the Lord, after she had been bowed by infirmity through the binding of Satan. For
those words of the Psalm lament such hidden enemies: “They bowed down my soul.”481 And thiswoman had her infirmity eighteen years, which is thrice six. And the months of eighteen years arefound in number to be the cube of six, viz. six times six times six. Nearly, too, in the same place in
the Gospel is that fig tree, which was convicted also by the third year of its miserable barrenness.

478
479
480
481

Phil. iii. 21.
Gen. i. 27.
Matt. i. 17.
Ps. lvii. 6.

99

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

But intercession was made for it, that it might be let alone that year, that year, that if it bore fruit,
well; if otherwise, it should be cut down.482 For both three years belong to the same threefold
division, and the months of three years make the square of six, which is six times six.
8. A single year also, if the whole twelve months are taken into account, which are made up of
thirty days each (for the month that has been kept from of old is that which the revolution of themoon determines), abounds in the number six. For that which six is, in the first order of numbers,
which consists of units up to ten, that sixty is in the second order, which consists of tens up to ahundred. Sixty days, then, are a sixth part of the year. Further, if that which stands as the sixth of
the second order is multiplied by the sixth of the first order, then we make six times sixty, i.e. threehundred and sixty days, which are the whole twelve months. But since, as the revolution of themoon determines the month for men, so the year is marked by the revolution of the sun; and fivedays and a quarter of a day remain, that the sun may fulfill its course and end the year; for four
quarters make one day, which must be intercalated in every fourth year, which they call bissextile,that the order of time may not be disturbed: if we consider, also, these five days and a quarterthemselves, the number six prevails in them. First, because, as it is usual to compute the wholefrom a part, we must not call it five days, but rather six, taking the quarter days for one day. Next,
because five days themselves are the sixth part of a month; while the quarter of a day contains six
hours. For the entire day, i.e. including its night, is twenty-four hours, of which the fourth part,which is a quarter of a day, is found to be six hours. So much in the course of the year does thesixth number prevail.

Chapter 5.—The Number Six is Also Commended in the Building Up of the Body of Christ andof the Temple at Jerusalem.
9. And not without reason is the number six understood to be put for a year in the building upof the body of the Lord, as a figure of which He said that He would raise up in three days the temple
destroyed by the Jews. For they said, “Forty and six years was this temple in building.”483 And six
times forty-six makes two hundred and seventy-six. And this number of days completes nine months
and six days, which are reckoned, as it were, ten months for the travail of women; not because allcome to the sixth day after the ninth month, but because the perfection itself of the body of theLord is found to have been brought in so many days to the birth, as the authority of the church
maintains upon the tradition of the elders. For He is believed to have been conceived on the 25thof March, upon which day also He suffered; so the womb of the Virgin, in which He was conceived,
where no one of mortals was begotten, corresponds to the new grave in which He was buried,
wherein was never man laid,484 neither before nor since. But He was born, according to tradition,
upon December the 25th. If, then you reckon from that day to this you find two hundred andseventy-six days which is forty-six times six. And in this number of years the temple was built,

482
483
484

Luke xiii. 6–17.
John ii. 20.
John xix. 41, 42.

100

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

because in that number of sixes the body of the Lord was perfected; which being destroyed by the
suffering of death, He raised again on the third day. For “He spake this of the temple of His body,”485
as is declared by the most clear and solid testimony of the Gospel; where He said, “For as Jonas
was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly, so shall the Son of man be three days and threenights in the heart of the earth.”486

Chapter 6.—The Three Days of the Resurrection, in Which Also the Ratio of Single to Double isApparent.
10. Scripture again witnesses that the space of those three days themselves was not whole andentire, but the first day is counted as a whole from its last part, and the third day is itself also counted
as a whole from its first part; but the intervening day, i.e. the second day, was absolutely a wholewith its twenty-four hours, twelve of the day and twelve of the night. For He was crucified first by
the voices of the Jews in the third hour, when it was the sixth day of the week. Then He hung on
the cross itself at the sixth hour, and yielded up His spirit at the ninth hour.487 But He was buried,“now when the even was come,” as the words of the evangelist express it;488 which means, at theend of the day. Wheresoever then you begin,—even if some other explanation can be given, so as
not to contradict the Gospel of John,489 but to understand that He was suspended on the cross at thethird hour,—still you cannot make the first day an entire day. It will be reckoned then an entire dayfrom its last part, as the third from its first part. For the night up to the dawn, when the resurrectionof the Lord was made known, belongs to the third day; because God (who commanded the light toshine out of darkness,490 that through the grace of the New Testament and the partaking of theresurrection of Christ the words might be spoken to us “For ye were sometimes darkness, but now
are ye light in the Lord”491) intimates to us in some way that the day takes its beginning from thenight. For as the first days of all were reckoned from light to night, on account of the future fall of
man;492 so these on account of the restoration of man, are reckoned from darkness to light. Fromthe hour, then, of His death to the dawn of the resurrection are forty hours, counting in also theninth hour itself. And with this number agrees also His life upon earth of forty days after His
resurrection. And this number is most frequently used in Scripture to express the mystery ofperfection in the fourfold world. For the number ten has a certain perfection, and that multiplied
by four makes forty. But from the evening of the burial to the dawn of the resurrection are thirty-six
hours which is six squared. And this is referred to that ratio of the single to the double wherein
there is the greatest consonance of co-adaptation. For twelve added to twenty-four suits the ratio
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492

John ii. 19–21.
Matt. xii. 40.
Matt. xxvii. 23–50.
Mark xv. 42–46.
John xix. 14.
2 Cor. iv. 6.
Eph. v. 8.
Gen. i. 4, 5.

101

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

of single added to double and makes thirty-six: namely a whole night with a whole day and a wholenight, and this not without the mystery which I have noticed above. For not unfitly do we liken thespirit to the day and the body to the night. For the body of the Lord in His death and resurrection
was a figure of our spirit and a type of our body. In this way, then, also that ratio of the single tothe double is apparent in the thirty-six hours, when twelve are added to twenty-four. As to thereasons, indeed, why these numbers are so put in the Holy Scriptures, other people may trace out
other reasons, either such that those which I have given are to be preferred to them, or such as areequally probable with mine, or even more probable than they are; but there is no one surely sofoolish or so absurd as to contend that they are so put in the Scriptures for no purpose at all, andthat there are no mystical reasons why those numbers are there mentioned. But those reasons which
I have here given, I have either gathered from the authority of the church, according to the traditionof our forefathers, or from the testimony of the divine Scriptures, or from the nature itself of numbers
and of similitudes. No sober person will decide against reason, no Christian against the Scriptures,no peaceable person against the church.

Chapter 7.—In What Manner We are Gathered from Many into One Through One Mediator.
11. This mystery, this sacrifice, this priest, this God, before He was sent and came, being madeof a woman—of Him, all those things which appeared to our fathers in a sacred and mystical way
by angelical miracles, or which were done by the fathers themselves, were similitudes; in orderthat every creature by its acts might speak in some way of that One who was to be, in whom there
was to be salvation in the recovery of all from death. For because by the wickedness of ungodliness
we had recoiled and fallen away in discord from the one true and supreme God, and had in manythings become vain, being distracted through many things and cleaving fast to many things; it wasneedful, by the decree and command of God in His mercy, that those same many things should joinin proclaiming the One that should come, and that One should come so proclaimed by these manythings, and that these many things should join in witnessing that this One had come; and that so,
freed from the burden of these many things, we should come to that One, and dead as we were in
our souls by many sins, and destined to die in the flesh on account of sin, that we should love that
One who, without sin, died in the flesh for us; and by believing in Him now raised again, and byrising again with Him in the spirit through faith, that we should be justified by being made one in
the one righteous One; and that we should not despair of our own resurrection in the flesh itself,
when we consider that the one Head had gone before us the many members; in whom, being now
cleansed through faith, and then renewed by sight, and through Him as mediator reconciled to God,
we are to cleave to the One, to feast upon the One, to continue one.

Chapter 8.—In What Manner Christ Wills that All Shall Be One in Himself.

102

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

12. So the Son of God Himself, the Word of God, Himself also the Mediator between God andmen, the Son of man,493 equal to the Father through the unity of the Godhead, and partaker with us
by the taking upon Him of humanity, interceding for us with the Father in that He was man,494 yet
not concealing that He was God, one with the Father, among other things speaks thus: “Neither
pray I for these alone,” He says, “but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;that they all may be one; as Thou, Father, art in me, and I in Thee, that they also may be one in us:that the world may believe that Thou hast sent me. And the glory which Thou gavest me I havegiven them; that they may be one, even as we are one.”495

Chapter 9.—The Same Argument Continued.
He did not say, I and they are one thing;496 although, in that He is the head of the church whichis His body,497 He might have said, and they are, not one thing,498 but one person,499 because thehead and the body is one Christ; but in order to show His own Godhead consubstantial with the
Father (for which reason He says in another place, “I and my Father are one”500), in His own kind,that is, in the consubstantial parity of the same nature, He wills His own to be one,501 but in Himself;
since they could not be so in themselves, separated as they are one from another by divers pleasuresand desires and uncleannesses of sin; whence they are cleansed through the Mediator, that they
may be one502 in Him, not only through the same nature in which all become from mortal men
equal to the angels, but also through the same will most harmoniously conspiring to the same
blessedness, and fused in some way by the fire of charity into one spirit. For to this His words
come, “That they may be one, even as we are one;” namely, that as the Father and Son are one, notonly in equality of substance, but also in will, so those also may be one, between whom and God
the Son is mediator, not only in that they are of the same nature, but also through the same unionof love. And then He goes on thus to intimate the truth itself, that He is the Mediator, through whom
we are reconciled to God, by saying, “I in them, and Thou in me, that they may be made perfect inone.”503

493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503

1 Tim. ii. 5.
Rom. viii. 34.
John xvii. 20–22.
Unum.
Eph. i. 22, 23.
Unum.
Unus.
John x. 30; unum.
Unum.
Unum.
John xvii. 23.

103

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 10.—As Christ is the Mediator of Life, So the Devil is the Mediator of Death.
13. Therein is our true peace and firm bond of union with our Creator, that we should be purified
and reconciled through the Mediator of life, as we had been polluted and alienated, and so had
departed from Him, through the mediator of death. For as the devil through pride led man throughpride to death; so Christ through lowliness led back man through obedience to life. Since, as theone fell through being lifted up, and cast down [man] also who consented to him; so the other was
raised up through being abased, and lifted up [man] also who believed in Him. For because thedevil had not himself come thither whither he had led the way (inasmuch as he bare indeed in his
ungodliness the death of the spirit, but had not undergone the death of the flesh, because he had
not assumed the covering of the flesh), he appeared to man to be a mighty chief among the legionsof devils, through whom he exercises his reign of deceits; so puffing up man the more, who is eager
for power more than righteousness, through the pride of elation, or through false philosophy; orelse entangling him through sacrilegious rites, in which, while casting down headlong by deceit
and illusion the minds of the more curious and prouder sort, he holds him captive also to magicaltrickery; promising too the cleansing of the soul, through those initiations which they call, by504
transforming himself into an angel of light, through divers machinations in signs and prodigies
of lying.

Chapter 11.—Miracles Which are Done by Demons are to Be Spurned.

77

14. For it is easy for the most worthless spirits to do many things by means of aerial bodies,such as to cause wonder to souls which are weighed down by earthly bodies, even though they beof the better inclined. For if earthly bodies themselves, when trained by a certain skill and practice,exhibit to men so great marvels in theatrical spectacles, that they who never saw such things scarcely
believe them when told; why should it be hard for the devil and his angels to make out of corporeal
elements, through their own aerial bodies, things at which the flesh marvels; or even by hidden
inspirations to contrive fantastic appearances to the deluding of men’s senses, whereby to deceive
them, whether awake or asleep, or to drive them into frenzy? But just as it may happen that one
who is better than they in life and character may gaze at the most worthless of men, either walking
on a rope, or doing by various motions of the body many things difficult of belief, and yet he may
not at all desire to do such things, nor think those men on that account to be preferred to himself;
so the faithful and pious soul, not only if it sees, but even if on account of the frailty of the flesh it
shudders at, the miracles of demons; yet will not for that either deplore its own want of power todo such things, or judge them on this account to be better than itself; especially since it is in thecompany of the holy, who, whether they are men or good angels, accomplish, through the powerof God, to whom all things are subject, wonders which are far greater and the very reverse of
deceptive.

504

2 Cor. xi. 14.

104

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 12.—The Devil the Mediator of Death, Christ of Life.
15. In no wise therefore are souls cleansed and reconciled to God by sacrilegious imitations,or curious arts that are impious, or magical incantations; since the false mediator does not translatethem to higher things, but rather blocks and cuts off the way thither through the affections, malignant
in proportion as they are proud, which he inspires into those of his own company; which are notable to nourish the wings of virtues so as to fly upwards, but rather to heap up the weight of vices
so as to press downwards; since the soul will fall down the more heavily, the more it seems to itself
to have been carried upwards. Accordingly, as the Magi did when warned of God,505 whom the star
led to adore the low estate of the Lord; so we also ought to return to our country, not by the way
by which we came, but by another way which the lowly King has taught, and which the proud king,the adversary of that lowly King, cannot block up. For to us, too, that we may adore the lowly
Christ, the “heavens have declared the glory of God, when their sound went into all the earth, andtheir words to the ends of the world.”506 A way was made for us to death through sin in Adam. For,
“By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, in
whom all have sinned.”507 Of this way the devil was the mediator, the persuader to sin, and thecaster down into death. For he, too, applied his one death to work out our double death. Since heindeed died in the spirit through ungodliness, but certainly did not die in the flesh: yet both persuaded
us to ungodliness, and thereby brought it to pass that we deserved to come into the death of theflesh. We desired therefore the one through wicked persuasion, the other followed us by a justcondemnation; and therefore it is written, “God made not death,”508 since He was not Himself thecause of death; but yet death was inflicted on the sinner, through His most just retribution. Just as
the judge inflicts punishment on the guilty; yet it is not the justice of the judge, but the desert ofthe crime, which is the cause of the punishment. Whither, then, the mediator of death caused us topass, yet did not come himself, that is, to the death of the flesh, there our Lord God introduced forus the medicine of correction, which He deserved not, by a hidden and exceeding mysterious decreeof divine and profound justice. In order, therefore, that as by one man came death, so by one man
might come also the resurrection of the dead;509 because men strove more to shun that which they
could not shun, viz. the death of the flesh, than the death of the spirit, i.e. punishment more thanthe desert of punishment (for not to sin is a thing about which either men are not solicitous or are
too little solicitous; but not to die, although it be not within reach of attainment, is yet eagerly sought
after); the Mediator of life, making it plain that death is not to be feared, which by the condition ofhumanity cannot now be escaped, but rather ungodliness, which can be guarded against throughfaith, meets us at the end to which we have come, but not by the way by which we came. For we,
indeed, came to death through sin; He through righteousness: and, therefore, as our death is thepunishment of sin, so His death was made a sacrifice for sin.

505
506
507
508
509

Matt. ii. 12.
Ps. xix. 1, 4.
Rom. v. 12—in quo.
Wisd. i. 13.
1 Cor. xv. 21, 22.

105

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 13.—The Death of Christ Voluntary. How the Mediator of Life Subdued the Mediator of
Death. How the Devil Leads His Own to Despise the Death of Christ.
16. Wherefore, since the spirit is to be preferred to the body, and the death of the spirit meansthat God has left it, but the death of the body that the spirit has left it; and since herein lies thepunishment in the death of the body, that the spirit leaves the body against its will, because it left
God willingly; so that, whereas the spirit left God because it would, it leaves the body although it
would not; nor leaves it when it would, unless it has offered violence to itself, whereby the bodyitself is slain: the spirit of the Mediator showed how it was through no punishment of sin that He
came to the death of the flesh, because He did not leave it against His will, but because He willed,when He willed, as He willed. For because He is so commingled [with the flesh] by the Word of
God as to be one, He says: “I have power to lay down my life, and I have power to take it again.
No man taketh it from me, but I lay down my life that I might take it again.”510 And, as the Gospel
tells us, they who were present were most astonished at this, that after that [last] word, in which
He set forth the figure of our sin, He immediately gave up His spirit. For they who are hung on the
cross are commonly tortured by a prolonged death. Whence it was that the legs of the thieves werebroken, in order that they might die directly, and be taken down from the cross before the Sabbath.
And that He was found to be dead already, caused wonder. And it was this also, at which, as weread, Pilate marvelled, when the body of the Lord was asked of him for burial.511
17. Because that deceiver then,—who was a mediator to death for man, and feignedly puts
himself forward as to life, under the name of cleansing by sacrilegious rites and sacrifices, by which
the proud are led away,—can neither share in our death, nor rise again from his own: he has indeed
been able to apply his single death to our double one; but he certainly has not been able to apply asingle resurrection, which should be at once a mystery of our renewal, and a type of that waking
up which is to be in the end. He then who being alive in the spirit raised again His own flesh thatwas dead, the true Mediator of life, has cast out him, who is dead in the spirit and the mediator ofdeath, from the spirits of those who believe in Himself, so that he should not reign within, butshould assault from without, and yet not prevail. And to him, too, He offered Himself to be tempted,
in order that He might be also a mediator to overcome his temptations, not only by succor, but also
by example. But when the devil, from the first, although striving through every entrance to creep
into His inward parts, was thrust out, having finished all his alluring temptation in the wilderness
after the baptism;512 because, being dead in the spirit, he forced no entrance into Him who wasalive in the spirit, he betook himself, through eagerness for the death of man in any way whatsoever,to effecting that death which he could, and was permitted to effect it upon that mortal element
which the living Mediator had received from us. And where he could do anything, there in every
respect he was conquered; and wherein he received outwardly the power of slaying the Lord in theflesh, therein his inward power, by which he held ourselves, was slain. For it was brought to passthat the bonds of many sins in many deaths were loosed, through the one death of One which nosin had preceded. Which death, though not due, the Lord therefore rendered for us, that the death
510
511
512

John x. 17, 18.
Mark xv. 37, 39, 43, 44, and John xix. 30–34.
Matt. iv. 1–11.

106

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

which was due might work us no hurt. For He was not stripped of the flesh by obligation of any
authority, but He stripped Himself. For doubtless He who was able not to die, if He would not, did
die because He would: and so He made a show of principalities and powers, openly triumphingover them in Himself.513 For whereas by His death the one and most real sacrifice was offered up
for us, whatever fault there was, whence principalities and powers held us fast as of right to pay
its penalty, He cleansed, abolished, extinguished; and by His own resurrection He also called uswhom He predestinated to a new life; and whom He called, them He justified; and whom He
justified, them He glorified.514 And so the devil, in that very death of the flesh, lost man, whom he
was possessing as by an absolute right, seduced as he was by his own consent, and over whom heruled, himself impeded by no corruption of flesh and blood, through that frailty of man’s mortal
body, whence he was both too poor and too weak; he who was proud in proportion as he was, as
it were, both richer and stronger, ruling over him who was, as it were, both clothed in rags and fullof troubles. For whither he drove the sinner to fall, himself not following, there by following hecompelled the Redeemer to descend. And so the Son of God deigned to become our friend in the
fellowship of death, to which because he came not, the enemy thought himself to be better andgreater than ourselves. For our Redeemer says, “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay
down his life for his friends.”515 Wherefore also the devil thought himself superior to the Lord
Himself, inasmuch as the Lord in His sufferings yielded to him; for of Him, too, is understood what
is read in the Psalm, “For Thou hast made Him a little lower than the angels:”516 so that He, being
Himself put to death, although innocent, by the unjust one acting against us as it were by just right,
might by a most just right overcome him, and so might lead captive the captivity wrought throughsin,517 and free us from a captivity that was just on account of sin, by blotting out the handwriting,and redeeming us who were to be justified although sinners, through His own righteous blood
unrighteously poured out.
18. Hence also the devil mocks those who are his own until this very day, to whom he presents
himself as a false mediator, as though they would be cleansed or rather entangled and drowned byhis rites, in that he very easily persuades the proud to ridicule and despise the death of Christ, fromwhich the more he himself is estranged, the more is he believed by them to be the holier and moredivine. Yet those who have remained with him are very few, since the nations acknowledge andwith pious humility imbibe the price paid for themselves, and in trust upon it abandon their enemy,
and gather together to their Redeemer. For the devil does not know how the most excellent wisdomof God makes use of both his snares and his fury to bring about the salvation of His own faithfulones, beginning from the former end, which is the beginning of the spiritual creature, even to thelatter end, which is the death of the body, and so “reaching from the one end to the other, mightily
and sweetly ordering all things.”518 For wisdom “passeth and goeth through all things by reason ofher pureness, and no defiled thing can fall into her.”519 And since the devil has nothing to do with

513
514
515
516
517
518
519

Col. ii. 15.
Rom. viii. 30.
John xv. 13.
Ps. viii. 5.
Eph. iv. 8.
Wisd. viii. 1.
Wisd. vii. 24, 25.

107

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

the death of the flesh, whence comes his exceeding pride, a death of another kind is prepared in
the eternal fire of hell, by which not only the spirits that have earthly, but also those who have aerial
bodies, can be tormented. But proud men, by whom Christ is despised, because He died, wherein
He bought us with so great a price,520 both bring back the former death, and also men, to thatmiserable condition of nature, which is derived from the first sin, and will be cast down into thelatter death with the devil. And they on this account preferred the devil to Christ, because the former
cast them into that former death, whither he himself fell not through the difference of his nature,
and whither on account of them Christ descended through His great mercy: and yet they do nothesitate to believe themselves better than the devils, and do not cease to assail and denounce themwith every sort of malediction, while they know them at any rate to have nothing to do with thesuffering of this kind of death, on account of which they despise Christ. Neither will they take into
account that the case may possibly be, that the Word of God, remaining in Himself, and in Himself
in no way changeable, may yet, through the taking upon Him of a lower nature, be able to suffer
somewhat of a lower kind, which the unclean spirit cannot suffer, because he has not an earthly
body. And so, whereas they themselves are better than the devils, yet, because they bear a body offlesh, they can so die, as the devils certainly cannot die, who do not bear such a body. They presume
much on the deaths of their own sacrifices, which they do not perceive that they sacrifice to deceitfuland proud spirits; or if they have come to perceive it, think their friendship to be of some good tothemselves, treacherous and envious although they are, whose purpose is bent upon nothing else
except to hinder our return.

Chapter 14.—Christ the Most Perfect Victim for Cleansing Our Faults. In Every Sacrifice Four
Things are to Be Considered.
19. They do not understand, that not even the proudest of spirits themselves could rejoice inthe honor of sacrifices, unless a true sacrifice was due to the one true God, in whose stead they
desire to be worshipped: and that this cannot be rightly offered except by a holy and righteous
priest; nor unless that which is offered be received from those for whom it is offered; and unlessalso it be without fault, so that it may be offered for cleansing the faulty. This at least all desire
who wish sacrifice to be offered for themselves to God. Who then is so righteous and holy a priest
as the only Son of God, who had no need to purge His own sins by sacrifice,521 neither original
sins, nor those which are added by human life? And what could be so fitly chosen by men to beoffered for them as human flesh? And what so fit for this immolation as mortal flesh? And what
so clean for cleansing the faults of mortal men as the flesh born in and from the womb of a virgin,
without any infection of carnal concupiscence? And what could be so acceptably offered and taken,
as the flesh of our sacrifice, made the body of our priest? In such wise that, whereas four things
are to be considered in every sacrifice,—to whom it is offered, by whom it is offered, what isoffered, for whom it is offered,—the same One and true Mediator Himself, reconciling us to God

520
521

1 Cor. vi. 20.
Heb. vii.

108

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

by the sacrifice of peace, might remain one with Him to whom He offered, might make those one
in Himself for whom He offered, Himself might be in one both the offerer and the offering.

Chapter 15.—They are Proud Who Think They are Able, by Their Own Righteousness, to Be
Cleansed So as to See God.
20. There are, however, some who think themselves capable of being cleansed by their own
righteousness, so as to contemplate God, and to dwell in God; whom their very pride itself stains
above all others. For there is no sin to which the divine law is more opposed, and over which thatproudest of spirits, who is a mediator to things below, but a barrier against things above, receives
a greater right of mastery: unless either his secret snares be avoided by going another way, or if herage openly by means of a sinful people (which Amalek, being interpreted, means), and forbid byfighting the passage to the land of promise, he be overcome by the cross of the Lord, which isprefigured by the holding out of the hands of Moses.522 For these persons promise themselvescleansing by their own righteousness for this reason, because some of them have been able topenetrate with the eye of the mind beyond the whole creature, and to touch, though it be in ever sosmall a part, the light of the unchangeable truth; a thing which they deride many Christians forbeing not yet able to do, who, in the meantime, live by faith alone. But of what use is it for theproud man, who on that account is ashamed to embark upon the ship of wood,523 to behold fromafar his country beyond the sea? Or how can it hurt the humble man not to behold it from so greata distance, when he is actually coming to it by that wood upon which the other disdains to be borne?

Chapter 16.—The Old Philosophers are Not to Be Consulted Concerning the Resurrection andConcerning Things to Come.
21. These people also blame us for believing the resurrection of the flesh, and rather wish us
to believe themselves concerning these things. As though, because they have been able to understandthe high and unchangeable substance by the things which are made,524 for this reason they had aclaim to be consulted concerning the revolutions of mutable things, or concerning the connectedorder of the ages. For pray, because they dispute most truly, and persuade us by most certain proofs,
that all things temporal are made after a science that is eternal, are they therefore able to see clearlyin the matter of this science itself, or to collect from it, how many kinds of animals there are, what
are the seeds of each in their beginnings, what measure in their increase, what numbers run throughtheir conceptions, births, ages, settings; what motions in desiring things according to their nature,and in avoiding the contrary? Have they not sought out all these things, not through that unchangeable
522
523
524

Ex. xvii. 8–16.
[The wood of the cross is meant. One of the ancient symbols of the church was a ship.—W.G.T.S.]
Rom. i. 20.

109

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

wisdom, but through the actual history of places and times, or have trusted the written experienceof others? Wherefore it is the less to be wondered at, that they have utterly failed in searching out
the succession of more lengthened ages, and in finding any goal of that course, down which, as
though down a river, the human race is sailing, and the transition thence of each to its own
appropriate end. For these are subjects which historians could not describe, inasmuch as they are
far in the future, and have been experienced and related by no one. Nor have those philosophers,
who have profiled better than others in that high and eternal science, been able to grasp such subjects
with the understanding; otherwise they would not be inquiring as they could into past things of thekind, such as are in the province of historians, but rather would foreknow also things future; andthose who are able to do this are called by them soothsayers, but by us prophets:

Chapter 17.—In How Many Ways Things Future are Foreknown. Neither Philosophers, Nor Those
Who Were Distinguished Among the Ancients, are to Be Consulted Concerning the Resurrectionof the Dead.
22.—although the name of prophets, too, is not altogether foreign to their writings. But it makes
the greatest possible difference, whether things future are conjectured by experience of things past
(as physicians also have committed many things to writing in the way of foresight, which they
themselves have noted by experience; or as again husbandmen, or sailors, too, foretell many things;
for if such predictions are made a long while before, they are thought to be divinations), or whether
such things have already started on their road to come to us, and being seen coming far off, areannounced in proportion to the acuteness of the sense of those who see them, by doing which theaerial powers are thought to divine (just as if a person from the top of a mountain were to see far
off some one coming, and were to announce it beforehand to those who dwelt close by in the plain);or whether they are either fore-announced to certain men, or are heard by them and again transmitted
to other men, by means of holy angels, to whom God shows those things by His Word and His
Wisdom, wherein both things future and things past consist: or whether the minds of certain men
themselves are so far borne upwards by theHoly Spirit, as to behold, not through the angels, but ofthemselves, the immoveable causes of things future, in that very highest pinnacle of the universe
itself. [And I say, behold,] for the aerial powers, too, hear these things, either by message throughangels, or through men; and hear only so much as He judges to be fitting, to whom all things are
subject. Many things, too, are foretold by a kind of instinct and inward impulse of such as know
them not: as Caiaphas did not know what he said, but being the high priest, he prophesied.525
23. Therefore, neither concerning the successions of ages, nor concerning the resurrection of
the dead, ought we to consult those philosophers, who have understood as much as they could theeternity of the Creator, in whom “we live, and move, and have our being.”526 Since, knowing God
through those things which are made, they have not glorified Him as God, neither were thankful

525
526

John xi. 51.
Acts xvii. 28.

110

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

but professing themselves wise, they became fools.527 And whereas they were not fit to fix the eyeof the mind so firmly upon the eternity of the spiritual and unchangeable nature, as to be able tosee, in the wisdom itself of the Creator and Governor of the universe, those revolutions of the ages,
which in that wisdom were already and were always, but here were about to be so that as yet they
were not; or, again, to see therein those changes for the better, not of the souls only, but also of thebodies of men, even to the perfection of their proper measure; whereas then, I say, they were in noway fit to see these things therein, they were not even judged worthy of receiving any announcementof them by the holy angels; whether externally through the senses of the body, or by interior
revelations exhibited in the spirit; as these things actually were manifested to our fathers, who were
gifted with true piety, and who by foretelling them, obtaining credence either by present signs, orby events close at hand, which turned out as they had foretold, earned authority to be believed
respecting things remotely future, even to the end of the world. But the proud and deceitful powersof the air, even if they are found to have said through their soothsayers some things of the fellowshipand citizenship of the saints, and of the true Mediator, which they heard from the holy prophets or
the angels, did so with the purpose of seducing even the faithful ones of God, if they could, by
these alien truths, to revolt to their own proper falsehoods. But God did this by those who knew
not what they said, in order that the truth might sound abroad from all sides, to aid the faithful, tobe a witness against the ungodly.

Chapter 18.—The Son of God Became Incarnate in Order that We Being Cleansed by Faith May
Be Raised to the Unchangeable Truth.
24. Since, then, we were not fit to take hold of things eternal, and since the foulness of sins
weighed us down, which we had contracted by the love of temporal things, and which were implanted
in us as it were naturally, from the root of mortality, it was needful that we should be cleansed. But
cleansed we could not be, so as to be tempered together with things eternal, except it were throughthings temporal, wherewith we were already tempered together and held fast. For health is at the
opposite extreme from disease; but the intermediate process of healing does not lead us to perfect
health, unless it has some congruity with the disease. Things temporal that are useless merely
deceive the sick; things temporal that are useful take up those that need healing, and pass them onhealed, to things eternal. And the rational mind, as when cleansed it owes contemplation to things
eternal; so, when needing cleansing, owes faith to things temporal. One even of those who wereformerly esteemed wise men among the Greeks has said, The truth stands to faith in the same
relation in which eternity stands to that which has a beginning. And he is no doubt right in saying
so. For what we call temporal, he describes as having had a beginning. And we also ourselves comeunder this kind, not only in respect to the body, but also in respect to the changeableness of thesoul. For that is not properly called eternal which undergoes any degree of change. Therefore, inso far as we are changeable, in so far we stand apart from eternity. But life eternal is promised tous through the truth, from the clear knowledge of which, again, our faith stands as far apart as

527

Rom. i. 21, 22.

111

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

mortality does from eternity. We then now put faith in things done in time on our account, and bythat faith itself we are cleansed; in order that when we have come to sight, as truth follows faith,so eternity may follow upon mortality. And therefore, since our faith will become truth, when we
have attained to that which is promised to us who believe: and that which is promised us is eternal
life; and the Truth (not that which shall come to be according as our faith shall be, but that truth
which is always, because in it is eternity,—the Truth then) has said, “And this is life eternal, thatthey might know Thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom Thou hast sent:”528 when ourfaith by seeing shall come to be truth, then eternity shall possess our now changed mortality. And
until this shall take place, and in order that it may take place,—because we adapt the faith of belief
to things which have a beginning, as in things eternal we hope for the truth of contemplation, lest
the faith of mortal life should be at discord with the truth of eternal life,—the Truth itself, co-eternalwith the Father, took a beginning from earth,529 when the Son of God so came as to become theSon of man, and to take to Himself our faith, that He might thereby lead us on to His own truth,
who so undertook our mortality, as not to lose His own eternity. For truth stands to faith in therelation in which eternity stands to that which has a beginning. Therefore, we must needs so becleansed, that we may come to have such a beginning as remains eternal, that we may not have one
beginning in faith, and another in truth. Neither could we pass to things eternal from the conditionof having a beginning, unless we were transferred, by union of the eternal to ourselves through ourown beginning, to His own eternity. Therefore our faith has, in some measure, now followed thither,whither He in whom we have believed has ascended; born,530 dead, risen again, taken up. Of thesefour things, we knew the first two in ourselves. For we know that men both have a beginning anddie. But the remaining two, that is, to be raised, and to be taken up, we rightly hope will be in us,
because we have believed them done in Him. Since, therefore, in Him that, too, which had abeginning has passed over to eternity, in ourselves also it will so pass over, when faith shall havearrived at truth. For to those who thus believe, in order that they might remain in the word of faith,and being thence led on to the truth, and through that to eternity, might be freed from death, He
speaks thus: “If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed.” And as though theywould ask, With what fruit? He proceeds to say, “And ye shall know the truth.” And again, as
though they would say, Of what good is truth to mortal men? “And the truth,” He says, “shall makeyou free.”531 From what, except from death, from corruptions, from changeableness? Since truth
remains immortal, incorrupt, unchangeable. But true immortality, true incorruptibility, true
unchangeableness, is eternity itself.

Chapter 19.—In What Manner the Son Was Sent and Proclaimed Beforehand. How in the Sendingof His Birth in the Flesh He Was Made Less Without Detriment to His Equality with the Father.

528
529
530
531

John xvii. 3.
Ps. lxxxv. 11.
Ortus.
John viii. 31, 32.

112

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

25. Behold, then, why the Son of God was sent; nay, rather behold what it is for the Son of God
to be sent. Whatever things they were which were wrought in time, with a view to produce faith,
whereby we might be cleansed so as to contemplate truth, in things that have a beginning, whichhave been put forth from eternity, and are referred back to eternity: these were either testimoniesof this mission, or they were the mission itself of the Son of God. But some of these testimonies
announced Him beforehand as to come, some testified that He had come already. For that He wasmade a creature by whom the whole creation was made, must needs find a witness in the wholecreation. For except one were preached by the sending of many [witnesses] one would not be boundto, the sending away of many. And unless there were such testimonies as should seem to be greatto those who are lowly, it would not be believed, that He being great should make men great, who
as lowly was sent to the lowly. For the heaven and the earth and all things in them are incomparably
greater works of the Son of God, since all things were made by Him, than the signs and the portents
which broke forth in testimony of Him. But yet men, in order that, being lowly, they might believethese great things to have been wrought by Him, trembled at those lowly things, as if they had been
great.
26. “When, therefore, the fullness of time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman,made under the Law;”532 to such a degree lowly, that He was “made;” in this way therefore sent,in that He was made. If, therefore, the greater sends the less, we too, acknowledge Him to havebeen made less; and in so far less, in so far as made; and in so far made, in so far as sent. For “Hesent forth His Son made of a woman.” And yet, because all things were made by Him, not only
before He was made and sent, but before all things were at all, we confess the same to be equal to
the sender, whom we call less, as having been sent. In what way, then, could He be seen by thefathers, when certain angelical visions were shown to them, before that fullness of time at which
it was fitting He should be sent, and so before He was sent, at a time when not yet sent He was seen
as He is equal with the Father? For how does He say to Philip, by whom He was certainly seen as
by all the rest, and even by those by whom He was crucified in the flesh, “Have I been so long timewith you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me, hath seen the Father also;”
unless because He was both seen and yet not seen? He was seen, as He had been made in being
sent; He was not seen, as by Him all things were made. Or how does He say this too, “He that hath
my commandments and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me; and he that loveth me shall be lovedof my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him,”533 at a time when He wasmanifest before the eyes of men; unless because He was offering that flesh, which the Word wasmade in the fullness of time, to be accepted by our faith; but was keeping back the Word itself, bywhom all things were made, to be contemplated in eternity by the mind when cleansed by faith?

532
533

Gal. iv. 4.
John xiv. 9, 21.

113

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 20.—The Sender and the Sent Equal. Why the Son is Said to Be Sent by the Father. Of
the Mission of the Holy Spirit. How and by Whom He Was Sent. The Father the Beginning of
the Whole Godhead.
27. But if the Son is said to be sent by the Father on this account, that the one is the Father, andthe other the Son, this does not in any manner hinder us from believing the Son to be equal, andconsubstantial, and co-eternal with the Father, and yet to have been sent as Son by the Father. Not
because the one is greater, the other less; but because the one is Father, the other Son; the one
begetter, the other begotten; the one, He from whom He is who is sent; the other, He who is from
Him who sends. For the Son is from the Father, not the Father from the Son. And according to thismanner we can now understand that the Son is not only said to have been sent because “the Word
was made flesh,”534 but therefore sent that the Word might be made flesh, and that He might performthrough His bodily presence those things which were written; that is, that not only is He understoodto have been sent as man, which the Word was made but the Word, too, was sent that it might bemade man; because He was not sent in respect to any inequality of power, or substance, or anythingthat in Him was not equal to the Father; but in respect to this, that the Son is from the Father, notthe Father from the Son; for the Son is the Word of the Father, which is also called His wisdom.
What wonder, therefore, if He is sent, not because He is unequal with the Father, but because He
is “a pure emanation (manatio) issuing from the glory of the Almighty God?” For there, that whichissues, and that from which it issues, is of one and the same substance. For it does not issue as water
issues from an aperture of earth or of stone, but as light issues from light. For the words, “For she
is the brightness of the everlasting light,” what else are they than, she is light of everlasting light?
For what is the brightness of light, except light itself? and so co-eternal, with the light, from which
the light is. But it is preferable to say, “the brightness of light,” rather than” the light of light;” lestthat which issues should be thought to be darker than that from which it issues. For when one hearsof the brightness of light as being light itself, it is more easy to believe that the former shines bymeans of the latter, than that the latter shines less. But because there was no need of warning men
not to think that light to be less, which begat the other (for no heretic ever dared say this, neither
is it to be believed that any one will dare to do so), Scripture meets that other thought, whereby
that light which issues might seem darker than that from which it issues; and it has removed thissurmise by saying, “It is the brightness of that light,” namely, of eternal light, and so shows it tobe equal. For if it were less, then it would be its darkness, not its brightness; but if it were greater,then it could not issue from it, for it could not surpass that from which it is educed. Therefore,
because it issues from it, it is not greater than it is; and because it is not its darkness, but its
brightness, it is not less than it is: therefore it is equal. Nor ought this to trouble us, that it is calleda pure emanation issuing from the glory of the Almighty God, as if itself were not omnipotent, but
an emanation from the Omnipotent; for soon after it is said of it, “And being but one, she can do
all things.”535 But who is omnipotent, unless He who can do all things? It is sent, therefore, by Him
from whom it issues; for so she is sought after by him who loved and desired her. “Send her,” hesays, “out of Thy holy heavens, and from the throne of Thy glory, that, being present, she may
534
535

John i. 3, 18, 14.
Wisd. vii. 25–27.

114

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

labor with me;”536 that is, may teach me to labor [heartily] in order that I may not labor [irksomely].
For her labors are virtues. But she is sent in one way that she may be with man; she has been sentin another way that she herself may be man. For, “entering into holy souls, she maketh them friendsof God and prophets;”537 so she also fills the holy angels, and works all things fitting for such
ministries by them.538 But when the fullness of time was come, she was sent,539 not to fill angels,
nor to be an angel, except in so far as she announced the counsel of the Father, which was her own
also; nor, again, to be with men or in men, for this too took place before, both in the fathers and in
the prophets; but that the Word itself should be made flesh, that is, should be made man. In which
future mystery, when revealed, was to be the salvation of those wise and holy men also, who, before
He was born of the Virgin, were born of women; and in which, when done and made known, is thesalvation of all who believe, and hope, and love. For this is “the great mystery of godliness, which540
was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believedon in the world, received up into glory.”541
28. Therefore the Word of God is sent by Him, of whom He is the Word; He is sent by Him,from whom He was begotten (genitum); He sends who begot, That is sent which is begotten. And
He is then sent to each one, when He is apprehended and perceived by each, in so far as He can beapprehended and perceived, in proportion to the comprehension of the rational soul, either advancing
towards God, or already perfect in God. The Son, therefore, is not properly said to have been sentin that He is begotten of the Father; but either in that the Word made flesh appeared to the world,whence He says, “I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world;”542 or in that fromtime to time, He is perceived by the mind of each, according to the saying, “Send her, that, being
present with me, she may labor with me.”543 What then is born (natum) from eternity is eternal,“for it is the brightness of the everlasting light;” but what is sent from time to time, is that which
is apprehended by each. But when the Son of God was made manifest in the flesh, He was sent
into this world in the fullness of time, made of a woman. “For after that, in the wisdom of God, theworld by wisdom knew not God” (since “the light shineth in darkness, and the darkness
comprehended it not”), it “pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe,”544
and that the Word should be made flesh, and dwell among us.545 But when from time to time He
comes forth and is perceived by the mind of each, He is said indeed to be sent, but not into thisworld; for He does not appear sensibly, that is, He does not present Himself to the corporeal senses.
For we ourselves, too, are not in this world, in respect to our grasping with the mind as far as we
can that which is eternal; and the spirits of all the righteous are not in this world, even of those whoare still living in the flesh, in so far as they have discernment in things divine. But the Father is not536

Wisd. ix. 10.
Wisd. vii. 27.
538[The allusion is to the Wisdom of Proverbs, and of the Book of Wisdom which Augustin regards as canonical, as his
frequent citations show.—W.G.T.S.]
539
Gal. iv. 4.
540
Quod, scil. sacramentum.
541
1 Tim. iii. 16.
542
John xvi. 28.
543
Wisd. ix. 10.
544
1 Cor. i. 21.
545
John i. 5, 14.
537

115

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

said to be sent, when from time to time He is apprehended by any one, for He has no one of whom
to be, or from whom to proceed; since Wisdom says, “I came out of the mouth of the Most High,”546
and it is said of the Holy Spirit, “He proceedeth from the Father,”547 but the Father is from no one.
29. As, therefore, the Father begat, the Son is begotten; so the Father sent, the Son was sent.
But in like manner as He who begat and He who was begotten, so both He who sent and He who
was sent, are one, since the Father and the Son are one.548 So also the Holy Spirit is one with them,since these three are one. For as to be born, in respect to the Son, means to be from the Father; so
to be sent, in respect to the Son, means to be known to be from the Father. And as to be the gift of
God in respect to the Holy Spirit, means to proceed from the Father; so to be sent, is to be known
to proceed from the Father. Neither can we say that the Holy Spirit does not also proceed from theSon, for the same Spirit is not without reason said to be the Spirit both of the Father and of theSon.549 Nor do I see what else He intended to signify, when He breathed on the face of the disciples,and said, “Receive ye the Holy Ghost.”550 For that bodily breathing, proceeding from the body withthe feeling of bodily touching, was not the substance of the Holy Spirit, but a declaration by a fitting
sign, that the Holy Spirit proceeds not only from the Father, but also from the Son. For the veriestof madmen would not say, that it was one Spirit which He gave when He breathed on them, andanother which He sent after His ascension.551 For the Spirit of God is one, the Spirit of the Father
and of the Son, the Holy Spirit, who worketh all in all.552 But that He was given twice was certainly
a significant economy, which we will discuss in its place, as far as the Lord may grant. That thenwhich the Lord says,—“Whom I will send unto you from the Father,”553—shows the Spirit to beboth of the Father and of the Son; because, also, when He had said, “Whom the Father will send,”
He added also, “in my name.”554 Yet He did not say, Whom the Father will send from me, as He
said, “Whom I will send unto you from the Father,”—showing, namely, that the Father is the
beginning (principium) of the whole divinity, or if it is better so expressed, deity.555 He, therefore,
who proceeds from the Father and from the Son, is referred back to Him from whom the Son wasborn (natus). And that which the evangelist says, “For the Holy Ghost was not yet given, because

546

Ecclus. xxiv. 3.
John xv. 26.
548
John x. 30.
549[Augustin here, as in previous instances, affirms the procession of the Spirit from the Father and Son.—W.G.T.S.]
550
John xx. 22.
551
Acts ii. 1–4.
552
1 Cor. xii. 6.
553
John xv. 26.
554
John xiv. 26.
555[The term “beginning” is employed “relatively, and not according to substance,” as Augustin says. The Father is “thebeginning of the whole deity,” with reference to the personal distinctions of Father, Son, and Spirit—the Son being from theFather, and the Spirit from Father and Son. The trinitarian relations or modes of the essence, “begin” with the first person, notthe second or the third. The phrase “whole deity,” in the above statement, is put for “trinity,” not for “essence.” Augustin would
not say that the Father is the “beginning” (principium) of the divine essence considered abstractly, but only of the essence astrinal. In this sense, Trinitarian writers denominate the Father “fons trinitatis,” and sometimes “fons deitatis.” Turrettin employs
this latter phraseology (iii. xxx. i. 8); so does Owen (Communion with Trinity, Ch. iii.); and Hooker (Polity, v. liv.). But in thiscase, the guarding clause of Turretin is to be subjoined: “fons deitatis, si modus subsistendi spectatur.” The phrase “fonstrinitatis,” or “principium trinitatis,” is less liable to be misconceived, and more accurate than “fons deitatis,” or “principum
deitatis.”—W.G.T.S.]
547

116

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffthat Jesus was not yet glorified;”556 how is this to be understood, unless because the special giving
or sending of the Holy Spirit after the glorification of Christ was to be such as it had never been
before? For it was not previously none at all, but it had not been such as this. For if the Holy Spirit
was not given before, wherewith were the prophets who spoke filled? Whereas the Scripture plainly
says, and shows in many places, that they spake by the Holy Spirit. Whereas, also, it is said of John
the Baptist, “And he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother’s womb.” And his
father Zacharias is found to have been filled with the Holy Ghost, so as to say such things of him.
And Mary, too, was filled with the Holy Ghost, so as to foretell such things of the Lord, whom she
was bearing in her womb.557 And Simeon and Anna were filled with the Holy Spirit, so as toacknowledge the greatness of the little child Christ.558 How, then, was “the Spirit not yet given,since Jesus was not yet glorified,” unless because that giving, or granting, or mission of the Holy
Spirit was to have a certain speciality of its own in its very advent, such as never was before? For
we read nowhere that men spoke in tongues which they did not know, through the Holy Spirit
coming upon them; as happened then, when it was needful that His coming should be made plain
by visible signs, in order to show that the whole world, and all nations constituted with different
tongues, should believe in Christ through the gift of the Holy Spirit, to fulfill that which is sung in
the Psalm, “There is no speech nor language where their voice is not heard; their sound is gone out
through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world.”559
30. Therefore man was united, and in some sense commingled, with the Word of God, so as tobe One Person, when the fullness of time was come, and the Son of God, made of a woman, wassent into this world, that He might be also the Son of man for the sake of the sons of men. And thisperson angelic nature could prefigure beforehand, so as to pre-announce, but could not appropriate,
so as to be that person itself.

Chapter 21.—Of the Sensible Showing of the Holy Spirit, and of the Coeternity of the Trinity.
What Has Been Said, and What Remains to Be Said.
But with respect to the sensible showing of the Holy Spirit, whether by the shape of a dove,560
or by fiery tongues,561 when the subjected and subservient creature by temporal motions and forms
manifested His substance co-eternal with the Father and the Son, and alike with them unchangeable,
while it was not united so as to be one person with Him, as the flesh was which the Word was
made;562 I do not dare to say that nothing of the kind was done aforetime. But I would boldly say,that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, of one and the same substance, God the Creator, the Omnipotent
Trinity, work indivisibly; but that this cannot be indivisibly manifested by the creature, which is
556
557
558
559
560
561
562

John vii. 39.
Luke i. 15, 41–79.
Luke ii. 25–38.
Ps. xix. 3, 4.
Matt. iii. 16.
Acts ii. 3.
John i. 14.

117

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

far inferior, and least of all by the bodily creature: just as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit cannot
be named by our words, which certainly are bodily sounds, except in their own proper intervals of
time, divided by a distinct separation, which intervals the proper syllables of each word occupy.
Since in their proper substance wherein they are, the three are one, the Father, and the Son, and theHoly Spirit, the very same, by no temporal motion, above the whole creature, without any intervalof time and place, and at once one and the same from eternity to eternity, as it were eternity itself,
which is not without truth and charity. But, in my words, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are
separated, and cannot be named at once, and occupy their own proper places separately invisible
letters. And as, when I name my memory, and intellect, and will, each name refers to each severally,
but yet each is uttered by all three; for there is no one of these three names that is not uttered byboth my memory and my intellect and my will together [by the soul as a whole]; so the Trinity
together wrought both the voice of the Father, and the flesh of the Son, and the dove of the Holy
Spirit, while each of these things is referred severally to each person. And by this similitude it isin some degree discernible, that the Trinity, which is inseparable in itself, is manifested separably
by the appearance of the visible creature; and that the operation of the Trinity is also inseparable
in each severally of those things which are said to pertain properly to the manifesting of either the
Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit.
31. If then I am asked, in what manner either words or sensible forms and appearances were
wrought before the incarnation of the Word of God, which should prefigure it as about to come, I
reply that God wrought those things by the angels; and this I have also shown sufficiently, as I
think, by testimonies of the Holy Scriptures. And if I am asked how the incarnation itself wasbrought to pass, I reply that the Word of God itself was made flesh, that is, was made man, yet not
turned and changed into that which was made; but so made, that there should be there not only the
Word of God and the flesh of man, but also the rational soul of man, and that this whole shouldboth be called God on account of God, and man on account of man. And if this is understood withdifficulty, the mind must be purged by faith, by more and more abstaining from sins, and by doing
good works, and by praying with the groaning of holy desires; that by profiting through the divine
help, it may both understand and love. And if I am asked, how, after the incarnation of the Word,either a voice of the Father was produced, or a corporeal appearance by which the Holy Spirit was
manifested: I do not doubt indeed that this was done through the creature; but whether only corporeal
and sensible, or whether by the employment also of the spirit rational or intellectual (for this is theterm by which some choose to call what the Greeks name), not certainly so as to form one
person (for who could possibly say that whatever creature it was by which the voice of the Father
sounded, is in such sense God the Father; or whatever creature it was by which the Holy Spirit was
manifested in the form of a dove, or in fiery tongues, is in such sense the Holy Spirit, as the Sonof God is that man who was made of a virgin?), but only to the ministry of bringing about such
intimations as God judged needful; or whether anything else is to be understood: is difficult to
discover, and not expedient rashly to affirm. Yet I see not how those things could have been brought
to pass without the rational or intellectual creature. But it is not yet the proper place to explain, as
the Lord may give me strength, why I so think; for the arguments of heretics must first be discussed
and refuted, which they do not produce from the divine books, but from their own reasons, and bywhich, as they think, they forcibly compel us so to understand the testimonies of the Scriptures
which treat of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, as they themselves will.

118

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

32. But now, as I think, it has been sufficiently shown, that the Son is not therefore less because
He is sent by the Father, nor the Holy Spirit less because both the Father sent Him and the Son.
For these things are perceived to be laid down in the Scriptures, either on account of the visible
creature; or rather on account of commending to our thoughts the emanation [within the Godhead];563
but not on account of inequality, or imparity, or unlikeness of substance; since, even if God theFather had willed to appear visibly through the subject creature, yet it would be most absurd to saythat He was sent either by the Son, whom He begot, or by the Holy Spirit, who proceeds from Him.
Let this, therefore, be the limit of the present book. Henceforth in the rest we shall see, the Lord
helping, of what sort are those crafty arguments of the heretics, and in what manner they may be
confuted.

Book V.
————————————
Proceeds to treat of the arguments put forward by the heretics, not from Scripture, but from theirown reason. Those are refuted, who think the substance of the Father and of the Son to be not
the same, because everything predicated of God is, in their opinion, predicated of Him according
to substance; and therefore it follows, that to beget and to be begotten, or to be begotten andunbegotten, being diverse, are diverse substances; whereas it is here demonstrated that not
everything predicated of God is predicated according to substance, in such manner as He iscalled good and great according to substance, or anything else that is predicated of Him in
respect to Himself; but that some things are also predicated of Him relatively, i.e. not in respect
to Himself, but to something not Himself, as He is called Father in respect to the Son, and Lordin respect to the creature that serveth Him; in which case, if anything thus predicated relatively,
i.e. in respect to something not Himself, is even predicated as happening in time, as e.g. “Lord,thou hast become our refuge,” yet nothing happens to God so as to work a change in Him, but
He Himself remains absolutely unchangeable in His own nature or essence.
Chapter 1.—What the Author Entreats from God, What from the Reader. In God Nothing is to Be
Thought Corporeal or Changeable.
1. Beginning, as I now do henceforward, to speak of subjects which cannot altogether be spoken
as they are thought, either by any man, or, at any rate, not by myself; although even our very thought,
563[The original is: “propter principii commendationem,” which the English translator renders “On account of commending
to our thoughts the principle [of the Godhead].” The technical use of “principium” is missed. Augustin says that the phrases,“sending the Son,” and “sending the Spirit,” have reference to the “visible creature” through which in the theophanies each was
manifested; but still more, to the fact that the Father is the “beginning” of the Son, and the Father and Son are the “beginning”
of the Spirit. This fact of a “beginning,” or emanation (manatio) of one from another, is what is commended to ourthoughts.—W.G.T.S.]

119

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

when we think of God the Trinity, falls (as we feel) very far short of Him of whom we think, nor
comprehends Him as He is; but He is seen, as it is written, even by those who are so great as was
the Apostle Paul, “through a glass and in an enigma:”564 first, I pray to our Lord God Himself, ofwhom we ought always to think, and of whom we are not able to think worthily, in praise of whom
blessing is at all times to be rendered,565 and whom no speech is sufficient to declare, that He will
grant me both help for understanding and explaining that which I design, and pardon if in anything
I offend. For I bear in mind, not only my desire, but also my infirmity. I ask also of my readers topardon me, where they may perceive me to have had the desire rather than the power to speak,what they either understand better themselves, or fail to understand through the obscurity of mylanguage, just as I myself pardon them what they cannot understand through their own dullness.
2. And we shall mutually pardon one another the more easily, if we know, or at any rate firmly
believe and hold, that whatever is said of a nature, unchangeable, invisible and having life absolutely
and sufficient to itself, must not be measured after the custom of things visible, and changeable,
and mortal, or not self-sufficient. But although we labor, and yet fail, to grasp and know even those
things which are within the scope of our corporeal senses, or what we are ourselves in the innerman; yet it is with no shamelessness that faithful piety burns after those divine and unspeakable
things which are above: piety, I say, not inflated by the arrogance of its own power, but inflamedby the grace of its Creator and Saviour Himself. For with what understanding can man apprehendGod, who does not yet apprehend that very understanding itself of his own, by which he desires toapprehend Him? And if he does already apprehend this, let him carefully consider that there isnothing in his own nature better than it; and let him see whether he can there see any outlines offorms, or brightness of colors, or greatness of space, or distance of parts, or extension of size, or
any movements through intervals of place, or any such thing at all. Certainly we find nothing of
all this in that, than which we find nothing better in our own nature, that is, in our own intellect,
by which we apprehend wisdom according to our capacity. What, therefore, we do not find in thatwhich is our own best, we ought not to seek in Him who is far better than that best of ours; that so
we may understand God, if we are able, and as much as we are able, as good without quality, greatwithout quantity, a creator though He lack nothing, ruling but from no position, sustaining all things
without “having” them, in His wholeness everywhere, yet without place, eternal without time,making things that are changeable, without change of Himself, and without passion. Whoso thus
thinks of God, although he cannot yet find out in all ways what He is, yet piously takes heed, asmuch as he is able, to think nothing of Him that He is not.

Chapter 2.—God the Only Unchangeable Essence.
3. He is, however, without doubt, a substance, or, if it be better so to call it, an essence, which
the Greeks call
. For as wisdom is so called from the being wise, and knowledge from knowing;

564
565

1 Cor. xiii. 12.
Ps. xxxiv. 1.

120

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

so from being566 comes that which we call essence. And who is there that is, more than He who
said to His servant Moses, “I am that I am;” and, “Thus shall thou say unto the children of Israel,
He who is hath sent me unto you?”567 But other things that are called essences or substances admitof accidents, whereby a change, whether great or small, is produced in them. But there can be no
accident of this kind in respect to God; and therefore He who is God is the only unchangeable
substance or essence, to whom certainly being itself, whence comes the name of essence, mostespecially and most truly belongs. For that which is changed does not retain its own being; and thatwhich can be changed, although it be not actually changed, is able not to be that which it had been;
and hence that which not only is not changed, but also cannot at all be changed, alone falls mosttruly, without difficulty or hesitation, under the category of being.

Chapter 3.—The Argument of the Arians is Refuted, Which is Drawn from the Words Begotten
and Unbegotten.
4. Wherefore,—to being now to answer the adversaries of our faith, respecting those things
also, which are neither said as they are thought, nor thought as they really are:—among the manythings which the Arians are wont to dispute against the Catholic faith, they seem chiefly to set forththis, as their most crafty device, namely, that whatsoever is said or understood of God, is said notaccording to accident, but according to substance, and therefore, to be unbegotten belongs to the
Father according to substance, and to be begotten belongs to the Son according to substance; but
to be unbegotten and to be begotten are different; therefore the substance of the Father and that of
the Son are different. To whom we reply, If whatever is spoken of God is spoken according tosubstance, then that which is said, “I and the Father are one,”568 is spoken according to substance.
Therefore there is one substance of the Father and the Son. Or if this is not said according tosubstance, then something is said of God not according to substance, and therefore we are no longer
compelled to understand unbegotten and begotten according to substance. It is also said of the Son,
“He thought it not robbery to be equal with God.”569 We ask, equal according to what? For if He
is not said to be equal according to substance, then they admit that something may be said of God
not according to substance. Let them admit, then, that unbegotten and begotten are not spoken
according to substance. And if they do not admit this, on the ground that they will have all things
to be spoken of God according to substance, then the Son is equal to the Father according tosubstance.

566
567
568
569

Esse.
Ex. iii. 14.
John x. 30.
Phil. ii. 6.

121

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 4.—The Accidental Always Implies Some Change in the Thing.
5. That which is accidental commonly implies that it can be lost by some change of the thing
to which it is an accident. For although some accidents are said to be inseparable, which in Greek
are called, as the color black is to the feather of a raven; yet the feather loses that color, notindeed so long as it is a feather, but because the feather is not always. Wherefore the matter itself
is changeable; and whenever that animal or that feather ceases to be, and the whole of that body ischanged and turned into earth, it loses certainly that color also. Although the kind of accident whichis called separable may likewise be lost, not by separation, but by change; as, for instance, blackness
is called a separable accident to the hair of men, because hair continuing to be hair can grow white;
yet, if carefully considered, it is sufficiently apparent, that it is not as if anything departed byseparation away from the head when it grows white, as though blackness departed thence and went
somewhere and whiteness came in its place, but that the quality of color there is turned and changed.
Therefore there is nothing accidental in God, because there is nothing changeable or that may belost. But if you choose to call that also accidental, which, although it may not be lost, yet can be
decreased or increased,—as, for instance, the life of the soul: for as long as it is a soul, so long it
lives, and because the soul is always, it always lives; but because it lives more when it is wise, andless when it is foolish, here, too, some change comes to pass, not such that life is absent, as wisdom
is absent to the foolish, but such that it is less;—nothing of this kind, either, happens to God, because
He remains altogether unchangeable.

Chapter 5.—Nothing is Spoken of God According to Accident, But According to Substance or
According to Relation.
6. Wherefore nothing in Him is said in respect to accident, since nothing is accidental to Him,and yet all that is said is not said according to substance. For in created and changeable things, thatwhich is not said according to substance, must, by necessary alternative, be said according toaccident. For all things are accidents to them, which can be either lost or diminished, whether
magnitudes or qualities; and so also is that which is said in relation to something, as friendships,
relationships, services, likenesses, equalities, and anything else of the kind; so also positions andconditions,570 places and times, acts and passions. But in God nothing is said to be according toaccident, because in Him nothing is changeable; and yet everything that is said, is not said, according
to substance. For it is said in relation to something, as the Father in relation to the Son and the Sonin relation to the Father, which is not accident; because both the one is always Father, and the otheris always Son: yet not “always,” meaning from the time when the Son was born [natus], so that the
Father ceases not to be the Father because the Son never ceases to be the Son, but because the Son
was always born, and never began to be the Son. But if He had begun to be at any time, or were atany time to cease to be, the Son, then He would be called Son according to accident. But if the

570

Habitus.

122

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Father, in that He is called the Father, were so called in relation to Himself, not to the Son; and theSon, in that He is called the Son, were so called in relation to Himself, not to the Father; then boththe one would be called Father, and the other Son, according to substance. But because the Father
is not called the Father except in that He has a Son, and the Son is not called Son except in that He
has a Father, these things are not said according to substance; because each of them is not so called
in relation to Himself, but the terms are used reciprocally and in relation each to the other; nor yet
according to accident, because both the being called the Father, and the being called the Son, is
eternal and unchangeable to them. Wherefore, although to be the Father and to be the Son is different,
yet their substance is not different; because they are so called, not according to substance, butaccording to relation, which relation, however, is not accident, because it is not changeable.

Chapter 6.—Reply is Made to the Cavils of the Heretics in Respect to the Same Words Begotten
and Unbegotten.
7. But if they think they can answer this reasoning thus,—that the Father indeed is so called inrelation to the Son, and the Son in relation to the Father, but that they are said to be unbegotten andbegotten in relation to themselves, not in relation each to the other; for that it is not the same thing
to call Him unbegotten as it is to call Him the Father, because there would be nothing to hinder our
calling Him unbegotten even if He had not begotten the Son; and if any one beget a son, he is nottherefore himself unbegotten, for men, who are begotten by other men, themselves also beget others;
and therefore they say the Father is called Father in relation to the Son, and the Son is called Son
in relation to the Father, but unbegotten is said in relation to Himself, and begotten in relation toHimself; and therefore, if whatever is said in relation to oneself is said according to substance,
while to be unbegotten and to be begotten are different, then the substance is different:—if this iswhat they say, then they do not understand that they do indeed say something that requires more
careful discussion in respect to the term unbegotten, because neither is any one therefore a father
because unbegotten, nor therefore unbegotten because he is a father, and on that account he issupposed to be called unbegotten, not in relation to anything else, but in respect to himself; but, on
the other hand, with a wonderful blindness, they do not perceive that no one can be said to be
begotten except in relation to something. For he is therefore a son because begotten; and becausea son, therefore certainly begotten. And as is the relation of son to father, so is the relation of the
begotten to the begetter; and as is the relation of father to son, so is the relation of the begetter tothe begotten. And therefore any one is understood to be a begetter under one notion, but understood
to be unbegotten under another. For though both are said of God the Father, yet the former is said
in relation to the begotten, that is to the Son, which, indeed, they do not deny; but that He is called
unbegotten, they declare to be said in respect to Himself. They say then, If anything is said to be afather in respect to itself, which cannot be said to be a son in respect to itself, and whatever is said
in respect to self is said according to substance; and He is said to be unbegotten in respect to Himself,
which the Son cannot be said to be; therefore He is said to be unbegotten according to substance;and because the Son cannot be so said to be, therefore He is not of the same substance. This subtlety
is to be answered by compelling them to say themselves according to what it is that the Son is equal

123

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

to the Father; whether according to that which is said in relation to Himself, or according to thatwhich is said in relation to the Father. For it is not according to that which is said in relation to the
Father, since in relation to the Father He is said to be Son, and the Father is not Son, but Father.
Since Father and Son are not so called in relation to each other in the same way as friends andneighbors are; for a friend is so called relatively to his friend, and if they love each other equally,
then the same friendship is in both; and a neighbor is so called relatively to a neighbor, and because
they are equally neighbors to each other (for each is neighbor to the other, in the same degree as
the other is neighbor to him), there is the same neighborhood in both. But because the Son is not
so called relatively to the Son, but to the Father, it is not according to that which is said in relation
to the Father that the Son is equal to the Father; and it remains that He is equal according to thatwhich is said in relation to Himself. But whatever is said in relation to self is said according tosubstance: it remains therefore that He is equal according to substance; therefore the substance ofboth is the same. But when the Father is said to be unbegotten, it is not said what He is, but what
He is not; and when a relative term is denied, it is not denied according to substance, since therelative itself is not affirmed according to substance.

Chapter 7.—The Addition of a Negative Does Not Change the Predicament.
8. This is to be made clear by examples. And first we must notice, that by the word begotten issignified the same thing as is signified by the word son. For therefore a son, because begotten, andbecause a son, therefore certainly begotten. By the word unbegotten, therefore, it is declared that
he is not son. But begotten and unbegotten are both of them terms suitably employed; whereas in
Latin we can use the word “filius,” but the custom of the language does not allow us to speak of“infilius.” It makes no difference, however, in the meaning if he is called “non filius;” just as it isprecisely the same thing if he is called “non genitus,” instead of “ingenitus.” For so the terms ofboth neighbor and friend are used relatively, yet we cannot speak of “invicinus” as we can of“inimicus.” Wherefore, in speaking of this thing or that, we must not consider what the usage of
our own language either allows or does not allow, but what clearly appears to be the meaning of
the things themselves. Let us not therefore any longer call it unbegotten, although it can be so calledin Latin; but instead of this let us call it not begotten, which means the same. Is this then anythingelse than saying that he is not a son? Now the prefixing of that negative particle does not make thatto be said according to substance, which, without it, is said relatively; but that only is denied, which,without it, was affirmed, as in the other predicaments. When we say he is a man, we denote
substance. He therefore who says he is not a man, enunciates no other kind of predicament, but
only denies that. As therefore I affirm according to substance in saying he is a man, so I denyaccording to substance in saying he is not a man. And when the question is asked how large he is?
and I say he is quadrupedal, that is, four feet in measure, I affirm according to quantity, and he whosays he is not quadrupedal, denies according to quantity. I say he is white, I affirm according toquality; if I say he is not white, I deny according to quality. I say he is near, I affirm according torelation; if I say he is not near, I deny according to relation. I affirm according to position, when I
say he lies down; I deny according to position, when I say he does not lie down. I speak according124

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

to condition,571 when I say he is armed; I deny according to condition, when I say he is not armed;
and it comes to the same thing as if I should say he is unarmed. I affirm according to time, when I
say he is of yesterday; I deny according to time, when I say he is not of yesterday. And when I say
he is at Rome, I affirm according to place; and I deny according to place, when I say he is not at
Rome. I affirm according to the predicament of action, when I say he smites; but if I say he does
not smite, I deny according to action, so as to declare that he does not so act. And when I say he issmitten, I affirm according to the predicament of passion; and I deny according to the same, when
I say he is not smitten. And, in a word, there is no kind of predicament according to which we mayplease to affirm anything, without being proved to deny according to the same predicament, if we
prefix the negative particle. And since this is so, if I were to affirm according to substance, in saying
son, I should deny according to substance, in saying not son. But because I affirm relatively when
I say he is a son, for I refer to the father; therefore I deny relatively if I say he is not a son, for I
refer the same negation to the father, in that I wish to declare that he has not a parent. But if to becalled son is precisely equivalent to the being called begotten (as we said before), then to be called
not begotten is precisely equivalent to the being called not son. But we deny relatively when we
say he is not son, therefore we deny relatively when we say he is not begotten. Further, what is
unbegotten, unless not begotten? We do not escape, therefore, from the relative predicament, when
he is called unbegotten. For as begotten is not said in relation to self, but in that he is of a begetter;
so when one is called unbegotten, he is not so called in relation to himself, but it is declared that
he is not of a begetter. Both meanings, however, turn upon the same predicament, which is calledthat of relation. But that which is asserted relatively does not denote substance, and accordingly,
although begotten and unbegotten are diverse, they do not denote a different substance; because,
as son is referred to father, and not son to not father, so it follows inevitably that begotten must be
referred to begetter, and not-begotten to not-begetter.572

Chapter 8.—Whatever is Spoken of God According to Substance, is Spoken of Each Person
Severally, and Together of the Trinity Itself. One Essence in God, and Three, in Greek,
Hypostases, in Latin, Persons.
9. Wherefore let us hold this above all, that whatsoever is said of that most eminent and divine
loftiness in respect to itself, is said in respect to substance, but that which is said in relation toanything, is not said in respect to substance, but relatively; and that the effect of the same substancein Father and Son and Holy Spirit is, that whatsoever is said of each in respect to themselves, is tobe taken of them, not in the plural in sum, but in the singular. For as the Father is God, and the Son
571
572

Habitus.
The terms “unbegotten” and “begotten” are interchangeable with the terms Father and Son. This follows from the relationof a substantive to its adjective. In whatever sense a substantive is employed, in the same sense must the adjective formed fromit be employed. Consequently, if the first person of the Trinity may be called Father in a sense that implies deity, he may becalled Unbegotten in the same sense. And if the second person may be called Son in a sense implying deity, he may be called
Begotten in the same sense. The Ancient church often employed the adjective, and spoke of God the Unbegotten and God theBegotten (Justin Martyr, Apol. i. 25, 53; ii. 12, 13. Clem. Alex. Stromata v. xii.). This phraseology sounds strange to the Modern
church, yet the latter really says the same thing when it speaks of God the Father, and God the Son.—W.G.T.S.]

125

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, which no one doubts to be said in respect to substance, yet we
do not say that the very Supreme Trinity itself is three Gods, but one God. So the Father is great,
the Son great, and the Holy Spirit great; yet not three greats, but one great. For it is not written of
the Father alone, as they perversely suppose, but of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,“Thou art great: Thou art God alone.”573 And the Father is good, the Son good, and the Holy Spirit
good; yet not three goods, but one good, of whom it is said, “None is good, save one, that is, God.”
For the Lord Jesus, lest He should be understood as man only by him who said, “Good Master,”as addressing a man, does not therefore say, There is none good, save the Father alone; but, “Noneis good, save one, that is, God.”574 For the Father by Himself is declared by the name of Father;but by the name of God, both Himself and the Son and the Holy Spirit, because the Trinity is one
God. But position, and condition, and places, and times, are not said to be in God properly, but
metaphorically and through similitudes. For He is both said to dwell between the cherubims,575
which is spoken in respect to position; and to be covered with the deep as with a garment,576 whichis said in respect to condition; and “Thy years shall have no end,”577 which is said in respect oftime; and, “If I ascend up into heaven, Thou art there,”578 which is said in respect to place. And as
respects action (or making), perhaps it may be said most truly of God alone, for God alone makes
and Himself is not made. Nor is He liable to passions as far as belongs to that substance whereby
He is God. So the Father is omnipotent, the Son omnipotent, and the Holy Spirit is omnipotent; yet
not three omnipotents, but one omnipotent:579 “For of Him are all things, and through Him are allthings, and in Him are all things; to whom be glory.”580 Whatever, therefore, is spoken of God in
respect to Himself, is both spoken singly of each person, that is, of the Father, and the Son, and theHoly Spirit; and together of the Trinity itself, not plurally but in the singular. For inasmuch as to
God it is not one thing to be, and another thing to be great, but to Him it is the same thing to be, as
it is to be great; therefore, as we do not say three essences, so we do not say three greatnesses, but
one essence and one greatness. I say essence, which in Greek is called , and which we call moreusually substance.
10. They indeed use also the word hypostasis; but they intend to put a difference, I know not
what, between
and hypostasis: so that most of ourselves who treat these things in the Greek
language, are accustomed to say, μ,€ or in Latin, one essence, three substances.581

573

Ps. lxxxvi. 10.
Luke xviii. 18, 19.
575
Ps. lxxx. 1.
576
Ps. civ. 6.
577
Ps. cii. 27.
578
Ps. cxxxix. 8.
579[This phraseology appears in the analytical statements of the so-called Athanasian creed (cap. 11–16), and affords groundfor the opinion that this symbol is a Western one, originating in the school of Augustin.—W.G.T.S.]
580
Rom. xi. 36.
581[It is remarkable that Augustin, understanding thoroughly the distinction between essence and person, should not have
known the difference between οὐσία and ὑπόστασις. It would seem as if his only moderate acquaintance with the Greek language
would have been more than compensated by his profound trinitarian knowledge.
574

In respect to the term “substantia”—when it was discriminated from “essentia,” as it is here by Augustin—it corresponds to ὑπόστασις,
of which it is the translation. In this case, God is one essence in three substances. But when “substantia” was identified with “essentia,”then to say that God is one essence in three substances would be a self-contradiction. The identification of the two terms led subsequently
to the coinage, in the mediæval Latin, of the term “subsistantia,” to denote ὑπόστασις.—W.G.T.S.]

126

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 9.—The Three Persons Not Properly So Called [in a Human Sense].
But because with us the usage has already obtained, that by essence we understand the samething which is understood by substance; we do not dare to say one essence, three substances, but
one essence or substance and three persons: as many writers in Latin, who treat of these things,
and are of authority, have said, in that they could not find any other more suitable way by whichto enunciate in words that which they understood without words. For, in truth, as the Father is not
the Son, and the Son is not the Father, and that Holy Spirit who is also called the gift of God isneither the Father nor the Son, certainly they are three. And so it is said plurally, “I and my Father
are one.”582 For He has not said, “is one,” as the Sabellians say; but, “are one.” Yet, when thequestion is asked, What three? human language labors altogether under great poverty of speech.
The answer, however, is given, three “persons,” not that it might be [completely] spoken, but thatit might not be left [wholly] unspoken.

Chapter 10.—Those Things Which Belong Absolutely to God as an Essence, are Spoken of the
Trinity in the Singular, Not in the Plural.
11. As, therefore, we do not say three essences, so we do not say three greatnesses, or three
who are great. For in things which are great by partaking of greatness, to which it is one thing tobe, and another to be great, as a great house, and a great mountain, and a great mind; in thesethings, I say, greatness is one thing, and that which is great because of greatness is another, and agreat house, certainly, is not absolute greatness itself. But that is absolute greatness by which not
only a great house is great, and any great mountain is great, but also by which every other thingwhatsoever is great, which is called great; so that greatness itself is one thing, and those things areanother which are called great from it. And this greatness certainly is primarily great, and in a much
more excellent way than those things which are great by partaking of it. But since God is not greatwith that greatness which is not Himself, so that God, in being great, is, as it were, partaker of that
greatness;—otherwise that will be a greatness greater than God, whereas there is nothing greaterthan God; therefore, He is great with that greatness by which He Himself is that same greatness.
And, therefore, as we do not say three essences, so neither do we say three greatnesses; for it is thesame thing to God to be, and to be great. For the same reason neither do we say three greats, but
one who is great; since God is not great by partaking of greatness, but He is great by Himself being
great, because He Himself is His own greatness. Let the same be said also of the goodness, and of
the eternity, and of the omnipotence of God, and, in short, of all the predicaments which can bepredicated of God, as He is spoken of in respect to Himself, not metaphorically and by similitude,
but properly, if indeed anything can be spoken of Him properly, by the mouth of man.

582

John x. 30.

127

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 11.—What is Said Relatively in the Trinity.
12. But whereas, in the same Trinity, some things severally are specially predicated, these arein no way said in reference to themselves in themselves, but either in mutual reference, or in respect
to the creature; and, therefore, it is manifest that such things are spoken relatively, not in the wayof substance. For the Trinity is called one God, great, good, eternal, omnipotent; and the same God
Himself may be called His own deity, His own magnitude, His own goodness, His own eternity,
His own omnipotence: but the Trinity cannot in the same way be called the Father, except perhaps
metaphorically, in respect to the creature, on account of the adoption of sons. For that which is
written, “Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God is one Lord,”583 ought certainly not to be understood as
if the Son were excepted, or the Holy Spirit were excepted; which one Lord our God we rightly
call also our Father, as regenerating us by His grace. Neither can the Trinity in any wise be called
the Son, but it can be called, in its entirety, the Holy Spirit, according to that which is written, “Godis a Spirit;”584 because both the Father is a spirit and the Son is a spirit, and the Father is holy andthe Son is holy. Therefore, since the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are one God, and certainly
God is holy, and God is a spirit, the Trinity can be called also the Holy Spirit. But yet that Holy
Spirit, who is not the Trinity, but is understood as in the Trinity, is spoken of in His proper nameof the Holy Spirit relatively, since He is referred both to the Father and to the Son, because theHoly Spirit is the Spirit both of the Father and of the Son. But the relation is not itself apparent inthat name, but it is apparent when He is called the gift of God;585 for He is the gift of the Father
and of the Son, because “He proceeds from the Father,”586 as the Lord says; and because that which
the apostle says, “Now, if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His,”587 he sayscertainly of the Holy Spirit Himself. When we say, therefore, the gift of the giver, and the giver ofthe gift, we speak in both cases relatively in reciprocal reference. Therefore the Holy Spirit is acertain unutterable communion of the Father and the Son; and on that account, perhaps, He is socalled, because the same name is suitable to both the Father and the Son. For He Himself is called
specially that which they are called in common; because both the Father is a spirit and the Son a
spirit, both the Father is holy and the Son holy.588 In order, therefore, that the communion of both583

Deut. vi. 4.
John iv. 24.
585
Acts viii. 20.
586John xv. 26.
587
Rom. viii. 9.
588[The reason which Augustin here assigns, why the name Holy Spirit is given to the third person—namely, because spirituality
is a characteristic of both the Father and Son, from both of whom he proceeds—is not that assigned in the more developed
trinitarianism. The explanation in this latter is, that the third person is denominated the Spirit because of the peculiar mannerin which the divine essence is communicated to him—namely, by spiration or out-breathing: spiritus quia spiratus. This is
supported by the etymological signification of πνεῦμα, which is breath; and by the symbolical action of Christ in John xx. 22,
which suggests the eternal spiration, or out-breathing of the third person. The third trinitarian person is no more spiritual, in thesense of immaterial, than the first and second persons, and if the term “Spirit” is to be taken in this the ordinary signification,
the “trinitarian relation,” or personal peculiarity, as Augustin remarks, “is not itself apparent in this name;” because it would
mention nothing distinctive of the third person, and not belonging to the first and second. But taken technically to denote thespiration or out-breathing by the Father and Son, the trinitarian peculiarity is apparent in the name.
584

And the epithet “Holy” is similarly explained. The third person is the Holy Spirit, not because he is any more holy than the first andsecond, but because he is the source and author of holiness in all created spirits. This is eminently and officially his work. In this way

128

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

may be signified from a name which is suitable to both, the Holy Spirit is called the gift of both.
And this Trinity is one God, alone, good, great, eternal, omnipotent; itself its own unity, deity,
greatness, goodness, eternity, omnipotence.

Chapter 12.—In Relative Things that are Reciprocal, Names are Sometimes Wanting.
13. Neither ought it to influence us—since we have said that the Holy Spirit is so called relatively,
not the Trinity itself, but He who is in the Trinity—that the designation of Him to whom He isreferred, does not seem to answer in turn to His designation. For we cannot, as we say the servantof a master, and the master of a servant, the son of a father and the father of a son, so also say
here—because these things are said relatively. For we speak of the Holy Spirit of the Father; but,on the other hand, we do not speak of the Father of the Holy Spirit, lest the Holy Spirit should beunderstood to be His Son. So also we speak of the Holy Spirit of the Son; but we do not speak of
the Son of the Holy Spirit, lest the Holy Spirit be understood to be His Father. For it is the case inmany relatives, that no designation is to be found by which those things which bear relation to eachother may [in name] mutually correspond to each other. For what is more clearly spoken relatively
than the word earnest? Since it is referred to that of which it is an earnest, and an earnest is always
an earnest of something. Can we then, as we say, the earnest of the Father and of the Son,589 say
in turn, the Father of the earnest or the Son of the earnest? But, on the other hand, when we say thegift of the Father and of the Son, we cannot indeed say the Father of the gift, or the Son of the gift;
but that these may correspond mutually to each other, we say the gift of the giver and the giver ofthe gift; because here a word in use may be found, there it cannot.

Chapter 13.—How the Word Beginning (Principium) is Spoken Relatively in the Trinity.
14. The Father is called so, therefore, relatively, and He is also relatively said to be the Beginning,
and whatever else there may be of the kind; but He is called the Father in relation to the Son, theBeginning in relation to all things, which are from Him. So the Son is relatively so called; He iscalled also relatively the Word and the Image. And in all these appellations He is referred to the
Father, but the Father is called by none of them. And the Son is also called the Beginning; for when
it was said to Him, “Who art Thou?” He replied, “Even the Beginning, who also speak to you.”590
But is He, pray, the Beginning of the Father? For He intended to show Himself to be the Creator
when He said that He was the Beginning, as the Father also is the beginning of the creature in that
all things are from Him. For creator, too, is spoken relatively to creature, as master to servant. And

also, the epithet “Holy”—which in its ordinary use would specify nothing peculiar to the third person,—mentions a characteristic thatdifferentiates him from the Father and Son.—W.G.T.S.]
589
590

2 Cor. v. 5, and Eph. i. 14.
John viii. 25.

129

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

so when we say, both that the Father is the Beginning, and that the Son is the Beginning, we do not
speak of two beginnings of the creature; since both the Father and the Son together is one beginningin respect to the creature, as one Creator, as one God. But if whatever remains within itself andproduces or works anything is a beginning to that thing which it produces or works; then we cannot
deny that the Holy Spirit also is rightly called the Beginning, since we do not separate Him fromthe appellation of Creator: and it is written of Him that He works; and assuredly, in working, He
remains within Himself; for He Himself is not changed and turned into any of the things which He
works. And see what it is that He works: “But the manifestation of the Spirit,” he says, “is given
to every man to profit withal. For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another theword of knowledge by the same Spirit; to another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts ofhealing by the same Spirit; to another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another thediscerning 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;”certainly as God—for who can work such great things but God?—but “it is the same God which
worketh all in all.”591 For if we are asked point by point concerning the Holy Spirit, we answer
most truly that He is God; and with the Father and the Son together He is one God. Therefore, God
is spoken of as one Beginning in respect to the creature, not as two or three beginnings.

Chapter 14.—The Father and the Son the Only Beginning (Principium) of the Holy Spirit.
15. But in their mutual relation to one another in the Trinity itself, if the begetter is a beginningin relation to that which he begets, the Father is a beginning in relation to the Son, because He
begets Him; but whether the Father is also a beginning in relation to the Holy Spirit, since it is said,“He proceeds from the Father,” is no small question. Because, if it is so, He will not only be a
beginning to that thing which He begets or makes, but also to that which He gives. And here, too,that question comes to light, as it can, which is wont to trouble many, Why the Holy Spirit is notalso a son, since He, too, comes forth from the Father, as it is read in the Gospel.592 For the Spirit
came forth, not as born, but as given; and so He is not called a son, because He was neither born,as the Only-begotten, nor made, so that by the grace of God He might be born into adoption, as weare. For that which is born of the Father, is referred to the Father only when called Son, and so the
Son is the Son of the Father, and not also our Son; but that which is given is referred both to Him
who gave, and to those to whom He gave; and so the Holy Spirit is not only the Spirit of the Father
and of the Son who gave Him, but He is also called ours, who have received Him: as “The salvationof the Lord,”593 who gives salvation, is said also to be our salvation, who have received it. Therefore,
the Spirit is both the Spirit of God who gave Him, and ours who have received Him. Not, indeed,that spirit of ours by which we are, because that is the spirit of a man which is in him; but this Spirit

591
592
593

1 Cor. xii. 6–11.
John xv. 26.
Ps. iii. 8.

130

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

is ours in another mode, viz. that in which we also say, “Give us this day our bread.”594 Althoughcertainly we have received that spirit also, which is called the spirit of a man. “For what hast thou,”he says, “which thou didst not receive?”595 But that is one thing, which we have received that wemight be; another, that which we have received that we might be holy. Whence it is also written
of John, that he “came in the spirit and power of Elias;”596 and by the spirit of Elias is meant theHoly Spirit, whom Elias received. And the same thing is to be understood of Moses, when the Lordsays to him, “And I will take of thy spirit, and will put it upon them;”597 that is, I will give to themof the Holy Spirit, which I have already given to thee. If, therefore, that also which is given has
him for a beginning by whom it is given, since it has received from no other source that which
proceeds from him; it must be admitted that the Father and the Son are a Beginning of the Holy
Spirit, not two Beginnings; but as the Father and Son are one God, and one Creator, and one Lord
relatively to the creature, so are they one Beginning relatively to the Holy Spirit. But the Father,
the Son, and the Holy Spirit is one Beginning in respect to the creature, as also one Creator and
one God.598

Chapter 15.—Whether the Holy Spirit Was a Gift Before as Well as After He Was Given.
16. But it is asked further, whether, as the Son, by being born, has not only this, that He is theSon, but that He is absolutely; and so also the Holy Spirit, by being given, has not only this, that
He is given, but that He is absolutely—whether therefore He was, before He was given, but was
not yet a gift; or whether, for the very reason that God was about to give Him, He was already agift also before He was given. But if He does not proceed unless when He is given, and assuredly
could not proceed before there was one to whom He might be given; how, in that case, was He[absolutely] in His very substance, if He is not unless because He is given? just as the Son, by being
born, not only has this, that He is a Son, which is said relatively, but His very substance absolutely,
so that He is. Does the Holy Spirit proceed always, and proceed not in time, but from eternity, but
because He so proceeded that He was capable of being given, was already a gift even before there
was one to whom He might be given? For there is a difference in meaning between a gift and a
594

Matt. vi. 11.
1 Cor. iv. 7.
596
Luke i. 17.
597
Num. xi. 17.
598[The term “beginning” (principium), when referring to the relation of the Trinity, or of any person of the Trinity, to thecreature, denotes creative energy, whereby a new substance is originated from nothing. This is the reference in chapter 13. But
when the term refers to the relations of the persons of the Trinity to each other, it denotes only a modifying energy, whereby
an existing uncreated substance is communicated by generation and spiration. This is the reference in chapter 14.
595

When it is said that the Father is the “beginning” of the Son, and the Father and Son are the “beginning” of the Spirit, it is not meantthat the substance of the Son is created ex nihilo by the Father, and the substance of the Spirit is created by the Father and Son, but onlythat the Son by eternal generation receives from the Father the one uncreated and undivided substance of the Godhead, and the Spirit by
eternal spiration receives the same numerical substance from the Father and Son. The term “beginning” relates not to the essence, but tothe personal peculiarity. Sonship originates in fatherhood; but deity is unoriginated. The Son as the second person “begins” from theFather, because the Father communicates the essence to him. His sonship, not his deity or godhood, “begins” from the Father. And thesame holds true of the term “beginning” as applied to the Holy Spirit. The “procession” of the Holy Spirit “begins” by spiration from theFather and Son, but not his deity or godhood.—W.G.T.S.]

131

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

thing that has been given. For a gift may exist even before it is given; but it cannot be called a thingthat has been given unless it has been given.

Chapter 16.—What is Said of God in Time, is Said Relatively, Not Accidentally.
17. Nor let it trouble us that the Holy Spirit, although He is co-eternal with the Father and theSon, yet is called something which exists in time; as, for instance, this very thing which we havecalled Him, a thing that has been given. For the Spirit is a gift eternally, but a thing that has been
given in time. For if a lord also is not so called unless when he begins to have a slave, that appellation
likewise is relative and in time to God; for the creature is not from all eternity, of which He is theLord. How then shall we make it good that relative terms themselves are not accidental, sincenothing happens accidentally to God in time, because He is incapable of change, as we have argued
in the beginning of this discussion? Behold! to be the Lord, is not eternal to God; otherwise weshould be compelled to say that the creature also is from eternity, since He would not be a lordfrom all eternity unless the creature also was a servant from all eternity. But as he cannot be a slave
who has not a lord, neither can he be a lord who has not a slave. And if there be any one who saysthat God, indeed, is alone eternal, and that times are not eternal on account of their variety andchangeableness, but that times nevertheless did not begin to be in time (for there was no time before
times began, and therefore it did not happen to God in time that He should be Lord, since He was
Lord of the very times themselves, which assuredly did not begin in time): what will he reply
respecting man, who was made in time, and of whom assuredly He was not the Lord before he wasof whom He was to be Lord? Certainly to be the Lord of man happened to God in time. And thatall dispute may seem to be taken away, certainly to be your Lord, or mine, who have only lately
begun to be, happened to God in time. Or if this, too, seems uncertain on account of the obscurequestion respecting the soul, what is to be said of His being the Lord of the people of Israel? since,
although the nature of the soul already existed, which that people had (a matter into which we do
not now inquire), yet that people existed not as yet, and the time is apparent when it began to exist.
Lastly, that He should be Lord of this or that tree, or of this or that corn crop, which only latelybegan to be, happened in time; since, although the matter itself already existed, yet it is one thing
to be Lord of the matter (materiæ), another to be Lord of the already created nature (naturæ).599
For man, too, is lord of the wood at one time, and at another he is lord of the chest, althoughfabricated of that same wood; which he certainly was not at the time when he was already the lordof the wood. How then shall we make it good that nothing is said of God according to accident,
except because nothing happens to His nature by which He may be changed, so that those things
are relative accidents which happen in connection with some change of the things of which they
are spoken. As a friend is so called relatively: for he does not begin to be one, unless when he has
begun to love; therefore some change of will takes place, in order that he may be called a friend.
And money, when it is called a price, is spoken of relatively, and yet it was not changed when it
599[“Matter” denotes the material as created ex nihilo: “nature” the material as formed into individuals. In this reference,
Augustin speaks of “the nature of the soul” of the people of Israel as existing while “as yet that people existed not” individually—
having in mind their race-existence in Adam.—W.G.T.S.]

132

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

began to be a price; nor, again, when it is called a pledge, or any other thing of the kind. If, therefore,
money can so often be spoken of relatively with no change of itself, so that neither when it begins,
nor when it ceases to be so spoken of, does any change take place in that nature or form of it,
whereby it is money; how much more easily ought we to admit, concerning that unchangeable
substance of God, that something may be so predicated relatively in respect to the creature, that
although it begin to be so predicated in time, yet nothing shall be understood to have happened tothe substance itself of God, but only to that creature in respect to which it is predicated? “Lord,” itis said, “Thou hast been made our refuge.”600 God, therefore, is said to be our refuge relatively, for
He is referred to us, and He then becomes our refuge when we flee to Him; pray does anything
come to pass then in His nature, which, before we fled to Him, was not? In us therefore some change
does take place; for we were worse before we fled to Him, and we become better by fleeing to Him:
but in Him there is no change. So also He begins to be our Father, when we are regenerated throughHis grace, since He gave us power to become the sons of God.601 Our substance therefore is changed
for the better, when we become His sons; and He at the same time begins to be our Father, but
without any change of His own substance. Therefore that which begins to be spoken of God intime, and which was not spoken of Him before, is manifestly spoken of Him relatively; yet notaccording to any accident of God, so that anything should have happened to Him, but clearlyaccording to some accident of that, in respect to which God begins to be called something relatively.
When a righteous man begins to be a friend of God, he himself is changed; but far be it from us tosay, that God loves any one in time with as it were a new love, which was not in Him before, withwhom things gone by have not passed away and things future have been already done. Therefore
He loved all His saints before the foundation of the world, as He predestinated them; but when they
are converted and find them; then they are said to begin to be loved by Him, that what is said may
be said in that way in which it can be comprehended by human affections. So also, when He is said
to be wroth with the unrighteous, and gentle with the good, they are changed, not He: just as thelight is troublesome to weak eyes, pleasant to those that are strong; namely, by their change, notits own.

Book VI.
————————————The question is proposed, how the apostle calls Christ “the power of God, and the wisdom of God.”
And an argument is raised, whether the Father is not wisdom Himself, but only the Father of
wisdom; or whether Wisdom begat Wisdom. But the answer to this is deferred for a little, while
the unity and equality of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, are proved; and

600
601

Ps. xc.1.
John i. 12.

133

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffthat we ought to believe in a Trinity, not in a threefold (triplicem) god. Lastly, that saying of
Hilary is explained, eternity in the Father, appearance in the image, use in the gift.
Chapter 1.—The Son, According to the Apostle, is the Power and Wisdom of the Father. Hencethe Reasoning of the Catholics Against the Earlier Arians. A Difficulty is Raised, Whether the
Father is Not Wisdom Himself, But Only the Father of Wisdom.
1. Somethink themselves hindered from admitting the equality of the Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit, because it is written, “Christ, the power of God, and the wisdom of God;” in that, on thisground, there does not appear to be equality; because the Father is not Himself power and wisdom,
but the begetter of power and wisdom. And, in truth, the question is usually asked with no common
earnestness, in what way God can be called the Father of power and wisdom. For the apostle says,“Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.”602 And hence some on our side have reasonedin this way against the Arians, at least against those who at first set themselves up against the
Catholic faith. For Arius himself is reported to have said, that if He is a Son, then He was born; if
He was born, there was a time when the Son was not: not understanding that even to be born is, toGod, from all eternity; so that the Son is co-eternal with the Father, as the brightness which is
produced and is spread around by fire is co-eval with it, and would be co-eternal, if fire were eternal.
And therefore some of the later Arians have abandoned that opinion, and have confessed that the
Son of God did not begin to be in time. But among the arguments which those on our side used tohold against them who said that there was a time when the Son was not, some were wont to introduce
such an argument as this: If the Son of God is the power and wisdom of God, and God was neverwithout power and wisdom, then the Son is co-eternal with God the Father; but the apostle says,“Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God;” and a man must be senseless to say that God
at any time had not power or wisdom; therefore there was no time when the Son was not.
2. Now this argument compels us to say that God the Father is not wise, except by having thewisdom which He begat, not by the Father in Himself being wisdom itself. Further, if it be so, justas the Son also Himself is called God of God, Light of Light, we must consider whether He can becalled wisdom of wisdom, if God the Father is not wisdom itself, but only the begetter of wisdom.
And if we hold this, why is He not the begetter also of His own greatness, and of His own goodness,and of His own eternity, and of His own omnipotence; so that He is not Himself His own greatness,and His own goodness, and His own eternity, and His own omnipotence; but is great with that
greatness which He begat, and good with that goodness, and eternal with that eternity, and omnipotent
with that omnipotence, which was born of Him; just as He Himself is not His own wisdom, but is
wise with that wisdom which was born of Him? For we need not be afraid of being compelled to
say that there are many sons of God, over and above the adoption of the creature, co-eternal with
the Father, if He be the begetter of His own greatness, and goodness, and eternity, and omnipotence.
Because it is easy to reply to this cavil, that it does not at all follow, because many things are named,that He should be the Father of many co-eternal sons; just as it does not follow that He is the Fatherof two sons, because Christ is said to be the power of God, and the wisdom of God. For that certainlyis the power which is the wisdom, and that is the wisdom which is the power; and in like manner,602

1 Cor. i. 24.

134

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

therefore, of the rest also; so that that is the greatness which is the power, or any other of those
things which either have been mentioned above, or may hereafter be mentioned.

Chapter 2 .—What is Said of the Father and Son Together, and What Not.
3. But if nothing is spoken of the Father as such, except that which is spoken of Him in relation
to the Son, that is, that He is His father, or begetter, or beginning; and if also the begetter is byconsequence a beginning to that which he begets of himself; but whatever else is spoken of Him
is so spoken as with the Son, or rather in the Son; whether that He is great with that greatness which
He begat, or just with that justice which He begat, or good with that goodness which He begat, or
powerful with that force or power which He begat, or wise with that wisdom which He begat: yet
the Father is not said to be greatness itself, but the begetter of greatness; but the Son, as He is called
the Son as such, is not so called with the Father but in relation to the Father, so is not great in andby himself, but with the Father, of whom He is the greatness; and so also is called wise with the
Father, of whom He Himself is the wisdom; just as the Father is called wise with the Son, because
He is wise with that wisdom which He begat; therefore the one is not called without the other,whatever they are called in respect to themselves; that is, whatever they are called that manifests
their essential nature, both are so called together;—if these things are so, then the Father is not God
without the Son, nor the Son God without the Father, but both together are God. And that whichis said, “In the beginning was the Word,” means that the Word was in the Father. Or if “In the
beginning” is intended to mean, Before all things; then in that which follows, “And the Word waswith God,” the Son alone is understood to be the Word, not the Father and Son together, as thoughboth were one Word (for He is the Word in the same way as He is the Image, but the Father and
Son are not both together the Image, but the Son alone is the Image of the Father: just as He is also
the Son of the Father, for both together are not the Son). But in that which is added, “And the Word
was with God,” there is much reason to understand thus: “The Word,” which is the Son alone, “waswith God,” which is not the Father alone, but God the Father and the Son together.603 But whatwonder is there, if this can be said in the case of some twofold things widely different from eachother? For what are so different as soul and body? Yet we can say the soul was with a man, that is,
in a man; although the soul is not the body, and man is both soul and body together. So that what
follows in the Scripture, “And the Word was God,”604 may be understood thus: The Word, which
is not the Father, was God together with the Father. Are we then to say thus, that the Father is thebegetter of His own greatness, that is, the begetter of His own power, or the begetter of His own
wisdom; and that the Son is greatness, and power, and wisdom; but that the great, omnipotent, and603[The term “God,” in the proposition, “the Word was with God,” must refer to the Father, not to “the Father and Son
together,” because the Son could not be said to be “with” himself. St. John says that “the word was God” (θεός). The absenceof the article with θεός denotes the abstract deity, or the divine nature without reference to the persons in it. He also says that“the Word was with God” (τόν θεόν). The presence of the article in this instance denotes one of the divine persons in the essence:
namely, the Father, with whom the Word was from eternity, and upon whose “bosom” he was from eternity. (John i.
18).—W.G.T.S.]
604
John i. 1.

135

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

wise God, is both together? How then God of God, Light of Light? For not both together are God
of God, but only the Son is of God, that is to say, of the Father; nor are both together Light of Light,
but the Son only is of Light, that is, of the Father. Unless, perhaps, it was in order to intimate andinculcate briefly that the Son is co-eternal with the Father, that it is said, God of God, and Light ofLight, or anything else of the like kind: as if to say, This which is not the Son without the Father,of this which is not the Father without the Son; that is, this Light which is not Light without the
Father, of that Light, viz. the Father, which is not Light without the Son; so that, when it is said,
God which is not the Son without the Father, and of God which is not the Father without the Son,it may be perfectly understood that the Begetter did not precede that which He begot. And if thisbe so, then this alone cannot be said of them, namely, this or that of this or that, which they are notboth together. Just as the Word cannot be said to be of the Word, because both are not the Word
together, but only the Son; nor image of image, since they are not both together the image; nor Son
of Son, since both together are not the Son, according to that which is said, “I and my Father areone.”605 For “we are one” means, what He is, that am I also; according to essence, not according
to relation.

Chapter 3.—That the Unity of the Essence of the Father and the Son is to Be Gathered from theWords, “We are One.” The Son is Equal to the Father Both in Wisdom and in All Other Things.
4. And I know not whether the words, “They are one,” are ever found in Scripture as spokenof things of which the nature is different. But if there are more things than one of the same nature,and they differ in sentiment, they are not one, and that so far as they differ in sentiment. For if thedisciples were already one by the fact of being men, He would not say, “That they may be one, as
we are one,”606 when commending them to the Father. But because Paul and Apollos were bothalike men, and also of like sentiments, “He that planteth,” he says, “and he that watereth are one.”607
When, therefore, anything is so called one, that it is not added in what it is one, and yet more things
than one are called one, then the same essence and nature is signified, not differing nor disagreeing.
But when it is added in what it is one, it may be meant that something is made one out of things
more than one, though they are different in nature. As soul and body are assuredly not one; for,what are so different? unless there be added, or understood in what they are one, that is, one man,or one animal [person]. Thence the apostle says, “He who is joined to a harlot, is one body;” hedoes not say, they are one or he is one; but he has added “body,” as though it were one bodycomposed by being joined together of two different bodies, masculine and feminine.608 And, “He
that is joined unto the Lord,” he says,” is one spirit:” he did not say, he that is joined unto the Lord
is one, or they are one; but he added, “spirit.” For the spirit of man and the Spirit of God are different
in nature; but by being joined they become one spirit of two different spirits, so that the Spirit of

605
606
607
608

John x. 30.
John xvii. 11.
1 Cor. iii. 8.
1 Cor. vi. 16, 17.

136

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

God is blessed and perfect without the human spirit, but the spirit of man cannot be blessed without
God. Nor is it without cause, I think, that when the Lord said so much in the Gospel according toJohn, and so often, of unity itself, whether of His own with the Father, or of ours interchangeably
with ourselves; He has nowhere said, that we are also one with Himself, but, “that they maybe one
as we also are one.”609 Therefore the Father and the Son are one, undoubtedly according to unityof substance; and there is one God, and one great, and one wise, as we have argued.
5. Whence then is the Father greater? For if greater, He is greater by greatness; but whereas the
Son is His greatness, neither assuredly is the Son greater than He who begat Him, nor is the Father
greater than that greatness, whereby He is great; therefore they are equal. For whence is He equal,
if not in that which He is, to whom it is not one thing to be, and another to be great? Or if the Father
is greater in eternity, the Son is not equal in anything whatsoever. For whence equal? If you say ingreatness, that greatness is not equal which is less eternal, and so of all things else. Or is He perhaps
equal in power, but not equal in wisdom? But how is that power which is less wise, equal? Or is
He equal in wisdom, but not equal in power? But how is that wisdom equal which is less powerful?
It remains, therefore, that if He is not equal in anything, He is not equal in all. But Scripture
proclaims, that “He thought it not robbery to be equal with God.”610 Therefore any adversary of
the truth whatever, provided he feels bound by apostolical authority, must needs confess that the
Son is equal with God in each one thing whatsoever. Let him choose that which he will; from it hewill be shown, that He is equal in all things which are said of His substance.

Chapter 4.—The Same Argument Continued.
6. For in like manner the virtues which are in the human mind, although each has its own several
and different meaning, yet are in no way mutually separable; so that, for instance, whosoever wereequal in courage, are equal also in prudence, and temperance, and justice. For if you say that suchand such men are equal in courage, but that one of them is greater in prudence, it follows that thecourage of the other is less prudent, and so neither are they equal in courage, since the courage ofthe former is more prudent. And so you will find it to be the case with the other virtues, if you
consider them one by one. For the question is not of the strength of the body, but of the courage ofthe mind. How much more therefore is this the case in that unchangeable and eternal substance,
which is incomparably more simple than the human mind is? Since, in the human mind, to be is
not the same as to be strong, or prudent, or just, or temperate; for a mind can exist, and yet havenone of these virtues. But in God to be is the same as to be strong, or to be just, or to be wise, orwhatever is said of that simple multiplicity, or multifold simplicity, whereby to signify His substance.
Wherefore, whether we say God of God in such way that this name belongs to each, yet not so thatboth together are two Gods, but one God; for they are in such way united with each other, as
according to the apostle’s testimony may take place even in diverse and differing substances; forboth the Lord alone is a Spirit, and the spirit of a man alone is assuredly a spirit; yet, if it cleave to

609
610

John xvii. 11.
Phil. ii. 6.

137

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

the Lord, “it is one spirit:” how much more there, where there is an absolutely inseparable andeternal union, so that He may not seem absurdly to be called as it were the Son of both, when He
is called the Son of God, if that which is called God is only said of both together. Or perhaps it is,that whatever is said of God so as to indicate His substance, is not said except of both together, nayof the Trinity itself together? Whether therefore it be this or that (which needs a closer inquiry), it
is enough for the present to see from what has been said, that the Son is in no respect equal with
the Father, if He is found to be unequal in anything which has to do with signifying His substance,
as we have already shown. But the apostle has said that He is equal. Therefore the Son is equalwith the Father in all things, and is of one and the same substance.

Chapter 5.—The Holy Spirit Also is Equal to the Father and the Son in All Things.
7. Wherefore also the Holy Spirit consists in the same unity of substance, and in the sameequality. For whether He is the unity of both, or the holiness, or the love, or therefore the unity
because the love, and therefore the love because the holiness, it is manifest that He is not one of
the two, through whom the two are joined, through whom the Begotten is loved by the Begetter,and loves Him that begat Him, and through whom, not by participation, but by their own essence,neither by the gift of any superior, but by their own, they are “keeping the unity of the Spirit in thebond of peace;”611 which we are commanded to imitate by grace, both towards God and towards
ourselves. “On which two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”612 So those three areGod, one, alone, great, wise, holy, blessed. But we are blessed from Him, and through Him, andin Him; because we ourselves are one by His gift, and one spirit with Him, because our soul cleaves
to Him so as to follow Him. And it is good for us to cleave to God, since He will destroy every
man who is estranged from Him.613 Therefore the Holy Spirit, whatever it is, is something common
both to the Father and Son. But that communion itself is consubstantial and co-eternal; and if it
may fitly be called friendship, let it be so called; but it is more aptly called love. And this is also a
substance, since God is a substance, and “God is love,” as it is written.614 But as He is a substance
together with the Father and the Son, so that substance is together with them great, and together
with them good, and together with them holy, and whatsoever else is said in reference to substance;since it is not one thing to God to be, and another to be great or to be good, and the rest, as we haveshown above. For if love is less great therein [i.e. in God] than wisdom, then wisdom is loved inless degree than according to what it is; love is therefore equal, in order that wisdom may be loved
according to its being; but wisdom is equal with the Father, as we have proved above; therefore
also the Holy Spirit is equal; and if equal, equal in all things, on account of the absolute simplicity
which is in that substance. And therefore they are not more than three: One who loves Him who is

611
612
613
614

Eph. iv. 3.
Matt. xxii. 37–40.
Ps. lxxvii. 28, 27.
1 John iv. 16.

138

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

from Himself, and One who loves Him from whom He is, and Love itself. And if this last is nothing,
how is “God love”? If it is not substance, how is God substance?

Chapter 6.—How God is a Substance Both Simple and Manifold.
8. But if it is asked how that substance is both simple and manifold: consider, first, why thecreature is manifold, but in no way really simple. And first, all that is body is composed certainlyof parts; so that therein one part is greater, another less, and the whole is greater than any partwhatever or how great soever. For the heaven and the earth are parts of the whole bulk of the world;
and the earth alone, and the heaven alone, is composed of innumerable parts; and its third part isless than the remainder, and the half of it is less than the whole; and the whole body of the world,which is usually called by its two parts, viz. the heaven and the earth, is certainly greater than theheaven alone or the earth alone. And in each several body, size is one thing, color another, shape
another; for the same color and the same shape may remain with diminished size; and the same
shape and the same size may remain with the color changed; and the same shape not remaining,
yet the thing may be just as great, and of the same color. And whatever other things are predicatedtogether of body can be changed either all together, or the larger part of them without the rest. And
hence the nature of body is conclusively proved to be manifold, and in no respect simple. The
spiritual creature also, that is, the soul, is indeed the more simple of the two if compared with thebody; but if we omit the comparison with the body, it is manifold, and itself also not simple. For
it is on this account more simple than the body, because it is not diffused in bulk through extensionof place, but in each body, it is both whole in the whole, and whole in each several part of it; and,
therefore, when anything takes place in any small particle whatever of the body, such as the soul
can feel, although it does not take place in the whole body, yet the whole soul feels it, since thewhole soul is not unconscious of it. But, nevertheless, since in the soul also it is one thing to beskillful, another to be indolent, another to be intelligent, another to be of retentive memory; since
cupidity is one thing, fear another, joy another, sadness another; and since things innumerable, andin innumerable ways, are to be found in the nature of the soul, some without others, and some more,some less; it is manifest that its nature is not simple, but manifold. For nothing simple is changeable,
but every creature is changeable.

Chapter 7.—God is a Trinity, But Not Triple (Triplex).
But God is truly called in manifold ways, great, good, wise, blessed, true, and whatsoever otherthing seems to be said of Him not unworthily: but His greatness is the same as His wisdom; for He
is not great by bulk, but by power; and His goodness is the same as His wisdom and greatness, andHis truth the same as all those things; and in Him it is not one thing to be blessed, and another tobe great, or wise, or true, or good, or in a word to be Himself.

139

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

9. Neither, since He is a Trinity, is He therefore to be thought triple (triplex)615 otherwise theFather alone, or the Son alone, will be less than the Father and Son together. Although, indeed, it
is hard to see how we can say, either the Father alone, or the Son alone; since both the Father iswith the Son, and the Son with the Father, always and inseparably: not that both are the Father, orboth are the Son; but because they are always one in relation to the other, and neither the one nor
the other alone. But because we call even the Trinity itself God alone, although He is always withholy spirits and souls, but say that He only is God, because they are not also God with Him; so wecall the Father the Father alone, not because He is separate from the Son, but because they are notboth together the Father.

Chapter 8.—No Addition Can Be Made to the Nature of God.
Since, therefore, the Father alone, or the Son alone, or the Holy Spirit alone, is as great as is
the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit together,616 in no manner is He to be called threefold.
Forasmuch as bodies increase by union of themselves. For although he who cleaves to his wife is
one body; yet it is a greater body than if it were that of the husband alone, or of the wife alone. But
in spiritual things, when the less adheres to the greater, as the creature to the Creator, the former
becomes greater than it was, not the latter.617 For in those things which are not great by bulk, to begreater is to be better. And the spirit of any creature becomes better, when it cleaves to the Creator,
than if it did not so cleave; and therefore also greater because better. “He,” then, that is joined unto
the Lord is one spirit:”618 but yet the Lord does not therefore become greater, although he who isjoined to the Lord does so. In God Himself, therefore when the equal Son, or the Holy Spirit equal
to the Father and the Son, is joined to the equal Father, God does not become greater than each ofthem severally; because that perfectness cannot increase. But whether it be the Father, or the Son,or the Holy Spirit, He is perfect, and God the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit is perfect; andtherefore He is a Trinity rather than triple.

615[The Divine Unity is trinal, not triple. The triple is composed of three different substances. It has parts, and is complex.
The trinal is without parts, and is incomplex. It denotes one simple substance in three modes or forms. “We may speak of thetrinal, but not of the triple deity.” Hollaz, in Hase’s Hutterus, 172.—W.G.T.S.]
616[Each trinitarian person is as great as the Trinity, if reference be had to the essence, but not if reference be had to thepersons. Each person has the entire essence, and the Trinity has the entire essence. But each person has the essence with only
one personal characteristic; while the Trinity has the essence with all three personal characteristics. No trinitarian person is ascomprehensive as the triune Godhead, because he does not possess the two personal characteristics belonging to the other two
persons. The Father is God, but he is not God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.—W.G.T.S.]
617[The addition of finite numbers, however great, to an infinite number, does not increase the infinite. Similarly, any
addition of finite being to the Infinite Being is no increase. God plus the universe is no larger an infinite than God minus theuniverse. The creation of the universe adds nothing to the infinite being and attributes of God. To add contingent being tonecessary being, does not make the latter any more necessary. To add imperfect being to perfect being, does not make the latter
more perfect. To add finite knowledge to infinite knowledge, does not produce a greater amount of knowledge. This truth has
been overlooked by Hamilton, Mansell, and others, in the argument against the personality of the Infinite, in which the Infinite
is confounded with the All, and which assumes that the All is greater than the Infinite—in other words, that God plus the universe
is greater than God minus the universe.—W.G.T.S.]
618
1 Cor. vi. 17.

140

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 9.—Whether One or the Three Persons Together are Called the Only God.
10. And since we are showing how we can say the Father alone, because there is no Father in
the Godhead except Himself, we must consider also the opinion which holds that the only true God
is not the Father alone, but the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. For if any one should ask
whether the Father alone is God, how can it be replied that He is not, unless perhaps we were to
say that the Father indeed is God, but that He is not God alone, but that the Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit are God alone? But then what shall we do with that testimony of the Lord? For He was
speaking to the Father, and had named the Father as Him to whom He was speaking, when He says,“And this is life eternal, that they may know Thee the one true God.”619 And this the Arians indeed
usually take, as if the Son were not true God. Passing them by, however, we must see whether,when it is said to the Father, “That they may know Thee the one true God,” we are forced tounderstand it as if He wished to intimate that the Father alone is the true God; lest we should notunderstand any to be God, except the three together, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Are we
therefore, from the testimony of the Lord, both to call the Father the one true God, and the Son the
one true God, and the Holy Spirit the one true God, and the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit
together, that is, the Trinity itself together, not three true Gods but one true God? Or because He
added, “And Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent,” are we to supply “the one true God;” so that theorder of the words is this, “That they may know Thee, and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent, theone true God?” Why then did He omit to mention the Holy Spirit? Is it because it follows, thatwhenever we name One who cleaves to One by a harmony so great that through this harmony bothare one, this harmony itself must be understood, although it is not mentioned? For in that place,
too, the apostle seems as it were to pass over the Holy Spirit; and yet there, too, He is understood,
where he says, “All are yours, and ye are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s.”620 And again, “The headof the woman is the man, the head of the man is Christ, and the head of Christ is God.”621 But again,
if God is only all three together, how can God be the head of Christ, that is, the Trinity the head ofChrist, since Christ is in the Trinity in order that it may be the Trinity? Is that which is the Father
with the Son, the head of that which is the Son alone? For the Father with the Son is God, but the
Son alone is Christ: especially since it is the Word already made flesh that speaks; and according
to this His humiliation also, the Father is greater than He, as He says, “for my Father is greater thanI;”622 so that the very being of God, which is one to Him with the Father, is itself the head of theman who is mediator, which He is alone.623 For if we rightly call the mind the chief thing of man,that is, as it were the head of the human substance, although the man himself together with themind is man; why is not the Word with the Father, which together is God, much more suitably andmuch more the head of Christ, although Christ as man cannot be understood except with the Word
which was made flesh? But this, as we have already said, we shall consider somewhat more carefully
hereafter. At present the equality and one and the same substance of the Trinity has been
619
620
621
622
623

John xvii. 3.
1 Cor. iii. 22, 23.
1 Cor. xi. 3.
John xiv. 28.
1 Tim. ii. 5.

141

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

demonstrated as briefly as possible, that in whatever way that other question be determined, themore rigorous discussion of which we have deferred, nothing may hinder us from confessing theabsolute equality of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Chapter 10.—Of the Attributes Assigned by Hilary to Each Person. The Trinity is Represented inThings that are Made.
11. A certain writer, when he would briefly intimate the special attributes of each of the persons
in the Trinity, tells us that “Eternity is in the Father, form in the Image, use in the Gift.” And since
he was a man of no mean authority in handling the Scriptures, and in the assertion of the faith, for
it is Hilary who put this in his book (On the Trinity, ii.); I have searched into the hidden meaningof these words as far as I can, that is, of the Father, and the Image, and the Gift, of eternity, and ofform, and of use. And I do not think that he intended more by the word eternity, than that the Father
has not a father from whom He is; but the Son is from the Father, so as to be, and so as to beco-eternal with Him. For if an image perfectly fills the measure of that of which it is the image,then the image is made equal to that of which it is the image, not the latter to its own image. And
in respect to this image he has named form, I believe on account of the quality of beauty, where
there is at once such great fitness, and prime equality, and prime likeness, differing in nothing, andunequal in no respect, and in no part unlike, but answering exactly to Him whose image it is: where
there is prime and absolute life, to whom it is not one thing to live, and another to be, but the samething to be and to live; and prime and absolute intellect, to whom it is not one thing to live, anotherto understand, but to understand is to live, and is to be, and all things are one: as though a perfect
Word (John i. 1), to which nothing is wanting, and a certain skill of the omnipotent and wise God,full of all living, unchangeable sciences, and all one in it, as itself is one from one, with whom it
is one. Therein God knew all things which He made by it; and therefore, while times pass away
and succeed, nothing passes away or succeeds to the knowledge of God. For things which are
created are not therefore known by God, because they have been made; and not rather have been
therefore made, even although changeable, because they are known unchangeably by Him. Therefore
that unspeakable conjunction of the Father and His image is not without fruition, without love,
without joy. Therefore that love, delight, felicity, or blessedness, if indeed it can be worthily
expressed by any human word, is called by him, in short, Use; and is the Holy Spirit in the Trinity,
not begotten, but the sweetness of the begetter and of the begotten, filling all creatures according
to their capacity with abundant bountifulness and copiousness, that they may keep their properorder and rest satisfied in their proper place.
12. Therefore all these things which are made by divine skill, show in themselves a certain
unity, and form, and order; for each of them is both some one thing, as are the several natures ofbodies and dispositions of souls; and is fashioned in some form, as are the figures or qualities ofbodies, and the various learning or skill of souls; and seeks or preserves a certain order, as are theseveral weights or combinations of bodies and the loves or delights of souls. When therefore we

142

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

regard the Creator, who is understood by the things that are made624 we must needs understand the
Trinity of whom there appear traces in the creature, as is fitting. For in that Trinity is the supreme
source of all things, and the most perfect beauty, and the most blessed delight. Those three, therefore,both seem to be mutually determined to each other, and are in themselves infinite. But here incorporeal things, one thing alone is not as much as three together, and two are something more thanone; but in that highest Trinity one is as much as the three together, nor are two anything more thanone. And They are infinite in themselves. So both each are in each, and all in each, and each in all,and all in all, and all are one. Let him who sees this, whether in part, or “through a glass and in an
enigma,”625 rejoice in knowing God; and let him honor Him as God, and give thanks; but let him
who does not see it, strive to see it through piety, not to cavil at it through blindness. Since God isone, but yet is a Trinity. Neither are we to take the words, “of whom, and through whom, and towhom are all things,” as used indiscriminately [i.e., to denote a unity without distinctions]; nor yet
to denote many gods, for “to Him, be glory for ever and ever. Amen.”626

Book VII.
————————————The question is explained, which had been deferred in the previous book, viz. that God the Father,
who begat the Son, His power and wisdom, is not only the Father of power and wisdom, butalso Himself power and wisdom; and similarly the Holy Spirit: yet that there are not three
powers or three wisdoms, but one power and one wisdom, as there is one God and one essence.
Inquiry is then made, why the Latins say one essence, three persons, in God; but the Greeks,
one essence, three substances or hypostases: and both modes of expression are shown to arise
from the necessities of speech, that we might have an answer to give when asked, what three,while truly confessing that there are three, viz. the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
Chapter 1.—Augustin Returns to the Question, Whether Each Person of the Trinity by Itself is
Wisdom. With What Difficulty, or in What Way, the Proposed Question is to Be Solved.
1. Let us now inquire more carefully, so far as God grants, into that which a little before wedeferred; whether each person also in the Trinity can also by Himself and not with the other two
be called God, or great, or wise, or true, or omnipotent, or just, or anything else that can be said ofGod, not relatively, but absolutely; or whether these things cannot be said except when the Trinity
is understood. For the question is raised,—because it is written, “Christ the power of God, and the

624
625
626

Rom. i. 20.
1 Cor. xiii. 12. Darkly, A.V.
Rom. xi. 36, in A.V.

143

NPNF (V1-03)

105

Philip Schaff

wisdom of God,”627—whether He is so the Father of His own wisdom and His own power, as that
He is wise with that wisdom which He begat, and powerful with that power which He begat; andwhether, since He is always powerful and wise, He always begat power and wisdom. For if it beso, then, as we have said, why is He not also the Father of His own greatness by which He is great,and of His own goodness by which He is good, and of His own justice by which He is just, andwhatever else there is? Or if all these things are understood, although under more names than one,
to be in the same wisdom and power, so that that is greatness which is power, that is goodness
which is wisdom, and that again is wisdom which is power, as we have already argued; then let us
remember, that when I mention any one of these, I am to be taken as if I mentioned all. It is asked,
then, whether the Father also by Himself is wise, and is Himself His own wisdom itself; or whether
He is wise in the same way as He speaks. For He speaks by the Word which He begat, not by theword which is uttered, and sounds, and passes away, but by the Word which was with God, and
the Word was God, and all things were made by Him:628 by the Word which is equal to Himself,
by whom He always and unchangeably utters Himself. For He is not Himself the Word, as He is
not the Son nor the image. But in speaking (putting aside those words of God in time which areproduced in the creature, for they sound and pass away,—in speaking then) by that co-eternal Word,
He is not understood singly, but with that Word itself, without whom certainly He does not speak.
Is He then in such way wise as He is one who speaks, so as to be in such way wisdom, as He is theWord, and so that to be the Word is to be wisdom, that is, also to be power, so that power andwisdom and the Word may be the same, and be so called relatively as the Son and the image: andthat the Father is not singly powerful or wise, but together with the power and wisdom itself which
He begat (genuit); just as He is not singly one who speaks, but by that Word and together with that
Word which He begat; and in like way great by that and together with that greatness, which He
begat? And if He is not great by one thing, and God by another, but great by that whereby He is
God, because it is not one thing to Him to be great and another to be God; it follows that neither is
He God singly, but by that and together with that deity (deitas) which He begat; so that the Son isthe deity of the Father, as He is the wisdom and power of the Father, and as He is the Word andimage of the Father. And because it is not one thing to Him to be, another to be God, the Son is
also the essence of the Father, as He is His Word and image. And hence also—except that He is
the Father [the Unbegotten]—the Father is not anything unless because He has the Son; so that not
only that which is meant by Father (which it is manifest He is not called relatively to Himself but
to the Son, and therefore is the Father because He has the Son), but that which He is in respect to
His own substance is so called, because He begat His own essence. For as He is great, only withthat greatness which He begat, so also He is, only with that essence which He begat; because it is
not one thing to Him to be, and another to be great. Is He therefore the Father of His own essence,in the same way as He is the Father of His own greatness, as He is the Father of His own power
and wisdom? since His greatness is the same as His power, and His essence the same as His
greatness.
2. This discussion has arisen from that which is written, that “Christ is the power of God, andthe wisdom of God.” Wherefore our discourse is compressed into these narrow limits, while we
desire to speak things unspeakable; that either we must say that Christ is not the power of God and
627
628

1 Cor. i. 24.
John i. 1, 3.

144

NPNF (V1-03)

106

Philip Schaff

the wisdom of God, and so shamelessly and impiously resist the apostle; or we must acknowledge
that Christ is indeed the power of God and the wisdom of God, but that His Father is not the Fatherof His own power and wisdom, which is not less impious; for so neither will He be the Father ofChrist, because Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God; or that the Father is not powerfulwith His own power, or wise with His own wisdom: and who shall dare to say this? Or yet, again,that we must understand, that in the Father it is one thing to be, another thing to be wise, so that
He is not by that by which He is wise: a thing usually understood of the soul, which is at sometimes unwise, at others wise; as being by nature changeable, and not absolutely and perfectly simple.
Or, again, that the Father is not anything in respect to His own substance; and that not only that He
is the Father, but that He is, is said relatively to the Son. How then can the Son be of the sameessence as the Father, seeing that the Father, in respect to Himself, is neither His own essence, nor
is at all in respect to Himself, but even His essence is in relation to the Son? But, on the contrary,much more is He of one and the same essence, since the Father and Son are one and the sameessence; seeing that the Father has His being itself not in respect to Himself, but to the Son, which
essence He begat, and by which essence He is whatever He is. Therefore neither [person] is inrespect to Himself alone; and both exist relatively the one to the other. Or is the Father alone notcalled Father of himself, but whatever He is called, is called relatively to the Son, but the Son ispredicated of in reference to Himself? And if it be so, what is predicated of Him in reference toHimself? Is it His essence itself? But the Son is the essence of the Father, as He is the power andwisdom of the Father, as He is the Word of the Father, and the image of the Father. Or if the Son
is called essence in reference to Himself, but the Father is not essence, but the begetter of theessence, and is not in respect to Himself, but is by that very essence which He begat; as He is greatby that greatness which He begat: therefore the Son is also called greatness in respect to Himself;
therefore He is also called, in like manner, power, and wisdom, and word, and image. But what
can be more absurd than that He should be called image in respect to Himself? Or if image andword are not the very same with power and wisdom, but the former are spoken relatively, and thelatter in respect to self, not to another; then we get to this, that the Father is not wise with that
wisdom which He begat, because He Himself cannot be spoken relatively to it, and it cannot be
spoken relatively to Him. For all things which are said relatively are said reciprocally; therefore it
remains that even in essence the Son is spoken of relatively to the Father. But from this is educeda most unexpected sense: that essence itself is not essence, or at least that, when it is called essence,
not essence but something relative is intimated. As when we speak of a master, essence is not
intimated, but a relative which has reference to a slave; but when we speak of a man, or any suchthing which is said in respect to self not to something else, then essence is intimated. Therefore
when a man is called a master, man himself is essence, but he is called master relatively; for he iscalled man in respect to himself, but master in respect to his slave. But in regard to the point fromwhich we started, if essence itself is spoken relatively, essence itself is not essence. Add further,that all essence which is spoken of relatively, is also something, although the relation be taken
away; as e.g. in the case of a man who is a master, and a man who is a slave, and a horse that is abeast of burden, and money that is a pledge, the man, and the horse, and the money are spoken in
respect to themselves, and are substances or essences; but master, and slave, and beast of burden,
and pledge, are spoken relatively to something. But if there were not a man, that is, some substance,
there would be none who could be called relatively a master; and if there were no horse having acertain essence, there would be nothing that could be called relatively a beast of burden; so if money
145

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

were not some kind of substance, it could not be called relatively a pledge. Wherefore, if the Father
also is not something in respect to Himself then there is no one at all that can be spoken of relatively
to something. For it is not as it is with color. The color of a thing is referred to the thing colored,
and color is not spoken at all in reference to substance, but is always of something that is colored;
but that thing of which it is the color, even if it is referred to color in respect to its being colored,is yet, in respect to its being a body, spoken of in respect to substance. But in no way may we think,in like manner, that the Father cannot be called anything in respect to His own substance, but thatwhatever He is called, He is called in relation to the Son; while the same Son is spoken of both inrespect to His own substance and in relation to the Father, when He is called great greatness, andpowerful power, plainly in respect to Himself, and the greatness and power of the great and powerful
Father, by which the Father is great and powerful. It is not so; but both are substance, and both are
one substance. And as it is absurd to say that whiteness is not white, so is it absurd to say that
wisdom is not wise; and as whiteness is called white in respect to itself, so also wisdom is called
wise in respect to itself. But the whiteness of a body is not an essence, since the body itself is theessence, and that is a quality of it; and hence also a body is said from that quality to be white, towhich body to be is not the same thing as to be white. For the form in it is one thing, and the color
another; and both are not in themselves, but in a certain bulk, which bulk is neither form nor color,but is formed and colored. True wisdom is both wise, and wise in itself. And since in the case of
every soul that becomes wise by partaking of wisdom, if it again becomes foolish, yet wisdom in
itself remains; nor when that soul was changed into folly is the wisdom likewise so changed;
therefore wisdom is not in him who becomes wise by it, in the same manner as whiteness is in the
body which is by it made white. For when the body has been changed into another color, thatwhiteness will not remain, but will altogether cease to be. But if the Father who begat wisdom isalso made wise by it, and to be is not to Him the same as to be wise, then the Son is His quality,
not His offspring; and there will no longer be absolute simplicity in the Godhead. But far be it frombeing so, since in truth in the Godhead is absolutely simple essence, and therefore to be is there thesame as to be wise. But if to be is there the same as to be wise, then the Father is not wise by that
wisdom which He begat; otherwise He did not beget it, but it begat Him. For what else do we saywhen we say, that to Him to be is the same as to be wise, unless that He is by that whereby He is
wise? Wherefore, that which is the cause to Him of being wise, is itself also the cause to Him that
He is; and accordingly, if the wisdom which He begat is the cause to Him of being wise, it is also
the cause to Him that He is; and this cannot be the case, except either by begetting or by creating
Him. But no one ever said in any sense that wisdom is either the begetter or the creator of the Father;
for what could be more senseless? Therefore both the Father Himself is wisdom, and the Son is insuch way called the wisdom of the Father, as He is called the light of the Father; that is, that in thesame manner as light from light, and yet both one light, so we are to understand wisdom of wisdom,and yet both one wisdom; and therefore also one essence, since, in God, to be, is the same as to be
wise. For what to be wise is to wisdom, and to be able is to power, and to be eternal is to eternity,
and to be just to justice, and to be great to greatness, that being itself is to essence. And since inthe Divine simplicity, to be wise is nothing else than to be, therefore wisdom there is the same as
essence.

146

NPNF (V1-03)

107

Philip Schaff

Chapter 2.—The Father and the Son are Together One Wisdom, as One Essence, Although Not
Together One Word.
3. Therefore the Father and the Son together are one essence, and one greatness, and one truth,and one wisdom. But the Father and Son both together are not one Word, because both together
are not one Son. For as the Son is referred to the Father, and is not so called in respect to Himself,
so also the Word is referred to him whose Word it is, when it is called the Word. Since He is the
Son in that He is the Word, and He is the Word in that He is the Son. Inasmuch, therefore, as the
Father and the Son together are certainly not one Son, it follows that the Father and the Son together
are not the one Word of both. And therefore He is not the Word in that He is wisdom; since He is
not called the Word in respect to Himself, but only relatively to Him whose Word He is, as He iscalled the Son in relation to the Father; but He is wisdom by that whereby He is essence. And
therefore, because one essence, one wisdom. But since the Word is also wisdom, yet is not thereby
the Word because He is wisdom for He is understood to be the Word relatively, but wisdom
essentially: let us understand, that when He is called the Word, it is meant, wisdom that is born, so
as to be both the Son and the Image; and that when these two words are used, namely wisdom (is)born, in one of the two, namely born,629 both Word, and Image, and Son, are understood, and in
all these names essence is not expressed, since they are spoken relatively; but in the other word,
namely wisdom, since it is spoken also in respect to substance, for wisdom is wise in itself, essence
also is expressed, and that being of His which is to be wise. Whence the Father and Son together
are one wisdom, because one essence, and singly wisdom of wisdom, as essence of essence. And
hence they are not therefore not one essence, because the Father is not the Son, and the Son is not
the Father, or because the Father is un-begotten, but the Son is begotten: since by these names only
their relative attributes are expressed. But both together are one wisdom and one essence; in which
to be, is the same as to be wise. And both together are not the Word or the Son, since to be is not
the same as to be the Word or the Son, as we have already sufficiently shown that these terms are
spoken relatively.

Chapter 3.—Why the Son Chiefly is Intimated in the Scriptures by the Name of Wisdom, While
Both the Father and the Holy Spirit are Wisdom. That the Holy Spirit, Together with the Father
and the Son, is One Wisdom.
4. Why, then, is scarcely anything ever said in the Scriptures of wisdom, unless to show that itis begotten or created of God?—begotten in the case of that Wisdom by which all things are made;but created or made, as in men, when they are converted to that Wisdom which is not created andmade but begotten, and are so enlightened; for in these men themselves there comes to be somethingwhich may be called their wisdom: even as the Scriptures foretell or narrate, that “the Word was

629[Augustin sometimes denominates the Son “begotten” (genitus), and sometimes “born” (natus). Both terms signify that
the Son is of the Father; God of God, Light of Light, Essence of Essence.—W.G.T.S.]

147

NPNF (V1-03)

108

Philip Schaff

made flesh, and dwelt among us;”630 for in this way Christ was made wisdom, because He wasmade man. Is it on this account that wisdom does not speak in these books, nor is anything spokenof it, except to declare that it is born of God, or made by Him (although the Father is Himself
wisdom), namely, because wisdom ought to be commended and imitated by us, by the imitationof which we are fashioned [rightly]? For the Father speaks it, that it may be His Word: yet not asa word producing a sound proceeds from the mouth, or is thought before it is pronounced. For thisword is completed in certain spaces of time, but that is eternal, and speaks to us by enlightening
us, what ought to be spoken to men, both of itself and of the Father. And therefore He says, “No
man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he
to whomsoever the Son will reveal Him:”631 since the Father reveals by the Son, that is, by His
Word. For if that word which we utter, and which is temporal and transitory, declares both itself,
and that of which we speak, how much more the Word of God, by which all things are made? For
this Word so declares the Father as He is the Father; because both itself so is, and is that which is
the Father, in so far as it is wisdom and essence. For in so far as it is the Word, it is not what the
Father is; because the Word is not the Father, and Word is spoken relatively, as is also Son, whichassuredly is not the Father. And therefore Christ is the power and wisdom of God, because He
Himself, being also power and wisdom, is from the Father, who is power and wisdom; as He islight of the Father, who is light, and the fountain of life with God the Father, who is Himself
assuredly the fountain of life. For “with Thee,” He says, “is the fountain of life, and in Thy lightshall we see light.”632 Because, “as the Father hath life in Himself, so hath He given to the Son tohave life in Himself:”633 and, “He was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into
the world:” and this light, “the Word,” was “with God;” but “the Word also was God;”634 and “Godis light, and in Him is no darkness at all:”635 but a light that is not corporeal, but spiritual; yet notin such way spiritual, that it was wrought by illumination, as it was said to the apostles, “Ye are
the light of the world,”636 but “the light which lighteth every man,” that very supreme wisdom itself
who is God, of whom we now treat. The Son therefore is Wisdom of wisdom, namely the Father,as He is Light of light, and God of God; so that both the Father singly is light, and the Son singly
is light; and the Father singly is God, and the Son singly is God: therefore the Father also singly is
wisdom, and the Son singly is wisdom. And as both together are one light and one God, so bothare one wisdom. But the Son is “by God made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, andsanctification;”637 because we turn ourselves to Him in time, that is, from some particular time, that
we may remain with Him for ever. And He Himself from a certain time was “the Word made flesh,and dwelt among us.”
5. On this account, then, when anything concerning wisdom is declared or narrated in the
Scriptures, whether as itself speaking, or where anything is spoken of it, the Son chiefly is intimated

630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637

John i. 14.
Matt. xi. 27.
Ps. xxxvi. 9.
John v. 2.
John i. 9, 1.
1 John i. 5.
Matt. v. 14.
1 Cor. i. 30.

148

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

to us. And by the example of Him who is the image, let us also not depart from God, since we also
are the Image of God: not indeed that which is equal to Him, since we are made so by the Father
through the Son, and not born of the Father, as that is. And we are so, because we are enlightenedwith light; but that is so, because it is the light that enlightens; and which, therefore, being without
pattern, is to us a pattern. For He does not imitate any one going before Him, in respect to the
Father, from whom He is never separable at all, since He is the very same substance with Him fromwhom He is. But we by striving imitate Him who abides, and follow Him who stands still, andwalking in Him, reach out towards Him; because He is made for us a way in time by His humiliation,
which is to us an eternal abiding-place by His divinity. For since to pure intellectual spirits, whohave not fallen through pride, He gives an example in the form of God and as equal with God and
as God; so, in order that He might also give Himself as an example of returning to fallen man who
on account of the uncleanness of sins and the punishment of mortality cannot see God, “He emptied
Himself;” not by changing His own divinity, but by assuming our changeableness: and “taking
upon Him the form of a servant”638 He came to us into this world,”639 who “was in this world,”
because “the world was made by Him;”640 that He might be an example upwards to those who see
God, an example downwards to those who admire man, an example to the sound to persevere, an
example to the sick to be made whole, an example to those who are to die that they may not fear,
an example to the dead that they may rise again, “that in all things He might have thepre-eminence.”641 So that, because man ought not to follow any except God to blessedness, andyet cannot perceive God; by following God made man, he might follow at once Him whom hecould perceive, and whom he ought to follow. Let us then love Him and cleave to Him, by charity
spread abroad in our hearts, through the Holy Spirit which is given unto us.642 It is not therefore to
be wondered at, if, on account of the example which the Image, which is equal to the Father, gives
to us, in order that we may be refashioned after the image of God, Scripture, when it speaks of
wisdom, speaks of the Son, whom we follow by living wisely; although the Father also is wisdom,as He is both light and God.
6. The Holy Spirit also, whether we are to call Him that absolute love which joins together
Father and Son, and joins us also from beneath, that so that is not unfitly said which is written,“God is love;”643 how is He not also Himself wisdom, since He is light, because “God is light”? orwhether after any other way the essence of the Holy Spirit is to be singly and properly named; then,too, since He is God, He is certainly light; and since He is light, He is certainly wisdom. But thatthe Holy Spirit is God, Scripture proclaims by the apostle, who says, “Know ye not that ye are thetemple of God?” and immediately subjoins, “And the Spirit of God dwelleth in you;”644 for God
dwelleth in His own temple. For the Spirit of God does not dwell in the temple of God as a servant,since he says more plainly in another place, “Know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy

638
639
640
641
642
643
644

Phil. ii. 7.
1 Tim. i. 15.
John i. 10.
Col. i. 18.
Rom. v. 5.
1 John iv. 8.
1 Cor. iii. 16.

149

NPNF (V1-03)

109

Philip Schaff

Ghost which is in you, and which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought witha great price: therefore glorify God in your body.”645 But what is wisdom, except spiritual andunchangeable light? For yonder sun also is light, but it is corporeal; and the spiritual creature also
is light, but it is not unchangeable. Therefore the Father is light, the Son is light, and the Holy Spirit
is light; but together not three lights, but one light. And so the Father is wisdom, the Son is wisdom,and the Holy Spirit is wisdom, and together not three wisdoms, but one wisdom: and because in
the Trinity to be is the same as to be wise, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, are one essence. Neither
in the Trinity is it one thing to be and another to be God; therefore the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit,
are one God.

Chapter 4.—How It Was Brought About that the Greeks Speak of Three Hypostases, the Latins ofThree Persons. Scripture Nowhere Speaks of Three Persons in One God.
7. For the sake, then, of speaking of things that cannot be uttered, that we may be able in some
way to utter what we are able in no way to utter fully, our Greek friends have spoken of one essence,
three substances; but the Latins of one essence or substance, three persons; because, as we havealready said,646 essence usually means nothing else than substance in our language, that is, in Latin.
And provided that what is said is understood only in a mystery, such a way of speaking was
sufficient, in order that there might be something to say when it was asked what the three are, which
the true faith pronounces to be three, when it both declares that the Father is not the Son, and thatthe Holy Spirit, which is the gift of God, is neither the Father nor the Son. When, then, it is asked
what the three are, or who the three are, we betake ourselves to the finding out of some special or
general name under which we may embrace these three; and no such name occurs to the mind,
because the super-eminence of the Godhead surpasses the power of customary speech. For God ismore truly thought than He is altered, and exists more truly than He is thought. For when we saythat Jacob was not the same as Abraham, but that Isaac was neither Abraham nor Jacob, certainly
we confess that they are three, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. But when it is asked what three, wereply three men, calling them in the plural by a specific name; but if we were to say three animals,then by a generic name; for man, as the ancients have defined him, is a rational, mortal animal: oragain, as our Scriptures usually speak, three souls, since it is fitting to denominate the whole fromthe better part, that is, to denominate both body and soul, which is the whole man, from the soul;for so it is said that seventy-five souls went down into Egypt with Jacob, instead of saying so many
men.647 Again, when we say that your horse is not mine, and that a third belonging to some one
else is neither mine nor yours, then we confess that there are three; and if any one ask what three,
we answer three horses by a specific name, but three animals by a generic one. And yet again, when
we say that an ox is not a horse, but that a dog is neither an ox nor a horse, we speak of a three;and if any one questions us what three, we do not speak now by a specific name of three horses,

645
646
647

1 Cor. vi. 19, 20.
Bk. v. c. 28.
Gen. xlvi. 27, and Deut. x. 22.

150

NPNF (V1-03)

110

Philip Schaff

or three oxen, or three dogs, because the three are not contained under the same species, but by ageneric name, three animals; or if under a higher genus, three substances, or three creatures, or
three natures. But whatsoever things are expressed in the plural number specifically by one name,can also be expressed generically by one name. But all things which are generically called by one
name cannot also be called specifically by one name. For three horses, which is a specific name,
we also call three animals; but, a horse, and an ox, and a dog, we call only three animals or
substances, which are generic names, or anything else that can be spoken generically concerningthem; but we cannot speak of them as three horses, or oxen, or dogs, which are specific names; forwe express those things by one name, although in the plural number, which have that in common
that is signified by the name. For Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, have in common that which isman; therefore they are called three men: a horse also, and an ox, and a dog, have in common thatwhich is animal; therefore they are called three animals. So three several laurels we also call threetrees; but a laurel, and a myrtle, and an olive, we call only three trees, or three substances, or threenatures: and so three stones we call also three bodies; but stone, and wood, and iron, we call only
three bodies, or by any other higher generic name by which they can be called. Of the Father,
therefore, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, seeing that they are three, let us ask what three they are,and what they have in common. For the being the Father is not common to them, so that they should
be interchangeably fathers to one another: as friends, since they are so called relatively to eachother, can be called three friends, because they are so mutually to each other. But this is not thecase in the Trinity, since the Father only is there father; and not Father of two, but of the Son only.
Neither are they three Sons, since the Father there is not the Son, nor is the Holy Spirit. Neither
three Holy Spirits, because the Holy Spirit also, in that proper meaning by which He is also called
the gift of God, is neither the Father nor the Son. What three therefore? For if three persons, thenthat which is meant by person is common to them; therefore this name is either specific or genericto them, according to the manner of speaking. But where there is no difference of nature, there
things that are several in number are so expressed generically, that they can also be expressed
specifically. For the difference of nature causes, that a laurel, and a myrtle, and an olive, or a horse,
and an ox, and a dog, are not called by the specific name, the former of three laurels, or the latterof three oxen, but by the generic name, the former of three trees, and the latter of three animals.
But here, where there is no difference of essence, it is necessary that these three should have a
specific name, which yet is not to be found. For person is a generic name, insomuch that man also
can be so called, although there is so great a difference between man and God.
8. Further, in regard to that very generic (generalis) word, if on this account we say three
persons, because that which person means is common to them (otherwise they can in no way be socalled, just as they are not called three sons, because that which son means is not common to them);
why do we not also say three Gods? For certainly, since the Father is a person, and the Son a person,
and the Holy Spirit a person, therefore there are three persons: since then the Father is God, andthe Son God, and the Holy Spirit God, why not three Gods? Or else, since on account of theirineffable union these three are together one God, why not also one person; so that we could not
say three persons, although we call each a person singly, just as we cannot say three Gods, although
we call each singly God, whether the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit? Is it because Scripture
does not say three Gods? But neither do we find that Scripture anywhere mentions three persons.
Or is it because Scripture does not call these three, either three persons or one person (for we readof the person of the Lord, but not of the Lord as a person), that therefore it was lawful through the151

NPNF (V1-03)

111

Philip Schaff

mere necessity of speaking and reasoning to say three persons, not because Scripture says it, but
because Scripture does not contradict it: whereas, if we were to say three Gods, Scripture would
contradict it, which says, “Hear, O Israel; the Lord thy God is one God?”648 Why then is it not also
lawful to say three essences; which, in like manner, as Scripture does not say, so neither does it
contradict? For if essence is a specific (specialis) name common to three, why are They not to becalled three essences, as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are called three men, because man is the specificname common to all men? But if essence is not a specific name, but a generic one, since man, andcattle, and tree, and constellation, and angel, are called essences; why are not these called threeessences, as three horses are called three animals, and three laurels are called three trees, and threestones three bodies? Or if they are not called three essences, but one essence, on account of theunity of the Trinity, why is it not the case, that on account of the same unity of the Trinity they are
not to be called three substances or three persons, but one substance and one person? For as thename of essence is common to them, so that each singly is called essence, so the name of either
substance or person is common to them. For that which must be understood of persons according
to our usage, this is to be understood of substances according to the Greek usage; for they say threesubstances, one essence, in the same way as we say three persons, one essence or substance.
9. What therefore remains, except that we confess that these terms sprang from the necessityof speaking, when copious reasoning was required against the devices or errors of the heretics? For
when human weakness endeavored to utter in speech to the senses of man what it grasps in thesecret places of the mind in proportion to its comprehension respecting the Lord God its creator,
whether by devout faith, or by any discernment whatsoever; it feared to say three essences, lest any
difference should be understood to exist in that absolute equality. Again, it could not say that there
were not three somewhats (tria quædam), for it was because Sabellius said this that he fell into
heresy. For it must be devoutly believed, as most certainly known from the Scriptures, and must
be grasped by the mental eye with undoubting perception, that there is both Father, and Son, andHoly Spirit; and that the Son is not the same with the Father, nor the Holy Spirit the same with the
Father or the Son. It sought then what three it should call them, and answered substances or persons;by which names it did not intend diversity to be meant, but singleness to be denied: that not only
unity might be understood therein from the being called one essence, but also Trinity from thebeing called three substances or persons. For if it is the same thing with God to be (esse) as tosubsist (subsistere), they were not to be called three substances, in such sense as they are not called
three essences; just as, because it is the same thing with God to be as to be wise, as we do not say
three essences, so neither three wisdoms. For so, because it is the same thing to Him to be God as
to be, it is not right to say three essences, as it is not right to say three Gods. But if it is one thing
to God to be, another to subsist, as it is one thing to God to be, another to be the Father or the Lord(for that which He is, is spoken in respect to Himself, but He is called Father in relation to the Son,and Lord in relation to the creature which serves Him); therefore He subsists relatively, as He begets
relatively, and bears rule relatively: so then substance will be no longer substance, because it will
be relative. For as from being, He is called essence, so from subsisting, we speak of substance. But

648

Deut. vi. 4.

152

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

it is absurd that substance should be spoken relatively, for everything subsists in respect to itself;
how much more God?649

Chapter 5.—In God, Substance is Spoken Improperly, Essence Properly.
10. If, however, it is fitting that God should be said to subsist—(For this word is rightly applied
to those things, in which as subjects those things are, which are said to be in a subject, as color or
shape in body. For body subsists, and so is substance; but those things are in the body, which
subsists and is their subject, and they are not substances, but are in a substance: and so, if either
that color or that shape ceases to be, it does not deprive the body of being a body, because it is notof the being of body, that it should retain this or that shape or color; therefore neither changeable
nor simple things are properly called substances.)—If, I say, God subsists so that He can be properly
called a substance, then there is something in Him as it were in a subject, and He is not simple, i.e.
such that to Him to be is the same as is anything else that is said concerning Him in respect toHimself; as, for instance, great, omnipotent, good, and whatever of this kind is not unfitly said ofGod. But it is an impiety to say that God subsists, and is a subject in relation to His own goodness,and that this goodness is not a substance or rather essence, and that God Himself is not His own
goodness, but that it is in Him as in a subject. And hence it is clear that God is improperly called
substance, in order that He may be understood to be, by the more usual name essence, which He
is truly and properly called; so that perhaps it is right that God alone should be called essence. For
He is truly alone, because He is unchangeable; and declared this to be His own name to His servant
Moses, when He says, “I am that I am;” and, “Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel: He
who is hath sent me unto you.”650 However, whether He be called essence, which He is properly
called, or substance, which He is called improperly, He is called both in respect to Himself, notrelatively to anything; whence to God to be is the same thing as to subsist; and so the Trinity, if
one essence, is also one substance. Perhaps therefore they are more conveniently called three persons
than three substances.

Chapter 6.—Why We Do Not in the Trinity Speak of One Person, and Three Essences. What He
Ought to Believe Concerning the Trinity Who Does Not Receive What is Said Above. Man isBoth After the Image, and is the Image of God.
11. But lest I should seem to favor ourselves [the Latins], let us make this further inquiry.
Although they [the Greeks] also, if they pleased, as they call three substances three hypostases, so

649[Augustin’s meaning is, that the term “substance” is not an adequate one whereby to denote a trinitarian distinction,
because in order to denote such a distinction it must be employed relatively, while in itself it has an absolute signification. In
the next chapter he proceeds to show this.—W.G.T.S.]
650
Ex. iii. 14.

153

NPNF (V1-03)

112

Philip Schaff

might call three persons three “prosopa,” yet they preferred that word which, perhaps, was morein accordance with the usage of their language. For the case is the same with the word persons also;
for to God it is not one thing to be, another to be a person, but it is absolutely the same thing. For
if to be is said in respect to Himself, but person relatively; in this way we should say three persons,
the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; just as we speak of three friends, or three relations, or threeneighbors, in that they are so mutually, not that each one of them is so in respect to himself.
Wherefore any one of these is the friend of the other two, or the relation, or the neighbor, because
these names have a relative signification. What then? Are we to call the Father the person of the
Son and of the Holy Spirit, or the Son the person of the Father and of the Holy Spirit, or the Holy
Spirit the person of the Father and of the Son? But neither is the word person commonly so usedin any case; nor in this Trinity, when we speak of the person of the Father, do we mean anythingelse than the substance of the Father. Wherefore, as the substance of the Father is the Father Himself,
not as He is the Father, but as He is, so also the person of the Father is not anything else than the
Father Himself; for He is called a person in respect to Himself, not in respect to the Son, or theHoly Spirit: just as He is called in respect to Himself both God and great, and good, and just, andanything else of the kind; and just as to Him to be is the same as to be God, or as to be great, or as
to be good, so it is the same thing to Him to be, as to be a person. Why, therefore, do we not callthese three together one person, as one essence and one God, but say three persons, while we donot say three Gods or three essences; unless it be because we wish some one word to serve for thatmeaning whereby the Trinity is understood, that we might not be altogether silent, when asked,
what three, while we confessed that they are three? For if essence is the genus, and substance or
person the species, as some think, then I must omit what I just now said, that they ought to be called
three essences, as they are called three substances or persons; as three horses are called three horses,
and the same are called three animals, since horse is the species, animal the genus. For in this casethe species is not spoken of in the plural, and the genus in the singular, as if we were to say thatthree horses were one animal; but as they are three horses by the special name, so they are three
animals by the generic one. But if they say that the name of substance or person does not signify
species, but something singular and individual; so that any one is not so called a substance or person
as he is called a man, for man is common to all men, but in the same manner as he is called this orthat man, as Abraham, as Isaac, as Jacob, or anyone else who, if present, could be pointed out withthe finger: so will the same reason reach these too. For as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, are called
three individuals, so are they called three men, and three souls. Why then are both the Father andthe Son and the Holy Spirit, if we are to reason about them also according to genus and species andindividual, not so called three essences, as they are called three substances or persons? But this, as
I said, I pass over: but I do affirm, that if essence is a genus, then a single essence has no species;
just as, because animal is a genus, a single animal has no species. Therefore the Father, Son, andHoly Spirit are not three species of one essence. But if essence is a species, as man is a species, but
those are three which we call substances or persons, then they have the same species in common,in such way as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob have in common the species which is called man; notas man is subdivided into Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, so can one man also be subdivided into
several single men; for this is altogether impossible, since one man is already a single man. Why
then is one essence subdivided into three substances or persons? For if essence is a species, as man
is, then one essence is as one man is: or do we, as we say that any three human beings of the same
sex, of the same constitution of body, of the same mind, are one nature,—for they are three human154

NPNF (V1-03)

113

Philip Schaff

beings, but one nature,—so also say in the Trinity three substances one essence, or three persons
one substance or essence? But this is somehow a parallel case, since the ancients also who spoke
Latin, before they had these terms, which have not long come into use, that is, essence or substance,
used for them to say nature. We do not therefore use these terms according to genus or species, but
as if according to a matter that is common and the same. Just as if three statues were made of thesame gold, we should say three statues one gold, yet should neither call the gold genus, and thestatues species; nor the gold species, and the statues individuals. For no species goes beyond its
own individuals, so as to comprehend anything external to them. For when I define what man is,which is a specific name, every several man that exists is contained in the same individual definition,neither does anything belong to it which is not a man. But when I define gold, not statues alone, ifthey be gold, but rings also, and anything else that is made of gold, will belong to gold; and even
if nothing were made of it, it would still be called gold; since, even if there were no gold statues,
there will not therefore be no statues at all. Likewise no species goes beyond the definition of its
genus. For when I define animal, since horse is a species of this genus, every horse is an animal;
but every statue is not gold. So, although in the case of three golden statues we should rightly say
three statues, one gold; yet we do not so say it, as to understand gold to be the genus, and the statues
to be species. Therefore neither do we so call the Trinity three persons or substances, one essence
and one God, as though three somethings subsisted out of one matter [leaving a remainder, i. e.];although whatever that is, it is unfolded in these three. For there is nothing else of that essence
besides the Trinity. Yet we say three persons of the same essence, or three persons one essence;
but we do not say three persons out of the same essence, as though therein essence were one thing,and person another, as we can say three statues out of the same gold; for there it is one thing to begold, another to be statues. And when we say three men one nature, or three men of the same nature,they also can be called three men out of the same nature, since out of the same nature there can bealso three other such men. But in that essence of the Trinity, in no way can any other person whatever
exist out of the same essence. Further, in these things, one man is not as much as three men together;and two men are something more than one man: and in equal statues, three together amount to moreof gold than each singly, and one amounts to less of gold than two. But in God it is not so; for the
Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit together is not a greater essence than the Father alone or the
Son alone; but these three substances or persons, if they must be so called, together are equal toeach singly: which the natural man does not comprehend. For he cannot think except under theconditions of bulk and space, either small or great, since phantasms or as it were images of bodies
flit about in his mind.
12. And until he be purged from this uncleanness, let him believe in the Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit, one God, alone, great, omnipotent, good, just, merciful, Creator of all things visible andinvisible, and whatsoever can be worthily and truly said of Him in proportion to human capacity.
And when he is told that the Father only is God, let him not separate from Him the Son or the Holy
Spirit; for together with Him He is the only God, together with whom also He is one God; because,
when we are told that the Son also is the only God, we must needs take it without any separationof the Father or the Holy Spirit. And let him so say one essence, as not to think one to be either
greater or better than, or in any respect differing from, another. Yet not that the Father Himself isboth Son and Holy Spirit, or whatever else each is singly called in relation to either of the others;
as Word, which is not said except of the Son, or Gift, which is not said except of the Holy Spirit.
And on this account also they admit the plural number, as it is written in the Gospel, “I and my155

NPNF (V1-03)

114

Philip Schaff

Father are one.”651 He has both said “one,”652 and “we are653one,” according to essence, because
they are the same God; “we are,” according to relation, because the one is Father, the other is Son.
Sometimes also the unity of the essence is left unexpressed, and the relatives alone are mentioned
in the plural number: “My Father and I will come unto him, and make our abode with him.”654 We
will come, and we will make our abode, is the plural number, since it was said before, “I and my
Father,” that is, the Son and the Father, which terms are used relatively to one another. Sometimes
the meaning is altogether latent, as in Genesis: “Let us make man after our image and likeness.”655
Both let us make and our is said in the plural, and ought not to be received except as of relatives.
For it was not that gods might make, or make after the image and likeness of gods; but that the
Father, and Son, and Holy Spirit might make after the image of the Father, and Son, and Holy
Spirit, that man might subsist as the image of God. And God is the Trinity. But because that imageof God was not made altogether equal to Him, as being not born of Him, but created by Him; inorder to signify this, he is in such way the image as that he is “after the image,” that is, he is notmade equal by parity, but approaches to Him by a sort of likeness. For approach to God is not byintervals of place, but by likeness, and withdrawal from Him is by unlikeness. For there are somewho draw this distinction, that they will have the Son to be the image, but man not to be the image,but “after the image.” But the apostle refutes them, saying, “For a man indeed ought not to cover
his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God.”656 He did not say after the image, but
the image. And this image, since it is elsewhere spoken of as after the image, is not as if it weresaid relatively to the Son, who is the image equal to the Father; otherwise he would not say after
our image. For how our, when the Son is the image of the Father alone? But man is said to be“after the image,” on account, as we have said, of the inequality of the likeness; and therefore after
our image, that man might be the image of the Trinity;657 not equal to the Trinity as the Son is equal
to the Father, but approaching to it, as has been said, by a certain likeness; just as nearness may ina sense be signified in things distant from each other, not in respect of place, but of a sort of imitation.
For it is also said, “Be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind;”658 to whom he likewise says,“Be ye therefore imitators of God as dear children.”659 For it is said to the new man, “which isrenewed to the knowledge of God, after the image of Him that created him.”660 Or if we choose toadmit the plural number, in order to meet the needs of argument, even putting aside relative terms,
that so we may answer in one term when it is asked what three, and say three substances or three
persons; then let no one think of any bulk or interval, or of any distance of howsoever little

651

John x. 30.
Unum.
653
Sumus.
654
John xiv. 23.
655
Gen. i. 26.
656
1 Cor. xi. 7.
657[Augustin would find this “image” in the ternaries of nature and the human mind which illustrate the Divine trinality.
The remainder of the treatise is mainly devoted to this abstruse subject; and is one of the most metaphysical pieces of compositionin patristic literature. The exegetical portion of the work ends substantially with the seventh chapter. The remainder is ontological,
yet growing out of, and founded upon the biblical data and results of the first part.—W.G.T.S.]
658
Rom. xii. 2.
659
Eph. v. 1.
660
Col. iii. 10.
652

156

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

unlikeness, so that in the Trinity any should be understood to be even a little less than another, inwhatsoever way one thing can be less than another: in order that there may be neither a confusionof persons, nor such a distinction as that there should be any inequality. And if this cannot be
grasped by the understanding, let it be held by faith, until He shall dawn in the heart who says by
the prophet, “If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not understand.”661

115

Book VIII.
————————————
Explains and proves that not only the Father is not greater than the Son, but neither are both
together anything greater than the Holy Spirit, nor any two together in the same trinity anything
greater than one, nor all three together anything greater than each severally. It is then shownhow the nature itself of God may be understood from our understanding of truth, and from ourknowledge of the supreme good, and from the innate love of righteousness, whereby a righteous
soul is loved even by a soul that is itself not yet righteous. But it is urged above all, that theknowledge of God is to be sought by love, which God is said to be in the Scriptures; and in thislove is also pointed out the existence of some trace of a trinity.
Preface.—The Conclusion of What Has Been Said Above. The Rule to Be Observed in the More
Difficult Questions of the Faith.
We have said elsewhere that those things are predicated specially in the Trinity as belonging
severally to each person, which are predicated relatively the one to the other, as Father and Son,and the gift of both, the Holy Spirit; for the Father is not the Trinity, nor the Son the Trinity, nor
the gift the Trinity: but what whenever each is singly spoken of in respect to themselves, then they
are not spoken of as three in the plural number, but one, the Trinity itself, as the Father God, theSon God, and the Holy Spirit God; the Father good, the Son good, and the Holy Spirit good; andthe Father omnipotent, the Son omnipotent, and the Holy Spirit omnipotent: yet neither three Gods,
nor three goods, nor three omnipotents, but one God, good, omnipotent, the Trinity itself; andwhatsoever else is said of them not relatively in respect to each other, but individually in respect
to themselves. For they are thus spoken of according to essence, since in them to be is the same as
to be great, as to be good, as to be wise, and whatever else is said of each person individually
therein, or of the Trinity itself, in respect to themselves. And that therefore they are called three
persons, or three substances, not in order that any difference of essence may be understood, butthat we may be able to answer by some one word, should any one ask what three, or what three
things? And that there is so great an equality in that Trinity, that not only the Father is not greaterthan the Son, as regards divinity, but neither are the Father and Son together greater than the Holy
661

Isa. vii. 9.

157

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Spirit; nor is each individual person, whichever it be of the three, less than the Trinity itself. This
is what we have said; and if it is handled and repeated frequently, it becomes, no doubt, morefamiliarly known: yet some limit, too, must be put to the discussion, and we must supplicate God
with most devout piety, that He will open our understanding, and take away the inclination of
disputing, in order that our minds may discern the essence of the truth, that has neither bulk nor
moveableness. Now, therefore, so far as the Creator Himself aids us in His marvellous mercy, let
us consider these subjects, into which we will enter more deeply than we entered into those which
preceded, although they are in truth the same; preserving the while this rule, that what has not yet
been made clear to our intellect, be nevertheless not loosened from the firmness of our faith.

116

Chapter 1.—It is Shown by Reason that in God Three are Not Anything Greater Than One Person.
2. For we say that in this Trinity two or three persons are not anything greater than one of them;which carnal perception does not receive, for no other reason except because it perceives as it can
the true things which are created, but cannot discern the truth itself by which they are created; for
if it could, then the very corporeal light would in no way be more clear than this which we havesaid. For in respect to the substance of truth, since it alone truly is, nothing is greater, unless because
it more truly is.662 But in respect to whatsoever is intelligible and unchangeable, no one thing ismore truly than another, since all alike are unchangeably eternal; and that which therein is called
great, is not great from any other source than from that by which it truly is. Wherefore, where
magnitude itself is truth, whatsoever has more of magnitude must needs have more of truth;whatsoever therefore has not more of truth, has not also more of magnitude. Further, whatsoever
has more of truth is certainly more true, just as that is greater which has more of magnitude; therefore
in respect to the substance of truth that is more great which is more true. But the Father and the
Son together are not more truly than the Father singly, or the Son singly. Both together, therefore,
are not anything greater than each of them singly. And since also the Holy Spirit equally is truly,
the Father and Son together are not anything greater than He, since neither are they more truly. The
Father also and the Holy Spirit together, since they do not surpass the Son in truth (for they are notmore truly), do not surpass Him either in magnitude. And so the Son and the Holy Spirit together
are just as great as the Father alone, since they are as truly. So also the Trinity itself is as great aseach several person therein. For where truth itself is magnitude, that is not more great which is not
more true: since in regard to the essence of truth, to be true is the same as to be, and to be is thesame as to be great; therefore to be great is the same as to be true. And in regard to it, therefore,
what is equally true must needs also be equally great.

662[In this and the following chapter, the meaning of Augustin will be clearer, if the Latin “veritas,” “vera,” and “vere,”
are rendered occasionally, by “reality,” “real,” and “really.” He is endeavoring to prove the equality of the three persons, by
the fact that they are equally real (true), and the degree of their reality (truth) is the same. Real being is true being; reality is
truth. In common phraseology, truth and reality are synonymous.—W.G.T.S.]

158

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 2.—Every Corporeal Conception Must Be Rejected, in Order that It May Be Understood
How God is Truth.

117

3. But in respect to bodies, it may be the case that this gold and that gold may be equally true
[real], but this may be greater than that, since magnitude is not the same thing in this case as truth;and it is one thing for it to be gold, another to be great. So also in the nature of the soul; a soul is
not called great in the same respect in which it is called true. For he, too, has a true [real] soul who
has not a great soul; since the essence of body and soul is not the essence of the truth [reality] itself;
as is the Trinity, one God, alone, great, true, truthful, the truth. Of whom if we endeavor to think,so far as He Himself permits and grants, let us not think of any touch or embrace in local space, as
if of three bodies, or of any compactness of conjunction, as fables tell of three-bodied Geryon; but
let whatsoever may occur to the mind, that is of such sort as to be greater in three than in eachsingly, and less in one than in two, be rejected without any doubt; for so everything corporeal isrejected. But also in spiritual things let nothing changeable that may have occurred to the mind bethought of God. For when we aspire from this depth to that height, it is a step towards no small
knowledge, if, before we can know what God is, we can already know what He is not. For certainly
He is neither earth nor heaven; nor, as it were, earth and heaven; nor any such thing as we see inthe heaven; nor any such thing as we do not see, but which perhaps is in heaven. Neither if you
were to magnify in the imagination of your thought the light of the sun as much as you are able,
either that it may be greater, or that it may be brighter, a thousand times as much, or times without
number; neither is this God. Neither as663 we think of the pure angels as spirits animating celestialbodies, and changing and dealing with them after the will by which they serve God; not even if all,and there are “thousands of thousands,”664 were brought together into one, and became one; neither
is any such thing God. Neither if you were to think of the same spirits as without bodies—a thing
indeed most difficult for carnal thought to do. Behold and see, if thou canst, O soul pressed downby the corruptible body, and weighed down by earthly thoughts, many and various; behold and see,
if thou canst, that God is truth.665 For it is written that “God is light;”666 not in such way as theseeyes see, but in such way as the heart sees, when it is said, He is truth [reality]. Ask not what istruth [reality] for immediately the darkness of corporeal images and the clouds of phantasms will
put themselves in the way, and will disturb that calm which at the first twinkling shone forth tothee, when I said truth [reality]. See that thou remainest, if thou canst, in that first twinkling withwhich thou art dazzled, as it were, by a flash, when it is said to thee, Truth [Reality]. But thou canst
not; thou wilt glide back into those usual and earthly things. And what weight, pray, is it that willcause thee so to glide back, unless it be the bird-lime of the stains of appetite thou hast contracted,
and the errors of thy wandering from the right path?

663
664
665
666

Read si for sicut, if for as. Bened. ed.
Apoc. v. 11.
Wisd. ix. 15.
1 John i. 5.

159

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 3.—How God May Be Known to Be the Chief Good. The Mind Does Not Become Good
Unless by Turning to God.
4. Behold again, and see if thou canst. Thou certainly dost not love anything except what isgood, since good is the earth, with the loftiness of its mountains, and the due measure of its hills,
and the level surface of its plains; and good is an estate that is pleasant and fertile; and good is ahouse that is arranged in due proportions, and is spacious and bright; and good are animal andanimate bodies; and good is air that is temperate, and salubrious; and good is food that is agreeable
and fit for health; and good is health, without pains or lassitude; and good is the countenance ofman that is disposed in fit proportions, and is cheerful in look, and bright in color; and good is themind of a friend, with the sweetness of agreement, and with the confidence of love; and good is arighteous man; and good are riches, since they are readily useful; and good is the heaven, with its
sun, and moon, and stars; and good are the angels, by their holy obedience; and good is discoursethat sweetly teaches and suitably admonishes the hearer; and good is a poem that is harmonious inits numbers and weighty in its sense. And why add yet more and more? This thing is good and that
good, but take away this and that, and regard good itself if thou canst; so wilt thou see God, notgood by a good that is other than Himself, but the good of all good. For in all these good things,
whether those which I have mentioned, or any else that are to be discerned or thought, we could
not say that one was better than another, when we judge truly, unless a conception of the good itself
had been impressed upon us, such that according to it we might both approve some things as good,and prefer one good to another. So God is to be loved, not this and that good, but the good itself.
For the good that must be sought for the soul is not one above which it is to fly by judging, but towhich it is to cleave by loving; and what can this be except God? Not a good mind, or a good angel,or the good heaven, but the good good. For perhaps what I wish to say may be more easily perceived
in this way. For when, for instance, a mind is called good, as there are two words, so from thesewords I understand two things—one whereby it is mind, and another whereby it is good. And itself
had no share in making itself a mind, for there was nothing as yet to make itself to be anything; but
to make itself to be a good mind, I see, must be brought about by the will: not because that by which
it is mind is not itself anything good;—for how else is it already called, and most truly called, better
than the body?—but it is not yet called a good mind, for this reason, that the action of the will stillis wanted, by which it is to become more excellent; and if it has neglected this, then it is justly
blamed, and is rightly called not a good mind. For it then differs from the mind which does perform
this; and since the latter is praiseworthy, the former doubtless, which does not perform, it isblameable. But when it does this of set purpose, and becomes a good mind, it yet cannot attain tobeing so unless it turn itself to something which itself is not. And to what can it turn itself that it
may become a good mind, except to the good which it loves, and seeks, and obtains? And if it turns
itself back again from this, and becomes not good, then by the very act of turning away from thegood, unless that good remain in it from which it turns away, it cannot again turn itself back thither
if it should wish to amend.
5. Wherefore there would be no changeable goods, unless there were the unchangeable good.
Whenever then thou art told of this good thing and that good thing, which things can also in otherrespects be called not good, if thou canst put aside those things which are good by the participationof the good, and discern that good itself by the participation of which they are good (for when this160

NPNF (V1-03)

118

Philip Schaff

or that good thing is spoken of, thou understandest together with them the good itself also): if, then,I say thou canst remove these things, and canst discern the good in itself, then thou wilt havediscerned God. And if thou shalt cleave to Him with love, thou shalt be forthwith blessed. But
whereas other things are not loved, except because they are good, be ashamed, in cleaving to them,not to love the good itself whence they are good. That also, which is a mind, only because it is amind, while it is not yet also good by the turning itself to the unchangeable good, but, as I said, isonly a mind; whenever it so pleases us, as that we prefer it even, if we understand aright, to all
corporeal light, does not please us in itself, but in that skill by which it was made. For it is thence
approved as made, wherein it is seen to have been to be made. This is truth, and simple good: for
it is nothing else than the good itself, and for this reason also the chief good. For no good can bediminished or increased, except that which is good from some other good. Therefore the mind turns
itself, in order to be good, to that by which it comes to be a mind. Therefore the will is then inharmony with nature, so that the mind may be perfected in good, when that good is loved by theturning of the will to it, whence that other good also comes which is not lost by the turning awayof the will from it. For by turning itself from the chief good, the mind loses the being a good mind;
but it does not lose the being a mind. And this, too, is a good already, and one better than the body.
The will, therefore, loses that which the will obtains. For the mind already was, that could wish tobe turned to that from which it was: but that as yet was not, that could wish to be before it was.
And herein is our [supreme] good, when we see whether the thing ought to be or to have been,
respecting which we comprehend that it ought to be or to have been, and when we see that the thing
could not have been unless it ought to have been, of which we also do not comprehend in whatmanner it ought to have been. This good then is not far from every one of us: for in it we live, andmove, and have our being.667

Chapter 4.—God Must First Be Known by an Unerring Faith, that He May Be Loved.
6. But it is by love that we must stand firm to this and cleave to this, in order that we may enjoy
the presence of that by which we are, and in the absence of which we could not be at all. For as“we walk as yet by faith, and not by sight,”668 we certainly do not yet see God, as the same [apostle]saith, “face to face:”669 whom however we shall never see, unless now already we love. But wholoves what he does not know? For it is possible something may be known and not loved: but I ask
whether it is possible that what is not known can be loved; since if it cannot, then no one loves God
before he knows Him. And what is it to know God except to behold Him and steadfastly perceive
Him with the mind? For He is not a body to be searched out by carnal eyes. But before also that
we have power to behold and to perceive God, as He can be beheld and perceived, which is permitted
to the pure in heart; for “blessed are the pure in heart. for they shall see God;”670 except He is loved

667
668
669
670

Acts xvii. 27, 28.
2 Cor. v. 7.
1 Cor. xiii. 12.
Matt. v. 8.

161

NPNF (V1-03)

119

Philip Schaff

by faith, it will not be possible for the heart to be cleansed, in order that it may be apt and meet tosee Him. For where are there those three, in order to build up which in the mind the whole apparatusof the divine Scriptures has been raised up, namely Faith, Hope, and Charity,671 except in a mind
believing what it does not yet see, and hoping and loving what it believes? Even He therefore who
is not known, but yet is believed, can be loved. But indisputably we must take care, lest the mind
believing that which it does not see, feign to itself something which is not, and hope for and lovethat which is false. For in that case, it will not be charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience,and of faith unfeigned, which is the end of the commandment, as the same apostle says.672
7. But it must needs be, that, when by reading or hearing of them we believe in any corporeal
things which we have not seen, the mind frames for itself something under bodily features andforms, just as it may occur to our thoughts; which either is not true, or even if it be true, which canmost rarely happen, yet this is of no benefit to us to believe in by faith, but it is useful for someother purpose, which is intimated by means of it. For who is there that reads or hears what the
Apostle Paul has written, or what has been written of him, that does not imagine to himself thecountenance both of the apostle himself, and of all those whose names are there mentioned? And
whereas, among such a multitude of men to whom these books are known, each imagines in adifferent way those bodily features and forms, it is assuredly uncertain which it is that imaginesthem more nearly and more like the reality. Nor, indeed, is our faith busied therein with the bodily
countenance of those men; but only that by the grace of God they so lived and so acted as that
Scripture witnesses: this it is which it is both useful to believe, and which must not be despairedof, and must be sought. For even the countenance of our Lord Himself in the flesh is variously
fancied by the diversity of countless imaginations, which yet was one, whatever it was. Nor in ourfaith which we have of our Lord Jesus Christ, is that wholesome which the mind imagines for itself,
perhaps far other than the reality, but that which we think of man according to his kind: for we havea notion of human nature implanted in us, as it were by rule, according to which we know forthwith,that whatever such thing we see is a man or the form of a man.

Chapter 5.—How the Trinity May Be Loved Though Unknown.
Our conception is framed according to this notion, when we believe that God was made manfor us, as an example of humility, and to show the love of God towards us. For this it is which it isgood for us to believe, and to retain firmly and unshakenly in our heart, that the humility by which
God was born of a woman, and was led to death through contumelies so great by mortal men, isthe chiefest remedy by which the swelling of our pride may be cured, and the profound mysteryby which the bond of sin may be loosed. So also, because we know what omnipotence is, we believe
concerning the omnipotent God in the power of His miracles and of His resurrection, and we frame
conceptions respecting actions of this kind, according to the species and genera of things that areeither ingrafted in us by nature, or gathered by experience, that our faith may not be feigned. For

671
672

1 Cor. xiii. 13.
1 Tim. i. 5.

162

NPNF (V1-03)

120

Philip Schaff

neither do we know the countenance of the Virgin Mary; from whom, untouched by a husband,nor tainted in the birth itself, He was wonderfully born. Neither have we seen what were thelineaments of the body of Lazarus; nor yet Bethany; nor the sepulchre, and that stone which He
commanded to be removed when He raised Him from the dead; nor the new tomb cut out in therock, whence He Himself arose; nor the Mount of Olives, from whence He ascended into heaven.
And, in short, whoever of us have not seen these things, know not whether they are as we conceive
them to be, nay judge them more probably not to be so. For when the aspect either of a place, or aman, or of any other body, which we happened to imagine before we saw it, turns out to be thesame when it occurs to our sight as it was when it occurred to our mind, we are moved with nolittle wonder. So scarcely and hardly ever does it happen. And yet we believe those things moststeadfastly, because we imagine them according to a special and general notion, of which we arecertain. For we believe our Lord Jesus Christ to be born of a virgin who was called Mary. But whata virgin is, or what it is to be born, and what is a proper name, we do not believe, but certainly
know. And whether that was the countenance of Mary which occurred to the mind in speaking of
those things or recollecting them, we neither know at all, nor believe. It is allowable, then, in thiscase to say without violation of the faith, perhaps she had such or such a countenance, perhaps she
had not: but no one could say without violation of the Christian faith, that perhaps Christ was bornof a virgin.
8. Wherefore, since we desire to understand the eternity, and equality, and unity of the Trinity,
as much as is permitted us, but ought to believe before we understand; and since we must watch
carefully, that our faith be not feigned; since we must have the fruition of the same Trinity, that we
may live blessedly; but if we have believed anything false of it, our hope would be worthless, andour charity not pure: how then can we love, by believing, that Trinity which we do not know? Is it
according to the special or general notion, according to which we love the Apostle Paul? In whosecase, even if he was not of that countenance which occurs to us when we think of him (and this we
do not know at all), yet we know what a man is. For not to go far away, this we are; and it is manifest
he, too, was this, and that his soul joined to his body lived after the manner of mortals. Therefore
we believe this of him, which we find in ourselves, according to the species or genus under which
all human nature alike is comprised. What then do we know, whether specially or generally, of thatmost excellent Trinity, as if there were many such trinities, some of which we had learned byexperience, so that we may believe that Trinity, too, to have been such as they, through the rule ofsimilitude, impressed upon us, whether a special or a general notion; and thus love also that thingwhich we believe and do not yet know, from the parity of the thing which we do know? But thiscertainly is not so. Or is it that, as we love in our Lord Jesus Christ, that He rose from the dead,although we never saw any one rise from thence, so we can believe in and love the Trinity which
we do not see, and the like of which we never have seen? But we certainly know what it is to die,and what it is to live; because we both live, and from time to time have seen and experienced bothdead and dying persons. And what else is it to rise again, except to live again, that is, to return tolife from death? When, therefore, we say and believe that there is a Trinity, we know what a Trinity
is, because we know what three are; but this is not what we love. For we can easily have thiswhenever we will, to pass over other things, by just holding up three fingers. Or do we indeed love,
not every trinity, but the Trinity, that is God? We love then in the Trinity, that it is God: but wenever saw or knew any other God, because God is One; He alone whom we have not yet seen, and163

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

whom we love by believing. But the question is, from what likeness or comparison of known things
can we believe, in order that we may love God, whom we do not yet know?

Chapter 6.—How the Man Not Yet Righteous Can Know the Righteous Man Whom He Loves.
9. Return then with me, and let us consider why we love the apostle. Is it at all on account of
his human kind, which we know right well, in that we believe him to have been a man? Assuredly
not; for if it were so, he now is not him whom we love, since he is no longer that man, for his soulis separated from his body. But we believe that which we love in him to be still living, for we love
his righteous mind. From what general or special rule then, except that we know both what a mind
is, and what it is to be righteous? And we say, indeed, not unfitly, that we therefore know what amind is, because we too have a mind. For neither did we ever see it with our eyes, and gather a
special or general notion from the resemblance of more minds than one, which we had seen; butrather, as I have said before, because we too have it. For what is known so intimately, and so
perceives itself to be itself, as that by which also all other things are perceived, that is, the mind
itself? For we recognize the movements of bodies also, by which we perceive that others live besides
ourselves, from the resemblance of ourselves; since we also so move our body in living as we
observe those bodies to be moved. For even when a living body is moved, there is no way opened
to our eyes to see the mind, a thing which cannot be seen by the eyes; but we perceive something
to be contained in that bulk, such as is contained in ourselves, so as to move in like manner ourown bulk, which is the life and the soul. Neither is this, as it were, the property of human foresightand reason, since brute animals also perceive that not only they themselves live, but also other brute
animals interchangeably, and the one the other, and that we ourselves do so. Neither do they see
our souls, save from the movements of the body, and that immediately and most easily by somenatural agreement. Therefore we both know the mind of any one from our own, and believe also
from our own of him whom we do not know. For not only do we perceive that there is a mind, but
we can also know what a mind is, by reflecting upon our own: for we have a mind. But whence do
we know what a righteous man is? For we said above that we love the apostle for no other reason
except that he is a righteous mind. We know, then, what a righteous man also is, just as we knowwhat a mind is. But what a mind is, as has been said, we know from ourselves, for there is a mind
in us. But whence do we know what a righteous man is, if we are not righteous? But if no one but
he who is righteous knows what is a righteous man, no one but a righteous man loves a righteousman; for one cannot love him whom one believes to be righteous, for this very reason that one does
believe him to be righteous, if one does not know what it is to be righteous; according to that which
we have shown above, that no one loves what he believes and does not see, except by some ruleof a general or special notion. And if for this reason no one but a righteous man loves a righteous
man, how will any one wish to be a righteous man who is not yet so? For no one wishes to be thatwhich he does not love. But, certainly, that he who is not righteous may be so, it is necessary thathe should wish to be righteous; and in order that he may wish to be righteous, he loves the righteous164

NPNF (V1-03)

121

Philip Schaffman. Therefore, even he who is not yet righteous, loves the righteous man.673 But he cannot lovethe righteous man, who is ignorant what a righteous man is. Accordingly, even he who is not yet
righteous, knows what a righteous man is. Whence then does he know this? Does he see it with his
eyes? Is any corporeal thing righteous, as it is white, or black, or square, or round? Who could say
this? Yet with one’s eyes one has seen nothing except corporeal things. But there is nothing righteous
in a man except the mind; and when a man is called a righteous man, he is called so from the mind,
not from the body. For righteousness is in some sort the beauty of the mind, by which men are
beautiful; very many too who are misshapen and deformed in body. And as the mind is not seen
with the eyes, so neither is its beauty. From whence then does he who is not yet righteous knowwhat a righteous man is, and love the righteous man that he may become righteous? Do certain
signs shine forth by the motion of the body, by which this or that man is manifested to be righteous?
But whence does any one know that these are the signs of a righteous mind when he is wholly
ignorant what it is to be righteous? Therefore he does know. But whence do we know what it is tobe righteous, even when we are not yet righteous? If we know from without ourselves, we know
it by some bodily thing. But this is not a thing of the body. Therefore we know in ourselves what
it is to be righteous. For I find this nowhere else when I seek to utter it, except within myself; andif I ask another what it is to be righteous, he seeks within himself what to answer; and whosoever
hence can answer truly, he has found within himself what to answer. And when indeed I wish to
speak of Carthage, I seek within myself what to speak, and I find within myself a notion or imageof Carthage; but I have received this through the body, that is, through the perception of the body,since I have been present in that city in the body, and I saw and perceived it, and retained it in mymemory, that I might find within myself a word concerning it, whenever I might wish to speak of
it. For its word is the image itself of it in my memory, not that sound of two syllables when Carthage
is named, or even when that name itself is thought of silently from time to time, but that which I
discern in my mind, when I utter that dissyllable with my voice, or even before I utter it. So also,
when I wish to speak of Alexandria, which I never saw, an image of it is present with me. For
whereas I had heard from many and had believed that city to be great, in such way as it could be
told me, I formed an image of it in my mind as I was able; and this is with me its word when I wish
to speak of it, before I utter with my voice the five syllables which make the name that almost every
one knows. And yet if I could bring forth that image from my mind to the eyes of men who know
Alexandria, certainly all either would say, It is not it; or if they said, It is, I should greatly wonder;
and as I gazed at it in my mind, that is, at the image which was as it were its picture, I should yet
not know it to be it, but should believe those who retained an image they had seen. But I do not so
ask what it is to be righteous, nor do I so find it, nor do I so gaze upon it, when I utter it; neither
am I so approved when I am heard, nor do I so approve when I hear; as though I have seen such athing with my eyes, or learned it by some perception of the body, or heard it from those who had
so learned it. For when I say, and say knowingly, that mind is righteous which knowingly and of
purpose assigns to every one his due in life and behavior, I do not think of anything absent, as
Carthage, or imagine it as I am able, as Alexandria, whether it be so or not; but I discern something

673[The “wish” and “love” which Augustin here attributes to the non-righteous man is not true and spiritual, but selfish. In
chapter vii. 10, he speaks of true love as distinct from that kind of desire which is a mere wish. The latter he calls cupiditas.
“That is to be called love which is true, otherwise it is desire (cupiditas); and so those who desire (cupidi) are improperly said
to love (diligere), just as they who love (diligunt) are said improperly to desire (cupere).”—W.G.T.S.]

165

NPNF (V1-03)

122

Philip Schaff

present, and I discern it within myself, though I myself am not that which I discern; and many ifthey hear will approve it. And whoever hears me and knowingly approves, he too discerns thissame thing within himself, even though he himself be not what he discerns. But when a righteous
man says this, he discerns and says that which he himself is. And whence also does he discern it,
except within himself? But this is not to be wondered at; for whence should he discern himself
except within himself? The wonderful thing is, that the mind should see within itself that which it
has seen nowhere else, and should see truly, and should see the very true righteous mind, and should
itself be a mind, and yet not a righteous mind, which nevertheless it sees within itself. Is there
another mind that is righteous in a mind that is not yet righteous? Or if there is not, what does it
there see when it sees and says what is a righteous mind, nor sees it anywhere else but in itself,
when itself is not a righteous mind? Is that which it sees an inner truth present to the mind whichhas power to behold it? Yet all have not that power; and they who have power to behold it, are not
all also that which they behold, that is, they are not also righteous minds themselves, just as they
are able to see and to say what is a righteous mind. And whence will they be able to be so, except
by cleaving to that very same form itself which they behold, so that from thence they may be formed
and may be righteous minds; not only discerning and saying that the mind is righteous whichknowingly and of purpose assigns to every one that which is his due in life and behavior, but so
likewise that they themselves may live righteously and be righteous in character, by assigning toevery one that which is his due, so as to owe no man anything, but to love one another.674 And
whence can any one cleave to that form but by loving it? Why then do we love another whom webelieve to be righteous, and do not love that form itself wherein we see what is a righteous mind,
that we also may be able to be righteous? Is it that unless we loved that also, we should not love
him at all, whom through it we love; but whilst we are not righteous, we love that form too little
to allow of our being able to be righteous? The man therefore who is believed to be righteous, isloved through that form and truth which he who loves discerns and understands within himself;
but that very form and truth itself cannot be loved from any other source than itself. For we do notfind any other such thing besides itself, so that by believing we might love it when it is unknown,in that we here already know another such thing. For whatsoever of such a kind one may have seen,
is itself; and there is not any other such thing, since itself alone is such as itself is. He therefore
who loves men, ought to love them either because they are righteous, or that they may becomerighteous. For so also he ought to love himself, either because he is righteous, or that he may becomerighteous; for in this way he loves his neighbor as himself without any risk. For he who loves
himself otherwise, loves himself wrongfully, since he loves himself to this end that he may be
unrighteous; therefore to this end that he may be wicked; and hence it follows next that he does
not love himself; for, “He who loveth iniquity,675 hateth his own soul.”676

674
675
676

Rom. xiii. 8.
Violence—A.V.
Ps. xi. 6.

166

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 7.—Of True Love, by Which We Arrive at the Knowledge of the Trinity. God is to Be
Sought, Not Outwardly, by Seeking to Do Wonderful Things with the Angels, But Inwardly,
by Imitating the Piety of Good Angels.
10. No other thing, then, is chiefly to be regarded in this inquiry, which we make concerning
the Trinity and concerning knowing God, except what is true love, nay, rather what is love. For
that is to be called love which is true, otherwise it is desire; and so those who desire are said
improperly to love, just as they who love are said improperly to desire. But this is true love, thatcleaving to the truth we may live righteously, and so may despise all mortal things in comparison
with the love of men, whereby we wish them to live righteously. For so we should be prepared also
to die profitably for our brethren, as our Lord Jesus Christ taught us by His example. For as there
are two commandments on which hang all the Law and the prophets, love of God and love of ourneighbor;677 not without cause the Scripture mostly puts one for both: whether it be of God only,
as is that text, “For we know that all things work together for good to them that love God;”678 andagain, “But if any man love God, the same is known of Him;”679 and that, “Because the love of
God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us;”680 and many otherpassages; because he who loves God must both needs do what God has commanded, and loves
Him just in such proportion as he does so; therefore he must needs also love his neighbor, because
God has commanded it: or whether it be that Scripture only mentions the love of our neighbor, as
in that text, “Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ;”681 and again, “For all
the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself;”682 and in theGospel, “All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them; forthis is the Law and the prophets.”683 And many other passages occur in the sacred writings, in which
only the love of our neighbor seems to be commanded for perfection, while the love of God is
passed over in silence; whereas the Law and the prophets hang on both precepts. But this, too, isbecause he who loves his neighbor must needs also love above all else love itself. But “God is love;and he that dwelleth in love, dwelleth in God.”684 Therefore he must needs above all else love God.
11. Wherefore they who seek God through those Powers which rule over the world, or parts of
the world, are removed and cast away far from Him; not by intervals of space, but by differenceof affections: for they endeavor to find a path outwardly, and forsake their own inward things,
within which is God. Therefore, even although they may either have heard some holy heavenly
Power, or in some way or another may have thought of it, yet they rather covet its deeds at whichhuman weakness marvels, but do not imitate the piety by which divine rest is acquired. For they
prefer, through pride, to be able to do that which an angel does, more than, through devotion, to be

677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684

Matt. xxii. 37–40.
Rom. viii. 28.
1 Cor. viii. 3.
Rom. v. 5.
Gal. vi. 2.
Gal. v. 14.
Matt. vii. 12.
1 John iv. 6.

167

NPNF (V1-03)

123

Philip Schaffthat which an angel is. For no holy being rejoices in his own power, but in His from whom he has
the power which he fitly can have; and he knows it to be more a mark of power to be united to the
Omnipotent by a pious will, than to be able, by his own power and will, to do what they may tremble
at who are not able to do such things. Therefore the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, in doing such things,
in order that He might teach better things to those who marvelled at them, and might turn those
who were intent and in doubt about unusual temporal things to eternal and inner things, says, “Comeunto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you.”
And He does not say, Learn of me, because I raise those who have been dead four days; but He
says, “Learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart.” For humility, which is most solid, is more
powerful and safer than pride, that is most inflated. And so He goes on to say, “And ye shall findrest unto your souls,”685 for “Love686 is not puffed up;”687 and “God is Love;”688 and “such as befaithful in love shall rest in689 Him,”690 called back from the din which is without to silent joys.
Behold, “God is Love:” why do we go forth and run to the heights of the heavens and the lowest
parts of the earth, seeking Him who is within us, if we wish to be with Him?

Chapter 8.—That He Who Loves His Brother, Loves God; Because He Loves Love Itself, Whichis of God, and is God.
12. Let no one say, I do not know what I love. Let him love his brother, and he will love thesame love. For he knows the love with which he loves, more than the brother whom he loves. So
now he can know God more than he knows his brother: clearly known more, because more present;
known more, because more within him; known more, because more certain. Embrace the love ofGod, and by love embrace God. That is love itself, which associates together all good angels andall the servants of God by the bond of sanctity, and joins together us and them mutually withourselves, and joins us subordinately to Himself. In proportion, therefore, as we are healed fromthe swelling of pride, in such proportion are we more filled with love; and with what is he full, who
is full of love, except with God? Well, but you will say, I see love, and, as far as I am able, I gazeupon it with my mind, and I believe the Scripture, saying, that “God is love; and he that dwelleth
in love, dwelleth in God;”691 but when I see love, I do not see in it the Trinity. Nay, but thou dost
see the Trinity if thou seest love. But if I can I will put you in mind, that thou mayest see that thouseest it; only let itself be present, that we may be moved by love to something good. Since, when
we love love, we love one who loves something, and that on account of this very thing, that he does
love something; therefore what does love love, that love itself also may be loved? For that is notlove which loves nothing. But if it loves itself it must love something, that it may love itself as

685
686
687
688
689
690
691

Matt. xi. 28, 29.
Charity.—A.V.
1 Cor. xiii. 4.
1 John iv. 8.
Abide with.—A.V.
Wisd. iii. 9.
1 John iv. 16.

168

NPNF (V1-03)

124

Philip Schaff

love. For as a word indicates something, and indicates also itself, but does not indicate itself to bea word, unless it indicates that it does indicate something; so love also loves indeed itself, but except
it love itself as loving something, it loves itself not as love. What therefore does love love, exceptthat which we love with love? But this, to begin from that which is nearest to us, is our brother.
And listen how greatly the Apostle John commends brotherly love: “He that loveth his brotherabideth in the light, and there is none occasion of stumbling in him.”692 It is manifest that he placed
the perfection of righteousness in the love of our brother; for he certainly is perfect in whom “there
is no occasion of stumbling.” And yet he seems to have passed by the love of God in silence; which
he never would have done, unless because he intends God to be understood in brotherly love itself.
For in this same epistle, a little further on, he says most plainly thus: “Beloved, let us love one
another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God. He thatloveth not, knoweth not God; for God is love.” And this passage declares sufficiently and plainly,that this same brotherly love itself (for that is brotherly love by which we love each other) is set
forth by so great authority, not only to be from God, but also to be God. When, therefore, we loveour brother from love, we love our brother from God; neither can it be that we do not love above
all else that same love by which we love our brother: whence it may be gathered that these twocommandments cannot exist unless interchangeably. For since “God is love,” he who loves lovecertainly loves God; but he must needs love love, who loves his brother. And so a little after hesays, “For he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath
not seen”?693 because the reason that he does not see God is, that he does not love his brother. For
he who does not love his brother, abideth not in love; and he who abideth not in love, abideth not
in God, because God is love. Further, he who abideth not in God, abideth not in light; for “God islight, and in Him is no darkness at all.”694 He therefore who abideth not in light, what wonder is it
if he does not see light, that is, does not see God, because he is in darkness? But he sees his brotherwith human sight, with which God cannot be seen. But if he loved with spiritual love him whom
he sees with human sight, he would see God, who is love itself, with the inner sight by which He
can be seen. Therefore he who does not love his brother whom he sees, how can he love God, whomon that account he does not see, because God is love, which he has not who does not love his
brother? Neither let that further question disturb us, how much of love we ought to spend upon ourbrother, and how much upon God: incomparably more upon God than upon ourselves, but upon
our brother as much as upon ourselves; and we love ourselves so much the more, the more we love
God. Therefore we love God and our neighbor from one and the same love; but we love God forthe sake of God, and ourselves and our neighbors for the sake of God.

Chapter 9.—Our Love of the Righteous is Kindled from Love Itself of the Unchangeable Form of
Righteousness.

692
693
694

1 John ii. 10.
1 John iv. 7, 8, 20.
1 John i. 5.

169

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

13. For why is it, pray, that we burn when we hear and read, “Behold, now is the accepted time;
behold, now is the day of salvation: giving no offense in anything, that the ministry be not blamed:
but in all things approving ourselves as the ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions, innecessities, in distresses, in stripes, in imprisonments, in tumults, in labors, in watchings, in fastings;
by pureness, by knowledge, by long-suffering, by kindness, by the Holy Ghost, by love unfeigned,by the word of truth, by the power of God, by the armor of righteousness on the right hand and on
the left, by honor and dishonor, by evil report and good report: as deceivers, and yet true; as
unknown, and yet well known; as dying, and, behold, we live; as chastened, and not killed; assorrowful, yet alway rejoicing; as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, and yet possessing
all things?”695 Why is it that we are inflamed with love of the Apostle Paul, when we read thesethings, unless that we believe him so to have lived? But we do not believe that the ministers of God
ought so to live because we have heard it from any one, but because we behold it inwardly within
ourselves, or rather above ourselves, in the truth itself. Him, therefore, whom we believe to haveso lived, we love for that which we see. And except we loved above all else that form which we
discern as always steadfast and unchangeable, we should not for that reason love him, because wehold fast in our belief that his life, when he was living in the flesh, was adapted to, and in harmony
with, this form. But somehow we are stirred up the more to the love of this form itself, through thebelief by which we believe some one to have so lived; and to the hope by which we no more at all
despair, that we, too, are able so to live; we who are men, from this fact itself, that some men haveso lived, so that we both desire this more ardently, and pray for it more confidently. So both thelove of that form, according to which they are believed to have lived, makes the life of these menthemselves to be loved by us; and their life thus believed stirs up a more burning love towards thatsame form; so that the more ardently we love God, the more certainly and the more calmly do wesee Him, because we behold in God the unchangeable form of righteousness, according to which
we judge that man ought to live. Therefore faith avails to the knowledge and to the love of God,
not as though of one altogether unknown, or altogether not loved; but so that thereby He may beknown more clearly, and loved more steadfastly.

Chapter 10.—There are Three Things in Love, as It Were a Trace of the Trinity.
14. But what is love or charity, which divine Scripture so greatly praises and proclaims, except
the love of good? But love is of some one that loves, and with love something is loved. Behold,then, there are three things: he that loves, and that which is loved, and love. What, then, is love,
except a certain life which couples or seeks to couple together some two things, namely, him thatloves, and that which is loved? And this is so even in outward and carnal loves. But that we may
drink in something more pure and clear, let us tread down the flesh and ascend to the mind. What
does the mind love in a friend except the mind? There, then, also are three things: he that loves,and that which is loved, and love. It remains to ascend also from hence, and to seek those things
which are above, as far as is given to man. But here for a little while let our purpose rest, not that695

2 Cor. vi. 2–10.

170

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

it may think itself to have found already what it seeks; but just as usually the place has first to befound where anything is to be sought, while the thing itself is not yet found, but we have only foundalready where to look for it; so let it suffice to have said thus much, that we may have, as it were,
the hinge of some starting-point, whence to weave the rest of our discourse.

125Book IX.
————————————
That a kind of trinity exists in man, who is the image of God, viz. the mind, and the knowledge
wherewith the mind knows itself, and the love wherewith it loves both itself and its own
knowledge; and these three are shown to be mutually equal, and of one essence.
Chapter 1.—In What Way We Must Inquire Concerning the Trinity.
1. We certainly seek a trinity,—not any trinity, but that Trinity which is God, and the true andsupreme and only God. Let my hearers then wait, for we are still seeking. And no one justly finds
fault with such a search, if at least he who seeks that which either to know or to utter is most difficult,is steadfast in the faith. But whosoever either sees or teaches better, finds fault quickly and justlywith any one who confidently affirms concerning it. “Seek God,” he says, “and your heart shall
live;”696 and lest any one should rashly rejoice that he has, as it were, apprehended it, “Seek,” hesays, “His face evermore.”697 And the apostle: “If any man,” he says, “think that he knoweth
anything, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know. But if any man love God, the same is knownof Him.”698 He has not said, has known Him, which is dangerous presumption, but “is known ofHim.” So also in another place, when he had said, “But now after that ye have known God:”
immediately correcting himself, he says, “or rather are known of God.”699 And above all in that
other place, “Brethren,” he says, “I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do,forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, I
press in purpose700 toward the mark, for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. Let us
therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded.”701 Perfection in this life, he tells us, is nothingelse than to forget those things which are behind, and to reach forth and press in purpose toward
those things which are before. For he that seeks has the safest purpose, [who seeks] until that istaken hold of whither we are tending, and for which we are reaching forth. But that is the right

696
697
698
699
700
701

Ps. lxix. 32.
Ps. cv. 4.
1 Cor. viii. 2.
Gal. iv. 19.
In purpose, om. in A.V.
Phil. iii. 13–15.

171

NPNF (V1-03)

126

Philip Schaff

purpose which starts from faith. For a certain faith is in some way the starting-point of knowledge;
but a certain knowledge will not be made perfect, except after this life, when we shall see face toface.702 Let us therefore be thus minded, so as to know that the disposition to seek the truth is more
safe than that which presumes things unknown to be known. Let us therefore so seek as if we shouldfind, and so find as if we were about to seek. For “when a man hath done, then he beginneth.”703
Let us doubt without unbelief of things to be believed; let us affirm without rashness of things to
be understood: authority must be held fast in the former, truth sought out in the latter. As regards
this question, then, let us believe that the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit is one God, theCreator and Ruler of the whole creature; and that the Father is not the Son, nor the Holy Spirit
either the Father or the Son, but a trinity of persons mutually interrelated, and a unity of an equal
essence. And let us seek to understand this, praying for help from Himself, whom we wish tounderstand; and as much as He grants, desiring to explain what we understand with so much pious
care and anxiety, that even if in any case we say one thing for another, we may at least say nothing
unworthy. As, for the sake of example, if we say anything concerning the Father that does notproperly belong to the Father, or does belong to the Son, or to the Holy Spirit, or to the Trinity
itself; and if anything of the Son which does not properly suit with the Son, or at all events which
does suit with the Father, or with the Holy Spirit, or with the Trinity; or if, again, anything concerning
the Holy Spirit, which is not fitly a property of the Holy Spirit, yet is not alien from the Father, orfrom the Son, or from the one God the Trinity itself. Even as now our wish is to see whether theHoly Spirit is properly that love which is most excellent which if He is not, either the Father islove, or the Son, or the Trinity itself; since we cannot withstand the most certain faith and weighty
authority of Scripture, saying, “God is love.”704 And yet we ought not to deviate into profane error,
so as to say anything of the Trinity which does not suit the Creator, but rather the creature, or whichis feigned outright by mere empty thought.

Chapter 2.—The Three Things Which are Found in Love Must Be Considered.705

702

1 Cor. xiii. 12.
Ecclus. xviii. 7.
704
1 John iv. 16.
[Augustin here begins his discussion of some ternaries that are found in the Finite, that illustrate the trinality of the Infinite.
Like all finite analogies, they fail at certain points. In the case chosen—namely, the lover, the loved, and love—the first two
are substances, the last is not. The mind is a substance, but its activity in loving is not. In chapter iv. 5, Augustin asserts that“love and knowledge exist substantially, as the mind itself does.” But no psychology, ancient or modern, has ever maintainedthat the agencies of a spiritual entity or substance are themselves spiritual entity or substances. The activities of the human mind
in cognizing, loving, etc., are only its energizing, not its substance.
The ambiguity of the Latin contributes to this error. The mind and its loving, and also the mind and its cognizing, aredenominated “duo quædam” the mind, love, and knowledge, are denominated “tria quædem.” By bringing the mind and its
love and knowledge under the one term “quædam,” and then giving the meaning of “substance” to “thing,” in “something,” theresult follows that all three are alike and equally “substantial.”
This analogy taken from the mind and its activities illustrates the trinality of the Divine essence, but fails to illustrate thesubstantiality of the three persons. The three Divine persons are not the Divine essence together with two of its activities (such,e.g., as creation and redemption), but the essence in three modes, or “forms,” as St. Paul denominates them in Phil. iii. 6.
703

705

172

NPNF (V1-03)

127

Philip Schaff

2. And this being so, let us direct our attention to those three things which we fancy we havefound. We are not yet speaking of heavenly things, nor yet of God the Father, and Son, and Holy
Spirit, but of that inadequate image, which yet is an image, that is, man; for our feeble mind perhaps
can gaze upon this more familiarly and more easily. Well then, when I, who make this inquiry, love
anything, there are three things concerned—myself, and that which I love, and love itself. For I do
not love love, except I love a lover; for there is no love where nothing is loved. Therefore there arethree things—he who loves, and that which is loved, and love. But what if I love none except
myself? Will there not then be two things—that which I love, and love? For he who loves and thatwhich is loved are the same when any one loves himself; just as to love and to be loved, in the sameway, is the very same thing when any one loves himself. Since the same thing is said, when it issaid, he loves himself, and he is loved by himself. For in that case to love and to be loved are not
two different things: just as he who loves and he who is loved are not two different persons. But
yet, even so, love and what is loved are still two things. For there is no love when any one loves
himself, except when love itself is loved. But it is one thing to love one’s self, another to love one’s
own love. For love is not loved, unless as already loving something; since where nothing is loved
there is no love. Therefore there are two things when any one loves himself—love, and that which
is loved. For then he that loves and that which is loved are one. Whence it seems that it does notfollow that three things are to be understood wherever love is. For let us put aside from the inquiry
all the other many things of which a man consists; and in order that we may discover clearly what
we are now seeking, as far as in such a subject is possible, let us treat of the mind alone. The mind,
then, when it loves itself, discloses two things—mind and love. But what is to love one’s self,
except to wish to help one’s self to the enjoyment of self? And when any one wishes himself to bejust as much as he is, then the will is on a par with the mind, and the love is equal to him who loves.
And if love is a substance, it is certainly not body, but spirit; and the mind also is not body, but
spirit. Yet love and mind are not two spirits, but one spirit; nor yet two essences, but one: and yethere are two things that are one, he that loves and love; or, if you like so to put it, that which is
loved and love. And these two, indeed, are mutually said relatively. Since he who loves is referred
to love, and love to him who loves. For he who loves, loves with some love, and love is the loveof some one who loves. But mind and spirit are not said relatively, but express essence. For mind
and spirit do not exist because the mind and spirit of some particular man exists. For if we subtract
the body from that which is man, which is so called with the conjunction of body, the mind andspirit remain. But if we subtract him that loves, then there is no love; and if we subtract love, thenthere is no one that loves. And therefore, in so far as they are mutually referred to one another, they
are two; but whereas they are spoken in respect to themselves, each are spirit, and both together
also are one spirit; and each are mind, and both together one mind. Where, then, is the trinity? Let
us attend as much as we can, and let us invoke the everlasting light, that He may illuminate ourdarkness, and that we may see in ourselves, as much as we are permitted, the image of God.

If Augustin could prove his assertion that the activities of the human spirit in knowing and loving are strictly “substantial,” then thisternary would illustrate not only the trinality of the essence, but the essentiality and objectivity of the persons. The fact which he mentions,that knowledge and love are inseparable from the knowing and loving mind, does not prove their equal substantiality with themind.—W.G.T.S.]

173

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 3.—The Image of the Trinity in the Mind of Man Who Knows Himself and Loves Himself.
The Mind Knows Itself Through Itself.
3. For the mind cannot love itself, except also it know itself; for how can it love what it does
not know? Or if any body says that the mind, from either general or special knowledge, believes
itself of such a character as it has by experience found others to be and therefore loves itself, hespeaks most foolishly. For whence does a mind know another mind, if it does not know itself? For
the mind does not know other minds and not know itself, as the eye of the body sees other eyesand does not see itself; for we see bodies through the eyes of the body, because, unless we arelooking into a mirror, we cannot refract and reflect the rays into themselves which shine forththrough those eyes, and touch whatever we discern,—a subject, indeed, which is treated of mostsubtlely and obscurely, until it be clearly demonstrated whether the fact be so, or whether it be not.
But whatever is the nature of the power by which we discern through the eyes, certainly, whether
it be rays or anything else, we cannot discern with the eyes that power itself; but we inquire into itwith the mind, and if possible, understand even this with the mind. As the mind, then, itself gathers
the knowledge of corporeal things through the senses of the body, so of incorporeal things throughitself. Therefore it knows itself also through itself, since it is incorporeal; for if it does not know
itself, it does not love itself.

Chapter 4.—The Three are One, and Also Equal, Viz. The Mind Itself, and the Love, and theKnowledge of It. That the Same Three Exist Substantially, and are Predicated Relatively. That
the Same Three are Inseparable. That the Same Three are Not Joined and Commingled Like
Parts, But that They are of One Essence, and are Relatives.
4. But as there are two things (duo quædam), the mind and the love of it, when it loves itself;
so there are two things, the mind and the knowledge of it, when it knows itself. Therefore the mind
itself, and the love of it, and the knowledge of it, are three things (tria quædam), and these three
are one; and when they are perfect they are equal. For if one loves himself less than as he is,—asfor example, suppose that the mind of a man only loves itself as much as the body of a man ought
to be loved, whereas the mind is more than the body,—then it is in fault, and its love is not perfect.
Again, if it loves itself more than as it is,—as if, for instance, it loves itself as much as God is tobe loved, whereas the mind is incomparably less than God,—here also it is exceedingly in fault,
and its love of self is not perfect. But it is in fault more perversely and wrongly still, when it loves
the body as much as God is to be loved. Also, if knowledge is less than that thing which is known,
and which can be fully known, then knowledge is not perfect; but if it is greater, then the nature
which knows is above that which is known, as the knowledge of the body is greater than the bodyitself, which is known by that knowledge. For knowledge is a kind of life in the reason of theknower, but the body is not life; and any life is greater than any body, not in bulk, but in power.
But when the mind knows itself, its own knowledge does not rise above itself, because itself knows,
and itself is known. When, therefore, it knows itself entirely, and no other thing with itself, thenits knowledge is equal to itself; because its knowledge is not from another nature, since it knows
174

NPNF (V1-03)

128

Philip Schaff

itself. And when it perceives itself entirely, and nothing more, then it is neither less nor greater.
We said therefore rightly, that these three things, [mind, love, and knowledge], when they are
perfect, are by consequence equal.
5. Similar reasoning suggests to us, if indeed we can any way understand the matter, that thesethings [i.e. love and knowledge] exist in the soul, and that, being as it were involved in it, they areso evolved from it as to be perceived and reckoned up substantially, or, so to say, essentially. Not
as though in a subject; as color, or shape, or any other quality or quantity, are in the body. For
anything of this [material] kind does not go beyond the subject in which it is; for the color or shapeof this particular body cannot be also those of another body. But the mind can also love something
besides itself, with that love with which it loves itself. And further, the mind does not know itself
only, but also many other things. Wherefore love and knowledge are not contained in the mind as
in a subject, but these also exist substantially, as the mind itself does; because, even if they aremutually predicated relatively, yet they exist each severally in their own substance. Nor are theyso mutually predicated relatively as color and the colored subject are; so that color is in the coloredsubject, but has not any proper substance in itself, since colored body is a substance, but color isin a substance; but as two friends are also two men, which are substances, while they are said tobe men not relatively, but friends relatively.
6. But, further, although one who loves or one who knows is a substance, and knowledge is a
substance, and love is a substance, but he that loves and love, or, he that knows and knowledge,
are spoken of relatively to each other, as are friends: yet mind or spirit are not relatives, as neither
are men relatives: nevertheless he that loves and love, or he that knows and knowledge, cannot
exist separately from each other, as men can that are friends. Although it would seem that friends,
too, can be separated in body, not in mind, in as far as they are friends: nay, it can even happen thata friend may even also begin to hate a friend and on this account cease to be a friend while the other
does not know it, and still loves him. But if the love with which the mind loves itself ceases to be,then the mind also will at the same time cease to love. Likewise, if the knowledge by which themind knows itself ceases to be, then the mind will also at the same time cease to know itself. Just
as the head of anything that has a head is certainly a head, and they are predicated relatively to eachother, although they are also substances: for both a head is a body, and so is that which has a head;
and if there be no head, then neither will there be that which has a head. Only these things can beseparated from each other by cutting off, those cannot.
7. And even if there are some bodies which cannot be wholly separated and divided, yet theywould not be bodies unless they consisted of their own proper parts. A part then is predicatedrelatively to a whole, since every part is a part of some whole, and a whole is a whole by having
all its parts. But since both part and whole are bodies, these things are not only predicated relatively,
but exist also substantially. Perhaps, then, the mind is a whole, and the love with which it loves
itself, and the knowledge with which it knows itself, are as it were its parts, of which two parts thatwhole consists. Or are there three equal parts which make up the one whole? But no part embraces
the whole, of which it is a part; whereas, when the mind knows itself as a whole, that is, knows
itself perfectly, then the knowledge of it extends through the whole of it; and when it loves itself
perfectly, then it loves itself as a whole, and the love of it extends through the whole of it. Is it,
then, as one drink is made from wine and water and honey, and each single part extends throughthe whole, and yet they are three things (for there is no part of the drink which does not containthese three things; for they are not joined as if they were water and oil, but are entirely commingled:
175

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

and they are all substances, and the whole of that liquor which is composed of the three is one
substance),—is it, I say, in some such way as this we are to think these three to be together, mind,
love, and knowledge? But water, wine, and honey are not of one substance, although one substanceresults in the drink made from the commingling of them. And I cannot see how those other three
are not of the same substance, since the mind itself loves itself, and itself knows itself; and thesethree so exist, as that the mind is neither loved nor known by any other thing at all. These three,therefore, must needs be of one and the same essence; and for that reason, if they were confounded
together as it were by a commingling, they could not be in any way three, neither could they bemutually referred to each other. Just as if you were to make from one and the same gold threesimilar rings, although connected with each other, they are mutually referred to each other, because
they are similar. For everything similar is similar to something, and there is a trinity of rings, andone gold. But if they are blended with each other, and each mingled with the other through thewhole of their own bulk, then that trinity will fall through, and it will not exist at all; and not only
will it be called one gold, as it was called in the case of those three rings, but now it will not becalled three things of gold at all.

Chapter 5.—That These Three are Several in Themselves, and Mutually All in All.

129

8. But in these three, when the mind knows itself and loves itself, there remains a trinity: mind,
love, knowledge; and this trinity is not confounded together by any commingling: although they
are each severally in themselves and mutually all in all, or each severally in each two, or each two
in each. Therefore all are in all. For certainly the mind is in itself, since it is called mind in respect
to itself: although it is said to be knowing, or known, or knowable, relatively to its own knowledge;
and although also as loving, and loved, or lovable, it is referred to love, by which it loves itself.
And knowledge, although it is referred to the mind that knows or is known, nevertheless is also
predicated both as known and knowing in respect to itself: for the knowledge by which the mind
knows itself is not unknown to itself. And although love is referred to the mind that loves, whose
love it is; nevertheless it is also love in respect to itself, so as to exist also in itself: since love too
is loved, yet cannot be loved with anything except with love, that is with itself. So these things areseverally in themselves. But so are they in each other; because both the mind that loves is in love,and love is in the knowledge of him that loves, and knowledge is in the mind that knows. And eachseverally is in like manner in each two, because the mind which knows and loves itself, is in its
own love and knowledge: and the love of the mind that loves and knows itself, is in the mind andin its knowledge: and the knowledge of the mind that knows and loves itself is in the mind and inits love, because it loves itself that knows, and knows itself that loves. And hence also each two isin each severally, since the mind which knows and loves itself, is together with its own knowledge
in love, and together with its own love in knowledge; and love too itself and knowledge are together
in the mind, which loves and knows itself. But in what way all are in all, we have already shown
above; since the mind loves itself as a whole, and knows itself as a whole, and knows its own love
wholly, and loves its own knowledge wholly, when these three things are perfect in respect tothemselves. Therefore these three things are marvellously inseparable from each other, and yet

176

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

each of them is severally a substance, and all together are one substance or essence, whilst they aremutually predicated relatively.706

Chapter 6.—There is One Knowledge of the Thing in the Thing Itself, and Another in Eternal Truth
Itself. That Corporeal Things, Too, are to Be Judged the Rules of Eternal Truth.
9. But when the human mind knows itself and loves itself, it does not know and love anythingunchangeable: and each individual man declares his own particular mind by one manner of speech,
when he considers what takes place in himself; but defines the human mind abstractly by special
or general knowledge. And so, when he speaks to me of his own individual mind, as to whether heunderstands this or that, or does not understand it, or whether he wishes or does not wish this orthat, I believe; but when he speaks the truth of the mind of man generally or specially, I recognize
and approve. Whence it is manifest, that each sees a thing in himself, in such way that anotherperson may believe what he says of it, yet may not see it; but another [sees a thing] in the truth
itself, in such way that another person also can gaze upon it; of which the former undergoes changes
at successive times, the latter consists in an unchangeable eternity. For we do not gather a genericor specific knowledge of the human mind by means of resemblance by seeing many minds withthe eyes of the body: but we gaze upon indestructible truth, from which to define perfectly, as far
as we can, not of what sort is the mind of any one particular man, but of what sort it ought to beupon the eternal plan.
10. Whence also, even in the case of the images of things corporeal which are drawn in throughthe bodily sense, and in some way infused into the memory, from which also those things whichhave not been seen are thought under a fancied image, whether otherwise than they really are, oreven perchance as they are;—even here too, we are proved either to accept or reject, within ourselves,by other rules which remain altogether unchangeable above our mind, when we approve or reject
anything rightly. For both when I recall the walls of Carthage which I have seen, and imagine tomyself the walls of Alexandria which I have not seen, and, in preferring this to that among forms
which in both cases are imaginary, make that preference upon grounds of reason; the judgment of
truth from above is still strong and clear, and rests firmly upon the utterly indestructible rules of

706[Augustin here illustrates, by the ternary of mind, love, and knowledge, what the Greek Trinitarians denominate theπεριχωρησις of the divine essence. By the figure of a circulation, they describe the eternal inbeing and indwelling of one person
in another. This is founded on John xiv. 10, 11; xvii. 21, 23. “Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me?
I pray that they all may be one, as thou Father art in Me, and I in Thee.” Athanasius (Oratio, iii. 21) remarks that Christ here
prays that the disciples “may imitate the trinitarian unity of essence, in their unity of affection.” Had it been possible for thedisciples to be in the essence of the Father as the Son is, he would have prayed that they all may be “one in Thee,” instead of“one in Us.”
The Platonists, also, employed this figure of circulatory movement, to explain the self-reflecting and self-communing
nature of the human mind. “It is not possible for us to know what our souls are, but only by their κινήσεις κυκλικαὶ, their circularand reflex motions and converse with themselves, which only can steal from them their own secrets.” J. Smith: Immortality of
the Soul, Ch. ii.
Augustin’s illustration, however, is imperfect, because “the three things” which circulate are not “each of them severally a substance.”
Only one of them, namely, the mind, is a substance.—W.G.T.S.]

177

NPNF (V1-03)

130

Philip Schaff

its own right; and if it is covered as it were by cloudiness of corporeal images, yet is not wrapt up
and confounded in them.
11. But it makes a difference, whether, under that or in that darkness, I am shut off as it werefrom the clear heaven; or whether (as usually happens on lofty mountains), enjoying the free air
between both, I at once look up above to the calmest light, and down below upon the densest clouds.
For whence is the ardor of brotherly love kindled in me, when I hear that some man has borne bitter
torments for the excellence and steadfastness of faith? And if that man is shown to me with thefinger, I am eager to join myself to him, to become acquainted with him, to bind him to myself infriendship. And accordingly, if opportunity offers, I draw near, I address him, I converse with him,
I express my goodwill towards him in what words I can, and wish that in him too in turn should be
brought to pass and expressed goodwill towards me; and I endeavor after a spiritual embrace in theway of belief, since I cannot search out so quickly and discern altogether his innermost heart. I love
therefore the faithful and courageous man with a pure and genuine love. But if he were to confessto me in the course of conversation, or were through unguardedness to show in any way, that either
he believes something unseemly of God, and desires also something carnal in Him, and that hebore these torments on behalf of such an error, or from the desire of money for which he hoped, orfrom empty greediness of human praise: immediately it follows that the love with which I wasborne towards him, displeased, and as it were repelled, and taken away from an unworthy man,remains in that form, after which, believing him such as I did, I had loved him; unless perhaps I
have come to love him to this end, that he may become such, while I have found him not to be suchin fact. And in that man, too, nothing is changed: although it can be changed, so that he may becomethat which I had believed him to be already. But in my mind there certainly is something changed,
viz., the estimate I had formed of him, which was before of one sort, and now is of another: andthe same love, at the bidding from above of unchangeable righteousness, is turned aside from the
purpose of enjoying, to the purpose of taking counsel. But the form itself of unshaken and stable
truth, wherein I should have enjoyed the fruition of the man, believing him to be good, and wherein
likewise I take counsel that he may be good, sheds in an immoveable eternity the same light ofincorruptible and most sound reason, both upon the sight of my mind, and upon that cloud of images,
which I discern from above, when I think of the same man whom I had seen. Again, when I callback to my mind some arch, turned beautifully and symmetrically, which, let us say, I saw atCarthage; a certain reality that had been made known to the mind through the eyes, and transferredto the memory, causes the imaginary view. But I behold in my mind yet another thing, according
to which that work of art pleases me; and whence also, if it displeased me, I should correct it. We
judge therefore of those particular things according to that [form of eternal truth], and discern thatform by the intuition of the rational mind. But those things themselves we either touch if presentby the bodily sense, or if absent remember their images as fixed in our memory, or picture, in theway of likeness to them, such things as we ourselves also, if we wished and were able, would
laboriously build up: figuring in the mind after one fashion the images of bodies, or seeing bodies
through the body; but after another, grasping by simple intelligence what is above the eye of themind, viz., the reasons and the unspeakably beautiful skill of such forms.

178

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 7.—We Conceive and Beget the Word Within, from the Things We Have Beheld in the
Eternal Truth. The Word, Whether of the Creature or of the Creator, is Conceived by Love.
12. We behold, then, by the sight of the mind, in that eternal truth from which all things temporal
are made, the form according to which we are, and according to which we do anything by true andright reason, either in ourselves, or in things corporeal; and we have the true knowledge of things,
thence conceived, as it were as a word within us, and by speaking we beget it from within; nor bybeing born does it depart from us. And when we speak to others, we apply to the word, remaining
within us, the ministry of the voice or of some bodily sign, that by some kind of sensible
remembrance some similar thing may be wrought also in the mind of him that hears,—similar, I
say, to that which does not depart from the mind of him that speaks. We do nothing, therefore,
through the members of the body in our words and actions, by which the behavior of men is either
approved or blamed, which we do not anticipate by a word uttered within ourselves. For no one
willingly does anything, which he has not first said in his heart.
13. And this word is conceived by love, either of the creature or of the Creator, that is, eitherof changeable nature or of unchangeable truth.707

131

Chapter 8.—In What Desire and Love Differ.
[Conceived] therefore, either by desire or by love: not that the creature ought not to be loved;
but if that love [of the creature] is referred to the Creator, then it will not be desire (cupiditas), butlove (charitas). For it is desire when the creature is loved for itself. And then it does not help a man
through making use of it, but corrupts him in the enjoying it. When, therefore, the creature is either
equal to us or inferior, we must use the inferior in order to God, but we must enjoy the equal duly
in God. For as thou oughtest to enjoy thyself, not in thyself, but in Him who made thee, so also
him whom thou lovest as thyself. Let us enjoy, therefore, both ourselves and our brethren in the
Lord; and hence let us not dare to yield, and as it were to relax, ourselves to ourselves in the direction
downwards. Now a word is born, when, being thought out, it pleases us either to the effect ofsinning, or to that of doing right. Therefore love, as it were a mean, conjoins our word and the mind
from which it is conceived, and without any confusion binds itself as a third with them, in anincorporeal embrace.

707[The inward production of a thought in the finite essence of the human spirit which is expressed outwardly in a spoken
word, is analogous to the eternal generation of the Eternal Wisdom in the infinite essence of God expressed in the Eternal Word.
Both are alike, in that something spiritual issues from something spiritual, without division or diminution of substance. But a
thought of the human mind is not an objective thing or substance; while the Eternal Word is.—W.G.T.S.]

179

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 9.—In the Love of Spiritual Things the Word Born is the Same as the Word Conceived.
It is Otherwise in the Love of Carnal Things.
14. But the word conceived and the word born are the very same when the will finds rest in
knowledge itself, as is the case in the love of spiritual things. For instance, he who knowsrighteousness perfectly, and loves it perfectly, is already righteous; even if no necessity exist ofworking according to it outwardly through the members of the body. But in the love of carnal andtemporal things, as in the offspring of animals, the conception of the word is one thing, the bringing
forth another. For here what is conceived by desiring is born by attaining. Since it does not suffice
to avarice to know and to love gold, except it also have it; nor to know and love to eat, or to lie
with any one, unless also one does it; nor to know and love honors and power, unless they actually
come to pass. Nay, all these things, even if obtained, do not suffice. “Whosoever drinketh of thiswater,” He says, “shall thirst again.”708 And so also the Psalmist, “He hath conceived pain andbrought forth iniquity.”709 And he speaks of pain or labor as conceived, when those things areconceived which it is not sufficient to know and will, and when the mind burns and grows sickwith want, until it arrives at those things, and, as it were, brings them forth. Whence in the Latin
language we have the word “parta” used elegantly for both “reperta” and “comperta,” which words
sound as if derived from bringing forth.710 Since “lust, when it hath conceived, bringeth forth sin.”711
Wherefore the Lord proclaims, “Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy laden;”712 and inanother place “Woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days!”713
And when therefore He referred all either right actions or sins to the bringing forth of the word,“By thy mouth,”714 He says, “thou shalt be justified, and by thy mouth715 thou shalt be
condemned,”716 intending thereby not the visible mouth, but that which is within and invisible, of
the thought and of the heart.

Chapter 10.—Whether Only Knowledge that is Loved is the Word of the Mind.
15. It is rightly asked then, whether all knowledge is a word, or only knowledge that is loved.
For we also know the things which we hate; but what we do not like, cannot be said to be either
conceived or brought forth by the mind. For not all things which in anyway touch it, are conceived
by it; but some only reach the point of being known, but yet are not spoken as words, as for instance

708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716

John iv. 13.
Ps. vii. 14.
Partus.
Jas. i. 15.
Matt. xi. 28.
Matt. xxiv. 19.
Words.
Words.—A.V.
Matt. xii. 37.

180

NPNF (V1-03)

132

Philip Schaff

those of which we speak now. For those are called words in one way, which occupy spaces of timeby their syllables, whether they are pronounced or only thought; and in another way, all that is
known is called a word imprinted on the mind, as long as it can be brought forth from the memoryand defined, even though we dislike the thing itself; and in another way still, when we like thatwhich is conceived in the mind. And that which the apostle says, must be taken according to thislast kind of word, “No man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost;”717 since thosealso say this, but according to another meaning of the term “word,” of whom the Lord Himself
says, “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.”718
Nay, even in the case of things which we hate, when we rightly dislike and rightly censure them,
we approve and like the censure bestowed upon them, and it becomes a word. Nor is it the knowledgeof vices that displeases us, but the vices themselves. For I like to know and define what intemperance
is; and this is its word. Just as there are known faults in art, and the knowledge of them is rightly
approved, when a connoisseur discerns the species or the privation of excellence, as to affirm anddeny that it is or that it is not; yet to be without excellence and to fall away into fault, is worthy ofcondemnation. And to define intemperance, and to say its word, belongs to the art of morals; but
to be intemperate belongs to that which that art censures. Just as to know and define what a solecism
is, belongs to the art of speaking; but to be guilty of one, is a fault which the same art reprehends.
A word, then, which is the point we wish now to discern and intimate, is knowledge together withlove. Whenever, then, the mind knows and loves itself, its word is joined to it by love. And since
it loves knowledge and knows love, both the word is in love and love is in the word, and both arein him who loves and speaks.719

Chapter 11.—That the Image or Begotten Word of the Mind that Knows Itself is Equal to the Mind
Itself.
16. But all knowledge according to species is like the thing which it knows. For there is anotherknowledge according to privation, according to which we speak a word only when we condemn.
And this condemnation of a privation is equivalent to praise of the species, and so is approved. The
mind, then, contains some likeness to a known species, whether when liking that species or when
disliking its privation. And hence, in so far as we know God, we are like Him, but not like to thepoint of equality, since we do not know Him to the extent of His own being. And as, when we speakof bodies by means of the bodily sense, there arises in our mind some likeness of them, which is aphantasm of the memory; for the bodies themselves are not at all in the mind, when we think them,but only the likenesses of those bodies; therefore, when we approve the latter for the former, we

717

1 Cor. xii. 3.
Matt. vii. 21.
719[The meaning of this obscure chapter seems to be, that only what the mind is pleased with, is the real expression andindex of the mind—its true “word.” The true nature of the mind is revealed in its sympathies. But this requires some qualification.
For in the case of contrary qualities, like right and wrong, beauty and ugliness, the real nature of the mind is seen also in its
antipathy as well as in its sympathy; in its hatred of wrong as well as in its love of right. Each alike is a true index of the mind,
because each really implies the other.—W.G.T.S.]
718

181

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

err, for the approving of one thing for another is an error; yet the image of the body in the mind isa thing of a better sort than the species of the body itself, inasmuch as the former is in a better
nature, viz. in a living substance, as the mind is: so when we know God, although we are madebetter than we were before we knew Him, and above all when the same knowledge being also liked
and worthily loved becomes a word, and so that knowledge becomes a kind of likeness of God; yetthat knowledge is of a lower kind, since it is in a lower nature; for the mind is creature, but God is
Creator. And from this it may be inferred, that when the mind knows and approves itself, this sameknowledge is in such way its word, as that it is altogether on a par and equal with it, and the same;
because it is neither the knowledge of a lower essence, as of the body, nor of a higher, as of God.
And whereas knowledge bears a likeness to that which it knows, that is, of which it is the knowledge;in this case it has perfect and equal likeness, when the mind itself, which knows, is known. And so
it is both image and word; because it is uttered concerning that mind to which it is equalled in
knowing, and that which is begotten is equal to the begetter.

Chapter 12.—Why Love is Not the Offspring of the Mind, as Knowledge is So. The Solution of
the Question. The Mind with the Knowledge of Itself and the Love of Itself is the Image of the
Trinity.

133

17. What then is love? Will it not be an image? Will it not be a word? Will it not be begotten?
For why does the mind beget its knowledge when it knows itself, and not beget its love when it
loves itself? For if it is the cause of its own knowing, for the reason that it is knowable, it is also
the cause of its own love because it is lovable. It is hard, then, to say why it does not beget both.
For there is a further question also respecting the supreme Trinity itself, the omnipotent God theCreator, after whose image man is made, which troubles men, whom the truth of God invites to thefaith by human speech; viz. why the Holy Spirit is not also to be either believed or understood tobe begotten by God the Father, so that He also may be called a Son. And this question we areendeavoring in some way to investigate in the human mind, in order that from a lower image, inwhich our own nature itself as it were answers, upon being questioned, in a way more familiar toourselves, we may be able to direct a more practised mental vision from the enlightened creature
to the unchangeable light; assuming, however, that the truth itself has persuaded us, that as no
Christian doubts the Word of God to be the Son, so that the Holy Spirit is love. Let us return, then,to a more careful questioning and consideration upon this subject of that image which is the creature,that is, of the rational mind; wherein the knowledge of some things coming into existence in time,
but which did not exist before, and the love of some things which were not loved before, opens to
us more clearly what to say: because to speech also itself, which must be disposed in time, thatthing is easier of explanation which is comprehended in the order of time.
18. First, therefore, it is clear that a thing may possibly be knowable, that is, such as can be
known, and yet that it may be unknown; but that it is not possible for that to be known which is
not knowable. Wherefore it must be clearly held that everything whatsoever that we know begets
at the same time in us the knowledge of itself; for knowledge is brought forth from both, from theknower and from the thing known. When, therefore, the mind knows itself, it alone is the parent

182

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffof its own knowledge; for it is itself both the thing known and the knower of it. But it was knowable
to itself also before it knew itself, only the knowledge of itself was not in itself so long as it did notknow itself. In knowing itself, then, it begets a knowledge of itself equal to itself; since it does notknow itself as less than itself is, nor is its knowledge the knowledge of the essence of some one
else, not only because itself knows, but also because it knows itself, as we have said above. Whatthen is to be said of love; why, when the mind loves itself, it should not seem also to have begotten
the love of itself? For it was lovable to itself even before it loved itself since it could love itself;
just as it was knowable to itself even before it knew itself, since it could know itself. For if it were
not knowable to itself, it never could have known itself; and so, if it were not lovable to itself, it
never could have loved itself. Why therefore may it not be said by loving itself to have begotten
its own love, as by knowing itself it has begotten its own knowledge? Is it because it is thereby
indeed plainly shown that this is the principle of love, whence it proceeds? for it proceeds from themind itself, which is lovable to itself before it loves itself, and so is the principle of its own loveby which it loves itself: but that this love is not therefore rightly said to be begotten by the mind,
as is the knowledge of itself by which the mind knows itself, because in the case of knowledge thething has been found already, which is what we call brought forth or discovered;720 and this iscommonly preceded by an inquiry such as to find rest when that end is attained. For inquiry is thedesire of finding, or, what is the same thing, of discovering.721 But those things which are discovered
are as it were brought forth, whence they are like offspring; but wherein, except in the case itself
of knowledge? For in that case they are as it were uttered and fashioned. For although the things
existed already which we found by seeking, yet the knowledge of them did not exist, whichknowledge we regard as an offspring that is born. Further, the desire (appetitus) which there is inseeking proceeds from him who seeks, and is in some way in suspense, and does not rest in the end
whither it is directed, except that which is sought be found and conjoined with him who seeks. And
this desire, that is, inquiry,—although it does not seem to be love, by which that which is known
is loved, for in this case we are still striving to know,—yet it is something of the same kind. For it
can be called will (voluntas),since every one who seeks wills (vult) to find; and if that is sought
which belongs to knowledge, every one who seeks wills to know. But if he wills ardently andearnestly, he is said to study (studere): a word that is most commonly employed in the case of
pursuing and obtaining any branches of learning. Therefore, the bringing forth of the mind ispreceded by some desire, by which, through seeking and finding what we wish to know, the offspring,
viz. knowledge itself, is born. And for this reason, that desire by which knowledge is conceived
and brought forth, cannot rightly be called the bringing forth and the offspring; and the same desire
which led us to long for the knowing of the thing, becomes the love of the thing when known, while
it holds and embraces its accepted offspring, that is, knowledge, and unites it to its begetter. And
so there is a kind of image of the Trinity in the mind itself, and the knowledge of it, which is its
offspring and its word concerning itself, and love as a third, and these three are one, and one
substance.722 Neither is the offspring less, since the mind knows itself according to the measure of
720“Partum” or “repertum.”“Reperiendi.”
722[It is not these three together that constitute the one substance. The mind alone is the substance—the knowledge and thelove being only two activities of it. When the mind is not cognizing or loving, it is still an entire mind. As previously remarked
in the annotation on IX. ii. this ternary will completely illustrate a trinality of a certain kind, but not that of the Trinity; in which
721

183

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

its own being; nor is the love less, since it loves itself according to the measure both of its own
knowledge and of its own being.

134

Book X.
————————————In which there is shown to be another trinity in the mind of man, and one that appears much moreevidently, viz. in his memory, understanding, and will.
Chapter 1.—The Love of the Studious Mind, that Is, of One Desirous to Know, is Not the Love ofa Thing Which It Does Not Know.
1. Let us now proceed, then, in due order, with a more exact purpose, to explain this same point
more thoroughly. And first, since no one can love at all a thing of which he is wholly ignorant, wemust carefully consider of what sort is the love of those who are studious, that is, of those who do
not already know, but are still desiring to know any branch of learning. Now certainly, in those
things whereof the word study is not commonly used, love often arises from hearsay, when the
reputation of anything for beauty inflames the mind to the seeing and enjoying it; since the mind
knows generically wherein consist the beauties of corporeal things, from having seen them veryfrequently, and since there exists within a faculty of approving that which outwardly is longed for.
And when this happens, the love that is called forth is not of a thing wholly unknown, since its
genus is thus known. But when we love a good man whose face we never saw, we love him fromthe knowledge of his virtues, which virtues we know [abstractly] in the truth itself. But in the caseof learning, it is for the most part the authority of others who praise and commend it that kindles
our love of it; although nevertheless we could not burn with any zeal at all for the study of it, unless
we had already in our mind at least a slight impression of the knowledge of each kind of learning.
For who, for instance, would devote any care and labor to the learning of rhetoric, unless he knew
before that it was the science of speaking? Sometimes, again, we marvel at the results of learning
itself, which we have heard of or experienced; and hence burn to obtain, by learning, the power ofattaining these results. Just as if it were said to one who did not know his letters, that there is a kindof learning which enables a man to send words, wrought with the hand in silence, to one who isever so far absent, for him in turn to whom they are sent to gather these words, not with his ears,
but with his eyes; and if the man were to see the thing actually done, is not that man, since he desires
to know how he can do this thing, altogether moved to study with a view to the result which hethe “tria quædam” are three subsistences, each of which is so substantial as to be the subject of attributes, and to be able toemploy them. The human mind is substantial enough to possess and employ the attributes of knowledge and love. We say thatthe mind knows and loves. But an activity of the mind is not substantial enough to possess and employ the attributes of knowledge
and love. We cannot say that the loving loves; or the loving knows; or the knowing loves, etc.—W.G.T.S.]

184

NPNF (V1-03)

135

Philip Schaff

already knows and holds? So it is that the studious zeal of those who learn is kindled: for that ofwhich any one is utterly ignorant, he can in no way love.
2. So also, if any one hear an unknown sign, as, for instance, the sound of some word of which
he does not know the signification, he desires to know what it is; that is, he desires to know whatthing it is which it is agreed shall be brought to mind by that sound: as if he heard the word
temetum723 uttered, and not knowing, should ask what it is. He must then know already that it is asign, i.e. that the word is not an empty sound, but that something is signified by it; for in otherrespects this trisyllabic word is known to him already, and has already impressed its articulate form
upon his mind through the sense of hearing. And then what more is to be required in him, that hemay go on to a greater knowledge of that of which all the letters and all the spaces of its several
sounds are already known, unless that it shall at the same time have become known to him that it
is a sign, and shall have also moved him with the desire of knowing of what it is the sign? The
more, then, the thing is known, yet not fully known, the more the mind desires to know concerning
it what remains to be known. For if he knew it to be only such and such a spoken word, and did
not know that it was the sign of something, he would seek nothing further, since the sensible thingis already perceived as far as it can be by the sense. But because he knows it to be not only a spoken
word, but also a sign, he wishes to know it perfectly; and no sign is known perfectly, except it be
known of what it is the sign. He then who with ardent carefulness seeks to know this, and inflamedby studious zeal perseveres in the search; can such an one be said to be without love? What thendoes he love? For certainly nothing can be loved unless it is known. For that man does not love
those three syllables which he knows already. But if he loves this in them, that he knows them tosignify something, this is not the point now in question, for it is not this which he seeks to know.
But we are now asking what it is he loves, in that which he is desirous to know, but which certainly
he does not yet know; and we are therefore wondering why he loves, since we know most assuredlythat nothing can be loved unless it be known. What then does he love, except that he knows andperceives in the reason of things what excellence there is in learning, in which the knowledge of
all signs is contained; and what benefit there is in the being skilled in these, since by them human
fellowship mutually communicates its own perceptions, lest the assemblies of men should be
actually worse than utter solitude, if they were not to mingle their thoughts by conversing together?
The soul, then, discerns this fitting and serviceable species, and knows it, and loves it; and he who
seeks the meaning of any words of which he is ignorant, studies to render that species perfect inhimself as much as he can: for it is one thing to behold it in the light of truth, another to desire it
as within his own capacity. For he beholds in the light of truth how great and how good a thing it
is to understand and to speak all tongues of all nations, and so to hear no tongue and to be heard
by none as from a foreigner. The beauty, then, of this knowledge is already discerned by thought,
and the thing being known is loved; and that thing is so regarded, and so stimulates the studiouszeal of learners, that they are moved with respect to it, and desire it eagerly in all the labor which
they spend upon the attainment of such a capacity, in order that they may also embrace in practicethat which they know beforehand by reason. And so every one, the nearer he approaches thatcapacity in hope, the more fervently desires it with love; for those branches of learning are studied
the more eagerly, which men do not despair of being able to attain; for when any one entertains no

723

Wine.

185

NPNF (V1-03)

136

Philip Schaff

hope of attaining his end, then he either loves lukewarmly or does not love at all, howsoever hemay see the excellence of it. Accordingly, because the knowledge of all languages is almost
universally felt to be hopeless, every one studies most to know that of his own nation; but if hefeels that he is not sufficient even to comprehend this perfectly, yet no one is so indolent in thisknowledge as not to wish to know, when he hears an unknown word, what it is, and to seek andlearn it if he can. And while he is seeking it, certainly he has a studious zeal of learning, and seems
to love a thing he does not know; but the case is really otherwise. For that species touches the mind,
which the mind knows and thinks, wherein the fitness is clearly visible which accrues from theassociating of minds with one another, in the hearing and returning of known and spoken words.
And this species kindles studious zeal in him who seeks what indeed he knows not, but gazes uponand loves the unknown form to which that pertains. If then, for example, any one were to ask, Whatis temetum (for I had instanced this word already), and it were said to him, What does this matterto you? he will answer, Lest perhaps I hear some one speaking, and understand him not; or perhaps
read the word somewhere, and know not what the writer meant. Who, pray, would say to such an
inquirer, Do not care about understanding what you hear; do not care about knowing what you
read? For almost every rational soul quickly discerns the beauty of that knowledge, through which
the thoughts of men are mutually made known by the enunciation of significant words; and it is on
account of this fitness thus known, and because known therefore loved, that such an unknown word
is studiously sought out. When then he hears and learns that wine was called “temetum” by ourforefathers, but that the word is already quite obsolete in our present usage of language, he will
think perhaps that he has still need of the word on account of this or that book of those forefathers.
But if he holds these also to be superfluous, perhaps he does now come to think the word not worth
remembering, since he sees it has nothing to do with that species of learning which he knows withthe mind, and gazes upon, and so loves.
3. Wherefore in all cases the love of a studious mind, that is, of one that wishes to know what
it does not know, is not the love of that thing which it does not know, but of that which it knows;
on account of which it wishes to know what it does not know. Or if it is so inquisitive as to be
carried away, not for any other cause known to it, but by the mere love of knowing things unknown;
then such an inquisitive person is, doubtless distinguishable from an ordinary student, yet does not,any more than he, love things he does not know; nay, on the contrary, he is more fitly said to hatethings he knows not, of which he wishes that there should be none, in wishing to know everything.
But lest any one should lay before us a more difficult question, by declaring that it is just as
impossible for any one to hate what he does not know, as to love what he does not know, we will
not withstand what is true; but it must be understood that it is not the same thing to say he loves toknow things unknown, as to say he loves things unknown. For it is possible that a man may loveto know things unknown; but it is not possible that he should love things unknown. For the word
to know is not placed there without meaning; since he who loves to know things unknown, does
not love the unknown things themselves, but the knowing of them. And unless he knew whatknowing means, no one could say confidently, either that he knew or that he did not know. For not
only he who says I know, and says so truly, must needs know what knowing is; but he also whosays, I do not know, and says so confidently and truly, and knows that he says so truly, certainly
knows what knowing is; for he both distinguishes him who does not know from him who knows,
when he looks into himself and says truly I do not know; and whereas he knows that he says thistruly, whence should he know it, if he did not know what knowing is?
186

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 2.—No One at All Loves Things Unknown.
4. No studious person, then, no inquisitive person, loves things he does not know, even while
he is urgent with the most vehement desire to know what he does not know. For he either knows
already generically what he loves, and longs to know it also in some individual or individuals,
which perhaps are praised, but not yet known to him; and he pictures in his mind an imaginary
form by which he may be stirred to love. And whence does he picture this, except from those things
which he has already known? And yet perhaps he will not love it, if he find that form which waspraised to be unlike that other form which was figured and in thought most fully known to his mind.
And if he has loved it, he will begin to love it from that time when he learned it; since a little before,that form which was loved was other than that which the mind that formed it had been wont to
exhibit to itself. But if he shall find it similar to that form which report had proclaimed, and to besuch that he could truly say I was already loving thee; yet certainly not even then did he love aform he did not know, since he had known it in that likeness. Or else we see somewhat in the speciesof the eternal reason, and therein love it; and when this is manifested in some image of a temporalthing, and we believe the praises of those who have made trial of it, and so love it, then we do notlove anything unknown, according to that which we have already sufficiently discussed above. Or
else, again, we love something known, and on account of it seek something unknown; and so it isby no means the love of the thing unknown that possesses us, but the love of the thing known, towhich we know the unknown thing belongs, so that we know that too which we seek still as
unknown; as a little before I said of an unknown word. Or else, again, every one loves the very
knowing itself, as no one can fail to know who desires to know anything. For these reasons they
seem to love things unknown who wish to know anything which they do not know, and who, on
account of their vehement desire of inquiry, cannot be said to be without love. But how different
the case really is, and that nothing at all can be loved which is not known, I think I must havepersuaded every one who carefully looks upon truth. But since the examples which we have given
belong to those who desire to know something which they themselves are not, we must take thought
lest perchance some new notion appear, when the mind desires to know itself.

Chapter 3.—That When the Mind Loves Itself, It is Not Unknown to Itself.

137

5. What, then, does the mind love, when it seeks ardently to know itself, whilst it is still unknown
to itself? For, behold, the mind seeks to know itself, and is excited thereto by studious zeal. It loves,
therefore; but what does it love? Is it itself? But how can this be when it does not yet know itself,
and no one can love what he does not know? Is it that report has declared to it its own species, inlike way as we commonly hear of people who are absent? Perhaps, then, it does not love itself, but
loves that which it imagines of itself, which is perhaps widely different from what itself is: or if
the phantasy in the mind is like the mind itself, and so when it loves this fancied image, it loves
itself before it knew itself, because it gazes upon that which is like itself; then it knew other minds
from which to picture itself, and so is known to itself generically. Why, then, when it knows otherminds, does it not know itself, since nothing can possibly be more present to it than itself? But if,
187

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

as other eyes are more known to the eyes of the body, than those eyes are to themselves; then let
it not seek itself, because it never will find itself. For eyes can never see themselves except inlooking-glasses; and it cannot be supposed in any way that anything of that kind can be appliedalso to the contemplation of incorporeal things, so that the mind should know itself, as it were, ina looking-glass. Or does it see in the reason of eternal truth how beautiful it is to know one’s self,and so loves this which it sees, and studies to bring it to pass in itself? because, although it is notknown to itself, yet it is known to it how good it is, that it should be known to itself. And this,indeed, is very wonderful, that it does not yet know itself, and yet knows already how excellent athing it is to know itself. Or does it see some most excellent end, viz. its own serenity and blessedness,by some hidden remembrance, which has not abandoned it, although it has gone far onwards, andbelieves that it cannot attain to that same end unless it know itself? And so while it loves that, itseeks this; and loves that which is known, on account of which it seeks that which is unknown. But
why should the remembrance of its own blessedness be able to last, and the remembrance of itself
not be able to last as well; that so it should know itself which wishes to attain, as well as know thatto which it wishes to attain? Or when it loves to know itself, does it love, not itself, which it does
not yet know, but the very act of knowing; and feel the more annoyed that itself is wanting to its
own knowledge wherewith it wishes to embrace all things? And it knows what it is to know; andwhilst it loves this, which it knows, desires also to know itself. Whereby, then, does it know its
own knowing, if it does not know itself? For it knows that it knows other things, but that it does
not know itself; for it is from hence that it knows also what knowing is. In what way, then, doesthat which does not know itself, know itself as knowing anything? For it does not know that someother mind knows, but that itself does so. Therefore it knows itself. Further, when it seeks to know
itself, it knows itself now as seeking. Therefore again it knows itself. And hence it cannot altogether
not know itself, when certainly it does so far know itself as that it knows itself as not knowing
itself. But if it does not know itself not to know itself, then it does not seek to know itself. And
therefore, in the very fact that it seeks itself, it is clearly convicted of being more known to itself
than unknown. For it knows itself as seeking and as not knowing itself, in that it seeks to know
itself.

Chapter 4.—How the Mind Knows Itself, Not in Part, But as a Whole.
6. What then shall we say? Does that which knows itself in part, not know itself in part? But it
is absurd to say, that it does not as a whole know what it knows. I do not say, it knows wholly; butwhat it knows, it as a whole knows. When therefore it knows anything about itself, which it can
only know as a whole, it knows itself as a whole. But it does know that itself knows something,while yet except as a whole it cannot know anything. Therefore it knows itself as a whole. Further,what in it is so known to itself, as that it lives? And it cannot at once be a mind, and not live, while
it has also something over and above, viz., that it understands: for the souls of beasts also live, but
do not understand. As therefore a mind is a whole mind, so it lives as a whole. But it knows that it
lives. Therefore it knows itself as a whole. Lastly, when the mind seeks to know itself, it alreadyknows that it is a mind: otherwise it knows not whether it seeks itself, and perhaps seeks one thing188

NPNF (V1-03)

138

Philip Schaff

while intending to seek another. For it might happen that itself was not a mind, and so, in seeking
to know a mind, that it did not seek to know itself. Wherefore since the mind, when it seeks toknow what mind is, knows that it seeks itself, certainly it knows that itself is a mind. Furthermore,
if it knows this in itself, that it is a mind, and a whole mind, then it knows itself as a whole. But
suppose it did not know itself to be a mind, but in seeking itself only knew that it did seek itself.
For so, too, it may possibly seek one thing for another, if it does not know this: but that it may notseek one thing for another, without doubt it knows what it seeks. But if it knows what it seeks, andseeks itself, then certainly it knows itself. What therefore more does it seek? But if it knows itself
in part, but still seeks itself in part, then it seeks not itself, but part of itself. For when we speak of
the mind itself, we speak of it as a whole. Further, because it knows that it is not yet found by itself
as a whole, it knows how much the whole is. And so it seeks that which is wanting, as we are wont
to seek to recall to the mind something that has slipped from the mind, but has not altogether goneaway from it; since we can recognize it, when it has come back, to be the same thing that we wereseeking. But how can mind come into mind, as though it were possible for the mind not to be in
the mind? Add to this, that if, having found a part, it does not seek itself as a whole, yet it as awhole seeks itself. Therefore as a whole it is present to itself, and there is nothing left to be sought:
for that is wanting which is sought, not the mind which seeks. Since therefore it as a whole seeks
itself, nothing of it is wanting. Or if it does not as a whole seek itself, but the part which has beenfound seeks the part which has not yet been found then the mind does not seek itself, of which nopart seeks itself. For the part which has been found, does not seek itself; nor yet does the part itself
which has not yet been found, seek itself; since it is sought by that part which has been alreadyfound. Wherefore, since neither the mind as a whole seeks itself, nor does any part of it seek itself,
the mind does not seek itself at all.

Chapter 5.—Why the Soul is Enjoined to Know Itself. Whence Come the Errors of the Mind
Concerning Its Own Substance.
7. Why therefore is it enjoined upon it, that it should know itself? I suppose, in order that, it
may consider itself, and live according to its own nature; that is, seek to be regulated according to
its own nature, viz., under Him to whom it ought to be subject, and above those things to which it
is to be preferred; under Him by whom it ought to be ruled, above those things which it ought torule. For it does many things through vicious desire, as though in forgetfulness of itself. For it sees
some things intrinsically excellent, in that more excellent nature which is God: and whereas it ought
to remain steadfast that it may enjoy them, it is turned away from Him, by wishing to appropriate
those things to itself, and not to be like to Him by His gift, but to be what He is by its own, and it
begins to move and slip gradually down into less and less, which it thinks to be more and more;
for it is neither sufficient for itself, nor is anything at all sufficient for it, if it withdraw from Him
who is alone sufficient: and so through want and distress it becomes too intent upon its own actions
and upon the unquiet delights which it obtains through them: and thus, by the desire of acquiringknowledge from those things that are without, the nature of which it knows and loves, and which
it feels can be lost unless held fast with anxious care, it loses its security, and thinks of itself so

189

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

much the less, in proportion as it feels the more secure that it cannot lose itself. So, whereas it is
one thing not to know oneself, and another not to think of oneself (for we do not say of the manthat is skilled in much learning, that he is ignorant of grammar, when he is only not thinking of it,
because he is thinking at the time of the art of medicine);—whereas, then, I say it is one thing not
to know oneself, and another not to think of oneself, such is the strength of love, that the mind
draws in with itself those things which it has long thought of with love, and has grown into themby the close adherence of diligent study, even when it returns in some way to think of itself. And
because these things are corporeal which it loved externally through the carnal senses; and because
it has become entangled with them by a kind of daily familiarity, and yet cannot carry those corporeal
things themselves with itself internally as it were into the region of incorporeal nature; therefore it
combines certain images of them, and thrusts them thus made from itself into itself. For it gives tothe forming of them somewhat of its own substance, yet preserves the while something by which
it may judge freely of the species of those images; and this something is more properly the mind,
that is, the rational understanding, which is preserved that it may judge. For we see that we havethose parts of the soul which are informed by the likenesses of corporeal things, in common alsowith beasts.

Chapter 6.—The Opinion Which the Mind Has of Itself is Deceitful.
8. But the mind errs, when it so lovingly and intimately connects itself with these images, aseven to consider itself to be something of the same kind. For so it is conformed to them to someextent, not by being this, but by thinking it is so: not that it thinks itself to be an image, but outrightthat very thing itself of which it entertains the image. For there still lives in it the power ofdistinguishing the corporeal thing which it leaves without, from the image of that corporeal thingwhich it contains therefrom within itself: except when these images are so projected as if felt without
and not thought within, as in the case of people who are asleep, or mad, or in a trance.

139

Chapter 7.—The Opinions of Philosophers Respecting the Substance of the Soul. The Error ofThose Who are of Opinion that the Soul is Corporeal, Does Not Arise from Defective Knowledgeof the Soul, But from Their Adding There to Something Foreign to It. What is Meant by Finding.
9. When, therefore, it thinks itself to be something of this kind, it thinks itself to be a corporeal
thing; and since it is perfectly conscious of its own superiority, by which it rules the body, it hashence come to pass that the question has been raised what part of the body has the greater powerin the body; and the opinion has been held that this is the mind, nay, that it is even the whole soulaltogether. And some accordingly think it to be the blood, others the brain, others the heart; not as
the Scripture says, “I will praise Thee, O Lord, with my whole heart;” and, “Thou shall love theLord thy God with all thine heart;”724 for this word by misapplication or metaphor is transferred724

Ps. ix., cxi., and cxxxviii., Deut. vi. 5, and Matt. xxii. 37.

190

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

from the body to the soul; but they have simply thought it to be that small part itself of the body,which we see when the inward parts are rent asunder. Others, again, have believed the soul to bemade up of very minute and individual corpustules, which they call atoms, meeting in themselvesand cohering. Others have said that its substance is air, others fire. Others have been of opinion
that it is no substance at all, since they could not think any substance unless it is body, and they
did not find that the soul was body; but it was in their opinion the tempering together itself of ourbody, or the combining together of the elements, by which that flesh is as it were conjoined. And
hence all of these have held the soul to be mortal; since, whether it were body, or some combinationof body, certainly it could not in either case continue always without death. But they who have held
its substance to be some kind of life the reverse of corporeal, since they have found it to be a lifethat animates and quickens every living body, have by consequence striven also, according as each
was able, to prove it immortal, since life cannot be without life.
For as to that fifth kind of body, I know not what, which some have added to the four well-known
elements of the world, and have said that the soul was made of this, I do not think we need spend
time in discussing it in this place. For either they mean by body what we mean by it, viz., that ofwhich a part is less than the whole in extension of place, and they are to be reckoned among those
who have believed the mind to be corporeal: or if they call either all substance, or all changeable
substance, body, whereas they know that not all substance is contained in extension of place by
any length and breadth and height, we need not contend with them about a question of words.
10. Now, in the case of all these opinions, any one who sees that the nature of the mind is atonce substance, and yet not corporeal,—that is, that it does not occupy a less extension of placewith a less part of itself, and a greater with a greater,—must needs see at the same time that they
who are of opinion that it is corporeal725 do not err from defect of knowledge concerning mind, but
because they associate with it qualities without which they are not able to conceive any nature atall. For if you bid them conceive of existence that is without corporeal phantasms, they hold it
merely nothing. And so the mind would not seek itself, as though wanting to itself. For what is sopresent to knowledge as that which is present to the mind? Or what is so present to the mind as themind itself? And hence what is called “invention,” if we consider the origin of the word, what else
does it mean, unless that to find out726 is to “come into” that which is sought? Those things
accordingly which come into the mind as it were of themselves, are not usually said to be foundout,727 although they may be said to be known; since we did not endeavor by seeking to come into
them, that is to invent or find them out. And therefore, as the mind itself really seeks those things
which are sought by the eyes or by any other sense of the body (for the mind directs even the carnal
sense, and then finds out or invents, when that sense comes to the things which are sought); so,too, it finds out or invents other things which it ought to know, not with the medium of corporeal
sense, but through itself, when it “comes into” them; and this, whether in the case of the higher

725[The distinction between corporeal and incorporeal substance is one that Augustin often insists upon. See Confessions
VII. i-iii. The doctrine that all substance is extended body, and that there is no such entity as spiritual unextended substance, iscombatted by Plato in the Theatetus. For a history of the contest and an able defence of the substantiality of spirit, see Cudworth’sIntellectual System, III. 384 sq. Harrison’s Ed.—W.G.T.S.]
726
Invenire.
727
Inventa.

191

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

substance that is in God, or of the other parts of the soul; just as it does when it judges of bodily
images themselves, for it finds these within, in the soul, impressed through the body.

140

Chapter 8.—How the Soul Inquires into Itself. Whence Comes the Error of the Soul Concerning
Itself.
11. It is then a wonderful question, in what manner the soul seeks and finds itself; at what it
aims in order to seek, or whither it comes, that it may come into or find out. For what is so muchin the mind as the mind itself? But because it is in those things which it thinks of with love, and iswont to be in sensible, that is, in corporeal things with love, it is unable to be in itself without theimages of those corporeal things. And hence shameful error arises to block its way, whilst it cannot
separate from itself the images of sensible things, so as to see itself alone. For they have marvellously
cohered with it by the close adhesion of love. And herein consists its uncleanness; since, while itstrives to think of itself alone, it fancies itself to be that, without which it cannot think of itself.
When, therefore, it is bidden to become acquainted with itself, let it not seek itself as though it werewithdrawn from itself; but let it withdraw that which it has added to itself. For itself lies moredeeply within, not only than those sensible things, which are clearly without, but also than theimages of them; which are indeed in some part of the soul, viz., that which beasts also have, althoughthese want understanding, which is proper to the mind. As therefore the mind is within, it goes
forth in some sort from itself, when it exerts the affection of love towards these, as it were, footprints
of many acts of attention. And these footprints are, as it were, imprinted on the memory, at the time
when the corporeal things which are without are perceived in such way, that even when those
corporeal things are absent, yet the images of them are at hand to those who think of them. Therefore
let the mind become acquainted with itself, and not seek itself as if it were absent; but fix uponitself the act of [voluntary] attention, by which it was wandering among other things, and let it thinkof itself. So it will see that at no time did it ever not love itself, at no time did it ever not know
itself; but by loving another thing together with itself it has confounded itself with it, and in somesense has grown one with it. And so, while it embraces diverse things, as though they were one, it
has come to think those things to be one which are diverse.

Chapter 9.—The Mind Knows Itself, by the Very Act of Understanding the Precept to Know Itself.
12. Let it not therefore seek to discern itself as though absent, but take pains to discern itself
as present. Nor let it take knowledge of itself as if it did not know itself, but let it distinguish itself
from that which it knows to be another. For how will it take pains to obey that very precept which
is given it, “Know thyself,” if it knows not either what “know” means or what “thyself” means?
But if it knows both, then it knows also itself. Since “know thyself” is not so said to the mind as is“Know the cherubim and the seraphim;” for they are absent, and we believe concerning them, andaccording to that belief they are declared to be certain celestial powers. Nor yet again as it is said,
192

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Know the will of that man: for this it is not within our reach to perceive at all, either by sense orunderstanding, unless by corporeal signs actually set forth; and this in such a way that we rather
believe than understand. Nor again as it is said to a man, Behold thy own face; which he can only
do in a looking-glass. For even our own face itself is out of the reach of our own seeing it; because
it is not there where our look can be directed. But when it is said to the mind, Know thyself; thenit knows itself by that very act by which it understands the word “thyself;” and this for no otherreason than that it is present to itself. But if it does not understand what is said, then certainly it
does not do as it is bid to do. And therefore it is bidden to do that thing which it does do, when it
understands the very precept that bids it.

Chapter 10.—Every Mind Knows Certainly Three Things Concerning Itself—That It Understands,
that It Is, and that It Lives.

141

13. Let it not then add anything to that which it knows itself to be, when it is bidden to know
itself. For it knows, at any rate, that this is said to itself; namely, to the self that is, and that lives,
and that understands. But a dead body also is, and cattle live; but neither a dead body nor cattle
understand. Therefore it so knows that it so is, and that it so lives, as an understanding is and lives.
When, therefore, for example’s sake, the mind thinks itself air, it thinks that air understands; it
knows, however, that itself understands, but it does not know itself to be air, but only thinks so.
Let it separate that which it thinks itself; let it discern that which it knows; let this remain to it,
about which not even have they doubted who have thought the mind to be this corporeal thing orthat. For certainly every mind does not consider itself to be air; but some think themselves fire,others the brain, and some one kind of corporeal thing, others another, as I have mentioned before;
yet all know that they themselves understand, and are, and live; but they refer understanding to thatwhich they understand, but to be, and to live, to themselves. And no one doubts, either that no one
understands who does not live, or that no one lives of whom it is not true that he is; and that therefore
by consequence that which understands both is and lives; not as a dead body is which does not live,
nor as a soul lives which does not understand, but in some proper and more excellent manner.
Further, they know that they will, and they equally know that no one can will who is not and who
does not live; and they also refer that will itself to something which they will with that will. They
know also that they remember; and they know at the same time that nobody could remember, unless
he both was and lived; but we refer memory itself also to something, in that we remember those
things. Therefore the knowledge and science of many things are contained in two of these three,memory and understanding; but will must be present, that we may enjoy or use them. For we enjoy
things known, in which things themselves the will finds delight for their own sake, and so reposes;
but we use those things, which we refer to some other thing which we are to enjoy. Neither is thelife of man vicious and culpable in any other way, than as wrongly using and wrongly enjoying.
But it is no place here to discuss this.
14. But since we treat of the nature of the mind, let us remove from our consideration all
knowledge which is received from without, through the senses of the body; and attend more carefully
to the position which we have laid down, that all minds know and are certain concerning themselves.

193

NPNF (V1-03)

142

Philip Schaff

For men certainly have doubted whether the power of living, of remembering, of understanding,of willing, of thinking, of knowing, of judging, be of air, or of fire, or of the brain, or of the blood,
or of atoms, or besides the usual four elements of a fifth kind of body, I know not what; or ,whether
the combining or tempering together of this our flesh itself has power to accomplish these things.
And one has attempted to establish this, and another to establish that. Yet who ever doubts that hehimself lives, and remembers, and understands, and wills, and thinks, and knows, and judges?
Seeing that even if he doubts, he lives; if he doubts, he remembers why he doubts; if he doubts, heunderstands that he doubts; if he doubts, he wishes to be certain; if he doubts, he thinks; if he doubts,
he knows that he does not know; if he doubts, he judges that he ought not to assent rashly. Whosoever
therefore doubts about anything else, ought not to doubt of all these things; which if they were not,he would not be able to doubt of anything.
15. They who think the mind to be either a body or the combination or tempering of the body,will have all these things to seem to be in a subject, so that the substance is air, or fire, or someother corporeal thing, which they think to be the mind; but that the understanding (intelligentia) isin this corporeal thing as its quality, so that this corporeal thing is the subject, but the understanding
is in the subject: viz. that the mind is the subject, which they judge to be a corporeal thing, but theunderstanding [intelligence], or any other of those things which we have mentioned as certain tous, is in that subject. They also hold nearly the same opinion who deny the mind itself to be body,but think it to be the combination or tempering together of the body; for there is this difference,that the former say that the mind itself is the substance, in which the understanding [intelligence]
is, as in a subject; but the latter say that the mind itself is in a subject, viz. in the body, of which itis the combination or tempering together. And hence, by consequence, what else can they think,
except that the understanding also is in the same body as in a subject?
16. And all these do not perceive that the mind knows itself, even when it seeks for itself, as
we have already shown. But nothing is at all rightly said to be known while its substance is notknown. And therefore, when the mind knows itself, it knows its own substance; and when it iscertain about itself, it as certain about its own substance. But it is certain about itself, as those things
which are said above prove convincingly; although it is not at all certain whether itself is air, orfire, or some body, or some function of body. Therefore it is not any of these. And to that whole
which is bidden to know itself, belongs this, that it is certain that it is not any of those things ofwhich it is uncertain, and is certain that it is that only, which only it is certain that it is. For it thinks
in this way of fire, or air, and whatever else of the body it thinks of. Neither can it in any way bebrought to pass that it should so think that which itself is, as it thinks that which itself is not. Since
it thinks all these things through an imaginary phantasy, whether fire, or air, or this or that body,or that part or combination and tempering together of the body: nor assuredly is it said to be all
those things, but some one of them. But if it were any one of them, it would think this one in adifferent manner from the rest viz. not through an imaginary phantasy, as absent things are thought,
which either themselves or some of like kind have been touched by the bodily sense; but by someinward, not feigned, but true presence (for nothing is more present to it than itself); just as it thinksthat itself lives, and remembers, and understands, and wills. For it knows these things in itself, anddoes not imagine them as though it had touched them by the sense outside itself, as corporeal things
are touched. And if it attaches nothing to itself from the thought of these things, so as to think itself
to be something of the kind, then whatsoever remains to it from itself that alone is itself.

194

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 11.—In Memory, Understanding [or Intelligence], and Will, We Have to Note Ability,
Learning, and Use. Memory, Understanding, and Will are One Essentially, and Three Relatively.
17. Putting aside, then, for a little while all other things, of which the mind is certain concerning
itself, let us especially consider and discuss these three—memory, understanding, will. For we may
commonly discern in these three the character of the abilities of the young also; since the more
tenaciously and easily a boy remembers, and the more acutely he understands, and the more ardently
he studies, the more praiseworthy is he in point of ability. But when the question is about any one’s
learning, then we ask not how solidly and easily he remembers, or how shrewdly he understands;
but what it is that he remembers, and what it is that he understands. And because the mind is regarded
as praiseworthy, not only as being learned, but also as being good, one gives heed not only to what
he remembers and what he understands, but also to what he wills (velit); not how ardently he wills,
but first what it is he wills, and then how greatly he wills it. For the mind that loves eagerly is thento be praised, when it loves that which ought to be loved eagerly. Since, then, we speak of thesethree—ability, knowledge, use—the first of these is to be considered under the three heads, of whata man can do in memory, and understanding, and will. The second of them is to be considered inregard to that which any one has in his memory and in his understanding, which he has attained bya studious will. But the third, viz. use, lies in the will, which handles those things that are containedin the memory and understanding, whether it refer them to anything further, or rest satisfied withthem as an end. For to use, is to take up something into the power of the will; and to enjoy, is touse with joy, not any longer of hope, but of the actual thing. Accordingly, every one who enjoys,
uses; for he takes up something into the power of the will, wherein he also is satisfied as with anend. But not every one who uses, enjoys, if he has sought after that, which he takes up into thepower of the will, not on account of the thing itself, but on account of something else.
18. Since, then, these three, memory, understanding, will, are not three lives, but one life; northree minds, but one mind; it follows certainly that neither are they three substances, but one
substance. Since memory, which is called life, and mind, and substance, is so called in respect toitself; but it is called memory, relatively to something. And I should say the same also of
understanding and of will, since they are called understanding and will relatively to something; buteach in respect to itself is life, and mind, and essence. And hence these three are one, in that they
are one life, one mind, one essence; and whatever else they are severally called in respect tothemselves, they are called also together, not plurally, but in the singular number. But they arethree, in that wherein they are mutually referred to each other; and if they were not equal, and thisnot only each to each, but also each to all, they certainly could not mutually contain each other; fornot only is each contained by each, but also all by each. For I remember that I have memory andunderstanding, and will; and I understand that I understand, and will, and remember; and I will that
I will, and remember, and understand; and I remember together my whole memory, andunderstanding, and will. For that of my memory which I do not remember, is not in my memory;and nothing is so much in the memory as memory itself. Therefore I remember the whole memory.
Also, whatever I understand I know that I understand, and I know that I will whatever I will; butwhatever I know I remember. Therefore I remember the whole of my understanding, and the wholeof my will. Likewise, when I understand these three things, I understand them together as whole.
For there is none of things intelligible which I do not understand, except what I do not know; but
195

NPNF (V1-03)

143

Philip Schaff

what I do not know, I neither remember, nor will. Therefore, whatever of things intelligible I do
not understand, it follows also that I neither remember nor will. And whatever of things intelligible
I remember and will, it follows that I understand. My will also embraces my whole understanding
and my whole memory whilst I use the whole that I understand and remember. And, therefore,
while all are mutually comprehended by each, and as wholes, each as a whole is equal to each asa whole, and each as a whole at the same time to all as wholes; and these three are one, one life,
one mind, one essence.728

Chapter 12.—The Mind is an Image of the Trinity in Its Own Memory, and Understanding, andWill.
19. Are we, then, now to go upward, with whatever strength of purpose we may, to that chiefest
and highest essence, of which the human mind is an inadequate image, yet an image? Or are thesesame three things to be yet more distinctly made plain in the soul, by means of those things which
we receive from without, through the bodily sense, wherein the knowledge of corporeal things isimpressed upon us in time? Since we found the mind itself to be such in its own memory, andunderstanding, and will, that since it was understood always to know and always to will itself, it
was understood also at the same time always to remember itself, always to understand and loveitself, although not always to think of itself as separate from those things which are not itself; andhence its memory of itself, and understanding of itself, are with difficult discerned in it. For in thiscase, where these two things are very closely conjoined, and one is not preceded by the other by
any time at all, it looks as if they were not two things, but one called by two names; and love itself
is not so plainly felt to exist when the sense of need does not disclose it, since what is loved isalways at hand. And hence these things may be more lucidly set forth, even to men of duller minds,
if such topics are treated of as are brought within reach of the mind in time, and happen to it intime; while it remembers what it did not remember before, and sees what it did not see before, andloves what it did not love before. But this discussion demands now another beginning, by reasonof the measure of the present book.

728[This ternary of memory, understanding, and will, is a better analogue to the Trinity than the preceding one in chapter
IX—namely, mind, knowledge, and love. Memory, understanding, and will have equal substantiality, while mind, knowledge,
and love have not. The former are three faculties, in each of which is the whole mind or spirit. The memory is the whole mind
as remembering; the understanding is the whole mind as cognizing; and the will is the whole mind as determining. The one
essence of the mind is in each of these three modes, each of which is distinct from the others; and yet there are not three essencesor minds. In the other ternary, of mind, knowledge, and love, the last two are not faculties but single acts of the mind. A particular
act of cognition is not the whole mind in the general mode of cognition. This would make it a faculty. A particular act of loving,or of willing, is not the whole mind in the general mode of loving, or of willing. This would make the momentary and transient
act a permanent faculty. This ternary fails, as we have noticed in a previous annotation (IX. ii. 2), in that only the mind is a
substance.
The ternary of memory, understanding, and will is an adequate analogue to the Trinity in respect to equal substantiality. But it fails
when the separate consciousness of the Trinitarian distinctions is brought into consideration. The three faculties of memory, understanding,
and will, are not so objective to each other as to admit of three forms of consciousness, of the use of the personal pronouns, and of thepersonal actions that are ascribed to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. It also fails, in that these three are not all the modes of the mind.
There are other faculties: e. g., the imagination. The whole essence of the mind is in this also.—W.G.T.S.]

196

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

144

Book XI.
————————————A kind of image of the Trinity is pointed out, even in the outer man; first of all, in those things which
are perceived from without, viz. in the bodily object that is seen, and in the form that is impressedby it upon the sight of the seer, and in the purpose of the will that combines the two; althoughthese three are neither mutually equal, nor of one substance. Next, a kind of trinity, in threesomewhats of one substance, is observed to exist in the mind itself, as it were introduced there
from those things that are perceived from without; viz. the image of the bodily object which isin the memory, and the impression formed therefrom when the mind’s eye of the thinker isturned to it, and the purpose of the will combining both. And this latter trinity is also said topertain to the outer man, in that it is introduced into the mind from bodily objects, which areperceived from without.
Chapter 1.—A Trace of the Trinity Also In the Outer Man.
1. No one doubts that, as the inner man is endued with understanding, so is the outer withbodily sense. Let us try, then, if we can, to discover in this outer man also, some trace, howeverslight, of the Trinity, not that itself also is in the same manner the image of God. For the opinionof the apostle is evident, which declares the inner man to be renewed in the knowledge of God after
the image of Him that created him:729 whereas he says also in another place, “But though our outerman perish, yet the inward man is renewed day by day.”730 Let us seek, then, so far as we can, inthat which perishes, some image of the Trinity, if not so express, yet perhaps more easy to bediscerned. For that outer man also is not called man to no purpose, but because there is in it somelikeness of the inner man. And owing to that very order of our condition whereby we are mademortal and fleshly, we handle things visible more easily and more familiarly than things intelligible;
since the former are outward, the latter inward; and the former are perceived by the bodily sense,
the latter are understood by the mind; and we ourselves, i.e. our minds, are not sensible things, thatis, bodies, but intelligible things, since we are life. And yet, as I said, we are so familiarly occupied
with bodies, and our thought has projected itself outwardly with so wonderful a proclivity towards
bodies, that, when it has been withdrawn from the uncertainty of things corporeal, that it may be
fixed with a much more certain and stable knowledge in that which is spirit, it flies back to thosebodies, and seeks rest there whence it has drawn weakness. And to this its feebleness we must suit
our argument; so that, if we would endeavor at any time to distinguish more aptly, and intimate
more readily, the inward spiritual thing, we must take examples of likenesses from outward things
pertaining to the body. The outer man, then, endued as he is with the bodily sense, is conversant
with bodies. And this bodily sense, as is easily observed, is fivefold; seeing, hearing, smelling,

729
730

Col. iii. 10.
2 Cor. iv. 16.

197

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

tasting, touching. But it is both a good deal of trouble, and is not necessary, that we should inquireof all these five senses about that which we seek. For that which one of them declares to us, holds
also good in the rest. Let us use, then, principally the testimony of the eyes. For this bodily sense
far surpasses the rest; and in proportion to its difference of kind, is nearer to the sight of the mind.
145

Chapter 2.—A Certain Trinity in the Sight. That There are Three Things in Sight, Which Differ in
Their Own Nature. In What Manner from a Visible Thing Vision is Produced, or the Image ofthat Thing Which is Seen. The Matter is Shown More Clearly by an Example. How These Three
Combine in One.
2. When, then, we see any corporeal object, these three things, as is most easy to do, are to beconsidered and distinguished: First, the object itself which we see; whether a stone, or flame, or
any other thing that can be seen by the eyes; and this certainly might exist also already before it
was seen; next, vision or the act of seeing, which did not exist before we perceived the object itself
which is presented to the sense; in the third place, that which keeps the sense of the eye in the object
seen, so long as it is seen, viz. the attention of the mind. In these three, then, not only is there anevident distinction, but also a diverse nature. For, first, that visible body is of a far different naturefrom the sense of the eyes, through the incidence of which sense upon it vision arises. And whatplainly is vision itself other than perception informed by that thing which is perceived? Although
there is no vision if the visible object be withdrawn, nor could there be any vision of the kind at allif there were no body that could be seen; yet the body by which the sense of the eyes is informed,
when that body is seen, and the form itself which is imprinted by it upon the sense, which is calledvision, are by no means of the same substance. For the body that is seen is, in its own nature,
separable; but the sense, which was already in the living subject, even before it saw what it wasable to see, when it fell in with something visible,—or the vision which comes to be in the sensefrom the visible body when now brought into connection with it and seen,—the sense, then, I say,or the vision, that is, the sense informed from without, belongs to the nature of the living subject,which is altogether other than that body which we perceive by seeing, and by which the sense is
not so formed as to be sense, but as to be vision. For unless the sense were also in us before thepresentation to us of the sensible object, we should not differ from the blind, at times when we areseeing nothing, whether in darkness, or when our eyes are closed. But we differ from them in this,that there is in us, even when we are not seeing, that whereby we are able to see, which is called
the sense; whereas this is not in them, nor are they called blind for any other reason than because
they have it not. Further also, that attention of the mind which keeps the sense in that thing which
we see, and connects both, not only differs from that visible thing in its nature; in that the one ismind, and the other body; but also from the sense and the vision itself: since this attention is theact of the mind alone; but the sense of the eyes is called a bodily sense, for no other reason thanbecause the eyes themselves also are members of the body; and although an inanimate body does
not perceive, yet the soul commingled with the body perceives through a corporeal instrument, andthat instrument is called sense. And this sense, too, is cut off and extinguished by suffering on thepart of the body, when any one is blinded; while the mind remains the same; and its attention, since198

NPNF (V1-03)

146

Philip Schaff

the eyes are lost, has not, indeed, the sense of the body which it may join, by seeing, to the bodywithout it, and so fix its look thereupon and see it, yet by the very effort shows that, although thebodily sense be taken away, itself can neither perish nor be diminished. For there remains unimpaired
a desire [appetitus] of seeing, whether it can be carried into effect or not. These three, then, thebody that is seen, and vision itself, and the attention of mind which joins both together, are manifestly
distinguishable, not only on account of the properties of each, but also on account of the differenceof their natures.
3. And since, in this case, the sensation does not proceed from that body which is seen, butfrom the body of the living being that perceives, with which the soul is tempered together in somewonderful way of its own; yet vision is produced, that is, the sense itself is informed, by the bodywhich is seen; so that now, not only is there the power of sense, which can exist also unimpaired
even in darkness, provided the eyes are sound, but also a sense actually informed, which is calledvision. Vision, then, is produced from a thing that is visible; but not from that alone, unless there
be present also one who sees. Therefore vision is produced from a thing that is visible, together
with one who sees; in such way that, on the part of him who sees, there is the sense of seeing andthe intention of looking and gazing at the object; while yet that information of the sense, which iscalled vision, is imprinted only by the body which is seen, that is, by some visible thing; whichbeing taken away, that form remains no more which was in the sense so long as that which wasseen was present: yet the sense itself remains, which existed also before anything was perceived;
just as the trace of a thing in water remains so long as the body itself, which is impressed on it, isin the water; but if this has been taken away, there will no longer be any such trace, although thewater remains, which existed also before it took the form of that body. And therefore we cannot,
indeed, say that a visible thing produces the sense; yet it produces the form, which is, as it were,its own likeness, which comes to be in the sense, when we perceive anything by seeing. But we do
not distinguish, through the same sense, the form of the body which we see, from the form which
is produced by it in the sense of him who sees; since the union of the two is so close that there is
no room for distinguishing them. But we rationally infer that we could not have sensation at all,unless some similitude of the body seen was wrought in our own sense. For when a ring is imprinted
on wax, it does not follow that no image is produced, because we cannot discern it unless when it
has been separated. But since, after the wax is separated, what was made remains, so that it can beseen; we are on that account easily persuaded that there was already also in the wax a form impressedfrom the ring before it was separated from it. But if the ring were imprinted upon a fluid, no image
at all would appear when it was withdrawn; and yet none the less for this ought the reason to discernthat there was in that fluid before the ring was withdrawn a form of the ring produced from thering, which is to be distinguished from that form which is in the ring, whence that form was produced
which ceases to be when the ring is withdrawn, although that in the ring remains, whence the otherwas produced. And so the [sensuous] perception of the eyes may not be supposed to contain noimage of the body, which is seen as long as it is seen, [merely] because when that is withdrawn theimage does not remain. And hence it is very difficult to persuade men of duller mind that an imageof the visible thing is formed in our sense, when we see it, and that this same form is vision.
4. But if any perhaps attend to what I am about to mention, they will find no such trouble inthis inquiry. Commonly, when we have looked for some little time at a light, and then shut oureyes, there seem to play before our eyes certain bright colors variously changing themselves, andshining less and less until they wholly cease; and these we must understand to be the remains of199

NPNF (V1-03)

147

Philip Schaffthat form which was wrought in the sense, while the shining body was seen, and that these variations
take place in them as they slowly and step by step fade away. For the lattices, too, of windows,
should we happen to be gazing at them, appear often in these colors; so that it is evident that oursense is affected by such impressions from that thing which is seen. That form therefore existed
also while we were seeing, and at that time it was more clear and express. But it was then closely
joined with the species of that thing which was being perceived, so that it could not be at all
distinguished from it; and this was vision itself. Why, even when the little flame of a lamp is insome way, as it were, doubled by the divergent rays of the eyes, a twofold vision comes to pass,although the thing which is seen is one. For the same rays, as they shoot forth each from its owneye, are affected severally, in that they are not allowed to meet evenly and conjointly, in regardingthat corporeal thing, so that one combined view might be formed from both. And so, if we shut oneeye, we shall not see two flames, but one as it really is. But why, if we shut the left eye, thatappearance ceases to be seen, which was on the right; and if, in turn, we shut the right eye, thatdrops out of existence which was on the left, is a matter both tedious in itself, and not necessary at
all to our present subject to inquire and discuss. For it is enough for the business in hand to consider,that unless some image, precisely like the thing we perceive, were produced in our sense, theappearance of the flame would not be doubled according to the number of the eyes; since a certain
way of perceiving has been employed, which could separate the union of rays. Certainly nothingthat is really single can be seen as if it were double by one eye, draw it down, or press, or distort
it as you please, if the other is shut.
5. The case then being so, let us remember how these three things, although diverse in nature,
are tempered together into a kind of unity; that is, the form of the body which is seen, and the imageof it impressed on the sense, which is vision or sense informed, and the will of the mind whichapplies the sense to the sensible thing, and retains the vision itself in it. The first of these, that is,the visible thing itself, does not belong to the nature of the living being, except when we discern
our own body. But the second belongs to that nature to this extent, that it is wrought in the body,and through the body in the soul; for it is wrought in the sense, which is neither without the bodynor without the soul. But the third is of the soul alone, because it is the will. Although then thesubstances of these three are so different, yet they coalesce into such a unity that the two former
can scarcely be distinguished, even with the intervention of the reason as judge, namely the formof the body which is seen, and the image of it which is wrought in the sense, that is, vision. And
the will so powerfully combines these two, as both to apply the sense, in order to be informed, tothat thing which is perceived, and to retain it when informed in that thing. And if it is so vehementthat it can be called love, or desire, or lust, it vehemently affects also the rest of the body of theliving being; and where a duller and harder matter does not resist, changes it into like shape andcolor. One may see the little body of a chameleon vary with ready change, according to the colors
which it sees. And in the case of other animals, since their grossness of flesh does not easily admitchange, the offspring, for the most part, betray the particular fancies of the mothers, whatever it isthat they have beheld with special delight. For the more tender, and so to say, the more formable,
are the primary seeds, the more effectually and capably they follow the bent of the soul of themother, and the phantasy that is wrought in it through that body, which it has greedily beheld.
Abundant instances might be adduced, but one is sufficient, taken from the most trustworthy books;
viz. what Jacob did, that the sheep and goats might give birth to offspring of various colors, by

200

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

placing variegated rods before them in the troughs of water for them to look at as they drank, at
the time they had conceived.731

Chapter 3.—The Unity of the Three Takes Place in Thought, Viz. Of Memory, of Ternal Vision,andof Will Combining Both.
6. The rational soul, however, lives in a degenerate fashion, when it lives according to a trinityof the outer man; that is, when it applies to those things which form the bodily sense from without,
not a praiseworthy will, by which to refer them to some useful end, but a base desire, by which tocleave to them. Since even if the form of the body, which was corporeally perceived, be withdrawn,
its likeness remains in the memory, to which the will may again direct its eye, so as to be formed
thence from within, as the sense was formed from without by the presentation of the sensible body.
And so that trinity is produced from memory, from internal vision, and from the will which unites
both. And when these three things are combined into one, from that combination732 itself they arecalled conception.733 And in these three there is no longer any diversity of substance. For neither
is the sensible body there, which is altogether distinct from the nature of the living being, nor isthe bodily sense there informed so as to produce vision, nor does the will itself perform its officeof applying the sense, that is to be informed, to the sensible body, and of retaining it in it when
informed; but in place of that bodily species which was perceived from without, there comes thememory retaining that species which the soul has imbibed through the bodily sense; and in placeof that vision which was outward when the sense was informed through the sensible body, there
comes a similar vision within, while the eye of the mind is informed from that which the memory
retains, and the corporeal things that are thought of are absent; and the will itself, as before it applied
the sense yet to be informed to the corporeal thing presented from without, and united it thereto
when informed, so now converts the vision of the recollecting mind to memory, in order that themental sight may be informed by that which the memory has retained, and so there may be in theconception a like vision. And as it was the reason that distinguished the visible appearance by which
the bodily sense was informed, from the similitude of it, which was wrought in the sense when
informed in order to produce vision (otherwise they had been so united as to be thought altogether
one and the same); so, although that phantasy also, which arises from the mind thinking of theappearance of a body that it has seen, consists of the similitude of the body which the memory
retains, together with that which is thence formed in the eye of the mind that recollects; yet it soseems to be one and single, that it can only be discovered to be two by the judgment of reason, bywhich we understand that which remains in the memory, even when we think it from some othersource, to be a different thing from that which is brought into being when we remember, that is,come back again to the memory, and there find the same appearance. And if this were not now
there, we should say that we had so forgotten as to be altogether unable to recollect. And if the eye

731
732
733

Gen. xxx. 37–41.
Coactus.
Cogitatio.

201

NPNF (V1-03)

148

Philip Schaffof him who recollects were not informed from that thing which was in the memory, the vision of
the thinker could in no way take place; but the conjunction of both, that is, of that which the memory
retains, and of that which is thence expressed so as to inform the eye of him who recollects, makes
them appear as if they were one, because they are exceedingly like. But when the eye of theconcipient is turned away thence, and has ceased to look at that which was perceived in the memory,then nothing of the form that was impressed thereon will remain in that eye, and it will be informedby that to which it had again been turned, so as to bring about another conception. Yet that remains
which it has left in the memory, to which it may again be turned when we recollect it, and being
turned thereto may be informed by it, and become one with that whence it is informed.

Chapter 4.—How This Unity Comes to Pass.
7. But if that will which moves to and fro, hither and thither, the eye that is to be informed, andunites it when formed, shall have wholly converged to the inward phantasy, and shall have absolutely
turned the mind’s eye from the presence of the bodies which lie around the senses, and from thevery bodily senses themselves, and shall have wholly turned it to that image, which is perceived
within; then so exact a likeness of the bodily species expressed from the memory is presented, that
not even reason itself is permitted to discern whether the body itself is seen without, or only
something of the kind thought of within. For men sometimes either allured or frightened byover-much thinking of visible things, have even suddenly uttered words accordingly, as if in realfact they were engaged in the very midst of such actions or sufferings. And I remember some one
telling me that he was wont to perceive in thought, so distinct and as it were solid, a form of afemale body, as to be moved, as though it were a reality. Such power has the soul over its own
body, and such influence has it in turning and changing the quality of its [corporeal] garment; justas a man may be affected when clothed, to whom his clothing sticks. It is the same kind of affection,
too, with which we are beguiled through imaginations in sleep. But it makes a very great difference,
whether the senses of the body are lulled to torpor, as in the case of sleepers, or disturbed fromtheir inward structure, as in the case of madmen, or distracted in some other mode, as in that of
diviners or prophets; and so from one or other of these causes, the intention of the mind is forced
by a kind of necessity upon those images which occur to it, either from memory, or by some otherhidden force through certain spiritual commixtures of a similarly spiritual substance: or whether,as sometimes happens to people in health and awake, that the will occupied by thought turns itself
away from the senses, and so informs the eye of the mind by various images of sensible things, as
though those sensible things themselves were actually perceived. But these impressions of images
not only take place when the will is directed upon such things by desiring them, but also when, inorder to avoid and guard against them, the mind is carried away to look upon these very thing so
as to flee from them. And hence, not only desire, but fear, causes both the bodily eye to be informedby the sensible things themselves, and the mental eye (acies) by the images of those sensible things.
Accordingly, the more vehement has been either fear or desire, the more distinctly is the eye
informed, whether in the case of him who [sensuously] perceives by means of the body that whichlies close to him in place, or in the case of him who conceives from the image of the body which202

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

is contained in the memory. What then a body in place is to the bodily sense, that, the similitudeof a body in memory is to the eye of the mind; and what the vision of one who looks at a thing isto that appearance of the body from which the sense is informed, that, the vision of a concipient isto the image of the body established in the memory, from which the eye of the mind is informed;
and what the intention of the will is towards a body seen and the vision to be combined with it, inorder that a certain unity of three things may therein take place, although their nature is diverse,
that, the same intention of the will is towards combining the image of the body which is in thememory, and the vision of the concipient, that is, the form which the eye of the mind has taken in
returning to the memory, in order that here too a certain unity may take place of three things, not
now distinguished by diversity of nature, but of one and the same substance; because this whole iswithin, and the whole is one mind.

Chapter 5.—The Trinity of the Outer Man, or of External Vision, is Not an Image of God. The
Likeness of God is Desired Even in Sins. In External Vision the Form of the Corporeal Thingis as It Were the Parent, Vision the Offspring; But the Will that Unites These Suggests the Holy
Spirit.

149

8. But as, when [both] the form and species of a body have perished, the will cannot recall toit the sense of perceiving; so, when the image which memory bears is blotted out by forgetfulness,
the will will be unable to force back the eye of the mind by recollection, so as to be formed thereby.
But because the mind has great power to imagine not only things forgotten, but also things that itnever saw, or experienced, either by increasing, or diminishing, or changing, or compounding, after
its pleasure, those which have not dropped out of its remembrance, it often imagines things to besuch as either it knows they are not, or does not know that they are. And in this case we have totake care, lest it either speak falsely that it may deceive, or hold an opinion so as to be deceived.
And if it avoid these two evils, then imagined phantasms do not hinder it: just as sensible things
experienced or retained by memory do not hinder it, if they are neither passionately sought forwhen pleasant, nor basely shunned when unpleasant. But when the will leaves better things, andgreedily wallows in these, then it becomes unclean; and they are so thought of hurtfully, when they
are present, and also more hurtfully when they are absent. And he therefore lives badly anddegenerately who lives according to the trinity of the outer man; because it is the purpose of using
things sensible and corporeal, that has begotten also that trinity, which although it imagines within,
yet imagines things without. For no one could use those things even well, unless the images ofthings perceived by the senses were retained in the memory. And unless the will for the greatest
part dwells in the higher and interior things, and unless that will itself, which is accommodated
either to bodies without, or to the images of them within, refers whatever it receives in them to abetter and truer life, and rests in that end by gazing at which it judges that those things ought to bedone; what else do we do, but that which the apostle prohibits us from doing, when he says, “Be
not conformed to this world”?734 And therefore that trinity is not an image of God since it is produced

734

Rom. xii. 2.

203

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

in the mind itself through the bodily sense, from the lowest, that is, the corporeal creature, thanwhich the mind is higher. Yet neither is it altogether dissimilar: for what is there that has not alikeness of God, in proportion to its kind and measure, seeing that God made all things very good,735
and for no other reason except that He Himself is supremely good? In so far, therefore, as anythingthat is, is good, in so far plainly it has still some likeness of the supreme good, at however great a
distance; and if a natural likeness, then certainly a right and well-ordered one; but if a faulty likeness,then certainly a debased and perverse one. For even souls in their very sins strive after nothing else
but some kind of likeness of God, in a proud and preposterous, and, so to say, slavish liberty. So
neither could our first parents have been persuaded to sin unless it had been said, “Ye shall be as
gods.”736 No doubt every thing in the creatures which is in any way like God, is not also to be called
His image; but that alone than which He Himself alone is higher. For that only is in all points copiedfrom Him, between which and Himself no nature is interposed.
9. Of that vision then; that is, of the form which is wrought in the sense of him who sees; theform of the bodily thing from which it is wrought, is, as it were, the parent. But it is not a true
parent; whence neither is that a true offspring; for it is not altogether born therefrom, since somethingelse is applied to the bodily thing in order that it may be formed from it, namely, the sense of him
who sees. And for this reason, to love this is to be estranged.737 Therefore the will which unites
both, viz. the quasi-parent and the quasi-child, is more spiritual than either of them. For that bodily
thing which is discerned, is not spiritual at all. But the vision which comes into existence in thesense, has something spiritual mingled with it, since it cannot come into existence without the soul.
But it is not wholly spiritual; since that which is formed is a sense of the body. Therefore the will
which unites both is confessedly more spiritual, as I have said; and so it begins to suggest (insinuare),as it were, the person of the Spirit in the Trinity. But it belongs more to the sense that is formed,
than to the bodily thing whence it is formed. For the sense and will of an animate being belongs to
the soul, not to the stone or other bodily thing that is seen. It does not therefore proceed from thatbodily thing as from a parent; yet neither does it proceed from that other as it were offspring,
namely, the vision and form that is in the sense. For the will existed before the vision came to pass,which will applied the sense that was to be formed to the bodily thing that was to be discerned; but
it was not yet satisfied. For how could that which was not yet seen satisfy? And satisfaction means
a will that rests content. And, therefore, we can neither call the will the quasi-offspring of vision,
since it existed before vision; nor the quasi-parent, since that vision was not formed and expressedfrom the will, but from the bodily thing that was seen.
150

Chapter 6.—Of What Kind We are to Reckon the Rest (Requies), and End (Finis), of the Will in
Vision.

735

Ecclus. xxxix. 16.
Gen. iii. 5.
737
Vid. Retract. Bk. II. c. 15, where Augustin adds that it is possible to love the bodily species to the praise of the Creator,
in which case there is no “estrangement.”
736

204

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

10. Perhaps we can rightly call vision the end and rest of the will, only with respect to this one
object [namely, the bodily thing that is visible]. For it will not will nothing else merely because it
sees something which it is now willing. It is not therefore the whole will itself of the man, of which
the end is nothing else than blessedness; but the will provisionally directed to this one object, which
has as its end in seeing, nothing but vision, whether it refer the thing seen to any other thing or not.
For if it does not refer the vision to anything further, but wills only to see this, there can be noquestion made about showing that the end of the will is the vision; for it is manifest. But if it doesrefer it to anything further, then certainly it does will something else, and it will not be now a will
merely to see; or if to see, not one to see the particular thing. Just as, if any one wished to see thescar, that from thence he might learn that there had been a wound; or wished to see the window,that through the window he might see the passers-by: all these and other such acts of will have theirown proper [proximate] ends, which are referred to that [final] end of the will by which we will tolive blessedly, and to attain to that life which is not referred to anything else, but suffices of itself
to him who loves it. The will then to see, has as its end vision; and the will to see this particularthing, has as its end the vision of this particular thing. Therefore the will to see the scar, desires its
own end, that is, the vision of the scar, and does not reach beyond it; for the will to prove that there
had been a wound, is a distinct will, although dependent upon that, of which the end also is to provethat there had been a wound. And the will to see the window, has as its end the vision of the window;
for that is another and further will which depends upon it, viz. to see the passers-by through thewindow, of which also the end is the vision of the passers-by. But all the several wills that arebound to each other, are at once right, if that one is good, to which all are referred; and if that isbad, then all are bad. And so the connected series of right wills is a sort of road which consists as
it were of certain steps, whereby to ascend to blessedness; but the entanglement of depraved anddistorted wills is a bond by which he will be bound who thus acts, so as to be cast into outerdarkness.738 Blessed therefore are they who in act and character sing the song of the steps[degrees];739 and woe to those that draw sin, as it were a long rope.740 And it is just the same tospeak of the will being in repose, which we call its end, if it is still referred to something further,as if we should say that the foot is at rest in walking, when it is placed there, whence yet anotherfoot may be planted in the direction of the man’s steps. But if something so satisfies, that the will
acquiesces in it with a certain delight; it is nevertheless not yet that to which the man ultimately
tends; but this too is referred to something further, so as to be regarded not as the native countryof a citizen, but as a place of refreshment, or even of stopping, for a traveller.

Chapter 7.—There is Another Trinity in the Memory of Him Who Thinks Over Again What He
Has Seen.

738
739
740

Matt. xxii. 13.
Psalms cxx., and following.
Isa. v. 18.

205

NPNF (V1-03)

151

Philip Schaff

11. But yet again, take the case of another trinity, more inward indeed than that which is inthings sensible, and in the senses, but which is yet conceived from thence; while now it is no longer
the sense of the body that is informed from the body, but the eye of the mind that is informed fromthe memory, since the species of the body which we perceived from without has inhered in thememory itself. And that species, which is in the memory, we call the quasi-parent of that which iswrought in the phantasy of one who conceives. For it was in the memory also, before we conceived
it, just as the body was in place also before we [sensuously] perceived it, in order that vision mighttake place. But when it is conceived, then from that form which the memory retains, there is copiedin the mind’s eye (acie) of him who conceives, and by remembrance is formed, that species, whichis the quasi-offspring of that which the memory retains. But neither is the one a true parent, nor theother a true offspring. For the mind’s vision which is formed from memory when we think anythingby recollection, does not proceed from that species which we remember as seen; since we could
not indeed have remembered those things, unless we had seen them; yet the mind’s eye, which isinformed by the recollection, existed also before we saw the body that we remember; and therefore
how much more before we committed it to memory? Although therefore the form which is wroughtin the mind’s eye of him who remembers, is wrought from that form which is in the memory; yetthe mind’s eye itself does not exist from thence, but existed before it. And it follows, that if the one
is not a true parent, neither is the other a true offspring. But both that quasi-parent and thatquasi-offspring suggest something, whence the inner and truer things may appear more practicallyand more certainly.
12. Further, it is more difficult to discern clearly, whether the will which connects the vision
to the memory is not either the parent or the offspring of some one of them; and the likeness andequality of the same nature and substance cause this difficulty of distinguishing. For it is not possible
to do in this case, as with the sense that is formed from without (which is easily discerned from thesensible body, and again the will from both), on account of the difference of nature which is mutuallyin all three, and of which we have treated sufficiently above. For although this trinity, of which weat present speak, is introduced into the mind from without; yet it is transacted within, and there isno part of it outside of the nature of the mind itself. In what way, then, can it be demonstrated thatthe will is neither the quasi-parent, nor the quasi-offspring, either of the corporeal likeness whichis contained in the memory, or of that which is copied thence in recollecting; when it so unites bothin the act of conceiving, as that they appear singly as one, and cannot be discerned except by reason?
It is then first to be considered that there cannot be any will to remember, unless we retain in therecesses of the memory either the whole, or some part, of that thing which we wish to remember.
For the very will to remember cannot arise in the case of a thing which we have forgotten altogether
and absolutely; since we have already remembered that the thing which we wish to remember isor has been, in our memory. For example, if I wish to remember what I supped on yesterday, either
I have already remembered that I did sup, or if not yet this, at least I have remembered something
about that time itself, if nothing else; at all events, I have remembered yesterday, and that part ofyesterday in which people usually sup, and what supping is. For if I had not remembered anythingat all of this kind, I could not wish to remember what I supped on yesterday. Whence we may
perceive that the will of remembering proceeds, indeed, from those things which are retained in
the memory, with the addition also of those which, by the act of discerning, are copied thence
through recollection; that is, from the combination of something which we have remembered, andof the vision which was thence wrought, when we remembered, in the mind’s eye of him who
206

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

thinks. But the will itself which unites both requires also some other thing, which is, as it were,close at hand, and adjacent to him who remembers. There are, then, as many trinities of this kindas there are remembrances; because there is no one of them wherein there are not these three things,
viz. that which was stored up in the memory also before it was thought, and that which takes placein the conception when this is discerned, and the will that unites both, and from both and itself asa third, completes one single thing. Or is it rather that we so recognize some one trinity in this kind,as that we are to speak generally, of whatever corporeal species lie hidden in the memory, as of asingle unity, and again of the general vision of the mind which remembers and conceives suchthings, as of a single unity, to the combination of which two there is to be joined as a third the willthat combines them, that this whole may be a certain unity made up from three?

Chapter 8.—Different Modes of Conceiving.

152

But since the eye of the mind cannot look at all things together, in one glance, which the memory
retains, these trinities of thought alternate in a series of withdrawals and successions, and so thattrinity becomes most innumerably numerous; and yet not infinite, if it pass not beyond the numberof things stored up in the memory. For, although we begin to reckon from the earliest perception
which any one has of material things through any bodily sense, and even take in also those things
which he has forgotten, yet the number would undoubtedly be certain and determined, althoughinnumerable. For we not only call infinite things innumerable, but also those, which, althoughfinite, exceed any one’s power of reckoning.
13. But we can hence perceive a little more clearly that what the memory stores up and retains
is a different thing from that which is thence copied in the conception of the man who remembers,
although, when both are combined together, they appear to be one and the same; because we canonly remember just as many species of bodies as we have actually seen, and so great, and such, as
we have actually seen; for the mind imbibes them into the memory from the bodily sense; whereas
the things seen in conception, although drawn from those things which are in the memory, yet are
multiplied and varied innumerably, and altogether without end. For I remember, no doubt, but one
sun, because according to the fact, I have seen but one; but if I please, I conceive of two, or three,or as many as I will; but the vision of my mind, when I conceive of many, is formed from the same
memory by which I remember one. And I remember it just as large as I saw it. For if I remember
it as larger or smaller than I saw it, then I no longer remember what I saw, and so I do not remember
it. But because I remember it, I remember it as large as I saw it; yet I conceive of it as greater or
as less according to my will. And I remember it as I saw it; but I conceive of it as running its course
as I will, and as standing still where I will, and as coming whence I will, and whither I will. For it
is in my power to conceive of it as square, although I remember it as round; and again, of what
color I please, although I have never seen, and therefore do not remember, a green sun; and as thesun, so all other things. But owing to the corporeal and sensible nature of these forms of things,
the mind falls into error when it imagines them to exist without, in the same mode in which it
conceives them within, either when they have already ceased to exist without, but are still retained207

NPNF (V1-03)

153

Philip Schaff

in the memory, or when in any other way also, that which we remember is formed in the mind, notby faithful recollection, but after the variations of thought.
14. Yet it very often happens that we believe also a true narrative, told us by others, of things
which the narrators have themselves perceived by their senses. And in this case, when we conceive
the things narrated to us, as we hear them, the eye of the mind does not seem to be turned back to
the memory, in order to bring up visions in our thoughts; for we do not conceive these things fromour own recollection, but upon the narration of another; and that trinity does not here seem to cometo its completion, which is made when the species lying hid in the memory, and the vision of the
man that remembers, are combined by will as a third. For I do not conceive that which lay hid in
my memory, but that which I hear, when anything is narrated to me. I am not speaking of the words
themselves of the speaker, lest any one should suppose that I have gone off to that other trinity,
which is transacted without, in sensible things, or in the senses: but I am conceiving of those species
of material things, which the narrator signifies to me by words and sounds; which species certainly
I conceive of not by remembering, but by hearing. But if we consider the matter more carefully,
even in this case, the limit of the memory is not overstepped. For I could not even understand thenarrator, if I did not remember generically the individual things of which he speaks, even although
I then hear them for the first time as connected together in one tale. For he who, for instance,
describes to me some mountain stripped of timber, and clothed with olive trees, describes it to me
who remembers the species both of mountains, and of timber, and of olive trees; and if I had
forgotten these, I should not know at all of what he was speaking, and therefore could not conceivethat description. And so it comes to pass, that every one who conceives things corporeal, whether
he himself imagine anything, or hear, or read, either a narrative of things past, or a foretelling ofthings future, has recourse to his memory, and finds there the limit and measure of all the forms at
which he gazes in his thought. For no one can conceive at all, either a color or a form of body,which he never saw, or a sound which he never heard, or a flavor which he never tasted, or a scent
which he never smelt, or any touch of a corporeal thing which he never felt. But if no one conceives
anything corporeal except what he has [sensuously] perceived, because no one remembers anything
corporeal except what he has thus perceived, then, as is the limit of perceiving in bodies, so is thelimit of thinking in the memory. For the sense receives the species from that body which we perceive,and the memory from the sense; but the mental eye of the concipient, from the memory.
15. Further, as the will applies the sense to the bodily object, so it applies the memory to thesense, and the eye of the mind of the concipient to the memory. But that which harmonizes those
things and unites them, itself also disjoins and separates them, that is, the will. But it separates thebodily senses from the bodies that are to be perceived, by movement of the body, either to hinder
our perceiving the thing, or that we may cease to perceive it: as when we avert our eyes from thatwhich we are unwilling to see, or shut them; so, again, the ears from sounds, or the nostrils fromsmells. So also we turn away from tastes, either by shutting the mouth, or by casting the thing outof the mouth. In touch, also, we either remove the bodily thing, that we may not touch what we do
not wish, or if we were already touching it, we fling or push it away. Thus the will acts by movementof the body, so that the bodily sense shall not be joined to the sensible things. And it does thisaccording to its power; for when it endures hardship in so doing, on account of the condition ofslavish mortality, then torment is the result, in such wise that nothing remains to the will saveendurance. But the will averts the memory from the sense; when, through its being intent onsomething else, it does not suffer things present to cleave to it. As any one may see, when often
208

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

we do not seem to ourselves to have heard some one who was speaking to us, because we werethinking of something else. But this is a mistake; for we did hear, but we do not remember, because
the words of the speaker presently slipped out of the perception of our ears, through the bidding of
the will being diverted elsewhere, by which they are usually fixed in the memory. Therefore, weshould say more accurately in such a case, we do not remember, than, we did not hear; for it happens
even in reading, and to myself very frequently, that when I have read through a page or an epistle,
I do not know what I have read, and I begin it again. For the purpose of the will being fixed onsomething else, the memory was not so applied to the bodily sense, as the sense itself was applied
to the letters. So, too, any one who walks with the will intent on something else, does not know
where he has got to; for if he had not seen, he would not have walked thither, or would have felt
his way in walking with greater attention, especially if he was passing through a place he did notknow; yet, because he walked easily, certainly he saw; but because the memory was not applied tothe sense itself in the same way as the sense of the eyes was applied to the places through which
he was passing, he could not remember at all even the last thing he saw. Now, to will to turn away
the eye of the mind from that which is in the memory, is nothing else but not to think thereupon.

Chapter 9.—Species is Produced by Species in Succession.
16. In this arrangement, then, while we begin from the bodily species and arrive finally at the
species which comes to be in the intuition (contuitu) of the concipient, we find four species born,as it were, step by step one from the other, the second from the first, the third from the second, thefourth from the third: since from the species of the body itself, there arises that which comes to bein the sense of the percipient; and from this, that which comes to be in the memory; and from this,that which comes to be in the mind’s eye of the concipient. And the will, therefore, thrice combines
as it were parent with offspring: first the species of the body with that to which it gives birth in thesense of the body; and that again with that which from it comes to be in the memory; and this also,
thirdly, with that which is born from it in the intuition of the concipient’s mind. But the intermediate
combination which is the second, although it is nearer to the first, is yet not so like the first as thethird is. For there are two kinds of vision, the one of [sensuous] perception (sentientis), the otherof conception (cogitantis). But in order that the vision of conception may come to be, there is
wrought for the purpose, in the memory, from the vision of [sensuous] perception something likeit, to which the eye of the mind may turn itself in conceiving, as the glance (acies) of the eyes turns
itself in [sensuously] perceiving to the bodily object. I have, therefore, chosen to put forward twotrinities in this kind: one when the vision of [sensuous] perception is formed from the bodily object,
the other when the vision of conception is formed from the memory. But I have refrained fromcommending an intermediate one; because we do not commonly call it vision, when the form whichcomes to be in the sense of him who perceives, is entrusted to the memory. Yet in all cases the will

209

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

does not appear unless as the combiner as it were of parent and offspring; and so, proceed fromwhence it may, it can be called neither parent nor offspring.741

Chapter 10.—The Imagination Also Adds Even to Things We Have Not Seen, Those Things Which
We Have Seen Elsewhere.

154

17. But if we do not remember except what we have [sensuously] perceived, nor conceive
except what we remember; why do we often conceive things that are false, when certainly we do
not remember falsely those things which we have perceived, unless it be because that will (which
I have already taken pains to show as much as I can to be the uniter and the separater of things ofthis kind) leads the vision of the conceiver that is to be formed, after its own will and pleasure,through the hidden stores of the memory; and, in order to conceive [imagine] those things which
we do not remember, impels it to take one thing from hence, and another from thence, from thosewhich we do remember; and these things combining into one vision make something which is called
false, because it either does not exist externally in the nature of corporeal things, or does not seem
copied from the memory, in that we do not remember that we ever saw such a thing. For who eversaw a black swan? And therefore no one remembers a black swan; yet who is there that cannot
conceive it? For it is easy to apply to that shape which we have come to know by seeing it, a blackcolor, which we have not the less seen in other bodies; and because we have seen both, we remember
both. Neither do I remember a bird with four feet, because I never saw one; but I contemplate sucha phantasy very easily, by adding to some winged shape such as I have seen, two other feet, suchas I have likewise seen.742 And therefore, in conceiving conjointly, what we remember to have seen
singly, we seem not to conceive that which we remember; while we really do this under the law of
the memory, whence we take everything which we join together after our own pleasure in manifold
and diverse ways. For we do not conceive even the very magnitudes of bodies, which magnitudes
we never saw, without help of the memory; for the measure of space to which our gaze commonly
reaches through the magnitude of the world, is the measure also to which we enlarge the bulk of
bodies, whatever they may be, when we conceive them as great as we can. And reason, indeed,
proceeds still beyond, but phantasy does not follow her; as when reason announces the infinity of
number also, which no vision of him who conceives according to corporeal things can apprehend.
The same reason also teaches that the most minute atoms are infinitely divisible; yet when we have

741

[Augustin’s map of consciousness is as follows: (1). The corporeal species=the external object (outward appearance). (2).
The sensible species=the sensation (appearance for the sense). (3). The mental species in its first form=present perception. (4).
The mental species in its second form=remembered perception. These three “species” or appearances of the object: namely,
corporeal, sensible, and mental, according to him, are combined in one synthesis with the object by the operation of the will.
By “will,” he does not mean distinct and separate volitions: but the spontaneity of the ego—what Kant denominates the mechanismof the understanding, seen in the spontaneous employment of the categories of thought, as the mind ascends from empiricalsensation to rational conception.
The English translator has failed to make clear the sharply defined psychology of these chapters, by loosely rendering“sentire,” “to perceive,” and “cogitare” to think.—W.G.T.S.]
742
Vid. Retract. 11. xv. 2. [Augustin here says that when he wrote the above, he forgot what is said in Leviticus xi. 20, of“fowls that creep, going upon all four, which have legs above their feet to leap withal upon the earth.”—W.G.T.S.]

210

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

come to those slight and minute particles which we remember to have seen, then we can no longer
behold phantasms more slender and more minute, although reason does not cease to continue todivide them. So we conceive no corporeal things, except either those we remember, or from those
things which we remember.

Chapter 11.—Number, Weight, Measure.
18. But because those things which are impressed on the memory singly, can be conceived
according to number, measure seems to belong to the memory, but number to the vision; because,
although the multiplicity of such visions is innumerable, yet a limit not to be transgressed isprescribed for each in the memory. Therefore, measure appears in the memory, number in the visionof things: as there is some measure in visible bodies themselves, to which measure the sense of
those who see is most numerously adjusted, and from one visible object is formed the vision ofmany beholders, so that even a single person sees commonly a single thing under a double
appearance, on account of the number of his two eyes, as we have laid down above. Therefore there
is some measure in those things whence visions are copied, but in the visions themselves there isnumber. But the will which unites and regulates these things, and combines them into a certain
unity, and does not quietly rest its desire of [sensuously] perceiving or of conceiving, except in
those things from whence the visions are formed, resembles weight. And therefore I would justnotice by way of anticipation these three things, measure, number, weight, which are to be perceived
in all other things also. In the meantime, I have now shown as much as I can, and to whom I can,that the will is the uniter of the visible thing and of the vision; as it were, of parent and of offspring;whether in [sensuous] perception or in conception, and that it cannot be called either parent oroffspring. Wherefore time admonishes us to seek for this same trinity in the inner man, and to strive
to pass inwards from that animal and carnal and (as he is called) outward man, of whom I have solong spoken. And here we hope to be able to find an image of God according to the Trinity, He
Himself helping our efforts, who as things themselves show, and as Holy Scripture also witnesses,
has regulated all things in measure, and number, and weight.743

155

Book XII.
————————————
Commencing with a distinction between wisdom and knowledge, points out a kind of trinity, of apeculiar sort, in that which is properly called knowledge, and which is the lower of the two;743

Wisd. xi. 21.

211

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

and this trinity, although it certainly pertains to the inner man, is still not yet to be called or
thought an image of God.
Chapter 1.—Of What Kind are the Outer and the Inner Man.
1. Come now, and let us see where lies, as it were, the boundary line between the outer andinner man. For whatever we have in the mind common with the beasts, thus much is rightly said
to belong to the outer man. For the outer man is not to be considered to be the body only, but withthe addition also of a certain peculiar life of the body, whence the structure of the body derives its
vigor, and all the senses with which he is equipped for the perception of outward things; and when
the images of these outward things already perceived, that have been fixed in the memory, are seen
again by recollection, it is still a matter pertaining to the outer man. And in all these things we do
not differ from the beasts, except that in shape of body we are not prone, but upright. And we areadmonished through this, by Him who made us, not to be like the beasts in that which is our better
part—that is, the mind—while we differ from them by the uprightness of the body. Not that we areto throw our mind into those bodily things which are exalted; for to seek rest for the will, even insuch things, is to prostrate the mind. But as the body is naturally raised upright to those bodily
things which are most elevated, that is, to things celestial; so the mind, which is a spiritual substance,
must be raised upright to those things which are most elevated in spiritual things, not by the elationof pride, but by the dutifulness of righteousness.

Chapter 2.—Man Alone of Animate Creatures Perceives the Eternal Reasons of Things Pertaining
to the Body.
2. And the beasts, too, are able both to perceive things corporeal from without, through thesenses of the body, and to fix them in the memory, and remember them, and in them to seek after
things suitable, and shun things inconvenient. But to note these things, and to retain them not only
as caught up naturally but also as deliberately committed to memory, and to imprint them again byrecollection and conception when now just slipping away into forgetfulness; in order that asconception is formed from that which the memory contains, so also the contents themselves of thememory may be fixed firmly by thought: to combine again imaginary objects of sight, by taking
this or that of what the memory remembers, and, as it were, tacking them to one another: to examine
after what manner it is that in this kind things like the true are to be distinguished from the true,
and this not in things spiritual, but in corporeal things themselves;—these acts, and the like, although
performed in reference to things sensible, and those which the mind has deduced through the bodily
senses, yet, as they are combined with reason, so are not common to men and beasts. But it is thepart of the higher reason to judge of these corporeal things according to incorporeal and eternalreasons; which, unless they were above the human mind, would certainly not be unchangeable; andyet, unless something of our own were subjoined to them, we should not be able to employ them212

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

as our measures by which to judge of corporeal things. But we judge of corporeal things from therule of dimensions and figures, which the mind knows to remain unchangeably.744

156

Chapter 3.—The Higher Reason Which Belongs to Contemplation, and the Lower Which Belongs
to Action, are in One Mind.
3. But that of our own which thus has to do with the handling of corporeal and temporal things,
is indeed rational, in that it is not common to us with the beasts; but it is drawn, as it were, out ofthat rational substance of our mind, by which we depend upon and cleave to the intelligible andunchangeable truth, and which is deputed to handle and direct the inferior things. For as among all
the beasts there was not found for the man a help like unto him, unless one were taken from himself,
and formed to be his consort: so for that mind, by which we consult the supernal and inward truth,
there is no like help for such employment as man’s nature requires among things corporeal out of
those parts of the soul which we have in common with the beasts. And so a certain part of ourreason, not separated so as to sever unity, but, as it were, diverted so as to be a help to fellowship,
is parted off for the performing of its proper work. And as the twain is one flesh in the case of maleand female, so in the mind one nature embraces our intellect and action, or our counsel andperformance, or our reason and rational appetite, or whatever other more significant terms there
may be by which to express them; so that, as it was said of the former, “And they two shall be in
one flesh,”745 it may be said of these, they two are in one mind.

Chapter 4.—The Trinity and the Image of God is in that Part of the Mind Alone Which Belongs
to the Contemplation of Eternal Things.
4. When, therefore, we discuss the nature of the human mind, we discuss a single subject, anddo not double it into those two which I have mentioned, except in respect to its functions. Therefore,
when we seek the trinity in the mind, we seek it in the whole mind, without separating the actionof the reason in things temporal from the contemplation of things eternal, so as to have further toseek some third thing, by which a trinity may be completed. But this trinity must needs be so
discovered in the whole nature of the mind, as that even if action upon temporal things were to bewithdrawn, for which work that help is necessary, with a view to which some part of the mind isdiverted in order to deal with these inferior things, yet a trinity would still be found in the one mind
that is no where parted off; and that when this distribution has been already made, not only a trinity
744[The distinction drawn here is between that low form of intelligence which exists in the brute, and that high formcharacteristic of man. In the Kantian nomenclature, the brute has understanding, but unenlightened by reason; either theoreticalor practical. He has intelligence, but not as modified by the forms of space and time and the categories of quantity, quality,
relation etc.; and still less as modified and exalted by the ideas of reason—namely, the mathematical ideas, and the moral ideas
of God, freedom, and immortality. The animal has no rational intelligence. He has mere understanding without reason.—W.G.T.S.]
745
Gen. ii. 24.

213

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

may be found, but also an image of God, in that alone which belongs to the contemplation of eternalthings; while in that other which is diverted from it in the dealing with temporal things, although
there may be a trinity, yet there cannot be found an image of God.

Chapter 5.—The Opinion Which Devises an Image of the Trinity in the Marriage of Male andFemale, and in Their Offspring.

157

5. Accordingly they do not seem to me to advance a probable opinion, who lay it down that atrinity of the image of God in three persons, so far as regards human nature, can so be discovered
as to be completed in the marriage of male and female and in their offspring; in that the man himself,
as it were, indicates the person of the Father, but that which has so proceeded from him as to beborn, that of the Son; and so the third person as of the Spirit, is, they say, the woman, who has soproceeded from the man as not herself to be either son or daughter,746 although it was by her
conception that the offspring was born. For the Lord hath said of the Holy Spirit that He proceedeth
from the Father,747 and yet he is not a son. In this erroneous opinion, then, the only point probably
alleged, and indeed sufficiently shown according to the faith of the Holy Scripture, is this,—in theaccount of the original creation of the woman,—that what so comes into existence from someperson as to make another person, cannot in every case be called a son; since the person of thewoman came into existence from the person of the man, and yet she is not called his daughter. All
the rest of this opinion is in truth so absurd, nay indeed so false, that it is most easy to refute it. For
I pass over such a thing, as to think the Holy Spirit to be the mother of the Son of God, and thewife of the Father; since perhaps it may be answered that these things offend us in carnal things,
because we think of bodily conceptions and births. Although these very things themselves are most
chastely thought of by the pure, to whom all things are pure; but to the defiled and unbelieving, ofwhom both the mind and conscience are polluted, nothing is pure;748 so that even Christ, born of avirgin according to the flesh, is a stumbling-block to some of them. But yet in the case of those
supreme spiritual things, after the likeness of which those kinds of the inferior creature also aremade although most remotely, and where there is nothing that can be injured and nothing corruptible,
nothing born in time, nothing formed from that which is formless, or whatever like expressions
there may be; yet they ought not to disturb the sober prudence of any one, lest in avoiding empty
disgust he run into pernicious error. Let him accustom himself so to find in corporeal things thetraces of things spiritual, that when he begins to ascend upwards from thence, under the guidanceof reason, in order to attain to the unchangeable truth itself through which these things were made,he may not draw with himself to things above what he despises in things below. For no one everblushed to choose for himself wisdom as a wife, because the name of wife puts into a man’s thoughts
the corruptible connection which consists in begetting children; or because in truth wisdom itself

746
747
748

Gen. ii. 22.
John xv. 26.
Tit. i. 15.

214

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

is a woman in sex, since it is expressed in both Greek and Latin tongues by a word of the feminine
gender.

Chapter 6. —Why This Opinion is to Be Rejected.
6. We do not therefore reject this opinion, because we fear to think of that holy and inviolable
and unchangeable Love, as the spouse of God the Father, existing as it does from Him, but not as
an offspring in order to beget the Word by which all things are made; but because divine Scriptureevidently shows it to be false. For God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness;”
and a little after it is said, “So God created man in the image of God.”749 Certainly, in that it is of
the plural number, the word “our” would not be rightly used if man were made in the image of one
person, whether of the Father, or of the Son, or of the Holy Spirit; but because he was made in theimage of the Trinity, on that account it is said, “After our image.” But again, lest we should thinkthat three Gods were to be believed in the Trinity, whereas the same Trinity is one God, it is said,“So God created man in the image of God,” instead of saying, “In His own image.”
7. For such expressions are customary in the Scriptures; and yet some persons, while maintaining
the Catholic faith, do not carefully attend to them, in such wise that they think the words, “Godmade man in the image of God,” to mean that the Father made man after the image of the Son; andthey thus desire to assert that the Son also is called God in the divine Scriptures, as if there were
not other most true and clear proofs wherein the Son is called not only God, but also the true God.
For whilst they aim at explaining another difficulty in this text, they become so entangled that theycannot extricate themselves. For if the Father made man after the image of the Son, so that he is
not the image of the Father, but of the Son, then the Son is unlike the Father. But if a pious faithteaches us, as it does, that the Son is like the Father after an equality of essence, then that which ismade in the likeness of the Son must needs also be made in the likeness of the Father. Further, if
the Father made man not in His own image, but in the image of His Son, why does He not say, “Letus make man after Thy image and likeness,” whereas He does say, “our;” unless it be because theimage of the Trinity was made in man, that in this way man should be the image of the one true
God, because the Trinity itself is the one true God? Such expressions are innumerable in the
Scriptures, but it will suffice to have produced these. It is so said in the Psalms, “Salvation belongeth
unto the Lord; Thy blessing is upon Thy people;”750 as if the words were spoken to some one else,
not to Him of whom it had been said, “Salvation belongeth unto the Lord.” And again, “For byThee,” he says, “I shall be delivered from temptation, and by hoping in my God I shall leap over
the wall;”751 as if he said to some one else, “By Thee I shall be delivered from temptation.” Andagain, “In the heart of the king’s enemies; whereby the people fall under Thee;”752 as if he were to
say, in the heart of Thy enemies. For he had said to that King, that is, to our Lord Jesus Christ, “The

749
750
751
752

Gen. i. 26, 27.
Ps. iii. 8.
Ps. xviii. 29.
Ps. xlv. 5.

215

NPNF (V1-03)

158

Philip Schaff

people fall under Thee,” whom he intended by the word King, when he said, “In the heart of theking’s enemies.” Things of this kind are found more rarely in the New Testament. But yet theapostle says to the Romans, “Concerning His Son who was made to Him of the seed of David
according to the flesh, and declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit ofholiness, by the resurrection of the dead of Jesus Christ our Lord;”753 as though he were speaking
above of some one else. For what is meant by the Son of God declared by the resurrection of thedead of Jesus Christ, except of the same Jesus Christ who was declared to be Son of God withpower? And as then in this passage, when we are told, “the Son of God with power of Jesus Christ,”
or “the Son of God according to the spirit of holiness of Jesus Christ,” or “the Son of God by the
resurrection of the dead of Jesus Christ,” whereas it might have been expressed in the ordinaryway, In His own power, or according to the spirit of His own holiness, or by the resurrection ofHis dead, or of their dead: as, I say, we are not compelled to understand another person, but one
and the same, that is, the person of the Son of God our Lord Jesus Christ; so, when we are told that
“God made man in the image of God,” although it might have been more usual to say, after His
own image, yet we are not compelled to understand any other person in the Trinity, but the one andselfsame Trinity itself, who is one God, and after whose image man is made.
8. And since the case stands thus, if we are to accept the same image of the Trinity, as not in
one, but in three human beings, father and mother and son, then the man was not made after theimage of God before a wife was made for him, and before they procreated a son; because there was
not yet a trinity. Will any one say there was already a trinity, because, although not yet in theirproper form, yet in their original nature, both the woman was already in the side of the man, andthe son in the loins of his father? Why then, when Scripture had said, “God made man after theimage of God,” did it go on to say, “God created him; male and female created He them: and God
blessed them”?754 (Or if it is to be so divided, “And God created man,” so that thereupon is to be
added, “in the image of God created He him,” and then subjoined in the third place, “male andfemale created He them;” for some have feared to say, He made him male and female, lest something
monstrous, as it were, should be understood, as are those whom they call hermaphrodites, althougheven so both might be understood not falsely in the singular number, on account of that which issaid, “Two in one flesh.”) Why then, as I began by saying, in regard to the nature of man madeafter the image of God, does Scripture specify nothing except male and female? Certainly, in order
to complete the image of the Trinity, it ought to have added also son, although still placed in theloins of his father, as the woman was in his side. Or was it perhaps that the woman also had been
already made, and that Scripture had combined in a short and comprehensive statement, that ofwhich it was going to explain afterwards more carefully, how it was done; and that therefore a son
could not be mentioned, because no son was yet born? As if the Holy Spirit could not havecomprehended this, too, in that brief statement, while about to narrate the birth of the son afterwards
in its own place; as it narrated afterwards in its own place, that the woman was taken from the sideof the man,755 and yet has not omitted here to name her.

753
754
755

Rom. i. 3, 4.
Gen. i. 27, 28.
Gen. ii. 24, 22.

216

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 7.—How Man is the Image of God. Whether the Woman is Not Also the Image of God.
How the Saying of the Apostle, that the Man is the Image of God, But the Woman is the Gloryof the Man, is to Be Understood Figuratively and Mystically.

159

9. We ought not therefore so to understand that man is made in the image of the supreme Trinity,that is, in the image of God, as that the same image should be understood to be in three humanbeings; especially when the apostle says that the man is the image of God, and on that accountremoves the covering from his head, which he warns the woman to use, speaking thus: “For a man
indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God; but the woman
is the glory of the man.” What then shall we say to this? If the woman fills up the image of thetrinity after the measure of her own person, why is the man still called that image after she has beentaken out of his side? Or if even one person of a human being out of three can be called the imageof God, as each person also is God in the supreme Trinity itself, why is the woman also not theimage of God? For she is instructed for this very reason to cover her head, which he is forbidden
to do because he is the image of God.756
10. But we must notice how that which the apostle says, that not the woman but the man is theimage of God, is not contrary to that which is written in Genesis, “God created man: in the imageof God created He him; male and female created He them: and He blessed them.” For this text saysthat human nature itself, which is complete [only] in both sexes, was made in the image of God;and it does not separate the woman from the image of God which it signifies. For after saying that
God made man in the image of God, “He created him,” it says, “male and female:” or at any rate,punctuating the words otherwise, “male and female created He them.” How then did the apostle
tell us that the man is the image of God, and therefore he is forbidden to cover his head; but thatthe woman is not so, and therefore is commanded to cover hers? Unless, forsooth, according to thatwhich I have said already, when I was treating of the nature of the human mind, that the woman
together with her own husband is the image of God, so that that whole substance may be one image;
but when she is referred separately to her quality of help-meet, which regards the woman herself
alone, then she is not the image of God; but as regards the man alone, he is the image of God as
fully and completely as when the woman too is joined with him in one. As we said of the natureof the human mind, that both in the case when as a whole it contemplates the truth it is the imageof God; and in the case when anything is divided from it, and diverted in order to the cognition of
temporal things; nevertheless on that side on which it beholds and consults truth, here also it is theimage of God, but on that side whereby it is directed to the cognition of the lower things, it is not
the image of God. And since it is so much the more formed after the image of God, the more it has
extended itself to that which is eternal, and is on that account not to be restrained, so as to withhold
and refrain itself from thence; therefore the man ought not to cover his head. But because too greata progression towards inferior things is dangerous to that rational cognition that is conversant withthings corporeal and temporal; this ought to have power on its head, which the covering indicates,by which it is signified that it ought to be restrained. For a holy and pious meaning is pleasing to
the holy angels.757 For God sees not after the way of time, neither does anything new take place in
756
757

1 Cor. xi. 7, 5.
1 Cor. xi. 10.

217

NPNF (V1-03)

160

Philip Schaff

His vision and knowledge, when anything is done in time and transitorily, after the way in whichsuch things affect the senses, whether the carnal senses of animals and men, or even the heavenly
senses of the angels.
11. For that the Apostle Paul, when speaking outwardly of the sex of male and female, figured
the mystery of some more hidden truth, may be understood from this, that when he says in anotherplace that she is a widow indeed who is desolate, without children and nephews, and yet that she
ought to trust in God, and to continue in prayers night and day,758 he here indicates, that the woman
having been brought into the transgression by being deceived, is brought to salvation bychild-bearing; and then he has added, “If they continue in faith, and charity, and holiness, withsobriety.”759 As if it could possibly hurt a good widow, if either she had not sons, or if those whom
she had did not choose to continue in good works. But because those things which are called goodworks are, as it were, the sons of our life, according to that sense of life in which it answers to thequestion, What is a man’s life? that is, How does he act in these temporal things? which life theGreeks do not call but ; and because these good works are chiefly performed in the way of
offices of mercy, while works of mercy are of no profit, either to Pagans, or to Jews who do notbelieve in Christ, or to any heretics or schismstics whatsoever in whom faith and charity and sober
holiness are not found: what the apostle meant to signify is plain, and in so far figuratively andmystically, because he was speaking of covering the head of the woman, which will remain mere
empty words, unless referred to some hidden sacrament.
12. For, as not only most true reason but also the authority of the apostle himself declares, man
was not made in the image of God according to the shape of his body, but according to his rational
mind. For the thought is a debased and empty one, which holds God to be circumscribed and limitedby the lineaments of bodily members. But further, does not the same blessed apostle say, “Be
renewed in the spirit of your mind, and put on the new man, which is created after God;”760 and inanother place more clearly, “Putting off the old man,” he says, “with his deeds; put on the newman, which is renewed to the knowledge of God after the image of Him that created him?”761 If,
then, we are renewed in the spirit of our mind, and he is the new man who is renewed to theknowledge of God after the image of Him that created him; no one can doubt, that man was madeafter the image of Him that created him, not according to the body, nor indiscriminately according
to any part of the mind, but according to the rational mind, wherein the knowledge of God canexist. And it is according to this renewal, also, that we are made sons of God by the baptism of
Christ; and putting on the new man, certainly put on Christ through faith. Who is there, then, whowill hold women to be alien from this fellowship, whereas they are fellow-heirs of grace with us;
and whereas in another place the same apostle says, “For ye are all the children of God by faith inChrist Jesus; for as many as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ: there is neither Jew
nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female; for ye are all one inChrist Jesus?”762 Pray, have faithful women then lost their bodily sex? But because they are there
renewed after the image of God, where there is no sex; man is there made after the image of God,
758
759
760
761
762

1 Tim. v. 5.
1 Tim. ii. 15.
Eph. iv. 23, 24.
Col. iii. 9, 10.
Gal. iii. 26–28.

218

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

where there is no sex, that is, in the spirit of his mind. Why, then, is the man on that account notbound to cover his head, because he is the image and glory of God, while the woman is bound to
do so, because she is the glory of the man; as though the woman were not renewed in the spirit ofher mind, which spirit is renewed to the knowledge of God after the image of Him who createdhim? But because she differs from the man in bodily sex, it was possible rightly to represent under
her bodily covering that part of the reason which is diverted to the government of temporal things;
so that the image of God may remain on that side of the mind of man on which it cleaves to thebeholding or the consulting of the eternal reasons of things; and this, it is clear, not men only, butalso women have.

Chapter 8.—Turning Aside from the Image of God.
13. A common nature, therefore, is recognized in their minds, but in their bodies a division ofthat one mind itself is figured. As we ascend, then, by certain steps of thought within, along the
succession of the parts of the mind, there where something first meets us which is not common toourselves with the beasts reason begins, so that here the inner man can now be recognized. And if
this inner man himself, through that reason to which the administering of things temporal has beendelegated, slips on too far by over-much progress into outward things, that which is his headmoreover consenting, that is, the (so to call it) masculine part which presides in the watch-towerof counsel not restraining or bridling it: then he waxeth old because of all his enemies,763 viz. thedemons with their prince the devil, who are envious of virtue; and that vision of eternal things iswithdrawn also from the head himself, eating with his spouse that which was forbidden, so that thelight of his eyes is gone from him;764 and so both being naked from that enlightenment of truth,
and with the eyes of their conscience opened to behold how they were left shameful and unseemly,
like the leaves of sweet fruits, but without the fruits themselves, they so weave together good words
without the fruit of good works, as while living wickedly to cover over their disgrace as it were by
speaking well.765

Chapter 9.—The Same Argument is Continued.
14. For the soul loving its own power, slips onwards from the whole which is common, to apart, which belongs especially to itself. And that apostatizing pride, which is called “the beginningof sin,”766 whereas it might have been most excellently governed by the laws of God, if it had
followed Him as its ruler in the universal creature, by seeking something more than the whole, and
763
764
765
766

Ps. vi. 7.
Ps. xxxviii. 10.
Gen. iii. 4.
Ecclus. x. 15.

219

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

struggling to govern this by a law of its own, is thrust on, since nothing is more than the whole,
into caring for a part; and thus by lusting after something more, is made less; whence also
covetousness is called “the root of all evil.”767 And it administers that whole, wherein it strives to
do something of its own against the laws by which the whole is governed, by its own body, which
it possesses only in part; and so being delighted by corporeal forms and motions, because it has
not the things themselves within itself, and because it is wrapped up in their images, which it has
fixed in the memory, and is foully polluted by fornication of the phantasy, while it refers all its
functions to those ends, for which it curiously seeks corporeal and temporal things through thesenses of the body, either it affects with swelling arrogance to be more excellent than other soulsthat are given up to the corporeal senses, or it is plunged into a foul whirlpool of carnal pleasure.

Chapter 10.—The Lowest Degradation Reached by Degrees.

161

15. When the soul then consults either for itself or for others with a good will towards perceiving
the inner and higher things, such as are possessed in a chaste embrace, without any narrowness or
envy, not individually, but in common by all who love such things; then even if it be deceived inanything, through ignorance of things temporal (for its action in this case is a temporal one), andif it does not hold fast to that mode of acting which it ought, the temptation is but one common toman. And it is a great thing so to pass through this life, on which we travel, as it were, like a roadon our return home, that no temptation may take us, but what is common to man.768 For this is asin, without the body, and must not be reckoned fornication, and on that account is very easily
pardoned. But when the soul does anything in order to attain those things which are perceived
through the body, through lust of proving or of surpassing or of handling them, in order that it may
place in them its final good, then whatever it does, it does wickedly, and commits fornication,
sinning against its own body:769 and while snatching from within the deceitful images of corporeal
things, and combining them by vain thought, so that nothing seems to it to be divine, unless it beof such a kind as this; by selfish greediness it is made fruitful in errors, and by selfish prodigality
it is emptied of strength. Yet it would not leap on at once from the commencement to such shamelessand miserable fornication, but, as it is written, “He that contemneth small things, shall fall by little
and little.”770

Chapter 11.—The Image of the Beast in Man.

767
768
769
770

1 Tim. vi. 10.
1 Cor. x. 13.
1 Cor. vi. 18.
Ecclus. xix. 1.

220

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

16. For as a snake does not creep on with open steps, but advances by the very minutest efforts
of its several scales; so the slippery motion of falling away [from what is good] takes possessionof the negligent only gradually, and beginning from a perverse desire for the likeness of God, arrives
in the end at the likeness of beasts. Hence it is that being naked of their first garment, they earnedby mortality coats of skins.771 For the true honor of man is the image and likeness of God, which
is not preserved except it be in relation to Him by whom it is impressed. The less therefore that one
loves what is one’s own, the more one cleaves to God. But through the desire of making trial of
his own power, man by his own bidding falls down to himself as to a sort of intermediate grade.
And so, while he wishes to be as God is, that is, under no one, he is thrust on, even from his own
middle grade, by way of punishment, to that which is lowest, that is, to those things in which beasts
delight: and thus, while his honor is the likeness of God, but his dishonor is the likeness of thebeast, “Man being in honor abideth not: he is compared to the beasts that are foolish, and is madelike to them.”772 By what path, then, could he pass so great a distance from the highest to the lowest,
except through his own intermediate grade? For when he neglects the love of wisdom, which
remains always after the same fashion, and lusts after knowledge by experiment upon things temporaland mutable, that knowledge puffeth up, it does not edify:773 so the mind is overweighed and thrustout, as it were, by its own weight from blessedness; and learns by its own punishment, through thattrial of its own intermediateness, what the difference is between the good it has abandoned and thebad to which it has committed itself; and having thrown away and destroyed its strength, it cannot
return, unless by the grace of its Maker calling it to repentance, and forgiving its sins. For who will
deliver the unhappy soul from the body of this death, unless the grace of God through Jesus Christ
our Lord?774 of which grace we will discourse in its place, so far as He Himself enables us.

Chapter 12.—There is a Kind of Hidden Wedlock in the Inner Man. Unlawful Pleasures of theThoughts.
17. Let us now complete, so far as the Lord helps us, the discussion which we have undertaken,
respecting that part of reason to which knowledge belongs, that is, the cognizance of things temporaland changeable, which is necessary for managing the affairs of this life. For as in the case of thatvisible wedlock of the two human beings who were made first, the serpent did not eat of the forbidden
tree, but only persuaded them to eat of it; and the woman did not eat alone, but gave to her husband,and they eat together; although she alone spoke with the serpent, and she alone was led away byhim:775 so also in the case of that hidden and secret kind of wedlock, which is transacted anddiscerned in a single human being, the carnal, or as I may say, since it is directed to the senses ofthe body, the sensuous movement of the soul, which is common to us with beasts, is shut off from

771
772
773
774
775

Gen. iii. 21.
Ps. xlix. 12.
1 Cor. viii. 1.
Rom. vii. 24, 25.
Gen. iii. 1–6.

221

NPNF (V1-03)

162

Philip Schaff

the reason of wisdom. For certainly bodily things are perceived by the sense of the body; but spiritual
things, which are eternal and unchangeable, are understood by the reason of wisdom. But the reasonof knowledge has appetite very near to it: seeing that what is called the science or knowledge ofactions reasons concerning the bodily things which are perceived by the bodily sense; if well, inorder that it may refer that knowledge to the end of the chief good; but if ill, in order that it may
enjoy them as being such good things as those wherein it reposes with a false blessedness. Whenever,then, that carnal or animal sense introduces into this purpose of the mind which is conversant about
things temporal and corporeal, with a view to the offices of a man’s actions, by the living force of
reason, some inducement to enjoy itself, that is, to enjoy itself as if it were some private good of
its own, not as the public and common, which is the unchangeable, good; then, as it were, theserpent discourses with the woman. And to consent to this allurement, is to eat of the forbidden
tree. But if that consent is satisfied by the pleasure of thought alone, but the members are so restrainedby the authority of higher counsel that they are not yielded as instruments of unrighteousness unto
sin;776 this, I think, is to be considered as if the woman alone should have eaten the forbidden food.
But if, in this consent to use wickedly the things which are perceived through the senses of thebody, any sin at all is so determined upon, that if there is the power it is also fulfilled by the body;then that woman must be understood to have given the unlawful food to her husband with her, tobe eaten together. For it is not possible for the mind to determine that a sin is not only to be thoughtof with pleasure, but also to be effectually committed, unless also that intention of the mind yields,
and serves the bad action, with which rests the chief power of applying the members to an outward
act, or of restraining them from one.
18. And yet, certainly, when the mind is pleased in thought alone with unlawful things, while
not indeed determining that they are to be done, but yet holding and pondering gladly things which
ought to have been rejected the very moment they touched the mind, it cannot be denied to be asin, but far less than if it were also determined to accomplished it in outward act. And therefore
pardon must be sought for such thoughts too, and the breast must be smitten, and it must be said,“Forgive us our debts;” and what follows must be done, and must be joined in our prayer, “As we
also forgive our debtors.”777 For it is not as it was with those two first human beings, of which eachone bare his own person; and so, if the woman alone had eaten the forbidden food, she certainly
alone would have been smitten with the punishment of death: it cannot, I say, be so said also in thecase of a single human being now, that if the thought, remaining alone, be gladly fed with unlawfulpleasures, from which it ought to turn away directly, while yet there is no determination that thebad actions are to be done, but only that they are retained with pleasure in remembrance, the woman
as it were can be condemned without the man. Far be it from us to believe this. For here is one
person, one human being, and he as a whole will be condemned, unless those things which, as
lacking the will to do, and yet having the will to please the mind with them, are perceived to besins of thought alone, are pardoned through the grace of the Mediator.778
19. This reasoning, then, whereby we have sought in the mind of each several human being acertain rational wedlock of contemplation and action, with functions distributed through each
776

Rom. vi. 13.
Matt. vi. 12.
778[Augustin here teaches that the inward lust is guilt as well as the outward action prompted by it. This is in accordancewith Matt. v. 28; Acts viii. 21–22; Rom. vii. 7; James i. 14.—W.G.T.S.]
777

222

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

severally, yet with the unity of the mind preserved in both; saving meanwhile the truth of that
history which divine testimony hands down respecting the first two human beings, that is, the man
and his wife, from whom the human species is propagated;779—this reasoning, I say, must be listened
to only thus far, that the apostle may be understood to have intended to signify something to besought in one individual man, by assigning the image of God to the man only, and not also to thewoman, although in the merely different sex of two human beings.

Chapter 13.—The Opinion of Those Who Have Thought that the Mind Was Signified by the Man,
the Bodily Sense by the Woman.

163

20. Nor does it escape me, that some who before us were eminent defenders of the Catholic
faith and expounders of the word of God, while they looked for these two things in one humanbeing, whose entire soul they perceived to be a sort of excellent paradise, asserted that the man was
the mind, but that the woman was the bodily sense. And according to this distribution, by which
the man is assumed to be the mind, but the woman the bodily sense, all things seem aptly to agree
together if they are handled with due attention: unless that it is written, that in all the beasts andflying things there was not found for man an helpmate like to himself; and then the woman wasmade out of his side.780 And on this account I, for my part, have not thought that the bodily sense
should be taken for the woman, which we see to be common to ourselves and to the beasts; but I
have desired to find something which the beasts had not; and I have rather thought the bodily sense
should be understood to be the serpent, whom we read to have been more subtle than all beasts ofthe field.781 For in those natural good things which we see are common to ourselves and to theirrational animals, the sense excels by a kind of living power; not the sense of which it is written
in the epistle addressed to the Hebrews, where we read, that “strong meat belongeth to them thatare of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both goodand evil;”782 for these “senses” belong to the rational nature and pertain to the understanding; butthat sense which is divided into five parts in the body, through which corporeal species and motion
is perceived not only by ourselves, but also by the beasts.
21. But whether that the apostle calls the man the image and glory of God, but the woman theglory of the man,783 is to be received in this, or that, or in any other way; yet it is clear, that when
we live according to God, our mind which is intent on the invisible things of Him ought to be
fashioned with proficiency from His eternity, truth, charity; but that something of our own rational
purpose, that is, of the same mind, must be directed to the using of changeable and corporeal things,
without which this life does not go on; not that we may be conformed to this world,784 by placing
779[Augustin means, that while he has given an allegorical and mystical interpretation to the narrative of the fall, in Genesis,
he also holds to its historical sense.—W.G.T.S.]
780
Gen. ii. 20–22.
781
Gen. iii. 1.
782
Heb. v. 14.
783
1 Cor. xi. 7.
784
Rom. xii. 2.

223

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

our end in such good things, and by forcing the desire of blessedness towards them, but that whatever
we do rationally in the using of temporal things, we may do it with the contemplation of attaining
eternal things, passing through the former, but cleaving to the latter.

Chapter 14.—What is the Difference Between Wisdom and Knowledge. The Worship of God is
the Love of Him. How the Intellectual Cognizance of Eternal Things Comes to Pass ThroughWisdom.
For knowledge also has its own good measure, if that in it which puffs up, or is wont to puff
up, is conquered by love of eternal things, which does not puff up, but, as we know, edifieth.785
Certainly without knowledge the virtues themselves, by which one lives rightly, cannot be possessed,
by which this miserable life may be so governed, that we may attain to that eternal life which istruly blessed.
22. Yet action, by which we use temporal things well, differs from contemplation of eternalthings; and the latter is reckoned to wisdom, the former to knowledge. For although that which is
wisdom can also be called knowledge, as the apostle too speaks, where he says, “Now I know inpart, but then shall I know even as also I am known;”786 when doubtless he meant his words to beunderstood of the knowledge of the contemplation of God, which will be the highest reward of thesaints; yet where he says, “For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom, to another theword of knowledge by the same Spirit,”787 certainly he distinguishes without doubt these two things,
although he does not there explain the difference, nor in what way one may be discerned from theother. But having examined a great number of passages from the Holy Scriptures, I find it written
in the Book of Job, that holy man being the speaker, “Behold, piety, that is wisdom; but to departfrom evil is knowledge.”788 In thus distinguishing, it must be understood that wisdom belongs tocontemplation, knowledge to action. For in this place he meant by piety the worship of God, whichin Greek is called ™ . For the sentence in the Greek mss. has that word. And what is there in
eternal things more excellent than God, of whom alone the nature is unchangeable? And what is
the worship of Him except the love of Him, by which we now desire to see Him, and we believe
and hope that we shall see Him; and in proportion as we make progress, see now through a glassin an enigma, but then in clearness? For this is what the Apostle Paul means by “face to face.”789
This is also what John says, “Beloved, now we are the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what
we shall be; but we know that, when He shall appear, we shall be like Him; for we shall see Him
as He is.”790 Discourse about these and the like subjects seems to me to be the discourse itself of
wisdom. But to depart from evil, which Job says is knowledge, is without doubt of temporal things.
Since it is in reference to time [and this world] that we are in evil, from which we ought to abstain
785
786
787
788
789
790

1 Cor. viii. 1.
1 Cor. xiii. 12.
1 Cor. xii. 8.
Job xxviii. 8.
1 Cor. xiii. 12.
1 John iii. 2.

224

NPNF (V1-03)

164

Philip Schaffthat we may come to those good eternal things. And therefore, whatsoever we do prudently, boldly,
temperately, and justly, belongs to that knowledge or discipline wherewith our action is conversantin avoiding evil and desiring good; and so also, whatsoever we gather by the knowledge that comesfrom inquiry, in the way of examples either to be guarded against or to be imitated, and in the wayof necessary proofs respecting any subject, accommodated to our use.
23. When a discourse then relates to these things, I hold it to be a discourse belonging toknowledge, and to be distinguished from a discourse belonging to wisdom, to which those things
belong, which neither have been, nor shall be, but are; and on account of that eternity in which they
are, are said to have been, and to be, and to be about to be, without any changeableness of times.
For neither have they been in such way as that they should cease to be, nor are they about to be insuch way as if they were not now; but they have always had and always will have that very absolute
being. And they abide, but not as if fixed in some place as are bodies; but as intelligible things inincorporeal nature, they are so at hand to the glance of the mind, as things visible or tangible inplace are to the sense of the body. And not only in the case of sensible things posited in place, there
abide also intelligible and incorporeal reasons of them apart from local space; but also of motions
that pass by in successive times, apart from any transit in time, there stand also like reasons,themselves certainly intelligible, and not sensible. And to attain to these with the eye of the mind
is the lot of few; and when they are attained as much as they can be, he himself who attains to themdoes not abide in them, but is as it were repelled by the rebounding of the eye itself of the mind,
and so there comes to be a transitory thought of a thing not transitory. And yet this transient thought
is committed to the memory through the instructions by which the mind is taught; that the mind
which is compelled to pass from thence, may be able to return thither again; although, if the thought
should not return to the memory and find there what it had committed to it, it would be led thereto
like an uninstructed person, as it had been led before, and would find it where it had first found it,that is to say, in that incorporeal truth, whence yet once more it may be as it were written down
and fixed in the mind. For the thought of man, for example, does not so abide in that incorporeal
and unchangeable reason of a square body, as that reason itself abides: if, to be sure, it could attainto it at all without the phantasy of local space. Or if one were to apprehend the rhythm of any
artificial or musical sound, passing through certain intervals of time, as it rested without time insome secret and deep silence, it could at least be thought as long as that song could be heard; yetwhat the glance of the mind, transient though it was, caught from thence, and, absorbing as it were
into a belly, so laid up in the memory, over this it will be able to rumiuate in some measure byrecollection, and to transfer what it has thus learned into systematic knowledge. But if this has beenblotted out by absolute forgetfulness, yet once again, under the guidance of teaching, one will cometo that which had altogether dropped away, and it will be found such as it was.

Chapter 15.—In Opposition to the Reminiscence of Plato and Pythagoras. Pythagoras the Samian.
Of the Difference Between Wisdom and Knowledge, and of Seeking the Trinity in the Knowledgeof Temporal Things.

225

NPNF (V1-03)

165

Philip Schaff

24. And hence that noble philosopher Plato endeavored to persuade us that the souls of men
lived even before they bare these bodies; and that hence those things which are learnt are rather
remembered, as having been known already, than taken into knowledge as things new. For he has
told us that a boy, when questioned I know not what respecting geometry, replied as if he were
perfectly skilled in that branch of learning. For being questioned step by step and skillfully, he saw
what was to be seen, and said that which he saw.791 But if this had been a recollecting of things
previously known, then certainly every one, or almost every one, would not have been able so toanswer when questioned. For not every one was a geometrician in the former life, since geometricians
are so few among men that scarcely one can be found anywhere. But we ought rather to believe,that the intellectual mind is so formed in its nature as to see those things, which by the dispositionof the Creator are subjoined to things intelligible in a natural order, by a sort of incorporeal lightof an unique kind; as the eye of the flesh sees things adjacent to itself in this bodily light, of whichlight it is made to be receptive, and adapted to it. For none the more does this fleshly eye, too,distinguish black things from white without a teacher, because it had already known them before
it was created in this flesh. Why, lastly, is it possible only in intelligible things that any one properly
questioned should answer according to any branch of learning, although ignorant of it? Why canno one do this with things sensible, except those which he has seen in this his present body, or has
believed the information of others who knew them, whether somebody’s writings or words? For
we must not acquiesce in their story, who assert that the Samian Pythagoras recollected some thingsof this kind, which he had experienced when he was previously here in another body; and others
tell yet of others, that they experienced something of the same sort in their minds: but it may beconjectured that these were untrue recollections, such as we commonly experience in sleep, when
we fancy we remember, as though we had done or seen it, what we never did or saw at all; and thatthe minds of these persons, even though awake, were affected in this way at the suggestion ofmalignant and deceitful spirits, whose care it is to confirm or to sow some false belief concerning
the changes of souls, in order to deceive men. This, I say, may be conjectured from this, that if they
really remembered those things which they had seen here before, while occupying other bodies,
the same thing would happen to many, nay to almost all; since they suppose that as the dead fromthe living, so, without cessation and continually, the living are coming into existence from the dead;as sleepers from those that are awake, and those that are awake from them that sleep.
25. If therefore this is the right distinction between wisdom and knowledge, that the intellectual
cognizance of eternal things belongs to wisdom, but the rational cognizance of temporal things toknowledge, it is not difficult to judge which is to be preferred or postponed to which. But if wemust employ some other distinction by which to know these two apart, which without doubt theapostle teaches us are different, saying, “To one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; toanother the word of knowledge, by the same Spirit:” still the difference between those two which
we have laid down is a most evident one, in that the intellectual cognizance of eternal things is one
thing, the rational cognizance of temporal things another; and no one doubts but that the former is
to be preferred to the latter. As then we leave behind those things which belong to the outer man,and desire to ascend within from those things which we have in common with beasts, before wecome to the cognizance of things intelligible and supreme, which are eternal, the rational cognizance

791[This fine specimen of the “obstetric method” of Socrates is given in Plato’s dialogue, Meno.—W.G.T.S.]

226

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffof temporal things presents itself. Let us then find a trinity in this also, if we can, as we found one
in the senses of the body, and in those things which through them entered in the way of images into
our soul or spirit; so that instead of corporeal things which we touch by corporeal sense, placed asthey are without us, we might have resemblances of bodies impressed within on the memory fromwhich thought might be formed, while the will as a third united them; just as the sight of the eyes
was formed from without, which the will applied to the visible thing in order to produce vision,and united both, while itself also added itself thereto as a third. But this subject must not becompressed into this book; so that in that which follows, if God help, it may be suitably examined,
and the conclusions to which we come may be unfolded.

166

Book XIII.
————————————The inquiry is prosecuted respecting knowledge, in which, as distinguished from wisdom, Augustin
had begun in the former book to look for a kind of trinity. And occasion is taken of commending
Christian faith, and of explaining how the faith of believers is one and common. Next, that alldesire blessedness, yet that all have not the faith whereby we arrive at blessedness; and that
this faith is defined in Christ, who in the flesh rose from the dead; and that no one is set freefrom the dominion of the devil through forgiveness of sins, save through Him. It is shown also
at length that it was needful that the devil should be conquered by Christ, not by power, but by
righteousness. Finally, that when the words of this faith are committed to memory, there is in
the mind a kind of trinity, since there are, first, in the memory the sounds of the words, and thiseven when the man is not thinking of them; and next, the mind’s eye of his recollection is formed
thereupon when he thinks of them; and, lastly, the will, when he so thinks and remembers,
combines both.
Chapter 1.—The Attempt is Made to Distinguish Out of the Scriptures the Offices of Wisdom andof Knowledge. That in the Beginning of John Some Things that are Said Belong to Wisdom,
Some to Knowledge. Some Things There are Only Known by the Help of Faith. How We See
the Faith that is in Us. In the Same Narrative of John, Some Things are Known by the Senseof the Body, Others Only by the Reason of the Mind.
1. In the book before this, viz. the twelfth of this work, we have done enough to distinguish theoffice of the rational mind in temporal things, wherein not only our knowing but our action isconcerned, from the more excellent office of the same mind, which is employed in contemplating
eternal things, and is limited to knowing alone. But I think it more convenient that I should insert
somewhat out of the Holy Scriptures, by which the two may more easily be distinguished.
2. John the Evangelist has thus begun his Gospel: “In the beginning was the Word, and theWord was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things
227

NPNF (V1-03)

167

Philip Schaff

were made by Him; and without was Him not anything made that was made. In Him was life; andthe life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it
not. There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. The same came for a witness, to bear
witness of the Light, that all men through Him might believe. He was not that Light, but was sent
to bear witness of that Light. That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into
the world. He was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and the world knew Him not. He
came unto His own, and His own received Him not. But as many as received Him, to them gave
He power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on His name: which were born,
not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. And the Word wasmade flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only-begotten of the
Father), full of grace and truth.”792 This entire passage, which I have here taken from the Gospel,
contains in its earlier portions what is immutable and eternal, the contemplation of which makes
us blessed; but in those which follow, eternal things are mentioned in conjunction with temporalthings. And hence some things there belong to knowledge, some to wisdom, according to ourprevious distinction in the twelfth book. For the words,—“In the beginning was the Word, and theWord 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 that was made. In Him was life; andthe life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehended it
not:”—require a contemplative life, and must be discerned by the intellectual mind; and the more
any one has profited in this, the wiser without doubt will he become. But on account of the verse,“The light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not,” faith certainly was necessary,
whereby that which was not seen might be believed. For by “darkness” he intended to signify thehearts of mortals turned away from light of this kind, and hardly able to behold it; for which reason
he subjoins, “There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. The same came for a witness,to bear witness of the Light, that all men through Him might believe.” But here we come to a thingthat was done in time, and belongs to knowledge, which is comprised in the cognizance of facts.
And we think of the man John under that phantasy which is impressed on our memory from thenotion of human nature. And whether men believe or not, they think this in the same manner. For
both alike know what man is, the outer part of whom, that is, his body, they have learned throughthe eyes of the body; but of the inner, that is, the soul, they possess the knowledge in themselves,because they also themselves are men, and through intercourse with men; so that they are able tothink what is said, “There was a man, whose name was John,” because they know the names also
by interchange of speech. But that which is there also, viz. “sent from God,” they who hold at all,hold by faith; and they who do not hold it by faith, either hesitate through doubt, or deride it throughunbelief. Yet both, if they are not in the number of those over-foolish ones, who say in their heart“There is no God,”793 when they hear these words, think both things, viz. both what God is, andwhat it is to be sent from God; and if they do not do this as the things themselves really are, they
do it at any rate as they can.
3. Further, we know from other sources the faith itself which a man sees to be in his own heart,
if he believes, or not to be there, if he does not believe: but not as we know bodies, which we seewith the bodily eyes, and think of even when absent through the images of themselves which we
792
793

John i. 1–14.
Ps. xiv. 1.

228

NPNF (V1-03)

168

Philip Schaff

retain in memory; nor yet as those things which we have not seen, and which we frame howsoever
we can in thought from those which we have seen, and commit them to memory, that we may recur
to them when we will, in order that therein we may similarly by recollection discern them, or rather
discern the images of them, of what sort soever these are which we have fixed there; nor again asa living man, whose soul we do not indeed see, but conjecture from our own, and from corporeal
motions gaze also in thought upon the living man, as we have learnt him by sight. Faith as not soseen in the heart in which it is, by him whose it is; but most certain knowledge holds it fast, andconscience proclaims it. Although therefore we are bidden to believe on this account, because wecannot see what we are bidden to believe; nevertheless we see faith itself in ourselves, when thatfaith is in us; because faith even in absent things is present, and faith in things which are without
us is within, and faith in things which are not seen is itself seen, and itself none the less comes into
the hearts of men in time; and if any cease to be faithful and become unbelievers, then it perishes
from them. And sometimes faith is accommodated even to falsehoods; for we sometimes so speak
as to say, I put faith in him, and he deceived me. And this kind of faith, if indeed it too is to becalled faith, perishes from the heart without blame, when truth is found and expels it. But faith inthings that are true, passes, as one should wish it to pass, into the things themselves. For we must
not say that faith perishes, when those things which were believed are seen. For is it indeed still to
be called faith, when faith, according to the definition in the Epistle to the Hebrews, is the evidenceof things not seen?794
4. In the words which follow next, “The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light,that all men through him might believe;” the action, as we have said, is one done in time. For tobear witness even to that which is eternal, as is that light that is intelligible, is a thing done in time.
And of this it was that John came to bear witness who “was not that Light, but was sent to bear
witness of that Light.” For he adds “That was the true Light that lighteth every man that cometh
into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and the world knew Him
not. He came unto His own, and His own received Him not.” Now they who know the Latin
language, understand all these words, from those things which they know: and of these, some havebecome known to us through the senses of the body, as man, as the world itself, of which thegreatness is so evident to our sight; as again the sounds of the words themselves, for hearing also
is a sense of the body; and some through the reason of the mind, as that which is said, “And His
own received Him not;” for this means, that they did not believe in Him; and what belief is, we do
not know by any sense of the body, but by the reason of the mind. We have learned, too, not thesounds, but the meanings of the words themselves, partly through the sense of the body, partly
through the reason of the mind. Nor have we now heard those words for the first time, but they arewords we had heard before. And we were retaining in our memory as things known, and we here
recognized, not only the words themselves, but also what they meant. For when the bisyllabic wordmundus is uttered, then something that is certainly corporeal, for it is a sound, has become known
through the body, that is, through the ear. But that which it means also, has become known throughthe body, that is, through the eyes of the flesh. For so far as the world is known to us at all, it is
known through sight. But the quadri-syllabic word crediderunt reaches us, so far as its sound, sincethat is a corporeal thing, through the ear of the flesh; but its meaning is discoverable by no sense

794

Heb. xi. 1.

229

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffof the body, but by the reason of the mind. For unless we knew through the mind what the word
crediderunt meant, we should not understand what they did not do, of whom it is said, “And His
own received Him not.” The sound then of the word rings upon the ears of the body from without,and reaches the sense which is called hearing. The species also of man is both known to us in
ourselves, and is presented to the senses of the body from without, in other men; to the eyes, when
it is seen; to the ears, when it is heard; to the touch, when it is held and touched; and it has, too, its
image in our memory, incorporeal indeed, but like the body. Lastly, the wonderful beauty of theworld itself is at hand from without, both to our gaze, and to that sense which is called touch, if wecome in contact with any of it: and this also has its image within in our memory, to which we revert,
when we think of it either in the enclosure of a room, or again in darkness. But we have alreadysufficiently spoken in the eleventh book of these images of corporeal things; incorporeal indeed,
yet having the likeness of bodies, and belonging to the life of the outer man. But we are treating
now of the inner man, and of his knowledge, namely, that knowledge which is of things temporaland changeable; into the purpose and scope of which, when anything is assumed, even of things
belonging to the outer man, it must be assumed for this end, that something may thence be taught
which may help rational knowledge. And hence the rational use of those things which we have incommon with irrational animals belongs to the inner man; neither can it rightly be said that this iscommon to us with the irrational animals.

Chapter 2.—Faith a Thing of the Heart, Not of the Body; How It is Common and One and the Samein All Believers. The Faith of Believers is One, No Otherwise than the Will of Those Who Will
is One.

169

5. But faith, of which we are compelled, by reason of the arrangement of our subject, to dispute
somewhat more at length in this book: faith I say, which they who have are called the faithful, andthey who have not, unbelievers, as were those who did not receive the Son of God coming to His
own; although it is wrought in us by hearing, yet does not belong to that sense of the body whichis called hearing, since it is not a sound; nor to the eyes of this our flesh, since it is neither color
nor bodily form; nor to that which is called touch, since it has nothing of bulk; nor to any sense of
the body at all, since it is a thing of the heart, not of the body; nor is it without apart from us, but
deeply seated within us; nor does any man see it in another, but each one in himself. Lastly, it is athing that can both be feigned by pretence, and be thought to be in him in whom it is not. Therefore
every one sees his own faith in himself; but does not see, but believes, that it is in another; andbelieves this the more firmly, the more he knows the fruits of it, which faith is wont to work bylove.795 And therefore this faith is common to all of whom the evangelist subjoins, “But as manyas received Him, to them gave He power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on
His name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but
of God;” common I say, not as any form of a bodily object is common, as regards sight, to the eyesof all to whom it is present, for in some way the gaze of all that behold it is informed by the same

795

Gal. v. 6.

230

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

one form; but as the human countenance can be said to be common to all men; for this is so said
that yet each certainly has his own. We say certainly with perfect truth, that the faith of believers
is impressed from one doctrine upon the heart of each several person who believes the same thing.
But that which is believed is a different thing from the faith by which it is believed. For the former
is in things which are said either to be, or to have been or to be about to be; but the latter is in themind of the believer, and is visible to him only whose it is; although not indeed itself but a faith
like it, is also in others. For it is not one in number, but in kind; yet on account of the likeness, andthe absence of all difference, we rather call it one than many. For when, too, we see two men
exceedingly alike, we wonder, and say that both have one countenance. It is therefore more easily
said that the souls were many,—a several soul, of course, for each several person—of whom weread in the Acts of the Apostles, that they were of one soul,796—than it is, where the apostle speaksof “one faith,”797 for any one to venture to say that there are as many faiths as there are faithful.
And yet He who says, “O woman, great is thy faith;”798 and to another, “O thou of little faith,
wherefore didst thou doubt?”799 intimates that each has his own faith. But the like faith of believers
is said to be one, in the same way as a like will of those who will is said to be one; since in the casealso of those who have the same will, the will of each is visible to himself, but that of the other is
not visible, although he wills the same thing; and if it intimate itself by any signs, it is believed
rather than seen. But each being conscious of his own mind certainly does not believe, but manifestly
sees outright, that this is his own will.

Chapter 3.—Some Desires Being the Same in All, are Known to Each. The Poet Ennius.
6. There is, indeed, so closely conspiring a harmony in the same nature living and using reason,that although one knows not what the other wills, yet there are some wills of all which are also
known to each; and although each man does not know what any other one man wills, yet in somethings he may know what all will. And hence comes that story of the comic actor’s witty joke, who
promised that he would say in the theatre, in some other play, what all had in their minds, and what
all willed; and when a still greater crowd had come together on the day appointed, with great
expectation, all being in suspense and silent, is affirmed to have said: You will to buy cheap, andsell dear. And mean actor though he was, yet all in his words recognized what themselves wereconscious of, and applauded him with wonderful goodwill, for saying before the eyes of all what
was confessedly true, yet what no one looked for. And why was so great expectation raised by his
promising that he would say what was the will of all, unless because no man knows the wills ofother men? But did not he know that will? Is there any one who does not know it? Yet why, unlessbecause there are some things which not unfitly each conjectures from himself to be in others,
through sympathy or agreement either in vice or virtue? But it is one thing to see one’s own will;

796
797
798
799

Acts iv. 32.
Eph. iv. 5.
Matt. xv. 28.
Matt. xiv. 31.

231

NPNF (V1-03)

170

Philip Schaff

another to conjecture, however certainly, what is another’s. For, in human affairs, I am as certainthat Rome was built as that Constantinople was, although I have seen Rome with my eyes, but
know nothing of the other city, except what I have believed on the testimony of others. And truly
that comic actor believed it to be common to all to will to buy cheap and sell dear, either by observing
himself or by making experiment also of others. But since such a will is in truth a fault, every one
can attain the counter virtue, or run into the mischief of some other fault which is contrary to it,
whereby to resist and conquer it. For I myself know a case where a manuscript was offered to a
man for purchase, who perceived that the vendor was ignorant of its value, and was therefore asking
something very small, and who thereupon gave him, though not expecting it, the just price, which
was much more. Suppose even the case of a man possessed with wickedness so great as to sellcheap what his parents left to him, and to buy dear, in order to waste it on his own lusts? Suchwanton extravagance, I fancy, is not incredible; and if such men are sought, they may be found, oreven fall in one’s way although not sought; who, by a wickedness more than that of the theatre,
make a mock of the theatrical proposition or declaration, by buying dishonor at a great price, while
selling lands at a small one. We have heard, too, of persons that, for the sake of distribution, havebought corn at a higher price, and sold it to their fellow-citizens at a lower one. And note also what
the old poet Ennius has said: that “all mortals wish themselves to be praised;” wherein, doubtless,he conjectured what was in others, both by himself, and by those whom he knew by experience;and so seems to have declared what it is that all men will. Lastly, if that comic actor himself, too,
had said, You all will to be praised, no one of you wills to be abused; he would have seemed inlike manner to have expressed what all will. Yet there are some who hate their own faults, and do
not desire to be praised by others for that for which they are displeased with themselves; and who
thank the kindness of those who rebuke them, when the purpose of that rebuke is their own
amendment. But if he had said, You all will to be blessed, you do not will to be wretched; he would
have said something which there is no one that would not recognize in his own will. For whateverelse a man may will secretly, he does not withdraw from that will, which is well known to all men,
and well known to be in all men.

Chapter 4.—The Will to Possess Blessedness is One in All, But the Variety of Wills is Very Great
Concerning that Blessedness Itself.
7. It is wonderful, however, since the will to obtain and retain blessedness is one in all, whencecomes, on the other hand, such a variety and diversity of wills concerning that blessedness itself;
not that any one is unwilling to have it, but that all do not know it. For if all knew it, it would not
be thought by some to be in goodness of mind; by others, in pleasure of body; by others, in both;and by some in one thing, by others in another. For as men find special delight in this thing or that,so have they placed in it their idea of a blessed life. How, then, do all love so warmly what not all
know? Who can love what he does not know?—a subject which I have already discussed in thepreceding books.800 Why, therefore, is blessedness loved by all, when it is not known by all? Is it

800

Bks. viii. c. 4, etc., x. c. 1.

232

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

perhaps that all know what it is itself, but all do not know where it is to be found, and that the
dispute arises from this?—as if, forsooth, the business was about some place in this world, where
every one ought to will to live who wills to live blessedly; and as if the question where blessedness
is were not implied in the question what it is. For certainly, if it is in the pleasure of the body, heis blessed who enjoys the pleasure of the body; if in goodness of mind, he has it who enjoys this;
if in both, he who enjoys both. When, therefore, one says, to live blessedly is to enjoy the pleasureof the body; but another, to live blessedly is to enjoy goodness of mind; is it not, that either bothknow, or both do not know, what a blessed life is? How, then, do both love it, if no one can love
what he does not know? Or is that perhaps false which we have assumed to be most true and mostcertain, viz. that all men will to live blessedly? For if to live blessedly is, for argument’s sake, tolive according to goodness of mind, how does he will to live blessedly who does not will this?
Should we not say more truly, That man does not will to live blessedly, because he does not wish
to live according to goodness, which alone is to live blessedly? Therefore all men do not will tolive blessedly; on the contrary, few wish it; if to live blessedly is nothing else but to live according
to goodness of mind, which many do not will to do. Shall we, then, hold that to be false of which
the Academic Cicero himself did not doubt (although Academics doubt every thing), who, when
he wanted in the dialogue Hortensius to find some certain thing, of which no one doubted, fromwhich to start his argument, says, We certainly all will to be blessed? Far be it from me to say thisis false. But what then? Are we to say that, although there is no other way of living blessedly thanliving according to goodness of mind, yet even he who does not will this, wills to live blessedly?
This, indeed, seems too absurd. For it is much as if we should say, Even he who does not will tolive blessedly, wills to live blessedly. Who could listen to, who could endure, such a contradiction?
And yet necessity thrusts us into this strait, if it is both true that all will to live blessedly, and yet
all do not will to live in that way in which alone one can live blessedly.

Chapter 5.—Of the Same Thing.

171

8. Or is, perhaps, the deliverance from our difficulties to be found in this, that, since we havesaid that every one places his idea of a blessed life in that which has most pleased him, as pleasurepleased Epicurus, and goodness Zeno, and something else pleased other people, we say that to live
blessedly is nothing else but to live according to one’s own pleasure: so that it is not false that all
will to live blessedly, because all will that which pleases each? For if this, too, had been proclaimed
to the people in the theatre, all would have found it in their own wills. But when Cicero, too, hadpropounded this in opposition to himself, he so refuted it as to make them blush who thought so.
For he says: “But, behold! people who are not indeed philosophers, but who yet are prompt todispute, say that all are blessed, whoever live as they will;” which is what we mean by, as pleases
each. But by and by he has subjoined: “But this is indeed false. For to will what is not fitting, isitself most miserable; neither is it so miserable not to obtain what one wills, as to will to obtainwhat one ought not.” Most excellently and altogether most truly does he speak. For who can be soblind in his mind, so alienated from all light of decency, and wrapped up in the darkness ofindecency, as to call him blessed, because he lives as he will, who lives wickedly and disgracefully;233

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

and with no one restraining him, no one punishing, and no one daring even to blame him, nay more,too, with most people praising him, since, as divine Scripture says, “The wicked is praised in hisheart’s desire: and he who works iniquity is blessed,”801 gratifies all his most criminal and flagitious
desires; when, doubtless, although even so he would be wretched, yet he would be less wretched,
if he could have had nothing of those things which he had wrongly willed? For every one is madewretched by a wicked will also, even though it stop short with will but more wretched by the powerby which the longing of a wicked will is fulfilled. And, therefore, since it is true that all men will
to be blessed, and that they seek for this one thing with the most ardent love, and on account of thisseek everything which they do seek; nor can any one love that of which he does not know at all
what or of what sort it is, nor can be ignorant what that is which he knows that he wills; it follows
that all know a blessed life. But all that are blessed have what they will, although not all who havewhat they will are forewith blessed. But they are forewith wretched, who either have not what they
will, or have that which they do not rightly will. Therefore he only is a blessed man, who both has
all things which he wills, and wills nothing ill.

Chapter 6.—Why, When All Will to Be Blessed, that is Rather Chosen by Which One Withdraws
from Being So.
9. Since, then, a blessed life consists of these two things, and is known to all, and dear to all;what can we think to be the cause why, when they cannot have both, men choose, out of these two,to have all things that they will, rather than to will all things well, even although they do not havethem? Is it the depravity itself of the human race, in such wise that, while they are not unaware thatneither is he blessed who has not what he wills, nor he who has what he wills wrongly, but he whoboth has whatsoever good things he wills, and wills no evil ones, yet, when both are not grantedof those two things in which the blessed life consists, that is rather chosen by which one is withdrawn
the more from a blessed life (since he certainly is further from it who obtains things which hewickedly desired, than he who only does not obtain the things which he desired); whereas the good
will ought rather to be chosen, and to be preferred, even if it do not obtain the things which it seeks?
For he comes near to being a blessed man, who wills well whatsoever he wills, and wills things,
which when he obtains, he will be blessed. And certainly not bad things, but good, make men
blessed, when they do so make them. And of good things he already has something, and that, too,a something not to be lightly esteemed,—namely, the very good will itself; who longs to rejoice inthose good things of which human nature is capable, and not in the performance or the attainmentof any evil; and who follows diligently, and attains as much as he can, with a prudent, temperate,courageous, and right mind, such good things as are possible in the present miserable life; so as tobe good even in evils, and when all evils have been put an end to, and all good things fulfilled, thento be blessed.

801

Ps. x. 3.

234

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 7.—Faith is Necessary, that Man May at Some Time Be Blessed, Which He Will Only
Attain in the Future Life. The Blessedness of Proud Philosophers Ridiculous and Pitiable.

172

10. And on this account, faith, by which men believe in God, is above all things necessary inthis mortal life, most full as it is of errors and hardships. For there are no good things whatever,
and above all, not those by which any one is made good, or those by which he will become blessed,of which any other source can be found whence they come to man, and are added to man, unless
it be from God. But when he who is good and faithful in these miseries shall have come from thislife to the blessed life, then will truly come to pass what now is absolutely impossible,—namely,that a man may live as he will.802 For he will not will to live badly in the midst of that felicity, norwill he will anything that will be wanting, nor will there be wanting anything which he shall havewilled. Whatever shall be loved, will be present; nor will that be longed for, which shall not bepresent. Everything which will be there will be good, and the supreme God will be the supremegood and will be present for those to enjoy who love Him; and what altogether is most blessed, it
will be certain that it will be so forever. But now, indeed, philosophers have made for themselves,
according to the pleasure of each, their own ideals of a blessed life; that they might be able, as itwere by their own power, to do that, which by the common conditions of mortals they were notable to do,—namely, to live as they would. For they felt that no one could be blessed otherwise
than by having what he would, and by suffering nothing which he would not. And who would not
will, that the life whatsoever it be, with which he is delighted, and which he therefore calls blessed,
were so in his own power, that he could have it continually? And yet who is in this condition? Whowills to suffer troubles in order that he may endure them manfully, although he both wills and isable to endure them if he does suffer them? Who would will to live in torments, even although heis able to live laudably by holding fast to righteousness in the midst of them through patience? They
who have endured these evils, either in wishing to have or in fearing to lose what they loved, whether
wickedly or laudably, have thought of them as transitory. For many have stretched boldly throughtransitory evils to good things which will last. And these, doubtless, are blessed through hope, evenwhile actually suffering such transitory evils, through which they arrive at good things which will
not be transitory. But he who is blessed through hope is not yet blessed: for he expects, throughpatience, a blessedness which he does not yet grasp. Whereas he, on the other hand, who is tormented
without any such hope, without any such reward, let him use as much endurance as he pleases, is
not truly blessed, but bravely miserable. For he is not on that account not miserable, because hewould be more so if he also bore misery impatiently. Further, even if he does not suffer those things
which he would not will to suffer in his own body, not even then is he to be esteemed blessed,
inasmuch as he does not live as he wills. For to omit other things, which, while the body remains
unhurt, belong to those annoyances of the mind, without which we should will to live, and which
are innumerable; he would will, at any rate, if he were able, so to have his body safe and sound,and so to suffer no inconveniences from it, as to have it within his own control, or even to have itwith an imperishableness of the body itself; and because he does not possess this, and hangs in

802[The prophet Nathan enunciates the same truth, in his words to David, “Go do all that is in thine heart; for the Lord iswith thee.” 2 Sam. vii. 3.—W.G.T.S.]

235

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

doubt about it, he certainly does not live as he wills. For although he may be ready from fortitude
to accept, and bear with an equal mind, whatever adversities may happen to him, yet he had rather
they should not happen, and prevents them if he is able; and he is in such way ready for bothalternatives, that, as much as is in him, he wishes for the one and shuns the other; and if he havefallen into that which he shuns, he therefore bears it willingly, because that could not happen which
he willed. He bears it, therefore, in order that he may not be crushed; but he would not willingly
be even burdened. How, then, does he live as he wills? Is it because he is willingly strong to bear
what he would not will to be put upon him? Then he only wills what he can, because he cannot
have what he wills. And here is the sum-total of the blessedness of proud mortals, I know notwhether to be laughed at, or not rather to be pitied, who boast that they live as they will, because
they willingly bear patiently what they are unwilling should happen to them. For this, they say, islike Terence’s wise saying,—“Since that cannot be which you will, will that which thou canst.”803
That this is aptly said, who denies? But it is advice given to the miserable man, that he may not
be more miserable. And it is not rightly or truly said to the blessed man, such as all wish themselves
to be, That cannot be which you will. For if he is blessed, whatever he wills can be; since he does
not will that which cannot be. But such a life is not for this mortal state, neither will it come to passunless when immortality also shall come to pass. And if this could not be given at all to man,blessedness too would be sought in vain, since it cannot be without immortality.

Chapter 8.—Blessedness Cannot Exist Without Immortality.

173

803

11. As, therefore, all men will to be blessed, certainly, if they will truly, they will also to be
immortal; for otherwise they could not be blessed. And further, if questioned also concerning
immortality, as before concerning blessedness, all reply that they will it. But blessedness of what
quality soever, such as is not so, but rather is so called, is sought, nay indeed is feigned in this life,
whilst immortality is despaired of, without which true blessedness cannot be. Since he lives blessedly,
as we have already said before, and have sufficiently proved and concluded, who lives as he wills,
and wills nothing wrongly. But no one wrongly wills immortality, if human nature is by God’s gift
capable of it; and if it is not capable of it, it is not capable of blessedness. For, that a man may live
blessedly, he must needs live. And if life quits him by his dying, how can a blessed life remain withhim? And when it quits him, without doubt it either quits him unwilling, or willing, or neither. If
unwilling, how is the life blessed which is so within his will as not to be within his power? And
whereas no one is blessed who wills something that he does not have, how much less is he blessed
who is quitted against his will, not by honor, nor by possessions, nor by any other thing, but by theblessed life itself, since he will have no life at all? And hence, although no feeling is left for his
life to be thereby miserable (for the blessed life quits him, because life altogether quits him), yet
he is wretched as long as he feels, because he knows that against his will that is being destroyed

Andreia, Act ii. Scene i, v. 5, 6.

236

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

for the sake of which he loves all else, and which he loves beyond all else. A life therefore cannot
both be blessed, and yet quit a man against his will, since no one becomes blessed against his will;
and hence how much more does it make a man miserable by quitting him against his will, when it
would make him miserable if he had it against his will! But if it quit him with his will, even so how
was that a blessed life, which he who had it willed should perish? It remains then for them to say,that neither of these is in the mind of the blessed man; that is, that he is neither unwilling nor willing
to be quitted by a blessed life, when through death life quits him altogether; for that he stands firmwith an even heart, prepared alike for either alternative. But neither is that a blessed life which issuch as to be unworthy of his love whom it makes blessed. For how is that a blessed life which theblessed man does not love? Or how is that loved, of which it is received indifferently, whether it
is to flourish or to perish? Unless perhaps the virtues, which we love in this way on account of
blessedness alone, venture to persuade us that we do not love blessedness itself. Yet if they did
this, we should certainly leave off loving the virtues themselves, when we do not love that on
account of which alone we loved them. And further, how will that opinion be true, which has been
so tried, and sifted, and thoroughly strained, and is so certain, viz. that all men will to be blessed,
if they themselves who are already blessed neither will nor do not will to be blessed? Or if they
will it, as truth proclaims, as nature constrains, in which indeed the supremely good and unchangeably
blessed Creator has implanted that will: if, I say, they will to be blessed who are blessed, certainly
they do not will to be not blessed. But if they do not will not to be blessed, without doubt they do
not will to be annihilated and perish in regard to their blessedness. But they cannot be blessed
except they are alive; therefore they do not will so to perish in regard to their life. Therefore, whoever
are either truly blessed or desire to be so, will to be immortal. But he does not live blessedly who
has not that which he wills. Therefore it follows that in no way can life be truly blessed unless it
be eternal.

Chapter 9.—We Say that Future Blessedness is Truly Eternal, Not Through Human Reasonings,
But by the Help of Faith. The Immortality of Blessedness Becomes Credible from the Incarnationof the Son of God.
12. Whether human nature can receive this, which yet it confesses to be desirable, is no small
question. But if faith be present, which is in those to whom Jesus has given power to become thesons of God, then there is no question. Assuredly, of those who endeavor to discover it from humanreasonings, scarcely a few, and they endued with great abilities, and abounding in leisure, andlearned with the most subtle learning, have been able to attain to the investigation of the immortalityof the soul alone. And even for the soul they have not found a blessed life that is stable, that is,true; since they have said that it returns to the miseries of this life even after blessedness. And theyamong them who are ashamed of this opinion, and have thought that the purified soul is to be placedin eternal happiness without a body, hold such opinions concerning the past eternity of the world,
as to confute this opinion of theirs concerning the soul; a thing which here it is too long todemonstrate; but it has been, as I think, sufficiently explained by us in the twelfth book of the City

237

NPNF (V1-03)

174

Philip Schaffof God.804 But that faith promises, not by human reasoning, but by divine authority, that the wholeman, who certainly consists of soul and body, shall be immortal, and on this account truly blessed.
And so, when it had been said in the Gospel, that Jesus has given “power to become the sons of
God to them who received Him;” and what it is to have received Him had been shortly explainedby saying, “To them that believe on His name;” and it was further added in what way they are to
become sons of God, viz., “Which were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of thewill of man, but of God;”—lest that infirmity of men which we all see and bear should despair ofattaining so great excellence, it is added in the same place, “And the Word was made flesh, anddwelt among us;”805 that, on the contrary, men might be convinced of that which seemed incredible.
For if He who is by nature the Son of God was made the Son of man through mercy for the sakeof the sons of men,—for this is what is meant by “The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us”
men,—how much more credible is it that the sons of men by nature should be made the sons ofGod by the grace of God, and should dwell in God, in whom alone and from whom alone the blessedcan be made partakers of that immortality; of which that we might be convinced, the Son of God
was made partaker of our mortality?

Chapter 10.—There Was No Other More Suitable Way of Freeing Man from the Misery of Mortality
Than The Incarnation of the Word. The Merits Which are Called Ours are the Gifts of God.
13. Those then who say, What, had God no other way by which He might free men from themisery of this mortality, that He should will the only-begotten Son, God co-eternal with Himself,
to become man, by putting on a human soul and flesh, and being made mortal to endure
death?—these, I say, it is not enough so to refute, as to assert that that mode by which God deigns
to free us through the Mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus, is good and suitable to the
dignity of God; but we must show also, not indeed that no other mode was possible to God, towhose power all things are equally subject, but that there neither was nor need have been any othermode more appropriate for curing our misery. For what was so necessary for the building up of ourhope, and for the freeing the minds of mortals cast down by the condition of mortality itself, fromdespair of immortality, than that it should be demonstrated to us at how great a price God rated us,
and how greatly He loved us? But what is more manifest and evident in this so great proof hereof,
than that the Son of God, unchangeably good, remaining what He was in Himself, and receivingfrom us and for us what He was not, apart from any loss of His own nature, and deigning to enter
into the fellowship of ours, should first, without any evil desert of His own, bear our evils; and sowith unobligated munificence should bestow His own gifts upon us, who now believe how much
God loves us, and who now hope that of which we used to despair, without any good deserts of
our own, nay, with our evil deserts too going before?

804
805

C. 20.
John i. 12–14.

238

NPNF (V1-03)

175

Philip Schaff

14. Since those also which are called our deserts, are His gifts. For, that faith may work bylove,806 “the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.”807
And He was then given, when Jesus was glorified by the resurrection. For then He promised that
He Himself would send Him, and He sent Him;808 because then, as it was written and foretold ofHim, “He ascended up on high, He led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.”809 These gifts
constitute our deserts, by which we arrive at the chief good of an immortal blessedness. “But God,”says the apostle, “commendeth His love towards as, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ diedfor us. Much more, then, being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath throughHim.” To this he goes on to add, “For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by
the death of His Son; much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.” Those whom
he first calls sinners he afterwards calls the enemies of God; and those whom he first speaks of as
justified by His blood, he afterwards speaks of as reconciled by the death of the Son of God; andthose whom he speaks of first as saved from wrath through Him, he afterwards speaks of as saved
by His life. We were not, therefore, before that grace merely anyhow sinners, but in such sins that
we were enemies of God. But the same apostle calls us above several times by two appellations,viz. sinners and enemies of God,—one as if the most mild, the other plainly the most harsh,—saying,“For if when we were yet weak, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.”810 Those whom he called
weak, the same he called ungodly. Weakness seems something slight; but sometimes it is such as
to be called impiety. Yet except it were weakness, it would not need a physician, who is in the
Hebrew Jesus, in the Greek, but in our speech Saviour. And this word the Latin language had
not previously, but could have seeing that it could have it when it wanted it. And this foregoingsentence of the apostle, where he says, “For when we were yet weak, in due time He died for theungodly,” coheres with those two following sentences; in the one of which he spoke of sinners, inthe other of enemies of God, as though he referred each severally to each, viz. sinners to the weak,the enemies of God to the ungodly.

Chapter 11.—A Difficulty, How We are Justitified in the Blood of the Son of God.
15. But what is meant by “justified in His blood?” What power is there in this blood, I beseech
you, that they who believe should be justified in it? And what is meant by “being reconciled by thedeath of His Son?” Was it indeed so, that when God the Father was wroth with us, He saw the deathof His Son for us, and was appeased towards us? Was then His Son already so far appeased towards
us, that He even deigned to die for us; while the Father was still so far wroth, that except His Sondied for us, He would not be appeased? And what, then, is that which the same teacher of the
Gentiles himself says in another place: “What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us,
who can be against us? He that spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all; how has
806
807
808
809
810

Gal. v. 5.
Rom. v. 4, 5.
John xx. 22, vii. 39, and xv. 26.
Eph. iv. 8 and Ps. lxviii. 18.
Rom. v. 6–10.

239

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

He not with Him also freely given us all things?”811 Pray, unless the Father had been alreadyappeased, would He have delivered up His own Son, not sparing Him for us? Does not this opinion
seem to be as it were contrary to that? In the one, the Son dies for us, and the Father is reconciled
to us by His death; in the other, as though the Father first loved us, He Himself on our account does
not spare the Son, He Himself for us delivers Him up to death. But I see that the Father loved us
also before, not only before the Son died for us, but before He created the world; the apostle himself
being witness, who says, “According as He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of theworld.”812 Nor was the Son delivered up for us as it were unwillingly, the Father Himself not sparing
Him; for it is said also concerning Him, “Who loved me, and delivered up Himself for me.”813
Therefore together both the Father and the Son, and the Spirit of both, work all things equally andharmoniously; yet we are justified in the blood of Christ, and we are reconciled to God by the deathof His Son. And I will explain, as I shall be able, here also, how this was done, as much as may
seem sufficient.

Chapter 12.—All, on Account of the Sin of Adam, Were Delivered into the Power of the Devil.
16. By the justice of God in some sense, the human race was delivered into the power of thedevil; the sin of the first man passing over originally into all of both sexes in their birth throughconjugal union, and the debt of our first parents binding their whole posterity. This delivering up
is first signified in Genesis, where, when it had been said to the serpent, “Dust shalt thou eat,” it
was said to the man, “Dust thou art, and unto dust thou shall return.”814 In the words, “Unto dust
shalt thou return,” the death of the body is fore-announced, because he would not have experienced
that either, if he had continued to the end upright as he was made; but in that it is said to him whilst
still living, “Dust thou art,” it is shown that the whole man was changed for the worse. For “Dustthou art” is much the same as, “My spirit shall not always remain in these men, for that they also
are flesh.”815 Therefore it was at that time shown, that he was delivered to him, in that it had been
said to him, “Dust shall thou eat.” But the apostle declares this more clearly, where he says: “Andyou who were dead in trespasses and sins, wherein in time past ye walked according to the courseof this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in thechildren of unfaithfulness; among whom we also had our conversation in times past, in the lusts ofour flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children ofwrath, even as others.”816 The “children of unfaithfulness” are the unbelievers; and who is not thisbefore he becomes a believer? And therefore all men are originally under the prince of the powerof the air, “who worketh in the children of unfaithfulness.” And that which I have expressed by“originally” is the same that the apostle expresses when he speaks of themselves who “by nature”
811
812
813
814
815
816

Rom. viii. 31, 32.
Eph. i. 4.
Gal. ii. 20.
Gen. iii. 14–19.
Gen. vi. 3. “Strive with man,” A.V.
Eph. ii. 1–3.

240

NPNF (V1-03)

176

Philip Schaff

were as others; viz. by nature as it has been depraved by sin, not as it was created upright from the
beginning. But the way in which man was thus delivered into the power of the devil, ought not tobe so understood as if God did this, or commanded it to be done; but that He only permitted it, yetthat justly. For when He abandoned the sinner, the author of the sin immediately entered. Yet God
did not certainly so abandon His own creature as not to show Himself to him as God creating andquickening, and among penal evils bestowing also many good things upon the evil. For He hathnot in anger shut up His tender mercies.817 Nor did He dismiss man from the law of His own power,
when He permitted him to be in the power of the devil; since even the devil himself is not separated
from the power of the Omnipotent, as neither from His goodness. For whence do even the evilangels subsist in whatever manner of life they have, except through Him who quickens all things?
If, therefore, the commission of sins through the just anger of God subjected man to the devil,
doubtless the remission of sins through the merciful reconciliation of God rescues man from thedevil.

Chapter 13.—Man Was to Be Rescued from the Power of the Devil, Not by Power, But by
Righteousness.
17. But the devil was to be overcome, not by the power of God, but by His righteousness. For
what is more powerful than the Omnipotent? Or what creature is there of which the power can becompared to the power of the Creator? But since the devil, by the fault of his own perversity, wasmade a lover of power, and a forsaker and assailant of righteousness,—for thus also men imitate
him so much the more in proportion as they set their hearts on power, to the neglect or even hatredof righteousness, and as they either rejoice in the attainment of power, or are inflamed by the lustof it,—it pleased God, that in order to the rescuing of man from the grasp of the devil, the devil
should be conquered, not by power, but by righteousness; and that so also men, imitating Christ,should seek to conquer the devil by righteousness, not by power. Not that power is to be shunned
as as though it were something evil; but the order must be preserved, whereby righteousness isbefore it. For how great can be the power of mortals? Therefore let mortals cleave to righteousness;
power will be given to immortals. And compared to this, the power, how great soever, of thosemen who are called powerful on earth, is found to be ridiculous weakness, and a pitfall is dug there
for the sinner, where the wicked seem to be most powerful. And the righteous man says in his song,“Blessed is the man whom Thou chasteneth, O Lord, and teachest him out of Thy law: that Thoumayest give him rest from the days of adversity, until the pit be digged for the wicked. For the Lord
will not cast off His people, neither will He forsake His inheritance, until righteousness return unto
judgment, and all who follow it are upright in heart.”818 At this present time, then, in which themight of the people of God is delayed, “the Lord will not cast off His people, neither will He forsake
His inheritance,” how bitter and unworthy things soever it may suffer in its humility and weakness;“until the righteousness,” which the weakness of the pious now possesses, “shall return to judgment,”

817
818

Ps. lxxvii. 9.
Ps. xciv. 12–15.

241

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffthat is, shall receive the power of judging; which is preserved in the end for the righteous whenpower in its due order shall have followed after righteousness going before. For power joined torighteousness, or righteousness added to power, constitutes a judicial authority. But righteousness
belongs to a good will; whence it was said by the angels when Christ was born: “Glory to God in
the highest, and on earth peace to men of good will.”819 But power ought to follow righteousness,
not to go before it; and accordingly it is placed in “second,” that is, prosperous fortune; and this iscalled “second,”820 from “following.” For whereas two things make a man blessed, as we haveargued above, to will well, and to be able to do what one wills, people ought not to be so perverse,
as has been noted in the same discussion, as that a man should choose from the two things whichmake him blessed, the being able to do what he wills, and should neglect to will what he ought;whereas he ought first to have a good will, but great power afterwards. Further, a good will mustbe purged from vices, by which if a man is overcome, he is in such wise overcome as that he wills
evil; and then how will his will be still good? It is to be wished, then, that power may now be given,
but power against vices, to conquer which men do not wish to be powerful, while they wish to be
so in order to conquer men; and why is this, unless that, being in truth conquered, they feignedly
conquer, and are conquerors not in truth, but in opinion? Let a man will to be prudent, will to bestrong, will to be temperate, will to be just; and that he may be able to have these things truly, let
him certainly desire power, and seek to be powerful in himself, and (strange though it be) against
himself for himself. But all the other things which he wills rightly, and yet is not able to have, as,for instance, immortality and true and full felicity, let him not cease to long for, and let him patiently
expect.

177

Chapter 14.—The Unobligated Death of Christ Has Freed Those Who Were Liable to Death.
18. What, then, is the righteousness by which the devil was conquered? What, except therighteousness of Jesus Christ? And how was he conquered? Because, when he found in Him nothingworthy of death, yet he slew Him. And certainly it is just, that we whom he held as debtors, should
be dismissed free by believing in Him whom he slew without any debt. In this way it is that we aresaid to be justified in the blood of Christ.821 For so that innocent blood was shed for the remissionof our sins. Whence He calls Himself in the Psalms, “Free among the dead.”822 For he only that isdead is free from the debt of death. Hence also in another psalm He says, “Then I restored thatwhich I seized not;”823 meaning sin by the thing seized, because sin is laid hold of against what is
lawful. Whence also He says, by the mouth of His own Flesh, as is read in the Gospel: “For the
prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me,” that is, no sin; but “that the world may know,”
He says, “that I do the commandment of the Father; arise, let us go hence.”824 And hence He proceeds
819
820
821
822
823
824

Luke ii. 14.
Res secundœ.
Rom. v. 9.
Ps. lxxxviii. 5.
Ps. lxix. 4.
John xiv. 30–31.

242

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

to His passion, that He might pay for us debtors that which He Himself did not owe. Would thenthe devil be conquered by this most just right, if Christ had willed to deal with him by power, notby righteousness? But He held back what was possible to Him, in order that He might first do what
was fitting. And hence it was necessary that He should be both man and God. For unless He had
been man, He could not have been slain; unless He had been God, men would not have believedthat He would not do what He could, but that He could not do what He would; nor should we havethought that righteousness was preferred by Him to power, but that He lacked power. But now He
suffered for us things belonging to man, because He was man; but if He had been unwilling, it
would have been in His power to not so to suffer, because He was also God. And righteousness
was therefore made more acceptable in humility, because so great power as was in His Divinity,
if He had been unwilling, would have been able not to suffer humility; and thus by Him who died,being thus powerful, both righteousness was commended, and power promised, to us, weak mortals.
For He did one of these two things by dying, the other by rising again. For what is more righteous,than to come even to the death of the cross for righteousness? And what more powerful, than torise from the dead, and to ascend into heaven with that very flesh in which He was slain? And
therefore He conquered the devil first by righteousness, and afterwards by power: namely, by
righteousness, because He had no sin, and was slain by him most unjustly; but by power, because
having been dead He lived again, never afterwards to die.825 But He would have conquered thedevil by power, even though He could not have been slain by him: although it belongs to a greater
power to conquer death itself also by rising again, than to avoid it by living. But the reason is reallya different one, why we are justified in the blood of Christ, when we are rescued from the powerof the devil through the remission of sins: it pertains to this, that the devil is conquered by Christby righteousness, not by power. For Christ was crucified, not through immortal power, but throughthe weakness which He took upon Him in mortal flesh; of which weakness nevertheless the apostle
says, “that the weakness of God is stronger than men.”826

Chapter 15.—Of the Same Subject.
19. It is not then difficult to see that the devil was conquered, when he who was slain by Him
rose again. It is something more, and more profound of comprehension, to see that the devil wasconquered when he thought himself to have conquered, that is, when Christ was slain. For then thatblood, since it was His who had no sin at all, was poured out for the remission of our sins; that,
because the devil deservedly held those whom, as guilty of sin, he bound by the condition of death,he might deservedly loose them through Him, whom, as guilty of no sin, the punishment of death
undeservedly affected. The strong man was conquered by this righteousness, and bound with thischain, that his vessels might be spoiled,827 which with himself and his angels had been vessels of

825
826
827

Rom. vi. 9.
1 Cor. i. 25.
Mark iii. 27.

243

NPNF (V1-03)

178

Philip Schaff

wrath while with him, and might be turned into vessels of mercy.828 For the Apostle Paul tells us,that these words of our Lord Jesus Christ Himself were spoken from heaven to him when he was
first called. For among the other things which he heard, he speaks also of this as said to him thus:“For I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of thesethings which thou hast seen from me, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee;delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, to open theeyes of the blind, and to turn them from darkness [to light], and from the power of Satan unto God,
that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified, andfaith that is in me.”829 And hence the same apostle also, exhorting believers to the giving of thanks
to God the Father, says: “Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness and hath translated us
into the kingdom of His dear Son: in whom we have redemption, even the forgiveness of sins.”830
In this redemption, the blood of Christ was given, as it were, as a price for us, by accepting which
the devil was not enriched, but bound:831 that we might be loosened from his bonds, and that hemight not with himself involve in the meshes of sins, and so deliver to the destruction of the secondand eternal death,832 any one of those whom Christ, free from all debt, had redeemed by pouringout His own blood unindebtedly; but that they who belong to the grace of Christ, foreknown, andpredestinated, and elected before the foundation of the world833 should only so far die as Christ
Himself died for them, i.e. only by the death of the flesh, not of the spirit.

Chapter 16.—The Remains of Death and the Evil Things of the World Turn to Good for the Elect.
How Fitly the Death of Christ Was Chosen, that We Might Be Justified in His Blood. What theAnger of God is.
20. For although the death, too, of the flesh itself came originally from the sin of the first man,
yet the good use of it has made most glorious martyrs. And so not only that death itself, bat all theevils of this world, and the griefs and labors of men, although they come from the deserts of sins,and especially of original sin, whence life itself too became bound by the bond of death, yet have
fitly remained, even when sin is forgiven; that man might have wherewith to contend for truth, andwhereby the goodness of the faithful might be exercised; in order that the new man through the
new covenant might be made ready among the evils of this world for a new world, by bearing
wisely the misery which this condemned life deserved, and by rejoicing soberly because it will befinished, but expecting faithfully and patiently the blessedness which the future life, being set free,
828

Rom. ix. 22, 23.
Acts xxvi. 16–18.
830
Col. i. 13, 14.
831[In this representation of Augustin, the relics of that misconception which appears in the earlier soteriology, paricularlythat of Irenæus, are seen: namely, that the death of Christ ransoms the sinner from Satan. Certain texts which teach that redemptiondelivers from the captivity to sin and Satan, were interpreted to teach deliverance from the claims of Satan. Augustin’s soteriology
is more free from this error than that of Irenæus, yet not entirely free from it. The doctrine of justification did not obtain its
most consistent and complete statement in the Patristic church.—W.G.T.S.]
832
Apoc. xxi. 8.
833
1 Pet. i. 20.
829

244

NPNF (V1-03)

179

Philip Schaff

will have for ever. For the devil being cast forth from his dominion, and from the hearts of thefaithful, in the condemnation and faithlessness of whom he, although himself also condemned, yetreigned, is only so far permitted to be an adversary according to the condition of this mortality, as
God knows to be expedient for them: concerning which the sacred writings speak through the mouthof the apostle: “God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; butwill with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.”834 And thoseevils which the faithful endure piously, are of profit either for the correction of sins, or for the
exercising and proving of righteousness, or to manifest the misery of this life, that the life where
will be that true and perpetual blessedness may be desired more ardently, and sought out moreearnestly. But it is on their account that these evils are still kept in being, of whom the apostle says:“For we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are called
to be holy according to His purpose. For whom He did foreknow, He also did predestinate to be
conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the first-born among many brethren. Moreover,whom He did predestinate, them He also called; and whom He called, them He also justified; andwhom He justified, them He also glorified.” It is of these who are predestinated, that not one shallperish with the devil; not one shall remain even to death under the power of the devil. And thenfollows what I have already cited above:835 “What shall we then say to these things? If God be forus, who can be against us? He that spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all; how
has He not with Him also freely given us all things?”836
21. Why then should the death of Christ not have come to pass? Nay, rather, why should notthat death itself have been chosen above all else to be brought to pass, to the passing by of the otherinnumerable ways which He who is omnipotent could have employed to free us; that death, I say,wherein neither was anything diminished or changed from His divinity, and so great benefit was
conferred upon men, from the humanity which He took upon Him, that a temporal death, which
was not due, was rendered by the eternal Son of God, who was also the Son of man, whereby Hemight free them from an eternal death which was due? The devil was holding fast our sins, andthrough them was fixing us deservedly in death. He discharged them, who had none of His own,
and who was led by him to death undeservedly. That blood was of such price, that he who evenslew Christ for a time by a death which was not due, can as his due detain no one, who has put on
Christ, in the eternal death which was due. Therefore “God commendeth His love towards us, inthat, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified in His
blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him.” Justified, he says, in His blood,—justified
plainly, in that we are freed from all sin; and freed from all sin, because the Son of God, who knew
no sin, was slain for us. Therefore “we shall be saved from wrath through Him;” from the wrathcertainly of God, which is nothing else but just retribution. For the wrath of God is not, as is thatof man, a perturbation of the mind; but it is the wrath of Him to whom Holy Scripture says inanother place, “But Thou, O Lord, mastering Thy power, judgest with calmness.”837 If, therefore,
the just retribution of God has received such a name, what can be the right understanding also of
the reconciliation of God, unless that then such wrath comes to an end? Neither were we enemies
834
835
836
837

1 Cor. x. 13.
C. 2.
Rom. viii. 28–32.
Wisd. xii. 18.

245

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

to God, except as sins are enemies to righteousness; which being forgiven, such enmities come toan end, and they whom He Himself justifies are reconciled to the Just One. And yet certainly He
loved them even while still enemies, since “He spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for
us all,” when we were still enemies. And therefore the apostle has rightly added: “For if, when wewere enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son,” by which that remission ofsins was made, “much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved in His life.” Saved in life, whowere reconciled by death. For who can doubt that He will give His life for His friends, for whom,
when enemies, He gave His death? “And not only so,” he says, “but we also joy in God, throughour Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.” “Not only,” he says, “shall
we be saved,” but “we also joy;” and not in ourselves, but “in God;” nor through ourselves, “butthrough our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement,” as we have argued
above. Then the apostle adds, “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death bysin; and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned;”838 etc.: in which he disputes atsome length concerning the two men; the one the first Adam, through whose sin and death we, hisdescendants, are bound by, as it were, hereditary evils; and the other the second Adam, who is not
only man, but also God, by whose payment for us of what He owed not, we are freed from the debts
both of our first father and of ourselves. Further, since on account of that one the devil held all who
were begotten through his corrupted carnal concupiscence, it is just that on account of this one heshould loose all who are regenerated through His immaculate spiritual grace.

Chapter 17.—Other Advantages of the Incarnation.
22. There are many other things also in the incarnation of Christ, displeasing as it is to theproud, that are to be observed and thought of advantageously. And one of them is, that it has been
demonstrated to man what place he has in the things which God has created; since human nature
could so be joined to God, that one person could be made of two substances, and thereby indeedof three—God, soul, and flesh: so that those proud malignant spirits, who interpose themselves as
mediators to deceive, although as if to help, do not therefore dare to place themselves above man
because they have not flesh; and chiefly because the Son of God deigned to die also in the same
flesh, lest they, because they seem to be immortal, should therefore succeed in getting themselves
worshipped as gods. Further, that the grace of God might be commended to us in the man Christ
without any precedent merits; because not even He Himself obtained by any precedent merits thatHe should be joined in such great unity with the true God, and should become the Son of God, one
Person with Him; but from the time when He began to be man, from that time He is also God;whence it is said, “The Word was made flesh.”839 Then, again, there is this, that the pride of man,
which is the chief hindrance against his cleaving to God, can be confuted and healed through suchgreat humility of God. Man learns also how far he has gone away from God; and what it is worth
to him as a pain to cure him, when he returns through such a Mediator, who both as God assists

838
839

Rom. v. 8, 12.
John i. 14.

246

NPNF (V1-03)

180

Philip Schaff

men by His divinity, and as man agrees with men by His weakness. For what greater example ofobedience could be given to us, who had perished through disobedience, than God the Son obedient
to God the Father, even to the death of the cross?840 Nay, wherein could the reward of obedience
itself be better shown, than in the flesh of so great a Mediator, which rose again to eternal life? Itbelonged also to the justice and goodness of the Creator, that the devil should be conquered by thesame rational creature which he rejoiced to have conquered, and by one that came from that samerace which, by the corruption of its origin through one, he held altogether.

Chapter 18.—Why the Son of God Took Man Upon Himself from the Race of Adam, and from a
Virgin.
23. For assuredly God could have taken upon Himself to be man, that in that manhood He might
be the Mediator between God and men, from some other source, and not from the race of that Adam
who bound the human race by his sin; as He did not create him whom He first created, of the raceof some one else. Therefore He was able, either so, or in any other mode that He would, to create
yet one other, by whom the conqueror of the first might be conquered. But God judged it betterboth to take upon Him man through whom to conquer the enemy of the human race, from the race
itself that had been conquered; and yet to do this of a virgin, whose conception, not flesh but spirit,
not lust but faith, preceded.841 Nor did that concupiscence of the flesh intervene, by which the restof men, who derive original sin, are propagated and conceived; but holy virginity became pregnant,not by conjugal intercourse, but by faith,—lust being utterly absent,—so that that which was bornfrom the root of the first man might derive only the origin of race, not also of guilt. For there wasborn, not a nature corrupted by the contagion of transgression, but the one only remedy of all suchcorruptions. There was born, I say, a Man having nothing at all, and to have nothing at all, of sin;through whom they were to be born again so as to be freed from sin, who could not be born withoutsin. For although conjugal chastity makes a right use of the carnal concupiscence which is in our
members; yet it is liable to motions not voluntary, by which it shows either that it could not haveexisted at all in paradise before sin, or if it did, that it was not then such as that sometimes it should
resist the will. But now we feel it to be such, that in opposition to the law of the mind, and even if
there is no question of begetting, it works in us the incitement of sexual intercourse; and if in thismen yield to it, then it is satisfied by an act of sin; if they do not, then it is bridled by an act ofrefusal: which two things who could doubt to have been alien from paradise before sin? For neither
did the chastity that then was do anything indecorous, nor did the pleasure that then was suffer
anything unquiet. It was necessary, therefore, that this carnal concupiscence should be entirely
absent, when the offspring of the Virgin was conceived; in whom the author of death was to findnothing worthy of death, and yet was to slay Him in order that he might be conquered by the deathof the Author of life: the conqueror of the first Adam, who held fast the human race, conquered by
the second Adam, and losing the Christian race, freed out of the human race from human guilt,

840
841

Phil. ii. 8.
Luke i. 26–32.

247

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

through Him who was not in the guilt, although He was of the race; that that deceiver might beconquered by that race which he had conquered by guilt. And this was so done, in order that man
may not be lifted up, but “that he that glorieth should glory in the Lord.”842 For he who wasconquered was only man; and he was therefore conquered, because he lusted proudly to be a god.
But He who conquered was both man and God; and therefore He so conquered, being born of avirgin, because God in humility did not, as He governs other saints, so govern that Man, but bareHim [as a Son]. These so great gifts of God, and whatever else there are, which it is too long for
us now upon this subject both to inquire and to discuss, could not exist unless the Word had been
made flesh.

Chapter 19.—What in the Incarnate Word Belongs to Knowledge, What to Wisdom.

181

24. And all these things which the Word made flesh did and bare for us in time and place,belong, according to the distinction which we have undertaken to demonstrate, to knowledge, notto wisdom. And as the Word is without time and without place, it is co-eternal with the Father, andin its wholeness everywhere; and if any one can, and as much as he can, speak truly concerning
this Word, then his discourse will pertain to wisdom. And hence the Word made flesh, which is
Christ Jesus, has the treasures both of wisdom and of knowledge. For the apostle, writing to the
Colossians, says: “For I would that ye knew what great conflict I have for you, and for them at
Laodicea, and for as many as have not seen my face in the flesh; that their hearts might be comforted,
being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to theacknowledgment of the mystery of God which is Christ Jesus: in whom are hid all the treasures of
wisdom and knowledge.”843 To what extent the apostle knew all those treasures, how much of themhe had penetrated, and in them to how great things he had reached, who can know? Yet, for mypart, according to that which is written, “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 wisdom, to another the word ofknowledge by the same Spirit;”844 if these two are in such way to be distinguished from each other,that wisdom is to be assigned to divine things, knowledge to human, I acknowledge both in Christ,and so with me do all His faithful ones. And when I read, “The Word was made flesh, and dwelt
among us,” I understand by the Word the true Son of God, I acknowledge in the flesh the true Sonof man, and both together joined into one Person of God and man, by an ineffable copiousness ofgrace. And on account of this, the apostle goes on to say, “And we beheld His glory, the glory asof the Only-begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.”845 If we refer grace to knowledge, andtruth to wisdom, I think we shall not swerve from that distinction between these two things which
we have commended. For in those things that have their origin in time, this is the highest grace,that man is joined with God in unity of person; but in things eternal the highest truth is rightly

842
843
844
845

2 Cor. x. 17.
Col. ii. 1–3.
1 Cor. xii. 7, 8.
John i. 14.

248

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

attributed to the Word of God. But that the same is Himself the Only-begotten of the Father, fullof grace and truth,—this took place, in order that He Himself in things done for us in time shouldbe the same for whom we are cleansed by the same faith, that we may contemplate Him steadfastly
in things eternal. And those distinguished philosophers of the heathen who have been able tounderstand and discern the invisible things of God by those things which are made, have yet, as issaid of them, “held down the truth in iniquity;”846 because they philosophized without a Mediator,that is, without the man Christ, whom they neither believed to be about to come at the word of theprophets, nor to have come at that of the apostles. For, placed as they were in these lowest things,
they could not but seek some media through which they might attain to those lofty things which
they had understood; and so they fell upon deceitful spirits, through whom it came to pass, that“they changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, andto birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things.”847 For in such forms also they set up or
worshipped idols. Therefore Christ is our knowledge, and the same Christ is also our wisdom. He
Himself implants in us faith concerning temporal things, He Himself shows forth the truth concerning
eternal things. Through Him we reach on to Himself: we stretch through knowledge to wisdom;
yet we do not withdraw from one and the same Christ, “in whom are hidden all the treasures of
wisdom and of knowledge.” But now we speak of knowledge, and will hereafter speak of wisdom
as much as He Himself shall grant. And let us not so take these two things, as if it were not allowable
to speak either of the wisdom which is in human things, or of the knowledge which is in divine.
For after a laxer custom of speech, both can be called wisdom, and both knowledge. Yet the apostle
could not in any way have written, “To one is given the word of wisdom, to another the word ofknowledge,” except also these several things had been properly called by the several names, of the
distinction between which we are now treating.

Chapter 20.—What Has Been Treated of in This Book. How We Have Reached by Steps to a
Certain Trinity, Which is Found in Practical Knowledge and True Faith.
25. Now, therefore, let us see what this prolix discourse has effected, what it has gathered,
whereto it has reached. It belongs to all men to will to be blessed; yet all men have not faith, whereby
the heart is cleansed, and so blessedness is reached. And thus it comes to pass, that by means of
the faith which not all men will, we have to reach on to the blessedness which every one wills. All
see in their own heart that they will to be blessed; and so great is the agreement of human natureon this subject, that the man is not deceived who conjectures this concerning another’s mind, outof his own: in short, we know ourselves that all will this. But many despair of being immortal,
although no otherwise can any one be that which all will, that is, blessed. Yet they will also to be
immortal if they could; but through not believing that they can, they do not so live that they can.
Therefore faith is necessary, that we may attain blessedness in all the good things of human nature,

846
847

Rom. i. 23; detinuerum.
Rom. i. 18, 20.

249

NPNF (V1-03)

182

Philip Schaffthat is, of both soul and body. But that same faith requires that this faith be limited in Christ, whorose in the flesh from the dead, not to die any more; and that no one is freed from the dominion of
the devil, through the forgiveness of sins, save by Him; and that in the abiding place of the devil,
life must needs be at once miserable and never-ending, which ought rather to be called death thanlife. All which I have also argued, so far as space permitted, in this book, while I have already saidmuch on the subject in the fourth book of this work as well;848 but in that place for one purpose,
here for another,—namely, there, that I might show why and how Christ was sent in the fullnessof time by the Father,849 on account of those who say that He who sent and He who was sent cannot
be equal in nature; but here, in order to distinguish practical knowlege from contemplative wisdom.
26. For we wished to ascend, as it were, by steps, and to seek in the inner man, both in knowledge
and in wisdom, a sort of trinity of its own special kind, such as we sought before in the outer man;in order that we may come, with a mind more practised in these lower things, to the contemplationof that Trinity which is God, according to our little measure, if indeed, we can even do this, at leastin a riddle and as through a glass.850 If, then, any one have committed to memory the words of thisfaith in their sounds alone, not knowing what they mean, as they commonly who do not know
Greek hold in memory Greek words, or similarly Latin ones, or those of any other language of
which they are ignorant, has not he a sort of trinity in his mind? because, first, those sounds ofwords are in his memory, even when he does not think thereupon; and next, the mental vision(acies) of his act of recollection is formed thence when he conceives of them; and next, the will of
him who remembers and thinks unites both. Yet we should by no means say that the man in sodoing busies himself with a trinity of the interior man, but rather of the exterior; because heremembers, and when he wills, contemplates as much as he wills, that alone which belongs to thesense of the body, which is called hearing. Nor in such an act of thought does he do anything elsethan deal with images of corporeal things, that is, of sounds. But if he holds and recollects what
those words signify, now indeed something of the inner man is brought into action; not yet, however,ought he to be said or thought to live according to a trinity of the inner man, if he does not love
those things which are there declared, enjoined, promised. For it is possible for him also to holdand conceive these things, supposing them to be false, in order that he may endeavor to disprovethem. Therefore that will, which in this case unites those things which are held in the memory withthose things which are thence impressed on the mind’s eye in conception, completes, indeed, somekind of trinity, since itself is a third added to two others; but the man does not live according tothis, when those things which are conceived are taken to be false, and are not accepted. But whenthose things are believed to be true, and those things which therein ought to be loved, are loved,
then at last the man does live according to a trinity of the inner man; for every one lives according
to that which he loves. But how can things be loved which are not known, but only believed? This
question has been already treated of in former books;851 and we found, that no one loves what heis wholly ignorant of, but that when things not known are said to be loved, they are loved fromthose things which are known. And now we so conclude this book, that we admonish the just to

848
849
850
851

Cc. 19–21.
Gal. iv. 4.
1 Cor. xiii. 12.
Bk. viii. cc. 8 seqq., and Bk. x. c. 1, etc.

250

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

live by faith,852 which faith worketh by love,853 so that the virtues also themselves, by which one
lives prudently, boldly, temperately, and justly, be all referred to the same faith; for not otherwise
can they be true virtues. And yet these in this life are not of so great worth, as that the remissionof sins, of some kind or other, is not sometimes necessary here; and this remission comes not topass, except through Him, who by His own blood conquered the prince of sinners. Whatsoever
ideas are in the mind of the faithful man from this faith, and from such a life, when they are containedin the memory, and are looked at by recollection, and please the will, set forth a kind of trinity of
its own sort.854 But the image of God, of which by His help we shall afterwards speak, is not yet
in that trinity; a thing which will then be more apparent, when it shall have been shown where itis, which the reader may expect in a succeeding book.

183

Book XIV.
————————————The true wisdom of man is treated of; and it is shown that the image of God, which man is in respect
to his mind, is not placed properly in transitory things, as in memory, understanding, and love,
whether of faith itself as existing in time, or even of the mind as busied with itself, but in things
that are permanent; and that this wisdom is then perfected, when the mind is renewed in theknowledge of God, according to the image of Him who created man after His own Image, andthus attains to wisdom, wherein that which is contemplated is eternal.
Chapter 1.—What the Wisdom is of Which We are Here to Treat. Whence the Name of Philosopher
Arose. What Has Been Already Said Concerning the Distinction of Knowledge and Wisdom.
1. We must now discourse concerning wisdom; not the wisdom of God, which without doubt
is God, for His only-begotten Son is called the wisdom of God;855 but we will speak of the wisdomof man, yet of true wisdom, which is according to God, and is His true and chief worship, whichis called in Greek by one term, ™ . And this term, as we have already observed, when our own
countrymen themselves also wished to interpret it by a single term, was by them rendered piety,whereas piety means more commonly what the Greeks call ™ . But because ™ cannot
be translated perfectly by any one word, it is better translated by two, so as to render it rather by“the worship of God.” That this is the wisdom of man, as we have already laid down in the twelfth

852

Rom. i. 17.
Gal. v. 6.
854[The ternary is this: 1. The idea of a truth or fact held in the memory. 2. The contemplation of it as thus recollected. 3.
The love of it. This last is the “will” that “unites” the first two.—W.G.T.S.]
855
Ecclus. xxiv. 5. and 1 Cor. i. 24.
853

251

NPNF (V1-03)

184

Philip Schaff

book856 of this work, is shown by the authority of Holy Scripture, in the book of God’s servant Job,
where we read that the Wisdom of God said to man, “Behold piety, that is wisdom; and to departfrom evil is knowledge;”857 or, as some have translated the Greek word
μ , “learning,”858 which
certainly takes its name from learning,859 whence also it may be called knowledge. For everythingis learned in order that it may be known. Although the same word, indeed,860 is employed in adifferent sense, where any one suffers evils for his sins, that he may be corrected. Whence is thatin the Epistle to the Hebrews, “For what son is he to whom the father giveth not discipline?” And
this is still more apparent in the same epistle: “Now no chastening861 for the present seemeth to bejoyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto
them which are exercised thereby.”862 Therefore God Himself is the chiefest wisdom; but theworship of God is the wisdom of man, of which we now speak. For “the wisdom of this world isfoolishness with God.”863 It is in respect to this wisdom, therefore, which is the worship of God,
that Holy Scripture says, “The multitude of the wise is the welfare of the world.”864
2. But if to dispute of wisdom belongs to wise men, what shall we do? Shall we dare indeed toprofess wisdom, lest it should be mere impudence for ourselves to dispute about it? Shall we not
be alarmed by the example of Pythagoras?—who dared not profess to be a wise man, but answeredthat he was a philosopher, i.e., a lover of wisdom; whence arose the name, that became thenceforthso much the popular name, that no matter how great the learning wherein any one excelled, either
in his own opinion or that of others, in things pertaining to wisdom, he was still called nothing
more than philosopher. Or was it for this reason that no one, even of such as these, dared to profess
himself a wise man,—because they imagined that a wise man was one without sin? But our Scriptures
do not say this, which say, “Rebuke a wise man, and he will love thee.”865 For doubtless he who
thinks a man ought to be rebuked, judges him to have sin. However, for my part, I dare not professmyself a wise man even in this sense; it is enough for me to assume, what they themselves cannot
deny, that to dispute of wisdom belongs also to the philosopher, i.e., the lover of wisdom. For they
have not given over so disputing who have professed to be lovers of wisdom rather than wise men.
3. In disputing, then, about wisdom, they have defined it thus: Wisdom is the knowledge ofthings human and divine. And hence, in the last book, I have not withheld the admission, that thecognizance of both subjects, whether divine or human, may be called both knowledge and wisdom.866
But according to the distinction made in the apostle’s words, “To one is given the word of wisdom,
to another the word of knowledge,”867 this definition is to be divided, so that the knowledge ofthings divine shall be called wisdom, and that of things human appropriate to itself the name of
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867

C. 14.
Job xxviii. 28.
Disciplina, disco.
Disciplina, disco.
Disciplina.
Disciplina.
Heb. xii. 7, 11.
1 Cor. iii. 19.
Wisd. vi. 26.
Prov. ix. 8.
Bk. xiii. cc. 1, 19.
1 Cor. xiii. 12.

252

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

knowledge; and of the latter I have treated in the thirteenth book, not indeed so as to attribute tothis knowledge everything whatever that can be known by man about things human, wherein thereis exceeding much of empty vanity and mischievous curiosity, but only those things by which thatmost wholesome faith, which leads to true blessedness, is begotten, nourished, defended,
strengthened; and in this knowledge most of the faithful are not strong, however exceeding strong
in the faith itself. For it is one thing to know only what man ought to believe in order to attain to a
blessed life, which must needs be an eternal one; but another to know in what way this belief itself
may both help the pious, and be defended against the impious, which last the apostle seems to callby the special name of knowledge. And when I was speaking of this knowledge before, my especial
business was to commend faith, first briefly distinguishing things eternal from things temporal,
and there discoursing of things temporal; but while deferring things eternal to the present book, I
showed also that faith respecting things eternal is itself a thing temporal, and dwells in time in thehearts of believers, and yet is necessary in order to attain the things eternal themselves.868 I argued
also, that faith respecting the things temporal which He that is eternal did and suffered for us asman, which manhood He bare in time and carried on to things eternal, is profitable also for theobtaining of things eternal; and that the virtues themselves, whereby in this temporal and mortallife men live prudently, bravely, temperately, and justly, are not true virtues, unless they are referredto that same faith, temporal though it is, which leads on nevertheless to things eternal.

Chapter 2.—There is a Kind of Trinity in the Holding, Contemplating, and Loving of Faith Temporal,
But One that Does Not Yet Attain to Being Properly an Image of God.
4. Wherefore since, as it is written, “While we are in the body, we are absent from the Lord;
for we walk by faith, not by sight;”869 undoubtedly, so long as the just man lives by faith,870
howsoever he lives according to the inner man, although he aims at truth and reaches on to things
eternal by this same temporal faith, nevertheless in the holding, contemplating, and loving this
temporal faith, we have not yet reached such a trinity as is to be called an image of God; lest thatshould seem to be constituted in things temporal which ought to be so in things eternal. For when
the human mind sees its own faith, whereby it believes what it does not see, it does not see a thing
eternal. For that will not always exist, which certainly will not then exist, when this pilgrimage,whereby we are absent from God, in such way that we must needs walk by faith, shall be ended,and that sight shall have succeeded it whereby we shall see face to face;871 just as now, because webelieve although we do not see, we shall deserve to see, and shall rejoice at having been brought
through faith to sight. For then it will be no longer faith, by which that is believed which is notseen; but sight, by which that is seen which is believed. And then, therefore, although we remember
this past mortal life, and call to mind by recollection that we once believed what we did not see,
yet that faith will be reckoned among things past and done with, not among things present and
868
869
870
871

Bk. xiii. c. 7.
2 Cor. v. 6, 7.
Rom. i. 17.
1 Cor. xiii. 12.

253

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

always continuing. And hence also that trinity which now consists in the remembering,
contemplating, and loving this same faith while present and continuing, will then be found to bedone with and past, and not still enduring. And hence it is to be gathered, that if that trinity is indeed
an image of God, then this image itself would have to be reckoned, not among things that exist
always, but among things transient.
185

Chapter 3.—A Difficulty Removed, Which Lies in the Way of What Has Just Been Said.
But far be it from us to think, that while the nature of the soul is immortal, and from the first
beginning of its creation thenceforth never ceases to be, yet that that which is the best thing it has
should not endure for ever with its own immortality. Yet what is there in its nature as created, better
than that it is made after the image of its Creator?872 We must find then what may be fittingly called
the image of God, not in the holding, contemplating, and loving that faith which will not exist
always, but in that which will exist always.
5. Shall we then scrutinize somewhat more carefully and deeply whether the case is really thus?
For it may be said that this trinity does not perish even when faith itself shall have passed away;
because, as now we both hold it by memory, and discern it by thought, and love it by will; so thenalso, when we shall both hold in memory, and shall recollect, that we once had it, and shall unite
these two by the third, namely will, the same trinity will still continue. Since, if it have left in its
passage as it were no trace in us, doubtless we shall not have ought of it even in our memory,whereto to recur when recollecting it as past, and by the third, viz. purpose, coupling both these, towit, what was in our memory though we were not thinking about it, and what is formed thence byconception. But he who speaks thus, does not perceive, that when we hold, see, and love in ourselves
our present faith, we are concerned with a different trinity as now existing, from that trinity which
will exist, when we shall contemplate by recollection, not the faith itself, but as it were the imagined
trace of it laid up in the memory, and shall unite by the will, as by a third, these two things, viz.
that which was in the memory of him who retains, and that which is impressed thence upon thevision of the mind of him who recollects. And that we may understand this, let us take an example
from things corporeal, of which we have sufficiently spoken in the eleventh book.873 For as we
ascend from lower to higher things, or pass inward from outer to inner things, we first find a trinity
in the bodily object which is seen, and in the vision of the seer, which, when he sees it, is informed
thereby, and in the purpose of the will which combines both. Let us assume a trinity like this, when
the faith which is now in ourselves is so established in our memory as the bodily object we spokeof was in place, from which faith is formed the conception in recollection, as from that bodily object
was formed the vision of the beholder; and to these two, to complete the trinity, will is to be reckoned
as a third, which connects and combines the faith established in the memory, and a sort of effigy
of that faith impressed upon the vision of recollection; just as in that trinity of corporeal vision, theform of the bodily object that is seen, and the corresponding form wrought in the vision of the

872
873

Gen. i. 27.
Cc. 2 sq.

254

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

beholder, are combined by the purpose of the will. Suppose, then, that this bodily object which wasbeheld was dissolved and had perished, and that nothing at all of it remained anywhere, to the visionof which the gaze might have recourse; are we then to say, that because the image of the bodily
object thus now past and done with remains in the memory, whence to form the conception inrecollecting, and to have the two united by will as a third, therefore it is the same trinity as thatformer one, when the appearance of the bodily object posited in place was seen? Certainly not, but
altogether a different one: for, not to say that that was from without, while this is from within; theformer certainly was produced by the appearance of a present bodily object, the latter by the imageof that object now past. So, too, in the case of which we are now treating, to illustrate which wehave thought good to adduce this example, the faith which is even now in our mind, as that bodily
object was in place, while held, looked at, loved, produces a sort of trinity; but that trinity will exist
no more, when this faith in the mind, like that bodily object in place, shall no longer exist. But thatwhich will then exist, when we shall remember it to have been, but not now to be, in us, will
doubtless be a different one. For that which now is, is wrought by the thing itself, actually present
and attached to the mind of one who believes; but that which shall then be, will be wrought by theimagination of a past thing left in the memory of one who recollects.

Chapter 4.—The Image of God is to Be Sought in the Immortality of the Rational Soul. How a
Trinity is Demonstrated in the Mind.

186

6. Therefore neither is that trinity an image of God, which is not now, nor is that other an imageof God, which then will not be; but we must find in the soul of man, i.e., the rational or intellectual
soul, that image of the Creator which is immortally implanted in its immortality. For as theimmortality itself of the soul is spoken with a qualification; since the soul too has its proper death,when it lacks a blessed life, which is to be called the true life of the soul; but it is therefore called
immortal, because it never ceases to live with some life or other, even when it is most miserable;—so,
although reason or intellect is at one time torpid in it, at another appears small, and at another great,
yet the human soul is never anything save rational or intellectual; and hence, if it is made after theimage of God in respect to this, that it is able to use reason and intellect in order to understand andbehold God, then from the moment when that nature so marvellous and so great began to be, whether
this image be so worn out as to be almost none at all, or whether it be obscure and defaced, or brightand beautiful, certainly it always is. Further, too, pitying the defaced condition of its dignity, divine
Scripture tells us, that “although man walks in an image, yet he disquieteth himself in vain; heheapeth up riches, and cannot tell who shall gather them.”874 It would not therefore attribute vanity
to the image of God, unless it perceived it to have been defaced. Yet it sufficiently shows that suchdefacing does not extend to the taking away its being an image, by saying, “Although man walks
in an image.” Wherefore in both ways that sentence can be truly enunciated; in that, as it is said,“Although man walketh in an image, yet he disquieteth himself in vain,” so it may be said, “Although
man disquieteth himself in vain, yet he walketh in an image.” For although the nature of the soul874

Ps. xxxix. 7.

255

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

is great, yet it can be corrupted, because it is not the highest; and although it can be corrupted,
because it is not the highest, yet because it is capable and can be partaker of the highest nature, it
is a great nature. Let us seek, then, in this image of God a certain trinity of a special kind, with theaid of Him who Himself made us after His own image. For no otherwise can we healthfully
investigate this subject, or arrive at any result according to the wisdom which is from Him. But if
the reader will either hold in remembrance and recollect what we have said of the human soul ormind in former books, and especially in the tenth, or will carefully re-peruse it in the passages
wherein it is contained, he will not require here any more lengthy discourse respecting the inquiry
into so great a thing.
7. We said, then, among other things in the tenth book, that the mind of man knows itself. For
the mind knows nothing so much as that which is close to itself; and nothing is more close to themind than itself. We adduced also other evidences, as much as seemed sufficient, whereby thismight be most certainly proved.

Chapter 5.—Whether the Mind of Infants Knows Itself.
What, then, is to be said of the mind of an infant, which is still so small, and buried in suchprofound ignorance of things, that the mind of a man which knows anything shrinks from thedarkness of it? Is that too to be believed to know itself; but that, as being too intent upon those
things which it has begun to perceive through the bodily senses, with the greater delight in proportion
to their novelty, it is not able indeed to be ignorant of itself, but is also not able to think of itself?
Moreover, how intently it is bent upon sensible things that are without it, may be conjectured fromthis one fact, that it is so greedy of sensible light, that if any one through carelessness, or ignoranceof the possible consequences, place a light at nighttime where an infant is lying down, on that side
to which the eyes of the child so lying down can be bent, but its neck cannot be turned, the gaze ofthat child will be so fixed in that direction, that we have known some to have come to squint by
this means, in that the eyes retained that form which habit in some way impressed upon them whiletender and soft.875 In the case, too, of the other bodily senses, the souls of infants, as far as theirage permits, so narrow themselves as it were, and are bent upon them, that they either vehemently
detest or vehemently desire that only which offends or allures through the flesh, but do not thinkof their own inward self, nor can be made to do so by admonition; because they do not yet know
the signs that express admonition, whereof words are the chief, of which as of other things they
are wholly ignorant. And that it is one thing not to know oneself, another not to think of oneself,
we have shown already in the same book.876
8. But let us pass by the infantine age, since we cannot question it as to what goes on within
itself, while we have ourselves pretty well forgotten it. Let it suffice only for us hence to be certain,that when man has come to be able to think of the nature of his own mind, and to find out what is

875
876

[This occurred in the the case of Edward Irving. Oliphant’s Life of Irving.—W.G.T.S.]
Bk. x. c. 5.

256

NPNF (V1-03)

187

Philip Schaff

the truth, he will find it nowhere else but in himself. And he will find, not what he did not know,
but that of which he did not think. For what do we know, if we do not know what is in our own
mind; when we can know nothing at all of what we do know, unless by the mind?

Chapter 6.—How a Kind of Trinity Exists in the Mind Thinking of Itself. What is the Part ofThought in This Trinity.
The function of thought, however, is so great, that not even the mind itself can, so to say, place
itself in its own sight, except when it thinks of itself; and hence it is so far the case, that nothing isin the sight of the mind, except that which is being thought of, that not even the mind itself, whereby
we think whatever we do think, can be in its own sight otherwise than by thinking of itself. But inwhat way it is not in its own sight when it is not thinking of itself, while it can never be without
itself, as though itself were one thing, and the sight of itself another, it is not in my power to discover.
For this is not unreasonably said of the eye of the body; for the eye itself of the body is fixed in its
own proper place in the body, but its sight extends to things external to itself, and reaches even to
the stars. And the eye is not in its own sight, since it does not look at itself, unless by means of amirror, as is said above;877 a thing that certainly does not happen when the mind places itself in its
own sight by thinking of itself. Does it then see one part of itself by means of another part of itself,
when it looks at itself in thought, as we look at some of our members, which can be in our sight,
with other also of our members, viz. with our eyes? What can be said or thought more absurd? For
by what is the mind removed, except by itself? or where is it placed so as to be in its own sight,
except before itself? Therefore it will not be there, where it was, when it was not in its own sight;
because it has been put down in one place, after being taken away from another. But if it migrated
in order to be beheld, where will it remain in order to behold? Is it as it were doubled, so as to bein this and in that place at the same time, viz. both where it can behold, and where it can be beheld;that in itself it may be beholding, and before itself beheld? If we ask the truth, it will tell us nothingof the sort since it is but feigned images of bodily objects of which we conceive when we conceive
thus; and that the mind is not such, is very certain to the few minds by which the truth on such a
subject can be inquired. It appears, therefore, that the beholding of the mind is something pertaining
to its nature, and is recalled to that nature when it conceives of itself, not as if by moving throughspace, but by an incorporeal conversion; but when it is not conceiving of itself, it appears that it is
not indeed in its own sight, nor is its own perception formed from it, but yet that it knows itself as
though it were to itself a remembrance of itself. Like one who is skilled in many branches oflearning: the things which he knows are contained in his memory, but nothing thereof is in the sightof his mind except that of which he is conceiving; while all the rest are stored up in a kind of secretknowledge, which is called memory. The trinity, then, which we were setting forth, was constituted
in this way: first, we placed in the memory the object by which the perception of the percipient
was formed; next, the conformation, or as it were the image which is impressed thereby; lastly,
love or will as that which combines the two. When the mind, then, beholds itself in conception, it

877

Bk. x. c. 3.

257

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

understands and cognizes itself; it begets, therefore, this its own understanding and cognition. For
an incorporeal thing is understood when it is beheld, and is cognized when understood. Yet certainly
the mind does not so beget this knowledge of itself, when it beholds itself as understood byconception, as though it had before been unknown to itself; but it was known to itself, in the way
in which things are known which are contained in the memory, but of which one is not thinking;since we say that a man knows letters even when he is thinking of something else, and not of letters.
And these two, the begetter and the begotten, are coupled together by love, as by a third, which is
nothing else than will, seeking or holding fast the enjoyment of something. We held, therefore, thata trinity of the mind is to be intimated also by these three terms, memory, intelligence, will.
9. But since the mind, as we said near the end of the same tenth book, always remembers itself,
and always understands and loves itself, although it does not always think of itself as distinguishedfrom those things which are not itself; we must inquire in what way understanding (intellectus)
belongs to conception, while the notion (notitia) of each thing that is in the mind, even when one
is not thinking of it, is said to belong only to the memory. For if this is so, then the mind had notthese three things: viz. the remembrance, the understanding, and the love of itself; but it only
remembered itself, and afterwards, when it began to think of itself, then it understood and loved
itself.
188

Chapter 7.—The Thing is Made Plain by an Example. In What Way the Matter is Handled in Order
to Help the Reader.
Wherefore let us consider more carefully that example which we have adduced, wherein it was
shown that not knowing a thing is different from not thinking [conceiving] of it; and that it may sohappen that a man knows something of which he is not thinking, when he is thinking of somethingelse, not of that. When any one, then, who is skilled in two or more branches of knowledge isthinking of one of them, though he is not thinking of the other or others, yet he knows them. But
can we rightly say, This musician certainly knows music, but he does not now understand it, because
he is not thinking of it; but he does now understand geometry, for of that he is now thinking? Suchan assertion, as far as appears, is absurd. What, again, if we were to say, This musician certainly
knows music, but he does not now love it, while he is not now thinking of it; but he does now lovegeometry, because of that he is now thinking,—is not this similarly absurd? But we say quite
correctly, This person whom you perceive disputing about geometry is also a perfect musician, forhe both remembers music, and understands, and loves it; but although he both knows and loves it,
he is not now thinking of it, since he is thinking of geometry, of which he is disputing. And hence
we are warned that we have a kind of knowledge of certain things stored up in the recesses of themind, and that this, when it is thought of, as it were, steps forth in public, and is placed as if openly
in the sight of the mind; for then the mind itself finds that it both remembers, and understands, andloves itself, even although it was not thinking of itself, when it was thinking of something else. But
in the case of that of which we have not thought for a long time, and cannot think of it unlessreminded; that, if the phrase is allowable, in some wonderful way I know not how, we do not knowthat we know. In short, it is rightly said by him who reminds, to him whom he reminds, You know

258

NPNF (V1-03)

189

Philip Schaff

this, but you do not know that you know it; I will remind you, and you will find that you knowwhat you had thought you did not know. Books, too, lead to the same results, viz. those that are
written upon subjects which the reader under the guidance of reason finds to be true; not thosesubjects which he believes to be true on the faith of the narrator, as in the case of history; but thosewhich he himself also finds to be true, either of himself, or in that truth itself which is the light ofthe mind. But he who cannot contemplate these things, even when reminded, is too deeply buriedin the darkness of ignorance, through great blindness of heart and too wonderfully needs divine
help, to be able to attain to true wisdom.
10. For this reason I have wished to adduce some kind of proof, be it what it might, respecting
the act of conceiving, such as might serve to show in what way, out of the things contained in thememory, the mind’s eye is informed in recollecting, and some such thing is begotten, when a manconceives, as was already in him when, before he conceived, he remembered; because it is easier
to distinguish things that take place at successive times, and where the parent precedes the offspringby an interval of time. For if we refer ourselves to the inner memory of the mind by which it
remembers itself, and to the inner understanding by which it understands itself, and to the inner
will by which it loves itself, where these three always are together, and always have been together
since they began to be at all, whether they were being thought of or not; the image of this trinity
will indeed appear to pertain even to the memory alone; but because in this case a word cannot be
without a thought (for we think all that we say, even if it be said by that inner word which belongs
to no separate language), this image is rather to be discerned in these three things, viz. memory,
intelligence, will. And I mean now by intelligence that by which we understand in thought, that is,when our thought is formed by the finding of those things, which had been at hand to the memory
but were not being thought of; and I mean that will, or love, or preference which combines thisoffspring and parent, and is in some way common to both. Hence it was that I tried also, viz. in theeleventh book, to lead on the slowness of readers by means of outward sensible things which areseen by the eyes of the flesh; and that I then proceeded to enter with them upon that power of theinner man whereby he reasons of things temporal, deferring the consideration of that which dominates
as the higher power, by which he contemplates things eternal. And I discussed this in two books,
distinguishing the two in the twelfth, the one of them being higher and the other lower, and thatthe lower ought to be subject to the higher; and in the thirteenth I discussed, with what truth andbrevity I could, the office of the lower, in which the wholesome knowledge of things human is
contained, in order that we may so act in this temporal life as to attain that which is eternal; since,
indeed, I have cursorily included in a single book a subject so manifold and copious, and one sowell known by the many and great arguments of many and great men, while manifesting that atrinity exists also in it, but not yet one that can be called an image of God.

Chapter 8.—The Trinity Which is the Image of God is Now to Be Sought in the Noblest Part of
the Mind.
11. But we have come now to that argument in which we have undertaken to consider the noblest
part of the human mind, by which it knows or can know God, in order that we may find in it the259

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

image of God. For although the human mind is not of the same nature with God, yet the image ofthat nature than which none is better, is to be sought and found in us, in that than which our nature
also has nothing better. But the mind must first be considered as it is in itself, before it becomespartaker of God; and His image must be found in it. For, as we have said, although worn out anddefaced by losing the participation of God, yet the image of God still remains.878 For it is His image
in this very point, that it is capable of Him, and can be partaker of Him; which so great good isonly made possible by its being His image. Well, then, the mind remembers, understands, loves
itself; if we discern this, we discern a trinity, not yet indeed God, but now at last an image of God.
The memory does not receive from without that which it is to hold; nor does the understanding findwithout that which it is to regard, as the eye of the body does; nor has will joined these two fromwithout, as it joins the form of the bodily object and that which is thence wrought in the vision of
the beholder; nor has conception, in being turned to it, found an image of a thing seen without,which has been somehow seized and laid up in the memory, whence the intuition of him that
recollects has been formed, will as a third joining the two: as we showed to take place in thosetrinities which were discovered in things corporeal, or which were somehow drawn within frombodily objects by the bodily sense; of all which we have discoursed in the eleventh book.879 Nor,again, as it took place, or appeared to do so, when we went on further to discuss that knowledge,
which had its place now in the workings of the inner man, and which was to be distinguished from
wisdom; of which knowledge the subject-matter was, as it were, adventitious to the mind, and either
was brought thither by historical information,—as deeds and words, which are performed in timeand pass away, or which again are established in the nature of things in their own times andplaces,—or arises in the man himself not being there before, whether on the information of others,
or by his own thinking,—as faith, which we commended at length in the thirteenth book, or as thevirtues, by which, if they are true, one so lives well in this mortality as to live blessedly in thatimmortality which God promises. These and other things of the kind have their proper order intime, and in that order we discerned more easily a trinity of memory, sight, and love. For some ofsuch things anticipate the knowledge of learners. For they are knowable also before they are known,and beget in the learner a knowledge of themselves. And they either exist in their own proper places,or have happened in time past; although things that are past do not themselves exist, but only certain
signs of them as past, the sight or hearing of which makes it known that they have been and havepassed away. And these signs are either situate in the places themselves, as e.g. monuments of thedead or the like; or exist in written books worthy of credit, as is all history that is of weight andapproved authority; or are in the minds of those who already know them; since what is alreadyknown to them is knowable certainly to others also, whose knowledge it has anticipated, and whoare able to know it on the information of those who do know it. And all these things, when they
are learned, produce a certain kind of trinity, viz. by their own proper species, which was knowablealso before it was known, and by the application to this of the knowledge of the learner, which thenbegins to exist when he learns them, and by will as a third which combines both; and when they
are known, yet another trinity is produced in the recollecting of them, and this now inwardly in themind itself, from those images which, when they were learned, were impressed upon the memory,and from the informing of the thought when the look has been turned upon these by recollection,
878
879

Supra, c. iv.
Cc. 2 sq.

260

NPNF (V1-03)

190

Philip Schaff

and from the will which as a third combines these two. But those things which arise in the mind,
not having been there before, as faith and other things of that kind, although they appear to beadventitious, since they are implanted by teaching, yet are not situate without or transacted without,
as are those things which are believed; but began to be altogether within in the mind itself. For faith
is not that which is believed, but that by which it is believed; and the former is believed, the latterseen. Nevertheless, because it began to be in the mind, which was a mind also before these things
began to be in it, it seems to be somewhat adventitious, and will be reckoned among things past,when sight shall have succeeded, and itself shall have ceased to be. And it makes now by its presence,retained as it is, and beheld, and loved, a different trinity from that which it will then make bymeans of some trace of itself, which in passing it will have left in the memory: as has been alreadysaid above.

Chapter 9.—Whether Justice and the Other Virtues Cease to Exist in the Future Life.
12. There is, however, some question raised, whether the virtues likewise by which one lives
well in this present mortality, seeing that they themselves begin also to be in the mind, which wasa mind none the less when it existed before without them, cease also to exist at that time when they
have brought us to things eternal. For some have thought that they will cease, and in the case of
three—prudence, fortitude, temperance—such an assertion seems to have something in it; but
justice is immortal, and will rather then be made perfect in us than cease to be. Yet Tullius, thegreat author of eloquence, when arguing in the dialogue Hortensius, says of all four: “If we wereallowed, when we migrated from this life, to live forever in the islands of the blessed, as fables tell,what need were there of eloquence when there would be no trials, or what need, indeed, of the very
virtues themselves? For we should not need fortitude when nothing of either toil or danger was
proposed to us; nor justice, when there was nothing of anybody else’s to be coveted; nor temperance,
to govern lasts that would not exist; nor, indeed, should we need prudence, when there was no
choice offered between good and evil. We should be blessed, therefore, solely by learning andknowing nature, by which alone also the life of the gods is praiseworthy. And hence we may perceivethat everything else is a matter of necessity, but this is one of free choice.” This great orator, then,when proclaiming the excellence of philosophy, going over again all that he had learned fromphilosophers, and excellently and pleasantly explaining it, has affirmed all four virtues to benecessary in this life only, which we see to be full of troubles and mistakes; but not one of themwhen we shall have migrated from this life, if we are permitted to live there where is a blessed life;
but that blessed souls are blessed only in learning and knowing, i.e. in the contemplation of nature,than which nothing is better and more lovable. It is that nature which created and appointed allother natures. And if it belongs to justice to be subject to the government of this nature then justiceis certainly immortal; nor will it cease to be in that blessedness, but will be such and so great thatit cannot be more perfect or greater. Perhaps, too, the other three virtues—prudence although nolonger with any risk of error, and fortitude without the vexation of bearing evils, and temperance
without the thwarting of lust—will exist in that blessedness: so that it may be the part of prudence
to prefer or equal no good thing to God; and of fortitude, to cleave to Him most steadfastly; and of261

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

temperance, to be pleased by no harmful defect. But that which justice is now concerned with inhelping the wretched, and prudence in guarding against treachery, and fortitude in bearing troubles
patiently, and temperance in controlling evil pleasures, will not exist there, where there will be noevil at all. And hence those acts of the virtues which are necessary to this mortal life, like the faith
to which they are to be referred, will be reckoned among things past; and they make now a different
trinity, whilst we hold, look at, and love them as present, from that which they will then make,when we shall discover them not to be, but to have been, by certain traces of them which they will
have left in passing in the memory; since then, too, there will be a trinity, when that trace, be it ofwhat sort it may, shall be retained in the memory, and truly recognized, and then these two be joinedby will as a third.

Chapter 10.—How a Trinity is Produced by the Mind Remembering, Understanding, and Loving
Itself.

191

13. In the knowledge of all these temporal things which we have mentioned, there are someknowable things which precede the acquisition of the knowledge of them by an interval of time,
as in the case of those sensible objects which were already real before they were known, or of all
those things that are learned through history; but some things begin to be at the same time with theknowing of them,—just as, if any visible object, which did not exist before at all, were to rise up
before our eyes, certainly it does not precede our knowing it; or if there be any sound made where
there is some one to hear, no doubt the sound and the hearing that sound begin and end
simultaneously. Yet none the less, whether preceding in time or beginning to exist simultaneously,
knowable things generate knowledge, and are not generated by knowledge. But when knowledge
has come to pass, whenever the things known and laid up in memory are reviewed by recollection,
who does not see that the retaining them in the memory is prior in time to the sight of them inrecollection, and to the uniting of the two things by will as a third? In the mind, howver, it is not
so. For the mind is not adventitious to itself, as though there came to itself already existing, thatsame self not already existing, from somewhere else, or did not indeed come from somewhere else,
but that in the mind itself already existing, there was born that same mind not already existing; just
as faith, which before was not, arises in the mind which already was. Nor does the mind see itself,
as it were, set up in its own memory by recollection subsequently to the knowing of itself, as though
it was not there before it knew itself; whereas,doubtless, from the time when it began to be, it has
never ceased to remember, to understand, and to love itself, as we have already shown. And hence,
when it is turned to itself by thought, there arises a trinity, in which now at length we can discern
also a word; since it is formed from thought itself, will uniting both. Here, then, we may recognize,
more than we have hitherto done, the image of which we are in search.

Chapter 11.—Whether Memory is Also of Things Present.

262

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

14. But some one will say, That is not memory by which the mind, which is ever present toitself, is affirmed to remember itself; for memory is of things past, not of things present. For there
are some, and among them Cicero, who, in treating of the virtues, have divided prudence into thesethree—memory, understanding, forethought: to wit, assigning memory to things past, understanding
to things present, forethought to things future; which last is certain only in the case of those whoare prescient of the future; and this is no gift of men, unless it be granted from above, as to theprophets. And hence the book of Wisdom, speaking of men, “The thoughts of mortals,” it says,“are fearful, and our forethought uncertain.”880 But memory of things past, and understanding ofthings present, are certain: certain, I mean, respecting things incorporeal, which are present; forthings corporeal are present to the sight of the corporeal eyes. But let any one who denies that there
is any memory of things present, attend to the language used even in profane literature, whereexactness of words was more looked for than truth of things. “Nor did Ulysses suffer such things,
nor did the Ithacan forget himself in so great a peril.”881 For when Virgil said that Ulysses did notforget himself, what else did he mean, except that he remembered himself? And since he was present
to himself, he could not possibly remember himself, unless memory pertained to things present.
And, therefore, as that is called memory in things past which makes it possible to recall andremember them; so in a thing present, as the mind is to itself, that is not unreasonably to be called
memory, which makes the mind at hand to itself, so that it can be understood by its own thought,
and then both be joined together by love of itself.

Chapter 12.—The Trinity in the Mind is the Image of God, in that It Remembers, Understands, andLoves God, Which to Do is Wisdom.
15. This trinity, then, of the mind is not therefore the image of God, because the mind remembers
itself, and understands and loves itself; but because it can also remember, understand, and love
Him by whom it was made. And in so doing it is made wise itself. But if it does not do so, evenwhen it remembers, understands, and loves itself, then it is foolish. Let it then remember its God,after whose image it is made, and let it understand and love Him. Or to say the same thing more
briefly, let it worship God, who is not made, by whom because itself was made, it is capable andcan be partaker of Him; wherefore it is written, “Behold, the worship of God, that is wisdom.”882
And then it will be wise, not by its own light, but by participation of that supreme Light; and wherein
it is eternal, therein shall reign in blessedness. For this wisdom of man is so called, in that it is alsoof God. For then it is true wisdom; for if it is human, it is vain. Yet not so of God, as is that wherewith
God is wise. For He is not wise by partaking of Himself, as the mind is by partaking of God. But
as we call it the righteousness of God, not only when we speak of that by which He Himself isrighteous, but also of that which He gives to man when He justifies the ungodly, which latterrighteousness the apostle commending, says of some, that “not knowing the righteousness of God

880
881
882

Wisd. ix. 14.
Æneid, iii. 628, 629.
Job xxviii. 28.

263

NPNF (V1-03)

192

Philip Schaff

and going about to establish their own righteousness,they are not subject to the righteousness ofGod;”883 so also it may be said of some, that not knowing the wisdom of God and going about toestablish their own wisdom, they are not subject to the wisdom of God.
16. There is, then, a nature not made, which made all other natures, great and small, and iswithout doubt more excellent than those which it has made, and therefore also than that of which
we are speaking; viz. than the rational and intellectual nature, which is the mind of man, made after
the image of Him who made it. And that nature, more excellent than the rest, is God. And indeed“He is not far from every one of us,” as the apostle says, who adds, “For in Him we live, and are
moved, and have our being.”884 And if this were said in respect to the body, it might be understoodeven of this corporeal world; for in it too in respect to the body, we live, and are moved, and haveour being. And therefore it ought to be taken in a more excellent way, and one that is spiritual, notvisible, in respect to the mind, which is made after His image. For what is there that is not in Him,of whom it is divinely written, “For of Him, and through Him, and in Him, are all things”?885 If,then, all things are in Him, in whom can any possibly live that do live, or be moved that are moved,
except in Him in whom they are? Yet all are not with Him in that way in which it is said to Him,
“I am continually with Thee.”886 Nor is He with all in that way in which we say, The Lord be withyou. And so it is the especial wretchedness of man not to be with Him, without whom he cannot
be. For, beyond a doubt, he is not without Him in whom he is; and yet if he does not remember,and understand, and love Him, he is not with Him. And when any one absolutely forgets a thing,certainly it is impossible even to remind him of it.

Chapter 13.—How Any One Can Forget and Remember God.
17. Let us take an instance for the purpose from visible things. Somebody whom you do notrecognize, says to you, You know me; and in order to remind you, tells you where, when, and how
he became known to you; and if, after the mention of every sign by which you might be recalled
to remembrance, you still do not recognize him, then you have so come to forget, as that the wholeof that knowledge is altogether blotted out of your mind; and nothing else remains, but that you
take his word for it who tells you that you once knew him; or do not even do that, if you do notthink the person who speaks to you to be worthy of credit. But if you do remember him, then no
doubt you return to your own memory, and find in it that which had not been altogether blotted out
by forgetfulness. Let us return to that which led us to adduce this instance from the intercourse ofmen. Among other things, the 9th Psalm says, “The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all thenations. that forget God;”887 and again the 22d Psalm, “All the ends of the world shall be reminded,and turned unto the Lord.”888 These nations, then, will not so have forgotten God as to be unable
883
884
885
886
887
888

Rom. x. 3.
Acts xvii. 27, 28.
Rom. xi. 36.
Ps. lxxiii. 23.
Ps. ix. 17.
Ps. xxii. 27.

264

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

to remember Him when reminded of Him; yet, by forgetting God, as though forgetting their own
life, they had been turned into death, i.e. into hell.889 But when reminded they are turned to theLord, as though coming to life again by remembering their proper life which they had forgotten.
It is read also in the 94th Psalm, “Perceive now, ye who are unwise among the people; and ye fools,
when will ye be wise? He that planted the ear, shall He not hear?” etc.890 For this is spoken to those,
who said vain things concerning God through not understanding Him.

Chapter 14.—The Mind Loves God in Rightly Loving Itself; And If It Love Not God, It Must Be
Said to Hate Itself. Even a Weak and Erring Mind is Always Strong in Remembering,
Understanding, and Loving Itself. Let It Be Turned to God, that It May Be Blessed by
Remembering, Understanding, and Loving Him.

193

18. But there are yet more testimonies in the divine Scriptures concerning the love of God. For
in it, those other two [namely, memory and understanding] are understood by consequence, inasmuch
as no one loves that which he does not remember, or of which he is wholly ignorant. And hence isthat well known and primary commandment, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God.”891 The humanmind, then, is so constituted, that at no time does it not remember, and understand, and love itself.
But since he who hates any one is anxious to injure him, not undeservedly is the mind of man also
said to hate itself when it injures itself. For it wills ill to itself through ignorance, in that it does notthink that what it wills is prejudicial to it; but it none the less does will ill to itself, when it wills
what would be prejudicial to it. And hence it is written, “He that loveth iniquity, hateth his own
soul.”892 He, therefore, who knows how to love himself, loves God; but he who does not love God,even if he does love himself,—a thing implanted in him by nature,—yet is not unsuitably said tohate himself, inasmuch as he does that which is adverse to himself, and assails himself as though
he were his own enemy. And this is no doubt a terrible delusion, that whereas all will to profit
themselves, many do nothing but that which is most pernicious to themselves. When the poet was
describing a like disease of dumb animals, “May the gods,” says he, “grant better things to thepious, and assign that delusion to enemies. They were rending with bare teeth their own torn
limbs.”893 Since it was a disease of the body he was speaking of, why has he called it a delusion,
unless because, while nature inclines every animal to take all the care it can of itself, that disease
was such that those animals rent those very limbs of theirs which they desired should be safe andsound? But when the mind loves God, and by consequence, as has been said remembers andunderstands Him, then it is rightly enjoined also to love its neighbor as itself; for it has now cometo love itself rightly and not perversely when it loves God, by partaking of whom that image not
only exists, but is also renewed so as to be no longer old, and restored so as to be no longer defaced,

889
890
891
892
893

[Augustin here understands “Sheol,” to denote the place of retribution for the wicked.—W.G.T.S.]
Ps. xciv. 8, 9.
Deut. vi. 5.
Ps. xi. 5.
Virg. Georg. iii. 513–514.

265

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

and beatified so as to be no longer unhappy. For although it so love itself, that, supposing thealternative to be proposed to it, it would lose all things which it loves less than itself rather thanperish; still, by abandoning Him who is above it, in dependence upon whom alone it could guard
its own strength, and enjoy Him as its light, to whom it is sung in the Psalm, “I will guard mystrength in dependence upon Thee,”894 and again, “Draw near to Him, and be enlightened,”895—it
has been made so weak and so dark, that it has fallen away unhappily from itself too, to those things
that are not what itself is, and which are beneath itself, by affections that it cannot conquer, anddelusions from which it sees no way to return. And hence, when by God’s mercy now penitent, itcries out in the Psalms, “My strength faileth me; as for the light of mine eyes, it also is gone fromme.”896
19. Yet, in the midst of these evils of weakness and delusion, great as they are, it could not lose
its natural memory, understanding and love of itself. And therefore what I quoted above897 can berightly said, “Although man walketh in an image, surely he is disquieted in vain: he heapeth uptreasures, and knoweth not who shall gather them.”898 For why does he heap up treasures, unlessbecause his strength has deserted him, through which he would have God, and so lack nothing?
And why cannot he tell for whom he shall gather them, unless because the light of his eyes is takenfrom him? And so he does not see what the Truth saith, “Thou fool, this night thy soul shall be
required of thee. Then whose shall those things be which thou hast provided?”899 Yet because evensuch a man walketh in an image, and the man’s mind has remembrance, understanding, and loveof itself; if it were made plain to it that it could not have both, while it was permitted to choose one
and lose the other, viz. either the treasures it has heaped up, or the mind; who is so utterly without
mind, as to prefer to have the treasures rather than the mind? For treasures commonly are able tosubvert the mind, but the mind that is not subverted by treasures can live more easily andunencumberedly without any treasures. But who will be able to possess treasures unless it be bymeans of the mind? For if an infant, born as rich as you please, although lord of everything that isrightfully his, yet possesses nothing if his mind be unconscious, how can any one possibly possess
anything whose mind is wholly lost? But why say of treasures, that anybody, if the choice be given
him, prefers going without them to going without a mind; when there is no one that prefers, nay,
no one that compares them, to those lights of the body, by which not one man only here and there,
as in the case of gold, but every man, possesses the very heaven? For every one possesses by theeyes of the body whatever he gladly sees. Who then is there, who, if he could not keep both, butmust lose one, would not rather lose his treasures than his eyes? And yet if it were put to him on
the same condition, whether he would rather lose eyes than mind, who is there with a mind that
does not see that he would rather lose the former than the latter? For a mind without the eyes ofthe flesh is still human, but the eyes of the flesh without a mind are bestial. And who would notrather be a man, even though blind in fleshly sight, than a beast that can see?

894
895
896
897
898
899

Ps. lix. 9.
Ps. xxxiv. 5.
Ps. xxxviii. 10.
C. 4.
Ps. xxxix. 6.
Luke xii. 20.

266

NPNF (V1-03)

194

Philip Schaff

20. I have said thus much, that even those who are slower of understanding, to whose eyes orears this book may come, might be admonished, however briefly, how greatly even a weak anderring mind loves itself, in wrongly loving and pursuing things beneath itself. Now it could notlove itself if it were altogether ignorant of itself, i.e. if it did not remember itself, nor understanditself by which image of God within itself it has such power as to be able to cleave to Him whose
image it is. For it is so reckoned in the order, not of place, but of natures, as that there is none above
it save Him. When, finally, it shall altogether cleave to Him, then it will be one spirit, as the apostle
testifies, saying, “But he who cleaves to the Lord is one spirit.”900 And this by its drawing near topartake of His nature, truth, and blessedness, yet not by His increasing in His own nature, truth andblessedness. In that nature, then, when it happily has cleaved to it, it will live unchangeably, andwill see as unchangeable all that it does see. Then, as divine Scripture promises, “His desire will
be satisfied with good things,”901 good things unchangeable,—the very Trinity itself, its own God,
whose image it is. And that it may not ever thenceforward suffer wrong, it will be in the hidden
place of His presence,902 filled with so great fullness of Him, that sin thenceforth will never delightit. But now, when it sees itself, it sees something not unchangeable.

Chapter 15.—Although the Soul Hopes for Blessedness, Yet It Does Not Remember Lost
Blessedness, But Remembers God and the Rules of Righteousness. The Unchangeable Rulesof Right Living are Known Even to the Ungodly.
21. And of this certainly it feels no doubt, that it is wretched, and longs to be blessed nor canit hope for the possibility of this on any other ground than its own changeableness for if it were notchangeable, then, as it could not become wretched after being blessed, so neither could it become
blessed after being wretched. And what could have made it wretched under an omnipotent andgood God, except its own sin and the righteousness of its Lord? And what will make it blessed,
unless its own merit, and its Lord’s reward? But its merit, too, is His grace, whose reward will be
its blessedness; for it cannot give itself the righteousness it has lost, and so has not. For this it
received when man was created, and assuredly lost it by sinning. Therefore it receives righteousness,that on account of this it may deserve to receive blessedness; and hence the apostle truly says to it,
when beginning to be proud as it were of its own good, “For what hast thou that thou didst notreceive? Now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory as if thou hadst not received it?”903 But
when it rightly remembers its own Lord, having received His Spirit, then, because it is so taught
by an inward teaching, it feels wholly that it cannot rise save by His affection freely given, nor has
been able to fall save by its own defection freely chosen. Certainly it does not remember its own
blessedness; since that has been, but is not, and it has utterly forgotten it, and therefore cannot even

900
901
902
903

1 Cor. vi. 17.
Ps. ciii. 5.
Ps. xxxi. 20.
1 Cor. iv. 7.

267

NPNF (V1-03)

195

Philip Schaff

be reminded of it.904 But it believes what the trustworthy Scriptures of its God tell of that blessedness,
which were written by His prophet, and tell of the blessedness of Paradise, and hand down to us
historical information of that first both good and ill of man. And it remembers the Lord its God;for He always is, nor has been and is not, nor is but has not been; but as He never will not be, so
He never was not. And He is whole everywhere. And hence it both lives, and is moved, and is in
Him;905 and so it can remember Him. Not because it recollects the having known Him in Adam or
anywhere else before the life of this present body, or when it was first made in order to be implantedin this body; for it remembers nothing at all of all this. Whatever there is of this, it has been blotted
out by forgetfulness. But it is reminded, that it may be turned to God, as though to that light bywhich it was in some way touched, even when turned away from Him. For hence it is that even theungodly think of eternity, and rightly blame and rightly praise many things in the morals of men.
And by what rules do they thus judge, except by those wherein they see how men ought to live,
even though they themselves do not so live? And where do they see these rules? For they do not
see them in their own [moral] nature; since no doubt these things are to be seen by the mind, andtheir minds are confessedly changeable, but these rules are seen as unchangeable by him who cansee them at all; nor yet in the character of their own mind, since these rules are rules of righteousness,and their minds are confessedly unrighteous. Where indeed are these rules written, wherein eventhe unrighteous recognizes what is righteous, wherein he discerns that he ought to have what hehimself has not? Where, then, are they written, unless in the book of that Light which is called
Truth? whence every righteous law is copied and transferred (not by migrating to it, but by being
as it were impressed upon it) to the heart of the man that worketh righteousness; as the impression
from a ring passes into the wax, yet does not leave the ring. But he who worketh not, and yet sees
how he ought to work, he is the man that is turned away from that light, which yet touches him.
But he who does not even see how he ought to live, sins indeed with more excuse, because he is
not a transgressor of a law that he knows; but even he too is just touched sometimes by the splendor
of the everywhere present truth, when upon admonition he confesses.

Chapter 16.—How the Image of God is Formed Anew in Man.
22. But those who, by being reminded, are turned to the Lord from that deformity whereby they
were through worldly lusts conformed to this world, are formed anew from the world, when they
hearken to the apostle, saying, “Be not conformed to this world, but be ye formed again in the
renewing of your mind;”906 that that image may begin to be formed again by Him by whom it had
been formed at first. For that image cannot form itself again, as it could deform itself. He says again
elsewhere: “Be ye renewed in the spirit of your mind; and put ye on the new man, which after God

904[In the case of knowledge that is remembered, there is something latent and potential—as when past acquisitions arerecalled by a voluntary act of recollection. The same is true of innate ideas—these also are latent, and brought into consciousness
by reflection. But no man can either remember, or elicit, his original holiness and blessedness, because this is not latent andpotential, but wholly lost by the fall.—W.G.T.S.]
905
Acts xvii. 28.
906
Rom. xii. 2.

268

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

is created in righteousness and true holiness.”907 That which is meant by “created after God,” isexpressed in another place by “after the image of God.”908 But it lost righteousness and true holinessby sinning, through which that image became defaced and tarnished; and this it recovers when it
is formed again and renewed. But when he says, “In the spirit of your mind,” he does not intend to
be understood of two things, as though mind were one, and the spirit of the mind another; but hespeaks thus, because all mind is spirit, but all spirit is not mind. For there is a Spirit also that is
God,909 which cannot be renewed, because it cannot grow old. And we speak also of a spirit in man
distinct from the mind, to which spirit belong the images that are formed after the likeness of bodies;and of this the apostle speaks to the Corinthians, where he says, “But if I shall have prayed with atongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.”910 For he speaks thus, when thatwhich is said is not understood; since it cannot even be said, unless the images of the corporeal
articulate sounds anticipate the oral sound by the thought of the spirit. The soul of man is also calledspirit, whence are the words in the Gospel, “And He bowed His head, and gave up His spirit;”911
by which the death of the body, through the spirit’s leaving it, is signified. We speak also of thespirit of a beast, as it is expressly written in the book of Solomon called Ecclesiastes; “Who knoweth
the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?”912
It is written too in Genesis, where it is said that by the deluge all flesh died which “had in it thespirit of life.”913 We speak also of the spirit, meaning the wind, a thing most manifestly corporeal;
whence is that in the Psalms, “Fire and hail, snow and ice, the spirit of the storm.”914 Since spirit,
then, is a word of so many meanings, the apostle intended to express by “the spirit of the mind”
that spirit which is called the mind. As the same apostle also, when he says, “In putting off the bodyof the flesh,”915 certainly did not intend two things, as though flesh were one, and the body of theflesh another; but because body is the name of many things that have no flesh (for besides the flesh,there are many bodies celestial and bodies terrestrial), he expressed by the body of the flesh thatbody which is flesh. In like manner, therefore, by the spirit of the mind, that spirit which is mind.
Elsewhere, too, he has even more plainly called it an image, while enforcing the same thing in otherwords. “Do you,” he says, “putting off the old man with his deeds, put on the new man, which isrenewed in the knowledge of God after the image of Him that created him.”916 Where the one
passage reads, “Put ye on the new man, which is created after God,” the other has, “Put ye on the
new man, which is renewed after the image of Him that created him.”
In the one place he says, “After God;” in the other, “After the image of Him that created him.”
But instead of saying, as in the former passages “In righteousness and true holiness,” he has put inthe latter, “In the knowledge of God.” This renewal, then, and forming again of the mind, is wrought

907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916

Eph. iv. 23, 24.
Gen. i. 27.
John iv. 24.
1 Cor. xiv. 14.
John xix. 30.
Eccles. iii. 21.
Gen. vii. 22.
Ps. cxlviii. 8.
Col. ii. 11.
Col. iii. 9, 10.

269

NPNF (V1-03)

196

Philip Schaff

either after God, or after the image of God. But it is said to be after God, in order that it may not
be supposed to be after another creature; and to be after the image of God, in order that this renewing
may be understood to take place in that wherein is the image of God, i.e. in the mind. Just as wesay, that he who has departed from the body a faithful and righteous man, is dead after the body,not after the spirit. For what do we mean by dead after the body, unless as to the body or in thebody, and not dead as to the soul or in the soul? Or if we want to say he is handsome after the body,or strong after the body, not after the mind; what else is this, than that he is handsome or strong inbody, not in mind? And the same is the case with numberless other instances. Let us not therefore
so understand the words, “After the image of Him that created him,” as though it were a different
image after which he is renewed, and not the very same which is itself renewed.

Chapter 17.—How the Image of God in the Mind is Renewed Until the Likeness of God is Perfected
in It in Blessedness.
23. Certainly this renewal does not take place in the single moment of conversion itself, as that
renewal in baptism takes place in a single moment by the remission of all sins; for not one, be it
ever so small, remains unremitted. But as it is one thing to be free from fever, and another to growstrong again from the infirmity which the fever produced; and one thing again to pluck out of the
body a weapon thrust into it, and another to heal the wound thereby made by a prosperous cure; so
the first cure is to remove the cause of infirmity, and this is wrought by the forgiving of all sins;
but the second cure is to heal the infirmity itself, and this takes place gradually by making progressin the renewal of that image: which two things are plainly shown in the Psalm, where we read,“Who forgiveth all thine iniquities,” which takes place in baptism; and then follows, “and healeth
all thine infirmities;”917 and this takes place by daily additions, while this image is being renewed.918
And the apostle has spoken of this most expressly, saying, “And though our outward man perish,
yet the inner man is renewed day by day.”919 And “it is renewed in the knowledge of God, i.e. inrighteousness and true holiness,” according to the testimonies of the apostle cited a little before.
He, then, who is day by day renewed by making progress in the knowledge of God, and inrighteousness and true holiness, transfers his love from things temporal to things eternal, fromthings visible to things intelligible, from things carnal to things spiritual; and diligently perseveresin bridling and lessening his desire for the former, and in binding himself by love to the latter. And
he does this in proportion as he is helped by God. For it is the sentence of God Himself, “Without
me ye can do nothing.”920 And when the last day of life shall have found any one holding fast faith917

Ps. ciii. 3.
[Justification is instantaneous: sanctification is gradual. Baptism is the sign, not the cause, of the former. “As many ofus as were baptized into Jesus Christ, were baptized with reference to (εἰς) his death;” and “are intombed with him by thebaptism that has reference to (εἰς) his death.” Rom. vi. 3, 4. According to St. Paul, baptism supposes a trust in the atonementof Christ, and is a seal of it. In saying that “the forgiveness of all thine iniquity takes place in baptism,” Augustin is liable to beunderstood as teaching the efficiency of baptism in producing forgiveness. This is the weak side of the Post Nicene
soteriology.—W.G.T.S.]
919
2 Cor. iv. 16.
920
John xv. 5.
918

270

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

in the Mediator in such progress and growth as this, he will be welcomed by the holy angels, to be
led to God, whom he has worshipped, and to be made perfect by Him; and so will receive in theend of the world an incorruptible body, in order not to punishment, but to glory. For the likenessof God will then be perfected in this image, when the sight of God shall be perfected. And of thisthe Apostle Paul speaks: “Now we see through a glass, in an enigma, but then face to face.”921 Andagain: “But we with open face, beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into thesame image, from glory to glory, even as by the spirit of the Lord.”922 And this is what happens
from day to day in those that make good progress.

Chapter 18.—Whether the Sentence of John is to Be Understood of Our Future Likeness with the
Son of God in the Immortality Itself Also of the Body.

197

24. But the Apostle John says, “Beloved, now are we the sons of God; and it doth not yet appear
what we shall be: but we know that, when He shall appear, we shall be like Him, for we shall see
Him as He is.”923 Hence it appears, that the full likeness of God is to take place in that image of
God at that time when it shall receive the full sight of God. And yet this may also possibly seemto be said by the Apostle John of the immortality of the body. For we shall be like to God in this
too, but only to the Son, because He only in the Trinity took a body, in which He died and rose
again, and which He carried with Him to heaven above. For this, too, is called an image of the Sonof God, in which we shall have, as He has, an immortal body, being conformed in this respect not
to the image of the Father or of the Holy Spirit, but only of the Son, because of Him alone is it readand received by a sound faith, that “the Word was made flesh.”924 And for this reason the apostle
says, “Whom He did foreknow, He also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of His Son,that He might be the first-born among many brethren.”925 “The first-born” certainly “from thedead,”926 according to the same apostle; by which death His flesh was sown in dishonor, and rose
again in glory. According to this image of the Son, to which we are conformed in the body byimmortality, we also do that of which the same apostle speaks, “As we have borne the image ofthe earthy, so shall we also bear the image of the heavenly;”927 to wit, that we who are mortal afterAdam, may hold by a true faith, and a sure and certain hope, that we shall be immortal after Christ.
For so can we now bear the same image, not yet in sight, but in faith; not yet in fact, but in hope.
For the apostle, when he said this, was speaking of the resurrection of the body.

921
922
923
924
925
926
927

1 Cor. xiii. 12.
2 Cor. iii. 18.
1 John iii. 2.
John i. 14.
Rom. viii. 29.
Col. i. 18.
1 Cor. xv. 43, 49.

271

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 19.—John is Rather to Be Understood of Our Perfect Likeness with the Trinity in Life
Eternal. Wisdom is Perfected in Happiness.
25. But in respect to that image indeed, of which it is said, “Let us make man after our image
and likeness,”928 we believe,—and, after the utmost search we have been able to make,understand,—that man was made after the image of the Trinity, because it is not said, After my, orAfter thy image. And therefore that place too of the Apostle John must be understood rather
according to this image, when he says, “We shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is;”because he spoke too of Him of whom he had said, “We are the sons of God.”929 And the immortalityof the flesh will be perfected in that moment of the resurrection, of which the Apostle Paul says,“In the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump; and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and weshall be changed.”930 For in that very twinkling of an eye, before the judgment, the spiritual bodyshall rise again in power, in incorruption, in glory, which is now sown a natural body in weakness,in corruption, in dishonor. But the image which is renewed in the spirit of the mind in the knowledge
of God, not outwardly, but inwardly, from day to day, shall be perfected by that sight itself; whichthen after the judgment shall be face to face, but now makes progress as through a glass in an
enigma.931 And we must understand it to be said on account of this perfection, that “we shall belike Him, for we shall see Him as He is.” For this gift will be given to us at that time, when it shallhave been said, “Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you.”932 For thenwill the ungodly be taken away, so that he shall not see the glory of the Lord,933 when those on theleft hand shall go into eternal punishment, while those on the right go into life eternal.934 But “thisis eternal life,” as the Truth tells us; “to know Thee,” He says, “the one true God, and Jesus Christ
whom Thou hast sent.”935
26. This contemplative wisdom, which I believe is properly called wisdom as distinct fromknowledge in the sacred writings; but wisdom only of man, which yet man has not except from
Him, by partaking of whom a rational and intellectual mind can be made truly wise;—thiscontemplative wisdom, I say, it is that Cicero commends, in the end of the dialogue Hortensius,
when he says: “While, then, we consider these things night and day, and sharpen our understanding,which is the eye of the mind, taking care that it be not ever dulled, that is, while we live inphilosophy; we, I say, in so doing, have great hope that, if, on the one hand, this sentiment andwisdom of ours is mortal and perishable, we shall still, when we have discharged our human offices,
have a pleasant setting, and a not painful extinction, and as it were a rest from life: or if, on theother, as ancient philosophers thought,—and those, too, the greatest and far the most celebrated,—wehave souls eternal and divine, then must we needs think, that the more these shall have always kept

928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935

Gen. i. 26.
John iii. 2.
1 Cor. xv. 52.
1 Cor. xiii. 12.
Matt. xxv. 34.
Isa. xxvi. 10.
Matt. xxv. 46.
John xvii. 3.

272

NPNF (V1-03)

198

Philip Schaff

in their own proper course, i.e. in reason and in the desire of inquiry, and the less they shall havemixed and entangled themselves in the vices and errors of men, the more easy ascent and return
they will have to heaven.” And then he says, adding this short sentence, and finishing his discourse
by repeating it: “Wherefore, to end my discourse at last, if we wish either for a tranquil extinction,
after living in the pursuit of these subjects, or if to migrate without delay from this present home
to another in no little measure better, we must bestow all our labor and care upon these pursuits.”
And here I marvel, that a man of such great ability should promise to men living in philosophy,
which makes man blessed by contemplation of truth, “a pleasant setting after the discharge ofhuman offices, if this our sentiment and wisdom is mortal and perishable;” as if that which we did
not love, or rather which we fiercely hated, were then to die and come to nothing, so that its setting
would be pleasant to us! But indeed he had not learned this from the philosophers, whom he extols
with great praise; but this sentiment is redolent of that New Academy, wherein it pleased him to
doubt of even the plainest things. But from the philosophers that were greatest and far mostcelebrated, as he himself confesses, he had learned that souls are eternal. For souls that are eternal
are not unsuitably stirred up by the exhortation to be found in “their own proper course,” when theend of this life shall have come, i.e. “in reason and in the desire of inquiry,” and to mix and entangle
themselves the less in the vices and errors of men, in order that they may have an easier return toGod. But that course which consists in the love and investigation of truth does not suffice for the
wretched, i.e. for all mortals who have only this kind of reason, and are without faith in the Mediator;
as I have taken pains to prove, as much as I could, in former books of this work, especially in the
fourth and thirteenth.

199

Book XV.
————————————
Begins by setting forth briefly and in sum the contents of the previous fourteen books. The argument
is then shown to have reached so far as to allow of our now inquiring concerning the Trinity,
which is God, in those eternal, incorporeal, and unchangeable things themselves, in the perfectcontemplation of which a blessed life is promised to us. But this Trinity, as he shows, is here
seen by us as by a mirror and in an enigma, in that it is seen by means of the image of God,
which we are, as in a likeness that is obscure and hard of discernment. In like manner, it isshown, that some kind of conjecture and explanation may be gathered respecting the generationof the divine Word, from the word of our own mind, but only with difficulty, on account of theexceeding disparity which is discernible between the two words; and, again, respecting theprocession of the Holy Spirit, from the love that is joined thereto by the will.
Chapter 1.—God is Above the Mind.

273

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

1. Desiring to exercise the reader in the things that are made, in order that he may know Him
by whom they are made, we have now advanced so far as to His image, which is man, in that
wherein he excels the other animals, i.e. in reason or intelligence, and whatever else can be said of
the rational or intellectual soul that pertains to what is called the mind.936 For by this name some
Latin writers, after their own peculiar mode of speech, distinguish that which excels in man, andis not in the beast, from the soul,937 which is in the beast as well. If, then, we seek anything that is
above this nature, and seek truly, it is God,—namely, a nature not created, but creating. And whether
this is the Trinity, it is now our business to demonstrate not only to believers, by authority of divine
Scripture, but also to such as understand, by some kind of reason, if we can. And why I say, if wecan, the thing itself will show better when we have begun to argue about it in our inquiry.

Chapter 2.—God, Although Incomprehensible, is Ever to Be Sought. The Traces of the Trinity are
Not Vainly Sought in the Creature.

200

2. For God Himself, whom we seek, will, as I hope, help our labors, that they may not be
unfruitful, and that we may understand how it is said in the holy Psalm, “Let the heart of themrejoice that seek the Lord. Seek the Lord, and be strengthened: seek His face evermore.”938 For thatwhich is always being sought seems as though it were never found; and how then will the heart ofthem that seek rejoice, and not rather be made sad, if they cannot find what they seek? For it is not
said, The heart shall rejoice of them that find, but of them that seek, the Lord. And yet the prophet
Isaiah testifies, that the Lord God can be found when He is sought, when he says: “Seek ye theLord; and as soon as ye have found Him, call upon Him: and when He has drawn near to you, let
the wicked man forsake his ways, and the unrighteous man his thoughts.”939 If, then, when sought,
He can be found, why is it said, “Seek ye His face evermore?” Is He perhaps to be sought evenwhen found? For things incomprehensible must so be investigated, as that no one may think he has
found nothing, when he has been able to find how incomprehensible that is which he was seeking.
Why then does he so seek, if he comprehends that which he seeks to be incomprehensible, unlessbecause he may not give over seeking so long as he makes progress in the inquiry itself into things
incomprehensible, and becomes ever better and better while seeking so great a good, which is bothsought in order to be found, and found in order to be sought? For it is both sought in order that it
may be found more sweetly, and found in order that it may be sought more eagerly. The words of
Wisdom in the book of Ecclesiasticus may be taken in this meaning: “They who eat me shall still
be hungry, and they who drink me shall still be thirsty.”940 For they eat and drink because they find;and they still continue seeking because they are hungry and thirst. Faith seeks, understanding finds;
whence the prophet says, “Unless ye believe, ye shall not understand.”941 And yet, again,
936
937
938
939
940
941

Mens or animus.
Anima.
Ps. cv. 3, 4.
Isa. lv. 6, 7.
Ecclus. xxiv. 29.
Isa. vii. 9.

274

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

understanding still seeks Him, whom it finds; for “God looked down upon the sons of men,” as itis sung in the holy Psalm, “to see if there were any that would understand, and seek after God.”942
And man, therefore, ought for this purpose to have understanding, that he may seek after God.
3. We shall have tarried then long enough among those things that God has made, in order thatby them He Himself may be known that made them. “For the invisible things of Him from thecreation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made.”943 And hence
they are rebuked in the book of Wisdom, “who could not out of the good things that are seen know
Him that is: neither by considering the works did they acknowledge the workmaster; but deemed
either fire, or wind, or the swift air or the circle of the stars, or the violent water, or the lights ofheaven, to be the gods which govern the world: with whose beauty if they, being delighted, tookthem to be gods, let them know how much better the Lord of them is; for the first Author of beauty
hath created them. But if they were astonished at their power and virtue, let them understand bythem how much mightier He is that made them. For by the greatness and beauty of the creatures
proportionably the Maker of them is seen.”944 I have quoted these words from the book of Wisdom
for this reason, that no one of the faithful may think me vainly and emptily to have sought first in
the creature, step by step through certain trinities, each of their own appropriate kind, until I cameat last to the mind of man, traces of that highest Trinity which we seek when we seek God.

Chapter 3.—A Brief Recapitulation of All the Previous Books.
4. But since the necessities of our discussion and argument have compelled us to say a great
many things in the course of fourteen books, which we cannot view at once in one glance, so as tobe able to refer them quickly in thought to that which we desire to grasp, I will attempt, by the helpof God, to the best of my power, to put briefly together, without arguing, whatever I have establishedin the several books by argument as known, and to place, as it were, under one mental view, notthe way in which we have been convinced of each point, but the points themselves of which wehave been convinced; in order that what follows may not be so far separated from that which
precedes, as that the perusal of the former shall produce forgetfulness of the latter; or at any rate,
if it have produced such forgetfulness, that what has escaped the memory may be speedily recalledby re-perusal.
5. In the first book, the unity and equality of that highest Trinity is shown from Holy Scripture.
In the second, and third, and fourth, the same: but a careful handling of the question respecting thesending of the Son and of the Holy Spirit has resulted in three books; and we have demonstrated,that He who is sent is not therefore less than He who sends because the one sent, the other wassent; since the Trinity, which is in all things equal, being also equally in its own nature unchangeable,
and invisible, and everywhere present, works indivisibly. In the fifth,—with a view to those who
think that the substance of the Father and of the Son is therefore not the same, because they suppose

942
943
944

Ps. xiv. 2.
Rom. i. 20.
Wisd. xiii. 1–5.

275

NPNF (V1-03)

201

Philip Schaff

everything that is predicated of God to be predicated according to substance, and therefore contend
that to beget and to be begotten, or to be begotten and unbegotten, as being diverse, are diverse
substances,—it is demonstrated that not everything that is predicated of God is predicated according
to substance, as He is called good and great according to substance, or anything else that is predicatedof Him in respect to Himself, but that some things also are predicated relatively, i.e. not in respect
to Himself, but in respect to something which is not Himself; as He is called the Father in respect
to the Son, or the Lord in respect to the creature that serves Him; and that here, if anything thus
relatively predicated, i.e. predicated in respect to something that is not Himself, is predicated also
as in time, as, e.g., “Lord, Thou hast become our refuge,”945 then nothing happens to Him so as towork a change in Him, but He Himself continues altogether unchangeable in His own nature or
essence. In the sixth, the question how Christ is called by the mouth of the apostle “the power of
God and the wisdom of God,”946 is so far argued that the more careful handling of that question isdeferred, viz. whether He from whom Christ is begotten is not wisdom Himself, but only the fatherof His own wisdom, or whether wisdom begat wisdom. But be it which it may, the equality of the
Trinity became apparent in this book also, and that God was not triple, but a Trinity; and that the
Father and the Son are not, as it were, a double as opposed to the single Holy Spirit: for therein
three are not anything more than one. We considered, too, how to understand the words of Bishop
Hilary, “Eternity in the Father, form in the Image, use in the Gift.” In the seventh, the question is
explained which had been deferred: in what way that God who begat the Son is not only Father of
His own power and wisdom, but is Himself also power and wisdom; so, too, the Holy Spirit; andyet that they are not three powers or three wisdoms, but one power and one wisdom, as one God
and one essence. It was next inquired, in what way they are called one essence, three persons, orby some Greeks one essence, three substances; and we found that the words were so used throughthe needs of speech, that there might be one term by which to answer, when it is asked what thethree are, whom we truly confess to be three, viz. Father, and Son, and Holy Spirit. In the eighth,
it is made plain by reason also to those who understand, that not only the Father is not greater thanthe Son in the substance of truth, but that both together are not anything greater than the Holy Spirit
alone, nor that any two at all in the same Trinity are anything greater than one, nor all three together
anything greater than each severally. Next, I have pointed out, that by means of the truth, which isbeheld by the understanding, and by means of the highest good, from which is all good, and bymeans of the righteousness for which a righteous mind is loved even by a mind not yet righteous,
we might understand, so far as it is possible to understand, that not only incorporeal but alsounchangeable nature which is God; and by means, too, of love, which in the Holy Scriptures iscalled God,947 by which, first of all, those who have understanding begin also, however feebly, todiscern the Trinity, to wit, one that loves, and that which is loved, and love. In the ninth, the argument
advances as far as to the image of God, viz. man in respect to his mind; and in this we found a kindof trinity, i.e. the mind, and the knowledge whereby the mind knows itself, and the love whereby
it loves both itself and its knowledge of itself; and these three are shown to be mutually equal, andof one essence. In the tenth, the same subject is more carefully and subtly handled, and is brought
to this point, that we found in the mind a still more manifest trinity of the mind, viz. in memory,
945
946
947

Ps. xc. 1.
1 Cor. i. 24.
1 John iv. 16.

276

NPNF (V1-03)

202

Philip Schaff

and understanding, and will. But since it turned out also, that the mind could never be in such acase as not to remember, understand, and love itself, although it did not always think of itself; butthat when it did think of itself, it did not in the same act of thought distinguish itself from things
corporeal; the argument respecting the Trinity, of which this is an image, was deferred, in order tofind a trinity also in the things themselves that are seen with the body, and to exercise the reader’sattention more distinctly in that. Accordingly, in the eleventh, we chose the sense of sight, whereinthat which should have been there found to hold good might be recognized also in the other fourbodily senses, although not expressly mentioned; and so a trinity of the outer man first showed
itself in those things which are discerned from without, to wit, from the bodily object which is seen,
and from the form which is thence impressed upon the eye of the beholder, and from the purposeof the will combining the two. But these three things, as was patent, were not mutually equal andof one substance. Next, we found yet another trinity in the mind itself, introduced into it, as it were,by the things perceived from without; wherein the same three things, as it appeared, were of one
substance: the image of the bodily object which is in the memory, and the form thence impressed
when the mind’s eye of the thinker is turned to it, and the purpose of the will combining the two.
But we found this trinity to pertain to the outer man, on this account, that it was introduced into
the mind from bodily objects which are perceived from without. In the twelfth, we thought goodto distinguish wisdom from knowledge, and to seek first, as being the lower of the two, a kind of
appropriate and special trinity in that which is specially called knowledge; but that although wehave got now in this to something pertaining to the inner man, yet it is not yet to be either calledor thought an image of God. And this is discussed in the thirteenth book by the commendation of
Christian faith. In the fourteenth we discuss the true wisdom of man, viz. that which is granted him
by God’s gift in the partaking of that very God Himself, which is distinct from knowledge; and thediscussion reached this point, that a trinity is discovered in the image of God, which is man inrespect to his mind, which mind is “renewed in the knowledge” of God, “after the image of Him
that created” man;948 “after His own image;”949 and so obtains wisdom, wherein is the contemplationof things eternal.

Chapter 4.—What Universal Nature Teaches Us Concerning God.
6. Let us, then, now seek the Trinity which is God, in the things themselves that are eternal,
incorporeal, and unchangeable; in the perfect contemplation of which a blessed life is promised us,which cannot be other than eternal. For not only does the authority of the divine books declare that
God is; but the whole nature of the universe itself which surrounds us, and to which we also belong,proclaims that it has a most excellent Creator, who has given to us a mind and natural reason,
whereby to see that things living are to be preferred to things that are not living; things that havesense to things that have not; things that have understanding to things that have not; things immortal
to things mortal; things powerful to things impotent; things righteous to things unrighteous; things

948
949

Col. iii. 10.
Gen. i. 27.

277

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

beautiful to things deformed; things good to things evil; things incorruptible to things corruptible;
things unchangeable to things changeable; things invisible to things visible; things incorporeal tothings corporeal; things blessed to things miserable. And hence, since without doubt we place theCreator above things created, we must needs confess that the Creator both lives in the highest sense,and perceives and understands all things, and that He cannot die, or suffer decay, or be changed;
and that He is not a body, but a spirit, of all the most powerful, most righteous, most beautiful,most good, most blessed.

Chapter 5.—How Difficult It is to Demonstrate the Trinity by Natural Reason.
7. But all that I have said, and whatever else seems to be worthily said of God after the likefashion of human speech, applies to the whole Trinity, which is one God, and to the several Persons
in that Trinity. For who would dare to say either of the one God, which is the Trinity itself, or of
the Father, or Son, or Holy Spirit, either that He is not living, or is without sense or intelligence;or that, in that nature in which they are affirmed to be mutually equal, any one of them is mortal,
or corruptible, or changeable, or corporeal? Or is there any one who would deny that any one in
the Trinity is most powerful, most righteous, most beautiful, most good, most blessed? If, then,these things, and all others of the kind, can be predicated both of the Trinity itself, and of eachseveral one in that Trinity, where or how shall the Trinity manifest itself? Let us therefore first
reduce these numerous predicates to some limited number. For that which is called life in God, isitself His essence and nature. God, therefore, does not live, unless by the life which He is to Himself.
And this life is not such as that which is in a tree, wherein is neither understanding nor sense; norsuch as is in a beast, for the life of a beast possesses the fivefold sense, but has no understanding.
But the life which is God perceives and understands all things, and perceives by mind, not by body,
because “God is a spirit.”950 And God does not perceive through a body, as animals do, which havebodies, for He does not consist of soul and body. And hence that single nature perceives as it
understands, and understands as it perceives, and its sense and understanding are one and the same.
Nor yet so, that at any time He should either cease or begin to be; for He is immortal. And it is not
said of Him in vain, that “He only hath immortality.”951 For immortality is true immortality in His
case whose nature admits no change. That is also true eternity by which God is unchangeable,
without beginning, without end; consequently also incorruptible. It is one and the same thing,
therefore, to call God eternal, or immortal, or incorruptible, or unchangeable; and it is likewise one
and the same thing to say that He is living, and that He is intelligent, that is, in truth, wise. For He
did not receive wisdom whereby to be wise, but He is Himself wisdom. And this is life, and again
is power or might, and yet again beauty, whereby He is called powerful and beautiful. For what ismore powerful and more beautiful than wisdom, “which reaches from end to end mightily, andsweetly disposes all things”?952 Or do goodness, again, and righteousness, differ from each other

950
951
952

John iv. 24.
1 Tim. vi. 16.
Wisd. viii. 1.

278

NPNF (V1-03)

203

Philip Schaff

in the nature of God, as they differ in His works, as though they were two diverse qualities of
God—goodness one, and righteousness another? Certainly not; but that which is righteousness isalso itself goodness; and that which is goodness is also itself blessedness. And God is therefore
called incorporeal, that He may be believed and understood to be a spirit, not a body.
8. Further, if we say, Eternal, immortal, incorruptible, unchangeable, living, wise, powerful,
beautiful, righteous, good, blessed spirit; only the last of this list as it were seems to signify substance,
but the rest to signify qualities of that substance; but it is not so in that ineffable and simple nature.
For whatever seems to be predicated therein according to quality, is to be understood according tosubstance or essence. For far be it from us to predicate spirit of God according to substance, andgood according to quality; but both according to substance.953 And so in like manner of all those
we have mentioned, of which we have already spoken at length in the former books. Let us choose,
then, one of the first four of those in our enumeration and arrangement, i.e. eternal, immortal,
incorruptible, unchangeable; since these four, as I have argued already, have one meaning; in orderthat our aim may not be distracted by a multiplicity of objects. And let it be rather that which wasplaced first, viz. eternal. Let us follow the same course with the four that come next, viz. living,wise, powerful, beautiful. And since life of some sort belongs also to the beast, which has not
wisdom; while the next two, viz. wisdom and might, are so compared to one another in the case ofman, as that Scripture says, “Better is he that is wise than he that is strong;”954 and beauty, again,
is commonly attributed to bodily objects also: out of these four that we have chosen, let Wise be
the one we take. Although these four are not to be called unequal in speaking of God; for they are
four names, but one thing. But of the third and last four,—although it is the same thing in God tobe righteous that it is to be good or to be blessed; and the same thing to be a spirit that it is to berighteous, and good, and blessed; yet, because in men there can be a spirit that is not blessed, andthere can be one both righteous and good, but not yet blessed; but that which is blessed is doubtless
both just, and good, and a spirit,—let us rather choose that one which cannot exist even in men
without the three others, viz. blessed.

Chapter 6.—How There is a Trinity in the Very Simplicity of God. Whether and How the Trinitythat is God is Manifested from the Trinities Which Have Been Shown to Be in Men.
9. When, then, we say, Eternal, wise, blessed, are these three the Trinity that is called God? We
reduce, indeed, those twelve to this small number of three; but perhaps we can go further, andreduce these three also to one of them. For if wisdom and might, or life and wisdom, can be one
and the same thing in the nature of God, why cannot eternity and wisdom, or blessedness andwisdom, be one and the same thing in the nature of God? And hence, as it made no difference953[In the Infinite Being, qualities are inseparable from essence; in the finite being, they are separable. If man or angelceases to be good, or wise, or righteous, he does not thereby cease to be man or angel. But if God should lose goodness, wisdomor righteousness, he would no longer be God. This is the meaning of Augustin, when he says that “goodness” as well as “spirit”
must be predicated of God, “according to substance”—that is, that qualities in God are essential qualities. They are so one withthe essence, that they are inseparable.—W.G.T.S.]
954
Wisd. vi. 1.

279

NPNF (V1-03)

204

Philip Schaff

whether we spoke of these twelve or of those three when we reduced the many to the small number;so does it make no difference whether we speak of those three, or of that one, to the singularity ofwhich we have shown that the other two of the three may be reduced. What fashion, then, ofargument, what possible force and might of understanding, what liveliness of reason, whatsharp-sightedness of thought, will set forth how (to pass over now the others) this one thing, that
God is called wisdom, is a trinity? For God does not receive wisdom from any one as we receive
it from Him, but He is Himself His own wisdom; because His wisdom is not one thing, and His
essence another, seeing that to Him to be wise is to be. Christ, indeed, is called in the Holy Scriptures,“the power of God, and the wisdom of God.”955 But we have discussed in the seventh book how
this is to be understood, so that the Son may not seem to make the Father wise; and our explanation
came to this, that the Son is wisdom of wisdom, in the same way as He is light of light, God ofGod. Nor could we find the Holy Spirit to be in any other way than that He Himself also is wisdom,
and altogether one wisdom, as one God, one essence. How, then, do we understand this wisdom,which is God, to be a trinity? I do not say, How do we believe this? For among the faithful thisought to admit no question. But supposing there is any way by which we can see with theunderstanding what we believe, what is that way?
10. For if we recall where it was in these books that a trinity first began to show itself to ourunderstanding, the eighth book is that which occurs to us; since it was there that to the best of ourpower we tried to raise the aim of the mind to understand that most excellent and unchangeable
nature, which our mind is not. And we so contemplated this nature as to think of it as not far fromus, and as above us, not in place, but by its own awful and wonderful excellence, and in such wisethat it appeared to be with us by its own present light. Yet in this no trinity was yet manifest to us,
because in that blaze of light we did not keep the eye of the mind steadfastly bent upon seeking it;
only we discerned it in a sense, because there was no bulk wherein we must needs think themagnitude of two or three to be more than that of one. But when we came to treat of love, whichin the Holy Scriptures is called God,956 then a trinity began to dawn upon us a little, i.e. one thatloves, and that which is loved, and love. But because that ineffable light beat back our gaze, and it
became in some degree plain that the weakness of our mind could not as yet be tempered to it, we
turned back in the midst of the course we had begun, and planned according to the (as it were) morefamiliar consideration of our own mind, according to which man is made after the image of God,957
in order to relieve our overstrained attention; and thereupon we dwelt from the ninth to the fourteenth
book upon the consideration of the creature, which we are, that we might be able to understand andbehold the invisible things of God by those things which are made. And now that we have exercised
the understanding, as far as was needful, or perhaps more than was needful, in lower things, lo! wewish, but have not strength, to raise ourselves to behold that highest Trinity which is God. For insuch manner as we see most undoubted trinities, whether those which are wrought from withoutby corporeal things, or when these same things are thought of which were perceived from without;or when those things which take their rise in the mind, and do not pertain to the senses of the body,as faith, or as the virtues which comprise the art of living, are discerned by manifest reason, and,held fast by knowledge; or when the mind itself, by which we know whatever we truly say that we
955
956
957

1 Cor. i. 24.
1 John iv. 16.
Gen. i. 27.

280

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

know, is known to itself, or thinks of itself; or when that mind beholds anything eternal andunchangeable, which itself is not;—in such way, then, I say, as we see in all these instances mostundoubted trinities, because they are wrought in ourselves, or are in ourselves, when we remember,look at, or desire these things;—do we, I say, in such manner also see the Trinity that is God;because there also, by the understanding, we behold both Him as it were speaking, and His Word,i.e. the Father and the Son; and then, proceeding thence, the love common to both, namely, theHoly Spirit? These trinities that pertain to our senses or to our mind, do we rather see than believethem, but rather believe than see that God is a trinity? But if this is so, then doubtless we either do
not at all understand and behold the invisible things of God by those things that are made, or if webehold them at all, we do not behold the Trinity in them; and there is therein somewhat to behold,and somewhat also which we ought to believe, even though not beheld. And as the eighth bookshowed that we behold the unchangeable good which we are not, so the fourteenth reminded us
thereof, when we spoke of the wisdom that man has from God. Why, then, do we not recognize
the Trinity therein? Does that wisdom which God is said to be, not perceive itself, and not loveitself? Who would say this? Or who is there that does not see, that where there is no knowledge,
there in no way is there wisdom? Or are we, in truth, to think that the Wisdom which is God knows
other things, and does not know itself; or loves other things, and does not love itself? But if this isa foolish and impious thing to say or believe, then behold we have a trinity,—to wit, wisdom, andthe knowledge wisdom has of itself, and its love of itself. For so, too, we find a trinity in man also,i.e. mind, and the knowledge wherewith mind knows itself, and the love wherewith it loves itself.

Chapter 7.—That It is Not Easy to Discover the Trinity that is God from the Trinities We Have
Spoken of.

205

11. But these three are in such way in man, that they are not themselves man. For man, as theancients defined him, is a rational mortal animal. These things, therefore, are the chief things inman, but are not man themselves. And any one person, i.e. each individual man, has these three
things in his mind. But if, again, we were so to define man as to say, Man is a rational substanceconsisting of mind and body, then without doubt man has a soul that is not body, and a body thatis not soul. And hence these three things are not man, but belong to man, or are in man. If, again,
we put aside the body, and think of the soul by itself, the mind is somewhat belonging to the soul,as though its head, or eye, or countenance; but these things are not to be regarded as bodies. It is
not then the soul, but that which is chief in the soul, that is called the mind. But can we say that the
Trinity is in such way in God, as to be somewhat belonging to God, and not itself God? And hence
each individual man, who is called the image of God, not according to all things that pertain to his
nature, but according to his mind alone, is one person, and is an image of the Trinity in his mind.
But that Trinity of which he is the image is nothing else in its totality than God, is nothing else in
its totality than the Trinity. Nor does anything pertain to the nature of God so as not to pertain tothat Trinity; and the Three Persons are of one essence, not as each individual man is one person.
12. There is, again, a wide difference in this point likewise, that whether we speak of the mind
in a man, and of its knowledge and love; or of memory, understanding, will,—we remember nothing281

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffof the mind except by memory, nor understand anything except by understanding, nor love anything
except by will. But in that Trinity, who would dare to say that the Father understands neither
Himself, nor the Son, nor the Holy Spirit, except by the Son, or loves them except by the Holy
Spirit; and that He remembers only by Himself either Himself, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit; andin the same way that the Son remembers neither Himself nor the Father, except by the Father, norloves them except by the Holy Spirit; but that by Himself He only understands both the Father and
Son and Holy Spirit: and in like manner, that the Holy Spirit by the Father remembers both the
Father and the Son and Himself, and by the Son understands both the Father and the Son and
Himself; but by Himself only loves both Himself and the Father and the Son;—as though the Father
were both His own memory, and that of the Son and of the Holy Spirit; and the Son were theunderstanding of both Himself, and the Father and the Holy Spirit; but the Holy Spirit were thelove both of Himself, and of the Father and of the Son? Who would presume to think or affirm thisof that Trinity? For if therein the Son alone understands both for Himself and for the Father andfor the Holy Spirit, we have returned to the old absurdity, that the Father is not wise from Himself,
but from the Son, and that wisdom has not begotten wisdom, but that the Father is said to be wiseby that wisdom which He begat. For where there is no understanding there can be no wisdom; andhence, if the Father does not understand Himself for Himself, but the Son understands for the Father,assuredly the Son makes the Father wise. But if to God to be is to be wise, and essence is to Him
the same as wisdom, then it is not the Son that has His essence from the Father, which is the truth,
but rather the Father from the Son, which is a most absurd falsehood. And this absurdity, beyond
all doubt, we have discussed, disproved, and rejected, in the seventh book. Therefore God the Father
is wise by that wisdom by which He is His own wisdom, and the Son is the wisdom of the Father
from the wisdom which is the Father, from whom the Son is begotten; whence it follows that the
Father understands also by that understanding by which He is His own understanding (for he could
not be Wise that did not understand); and that the Son is the understanding of the Father, begottenof the understanding which is the Father. And this same may not be unfitly said of memory also.
For how is he wise, that remembers nothing, or does not remember himself? Accordingly, since
the Father is wisdom, and the Son is wisdom, therefore, as the Father remembers Himself, so does
the Son also remember Himself; and as the Father remembers both Himself and the Son, not by
the memory of the Son, but by His own, so does the Son remember both Himself and the Father,not by the memory of the Father, but by His own. Where, again, there is no love, who would say
there was any wisdom? And hence we must infer that the Father is in such way His own love, as
He is His own understanding and memory. And therefore these three, i.e. memory, understanding,love or will in that highest and unchangeable essence which is God, are, we see, not the Father andthe Son and the Holy Spirit, but the Father alone. And because the Son too is wisdom begotten of
wisdom, as neither the Father nor the Holy Spirit understands for Him, but He understands for
Himself; so neither does the Father remember for Him, nor the Holy Spirit love for Him, but He
remembers and loves for Himself: for He is Himself also His own memory, His own understanding,and His own love. But that He is so comes to Him from the Father, of whom He is born. And
because the Holy Spirit also is wisdom proceeding from wisdom, He too has not the Father for amemory, and the Son for an understanding, and Himself for love: for He would not be wisdom if
another remembered for Him, and yet another understood for Him, and He only loved for Himself;

282

NPNF (V1-03)

206

Philip Schaff

but Himself has all three things, and has them in such way that they are Himself. But that He is socomes to Him thence, whence He proceeds.
13. What man, then, is there who can comprehend that wisdom by which God knows all things,
in such wise that neither what we call things past are past therein, nor what we call things future
are therein waited for as coming, as though they were absent, but both past and future with things
present are all present; nor yet are things thought severally, so that thought passes from one toanother, but all things simultaneously are at hand in one glance;—what man, I say, is there thatcomprehends that wisdom, and the like prudence, and the like knowledge, since in truth even ourown wisdom is beyond our comprehension? For somehow we are able to behold the things that arepresent to our senses or to our understanding; but the things that are absent, and yet have once beenpresent, we know by memory, if we have not forgotten them. And we conjecture, too, not the pastfrom the future, but the future from the past, yet by all unstable knowledge. For there are some ofour thoughts to which, although future, we, as it were, look onward with greater plainness andcertainty as being very near; and we do this by the means of memory when we are able to do it, asmuch as we ever are able, although memory seems to belong not to the future, but to the past. And
this may be tried in the case of any words or songs, the due order of which we are rendering by
memory; for we certainly should not utter each in succession, unless we foresaw in thought whatcame next. And yet it is not foresight, but memory, that enables us to foresee it; for up to the very
end of the words or the song, nothing is uttered except as foreseen and looked forward to. And yet
in doing this, we are not said to speak or sing by foresight, but by memory; and if any one is morethan commonly capable of uttering many pieces in this way, he is usually praised, not for hisforesight, but for his memory. We know, and are absolutely certain, that all this takes place in our
mind or by our mind; but how it takes place, the more attentively we desire to scrutinize, the more
do both our very words break down, and our purpose itself fails, when by our understanding, if not
our tongue, we would reach to something of clearness. And do such as we are, think, that in sogreat infirmity of mind we can comprehend whether the foresight of God is the same as His memoryand His understanding, who does not regard in thought each several thing, but embraces all that
He knows in one eternal and unchangeable and ineffable vision? In this difficulty, then, and strait,
we may well cry out to the living God, “Such knowledge is too wonderful for me: it is high, I cannot
attain unto it.”958 For I understand by myself how wonderful and incomprehensible is Thy knowledge,
by which Thou madest me, when I cannot even comprehend myself whom Thou hast made! And
yet, “while I was musing, the fire burned,”959 so that “I seek Thy face evermore.”960

Chapter 8.—How the Apostle Says that God is Now Seen by Us Through a Glass.
14. I know that wisdom is an incorporeal substance, and that it is the light by which those things
are seen that are not seen by carnal eyes; and yet a man so great and so spiritual [as Paul] says,

958
959
960

Ps. cxxxix. 6.
Ps. xxxix. 3.
Ps. cv. 4.

283

NPNF (V1-03)

207

Philip Schaff“We see now through a glass, in an enigma, but then face to face.”961 If we ask what and of whatsort is this “glass,” this assuredly occurs to our minds, that in a glass nothing is discerned but animage. We have endeavored, then, so to do; in order that we might see in some way or other by
this image which we are, Him by whom we are made, as by a glass. And this is intimated also in
the words of the same apostle: “But we with open face, beholding as in a glass the glory of theLord, are transformed into the same image, from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.”962“Beholding as in a glass,”963 he has said, i.e. seeing by means of a glass, not looking from awatch-tower: an ambiguity that does not exist in the Greek language, whence the apostolic epistles
have been rendered into Latin. For in Greek, a glass,964 in which the images of things are visible,
is wholly distinct in the sound of the word also from a watch-tower,965 from the height of which
we command a more distant view. And it is quite plain that the apostle, in using the word
“speculantes” in respect to the glory of the Lord, meant it to come from “speculum,” not from“specula.” But where he says, “We are transformed into the same image,” he assuredly means to
speak of the image of God; and by calling it “the same,” he means that very image which we seein the glass, because that same image is also the glory of the Lord; as he says elsewhere, “For aman indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God,”966—atext already discussed in the twelfth book. He means, then, by “We are transformed,” that we arechanged from one form to another, and that we pass from a form that is obscure to a form that isbright: since the obscure form, too, is the image of God; and if an image, then assuredly also “glory,”in which we are created as men, being better than the other animals. For it is said of human nature
in itself, “The man ought not to cover his head, because he is the image and glory of God.” And
this nature, being the most excellent among things created, is transformed from a form that is
defaced into a form that is beautiful, when it is justified by its own Creator from ungodliness. Sinceeven in ungodliness itself, the more the faultiness is to be condemned, the more certainly is thenature to be praised. And therefore he has added, “from glory to glory:” from the glory of creation
to the glory of justification. Although these words, “from glory to glory,” may be understood also
in other ways;—from the glory of faith to the glory of sight, from the glory whereby we are sonsof God to the glory whereby we shall be like Him, because “we shall see Him as He is.”967 But inthat he has added “as from the Spirit of the Lord,” he declares that the blessing of so desirable atransformation is conferred upon us by the grace of God.

Chapter 9.—Of the Term “Enigma,” And of Tropical Modes of Speech.

961
962
963
964
965
966
967

1 Cor. xiii. 12.
2 Cor. iii. 18.
Speculantes.
Speculum.
Specula.
1 Cor. xi. 7.
1 John iii. 2.

284

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

15. What has been said relates to the words of the apostle, that “we see now through a glass;”
but whereas he has added, “in an enigma,” the meaning of this addition is unknown to any who areunacquainted with the books that contain the doctrine of those modes of speech, which the Greeks
call Tropes, which Greek word we also use in Latin. For as we more commonly speak of schemata
than of figures, so we more commonly speak of tropes than of modes. And it is a very difficult anduncommon thing to express the names of the several modes or tropes in Latin, so as to refer its
appropriate name to each. And hence some Latin translators, through unwillingness to employ a
Greek word, where the apostle says, “Which things are an allegory,”968 have rendered it by acircumlocution—Which things signify one thing by another. But there are several species of thiskind of trope that is called allegory, and one of them is that which is called enigma. Now thedefinition of the generic term must necessarily embrace also all its species; and hence, as every
horse is an animal, but not every animal is a horse, so every enigma is an allegory, but every allegory
is not an enigma. What then is an allegory, but a trope wherein one thing is understood from another?
as in the Epistle to the Thessalonians, “Let us not therefore sleep, as do others; but let us watch andbe sober: for they who sleep, sleep in the night; and they who are drunken, are drunken in the night:
but let us who are of the day, be sober.”969 But this allegory is not an enigma. for here the meaning
is patent to all but the very dull; but an enigma is, to explain it briefly, an obscure allegory, as,e.g., “The horseleech had three daughters,”970 and other like instances. But when the apostle spokeof an allegory, he does not find it in the words, but in the fact; since he has shown that the two
Testaments are to be understood by the two sons of Abraham, one by a bondmaid, and the otherby a free woman, which was a thing not said, but also done. And before this was explained, it was
obscure; and accordingly such an allegory, which is the generic name, could be specifically called
an enigma.
16. But because it is not only those that are ignorant of the books that contain the doctrine oftropes, who inquire the apostle’s meaning, when he said that we “see now in an enigma,” but those,
too, who are acquainted with the doctrine, but yet desire to know what that enigma is in which “wenow see;” we must find a single meaning for the two phrases, viz. for that which says, “we see now
through a glass,” and for that which adds, “in an enigma.” For it makes but one sentence, when thewhole is so uttered, “We see now through a glass in an enigma.” Accordingly, as far as my judgment
goes, as by the word glass he meant to signify an image, so by that of enigma any likeness you
will, but yet one obscure, and difficult to see through. While, therefore, any likenesses whatever
may be understood as signified by the apostle when he speaks of a glass and an enigma, so thatthey are adapted to the understanding of God, in such way as He can be understood; yet nothing isbetter adapted to this purpose than that which is not vainly called His image. Let no one, then,wonder, that we labor to see in any way at all, even in that fashion of seeing which is granted to us
in this life, viz. through a glass, in an enigma. For we should not hear of an enigma in this place ifsight were easy. And this is a yet greater enigma, that we do not see what we cannot but see. For
who does not see his own thought? And yet who does see his own thought, I do not say with the

968
969
970

Gal. iv. 24.
1 Thess. v. 6–8.
Prov. xxx. 15.

285

NPNF (V1-03)

208

Philip Schaff

eye of the flesh, but with the inner sight itself? Who does not see it, and who does see it? Since
thought is a kind of sight of the mind; whether those things are present which are seen also by thebodily eyes, or perceived by the other senses; or whether they are not present, but their likenesses
are discerned by thought; or whether neither of these is the case, but things are thought of that areneither bodily things nor likenesses of bodily things, as the virtues and vices; or as, indeed, thought
itself is thought of; or whether it be those things which are the subjects of instruction and of liberalsciences; or whether the higher causes and reasons themselves of all these things in the unchangeable
nature are thought of; or whether it be even evil, and vain, and false things that we are thinking of,with either the sense not consenting, or erring in its consent.

Chapter 10.—Concerning the Word of the Mind, in Which We See the Word of God, as in a Glassand an Enigma.
17. But let us now speak of those things of which we think as known, and have in our knowledge
even if we do not think of them; whether they belong to the contemplative knowledge, which, asI have argued, is properly to be called wisdom, or to the active which is properly to be calledknowledge. For both together belong to one mind, and are one image of God. But when we treatof the lower of the two distinctly and separately, then it is not to be called an image of God, althougheven then, too, some likeness of that Trinity may be found in it; as we showed in the thirteenth
book. We speak now, therefore, of the entire knowledge of man altogether, in which whatever isknown to us is known; that, at any rate, which is true; otherwise it would not be known. For no one
knows what is false, except when he knows it to be false; and if he knows this, then he knows what
is true: for it is true that that is false. We treat, therefore, now of those things which we think as
known, and which are known to us even if they are not being thought of. But certainly, if we would
utter them in words, we can only do so by thinking them. For although there were no words spoken,
at any rate, he who thinks speaks in his heart. And hence that passage in the book of Wisdom:“They said within themselves, thinking not aright.”971 For the words, “They said within themselves,”
are explained by the addition of “thinking.” A like passage to this is that in the Gospel,—that certain
scribes, when they heard the Lord’s words to the paralytic man, “Be of good cheer, my son, thysins are forgiven thee,” said within themselves, “This man blasphemeth.” For how did they “saywithin themselves,” except by thinking? Then follows, “And when Jesus saw their thoughts, He
said, Why think ye evil in your thoughts?”972 So far Matthew. But Luke narrates the same thing
thus: “The scribes and Pharisees began to think, saying, Who is this that speaketh blasphemies?
Who can forgive sins but God alone? But when Jesus perceived their thoughts, He, answering, said
unto them, What think ye in your hearts?”973 That which in the book of Wisdom is, “They said,
thinking,” is the same here with, “They thought, saying.” For both there and here it is declared,that they spake within themselves, and in their own heart, i.e. spake by thinking. For they “spake

971
972
973

Wisd. ii. 1.
Matt. ix. 2–4.
Luke v. 21, 22.

286

NPNF (V1-03)

209

Philip Schaff

within themselves,” and it was said to them, “What think ye?” And the Lord Himself says of thatrich man whose ground brought forth plentifully, “And he thought within himself, saying.”974
18. Some thoughts, then, are speeches of the heart, wherein the Lord also shows that there is amouth, when He says, “Not that which entereth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which
proceedeth out of the mouth, that defileth a man.” In one sentence He has comprised two diverse
mouths of the man, one of the body, one of the heart. For assuredly, that from which they thought
the man to be defiled, enters into the mouth of the body; but that from which the Lord said the man
was defiled, proceedeth out of the mouth of the heart. So certainly He Himself explained what He
had said. For a little after, He says also to His disciples concerning the same thing: “Are ye also
yet without understanding? Do ye not understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth
into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?” Here He most certainly pointed to the mouth of the
body. But in that which follows He plainly speaks of the mouth of the heart, where He says, “Butthose 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,”975 etc. What is clearer than this explanation? And yet,when we call thoughts speeches of the heart, it does not follow that they are not also acts of sight,
arising from the sight of knowledge, when they are true. For when these things are done outwardly
by means of the body, then speech and sight are different things; but when we think inwardly, thetwo are one,—just as sight and hearing are two things mutually distinct in the bodily senses, but
to see and hear are the same thing in the mind; and hence, while speech is not seen but rather heard
outwardly, yet the inward speeches, i.e. thoughts, are said by the holy Gospel to have been seen,
not heard, by the Lord. “They said within themselves, This man blasphemeth,” says the Gospel;and then subjoined, “And when Jesus saw their thoughts.” Therefore He saw, what they said. For
by His own thought He saw their thoughts, which they supposed no one saw but themselves.
19. Whoever, then, is able to understand a word, not only before it is uttered in sound, but also
before the images of its sounds are considered in thought,—for this it is which belongs to no tongue,
to wit, of those which are called the tongues of nations, of which our Latin tongue is one;—whoever,I say, is able to understand this, is able now to see through this glass and in this enigma somelikeness of that Word of whom it is said, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with
God, and the Word was God.”976 For of necessity, when we speak what is true, i.e. speak what weknow, there is born from the knowledge itself which the memory retains, a word that is altogetherof the same kind with that knowledge from which it is born. For the thought that is formed by thething which we know, is the word which we speak in the heart: which word is neither Greek nor
Latin, nor of any other tongue. But when it is needful to convey this to the knowledge of those towhom we speak, then some sign is assumed whereby to signify it. And generally a sound, sometimes
a nod, is exhibited, the former to the ears, the latter to the eyes, that the word which we bear in our
mind may become known also by bodily signs to the bodily senses. For what is to nod or beckon,
except to speak in some way to the sight? And Holy Scripture gives its testimony to this; for weread in the Gospel according to John: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, that one of you shall betray
me. Then the disciples looked one upon another, doubting of whom He spake. Now there wasleaning on Jesus’ breast one of His disciples whom Jesus loved. Simon Peter therefore beckons to
974
975
976

Luke xii. 17.
Matt. xv. 10–20.
John i. 1.

287

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

him, and says to him, Who is it of whom He speaks?”977 Here he spoke by beckoning what he did
not venture to speak by sounds. But whereas we exhibit these and the like bodily signs either toears or eyes of persons present to whom we speak, letters have been invented that we might be able
to converse also with the absent; but these are signs of words, as words themselves are signs in ourconversation of those things which we think.

Chapter 11.—The Likeness of the Divine Word, Such as It Is, is to Be Sought, Not in Our Own
Outer and Sensible Word, But in the Inner and Mental One. There is the Greatest Possible
Unlikeness Between Our Word and Knowledge and the Divine Word and Knowledge.

210

20. Accordingly, the word that sounds outwardly is the sign of the word that gives light inwardly;
which latter has the greater claim to be called a word. For that which is uttered with the mouth of
the flesh, is the articulate sound of a word; and is itself also called a word, on account of that to
make which outwardly apparent it is itself assumed. For our word is so made in some way into anarticulate sound of the body, by assuming that articulate sound by which it may be manifested tomen’s senses, as the Word of God was made flesh, by assuming that flesh in which itself also might
be manifested to men’s senses. And as our word becomes an articulate sound, yet is not changed
into one; so the Word of God became flesh, but far be it from us to say He was changed into flesh.
For both that word of ours became an articulate sound, and that other Word became flesh, byassuming it, not by consuming itself so as to be changed into it. And therefore whoever desires toarrive at any likeness, be it of what sort it may, of the Word of God, however in many respects
unlike, must not regard the word of ours that sounds in the ears, either when it is uttered in anarticulate sound or when it is silently thought. For the words of all tongues that are uttered in soundare also silently thought, and the mind runs over verses while the bodily mouth is silent. And not
only the numbers of syllables, but the tunes also of songs, since they are corporeal, and pertain tothat sense of the body which is called hearing, are at hand by certain incorporeal images appropriate
to them, to those who think of them, and who silently revolve all these things. But we must passby this, in order to arrive at that word of man, by the likeness of which, be it of what sort it may,
the Word of God may be somehow seen as in an enigma. Not that word which was spoken to thisor that prophet, and of which it is said, “Now the word of God grew and multiplied;”978 and again,“Faith then cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ;”979 and again, “When ye received
the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men but, as it is in truth,
the word of God”980 (and there are countless other like sayings in the Scriptures respecting the wordof God, which is disseminated in the sounds of many and diverse languages through the hearts andmouths of men; and which is therefore called the word of God, because the doctrine that is delivered
is not human, but divine);—but we are now seeking to see, in whatsoever way we can, by means

977
978
979
980

John xiii. 21–24.
Acts vi. 7.
Rom. x. 17.
1 Thess. ii. 13.

288

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffof this likeness, that Word of God of which it is said, “The Word was God;” of which it is said,“All things were made by Him;” of which it is said, “The Word became flesh;” of which it is said
“The Word of God on high is the fountain of wisdom.”981 We must go on, then, to that word ofman, to the word of the rational animal, to the word of that image of God, that is not born of God,but made by God; which is neither utterable in sound nor capable of being thought under the likenessof sound such as must needs be with the word of any tongue; but which precedes all the signs bywhich it is signified, and is begotten from the knowledge that continues in the mind, when thatsame knowledge is spoken inwardly according as it really is. For the sight of thinking is exceedingly
like the sight of knowledge. For when it is uttered by sound, or by any bodily sign, it is not utteredaccording as it really is, but as it can be seen or heard by the body. When, therefore, that is in theword which is in the knowledge, then there is a true word, and truth, such as is looked for fromman; such that what is in the knowledge is also in the word, and what is not in the knowledge isalso not in the word. Here may be recognized, “Yea, yea; nay, nay.”982 And so this likeness of theimage that is made, approaches as nearly as is possible to that likeness of the image that is born,by which God the Son is declared to be in all things like in substance to the Father. We must noticein this enigma also another likeness of the word of God; viz. that, as it is said of that Word, “Allthings were made by Him,” where God is declared to have made the universe by His only-begotten
Son, so there are no works of man that are not first spoken in his heart: whence it is written, “A
word is the beginning of every work.”983 But here also, it is when the word is true, that then it is
the beginning of a good work. And a word is true when it is begotten from the knowledge of working
good works, so that there too may be preserved the “yea yea, nay nay;” in order that whatever isin that knowledge by which we are to live, may be also in the word by which we are to work, andwhatever is not in the one may not be in the other. Otherwise such a word will be a lie, not truth;
and what comes thence will be a sin, and not a good work. There is yet this other likeness of theWord of God in this likeness of our word, that there can be a word of ours with no work following
it, but there cannot be any work unless a word precedes; just as the Word of God could have existed
though no creature existed, but no creature could exist unless by that Word by which all things are
made. And therefore not God the Father, not the Holy Spirit, not the Trinity itself, but the Son only,
which is the Word of God, was made flesh; although the Trinity was the maker: in order that wemight live rightly through our word following and imitating His example, i.e. by having no lie ineither the thought or the work of our word. But this perfection of this image is one to be at sometime hereafter. In order to attain this it is that the good master teaches us by Christian faith, and by
pious doctrine, that “with face unveiled” from the veil of the law, which is the shadow of things tocome, “beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord,” i.e. gazing at it through a glass, “we may betransformed into the same image from glory to glory, as by the Spirit of the Lord;”984 as we explained
above.
21. When, therefore, this image shall have been renewed to perfection by this transformation,then we shall be like God, because we shall see Him, not through a glass, but “as He is;”985 which
981
982
983
984
985

Ecclus. i. 5.
Matt. v. 37.
Ecclus. xxxvii. 20.
2 Cor. iii. 17.
1 John iii. 4.

289

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

the Apostle Paul expresses by “face to face.”986 But now, who can explain how great is the unlikenessalso, in this glass, in this enigma, in this likeness such as it is? Yet I will touch upon some points,
as I can, by which to indicate it.

Chapter 12.—The Academic Philosophy.

211

First, of what sort and how great is the very knowledge itself that a man can attain, be he everso skillful and learned, by which our thought is formed with truth, when we speak what we know?
For to pass by those things that come into the mind from the bodily senses, among which so manyare otherwise than they seem to be, that he who is overmuch pressed down by their resemblance
to truth, seems sane to himself, but really is not sane;—whence it is that the Academic987 philosophy
has so prevailed as to be still more wretchedly insane by doubting all things;—passing by, then,those things that come into the mind by the bodily senses, how large a proportion is left of things
which we know in such manner as we know that we live? In regard to this, indeed, we are absolutely
without any fear lest perchance we are being deceived by some resemblance of the truth; since itis certain, that he who is deceived, yet lives. And this again is not reckoned among those objectsof sight that are presented from without, so that the eye may be deceived in it; in such way as it iswhen an oar in the water looks bent, and towers seem to move as you sail past them, and a thousand
other things that are otherwise than they seem to be: for this is not a thing that is discerned by theeye of the flesh. The knowledge by which we know that we live is the most inward of all knowledge,of which even the Academic cannot insinuate: Perhaps you are asleep, and do not know it, and you
see things in your sleep. For who does not know that what people see in dreams is precisely likewhat they see when awake? But he who is certain of the knowledge of his own life, does not thereinsay, I know I am awake, but, I know I am alive; therefore, whether he be asleep or awake, he isalive. Nor can he be deceived in that knowledge by dreams; since it belongs to a living man bothto sleep and to see in sleep. Nor can the Academic again say, in confutation of this knowledge:
Perhaps you are mad, and do not know it: for what madmen see is precisely like what they also see
who are sane; but he who is mad is alive. Nor does he answer the Academic by saying, I know I
am not mad, but, I know I am alive. Therefore he who says he knows he is alive, can neither be
deceived nor lie. Let a thousand kinds, then, of deceitful objects of sight be presented to him whosays, I know I am alive; yet he will fear none of them, for he who is deceived yet is alive. But if
such things alone pertain to human knowledge, they are very few indeed; unless that they can be
so multiplied in each kind, as not only not to be few, but to reach in the result to infinity. For he
who says, I know I am alive, says that he knows one single thing. Further, if he says, I know that
I know I am alive, now there are two; but that he knows these two is a third thing to know. And so
he can add a fourth and a fifth, and innumerable others, if he holds out. But since he cannot either
comprehend an innumerable number by additions of units, or say a thing innumerable times, he

986
987

1 Cor. xiii. 12.
[Not the Old Academy of Plato and his immediate disciples, who were anti-skeptical; but the new Academy, to which
Augustin has previously referred (XIV. xix. 26). This was skeptical—W.G.T.S.]

290

NPNF (V1-03)

212

Philip Schaff

comprehends this at least, and with perfect certainty, viz. that this is both true and so innumerable
that he cannot truly comprehend and say its infinite number. This same thing may be noticed also
in the case of a will that is certain. For it would be an impudent answer to make to any one whoshould say, I will to be happy, that perhaps you are deceived. And if he should say, I know that I
will this, and I know that I know it, he can add yet a third to these two, viz. that he knows thesetwo; and a fourth, that he knows that he knows these two; and so on ad infinitum. Likewise, if any
one were to say, I will not to be mistaken; will it not be true, whether he is mistaken or whether heis not, that nevertheless he does will not to be mistaken? Would it not be most impudent to say tohim, Perhaps you are deceived? when beyond doubt, whereinsoever he may be deceived, he isnevertheless not deceived in thinking that he wills not to be deceived. And if he says he knows this,he adds any number he chooses of things known, and perceives that number to be infinite. For he
who says, I will not to be deceived, and I know that I will not to be so, and I know that I know it,is able now to set forth an infinite number here also, however awkward may be the expression of
it. And other things too are to be found capable of refuting the Academics, who contend that man
can know nothing. But we must restrict ourselves, especially as this is not the subject we haveundertaken in the present work. There are three books of ours on that subject,988 written in the earlytime of our conversion, which he who can and will read, and who understands them, will doubtless
not be much moved by any of the many arguments which they have found out against the discoveryof truth. For whereas there are two kinds of knowable things,—one, of those things which the mind
perceives by the bodily senses; the other, of those which it perceives by itself,—these philosophers
have babbled much against the bodily senses, but have never been able to throw doubt upon thosemost certain perceptions of things true, which the mind knows by itself, such as is that which I havementioned, I know that I am alive. But far be it from us to doubt the truth of what we have learned
by the bodily senses; since by them we have learned to know the heaven and the earth, and those
things in them which are known to us, so far as He who created both us and them has willed them
to be within our knowledge. Far be it from us too to deny, that we know what we have learned by
the testimony of others: otherwise we know not that there is an ocean; we know not that the lands
and cities exist which most copious report commends to us; we know not that those men were, andtheir works, which we have learned by reading history; we know not the news that is daily brought
us from this quarter or that, and confirmed by consistent and conspiring evidence; lastly, we know
not at what place or from whom we have been born: since in all these things we have believed thetestimony of others. And if it is most absurd to say this, then we must confess, that not only ourown senses, but those of other persons also, have added very much indeed to our knowledge.
22. All these things, then, both those which the human mind knows by itself, and those which
it knows by the bodily senses, and those which it has received and knows by the testimony of others,
are laid up and retained in the storehouse of the memory; and from these is begotten a word that istrue when we speak what we know, but a word that is before all sound, before all thought of asound. For the word is then most like to the thing known, from which also its image is begotten,
since the sight of thinking arises from the sight of knowledge; when it is a word belonging to no
tongue, but is a true word concerning a true thing, having nothing of its own, but wholly derived
from that knowledge from which it is born. Nor does it signify when he learned it, who speaks what

988

Libri Tres contra Academicos.

291

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

he knows; for sometimes he says it immediately upon learning it; provided only that the word istrue, i.e. sprung from things that are known.

Chapter 13.—Still Further of the Difference Between the Knowledge and Word of Our Mind, andthe Knowledge and Word of God.
But is it so, that God the Father, from whom is born the Word that is God of God,—is it so,then, that God the Father, in respect to that wisdom which He is to Himself, has learned some things
by His bodily senses, and others by Himself? Who could say this, who thinks of God, not as arational animal, but as One above the rational soul? So far at least as He can be thought of, by those
who place Him above all animals and all souls, although they see Him by conjecture through a
glass and in an enigma, not yet face to face as He is. Is it that God the Father has learned those very
things which He knows, not by the body, for He has none, but by Himself, from elsewhere fromsome one? or has stood in need of messengers or witnesses that He might know them? Certainly
not; since His own perfection enables Him to know all things that He knows. No doubt He has
messengers, viz. the angels; but not to announce to Him things that He knows not, for there isnothing He does not know. But their good lies in consulting the truth about their own works. And
this it is which is meant by saying that they bring Him word of some things, not that He may learnof them, but they of Him by His word without bodily sound. They bring Him word, too, of thatwhich He wills, being sent by Him to whomever He wills, and hearing all from Him by that wordof His, i.e. finding in His truth what themselves are to do: what, to whom, and when, they are to
bring word. For we too pray to Him, yet do not inform Him what our necessities are. “For yourFather knoweth,” says His Word, “what things ye have need of, before you ask Him.”989 Nor did
He become acquainted with them, so as to know them, at any definite time; but He knew beforehand,
without any beginning, all things to come in time, and among them also both what we should ask
of Him, and when; and to whom He would either listen or not listen, and on what subjects. And
with respect to all His creatures, both spiritual and corporeal, He does not know them because they
are, but they are because He knows them. For He was not ignorant of what He was about to create;
therefore He created because He knew; He did not know because He created. Nor did He know
them when created in any other way than He knew them when still to be created, for nothing accrued
to His wisdom from them; but that wisdom remained as it was, while they came into existence as
it was fitting and when it was fitting. So, too, it is written in the book of Ecclesiasticus: “All things
are known to Him ere ever they were created: so also after they were perfected.”990 “So,” he says,
not otherwise; so were they known to Him, both ere ever they were created, and after they were
perfected. This knowledge, therefore, is far unlike our knowledge. And the knowledge of God isitself also His wisdom, and His wisdom is itself His essence or substance. Because in the marvellous
simplicity of that nature, it is not one thing to be wise and another to be, but to be wise is to be; as

989
990

Matt. vi. 8.
Ecclus. xxiii. 20.

292

NPNF (V1-03)

213

Philip Schaff

we have often said already also in the earlier books. But our knowledge is in most things capable
both of being lost and of being recovered, because to us to be is not the same as to know or to be
wise; since it is possible for us to be, even although we know not, neither are wise in that which
we have learned from elsewhere. Therefore, as our knowledge is unlike that knowledge of God, so
is our word also, which is born from our knowledge, unlike that Word of God which is born fromthe essence of the Father. And this is as if I should say, born from the Father’s knowledge, fromthe Father’s wisdom; or still more exactly, from the Father who is knowledge, from the Father who
is wisdom.

Chapter 14.—The Word of God is in All Things Equal to the Father, from Whom It is.
23. The Word of God, then, the only-begotten Son of the Father, in all things like and equal to
the Father, God of God, Light of Light, Wisdom of Wisdom, Essence of Essence, is altogether thatwhich the Father is, yet is not the Father, because the one is Son, the other is Father. And hence
He knows all that the Father knows; but to Him to know, as to be, is from the Father, for to know
and to be is there one. And therefore, as to be is not to the Father from the Son, so neither is toknow. Accordingly, as though uttering Himself, the Father begat the Word equal to Himself in all
things; for He would not have uttered Himself wholly and perfectly, if there were in His Word
anything more or less than in Himself. And here that is recognized in the highest sense, “Yea, yea;nay, nay.”991 And therefore this Word is truly truth, since whatever is in that knowledge from which
it is born is also in itself and whatever is not in that knowledge is not in the Word. And this Word
can never have anything false, because it is unchangeable, as He is from whom it is. For “the Son
can do nothing of Himself, but what He seeth the Father do.”992 Through power He cannot do this;nor is it infirmity, but strength, by which truth cannot be false. Therefore God the Father knows allthings in Himself, knows all things in the Son; but in Himself as though Himself, in the Son as
though His own Word which Word is spoken concerning all those things that are in Himself.
Similarly the Son knows all things, viz. in Himself, as things which are born of those which the
Father knows in Himself, and in the Father, as those of which they are born, which the Son Himself
knows in Himself. The Father then, and the Son know mutually; but the one by begetting, the otherby being born. And each of them sees simultaneously all things that are in their knowledge, in their
wisdom, in their essence: not by parts or singly, as though by alternately looking from this side tothat, and from that side to this, and again from this or that object to this or that object, so as not tobe able to see some things without at the same time not seeing others; but, as I said, sees all things
simultaneously, whereof there is not one that He does not always see.
24. And that word, then, of ours which has neither sound nor thought of sound, but is of thatthing in seeing which we speak inwardly, and which therefore belongs to no tongue; and hence isin some sort like, in this enigma, to that Word of God which is also God; since this too is born of
our knowledge, in such manner as that also is born of the knowledge of the Father: such a word, I

991
992

Matt. v. 37.
John v. 19.

293

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

say, of ours, which we find to be in some way like that Word, let us not be slow to consider how
unlike also it is, as it may be in our power to utter it.

Chapter 15.—How Great is the Unlikeness Between Our Word and the Divine Word. Our Word
Cannot Be or Be Called Eternal.

214

Is our word, then, born of our knowledge only? Do we not say many things also that we do not
know? And say them not with doubt, but thinking them to be true; while if perchance they are true
in respect to the things themselves of which we speak, they are yet not true in respect to our word,
because a word is not true unless it is born of a thing that is known. In this sense, then, our word
is false, not when we lie, but when we are deceived. And when we doubt, our word is not yet of
the thing of which we doubt, but it is a word concerning the doubt itself. For although we do notknow whether that is true of which we doubt, yet we do know that we doubt; and hence, when we
say we doubt, we say a word that is true, for we say what we know. And what, too, of its being
possible for us to lie? And when we do, certainly we both willingly and knowingly have a wordthat is false, wherein there is a word that is true, viz. that we lie, for this we know. And when we
confess that we have lied, we speak that which is true; for we say what we know, for we know that
we lied. But that Word which is God, and can do more than we, cannot do this. For it “can do
nothing except what it sees the Father do;” and it “speaks not of itself,” but it has from the Father
all that it speaks, since the Father speaks it in a special way; and the great might of that Word isthat it cannot lie, because there cannot be there “yea and nay,”993 but “yea yea, nay nay.” Well, butthat is not even to be called a word, which is not true. I willingly assent, if so it be. What, then, if
our word is true and therefore is rightly called a word? Is it the case that, as we can speak of sightof sight, and knowledge of knowledge, so we can speak of essence of essence, as that Word of God
is especially spoken of, and is especially to be spoken of? Why so? Because to us, to be is not thesame as to know; since we know many things which in some sense live by memory, and so in somesense die by being forgotten: and so, when those things are no longer in our knowledge, yet we
still are: and while our knowledge has slipped away and perished out of our mind, we are still alive.
25. In respect to those things also which are so known that they can never escape the memory,
because they are present, and belong to the nature of the mind itself,—as, e.g., the knowing that
we are alive (for this continues so long as the mind continues; and because the mind continues
always, this also continues always);—I say, in respect to this and to any other like instances, inwhich we are the rather to contemplate the image of God, it is difficult to make out in what way,although they are always known, yet because they are not always also thought of, an eternal word
can be spoken respecting them, when our word is spoken in our thought. For it is eternal to the soul
to live; it is eternal to know that it lives. Yet it is not eternal to it to be thinking of its own life, orto be thinking of its own knowledge of its own life; since, in entering upon this or that occupation,
it will cease to think of this, although it does not cease from knowing it. And hence it comes topass, that if there can be in the mind any knowledge that is eternal, while the thought of that993

2 Cor. i. 19.

294

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

knowledge cannot be eternal, and any inner and true word of ours is only said by our thought, then
God alone can be understood to have a Word that is eternal, and co-eternal with Himself. Unless,perhaps, we are to say that the very possibility of thought—since that which is known is capableof being truly thought, even at the time when it is not being thought—constitutes a word as perpetualas the knowledge itself is perpetual. But how is that a word which is not yet formed in the visionof the thought? How will it be like the knowledge of which it is born, if it has not the form of thatknowledge, and is only now called a word because it can have it? For it is much as if one were to
say that a word is to be so called because it can be a word. But what is this that can be a word, andis therefore already held worthy of the name of a word? What, I say, is this thing that is formable,
but not yet formed, except a something in our mind, which we toss to and fro by revolving it thisway or that, while we think of first one thing and then another, according as they are found by or
occur to us? And the true word then comes into being, when, as I said, that which we toss to andfro by revolving it arrives at that which we know, and is formed by that, in taking its entire likeness;so that in what manner each thing is known, in that manner also it is thought, i.e. is said in thismanner in the heart, without articulate sound, without thought of articulate sound, such as no doubt
belongs to some particular tongue. And hence if we even admit, in order not to dispute laboriously
about a name, that this something of our mind, which can be formed from our knowledge, is to bealready called a word, even before it is so formed, because it is, so to say, already formable, who
would not see how great would be the unlikeness between it and that Word of God, which is so in
the form of God, as not to have been formable before it was formed, or to have been capable at any
time of being formless, but is a simple form, and simply equal to Him from whom it is, and withwhom it is wonderfully co-eternal?

Chapter 16.—Our Word is Never to Be Equalled to the Divine Word, Not Even When We Shall
Be Like God.

215

Wherefore that Word of God is in such wise so called, as not to be called a thought of God, lest
we believe that there is anything in God which can be revolved, so that it at one time receives andat another recovers a form, so as to be a word, and again can lose that form and be revolved in somesense formlessly. Certainly that excellent master of speech knew well the force of words, and had
looked into the nature of thought, who said in his poem, “And revolves with himself the varying
issues of war,”994 i.e. thinks of them. That Son of God, then, is not called the Thought of God, but
the Word of God. For our own thought, attaining to what we know, and formed thereby, is our true
word. And so the Word of God ought to be understood without any thought on the part of God, sothat it be understood as the simple form itself, but containing nothing formable that can be also
unformed. There are, indeed, passages of Holy Scripture that speak of God’s thoughts; but this isafter the same mode of speech by which the forgetfulness of God is also there spoken of, whereas
in strict propriety of language there is in Him certainly no forgetfulness.

994

Æn. x. 159, 160.

295

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

26. Wherefore, since we have found now in this enigma so great an unlikeness to God and theWord of God, wherein yet there was found before some likeness, this, too, must be admitted, thateven when we shall be like Him, when “we shall see Him as He is”995 (and certainly he who said
this was aware beyond doubt of our present unlikeness), not even then shall we be equal to Him innature. For that nature which is made is ever less than that which makes. And at that time our word
will not indeed be false, because we shall neither lie nor be deceived. Perhaps, too, our thoughts
will no longer revolve by passing and repassing from one thing to another, but we shall see all our
knowledge at once, and at one glance. Still, when even this shall have come to pass, if indeed it
shall come to pass, the creature which was formable will indeed have been formed, so that nothing
will be wanting of that form to which it ought to attain; yet nevertheless it will not be to be equalled
to that simplicity wherein there is not anything formable, which has been formed or reformed, but
only form; and which being neither formless nor formed, itself is eternal and unchangeable substance.

Chapter 17.—How the Holy Spirit is Called Love, and Whether He Alone is So Called. That theHoly Spirit is in the Scriptures Properly Called by the Name of Love.
27. We have sufficiently spoken of the Father and of the Son, so far as was possible for us to
see through this glass and in this enigma. We must now treat of the Holy Spirit, so far as by God’s
gift it is permitted to see Him. And the Holy Spirit, according to the Holy Scriptures, is neither of
the Father alone, nor of the Son alone, but of both; and so intimates to us a mutual love, wherewith
the Father and the Son reciprocally love one another. But the language of the Word of God, in order
to exercise us, has caused those things to be sought into with the greater zeal, which do not lie on
the surface, but are to be scrutinized in hidden depths, and to be drawn out from thence. The
Scriptures, accordingly, have not said, The Holy Spirit is Love. If they had said so, they would
have done away with no small part of this inquiry. But they have said, “God is love;”996 so that it
is uncertain and remains to be inquired whether God the Father is love, or God the Son, or God theHoly Ghost, or the Trinity itself which is God. For we are not going to say that God is called Lovebecause love itself is a substance worthy of the name of God, but because it is a gift of God, as it
is said to God, “Thou art my patience.”997 For this is not said because our patience is God’s substance,
but in that He Himself gives it to us; as it is elsewhere read, “Since from Him is my patience.”998
For the usage of words itself in Scripture sufficiently refutes this interpretation; for “Thou art mypatience” is of the same kind as “Thou, Lord, art my hope,”999 and “The Lord my God is mymercy,”1000 and many like texts. And it is not said, O Lord my love, or, Thou art my love, or, God
my love; but it is said thus, “God is love,” as it is said, “God is a Spirit.”1001 And he who does not
995
996
997
998
999
1000
1001

1 John iii. 2.
1 John iv. 16.
Ps. lxxi. 5.
Ps. lxii. 5.
Ps. xci. 9.
Ps. lix. 17.
John iv. 24.

296

NPNF (V1-03)

216

Philip Schaff

discern this, must ask understanding from the Lord, not an explanation from us; for we cannot say
anything more clearly.
28. “God,” then, “is love;” but the question is, whether the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit,or the Trinity itself: because the Trinity is not three Gods, but one God. But I have already argued
above in this book, that the Trinity, which is God, is not so to be understood from those three things
which have been set forth in the trinity of our mind, as that the Father should be the memory of all
three, and the Son the understanding of all three, and the Holy Spirit the love of all three; as though
the Father should neither understand nor love for Himself, but the Son should understand for Him,and the Holy Spirit love for Him, but He Himself should remember only both for Himself and forthem; nor the Son remember nor love for Himself, but the Father should remember for Him, andthe Holy Spirit love for Him, but He Himself understand only both for Himself and them; norlikewise that the Holy Spirit should neither remember nor understand for Himself, but the Father
should remember for Him, and the Son understand for Him, while He Himself should love only
both for Himself and for them; but rather in this way, that both all and each have all three each in
His own nature. Nor that these things should differ in them, as in us memory is one thing,understanding another, love or charity another, but should be some one thing that is equivalent toall, as wisdom itself; and should be so contained in the nature of each, as that He who has it is thatwhich He has, as being an unchangeable and simple substance. If all this, then, has been understood,and so far as is granted to us to see or conjecture in things so great, has been made patently true, I
know not why both the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit should not be called Love, and all
together one love, just as both the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit is called Wisdom, andall together not three, but one wisdom. For so also both the Father is God, and the Son God, andthe Holy Ghost God, and all three together one God.
29. And yet it is not to no purpose that in this Trinity the Son and none other is called the Wordof God, and the Holy Spirit and none other the Gift of God, and God the Father alone is He fromwhom the Word is born, and from whom the Holy Spirit principally proceeds. And therefore I haveadded the word principally, because we find that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son also. But
the Father gave Him this too, not as to one already existing, and not yet having it; but whatever Hegave to the only-begotten Word, He gave by begetting Him. Therefore He so begat Him as that thecommon Gift should proceed from Him also, and the Holy Spirit should be the Spirit of both. Thisdistinction, then, of the inseparable Trinity is not to be merely accepted in passing, but to be carefully
considered; for hence it was that the Word of God was specially called also the Wisdom of God,
although both Father and Holy Spirit are wisdom. If, then, any one of the three is to be speciallycalled Love, what more fitting than that it should be the Holy Spirit?—namely, that in that simple
and highest nature, substance should not be one thing and love another, but that substance itself
should be love, and love itself should be substance, whether in the Father, or in the Son, or in the
Holy Spirit; and yet that the Holy Spirit should be specially called Love.
30. Just as sometimes all the utterances of the Old Testament together in the Holy Scripturesare signified by the name of the Law. For the apostle, in citing a text from the prophet Isaiah, where
he says, “With divers tongues and with divers lips will I speak to this people,” yet prefaced it by,“It is written in the Law.”1002 And the Lord Himself says, “It is written in their Law, They hated

1002

Isa. xxviii. 11 and 1 Cor. xiv. 21.

297

NPNF (V1-03)

217

Philip Schaff

me without a cause,”1003 whereas this is read in the Psalm.1004 And sometimes that which was given
by Moses is specially called the Law: as it is said, “The Law and the Prophets were until John;”1005
and, “On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”1006 Here, certainly, that is
specially called the Law which was from Mount Sinai. And the Psalms, too, are signified under
the name of the Prophets; and yet in another place the Saviour Himself says, “All things must needs
be fulfilled, which are written in the Law, and the Prophets, and the Psalms concerning me.”1007
Here, on the other side, He meant the name of Prophets to be taken as not including the Psalms.
Therefore the Law with the Prophets and the Psalms taken together is called the Law universally,
and the Law is also specially so called which was given by Moses. Likewise the Prophets are socalled in common together with the Psalms, and they are also specially so called exclusive of thePsalms. And many other instances might be adduced to teach us, that many names of things areboth put universally, and also specially applied to particular things, were it not that a long discourse
is to be avoided in a plain case. I have said so much, lest any one should think that it was therefore
unsuitable for us to call the Holy Spirit Love, because both God the Father and God the Son canbe called Love.
31. As, then, we call the only Word of God specially by the name of Wisdom, although
universally both the Holy Spirit and the Father Himself is wisdom; so the Holy Spirit is speciallycalled by the name of Love, although universally both the Father and the Son are love. But theWord of God, i.e. the only-begotten Son of God, is expressly called the Wisdom of God by themouth of the apostle, where he says, “Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.”1008 But
where the Holy Spirit is called Love, is to be found by careful scrutiny of the language of John theapostle, who, after saying, “Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God,” has gone on tosay, “And every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God. He that loveth not, knoweth not
God; for God is love.” Here, manifestly, he has called that love God, which he said was of God;
therefore God of God is love. But because both the Son is born of God the Father, and the Holy
Spirit proceeds from God the Father, it is rightly asked which of them we ought here to think is therather called the love that is God. For the Father only is so God as not to be of God; and hence thelove that is so God as to be of God, is either the Son or the Holy Spirit. But when, in what follows,
the apostle had mentioned the love of God, not that by which we love Him, but that by which He“loved us, and sent His Son to be a propitiator for our sins,”1009 and thereupon had exhorted us also
to love one another, and that so God would abide in us,—because, namely, he had called God Love;
immediately, in his wish to speak yet more expressly on the subject, “Hereby,” he says, “know wethat we dwell in Him, and He in us, because He hath given us of His Spirit.” Therefore the Holy
Spirit, of whom He hath given us, makes us to abide in God, and Him in us; and this it is that love
does. Therefore He is the God that is love. Lastly, a little after, when he had repeated the samething, and had said “God is love,” he immediately subjoined, “And he who abideth in love, abideth

1003
1004
1005
1006
1007
1008
1009

John xv. 25.
Ps. xxxv. 19.
Matt. xi. 13.
Matt. xxii. 40.
Luke xxiv. 44.
1 Cor. i. 24.
John iv. 10.

298

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

in God, and God abideth in him;” whence he had said above, “Hereby we know that we abide inHim, and He in us, because He hath given us of His Spirit.” He therefore is signified, where weread that God is love. Therefore God the Holy Spirit, who proceedeth from the Father, when He
has been given to man, inflames him to the love of God and of his neighbor, and is Himself love.
For man has not whence to love God, unless from God; and therefore he says a little after, “Let us
love Him, because He first loved us.”1010 The Apostle Paul, too, says, “The love of God is shedabroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us.”1011

Chapter 18.—No Gift of God is More Excellent Than Love.
32. There is no gift of God more excellent than this. It alone distinguishes the sons of the eternal
kingdom and the sons of eternal perdition. Other gifts, too, are given by the Holy Spirit; but withoutlove they profit nothing. Unless, therefore, the Holy Spirit is so far imparted to each, as to makehim one who loves God and his neighbor, he is not removed from the left hand to the right. Nor is
the Spirit specially called the Gift, unless on account of love. And he who has not this love, “though
he speak with the tongues of men and angels, is sounding brass and a tinkling cymbal; and though
he have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge, and though he have allfaith, so that he can remove mountains, he is nothing; and though he bestow all his goods to feed
the poor, and though he give his body to be burned, it profiteth him nothing.”1012 How great a good,
then, is that without which goods so great bring no one to eternal life! But love or charity itself,—for
they are two names for one thing,—if he have it that does not speak with tongues, nor has the giftof prophecy, nor knows all mysteries and all knowledge, nor gives all his goods to the poor, either
because he has none to give or because some necessity hinders, nor delivers his body to be burned,
if no trial of such a suffering overtakes him, brings that man to the kingdom, so that faith itself isonly rendered profitable by love, since faith without love can indeed exist, but cannot profit. And
therefore also the Apostle Paul says, “In Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor
uncircumcision, but faith that worketh by love:”1013 so distinguishing it from that faith by whicheven “the devils believe and tremble.”1014 Love, therefore, which is of God and is God, is speciallythe Holy Spirit, by whom the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts, by which love the whole
Trinity dwells in us. And therefore most rightly is the Holy Spirit, although He is God, called also
the gift of God.1015 And by that gift what else can properly be understood except love, which brings
to God, and without which any other gift of God whatsoever does not bring to God?

1010
1011
1012
1013
1014
1015

1 John iv. 7–19.
Rom. v. 5.
1 Cor. xiii. 1–3.
Gal. v. 6.
Jas. ii. 19.
Acts viii. 20.

299

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 19.—The Holy Spirit is Called the Gift of God in the Scriptures. By the Gift of the Holy
Spirit is Meant the Gift Which is the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is Specially Called Love,
Although Not Only the Holy Spirit in the Trinity is Love.

218

33. Is this too to be proved, that the Holy Spirit is called in the sacred books the gift of God?
If people look for this too, we have in the Gospel according to John the words of our Lord Jesus
Christ, who says, “If any one thirst, let him come to me and drink: he that believeth on me, as the
Scripture saith, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.” And the evangelist has gone on
further to add, “And this He spake of the Spirit, which they should receive who believe in Him.”1016
And hence Paul the apostle also says, “And we have all been made to drink into one Spirit.”1017
The question then is, whether that water is called the gift of God which is the Holy Spirit. But as
we find here that this water is the Holy Spirit, so we find elsewhere in the Gospel itself that thiswater is called the gift of God. For when the same Lord was talking with the woman of Samaria at
the well, to whom He had said, “Give me to drink,” and she had answered that the Jews “have no
dealings” with the Samaritans, Jesus answered and said unto her, “If thou hadst known the gift ofGod, and who it is that says to thee, Give me to drink, thou wouldest have asked of Him, and He
would have given thee living water. The woman saith unto Him, Sir, thou hast nothing to draw
with, and the well is deep: whence then hast thou this living water, etc.? Jesus answered and said
unto her, Every one that drinketh of this water shall thirst again; but whose shall drink of the waterthat I shall give him, shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him, shall be in him a fountainof water springing up unto eternal life.”1018 Because this living water, then, as the evangelist has
explained to us, is the Holy Spirit, without doubt the Spirit is the gift of God, of which the Lordsays here, “If thou hadst known the gift of God, and who it is that saith unto thee, Give me to drink,thou wouldest have asked of Him, and He would have given thee living water.” For that which isin the one passage, “Out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water,” is in the other, “shall be in
him a fountain of water springing up unto eternal life.”
34. Paul the apostle also says, “To each of us is given grace according to the measure of thegift of Christ;” and then, that he might show that by the gift of Christ he meant the Holy Spirit, he
has gone on to add, “Wherefore He saith, He hath ascended up on high, He hath led captivity
captive, and hath given gifts to men.”1019 And every one knows that the Lord Jesus, when He had
ascended into heaven after the resurrection from the dead, gave the Holy Spirit, with whom they
who believed were filled, and spake with the tongues of all nations. And let no one object that hesays gifts, not gift: for he quoted the text from the Psalm. And in the Psalm it is read thus, “Thouhast ascended up on high, Thou hast led captivity captive, Thou hast received gifts in men.”1020 For
so it stands in many mss., especially in the Greek mss., and so we have it translated from the
Hebrew. The apostle therefore said gifts, as the prophet did, not gift. But whereas the prophet said,“Thou hast received gifts in men,” the apostle has preferred saying, “He gave gifts to men:” and
1016
1017
1018
1019
1020

John vii. 37–39.
1 Cor. xii. 13.
John iv. 7–14.
Eph. iv. 7, 8.
Ps. lxviii. 18.

300

NPNF (V1-03)

219

Philip Schaff

this in order that the fullest sense may be gathered from both expressions, the one prophetic, theother apostolic; because both possess the authority of a divine utterance. For both are true, as wellthat He gave to men, as that He received in men. He gave to men, as the head to His own members:
He Himself that gave, received in men, no doubt as in His own members; on account of which,namely, His own members, He cried from heaven, “Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?”1021 Andof which, namely, His own members, He says, “Since ye have done it to one of the least of thesethat are mine, ye have done it unto me.”1022 Christ Himself, therefore, both gave from heaven andreceived on earth. And further, both prophet and apostle have said gifts for this reason, because
many gifts, which are proper to each, are divided in common to all the members of Christ, by theGift, which is the Holy Spirit. For each severally has not all, but some have these and some havethose; although all have the Gift itself by which that which is proper to each is divided to Him, i.e.
the Holy Spirit. For elsewhere also, when he had mentioned many gifts, “All these,” he says,“worketh that one and the self-same Spirit, dividing to each severally as He will.”1023 And this word
is found also in the Epistle to the Hebrews, where it is written, “God also bearing witness both withsigns and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts1024 of the Holy Ghost.”1025 And so here,
when he had said, “He ascended up on high, He led captivity captive, He gave gifts to men,” hesays further, “But that He ascended, what is it but that He also first descended into the lower partsof the earth? He who descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that He
might fill all things. And He gave some apostles, some prophets, and some evangelists, and somepastors and doctors.” (This we see is the reason why gifts are spoken of; because, as he says
elsewhere, “Are all apostles? are all prophets?”1026 etc.) And here he has added, “For the perfectingof the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the building up of the body of Christ.”1027 This is thehouse which, as the Psalm sings, is built up after the captivity;1028 since the house of Christ, whichhouse is called His Church, is built up of those who have been rescued from the devil, by whomthey were held captive. But He Himself led this captivity captive, who conquered the devil. And
that he might not draw with him into eternal punishment those who were to become the membersof the Holy Head, He bound him first by the bonds of righteousness, and then by those of might.
The devil himself, therefore, is called captivity, which He led captive who ascended up on high,and gave gifts to men, or received gifts in men.
35. And Peter the apostle, as we read in that canonical book, wherein the Acts of the Apostles
are recorded,—when the hearts of the Jews were troubled as he spake of Christ, and they said,“Brethren, what shall we do? tell us,”—said to them, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you
in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins: and ye shall receive the gift of theHoly Spirit.”1029 And we read likewise in the same book, that Simon Magus desired to give money

1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1026
1027
1028
1029

Acts ix. 4.
Matt. xxv. 40.
1 Cor. xii. 11.
Distributionibus.
Heb. ii. 4.
1 Cor. xii. 29.
Eph. iv. 7–12.
Ps. cxxvi. 1.
Acts ii. 37, 38.

301

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

to the apostles, that he might receive power from them, whereby the Holy Spirit might be given by
the laying on of his hands. And the same Peter said to him, “Thy money perish with thee: becausethou hast thought to purchase for money the gift of God.”1030 And in another place of the same
book, when Peter was speaking to Cornelius, and to those who were with him, and was announcing
and preaching Christ, the Scripture says, “While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy
Spirit fell upon all them that heard the word; and they of the circumcision that believed, as manyas came with Peter, were astonished, because that upon the Gentiles also the gift of the Holy Spirit
was poured out. For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God.”1031 And when Peter
afterwards was giving an account to the brethren that were at Jerusalem of this act of his, that hehad baptized those who were not circumcised, because the Holy Spirit, to cut the knot of the question,
had come upon them before they were baptized, and the brethren at Jerusalem were moved when
they heard it, he says, after the rest of his words, “And when I began to speak to them, the Holy
Spirit fell upon them, as upon us in the beginning. And I remembered the word of the Lord, how
He said, that John indeed baptized with water, but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit. If,
therefore, He gave a like gift to them, as also to us who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who wasI, that I could hinder God from giving to them the Holy Spirit?”1032 And there are many othertestimonies of the Scriptures, which unanimously attest that the Holy Spirit is the gift of God, inso far as He is given to those who by Him love God. But it is too long a task to collect them all.
And what is enough to satisfy those who are not satisfied with those we have alleged?
36. Certainly they must be warned, since they now see that the Holy Spirit is called the gift ofGod, that when they hear of “the gift of the Holy Spirit,” they should recognize therein that modeof speech which is found in the words, “In the spoiling of the body of the flesh.”1033 For as the bodyof the flesh is nothing else but the flesh, so the gift of the Holy Spirit is nothing else but the Holy
Spirit. He is then the gift of God, so far as He is given to those to whom He is given. But in Himself
He is God, although He were given to no one, because He was God co-eternal with the Father andthe Son before He was given to any one. Nor is He less than they, because they give, and He isgiven. For He is given as a gift of God in such way that He Himself also gives Himself as being
God. For He cannot be said not to be in His own power, of whom it is said, “The Spirit bloweth
where it listeth;”1034 and the apostle says, as I have already mentioned above, “All these things
worketh that selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as He will.” We have not here thecreating of Him that is given, and the rule of them that give, but the concord of the given and thegivers.
37. Wherefore, if Holy Scripture proclaims that God is love, and that love is of God, and works
this in us that we abide in God and He in us, and that hereby we know this, because He has given
us of His Spirit, then the Spirit Himself is God, who is love. Next, if there be among the gifts of
God none greater than love, and there is no greater gift of God than the Holy Spirit, what follows
more naturally than that He is Himself love, who is called both God and of God? And if the loveby which the Father loves the Son, and the Son loves the Father, ineffably demonstrates the
1030
1031
1032
1033
1034

Acts viii. 18–20.
Acts x. 44, 46.
Acts xi. 15–17.
Col. ii. 11.
John iii. 6.

302

NPNF (V1-03)

220

Philip Schaff

communion of both, what is more suitable than that He should be specially called love, who is theSpirit common to both? For this is the sounder thing both to believe and to understand, that theHoly Spirit is not alone love in that Trinity, yet is not specially called love to no purpose, for thereasons we have alleged; just as He is not alone in that Trinity either a Spirit or holy, since both
the Father is a Spirit, and the Son is a Spirit; and both the Father is holy, and the Son is holy,—as
piety doubts not. And yet it is not to no purpose that He is specially called the Holy Spirit; forbecause He is common to both, He is specially called that which both are in common. Otherwise,
if in that Trinity the Holy Spirit alone is love, then doubtless the Son too turns out to be the Son,not of the Father only, but also of the Holy Spirit. For He is both said and read in countless places
to be so,—the only-begotten Son of God the Father; as that what the apostle says of God the Father
is true too: “Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness and hath translated us into the
kingdom of the Son of His own love.”1035 He did not say, “of His own Son.” If He had so said, He
would have said it most truly, just as He did say it most truly, because He has often said it; but He
says, “the Son of His own love.” Therefore He is the Son also of the Holy Spirit, if there is in that
Trinity no love in God except the Holy Spirit. And if this is most absurd, it remains that the Holy
Spirit is not alone therein love, but is specially so called for the reasons I have sufficiently set forth;and that the words, “Son of His own love,” mean nothing else than His own beloved Son,—theSon, in short, of His own substance. For the love in the Father, which is in His ineffably simple
nature, is nothing else than His very nature and substance itself,—as we have already often said,
and are not ashamed of often repeating. And hence the “Son of His love,” is none other than He
who is born of His substance.

Chapter 20.—Against Eunomius, Saying that the Son of God is the Son, Not of His Nature, But of
His Will. Epilogue to What Has Been Said Already.
38. Wherefore the logic of Eunomius, from whom the Eunomian heretics sprang, is ridiculous.
For when he could not understand, and would not believe, that the only-begotten Word of God, bywhich all things were made is the Son of God by nature,—i.e. born of the substance of the
Father,—he alleged that He was not the Son of His own nature or substance or essence, but the Sonof the will of God; so as to mean to assert that the will by which he begot the Son was something
accidental [and optional] to God,—to wit, in that way that we ourselves sometimes will somethingwhich before we did not will, as though it was not for these very things that our nature is perceived
to be changeable,—a thing which far be it from us to believe of God. For it is written, “Many are
the thoughts in the heart of man, but the counsel of the Lord abideth for ever,”1036 for no otherreason except that we may understand or believe that as God is eternal, so is His counsel for eternity,
and therefore unchangeable, as He himself is. And what is said of thoughts can most truly be said
also of the will: there are many wills in the heart of man, but the will of the Lord abideth for ever.
Some, again, to escape saying that the only-begotten Word is the Son of the counsel or will of God,

1035
1036

Col. i. 13.
Prov. xix. 21.

303

NPNF (V1-03)

221

Philip Schaff

have affirmed the same Word to be the counsel or will itself of the Father. But it is better in myjudgment to say counsel of counsel, and will of will, as substance of substance, wisdom of wisdom,that we may not be led into that absurdity, which we have refuted already, and say that the Son
makes the Father wise or willing, if the Father has not in His own substance either counsel or will.
It was certainly a sharp answer that somebody gave to the heretic, who most subtly asked him
whether God begat the Son willingly or unwillingly, in order that if he said unwillingly, it would
follow most absurdly that God was miserable; but if willingly, he would forthwith infer, as thoughby an invincible reason, that at which he was aiming, viz. that He was the Son, not of His nature,but of His will. But that other, with great wakefulness, demanded of him in turn, whether God theFather was God willingly or unwillingly; in order that if he answered unwillingly, that misery would
follow, which to believe of God is sheer madness; and if he said willingly, it would be replied tohim, Then He is God too by His own will, not by His nature. What remained, then, except that heshould hold his peace, and discern that he was himself bound by his own question in an insoluble
bond? But if any person in the Trinity is also to be specially called the will of God, this name, likelove, is better suited to the Holy Spirit; for what else is love, except will?
39. I see that my argument in this book respecting the Holy Spirit, according to the Holy
Scripture, is quite enough for faithful men who know already that the Holy Spirit is God, and notof another substance, nor less than the Father and the Son,—as we have shown to be true in theformer books, according to the same Scriptures. We have reasoned also from the creature which
God made, and, as far as we could, have warned those who demand a reason on such subjects tobehold and understand His invisible things, so far as they could, by those things which are made1037
and especially by the rational or intellectual creature which is made after the image of God; throughwhich glass, so to say, they might discern as far as they could, if they could, the Trinity which isGod, in our own memory, understanding, will. Which three things, if any one intelligently regards
as by nature divinely appointed in his own mind, and remembers by memory, contemplates by
understanding, embraces by love, how great a thing that is in the mind, whereby even the eternaland unchangeable nature can be recollected, beheld, desired, doubtless that man finds an image ofthat highest Trinity. And he ought to refer the whole of his life to the remembering, seeing, lovingthat highest Trinity, in order that he may recollect, contemplate, be delighted by it. But I havewarned him, so far as seemed sufficient, that he must not so compare this image thus wrought bythat Trinity, and by his own fault changed for the worse, to that same Trinity as to think it in all
points like to it, but rather that he should discern in that likeness, of whatever sort it be, a great
unlikeness also.

Chapter 21.—Of the Likeness of the Father and of the Son Alleged to Be in Our Memory andUnderstanding. Of the Likeness of the Holy Spirit in Our Will or Love.

1037

Rom. i. 20.

304

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

40. I have undoubtedly taken pains so far as I could, not indeed so that the thing might be seen
face to face, but that it might be seen by this likeness in an enigma,1038 in how small a degree soever,by conjecture, in our memory and understanding, to intimate God the Father and God the Son: i.e.
God the begetter, who has in some way spoken by His own co-eternal Word all things that He hasin His substance; and God His Word Himself, who Himself has nothing either more or less insubstance than is in Him, who, not lyingly but truly, hath begotten the Word; and I have assigned
to memory everything that we know, even if we were not thinking of it, but to understanding theformation after a certain special mode of the thought. For we are usually said to understand what,by thinking of it, we have found to be true; and this it is again that we leave in the memory. Butthat is a still more hidden depth of our memory, wherein we found this also first when we thoughtof it, and wherein an inner word is begotten such as belongs to no tongue,—as it were, knowledgeof knowledge, vision of vision, and understanding which appears in [reflective] thought; ofunderstanding which had indeed existed before in the memory, but was latent there, although, unlessthe thought itself had also some sort of memory of its own, it would not return to those things which
it had left in the memory while it turned to think of other things.
41. But I have shown nothing in this enigma respecting the Holy Spirit such as might appear
to be like Him, except our own will, or love, or affection, which is a stronger will, since our will
which we have naturally is variously affected, according as various objects are adjacent or occur
to it, by which we are attracted or offended. What, then, is this? Are we to say that our will, when
it is right, knows not what to desire, what to avoid? Further, if it knows, doubtless then it has a kindof knowledge of its own, such as cannot be without memory and understanding. Or are we to listen
to any one who should say that love knows not what it does, which does not do wrongly? As, then,there are both understanding and love in that primary memory wherein we find provided and stored
up that to which we can come in thought, because we find also those two things there, when wefind by thinking that we both understand and love anything; which things were there too when wewere not thinking of them: and as there are memory and love in that understanding, which is formedby thought, which true word we say inwardly without the tongue of any nation when we say what
we know; for the gaze of our thought does not return to anything except by remembering it, anddoes not care to return unless by loving it: so love, which combines the vision brought about in thememory, and the vision of the thought formed thereby, as if parent and offspring, would not knowwhat to love rightly unless it had a knowledge of what it desired, which it cannot have without
memory and understanding.

Chapter 22.—How Great the Unlikeness is Between the Image of the Trinity Which We Have
Found in Ourselves, and the Trinity Itself.
42. But since these are in one person, as man is, some one may say to us, These three things,
memory, understanding, and love, are mine, not their own; neither do they do that which they dofor themselves, but for me, or rather I do it by them. For it is I who remember by memory, and1038

1 Cor. xiii. 12.

305

NPNF (V1-03)

222

Philip Schaff

understand by understanding, and love by love: and when I direct the mind’s eye to my memory,and so say in my heart the thing I know, and a true word is begotten of my knowledge, both aremine, both the knowledge certainly and the word. For it is I who know, and it is I who say in myheart the thing I know. And when I come to find in my memory by thinking that I understand andlove anything, which understanding and love were there also before I thought thereon, it is my own
understanding and my own love that I find in my own memory, whereby it is I that understand, andI that love, not those things themselves. Likewise, when my thought is mindful, and wills to returnto those things which it had left in the memory, and to understand and behold them, and say theminwardly, it is my own memory that is mindful, and it is my own, not its will, wherewith it wills.
When my very love itself, too, remembers and understands what it ought to desire and what to
avoid, it remembers by my, not by its own memory; and understands that which it intelligently
loves by my, not by its own, understanding. In brief, by all these three things, it is I that remember,I that understand, I that love, who am neither memory, nor understanding, nor love, but who havethem. These things, then, can be said by a single person, which has these three, but is not thesethree. But in the simplicity of that Highest Nature, which is God, although there is one God, there
are three persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Chapter 23.—Augustin Dwells Still Further on the Disparity Between the Trinity Which is in Man,and the Trinity Which is God. The Trinity is Now Seen Through a Glass by the Help of Faith,that It May Hereafter Be More Clearly Seen in the Promised Sight Face to Face.
43. A thing itself, then, which is a trinity is different from the image of a trinity in some otherthing; by reason of which image, at the same time that also in which these three things are is called
an image; just as both the panel, and the picture painted on it, are at the same time called an image;
but by reason of the picture painted on it, the panel also is called by the name of image. But in that
Highest Trinity, which is incomparably above all things, there is so great an indivisibility, that
whereas a trinity of men cannot be called one man, in that, there both is said to be and is one God,nor is that Trinity in one God, but it is one God. Nor, again, as that image in the case of man has
these three things but is one person, so is it with the Trinity; but therein are three persons, the Fatherof the Son, and the Son of the Father, and the Spirit of both Father and Son. For although thememory in the case of man, and especially that memory which beasts have not—viz. the memoryby which things intelligible are so contained as that they have not entered that memory through thebodily senses1039—has in this image of the Trinity, in proportion to its own small measure, a likenessof the Father, incomparably unequal, yet of some sort, whatever it be: and likewise the understanding
in the case of man, which by the purpose of the thought is formed thereby, when that which is
known is said, and there is a word of the heart belonging to no tongue, has in its own great disparity
some likeness of the Son; and love in the case of man proceeding from knowledge, and combining
1039[The reader will observe that Augustin has employed the term “memory” in a wider sense than in the modern ordinaryuse. With him, it is the mind as including all that is potential or latent in it. The innate ideas, in this use, are laid up in the“memory,” and called into consciousness or “remembered” by reflection. The idea of God, for example, is not in the “memory”
when not elicited by reflection. The same is true of the ideas of space and time, etc.—W.G.T.S.]

306

NPNF (V1-03)

223

Philip Schaff

memory and understanding, as though common to parent and offspring, whereby it is understood
to be neither parent nor offspring, has in that image, some, however exceedingly unequal, likenessof the Holy Spirit: it is nevertheless not the case, that, as in that image of the Trinity, these three
are not one man, but belong to one man, so in the Highest Trinity itself, of which this is an image,these three belong to one God, but they are one God, and these are three persons, not one. A thingcertainly wonderfully ineffable, or ineffably wonderful, that while this image of the Trinity is one
person, but the Highest Trinity itself is three persons, yet that Trinity of three persons is moreindivisible than this of one. For that [Trinity], in the nature of the Divinity, or perhaps better Deity,is that which it is, and is mutually and always unchangeably equal: and there was no time when it
was not, or when it was otherwise; and there will be no time when it will not be, or when it will beotherwise. But these three that are in the inadequate image, although they are not separate in place,for they are not bodies, yet are now in this life mutually separate in magnitude. For that there are
therein no several bulks, does not hinder our seeing that memory is greater than understanding in
one man, but the contrary in another; and that in yet another these two are overpassed by thegreatness of love; and this whether the two themselves are or are not equal to one another. And soeach two by each one, and each one by each two, and each one by each one: the less are surpassedby the greater. And when they have been healed of all infirmity, and are mutually equal, not eventhen will that thing which by grace will not be changed, be made equal to that which by naturecannot change, because the creature cannot be equalled to the Creator, and when it shall be healed
from all infirmity, will be changed.
44. But when the sight shall have come which is promised anew to us face to face, we shall see
this not only incorporeal but also absolutely indivisible and truly unchangeable Trinity far moreclearly and certainly than we now see its image which we ourselves are: and yet they who see
through this glass and in this enigma, as it is permitted in this life to see, are not those who beholdin their own mind the things which we have set in order and pressed upon them; but those who see
this as if an image, so as to be able to refer what they see, in some way be it what it may, to Him
whose image it is, and to see that also by conjecturing, which they see through the image bybeholding, since they cannot yet see face to face. For the apostle does not say, We see now a glass,but, We see now through a glass.1040

Chapter 24.—The Infirmity of the Human Mind.
They, then, who see their own mind, in whatever way that is possible, and in it that Trinity ofwhich I have treated as I could in many ways, and yet do not believe or understand it to be an imageof God, see indeed a glass, but do not so far see through the glass Him who is now to be seen
through the glass, that they do not even know the glass itself which they see to be a glass, i.e. animage. And if they knew this, perhaps they would feel that He too whose glass this is, should by it
be sought, and somehow provisionally be seen, an unfeigned faith purging their hearts,1041 that He

1040
1041

1 Cor. xiii. 12.
1 Tim. i. 5.

307

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

who is now seen through a glass may be able to be seen face to face. And if they despise this faiththat purifies the heart, what do they accomplish by understanding the most subtle disputes concerning
the nature of the human mind, unless that they be condemned also by the witness of their own
understanding? And they would certainly not so fail in understanding, and hardly arrive at anythingcertain, were they not involved in penal darkness, and burdened with the corruptible body thatpresses down the soul.1042 And for what demerit save that of sin is this evil inflicted on them?
Wherefore, being warned by the magnitude of so great an evil, they ought to follow the Lamb thattaketh away the sins of the world.1043

Chapter 25.—The Question Why the Holy Spirit is Not Begotten, and How He Proceeds from theFather and the Son, Will Only Be Understood When We are in Bliss.
For if any belong to Him, although far duller in intellect than those, yet when they are freed
from the body at the end of this life, the envious powers have no right to hold them. For that Lambthat was slain by them without any debt of sin has conquered them; but not by the might of power
before He had done so by the righteousness of blood. And free accordingly from the power of thedevil, they are borne up by holy angels, being set free from all evils by the mediator of God andmen, the man Christ Jesus.1044 Since by the harmonious testimony of the Divine Scriptures, both
Old and New, both those by which Christ was foretold, and those by which He was announced,
there is no other name under heaven whereby men must be saved.1045 And when purged from allcontagion of corruption, they are placed in peaceful abodes until they take their bodies again, theirown, but now incorruptible, to adorn, not to burden them. For this is the will of the best and mostwise Creator, that the spirit of a man, when piously subject to God, should have a body happily
subject, and that this happiness should last for ever.
45. There we shall see the truth without any difficulty, and shall enjoy it to the full, most clear
and most certain. Nor shall we be inquiring into anything by a mind that reasons, but shall discern
by a mind that contemplates, why the Holy Spirit is not a Son, although He proceeds from theFather. In that light there will be no place for inquiry: but here, by experience itself it has appeared
to me so difficult,—as beyond doubt it will likewise appear to them also who shall carefully andintelligently read what I have written,—that although in the second book1046 I promised that I would
speak thereof in another place, yet as often as I have desired to illustrate it by the creaturely imageof it which we ourselves are, so often, let my meaning be of what sort it might, did adequate utterance
entirely fail me; nay, even in my very meaning I felt that I had attained to endeavor rather thanaccomplishment. I had indeed found in one person, such as is a man, an image of that Highest
Trinity, and had desired, especially in the ninth book, to illustrate and render more intelligible the

1042
1043
1044
1045
1046

Wisd. ix. 15.
John i. 29.
1 Tim. ii. 5.
Acts iv. 12.
C. 3.

308

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

relation of the Three Persons by that which is subject to time and change. But three things belonging
to one person cannot suit those Three Persons, as man’s purpose demands; and this we havedemonstrated in this fifteenth book.

Chapter 26.—The Holy Spirit Twice Given by Christ. The Procession of the Holy Spirit from theFather and from the Son is Apart from Time, Nor Can He Be Called the Son of Both.

224

Further, in that Highest Trinity which is God, there are no intervals of time, by which it could
be shown, or at least inquired, whether the Son was born of the Father first and then afterwards theHoly Spirit proceeded from both; since Holy Scripture calls Him the Spirit of both. For it is He ofwhom the apostle says, “But because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into
your hearts:”1047 and it is He of whom the same Son says, “For it is not ye who speak, but the Spiritof your Father who speaketh in you.”1048 And it is proved by many other testimonies of the Divine
Word, that the Spirit, who is specially called in the Trinity the Holy Spirit, is of the Father and of
the Son: of whom likewise the Son Himself says, “Whom I will send unto you from the Father;”1049
and in another place, “Whom the Father will send in my name.”1050 And we are so taught that Heproceeds from both, because the Son Himself says, He proceeds from the Father. And when He
had risen from the dead, and had appeared to His disciples, “He breathed upon them, and said,
Receive the Holy Ghost,”1051 so as to show that He proceeded also from Himself. And Itself is thatvery “power that went out from Him,” as we read in the Gospel, “and healed them all.”1052
46. But the reason why, after His resurrection, He both gave the Holy Spirit, first on earth,1053
and afterwards sent Him from heaven,1054 is in my judgment this: that “love is shed abroad in ourhearts,”1055 by that Gift itself, whereby we love God and our neighbors, according to those twocommandments, “on which hang all the law and the prophets.”1056 And Jesus Christ, in order tosignify this, gave to them the Holy Spirit, once upon earth, on account of the love of our neighbor,and a second time from heaven, on account of the love of God. And if some other reason may
perhaps be given for this double gift of the Holy Spirit, at any rate we ought not to doubt that thesame Holy Spirit was given when Jesus breathed upon them, of whom He by and by says, “Go,baptize all nations in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,” where thisTrinity is especially commended to us. It is therefore He who was also given from heaven on the
day of Pentecost, i.e. ten days after the Lord ascended into heaven. How, therefore, is He not God,
1047
1048
1049
1050
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
1056

Gal. iv. 6.
Matt. x. 20.
John xv. 26.
John xiv. 26.
John xx. 23.
Luke vi. 19.
John xx. 22.
Acts. ii. 4.
Rom. v. 5.
Matt. xxii. 37–40.

309

NPNF (V1-03)

225

Philip Schaff

who gives the Holy Spirit? Nay, how great a God is He who gives God! For no one of His disciples
gave the Holy Spirit, since they prayed that He might come upon those upon whom they laid theirhands: they did not give Him themselves. And the Church preserves this custom even now in thecase of her rulers. Lastly, Simon Magus also, when he offered the apostles money, does not say,“Give me also this power, that I may give” the Holy Spirit; but, “that on whomsoever I may lay
my hands, he may receive the Holy Spirit.” Because neither had the Scriptures said before, And
Simon, seeing that the apostles gave the Holy Spirit; but it had said, “And Simon, seeing that theHoly Spirit was given by the laying on of the apostles’ hands.”1057 Therefore also the Lord Jesus
Christ Himself not only gave the Holy Spirit as God, but also received it as man, and therefore He
is said to be full of grace,1058 and of the Holy Spirit.1059 And in the Acts of the Apostles it is more
plainly written of Him, “Because God anointed Him with the Holy Spirit.”1060 Certainly not withvisible oil but with the gift of grace which is signified by the visible ointment wherewith the Church
anoints the baptized. And Christ was certainly not then anointed with the Holy Spirit, when He, asa dove, descended upon Him at His baptism.1061 For at that time He deigned to prefigure His body,i.e. His Church, in which especially the baptized receive the Holy Spirit. But He is to be understoodto have been then anointed with that mystical and invisible unction, when the Word of God wasmade flesh,1062 i.e. when human nature, without any precedent merits of good works, was joined
to God the Word in the womb of the Virgin, so that with it it became one person. Therefore it isthat we confess Him to have been born of the Holy Spirit and of the Virgin Mary. For it is mostabsurd to believe Him to have received the Holy Spirit when He was near thirty years old: for atthat age He was baptized by John;1063 but that He came to baptism as without any sin at all, so notwithout the Holy Spirit. For if it was written of His servant and forerunner John himself, “He shallbe filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother’s womb,”1064 because, although generated byhis father, yet he received the Holy Spirit when formed in the womb; what must be understood andbelieved of the man Christ, of whose flesh the very conception was not carnal, but spiritual? Bothnatures, too, as well the human as the divine, are shown in that also that is written of Him, that He
received of the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, and shed forth the Holy Spirit:1065 seeing that
He received as man, and shed forth as God. And we indeed can receive that gift according to oursmall measure, but assuredly we cannot shed it forth upon others; but, that this may be done, we
invoke over them God, by whom this is accomplished.
47. Are we therefore able to ask whether the Holy Spirit had already proceeded from the Father
when the Son was born, or had not yet proceeded; and when He was born, proceeded from both,wherein there is no such thing as distinct times: just as we have been able to ask, in a case where
we do find times, that the will proceeds from the human mind first, in order that that may be sought

1057
1058
1059
1060
1061
1062
1063
1064
1065

Acts viii. 18, 19.
John i. 14.
Luke ii. 52 and iv. 1.
Acts x. 38.
Matt. iii. 16.
John i.14.
Luke iii. 21–23.
Luke i. 15.
Acts ii. 33.

310

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

which, when found, may be called offspring; which offspring being already brought forth or born,that will is made perfect, resting in this end, so that what had been its desire when seeking, is its
love when enjoying; which love now proceeds from both, i.e. from the mind that begets, and fromthe notion that is begotten, as if from parent and offspring? These things it is absolutely impossible
to ask in this case, where nothing is begun in time, so as to be perfected in a time following.
Wherefore let him who can understand the generation of the Son from the Father without time,
understand also the procession of the Holy Spirit from both without time. And let him who canunderstand, in that which the Son says, “As the Father hath life in Himself, so hath He given to the
Son to have life in Himself,”1066 not that the Father gave life to the Son already existing without
life, but that He so begat Him apart from time, that the life which the Father gave to the Son by
begetting Him is co-eternal with the life of the Father who gave it:1067 let him, I say, understand,that as the Father has in Himself that the Holy Spirit should proceed from Him, so has He given to
the Son that the same Holy Spirit should proceed from Him, and be both apart from time: and thatthe Holy Spirit is so said to proceed from the Father as that it be understood that His proceeding
also from the Son, is a property derived by the Son from the Father. For if the Son has of the Father
whatever He has, then certainly He has of the Father, that the Holy Spirit proceeds also from Him.
But let no one think of any times therein which imply a sooner and a later; because these things
are not there at all. How, then, would it not be most absurd to call Him the Son of both: when, justas generation from the Father, without any changeableness of nature, gives to the Son essence,
without beginning of time; so procession from both, without any changeableness of nature, gives
to the Holy Spirit essence without beginning of time? For while we do not say that the Holy Spirit
is begotten, yet we do not therefore dare to say that He is unbegotten, lest any one suspect in thisword either two Fathers in that Trinity, or two who are not from another. For the Father alone is
not from another, and therefore He alone is called unbegotten, not indeed in the Scriptures,1068 butin the usage of disputants, who employ such language as they can on so great a subject. And the
Son is born of the Father; and the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father principally, the Father giving
the procession without any interval of time, yet in common from both [Father and Son].1069 But He
would be called the Son of the Father and of the Son, if—a thing abhorrent to the feeling of allsound minds—both had begotten Him. Therefore the Spirit of both is not begotten of both, but
proceeds from both.

1066

John v. 26.
[Says Turrettin, III. xxix. 21. “The Father does not generate the Son either as previously existing, for in this case there
would be no need of generation; nor yet as not yet existing, for in this case the Son would not be eternal; but as co-existing,because he is from eternity in the God-head.”—W.G.T.S.]
1068[The term “unbegotten” is not found in Scripture, but it is implied in the terms “begotten” and “only-begotten,” which
are found. The term “unity” is not applied to God in Scripture, but it is implied in the term “one” which is so applied.—W.G.T.S.]
1069[The spiration and procession of the Holy Spirit is not by two separate acts, one of the Father, and one of the Son—as
perhaps might be inferred from Augustin’s remark that “the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father principally.” As Turrettinsays: “The Father and Son spirate the Spirit, not as two different essences in each of which resides a spirative energy, but as
two personal subsistences of one essence, who concur in one act of spiration.” Institutio III. xxxi. 6.—W.G.T.S.]
1067

311

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 27.—What It is that Suffices Here to Solve the Question Why the Spirit is Not Said to Be
Begotten, and Why the Father Alone is Unbegotten. What They Ought to Do Who Do Not
Understand These Things.

226

48. But because it is most difficult to distinguish generation from procession in that co-eternal,
and equal, and incorporeal, and ineffably unchangeable and indivisible Trinity, let it sufficemeanwhile to put before those who are not able to be drawn on further, what we said upon thissubject in a sermon to be delivered in the ears of Christian people, and after saying wrote it down.
For when, among other things, I had taught them by testimonies of the Holy Scriptures that theHoly Spirit proceeds from both, I continue: “If, then, the Holy Spirit proceeds both from the Father
and from the Son, why did the Son say, ‘He proceedeth from the Father?’1070 Why, think you,
except as He is wont to refer to Him, that also which is His own, from whom also He Himself is?
Whence also is that which He saith, ‘My doctrine is not mine own, but His that sent me?’1071 If,
therefore, it is His doctrine that is here understood, which yet He said was not His own, but His
that sent Him, how much more is it there to be understood that the Holy Spirit proceeds also from
Himself, where He so says, He proceedeth from the Father, as not to say, He proceedeth not fromme? From Him, certainly, from whom the Son had his Divine nature, for He is God of God, He
has also, that from Him too proceeds the Holy Spirit; and hence the Holy Spirit has from the Father
Himself, that He should proceed from the Son also, as He proceeds from the Father. Here, too, insome way may this also be understood, so far as it can be understood by such as we are, why theHoly Spirit is not said to be born, but rather to proceed;1072 since if He, too, was called a Son, He
would certainly be called the Son of both, which is most absurd, since no one is son of two, saveof father and mother. But far be it from us to surmise any such thing as this between God the Father
and God the Son. Because not even the son of men proceeds at the same time from both father andmother; but when he proceeds from the father into the mother, he does not at that time proceedfrom the mother; and when he proceeds from the mother into this present light, he does not at thattime proceed from the father. But the Holy Spirit does not proceed from the Father into the Son,and from the Son proceed to sanctify the creature, but proceeds at once from both; although the
Father has given this to the Son, that He should proceed, as from Himself, so also from Him. For
we cannot say that the Holy Spirit is not life, while the Father is life, and the Son is life: and hence
as the Father, while He has life in Himself, has given also to the Son to have life in Himself; so has
He given also to Him that life should proceed from Him, as it also proceeds from Himself.”1073 I
1070

John xv. 26.
John vii. 16.
1072[Generation and procession are each an emanation of the essence by which it is modified. Neither of them is a creation
ex nihilo. The school-men attempted to explain the difference between the two emanations, by saying that the generation of the
Son is by the mode of the intellect—hence the Son is called Wisdom, or Word (Logos); but the procession of the Spirit is by
the mode of the will—hence the Spirit is called Love. Turrettin distinguishes the difference by the following particulars: 1. In
respect to the source. Generation is from the Father alone; procession is from Father and Son. 2. In respect to effects. Generation
yields not only personality, but resemblance. The Son is the “image” of the Father, but the Spirit is not the image of the Father
and Son. Generation is accompanied with the power to communicate the essence; procession is not. 3. In respect to order ofrelationship. Generation is second, procession is third. In the order of nature, not of time (for both generation and procession
are eternal, therefore simultaneous), procession is after generation. Institutio III. xxxi. 3.—W.G.T.S.]
1073
Serm. in Joh. Evang. tract.. 99, n. 8, 9.
1071

312

NPNF (V1-03)

227

Philip Schaff

have transferred this from that sermon into this book, but I was speaking to believers, not tounbelievers.
49. But if they are not competent to gaze upon this image, and to see how true these things arewhich are in their mind, and yet which are not so three as to be three persons, but all three belong
to a man who is one person; why do they not believe what they find in the sacred books respectingthat highest Trinity which is God, rather than insist on the clearest reason being rendered them,which cannot be comprehended by the human mind, dull and infirm as it is? And to be sure, when
they have steadfastly believed the Holy Scriptures as most true witnesses, let them strive, by praying
and seeking and living well, that they may understand, i.e. that so far as it can be seen, that may beseen by the mind which is held fast by faith. Who would forbid this? Nay, who would not rather
exhort them to it? But if they think they ought to deny that these things are, because they, with theirblind minds, cannot discern them, they, too, who are blind from their birth, ought to deny that there
is a sun. The light then shineth in darkness; but if the darkness comprehend it not,1074 let them firstbe illuminated by the gift of God, that they may be believers, and let them begin to be light incomparison with the unbelievers; and when this foundation is first laid, let them be built up to see
what they believe, that at some time they may be able to see. For some things are so believed, thatthey cannot be seen at all. For Christ is not to be seen a second time on the cross; but unless thisbe believed which has been so done and seen, that it is not now to be hoped for as about to be andto be seen, there is no coming to Christ, such as without end He is to be seen. But as far as relates
to the discerning in some way by the understanding that highest, ineffable, incorporeal, andunchangeable nature the sight of the human mind can nowhere better exercise itself, so only thatthe rule of faith govern it, than in that which man himself has in his own nature better than the otheranimals, better also than the other parts of his own soul, which is the mind itself, to which has been
assigned a certain sight of things invisible, and to which, as though honorably presiding in a higher
and inner place, the bodily senses also bring word of all things, that they may be judged, and thanwhich there is no higher, to which it is to be subject, and by which it is to be governed, except God.
50. But among these many things which I have now said, and of which there is nothing that I
dare to profess myself to have said worthy of the ineffableness of that highest Trinity, but rather
to confess that the wonderful knowledge of Him is too great for me, and that I cannot attain1075 to
it: O thou, my soul, where dost thou feel thyself to be? where dost thou lie? where dost thou stand?
until all thy infirmities be healed by Him who has forgiven all thy iniquities.1076 Thou perceivest
thyself assuredly to be in that inn whither that Samaritan brought him whom he found with many
wounds inflicted by thieves, half-dead.1077 And yet thou hast seen many things that are true, not by
those eyes by which colored objects are seen, but by those for which he prayed who said, “Let mineeyes behold the things that are equal.”1078 Certainly, then, thou hast seen many things that are true,and hast distinguished them from that light by the light of which thou hast seen them. Lift up thineeyes to the light itself, and fix them upon it if thou canst. For so thou wilt see how the birth of theWord of God differs from the procession of the Gift of God, on account of which the only-begotten
1074
1075
1076
1077
1078

John i. 5.
Ps. cxxxix. 5.
Ps. ciii. 3.
Luke x. 30, 34.
Ps. xvii. 2.

313

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Son did not say that the Holy Spirit is begotten of the Father, otherwise He would be His brother,
but that lie proceeds from Him. Whence, since the Spirit of both is a kind of consubstantial
communion of Father and Son, He is not called, far be it from us to say so, the Son of both. But
thou canst not fix thy sight there, so as to discern this lucidly and clearly; I know thou canst not. I
say the truth, I say to myself, I know what I cannot do; yet that light itself shows to thee these three
things in thyself, wherein thou mayest recognize an image of the highest Trinity itself, which thoucanst not yet contemplate with steady eye. Itself shows to thee that there is in thee a true word,when it is born of thy knowledge, i.e. when we say what we know: although we neither utter nor
think of any articulate word that is significant in any tongue of any nation, but our thought is formedby that which we know; and there is in the mind’s eye of the thinker an image resembling thatthought which the memory contained, will or love as a third combining these two as parent andoffspring. And he who can, sees and discerns that this will proceeds indeed from thought (for no
one wills that of which he is absolutely ignorant what or of what sort it is), yet is not an image ofthe thought: and so that there is insinuated in this intelligible thing a sort of difference between
birth and procession, since to behold by thought is not the same as to desire, or even to enjoy will.
Thou, too, hast been able [to discern this], although thou hast not been, neither art, able to unfold
with adequate speech what, amidst the clouds of bodily likenesses, which cease not to flit up anddown before human thoughts, thou hast scarcely seen. But that light which is not thyself showsthee this too, that these incorporeal likenesses of bodies are different from the truth, which, by
rejecting them, we contemplate with the understanding. These, and other things similarly certain,that light hath shown to thine inner eyes. What reason, then, is there why thou canst not see thatlight itself with steady eye, except certainly infirmity? And what has produced this in thee, except
iniquity? Who, then, is it that healeth all thine infirmities, unless it be He that forgiveth all thine
iniquities? And therefore I will now at length finish this book by a prayer better than by an argument.

Chapter 28.—The Conclusion of the Book with a Prayer, and an Apology for Multitude of Words.
51. O Lord our God, we believe in Thee, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. For the
Truth would not say, Go, baptize all nations in the name of the Father and of the Son and of theHoly Spirit, unless Thou wast a Trinity. Nor wouldest thou, O Lord God, bid us to be baptized in
the name of Him who is not the Lord God. Nor would the divine voice have said, Hear, O Israel,the Lord thy God is one God, unless Thou wert so a Trinity as to be one Lord God. And if Thou,
O God, wert Thyself the Father, and wert Thyself the Son, Thy Word Jesus Christ, and the Holy
Spirit your gift, we should not read in the book of truth, “God sent His Son;”1079 nor wouldest Thou,O Only-begotten, say of the Holy Spirit, “Whom the Father will send in my name;”1080 and, “WhomI will send to you from the Father.”1081 Directing my purpose by this rule of faith, so far as I havebeen able, so far as Thou hast made me to be able, I have sought Thee, and have desired to see with

1079
1080
1081

Gal. iv. 5 and John iii. 17.
John xiv. 26.
John xv. 26.

314

NPNF (V1-03)

228

Philip Schaff

my understanding what I believed; and I have argued and labored much. O Lord my God, my one
hope, hearken to me, lest through weariness I be unwilling to seek Thee, “but that I may always
ardently seek Thy face.”1082 Do Thou give strength to seek, who hast made me find Thee, and hastgiven the hope of finding Thee more and more. My strength and my infirmity are in Thy sight:
preserve the one, and heal the other. My knowledge and my ignorance are in Thy sight; where Thouhast opened to me, receive me as I enter; where Thou hast closed, open to me as I knock. May I
remember Thee, understand Thee, love Thee. Increase these things in me, until Thou renewest me
wholly. I know it is written, “In the multitude of speech, thou shalt not escape sin.”1083 But O that
I might speak only in preaching Thy word, and in praising Thee! Not only should I so flee fromsin, but I should earn good desert, however much I so spake. For a man blessed of Thee would not
enjoin a sin upon his own true son in the faith, to whom he wrote, “Preach the word: be instant inseason, out of season.”1084 Are we to say that he has not spoken much, who was not silent about
Thy word, O Lord, not only in season, but out of season? But therefore it was not much, because
it was only what was necessary. Set me free, O God, from that multitude of speech which I suffer
inwardly in my soul, wretched as it is in Thy sight, and flying for refuge to Thy mercy; for I am
not silent in thoughts, even when silent in words. And if, indeed, I thought of nothing save what
pleased Thee, certainly I would not ask Thee to set me free from such multitude of speech. But
many are my thoughts, such as Thou knowest, “thoughts of man, since they are vain.”1085 Grant tome not to consent to them; and if ever they delight me, nevertheless to condemn them, and not todwell in them, as though I slumbered. Nor let them so prevail in me, as that anything in my actsshould proceed from them; but at least let my opinions, let my conscience, be safe from them, underThy protection. When the wise man spake of Thee in his book, which is now called by the specialname of Ecclesiasticus, “We speak,” he said, “much, and yet come short; and in sum of words, He
is all.”1086 When, therefore, we shall have come to Thee, these very many things that we speak, andyet come short, will cease; and Thou, as One, wilt remain “all in all.”1087 And we shall say one
thing without end, in praising Thee in One, ourselves also made one in Thee. O Lord the one God,
God the Trinity, whatever I have said in these books that is of Thine, may they acknowledge who
are Thine; if anything of my own, may it be pardoned both by Thee and by those who are Thine.
Amen.

229

The Enchiridion,

1082
1083
1084
1085
1086
1087

Ps. cv. 4.
Prov. x. 19.
2 Tim. iv. 2.
Ps. xciv. 11.
Ecclus. xliii. 29.
1 Cor. xv. 28.

315

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Addressed to Laurentius;
Being a Treatise on Faith, Hope and Love.
Translated by Professor J. F. Shaw, Londonderry.
231

Introductory Notice
By the Editor.
St. Augustin speaks of this book in his Retractations, l. ii. c. 63, as follows:“I also wrote a book on Faith, Hope, and Charity, at the request of the person to whom I
addressed it, that he might have a work of mine which should never be out of his hands, such as
the Greeks call an Enchiridion (Hand-Book). There I think I have pretty carefully treated of themanner in which God is to be worshipped, which knowledge divine Scripture defines to be the true
wisdom of man. The book begins: ‘I cannot express,’” etc.1088
The Enchiridion is among the latest books of Augustin. It was written after the death of Jerome,
which occurred Sept. 30, 420; for he alludes in ch. 87 to Jerome “of blessed memory” (sanctæ
memoriæ Hieronymus presbyter).
It is addressed to Laurentius, in answer to his questions. This person is otherwise unknown.
One ms. calls him a deacon, another a notary of the city of Rome. He was probably a layman.
The author usually calls the book “On Faith, Hope and Love,” because he treats the subject
under these three heads (comp. (I Cor. xiii. 13). He follows under the first head the order of theApostles’ Creed, and refutes, without naming them, the Manichæan, Apollinarian, Arian, andPelagian heresies. Under the second head he gives a brief exposition of the Lord’s Prayer. The thirdpart is a discourse on Christian love.
The original is in the sixth volume of the Benedictine edition. A neat edition of the Latin text,
with three other small tracts of Augustin, (De Catechizandis Rudibus; De Fide Rerum quæ non
creduntur; De Utilitate Credendi), is also published in C. Marriott’s S. Aurelius Augustinus, 4thed. by H. de Romestin, Oxford and London (Parker and Comp.), 1885 (pp. 150–251.) An English
edition of the same tracts by H. de Romestin, Oxford and London, 1885 (pp. 151–251). His English
translation is based on that of C. L. Cornish, M.A., which appeared in the Oxford “Library of the
Fathers,” Oxford 1847 (“Seventeen Short Treatises of St. Aug.” pp. 85–158).
The present translation by Professor Shaw was first published in Dr. Dods’s series of Augustin’s
works, Edinburgh, (T. and T. Clark,) 3d ed. 1883. It is more free and idiomatic than that of Cornish.
I have in a few cases conformed it more closely to the original.
P.S.
1088

“Scripsi etiam librum ‘de Fide, Spe et Charitate’ cum a me ad quem scriptus est postulasset ut aliquod opusculum
haberet meum de suis manibus nunquam recessurum, quod genus Græci Enchiridion vocant. Ubi satis diligenter mihi videor
esse complexus quomodo sit colendus Deus quam sapientiam esse hominis utique veram Divina Scriptura definit. Hic liber sic
incipit, ‘Dici non potest, dilectissime fili Laurenti, quantum tuâ eruditione delecter.’”

316

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

The Enchiridion.
237————————————
Argument.
Laurentius having asked Augustin to furnish him with a handbook of Christian doctrine, containing
in brief compass answers to several questions which he had proposed, Augustin shows him thatthese questions can be fully answered by any one who knows the proper objects of faith, hope,and love. He then proceeds, in the first part of the work (Chap. ix.—cxiii.), to expound theobjects of faith, taking as his text the Apostles’ Creed; and in the course of this exposition,
besides refuting divers heresies, he throws out many observations on the conduct of life. The
second part of the work (Chap. cxiv.—cxvi.) treats of the objects of hope, and consists of a very
brief exposition of the several petitions in the Lord’s Prayer. The third and concluding part
(Chap. cxvii.-cxxii.) treats of the objects of love, showing the pre-eminence of this grace in thegospel system, that it is the end of the commandment and the fulfilling of the law, and that God
himself is love.

Chapter 1.—The Author Desires the Gift of True Wisdom for Laurentius.
I Cannot express, my beloved son Laurentius, the delight with which I witness your progressin knowledge, and the earnest desire I have that you should be a wise man: not one of those ofwhom it is said, “Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hathnot God made foolish the wisdom of this world?”1089 but one of those of whom it is said, “The
multitude of the wise is the welfare of the world,”1090 and such as the apostles wishes those to
become, whom he tells,” I would have you wise unto that which is good, and simple concerning
evil.”1091 Now, just as no one can exist of himself, so no one can be wise of himself, but only by
the enlightening influence of Him of whom it is written,” All wisdom cometh from the Lord.”1092

Chapter 2.—The Fear of God is Man’s True Wisdom.

1089
1090
1091
1092

1 Cor. i. 20.
Wisd. vi. 24. [Greek text, ver. 25: πλῆθος σοφῶν σωτηρία κόσμου.—P.S.]
Rom. xvi. 19.
Ecclus. i. 1.

317

NPNF (V1-03)

238

Philip Schaff

The true wisdom of man is piety. You find this in the book of holy Job. For we read there what
wisdom itself has said to man: “Behold, the fear of the Lord [pietas], that is wisdom.”1093 If you
ask further what is meant in that place by pietas, the Greek calls it more definitely™ , thatis, the worship of God. The Greeks sometimes call piety ™ , which signifies right worship,
though this, of course, refers specially to the worship of God. But when we are defining in what
man’s true wisdom consists, the most convenient word to use is that which distinctly expresses thefear of God. And can you, who are anxious that I should treat of great matters in few words, wish
for a briefer form of expression? Or perhaps you are anxious that this expression should itself bebriefly explained, and that I should unfold in a short discourse the proper mode of worshippingGod?

Chapter 3.—God is to Be Worshipped Through Faith, Hope, and Love.
Now if I should answer, that God is to be worshipped with faith, hope, and love, you will at
once say that this answer is too brief, and will ask me briefly to unfold the objects of each of thesethree graces, viz., what we are to believe, what we are to hope for, and what we are to love. And
when I have done this, you will have an answer to all the questions you asked in your letter. If you
have kept a copy of your letter, you can easily turn it up and read it over again: if you have not,you will have no difficulty in recalling it when I refresh your memory.

Chapter 4.—The Questions Propounded by Laurentius.
You are anxious, you say, that I should write a sort of handbook for you, which you mightalways keep beside you, containing answers to the questions you put, viz.: what ought to be man’schief end in life; what he ought, in view of the various heresies, chiefly to avoid; to what extent
religion is supported by reason; what there is in reason that lends no support to faith, when faithstands alone; what is the starting-point, what the goal, of religion; what is the sum of the wholebody of doctrine; what is the sure and proper foundation of the catholic faith. Now, undoubtedly,
you will know the answers to all these questions, if you know thoroughly the proper objects offaith, hope, and love. For these must be the chief, nay, the exclusive objects of pursuit in religion.
He who speaks against these is either a total stranger to the name of Christ, or is a heretic. These
are to be defended by reason, which must have its starting-point either in the bodily senses or in
the intuitions of the mind. And what we have neither had experience of through our bodily senses,
nor have been able to reach through the intellect, must undoubtedly be believed on the testimonyof those witnesses by whom the Scriptures, justly called divine, were written; and who by divine
assistance were enabled, either through bodily sense or intellectual perception, to see or to foresee
the things in question.
1093

Job xxviii. 28.

318

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 5.—Brief Answers to These Questions.
Moreover, when the mind has been imbued with the first elements of that faith which worketh
by love,1094 it endeavors by purity of life to attain unto sight, where the pure and perfect in heartknow that unspeakable beauty, the full vision of which is supreme happiness. Here surely is ananswer to your question as to what is the starting-point, and what the goal: we begin in faith, andare made perfect by sight. This also is the sum of the whole body of doctrine. But the sure andproper foundation of the catholic faith is Christ. “For other foundation,” says the apostle, “can no
man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.”1095 Nor are we to deny that this is the proper
foundation of the catholic faith, because it may be supposed that some heretics hold this in common
with us. For if we carefully consider the things that pertain to Christ, we shall find that, among
those heretics who call themselves Christians, Christ is present in name only: in deed and in truth
He is not among them. But to show this would occupy us too long, for we should require to go over
all the heresies which have existed, which do exist, or which could exist, under the Christian name,and to show that this is true in the case of each,—a discussion which would occupy so many volumes
as to be all but interminable.

Chapter 6.—Controversy Out of Place in a Handbook Like the Present.
Now you ask of me a handbook, that is, one that can be carried in the hand, not one to load
your shelves. To return, then, to the three graces through which, as I have said, God should be
worshipped—faith, hope, and love: to state what are the true and proper objects of each of these iseasy. But to defend this true doctrine against the assaults of those who hold an opposite opinion,
requires much fuller and more elaborate instruction. And the true way to obtain this instruction is
not to have a short treatise put into one’s hands, but to have a great zeal kindled in one’s heart.

Chapter 7.—The Creed and the Lord’s Prayer Demand the Exercise of Faith, Hope, and Love.

239

For you have the Creed and the Lord’s Prayer. What can be briefer to hear or to read? Whateasier to commit to memory? When, as the result of sin, the human race was groaning under aheavy load of misery, and was in urgent need of the divine compassion, one of the prophets,
anticipating the time of God’s grace, declared: “And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shallcall on the name of the Lord shall be delivered.”1096 Hence the Lord’s Prayer. But the apostle, when,
for the purpose of commending this very grace, he had quoted this prophetic testimony, immediately

1094
1095
1096

Gal. v. 6.
1 Cor. iii. 11.
Joel ii. 32.

319

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

added: “How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed?”1097 Hence the Creed.
In these two you have those three graces exemplified: faith believes, hope and love pray. But withoutfaith the two last cannot exist, and therefore we may say that faith also prays. Whence it is written:“How shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed?”

Chapter 8.—The Distinction Between Faith and Hope, and the Mutual Dependence of Faith, Hope,and Love.
Again, can anything be hoped for which is not an object of faith? It is true that a thing which
is not an object of hope may be believed. What true Christian, for example, does not believe in thepunishment of the wicked? And yet such an one does not hope for it. And the man who believes
that punishment to be hanging over himself, and who shrinks in horror from the prospect, is more
properly said to fear than to hope. And these two states of mind the poet carefully distinguishes,
when he says: “Permit the fearful to have hope.”1098 Another poet, who is usually much superior
to this one, makes a wrong use of the word, when he says: “If I have been able to hope for so greata grief as this.”1099 And some grammarians take this case as an example of impropriety of speech,saying, “He said sperare [to hope] instead of timere [to fear].” Accordingly, faith may have forits object evil as well as good; for both good and evil are believed, and the faith that believes themis not evil, but good. Faith, moreover, is concerned with the past, the present, and the future, allthree. We believe, for example, that Christ died,—an event in the past; we believe that He is sittingat the right hand of God,—a state of things which is present; we believe that He will come to judge
the quick and the dead,—an event of the future. Again, faith applies both to one’s own circumstances
and those of others. Every one, for example, believes that his own existence had a beginning, andwas not eternal, and he believes the same both of other men and other things. Many of our beliefs
in regard to religious matters, again, have reference not merely to other men, but to angels also.
But hope has for its object only what is good, only what is future, and only what affects the man
who entertains the hope. For these reasons, then, faith must be distinguished from hope, not merely
as a matter of verbal propriety, but because they are essentially different. The fact that we do notsee either what we believe or what we hope for, is all that is common to faith and hope. In the
Epistle to the Hebrews, for example, faith is defined (and eminent defenders of the catholic faithhave used the definition as a standard) “the evidence of things not seen.”1100 Although, should any
one say that he believes, that is, has grounded his faith, not on words, nor on witnesses, nor on any
reasoning whatever, but on the direct evidence of his own senses, he would not be guilty of suchan impropriety of speech as to be justly liable to the criticism, “You saw, therefore you did not
believe.” And hence it does not follow that an object of faith is not an object of sight. But it is betterthat we should use the word “faith” as the Scriptures have taught us, applying it to those things

1097
1098
1099
1100

Rom. x. 14.
Lucan, Phars. ii. 15.
Virgil, Æneid, iv. 419.
Heb. xi. 1.

320

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

which are not seen. Concerning hope, again, the apostle says: “Hope that is seen is not hope; forwhat a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for? But if we hope for that we see not, then do we withpatience wait for it.”1101 When, then, we believe that good is about to come, this is nothing else but
to hope for it. Now what shall I say of love? Without it, faith profits nothing; and in its absence,hope cannot exist. The Apostle James says: “The devils also believe, and tremble.”1102—that is,they, having neither hope nor love, but believing that what we love and hope for is about to come,are in terror. And so the Apostle Paul approves and commends the “faith that worketh by love;”1103
and this certainly cannot exist without hope. Wherefore there is no love without hope, no hope
without love, and neither love nor hope without faith.

Chapter 9.—What We are to Believe. In Regard to Nature It is Not Necessary for the Christian toKnow More Than that the Goodness of the Creator is the Cause of All Things.

240

When, then, the question is asked what we are to believe in regard to religion, it is not necessary
to probe into the nature of things, as was done by those whom the Greeks call physici; nor need webe in alarm lest the Christian should be ignorant of the force and number of the elements,—themotion, and order, and eclipses of the heavenly bodies; the form of the heavens; the species andthe natures of animals, plants, stones, fountains, rivers, mountains; about chronology and distances;
the signs of coming storms; and a thousand other things which those philosophers either have foundout, or think they have found out. For even these men themselves, endowed though they are withso much genius, burning with zeal, abounding in leisure, tracking some things by the aid of humanconjecture, searching into others with the aids of history and experience, have not found out all
things; and even their boasted discoveries are oftener mere guesses than certain knowledge. It isenough for the Christian to believe that the only cause of all created things, whether heavenly or
earthly, whether visible or invisible, is the goodness of the Creator the one true God; and that
nothing exists but Himself that does not derive its existence from Him; and that He is the Trinity—towit, the Father, and the Son begotten of the Father, and the Holy Spirit proceeding from the same
Father, but one and the same Spirit of Father and Son.

Chapter 10.—The Supremely Good Creator Made All Things Good.
By the Trinity, thus supremely and equally and unchangeably good, all things were created;
and these are not supremely and equally and unchangeably good, but yet they are good, even taken
separately. Taken as a whole, however, they are very good, because their ensemble constitutes theuniverse in all its wonderful order and beauty.
1101
1102
1103

Rom. viii. 24, 25.
Jas. ii. 19.
Gal. v. 6.

321

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 11.—What is Called Evil in the Universe is But the Absence of Good.
And in the universe, even that which is called evil, when it is regulated and put in its own place,
only enhances our admiration of the good; for we enjoy and value the good more when we compare
it with the evil. For the Almighty God, who, as even the heathen acknowledge, has supreme powerover all things, being Himself supremely good, would never permit the existence of anything evilamong His works, if He were not so omnipotent and good that He can bring good even out of evil.
For what is that which we call evil but the absence of good? In the bodies of animals, disease andwounds mean nothing but the absence of health; for when a cure is effected, that does not meanthat the evils which were present—namely, the diseases and wounds—go away from the body anddwell elsewhere: they altogether cease to exist; for the wound or disease is not a substance, but adefect in the fleshly substance,—the flesh itself being a substance, and therefore something good,of which those evils—that is, privations of the good which we call health—are accidents. Just in
the same way, what are called vices in the soul are nothing but privations of natural good. And
when they are cured, they are not transferred elsewhere: when they cease to exist in the healthysoul, they cannot exist anywhere else.

Chapter 12.—All Beings Were Made Good, But Not Being Made Perfectly Good, are Liable toCorruption.

241

All things that exist, therefore, seeing that the Creator of them all is supremely good, arethemselves good. But because they are not, like their Creator, supremely and unchangeably good,their good may be diminished and increased. But for good to be diminished is an evil, although,however much it may be diminished, it is necessary, if the being is to continue, that some goodshould remain to constitute the being. For however small or of whatever kind the being may be,
the good which makes it a being cannot be destroyed without destroying the being itself. An
uncorrupted nature is justly held in esteem. But if, still further, it be incorruptible, it is undoubtedly
considered of still higher value. When it is corrupted, however, its corruption is an evil, because it
is deprived of some sort of good. For if it be deprived of no good, it receives no injury; but it does
receive injury, therefore it is deprived of good. Therefore, so long as a being is in process ofcorruption, there is in it some good of which it is being deprived; and if a part of the being should
remain which cannot be corrupted, this will certainly be an incorruptible being, and accordingly
the process of corruption will result in the manifestation of this great good. But if it do not cease
to be corrupted, neither can it cease to possess good of which corruption may deprive it. But if itshould be thoroughly and completely consumed by corruption, there will then be no good left,
because there will be no being. Wherefore corruption can consume the good only by consuming
the being. Every being, therefore, is a good; a great good, if it can not be corrupted; a little good,
if it can: but in any case, only the foolish or ignorant will deny that it is a good. And if it be wholly
consumed by corruption, then the corruption itself must cease to exist, as there is no being left inwhich it can dwell.

322

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 13.—There Can Be No Evil Where There is No Good; And an Evil Man is an Evil Good.
Accordingly, there is nothing of what we call evil, if there be nothing good. But a good which
is wholly without evil is a perfect good. A good, on the other hand, which contains evil is a faulty
or imperfect good; and there can be no evil where there is no good. From all this we arrive at the
curious result: that since every being, so far as it is a being, is good, when we say that a faulty being
is an evil being, we just seem to say that what is good is evil, and that nothing but what is good canbe evil, seeing that every being is good, and that no evil can exist except in a being. Nothing, then,can be evil except something which is good. And although this, when stated, seems to be acontradiction, yet the strictness of reasoning leaves us no escape from the conclusion. We must,however, beware of incurring the prophetic condemnation: “Woe unto them that call evil good,and good evil: that put darkness for light, and light for darkness: that put bitter for sweet, and sweet
for bitter.”1104 And yet our Lord says: “An evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth
forth that which is evil.”1105 Now, what is evil man but an evil being? for a man is a being. Now,
if a man is a good thing because he is a being, what is an evil man but an evil good? Yet, when we
accurately distinguish these two things, we find that it is not because he is a man that he is an evil,or because he is wicked that he is a good; but that he is a good because he is a man, and an evil
because he is wicked. Whoever, then, says, “To be a man is an evil,” or, “To be wicked is a good,”
falls under the prophetic denunciation: “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil!” For hecondemns the work of God, which is the man, and praises the defect of man, which is the wickedness.
Therefore every being, even if it be a defective one, in so far as it is a being is good, and in so far
as it is defective is evil.

Chapter 14.—Good and Evil are an Exception to the Rule that Contrary Attributes Cannot Be
Predicated of the Same Subject. Evil Springs Up in What is Good, and Cannot Exist Except in
What is Good.
Accordingly, in the case of these contraries which we call good and evil, the rule of thelogicians,that two contraries cannot be predicated at the same time of the same thing, does not hold. No
weather is at the same time dark and bright: no food or drink is at the same time sweet and bitter:no body is at the same time and in the same place black and white: none is at the same time and in
the same place deformed and beautiful. And this rule is found to hold in regard to many, indeed
nearly all, contraries, that they cannot exist at the same time in any one thing. But although no one
can doubt that good and evil are contraries, not only can they exist at the same time, but evil cannot
exist without good, or in anything that is not good. Good, however, can exist without evil. For aman or an angel can exist without being wicked; but nothing can be wicked except a man or anangel: and so far as he is a man or an angel, he is good; so far as he is wicked, he is an evil. And

1104
1105

Isa. v. 20.
Luke vi. 45.

323

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

these two contraries are so far co-existent, that if good did not exist in what is evil, neither could
evil exist; because corruption could not have either a place to dwell in, or a source to spring from,
if there were nothing that could be corrupted; and nothing can be corrupted except what is good,for corruption is nothing else but the destruction of good. From what is good, then, evils arose, andexcept in what is good they do not exist; nor was there any other source from which any evil nature
could arise. For if there were, then, in so far as this was a being, it was certainly a good: and a being
which was incorruptible would be a great good; and even one which was corruptible must be tosome extent a good, for only by corrupting what was good in it could corruption do it harm.

Chapter 15.—The Preceding Argument is in No Wise Inconsistent with the Saying of Our Lord:“A Good Tree Cannot Bring Forth Evil Fruit.”242

But when we say that evil springs out of good, let it not be thought that this contradicts ourLord’s saying: “A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit.”1106 For, as He who is the Truth says, you
cannot gather grapes of thorns,1107 because grapes do not grow on thorns. But we see that on goodsoil both vines and thorns may be grown. And in the same way, just as an evil tree cannot bring
forth good fruit, so an evil will cannot produce good works. But from the nature of man, which isgood, may spring either a good or an evil will. And certainly there was at first no source from whichan evil will could spring, except the nature of angel or of man, which was good. And our Lord
Himself clearly shows this in the very same place where He speaks about the tree and its fruit. For
He says: “Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit
corrupt,”1108—clearly enough warning us that evil fruits do not grow on a good tree, nor good fruits
on an evil tree; but that nevertheless the ground itself, by which He meant those whom He was thenaddressing, might grow either kind of trees.

Chapter 16.—It is Not Essential to Man’s Happiness that He Should Know the Causes of PhysicalConvulsions; But It Is, that He Should Know the Causes of Good and Evil.
Now, in view of these considerations, when we are pleased with that line of Maro, “Happy theman who has attained to the knowledge of the causes of things,”1109 we should not suppose that itis necessary to happiness to know the causes of the great physical convulsions, causes which lie
hid in the most secret recesses of nature’s kingdom, “whence comes the earthquake whose force
makes the deep seas to swell and burst their barriers, and again to return upon themselves and settle

1106
1107
1108
1109

Matt. vii. 18.
Matt. vii. 16.
Matt. xii. 33.
Virgil, Georgics, ii. 490.

324

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

down.”1110 But we ought to know the causes of good and evil as far as man may in this life know
them, in order to avoid the mistakes and troubles of which this life is so full. For our aim must
always be to reach that state of happiness in which no trouble shall distress us, and no error mislead
us. If we must know the causes of physical convulsions, there are none which it concerns us more
to know than those which affect our own health. But seeing that, in our ignorance of these, we arefain to resort to physicians, it would seem that we might bear with considerable patience ourignorance of the secrets that lie hid in the earth and heavens.

Chapter 17.—The Nature of Error. All Error is Not Hurtful, Though It is Man’s Duty as Far as
Possible to Avoid It.
For although we ought with the greatest possible care to avoid error, not only in great but evenin little things, and although we cannot err except through ignorance, it does not follow that, if a
man is ignorant of a thing, he must forthwith fall into error. That is rather the fate of the man who
thinks he knows what he does not know. For he accepts what is false as if it were true, and that isthe essence of error. But it is a point of very great importance what the subject is in regard to whicha man makes a mistake. For on one and the same subject we rightly prefer an instructed man to an
ignorant one, and a man who is not in error to one who is. In the case of different subjects,
however,—that is, when one man knows one thing, and another a different thing, and when what
the former knows is useful, and what the latter knows is not so useful, or is actually hurtful,—whowould not, in regard to the things the latter knows, prefer the ignorance of the former to theknowledge of the latter? For there are points on which ignorance is better than knowledge. And in
the same way, it has sometimes been an advantage to depart from the right way,—in travelling,
however, not in morals. It has happened to myself to take the wrong road where two ways met, sothat I did not pass by the place where an armed band of Donatists lay in wait for me. Yet I arrived
at the place whither I was bent, though by a roundabout route; and when I heard of the ambush, I
congratulated myself on my mistake, and gave thanks to God for it. Now, who would not rather be
the traveller who made a mistake like this, than the highwayman who made no mistake? And hence,
perhaps, it is that the prince of poets puts these words into the mouth of a lover in misery:1111 “HowI am undone, how I have been carried away by an evil error!” for there is an error which is good,as it not merely does no harm, but produces some actual advantage. But when we look more closely
into the nature of truth, and consider that to err is just to take the false for the true, and the true forthe false, or to hold what is certain as uncertain, and what is uncertain as certain, and that error in
the soul is hideous and repulsive just in proportion as it appears fair and plausible when we utterit, or assent to it, saying, “Yea, yea; Nay, nay,”—surely this life that we live is wretched indeed, if
only on this account, that sometimes, in order to preserve it, it is necessary to fall into error. God
forbid that such should be that other life, where truth itself is the life of the soul, where no one
deceives, and no one is deceived. But here men deceive and are deceived, and they are more to be

1110
1111

Ibid.
Virgil, Eclog. viii. 41.

325

NPNF (V1-03)

243

Philip Schaff

pitied when they lead others astray than when they are themselves led astray by putting trust inliars. Yet so much does a rational soul shrink from what is false, and so earnestly does it struggle
against error, that even those who love to deceive are most unwilling to be deceived. For the liar
does not think that he errs, but that he leads another who trusts him into error. And certainly hedoes not err in regard to the matter about which he lies, if he himself knows the truth; but he isdeceived in this, that he thinks his lie does him no harm, whereas every sin is more hurtful to thesinner than to the sinned against.

Chapter 18.—It is Never Allowable to Tell a Lie; But Lies Differ Very Much in Guilt, According
to the Intention and the Subject.
But here arises a very difficult and very intricate question, about which I once wrote a large
book, finding it necessary to give it an answer. The question is this: whether at any time it canbecome the duty of a good man to tell a lie? For some go so far as to contend that there are occasions
on which it is a good and pious work to commit perjury even, and to say what is false about mattersthat relate to the worship of God, and about the very nature of God Himself. To me, however, it
seems certain that every lie is a sin, though it makes a great difference with what intention and on
what subject one lies. For the sin of the man who tells a lie to help another is not so heinous as thatof the man who tells a lie to injure another; and the man who by his lying puts a traveller on thewrong road, does not do so much harm as the man who by false or misleading representations
distorts the whole course of a life. No one, of course, is to be condemned as a liar who says what
is false, believing it to be true, because such an one does not consciously deceive, but rather ishimself deceived. And, on the same principle, a man is not to be accused of lying, though he may
sometimes be open to the charge of rashness, if through carelessness he takes up what is false andholds it as true; but, on the other hand, the man who says what is true, believing it to be false, is,so far as his own consciousness is concerned, a liar. For in saying what he does not believe, he says
what to his own conscience is false, even though it should in fact be true; nor is the man in any
sense free from lying who with his mouth speaks the truth without knowing it, but in his heart wills
to tell a lie. And, therefore, not looking at the matter spoken of, but solely at the intention of the
speaker, the man who unwittingly says what is false, thinking all the time that it is true, is a betterman than the one who unwittingly says what is true, but in his conscience intends to deceive. For
the former does not think one thing and say another; but the latter, though his statements may betrue in fact, has one thought in his heart and another on his lips: and that is the very essence oflying. But when we come to consider truth and falsehood in respect to the subjects spoken of, thepoint on which one deceives or is deceived becomes a matter of the utmost importance. For although,as far as a man’s own conscience is concerned, it is a greater evil to deceive than to be deceived,
nevertheless it is a far less evil to tell a lie in regard to matters that do not relate to religion, thanto be led into error in regard to matters the knowledge and belief of which are essential to the rightworship of God. To illustrate this by example: suppose that one man should say of some one who
is dead that he is still alive, knowing this to be untrue; and that another man should, being deceived,
believe that Christ shall at the end of some time (make the time as long as you please) die; would

326

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

it not be incomparably better to lie like the former, than to be deceived like the latter? and would
it not be a much less evil to lead some man into the former error, than to be led by any man into
the latter?

Chapter 19.—Men’s Errors Vary Very Much in the Magnitude of the Evils They Produce; But Yet
Every Error is in Itself an Evil.

244

In some things, then, it is a great evil to be deceived; in some it is a small evil; in some no evil
at all; and in some it is an actual advantage. It is to his grievous injury that a man is deceived when
he does not believe what leads to eternal life, or believes what leads to eternal death. It is a small
evil for a man to be deceived, when, by taking falsehood for truth, he brings upon himself temporalannoyances; for the patience of the believer will turn even these to a good use, as when, for example,
taking a bad man for a good, he receives injury from him. But one who believes a bad man to begood, and yet suffers no injury, is nothing the worse for being deceived, nor does he fall under theprophetic denunciation: “Woe to those who call evil good!”1112 For we are to understand that thisis spoken not about evil men, but about the things that make men evil. Hence the man who calls
adultery good, falls justly under that prophetic denunciation. But the man who calls the adulterer
good, thinking him to be chaste, and not knowing him to be an adulterer, falls into no error in regard
to the nature of good and evil, but only makes a mistake as to the secrets of human conduct. He
calls the man good on the ground of believing him to be what is undoubtedly good; he calls theadulterer evil, and the pure man good; and he calls this man good, not knowing him to be an
adulterer, but believing him to be pure. Further, if by making a mistake one escape death, as I havesaid above once happened to me, one even derives some advantage from one’s mistake. But whenI assert that in certain cases a man may be deceived without any injury to himself, or even withsome advantage to himself, I do not mean that the mistake in itself is no evil, or is in any sense a
good; I refer only to the evil that is avoided, or the advantage that is gained, through making themistake. For the mistake, considered in itself, is an evil: a great evil if it concern a great matter, asmall evil if it concern a small matter, but yet always an evil. For who that is of sound mind candeny that it is an evil to receive what is false as if it were true, and to reject what is true as if it werefalse, or to hold what is uncertain as certain, and what is certain as uncertain? But it is one thing tothink a man good when he is really bad, which is a mistake; it is another thing to suffer no ulterior
injury in consequence of the mistake, supposing that the bad man whom we think good inflicts nodamage upon us. In the same way, it is one thing to think that we are on the right road when weare not; it is another thing when this mistake of ours, which is an evil, leads to some good, such as
saving us from an ambush of wicked men.

1112

Isa. v. 20.

327

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 20.—Every Error is Not a Sin. An Examination of the Opinion of the Academic
Philosophers, that to Avoid Error We Should in All Cases Suspend Belief.
I am not sure whether mistakes such as the following,—when one forms a good opinion of abad man, not knowing what sort of man he is; or when, instead of the ordinary perceptions throughthe bodily senses, other appearances of a similar kind present themselves, which we perceive inthe spirit, but think we perceive in the body, or perceive in the body, but think we perceive in thespirit (such a mistake as the Apostle Peter made when the angel suddenly freed him from his chains
and imprisonment, and he thought he saw a vision1113); or when, in the case of sensible objects
themselves, we mistake rough for smooth, or bitter for sweet, or think that putrid matter has a good
smell; or when we mistake the passing of a carriage for thunder; or mistake one man for another,
the two being very much alike, as often happens in the case of twins (hence our great poet calls it“a mistake pleasing to parents”1114),—whether these, and other mistakes of this kind, ought to becalled sins. Nor do I now undertake to solve a very knotty question, which perplexed those very
acute thinkers, the Academic philosophers: whether a wise man ought to give his assent to anything,seeing that he may fall into error by assenting to falsehood: for all things, as they assert, are either
unknown or uncertain. Now I wrote three volumes shortly after my conversion, to remove out of
my way the objections which lie, as it were, on the very threshold of faith. And assuredly it wasnecessary at the very outset to remove this utter despair of reaching truth, which seems to bestrengthened by the arguments of these philosophers. Now in their eyes every error is regarded asa sin, and they think that error can only be avoided by entirely suspending belief. For they say thatthe man who assents to what is uncertain falls into error; and they strive by the most acute, but
most audacious arguments, to show that, even though a man’s opinion should by chance be true,
yet that there is no certainty of its truth, owing to the impossibility of distinguishing truth fromfalsehood. But with us, “the just shall live by faith.”1115 Now, if assent be taken away, faith goes
too; for without assent there can be no belief. And there are truths, whether we know them or not,which must be believed if we would attain to a happy life, that is, to eternal life. But I am not surewhether one ought to argue with men who not only do not know that there is an eternal life before
them, but do not know whether they are living at the present moment; nay, say that they do notknow what it is impossible they can be ignorant of. For it is impossible that any one should be
ignorant that he is alive, seeing that if he be not alive it is impossible for him to be ignorant; fornot knowledge merely, but ignorance too, can be an attribute only of the living. But, forsooth, they
think that by not acknowledging that they are alive they avoid error, when even their very error
proves that they are alive, since one who is not alive cannot err. As, then, it is not only true, but
certain, that we are alive, so there are many other things both true and certain; and God forbid thatit should ever be called wisdom, and not the height of folly, to refuse assent to these.

1113
1114
1115

Acts xii. 9.
Virgil, Æn. x. 392.
Rom. i. 17.

328

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 21.—Error, Though Not Always a Sin, is Always an Evil.

245

But as to those matters in regard to which our belief or disbelief, and indeed their truth or
supposed truth or falsity, are of no importance whatever, so far as attaining the kingdom of God isconcerned: to make a mistake in such matters is not to be looked on as a sin, or at least as a verysmall and trifling sin. In short, a mistake in matters of this kind, whatever its nature and magnitude,
does not relate to the way of approach to God, which is the faith of Christ that “worketh by love.”1116
For the “mistake pleasing to parents” in the case of the twin children was no deviation from thisway; nor did the Apostle Peter deviate from this way, when, thinking that he saw a vision, he so
mistook one thing for another, that, till the angel who delivered him had departed from him, he did
not distinguish the real objects among which he was moving from the visionary objects of a
dream;1117 nor did the patriarch Jacob deviate from this way, when he believed that his son, who
was really alive, had been slain by a beast.1118 In the case of these and other false impressions of
the same kind, we are indeed deceived, but our faith in God remains secure. We go astray, but we
do not leave the way that leads us to Him. But yet these errors, though they are not sinful, are to
be reckoned among the evils of this life which is so far made subject to vanity, that we receive what
is false as if it were true, reject what is true as if it were false, and cling to what is uncertain as if
it were certain. And although they do not trench upon that true and certain faith through which wereach eternal blessedness, yet they have much to do with that misery in which we are now living.
And assuredly, if we were now in the enjoyment of the true and perfect happiness that lies before
us, we should not be subject to any deception through any sense, whether of body or of mind.

Chapter 22.—A Lie is Not Allowable, Even to Save Another from Injury.
But every lie must be called a sin, because not only when a man knows the truth, but even when,
as a man may be, he is mistaken and deceived, it is his duty to say what he thinks in his heart,
whether it be true, or whether he only think it to be true. But every liar says the opposite of what
he thinks in his heart, with purpose to deceive. Now it is evident that speech was given to man, notthat men might therewith deceive one another, but that one man might make known his thoughts
to another. To use speech, then, for the purpose of deception, and not for its appointed end, is a sin.
Nor are we to suppose that there is any lie that is not a sin, because it is sometimes possible, by
telling a lie, to do service to another. For it is possible to do this by theft also, as when we steal
from a rich man who never feels the loss, to give to a poor man who is sensibly benefited by what
he gets. And the same can be said of adultery also, when, for instance, some woman appears likely
to die of love unless we consent to her wishes, while if she lived she might purify herself byrepentance; but yet no one will assert that on this account such an adultery is not a sin. And if we

1116
1117
1118

Gal. v. 6.
Acts xii. 9–11.
Gen. xxxvii. 33.

329

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

justly place so high a value upon chastity, what offense have we taken at truth, that, while noprospect of advantage to another will lead us to violate the former by adultery, we should be readyto violate the latter by lying? It cannot be denied that they have attained a very high standard of
goodness who never lie except to save a man from injury; but in the case of men who have reachedthis standard, it is not the deceit, but their good intention, that is justly praised, and sometimes evenrewarded. It is quite enough that the deception should be pardoned, without its being made an objectof laudation, especially among the heirs of the new covenant, to whom it is said: “Let yourcommunication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.”1119 And
it is on account of this evil, which never ceases to creep in while we retain this mortal vesture, thatthe co-heirs of Christ themselves say, “Forgive us our debts.”1120

Chapter 23.—Summary of the Results of the Preceding Discussion.
As it is right that we should know the causes of good and evil, so much of them at least as will
suffice for the way that leads us to the kingdom, where there will be life without the shadow ofdeath, truth without any alloy of error, and happiness unbroken by any sorrow, I have discussed
these subjects with the brevity which my limited space demanded. And I think there cannot now
be any doubt, that the only cause of any good that we enjoy is the goodness of God, and that the
only cause of evil is the falling away from the unchangeable good of a being made good butchangeable, first in the case of an angel, and afterwards in the case of man.

Chapter 24.—The Secondary Causes of Evil are Ignorance and Lust.

246

This is the first evil that befell the intelligent creation—that is, its first privation of good.
Following upon this crept in, and now even in opposition to man’s will, ignorance of duty, and lust
after what is hurtful: and these brought in their train error and suffering, which, when they are felt
to be imminent, produce that shrinking of the mind which is called fear. Further, when the mind
attains the objects of its desire, however hurtful or empty they may be, error prevents it fromperceiving their true nature, or its perceptions are overborne by a diseased appetite, and so it ispuffed up with a foolish joy. From these fountains of evil, which spring out of defect rather thansuperfluity, flows every form of misery that besets a rational nature.

1119
1120

Matt. v. 37.
Matt. vi. 12.

330

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 25.—God’s Judgments Upon Fallen Men and Angels. The Death of the Body is Man’s
Peculiar Punishment.
And yet such a nature, in the midst of all its evils, could not lose the craving after happiness.
Now the evils I have mentioned are common to all who for their wickedness have been justly
condemned by God, whether they be men or angels. But there is one form of punishment peculiar
to man—the death of the body. God had threatened him with this punishment of death if he shouldsin,1121 leaving him indeed to the freedom of his own will, but yet commanding his obedience underpain of death; and He placed him amid the happiness of Eden, as it were in a protected nook of life,
with the intention that, if he preserved his righteousness, he should thence ascend to a better place.

Chapter 26.—Through Adam’s Sin His Whole Posterity Were Corrupted, and Were Born Under
the Penalty of Death, Which He Had Incurred.
Thence, after his sin, he was driven into exile, and by his sin the whole race of which he was
the root was corrupted in him, and thereby subjected to the penalty of death. And so it happens thatall descended from him, and from the woman who had led him into sin, and was condemned at thesame time with him,—being the offspring of carnal lust on which the same punishment of
disobedience was visited,—were tainted with the original sin, and were by it drawn through divers
errors and sufferings into that last and endless punishment which they suffer in common with thefallen angels, their corrupters and masters, and the partakers of their doom. And thus “by one mansin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all havesinned.”1122 By “the world” the apostle, of course, means in this place the whole human race.

Chapter 27.—The State of Misery to Which Adam’s Sin Reduced Mankind, and the Restoration
Effected Through the Mercy of God.
Thus, then, matters stood. The whole mass of the human race was under condemnation, waslying steeped and wallowing in misery, and was being tossed from one form of evil to another, and,having joined the faction of the fallen angels, was paying the well-merited penalty of that impious
rebellion. For whatever the wicked freely do through blind and unbridled lust, and whatever they
suffer against their will in the way of open punishment, this all evidently pertains to the just wrathof God. But the goodness of the Creator never fails either to supply life and vital power to thewicked angels (without which their existence would soon come to an end); or, in the case of mankind,
who spring from a condemned and corrupt stock, to impart form and life to their seed, to fashion
1121
1122

Gen. ii. 17.
Rom. v. 12.

331

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

their members, and through the various seasons of their life, and in the different parts of the earth,
to quicken their senses, and bestow upon them the nourishment they need. For He judged it betterto bring good out of evil, than not to permit any evil to exist. And if He had determined that in thecase of men, as in the case of the fallen angels, there should be no restoration to happiness, would
it not have been quite just, that the being who rebelled against God, who in the abuse of his freedom
spurned and transgressed the command of his Creator when he could so easily have kept it, who
defaced in himself the image of his Creator by stubbornly turning away from His light, who by anevil use of his free-will broke away from his wholesome bondage to the Creator’s laws,—would
it not have been just that such a being should have been wholly and to all eternity deserted by God,and left to suffer the everlasting punishment he had so richly earned? Certainly so God would havedone, had He been only just and not also merciful, and had He not designed that His unmeritedmercy should shine forth the more brightly in contrast with the unworthiness of its objects.

Chapter 28.—When the Rebellious Angels Were Cast Out, the Rest Remained in the Enjoymentof Eternal Happiness with God.

247

Whilst some of the angels, then, in their pride and impiety rebelled against God, and were castdown from their heavenly abode into the lowest darkness, the remaining number dwelt with God
in eternal and unchanging purity and happiness. For all were not sprung from one angel who had
fallen and been condemned, so that they were not all, like men, involved by one original sin in thebonds of an inherited guilt, and so made subject to the penalty which one had incurred; but whenhe, who afterwards became the devil, was with his associates in crime exalted in pride, and by thatvery exaltation was with them cast down, the rest remained steadfast in piety and obedience to theirLord, and obtained, what before they had not enjoyed, a sure and certain knowledge of their eternalsafety, and freedom from the possibility of falling.

Chapter 29.—The Restored Part of Humanity Shall, in Accordance with the Promises of God,
Succeed to the Place Which the Rebellious Angels Lost.
And so it pleased God, the Creator and Governor of the universe, that, since the whole body of
the angels had not fallen into rebellion, the part of them which had fallen should remain in perdition
eternally, and that the other part, which had in the rebellion remained steadfastly loyal, should
rejoice in the sure and certain knowledge of their eternal happiness; but that, on the other hand,mankind, who constituted the remainder of the intelligent creation, having perished without exception
under sin, both original and actual, and the consequent punishments, should be in part restored,
and should fill up the gap which the rebellion and fall of the devils had left in the company of theangels. For this is the promise to the saints, that at the resurrection they shall be equal to the angels
of God.1123 And thus the Jerusalem which is above, which is the mother of us all, the city of God,
1123

Luke xx. 36.

332

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

shall not be spoiled of any of the number of her citizens, shall perhaps reign over even a moreabundant population. We do not know the number either of the saints or of the devils; but we knowthat the children of the holy mother who was called barren on earth shall succeed to the place ofthe fallen angels, and shall dwell for ever in that peaceful abode from which they fell. But the
number of the citizens, whether as it now is or as it shall be, is present to the thoughts of the great
Creator, who calls those things which are not as though they were,1124 and ordereth all things inmeasure, and number, and weight.1125

Chapter 30.—Men are Not Saved by Good Works, Nor by the Free Determination of Their Own
Will, But by the Grace of God Through Faith.
But this part of the human race to which God has promised pardon and a share in His eternal
kingdom, can they be restored through the merit of their own works? God forbid. For what goodwork can a lost man perform, except so far as he has been delivered from perdition? Can they doanything by the free determination of their own will? Again I say, God forbid. For it was by theevil use of his free-will that man destroyed both it and himself. For, as a man who kills himself
must, of course, be alive when he kills himself, but after he has killed himself ceases to live, andcannot restore himself to life; so, when man by his own free-will sinned, then sin being victorious
over him, the freedom of his will was lost. “For of whom a man is overcome, of the same is hebrought in bondage.”1126 This is the judgment of the Apostle Peter. And as it is certainly true, whatkind of liberty, I ask, can the bond-slave possess, except when it pleases him to sin? For he is freely
in bondage who does with pleasure the will of his master. Accordingly, he who is the servant of
sin is free to sin. And hence he will not be free to do right, until, being freed from sin, he shall begin
to be the servant of righteousness. And this is true liberty, for he has pleasure in the righteous deed;
and it is at the same time a holy bondage, for he is obedient to the will of God. But whence comes
this liberty to do right to the man who is in bondage and sold under sin, except he be redeemed by
Him who has said, “If the Son shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed?”1127 And before thisredemption is wrought in a man, when he is not yet free to do what is right, how can he talk of thefreedom of his will and his good works, except he be inflated by that foolish pride of boasting
which the apostle restrains when he says, “By grace are ye saved, through faith.”1128

1124
1125
1126
1127
1128

Rom. iv. 17.
Wisd. xi. 20.
2 Pet. ii. 19.
John viii. 36.
Eph. ii. 8.

333

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 31.—Faith Itself is the Gift of God; And Good Works Will Not Be Wanting in Those Who
Believe.

248

And lest men should arrogate to themselves the merit of their own faith at least, not understandingthat this too is the gift of God, this same apostle, who says in another place that he had “obtained
mercy of the Lord to be faithful,”1129 here also adds: “and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of
God: not of works, lest any man should boast.”1130 And lest it should be thought that good works
will be wanting in those who believe, he adds further: “For we are His workmanship, created in
Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.”1131
We shall be made truly free, then, when God fashions us, that is, forms and creates us anew, notas men—for He has done that already—but as good men, which His grace is now doing, that wemay be a new creation in Christ Jesus, according as it is said: “Create in me a clean heart, O God.”1132
For God had already created his heart, so far as the physical structure of the human heart isconcerned; but the psalmist prays for the renewal of the life which was still lingering in his heart.

Chapter 32.—The Freedom of the Will is Also the Gift of God, for God Worketh in Us Both toWill and to Do.
And further, should any one be inclined to boast, not indeed of his works, but of the freedomof his will, as if the first merit belonged to him, this very liberty of good action being given to him
as a reward he had earned, let him listen to this same preacher of grace, when he says: “For it is
God which worketh in you, both to will and to do of His own good pleasure;”1133 and in anotherplace: “So, then, it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth
mercy.”1134 Now as, undoubtedly, if a man is of the age to use his reason, he cannot believe, hope,
love, unless he will to do so, nor obtain the prize of the high calling of God unless he voluntarily
run for it; in what sense is it “not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God thatshoweth mercy,” except that, as it is written, “the preparation of the heart is from the Lord?”1135
Otherwise, if it is said, “It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth
mercy,” because it is of both, that is, both of the will of man and of the mercy of God, so that weare to understand the saying, “It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God thatshoweth mercy,” as if it meant the will of man alone is not sufficient, if the mercy of God go notwith it,—then it will follow that the mercy of God alone is not sufficient, if the will of man go notwith it; and therefore, if we may rightly say, “it is not of man that willeth, but of God that showeth
1129
1130
1131
1132
1133
1134
1135

1 Cor. vii. 25.
Eph. ii. 8, 9.
Eph. ii. 10.
Ps. li. 10.
Phil. ii. 13.
Rom. ix. 16.
Prov. xvi. 1.

334

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

mercy,” because the will of man by itself is not enough, why may we not also rightly put it in theconverse way: “It is not of God that showeth mercy, but of man that willeth,” because the mercyof God by itself does not suffice? Surely, if no Christian will dare to say this, “It is not of God thatshoweth mercy, but of man that willeth,” lest he should openly contradict the apostle, it follows
that the true interpretation of the saying, “It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but
of God that showeth mercy,” is that the whole work belongs to God, who both makes the will of
man righteous, and thus prepares it for assistance, and assists it when it is prepared. For the man’s
righteousness of will precedes many of God’s gifts, but not all; and it must itself be included among
those which it does not precede. We read in Holy Scripture, both that God’s mercy “shall meetme,”1136 and that His mercy “shall follow me.”1137 It goes before the unwilling to make him willing;
it follows the willing to make his will effectual. Why are we taught to pray for our enemies,1138
who are plainly unwilling to lead a holy life, unless that God may work willingness in them? And
why are we ourselves taught to ask that we may receive,1139 unless that He who has created in us
the wish, may Himself satisfy the wish? We pray, then, for our enemies, that the mercy of God
may prevent them, as it has prevented us: we pray for ourselves that His mercy may follow us.

Chapter 33.—Men, Being by Nature the Children of Wrath, Needed a Mediator. In What Sense
God is Said to Be Angry.

249

And so the human race was lying under a just condemnation, and all men were the children ofwrath. Of which wrath it is written: “All our days are passed away in Thy wrath; we spend ouryears as a tale that is told.”1140 Of which wrath also Job says: “Man that is born of a woman is of
few days, and full of trouble.”1141 Of which wrath also the Lord Jesus says: “He that believeth on
the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of
God abideth on him.”1142 He does not say it will come, but it “abideth on him.” For every man isborn with it; wherefore the apostle says: “We were by nature the children of wrath, even as
others.”1143 Now, as men were lying under this wrath by reason of their original sin, and as thisoriginal sin was the more heavy and deadly in proportion to the number and magnitude of the actualsins which were added to it, there was need for a Mediator, that is, for a reconciler, who, by theoffering of one sacrifice, of which all the sacrifices of the law and the prophets were types, shouldtake away this wrath. Wherefore the apostle says: “For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled
to God by the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.”1144

1136
1137
1138
1139
1140
1141
1142
1143
1144

Ps. lix. 10.
Ps. xxiii. 6.
Matt. v. 44.
Matt. vii. 7.
Ps. xc. 9.
Job xiv.1.
John iii. 36. These words, attributed by the author to Christ, were really spoken by John the Baptist.
Eph. ii. 3.
Rom. v. 10.

335

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Now when God is said to be angry, we do not attribute to Him such a disturbed feeling as exists inthe mind of an angry man; but we call His just displeasure against sin by the name “anger,” a wordtransferred by analogy from human emotions. But our being reconciled to God through a Mediator,
and receiving the Holy Spirit, so that we who were enemies are made sons (“For as many as are
led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God”1145): this is the grace of God through Jesus Christ
our Lord.

Chapter 34.—The Ineffable Mystery of the Birth of Christ the Mediator Through the Virgin Mary.
Now of this Mediator it would occupy too much space to say anything at all worthy of Him;and, indeed, to say what is worthy of Him is not in the power of man. For who will explain inconsistent words this single statement, that “the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,”1146
so that we may believe on the only Son of God the Father Almighty, born of the Holy Ghost andthe Virgin Mary. The meaning of the Word being made flesh, is not that the divine nature waschanged into flesh, but that the divine nature assumed our flesh. And by “flesh” we are here tounderstand “man,” the part being put for the whole, as when it is said: “By the deeds of the law
shall no flesh be justified,”1147 that is, no man. For we must believe that no part was wanting in thathuman nature which He put on, save that it was a nature wholly free from every taint of sin,—notsuch a nature as is conceived between the two sexes through carnal lust, which is born in sin, andwhose guilt is washed away in regeneration; but such as it behoved a virgin to bring forth, whenthe mother’s faith, not her lust, was the condition of conception. And if her virginity had beenmarred even in bringing Him forth, He would not have been born of a virgin; and it would be false(which God forbid) that He was born of the Virgin Mary, as is believed and declared by the whole
Church, which, in imitation of His mother, daily brings forth members of His body, and yet remains
a virgin. Read, if you please, my letter on the virginity of the holy Mary which I sent to that eminentman, whose name I mention with respect and affection, Volusianus.1148

Chapter 35.—Jesus Christ, Being the Only Son of God, is at the Same Time Man.
Wherefore Christ Jesus, the Son of God, is both God and man; God before all worlds; man in
our world: God, because the Word of God (for “the Word was God”1149); and man, because in His
one person the Word was joined with a body and a rational soul. Wherefore, so far as He is God,He and the Father are one; so far as He is man, the Father is greater than He. For when He was the
1145
1146
1147
1148
1149

Rom. viii. 14.
John i. 14.
3[1147] Rom. iii. 20.
Ep. 137.
John i. 1.

336

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

only Son of God, not by grace, but by nature, that He might be also full of grace, He became theSon of man; and He Himself unites both natures in His own identity, and both natures constitute
one Christ; because, “being in the form of God, He thought it not robbery to be,” what He was bynature, “equal with God.”1150 But He made Himself of no reputation, and took upon Himself theform of a servant, not losing or lessening the form of God. And, accordingly, He was both madeless and remained equal, being both in one, as has been said: but He was one of these as Word, andthe other as man. As Word, He is equal with the Father; as man, less than the Father. One Son ofGod, and at the same time Son of man; one Son of man, and at the same time Son of God; not two
Sons of God, God and man, but one Son of God: God without beginning; man with a beginning,
our Lord Jesus Christ.

Chapter 36.—The Grace of God is Clearly and Remarkably Displayed in Raising the Man ChristJesus to the Dignity of the Son of God.

250

Now here the grace of God is displayed with the greatest power and clearness. For what merit
had the human nature in the man Christ earned, that it should in this unparalleled way be taken up
into the unity of the person of the only Son of God? What goodness of will, what goodness of desire
and intention, what good works, had gone before, which made this man worthy to become one
person with God? Had He been a man previously to this, and had He earned this unprecedented
reward, that He should be thought worthy to become God? Assuredly nay; from the very momentthat He began to be man, He was nothing else than the Son of God, the only Son of God, the Word
who was made flesh, and therefore He was God so that just as each individual man unites in one
person a body and a rational soul, so Christ in one person unites the Word and man. Now wherefore
was this unheard of glory conferred on human nature,—a glory which, as there was no antecedent
merit, was of course wholly of grace,—except that here those who looked at the matter soberly andhonestly might behold a clear manifestation of the power of God’s free grace, and might understandthat they are justified from their sins by the same grace which made the man Christ Jesus free fromthe possibility of sin? And so the angel, when he announced to Christ’s mother the coming birth,
saluted her thus: “Hail, thou that art full of grace;”1151 and shortly afterwards, “Thou hast foundgrace with God.”1152 Now she was said to be full of grace, and to have found grace with God,because she was to be the mother of her Lord, nay, of the Lord of all flesh. But, speaking of Christ
Himself, the evangelist John, after saying, “The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,” adds,“and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only-begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.”1153
When he says, “The Word was made flesh,” this is “full of grace;” when he says, “the glory of theonly-begotten of the Father,” this is “full of truth.” For the Truth Himself, who was the only-begotten

1150
1151
1152
1153

Phil. ii. 6.
Luke i. 28 (“thou that are highly favored,” A.V.).
Luke i. 30 (“Thou hast found favor with God,” A.V.).
John i. 14.

337

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffof the Father, not by grace, but by nature, by grace took our humanity upon Him, and so united itwith His own person that He Himself became also the Son of man.

Chapter 37.—The Same Grace is Further Clearly Manifested in This, that the Birth of Christ
According to the Flesh is of the Holy Ghost.
For the same Jesus Christ who is the only-begotten, that is, the only Son of God, our Lord, wasborn of the Holy Ghost and of the Virgin Mary. And we know that the Holy Spirit is the gift ofGod, the gift being Himself indeed equal to the Giver. And therefore the Holy Spirit also is God,
not inferior to the Father and the Son. The fact, therefore, that the nativity of Christ in His humannature was by the Holy Spirit, is another clear manifestation of grace. For when the Virgin asked
the angel how this which he had announced should be, seeing she knew not a man, the angelanswered, “The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow
thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.”1154
And when Joseph was minded to put her away, suspecting her of adultery, as he knew she was notwith child by himself, he was told by the angel, “Fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife; for thatwhich is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost:”1155 that is, what thou suspectest to be begotten ofanother man is of the Holy Ghost.

Chapter 38.—Jesus Christ, According to the Flesh, Was Not Born of the Holy Spirit in Such a
Sense that the Holy Spirit is His Father.
Nevertheless, are we on this account to say that the Holy Ghost is the father of the man Christ,
and that as God the Father begat the Word, so God the Holy Spirit begat the man, and that these
two natures constitute the one Christ; and that as the Word He is the Son of God the Father, and as
man the Son of God the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit as His father begat Him of the Virgin
Mary? Who will dare to say so? Nor is it necessary to show by reasoning how many other absurdities
flow from this supposition, when it is itself so absurd that no believer’s ears can bear to hear it.
Hence, as we confess, “Our Lord Jesus Christ, who of God is God, and as man was born of theHoly Ghost and of the Virgin Mary, having both natures, the divine and the human, is the only Son
of God the Father Almighty, from whom proceedeth the Holy Spirit.”1156 Now in what sense do
we say that Christ was born of the Holy Spirit, if the Holy Spirit did not beget Him? Is it that He
made Him, since our Lord Jesus Christ, though as God “all things were made by Him,”1157 yet as
man was Himself made; as the apostle says, “who was made of the seed of David according to the
1154
1155
1156
1157

Luke i. 35.
Matt. i. 20.
A quotation from a form of the Apostles’ Creed anciently in use in the Latin Church.
John i. 3.

338

NPNF (V1-03)

251

Philip Schaff

flesh?”1158 But as that created thing which the Virgin conceived and brought forth though it was
united only to the person of the Son, was made by the whole Trinity (for the works of the Trinity
are not separable), why should the Holy Spirit alone be mentioned as having made it? Or is it that,when one of the Three is mentioned as the author of any work, the whole Trinity is to be understood
as working? That is true, and can be proved by examples. But we need not dwell longer on thissolution. For the puzzle is, in what sense it is said, “born of the Holy Ghost,” when He is in nosense the Son of the Holy Ghost? For though God made this world, it would not be right to say that
it is the Son of God, or that it was born of God; we would say that it was created, or made, orframed, or ordered by Him, or whatever form of expression we can properly use. Here, then, when
we make confession that Christ was born of the Holy Ghost and of the Virgin Mary, it is difficult
to explain how it is that He is not the Son of the Holy Ghost and is the Son of the Virgin Mary,
when He was born both of Him and of her. It is clear beyond a doubt that He was not born of theHoly Spirit as His father, in the same sense that He was born of the Virgin as His mother.

Chapter 39.—Not Everything that is Born of Another is to Be Called a Son of that Other.
We need not therefore take for granted, that whatever is born of a thing is forthwith to be
declared the son of that thing. For, to pass over the fact that a son is born of a man in a different
sense from that in which a hair or a louse is born of him, neither of these being a son; to pass overthis, I say, as too mean an illustration for a subject of so much importance: it is certain that those
who are born of water and of the Holy Spirit cannot with propriety be called sons of the water
though they are called sons of God the Father, and of the Church their mother. In the same way,then, He who was born of the Holy Spirit is the Son of God the Father, not of the Holy Spirit. For
what I have said of the hair and the other things is sufficient to show us that not everything which
is born of another can be called the son of that of which it is born, just as it does not follow that all
who are called a man’s sons were born of him, for some sons are adopted. And some men are calledsons of hell, not as being born of hell, but as prepared for it, as the sons of the kingdom are prepared
for the kingdom.

Chapter 40.—Christ’s Birth Through the Holy Spirit Manifests to Us the Grace of God.
And, therefore, as one thing may be born of another, and yet not in such a way as to be its son,and as not every one who is called a son was born of him whose son he is called, it is clear that thisarrangement by which Christ was born of the Holy Spirit, but not as His son, and of the Virgin
Mary as her son, is intended as a manifestation of the grace of God. For it was by this grace that aman, without any antecedent merit, was at the very commencement of His existence as man, so
united in one person with the Word of God, that the very person who was Son of man was at the1158

Rom. i. 3.

339

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

same time Son of God, and the very person who was Son of God was at the same time Son of man;and in the adoption of His human nature into the divine, the grace itself became in a way so naturalto the man, as to leave no room for the entrance of sin. Wherefore this grace is signified by theHoly Spirit; for He, though in His own nature God, may also be called the gift of God. And to
explain all this sufficiently, if indeed it could be done at all, would require a very lengthened
discussion.

Chapter 41.—Christ, Who Was Himself Free from Sin, Was Made Sin for Us, that We Might Be
Reconciled to God.
Begotten and conceived, then, without any indulgence of carnal lust, and therefore bringing
with Him no original sin, and by the grace of God joined and united in a wonderful and unspeakable
way in one person with the Word, the Only-begotten of the Father, a son by nature, not by grace,and therefore having no sin of His own; nevertheless, on account of the likeness of sinful flesh inwhich He came, He was called sin, that He might be sacrificed to wash away sin. For, under the
Old Covenant, sacrifices for sin were called sins.1159 And He, of whom all these sacrifices weretypes and shadows, was Himself truly made sin. Hence the apostle, after saying, “We pray you in
Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God,” forthwith adds: “for He hath made Him to be sin for us
who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him.”1160 He does not say,as some incorrect copies read, “He who knew no sin did sin for us,” as if Christ had Himself sinned
for our sakes; but he says, “Him who knew no sin,” that is, Christ, God, to whom we are to bereconciled, “hath made to be sin for us,” that is, hath made Him a sacrifice for our sins, by which
we might be reconciled to God. He, then, being made sin, just as we are made righteousness (ourrighteousness being not our own, but God’s, not in ourselves, but in Him); He being made sin, not
His own, but ours, not in Himself, but in us, showed, by the likeness of sinful flesh in which He
was crucified, that though sin was not in Him, yet that in a certain sense He died to sin, by dyingin the flesh which was the likeness of sin; and that although He Himself had never lived the oldlife of sin, yet by His resurrection He typified our new life springing up out of the old death in sin.
252

Chapter 42.—The Sacrament of Baptism Indicates Our Death with Christ to Sin, and Our
Resurrection with Him to Newness of Life.
And this is the meaning of the great sacrament of baptism which is solemnized among us, that
all who attain to this grace should die to sin, as He is said to have died to sin, because He died in
the flesh, which is the likeness of sin; and rising from the font regenerate, as He arose alive fromthe grave, should begin a new life in the Spirit, whatever may be the age of the body?
1159
1160

Hos. iv. 8.
2 Cor. v. 20, 21.

340

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 43.—Baptism and the Grace Which It Typifies are Open to All, Both Infants and Adults.
For from the infant newly born to the old man bent with age, as there is none shut out frombaptism, so there is none who in baptism does not die to sin. But infants die only to original sin;those who are older die also to all the sins which their evil lives have added to the sin which theybrought with them.

Chapter 44.—In Speaking of Sin, the Singular Number is Often Put for the Plural, and the Pluralfor the Singular.
But even these latter are frequently said to die to sin, though undoubtedly they die not to one
sin, but to all the numerous actual sins they have committed in thought, word, or deed: for the
singular number is often put for the plural, as when the poet says, “They fill its belly with the armed
soldier,”1161 though in the case here referred to there were many soldiers concerned. And we readin our own Scriptures: “Pray to the Lord, that He take away the serpent from us.”1162 He does not
say serpents though the people were suffering from many; and so in other cases. When, on the other
hand, the original sin is expressed in the plural number, as when we say that infants are baptizedfor the remission of sins, instead of saying for the remission of sin, this is the converse figure ofspeech, by which the plural number is put in place of the singular; as in the Gospel it is said of thedeath of Herod, “for they are dead which sought the young child’s life,”1163 instead of saying, “heis dead.” And in Exodus: “They have made them,” Moses says, “gods of gold,”1164 though they
had made only one calf, of which they said: “These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up
out of the land of Egypt,”1165—here, too, putting the plural in place of the singular.

Chapter 45.—In Adam’s First Sin, Many Kinds of Sin Were Involved.
However, even in that one sin, which “by one man entered into the world, and so passed upon
all men,”1166 and on account of which infants are baptized, a number of distinct sins may be observed,
if it be analyzed as it were into its separate elements. For there is in it pride, because man chose to
be under his own dominion, rather than under the dominion of God; and blasphemy, because he
did not believe God; and murder, for he brought death upon himself; and spiritual fornication, for

1161
1162
1163
1164
1165
1166

“Uterumque armato milite complent.”.—Virgil, Æn. ii. 20.
Num. xxi. 7 (“serpents,” A. and R.V.).
Matt. ii. 20.
Ex. xxxii. 31.
Ex. xxxii. 4.
Rom. v. 12.

341

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

the purity of the human soul was corrupted by the seducing blandishments of the serpent; and theft,
for man turned to his own use the food he had been forbidden to touch; and avarice, for he had acraving for more than should have been sufficient for him; and whatever other sin can be discoveredon careful reflection to be involved in this one admitted sin.

Chapter 46.—It is Probable that Children are Involved in the Guilt Not Only of the First Pair, Butof Their Own Immediate Parents.

253

And it is said, with much appearance of probability, that infants are involved in the guilt of thesins not only of the first pair, but of their own immediate parents. For that divine judgment, “I shallvisit the iniquities of the fathers upon the children,”1167 certainly applies to them before they comeunder the new covenant by regeneration. And it was this new covenant that was prophesied of,when it was said by Ezekiel, that the sons should not bear the iniquity of the fathers, and that itshould no longer be a proverb in Israel, “The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s
teeth are set on edge.”1168 Here lies the necessity that each man should be born again, that he might
be freed from the sin in which he was born. For the sins committed afterwards can be cured bypenitence, as we see is the case after baptism. And therefore the new birth would not have been
appointed only that the first birth was sinful, so sinful that even one who was legitimately born inwedlock says: “I was shapen in iniquities, and in sins did my mother conceive me.”1169 He did not
say in iniquity, or in sin, though he might have said so correctly; but he preferred to say “iniquities”
and “sins,” because in that one sin which passed upon all men, and which was so great that humannature was by it made subject to inevitable death, many sins, as I showed above, may bediscriminated; and further, because there are other sins of the immediate parents, which though
they have not the same effect in producing a change of nature, yet subject the children to guilt
unless the divine grace and mercy interpose to rescue them.

Chapter 47.—It is Difficult to Decide Whether the Sins of a Man’s Other Progenitors are Imputed
to Him.
But about the sins of the other progenitors who intervene between Adam and a man’s own
parents, a question may very well be raised. Whether every one who is born is involved in all theiraccumulated evil acts, in all their multiplied original guilt, so that the later he is born, so much theworse is his condition; or whether God threatens to visit the iniquity of the fathers upon the children
unto the third and fourth generations, because in His mercy He does not extend His wrath against
the sins of the progenitors further than that, lest those who do not obtain the grace of regeneration
1167
1168
1169

Ex. xx. 5; Deut. v. 9.
Ezek. xviii. 2.
Ps. li. 5 (The A.V. has the singular, “iniquity” and “sin”).

342

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

might be crushed down under too heavy a burden if they were compelled to bear as original guilt
all the sins of all their progenitors from the very beginning of the human race, and to pay the penalty
due to them; or whether any other solution of this great question may or may not be found in
Scripture by a more diligent search and a more careful interpretation, I dare not rashly affirm.

Chapter 48.—The Guilt of the First Sin is So Great that It Can Be Washed Away Only in the Bloodof the Mediator, Jesus Christ.
Nevertheless, that one sin, admitted into a place where such perfect happiness reigned, was ofso heinous a character, that in one man the whole human race was originally, and as one may say,radically, condemned; and it cannot be pardoned and blotted out except through the one Mediator
between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who only has had power to be so born as not to needa second birth.

Chapter 49.—Christ Was Not Regenerated in the Baptism of John, But Submitted to It to Give Us
an Example of Humility, Just as He Submitted to Death, Not as the Punishment of Sin, But toTake Away the Sin of the World.
Now, those who were baptized in the baptism of John, by whom Christ was Himself baptized,1170
were not regenerated; but they were prepared through the ministry of His forerunner, who cried,“Prepare ye the way of the Lord,”1171 for Him in whom only they could be regenerated. For His
baptism is not with water only, as was that of John, but with the Holy Ghost also;1172 so that whoever
believes in Christ is regenerated by that Spirit, of whom Christ being generated, He did not needregeneration. Whence that announcement of the Father which was heard after His baptism, “Thisday have I begotten Thee,”1173 referred not to that one day of time on which He was baptized, but
to the one day of an unchangeable eternity, so as to show that this man was one in person with the
Only-begotten. For when a day neither begins with the close of yesterday, nor ends with the
beginning of to-morrow, it is an eternal to-day. Therefore He asked to be baptized in water by John,not that any iniquity of His might be washed away, but that He might manifest the depth of His
humility. For baptism found in Him nothing to wash away, as death found in Him nothing to punish;
so that it was in the strictest justice, and not by the mere violence of power, that the devil was
crushed and conquered: for, as he had most unjustly put Christ to death, though there was no sin
in Him to deserve death, it was most just that through Christ he should lose his hold of those who
by sin were justly subject to the bondage in which he held them. Both of these, then, that is, both
1170
1171
1172
1173

Matt. iii. 13–15.
Matt. iii. 3.
Matt. iii. 11.
Ps. ii. 7; Heb. i. 5, v. 5. It is by a mistake that Augustin quotes these words as pronounced at our Lord’s baptism.

343

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

baptism and death, were submitted to by Him, not through a pitiable necessity, but of His own freepity for us, and as part of an arrangement by which, as one man brought sin into the world, that is,upon the whole human race, so one man was to take away the sin of the world.

Chapter 50.—Christ Took Away Not Only the One Original Sin, But All the Other Sins that Have
Been Added to It.

254

With this difference: the first man brought one sin into the world, but this man took away not
only that one sin, but all that He found added to it. Hence the apostle says: “And not as it was by
one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is ofmany offenses unto justification.”1174 For it is evident that the one sin which we bring with us by
nature would, even if it stood alone, bring us under condemnation; but the free gift justifies manfrom many offenses: for each man, in addition to the one sin which, in common with all his kind,he brings with him by nature, has committed many sins that are strictly his own.

Chapter 51.—All Men Born of Adam are Under Condemnation, and Only If New Born in Christ
are Freed from Condemnation.
But what he says a little after, “Therefore, as by the offense of one judgment came upon all
men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto
justification of life,”1175 shows clearly enough that there is no one born of Adam but is subject tocondemnation, and that no one, unless he be new born in Christ, is freed from condemnation.

Chapter 52.—In Baptism, Which is the Similitude of the Death and Resurrection of Christ, All,
Both Infants and Adults, Die to Sin that They May Walk in Newness of Life.
And after he has said as much about the condemnation through one man, and the free gift
through one man, as he deemed sufficient for that part of his epistle, the apostle goes on to speakof the great mystery of holy baptism in the cross of Christ, and to clearly explain to us that baptism
in Christ is nothing else than a similitude of the death of Christ, and that the death of Christ on the
cross is nothing but a similitude of the pardon of sin: so that just as real as is His death, so real is
the remission of our sins; and just as real as is His resurrection, so real is our justification. He says:“What shall we say, then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?”1176 For he had said
1174
1175
1176

Rom. v. 16.
Rom. v. 18.
Rom. vi. 1.

344

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

previously, “But where sin, abounded, grace did much more abound.”1177 And therefore he proposes
to himself the question, whether it would be right to continue in sin for the sake of the consequent
abounding grace. But he answers, “God forbid;” and adds, “How shall we, that are dead to sin, live
any longer therein?” Then, to show that we are dead to sin, “Know ye not,” he says, “that so manyof us as were baptized into Jesus Christ, were baptized into His death?” If, then, the fact that wewere baptized into the death of Christ proves that we are dead to sin, it follows that even infants
who are baptized into Christ die to sin, being baptized into His death. For there is no exception
made: “So many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ, were baptized into His death.” And thisis said to prove that we are dead to sin. Now, to what sin do infants die in their regeneration butthat sin which they bring with them at birth? And therefore to these also applies what follows:“Therefore we are buried with Him by baptism into death; that, like as Christ was raised up fromthe dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we havebeen planted together in the likeness of His death, we shall be also in the likeness of His resurrection:
knowing this, that our old man is crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, thathenceforth we should not serve sin. For he that is dead is freed from sin. Now if we be dead with
Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him: knowing that Christ, being raised from thedead, dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over Him. For in that He died, He died unto sin
once; but in that He liveth, He liveth unto God. Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be deadindeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.” Now he had commenced with
proving that we must not continue in sin that grace may abound, and had said: “How shall we thatare dead to sin live any longer therein?” And to show that we are dead to sin, he added: “Know ye
not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ, were baptized into His death?” And so
he concludes this whole passage just as he began it. For he has brought in the death of Christ insuch a way as to imply that Christ Himself also died to sin. To what sin did He die if not to theflesh, in which there was not sin, but the likeness of sin, and which was therefore called by thename of sin? To those who are baptized into the death of Christ, then,—and this class includes not
adults only, but infants as well,—he says: “Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed
unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.”1178

Chapter 53.—Christ’s Cross and Burial, Resurrection, Ascension, and Sitting Down at the Right
Hand of God, are Images of the Christian Life.

255

All the events, then, of Christ’s crucifixion, of His burial, of His resurrection the third day, of
His ascension into heaven, of His sitting down at the right hand of the Father, were so ordered, thatthe life which the Christian leads here might be modelled upon them, not merely in a mysticalsense, but in reality. For in reference to His crucifixion it is said: “They that are Christ’s havecrucified the flesh, with the affections and lusts.”1179 And in reference to His burial: “We are buried

1177
1178
1179

Rom. v. 20.
Rom. vi. 1–11.
Gal. v. 24.

345

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

with Him by baptism into death.”1180 In reference to His resurrection: “That, like as Christ was
raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness oflife.”1181 And in reference to His ascension into heaven and sitting down at the right hand of the
Father: “If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on
the right hand of God. Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth. For ye aredead, and your life is hid with Christ in God.”1182

Chapter 54.—Christ’s Second Coming Does Not Belong to the Past, But Will Take Place at theEnd of the World.
But what we believe as to Christ’s action in the future, when He shall come from heaven to
judge the quick and the dead, has no bearing upon the life which we now lead here; for it forms nopart of what He did upon earth, but is part of what He shall do at the end of the world. And it is tothis that the apostle refers in what immediately follows the passage quoted above: “When Christ,
who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with Him in glory.”1183

Chapter 55.—The Expression, “Christ Shall Judge the Quick and the Dead,” May Be Understoodin Either of Two Senses.
Now the expression, “to judge the quick and the dead,” may be interpreted in two ways: either
we may understand by the “quick” those who at His advent shall not yet have died, but whom He
shall find alive in the flesh, and by the “dead” those who have departed from the body, or who shallhave departed before His coming; or we may understand the “quick” to mean the righteous, andthe “dead” the unrighteous; for the righteous shall be judged as well as others. Now the judgmentof God is sometimes taken in a bad sense, as, for example, “They that have done evil unto theresurrection of judgment;”1184 sometimes in a good sense, as, “Save me, O God, by Thy name, andjudge me by Thy strength.”1185 This is easily understood when we consider that it is the judgmentof God which separates the good from the evil, and sets the good at His right hand, that they may
be delivered from evil, and not destroyed with the wicked; and it is for this reason that the Psalmist
cried, “Judge me, O God,” and then added, as if in explanation, “and distinguish my cause fromthat of an ungodly nation.”1186

1180
1181
1182
1183
1184
1185
1186

Rom. vi. 4.
Rom. vi. 5.
Col. iii. 1–3.
Col. iii. 4.
John v. 29 (damnation, A.V.)
Ps. liv. 1.
Ps. xliii. 1 (“Plead my cause against an ungodly nation,” A.V.).

346

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 56.—The Holy Spirit and the Church. The Church is the Temple of God.

256

And now, having spoken of Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, our Lord, with the brevity suitable
to a confession of our faith, we go on to say that we believe also in the Holy Ghost,—thus completing
the Trinity which constitutes the Godhead. Then we mention the Holy Church. And thus we are
made to understand that the intelligent creation, which constitutes the free Jerusalem,1187 ought tobe subordinate in the order of speech to the Creator, the Supreme Trinity: for all that is said of the
man Christ Jesus has reference, of course, to the unity of the person of the Only-begotten. Therefore
the true order of the Creed demanded that the Church should be made subordinate to the Trinity,
as the house to Him who dwells in it, the temple to God who occupies it, and the city to its builder.
And we are here to understand the whole Church, not that part of it only which wanders as a stranger
on the earth, praising the name of God from the rising of the sun to the going down of the same,and singing a new song of deliverance from its old captivity; but that part also which has always
from its creation remained steadfast to God in heaven, and has never experienced the miseryconsequent upon a fall. This part is made up of the holy angels, who enjoy uninterrupted happiness;and (as it is bound to do) it renders assistance to the part which is still wandering among strangers:
for these two parts shall be one in the fellowship of eternity, and now they are one in the bonds oflove, the whole having been ordained for the worship of the one God. Wherefore, neither the whole
Church, nor any part of it, has any desire to be worshipped instead of God, nor to be God to any
one who belongs to the temple of God—that temple which is built up of the saints who were createdby the uncreated God. And therefore the Holy Spirit, if a creature, could not be the Creator, butwould be a part of the intelligent creation. He would simply be the highest creature, and therefore
would not be mentioned in the Creed before the Church; for He Himself would belong to the Church,
to that part of it which is in the heavens. And He would not have a temple, for He Himself would
be part of a temple. Now He has a temple, of which the apostle says: “Know ye not that your bodyis the temple of the Holy Ghost, which is in you, which ye have of God?”1188 Of which body hesays in another place: “Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ?”1189 How, then,is He not God, seeing that He has a temple? and how can He be less than Christ, whose members
are His temple? Nor has He one temple, and God another, seeing that the same apostle says: “Knowye not that ye are the temple of God?”1190 and adds, as proof of this, “and that the Spirit of God
dwelleth in you.”1191 God, then, dwells in His temple: not the Holy Spirit only, but the Father also,
and the Son, who says of His own body, through which He was made Head of the Church uponearth (“that in all things He might have the pre-eminence):”1192 “Destroy this temple, and in threedays I will raise it up.”1193 The temple of God, then, that is, of the Supreme Trinity as a whole, isthe Holy Church, embracing in its full extent both heaven and earth.

1187
1188
1189
1190
1191
1192
1193

Gal. iv. 26.
1 Cor. vi. 19.
1 Cor. vi. 15.
1 Cor. iii. 16.
1 Cor. iii. 16.
Col. i. 18.
John ii. 19.

347

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 57.—The Condition of the Church in Heaven.
But of that part of the Church which is in heaven what can we say, except that no wicked one
is found in it, and that no one has fallen from it, or shall ever fall from it, since the time that “Godspared not the angels that sinned,” as the Apostle Peter writes, “but cast them down to hell, anddelivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment?”1194

Chapter 58.—We Have No Certain Knowledge of the Organization of the Angelic Society.
Now, what the organization is of that supremely happy society in heaven: what the differencesof rank are, which explain the fact that while all are called by the general name angels, as we readin the Epistle to the Hebrews, “but to which of the angels said God at any time, Sit on my righthand?”1195 (this form of expression being evidently designed to embrace all the angels without
exception), we yet find that there are some called archangels; and whether the archangels are thesame as those called hosts, so that the expression, “Praise ye Him, all His angels: praise ye Him,all His hosts,”1196 is the same as if it had been said, “Praise ye Him, all His angels: praise ye Him,all His archangels;” and what are the various significations of those four names under which theapostle seems to embrace the whole heavenly company without exception, “whether they be thrones,
or dominions, or principalities, or powers:”1197—let those who are able answer these questions, if
they can also prove their answers to be true; but as for me, I confess my ignorance. I am not evencertain upon this point: whether the sun, and the moon, and all the stars, do not form part of thissame society, though many consider them merely luminous bodies, without either sensation or
intelligence.

Chapter 59.—The Bodies Assumed by Angels Raise a Very Difficult, and Not Very Useful, Subjectof Discussion.
Further, who will tell with what sort of bodies it was that the angels appeared to men, making
themselves not only visible, but tangible; and again, how it is that, not through material bodies, but
by spiritual power, they present visions not to the bodily eyes, but to the spiritual eyes of the mind,or speak something not into the ear from without, but from within the soul of the man, they
themselves being stationed there too, as it is written in the prophet, “And the angel that spake in

1194
1195
1196
1197

2 Pet. ii. 4.
Heb. i. 13.
Ps. cxlviii. 2, [“host,” R.V.].
Col. i. 16.

348

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

me said unto me”1198 (he does not say, “that spake to me,” but “that spake in me”); or appear tomen in sleep, and make communications through dreams, as we read in the Gospel, “Behold, theangel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying”?1199 For these methods of communication
seem to imply that the angels have not tangible bodies, and make it a very difficult question tosolve how the patriarchs washed their feet,1200 and how it was that Jacob wrestled with the angelin a way so unmistakeably material.1201 To ask questions like these, and to make such guesses as
we can at the answers, is a useful exercise for the intellect, if the discussion be kept within properbounds, and if we avoid the error of supposing ourselves to know what we do not know. For whatis the necessity for affirming, or denying, or defining with accuracy on these subjects, and others
like them, when we may without blame be entirely ignorant of them?

257

Chapter 60.—It is More Necessary to Be Able to Detect the Wiles of Satan When He Transforms
Himself into an Angel of Light.
It is more necessary to use all our powers of discrimination and judgment when Satan transforms
himself into an angel of light,1202 lest by his wiles he should lead us astray into hurtful courses. For,
while he only deceives the bodily senses, and does not pervert the mind from that true and soundjudgment which enables a man to lead a life of faith, there is no danger to religion; or if, feigninghimself to be good, he does or says the things that befit good angels, and we believe him to begood, the error is not one that is hurtful or dangerous to Christian faith. But when, through thesemeans, which are alien to his nature, he goes on to lead us into courses of his own, then great
watchfulness is necessary to detect, and refuse to follow, him. But how many men are fit to evade
all his deadly wiles, unless God restrains and watches over them? The very difficulty of the matter,
however, is useful in this respect, that it prevents men from trusting in themselves or in one another,and leads all to place their confidence in God alone. And certainly no pious man can doubt that
this is most expedient for us.

Chapter 61.—The Church on Earth Has Been Redeemed from Sin by the Blood of a Mediator.
This part of the Church, then, which is made up of the holy angels and the hosts of God, shallbecome known to us in its true nature, when, at the end of the world, we shall be united with it in
the common possession of everlasting happiness. But the other part, which, separated from it,
wanders as a stranger on the earth, is better known to us, both because we belong to it, and because

1198
1199
1200
1201
1202

Zech. i. 9 (“The angel that talked with me,” A.V.).
Matt. i. 20.
Gen. xviii. 4, xix. 2.
Gen. xxxii. 24, 25.
2 Cor. xi. 14.

349

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

it is composed of men, and we too are men. This section of the Church has been redeemed fromall sin by the blood of a Mediator who had no sin, and its song is: “If God be for us, who can beagainst us? He that spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all.”1203 Now it was not
for the angels that Christ died. Yet what was done for the redemption of man through His death
was in a sense done for the angels, because the enmity which sin had put between men and the holyangels is removed, and friendship is restored between them, and by the redemption of man the gaps
which the great apostasy left in the angelic host are filled up.

Chapter 62.—By the Sacrifice of Christ All Things are Restored, and Peace is Made Between Earthand Heaven.
And, of course, the holy angels, taught by God, in the eternal contemplation of whose truth
their happiness consists, know how great a number of the human race are to supplement their ranks,
and fill up the full tale of their citizenship. Wherefore the apostle says, that “all things are gathered
together in one in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth.”1204 The things which
are in heaven are gathered together when what was lost therefrom in the fall of the angels is restoredfrom among men; and the things which are on earth are gathered together, when those who arepredestined to eternal life are redeemed from their old corruption. And thus, through that single
sacrifice in which the Mediator was offered up, the one sacrifice of which the many victims under
the law were types, heavenly things are brought into peace with earthly things, and earthly things
with heavenly. Wherefore, as the same apostle says: “For it pleased the Father that in Him should
all fullness dwell: and, having made peace through the blood of His cross, by Him to reconcile allthings to Himself: by Him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.”1205

Chapter 63.—The Peace of God, Which Reigneth in Heaven, Passeth All Understanding.
This peace, as Scripture saith, “passeth all understanding,”1206 and cannot be known by us until
we have come into the full possession of it. For in what sense are heavenly things reconciled, except
they be reconciled to us, viz. by coming into harmony with us? For in heaven there is unbroken
peace, both between all the intelligent creatures that exist there, and between these and their Creator.
And this peace, as is said, passeth all understanding; but this, of course, means our understanding,
not that of those who always behold the face of their Father. We now, however great may be ourhuman understanding, know but in part, and see through a glass darkly.1207 But when we shall be

1203
1204
1205
1206
1207

Rom. viii. 31.
Eph. i. 10.
Col. i. 19, 20. [ R.V. “summed up.”].
Phil. iv. 7.
1 Cor. xiii. 12.

350

NPNF (V1-03)

258

Philip Schaff

equal unto the angels of God1208 then we shall see face to face, as they do; and we shall have as
great peace towards them as they have towards us, because we shall love them as much as we are
loved by them. And so their peace shall be known to us: for our own peace shall be like to theirs,
and as great as theirs, nor shall it then pass our understanding. But the peace of God, the peace
which He cherisheth towards us, shall undoubtedly pass not our understanding only, but theirs as
well. And this must be so: for every rational creature which is happy derives its happiness from
Him; He does not derive His from it. And in this view it is better to interpret “all” in the passage,“The peace of God passeth all understanding,” as admitting of no exception even in favor of theunderstanding of the holy angels: the only exception that can be made is that of God Himself. For,of course, His peace does not pass His own understanding.

Chapter 64.—Pardon of Sin Extends Over the Whole Mortal Life of the Saints, Which, ThoughFree from Crime, is Not Free from Sin.
But the angels even now are at peace with us when our sins are pardoned. Hence, in the orderof the Creed, after the mention of the Holy Church is placed the remission of sins. For it is by thisthat the Church on earth stands: it is through this that what had been lost, and was found, is saved
from being lost again. For, setting aside the grace of baptism, which is given as an antidote tooriginal sin, so that what our birth imposes upon us, our new birth relieves us from (this grace,
however, takes away all the actual sins also that have been committed in thought, word, and deed):setting aside, then, this great act of favor, whence commences man’s restoration, and in which all
our guilt, both original and actual, is washed away, the rest of our life from the time that we havethe use of reason provides constant occasion for the remission of sins, however great may be ouradvance in righteousness. For the sons of God, as long as they live in this body of death, are in
conflict with death. And although it is truly said of them, “As many as are led by the Spirit of God,
they are the sons of God,”1209 yet they are led by the Spirit of God, and as the sons of God advancetowards God under this drawback, that they are led also by their own spirit, weighted as it is by thecorruptible body;1210 and that, as the sons of men, under the influence of human affections, theyfall back to their old level, and so sin. There is a difference, however. For although every crime isa sin, every sin is not a crime. And so we say that the life of holy men, as long as they remain inthis mortal body, may be found without crime; but, as the Apostle John says, “If we say that wehave no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.”1211

1208
1209
1210
1211

Luke xx. 36.
Rom. viii. 14.
Wisd. ix. 15.
1 John i. 8.

351

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 65.—God Pardons Sins, But on Condition of Penitence, Certain Times for Which Have
Been Fixed by the Law of the Church.
But even crimes themselves, however great, may be remitted in the Holy Church; and the mercyof God is never to be despaired of by men who truly repent, each according to the measure of his
sin. And in the act of repentance, where a crime has been committed of such a nature as to cut off
the sinner from the body of Christ, we are not to take account so much of the measure of time asof the measure of sorrow; for a broken and a contrite heart God doth not despise.1212 But as thegrief of one heart is frequently hid from another, and is not made known to others by words or othersigns, when it is manifest to Him of whom it is said, “My groaning is not hid from Thee,”1213 those
who govern the Church have rightly appointed times of penitence, that the Church in which thesins are remitted may be satisfied; and outside the Church sins are not remitted. For the Church
alone has received the pledge of the Holy Spirit, without which there is no remission of sins—such,at least, as brings the pardoned to eternal life.

Chapter 66.—The Pardon of Sin Has Reference Chiefly to the Future Judgment.

259

Now the pardon of sin has reference chiefly to the future judgment. For, as far as this life isconcerned, the saying of Scripture holds good: “A heavy yoke is upon the sons of Adam, from the
day that they go out of their mother’s womb, till the day that they return to the mother of allthings.”1214 So that we see even infants, after baptism and regeneration, suffering from the inflictionof divers evils: and thus we are given to understand, that all that is set forth in the sacraments ofsalvation refers rather to the hope of future good, than to the retaining or attaining of present
blessings. For many sins seem in this world to be overlooked and visited with no punishment, whose
punishment is reserved for the future (for it is not in vain that the day when Christ shall come as
Judge of quick and dead is peculiarly named the day of judgment); just as, on the other hand, manysins are punished in this life, which nevertheless are pardoned, and shall bring down no punishment
in the future life. Accordingly, in reference to certain temporal punishments, which in this life arevisited upon sinners, the apostle, addressing those whose sins are blotted out, and not reserved forthe final judgment, says: “For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. But when weare judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.”1215

1212
1213
1214
1215

Ps. li. 17.
Ps. xxxviii. 9.
Ecclus. xl. 1.
1 Cor. xi. 31, 32.

352

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 67.—Faith Without Works is Dead, and Cannot Save a Man.
It is believed, moreover, by some, that men who do not abandon the name of Christ, and who
have been baptized in the Church by His baptism, and who have never been cut off from the Church
by any schism or heresy, though they should live in the grossest sin and never either wash it awayin penitence nor redeem it by almsgiving, but persevere in it persistently to the last day of theirlives, shall be saved by fire; that is, that although they shall suffer a punishment by fire, lasting fora time proportionate to the magnitude of their crimes and misdeeds, they shall not be punished witheverlasting fire. But those who believe this, and yet are Catholics, seem to me to be led astray by
a kind of benevolent feeling natural to humanity. For Holy Scripture, when consulted, gives a very
different answer. I have written a book on this subject, entitled Of Faith and Works, in which, tothe best of my ability, God assisting me, I have shown from Scripture, that the faith which saves
us is that which the Apostle Paul clearly enough describes when he says: “For in Jesus Christ neither
circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but faith which worketh by love.”1216 But if it
worketh evil, and not good, then without doubt, as the Apostle James says, “it is dead, beingalone.”1217 The same apostle says again, “What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say hehath faith, and have not works? Can faith save him?”1218 And further, if a wicked man shall besaved by fire on account of his faith alone, and if this is what the blessed Apostle Paul means when
he says, “But he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire;”1219 then faith without works can save aman, and what his fellow-apostle James says must be false. And that must be false which Paulhimself says in another place: “Be not deceived: 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.”1220 For if those who persevere inthese wicked courses shall nevertheless be saved on account of their faith in Christ, how can it betrue that they shall not inherit the kingdom of God?

Chapter 68.—The True Sense of the Passage (I Cor. III. 11–15) About Those Who are Saved, Yet
So as by Fire.
But as these most plain and unmistakeable declarations of the apostles cannot be false, that
obscure saying about those who build upon the foundation, Christ, not gold, silver, and precious
stones, but wood, hay, and stubble (for it is these who, it is said, shall be saved, yet so as by fire,the merit of the foundation saving them1221), must be so interpreted as not to conflict with the plain
1216

Gal. v. 6.
Jas. ii. 17. [See R.V.]
1218
Jas. ii. 14.
1219
1 Cor. iii. 15.
1220
1 Cor. vi. 9, 10.
1221
1 Cor. iii. 11–15. [The “fire” in ver. 15 is not the purgatorial fire in the state between death and resurrection, but, as inver. 14, the fire of the day of judgment.—P.S.]
1217

353

NPNF (V1-03)

260

Philip Schaff

statements quoted above. Now wood, hay, and stubble may, without incongruity, be understood tosignify such an attachment to worldly things, however lawful these may be in themselves, that theycannot be lost without grief of mind. And though this grief burns, yet if Christ hold the place offoundation in the heart,—that is, if nothing be preferred to Him, and if the man, though burningwith grief, is yet more willing to lose the things he loves so much than to lose Christ,—he is savedby fire. If, however, in time of temptation, he prefer to hold by temporal and earthly things rather
than by Christ, he has not Christ as his foundation; for he puts earthly things in the first place, andin a building nothing comes before the foundation. Again, the fire of which the apostle speaks inthis place must be such a fire as both men are made to pass through, that is, both the man who
builds upon the foundation, gold, silver, precious stones, and the man who builds wood, hay, stubble.
For he immediately adds: “The fire shall try every man’s work, of what sort it is. If any man’s work
abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man’s work shall be burned,
he shall suffer loss; but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.”1222 The fire then shall prove,not the work of one of them only, but of both. Now the trial of adversity is a kind of fire which isplainly spoken of in another place: “The furnace proveth the potter’s vessels: and the furnace ofadversity just men.”1223 And this fire does in the course of this life act exactly in the way the apostle
says. If it come into contact with two believers, one “caring for the things that belong to the Lord,
how he may please the Lord,”1224 that is, building upon Christ the foundation, gold, silver, precious
stones; the other “caring for the things that are of the world, how he may please his wife,”1225 thatis, building upon the same foundation wood, hay, stubble,—the work of the former is not burned,
because he has not given his love to things whose loss can cause him grief; but the work of thelatter is burned, because things that are enjoyed with desire cannot be lost without pain. But since,by our supposition, even the latter prefers to lose these things rather than to lose Christ, and since
he does not desert Christ out of fear of losing them, though he is grieved when he does lose them,
he is saved, but it is so as by fire; because the grief for what he loved and has lost burns him. But
it does not subvert nor consume him; for he is protected by his immoveable and incorruptible
foundation.

Chapter 69.—It is Not Impossible that Some Believers May Pass Through a Purgatorial Fire in the
Future Life.
And it is not impossible that something of the same kind may take place even after this life. It
is a matter that may be inquired into, and either ascertained or left doubtful, whether some believers
shall pass through a kind of purgatorial fire, and in proportion as they have loved with more or lessdevotion the goods that perish, be less or more quickly delivered from it. This cannot, however, be

1222
1223
1224
1225

1 Cor. iii. 13–15.
Ecclus. xxvii. 5, ii. 5.
1 Cor. vii. 32.
1 Cor. vii. 33. [See R.V.]

354

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

the case of any of those of whom it is said, that they “shall not inherit the kingdom of God,”1226
unless after suitable repentance their sins be forgiven them. When I say “suitable,” I mean that they
are not to be unfruitful in almsgiving; for Holy Scripture lays so much stress on this virtue, that
our Lord tells us beforehand, that He will ascribe no merit to those on His right hand but that theyabound in it, and no defect to those on His left hand but their want of it, when He shall say to theformer, “Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom,” and to the latter, “Depart from me,ye cursed, into everlasting fire.”1227

Chapter 70.—Almsgiving Will Not Atone for Sin Unless the Life Be Changed.
We must beware, however, lest any one should suppose that gross sins, such as are committed
by those who shall not inherit the kingdom of God, may be daily perpetrated, and daily atoned forby almsgiving. The life must be changed for the better; and almsgiving must be used to propitiate
God for past sins, not to purchase impunity for the commission of such sins in the future. For He
has given no man license to sin,1228 although in His mercy He may blot out sins that are alreadycommitted, if we do not neglect to make proper satisfaction.

Chapter 71.—The Daily Prayer of the Believer Makes Satisfaction for the Trivial Sins that Daily
Stain His Life.
Now the daily prayer of the believer makes satisfaction for those daily sins of a momentary andtrivial kind which are necessary incidents of this life. For he can say, “Our Father which art inheaven,”1229 seeing that to such a Father he is now born again of water and of the Spirit.1230 And
this prayer certainly takes away the very small sins of daily life. It takes away also those which at
one time made the life of the believer very wicked, but which, now that he is changed for the betterby repentance, he has given up, provided that as truly as he says, “Forgive us our debts” (for there
is no want of debts to be forgiven), so truly does he say, “as we forgive our debtors;”1231 that is,provided he does what he says he does: for to forgive a man who asks for pardon, is really to give
alms.

1226
1227
1228
1229
1230
1231

1 Cor. vi. 10.
Matt. xxv. 31–46.
Ecclus. xv. 20.
Matt. vi. 9.
John iii. 5.
Matt. vi. 12.

355

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 72.—There are Many Kinds of Alms, the Giving of Which Assists to Procure Pardon for
Our Sins.

261

And on this principle of interpretation, our Lord’s saying, “Give alms of such things as ye have,
and, behold, all things are clean unto you,”1232 applies to every useful act that a man does in mercy.
Not only, then, the man who gives food to the hungry, drink to the thirsty, clothing to the naked,
hospitality to the stranger, shelter to the fugitive, who visits the sick and the imprisoned, ransoms
the captive, assists the weak, leads the blind, comforts the sorrowful, heals the sick, puts the wanderer
on the right path, gives advice to the perplexed, and supplies the wants of the needy,—not this man
only, but the man who pardons the sinner also gives alms; and the man who corrects with blows,or restrains by any kind of discipline one over whom he has power, and who at the same time
forgives from the heart the sin by which he was injured, or prays that it may be forgiven, is also agiver of alms, not only in that he forgives, or prays for forgiveness for the sin, but also in that herebukes and corrects the sinner: for in this, too, he shows mercy. Now much good is bestowed upon
unwilling recipients, when their advantage and not their pleasure is consulted; and they themselves
frequently prove to be their own enemies, while their true friends are those whom they take for
their enemies, and to whom in their blindness they return evil for good. (A Christian, indeed, is not
permitted to return evil even for evil.1233) And thus there are many kinds of alms, by giving of
which we assist to procure the pardon of our sins.

Chapter 73.—The Greatest of All Alms is to Forgive Our Debtors and to Love Our Enemies.
But none of those is greater than to forgive from the heart a sin that has been committed against
us. For it is a comparatively small thing to wish well to, or even to do good to, a man who has done
no evil to you. It is a much higher thing, and is the result of the most exalted goodness, to love yourenemy, and always to wish well to, and when you have the opportunity, to do good to, the man
who wishes you ill, and, when he can, does you harm. This is to obey the command of God: “Love
your enemies, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which persecute you.”1234 But
seeing that this is a frame of mind only reached by the perfect sons of God, and that though every
believer ought to strive after it, and by prayer to God and earnest struggling with himself endeavor
to bring his soul up to this standard, yet a degree of goodness so high can hardly belong to so greata multitude as we believe are heard when they use this petition, “Forgive us our debts, as we forgive
our debtors;” in view of all this, it cannot be doubted that the implied undertaking is fulfilled if aman, though he has not yet attained to loving his enemy, yet, when asked by one who has sinned
against him to forgive him his sin, does forgive him from his heart. For he certainly desires to be

1232
1233
1234

Luke xi. 41.
Rom. xii. 17; Matt. v. 44.
Matt. v. 44.

356

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

himself forgiven when he prays, “as we forgive our debtors,” that is, Forgive us our debts when
we beg forgiveness, as we forgive our debtors when they beg forgiveness from us.

Chapter 74.—God Does Not Pardon the Sins of Those Who Do Not from the Heart Forgive Others.
Now, he who asks forgiveness of the man against whom he has sinned, being moved by his sin
to ask forgiveness, cannot be counted an enemy in such a sense that it should be as difficult to love
him now as it was when he was engaged in active hostility. And the man who does not from hisheart forgive him who repents of his sin, and asks forgiveness, need not suppose that his own sinsare forgiven of God. For the Truth cannot lie. And what reader or hearer of the Gospel can havefailed to notice, that the same person who said, “I am the Truth,”1235 taught us also this form of
prayer; and in order to impress this particular petition deeply upon our minds, said, “For if ye
forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you; but if ye forgive not men
their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses”?1236 The man whom the thunderof this warning does not awaken is not asleep, but dead; and yet so powerful is that voice, that it
can awaken even the dead.

Chapter 75.—The Wicked and the Unbelieving are Not Made Clean by the Giving of Alms, Except
They Be Born Again.
Assuredly, then, those who live in gross wickedness, and take no care to reform their lives andmanners, and yet amid all their crimes and vices do not cease to give frequent alms, in vain takecomfort to themselves from the saying of our Lord: “Give alms of such things as ye have; and,behold, all things are clean unto you.”1237 For they do not understand how far this saying reaches.
But that they may understand this, let them hear what He says. For we read in the Gospel as follows:“And as He spake, a certain Pharisee besought Him to dine with him; and He went in, and sat down
to meat. And when the Pharisee saw it, he marvelled that He had not first washed before dinner.
And the Lord said unto him, Now do ye Pharisees make clean the outside of the cup and the platter;but your inward part is full of ravening and wickedness. Ye fools, did not he that made that which
is without, make that which is within also? But rather give alms of such things as ye have; and,behold, all things are clean unto you.”1238 Are we to understand this as meaning that to the Pharisees
who have not the faith of Christ all things are clean, if only they give alms in the way these men
count almsgiving, even though they have never believed in Christ, nor been born again of waterand of the Spirit? But the fact is, that all are unclean who are not made clean by the faith of Christ,
1235
1236
1237
1238

John xiv. 6.
Matt. vi. 14, 15.
Luke xi. 41.
Luke xi. 37–41. [See R.V.]

357

NPNF (V1-03)

262

Philip Schaff

according to the expression, “purifying their hearts by faith;”1239 and that the apostle says, “Untothem that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience isdefiled.”1240 How, then, could all things be clean to the Pharisees, even though they gave alms, if
they were not believers? And how could they be believers if they were not willing to have faith inChrist, and to be born again of His grace? And yet what they heard is true: “Give alms of suchthings as ye have; and, behold, all things are clean unto you.”

Chapter 76.—To Give Alms Aright, We Should Begin with Ourselves, and Have Pity Upon Our
Own Souls.
For the man who wishes to give aims as he ought, should begin with himself, and give to himself
first. For almsgiving is a work of mercy; and most truly is it said, “To have mercy on thy soul ispleasing to God.”1241 And for this end are we born again, that we should be pleasing to God, who
is justly displeased with that which we brought with us when we were born. This is our first alms,
which we give to ourselves when, through the mercy of a pitying God, we find that we are ourselves
wretched, and confess the justice of His judgment by which we are made wretched, of which theapostle says, “The judgment was by one to condemnation;”1242 and praise the greatness of His love,of which the same preacher of grace says, “God commendeth His love toward us, in that, while wewere yet sinners, Christ died for us:”1243 and thus judging truly of our own misery, and loving God
with the love which He has Himself bestowed, we lead a holy and virtuous life. But the Pharisees,
while they gave as alms the tithe of all their fruits, even the most insignificant, passed over judgment
and the love of God, and so did not commence their alms-giving at home, and extend their pity tothemselves in the first instance. And it is in reference to this order of love that it is said, “Love thyneighbor as thyself.”1244 When, then, our Lord had rebuked them because they made themselvesclean on the outside, but within were full of ravening and wickedness, He advised them, in theexercise of that charity which each man owes to himself in the first instance, to make clean the
inward parts. “But rather,” He says, “give alms of such things as ye have; and, behold, all things
are clean unto you.”1245 Then, to show what it was that He advised, and what they took no pains todo, and to show that He did not overlook or forget their almsgiving, “But woe unto you,
Pharisees!”1246 He says; as if He meant to say: I indeed advise you to give alms which shall makeall things clean unto you; “but woe unto you! for ye tithe mint, and rue, and all manner of herbs;”
as if He meant to say: I know these alms of yours, and ye need not think that I am now admonishing
you in respect of such things; “and pass over judgment and the love of God,” an alms by which ye
1239
1240
1241
1242
1243
1244
1245
1246

Acts xv. 9.
Tit. i. 15.
Ecclus. xxx. 24.
Rom. v. 16.
Rom. v. 8.
Luke x. 27.
Luke xi. 42.
Luke xi. 42.

358

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

might have been made clean from all inward impurity, so that even the bodies which ye are now
washing would have been clean to you. For this is the import of “all things,” both inward andoutward things, as we read in another place: “Cleanse first that which is within, that the outside
may be clean also.”1247 But lest He might appear to despise the alms which they were giving outof the fruits of the earth, He says: “These ought ye to have done,” referring to judgment and thelove of God, “and not to leave the other undone,” referring to the giving of the tithes.

Chapter 77.—If We Would Give Alms to Ourselves, We Must Flee Iniquity; For He Who Loveth
Iniquity Hateth His Soul.
Those, then, who think that they can by giving alms, however profuse, whether in money or in
kind, purchase for themselves the privilege of persisting with impunity in their monstrous crimes
and hideous vices, need not thus deceive themselves. For not only do they commit these sins, butthey love them so much that they would like to go on forever committing them, if only they could
do so with impunity. Now, he who loveth iniquity hateth his own soul;1248 and he who hateth his
own soul is not merciful but cruel towards it. For in loving it according to the world, he hateth it
according to God. But if he desired to give alms to it which should make all things clean unto him,
he would hate it according to the world, and love it according to God. Now no one gives alms unlesshe receive what he gives from one who is not in want of it. Therefore it is said, “His mercy shallmeet me.”1249

Chapter 78.—What Sins are Trivial and What Heinous is a Matter for God’s Judgment.

263

Now, what sins are trivial and what heinous is not a matter to be decided by man’s judgment,
but by the judgment of God. For it is plain that the apostles themselves have given an indulgencein the case of certain sins: take, for example, what the Apostle Paul says to those who are married:“Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves tofasting and prayer: and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.”1250
Now it is possible that it might not have been considered a sin to have intercourse with a spouse,
not with a view to the procreation of children, which is the great blessing of marriage, but for thesake of carnal pleasure, and to save the incontinent from being led by their weakness into the deadly
sin of fornication, or adultery, or another form of uncleanness which it is shameful even to name,and into which it is possible that they might be drawn by lust under the temptation of Satan. It is
possible, I say, that this might not have been considered a sin, had the apostle not added: “But I
1247
1248
1249
1250

Matt. xxiii. 26.
Ps. xi. 5. (“Him that loveth violence, His (God’s) soul hateth.” A.V.)
Ps. lix. 10.
1 Cor. vii. 5.

359

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

speak this by permission, and not of commandment.”1251 Who, then, can deny that it is a sin, when
confessedly it is only by apostolic authority that permission is granted to those who do it? Anothercase of the same kind is where he says: “Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go tolaw before the unjust, and not before the saints?”1252 And shortly afterwards: “If then ye have
judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the Church.
I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall beable to judge between his brethren? But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before theunbelievers.”1253 Now it might have been supposed in this case that it is not a sin to have a quarrel
with another, that the only sin is in wishing to have it adjudicated upon outside the Church, had
not the apostle immediately added: “Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye
go to law with one another.”1254 And lest any one should excuse himself by saying that he had ajust cause, and was suffering wrong, and that he only wished the sentence of the judges to remove
his wrong, the apostle immediately anticipates such thoughts and excuses, and says: “Why do ye
not rather take wrong? Why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?” Thus bringing us
back to our Lord’s saying, “If any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him
have thy cloak also;”1255 and again, “Of him that taketh away thy goods, ask them not again.”1256
Therefore our Lord has forbidden His followers to go to law with other men about worldly affairs.
And carrying out this principle, the apostle here declares that to do so is “altogether a fault.” But
when, notwithstanding, he grants his permission to have such cases between brethren decided in
the Church, other brethren adjudicating, and only sternly forbids them to be carried outside the
Church, it is manifest that here again an indulgence is extended to the infirmities of the weak. It isin view, then, of these sins, and others of the same sort, and of others again more trifling still, which
consist of offenses in words and thought (as the Apostle James confesses, “In many things we
offend all”1257), that we need to pray every day and often to the Lord, saying, “Forgive us our debts,”
and to add in truth and sincerity, “as we forgive our debtors.”

Chapter 79.—Sins Which Appear Very Trifling, are Sometimes in Reality Very Serious.
Again, there are some sins which would be considered very trifling, if the Scriptures did notshow that they are really very serious. For who would suppose that the man who says to his brother,“Thou fool,” is in danger of hell-fire, did not He who is the Truth say so? To the wound, however,He immediately applies the cure, giving a rule for reconciliation with one’s offended brother:“Therefore, if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought
against thee; leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way: first be reconciled to thy brother,
1251
1252
1253
1254
1255
1256
1257

1 Cor. vii. 6. [“Concession,” R.V.]
1 Cor. vi. 1.
1 Cor. vi. 4–6.
1 Cor. vi. 7.
Matt. v. 40.
Luke vi. 30.
Jas. iii. 2. [See R.V.]

360

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

and then come and offer thy gift.”1258 Again, who would suppose that it was so great a sin to observedays, and months, and times, and years, as those do who are anxious or unwilling to begin anythingon certain days, or in certain months or years, because the vain doctrines of men lead them to thinksuch times lucky or unlucky, had we not the means of estimating the greatness of the evil from thefear expressed by the apostle, who says to such men, “I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon
you labor in vain”?1259

Chapter 80.—Sins, However Great and Detestable, Seem Trivial When We are Accustomed to
Them.

264

Add to this, that sins, however great and detestable they may be, are looked upon as trivial, oras not sins at all, when men get accustomed to them; and so far does this go, that such sins are not
only not concealed, but are boasted of, and published far and wide; and thus, as it is written, “Thewicked boasteth of his heart’s desire, and blesseth the covetous, whom the Lord abhorreth.”1260
Iniquity of this kind is in Scripture called a cry. You have an instance in the prophet Isaiah, in thecase of the evil vineyard: “He looked for judgment, but behold oppression; for righteousness, butbehold a cry.”1261 Whence also the expression in Genesis: “The cry of Sodom and Gomorrah isgreat,”1262 because in these cities crimes were not only not punished, but were openly committed,
as if under the protection of the law. And so in our own times: many forms of sin, though not justthe sameas those of Sodom and Gomorrah, are now so openly and habitually practised, that not
only dare we not excommunicate a layman, we dare not even degrade a clergyman, for thecommission of them. So that when, a few years ago, I was expounding the Epistle to the Galatians,
in commenting on that very place where the apostle says, “I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed
labor upon you in vain,” I was compelled to exclaim, “Woe to the sins of men! for it is only when
we are not accustomed to them that we shrink from them: when once we are accustomed to them,though the blood of the Son of God was poured out to wash them away, though they are so greatthat the kingdom of God is wholly shut against them, constant familiarity leads to the toleration ofthem all, and habitual toleration leads to the practice of many of them. And grant, O Lord, that we
may not come to practise all that we have not the power to hinder.” But I shall see whether the
extravagance of grief did not betray me into rashness of speech.

1258
1259
1260
1261
1262

Matt. v. 22, 23.
Gal. iv. 10, 11.
Ps. x. 3.
Isa. v. 7.
Gen. xviii. 20.

361

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 81.—There are Two Causes of Sin, Ignorance and Weakness; And We Need Divine Help
to Overcome Both.
I shall now say this, which I have often said before in other places of my works. There are twocauses that lead to sin: either we do not yet know our duty, or we do not perform the duty that weknow. The former is the sin of ignorance, the latter of weakness. Now against these it is our duty
to struggle; but we shall certainly be beaten in the fight, unless we are helped by God, not only to
see our duty, but also, when we clearly see it, to make the love of righteousness stronger in us thanthe love of earthly things, the eager longing after which, or the fear of losing which, leads us with
our eyes open into known sin. In the latter case we are not only sinners, for we are so even when
we err through ignorance, but we are also transgressors of the law; for we leave undone what weknow we ought to do, and we do what we know we ought not to do. Wherefore not only ought weto pray for pardon when we have sinned, saying, “Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors;”
but we ought to pray for guidance, that we may be kept from sinning, saying, “and lead us not into
temptation.” And we are to pray to Him of whom the Psalmist says, “The Lord is my light and mysalvation:”1263 my light, for He removes my ignorance; my salvation, for He takes away my infirmity.

Chapter 82.—The Mercy of God is Necessary to True Repentance.
Now even penance itself, when by the law of the Church there is sufficient reason for its being
gone through, is frequently evaded through infirmity; for shame is the fear of losing pleasure when
the good opinion of men gives more pleasure than the righteousness which leads a man to humble
himself in penitence. Wherefore the mercy of God is necessary not only when a man repents, buteven to lead him to repent. How else explain what the apostle says of certain persons: “if God
peradventure will give them repentance”?1264 And before Peter wept bitterly, we are told by theevangelist, “The Lord turned, and looked upon him.”1265

Chapter 83.—The Man Who Despises the Mercy of God is Guilty of the Sin Against the Holy
Ghost.
Now the man who, not believing that sins are remitted in the Church, despises this great gift ofGod’s mercy, and persists to the last day of his life in his obstinacy of heart, is guilty of the

1263
1264
1265

Ps. xxvii. 1.
2 Tim. ii. 25.
Luke xxii. 61.

362

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

unpardonable sin against the Holy Ghost, in whom Christ forgives sins.1266 But this difficult question
I have discussed as clearly as I could in a book devoted exclusively to this one point.

Chapter 84.—The Resurrection of the Body Gives Rise to Numerous Questions.
Now, as to the resurrection of the body, —not a resurrection such as some have had, who cameback to life for a time and died again, but a resurrection to eternal life, as the body of Christ Himself
rose again,—I do not see how I can discuss the matter briefly, and at the same time give a satisfactory
answer to all the questions that are ordinarily raised about it. Yet that the bodies of all men—boththose who have been born and those who shall be born, both those who have died and those who
shall die—shall be raised again, no Christian ought to have the shadow of a doubt.

265

Chapter 85.—The Case of Abortive Conceptions.
Hence in the first place arises a question about abortive conceptions, which have indeed beenborn in the mother’s womb, but not so born that they could be born again. For if we shall decidethat these are to rise again, we cannot object to any conclusion that may be drawn in regard to thosewhich are fully formed. Now who is there that is not rather disposed to think that unformed abortions
perish, like seeds that have never fructified? But who will dare to deny, though he may not dare toaffirm, that at the resurrection every defect in the form shall be supplied, and that thus the perfection
which time would have brought shall not be wanting, any more than the blemishes which time didbring shall be present: so that the nature shall neither want anything suitable and in harmony withit that length of days would have added, nor be debased by the presence of anything of an opposite
kind that length of days has added; but that what is not yet complete shall be completed, just as
what has been injured shall be renewed.

Chapter 86.—If They Have Ever Lived, They Must of Course Have Died, and Therefore Shall
Have a Share in the Resurrection of the Dead.
And therefore the following question may be very carefully inquired into and discussed bylearned men, though I do not know whether it is in man’s power to resolve it: At what time theinfant begins to live in the womb: whether life exists in a latent form before it manifests itself inthe motions of the living being. To deny that the young who are cut out limb by limb from thewomb, lest if they were left there dead the mother should die too, have never been alive, seems too

1266

Matt. xii. 32.

363

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

audacious. Now, from the time that a man begins to live, from that time it is possible for him todie. And if he die, wheresoever death may overtake him, I cannot discover on what principle hecan be denied an interest in the resurrection of the dead.

Chapter 87.—The Case of Monstrous Births.
We are not justified in affirming even of monstrosities, which are born and live, however quickly
they may die, that they shall not rise again, nor that they shall rise again in their deformity, and notrather with an amended and perfected body. God forbid that the double limbed man who was lately
born in the East, of whom an account was brought by most trustworthy brethren who had seen
him,—an account which the presbyter Jerome, of blessed memory, left in writing;1267—God forbid,
I say, that we should think that at the resurrection there shall be one man with double limbs, andnot two distinct men, as would have been the case had twins been born. And so other births, which,because they have either a superfluity or a defect, or because they are very much deformed, arecalled monstrosities, shall at the resurrection be restored to the normal shape of man; and so eachsingle soul shall possess its own body; and no bodies shall cohere together even though they wereborn in cohesion, but each separately shall possess all the members which constitute a complete
human body.

Chapter 88.—The Material of the Body Never Perishes.
Nor does the earthly material out of which men’s mortal bodies are created ever perish; butthough it may crumble into dust and ashes, or be dissolved into vapors and exhalations, though it
may be transformed into the substance of other bodies, or dispersed into the elements, though it
should become food for beasts or men, and be changed into their flesh, it returns in a moment oftime to that human soul which animated it at the first, and which caused it to become man, and tolive and grow.

Chapter 89.—But This Material May Be Differently Arranged in the Resurrection Body.
And this earthly material, which when the soul leaves it becomes a corpse, shall not at theresurrection be so restored as that the parts into which it is separated, and which under various
forms and appearances become parts of other things (though they shall all return to the same bodyfrom which they were separated), must necessarily return to the same parts of the body in which
1267

Jerome, in his Epistle to Vitalis: “Or because in our times a man was born at Lydda with two heads, four hands, one
belly, and two feet, does it necessarily follow that all men are so born?”364

NPNF (V1-03)

266

Philip Schaff

they were originally situated. For otherwise, to suppose that the hair recovers all that our frequent
clippings and shavings have taken away from it, and the nails all that we have so often pared off,presents to the imagination such a picture of ugliness and deformity, as to make the resurrectionof the body all but incredible. But just as if a statue of some soluble metal were either melted byfire, or broken into dust, or reduced to a shapeless mass, and a sculptor wished to restore it fromthe same quantity of metal, it would make no difference to the completeness of the work what partof the statue any given particle of the material was put into, as long as the restored statue contained
all the material of the original one; so God, the Artificer of marvellous and unspeakable power,
shall with marvellous and unspeakable rapidity restore our body, using up the whole material ofwhich it originally consisted. Nor will it affect the completeness of its restoration whether hairs
return to hairs, and nails to nails, or whether the part of these that had perished be changed into
flesh, and called to take its place in another part of the body, the great Artist taking careful heedthat nothing shall be unbecoming or out of place.

Chapter 90.—If There Be Differences and Inequalities Among the Bodies of Those Who Rise
Again, There Shall Be Nothing Offensive or Disproportionate in Any.
Nor does it necessarily follow that there shall be differences of stature among those who riseagain, because they were of different statures during life; nor is it certain that the lean shall riseagain in their former leanness, and the fat in their former fatness. But if it is part of the Creator’s
design that each should preserve his own peculiarities of feature, and retain a recognizable likenessto his former self, while in regard to other bodily advantages all should be equal, then the materialof which each is composed may be so modified that none of it shall be lost, and that any defectmay be supplied by Him who can create at His will out of nothing. But if in the bodies of those
who rise again there shall be a well-ordered inequality, such as there is in the voices that make up
a full harmony, then the material of each man’s body shall be so dealt with that it shall form a man
fit for the assemblies of the angels, and one who shall bring nothing among them to jar upon their
sensibilities. And assuredly nothing that is unseemly shall be there; but whatever shall be there
shall be graceful and becoming: for if anything is not seemly, neither shall it be.

Chapter 91.—The Bodies of the Saints Shall at The Resurrection Be Spiritual Bodies.
The bodies of the saints, then, shall rise again free from every defect, from every blemish, asfrom all corruption, weight, and impediment. For their ease of movement shall be as complete as
their happiness. Whence their bodies have been called spiritual, though undoubtedly they shall bebodies and not spirits. For just as now the body is called animate, though it is a body, and not asoul [anima], so then the body shall be called spiritual, though it shall be a body, not a spirit.1268
1268

1 Cor. xv. 44. [See R.V.]

365

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip SchaffHence, as far as regards the corruption which now weighs down the soul, and the vices which urge
the flesh to lust against the spirit,1269 it shall not then be flesh, but body; for there are bodies which
are called celestial. Wherefore it is said, “Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God;”
and, as if in explanation of this, “neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.”1270 What the apostle
first called “flesh and blood,” he afterwards calls “corruption;” and what he first called “the kingdomof God,” he afterwards calls “incorruption.” But as far as regards the substance, even then it shallbe flesh. For even after the resurrection the body of Christ was called flesh.1271 The apostle, however,says: “It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body;”1272 because so perfect shah then be
the harmony between flesh and spirit, the spirit keeping alive the subjugated flesh without the needof any nourishment, that no part of our nature shall be in discord with another; but as we shall befree from enemies without, so we shall not have ourselves for enemies within.

Chapter 92.—The Resurrection of the Lost.
But as for those who, out of the mass of perdition caused by the first man’s sin, are not redeemedthrough the one Mediator between God and man, they too shall rise again, each with his own body,but only to be punished with the devil and his angels. Now, whether they shall rise again with all
their diseases and deformities of body, bringing with them the diseased and deformed limbs which
they possessed here, it would be labor lost to inquire. For we need not weary ourselves speculating
about their health or their beauty, which are matters uncertain, when their eternal damnation is amatter of certainty. Nor need we inquire in what sense their body shall be incorruptible, if it besusceptible of pain; or in what sense corruptible, if it be free from the possibility of death. For there
is no true life except where there is happiness in life, and no true incorruption except where healthis unbroken by any pain. When, however, the unhappy are not permitted to die, then, if I may sospeak, death itself dies not; and where pain without intermission afflicts the soul, and never comesto an end, corruption itself is not completed. This is called in Holy Scripture “the second death.”1273
267

Chapter 93.—Both the First and the Second Deaths are the Consequence of Sin. Punishment is
Proportioned to Guilt.
And neither the first death, which takes place when the soul is compelled to leave the body,nor the second death, which takes place when the soul is not permitted to leave the suffering body,
would have been inflicted on man had no one sinned. And, of course, the mildest punishment of

1269
1270
1271
1272
1273

Wisd. ix. 15; Gal. v. 17.
1 Cor. xv. 50.
Luke xxiv. 39.
1 Cor. xv. 44.
Rev. ii. 2.

366

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

all will fall upon those who have added no actual sin, to the original sin they brought with them;and as for the rest who have added such actual sins, the punishment of each will be the more tolerable
in the next world, according as his iniquity has been less in this world.

Chapter 94.—The Saints Shall Know More Fully in the Next World the Benefits They Have
Received by Grace.
Thus, when reprobate angels and men are left to endure everlasting punishment, the saints shallknow more fully the benefits they have received by grace. Then, in contemplation of the actual
facts, they shall see more clearly the meaning of the expression in the psalms, “I will sing of mercy
and judgment;”1274 for it is only of unmerited mercy that any is redeemed, and only in well-merited
judgment that any is condemned.

Chapter 95.—God’s Judgments Shall Then Be Explained.
Then shall be made clear much that is now dark. For example, when of two infants, whose cases
seem in all respects alike, one by the mercy of God chosen to Himself, and the other is by His
justice abandoned (wherein the one who is chosen may recognize what was of justice due to himself,
had not mercy intervened); why, of these two, the one should have been chosen rather than theother, is to us an insoluble problem. And again, why miracles were not wrought in the presence ofmen who would have repented at the working of the miracles, while they were wrought in thepresence of others who, it was known, would not repent. For our Lord says most distinctly: “Woeunto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works, which were done in you,
had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes.”1275
And assuredly there was no injustice in God’s not willing that they should be saved, though they
could have been saved had He so willed it. Then shall be seen in the clearest light of wisdom whatwith the pious is now a faith, though it is not yet a matter of certain knowledge, how sure, howunchangeable, and how effectual is the will of God; how many things He can do which He does
not will to do, though willing nothing which He cannot perform; and how true is the song of thepsalmist, “But our God is in the heavens; He hath done whatsoever He hath pleased.”1276 And thiscertainly is not true, if God has ever willed anything that He has not performed; and, still worse, if
it was the will of man that hindered the Omnipotent from doing what He pleased. Nothing, therefore,
happens but by the will of the Omnipotent, He either permitting it to be done, or Himself doing it.

1274
1275
1276

Ps. ci. 1.
Matt. xi. 21.
Ps. cxv. 3.

367

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 96.—The Omnipotent God Does Well Even in the Permission of Evil.
Nor can we doubt that God does well even in the permission of what is evil. For He permits it
only in the justice of His judgment. And surely all that is just is good. Although, therefore, evil, in
so far as it is evil, is not a good; yet the fact that evil as well as good exists, is a good. For if it were
not a good that evil should exist, its existence would not be permitted by the omnipotent Good,
who without doubt can as easily refuse to permit what He does not wish, as bring about what He
does wish. And if we do not believe this, the very first sentence of our creed is endangered, wherein
we profess to believe in God the Father Almighty. For He is not truly called Almighty if He cannot
do whatsoever He pleases, or if the power of His almighty will is hindered by the will of any creaturewhatsoever.

Chapter 97.—In What Sense Does the Apostle Say that “God Will Have All Men to Be Saved,”
When, as a Matter of Fact, All are Not Saved?

268

Hence we must inquire in what sense is said of God what the apostle has mostly truly said:“Who will have all men to be saved.”1277 For, as a matter of fact, not all, nor even a majority, aresaved: so that it would seem that what God wills is not done, man’s will interfering with, andhindering the will of God. When we ask the reason why all men are not saved, the ordinary answer
is: “Because men themselves are not willing.” This, indeed cannot be said of infants, for it is notin their power either to will or not to will. But if we could attribute to their will the childish
movements they make at baptism, when they make all the resistance they can, we should say thateven they are not willing to be saved. Our Lord says plainly, however, in the Gospel, when
upbraiding the impious city: “How often would I have gathered thy children together, even as ahen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!”1278 as if the will of God had been
overcome by the will of men, and when the weakest stood in the way with their want of will, thewill of the strongest could not be carried out. And where is that omnipotence which hath done allthat it pleased on earth and in heaven, if God willed to gather together the children of Jerusalem,and did not accomplish it? or rather, Jerusalem was not willing that her children should be gathered
together? But even though she was unwilling, He gathered together as many of her children as He
wished: for He does not will some things and do them, and will others and do them not; but “Hehath done all that He pleased in heaven and in earth.”

Chapter 98.—Predestination to Eternal Life is Wholly of God’s Free Grace.

1277
1278

1 Tim. ii. 4. [See R.V.]
Matt. xxiii. 37.

368

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

And, moreover, who will be so foolish and blasphemous as to say that God cannot change theevil wills of men, whichever, whenever, and wheresoever He chooses, and direct them to what isgood? But when He does this He does it of mercy; when He does it not, it is of justice that He does
it not for “He hath mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardeneth.”1279 And
when the apostle said this, he was illustrating the grace of God, in connection with which he hadjust spoken of the twins in the womb of Rebecca, “who being not yet born, neither having done
any good or evil that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of
Him that calleth, it was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.”1280 And in reference tothis matter he quotes another prophetic testimony: “Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.”1281
But perceiving how what he had said might affect those who could not penetrate by theirunderstanding the depth of this grace: “What shall we say then?” he says: “Is there unrighteousness
with God? God forbid.”1282 For it seems unjust that, in the absence of any merit or demerit, fromgood or evil works, God should love the one and hate the other. Now, if the apostle had wished us
to understand that there were future good works of the one, and evil works of the other, which ofcourse God foreknew, he would never have said, “not of works,” but, “of future works,” and inthat way would have solved the difficulty, or rather there would then have been no difficulty tosolve. As it is, however, after answering, “God forbid;” that is, God forbid that there should be
unrighteousness with God; he goes on to prove that there is no unrighteousness in God’s doing
this, and says: “For He saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will
have compassion on whom I will have compassion.”1283 Now, who but a fool would think that God
was unrighteous, either in inflicting penal justice on those who had earned it, or in extending mercy
to the unworthy? Then he draws his conclusion: “So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him
that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy.”1284 Thus both the twins were born children of wrath,
not on account of any works of their own, but because they were bound in the fetters of that original
condemnation which came through Adam. But He who said, “I will have mercy on whom I will
have mercy,” loved Jacob of His undeserved grace, and hated Esau of His deserved judgment. And
as this judgment was due to both, the former learnt from the case of the latter that the fact of thesame punishment not falling upon himself gave him no room to glory in any merit of his own, but
only in the riches of the divine grace; because “it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth,
but of God that showeth mercy.” And indeed the whole face, and, if I may use the expression, every
lineament of the countenance of Scripture conveys by a very profound analogy this wholesome
warning to every one who looks carefully into it, that he who glories should glory in the Lord.1285

1279
1280
1281
1282
1283
1284
1285

Rom. ix. 18.
Rom. ix. 12.
Rom. ix. 13; Mal. i. 2, 3.
Rom. ix. 14.
Rom. ix. 15; Ex. xxxiii. 19.
Rom. ix. 16. [See R V.]
Comp. 1 Cor. i. 31.

369

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 99.—As God’s Mercy is Free, So His Judgments are Just, and Cannot Be Gainsaid.

269

Now after commending the mercy of God, saying, “So it is not of him that willeth, nor of him
that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy,” that he might commend His justice also (for the man
who does not obtain mercy finds, not iniquity, but justice, there being no iniquity with God), he
immediately adds: “For the scripture saith unto Pharoah, Even for this same purpose have I raised
thee up, that I might show my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all
the earth.”1286 And then he draws a conclusion that applies to both, that is, both to His mercy and
His justice: “Therefore hath He mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He
hardeneth.”1287 “He hath mercy” of His great goodness, “He hardeneth” without any injustice; sothat neither can he that is pardoned glory in any merit of his own, nor he that is condemned complainof anything but his own demerit. For it is grace alone that separates the redeemed from the lost, allhaving been involved in one common perdition through their common origin. Now if any one, on
hearing this, should say, “Why doth He yet find fault? for who hath resisted His will?”1288 as if aman ought not to be blamed for being bad, because God hath mercy on whom He will have mercy,
and whom He will He hardeneth, God forbid that we should be ashamed to answer as we see theapostle answered: “Nay, but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed
say to Him that formed it, Why hast Thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay,of the same lump to make one vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor?”1289 Now some foolishpeople, think that in this place the apostle had no answer to give; and for want of a reason to render,
rebuked the presumption of his interrogator. But there is great weight in this saying: “Nay, but, O
man, who art thou?” and in such a matter as this it suggests to a man in a single word the limits of
his capacity, and at the same time does in reality convey an important reason. For if a man does
not understand these matters, who is he that he should reply against God? And if he does understandthem, he finds no further room for reply. For then he perceives that the whole human race wascondemned in its rebellious head by a divine judgment so just, that if not a single member of therace had been redeemed, no one could justly have questioned the justice of God; and that it wasright that those who are redeemed should be redeemed in such a way as to show, by the greaternumber who are unredeemed and left in their just condemnation, what the whole race deserved,
and whither the deserved judgment of God would lead even the redeemed, did not His undeserved
mercy interpose, so that every mouth might be stopped of those who wish to glory in their own
merits, and that he that glorieth might glory in the Lord.1290

1286
1287
1288
1289
1290

Rom. ix. 17; Ex. ix. 16.
Rom. ix. 18.
Rom. ix. 19.
Rom. ix. 20, 21.
Rom. iii. 19; 1 Cor. i. 31.

370

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 100.—The Will of God is Never Defeated, Though Much is Done that is Contrary to His
Will.
These are the great works of the Lord, sought out according to all His pleasure,1291 and so wiselysought out, that when the intelligent creation, both angelic and human, sinned, doing not His will
but their own, He used the very will of the creature which was working in opposition to the Creator’s
will as an instrument for carrying out His will, the supremely Good thus turning to good accounteven what is evil, to the condemnation of those whom in His justice He has predestined topunishment, and to the salvation of those whom in His mercy He has predestined to grace. For, as
far as relates to their own consciousness, these creatures did what God wished not to be done: but
in view of God’s omnipotence, they could in no wise effect their purpose. For in the very fact thatthey acted in opposition to His will, His will concerning them was fulfilled. And hence it is that“the works of the Lord are great, sought out according to all His pleasure,” because in a way
unspeakably strange and wonderful, even what is done in opposition to His will does not defeat
His will. For it would not be done did He not permit it (and of course His permission is not unwilling,
but willing); nor would a Good Being permit evil to be done only that in His omnipotence He canturn evil into good.

Chapter 101.—The Will of God, Which is Always Good, is Sometimes Fulfilled Through the EvilWill of Man.

270

Sometimes, however, a man in the goodness of his will desires something that God does notdesire, even though God’s will is also good, nay, much more fully and more surely good (for His
will never can be evil): for example, if a good son is anxious that his father should live, when it is
God’s good will that he should die. Again, it is possible for a man with evil will to desire what God
wills in His goodness: for example, if a bad son wishes his father to die, when this is also the willof God. It is plain that the former wishes what God does not wish, and that the latter wishes what
God does wish; and yet the filial love of the former is more in harmony with the good will of God,
though its desire is different from God’s, than the want of filial affection of the latter, though its
desire is the same as God’s. So necessary is it, in determining whether a man’s desire is one to beapproved or disapproved, to consider what it is proper for man, and what it is proper for God, todesire, and what is in each case the real motive of the will. For God accomplishes some of His
purposes, which of course are all good, through the evil desires of wicked men: for example, it was
through the wicked designs of the Jews, working out the good purpose of the Father, that Christ
was slain and this event was so truly good, that when the Apostle Peter expressed his unwillingnessthat it should take place, he was designated Satan by Him who had come to be slain.1292 How good
seemed the intentions of the pious believers who were unwilling that Paul should go up to Jerusalem

1291
1292

Ps. cxi. 2 (LXX.): “The works of the Lord are great, sought out of all them that have pleasure therein.” (A.V.)
Matt. xvi. 21–23.

371

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

lest the evils which Agabus had foretold should there befall him!1293 And yet it was God’s purposethat he should suffer these evils for preaching the faith of Christ, and thereby become a witness for
Christ. And this purpose of His, which was good, God did not fulfill through the good counsels of
the Christians, but through the evil counsels of the Jews; so that those who opposed His purpose
were more truly His servants than those who were the willing instruments of its accomplishment.

Chapter 102.—The Will of the Omnipotent God is Never Defeated, and is Never Evil.
But however strong may be the purposes either of angels or of men, whether of good or bad,whether these purposes fall in with the will of God or run counter to it, the will of the Omnipotent
is never defeated; and His will never can be evil; because even when it inflicts evil it is just, andwhat is just is certainly not evil. The omnipotent God, then, whether in mercy He pitieth whom He
will, or in judgment hardeneth whom He will, is never unjust in what He does, never does anything
except of His own free-will, and never wills anything that He does not perform.

Chapter 103.—Interpretation of the Expression in I Tim. II. 4: “Who Will Have All Men to Be
Saved.”
Accordingly, when we hear and read in Scripture that He “will have all men to be saved,”1294
although we know well that all men are not saved, we are not on that account to restrict theomnipotence of God, but are rather to understand the Scripture, “Who will have all men to be
saved,” as meaning that no man is saved unless God wills his salvation: not that there is no man
whose salvation He does not will, but that no man is saved apart from His will; and that, therefore,
we should pray Him to will our salvation, because if He will it, it must necessarily be accomplished.
And it was of prayer to God that the apostle was speaking when he used this expression. And on
the same principle we interpret the expression in the Gospel: “The true light which lighteth every
man that cometh into the world:”1295 not that there is no man who is not enlightened, but that no
man is enlightened except by Him. Or, it is said, “Who will have all men to be saved;” not that
there is no man whose salvation He does not will (for how, then, explain the fact that He was
unwilling to work miracles in the presence of some who, He said, would have repented if He had
worked them?), but that we are to understand by “all men,” the human race in all its varieties ofrank and circumstances,—kings, subjects; noble, plebeian, high, low, learned, and unlearned; thesound in body, the feeble, the clever, the dull, the foolish, the rich, the poor, and those of middlingcircumstances; males, females, infants, boys, youths; young, middle-aged, and old men; of every
tongue, of every fashion, of all arts, of all professions, with all the innumerable differences of will
1293
1294
1295

Acts xxi. 10–12.
1 Tim. ii. 4.
John i. 9.

372

NPNF (V1-03)

271

Philip Schaffand conscience, and whatever else there is that makes a distinction among men. For which of allthese classes is there out of which God does not will that men should be saved in all nations throughHis only-begotten Son, our Lord, and therefore does save them; for the Omnipotent cannot will invain, whatsoever He may will? Now the apostle had enjoined that prayers should be made for allmen, and had especially added, “For kings, and for all that are in authority,” who might be supposed,in the pride and pomp of worldly station, to shrink from the humility of the Christian faith. Thensaying, “For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour,” that is, that prayers should
be made for such as these, he immediately adds, as if to remove any ground of despair, “Who will
have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.”1296 God, then, in His great
condescension has judged it good to grant to the prayers of the humble the salvation of the exalted;
and assuredly we have many examples of this. Our Lord, too, makes use of the same mode of speechin the Gospel, when He says to the Pharisees: “Ye tithe mint, and rue, and every herb.”1297 For the
Pharisees did not tithe what belonged to others, nor all the herbs of all the inhabitants of other lands.
As, then, in this place we must understand by “every herb,” every kind of herbs, so in the former
passage we may understand by “all men,” every sort of men. And we may interpret it in any otherway we please, so long as we are not compelled to believe that the omnipotent God has willed
anything to be done which was not done: for setting aside all ambiguities, if “He hath done all that
He pleased in heaven and in earth,”1298 as the psalmist sings of Him, He certainly did not will to
do anything that He hath not done.

Chapter 104.—God, Foreknowing the Sin of the First Man, Ordered His Own Purposes Accordingly.
Wherefore, God would have been willing to preserve even the first man in that state of salvationin which he was created, and after he had begotten sons to remove him at a fit time, without theintervention of death, to a better place, where he should have been not only free from sin, but freeeven from the desire of sinning, if He had foreseen that man would have the steadfast will to persist
in the state of innocence in which he was created. But as He foresaw that man would make a bad
use of his free-will, that is, would sin, God arranged His own designs rather with a view to do goodto man even in his sinfulness, that thus the good will of the Omnipotent might not be made voidby the evil will of man, but might be fulfilled in spite of it.

Chapter 105.—Man Was So Created as to Be Able to Choose Either Good or Evil: in the Future
Life, the Choice of Evil Will Be Impossible.

1296
1297
1298

1 Tim. ii. 1–4.
Luke xi. 42. [“All manner of herbs.” A.V.]
Ps cxv. 3. [“Our God is in the heavens: He hath done whatsoever He hath pleased.” A.V.]

373

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Now it was expedient that man should be at first so created, as to have it in his power both towill what was right and to will what was wrong; not without reward if he willed the former, andnot without punishment if he willed the latter. But in the future life it shall not be in his power towill evil; and yet this will constitute no restriction on the freedom of his will. On the contrary, hiswill shall be much freer when it shall be wholly impossible for him to be the slave of sin. We should
never think of blaming the will, or saying that it was no will, or that it was not to be called free,when we so desire happiness, that not only do we shrink from misery, but find it utterly impossible
to do otherwise. As, then, the soul even now finds it impossible to desire unhappiness, so in future
it shall be wholly impossible for it to desire sin. But God’s arrangement was not to be broken,
according to which He willed to show how good is a rational being who is able even to refrain fromsin, and yet how much better is one who cannot sin at all; just as that was an inferior sort ofimmortality, and yet it was immortality, when it was possible for man to avoid death, although
there is reserved for the future a more perfect immortality, when it shall be impossible for man todie.

Chapter 106.—The Grace of God Was Necessary to Man’s Salvation Before the Fall as Well as
After It.
The former immortality man lost through the exercise of his free-will; the latter he shall obtainthrough grace, whereas, if he had not sinned, he should have obtained it by desert. Even in thatcase, however, there could have been no merit without grace; because, although the mere exercise
of man’s free-will was sufficient to bring in sin, his free-will would not have sufficed for his
maintenance in righteousness, unless God had assisted it by imparting a portion of His unchangeable
goodness. Just as it is in man’s power to die whenever he will (for, not to speak of other means,any one can put an end to himself by simple abstinence from food), but the mere will cannot preserve
life in the absence of food and the other means of life; so man in paradise was able of his mere will,
simply by abandoning righteousness, to destroy himself; but to have maintained a life ofrighteousness would have been too much for his will, unless it had been sustained by the Creator’s
power. After the fall, however, a more abundant exercise of God’s mercy was required, because
the will itself had to be freed from the bondage in which it was held by sin and death. And the willowes its freedom in no degree to itself, but solely to the grace of God which comes by faith in Jesus
Christ; so that the very will, through which we accept all the other gifts of God which lead us on
to His eternal gift, is itself prepared of the Lord, as the Scripture says.1299

Chapter 107.—Eternal Life, Though the Reward of Good Works, is Itself the Gift of God.

1299

Prov xvi. 1. [“The preparation of the heart in man… is from the Lord.” A.V.]

374

NPNF (V1-03)

272

Philip Schaff

Wherefore, even eternal life itself, which is surely the reward of good works, the apostle calls
the gift of God. “For the wages of sin,” he says, “is death; but the gift of God is eternal life throughJesus Christ our Lord.”1300 Wages (stipendium) is paid as a recompense for military service; it is
not a gift: wherefore he says, “the wages of sin is death,” to show that death was not inflicted
undeservedly, but as the due recompense of sin. But a gift, unless it is wholly unearned, is not a
gift at all.1301 We are to understand, then, that man’s good deserts are themselves the gift of God,so that when these obtain the recompense of eternal life, it is simply grace given for grace. Man,
therefore, was thus made upright that, though unable to remain in his uprightness without divine
help, he could of his own mere will depart from it. And whichever of these courses he had chosen,
God’s will would have been done, either by him, or concerning him. Therefore, as he chose to do
his own will rather than God’s, the will of God is fulfilled concerning him; for God, out of one andthe same heap of perdition which constitutes the race of man, makes one vessel to honor, anotherto dishonor; to honor in mercy, to dishonor in judgment;1302 that no one may glory in man, andconsequently not in himself.

Chapter 108.—A Mediator Was Necessary to Reconcile Us to God; And Unless This Mediator
Had Been God, He Could Not Have Been Our Redeemer.
For we could not be redeemed, even through the one Mediator between God and men, the man
Christ Jesus, if He were not also God. Now when Adam was created, he, being a righteous man,
had no need of a mediator. But when sin had placed a wide gulf between God and the human race,
it was expedient that a Mediator, who alone of the human race was born, lived, and died withoutsin, should reconcile us to God, and procure even for our bodies a resurrection to eternal life, inorder that the pride of man might be exposed and cured through the humility of God; that man
might be shown how far he had departed from God, when God became incarnate to bring him back;that an example might be set to disobedient man in the life of obedience of the God-Man; that thefountain of grace might be opened by the Only-begotten taking upon Himself the form of a servant,a form which had no antecedent merit; that an earnest of that resurrection of the body which ispromised to the redeemed might be given in the resurrection of the Redeemer; that the devil might
be subdued by the same nature which it was his boast to have deceived, and yet man not glorified,lest pride should again spring up; and, in fine, with a view to all the advantages which the thoughtful
can perceive and describe, or perceive without being able to describe, as flowing from thetranscendent mystery of the person of the Mediator.

1300
1301
1302

Rom. vi. 23.
Comp. Rom. xi. 6.
Rom. ix. 21.

375

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 109.—The State of the Soul During the Interval Between Death and the Resurrection.
During the time, moreover, which intervenes between a man’s death and the final resurrection,
the soul dwells in a hidden retreat, where it enjoys rest or suffers affliction just in proportion to themerit it has earned by the life which it led on earth.

Chapter 110.—The Benefit to the Souls of the Dead from the Sacraments and Alms of Their Living
Friends.

273

Nor can it be denied that the souls of the dead are benefited by the piety of their living friends,
who offer the sacrifice of the Mediator, or give alms in the church on their behalf. But these services
are of advantage only to those who during their lives have earned such merit, that services of thiskind can help them. For there is a manner of life which is neither so good as not to require these
services after death, nor so bad that such services are of no avail after death; there is, on the other
hand, a kind of life so good as not to require them; and again, one so bad that when life is over they
render no help. Therefore, it is in this life that all the merit or demerit is acquired, which can either
relieve or aggravate a man’s sufferings after this life. No one, then, need hope that after he is deadhe shall obtain merit with God which he has neglected to secure here. And accordingly it is plainthat the services which the church celebrates for the dead are in no way opposed to the apostle’s
words: “For we must all appear before the judgment-seat of Christ; that every one may receive thethings done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad;”1303 for the meritwhich renders such services as I speak of profitable to a man, is earned while he lives in the body.
It is not to every one that these services are profitable. And why are they not profitable to all, except
because of the different kinds of lives that men lead in the body? When, then, sacrifices either of
the altar or of alms are offered on behalf of all the baptized dead, they are thank-offerings for thevery good, they are propitiatory offerings for the not very bad, and in the case of the very bad, eventhough they do not assist the dead, they are a species of consolation to the living. And where they
are profitable, their benefit consists either in obtaining a full remission of sins, or at least in making
the condemnation more tolerable.

Chapter 111.—After the Resurrection There Shall Be Two Distinct Kingdoms, One of Eternal
Happiness, the Other of Eternal Misery.
After the resurrection, however, when the final, universal judgment has been completed, there
shall be two kingdoms, each with its own distinct boundaries, the one Christ’s, the other the devil’s;the one consisting of the good, the other of the bad,—both, however, consisting of angels and men.
1303

2 Cor. v. 10; comp. Rom. xiv. 10.

376

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

The former shall have no will, the latter no power, to sin, and neither shall have any power to choose
death; but the former shall live truly and happily in eternal life, the latter shall drag a miserable
existence in eternal death without the power of dying; for the life and the death shall both be without
end. But among the former there shall be degrees of happiness, one being more pre-eminently
happy than another; and among the latter there shall be degrees of misery, one being more endurably
miserable than another.

Chapter 112.—There is No Ground in Scripture for the Opinion of Those Who Deny the Eternityof Future Punishments.
It is in vain, then, that some, indeed very many, make moan over the eternal punishment, andperpetual, unintermitted torments of the lost, and say they do not believe it shall be so; not, indeed,that they directly oppose themselves to Holy Scripture, but, at the suggestion of their own feelings,
they soften down everything that seems hard, and give a milder turn to statements which they think
are rather designed to terrify than to be received as literally true. For “Hath God” they say, forgotten
to be gracious? hath He in anger shut up His tender mercies?”1304 Now, they read this in one of theholy psalms. But without doubt we are to understand it as spoken of those who are elsewhere called“vessels of mercy,”1305 because even they are freed from misery not on account of any merit of
their own, but solely through the pity of God. Or, if the men we speak of insist that this passage
applies to all mankind, there is no reason why they should therefore suppose that there will be an
end to the punishment of those of whom it is said, “These shall go away into everlasting punishment;”
for this shall end in the same manner and at the same time as the happiness of those of whom it issaid, “but the righteous unto life eternal.”1306 But let them suppose, if the thought gives thempleasure, that the pains of the damned are, at certain intervals, in some degree assuaged. For evenin this case the wrath of God, that is, their condemnation (for it is this, and not any disturbed feelingin the mind of God that is called His wrath), abideth upon them;1307 that is, His wrath, though it
still remains, does not shut up His tender mercies; though His tender mercies are exhibited, not in
putting an end to their eternal punishment, but in mitigating, or in granting them a respite from,their torments; for the psalm does not say, “to put an end to His anger,” or, “when His anger ispassed by,” but “in His anger.”1308 Now, if this anger stood alone, or if it existed in the smallest
conceivable degree, yet to be lost out of the kingdom of God, to be an exile from the city of God,to be alienated from the life of God, to have no share in that great goodness which God hath laid
up for them that fear Him, and hath wrought out for them that trust in Him,1309 would be a punishment
so great, that, supposing it to be eternal, no torments that we know of, continued through as manyages as man’s imagination can conceive, could be compared with it.
1304
1305
1306
1307
1308
1309

Ps. lxxvii. 9.
Rom. ix. 23.
Matt. xxv. 46.
John iii. 36.
Ps. lxxviii.
Ps. xxxi. 19.

377

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 113.—The Death of the Wicked Shall Be Eternal in the Same Sense as the Life of theSaints.
This perpetual death of the wicked, then, that is, their alienation from the life of God, shallabide for ever, and shall be common to them all, whatever men, prompted by their human affections,
may conjecture as to a variety of punishments, or as to a mitigation or intermission of their woes;
just as the eternal life of the saints shall abide for ever, and shall be common to them all, whatevergrades of rank and honor there may be among those who shine with an harmonious effulgence.

Chapter 114.—Having Dealt with Faith, We Now Come to Speak of Hope. Everything that Pertains
to Hope is Embraced in the Lord’s Prayer.

274

Out of this confession of faith, which is briefly comprehended in the Creed, and which, carnally
understood, is milk for babes, but, spiritually apprehended and studied, is meat for strong men,
springs the good hope of believers; and this is accompanied by a holy love. But of these matters,
all of which are true objects of faith, those only pertain to hope which are embraced in the Lord’s
Prayer. For, “Cursed is the man that trusteth in man”1310 is the testimony of holy writ; and,
consequently, this curse attaches also to the man who trusteth in himself. Therefore, except from
God the Lord we ought to ask for nothing either that we hope to do well, or hope to obtain as areward of our good works.

Chapter 115.—The Seven Petitions of the Lord’s Prayer, According to Matthew.
Accordingly, in the Gospel according to Matthew the Lord’s Prayer seems to embrace sevenpetitions, three of which ask for eternal blessings, and the remaining four for temporal; these latter,
however, being necessary antecedents to the attainment of the eternal. For when we say, “Hallowed
be Thy name: Thy kingdom come: Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven”1311 (which somehave interpreted, not unfairly, in body as well as in spirit), we ask for blessings that are to be enjoyedfor ever; which are indeed begun in this world, and grow in us as we grow in grace, but in theirperfect state, which is to be looked for in another life, shall be a possession for evermore. But when
we say, “Give us this day our daily bread: and forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors: andlead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil,”1312 who does not see that we ask for blessingsthat have reference to the wants of this present life? In that eternal life, where we hope to live for
ever, the hallowing of God’s name, and His kingdom, and His will in our spirit and body, shall be

1310
1311
1312

Jer. xvii. 5.
Matt. vi. 9, 10.
Matt. vi. 11–13.

378

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

brought to perfection, and shall endure to everlasting. But our daily bread is so called because there
is here constant need for as much nourishment as the spirit and the flesh demand, whether weunderstand the expression spiritually, or carnally, or in both senses. It is here too that we need theforgiveness that we ask, for it is here that we commit the sins; here are the temptations which allure
or drive us into sin; here, in a word, is the evil from which we desire deliverance: but in that otherworld there shall be none of these things.

Chapter 116.—Luke Expresses the Substance of These Seven Petitions More Briefly in Five.
But the Evangelist Luke in his version of the Lord’s prayer embraces not seven, but five petitions:not, of course, that there is any discrepancy between the two evangelists, but that Luke indicatesby his very brevity the mode in which the seven petitions of Matthew are to be understood. For
God’s name is hallowed in the spirit; and God’s kingdom shall come in the resurrection of the body.
Luke, therefore, intending to show that the third petition is a sort of repetition of the first two, haschosen to indicate that by omitting the third altogether.1313 Then he adds three others: one for dailybread, another for pardon of sin, another for immunity from temptation. And what Matthew puts
as the last petition, “but deliver us from evil,” Luke has omitted,1314 to show us that it is embraced
in the previous petition about temptation. Matthew, indeed, himself says, “but deliver,” not “anddeliver,” as if to show that the petitions are virtually one: do not this, but this; so that every man is
to understand that he is delivered from evil in the very fact of his not being led into temptation.

Chapter 117.—Love, Which is Greater Than Faith and Hope, is Shed Abroad in Our Hearts by theHoly Ghost.
And now as to love, which the apostle declares to be greater than the other two graces, that is,than faith and hope,1315 the greater the measure in which it dwells in a man, the better is the man
in whom it dwells. For when there is a question as to whether a man is good, one does not ask what
he believes, or what he hopes, but what he loves. For the man who loves aright no doubt believes
and hopes aright; whereas the man who has not love believes in vain, even though his beliefs aretrue; and hopes in vain, even though the objects of his hope are a real part of true happiness; unless,indeed, he believes and hopes for this, that he may obtain by prayer the blessing of love. For,although it is not possible to hope without love, it may yet happen that a man does not love thatwhich is necessary to the attainment of his hope; as, for example, if he hopes for eternal life (and
who is there that does not desire this?) and yet does not love righteousness, without which no one

1313
1314
1315

[These petitions are retained in the A.V., but omitted in the R.V., according to the oldest authorities.—P.S.][These petitions are retained in the A.V., but omitted in the R.V., according to the oldest authorities.—P.S.]
1 Cor. xiii. 13.

379

NPNF (V1-03)

275

Philip Schaff

can attain to eternal life. Now this is the true faith of Christ which the apostle speaks of, “which
worketh by love;”1316 and if there is anything that it does not yet embrace in its love, asks that it
may receive, seeks that it may find, and knocks that it may be opened unto it.1317 For faith obtains
through prayer that which the law commands. For without the gift of God, that is, without the Holy
Spirit, through whom love is shed abroad in our hearts,1318 the law can command, but it cannot
assist; and, moreover, it makes a man a transgressor, for he can no longer excuse himself on theplea of ignorance. Now carnal lust reigns where there is not the love of God.

Chapter 118.—The Four Stages of the Christian’s Life, and the Four Corresponding Stages of the
Church’s History.
When, sunk in the darkest depths of ignorance, man lives according to the flesh undisturbed
by any struggle of reason or conscience, this is his first state. Afterwards, when through the law
has come the knowledge of sin, and the Spirit of God has not yet interposed His aid, man, striving
to live according to the law, is thwarted in his efforts and falls into conscious sin, and so, being
overcome of sin, becomes its slave (“for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought inbondage”1319); and thus the effect produced by the knowledge of the commandment is this, that sin
worketh in man all manner of concupiscence, and he is involved in the additional guilt of willfultransgression, and that is fulfilled which is written: “The, law entered that the offense mightabound.”1320 This is man’s second state. But if God has regard to him, and inspires him with faithin God’s help, and the Spirit of God begins to work in him, then the mightier power of love strives
against the power of the flesh; and although there is still in the man’s own nature a power that fights
against him (for his disease is not completely cured), yet he lives the life of the just by faith, andlives in righteousness so far as he does not yield to evil lust, but conquers it by the love of holiness.
This is the third state of a man of good hope; and he who by steadfast piety advances in this course,
shall attain at last to peace, that peace which, after this life is over, shall be perfected in the reposeof the spirit, and finally in the resurrection of the body. Of these four different stages the first is
before the law, the second is under the law, the third is under grace, and the fourth is in full andperfect peace. Thus, too, has the history of God’s people been ordered according to His pleasure
who disposeth all things in number, and measure, and weight.1321 For the church existed at first
before the law; then under the law, which was given by Moses; then under grace, which was firstmade manifest in the coming of the Mediator. Not, indeed, that this grace was absent previously,
but, in harmony with the arrangements of the time, it was veiled and hidden. For none, even of thejust men of old, could find salvation apart from the faith of Christ; nor unless He had been known

1316
1317
1318
1319
1320
1321

Gal. v. 6.
Matt. vii. 7.
Rom. v. 5.
2 Pet. ii. 19.
Rom. v. 20.
Comp. Wisd. xi. 20.

380

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

to them could their ministry have been used to convey prophecies concerning Him to us, somemore plain, and some more obscure.

Chapter 119.—The Grace of Regeneration Washes Away All Past Sin and All Original Guilt.
Now in whichever of these four stages (as we may call them) the grace of regeneration finds
any particular man, all his past sins are there and then pardoned, and the guilt which he contracted
in his birth is removed in his new birth; and so true is it that “the wind bloweth where it listeth,”1322
that some have never known the second stage, that of slavery under the law, but have received the
divine assistance as soon as they received the commandment.

Chapter 120.—Death Cannot Injure Those Who Have Received the Grace of Regeneration.
But before a man can receive the commandment, it is necessary that he should live according
to the flesh. But if once he has received the grace of regeneration, death shall not injure him, even
if he should forthwith depart from this life; “for to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived,that He might be Lord both of the dead and the living;”1323 nor shall death retain dominion over
him for whom Christ freely died.

Chapter 121.—Love is the End of All the Commandments, and God Himself is Love.

276

All the commandments of God, then, are embraced in love, of which the apostle says: “Nowthe end of the commandment is charity, out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith
unfeigned.”1324 Thus the end of every commandment is charity, that is, every commandment has
love for its aim. But whatever is done either through fear of punishment or from some other carnal
motive, and has not for its principle that love which the Spirit of God sheds abroad in the heart, is
not done as it ought to be done, however it may appear to men. For this love embraces both thelove of God and the love of our neighbor, and “on these two commandments hang all the law andthe prophets,”1325 we may add the Gospel and the apostles. For it is from these that we hear thisvoice: The end of the commandment is charity, and God is love.1326 Wherefore, all God’s

1322
1323
1324
1325
1326

John iii. 8.
Rom. xiv. 9.
1 Tim. i. 5.
Matt. xxii. 40; comp. Rom. v. 5.
1 Tim. i. 5; 1 John iv. 16.

381

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

commandments, one of which is, “Thou shalt not commit adultery,”1327 and all those precepts which
are not commandments but special counsels, one of which is, “It is good for a man not to touch awoman,”1328 are rightly carried out only when the motive principle of action is the love of God,and the love of our neighbor in God. And this applies both to the present and the future life. We
love God now by faith, then we shall love Him through sight. Now we love even our neighbor byfaith; for we who are ourselves mortal know not the hearts of mortal men. But in the future life,
the Lord “both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels
of the hearts, and then shall every man have praise of God;”1329 for every man shall love and praisein his neighbor the virtue which, that it may not be hid, the Lord Himself shall bring to light.
Moreover, lust diminishes as love grows, till the latter grows to such a height that it can grow nohigher here. For “greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.”1330
Who then can tell how great love shall be in the future world, when there shall be no lust for it torestrain and conquer? for that will be the perfection of health when there shall be no struggle withdeath.

Chapter 122.—Conclusion.
But now there must be an end at last to this volume. And it is for yourself to judge whether you
should call it a hand-book, or should use it as such. I, however, thinking that your zeal in Christ
ought not to be despised, and believing and hoping all good of you in dependence on our Redeemer’s
help, and loving you very much as one of the members of His body, have, to the best of my ability,
written this book for you on Faith, Hope, and Love. May its value be equal to its length.

277

On the Catechising of the Uninstructed1331
In One Book.
Translated by
Rev. S. D. F. Salmond, D.D.,

1327
1328
1329
1330
1331

Comp. Matt. v. 27 and Rom. xiii. 9.
1 Cor. vii. 1.
1 Cor. iv. 5.
John xv. 13.
[The Oxford Library and H. de Romestin translate the title: On Instructing the Unlearned.—P.S.]

382

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Professor of Systematic Theology, Free Church College, Aberdeen.
279

Introductory Notice.
In the fourteenth chapter of the second book of his Retractations, Augustin makes the following
statement: “There is also a book of ours on the subject of the Catechising of the Uninstructed, [or,for Instructing the Unlearned, De Catechizandis Rudibus], that being, indeed, the express title bywhich it is designated. In this book, where I have said, ‘Neither did the angel, who, in company
with other spirits who were his satellites, forsook in pride the obedience of God, and became thedevil, do any hurt to God, but to himself; for God knoweth how to dispose of souls that leave Him:’
it would be more appropriate to say, ‘spirits that leave Him,’ inasmuch as the question dealt withangels. This book commences in these terms: ‘You have requested me, brother Deogratias.’ ”
The composition so described in the passage cited is reviewed by Augustin in connection withother works which he had in hand about the year 400 A.D., and may therefore be taken to belong
to that date. It has been conjectured that the person to whom it is addressed may perhaps be thesame with the presbyter Deogratias, to whom, as we read in the epistle which now ranks as thehundred and second, Augustin wrote about the year 406, in reply to some questions of the pagans
which were forwarded to him from Carthage.
The Benedictine editors introduce the treatise in the following terms: “At the request of a deaconof Carthage, Augustin undertakes the task of teaching the art of catechising; and in the first place,
he gives certain injunctions, to the effect that this kind of duty may be discharged not only in asettled method and an apt order, but also without tediousness, and in a spirit of cheerfulness.
Thereafter reducing his injunctions to practical use, he gives an example of what he means bydelivering two set discourses, presenting parallels to each other, the one being somewhat lengthened
and the other very brief, but both suitable for the instruction of any individual whose desire is tobe a Christian.”[This treatise shows what was thought in the age of Saint Augustin to be the most needful
instruction in religion. The Latin text: De Cactechizandis Rudibus, is in the sixth vol. of the
Benedictine edition, and in the handy ed. of C. Marriott: S. Augustini Opuscula quædam, Oxford
and London (Parker & Co.) 4th ed. 1885. An earlier and closer English Version by Rev. C. L.
Cornish, M. A., of Exeter College, Oxford, appeared in the Oxford “Library of the Fathers” (1847,
pp. 187 sqq.,) under the title On Instructing the Unlearned. H. De Romestin reproduces the Oxford
translation in the English version of Marriott’s ed. of five treatises of St. Augustin, Oxford andLondon, 1885, pp. 1–71.—P.S.]————————————

283

Chapter 1.—How Augustin Writes in Answer to a Favor Asked by a Deacon of Carthage.

383

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

1. You have requested me, brother Deogratias, to send you in writing something which might
be of service to you in the matter of catechising the uninstructed. For you have informed me thatin Carthage, where you hold the position of a deacon, persons, who have to be taught the Christianfaith from its very rudiments, are frequently brought to you by reason of your enjoying the reputationof possessing a rich gift in catechising, due at once to an intimate acquaintance with the faith, andto an attractive method of discourse;1332 but that you almost always find yourself in a difficulty as
to the manner in which a suitable declaration is to be made of the precise doctrine, the belief ofwhich constitutes us Christians: regarding the point at which our statement of the same ought tocommence, and the limit to which it should be allowed to proceed: and with respect to the question
whether, when our narration is concluded, we ought to make use of any kind of exhortation, or
simply specify those precepts in the observance of which the person to whom we are discoursing
may know the Christian life and profession to be maintained.1333 At the same time, you have madethe confession and complaint that it has often befallen you that in the course of a lengthened andlanguid address you have become profitless and distasteful even to yourself, not to speak of thelearner whom you have been endeavoring to instruct by your utterance, and the other parties who
have been present as hearers; and that you have been constrained by these straits to put upon me
the constraint of that love which I owe to you, so that I may not feel it a burdensome thing among
all my engagements to write you something on this subject.
2. As for myself then, if, in the exercise of those capacities which through the bounty of ourLord I am enabled to present, the same Lord requires me to offer any manner of aid to those whom
He has made brethren to me, I feel constrained not only by that love and service which is due fromme to you on the terms of familiar friendship, but also by that which I owe universally to my mother
the Church, by no means to refuse the task, but rather to take it up with a prompt and devoted
willingness. For the more extensively I desire to see the treasure of the Lord1334 distributed, themore does it become my duty, if I ascertain that the stewards, who are my fellow-servants, findany difficulty in laying it out, to do all that lies in my power to the end that they may be able toaccomplish easily and expeditiously what they sedulously and earnestly aim at.

Chapter 2.—How It Often Happens that a Discourse Which Gives Pleasure to the Hearer isDistasteful to the Speaker; And What Explanation is to Be Offered of that Fact.

284

3. But as regards the idea thus privately entertained by yourself in such efforts, I would nothave you to be disturbed by the consideration that you have often appeared to yourself to bedelivering a poor and wearisome discourse. For it may very well be the case that the matter has not
so presented itself to the person whom you were trying to instruct, but that what you were uttering
seemed to you to be unworthy of the ears of others, simply because it was your own earnest desire
1332

Reading et doctrina fidei et suavitate sermonis, instead of which, however, et doctrinam…suavitatem, etc. also occurs,= possessing at once a rich gift in catechising, and an intimate acquaintance with the faith, and an attractive method of discourse,[or, sweetness of language].
1333
Reading retineri as in the mss. Some editions give retinere = know how to maintain the Christian life and profession.
1334
Pecuniam Dominicam.

384

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffthat there should be something better to listen to. Indeed with me, too, it is almost always the factthat my speech displeases myself. For I am covetous of something better, the possession of which
I frequently enjoy within me before I commence to body it forth in intelligible words:1335 and thenwhen my capacities of expression prove inferior to my inner apprehensions, I grieve over theinability which my tongue has betrayed in answering to my heart. For it is my wish that he whohears me should have the same complete understanding of the subject which I have myself; and I
perceive that I fail to speak in a manner calculated to effect that, and that this arises mainly fromthe circumstance that the intellectual apprehension diffuses itself through the mind with something
like a rapid flash, whereas the utterance is slow, and occupies time, and is of a vastly different
nature, so that, while this latter is moving on, the intellectual apprehension has already withdrawn
itself within its secret abodes. Yet, in consequence of its having stamped certain impressions ofitself in a marvellous manner upon the memory, these prints endure with the brief pauses of thesyllables;1336 and as the outcome of these same impressions we form intelligible signs,1337 which
get the name of a certain language, either the Latin, or the Greek, or the Hebrew, or some other.
And these signs may be objects of thought, or they may also be actually uttered by the voice. On
the other hand however, the impressions themselves are neither Latin, nor Greek, nor Hebrew, nor
peculiar to any other race whatsoever, but are made good in the mind just as looks are in the body.
For anger is designated by one word in Latin, by another in Greek, and by different terms in otherlanguages, according to their several diversities. But the look of the angry man is neither (peculiarly)
Latin nor (peculiarly) Greek. Thus it is that when a person says Iratus sum,1338 he is not understoodby every nation, but only by the Latins; whereas, if the mood of his mind when it is kindling towrath comes forth upon the face and affects the look, all who have the individual within their view
understand that he is angry. But, again, it is not in our power to bring out those impressions which
the intellectual apprehension stamps upon the memory, and to hold them forth, as it were, to theperception of the hearers by means of the sound of the voice, in any manner parallel to the clear
and evident form in which the look appears. For those former are within in the mind, while thislatter is without in the body. Wherefore we have to surmise how far the sound of our mouth must
be from representing that stroke of the intelligence, seeing that it does not correspond even with
the impression produced upon the memory. Now, it is a common occurrence with us that, in theardent desire to effect what is of profit to our hearer, our aim is to express ourselves to him exactly
as our intellectual apprehension is at the time, when, in the very effort, we are failing in the ability
to speak; and then, because this does not succeed with us, we are vexed, and we pine in wearinessas if we were applying ourselves to vain labors; and, as the result of this very weariness, our discourse
becomes itself more languid and pointless even than it was when it first induced such a sense of
tediousness.
4. But ofttimes the earnestness of those who are desirous of hearing me shows me that myutterance is not so frigid as it seems to myself to be. From the delight, too, which they exhibit, I
gather that they derive some profit from it. And I occupy myself sedulously with the endeavor not
to fail in putting before them a service in which I perceive them to take in such good part what is
1335
1336
1337
1338

Verbis sonantibus,—sounding words.
Perdurant illa cum syllabarum morulis.
Sonantia signa,—vocal signs.
I am angry.

385

NPNF (V1-03)

285

Philip Schaff

put before them. Even, so, on your side also, the very fact that persons who require to be instructedin the faith are brought so frequently to you, ought to help you to understand that your discourse
is not displeasing to others as it is displeasing to yourself; and you ought not to consider yourself
unfruitful, simply because you do not succeed in setting forth in such a manner as you desire thethings which you discern; for, perchance, you may be just as little able to discern them in the way
you wish. For in this life who sees except as “in an enigma and through a glass”?1339 Neither is loveitself of might sufficient to rend the darkness of the flesh, and penetrate into that eternal calm fromwhich even things which pass away derive the light in which they shine. But inasmuch as day by
day the good are making advances towards the vision of that day, independent of the rolling sky,1340
and without the invasion of the night, “which eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither hath it enteredinto the heart of man,”1341 there is no greater reason why our discourse should become valuelessin our own estimate, when we are engaged in teaching the uninstructed, than this,—namely, that
it is a delight to us to discern in an extraordinary fashion, and a weariness to speak in an ordinary.
And in reality we are listened to with much greater satisfaction, indeed, when we ourselves also
have pleasure in the same work; for the thread of our address is affected by the very joy of which
we ourselves are sensible, and it proceeds from us with greater ease and with more acceptance.
Consequently, as regards those matters which are recommended as articles of belief, the task is nota difficult one to lay down injunctions, with respect to the points at which the narration should becommenced and ended, or with respect to the method in which the narration is to be varied, so thatat one time it may be briefer, at another more lengthened, and yet at all times full and perfect; and,again, with respect to the particular occasions on which it may be right to use the shorter form, andthose on which it will be proper to employ the longer. But as to the means by which all is to bedone, so that every one may have pleasure in his work when he catechises (for the better he succeedsin this the more attractive will he be),—that is what requires the greatest consideration. And yet
we have not far to seek for the precept which will rule in this sphere. For if, in the matter of carnalmeans, God loves a cheerful giver,1342 how much more so in that of the spiritual? But our security
that this cheerfulness may be with us at the seasonable hour, is something dependent upon themercy of Him who has given us such precepts. Therefore, in accordance with my understandingof what your own wish is, we shall discuss in the first place the subject of the method of narration,then that of the duty of delivering injunction and exhortation, and afterwards that of the attainmentof the said cheerfulness, so far as God may furnish us with the ideas.

Chapter 3.—Of the Full Narration to Be Employed in Catechising.

1339
1340
1341
1342

1 Cor. xiii. 12.
Sine volumine cæli.
1 Cor. ii. 9.
2 Cor. ix. 7.

386

NPNF (V1-03)

286

Philip Schaff

5. The narration is full when each person is catechised in the first instance from what is written
in the text, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth,”1343 on to the present times of
the Church. This does not imply, however, either that we ought to repeat by memory the entire
Pentateuch, and the entire Books of Judges, and Kings, and Esdras,1344 and the entire Gospel andActs of the Apostles, if we have learned all these word for word; or that we should put all the matterswhich are contained in these volumes into our own words, and in that manner unfold and expoundthem as a whole. For neither does the time admit of that, nor does any necessity demand it. But
what we ought to do is, to give a comprehensive statement of all things, summarily and generally,so that certain of the more wonderful facts may be selected which are listened to with superior
gratification, and which have been ranked so remarkably among the exact turning-points (of thehistory);1345 that, instead of exhibiting them to view only in their wrappings, if we may so speak,
and then instantly snatching them from our sight, we ought to dwell on them for a certain space,
and thus, as it were, unfold them and open them out to vision, and present them to the minds of thehearers as things to be examined and admired. But as for all other details, these should be passed
over rapidly, and thus far introduced and woven into the narrative. The effect of pursuing this planis, that the particular facts which we wish to see specially commended to attention obtain greater
prominence in consequence of the others being made to yield to them; while, at the same time,neither does the learner, whose interest we are anxious to stimulate by our statement, come to thesesubjects with a mind already exhausted, nor is confusion induced upon the memory of the person
whom we ought to be instructing by our teaching.
6. In all things, indeed, not only ought our own eye to be kept fixed upon the end of thecommandment, which is “charity, out of a pure heart, and a good conscience, and faith unfeigned,”1346
to which we should make all that we utter refer; but in like manner ought the gaze of the person
whom we are instructing by our utterance to be moved1347 toward the same, and guided in that
direction. And, in truth, for no other reason were all those things which we read in the Holy Scriptures
written, previous to the Lord’s advent, but for this,—namely, that His advent might be pressed
upon the attention, and that the Church which was to be, should be intimated beforehand, that is tosay, the people of God throughout all nations; which Church is His body, wherewith also are unitedand numbered all the saints who lived in this world, even before His advent, and who believed thenin His future coming, just as we believe in His past coming. For (to use an illustration) Jacob, at
the time when he was being born, first put forth from the womb a hand, with which also he held
the foot of the brother who was taking priority of him in the act of birth; and next indeed the headfollowed, and thereafter, at last, and as matter of course, the rest of the members:1348 while,
nevertheless the head in point of dignity and power has precedence, not only of those members
which followed it then, but also of the very hand which anticipated it in the process of the birth,and is really the first, although not in the matter of the time of appearing, at least in the order of1343

Gen. i. 1.
In the mss. we also find the reading Ezræ = Ezra.
1345
In ipsis articulis = “among the very articles,” or “connecting links.” Reference is made to certain great epochs or articles
of time in sections 6 and 39.
1346
1 Tim. i. 5.
1347
Reading movendus, for which monendus = to be admonished, also occurs in the editions.
1348
Gen. xxv. 26.
1344

387

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

nature. And in an analogous manner, the Lord Jesus Christ, previous to His appearing in the flesh,and coming forth in a certain manner out of the womb of His secrecy, before the eyes of men as
Man, the Mediator between God and men,1349 “who is over all, God blessed for ever,”1350 sent
before Him, in the person of the holy patriarchs and prophets, a certain portion of His body,wherewith, as by a hand, He gave token beforetime of His own approaching birth, and also
supplanted1351 the people who were prior to Him in their pride, using for that purpose the bonds ofthe law, as if they were His five fingers. For through five epochs of times1352 there was no cessationin the foretelling and prophesying of His own destined coming; and in a manner consonant with
this, he through whom the law was given wrote five books; and proud men, who were carnallyminded, and sought to “establish their own righteousness,”1353 were not filled with blessing by theopen hand of Christ, but were debarred from such good by the hand compressed and closed; andtherefore their feet were tied, and “they fell, while we are risen, and stand upright.”1354 But although,as I have said, the Lord Christ did thus send before Him a certain portion of His body, in the personof those holy men who came before Him as regards the time of birth, nevertheless He is Himself
the Head of the body, the Church,1355 and all these have been attached to that same body of which
He is the head, in virtue of their believing in Him whom they announced prophetically. For they
were not sundered (from that body) in consequence of fulfilling their course before Him, but rather
were they made one with the same by reason of their obedience. For although the hand may be put
forward away before the head, still it has its connection beneath the head. Wherefore all things
which were written aforetime were written in order that we might be taught thereby,1356 and were
our figures, and happened in a figure in the case of these men. Moreover they were written for our
sakes, upon whom the end of the ages has come.1357

Chapter 4.—That the Great Reason for the Advent of Christ Was the Commendation of Love.
7. Moreover, what greater reason is apparent for the advent of the Lord than that God mightshow His love in us, commending it powerfully, inasmuch as “while we were yet sinners, Christ
died for us”?1358 And furthermore, this is with the intent that, inasmuch as charity is “the end of
the commandment,”1359 and “the fulfilling of the law,”1360 we also may love one another and lay

1349
1350
1351
1352
1353
1354
1355
1356
1357
1358
1359
1360

1 Tim. ii. 5.
Rom. ix. 5.
Reading supplantavit. Some mss. give supplantaret = wherewith also He might supplant, etc.
Temporum articulos.
Rom. x. 3.
Ps. xx. 8.
Col. i. 18.
Rom. xv. 4.
1 Cor. x. 11.
Rom. v. 8, 10.
1 Tim. i. 5.
Rom. xiii. 10.

388

NPNF (V1-03)

287

Philip Schaff

down our life for the brethren, even as He laid down His life for us.1361 And with regard to God
Himself, its object is that, even if it were an irksome task to love Him, it may now at least cease tobe irksome for us to return His love, seeing that “He first loved us,”1362 and “spared not His own
only Son, but delivered Him up for us all.”1363 For there is no mightier invitation to love than toanticipate in loving; and that soul is over hard which, supposing it unwilling indeed to give love,is unwilling also to give the return of love. But if, even in the case of criminal and sordid loves, we
see how those who desire to be loved in return make it their special and absorbing business, bysuch proofs as are within their power, to render the strength of the love which they themselves bear
plain and patent; if we also perceive how they affect to put forward an appearance of justice inwhat they thus offer, such as may qualify them in some sort to demand that a response be made in
all fairness to them on the part of those souls which they are laboring to beguile; if, further, theirown passion burns more vehemently when they observe that the minds which they are eager topossess are also moved now by the same fire: if thus, I say, it happens at once that the soul which
before was torpid is excited so soon as it feels itself to be loved, and that the soul which was
enkindled already becomes the more inflamed so soon as it is made cognizant of the return of its
own love, it is evident that no greater reason is to be found why love should be either originatedor enlarged, than what appears in the occasion when one who as yet loves not at all comes to know
himself to be the object of love, or when one who is already a lover either hopes that he may yet
be loved in turn, or has by this time the evidence of a response to his affection. And if this holds
good even in the case of base loves, how much more1364 in (true) friendship? For what else have
we carefully to attend to in this question touching the injuring of friendship than to this, namely,
not to give our friend cause to suppose either that we do not love him at all, or that we love him
less than he loves us? If, indeed, he is led to entertain this belief, he will be cooler in that love inwhich men enjoy the interchange of intimacies one with another; and if he is not of that weak typeof character to which such an offense to affection will serve as a cause of freezing off from love
altogether, he yet confines himself to that kind of affection in which he loves, not with the view ofenjoyment to himself, but with the idea of studying the good of others. But again it is worth ourwhile to notice how,—although superiors also have the wish to be loved by their inferiors, and are
gratified with the zealous attention1365 paid to them by such, and themselves cherish greater affection
towards these inferiors the more they become cognizant of that,—with what might of love,
nevertheless, the inferior kindles so soon as he learns that he is beloved by his superior. For there
have we love in its more grateful aspect, where it does not consume itself1366 in the drought of want,
but flows forth in the plenteousness of beneficence. For the former type of love is of misery, thelatter of mercy.1367 And furthermore, if the inferior was despairing even of the possibility of his
being loved by his superior, he will now be inexpressibly moved to love if the superior has of his
1361

1 John iii. 16.
1 John iv. 10, 19.
1363
Rom. viii. 32.
1364
Reading quanto plus, for which some mss. give plurius, while in a large number we find purius = with how much greater
purity should it hold good, etc.
1365
Reading studioso…obsequio, for which studiose, etc., also occurs in the editions = are earnestly gratified with theattention, etc.
1366Æstuat= burn, heave.
1367
Ex miseria…ex misericordia.
1362

389

NPNF (V1-03)

288

Philip Schaff

own will condescended to show how much he loves this person who could by no means be boldenough to promise himself so great a good. But what is there superior to God in the character ofJudge? and what more desperate than man in the character of sinner?—than man, I ask, who had
given himself all the more unreservedly up to the wardship and domination of proud powers which
are unable to make him blessed, as he had come more absolutely to despair of the possibility of his
being an object of interest to that power which wills not to be exalted in wickedness, but is exalted
in goodness.
8. If, therefore, it was mainly for this purpose that Christ came, to wit, that man might learn
how much God loves him; and that he might learn this, to the intent that he might be kindled to thelove of Him by whom he was first loved, and might also love his neighbor at the command andshowing of Him who became our neighbor, in that He loved man when, instead of being a neighborto Him, he was sojourning far apart: if, again, all divine Scripture, which was written aforetime,
was written with the view of presignifying the Lord’s advent; and if whatever has been committed
to writing in times subsequent to these, and established by divine authority, is a record of Christ,and admonishes us of love, it is manifest that on those two commandments of love to God and loveto our neighbor1368 hang not only all the law and the prophets, which at the time when the Lord
spoke to that effect were as yet the only Holy Scripture, but also all those books of the divine
literature which have been written1369 at a later period for our health, and consigned to remembrance.
Wherefore, in the Old Testament there is a veiling of the New, and in the New Testament there isa revealing of the Old. According to that veiling, carnal men, understanding things in a carnal
fashion, have been under the dominion, both then and now, of a penal fear. According to thisrevealing, on the other hand, spiritual men,—among whom we reckon at once those then who
knocked in piety and found even hidden things opened to them, and others now who seek in no
spirit of pride, lest even things uncovered should be closed to them,—understanding in a spiritual
fashion, have been made free through the love wherewith they have been gifted. Consequently,
inasmuch as there is nothing more adverse to love than envy, and as pride is the mother of envy,
the same Lord Jesus Christ, God-man, is both a manifestation of divine love towards us, and an
example of human humility with us, to the end that our great swelling might be cured by a greatercounteracting remedy. For here is great misery, proud man! But there is greater mercy, a humble
God! Take this love, therefore, as the end that is set before you, to which you are to refer all thatyou say, and, whatever you narrate, narrate it in such a manner that he to whom you are discoursing
on hearing may believe, on believing may hope, on hoping may love.

Chapter 5.—That the Person Who Comes for Catechetical Instruction is to Be Examined with
Respect to His Views, on Desiring to Become a Christian.

1368
1369

Matt. xxii. 40.
Reading conscripta, for which some mss. have consecuta = have followed, and many give consecrata, dedicated.

390

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

9. Moreover, it is on the gound of that very severity of God,1370 by which the hearts of mortals
are agitated with a most wholesome terror, that love is to be built up; so that, rejoicing that he is
loved by Him whom he fears, man may have boldness to love Him in return, and yet at the sametime be afraid to displease His love toward himself, even should he be able to do so with impunity.
For certainly it very rarely happens, nay, I should rather say, never, that any one approaches us
with the wish to become a Christian who has not been smitten with some sort of fear of God. For
if it is in the expectation of some advantage from men whom he deems himself unlikely to pleasein any other way, or with the idea of escaping any disadvantage at the hands of men of whose
displeasure or hostility he is seriously afraid, that a man wishes to become a Christian, then his
wish to become one is not so earnest as his desire to feign one.1371 For faith is not a matter of the
body which does obeisance,1372 but of the mind which believes. But unmistakeably it is often thecase that the mercy of God comes to be present through the ministry of the catechiser, so that,
affected by the discourse, the man now wishes to become in reality that which he had made up his
mind only to feign. And so soon as he begins to have this manner of desire, we may judge him thento have made a genuine approach to us. It is true, indeed, that the precise time when a man, whom
we perceive to be present with us already in the body, comes to us in reality with his mind,1373 isa thing hidden from us. But, notwithstanding that, we ought to deal with him in such a manner that
this wish may be made to arise within him, even should it not be there at present. For no such laboris lost, inasmuch as, if there is any wish at all, it is assuredly strengthened by such action on ourpart, although we may be ignorant of the time or the hour at which it began. It is useful certainly,
if it can be done, to get from those who know the man some idea beforehand of the state of mind
in which he is, or of the causes which have induced him to come with the view of embracing
religion. But if there is no other person available from whom we may gather such information,
then, indeed, the man himself is to be interrogated, so that from what he says in reply we may draw
the beginning of our discourse. Now if he has come with a false heart, desirous only of humanadvantages or thinking to escape disadvantages, he will certainly speak what is untrue. Nevertheless,the very untruth which he utters should be made the point from which we start. This should not be
done, however, with the (open) intention of confuting his falsehood, as if that were a settled matterwith you; but, taking it for granted that he has professed to have come with a purpose which isreally worthy of approbation (whether that profession be true or false), it should rather be our aim
to commend and praise such a purpose as that with which, in his reply, he has declared himself tohave come; so that we may make him feel it a pleasure to be the kind of man actually that he wishes
to seem to be. On the other hand, supposing him to have given a declaration of his views other thanwhat ought to be before the mind of one who is to be instructed in the Christian faith, then by
reproving him with more than usual kindness and gentleness, as a person uninstructed and ignorant,
by pointing out and commending, concisely and in a grave spirit the end of Christian doctrine inits genuine reality, and by doing all this in such a manner as neither to anticipate the times of a1370

De ipsa etiam severitate Dei…caritas ædificanda est.
Non fieri vult potius quam fingere.
1372
Or = “signifying assent by its motions,” adopting the reading of the best mss., viz. salutantis corporis. Some editions
give salvandi, while certain mss. have salutis, and others saltantis.
1373
Reading quando veniat animo, for which quo veniat animo also occurs = the mind in which a man comes…is a matter
hidden from us.
1371

391

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

narration, which should be given subsequently, nor to venture to impose that kind of statement
upon a mind not previously set for it, you may bring him to desire that which, either in mistake orin dissimulation, he has not been desiring up to this stage.

Chapter 6.—Of the Way to Commence the Catechetical Instruction, and of the Narration of Factsfrom the History of the World’s Creation on to the Present Times of the Church.

289

10. But if it happens that his answer is to the effect that he has met with some divine warning,or with some divine terror, prompting him to become a Christian, this opens up the way mostsatisfactorily for a commencement to our discourse, by suggesting the greatness of God’s interestin us. His thoughts, however, ought certainly to be turned away from this line of things, whether
miracles or dreams, and directed to the more solid path and the surer oracles of the Scriptures; sothat he may also come to understand how mercifully that warning was administered to him inadvance,1374 previous to his giving himself to the Holy Scriptures. And assuredly it ought to be
pointed out to him, that the Lord Himself would neither thus have admonished him and urged him
on to become a Christian, and to be incorporated into the Church, nor have taught him by suchsigns or revelations, had it not been His will that, for his greater safety and security, he should enter
upon a pathway already prepared in the Holy Scriptures, in which he should not seek after visible
miracles, but learn the habit of hoping for things invisible, and in which also he should receive
monitions not in sleep but in wakefulness. At this point the narration ought now to be commenced,
which should start with the fact that God made all things very good,1375 and which should becontinued, as we have said, on to the present times of the Church. This should be done in such amanner as to give, for each of the affairs and events which we relate, causes and reasons by which
we may refer them severally to that end of love from which neither the eye of the man who is
occupied in doing anything, nor that of the man who is engaged in speaking, ought to be turned
away. For if, even in handling the fables of the poets, which are but fictitious creations and things
devised for the pleasure1376 of minds whose food is found in trifles, those grammarians who havethe reputation and the name of being good do nevertheless endeavor to bring them to bear uponsome kind of (assumed) use, although that use itself may be only something vain and grossly bent
upon the coarse nutriment of this world:1377 how much more careful does it become us to be, notto let those genuine verities which we narrate, in consequence of any want of a well-considered
account of their causes, be accepted either with a gratification which issues in no practical good,or, still less, with a cupidity which may prove hurtful! At the same time, we are not to set forth
these causes in such a manner as to leave the proper course of our narration, and let our heart andour tongue indulge in digressions into the knotty questions of more intricate discussion. But the

1374
1375
1376
1377

Prærogata sit.
Gen. i. 31.
Reading ad voluptatem. But many mss. give ad voluntatem = according to the inclination, etc.
Avidam saginæ sœcularis.

392

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

simple truth of the explanation which we adduce1378 ought to be like the gold which binds together
a row of gems, and yet does not interfere with the choice symmetry of the ornament by any undue
intrusion of itself.1379

Chapter 7.—Of the Exposition of the Resurrection, the Judgment, and Other Subjects, Which Should
Follow This Narration.

290

11. On the completion of this narration, the hope of the resurrection should be set forth, and,so far as the capacity and strength of the hearer will bear it, and so far also as the measure of timeat our disposal will allow, we ought to handle our arguments against the vain scoffings of unbelieverson the subject of the resurrection of the body, as well as on that of the future judgment, with its
goodness in relation to the good, its severity in relation to the evil, its truth in relation to all. And
after the penalties of the impious have thus been declared with detestation and horror, then the
kingdom of the righteous and faithful, and that supernal city and its joy, should form the next themes
for our discourse. At this point, moreover, we ought to equip and animate the weakness of man inwithstanding temptations and offenses, whether these emerge without or rise within the church
itself; without, as in opposition to Gentiles, or Jews, or heretics; within, on the other hand, as in
opposition to the chaff of the Lord’s threshing-floor. It is not meant, however, that we are to dispute
against each several type of perverse men, and that all their wrong opinions are to be refuted by
set arrays of argumentations: but, in a manner suitable to a limited allowance of time, we ought toshow how all this was foretold, and to point out of what service temptations are in the training of
the faithful, and what relief1380 there is in the example of the patience of God, who has resolved topermit them even to the end. But, again, while he is being furnished against these (adversaries),whose perverse multitudes fill the churches so far as bodily presence is concerned, the precepts ofa Christian and honorable manner of life should also be briefly and befittingly detailed at the sametime, to the intent that he may neither allow himself to be easily led astray in this way, by any who
are drunkards, covetous, fraudulent, gamesters, adulterers, fornicators, lovers of public spectacles,
wearers of unholy charms, sorcerers, astrologers, or diviners practising any sort of vain and wicked
arts, and all other parties of a similar character; nor to let himself fancy that any such course may
be followed with impunity on his part, simply because he sees many who are called Christians
loving these things, and engaging themselves with them, and defending them, and recommending
them, and actually persuading others to their use. For as to the end which is appointed for those
who persist in such a mode of life, and as to the method in which they are to be borne with in the
church itself, out of which they are destined to be separated in the end,—these are subjects in which
the learner ought to be instructed by means of the testimonies of the divine books. He should also,
however, be informed beforehand that he will find in the church many good Christians, most genuine
citizens of the heavenly Jerusalem, if he sets about being such himself. And, finally, he must be
1378

Reading veritas adhibitœ rationis, for which we also find adhibita rationis = the applied truth, etc.; and adhibita rationi= the truth applied to our explanation.
1379
Non tamen ornamenti seriem ulla immoderatione perturbans.
1380
Medicina.

393

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

sedulously warned against letting his hope rest on man. For it is not a matter that can be easily
judged by man, what man is righteous. And even were this a matter which could be easily done,
still the object with which the examples of righteous men are set before us is not that we may bejustified by them, but that, as we imitate them, we may understand how we ourselves also are
justified by their Justifier. For the issue of this will be something which must merit the highest
approval,—namely this, that when the person who is hearing us, or rather, who is hearing God byus, has begun to make some progress in moral qualities and in knowledge, and to enter upon theway of Christ with ardor, he will not be so bold as to ascribe the change either to us or to himself;
but he will love both himself and us, and whatever other persons he loves as friends, in Him, andfor His sake who loved him when he was an enemy, in order that He might justify him and makehim a friend. And now that we have advanced thus far, I do not think that you need any preceptor
to tell you how you should discuss matters briefly, when either your own time or that of those whoare hearing you is occupied; and how, on the other hand, you should discourse at greater length
when there is more time at your command. For the very necessity of the case recommends this,apart from the counsel of any adviser.

Chapter 8.—Of the Method to Be Pursued in Catechising Those Who Have Had a Liberal Education.
12. But there is another case which evidently must not be overlooked. I mean the case of one
coming to you to receive catchetical instruction who has cultivated the field of liberal studies, who
has already made up his mind to be a Christian, and who has betaken himself to you for the express
purpose of becoming one. It can scarcely fail to be the fact that a person of this character has alreadyacquired a considerable knowledge of our Scriptures and literature; and, furnished with this, he
may have come now simply with the view of being made a partaker in the sacraments. For it iscustomary with men of this class to inquire carefully into all things, not at the very time when they
are made Christians, but previous to that, and thus early also to communicate and reason, with any
whom they can reach, on the subject of the feelings of their own minds. Consequently a brief methodof procedure should be adopted with these, so as not to inculcate on them, in an odious fashion1381
things which they know already, but to pass over these with a light and modest touch. Thus weshould say how we believe that they are already familiar with this and the other subject, and that
we therefore simply reckon up in a cursory manner all those facts which require to be formallyurged upon the attention of the uninstructed and unlearned. And we should endeavor so to proceed,
that, supposing this man of culture to have been previously acquainted with any one of our themes,
he may not hear it now as from a teacher; and that, in the event of his being still ignorant of any ofthem, he may yet learn the same while we are going over the things with which we understand him
to be already familiar. Moreover, it is certainly not without advantage to interrogate the man himself
as to the means by which he was induced to desire to be a Christian; so that, if you discover him
to have been moved to that decision by books, whether they be the canonical writings or the1381

Reading odiose, for which several mss. give otiose = idly.

394

NPNF (V1-03)

291

Philip Schaff

compositions of literary men worth the studying,1382 you may say something about these at theoutset, expressing your approbation of them in a manner which may suit the distinct merits which
they severally possess, in respect of canonical authority and of skillfully applied diligence on thepart of these expounders;1383 and, in the case of the canonical Scriptures, commending above all
the most salutary modesty (of language) displayed alongside their wonderful loftiness (of subject);
while, in those other productions you notice, in accordance with the characteristic faculty of eachseveral writer, a style of a more sonorous and, as it were more rounded eloquence adapted to minds
that are prouder, and, by reason thereof weaker. We should certainly also elicit from him someaccount of himself, so that he may give us to understand what writer he chiefly perused, and withwhat books he was more familiarly conversant, as these were the means of moving him to wish to
be associated with the church. And when he has given us this information, then if the said books
are known to us, or if we have at least ecclesiastical report as our warrant for taking them to havebeen written by some catholic man of note, we should joyfully express our approbation. But if, on
the other hand, he has fallen upon the productions of some heretic and in ignorance, it may be, hasretained in his mind anything which1384 the true faith condemns, and yet supposes it to be catholic
doctrine, then we must set ourselves sedulously to teach him, bringing before him (in its rightful
superiority) the authority of the Church universal, and of other most learned men reputed both fortheir disputations and for their writings in (the cause of) its truth.1385 At the same time, it is to be
admitted that even those who have departed this life as genuine catholics, and have left to posterity
some Christian writings, in certain passages of their small works, either in consequence of theirfailing to be understood, or (as the way is with human infirmity) because they lack ability to pierce
into the deeper mysteries with the eye of the mind, and in (pursuing) the semblance of what is true,
wander from the truth itself, have proved an occasion to the presumptuous and audacious forconstructing and generating some heresy. This, however, is not to be wondered at, when, even in
the instance of the canonical writings themselves, where all things have been expressed in thesoundest manner, we see how it has happened,—not indeed through merely taking certain passages
in a sense different from that which the writer had in view or which is consistent with the truth
itself, (for if this were all, who would not gladly pardon human infirmity, when it exhibits a readinessto accept correction?), but by persistently defending, with the bitterest vehemence and in impudent
arrogance, opinions which they have taken up in perversity and error,—many have given birth to
many pernicious dogmas at the cost of rending the unity of the (Christian) communion. All thesesubjects we should discuss in modest conference with the individual who makes his approach tothe society of the Christian people, not in the character of an uneducated man,1386 as they say, but
in that of one who has passed through a finished culture and training in the books of the learned.
And in enjoining him to guard against the errors of presumption, we should assume only so muchauthority as that humility of his, which induced him to come to us, is now felt to admit of. As to1382

Utilium tractatorum.
Reading exponentium. Various codices give ad exponendum = in expounding.
1384
Reading quod, with Marriott. But if we accept quod with the Benedictine editors, the sense will = and in ignorance it
may be that the true faith condemns them, has retained them in his mind.
1385
Aliorumque doctissimorum hominum et disputationibus et scriptionibus in ejus veritate florentium. It may also be =bringing before him the authority of the Church universal, as well as both the disputations and the writings of other most learned
men well reputed in (the cause of) its truth.
1386
Idiota.
1383

395

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

other things, moreover, in accordance with the rules of saving doctrine, which require to be narrated
or discussed, whether they be matters relating to the faith, or questions bearing on the moral life,
or others dealing with temptations, all these should be gone through in the manner which I haveindicated, and ought therein to be referred to the more excellent way (already noticed).1387

Chapter 9.—Of the Method in Which Grammarians and Professional Speakers are to Be Dealt with.

292

13. There are also some who come from the commonest schools of the grammarians andprofessional speakers, whom you may not venture to reckon either among the uneducated or among
those very learned classes whose minds have been exercised in questions of real magnitude. Whensuch persons, therefore, who appear to be superior to the rest of mankind, so far as the art of speaking
is concerned, approach you with the view of becoming Christians, it will be your duty in yourcommunications with them, in a higher degree than in your dealings with those other illiteratehearers, to make it plain that they are to be diligently admonished to clothe themselves with Christianhumility, and learn not to despise individuals whom they may discover keeping themselves freefrom vices of conduct more carefully than from faults of language; and also that they ought not topresume so much as to compare with a pure heart the practised tongue which they were accustomed
even to put in preference. But above all, such persons should be taught to listen to the divine
Scriptures, so that they may neither deem solid eloquence to be mean, merely because it is not
inflated, nor suppose that the words or deeds of men, of which we read the accounts in those books,
involved and covered as they are in carnal wrappings,1388 are not to be drawn forth and unfoldedwith a view to an (adequate) understanding of them, but are to be taken merely according to thesound of the letter. And as to this same matter of the utility of the hidden meaning, the existenceof which is the reason why they are called also mysteries, the power wielded by these intricacies
of enigmatical utterances in the way of sharpening our love for the truth, and shaking off the torporof weariness, is a thing which the persons in question must have made good to them by actual
experience, when some subject which failed to move them when it was placed baldly before them,has its significance elicited by the detailed working out of an allegorical sense. For it is in thehighest degree useful to such men to come to know how ideas are to be preferred to words, just as
the soul is preferred to the body. And from this, too, it follows that they ought to have the desire
to listen to discourses remarkable for their truth, rather than to those which are notable for theireloquence; just as they ought to be anxious to have friends distinguished for their wisdom, rather
than those whose chief merit is their beauty. They should also understand that there is no voice forthe ears of God save the affection of the soul. For thus they will not act the mocker if they happen
to observe any of the prelates and ministers of the Church either calling upon God in language
marked by barbarisms and solecisms, or failing in understanding correctly the very words which
they are pronouncing, and making confused pauses.1389 It is not meant, of course, that such faults

1387
1388
1389

1 Cor. xii. 31. See also above, § 9.
Carnalibus integumentis involuta atque operta.
Or = confusing the sense by false pauses: perturbateque distinguere.

396

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

are not to be corrected, so that the people may say “Amen” to something which they plainly
understand; but what is intended is, that such things should be piously borne with by those whohave come to understand how, as in the forum it is in the sound, so in the church it is in the desirethat the grace of speech resides.1390 Therefore that of the forum may sometimes be called goodspeech, but never gracious speech.1391 Moreover, with respect to the sacrament which they are about
to receive, it is enough for the more intelligent simply to hear what the thing signifies. But withthose of slower intellect, it will be necessary to adopt a somewhat more detailed explanation,
together with the use of similitudes, to prevent them from despising what they see.

Chapter 10.—Of the Attainment of Cheerfulness in the Duty of Catechising, and of Various Causes
Producing Weariness in the Catechumen.

293

14. At this point you perhaps desiderate some example of the kind of discourse intended, sothat I may show you by an actual instance how the things which I have recommended are to be
done. This indeed I shall do, so far as by God’s help I shall be able. But before proceeding to that,
it is my duty, in consistency with what I have promised, to speak of the acquisition of the cheerfulness(to which I have alluded). For as regards the matter of the rules in accordance with which yourdiscourse should be set forth, in the case of the catechetical instruction of a person who comes withthe express view of being made a Christian, I have already made good, as far as has appeared
sufficient, the promise which I made. And surely I am under no obligation at the same time to domyself in this volume that which I enjoin as the right thing to be done. Consequently, if I do that,
it will have the value of an overplus. But how can the overplus be super-added by me before I havefilled up the measure of what is due? Besides, one thing which I have heard you make the subjectof your complaint above all others, is the fact that your discourse seemed to yourself to be poorand spiritless when you were instructing any one in the Christian name. Now this, I know, results
not so much from want of matter to say, with which I am well aware you are sufficiently provided
and furnished, or from poverty of speech itself, as rather from weariness of mind. And that may
spring either from the cause of which I have already spoken, namely, the fact that our intelligenceis better pleased and more thoroughly arrested by that which we perceive in silence in the mind,
and that we have no inclination to have our attention called off from it to a noise of words coming
far short of representing it; or from the circumstance that even when discourse is pleasant, we havemore delight in hearing or reading things which have been expressed in a superior manner, andwhich are set forth without any care or anxiety on our part, than in putting together, with a view tothe comprehension of others, words suddenly conceived, and leaving it an uncertain issue, on the
one hand, whether such terms occur to us as adequately represent the sense, and on the other,whether they be accepted in such a manner as to profit; or yet again, from the consideration that,in consequence of their being now thoroughly familiar to ourselves, and no longer necessary to ourown advancement, it becomes irksome to us to be recurring very frequently to those matters which

1390
1391

Ut sono in foro, sic voto in ecclesia benedici.
Bona dictio, nunquam tamen benedictio.

397

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

are urged upon the uninstructed, and our mind, as being by this time pretty well matured, moves
with no manner of pleasure in the circle of subjects so well-worn, and, as it were, so childish. A
sense of weariness is also induced upon the speaker when he has a hearer who remains unmoved,
either in that he is actually not stirred by any feeling, or in that he does not indicate by any motionof the body that he understands or that he is pleased with what is said.1392 Not that it is a becoming
disposition in us to be greedy of the praises of men, but that the things which we minister are of
God; and the more we love those to whom we discourse, the more desirous are we that they shouldbe pleased with the matters which are held forth for their salvation: so that if we do not succeed inthis, we are pained, and we are weakened, and become broken-spirited in the midst of our course,
as if we were wasting our efforts to no purpose. Sometimes, too, when we are drawn off from somematter which we are desirous to go on with, and the transaction of which was a pleasure to us, orappeared to be more than usually needful, and when we are compelled, either by the command ofa person whom we are unwilling to offend, or by the importunity of some parties that we find it
impossible to get rid of, to instruct any one catechetically, in such circumstances we approach aduty for which great calmness is indispensable with minds already perturbed, and grieving at once
that we are not permitted to keep that order which we desire to observe in our actions, and that wecannot possibly be competent for all things; and thus out of very heaviness our discourse as it
advances is less of an attraction, because, starting from the arid soil of dejection, it goes on lessflowingly. Sometimes, too, sadness has taken possession of our heart in consequence of someoffense or other, and at that very time we are addressed thus: “Come, speak with this person; hedesires to become a Christian.” For they who thus address us do it in ignorance of the hidden trouble
which is consuming us within. So it happens that, if they are not the persons to whom it befits us
to open up our feelings, we undertake with no sense of pleasure what they desire; and then, certainly,
the discourse will be languid and unenjoyable which is transmitted through the agitated and fuming
channel of a heart in that condition. Consequently, seeing there are so many causes serving to cloudthe calm serenity of our minds, in accordance with God’s will we must seek remedies for them,such as may bring us relief from these feelings of heaviness, and help us to rejoice in fervor of
spirit, and to be jocund in the tranquility of a good work. “For God loveth a cheerful giver.”1393
15. Now if the cause of our sadness lies in the circumstance that our hearer does not apprehend
what we mean, so that we have to come down in a certain fashion from the elevation of our own
conceptions, and are under the necessity of dwelling long in the tedious processes of syllables whichcome far beneath the standard of our ideas, and have anxiously to consider how that which weourselves take in with a most rapid draught of mental apprehension is to be given forth by the mouthof flesh in the long and perplexed intricacies of its method of enunciation; and if the great
dissimilarity thus felt (between our utterance and our thought) makes it distasteful to us to speak,
and a pleasure to us to keep silence, then let us ponder what has been set before us by Him who
has “showed us an example that we should follow His steps.”1394 For however much our articulate
speech may differ from the vivacity of our intelligence, much greater is the difference of the flesh
of mortality from the equality of God. And, neverless, “although He was in the same form, He

1392
1393
1394

The sentence, “either in that he is actually not stirred…by what is said,” is omitted in many mss.
2 Cor. ix. 7.
1 Pet. ii. 21.

398

NPNF (V1-03)

294

Philip Schaff

emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant,”—and so on down to the words “the death of thecross.”1395 What is the explanation of this but that He made Himself “weak to the weak, in orderthat He might gain the weak?”1396 Listen to His follower as he expresses himself also in anotherplace to this effect: “For whether we be beside ourselves, it is to God; or whether we be sober, it
is for your cause. For the love of Christ constraineth us, because we thus judge that He died forall.”1397 And how, indeed, should one be ready to be spent for their souls,1398 if he should find it
irksome to him to bend himself to their ears? For this reason, therefore, He became a little child in
the midst of us, (and) like a nurse cherishing her children.1399 For is it a pleasure to lisp shortened
and broken words, unless love invites us? And yet men desire to have infants to whom they haveto do that kind of service; and it is a sweeter thing to a mother to put small morsels of masticatedfood into her little son’s mouth, than to eat up and devour larger pieces herself. In like manner,
accordingly, let not the thought of the hen1400 recede from your heart, who covers her tender broodwith her drooping feathers, and with broken voice calls her chirping young ones to her, while theythat turn away from her fostering wings in their pride become a prey to birds. For if intelligencebrings delights in its purest recesses, it should also be a delight to us to have an intelligent
understanding of the manner in which charity, the more complaisantly it descends to the lowest
objects, finds its way back, with all the greater vigor to those that are most secret, along the courseof a good conscience which witnesses that it has sought nothing from those to whom it has descended
except their everlasting salvation.

Chapter 11.—Of the Remedy for the Second Source of Weariness.
16. If, however, it is rather our desire to read or hear such things as are already prepared forour use and expressed in a superior style, and if the consequence is that we feel it irksome to put
together, at the time and with an uncertain issue, the terms of discourse on our own side, then,provided only that our mind does not wander off from the truth of the facts themselves, it is an easy
matter for the hearer, if he is offended by anything in our language, to come to see in that very
circumstance how little value should be set, supposing the subject itself to be rightly understood,
upon the mere fact that there may have been some imperfection or some inaccuracy in the literalexpressions, which were employed indeed simply with the view of securing a correct apprehensionof the subject-matter. But if the bent of human infirmity has wandered off from the truth of thefacts themselves,—although in the catechetical instruction of the unlearned, where we have to keep

1395

Phil. ii. 17. The form in which the quotation is given above, with the omission of the intermediate clauses, is due probably
to the copyist, and not to Augustin himself. The words left out are given thus in the Serm. XLVII on Ezekiel xxxiv.: “Being
made in the likeness of men, and being found in the fashion of a man: He humbled Himself, being made obedient unto death,even the death of the cross.” [See R.V.]
1396
Cf. 1 Cor. ix. 22.
1397
2 Cor. v. 13, 14.
1398
Cf. 2 Cor. xii. 15.
1399
Cf. 1 Thess. ii. 7.
1400
Illius gallinœ,—in reference to Matt. xxiii. 37.

399

NPNF (V1-03)

295

Philip Schaff

by the most beaten track, that cannot occur very readily,—still, lest haply it should turn out that
our hearer finds cause of offence even in this direction, we ought not to deem this to have comeupon us in any other way than as the issue of God’s own wish to put us to the test with respect toour readiness to receive correction in calmness of mind, so as not to rush headlong, in the courseof a still greater error, into the defense of our error. But if, again, no one has told us of it, and if thething has altogether escaped our own notice, as well as the observation of our hearers, then there
is nothing to grieve over, provided only the same thing does not occur a second time. For the mostpart, however, when we recall what we have said, we ourselves discover something to find fault
with, and are ignorant of the manner in which it was received when it was uttered; and so whencharity is fervent within us, we are the more vexed if the thing, while really false, has been received
with unquestioning acceptance. This being the case, then, whenever an opportunity occurs, as wehave been finding fault with ourselves in silence, we ought in like manner to see to it that those
persons be also set right on the subject in a considerate method, who have fallen into some sort oferror, not by the words of God, but plainly by those used by us. If, on the other hand, there are any
who, blinded by insensate spite, rejoice that we have committed a mistake, whisperers as they are,and slanderers, and “hateful to God,”1401 such characters should afford us matter for the exerciseof patience with pity, inasmuch as also the “patience of God leadeth them to repentance.”1402 For
what is more detestable, and what more likely to “treasure up wrath in the day of wrath and revelationof the righteous judgment of God,”1403 than to rejoice, after the evil likeness and pattern of thedevil, in the evil of another? At times, too, even when all is correctly and truly spoken, either
something which has not been understood, or something which, as being opposed to the idea andwont of an old error, seems harsh in its very novelty, offends and disturbs the hearer. But if thisbecomes apparent, and if the person shows himself capable of being set right, he should be set rightwithout any delay by the use of abundance of authorities and reasons. On the other hand, if theoffense is tacit and hidden, the medicine of God is the effective remedy for it. And if, again, theperson starts back and declines to be cured, we should comfort ourselves with that example of ourLord, who, when men were offended at His word, and shrank from it as a hard saying, addressed
Himself at the same time to those who had remained, in these terms, “Will ye also go away?”1404
For it ought to be retained as a thoroughly “fixed and immovable” position in our heart, that
Jerusalem which is in captivity is set free from the Babylon of this world when the times have run
their course, and that none belonging to her shall perish: for whoever may perish was not of her.
“For the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are His;
and, let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.”1405 If we ponder thesethings, and call upon the Lord to come into our heart, we shall be less apprehensive of the uncertain
issues of our discourse, consequent on the uncertain feelings of our hearers; and the very enduranceof vexations in the cause of a work of mercy will also be something pleasant to us, if we seek not
our own glory in the same. For then is a work truly good, when the aim of the doer gets its impetus

1401
1402
1403
1404
1405

Cf. Rom. i. 30.
Rom. ii. 4. [See R.V.]
Rom. ii. 5.
John vi. 67.
2 Tim. ii. 19.

400

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

from charity,1406 and, as if returning to its own place, rests again in charity. Moreover, the reading
which delights us, or any listening to an eloquence superior to our own, the effect of which is tomake us inclined to set a greater value upon it than upon the discourse which we ourselves have todeliver, and so to lead us to speak with a reluctant or tedious utterance, will come upon us in ahappier spirit, and will be found to be more enjoyable after labor. Then, too, with a stronger
confidence shall we pray to God to speak to us as we wish, if we cheerfully submit to let Him speakby us as we are able. Thus is it brought about that all things come together for good to them thatlove God.1407

Chapter 12.—Of the Remedy for the Third Source of Weariness.
17. Once more, however, we often feel it very wearisome to go over repeatedly matters which
are thoroughly familiar, and adapted (rather) to children. If this is the case with us, then we should
endeavor to meet them with a brother’s, a father’s, and a mother’s love; and, if we are once united
with them thus in heart, to us no less than to them will these things seem new. For so great is thepower of a sympathetic disposition of mind, that, as they are affected while we are speaking, andwe are affected while they are learning, we have our dwelling in each other; and thus, at one andthe same time, they as it were in us speak what they hear, and we in them learn after a certain
fashion what we teach. Is it not a common occurrence with us, that when we show to persons, whohave never seen them, certain spacious and beautiful tracts, either in cities or in fields, which wehave been in the habit of passing by without any sense of pleasure, simply because we have becomeso accustomed to the sight of them, we find our own enjoyment renewed in their enjoyment of thenovelty of the scene? And this is so much the more our experience in proportion to the intimacyof our friendship with them; because, just as we are in them in virtue of the bond of love, in thesame degree do things become new to us which previously were old. But if we ourselves have madeany considerable progress in the contemplative study of things, it is not our wish that those whom
we love should simply be gratified and astonished as they gaze upon the works of men’s hands;
but it becomes our wish to lift them to (the contemplation of) the very skill1408 or wisdom of theirauthor, and from this to (see them) rise to the admiration and praise of the all-creating God, withwhom1409 is the most fruitful end of love. How much more, then, ought we to be delighted whenmen come to us with the purpose already formed of obtaining the knowledge of God Himself, witha view to (the knowledge of) whom all things should be learned which are to be learned! And how
ought we to feel ourselves renewed in their newness (of experience), so that if our ordinary preachingis somewhat frigid, it may rise to fresh warmth under (the stimulus of) their extraordinary hearing!
There is also this additional consideration to help us in the attainment of gladness, namely, that we
ponder and bear in mind out of what death of error the man is passing over into the life of faith.

1406
1407
1408
1409

A caritate jaculatur.
Concurrant in bonum. Rom. viii. 28.
Some editions read arcem = stronghold, instead of artem.
Or = wherein: ubi.

401

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

And if we walk through streets which are most familiar to us, with a beneficent cheerfulness, when
we happen to be pointing out the way to some individual who had been in distress in consequenceof missing his direction, how much more should be the alacrity of spirit, and how much greater thejoy with which, in the matter of saving doctrine, we ought to traverse again and again even thosetracks which, so far as we are ourselves concerned, there is no need to open up any more; seeingthat we are leading a miserable soul, and one worn out with the devious courses of this world,
through the paths of peace, at the command of Him who made that peace1410 good to us!

296

Chapter 13.—Of the Remedy for the Fourth Source of Weariness.
18. But in good truth it is a serious demand to make upon us, to continue discoursing on to theset limit when we fail to see our hearer in any degree moved; whether it be that, under the restraintsof the awe of religion, he has not the boldness to signify his approval by voice or by any movementof his body, or that he is kept back by the modesty proper to man,1411 or that he does not understandour sayings, or that he counts them of no value. Since, then, this must be a matter of uncertainty tous, as we cannot discern his mind, it becomes our duty in our discourse to make trial of all things
which may be of any avail in stirring him up and drawing him forth as it were from his place ofconcealment. For that sort of fear which is excessive, and which obstructs the declaration of his
judgment, ought to be dispelled by the force of kindly exhortation; and by bringing before him theconsideration of our brotherly affinity, we should temper his reverence for us; and by questioning
him, we should ascertain whether he understands what is addressed to him; and we should impartto him a sense of confidence, so that he may give free expression to any objection which suggests
itself to him. We should at the same time ask him whether he has already listened to such themeson some previous occasion, and whether perchance they fail to move him now in consequence of
their being to him like things well known and commonplace. And we ought to shape our course inaccordance with his answer, so as either to speak in a simpler style and with greater detail of
explanation, or to refute some antagonistic opinion, or, instead of attempting any more diffuse
exposition of the subjects which are known to him, to give a brief summary of these, and to selectsome of those matters which are handled in a mystical manner in the holy books, and especially inthe historical narrative, the unfolding and setting forth of which may make our addresses more
attractive. But if the man is of a very sluggish disposition, and if he is senseless, and without anythingin common with all such sources of pleasure, then we must simply bear with him in a compassionate
spirit; and, after briefly going over other points, we ought to impress upon him, in a manner
calculated to inspire him with awe, the truths which are most indispensable on the subject of theunity of the Catholic Church,1412 on that of temptation, on that of a Christian conversation in viewof the future judgment; and we ought rather to address ourselves to God for him than address muchto him concerning God.
1410

Instead of eam, the reading ea = those things, also occurs.
Or = by the reverence which he feels for the man: humana verecundia.
1412
The text gives simply Catholicæ. One ms. has Catholicæ fidei = the Catholic faith. But it is most natural to supply
Ecclesiæ.
1411

402

NPNF (V1-03)

297

Philip Schaff

19. It is likewise a frequent occurrence that one who at first listened to us with all readiness,becomes exhausted either by the effort of hearing or by standing, and now no longer commends
what is said, but gapes and yawns, and even unwillingly exhibits a disposition to depart. When we
observe that, it becomes our duty to refresh his mind by saying something seasoned with an honest
cheerfulness and adapted to the matter which is being discussed, or something of a very wonderful
and amazing order, or even, it may be, something of a painful and mournful nature. Whatever wethus say may be all the better if it affects himself more immediately, so that the quick sense of
self-concern may keep his attention on the alert. At the same time, however, it should not be of thekind to offend his spirit of reverence by any harshness attaching to it; but it should be of a nature
fitted rather to conciliate him by the friendliness which it breathes. Or else, we should relieve him
by accommodating him with a seat, although unquestionably matters will be better ordered if fromthe outset, whenever that can be done with propriety, he sits and listens. And indeed in certain of
the churches beyond the sea, with a far more considerate regard to the fitness of things, not only
do the prelates sit when they address the people, but they also themselves put down seats for thepeople, lest any person of enfeebled strength should become exhausted by standing, and thus have
his mind diverted from the most wholesome purport (of the discourse), or even be under the necessityof departing. And yet it is one thing if it be simply some one out of a great multitude who withdraws
in order to recruit his strength, he being also already under the obligations which result fromparticipation in the sacraments; and it is quite another thing if the person withdrawing is one(inasmuch as it is usually the case in these circumstances that the man is unavoidably urged to thatcourse by the fear that he should even fall, overcome by internal weakness) who has to be initiatedin the first sacraments; for a person in this position is at once restrained by the sense of shame fromstating the reason of his going, and not permitted to stand through the force of his weakness. ThisI speak from experience. For this was the case with a certain individual, a man from the country,
when I was instructing him catechetically: and from his instance I have learned that this kind ofthing is carefully to be guarded against. For who can endure our arrogance when we fail to makemen who are our brethren,1413 or even those who are not yet in that relation to us (for our solicitude
then should be all the greater to get them to become our brethren), to be seated in our presence,
seeing that even a woman sat as she listened to our Lord Himself, in whose service the angels standalert?1414 Of course if the address is to be but short, or if the place is not well adapted for sitting,they should listen standing. But that should be the case only when there are many hearers, and when
they are not to be formally admitted1415 at the time. For when the audience consists only of one or
two, or a few, who have come with the express purpose of being made Christians, there is a risk in
speaking to them standing. Nevertheless, supposing that we have once begun in that manner, we
ought at least, whenever we observe signs of weariness on the part of the hearer, to offer him theliberty of being seated; nay more, we should urge him by all means to sit down, and we ought todrop some remark calculated at once to refresh him and to banish from his mind any anxiety which
may have chanced to break in upon him and draw off his attention. For inasmuch as the reasons
why he remains silent and declines to listen cannot be certainly known to us, now that he is seated
we may speak to some extent against the incidence of thoughts about worldly affairs, delivering
1413
1414
1415

Instead of viros fratres, some mss. read veros fratres = our genuine brethren.
Luke x. 39.
Initiandi = initiated.

403

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

ourselves either in the cheerful spirit to which I have already adverted, or in a serious vein; so that,
if these are the particular anxieties which have occupied his mind, they may be made to give way
as if indicted by name: while, on the other hand, supposing them not to be the special causes (ofthe loss of interest), and supposing him to be simply worn out with listening, his attention will be
relieved of the pressure of weariness when we address to him some unexpected and extraordinary
strain of remark on these subjects, in the mode of which I have spoken, as if they were the particularanxieties,—for indeed we are simply ignorant (of the true causes). But let the remark thus madebe short, especially considering that it is thrown in out of order, lest the very medicine even increase
the malady of weariness which we desire to relieve; and, at the same time, we should go on rapidly
with what remains, and promise and present the prospect of a conclusion nearer than was lookedfor.

Chapter 14.—Of the Remedy Against the Fifth and Sixth Sources of Weariness.
20. If, again, your spirit has been broken by the necessity of giving up some other employment,on which, as the more requisite, you were now bent; and if the sadness caused by that constraint
makes you catechise in no pleasant mood, you ought to ponder the fact that, excepting that weknow it to be our duty, in all our dealings with men, to act in a merciful manner, and in the exerciseof the sincerest charity,—with this one exception, I say, it is quite uncertain to us what is the more
profitable thing for us to do, and what the more opportune thing for us either to pass by for a timeor altogether to omit. For inasmuch as we know not how the merits of men, on whose behalf weare acting, stand with God, the question as to what is expedient for them at a certain time is somethingwhich, instead of being able to comprehend, we can rather only surmise, without the aid of any(clear) inferences, or (at best) with the slenderest and the most uncertain. Therefore we oughtcertainly to dispose the matters with which we have to deal according to our intelligence; and then,if we prove able to carry them out in the manner upon which we have resolved, we should rejoice,not indeed that it was our will, but that it was God’s will, that they should thus be accomplished.
But if anything unavoidable happens, by which the disposition thus proposed by us is interferedwith, we should bend ourselves to it readily, lest we be broken; so that the very disposition of affairs
which God has preferred to ours may also be made our own. For it is more in accordance with
propriety that we should follow His will than that He should follow ours. Besides, as regards thisorder in the doing of things, which we wish to keep in accordance with our own judgment, surelythat course is to be approved of in which objects that are superior have the precedence. Why then
are we aggrieved that the precedence over men should be held by the Lord God in His vast superiority
to us men, so that in the said love which we entertain for our own order, we should thus (exhibit
the disposition to) despise order? For “no one orders for the better” what he has to do, except theman who is rather ready to leave undone what he is prohibited from doing by the divine power,
than desirous of doing that which he meditates in his own human cogitations. For “there are many
devices in a man’s heart; nevertheless, the counsel of the Lord stands for ever.”1416

1416

Prov. xix. 21.

404

NPNF (V1-03)

298

Philip Schaff

21. But if our mind is agitated by some cause of offense, so as not to be capable of deliveringa discourse of a calm and enjoyable strain, our charity towards those for whom Christ died, desiring
to redeem them by the price of His own blood from the death of the errors of this world, ought tobe so great, that the very circumstance of intelligence being brought us in our sadness, regarding
the advent of some person who longs to become a Christian, ought to be enough to cheer us anddissipate that heaviness of spirit, just as the delights of gain are wont to soften the pain of losses.
For we are not (fairly) oppressed by the offense of any individual, unless it be that of the man whom
we either perceive or believe to be perishing himself, or to be the occasion of the undoing of someweak one. Accordingly, one who comes to us with the view of being formally admitted, in that we
cherish the hope of his ability to go forward, should wipe away the sorrow caused by one who fails
us. For even if the dread that our proselyte may become the child of hell1417 comes into our thoughts,
as, there are many such before our eyes, from whom those offenses arise by which we are distressed,
this ought to operate, not in the way of keeping us back, but rather in the way of stimulating us andspurring us on. And in the same measure we ought to admonish him whom we are instructing to
be on his guard against imitating those who are Christians only in name and not in very truth, andto take care not to suffer himself to be so moved by their numbers as either to be desirous offollowing them, or to be reluctant to follow Christ on their account, and either to be unwilling to
be in the Church of God, where they are, or to wish to be there in such a character as they bear.
And somehow or other, in admonitions of this sort, that address is the more glowing to which a
present sense of grief supplies the fuel; so that instead of being duller, we utter with greater fireand vehemence under such feelings things which, in times of greater ease, we would give forth ina colder and less energetic manner. And this should make us rejoice that an opportunity is afforded
us under which the emotions of our mind pass not away without yielding some fruit.
22. If, however, grief has taken possession of us on account of something in which we ourselves
have erred or sinned, we should bear in mind not only that a “broken spirit is a sacrifice to God,”1418
but also the saying, “Like as water quencheth fire, so alms sin;”1419 and again, “I will have mercy,”
saith He, “rather than sacrifice.”1420 Therefore, as in the event of our being in peril from fire wewould certainly run to the water in order to get the fire extinguished, and we would be grateful if
any person were to offer it in the immediate vicinity; so, if some flame of sin has risen from ourown stack,1421 and if we are troubled on that account, when an opportunity has been given for amost merciful work, we should rejoice in it, as if a fountain were offered us in order that by it theconflagration which had burst forth might be extinguished. Unless haply we are foolish enough tothink that we ought to be readier in running with bread, wherewith we may fill the belly of a hungry
man, than with the word of God, wherewith we may instruct the mind of the man who feeds on
it.1422 There is this also to consider, namely, that if it would only be of advantage to us to do thisthing, and entail no disadvantage to leave it undone, we might despise a remedy offered in an
unhappy fashion in the time of peril with a view to the safety, not now of a neighbor, but of ourselves.
1417
1418
1419
1420
1421
1422

Matt. xxiii. 15.
Ps. li. 17.
Ecclus. iii. 30.
Hos. vi. 6.
Fæno= hay.
Reading istud edentis; for which some editions give studentis = of one who studies it.

405

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

But when from the mouth of the Lord this so threatening sentence is heard, “Thou wicked andslothful servant, thou oughtest to give my money to the exchangers,”1423 what madness, I pray thee,is it thus, seeing that our sin pains us, to be minded to sin again, by refusing to give the Lord’s
money to one who desires it and asks it! When these and such like considerations and reflections
have succeeded in dispelling the darkness of weary feelings, the bent of mind is rendered apt forthe duty of catechising, so that that is received in a pleasant manner which breaks forth vigorously
and cheerfully from the rich vein of charity. For these things indeed which are uttered here are
spoken, not so much by me to you, as rather to us all by that very “love which is shed abroad in
our hearts by the Holy Spirit that is given to us.”1424

Chapter 15.—Of the Method in Which Our Address Should Be Adapted to Different Classes of
Hearers.

299

23. But now, perhaps, you also demand of me as a debt that which, previous to the promise
which I made, I was under no obligation to give, namely, that I should not count it burdensome to
unfold some sort of example of the discourse intended, and to set it before you for your study, justas if I were myself engaged in catechising some individual. Before I do that, however, I wish you
to keep in mind the fact that the mental effort is of one kind in the case of a person who dictates,with a future reader in his view, and that it is of quite another kind in the case of a person who
speaks with a present hearer to whom to direct his attention. And further, it is to be remembered
that, in this latter instance in particular, the effort is of one kind when one is admonishing in private,
and when there is no other person at hand to pronounce judgment on us; whereas it is of a different
order when one is conveying any instruction in public, and when there stands around him an audienceof persons holding dissimilar opinions; and again, that in this exercise of teaching, the effort will
be of one sort when only a single individual is being instructed, while all the rest listen, like persons
judging or attesting things well known to them, and that it will be different when all those who arepresent wait for what we have to deliver to them; and once more, that, in this same instance, theeffort will be one thing when all are seated, as it were, in private conference with a view to engaging
in some discussion, and that it will be quite another thing when the people sit silent and intent on
giving their attention to some single speaker who is to address them from a higher position. It will
likewise make a considerable difference, even when we are discoursing in that style, whether there
are few present or many, whether they are learned or unlearned, or made up of both classes combined;
whether they are city-bred or rustics, or both the one and the other together; or whether, again, they
are a people composed of all orders of men in due proportion. For it is impossible but that they willaffect in different ways the person who has to speak to them and discourse with them, and that theaddress which is delivered will both bear certain features, as it were, expressive of the feelings ofthe mind from which it proceeds, and also influence the hearers in different ways, in accordancewith that same difference (in the speaker’s disposition), while at the same time the hearers themselves

1423
1424

Matt. xxv. 26, 27.
Rom. v. 5.

406

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

will influence one another in different ways by the simple force of their presence with each other.
But as we are dealing at present with the matter of the instruction of the unlearned, I am a witness
to you, as regards my own experience, that I find myself variously moved, according as I see before
me, for the purposes of catechetical instruction, a highly educated man, a dull fellow, a citizen, aforeigner, a rich man, a poor man, a private individual, a man of honors, a person occupying someposition of authority, an individual of this or the other nation, of this or the other age or sex, one
proceeding from this or the other sect, from this or the other common error,—and ever in accordancewith the difference of my feelings does my discourse itself at once set out, go on, and reach its end.
And inasmuch as, although the same charity is due to all, yet the same medicine is not to beadministered to all, in like manner charity itself travails with some, is made weak together withothers; is at pains to edify some, tremblingly apprehends being an offense to others; bends to some,
lifts itself erect to others; is gentle to some, severe to others; to none an enemy, to all a mother.
And when one, who has not gone through the kind of experience to which I refer in the same spiritof charity, sees us attaining, in virtue of some gift which has been conferred upon us, and which
carries the power of pleasing, a certain repute of an eulogistic nature in the mouth of the multitude,
he counts us happy on that account. But may God, into whose cognizance the “groaning of themthat are bound enters,”1425 look upon our humility, and our labor, and forgive us all our sins.1426
Wherefore, if anything in us has so far pleased you as to make you desirous of hearing from us
some remarks on the subject of the form of discourse which you ought to follow,1427 you should
acquire a more thorough understanding of the matter by contemplating us, and listening to us when
we are actually engaged with these topics, than by a perusal when we are only dictating them.

Chapter 16.—A Specimen of a Catechetical Address; And First, the Case of a Catechumen withWorthy Views.

300

24. Nevertheless, however that may be, let us here suppose that some one has come to us who
desires to be made a Christian, and who belongs indeed to the order of private persons,1428 and yet
not to the class of rustics, but to that of the city-bred, such as those whom you cannot fail to comeacross in numbers in Carthage. Let us also suppose that, on being asked whether the inducement
leading him to desire to be a Christian is any advantage looked for in the present life, or the rest
which is hoped for after this life, he has answered that his inducement has been the rest that is yet
to come. Then perchance such a person might be instructed by us in some such strain of address
as the following: “Thanks be to God, my brother; cordially do I wish you joy, and I am glad on
your account that, amid all the storms of this world, which are at once so great and so dangerous,
you have bethought yourself of some true and certain security. For even in this life men go in questof rest and security at the cost of heavy labors, but they fail to find such in consequence of theirwicked lusts. For their thought is to find rest in things which are unquiet, and which endure not.
1425
1426
1427
1428

Ps. lxxix. 11.
Cf. Ps. xxv. 18.
Ut aliquam observationem sermonis tui a nobis audire quæreres.
Idiotarum.

407

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

And these objects, inasmuch as they are withdrawn from them and pass away in the course of time,
agitate them by fears and griefs, and suffer them not to enjoy tranquillity. For if it be that a man
seeks to find his rest in wealth, he is rendered proud rather than at ease. Do we not see how many
have lost their riches on a sudden,—how many, too, have been undone by reason of them, either
as they have been coveting to possess them, or as they have been borne down and despoiled ofthem by others more covetous than themselves? And even should they remain with the man all his
life long, and never leave their lover, yet would he himself (have to) leave them at his death. Forof what measure is the life of man, even if he lives to old age? Or when men desire for themselves
old age, what else do they really desire but long infirmity? So, too, with the honors of thisworld,—what are they but empty pride and vanity, and peril of ruin? For holy Scripture speaks inthis wise: ‘All flesh is grass, and the glory of man is as the flower of grass. The grass withereth,the flower thereof falleth away; but the word of the Lord endureth for ever.’1429 Consequently, if
any man longs for true rest and true felicity, he ought to lift his hope off things which are mortal
and transitory, and fix it on the word of the Lord; so that, cleaving to that which endures for ever,he may himself together with it endure for ever.
25. “There are also other men who neither crave to be rich nor go about seeking the vain pomps
of honors, but who nevertheless are minded to find their pleasure and rest in dainty meats, and infornications, and in those theatres and spectacles which are at their disposal in great cities fornothing. But it fares with these, too, in the same way; or they waste their small means in luxury,
and subsequently, under pressure of want, break out into thefts and burglaries, and at times eveninto highway robberies, and so they are suddenly filled with fears both numerous and great; andmen who a little before were singing in the house of revelry, are now dreaming of the sorrows of
the prison. Moreover, in their eager devotion to the public spectacles, they come to resemble demons,as they incite men by their cries to wound each other, and instigate those who have done them nohurt to engage in furious contests with each other, while they seek to please an insane people. And
if they perceive any such to be peaceably disposed, they straightway hate them and persecute them,and raise an outcry, asking that they should be beaten with clubs, as if they had been in collusion
to cheat them; and this iniquity they force even the judge, who is the (appointed) avenger of
iniquities, to perpetrate. On the other hand, if they observe such men exerting themselves in horrid
hostilities against each other, whether they be those who are called sintœ,1430 or theatrical actors
and players,1431 or charioteers, or hunters,—those wretched men whom they engage in conflicts
and struggles, not only men with men, but even men with beasts,—then the fiercer the fury withwhich they perceive these unhappy creatures rage against each other, the better they like them, andthe greater the enjoyment they have in them; and they favor them when thus excited,1432 and by sofavoring them they excite them all the more, the spectators themselves striving more madly witheach other, as they espouse the cause of different combatants, than is the case even with those very
1429

Isa. xl. 6, 8; 1 Pet. i. 24, 25.
Reading sive sintœ qui appellantur, for which there occur such varieties of reading as these: sint athletæ qui appellantur= those who are called athletes; or sint æqui appellantur; or simply sint qui appellantur = whatever name they bear, whether
actors, etc. The term sintæ, borrowed from the Greek Σινται = devourers, spoilers, may have been a word in common use among
the Africans, as the Benedictine editors suggest, for designating some sort of coarse characters.
1431
Thymelici, strictly = the musicians belonging to the thymele, or orchestra.
1432
Reading incitatis favent, for which some mss. give incitati = excited themselves, they favor them; and others have
incitantes = exciting them, they favor them.
1430

408

NPNF (V1-03)

301

Philip Schaff

men whose madness they madly provoke, while at the same time they also long to be spectators of
the same in their mad frenzy.1433 How then can that mind keep the soundness of peace which feeds
on strifes and contentions? For just as is the food which is received, such is the health which results.
In fine, although mad pleasures are no pleasures, nevertheless let these things be taken as they are,and it still remains the case that, whatever their nature may be, and whatever the measure ofenjoyment yielded by the boasts of riches, and the inflation of honors, and the spendthrift pleasuresof the taverns, and the contests of the theatres, and the impurity of fornications, and the pruriencyof the baths, they are all things of which one little fever deprives us, while, even from those who
still survive, it takes away the whole false happiness of their life. Then there remains only a void
and wounded conscience, destined to apprehend that God as a Judge whom it refused to have as a
Father, and destined also to find a severe Lord in Him whom it scorned to seek and love as a tender
Father. But thou, inasmuch as thou seekest that true rest which is promised to Christians after thislife, wilt taste the same sweet and pleasant rest even here among the bitterest troubles of this life,
if thou continuest to love the commandments of Him who hath promised the same. For quickly
wilt thou feel that the fruits of righteousness are sweeter than those of unrighteousness, and that a
man finds a more genuine and pleasurable joy in the possession of a good conscience in the midstof troubles than in that of an evil conscience in the midst of delights. For thou hast not come to beunited to the Church of God with the idea of seeking from it any temporal advantage.

Chapter 17.—The Specimen of Catechetical Discourse Continued, in Reference Specially to the
Reproval of False Aims on the Catechumen’s Part.
26. “For there are some whose reason for desiring to become Christians is either that they may
gain the favor of men from whom they look for temporal advantages, or that they are reluctant tooffend those whom they fear. But these are reprobate; and although the church bears them for atime, as the threshing-floor bears the chaff until the period of winnowing, yet if they fail to amend
and begin to be Christians in sincerity in view of the everlasting rest which is to come, they will
be separated from it in the end. And let not such flatter themselves, because it is possible for them
to be in the threshing-floor along with the grain of God. For they will not be together with that in
the barn, but are destined for the fire, which is their due. There are also others of better hope indeed,
but nevertheless in no inferior danger. I mean those who now fear God, and mock not the Christianname, neither enter the church of God with an assumed heart, but still look for their felicity in thislife, expecting to have more felicity in earthly things than those enjoy who refuse to worship God.
And the consequence of this false anticipation is, that when they see some wicked and impious
men strongly established and excelling in this worldly prosperity, while they themselves either
possess it in a smaller degree or miss it altogether, they are troubled with the thought that they areserving God without reason, and so they readily fall away from the faith.
27. “But as to the man who has in view that everlasting blessedness and perpetual rest which
is promised as the lot destined for the saints after this life, and who desires to become a Christian,

1433

Compare a passage in the Confessions, vi. 13.

409

NPNF (V1-03)

302

Philip Schaff

in order that he may not pass into eternal fire with the devil, but enter into the eternal kingdom
together with Christ,1434 such an one is truly a Christian; (and he will be) on his guard in every
temptation, so that he may neither be corrupted by prosperity nor be utterly broken in spirit byadversity, but remain at once modest and temperate when the good things of earth abound withhim, and brave and patient when tribulations overtake him. A person of this character will also
advance in attainments until he comes to that disposition of mind which will make him love God
more than he fears hell; so that even were God to say to him, ‘Avail yourself of carnal pleasuresfor ever, and sin as much as you are able, and you shall neither die nor be sent into hell, but you
will only not be with me, he would be terribly dismayed, and would altogether abstain from sinning,
not now (simply) with the purpose of not falling into that of which he was wont to be afraid, butwith the wish not to offend Him whom he so greatly loves: in whom alone also there is the rest
which eye hath not seen, neither hath ear heard, neither hath it entered into the heart of man (toconceive),—the rest which God hath prepared for them that love Him.1435
28. “Now, on the subject of this rest Scripture is significant, and refrains not to speak, when it
tells us how at the beginning of the world, and at the time when God made heaven and earth andall things which are in them, He worked during six days, and rested on the seventh day.1436 For it
was in the power of the Almighty to make all things even in one moment of time. For He had notlabored in the view that He might enjoy (a needful) rest, since indeed “He spake, and they weremade; He commanded, and they were created;”1437 but that He might signify how, after six ages ofthis world, in a seventh age, as on the seventh day, He will rest in His saints; inasmuch as thesesame saints shall rest also in Him after all the good works in which they have served Him,—which
He Himself, indeed, works in them, who calls them, and instructs them, and puts away the offenses
that are past, and justifies the man who previously was ungodly. For as, when by His gift they workthat which is good, He is Himself rightly said to work (that in them), so, when they rest in Him,
He is rightly said to rest Himself. For, as regards Himself, He seeks no cessation, because He feels
no labor. Moreover He made all things by His Word; and His Word is Christ Himself, in whom
the angels and all those purest spirits of heaven rest in holy silence. Man, however in that he fellby sin, has lost the rest which he possessed in His divinity, and receives it again (now) in His
humanity; and for this purpose He became man, and was born of a woman, at the seasonable timeat which He Himself knew it behoved it so to be fulfilled. And from the flesh assuredly He could
not sustain any contamination, being Himself rather destined to purify the flesh. Of His future
coming the ancient saints, in the revelation of the Spirit, had knowledge, and prophesied. And thus
were they saved by believing that He was to come, even as we are saved by believing that He hascome. Hence ought we to love God who has so loved us as to have sent His only Son, in order that
He might endue Himself with the lowliness1438 of our mortality, and die both at the hands of sinners
and on behalf of sinners. For even in times of old, and in the opening ages, the depth of this mysteryceases not to be prefigured and prophetically announced.

1434
1435
1436
1437
1438

Cf. Matt. xxv. 34, 41.
1 Cor. ii. 9.
Gen. ii. 1–3.
Ps. cxlviii. 5.
Humanitate, = humanity, also occurs instead of humilitate.

410

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 18.—Of What is to Be Believed on the Subject of the Creation of Man and Other Objects.
29. “Whereas, then, the omnipotent God, who is also good and just and merciful, who madeall things,—whether they be great or small, whether they be highest or lowest, whether they bethings which are seen, such as are the heavens and the earth and the sea, and in the heavens, inparticular, the sun and the moon and other luminaries, and in the earth and the sea, again, trees andshrubs and animals each after their kind, and all bodies celestial or terrestrial alike, or whether theybe things which are not seen, such as are those spirits whereby bodies are animated and endowedwith life,—made also man after His own image, in order that, as He Himself, in virtue of His
omnipotence, presides over universal creation, so man, in virtue of that intelligence of his by which
he comes to know even his Creator and worships Him, might preside over all the living creaturesof earth: Whereas, too, he made the woman to be an helpmeet for him: not for carnal
concupiscence,—since, indeed, they had not corruptible bodies at that period, before the punishmentof sin invaded them in the form of mortality,—but for this purpose, that the man might at once haveglory of the woman in so far as he went before her to God, and present in himself an example toher for imitation in holiness and piety, even as he himself was to be the glory of God in so far as
he followed his wisdom:
30. “Therefore did he place them in a certain locality of perpetual blessedness, which the
Scripture designates Paradise: and he gave them a commandment, on condition of not violating
which they were to continue for ever in that blessedness of immortality; while, on the other hand,
if they transgressed it, they were to sustain the penalties of mortality. Now God knew beforehandthat they would trangress it. Nevertheless, in that He is the author and maker of everything good,
He chose rather to make them, as He also made the beasts, in order that He might replenish theearth with the good things proper to earth. And certainly man, even sinful man, is better than abeast. And the commandment, which they were not to keep, He yet preferred to give them, in orderthat they might be without excuse when He should begin to vindicate Himself against them. For
whatever man may have done, he finds God worthy to be praised in all His doings: if he shall haveacted rightly, he finds Him worthy to be praised for the righteousness of His rewards: if he shallhave sinned, he finds Him worthy to be praised for the righteousness of His punishments: if heshall have confessed his sins and returned to an upright life, he finds Him worthy to be praised forthe mercy of His pardoning favors. Why, then, should God not make man, although He foreknew
that he would sin, when He might crown him if he stood, and set him right if he fell, and help him
if he rose, Himself being always and everywhere glorious in goodness, righteousness, and clemency?
Above all, why should He not do so, since He also foreknew this, namely, that from the race ofthat mortality there would spring saints, who should not seek their own, but give glory to theirCreator; and who, obtaining deliverance from every corruption by worshipping Him, should becounted worthy to live for ever, and to live in blessedness with the holy angels? For He who gave
freedom of will to men, in order that they might worship God not of slavish necessity but withingenuous inclination, gave it also to the angels; and hence neither did the angel, who, in company
with other spirits who were his satellites, forsook in pride the obedience of God and became the
303

411

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

devil, do any hurt to God, but to himself. For God knoweth how to dispose of souls1439 that leave
Him, and out of their righteous misery to furnish the inferior sections of His creatures with the mostappropriate and befitting laws of His wonderful dispensation. Consequently, neither did the devil
in any manner harm God, whether in falling himself, or in seducing man to death; nor did man
himself in any degree impair the truth, or power, or blessedness1440 of His Maker, in that, when his
partner was seduced by the devil, he of his own deliberate inclination consented unto her in the
doing of that which God had forbidden. For by the most righteous laws of God all were condemned,
God Himself being glorious in the equity of retribution, while they were shamed through thedegradation of punishment: to the end that man, when he turned away from his Creator, should beovercome by the devil and made his subject, and that the devil might be set before man as an enemy
to be conquered, when he turned again to his Creator; so that whosoever should consent unto thedevil even to the end, might go with him into eternal punishments; whereas those who should
humble themselves to God, and by His grace overcome the devil, might be counted worthy of
eternal rewards.

Chapter 19.—Of the Co-Existence of Good and Evil in the Church, and Their Final Separation.
31. “Neither ought we to be moved by the consideration that many consent unto the devil, andfew follow God; for the grain, too, in comparison with the chaff, has greatly the defect in number.
But even as the husbandman knows what to do with the mighty heap of chaff, so the multitude ofsinners is nothing to God, who knows what to do with them, so as not to let the administration ofHis kingdom be disordered and dishonored in any part. Nor is the devil to be supposed to have
proved victorious for the mere reason of his drawing away with him more than the few by whom
he may be overcome. In this way there are two communities—one of the ungodly, and another ofthe holy—which are carried down from the beginning of the human race even to the end of theworld, which are at present commingled in respect of bodies, but separated in respect of wills, andwhich, moreover, are destined to be separated also in respect of bodily presence in the day of
judgment. For all men who love pride and temporal power with vain elation and pomp of arrogance,
and all spirits who set their affections on such things and seek their own glory in the subjection ofmen, are bound fast together in one association; nay, even although they frequently fight against
each other on account of these things, they are nevertheless precipitated by the like weight of lust
into the same abyss, and are united with each other by similarity of manners and merits. And, again,
all men and all spirits who humbly seek the glory of God and not their own, and who follow Him
in piety, belong to one fellowship. And, notwithstanding this, God is most merciful and patientwith ungodly men, and offers them a place for penitence and amendment.
32. “For with respect also to the fact that He destroyed all men in the flood, with the exceptionof one righteous man together with his house, whom He willed to be saved in the ark, He knew
indeed that they would not amend themselves; yet, nevertheless, as the building of the ark went on

1439
1440

Rather “spirits.” See the correction made in the Retractations, ii. 14, as given above in the Introductory Notice.
The beatitatem is omitted by several mss.

412

NPNF (V1-03)

304

Philip Schaff

for the space of a hundred years, the wrath of God which was to come upon them was certainly
preached to them:1441 and if they only would have turned to God, He would have spared them, as
at a later period He spared the city of Nineveh when it repented, after He had announced to it, bymeans of a prophet, the destruction that was about to overtake it.1442 Thus, moreover, God acts,
granting a space for repentance even to those who He knows will persist in wickedness, in orderthat He may exercise and instruct our patience by His own example; whereby also we may know
how greatly it befits us to bear with the evil in long-suffering, when we know not what manner ofmen they will prove hereafter, seeing that He, whose cognizance nothing that is yet to be escapes,
spares them and suffers them to live. Under the sacramental sign of the flood, however, in which
the righteous were rescued by the wood, there was also a fore-announcement of the Church which
was to be, which Christ, its King and God, has raised on high; by the mystery of His cross, in safety
from the submersion of this world. Moreover, God was not ignorant of the fact that, even of those
who had been saved in the ark, there would be born wicked men, who would cover the face of theearth a second time with iniquities. But, nevertheless, He both gave them a pattern of the future
judgment, and fore-announced the deliverance of the holy by the mystery of the wood. For evenafter these things wickedness did not cease to sprout forth again through pride, and lusts, and illicit
impieties, when men, forsaking their Creator, not only fell to the (standard of the) creature which
God made, so as to worship instead of God that which God made, but even bowed their souls to
the works of the hands of men and to the contrivances of craftsmen, wherein a more shamefultriumph was to be won over them by the devil, and by those evil spirits who rejoice in finding
themselves adored and reverenced in such false devices, while they feed1443 their own errors withthe errors of men.
33. “But in truth there were not wanting in those times righteous men also of the kind to seek
God piously and to overcome the pride of the devil, citizens of that holy community, who weremade whole by the humiliation of Christ, which was then only destined to enter, but was revealed
to them by the Spirit. From among these, Abraham, a pious and faithful servant of God, was chosen,
in order that to him might be shown the sacrament of the Son of God, so that thus, in virtue of theimitation of his faith, all the faithful of all nations might be called his children in the future. Of him
was born a people, by whom the one true God who made heaven and earth should be worshipped
when all other nations did service to idols and evil spirits. In that people, plainly, the future Church
was much more evidently prefigured. For in it there was a carnal multitude that worshipped God
with a view to visible benefits. But in it there were also a few who thought of the future rest, andlooked longingly for the heavenly fatherland, to whom through prophecy was revealed the coming
humiliation of God in the person of our King and Lord Jesus Christ, in order that they might bemade whole of all pride and arrogance through that faith. And with respect to these saints who inpoint of time had precedence of the birth of the Lord, not only their speech, but also their life, andtheir marriages, and their children, and their doings, constituted a prophecy of this time, at which
the Church is being gathered together out of all nations through faith in the passion of Christ. By
the instrumentality of those holy patriarchs and prophets this carnal people of Israel, who at a later
period were also called Jews, had ministered unto them at once those visible benefits which they
1441
1442
1443

Gen. vi. 7.
Jonah iii.
Instead of pascunt the reading miscent, = mix, is also found.

413

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

eagerly desired of the Lord in a carnal manner, and those chastisements, in the form of bodily
punishments, which were intended to terrify them for the time, as was befitting for their obstinacy.
And in all these, nevertheless, there were also spiritual mysteries signified, such as were meant tobear upon Christ and the Church; of which Church those saints also were members, although they
existed in this life previous to the birth of Christ, the Lord, according to the flesh. For this same
Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, the Word of the Father, equal and co-eternal with the Father,by whom all things were made, was Himself also made man for our sakes, in order that of the whole
Church, as of His whole body, He might be the Head. But just as when the whole man is in theprocess of being born, although he may put the hand forth first in the act of birth, yet is that handjoined and compacted together with the whole body under the head, even as also among these same
patriarchs some were born1444 with the hand put forth first as a sign of this very thing: so all thesaints who lived upon the earth previous to the birth of our Lord Jesus Christ, although they wereborn antecedently, were nevertheless united under the Head with that universal body of which He
is the Head.

Chapter 20.—Of Israel’s Bondage in Egypt, Their Deliverance, and Their Passage Through the
Red Sea.

305

34. “That people, then, having been brought down into Egypt, were in bondage to the harshestof kings; and, taught by the most oppressive labors, they sought their deliverer in God; and there
was sent to them one belonging to the people themselves, Moses, the holy servant of God, who, inthe might of God, terrified the impious nation of the Egyptians in those days by great miracles, andled forth the people of God out of that land through the Red Sea, where the water parted and opened
up a way for them as they crossed it, whereas, when the Egyptians pressed on in pursuit, the waves
returned to their channel and overwhelmed them, so that they perished. Thus, then, just as the earth
through the agency of the flood was cleansed by the waters from the wickedness of the sinners,
who in those times were destroyed in their inundation, while the righteous escaped by means of
the wood; so the people of God, when they went forth from Egypt, found a way through the waters
by which their enemies were devoured. Nor was the sacrament of the wood wanting there. For
Moses smote with his rod, in order that that miracle might be effected. Both these are signs of holybaptism, by which the faithful pass into the new life, while their sins are done away with likeenemies, and perish. But more clearly was the passion of Christ prefigured in the case of that people,
when they were commanded to slay and eat the lamb, and to mark their door-posts with its blood,and to celebrate this rite every year, and to designate it the Lord’s passover. For surely prophecy
speaks with the utmost plainness of the Lord Jesus Christ, when it says that “He was led as a lambto the slaughter.”1445 And with the sign of His passion and cross, thou art this day to be marked on
thy forehead, as on the door-post, and all Christians are marked with the same.

1444
1445

Gen. xxv. 26, xxxviii. 27–30.
Isa. liii. 7.

414

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

35. “Thereafter this people was conducted through the wilderness for forty years. They also
received the law written by the finger of God, under which name the Holy Spirit is signified, as it
is declared with the utmost plainness in the Gospel. For God is not defined1446 by the form of abody, neither are members and fingers to be thought of as existent in Him in the way in which we
see them in ourselves. But, inasmuch as it is through the Holy Spirit that God’s gifts are divided
to His saints, in order that, although they vary in their capacities, they may nevertheless not lapse
from the concord of charity, and inasmuch as it is especially in the fingers that there appears acertain kind of division, while nevertheless there is no separation from unity, this may be theexplanation of the phrase. But whether this may be the case, or whatever other reason may be
assigned for the Holy Spirit being called the finger of God, we ought not at any rate to think of theform of a human body when we hear this expression used. The people in question, then, received
the law written by the finger of God, and that in good sooth on tables of stone, to signify the hardnessof their heart in that they were not to fulfill the law. For, as they eagerly sought from the Lord gifts
meant for the uses of the body, they were held by carnal fear rather than by spiritual charity. But
nothing fulfills the law save charity. Consequently, they were burdened with many visible sacraments,
to the intent that they should feel the pressure of the yoke of bondage in the observances of meats,
and in the sacrifices of animals, and in other rites innumerable; which things, at the same time,
were signs of spiritual matters relating to the Lord Jesus Christ and to the Church; which,furthermore, at that time were both understood by a few holy men to the effect of yielding the fruitof salvation, and observed by them in accordance with the fitness of the time, while by the multitude
of carnal men they were observed only and not understood.
36. “In this manner, then, through many varied signs of things to come, which it would betedious to enumerate in complete detail, and which we now see in their fulfillment in the Church,that people were brought to the land of promise, in which they were to reign in a temporal andcarnal way in accordance with their own longings: which earthly kingdom, nevertheless, sustained
the image of a spiritual kingdom. There Jerusalem was founded, that most celebrated city of God,
which, while in bondage, served as a sign of the free city, which is called the heavenly Jerusalem1447
which latter term is a Hebrew word, and signifies by interpretation the ‘vision of peace.’ The citizens
thereof are all sanctified men, who have been, who are, and who are yet to be; and all sanctified
spirits, even as many as are obedient to God with pious devotion in the exalted regions of heaven,and imitate not the impious pride of the devil and his angels. The King of this city is the Lord Jesus
Christ, the Word of God, by whom the highest angels are governed, and at the same time the Word
that took unto Himself human nature,1448 in order that by Him men also might be governed, who,
in His fellowship, shall reign all together in eternal peace. In the service of prefiguring this Kingin that earthly kingdom of the people of Israel, King David stood forth pre-eminent,1449 of whose
seed according to the flesh that truest King was to come, to wit, our Lord Jesus Christ, ‘who is overall, God blessed for ever.’1450 In that land of promise many things were done, which held good as

1446
1447
1448
1449
1450

Or = circumscribed, definitus.
Cf. Gal. iv. 26.
Hominem.
1 Kings xi. 13.
Rom. ix. 5.

415

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

figures of the Christ who was to come, and of the Church, with which you will have it in yourpower to acquaint yourself by degrees in the Holy Books.

Chapter 21.—Of the Babylonish Captivity, and the Things Signified Thereby.

306

37. “Howbeit, after the lapse of some generations, another type was presented, which bears
very emphatically on the matter in hand. For that city1451 was brought into captivity, and a large
section of the people were carried off into Babylonia. Now, as Jerusalem signifies the city andfellowship of the saints, so Babylonia signifies the city and fellowship of the wicked, seeing thatby interpretation it denotes confusion. On the subject of these two cities, which have been runningtheir courses, mingling the one with the other, through all the changes of time from the beginningof the human race, and which shall so move on together until the end of the world, when they aredestined to be separated at the last judgment, we have spoken already a little ago.1452 That captivity,
then, of the city of Jerusalem, and the people thus carried into Babylonia in bondage, were ordained
so to proceed by the Lord, by the voice of Jeremiah, a prophet of that time.1453 And there appearedkings1454 of Babylon, under whom they were in slavery, who on occasion of the captivity of thispeople were so wrought upon by certain miracles that they came to know the one true God who
founded universal creation, and worshipped Him, and commanded that He should be worshipped.
Moreover the people were ordered both to pray for those by whom they were detained in captivity,and in their peace to hope for peace, to the effect that they should beget children, and build houses,and plant gardens and vineyards.1455 But at the end of seventy years, release from their captivity
was promised to them.1456 All this, furthermore, signified in a figure that the Church of Christ in
all His saints, who are citizens of the heavenly Jerusalem, would have to do service under the kingsof this world. For the doctrine of the apostles speaks also in this wise, that ‘every soul should be
subject to the higher powers,’ and that there ‘should be rendered all things to all men, tribute towhom tribute (is due), custom to whom custom,’1457 and all other things in like manner which,without detriment to the worship of our God, we render to the rulers in the constitution of humansociety: for the Lord Himself also, in order to set before us an example of this sound doctrine, did
not deem it unworthy of Him to pay tribute1458 on account of that human individuality1459 wherewith
He was invested. Again, Christian servants and good believers are also commanded to serve theirtemporal masters in equanimity and faithfulness;1460 whom they will hereafter judge, if even on to

1451
1452
1453
1454
1455
1456
1457
1458
1459
1460

Or = community, civitas.
See Chapter xix.
Jer. xxv. 18, xxix. 1.
Dan. ii. 47, iii. 29, vi. 26; 1 Esdr. ii. 7; Bel. 41.
Jer. xxix. 4–7.
Jer. xxv. 12.
Rom. xiii. 1, 7.
Matt. xvii. 27.
Pro capite hominis, literally = "on" account of that head of man, etc.
Eph. vi. 5.

416

NPNF (V1-03)

307

Philip Schaff

the end they find them wicked, or with whom they will hereafter reign in equality, if they too shallhave been converted to the true God. Still all are enjoined to be subject to the powers that are of
man and of earth, even until, at the end of the predetermined time which the seventy years signify,
the Church shall be delivered from the confusion of this world, like as Jerusalem was to be set freefrom the captivity in Babylonia. By occasion of that captivity, however, the kings of earth too havethemselves been led to forsake the idols on account of which they were wont to persecute theChristians, and have come to know, and now worship, the one true God and Christ the Lord; andit is on their behalf that the Apostle Paul enjoins prayer to be made, even although they should
persecute the Church. For he speaks in these terms: ‘I entreat, therefore, that first of all supplications,adorations,1461 intercessions, and givings of thanks be made for kings, for all men, and all that arein authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, with all godliness and charity.’1462
Accordingly peace has been given to the Church by these same persons, although it be but of atemporal sort,—a temporal quiet for the work of building houses after a spiritual fashion, andplanting gardens and vineyards. For witness your own case, too,—at this very time we are engaged,
by means of this discourse, in building you up and planting you. And the like process is going on
throughout the whole circle of lands, in virtue of the peace allowed by Christian kings, even as thesame apostle thus expresses himself: ‘Ye are God’s husbandry; ye are God’s building.’1463
38. “And, indeed, after the lapse of the seventy years of which Jeremiah had mysticallyprophesied, to the intent of prefiguring the end of times, with a view still to the perfecting of thatsame figure, no settled peace and liberty were conceded again to the Jews. Thus it was that they
were conquered subsequently by the Romans and made tributary. From that period, in truth, atwhich they received the land of promise and began to have kings, in order to preclude the supposition
that the promise of the Christ who was to be their Liberator had met its complete fulfillment in the
person of any one of their kings, Christ was prophesied of with greater clearness in a number ofprophecies; not only by David himself in the book of Psalms, but also by the rest of the great andholy prophets, even on to the time of their conveyance into captivity in Babylonia; and in that same
captivity there were also prophets whose mission was to prophesy of the coming of the Lord Jesus
Christ as the Liberator of all. And after the restoration of the temple, when the seventy years had
passed, the Jews sustained grievous oppressions and sufferings at the hands of the kings of the
Gentiles, fitted to make them understand that the Liberator was not yet come, whom they failed toapprehend as one who was to effect for them a spiritual deliverance, and whom they fondly longed
for on account of a carnal liberation.

Chapter 22.—Of the Six Ages of the World.
39. “Five ages of the world, accordingly, having been now completed (there has entered thesixth). Of these ages the first is from the beginning of the human race, that is, from Adam, who

1461
1462
1463

Instead of orationes; the better authenticated reading is adorationes.
1 Tim. ii. 1, 2.
1 Cor. iii. 9; cf. Jer. xxv. 12, xxix. 10.

417

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

was the first man that was made, down to Noah, who constructed the ark at the time of the flood.1464
Then the second extends from that period on to Abraham, who was called1465 the father indeed of
all nations1466 which should follow the example of his faith, but who at the same time in the wayof natural descent from his own flesh was the father of the destined people of the Jews; whichpeople, previous to the entrance of the Gentiles into the Christian faith, was the one people among
all the nations of all lands that worshipped the one true God: from which people also Christ the
Saviour was decreed to come according to the flesh. For these turning-points1467 of those two ages
occupy an eminent place in the ancient books. On the other hand, those of the other three ages arealso declared in the Gospel,1468 where the descent of the Lord Jesus Christ according to the flesh
is likewise mentioned. For the third age extends from Abraham on to David the king; the fourthfrom David on to that captivity whereby the people of God passed over into Babylonia; and thefifth from that transmigration down to the advent of our Lord Jesus Christ. With His coming thesixth age has entered on its process; so that now the spiritual grace, which in previous times was
known to a few patriarchs and prophets, may be made manifest to all nations; to the intent that no
man should worship God but freely,1469 fondly desiring of Him not the visible rewards of His
services and the happiness of this present life, but that eternal life alone in which he is to enjoy
God Himself: in order that in this sixth age the mind of man may be renewed after the image ofGod, even as on the sixth day man was made after the image of God.1470 For then, too, is the law
fulfilled, when all that it has commanded is done, not in the strong desire for things temporal, but
in the love of Him who has given the commandment. Who is there, moreover, who should not beearnestly disposed to give the return of love to a God of supreme righteousness and also of supreme
mercy, who has first loved men of the greatest unrighteousness and the loftiest pride, and that, too,so deeply as to have sent in their behalf His only Son, by whom He made all things, and who being
made man, not by any change of Himself, but by the assumption of human nature, was designed
thus to become capable not only of living with them, but also of dying at once for them and by theirhands?
40. “Thus, then, showing forth the New Testament of our everlasting inheritance, wherein man
was to be renewed by the grace of God and lead a new life, that is, a spiritual life; and with theview of exhibiting the first one as an old dispensation, wherein a carnal people acting out the oldman (with the exception of a few patriarchs and prophets, who had understanding, and some hidden
saints), and leading a carnal life, desiderated carnal rewards at the hands of the Lord God, andreceived in that fashion but the figures of spiritual blessings;—with this intent, I say, the Lord
Christ, when made man, despised all earthly good things, in order that He might show us how thesethings ought to be despised; and He endured all earthly ills which He was inculcating as things
needful to be endured; so that neither might our happiness be sought for in the former class, nor
our unhappiness be apprehended in the latter. For being born of a mother who, although she

1464
1465
1466
1467
1468
1469
1470

Gen. vi. 22.
Instead of dictus est the mss. give also electus est = was chosen to be.
Gen. xvii. 4.
articuli = articles.
Matt. i. 17.
Gratis.
Gen. i. 27.

418

NPNF (V1-03)

308

Philip Schaff

conceived without being touched by man and always remained thus untouched, in virginity
conceiving, in virginity bringing forth, in virginity dying, had nevertheless been espoused to ahandicraftsman, He extinguished all the inflated pride of carnal nobility. Moreover, being born inthe city of Bethlehem, which among all the cities of Judæa was so insignificant that even in ourown day it is designated a village, He willed not that any one should glory in the exalted positionof any city of earth. He, too, whose are all things and by whom all things were created, was madepoor, in order that no one, while believing in Him, might venture to boast himself in earthly riches.
He refused to be made by men a king, because He displayed the pathway of humility to thoseunhappy ones whom pride had separated from Him;1471 and yet universal creation attests the factof His everlasting kingdom. An hungered was He who feeds all men; athirst was He by whom iscreated whatsoever is drunk, and who in a spiritual manner is the bread of the hungry and thefountain of the thirsty; in journeying on earth, wearied was He who has made Himself the way for
us into heaven; as like one dumb and deaf in the presence of His revilers was He by whom thedumb spoke and the deaf heard; bound was He who freed us from the bonds of infirmities; scourged
was He who expelled from the bodies of man the scourges of all distresses; crucified was He who
put an end to our crucial pains;1472 dead did He become who raised the dead. But He also rose again,
no more to die, so that no one should from Him learn so to contemn death as if he were never tolive again.

Chapter 23.—Of the Mission of the Holy Ghost Fifty Days After Christ’s Resurrection.
41. “Thereafter, having confirmed the disciples, and having sojourned with them forty days,
He ascended up into heaven, as these same persons were beholding Him. And on the completionof fifty days from His resurrection He sent to them the Holy Spirit (for so He had promised), bywhose agency they were to have love shed abroad in their hearts,1473 to the end that they might beable to fulfill the law, not only without the sense of its being burdensome, but even with a joyful
mind. This law was given to the Jews in the ten commandments, which they call the Decalogue.
And these commandments, again, are reduced to two, namely that we should love God with all ourheart, with all our soul, with all our mind; and that we should love our neighbor as ourselves.1474
For that on these two precepts hang all the law and the prophets, the Lord Himself has at once
declared in the Gospel and shown in His own example. For thus it was likewise in the instance ofthe people of Israel, that from the day on which they first celebrated the passover in a form,1475
slaying and eating the sheep, with whose blood their door-posts were marked for the securing of
their safety,1476—from this day, I repeat, the fiftieth day in succession was completed, and then

1471
1472
1473
1474
1475
1476

Reading ab eo; for which some editions give ab ea = from that humility.
There is a play in the words here: crucifixus est qui cruciatus nostros finivit.
Cf. Rom. v. 5.
Matt. xxii. 37–40.
In imagine.
Ex. xii.

419

NPNF (V1-03)

309

Philip Schaff

they received the law written by the finger of God,1477 under which phrase we have already statedthat the Holy Spirit is signified.1478 And in the same manner, after the passion and resurrection of
the Lord, who is the true passover, the Holy Ghost was sent personally to the disciples on the fiftiethday: not now, however, by tables of stone significant of the hardness of their hearts; but, when they
were gathered together in one place at Jerusalem itself, suddenly there came a sound from heaven,as if a violent blast were being borne onwards, and there appeared to them tongues cloven like fire,
and they began to speak with tongues, in such a manner that all those who had come to themrecognized each his own language1479 (for in that city the Jews were in the habit of assembling fromevery country wheresoever they had been scattered abroad, and had learned the diverse tongues ofdiverse nations); and thereafter, preaching Christ with all boldness, they wrought many signs in
His name,—so much so, that as Peter was passing by, his shadow touched a certain dead person,
and the man rose in life again.1480
42. “But when the Jews perceived so great signs to be wrought in the name of Him, whom,
partly through ill-will and partly in ignorance, they crucified, some of them were provoked topersecute the apostles, who were His preachers; while others, on the contrary, marvelling the moreat this very circumstance, that so great miracles were being performed in the name of Him whomthey had derided as one overborne and conquered by themselves, repented, and were converted,
so that thousands of Jews believed on Him. For these parties were not bent now on craving at thehand of God temporal benefits and an earthly kingdom, neither did they look any more for Christ,
the promised king, in a carnal spirit; but they continued in immortal fashion to apprehend and love
Him, who in mortal fashion endured on their behalf at their own hands sufferings so heavy, andimparted to them the gift of forgiveness for all their sins, even down to the iniquity of His own
blood, and by the example of His own resurrection unfolded immortality as the object which theyshould hope for and long for at His hands. Accordingly, now mortifying the earthly cravings of theold man, and inflamed with the new experience of the spiritual life, as the Lord had enjoined in theGospel, they sold all that they had, and laid the price of their possessions at the feet of the apostles,
in order that these might distribute to every man according as each had need; and living in Christian
love harmoniously with each other, they did not affirm anything to be their own, but they had allthings in common, and were one in soul and heart toward God.1481 Afterwards these same persons
also themselves suffered persecution in their flesh at the hands of the Jews, their carnal
fellow-countrymen, and were dispersed abroad, to the end that, in consequence of their dispersion,
Christ should be preached more extensively, and that they themselves at the same time should be
followers of the patience of their Lord. For He who in meekness had endured them,1482 enjoined
them in meekness to endure for His sake.
1477

Ex. xxxiv. 28.
Luke xi. 20.
1479
Acts ii.
1480
The reference evidently is to Acts v. 15, where, however, it is only the people’s intention that is noticed, and that onlyin the instance of the sick, and not of any individual actually dead.
1481
Acts ii. 44, iv. 34.
1482
Adopting the Benedictine version, qui eos mansuetus passus fuerat, and taking it as a parallel to Acts xiii. 18, Heb. xii.
3. There is, however, great variety of reading here. Thus we find qui ante eos, etc. = who had suffered in meekness before them:qui pro eis, etc. = who had suffered in their stead: qui propter eos, etc. = who had suffered on their account: and qui per eos,
etc. = who had suffered through them, etc. But the reading in the text appears best authenticated.
1478

420

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

43. “Among those same persecutors of the saints the Apostle Paul had once also ranked; andhe raged with eminent violence against the Christians. But, subsequently, he became a believer andan apostle, and was sent to preach the gospel to the Gentiles, suffering (in that ministry) things
more grievous on behalf of the name of Christ than were those which he had done against the nameof Christ. Moreover, in establishing churches throughout all the nations where he was sowing theseed of the gospel, he was wont to give earnest injunction that, as these converts (coming as they
did from the worship of idols and without experience in the worship of the one God) could notreadily serve God in the way of selling and distributing their possessions, they should make offerings
for the poor brethren among the saints who were in the churches of Judea which had believed in
Christ. In this manner the doctrine of the apostle constituted some to be, as it were, soldiers, andothers to be, as it were, provincial tributaries, while it set Christ in the centre of them like thecorner-stone (in accordance with what had been announced beforetime by the prophet),1483 in whomboth parties, like walls advancing from different sides, that is to say, from Jews and from Gentiles,
might be joined together in the affection of kinship. But at a later period heavier and more frequent
persecutions arose from the unbelieving Gentiles against the Church of Christ, and day by day wasfulfilled that prophetic word which the Lord spake when He said, ‘Behold, I send you as sheep inthe midst of wolves.’1484

Chapter 24.—Of the Church in Its Likeness to a Vine Sprouting and Suffering Pruning.
44. “But that vine, which was spreading forth its fruitful shoots throughout the circle of lands,
according as had been prophesied with regard to it, and as had been foretold by the Lord Himself,
sprouted all the more luxuriantly in proportion as it was watered with richer streams of the bloodof martyrs. And as these died in behalf of the truth of the faith in countless numbers throughout alllands, even the persecuting kingdoms themselves desisted, and were converted to the knowledge
and worship of Christ, with the neck of their pride broken. Moreover it behoved that this same vine
should be pruned in accordance with the Lord’s repeated predictions,1485 and that the unfruitfultwigs should be cut out of it, by which heresies and schisms were occasioned in various localities,
under the name of Christ, on the part of men who sought not His glory but their own; whose
oppositions, however, also served more and more to discipline the Church, and to test and illustrate
both its doctrine and its patience.
45. “All these things, then, we now perceive to be realized precisely as we read of them inpredictions uttered so long before the event. And as the first Christians, inasmuch as they did not
see these things literally made good in their own day, were moved by miracles to believe them; so
as regards ourselves, inasmuch as all these things have now been brought to pass exactly as weread of them in those books which were written a long time previous to the fulfillment of the things
in question, wherein they were all announced as matters yet future, even as they are now seen to

1483
1484
1485

Ps. cxviii. 22; Isa. xxviii. 16.
Matt. x. 16.
John xv. 2.

421

NPNF (V1-03)

310

Philip Schaff

be actually present, we are built up unto faith, so that, enduring and persevering in the Lord, we
believe without any hesitation in the destined accomplishment even of those things which still
remain to be realized. For, indeed, in the same Scriptures, tribulations yet to come are still read of,as well as the final day of judgment itself, when all the citizens of these two states shall receive
their bodies again, and rise and give account of their life before the judgment-seat of Christ. For
He will come in the glory of His power, who of old condescended to come in the lowliness ofhumanity; and He will separate all the godly from the ungodly,—not only from those who haveutterly refused to believe in Him at all, but also from those who have believed in Him to no purpose
and without fruit. To the one class He will give an eternal kingdom together with Himself, while
to the other He will award eternal punishment together with the devil. But as no joy yielded bythings temporal can be found in any measure comparable to the joy of life eternal which the saints
are destined to attain, so no torment of temporal punishments can be compared to the everlasting
torments of the unrighteous.

Chapter 25.—Of Constancy in the Faith of the Resurrection.
46. “Therefore, brother, confirm yourself in the name and help of Him in whom you believe,
so as to withstand the tongues of those who mock at our faith, in whose case the devil speaks
seductive words, bent above all on making a mockery of the faith in a resurrection. But, judging
from your own history,1486 believe that, seeing you have been, you will also be hereafter, even as
you perceive yourself now to be, although previously you were not. For where was this great
structure of your body, and where this formation and compacted connection of members a few
years ago, before you were born, or even before you were conceived in your mother’s womb?
Where, I repeat, was then this structure and this stature of your body? Did it not come forth to lightfrom the hidden secrets of this creation, under the invisible formative operations of the Lord God,and did it not rise to its present magnitude and fashion by those fixed measures of increase whichcome with the successive periods of life?1487 Is it then in any way a difficult thing for God, who
also in a moment brings together out of secrecy the masses of the clouds and veils the heavens in
an instant of time, to make this quantity of your body again what it was, seeing that He was able
to make it what formerly it was not?1488 Consequently, believe with a manful and unshaken spiritthat all those things which seem to be withdrawn from the eyes of men as if to perish, are safe andexempt from loss in relation to the omnipotence of God, who will restore them, without any delay
or difficulty, when He is so minded,—those of them at least, I should say, that are judged by His
justice to merit restoration; in order that men may give account of their deeds in their very bodies
in which they have done them; and that in these they may be deemed worthy to receive either theexchange of heavenly incorruption in accordance with the deserts of their piety, or the corruptible

1486
1487
1488

Sed ex te ipso crede. It may also = but, on your side, do you believe.
Certisque ætatum incrementis, etc.
Reading sicut non erat; for which, however, cum non erat also occurs = seeing He was able to make it when it was not.

422

NPNF (V1-03)

311

Philip Schaff

condition of body1489 in accordance with the deserts of their wickedness,—and that, too, not a
condition such as may be done away with by death, but such as shall furnish material for everlasting
pains.
47. “Flee, therefore, by steadfast faith and good manners,—flee, brother, those torments inwhich neither the torturers fail, nor do the tortured die; to whom it is death without end, to be unable
to die in their pains. And be kindled with love and longing for the everlasting life of the saints, inwhich neither will action be toilsome nor will rest be indolent; in which the praise of God will be
without irksomeness and without defect; wherein there will be no weariness in the mind, no
exhaustion in the body; wherein, too, there shall be no want, whether on your own part, so that you
should crave for relief, or on your neighbor’s part, so that you should be in haste to carry relief tohim. God will be the whole enjoyment and satisfaction1490 of that holy city, which lives in Him andof Him, in wisdom and beatitude. For as we hope and look for what has been promised by Him,
we shall be made equal to the angels of God,1491 and together with them we shall enjoy that Trinity
now by sight, wherein at present we walk by faith.1492 For we believe that which we see not, inorder that through these very deserts of faith we may be counted worthy also to see that which we
believe, and to abide in it; to the intent that these mysteries of the equality of the Father, the Son,and the Holy Spirit, and the unity of this same Trinity, and the manner in which these threesubsistences are one God, need no more be uttered by us in words of faith and sounding syllables,
but may be drunk in in purest and most burning contemplation in that silence.
48. “These things hold fixed in your heart, and call upon the God in whom you believe, todefend you against the temptations of the devil; and be careful, lest that adversary come stealthily
upon you from a strange quarter, who, as a most malevolent solace for his own damnation, seeks
others whose companionship he may obtain in that damnation. For he is bold enough not only totempt Christian people through the instrumentality of those who hate the Christian name, or are
pained to see the world taken possession of by that name, and still fondly desire to do service toidols and to the curious rites of evil spirits, but at times he also attempts the same through the agencyof such men as we have mentioned a little ago, to wit, persons severed from the unity of the Church,
like the twigs which are lopped off when the vine is pruned, who are called heretics or schismatics.
Howbeit sometimes also he makes the same effort by means of the Jews, seeking to tempt andseduce believers by their instrumentality. Nevertheless, what ought above all things to be guarded
against is, that no individual may suffer himself to be tempted and deceived by men who are within
the Catholic Church itself, and who are borne by it like the chaff that is sustained against the timeof its winnowing. For in being patient toward such persons, God has this end in view, namely, toexercise and confirm the faith and prudence of His elect by means of the perverseness of theseothers while at the same time He also takes account of the fact that many of their number make anadvance, and are converted to the doing of the good pleasure of God with a great impetus, when

1489
1490
1491
1492

Corruptibilem corporis conditionem. But corruptibilis also occurs = the condition of a corruptible body.
Satietas. Some editions, however, give societas = the society.
Luke xx. 36.
2 Cor. v. 7.

423

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

led to take pity upon their own souls.1493 For not all treasure up for themselves, through the patienceof God, wrath in the day of the wrath of His just judgment;1494 but many are brought by the same
patience of the Almighty to the most wholesome pain of repentance.1495 And until that is effected,
they are made the means of exercising not only the forbearance, but also the compassion of those
who are already holding by the right way. Accordingly, you will have to witness many drunkards,
covetous men, deceivers gamesters, adulterers, fornicators, men who bind upon their persons
sacrilegious charms and others given up to sorcerers and astrologers,1496 and diviners practised in
all kinds of impious arts. You will also have to observe how those very crowds which fill the theatreson the festal days of the pagans also fill the churches on the festal days of the Christians. And when
you see these things you will be tempted to imitate them. Nay, why should I use the expression,
you will see, in reference to what you assuredly are acquainted with even already? For you are notignorant of the fact that many who are called Christians engage in all these evil things which I havebriefly mentioned. Neither are you ignorant that at times, perchance, men whom you know to bear
the name of Christians are guilty of even more grievous offenses than these. But if you have comewith the notion that you may do such things as in a secured position, you are greatly in error; neither
will the name of Christ be of any avail to you when He begins to judge in utmost strictness, who
also of old condescended in utmost mercy to come to man’s relief. For He Himself has foretoldthese things, and speaks to this effect in the Gospel: ‘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. Many shall say unto
me in that day, Lord, Lord, in thy name we have eaten and drunken.’1497 For all, therefore, who
persevere in such works the end is damnation. Consequently, when you see many not only doingthese things but also defending and recommending them, keep yourself firmly by the law of God,and follow not its willful transgressors. For it is not according to their mind, but according to His1498
truth that you will be judged.
49. “Associate with the good, whom you perceive to be at one with you in loving your King.
For there are many such for you to discover, if you also begin to cultivate that character yourself.
For if in the public spectacles you wished to be in congenial company, and to attach yourself
closely1499 to men who are united with you in a liking for some charioteer, or some hunter, or someplayer or other, how much more ought you to find pleasure in associating with those who are at
one with you in loving that God, with regard to whom no one that loves Him shall ever have cause
for the blush of shame, inasmuch as not only is He Himself incapable of being overcome, but He
will also render those unconquerable who are affectionately disposed toward Him. At the sametime, not even on those same good men, who either anticipate you or accompany you on the way

1493

Ad placendum Deo miserati animas suas, etc. Instead of miserati the reading miseranti also occurs = "to" the doing of
the good pleasure of the God who takes pity on their souls. The Benedictine editors suggest that the whole clause is in reference
to Ecclesiasticus xxx. 24, (23), which in the Latin runs thus: miserere animæ tuæ placens Deo.
1494
Rom. ii. 5.
1495
Cf. Rom. ii. 4.
1496
Mathematicis.
1497
Matt. vii. 21, 22.
1498
Or = its (i.e. the law’s) truth.
1499
Adopting nam si in spectaculis cum illis esse cupiebas et eis inhærere. Another, but less weightily supported reading,is, nam si in spectaculis et vanitatibus insanorum certaminum illis cupiebas inhærere = for if in the public spectacles and vanities
of mad struggles you wish to attach yourself closely to men, etc.

424

NPNF (V1-03)

312

Philip Schaff

to God, ought you to set your hope, seeing that no more ought you to place it on yourself, however
great may be the progress you have made, but on Him who justifies both them and you, and thus
makes you what you are. For you are secure in God, because He changes not; but in man no one
prudently counts himself secure. But if we ought to love those who are not righteous as yet, withthe view that they may be so, how much more warmly ought those to be loved who already arerighteous? At the same time, it is one thing to love man, and another thing to set one’s hope in man;and the difference is so great, that God enjoins the one and forbids the other. Moreover, if you haveto sustain either any insults or any sufferings in the cause of the name of Christ, and neither fallaway from the faith nor decline from the good way,1500 you are certain to receive the greater reward;
whereas those who give way to the devil in such circumstances, lose even the less reward. But behumble toward God, in order that He may not permit you to be tempted beyond your strength.”

Chapter 26.—Of the Formal Admission of the Catechumen, and of the Signs Therein Made Useof.
50. At the conclusion of this address the person is to be asked whether he believes these thingsand earnestly desires to observe them. And on his replying to that effect then certainly he is to besolemnly signed and dealt with in accordance with the custom of the Church. On the subject of thesacrament, indeed,1501 which he receives, it is first to be well impressed upon his notice that thesigns of divine things are, it is true, things visible, but that the invisible things themselves are also
honored in them, and that that species,1502 which is then sanctified by the blessing, is therefore not
to be regarded merely in the way in which it is regarded in any common use. And thereafter heought to be told what is also signified by the form of words to which he has listened, and what in
him is seasoned1503 by that (spiritual grace) of which this material substance presents the emblem.
Next we should take occasion by that ceremony to admonish him that, if he hears anything evenin the Scriptures which may carry a carnal sound, he should, even although he fails to understandit, nevertheless believe that something spiritual is signified thereby, which bears upon holiness ofcharacter and the future life. Moreover, in this way he learns briefly that, whatever he may hear in
the canonical books of such a kind as to make him unable to refer it to the love of eternity, and oftruth, and of sanctity, and to the love of our neighbor, he should believe that to have been spoken
or done with a figurative significance; and that, consequently, he should endeavor to understand it

1500

Bona via. Another and well authenticated rendering is, bona vita = the good life.
It has been supposed by the Benedictine editors that sane may be a misreading for salis. Whether that be or be not thecase, the sacramentum intended here appears to be the sacramentum salis, in reference to which Neander (Church History iii.
p. 458, Bohn’s Translation) states that “in the North African Church the bishop gave to those whom he received as competentes,
while signing the cross over them as a symbol of consecration, a portion of salt over which a blessing had been pronounced.
This was to signify the divine word imparted to the candidates as the true salt for human nature.” There is an allusion to thesame in the Confessions (i. 11), where Augustin says, “Even from my mother’s womb who greatly hoped in thee, I was signedwith the sign of His cross, and seasoned with His salt.”
1502
Speciem = kind, in reference to the outward and sensible sign of the salt.
1503
Adopting condiat, which unquestionably is the reading most accordant with the figure of the sacramental salt here dealt
with. Some editions give condatur = what is hidden in it, i.e. in the said form of words.
1501

425

NPNF (V1-03)

313

Philip Schaff

in such a manner as to refer it to that twofold (duty of) love. He should be further admonished,however, not to take the term neighbor in a carnal sense, but to understand under it every one who
may ever be with him in that holy city, whether there already or not yet apparent. And (he should
finally be counselled) not to despair of the amendment of any man whom he perceives to be living
under the patience of God for no other reason, as the apostle1504 says, than that he may be brought
to repentance.
51. If this discourse, in which I have supposed myself to have been teaching some uninstructed
person in my presence, appears to you to be too long, you are at liberty to expound these matterswith greater brevity. I do not think, however, that it ought to be longer than this. At the same time,
much depends on what the case itself, as it goes on, may render advisable, and what the audience
actually present shows itself not only to bear, but also to desire. When, however, rapid despatch is
required, notice with what facility the whole matter admits of being explained. Suppose once morethat some one comes before us who desires to be a Christian; and accordingly, suppose further that
he has been interrogated, and that he has returned the answer which we have taken the former
catechumen to have given; for, even should he decline to make this reply, it must at least be said
that he ought to have given it;—then all that remains to be said to him should be put together inthe following manner:—
52. Of a truth, brother, that is great and true blessedness which is promised to the saints in a
future world. All visible things, on the other hand, pass away, and all the pomp, and pleasure, andsolicitude1505 of this world will perish, and (even now) they drag those who love them along withthem onward to destruction. The merciful God, willing to deliver men from this destruction, thatis to say, from everlasting pains, if they should not prove enemies to themselves, and if they should
not withstand the mercy of their Creator, sent His only-begotten Son, that is to say, His Word, equalwith Himself, by whom He made all things. And He, while abiding indeed in His divinity, andneither receding from the Father nor being changed in anything, did at the same time, by taking on
Himself human nature,1506 and appearing to men in mortal flesh, come unto men; in order that, justas death entered among the human race by one man, to wit, the first that was made, that is to say,
Adam, because he consented unto his wife when she was seduced by the devil to the effect thatthey (both) transgressed the commandment of God; even so by one man, Jesus Christ, who is alsoGod, the Son of God, all those who believe in Him might have all their past sins done away with,and enter into eternal life.

Chapter 27.—Of the Prophecies of the Old Testament in Their Visible Fulfillment in the Church.
53. “For all those things, which at present you witness in the Church of God, and which you
see to be taking place under the name of Christ throughout the whole world, were predicted longages ago. And even as we read of them, so also we now see them. And by means of these things

1504
1505
1506

Rom. ii . 4.
Curiositas.
Hominem.

426

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

we are built up unto faith. Once of old there occurred a flood over the whole earth, the object ofwhich was that sinners might be destroyed. And, nevertheless, those who escaped in the ark exhibiteda sacramental sign of the Church that was to be, which at present is floating on the waves of theworld, and is delivered from submersion by the wood of the cross of Christ. It was predicted to
Abraham, a faithful servant of God, a single man, that of Him it was determined that a people
should be born who should worship one God in the midst of all other nations which worshipped
idols; and all things which were prophesied of as destined to happen to that people have come topass exactly as they were foretold. Among that people Christ, the King of all saints and their God,
was also prophesied of as destined to come of the seed of that same Abraham according to the flesh,which (flesh) He took unto Himself, in order that all those also who became followers of His faithmight be sons of Abraham; and thus it has come to pass: Christ was born of the Virgin Mary, who
belonged to that race. It was foretold by the prophets that He would suffer on the cross at the handsof that same people of the Jews, of whose lineage, according to the flesh, He came; and thus it hascome to pass. It was foretold that He would rise again: He has risen again; and, in accordance withthese same predictions of the prophets, He has ascended into heaven and has sent the Holy Spirit
to His disciples. It was foretold not only by the prophets, but also by the Lord Jesus Christ Himself,that His Church would exist throughout the whole world, extended by the martyrdoms and sufferingsof the saints; and this was foretold at a time when as yet His name was at once undeclared to the
Gentiles, and made a subject of derision where it was known; and, nevertheless, in the power of
His miracles, whether those which He wrought by His own hand or those which he effected bymeans of His servants, as these things are being reported and believed, we already see the fulfillmentof that which was predicted, and behold the very kings of the earth, who formerly were wont topersecute the Christians, even now brought into subjection to the name of Christ. It was also foretoldthat schisms and heresies would arise from His Church, and that under His name they would seek
their own glory instead of Christ’s, in such places as they might be able to command; and thesepredictions have been realized.
54. “Will those things, then, which yet remain fail to come to pass? It is manifest that, just as
the former class of things which were foretold have come to pass, so will these latter also come topass. I refer to all the tribulations of the righteous, which yet wait for fulfillment, and to the day of
judgment, which will separate all the wicked from the righteous in the resurrection of the dead;—and
not only will it thus separate those wicked men who are outside the Church, but also it will set apartfor the fire, which is due to such, the chaff of the Church itself, which must be borne with in utmost
patience on to the last winnowing. Moreover, they who deride the (doctrine of a) resurrection,
because they think that this flesh, inasmuch as it becomes corrupt, cannot rise again, will certainly
rise in the same unto punishment, and God will make it plain to such, that He who was able to form
these bodies when as yet they were not, is able in a moment to restore them as they were. But all
the faithful who are destined to reign with Christ shall rise with the same body in such wise thatthey may also be counted worthy to be changed into angelic incorruption; so that they may be madeequal unto the angels of God, even as the Lord Himself has promised;1507 and that they may praise
Him without any failure and without any weariness, ever living in Him and of Him, with such joy
and blessedness as can be neither expressed nor conceived by man.

1507

Luke xx. 36.

427

NPNF (V1-03)

314

Philip Schaff

55. “Believe these things, therefore, and be on your guard against temptations (for the devil
seeks for others who may be brought to perish along with himself); so that not only may thatadversary fail to seduce you by the help of those who are without the Church, whether they bepagans, or Jews, or heretics; but you yourself also may decline to follow the example of thosewithin the Catholic Church itself whom you see leading an evil life, either indulging in excess inthe pleasures of the belly and the throat, or unchaste, or given up to the vain and unlawfulobservances of curious superstitions, whether they be addicted to (the inanities of) public spectacles,or charms, or divinations of devils,1508 or be living in the pomp and inflated arrogance ofcovetousness and pride, or be pursuing any sort of life which the law condemns and punishes. But
rather connect yourself with the good, whom you will easily find out, if you yourself were once
become of that character; so that you may unite with each other in worshipping and loving God for
His own sake;1509 for He himself will be our complete reward to the intent that we may enjoy His
goodness and beauty1510 in that life. He is to be loved, however, not in the way in which any object
that is seen with the eyes is loved, but as wisdom is loved, and truth, and holiness, and righteousness,and charity,1511 and whatever else may be mentioned as of kindred nature; and further, with a love
conformable to these things not as they are in men, but as they are in the very fountain ofincorruptible and unchangeable wisdom. Whomsoever, therefore, you may observe to be loving
these things, attach yourself to them, so that through Christ, who became man in order that He
might be the Mediator between God and men, you may be reconciled to God. But as regards theperverse, even if they find their way within the walls of the Church, think not that they will findtheir way into the kingdom of heaven; for in their own time they will be set apart, if they have notaltered to the better. Consequently, follow the example of good men, bear with the wicked, loveall; forasmuch as you know not what he will be to-morrow who to-day is evil. Howbeit, love not
the unrighteousness of such; but love the persons themselves with the express intent that they may
apprehend righteousness; for not only is the love of God enjoined upon us, but also the love of ourneighbor, on which two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.1512 And this is fulfilled
by no one save the man who has received the (other) gift,1513 the Holy Spirit, who is indeed equalwith the Father and with the Son; for this same Trinity is God; and on this God every hope ought
to be placed. On man our hope ought not to be placed, of whatsoever character he may be. For He,
by whom we are justified, is one thing; and they, together with whom we are justified, are another.
Moreover, it is not only by lusts that the devil tempts, but also by the terrors of insults, and pains,and death itself. But whatever a man shall have suffered on behalf of the name of Christ, and forthe sake of the hope of eternal life, and shall have endured in constancy, (in accordance therewith)the greater reward shall be given him; whereas, if he shall give way to the devil, he shall be damnedalong with him. But works of mercy, conjoined with pious humility, meet with this acknowledgment

1508

Remediorum aut divinationum diabolicarum. Some editions insert sacrilegorum after remediorum = sacrilegious charms
or divinations of devils.
1509
Gratis.
1510
Cf. Zech. ix. 17.
1511
Many mss. omit the words: and holiness, and righteousness, and charity.
1512
Matt. xxii. 37, 39.
1513
One edition reads Dominum, the Lord, the Holy Spirit, etc., instead of donum.

428

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

from God, to wit, that He will not suffer His servants to be tempted more than they are able tobear.”1514

315

A Treatise on Faith and the Creed.
[De Fide Et Symbolo.]in One Book.
Translated by
Rev. S. D. F. Salmond, D.D.,
Professor of Systematic Theology, Free Church College, Aberdeen.
[A discourse delivered before a council of the whole North African Episcopate assembled at
Hippo-Regius.]
317

Introductory Notice.
The occasion and date of the composition of this treatise are indicated in a statement which
Augustin makes in the seventeenth chapter of the First Book of his Retractations.
From this we learn that, in its original form, it was a discourse which Augustin, when only apresbyter, was requested to deliver in public by the bishops assembled at the Council of
Hippo-Regius, and that it was subsequently issued as a book at the desire of friends. The general
assembly of the North African Church, which was thus convened at what is now Bona, in themodern territory of Algiers, took place in the year 393 A.D., and was otherwise one of somehistorical importance, on account of the determined protest which it emitted against the position
elsewhere allowed to Patriarchs in the Church, and against the admittance of any more authoritative
or magisterial title to the highest ecclesiastical official than that of simply “Bishop of the first
Church” (primæ sedis episcopus).
The work constitutes an exposition of the several clauses of the so-called Apostles’ Creed. The
questions concerning the mutual relations of the three Persons in the Godhead are handled withgreatest fullness; in connection with which, especially in the use made of the analogies of Being,
Knowledge, and Love, and in the cautions thrown in against certain applications of these and other1514

1 Cor. x. 13.

429

NPNF (V1-03)

318

Philip Schaff

illustrations taken from things of human experience, we come across sentiments which are also
repeated in the City of God, the books on the Trinity, and others of his doctrinal writings.
The passage referred to in the Retractations is as follows: About the same period, in presenceof the bishops, who gave me orders to that effect, and who were holding a plenary Council of thewhole of Africa at Hippo-Regius, I delivered, as presbyter, a discussion on the subject of Faith andthe Creed. This disputation, at the very pressing request of some of those who were on terms of
more than usual intimacy and affection with us, I threw into the form of a book, in which the themes
themselves are made the subjects of discourse, although not in a method involving the adoption of
the particular connection of words which is given to the competentes1515 to be committed to memory.
In this book, when discussing the question of the resurrection of the flesh, I say:1516 ‘Rise again the
body will, according to the Christian faith, which is incapable of deceiving. And if this appears
incredible to any one, [it is because] he looks simply to what the flesh is at present, while he fails
to consider of what nature it shall be hereafter. For at that time of angelic change it will no more
be flesh and blood, but only body;’ and so on, through the other statements which I have madethere on the subject of the change of bodies terrestrial into bodies celestial, as the apostle, when hespake from the same point, said, ‘Flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God.’1517 But if
any one takes these declarations in a sense leading him to suppose that the earthly body, such as
we now have it, is changed in the resurrection into a celestial body, in any such wise as that neither
these members nor the substance of the flesh will subsist any more, undoubtedly he must be set
right, by being put in mind of the body of the Lord, who subsequently to His resurrection appearedin the same members, as One who was not only to be seen with the eyes, but also handled with thehands; and made His possession of the flesh likewise surer by the discourse which He spake, saying,‘Handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.’1518 Hence it is certainthat the apostle did not deny that the substance of the flesh will exist in the kingdom of God, butthat under the name of ‘flesh and blood’ he designated either men who live after the flesh, or the
express corruption of the flesh, which assuredly at that period shall subsist no more. For after hehad said, ‘Flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God,’ what he proceeds to say
next,—namely, ‘neither shall corruption inherit incorruption,’—is rightly taken to have been addedby way of explaining his previous statement. And on this subject, which is one on which it is difficult
to convince unbelievers, any one who reads my last book, On the City of God, will find that I havediscoursed with the utmost carefulness of which I am capable.1519 The performance in questioncommences thus: ‘Since it is written,’ etc.”[Additional Note by the American Editor.][Another English edition of this treatise De Fide et Symbolo was prepared by the Rev. Charles
a. Heurtley, D.D., Margaret Professor of Divinity and Canon of Christ Church, Oxford, and published
by Parker & Co., Oxford and London, 1886.
1515
1516
1517
1518
1519

i.e.the third order of catechumens, embracing those thoroughly prepared for baptism.
Chap. x. § 24.
1 Cor. xv. 50.
Luke xxiv. 39.
City of God, Bk. xxii. Ch. 21.

430

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

The following text of the Apostles’ Creed may be collected from this book of St. Augustin, andwas current in North Africa towards the close of the fourth century:
1. I Believe in God the Father Almighty. Chs. 2 and 3.
2. (And) In Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Only-Begotten of the Father, or, His Only Son,
Our Lord. Ch. 3.
3. Who Was Born Through the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary. Ch. 4 (§ 8.)
4. Who Under Pontius Pilate Was Crucified and Buried. Ch. 5 (§ 11.)
5. On the Third Day He Rose Again from the Dead. Ch. 5 (§ 12.)
6. He Ascended into Heaven. Ch. 6 (§ 13.)
7. He Sitteth at the Right Hand of the Father. Ch. 7 (§ 14.)
8. From Thence He Will Come and Judge the Living and the Dead. Ch. 8 (§ 15.)
9. (and I Believe) in the Holy Spirit. Ch. 9 (§ 16–19.)
10. I Believe the Holy Church (Catholic). Ch. 10 (§ 21.)
11. The Forgiveness of Sin. Ch. 10 (§ 23.)
12. The Resurrection of the Body. Ch. 10 (§ 23, 24.)
13. The Life Everlasting. Ch. 10 (§ 24.)]

A Treatise on Faith and the Creed.
321

Chapter 1.—Of the Origin and Object of the Composition.
1. Inasmuch as it is a position, written and established on the most solid foundation of apostolicteaching, “that the just lives of faith;”1520 and inasmuch also as this faith demands of us the duty atonce of heart and tongue,—for an apostle says, “With the heart man believeth unto righteousness,
and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation,”1521—it becomes us to be mindful both ofrighteousness and of salvation. For, destined as we are to reign hereafter in everlasting righteousness,
we certainly cannot secure our salvation from the present evil world, unless at the same time, whilelaboring for the salvation of our neighbors, we likewise with the mouth make our own professionof the faith which we carry in our heart. And it must be our aim, by pious and careful watchfulness,to provide against the possibility of the said faith sustaining any injury in us, on any side, throughthe fraudulent artifices [or, cunning fraud] of the heretics.
We have, however, the catholic faith in the Creed, known to the faithful and committed tomemory, contained in a form of expression as concise as has been rendered admissible by thecircumstances of the case; the purpose of which [compilation] was, that individuals who are but
beginners and sucklings among those who have been born again in Christ, and who have not yet
been strengthened by most diligent and spiritual handling and understanding of the divine Scriptures,
should be furnished with a summary, expressed in few words, of those matters of necessary belief
which were subsequently to be explained to them in many words, as they made progress and roseto [the height of] divine doctrine, on the assured and steadfast basis of humility and charity. It is
1520
1521

Hab. ii. 4; Rom. i. 17; Gal. iii. 11; Heb. x. 38.
Rom. x. 10.

431

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

underneath these few words, therefore, which are thus set in order in the Creed, that most heretics
have endeavored to conceal their poisons; whom divine mercy has withstood, and still withstands,
by the instrumentality of spiritual men, who have been counted worthy not only to accept andbelieve the catholic faith as expounded in those terms, but also thoroughly to understand andapprehend it by the enlightenment imparted by the Lord. For it is written, “Unless ye believe, ye
shall not understand.”1522 But the handling of the faith is of service for the protection of the Creed;
not, however, to the intent that this should itself be given instead of the Creed, to be committed tomemory and repeated by those who are receiving the grace of God, but that it may guard the matterswhich are retained in the Creed against the insidious assaults of the heretics, by means of catholic
authority and a more entrenched defence.

322

Chapter 2.—Of God and His Exclusive Eternity.
2. For certain parties have attempted to gain acceptance for the opinion that God the Father is
not Almighty: not that they have been bold enough expressly to affirm this, but in their traditions
they are convicted of entertaining and crediting such a notion. For when they affirm that there is anature1523 which God Almighty did not create, but of which at the same time He fashioned thisworld, which they admit to have been disposed in beauty,1524 they thereby deny that God is almighty,
to the effect of not believing that He could have created the world without employing, for the
purpose of its construction, another nature, which had been in existence previously, and which He
Himself had not made. Thus, forsooth, [they reason] from their carnal familiarity with the sight ofcraftsmen and house-builders, and artisans of all descriptions, who have no power to make goodthe effect of their own art unless they get the help of materials already prepared. And so theseparties in like manner understand the Maker of the world not to be almighty, if1525 thus He could
not fashion the said world without the help of some other nature, not framed by Himself, which He
had to use as His materials. Or if indeed they do allow God, the Maker of the world, to be almighty,
it becomes matter of course that they must also acknowledge that He made out of nothing the things
which He did make. For, granting that He is almighty, there cannot exist anything of which He
should not be the Creator. For although He made something out of something, as man out of clay,1526
nevertheless He certainly did not make any object out of aught which He Himself had not made;for the earth from which the clay comes He had made out of nothing. And even if He had madeout of some material the heavens and the earth themselves, that is to say, the universe and all things
which are in it, according as it is written, “Thou who didst make the world out of matter unseen,”1527or also “without form,” as some copies give it; yet we are under no manner of necessity to believethat this very material of which the universe was made, although it might be “without form,”
1522
1523
1524
1525
1526
1527

Isa. vii. 9, according to the rendering of the Septuagint.
Naturam.
Reading pulchre ordinatum. Some editions give pulchre ornatum = beautifully adorned.
Si mundum fabricare non posset. For si some mss. give qui = inasmuch as He could not, etc.
De limo = of mud.
Wisd. xi. 17.

432

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

although it might be “unseen,” whatever might be the mode of its subsistence, could possibly havesubsisted of itself, as if it were co-eternal and co-eval with God. But whatsoever that mode waswhich it possessed to the effect of subsisting in some manner, whatever that manner might be, andof being capable of taking on the forms of distinct things, this it did not possess except by the handof Almighty God, by whose goodness it is that everything exists,—not only every object which isalready formed, but also every object which is formable. This, moreover, is the difference between
the formed and the formable, that the formed has already taken on form, while the formable iscapable of taking the same. But the same Being who imparts form to objects, also imparts thecapability of being formed. For of Him and in Him is the fairest figure1528 of all things, unchangeable;
and therefore He Himself is One, who communicates to everything its possibilities, not only thatit be beautiful actually, but also that it be capable of being beautiful. For which reason we do mostright to believe that God made all things of nothing. For, even although the world was made ofsome sort of material, this self-same material itself was made of nothing; so that, in accordancewith the most orderly gift of God, there was to enter first the capacity of taking forms, and thenthat all things should be formed which have been formed. This, however, we have said, in orderthat no one might suppose that the utterances of the divine Scriptures are contrary the one to theother, in so far as it is written at once that God made all things of nothing, and that the world wasmade of matter without form.
3. As we believe, therefore, in God the Father Almighty, we ought to uphold the opinion that
there is no creature which has not been created by the Almighty. And since He created all things
by the Word,1529 which Word is also designated the Truth, and the Power, and the Wisdom of
God,1530—as also under many other appellations the Lord Jesus Christ, who1531 is commended to
our faith, is presented likewise to our mental apprehensions, to wit, our Deliverer and Ruler,1532
the Son of God; for that Word, by whose means all things were founded, could not have been
begotten by any other than by Him who founded all things by His instrumentality;—

Chapter 3.—Of the Son of God, and His Peculiar Designation as the Word.

323—Since this is the case, I repeat, we believe also in Jesus Christ, the Son of God the
Only-Begotten of the Father, that is to say, His Only Son, our Lord. This Word however, we ought
not to apprehend merely in the sense in which we think of our own words, which are given forth
by the voice and the mouth, and strike the air and pass on, and subsist no longer than their soundcontinues. For that Word remains unchangeably: for of this very Word was it spoken when of
Wisdom it was said, “Remaining in herself, she maketh all things new.”1533 Moreover, the reason
1528

Speciosissima species = the seemliest semblance.
John i. 3.
1530
John xiv. 6; 1 Cor. i. 24.
1531
For qui several mss. give quibus here = "under" many other appellations is the Lord Jesus Christ introduced to our mental
apprehensions, by which He is commended to our faith.
1532
For Rector we also find Creator = Creator.
1533
Wisd. vii. 27.
1529

433

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffof His being named the Word of the Father, is that the Father is made known by Him. Accordingly,
just as it is our intention, when we speak truth, that by means of our words our mind should bemade known to him who hears us, and that whatever we carry in secrecy in our heart may be set
forth by means of signs of this sort for the intelligent understanding of another individual; so thisWisdom that God the Father begot is most appropriately named His Word, inasmuch as the most
hidden Father is made known to worthy minds by the same.1534
4. Now there is a very great difference between our mind and those words of ours, by which
we endeavor to set forth the said mind. We indeed do not beget intelligible words,1535 but we form
them; and in the forming of them the body is the underlying material. Between mind and body,
however, there is the greatest difference. But God, when He begot the Word, begot that which He
is Himself. Neither out of nothing, nor of any material already made and founded did He then beget;
but He begot of Himself that which He is Himself. For we too aim at this when we speak, (as weshall see) if we carefully consider the inclination1536 of our will; not when we lie, but when we
speak the truth. For to what else do we direct our efforts then, but to bring our own very mind, if
it can be done at all, in upon the mind of the hearer, with the view of its being apprehended andthoroughly discerned by him; so that we may indeed abide in our very selves, and make no retreat
from ourselves, and yet at the same time put forth a sign of such a nature as that by it a knowledge
of us1537 may be effected in another individual; that thus, so far as the faculty is granted us, anothermind may be, as it were, put forth by the mind, whereby it may disclose itself? This we do, making
the attempt1538 both by words, and by the simple sound of the voice, and by the countenance, andby the gestures of the body,—by so many contrivances, in sooth, desiring to make patent that which
is within; inasmuch as we are not able to put forth aught of this nature [in itself completely]: andthus it is that the mind of the speaker cannot become perfectly known; thus also it results that aplace is open for falsehoods. God the Father, on the other hand, who possessed both the will andthe power to declare Himself with the utmost truth to minds designed to obtain knowledge of Him,with the purpose of thus declaring Himself begot this [Word] which He Himself is who did beget;
which [Person] is likewise called His Power and Wisdom,1539 inasmuch as it is by Him that He has
wrought all things, and in order disposed them; of whom these words are for this reason spoken:“She (Wisdom) reacheth from one end to another mightily, and sweetly doth she order all things.”1540

1534

Adopting the Benedictine version per ipsam innotescit dignis animis secretissimus Pater. There is, however, great varietyof reading here. Some mss. give ignis for dignis = the most hidden fire of the Father is made known to minds. Others give signis= the most hidden Father is made known by signs to minds. Others have innotescit animus secretissimus Patris, or innotescit
signis secretissimus Pater = the most hidden mind of the Father is made known by the same, or = the most hidden Father ismade known by the same in signs.
1535
Sonantia verba = sounding, vocal words.
1536
Appetitum.
1537
Nostra notitia = our knowledge.
1538
Reading conantes et verbis, etc. Three good mss. give conante fetu verbi = as the offspring of the word makes theattempt. The Benedictine editors suggest conantes fetu verbi = making the attempt by the offspring of the word.
1539
1 Cor. i. 24.
1540
Wisd. viii. 1.

434

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Chapter 4.—Of the Son of God as Neither Made by the Father Nor Less Than the Father, and of
His Incarnation.

324

5. Wherefore The Only-Begotten Son of God was neither made by the Father; for, according
to the word of an evangelist, “all things were made by Him:”1541 nor begotten instantaneously;1542
since God, who is eternally1543 wise, has with Himself His eternal Wisdom: nor unequal with the
Father, that is to say, in anything less than He; for an apostle also speaks in this wise, “Who, although
He was constituted in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.”1544 By thiscatholic faith, therefore, those are excluded, on the one hand, who affirm that the Son is the same
[Person] as the Father; for [it is clear that] this Word could not possibly be with God, were it notwith God the Father, and [it is just as evident that] He who is alone is equal to no one. And, on theother hand, those are equally excluded who affirm that the Son is a creature, although not such an
one as the rest of the creatures are. For however great they declare the creature to be, if it is acreature, it has been fashioned and made.1545 For the terms fashion and create1546 mean one and thesame thing; although in the usage of the Latin tongue the phrase create is employed at times insteadof what would be the strictly accurate word beget. But the Greek language makes a distinction. For
we call that creatura (creature) which they call μ or
; and when we desire to speak without
ambiguity, we use not the word creare (create), but the word condere (fashion, found).
Consequently, if the Son is a creature, however great that may be, He has been made. But we believe
in Him by whom all things (omnia) were made, not in Him by whom the rest of things (cetera)
were made. For here again we cannot take this term all things in any other sense than as meaning
whatsoever things have been made.
6. But as “the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,”1547 the same Wisdom which was
begotten of God condescended also to be created among men.1548 There is a reference to this in theword, “The Lord created me in the beginning of His ways.”1549 For the beginning of His ways is
the Head of the Church, which is Christ1550 endued with human nature (homine indutus), by whom
it was purposed that there should be given to us a pattern of living, that is, a sure1551 way by which
we might reach God. For by no other path was it possible for us to return but by humility, who fell
by pride, according as it was said to our first creation, “Taste, and ye shall be as gods.”1552 Of this1541

John i. 3.
According to the literal meaning of the phrase ex tempore. It may, however, here be used as = under conditions of time,or in time.
1543
Reading sempiterne: for which sempiternus = the eternal wise God, is also given.
1544
Phil. ii. 6.
1545
Condita et facta est.
1546
Condere and creare.
1547
John i. 14.
1548
Adopting in hominibus creavi. One important ms. gives in omnibus = amongst all.
1549
Prov. viii. 22, with creavit me instead of the possessed me of the English version.
1550
Various editions give principium et caput Ecclesiæ est Christus = the beginning of His ways and the Head of the Church
is Christ.
1551
For via certa others give via recta = a right way.
1552
Gen. iii. 5.
1542

435

NPNF (V1-03)

325

Philip Schaff

humility, therefore, that is to say, of the way by which it was needful for us to return, our Restorer
Himself has deemed it meet to exhibit an example in His own person, “who thought it not robbery
to be equal with God, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant;”1553 in order that He might
be created Man in the beginning of His ways, the Word by whom all things were made. Wherefore,
in so far as He is the Only-begotten, He has no brethren; but in so far as He is the First-begotten,
He has deemed it worthy of Him to give the name of brethren to all those who, subsequently to andby means of His pre-eminence,1554 are born again into the grace of God through the adoption ofsons, according to the truth commended to us by apostolic teaching.1555 Thus, then, the Son according
to nature (naturalis filius) was born of the very substance of the Father, the only one so born,
subsisting as that which the Father is,1556 God of God, Light of Light. We, on the other hand, are
not the light by nature, but are enlightened by that Light, so that we may be able to shine in wisdom.
For, as one says, “that was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.”1557
Therefore we add to the faith of things eternal likewise the temporal dispensation1558 of our Lord,
which He deemed it worthy of Him to bear for us and to minister in behalf of our salvation. For inso far as He is the only-begotten Son of God, it cannot be said of Him that He was and that He shallbe, but only that He is; because, on the one hand, that which was, now is not; and, on the other, thatwhich shall be, as yet is not. He, then, is unchangeable, independent of the condition of times andvariation. And it is my opinion that this is the very consideration to which was due the circumstancethat He introduced to the apprehension of His servant Moses the kind of name [which He thenadopted]. For when he asked of Him by whom he should say that he was sent, in the event of thepeople to whom he was being sent despising him, he received his answer when He spake in thiswise: “I Am that I Am.” Thereafter, too, He added this: “Thus shalt thou say unto the children of
Israel, He that is (Qui est) has sent me unto you.”1559
7. From this, I trust, it is now made patent to spiritual minds that there cannot possibly exist
any nature contrary to God. For if He is,—and this is a word which can be spoken with propriety
only of God (for that which truly is remains unchangeably; inasmuch as that which is changed has
been something which now it is not, and shall be something which as yet it is not),—it follows that
God has nothing contrary to Himself. For if the question were put to us, What is contrary to white?
we would reply, black; if the question were, What is contrary to hot? we would reply, cold; if thequestion were, What is contrary to quick? we would reply, slow; and all similar interrogations wewould answer in like manner. When, however, it is asked, What is contrary to that which is? theright reply to give is, that which is not.

1553

Phil. ii. 6, 7.
Per ejus primatum = by means of His standing as the Firstborn. We follow the Benedictine reading, qui post ejus et perejus primatum in Dei gratiam renascuntur. But there is another, although less authoritative, version, viz. qui post ejus primitias
in Dei gratia nascimur = all of us who, subsequently to His first-fruits, are born in the grace of God.
1555
Luke viii. 21; Rom. viii. 15–17; Gal. iv. 5; Eph. i. 5; Heb. ii. 11.
1556
Id existens quod Pater est, etc. Another version is, idem existens quod Pater Deus = subsisting as the same that God theFather is.
1557
John i. 9.
1558
The term dispensatio occurs very frequently as the equivalent of the Greek οἰκονομια = economy, designating theIncarnation.
1559
Ex. iii. 14.
1554

436

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

8. But whereas, in a temporal dispensation, as I have said, with a view to our salvation andrestoration, and with the goodness of God acting therein, our changeable nature has been assumed
by that unchangeable Wisdom of God, we add the faith in temporal things which have been donewith salutary effect on our behalf, believing in that Son of God Who Was Born Through the Holy
Ghost of the Virgin Mary. For by the gift of God, that is, by the Holy Spirit, there was granted tous so great humility on the part of so great a God, that He deemed it worthy of Him to assume theentire nature of man (totum hominem) in the womb of the Virgin, inhabiting the material body sothat it sustained no detriment (integrum), and leaving it1560 without detriment. This temporaldispensation is in many ways craftily assailed by the heretics. But if any one shall have grasped
the catholic faith, so as to believe that the entire nature of man was assumed by the Word of God,
that is to say, body, soul, and spirit, he has sufficient defense against those parties. For surely, sincethat assumption was effected in behalf of our salvation, one must be on his guard lest, as he believes
that there is something belonging to our nature which sustains no relation to that assumption, thissomething may fail also to sustain any relation to the salvation.1561 And seeing that, with the
exception of the form of the members, which has been imparted to the varieties of living objects
with differences adapted to their different kinds, man is in nothing separated from the cattle but in[the possession of] a rational spirit (rationali spiritu), which is also named mind (mens), how isthat faith sound, according to which the belief is maintained, that the Wisdom of God assumed thatpart of us which we hold in common with the cattle, while He did not assume that which is brightly
illumined by the light of wisdom, and which is man’s peculiar gift?
9. Moreover, those parties1562 also are to be abhorred who deny that our Lord Jesus Christ had
in Mary a mother upon earth; while that dispensation has honored both sexes, at once the male andthe female, and has made it plain that not only that sex which He assumed pertains to God’s care,
but also that sex by which He did assume this other, in that He bore [the nature of] the man (virum
gerendo), [and] in that He was born of the woman. Neither is there anything to compel us to adenial of the mother of the Lord, in the circumstance that this word was spoken by Him: “Woman,
what have I to do with thee? Mine hour is not yet come.”1563 But He rather admonishesus tounderstand that, in respect of His being God, there was no mother for Him, the part of whose
personal majesty (cujus majestatis personam) He was preparing to show forth in the turning ofwater into wine. But as regards His being crucified, He was crucified in respect of his being man;and that was the hour which had not come as yet, at the time when this word was spoken, “Whathave I to do with thee? Mine hour is not yet come;” that is, the hour at which I shall recognize thee.
For at that period, when He was crucified as man, He recognized His human mother (hominem
matrem), and committed her most humanely (humanissime) to the care of the best beloved
disciple.1564 Nor, again, should we be moved by the fact that, when the presence of His mother andHis brethren was announced to Him, He replied, “Who is my mother, or who my brethren?” etc.1565
But rather let it teach us, that when parents hinder our ministry wherein we minister the word of
1560
1561
1562
1563
1564
1565

Deserens. With less point, deferens has been suggested = bearing it, or delivering it.
Or it may = he should fail to have any relation to the salvation.
Referring to the Manicheans.
John ii. 4.
John xix. 26, 27.
Matt. xii. 48.

437

NPNF (V1-03)

326

Philip Schaff

God to our brethren, they ought not to be recognized by us. For if, on the ground of His having
said, “Who is my mother?” every one should conclude that He had no mother on earth, then eachshould as matter of course be also compelled to deny that the apostles had fathers on earth; since
He gave them an injunction in these terms: “Call no man your father upon the earth; for one is yourFather, which is in heaven.”1566
10. Neither should the thought of the woman’s womb impair this faith in us, to the effect that
there should appear to be any necessity for rejecting such a generation of our Lord for the mere
reason that worthless men consider it unworthy (sordidi sordidam putant). For most true are thesesayings of an apostle, both that “the foolishness of God is wiser than men,”1567 and that “to the pure
all things are pure.”1568 Those,1569 therefore, who entertain this opinion ought to ponder the factthat the rays of this sun, which indeed they do not praise as a creature of God, but adore as God,are diffused all the world over, through the noisomenesses of sewers and every kind of horrible
thing, and that they operate in these according to their nature, and yet never become debased byany defilement thence contracted, albeit that the visible light is by nature in closer conjunction withvisible pollutions. How much less, therefore, could the Word of God, who is neither corporeal nor
visible, sustain defilement from the female body, wherein He assumed human flesh together withsoul and spirit, through the incoming of which the majesty of the Word dwells in a less immediate
conjunction with the frailty of a human body!1570 Hence it is manifest that the Word of God could
in no way have been defiled by a human body, by which even the human soul is not defiled. For
not when it rules the body and quickens it, but only when it lusts after the mortal good things thereof,is the soul defiled by the body. But if these persons were to desire to avoid the defilements of thesoul, they would dread rather these falsehoods and profanities.

Chapter 5.—Of Christ’s Passion, Burial, and Resurrection.
11. But little [comparatively] was the humiliation (humilitas) of our Lord on our behalf in His
being born: it was also added that He deemed it meet to die in behalf of mortal men. For “He
humbled Himself, being made subject even unto death, yea, the death of the cross:”1571 lest any oneof us, even were he able to have no fear of death [in general], should yet shudder at some particularsort of death which men reckon most shameful. Therefore do we believe in Him Who Under Pontius
Pilate Was Crucified and Buried. For it was requisite that the name of the judge should be added,
with a view to the cognizance of the times. Moreover, when that burial is made an object of belief,

1566

Matt. xxiii. 9.
1 Cor. i. 25.
1568
Tit. i. 15.
1569
In reference to the Manicheans.
1570
The Benedictine text gives, quibus intervenientibus habitat majestas Verbi ab humani corporis fragilitate secretius.
Another well-supported version is, ad humani corporis fragilitatem, etc. = more retired in relation to the frailty of the human
body.
1571
Phil. ii. 8.
1567

438

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

there enters also the recollection of the new tomb,1572 which was meant to present a testimony to
Him in His destiny to rise again to newness of life, even as the Virgin’s womb did the same to Him
in His appointment to be born. For just as in that sepulchre no other dead person was buried,1573
whether before or after Him; so neither in that womb, whether before or after, was anything mortal
conceived.
12. We believe also, that On the Third Day He Rose Again from The Dead, the first-begotten
for brethren destined to come after Him, whom He has called into the adoption of the sons of
God,1574 whom [also] He has deemed it meet to make His own joint-partners and joint-heirs.1575

Chapter 6.—Of Christ’s Ascension into Heaven.
13. We believe that He Ascended into Heaven, which place of blessedness He has likewise
promised unto us, saying, “They shall be as the angels in the heavens,”1576 in that city which is themother of us all,1577 the Jerusalem eternal in the heavens. But it is wont to give offense to certain
parties, either impious Gentiles or heretics, that we should believe in the assumption of an earthly
body into heaven. The Gentiles, however, for the most part, set themselves diligently to ply us withthe arguments of the philosophers, to the effect of affirming that there cannot possibly be anythingearthly in heaven. For they know not our Scriptures, neither do they understand how it has beensaid, “It is sown an animal body, it is raised a spiritual body.”1578 For thus it has not been expressed,
as if body were turned into spirit and became spirit; inasmuch as at present, too, our body, whichis called animal (animale), has not been turned into soul and become soul (anima). But by a spiritual
body is meant one which has been made subject to spirit in such wise1579 that it is adapted to aheavenly habitation, all frailty and every earthly blemish having been changed and converted into
heavenly purity and stability. This is the change concerning which the apostle likewise speaks thus:“We shall all rise, but we shall not all be changed.”1580 And that this change is made not unto theworse, but unto the better, the same [apostle] teaches, when he says, “And we shall be changed.”1581
But the question as to where and in what manner the Lord’s body is in heaven, is one which it
would be altogether over-curious and superfluous to prosecute. Only we must believe that it is inheaven. For it pertains not to our frailty to investigate the secret things of heaven, but it does pertain

1572

For monumenti some editions give testamenti = testament.
John xix. 41.
1574
Eph. i. 5.
1575
Rom. viii. 17.
1576
Matt. xxii. 30.
1577
Gal. iv. 26.
1578
1 Cor. xv. 44.
1579
Adopting the Benedictine reading, quod ita spiritui subditum est. But several mss. give quia ita coaptandum est = it isunderstood to be a spiritual body, in that it is to be so adapted as to suit a heavenly habitation.
1580
1 Cor. xv. 51, according to the Vulgate’s transposition of the negative.
1581
1 Cor. xv. 52.
1573

439

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

to our faith to hold elevated and honorable sentiments on the subject of the dignity of the Lord’s
body.

Chapter 7.—Of Christ’s Session at the Father’s Right Hand.

327

14. We believe also that He Sitteth at the Right Hand of the Father. This, however, is not tolead us to suppose that God the Father is, as it were, circumscribed by a human form, so that, when
we think of Him, a right side or a left should suggest itself to the mind. Nor, again, when it is thus
said in express terms that the Father sitteth, are we to fancy that this is done with bended knees;
lest we should fall into that profanity, in [dealing with] which an apostle execrates those who“changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of corruptible man.”1582 For it isunlawful for a Christian to set up any such image for God in a temple; much more nefarious is it,[therefore], to set it up in the heart, in which truly is the temple of God, provided it be purged ofearthly lust and error. This expression, “at the right hand,” therefore, we must understand to signify
a position in supremest blessedness, where righteousness and peace and joy are; just as the kids
are set on the left hand,1583 that is to say, in misery, by reason of unrighteousness, labors, andtorments.1584 And in accordance with this, when it is said that God “sitteth,” the expression indicates
not a posture of the members, but a judicial power, which that Majesty never fails to possess, as
He is always awarding deserts as men deserve them (digna dignis tribuendo); although at the last
judgment the unquestionable brightness of the only-begotten Son of God, the Judge of the living
and the dead, is destined yet to be1585 a thing much more manifest among men.

Chapter 8.—Of Christ’s Coming to Judgment.
15. We believe also, that at the most seasonable time He Will Come from Thence, and Will
Judge the Quick and the Dead: whether by these terms are signified the righteous and sinners, orwhether it be the case that those persons are here called the quick, whom at that period He shallfind, previous to [their] death,1586 upon the earth, while the dead denote those who shall rise again
at His advent. This temporal dispensation not only is, as holds good of that generation which respects
His being God, but also hath been and shall be. For our Lord hath been upon the earth, and atpresent He is in heaven, and [hereafter] He shall be in His brightness as the Judge of the quick andthe dead. For He shall yet come, even so as He has ascended, according to the authority which is

1582

Rom. i. 23.
Matt. xxv. 33.
1584
Reading propter iniquitates, labores atque cruciatus. Several mss. give propter iniquitatis labores, etc. = by reason of
the labors and torments of unrighteousness.
1585
Reading futura sit; for which fulsura sit also occurs = is destined to shine much more manifestly, etc.
1586
The text gives simply ante mortem. Some editions insert nostram = previous to our death.
1583

440

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

contained in the Acts of the Apostles.1587 It is in accordance with this temporal dispensation,
therefore, that He speaks in the Apocalypse, where it is written in this wise: “These things saithHe, who is, and who was, and who is to come.”1588

Chapter 9.—Of the Holy Spirit and the Mystery of the Trinity.

328

16. The divine generation, therefore, of our Lord, and his human dispensation, having bothbeen thus systematically disposed and commended to faith,1589 there is added to our Confession,
with a view to the perfecting of the faith which we have regarding God, [the doctrine of] The Holy
Spirit, who is not of a nature inferior1590 to the Father and the Son, but, so to say, consubstantial
and co-eternal: for this Trinity is one God, not to the effect that the Father is the same [Person] as
the Son and the Holy Spirit, but to the effect that the Father is the Father, and the Son is the Son,and the Holy Spirit is the Holy Spirit; and this Trinity is one God, according as it is written, “Hear,
O Israel, the Lord your God is one God.”1591 At the same time, if we be interrogated on the subjectof each separately, and if the question be put to us, “Is the Father God?” we shall reply, “He isGod.” If it be asked whether the Son is God, we shall answer to the same effect. Nor, if this kindof inquiry be addressed to us with respect to the Holy Spirit, ought we to affirm in reply that He isanything else than God; being earnestly on our guard, [however], against an acceptance of thismerely in the sense in which it is applied to men, when it is said, “Ye are gods.”1592 For of all those
who have been made and fashioned of the Father, through the Son, by the gift of the Holy Spirit,
none are gods according to nature. For it is this same Trinity that is signified when an apostle says,“For of Him, and in Him, and through Him, are all things.”1593 Consequently, although, when weare interrogated on the subject of each [of these Persons] severally, we reply that that particular
one regarding whom the question is asked, whether it be the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit,
is God, no one, notwithstanding this, should suppose that three Gods are worshipped by us.
17. Neither is it strange that these things are said in reference to an ineffable Nature, when evenin those objects which we discern with the bodily eyes, and judge of by the bodily sense, somethingsimilar holds good. For take the instance of an interrogation on the subject of a fountain, and consider
how we are unable then to affirm that the said fountain is itself the river; and how, when we areasked about the river, we are as little able to call it the fountain; and, again, how we are equallyunable to designate the draught, which comes of the fountain or the river, either river or fountain.
Nevertheless, in the case of this trinity we use the name water [for the whole]; and when the question

1587

Acts i. 11.
Rev. i. 8.
1589
Instead of fideique commendata et divina generatione, etc., another, but weakly supported, version is, fide atquecommendata divina, etc., which makes the sense = The faith, therefore, having been systematically disposed, and our Lord’s
divine generation and human dispensation having been commended to the understanding, etc.
1590
Non minore natura quam Pater. The Benedictine editors suggest minor for minore = not inferior in nature, etc.
1591
Deut. vi. 4.
1592
Ps. lxxxii. 6.
1593
Rom. xi. 36.
1588

441

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

is put regarding each of these separately, we reply in each several instance that the thing is water.
For if I inquire whether it is water in the fountain, the reply is given that it is water; and if we ask
whether it is water in the river, no different response is returned; and in the case of the said draught,
no other answer can possibly be made: and yet, for all this, we do not speak of these things as threewaters, but as one water. At the same time, of course, care must be taken that no one should conceiveof the ineffable substance of that Majesty merely as he might think of this visible and material1594
fountain, or river, or draught. For in the case of these latter that water which is at present in thefountain goes forth into the river, and does not abide in itself; and when it passes from the river orfrom the fountain into the draught, it does not continue permanently there where it is taken from.
Therefore it is possible here that the same water may be in view at one time under the appellationof the fountain and at another under that of the river, and at a third under that of the draught. But
in the case of that Trinity, we have affirmed it to be impossible that the Father should be sometime
the Son, and sometime the Holy Spirit: just as, in a tree, the root is nothing else than the root, andthe trunk (robur) is nothing else than the trunk, and we cannot call the branches anything else thanbranches; for, what is called the root cannot be called trunk and branches; and the wood which
belongs to the root cannot by any sort of transference be now in the root, and again in the trunk,and yet again in the branches, but only in the root; since this rule of designation stands fast, so thatthe root is wood, and the trunk is wood, and the branches are wood, while nevertheless it is notthree woods that are thus spoken of, but only one. Or, if these objects have some sort of dissimilarity,
so that on account of their difference in strength they may be spoken of, without any absurdity, as
three woods; at least all parties admit the force of the former example,—namely, that if three cups
be filled out of one fountain, they may certainly be called three cups, but cannot be spoken of as
three waters, but only as one all together. Yet, at the same time, when asked concerning the several
cups, one by one, we may answer that in each of them by itself there is water; although in this caseno such transference takes place as we were speaking of as occurring from the fountain into theriver. But these examples in things material (corporalia exempla) have been adduced not in virtueof their likeness to that divine Nature, but in reference to the oneness which subsists even in things
visible, so that it may be understood to be quite a possibility for three objects of some sort, not only
severally, but also all together, to obtain one single name; and that in this way no one may wonder
and think it absurd that we should call the Father God, the Son God, the Holy Spirit God, and thatnevertheless we should say that there are not three Gods in that Trinity, but one God and one
substance.1595
18. And, indeed, on this subject of the Father and the Son, learned and spiritual1596 men haveconducted discussions in many books, in which, so far as men could do with men, they haveendeavored to introduce an intelligible account as to how the Father was not one personally with
the Son, and yet the two were one substantially;1597 and as to what the Father was individually(proprie), and what the Son: to wit, that the former was the Begetter, the latter the Begotten; the1594

Corporeum = corporeal.
Many mss., however, insert colamus after Deum in the closing sentence, sed unum Deum unamque substantiam. The
sense then will be = and that nevertheless we should worship in that Trinity not three Gods, but one God and one substance.
1596
Spiritales, for which religiosi = religious, is also sometimes given.
1597
Non unus esset Pater et Filius, sed unum essent = how the Father and the Son were not one in person, but were one inessence.
1595

442

NPNF (V1-03)

329

Philip Schaff

former not of the Son, the latter of the Father: the former the Beginning of the latter, whence also
He is called the Head of Christ,1598 although Christ likewise is the Beginning,1599 but not of the
Father; the latter, moreover, the Image1600 of the former, although in no respect dissimilar, andalthough absolutely and without difference equal (omnino et indifferenter æqualis). These questions
are handled with greater breadth by those who, in less narrow limits than ours are at present, seek
to set forth the profession of the Christian faith in its totality. Accordingly, in so far as He is theSon, of the Father received He it that He is, while that other [the Father] received not this of theSon; and in so far as He, in unutterable mercy, in a temporal dispensation took upon Himself the[nature of] man (hominem),—to wit, the changeable creature that was thereby to be changed into
something better,—many statements concerning Him are discovered in the Scriptures, which areso expressed as to have given occasion to error in the impious intellects of heretics, with whom thedesire to teach takes precedence of that to understand, so that they have supposed Him to be neither
equal with the Father nor of the same substance. Such statements [are meant] as the following: “Forthe Father is greater than I;”1601 and, “The head of the woman is the man, the Head of the man is
Christ, and the Head of Christ is God;”1602 and, “Then shall He Himself be subject unto Him that
put all things under Him;”1603 and, “I go to my Father and your Father, my God and your God,”1604
together with some others of like tenor. Now all these have had a place given them, [certainly] notwith the object of signifying an inequality of nature and substance; for to take them so would be
to falsify a different class of statements, such as, “I and my Father are one” (unum);1605 and, “He
that hath seen me hath seen my Father also;”1606 and, “The Word was God,”1607 for He was notmade, inasmuch as “all things were made by Him;”1608 and, “He thought it not robbery to be equalwith God:”1609 together with all the other passages of a similar order. But these statements have
had a place given them, partly with a view to that administration of His assumption of human nature(administrationem suscepti hominis), in accordance with which it is said that “He emptied Himself:”
not that that Wisdom was changed, since it is absolutely unchangeable; but that it was His will tomake Himself known in such humble fashion to men. Partly then, I repeat, it is with a view to thisadministration that those things have been thus written which the heretics make the ground of theirfalse allegations; and partly it was with a view to the consideration that the Son owes to the Father
that which He is,1610—thereby also certainly owing this in particular to the Father, to wit, that He

1598

1 Cor. xi. 3.
In reference probably to John viii. 25, where the Vulgate gives principium qui et loquor vobis as the literal equivalent
for the Greek πὴν ἀρχὴν ὅ, τι καὶ λαλῶ ὑηῖν.
1600
Col. i. 15.
1601
John xiv. 28.
1602
1 Cor. xi. 3.
1603
1 Cor. xv. 28.
1604
John xx. 17.
1605
John x. 30.
1606
John xiv. 9.
1607
John i. 1.
1608
John i. 3.
1609
Phil. ii. 9. [See R.V.]
1610
Or it may be = that the Son owes it to the Father that He is.
1599

443

NPNF (V1-03)

330

Philip Schaff

is equal to the same Father, or that He is His Peer (eidem Patri æqualis aut par est), whereas the
Father owes whatsoever He is to no one.
19. With respect to the Holy Spirit, however, there has not been as yet, on the part of learned
and distinguished investigators of the Scriptures, a discussion of the subject full enough or careful
enough to make it possible for us to obtain an intelligent conception of what also constitutes His
special individuality (proprium): in virtue of which special individuality it comes to be the casethat we cannot call Him either the Son or the Father, but only the Holy Spirit; excepting that they
predicate Him to be the Gift of God, so that we may believe God not to give a gift inferior to
Himself. At the same time they hold by this position, namely, to predicate the Holy Spirit neither
as begotten, like the Son, of the Father; for Christ is the only one [so begotten]: nor as [begotten]of the Son, like a Grandson of the Supreme Father: while they do not affirm Him to owe that which
He is to no one, but [admit Him to owe it] to the Father, of whom are all things; lest we should
establish two Beginnings without beginning (ne duo constituamus principia isne principio), which
would be an assertion at once most false and most absurd, and one proper not to the catholic faith,
but to the error of certain heretics.1611 Some, however, have gone so far as to believe that thecommunion of the Father and the Son, and (so to speak) their Godhead (deitatem), which the Greeks
designate, is the Holy Spirit; so that, inasmuch as the Father is God and the Son God, theGodhead itself, in which they are united with each other,—to wit, the former by begetting the Son,and the latter by cleaving to the Father,1612—should [thereby] be constituted equal with Him bywhom He is begotten. This Godhead, then, which they wish to be understood likewise as the loveand charity subsisting between these two [Persons], the one toward the other, they affirm to havereceived the name of the Holy Spirit. And this opinion of theirs they support by many proofs drawn
from the Scriptures; among which we might instance either the passage which says, “For the loveof God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, who has been given unto us,”1613 or manyother proofs texts of a similar tenor: while they ground their position also upon the express factthat it is through the Holy Spirit that we are reconciled unto God; whence also, when He is called
the Gift of God, they will have it that sufficient indication is offered of the love of God and theHoly Spirit being identical. For we are not reconciled unto Him except through that love in virtueof which we are also called sons:1614 as we are no more “under fear, like servants,”1615 because“love, when it is made perfect, casteth out fear;”1616 and [as] “we have received the spirit of liberty,
wherein we cry, Abba, Father.”1617 And inasmuch as, being reconciled and called back into friendshipthrough love, we shall be able to become acquainted with all the secret things of God, for this reason
it is said of the Holy Spirit that “He shall lead you into all truth.”1618 For the same reason also, that
confidence in preaching the truth, with which the apostles were filled at His advent,1619 is rightly

1611
1612
1613
1614
1615
1616
1617
1618
1619

In reference, again, to Manichean errorists.
Patri cohœrendo = by close connection with the Father.
Rom. v. 5.
1 John iii. 1. The word Dei = of God, is sometimes added here.
Rom. viii. 15.
1 John iv. 18.
Rom. viii. 15.
John xvi. 13.
Acts ii. 4.

444

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

ascribed to love; because diffidence also is assigned to fear, which the perfecting of love excludes.
Thus, likewise, the same is called the Gift of God,1620 because no one enjoys that which he knows,
unless he also love it. To enjoy the Wisdom of God, however, implies nothing else than to cleaveto the same in love (ei dilectione cohærere). Neither does any one abide in that which he apprehends,
but by love; and accordingly the Holy Spirit is called the Spirit of sanctity (Spiritus Sanctus),
inasmuch as all things that are sanctioned (sanciuntur)1621 are sanctioned with a view to theirpermanence, and there is no doubt that the term sanctity (sanctitatem) is derived from sanction (asanciendo). Above all, however, that testimony is employed by the upholders of this opinion, where
it is thus written, “That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit isspirit;”1622 “for God is a Spirit.”1623 For here He speaks of our regeneration,1624 which is not,according to Adam, of the flesh, but, according to Christ, of the Holy Spirit. Wherefore, if in thispassage mention is made of the Holy Spirit, when it is said, “For God is a Spirit,” they maintainthat we must take note that it is not said, “for the Spirit is God,”1625 but, “for God is a Spirit;” sothat the very Godhead of the Father and the Son is in this passage called God, and that is the Holy
Spirit. To this is added another testimony which the Apostle John offers, when he says, “For God
is love.”1626 For here, in like manner, what he says is not, “Love is God,”1627 but, “God is love;” sothat the very Godhead is taken to be love. And with respect to the circumstance that, in thatenumeration of mutually connected objects which is given when it is said, “All things are yours,
and ye are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s,”1628 as also, “The head of the woman is the man, the Headof the man is Christ, and the Head of Christ is God,”1629 there is no mention of the Holy Spirit; thisthey affirm to be but an application of the principle that, in general, the connection itself is not wont
to be enumerated among the things which are connected with each other. Whence, also, those whoread with closer attention appear to recognize the express Trinity likewise in that passage in which
it is said, “For of Him, and through Him, and in Him, are all things.”1630 “Of Him,” as if it meant,of that One who owes it to no one that He is: “through Him,” as if the idea were, through a Mediator;“in Him,” as if it were, in that One who holds together, that is, unites by connecting.
20. Those parties oppose this opinion who think that the said communion, which we call either
Godhead, or Love, or Charity, is not a substance. Moreover, they require the Holy Spirit to be set
forth to them according to substance; neither do they take it to have been otherwise impossible forthe expression “God is Love” to have been used, unless love were a substance. In this, indeed, they
are influenced by the wont of things of a bodily nature. For if two bodies are connected with each

1620

Eph. iii. 7, 8.
Instead of sanciuntur, which is the reading of the mss., some editions give sanctificantur = all things that are sanctified
are sanctioned, etc.
1622
John iii. 6.
1623
John iv. 24.
1624
Reading, with the mss. and the Benedictine editors, Hic enim regenerationem nostram dicit. Some editions give Hoc for
Hic, and dicunt for dicit = for they say that this expresses our regeneration.
1625
Quoniam Spiritus Deus est. But various editions and mss. give Dei for Deus = for the Spirit is of God.
1626
1 John iv. 16.
1627
Here again, instead of dilectio Deus est, we also find dilectio Dei est = love is of God.
1628
1 Cor. iii. 22, 23.
1629
1 Cor. xi. 3.
1630
Rom. xi. 36.
1621

445

NPNF (V1-03)

331

Philip Schaff

other in such wise as to be placed in juxtaposition one with the other, the connection itself is not abody: inasmuch as when these bodies which had been connected are separated, no such connection
certainly is found [any more]; while, at the same time, it is not understood to have departed, as it
were, and migrated, as is the case with those bodies themselves. But men like these should maketheir heart pure, so far as they can, in order that they may have power to see that in the substanceof God there is not anything of such a nature as would imply that therein substance is one thing,
and that which is accident to substance (aliud quod accidat subsantiœ) another thing, and not
substance; whereas whatsoever can be taken to be therein is substance. These things, however, caneasily be spoken and believed; but seen, so as to reveal how they are in themselves, they absolutely
cannot be, except by the pure heart. For which reason, whether the opinion in question be true, orsomething else be the case, the faith ought to be maintained unshaken, so that we should call the
Father God, the Son God, the Holy Spirit God, and yet not affirm three Gods, but hold the said
Trinity to be one God; and again, not affirm these [Persons] to be different in nature, but hold them
to be of the same substance; and further uphold it, not as if the Father were sometime the Son, andsometime the Holy Spirit, but in such wise that the Father is always the Father, and the Son always
the Son, and the Holy Spirit always the Holy Spirit. Neither should we make any affirmation on
the subject of things unseen rashly, as if we had knowledge, but [only modestly] as believing. For
these things cannot be seen except by the heart made pure; and [even] he who in this life sees them“in part,” as it has been said, and “in an enigma,”1631 cannot secure it that the person to whom hespeaks shall also see them, if he is hampered by impurities of heart. “Blessed,” however, “are theyof a pure heart, for they shall see God.”1632 This is the faith on the subject of God our Maker andRenewer.
21. But inasmuch as love is enjoined upon us, not only toward God, when it was said, “Thoushalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind;”1633 but
also toward our neighbor, for “thou shalt love,” saith He, “thy neighbor as thyself;”1634 and inasmuch,
moreover, as the faith in question is less fruitful, if it does not comprehend a congregation andsociety of men, wherein brotherly charity may operate;—

Chapter 10.—Of the Catholic Church, the Remission of Sins, and the Resurrection of the Flesh.
—Inasmuch, I repeat, as this is the case, we believe also in The Holy Church, [intending thereby]assuredly the Catholic. For both heretics and schismatics style their congregations churches. But
heretics, in holding false opinions regarding God, do injury to the faith itself; while schismatics,
on the other hand, in wicked separations break off from brotherly charity, although they may believe
just what we believe. Wherefore neither do the heretics belong to the Church catholic, which loves
God; nor do the schismatics form a part of the same, inasmuch as it loves the neighbor, and

1631
1632
1633
1634

1 Cor. xiii. 12.
Matt. v. 8.
Deut. vi. 5.
Luke x. 27.

446

NPNF (V1-03)

332

Philip Schaff

consequently readily forgives the neighbor’s sins, because it prays that forgiveness may be extended
to itself by Him who has reconciled us to Himself, doing away with all past things, and calling us
to a new life. And until we reach the perfection of this new life, we cannot be without sins.
Nevertheless it is a matter of consequence of what sort those sins may be.
22. Neither ought we only to treat of the difference between sins, but we ought most thoroughly
to believe that those things in which we sin are in no way forgiven us, if we show ourselves severely
unyielding in the matter of forgiving the sins of others.1635 Thus, then, we believe also in The
Remission of Sins.
23. And inasmuch as there are three things of which man consists,—namely, spirit, soul, andbody,—which again are spoken of as two, because frequently the soul is named along with thespirit; for a certain rational portion of the same, of which beasts are devoid, is called spirit: theprincipal part in us is the spirit; next, the life whereby we are united with the body is called thesoul; finally, the body itself, as it is visible, is the last part in us. This “whole creation” (creatura),
however, “groaneth and travaileth until now.”1636 Nevertheless, He has given it the first-fruits of
the Spirit, in that it has believed God, and is now of a good will.1637 This spirit is also called themind, regarding which an apostle speaks thus: “With the mind I serve the law of God.”1638 Whichapostle likewise expresses himself thus in another passage: “For God is my witness, whom I servein my spirit.”1639 Moreover, the soul, when as yet it lusts after carnal good things, is called the flesh.
For a certain part thereof resists1640 the Spirit, not in virtue of nature, but in virtue of the custom ofsins; whence it is said, “With the mind I serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.”
And this custom has been turned into a nature, according to mortal generation, by the sin of thefirst man. Consequently it is also written in this wise, “And we were sometime by nature the childrenof wrath,”1641 that is, of vengeance, through which it has come to pass that we serve the law of sin.
The nature of the soul, however, is perfect when it is made subject to its own spirit, and when it
follows that spirit as the same follows God. Therefore “the animal man1642 receiveth not the things
which are of the Spirit of God.”1643 But the soul is not so speedily subdued to the spirit unto goodaction, as is the spirit to God unto true faith and goodwill; but sometimes its impetus, whereby it
moves downwards into things carnal and temporal, is more tardily bridled. But inasmuch as thissame soul is also made pure, and receives the stability of its own nature, under the dominance ofthe spirit, which is the head for it, which head of the said soul has again its own head in Christ, we
ought not to despair of the restoration of the body also to its own proper nature. But this certainly
will not be effected so speedily as is the case with the soul; just as the soul too, is not restored so
speedily as the spirit. Yet it will take place in the appropriate season, at the last trump, when “the1635Matt. vi. 15.
Rom. viii. 22.
1637
Reading spiritus. Taking spiritus, the sense might be = Nevertheless, the spirit hath imparted the first-fruits, in that it
has believed God, and is now of a good will.
1638
Rom. vii. 25.
1639
Rom. i. 9.
1640
Instead of caro nominatur. Pars enim ejus quœdam resistit, etc., some good mss. read caro nominatur et resistit, etc. =is called the flesh, and resists, etc.
1641
Eph. ii. 3.
1642
Animalis homo, literally = "the" soulish man.
1643
1 Cor. ii. 14.
1636

447

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

dead shall rise uncorrupted, and we shall be changed.”1644 And accordingly we believe also in The
Resurrection of the Flesh, to wit, not merely that that soul, which at present by reason of carnal
affections is called the flesh, is restored; but that it shall be so likewise with this visible flesh, whichis the flesh according to nature, the name of which has been received by the soul, not in virtue ofnature, but in reference to carnal affections: this visible flesh, then, I say, which is the flesh properly
so called, must without doubt be believed to be destined to rise again. For the Apostle Paul appears
to point to this, as it were, with his finger, when he says, “This corruptible must put on
incorruption.”1645 For when he says this, he, as it were, directs his finger toward it. Now it is thatwhich is visible that admits of being pointed out with the finger; since the soul might also havebeen called corruptible, for it is itself corrupted by vices of manners. And when it is read, “and thismortal [must] put on immortality,” the same visible flesh is signified, inasmuch as at it ever andanon the finger is thus as it were pointed. For the soul also may thus in like manner be called mortal,
even as it is designated corruptible in reference to vices of manners. For assuredly it is “the deathof the soul to apostatize from God;”1646 which is its first sin in Paradise, as it is contained in thesacred writings.
24. Rise again, therefore, the body will, according to the Christian faith, which is incapable ofdeceiving. And if this appears incredible to any one, [it is because] he looks simply to what theflesh is at present, while he fails to consider of what nature it shall be hereafter. For at that time ofangelic change it will no more be flesh and blood, but only body.1647 For when the apostle speaksof the flesh, he says, “There is one flesh of cattle, another of birds, another of fishes, another ofcreeping things: there are also both celestial bodies and terrestrial bodies.”1648 Now what he has
said here is not “celestial flesh,” but “both celestial bodies and terrestrial bodies.” For all flesh isalso body; but every body is not also flesh. In the first instance, [for example, this holds good] inthe case of those terrestrial bodies, inasmuch as wood is body, but not flesh. In the case of man,again, or in that of cattle, we have both body and flesh. In the case of celestial bodies, on the other
hand, there is no flesh, but only those simple and lucent bodies which the apostle designates spiritual,
while some call them ethereal. And consequently, when he says, “Flesh and blood shall not inherit
the kingdom of God,”1649 that does not contradict the resurrection of the flesh; but the sentence
predicates what will be the nature of that hereafter which at present is flesh and blood. And if any
one refuses to believe that the flesh is capable of being changed into the sort of nature thus indicated,
he must be led on, step by step, to this faith. For if you require of him whether earth is capable ofbeing changed into water, the nearness of the thing will make it not seem incredible to him. Again,
if you inquire whether water is capable of being changed into air, he replies that this also is not
absurd, for the elements are near each other. And if, on the subject of the air, it is asked whether
that can be changed into an ethereal, that is, a celestial body, the simple fact of the nearness at once
convinces him of the possibility of the thing. But if, then, he concedes that through such gradations

1644

1 Cor. xv. 52.
1 Cor. xv. 53.
1646
The text gives, Mors quippe animæ est apostatare a Deo. The reference, perhaps, is to Ecclus. x. 12, where the Vulgate
has, initium superbiœ hominis, apostatare a Deo.
1647
Augustin refers to this statement in the passage quoted from the Retractations in the Introductory Notice above.
1648
1 Cor. xv. 39, 40.
1649
1 Cor. xv. 50.
1645

448

NPNF (V1-03)

333

Philip Schaff

it is quite a possible thing that earth should be changed into an ethereal body, why does he refuse
to believe, when that will of God, too, enters in addition, whereby a human body had power to walkupon the waters, that the same change is capable of being effected with the utmost rapidity, precisely
in accordance with the saying, “in the twinkling of an eye,”1650 and without any such gradations,even as, according to common wont, smoke is changed into flame with marvellous quickness? For
our flesh assuredly is of earth. But philosophers, on the ground of whose arguments opposition isfor the most part offered to the resurrection of the flesh, so far as in these they assert that no terrene
body can possibly exist in heaven, yet concede that any kind of body may be converted and changed
into every [other] sort of body. And when this resurrection of the body has taken place, being set
free then from the condition of time, we shall fully enjoy Eternal Life in ineffable love andsteadfastness, without corruption.1651 For “then shall be brought to pass the saying which is written,
Death is swallowed up in victory. Where is, O death, thy sting? Where is, O death, thycontention?”1652
25. This is the faith which in few words is given in the Creed to Christian novices, to be heldby them. And these few words are known to the faithful, to the end that in believing they may bemade subject to God; that being made subject, they may rightly live; that in rightly living, they may
make the heart pure; that with the heart made pure, they may understand that which they believe.

337

Concerning Faith of Things Not Seen
[De Fide Rerum Quæ Non Videntur.]
This tract was thought spurious by some, but is known to be St. Augustin’s by his mentionof it in Ep. ccxxxi. ad Darium Comitem. It seems to have been written after 399, from what issaid about Idols, § 10; for in that year Honorius enacted laws against them.—From Bened. Ed.
The reader of Butler’s Analogy will recognise many similar turns of thought.
1. There are those who think that the Christian religion is what we should smile at rather thanhold fast, for this reason, that, in it, not what may be seen, is shown, but men are commanded faithof things which are not seen. We therefore, that we may refute these, who seem to themselves
through prudence to be unwilling to believe what they cannot see, although we are not able to show
unto human sight those divine things which we believe, yet do show unto human minds that eventhose things which are not seen are to be believed. And first they are to be admonished, (whomfolly hath so made subject to their carnal eyes, as that, whatsoever they see not through them, they
think not that they are to believe,) how many things they not only believe but also know, which
1650

1 Cor. xv. 52.
Instead of a temporis conditione liberati, æterna vita ineffabili caritate atque stabilitate sine corruptione per fruemur,
several mss. read, corpus a temporis conditione liberatum æterna vita ineffabili caritate per fruetur = the body, set free fromthe condition of time, shall fully enjoy eternal life in ineffable love.
1652
1 Cor. xv. 54, 55.
1651

449

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

cannot be seen by such eyes. Which things being without number in our mind itself, (the nature ofwhich mind is incapable of being seen,) not to mention others, the very faith whereby we believe,or the thought whereby we know that we either believe any thing, or believe not, being as it isaltogether alien from the sight of those eyes; what so naked, so clear, what so certain is there to theinner eyes of our minds? How then are we not to believe what we see not with the eyes of the body,whereas, either that we believe, or that we believe not, in a case where we cannot apply the eyesof the body, we without any doubt see?

338

2. But, say they, those things which are in the mind, in that we can by the mind itself discern
them, we have no need to know through the eyes of the body; but those things, which you say unto
us that we should believe, you neither point to without, that through the eyes of the body we may
know them; nor are they within, in our own mind, that by exercising thought we may see them.
And these things they so say, as though any one would be bidden to believe, if that, which isbelieved, he could already see set before him. Therefore certainly ought we to believe certain
temporal things also, which we see not, that we may merit1653 to see eternal things also, which we
believe. But, whosoever thou art who wilt not believe save what thou seest, lo, bodies that arepresent thou seest with the eyes of the body, wills and thoughts of thine own that are present,
because they are in thine own mind, thou seest by the mind itself; tell me, I pray thee, thy friend’s
will towards thee by what eyes seest thou? For no will can be seen by the eyes of the body. What?
see you in your own mind this also which is going on in the mind of another? But if you see it not,how do you repay in turn the good will of your friend, if what you cannot see, you believe not?
Will you haply say that you see the will of another through his works? Therefore you will see acts,and hear words, but concerning your friend’s will, that which cannot be seen and heard you will
believe. For that will is not color or figure, so as to be thrown upon the eyes; or sound or strain, so
as to glide into the ears; nor indeed is it your own, so as to be perceived by the motion1654 of yourown heart. It remains therefore that, being neither seen, nor heard, nor beheld within thyself, it bebelieved, that thy life be not left deserted without any friendship, or affection bestowed upon theebe not repaid by thee in return. Where then is that which thou saidest, that thou oughtest not tobelieve, save what thou sawest either outwardly in the body, or inwardly in the heart? Lo, out ofthine own heart, thou believest an heart not thine own; and lendest thy faith, where thou dost notdirect the glance of thy body or of thy mind. Thy friend’s face thou discernest by thy own body,
thy own faith thou discernest by thine own mind; but thy friend’s faith is not loved by thee, unlessthere be in thee in return that faith, whereby thou mayest believe that which in him thou seest not.
Although a man may also deceive by feigning good will, and hiding malice: or, if he have no thought
to do harm, yet by expecting some benefit from thee, feigns, because he has not, love.

3. But you say, that you therefore believe your friend, whose heart you cannot see, because you
have proved him in your trials, and have come to know of what manner of spirit he was towards
1653
1654

Mereamur.
Affectione.

450

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

you in your dangers, wherein he deserted you not. Seemeth it therefore to you that we must wish
for our own affliction, that our friend’s love towards us may be proved? And shall no man be happy
in most sure friends, unless he shall be unhappy through adversity? so that, forsooth, he enjoy not
the tried love of the other, unless he be racked by pain and fear of his own? And how in the havingof true friends can that happiness be wished for, and not rather feared, which nothing save
unhappiness can put to the proof? And yet it is true that a friend may be had also in prosperity, but
proved more surely in adversity. But assuredly in order to prove him, neither would you commit
yourself to dangers of your own, unless you believed; and thus, when you commit yourself in orderto prove, you believe before you prove. For surely, if we ought not to believe things not seen,1655
since indeed we believe the hearts of our friends, and that, not yet surely proved; and, after we shallhave proved them good by our own ills, even then we believe rather than see their good will towards
us: except that so great is faith, that, not unsuitably, we judge that we see, with certain eyes of it,that which we believe, whereas we ought therefore to believe, because we cannot see.

339

4. If this faith be taken away from human affairs, who but must observe how great disorder inthem, and how fearful confusion must follow? For who will be loved by any with mutual affection,(being that the loving1656 itself is invisible,) if what I see not, I ought not to believe? Therefore will
the whole of friendship perish, in that it consists not save of mutual love. For what of it will it beable to receive from any, if nothing of it shall be believed to be shown? Further, friendship perishing,
there will be preserved in the mind the bonds neither of marriages, nor of kindreds and relations;because in these also there is assuredly a friendly union of sentiment. Spouse therefore will not beable to love spouse in turn, inasmuch as each believes not the other’s love, because the love itself
cannot be seen. Nor will they long to have sons, who they believe not will make them a return. And
if these be born and grow up, much less will the parents themselves love their own children, whose
love towards themselves in those children’s hearts they will not see, it being invisible; if it be notpraiseworthy faith, but blameable rashness, to believe those things which are not seen. Why should
I now speak of the other connections, of brothers, sisters, sons-in-law, and fathers-in-law, and ofthem who are joined together by any kindred or affinity, if love is uncertain, and the will suspected,that of parents by sons, and that of sons by parents, whilst due benevolence is not rendered; because
neither is it thought to be due, that which is not seen in another not being thought to exist. Further,
if this caution be not a mark of ability,1657 but be hateful, wherein we believe not that we are loved,
because we see not the love of them who love, and repay not them, unto whom we think not that
we owe a return; to that degree are human affairs thrown into disorder, if what we see not we believe
not, as to be altogether and utterly overthrown, if we believe no wills of men, which assuredly wecannot see. I omit to mention in how many things they, who find fault with us because we believe
what we see not, believe report or history; or concerning places where they have not themselves
been; and say not, we believe not, because we have not seen. Since if they say this, they are obliged
1655

The text seems corrupt. A ms. in Brasenose Library reads, “si non vis rebus credere.” If we read “Si non vis rebus nonvisis credere,” the sense will be, “For certainly if you will not have us believe things unseen, we ought not (to believe this),since” etc.
1656
Dilectio.
1657
Ingeniosa.

451

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

to confess that their own parents are not surely known to them: because on this point also they havebelieved the accounts of others telling of it, who yet are unable to show it, because it is a thingalready past; retaining themselves no sense of that time, and yet yielding assent without any doubting
to others speaking of that time: and unless this be done, there must of necessity be incurred afaithless impiety towards parents, whilst we are, as it were, showing a rashness of belief in those
things which we cannot see. Since therefore, if we believe not those things which we cannot see,human society itself, through concord perishing, will not stand how much more is faith to be applied
to divine things, although they be not seen; failing the application of which, it is not the friendshipof some men or other, but the very chiefest bond of piety1658 that is violated, so as for the chiefest
misery to follow.

5. But you will say, the good will of a friend towards me, although I cannot see it, yet can I
trace it out by many proofs; but you, what things you will us to believe not being seen, you haveno proofs whereby to show them. In the mean time it is no slight thing, that you confess that byreason of the clearness of certain proofs, some things, even such as are not seen, ought to be believed:for even thus it is agreed, that not all things which are not seen, are not to be believed; and thatsaying, “that we ought not to believe things which we see not,” falls to the ground, cast away, andrefuted. But they are much deceived, who think that we believe in Christ without any proofs
concerning Christ. For what are there clearer proofs than those things, which we now see to havebeen foretold and fulfilled? Wherefore do ye, who think that there are no proofs why ye ought tobelieve concerning Christ those things which ye have not seen, give heed to what things ye see.
The Church herself addresses you out of the mouth of a mother’s love: “I, whom ye view withwonder throughout the whole world, bearing fruit and increasing, was not once such as ye now
behold me.” But, “In thy Seed shall all nations be blessed.”1659 When God blessed Abraham, Hegave the promise of me; for throughout all nations in the blessing of Christ am I shed abroad. That
Christ is the Seed of Abraham, the order of successive generations bears witness. Shortly to sum
up which, Abraham begat Isaac, Isaac begat Jacob, Jacob begat twelve sons, of whom sprung thepeople Israel. For Jacob himself was called Israel. Among these twelve sons he begat Judah, whence
the Jews have their name, of whom was born the Virgin Mary, who bore Christ. And, lo, in Christ,that is, in the seed of Abraham, that all the nations are blessed, ye see and are amazed: and do ye
still fear to believe in Him, in Whom ye ought rather to have feared not to believe? What? doubt
ye, or refuse ye to believe, the travail of a Virgin, whereas ye ought rather to believe that it was
fitting that so God should be born Man. For this also receive ye to have been foretold by theProphet;1660 “Behold, a Virgin shall conceive in the womb, and shall bring forth a Son, and theyshall call His Name Emmanuel, which is, being interpreted, God with us.” Ye will not therefore
doubt of a Virgin bringing forth, if ye be willing to believe of a God being born; leaving not the
governance of the world, and coming unto men in the flesh; unto His Mother bringing fruitfulness,

1658
1659
1660

“Religio,” (toward parents).
Gen. xxii. 18.
Is. vii. 14; Matt. i. 23.

452

NPNF (V1-03)

340

Philip Schaff

not taking away maidenhood. For thus behoved it that He should be born as Man, albeit1661 He was
ever1662 God, by which birth He might become a God unto us. Hence again the Prophet says
concerning Him, “Thy Throne, O God, is for ever and ever; a sceptre of right, the sceptre of Thy
Kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, Thy God, hath anointed
Thee with the oil of gladness above Thy fellows.”1663 This anointing is spiritual, wherewith God
anointed God, the Father, that is, the Son: whence called from the “Chrism,” that is, from theanointing, we know Him as Christ. I am the Church, concerning whom it is said unto Him in thesame Psalm, and what was future foretold as already done; “There stood at Thy right hand theQueen, in a vesture of gold, in raiment of divers colors;” that is, in the mystery of wisdom, “adorned
with divers tongues.” There it said unto me, “Hearken, O daughter, and see, and incline thine ear,and forget thy own people and thy father’s house: for the King hath desired thy beauty: seeing that
He is the Lord thy God: and the daughters of Tyre shall worship Him with gifts, thy face shall all
the rich of the people entreat. All the glory of that King’s daughter is within, in fringes of gold,with raiment of divers colors. There shall be brought unto the King the maidens after her; hercompanions shall be brought unto Thee. They shall be brought with joy and gladness, they shallbe brought into the Temple of the King. Instead of thy fathers, there are born unto thee sons, thoushall set them as princes over the whole earth. They shall be mindful of thy name, even fromgeneration to generation. Therefore shall the people confess unto thee for ever, and for ever andever.

6. If this Queen ye see not, now rich also with royal progeny. If she see not that fulfilled which
she heard to have been promised, she, unto whom it was said, “Hear, O daughter, and see.” If shehath not left the ancient rites of the world, she, unto whom it was said, “Forget thy own people andthy Father’s house.” If she confesses not every where Christ the Lord, she, unto whom it was said,“The King hath desired thy beauty, for He is the Lord thy God.” If she sees not the cities of thenations pour forth prayers and offer gifts unto Christ, concerning Whom it was said unto her, “There
shall worship Him the daughters of Tyre with gifts.” If the pride also of the rich is not laid aside,and they do not entreat help of the Church, unto whom it was said, “Thy face shall all the rich of
the people entreat.” If He acknowledges not the King’s daughter, unto Whom she was bidden tosay, “Our Father Who art in Heaven;”1664 and in her saints in the inner man she is not renewed fromday to day, concerning whom it was said, “All the glory of that King’s daughter is within:” although
she strike upon the eyes of them also that are without with the blaze1665 of the fame of her preachers,
in diversity of tongues, as “in fringes of gold, and raiment of divers colors.” If there be not, nowthat His fame is spread abroad in every place by His good odor,1666 virgins also brought unto Christ
to be consecrated, of Whom it is said, and to Whom it is said, “There shall be brought unto the

1661
1662
1663
1664
1665
1666

mss. “si”—“if.”Semper.
Ps. xlv. 6–17.
Matt. vi. 9; 2 Cor. iv. 16.
Ben. conj. “fulgente,” for “fulgentes.”
Song of Sol. i. 3.

453

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

King the virgins after her, her companions shall be brought unto Thee.” And that they might notseem to be brought like captives, into some, as it were, prison, he says, “They shall be brought in
joy and gladness, they shall be brought into the King’s temple.” If she brings not forth sons, thatof them she may have, as it were, fathers, whom she may appoint unto herself every where as rulers,she, unto whom it is said, “Instead of thy fathers there are born unto thee sons, thou shall set themas princes over the whole earth:” unto whose prayers their mother both preferred and made subject,commends herself, “They shall be mindful of thy name, even from generation to generation.” If,by reason of the preaching of those same fathers, wherein they have without ceasing made mentionof her name, there are not so great multitudes in her gathered together, and without end in theirown tongues unto her confess the praise of grace, unto whom it is said, “Therefore shall the people
confess unto thee for ever, and for ever and ever.” If these things are not so shown to be clear, asthat the eyes of enemies find not in what direction to turn aside, where the same clearness strikes
them not, so as by it to be obliged to confess what is evident: you perhaps assert with reason, thatno proofs are shown to you, by seeing which you may believe those things also which you see not.
But if those things, which you see, both have been foretold long before, and are so clearly fulfilled;
if the truth itself makes itself clear to you, by effects1667 going before and following after, O remnant
of unbelief, that ye may believe the things which you see not, blush at those things which ye see.

341

7. “Give heed unto me,” the Church says unto you; give heed unto me, whom ye see, although
to see ye be unwilling. For the faithful, who were in those times in the land of Judæa, were present
at, and learnt as present, Christ’s wonderful birth of a virgin, and His passion, resurrection, ascension;
all His divine words and deeds. These things ye have not seen, and therefore ye refuse to believe.
Therefore behold these things, fix your eyes on these things, these things which ye see reflect on,
which are not told you as things past, nor foretold you as things future, but are shown you as things
present. What? seemeth it to you a vain or a light thing. and think you it to be none, or a little,
divine miracle, that in the name of One Crucified the whole human race runs? Ye saw not what
was foretold and fulfilled concerning the human birth of Christ, “Behold, a Virgin shall conceivein the womb, and shall bear a Son;”1668 but you see the Word of God which was foretold and fulfilled
unto Abraham, “In thy seed shall all nations be blessed.”1669 Ye saw not what was foretold concerning
the wonderful works of Christ, “Come ye, and see the works of the Lord, what wonders He hath
set upon the earth:”1670 but ye see that which was foretold, “The Lord said unto Me, My Son art
Thou, I have this day begotten Thee; demand of Me and I will give Thee nations as Thy inheritance,
and as Thy possession the bounds of the earth.”1671 Ye saw not that which was foretold and fulfilledconcerning the Passion of Christ, “They pierced My hands and My feet, they numbered all My
bones; but they themselves regarded and beheld Me; they divided among them My garments, and

1667

The Prophecy might be called an “effect” as well as its fulfillment; or read “verbis,” for “vobis,” “clear by words going
before and effects following after.” For further illustration see St. Aug. on Ps. 45.
1668
Is. vii. 14.
1669
Gen. xxii. 18.
1670
Ps. xlvi. 8.
1671
Ps. ii. 7, 8; Heb. i. 5; v. 5; Acts. xiii. 33.

454

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

upon My vesture they cast the lot;”1672 but ye see that which was in the same Psalm foretold, andnow is clearly fulfilled; “All the ends of the earth shall remember and be turned unto the Lord, andall the kindreds of the nations shall worship in His sight; for the kingdom is the Lord’s, and He
shall rule over the nations.”1673 Ye saw not what was foretold and fulfilled concerning the
Resurrection of Christ, the Psalm speaking, in His Person, first concerning His betrayer andpersecutors: “They went forth out of doors, and spake together: against Me whispered all My
enemies, against Me thought they evil for Me;” they set in order an unrighteous word against Me.1674
Where, to show that they availed nothing by slaying Him Who was about to rise again, He adds
and says; “What? will not He, that sleeps, add this, that He rise again?” And a little after, when He
had foretold, by means of the same prophecy, concerning His betrayer himself, that which is written
in the Gospel also, “He that did eat of My bread, enlarged his heel upon Me,”1675 that is, trampled
Me under foot: He straightway added, “But do Thou, O Lord, have mercy upon Me, and raise Thou
Me up again, and I shall repay them.” This was fulfilled, Christ slept and awoke, that is, rose again:
Who through the same prophecy in another Psalm says, “I slept and took my rest; and I rose again,
for the Lord will uphold Me.”1676 But this ye saw not, but ye see His Church, concerning whom it
is written in like manner, and fulfilled, “O Lord My God, the nations shall come unto Thee fromthe extremity of the earth and shall say, Truly our fathers worshipped lying images, and there is
not in them any profit.”1677 This certainly, whether ye will or no, ye behold; even although ye yetbelieve, that there either is, or was, in those idols some profit; yet certainly unnumbered peoplesof the nations, after having left, or cast away, or broken in pieces such like vanities, ye have heard
say, “Truly our fathers worshipped lying images, and there is not in them any profit; shall a man
make gods, and, lo, they are no gods?”1678 Nor think that it was foretold that the nations shouldcome unto some one place of God, in that it was said, “Unto Thee shall the nations come from theextremity of the earth.” Understand, if you can, that unto the God of the Christians, Who is theSupreme and True God, the peoples of the nations come, not by walking but by believing. For thesame thing was by another prophet thus foretold, “The Lord,” saith he, “shall prevail against them,and shall utterly destroy all the gods of the nations of the earth: and all the isles of the nations shallworship Him, each man from his place.”1679 Whereas the one says, “Unto Thee all nations shallcome;” this the other says, “They shall worship Him, each man from his place.” Therefore theyshall come unto Him, not departing from their own place, because believing in Him they shall findHim in their hearts. Ye saw not what was foretold and fulfilled concerning the ascension of Christ;“Be Thou exalted above the Heavens, O God;”1680 but ye see what follows immediately after, “Andabove all the earth Thy Glory.” Those things concerning Christ already done and past, all of themye have not seen; but these things present in His Church ye deny not that ye see. Both things we

1672
1673
1674
1675
1676
1677
1678
1679
1680

Ps xxii. 16, 17, 18; John xix. 23, 24.
Ps. xxii. 27, 28.
Ps. xli. 6–8.
Ps. xli. 9, 10.
Ps. iv. 8.
Jer. xvi. 19.
Jer. xvi. 19, 20.
Zeph. ii. 11.
Ps. cviii. 5.

455

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

point out to you as foretold; but the fulfillment of both we are therefore unable to point out for you
to see, because we cannot bring back into sight things past.

342

8. But as the wills of friends, which are not seen, are believed through tokens which are seen;
thus the Church, which is now seen, is, of all things which are not seen, but which are shown forthin those writings wherein itself also is foretold, an index of the past, and a herald of the future.
Because both things past, which cannot now be seen, and things present which cannot be seen allof them, at the time at which they were foretold, no one of these could then be seen. Therefore,
since they have begun to come to pass as they were foretold, from those things which have cometo pass unto those which are coming to pass, those things which were foretold concerning Christ
and the Church have run on in an ordered series: unto which series these pertain concerning the
day of Judgment, concerning the resurrection of the dead, concerning the eternal damnation of theungodly with the devil, and concerning the eternal recompense of the godly with Christ, things
which, foretold in like manner, are yet to come. Why therefore should we not believe the first andthe last things which we see not, when we have, as witnesses of both, the things between, which
we see, and in the books of the Prophets either hear or read both the first things, and the things
between, and the last things, foretold before they came to pass? Unless haply unbelieving men
judge those things to have been written by Christians, in order that those things which they alreadybelieved might have greater weight of authority, if they should be thought to have been promised
before they came.

9. If they suspect this, let them examine carefully the copies1681 of our enemies the Jews. Therelet them read those things of which we have made mention, foretold concerning Christ in Whom
we believe, and the Church whom we discern from the toilsome beginning of faith even unto theeternal blessedness of the kingdom. But, whilst they read, let them not wonder that they, whose are
the books, understand not by reason of the darkness of enmity. For that they would not understandwas foretold beforehand by the same Prophets; which it behoved should be fulfilled in like manneras the rest, and that by the secret and just judgment of God due punishment should be rendered totheir deserts. He indeed, Whom they crucified, and unto Whom they gave gall and vinegar, althoughwhen hanging upon the Tree, by reason of those whom He had been about to lead forth fromdarkness into light, He said unto the Father, “Forgive them, for they know not what they do;”1682
yet by reason of those whom through more hidden causes He had been about to desert, by theProphet so long before foretold, “They gave Me gall for My meat, and in My thirst they gave Me
vinegar to drink; let their table become a snare before them, and a recompense, and astumbling-block: let their eyes be darkened that they see not, and ever bow Thou down theirback.”1683 Thus, having with them the clearest testimonies of our cause, they walk round about witheyes darkened, that by their means those testimonies may be proved, wherein they themselves are
1681
1682
1683

Codices.
Luke xxiii. 34.
Ps. lxix. 21–23.

456

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

disapproved. Therefore was it brought to pass, that they should not be so blotted out, as that thissame sect should altogether exist not: but it was scattered abroad upon the earth, in order that,carrying with it the prophecies of the grace conferred upon us, more surely to convince unbelievers,
it might every where profit us. And this very thing which I assert, receive ye after what manner it
was prophesied of: “Slay them not,” saith He, “lest at any time they forget Thy law, but scatterthem abroad in Thy might.”1684 Therefore they were not slain, in that they forgot not those things
which were read and heard among them. For if they were altogether to forget, albeit they understandnot, the Holy Scriptures, they would be slain in the Jewish ritual itself; because, when the Jews
should know nothing of the Law and of the Prophets, they would be unable to profit us. Therefore
they were not slain, but scattered abroad; in order that, although they should not have in faith,
whence they might be saved; yet they should retain in their memory, whence we might be helped;in their books our supporters, in their hearts our enemies, in their copies our witnesses.

343

10. Although, even if there went before no testimonies concerning Christ and the Church, whom
ought it not to move unto belief, that the Divine brightness hath on a sudden shone on the humanrace, when we see, (the false gods now abandoned, and their images every where broken in pieces,
their temples overthrown or changed into other uses, and so many vain rites plucked out by theroots from the most inveterate usage of men,) the One True God invoked by all? And that this hathbeen brought to pass-by One Man, by men mocked, seized, bound, scourged, smitten with the palmsof the hand, reviled, crucified, slain: His disciples, (whom He chose common men,1685 and unlearned,
and fishermen, and publicans, that by their means His teaching might be set forth,) proclaiming
His Resurrection, His Ascension, which they asserted that they had seen, and being filled with theHoly Ghost, sounded forth this Gospel, in all tongues which they had not learned. And of them
who heard them, part believed, part, believing not, fiercely withstood them who preached. Thus
while they were faithful even unto death for the truth, strove not by returning evil, but by enduring,overcame not by killing, but by dying; thus was the world changed unto this religion, thus unto thisGospel were the hearts of mortals turned, of men and women, of small and great, of learned andunlearned, of wise and foolish, of mighty and weak, of noble and ignoble, of high and low, and,throughout all nations the Church shed abroad so increased, that even against the Catholic faithitself there arises not any perverse sect, any kind of error, which is found so to oppose itself toChristian truth, as that it affect not and go not about to glory in the name of Christ: which very error
would not be suffered to spring up throughout the earth, were it not that the very gainsaying exercised
an wholesome discipline. How1686 would The Crucified have availed so greatly, had He not been
God that took upon Him Man, even if He had through the Prophet foretold no such things to come?
But when now this so great mystery of godliness hath had its prophets and heralds going before,
by whose divine voices it was afore proclaimed; and when it hath come in such manner as it wasafore proclaimed, who is there so mad as to assert that the Apostles lied concerning Christ, of Whomthey preached that He was come in such manner as the Prophets foretold afore that He should come,

1684
1685
1686

Ps. lix. 11.
Idiotas.
Lit. “when.”457

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

which Prophets were not silent as to true things to come concerning the Apostles themselves? For
concerning these they had said, “There is neither speech nor language, whereof their voices are notheard; their sound went out into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world.”1687 And
this at any rate we see fulfilled in the world, although we have not yet seen Christ in the flesh. Whotherefore, unless blinded by amazing madness, or hard and steeled by amazing obstinacy, would
be unwilling to put faith in the sacred Scriptures, which have foretold the faith of the whole world?

11. But you, beloved, who possess this faith, or who have begun now newly to have it, let it benourished and increase in you. For as things temporal have come, so long before foretold, so willthings eternal also come, which are promised. Nor let them deceive you, either the vain heathen,or the false Jews, or the deceitful heretics, or also within the Catholic (Church) itself evil Christians,
enemies by so much the more hurtful, as they are the more within us. For, lest on this subject also
the weak should be troubled, divine prophecy hath not been silent, where in the Song of Songs theBridegroom speaking unto the Bride, that is, Christ the Lord unto the Church, saith, “As a lily inthe midst of thorns, so is my best Beloved1688 in the midst of the daughters.”1689 He said not, in the
midst of them that are without; but, “in the midst of daughters. Whoso hath ears to hear, let him
hear:”1690 and whilst the net which is cast into the sea,1691 and gathers together all kinds of fishes,
as saith the holy Gospel, is being drawn unto the shore, that is, unto the end of the world, let him
separate himself from the evil fishes, in heart, not in body; by changing evil habits, not by breaking
sacred nets; lest they who now seem being approved to be mingled with the reprobate, find, notlife, but punishment everlasting,1692 when they shall begin on the shore to be separated.

347

On the Profit of Believing.
[De Utilitate Credendi.]
Translated by Rev. C. L. Cornish. M.A.
Retract. i. cap. 14. Moreover now at Hippo-Regius as Presbyter I wrote a book on the Profit ofBelieving, to a friend of mine who had been taken in by the Manichees, and whom I knew to be
still held in that error, and to deride the Catholic school of Faith, in that men were bid believe, but

1687
1688
1689
1690
1691
1692

Ps. xix. 3, 4.
Proxima.
Song of Sol. ii. 2.
Matt. xiii. 9.
Matt. xiii. 47–50.
Some mss. “that they &c. may find not punishment, but life.”458

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

not taught what was truth by a most certain method. In this book I said, &c. * * *. This book begins
thus, “Si mihi Honorate, unum atque idem videretur esse.”
St. Augustin enumerates his book on the Profit of Believing first amongst those he wrote
as Presbyter, to which order he was raised at Hippo about the beginning of the year 391. The
person for whom he wrote had been led into error by himself, and appears to have been recoveredfrom it, at least if he is the same who wrote to St. Augustin from Carthage about 412, proposing
several questions, and to whom St. Augustin wrote his 140th Epistle. Cassiodorus calls him a
Presbyter, though at that time he was not baptized. In Ep. 83, St. Augustin speaks of the deathof another Honoratus, a Presbyter. Towards the end of his life he also wrote his 228th Epistle
to a Bishop of Thabenna of the same name.—(Bened. Ed.)
The remarks in the Retractations are given in notes to the passages where they occur.

348

1. IF, Honoratus, a heretic, and a man trusting heretics seemed to me one and the same, I should
judge it my duty to remain silent both in tongue and pen in this matter. But now, whereas there isa very great difference between these two: forasmuch as he, in my opinion, is an heretic, who, forthe sake of some temporal advantage, and chiefly for the sake of his own glory and pre-eminence,either gives birth to, or follows, false and new opinions; but he, who trusts men of this kind, is a
man deceived by a certain imagination of truth and piety. This being the case, I have not thought
it my duty to be silent towards you, as to my opinions on the finding and retaining of truth: withgreat love of which, as you know, we have burned from our very earliest youth: but it is a thing far
removed from the minds of vain men, who, having too far advanced and fallen into these corporeal
things, think that there is nothing else than what they perceive by those five well-known reportersof the body; and what impressions1693 and images they have received from these, they carry overwith themselves, even when they essay to withdraw from the senses; and by the deadly and mostdeceitful rule of these think that they measure most rightly the unspeakable recesses of truth. Nothingis more easy, my dearest friend, than for one not only to say, but also to think, that he hath foundout the truth; but how difficult it is in reality, you will perceive, I trust, from this letter of mine.
And that this may profit you, or at any rate may in no way harm you, and also all, into whose hands
it shall chance to come, I have both prayed, and do pray, unto God; and I hope that it will be so,forasmuch as1694 I am fully conscious that I have undertaken to write it, in a pious and friendly
spirit, not as aiming at vain reputation, or trifling display.

2. It is then my purpose to prove to you, if I can, that the Manichees profanely and rashly inveighagainst those, who, following the authority of the Catholic Faith, before that they are able to gazeupon that Truth, which the pure mind beholds, are by believing forearmed, and prepared for God
Who is about to give them light. For you know, Honoratus, that for no other reason we fell in with

1693
1694

Plagas.
Si.

459

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

such men, than because they used to say, that, apart from all terror of authority, by pure and simple
reason, they would lead within to God, and set free from all error those who were willing to be
their hearers. For what else constrained me, during nearly nine years, spurning the religion which
had been set in me from a child by my parents, to be a follower and diligent hearer of those men,1695
save that they said that we are alarmed by superstition, and are commanded to have faith before
reason, but that they urge no one to have faith, without having first discussed and made clear thetruth? Who would not be enticed by such promises, especially the mind of a young man desirousof the truth, and further a proud and talkative mind by discussions of certain learned men in theschool? such as they then found me, disdainful forsooth as of old wives’ fables, and desirous tograsp and drink in, what they promised, the open and pure Truth? But what reason, on the other
hand, recalled me, not to be altogether joined to them, so that I continued in that rank which theycall of Hearers, so that I resigned not the hope and business of this world; save that I noticed thatthey also are rather eloquent and full in refutation of others, than abide firm and sure in proof ofwhat is their own. But of myself what shall I say, who was already a Catholic Christian? teats which
now, after very long thirst, I almost exhausted and dry, have returned to with all greediness, andwith deeper weeping and groaning have shaken together and wrung them out more deeply, that sothere might flow what might be enough to refresh me affected as I was, and to bring back hope oflife and safety. What then shall I say of myself? You, not yet a Christian, who, throughencouragement from me, execrating them greatly as you did, were hardly led to believe that you
ought to listen to them and make trial of them, by what else, I pray you, were you delighted, callto mind, I entreat you, save by a certain great presumption and promise of reasons? But because
they disputed long and much with very great copiousness and vehemence concerning the errors of
unlearned men, a thing which I learned too late at length to be most easy for any moderately educatedman; if even of their own they implanted in us any thing, we thought that we were obliged to retain
it, insomuch as there fell not in our way other things, wherein to acquiesce. So they did in our casewhat crafty fowlers are wont to do, who set branches smeared with bird-lime beside water to deceive
thirsty birds. For they fill up and cover anyhow the other waters which are around, or fright themfrom them by alarming devices, that they may fall into their snares, not through choice, but want.

3. But why do I not make answer to myself, that these fair and clever similies, and charges ofthis nature may be poured forth against all who are teachers of any thing by any adversary, with
abundance of wit and sarcasm? But I thought that I ought to insert something of this kind in myletter, in order to admonish them to give over such proceedings; so that, as he1696 says, apart from
trifles of common-places, matter may contend with matter, cause with cause, reason with reason.
Wherefore let them give over that saying, which they have in their mouths as though of necessity,
when any one, who hath been for some long time a hearer, hath left them; “The Light hath madea passage through him.” For you see, you who are my chief care, (for I am not over anxious about
them,) how empty this is, and most easy for any one to find fault with. Therefore I leave this foryour own wisdom to consider. For I have no fear that you will think me possessed by indwelling

1695
1696

Confess. b. i. c. 11; b. v. c. 14.
Cicero.

460

NPNF (V1-03)

349

Philip Schaff

Light, when I was entangled in the life of this world, having a darkened hope, of beauty of wife,of pomp of riches, of emptiness of honors, and of all other hurtful and deadly pleasures. For allthese, as is not unknown to you, I ceased not to desire and hope for, at the time when I was theirattentive hearer. And I do not lay this to the charge of their teaching; for I also confess that theyalso carefully advise to shun these. But now to say that I am deserted by light, when I have turned
myself from all these shadows of things, and have determined to be content with that diet merely
which is necessary for health of body; but that I was enlightened and shining, at a time when I loved
these things, and was wrapped up in them, is the part of a man, to use the mildest expression,
wanting in a keen insight into matters, on which he loves to speak at length. But, if you please, let
us come to the cause in hand.

4. For you well know that the Manichees move the unlearned by finding fault with the Catholic
Faith, and chiefly by rending in pieces and tearing the Old Testament: and they are utterly ignorant,
how far1697 these things are to be taken, and how drawn out they descend with profit into the veins
and marrows of souls as yet as it were but able to cry.1698 And because there are in them certain
things which are some slight offense to minds ignorant and careless of themselves, (and there arevery many such,) they admit of being accused in a popular way: but defended in a popular way
they cannot be, by any great number of persons, by reason of the mysteries that are contained inthem. But the few, who know how to do this, do not love public and much talked of controversies
and disputes:1699 and on this account are very little known, save to such as are most earnest inseeking them out. Concerning then this rashness of the Manichees, whereby they find fault with
the Old Testament and the Catholic Faith, listen, I entreat you, to the considerations which moveme. But I desire and hope that you will receive them in the same spirit in which I say them. For
God, unto Whom are known the secrets of my conscience knows, that in this discourse I am doing
nothing of evil craft; but, as I think it should be received, for the sake of proving the truth, for which
one thing we have now long ago determined to live; and with incredible anxiety, lest it may havebeen most easy for me to err with you, but most difficult, to use no harder term, to hold the rightway with you. But I venture1700 to anticipate that, in this hope, wherein I hope that you will holdwith us the way of wisdom, He will not fail me, unto Whom I have been consecrated; Whom day
and night I endeavor to gaze upon: and since, by reason of my sins, and by reason of past habit,
having the eye of the mind wounded by strokes of feeble opinions, I know that I am without strength,
I often entreat with tears, and as, after long blindness and darkness the eyes being hardly opened,
and as yet, by frequent throbbing and turning away, refusing the light which yet they long after;
specially if one endeavor to show to them the very sun; so it has now befallen me, who do not denythat there is a certain unspeakable and singular good of the soul, which the mind sees; and whowith tears and groaning confess that I am not yet worthy of it. He will not then fail me, if I feign
nothing, if I am led by duty, if I love truth, if I esteem friendship, if I fear much lest you be deceived.

1697
1698
1699
1700

Quatenus.
Vagientium.
Famigerula.
Præsumo.

461

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

5. All that Scripture therefore, which is called the Old Testament, is handed down fourfold tothem who desire to know it, according to history, according to ætiology, according to analogy,
according to allegory. Do not think me silly for using Greek words. In the first place, because I
have so received, nor do I dare to make known to you otherwise than I have received. Next you
yourself perceive, that we have not in use terms for such things: and had I translated and madesuch, I should have been indeed more silly: but, were I to use circumlocution, I should be less freein treating: this only I pray you to believe, that in whatever way I err, I am not inflated or swollen
in any thing that I do. Thus (for example) it is handed down according to history, when there istaught what hath been written, or what hath been done; what not done, but only written as though
it had been done. According to ætiology, when it is shown for what cause any thing hath been doneor said. According to analogy, when it is shown that the two Testaments, the Old and the New, arenot contrary the one to the other. According to allegory, when it is taught that certain things whichhave been written are not to be taken in the letter, but are to be understood in a figure.

6. All these ways our Lord Jesus Christ and His Apostles used. For when it had been objectedthat His disciples had plucked the ears of corn on the sabbath-day, the instance was taken from
history; “Have ye not read,” saith He, “what David did when he was an hungered, and they thatwere with him; how he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was notlawful for him to eat, neither for them that were with him, but only for the priests?”1701 But the
instance pertains to ætiology, that, when Christ had forbidden a wife to be put away, save for thecause of fornication, and they, who asked Him, had alleged that Moses had granted permission
after a writing of divorcement had been given, This, saith He, “Moses did because of the hardnessof your heart.”1702 For here a reason was given, why that had been well allowed by Moses for atime; that this command of Christ might seem to show that now the times were other. But it werelong to explain the changes of these times, and their order arranged and settled by a certain
marvellous appointment of Divine Providence.
350

7. And further, analogy, whereby the agreement of both Testaments is plainly seen, why shall
I say that all have made use of, to whose authority they yield; whereas it is in their power to consider
with themselves, how many things they are wont to say have been inserted in the divine Scripturesby certain, I know not who, corrupters of truth? Which speech of theirs I always thought to be mostweak, even at the time that I was their hearer: nor I alone, but you also, (for I well remember,) andall of us, who essayed to exercise a little more care in forming a judgment than the crowd of hearers.
But now, after that many things have been expounded and made clear to me, which used chiefly
to move me: those I mean, wherein their discourse for the most part boasts itself, and expatiates
the more freely, the more safely it can do so as having no opponent; it seems to me that there is noassertion of theirs more shameless, or (to use a milder phrase) more careless and weak than thatthe divine Scriptures have been corrupted; whereas there are no copies in existence, in a matter of
1701
1702

Matt. xii. 3, 4.
Matt. xix. 8.

462

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

so recent date, whereby they can prove it. For were they to assert, that they thought not that theyought thoroughly to receive them, because they had been written by persons, who they thought had
not written the truth; any how their refusal1703 would be more right, or their error more natural.1704
For this is what they have done in the case of the Book which is inscribed the Acts of the Apostles.
And this device of theirs, when I consider with myself, I cannot enough wonder at. For it is not thewant of wisdom in the men that I complain of in this matter, but the want of ordinary
understanding.1705 For that book hath so great matters, which are like what they receive, that it
seems to me great folly to refuse to receive this book also, and if any thing offend them there tocall it false and inserted. Or, if such language is shameless, as it is why in the Epistles of Paul, whyin the four books of the Gospel, do they think that they1706 are of any avail, in which I am not surebut that there are in proportion many more things, than could be in that book, which they will havebelieved to have been interpolated by falsifiers. But forsooth this is what I believe to be the case,and I ask of you to consider it with me with as calm and serene a judgment as possible. For you
know that, essaying to bring the person of their founder Manichæus into the number of the Apostles,
they say that the Holy Spirit, Whom the Lord promised His disciples that He would send, hathcome to us through him. Therefore, were they to receive those Acts of the Apostles, in which thecoming of the Holy Spirit is plainly set forth,1707 they could not find how to say that it wasinterpolated. For they will have it that there were some, I know not who, falsifiers of the divine
Books before the times of Manichæus himself; and that they were falsified by persons who wished
to combine the Law of the Jews with the Gospel. But this they cannot say concerning the Holy
Spirit, unless haply they assert that those persons divined, and set in their books what should be
brought forward against Manichæus, who should at some future time arise, and say that the Holy
Spirit had been sent through him. But concerning the Holy Spirit we will speak somewhat more
plainly in another place. Now let us return to my purpose.

8. For that both history of the Old Testament, and ætiology, and analogy are found in the New
Testament, has been, as I think, sufficiently proved: it remains to show this of allegory. Our
Redeemer Himself in the Gospel uses allegory out of the Old Testament. “This generation,” saithHe, “seeketh a sign, and there shall not be given it save the sign of Jonas the prophet. For as Jonas
was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly, so also shall the Son of Man be three days andthree nights in the heart of the earth.”1708 For why should I speak of the Apostle Paul, who in his
first Epistle to the Corinthians shows that even the very history of the Exodus was an allegory of
the future Christian People. “But I would not that ye should be ignorant, brethren, how that all ourfathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and were all baptized into Moses, inthe cloud, and in the sea, and did all eat the same spiritual meat, and did all drink the same spiritual
drink; for they drank of the spiritual Rock that followed with them; and that Rock was Christ. But
1703
1704
1705
1706
1707
1708

Tergiversatio.
Humanior.
Cor mediocre.
Ea.
Acts ii. 2, 3, 4.
Matt. xii. 39, 40.

463

NPNF (V1-03)

351

Philip Schaff

in the more part of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness.
But these things were figures of us,1709 that we be not lustful of evil things, as they also lusted.
Neither let us worship idols, as certain of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat anddrink, and rose up to play. Neither let us commit fornication, as certain of them committed, andfell in one day three and twenty thousand men. Neither let us tempt Christ, as certain of them
tempted, and perished of serpents. Neither murmur we, as certain of them murmured, and perishedof the destroyer. But all these things happened unto them in a figure.1710 But they were written for
our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world have come.”1711 There is also in the Apostle acertain allegory, which indeed greatly relates to the cause in hand, for this reason that they themselves
are wont to bring it forward, and make a display of it in disputing. For the same Paul says to theGalatians, “For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, one of a bond-maid, and one of a freewoman. But he who was of the bond-maid was born after the flesh: but he who was of the freewoman, by promise: which things were spoken by way of allegory.1712 For these are the two
Testaments, one of Mount Sinai gendering unto bondage, which is Agar: for Sinai is a mount inArabia, which bordereth1713 upon that Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
But that Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.”1714

9. Here therefore these men too evil, while they essay to make void the Law, force us to approvethese Scriptures. For they mark what is said, that they who are under the Law are in bondage, andthey keep flying above the rest that last saying, “Ye are made empty1715 of Christ, as many of you
as are justified in the Law; ye have fallen from Grace.”1716 We grant that all these things are true,
and we say that the Law is not necessary, save for them unto whom bondage is yet profitable: andthat the Law was on this account profitably enacted, in that men, who could not be recalled fromsins by reason, needed to be restrained by such a Law, that is to say, by the threats and terrors of
those punishments which can be seen by fools: from which when the Grace of Christ sets us free,
it condemns not that Law, but invites us at length to yield obedience to its love, not to be slaves tothe fear of the Law. Itself is Grace, that is free gift,1717 which they understand not to have come tothem from God, who still desire to be under the bonds of the Law. Whom Paul deservedly rebukes
as unbelievers, because they do not believe that now through our Lord Jesus they have been set
free from that bondage, under which they were placed for a certain time by the most just appointmentof God. Hence is that saying of the same Apostle, “For the Law was our schoolmaster in Christ.”1718
He therefore gave to men a schoolmaster to fear, Who after gave a Master to love. And yet in these
1709
1710
1711
1712
1713
1714
1715
1716
1717
1718

Figuræ nostra τὐποι ἠμῶν Gr. in figura facta sunt nostri. Vulg.
τύποι.
1 Cor. x. 1–11. (See R.R.)
ἀλληγοροὐμενα Gr.
Confinis.
Gal. iv. 22–26.
Ventilant.
Gal. v. 4.
Beneficium.
Gal. iii. 24. in Christo.

464

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

precepts and commands of the Law, which now it is not allowed Christians to use, such as either
the Sabbath, or Circumcision, or Sacrifices, and if there be any thing of this kind, so great mysteries
are contained, as that every pious person may understand, there is nothing more deadly than thatwhatever is there be understood to the letter, that is, to the word:1719 and nothing more healthful
than that it be unveiled in the Spirit. Hence it is: “The letter killeth, but the Spirit quickeneth.”1720
Hence it is, “That same veil remaineth in the reading of the Old Testament, which veil is not taken
away; since it is made void in Christ.”1721 For there is made void in Christ, not the Old Testament,
but its veil: that so through Christ that may be understood, and, as it were, laid bare, which without
Christ is obscure and covered. Forasmuch as the same Apostle straightway adds, “But when thoushalt have passed over to Christ, the veil shall be taken away.”1722 For he saith not, the Law shallbe taken away, or, the Old Testament. Not therefore through the Grace of the Lord, as thoughuseless things were there hidden, have they been taken away; but rather the covering whereby usefulthings were covered. In this manner all they are dealt with, who earnestly and piously, not disorderly
and shamelessly, seek the sense of those Scriptures, and they are carefully shown both the orderof events, and the causes of deeds and words, and so great agreement of the Old Testament with
the New, that there is left no jot1723 that agrees not; and so great secrets of figures, that all the things
that are drawn forth by interpretation force them to confess that they are wretched, who will tocondemn these before they learn them.

352

10. But, passing over in the mean while the depth of knowledge, to deal with you as I think I
ought to deal with my intimate friend; that is, as I have myself power, not as I have wondered at
the power of very learned men; there are three kinds of error, whereby men err, when they read
anything. I will speak of them one by one. The first kind is, wherein that which is false is thought
true, whereas the writer thought otherwise. A second kind, although not so extensive, yet not lesshurtful, when that, which is false, is thought true, yet the thought is the same as that of the writer.
A third kind, when from the writing of another some truth is understood, whereas the writerunderstood it not. In which kind there is no little profit, rather, if you consider carefully, the wholeentire fruit of reading. An instance of the first kind is, as if any one, for example, should say andbelieve that Rhadamanthus hears and judges the causes of the dead in the realms below, because
he hath so read in the strain of Maro.1724 For this one errs in two ways: both in that he believes athing not to be believed, and also in that he, whom he reads, is not to be thought to have believed
it. The second kind may be thus noticed: if one, because Lucretius writes that the soul is formedof atoms, and that after death it is dissolved into the same atoms and perishes, were to think this tobe true and what he ought to believe. For this one also is not less wretched, if, in a matter of so
1719

Ad verbum.
Vid. Retr. l. i. c. 14. n. l. “In this book I said, ‘in which &c.’ but I have otherwise explained those words of the Apostle
Paul, and as far as I can see, or rather as is apparent from the plain state of the case, much more suitably, in the book entitled
De Spiritu et Literâ, though this sense too is not to be utterly rejected.” 2 Cor. iii. 6.
1721
2 Cor. iii. 14. quoniam, ὀτι Gr. “which veil,” Eng. T.
1722
2 Cor. iii. 16.
1723
Apex.
1724
Virg. Æn. vi. 566–569.
1720

465

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

great moment, he hath persuaded himself of that which is false, as certain; although Lucretius, bywhose books he hath been deceived, held this opinion. For what doth it profit this one to be assuredof the meaning of the author, whereas he hath chosen him to himself not so as through him to escapeerror, but so as with him to err. An instance suited to the third kind is, if one, after having read in
the books of Epicurus some place wherein he praises continence, were to assert that he had madethe chief good to consist in virtue, and that therefore he is not to be blamed. For how is this man
injured by the error of Epicurus, what though Epicurus believe that bodily pleasure is the chief
good of man: whereas he hath not surrendered up himself to so base and hurtful an opinion, and ispleased with Epicurus for no other reason, than that he thinks him not to have held sentiments which
ought not to be holden. This error is not only natural to man,1725 but often also most worthy of aman. For what, if word were brought to me, concerning some one whom I loved, that, when now
he was of bearded age, he had said, in the hearing of many, that he was so pleased with boyhoodand childhood, as even to swear that he wished to live after the same fashion, and that that was soproved to me, as that I should be shameless to deny it: I should not, should I, seem worthy of blame,
if I thought that, in saying this, he wished to show, that he was pleased with the innocence, andwith the temper of mind alien from those desires in which the race of man is wrapped up, and fromthis circumstance should love him yet more and more, than I used to love him before; althoughperhaps he had been foolish enough to love in the age of children a certain freedom in play andfood, and an idle ease? For suppose that he had died after this report had reached me, and that I
had been unable to make any inquiry of him, so as for him to open his meaning; would there be
any one so shameless as to be angry with me, for praising the man’s purpose and wish, throughthose very words which I had heard? What, that even a just judge of matters would not hesitate
perhaps to praise my sentiment and wish, in that both I was pleased with innocence, and, as manof man, in a matter of doubt, preferred to think well, when it was in my power also to think ill?

11. And, this being so, hear also just so many conditions and differences of the same Scriptures.
For it must be that just so many meet us. For either any one hath written profitably, and is notprofitably understood by some one: or both take place unprofitably: or the reader understands
profitably, whereas he, who is read, hath written contrariwise. Of these the first I blame not, thelast I regard not. For neither can I blame the man, who without any fault of his own hath been ill
understood; nor can I be distressed at any one being read, who hath failed to see the truth, when I
see that the readers are no way injured. There is then one kind most approved, and as it were mostcleansed, when both the things written are well, and are taken in a good sense by the readers. And
yet that also is still further divided into two: for it doth not altogether shut out error. For it generally
comes to pass, that, when a writer hath held a good sense, the reader also holds a good sense; stillother than he, and often better, often worse, yet profitably. But when both we hold the same sense
as he whom we read, and that is every way suited to right conduct of life, there is the fullest possible
measure of truth, and there is no place opened for error from any other quarter. And this kind isaltogether very rare, when what we read is matter of extreme obscurity: nor can it, in my opinion,
be clearly known, but only believed. For by what proofs shall I so gather the will of a man who is1725

Humanus.

466

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

absent or dead, as that I can swear to it: when, even if he were questioned being present, there might
be many things, which, if he were no ill man, he would most carefully hide? But I think that it hathnothing to do towards learning the matter of fact, of what character the writer was; yet is he mostfairly believed good, whose writings have benefited the human race and posterity.

353

12. Wherefore I would that they would tell me, in what kind they place the, supposed, error of
the Catholic Church. If in the first, it is altogether a grave charge; but it needs not a far-fetcheddefense: for it is enough to deny that we so understand, as the persons, who inveigh against us,
suppose. If in the second, the charge is not less grave; but they shall be refuted by the same saying.
If in the third, it is no charge at all. Proceed, and next consider the Scriptures themselves. For what
objection do they raise against the books of (what is called) the Old Testament? Is it that they are
good, but are understood by us in an ill sense? But they themselves do not receive them. Or is itthat they are neither good, nor are well understood? But our defense above is enough to drive themfrom this position. Or is it this that they will say, although they are understood by you in a good
sense, yet they are evil? What is this other than to acquit living adversaries, with whom they haveto do, and to accuse men long ago dead, with whom they have no strife? I indeed believe that boththose men profitably delivered to memory all things, and that they were great and divine. And thatthat Law was published, and framed by the command and will of God: and of this, although I havebut very slight knowledge of books of that kind, yet I can easily persuade any, if there apply to mea mind fair and no way obstinate: and this I will do, when you shall grant to me your ears and mind
well disposed: this however when it shall be in my power: but now is it not enough for me, howeverthat matter may stand, not to have been deceived?

13. I call to witness, Honoratus, my conscience, and God Who hath His dwelling in pure souls,
that I account nothing more prudent, chaste, and religious, than are all those Scriptures, which under
the name of the Old Testament the Catholic Church retains. You wonder at this, I am aware. For I
cannot hide that we were far otherwise persuaded. But there is indeed nothing more full of rashness,(which at that time, being boys, we had in us,) than in the case of each several book, to desert
expounders, who profess that they hold them, and that they can deliver them to their scholars, andto seek their meaning from those, who, I know not from what cause compelling, have proclaimed
a most bitter war against the framers and authors of them. For who ever thought that the hidden
and dark books of Aristotle were to be expounded to him by one who was the enemy of Aristotle;
to speak of these systems of teaching, wherein a reader may perhaps err without sacrilege? Who,in fine, willed to read or learn the geometrical writings of Archimedes, under Epicurus as a master;
against which Epicurus used to argue with great obstinacy, so far as I judge, understanding them
not at all? What are those Scriptures of the law most plain, against which, as though set forth inpublic, these men make their attack in vain and to no purpose? And they seem to me to be like thatweak woman, whom these same men are wont to mock at, who enraged at the sun being extolled
to her, and recommended as an object of worship by a certain female Manichee, being as she wassimple-minded and of a religions spirit, leaped up in haste, and often striking with her foot thatspot on which the sun through the window cast light, began to cry out, Lo, I trample on the sun and467

NPNF (V1-03)

354

Philip Schaff

your God: altogether after a foolish and womanish manner; Who denies it? But do not those menseem to you to be such, who, in matters which they understand not, either wherefore, or altogetherof what kind they are, although like to matters cast in the way,1726 yet to such as understand themexact1727 and divine, rending them with great onset of speech and reproaches, think that they are
effecting something, because the unlearned applaud them? Believe me, whatever there is in these
Scriptures, it is lofty and divine: there is in them altogether truth, and a system of teaching mostsuited to refresh and renew minds: and clearly so ordered in measure, as that there is no one but
may draw thence, what is enough for himself, if only he approach to draw with devotion and piety,as true religion demands. To prove this to you, needs many reasons and a longer discourse. For
first I must so treat with you as that you may not hate the authors themselves; next, so as that you
may love them: and this I must treat in any other way, rather than by expounding their meanings
and words. For this reason, because in case we hated Virgil, nay, rather in case we loved him not,before understanding him, by the commendation of our forefathers, we should never be satisfied
on those questions about him without number, by which grammarians are wont to be disquieted
and troubled; nor should we listen willingly to one who solved these at the same time praising him;
but should favor that one who by means of these essayed to show that he had erred and doated. But
now, whereas many essay to open these, and each (in a different way according to his capacity, weapplaud these in preference, through whose exposition the poet is found better, who is believed,
even by those who do not understand him, not only in nothing to have offended, but also to havesung nothing but what was worthy of praise. So that in some minute question, we are rather angry
with the master who fails, and has not what to answer, than think him silent through any fault in
Maro. And now, if, in order to defend himself, he should wish to assert a fault in so great an author,
hardly will his scholars remain with him, even after they have paid his fee. How great matter wereit, that we should shew like good will towards them, of whom it hath been confirmed by so longtime of old that the Holy Spirit spake by them? But, forsooth, we youths of the greatest
understanding, and marvellous searchers out of reasons, without having at least unrolled thesewritings, without having sought teachers, without having somewhat chided our own dullness, lastly,
without having yielded our heart even in a measure1728 to those who have willed that writings ofthis kind be so long read, kept, and handled through the whole world; have thought that nothing inthem is to be believed, moved by the speech of those who are unfriendly and hostile to them, withwhom, under a false promise of reason, we should be compelled to believe and cherish thousandsof fables.

14. But now I will proceed with what I have begun, if I can, and I will so treat with you, as notin the mean while to lay open the Catholic Faith, but, in order that they may search out its great
mysteries, to show to those who have a care for their souls, hope of divine fruit, and of the discerningof truth. No one doubts of him who seeks true religion, either that he already believes that there is
an immortal soul for that religion to profit, or that he also wishes to find that very thing in this same

1726
1727
1728

Jacentibus.
Subtilia.
Mediocri corde.

468

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

religion. Therefore all religion is for the sake of the soul; for howsoever the nature of the body may
be, it causes no care or anxiety, especially after death, to him, whose soul possesses that whereby
it is blessed. For the sake of the soul, therefore, either alone or chiefly, hath true religion, if there
be any such, been appointed. But this soul, (I will consider for what reason, and I confess the matterto be most obscure,) yet errs, and is foolish, as we see, until it attain to and perceive wisdom, andperhaps this very [wisdom] is true religion. I am not, am I, sending you to fables? I am not, am I,
forcing you to believe rashly? I say that our soul entangled and sunk in error and folly seeks theway of truth, if there be any such. If this be not your case, pardon me, I pray, and share with me
your wisdom; but if you recognize in yourself what I say, let us, I entreat, together seek the truth.

15. Put the case that we have not as yet heard a teacher of any religion. Lo we have undertakena new matter and business. We must seek, I suppose, them who profess this matter, if it have any
existence. Suppose that we have found different persons holding different opinions, and throughtheir difference of opinions seeking to draw persons each one to himself: but that, in the mean
while, there are certain pre-eminent from being much spoken of, and from having possession ofnearly all peoples. Whether these hold the truth, is a great question: but ought we not to make fulltrial of them first, in order that, so long as we err, being as we are men, we may seem to err withthe human race itself?

16. But it will be said, the truth is with some few; therefore you already know what it is, if you
know with whom it is. Said I not a little above, that we were in search of it as unlearned men? But
if from the very force of truth you conjecture that few possess it, but know not who they are; what
if it is thus, that there are so few who know the truth, as that they hold the multitude by theirauthority, whence the small number may set itself free, and, as it were, strain itself1729 forth into
those secrets? Do we not see how few attain the highest eloquence, whereas through the wholeworld the schools of rhetoricians are resounding with troops of young men? What, do they, as manyas desire to turn out good orators, alarmed at the multitude of the unlearned, think that they are to
bestow their labor on the orations of Cæcilius, or Erucius, rather than those of Tullius? All aim atthese, which are confirmed by authority of our forefathers. Crowds of unlearned persons essay tolearn the same, which by the few learned are received as to be learned: yet very few attain, yet
fewer practise, the very fewest possible become famous. What, if true religion be some such thing?
What if a multitude of unlearned persons attend the Churches, and yet that be no proof, that therefore
no one is made perfect by these mysteries? And yet, if they who studied eloquence were as few as
the few who are eloquent, our parents would never believe that we ought to be committed to such
masters. Whereas, then, we have been called to these studies by a multitude, which is numerous inthat portion of it which is made up of the unlearned, so as to become enamored of that which few

1729

Eliquare.

469

NPNF (V1-03)

355

Philip Schaff

can attain unto; why are we unwilling to be in the same case in religion, which perhaps we despisewith great danger to our soul? For if the truest and purest worship of God, although it be foundwith a few, be yet found with those, with whom a multitude albeit wrapped up in lusts, and removed
far from purity of understanding, agrees; (and who can doubt that this may happen?) I ask, if one
were to charge us with rashness and folly, that we seek not diligently with them who teach it, that,which we are greatly anxious to discover, what can we answer? [Shall we say,] I was deterred bynumbers? Why from the pursuit of liberal arts, which hardly bring any profit to this present life;
why from search after money? Why from attaining unto honor; why, in fine, from gaining andkeeping good health; lastly, why from the very aim at a happy life; whereas all are engaged in these,
few excel; were you deterred by no numbers?

17. “But they seemed there to make absurd statements.” On whose assertion? Forsooth on thatof enemies, for whatever cause, for whatever reason, for this is not now the question, still enemies.
Upon reading, I found it so of myself. Is it so? Without having received any instruction in poetry,
you would not dare to essay to read Terentianus Maurus without a master: Asper, Cornutus, Donatus,and others without number are needed, that any poet whatever may be understood, whose strains
seem to court even the applause of the theatre; do you in the case of those books, which, however
they may be, yet by the confession of well-nigh the whole human race are commonly reported tobe sacred and full of divine things, rush upon them without a guide, and dare to deliver an opinion
on them without a teacher; and, if there meet you any matters, which seem absurd, do not accuse
rather your own dullness, and mind decayed by the corruption of this world, such as is that of allthat are foolish, than those [books] which haply cannot be understood by such persons! You shouldseek some one at once pious and learned, or who by consent of many was said to be such, that you
might be both bettered by his advice, and instructed by his learning. Was he not easy to find? Heshould be searched out with pains. Was there no one in the country in which you lived? What cause
could more profitably force to travel? Was he quite hidden, or did he not exist on the continent1730?
One should cross the sea. If across the sea he was not found in any place near to us, you should
proceed even as far as those lands, in which the things related in those books are said to have takenplace. What, Honoratus, have we done of this kind? And yet a religion perhaps the most holy, (foras yet I am speaking as though it were matter of doubt,) the opinion whereof hath by this time taken
possession of the whole world, we wretched boys condemned at our own discretion and sentence.
What if those things which in those same Scriptures seem to offend some unlearned persons, wereso set there for this purpose, that when things were read of such as are abhorrent from the feelingof ordinary men, not to say of wise and holy men, we might with much more earnestness seek thehidden meaning. Perceive you not how the Catamite of the Bucolics,1731 for whom the roughshepherd gushed forth into tears, men essay to interpret, and affirm that the boy Alexis, on whom
Plato also is said to have composed a love strain, hath some great meaning or other, but escapes
the judgment of the unlearned; whereas without any sacrilege a poet however rich may seem tohave published wanton songs?

1730
1731

Continenti.
Virg. Ecl. ii.

470

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

18. But in truth was there either decree of any law, or power of gainsayers, or vile character of
persons consecrated, or shameful report, or newness of institution, or hidden profession, to recall
us from, and forbid us, the search? There is nothing of these. All laws divine and human allow us
to seek the Catholic Faith; but to hold and exercise it is allowed us at any rate by human law, even
if so long as we are in error there be a doubt concerning divine law; no enemy alarms our weakness,(although truth and the salvation of the soul, in case being diligently sought it be not found where
it may with most safety, ought to be sought at any risk); the degrees of all ranks and powers mostdevotedly minister to this divine worship; the name of religion is most honorable and most famous.
What, I pray, hinders to search out and discuss with pious and careful enquiry, whether there behere that which it must needs be few know and guard in entire purity, although the goodwill andaffection of all nations conspire in its favor?

356

19. The case standing thus, suppose, as I said, that we are now for the first time seeking unto
what religion we shall deliver up our souls, for it to cleanse and renew them; without doubt wemust begin with the Catholic Church. For by this time there are more Christians, than if the Jews
and idolaters be added together. But of these same Christians, whereas there are several heresies,
and all wish to appear Catholics, and call all others besides themselves heretics, there is one Church,
as all allow: if you consider the whole world, more full filled in number; but, as they who know
affirm, more pure also in truth than all the rest. But the question of truth is another; but, what isenough for such as are in search, there is one Catholic, to which different heresies give different
names whereas they themselves are called each by names of their own, which they dare not deny.
From which may be understood, by judgment of umpires who are hindered by no favor, to whichis to be assigned the name Catholic, which all covet. But, that no one may suppose that it is to bemade matter of over garrulous or unnecessary discussion, this is at any rate one, in which humanlaws themselves also are in a certain way Christian. I do not wish any prejudgment to be formed
from this fact, but I account it a most favorable commencement for enquiry. For we are not to fear
lest the true worship of God; resting on no strength of its own, seem to need to be supported bythem whom it ought to support: but, at any rate, it is perfect happiness, if the truth may be there
found, where it is most safe both to search for it and to hold it: in case it cannot, then at length, at
whatever risk, we must go and search some other where.

20. Having then laid down these principles, which, as I think, are so just that I ought to win thiscause before you, let who will be my adversary, I will set forth to you, as I am able, what way I
followed, when I was searching after true religion in that spirit, in which I have now set forth that
it ought to be sought. For upon leaving you and crossing the sea, now delaying and hesitating, what
I ought to hold, what to let go; which delay rose upon me every day the more, from the time that I
was a hearer of that man,1732 whose coming was promised to us, as you know, as if from heaven,to explain all things which moved us, and found him, with the exception of a certain eloquence,1732

i.e. Faustus. v. Conf. b. v. c. vi. § 10471

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

such as the rest; being now settled in Italy, I reasoned and deliberated greatly with myself, notwhether I should continue in that sect, into which I was sorry that I had fallen, but in what way I
was to find the truth, my sighs through love of which are known to no one better than to yourself.
Often it seemed to me that it could not be found, and huge waves of my thoughts would roll towarddeciding in favor of the Academics. Often again, with what power I had, looking into the humansoul, with so much life, with so much intelligence, with so much clearness, I thought that the truth
lay not hid, save that in it the way of search lay hid, and that this same way must be taken fromsome divine authority. It remained to enquire what was that authority, where in so great dissensions
each promised that he would deliver it. Thus there met me a wood, out of which there was no way,
which I was very loath to be involved in: and amid these things, without any rest, my mind wasagitated through desire of finding the truth. However, I continued to unsew myself more and morefrom those whom now I had proposed to leave. But there remained nothing else, in so great dangers,
than with words full of tears and sorrow to entreat the Divine Providence to help me. And this I
was content to do: and now certain disputations of the Bishop of Milan1733 had almost moved me
to desire, not without some hope, to enquire into many things concerning the Old Testament itself,
which, as you know, we used to view as accursed, having been ill commended to us. And I had
decided to be a Catechumen in the Church, unto which I had been delivered by my parents, until
such time as I should either find what I wished, or should persuade myself that it needed not to besought. Therefore had there been one who could teach me, he would find me at a very critical
moment most fervently disposed and very apt to learn. If you see that you too have been longaffected in this way, therefore, and with a like care for thy soul, and if now you seem to yourself
to have been tossed to and fro enough, and wish to put an end to labors of this kind, follow thepathway of Catholic teaching, which hath flowed down from Christ Himself through the Apostles
even unto us, and will hereafter flow down to posterity.

357

21. This, you will say, is ridiculous, whereas all profess to hold and teach this: all heretics makethis profession, I cannot deny it; but so, as that they promise to those whom they entice, that they
will give them a reason concerning matters the most obscure: and on this account chiefly charge
the Catholic [Church], that they who come to her are enjoined to believe; but they make it theirboast, that they impose not a yoke of believing, but open a fount of teaching. You answer, What
could be said, that should pertain more to their praise? It is not so. For this they do, without beingendued with any strength, but in order to conciliate to themselves a crowd by the name of reason:on the promise of which the human soul naturally is pleased, and, without considering its own
strength and state of health, by seeking the food of the sound, which is ill entrusted save to such as
are in health, rushes upon the poisons of them who deceive. For true religion, unless those things
be believed, which each one after, if he shall conduct himself well and shall be worthy, attains unto
and understands, and altogether without a certain weighty power of authority, can in no way berightly entered upon.

1733

i.e. S. Ambrose. v. Conf. b. v. c. xiii. xiv. § 23, 24, 25

472

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

22. But perhaps you seek to have some reason given you on this very point, such as may persuadeyou, that you ought not to be taught by reason before faith. Which may easily be done, if only you
make yourself a fair hearer. But, in order that it may be done suitably, I wish you as it were toanswer my questions; and, first, to tell me, why you, think that one ought not to believe. Because,you
say, credulity, from which men are called credulous, in itself, seems to me to be a certain fault:
otherwise we should not use to cast this as a term of reproach. For if a suspicious man is in fault,
in that he suspects things not ascertained; how much more a credulous man, who herein differsfrom a suspicious man, that the one allows some doubt, the other none, in matters which he knowsnot. In the mean while I accept this opinion and distinction. But you know that we are not wont tocall a person even curious without some reproach; but we call him studious even with praise.
Wherefore observe, if you please, what seems to you to be the difference between these two. Thissurely, you answer, that, although both be led by great desire to know, yet the curious man seeks
after things that no way pertain to him, but the studious man, on the contrary, seeks after whatpertain to him. But, because we deny not that a man’s wife and children, and their health, pertain
unto him; if any one, being settled abroad, were to be careful to ask all comers, how his wife andchildren are and fare, he is surely led by great desire to know, and yet we call not this man studious,
who both exceedingly wishes to know, and that (in) matters which very greatly pertain unto him.
Wherefore you now understand that the definition of a studious person falters in this point, thatevery studious person wishes to know what pertain to himself, and yet not every one, who makes
this his business, is to be called studious; but he who with all earnestness seeks those things whichpertain unto the liberal culture and adornment of the mind. Yet we rightly call him one who
studies,1734 especially if we add what he studies to hear. For we may call him even studious of his
own (family) if he love only his own (family), we do not however, without some addition, think
him worthy of the common name of the studious. But one who was desirous to hear how his family
were I should not call studious of hearing, unless taking pleasure in the good report, he should wish
to hear it again and again: but one who studied, even if only once. Now return to the curious person,
and tell me, if any one should be willing to listen to some tale, such as would no way profit him,that is, of matters that pertain not to him: and that not in an offensive way and frequently, but very
seldom and with great moderation, either at a feast, or in some company, or meeting of any kind;
would he seem to you curious? I think not: but at any rate he would certainly seem to have a carefor that matter, to which he was willing to listen. Wherefore the definition of a curious person also
must be corrected by the same rule as that of a studious person: Consider therefore whether theformer statements also do not need to be corrected. For why should not both he, who at some timesuspects something, be unworthy the name of a suspicious person; and he who at some time believes
something, of a credulous person? Thus as there is very great difference between one who studies
any matter, and the absolutely studious; and again between him who hath a care and the curious;
so is there between him who believes and the credulous.

23. But you will say, consider now whether we ought to believe in religion. For, although we
grant that it is one thing to believe, another to be credulous, it does not follow that it is no fault to1734

Studentem.

473

NPNF (V1-03)

358

Philip Schaff

believe in matters of religion. For what if it be a fault both to believe and to be credulous, as (it is)both to be drunk and to be a drunkard? Now he who thinks this certain, it seems to me can have nofriend; for, if it is base to believe any thing, either he acts basely who believes a friend, or in nothing
believing a friend I see not how he can call either him or himself a friend. Here perhaps you may
say, I grant that we must believe something at some time; now make plain, how in the case ofreligion it be not base to believe before one knows. I will do so, if I can. Wherefore I ask of you,which you esteem the graver fault, to deliver religion to one unworthy, or to believe what is saidby them who deliver it. If you understand not whom I call unworthy, I call him, who approacheswith feigned breast. You grant, as I suppose, that it is more blameable to unfold unto such an one
whatever holy secrets there are, than to believe religious men affirming any thing on the matter ofreligion itself. For it would be unbecoming you to make any other answer. Wherefore now suppose
him present, who is about to deliver to you a religion, in what way shall you assure him, that you
approach with a true mind, and that, so far as this matter is concerned, there is in you no fraud or
feigning? You will say, your own good conscience that you are no way feigning, asserting this withwords as strong as you can, but yet with words. For you cannot lay open man to man the hiding
places of your soul, so that you may be thoroughly known. But if he shall say, Lo, I believe you,but is it not more fair that you also believe me, when, if I hold any truth, you are about to receive,
I about to give, a benefit? what will you answer, save that you must believe.

24. But you say, Were it not better that you should give me a reason, that, wherever, that shalllead me, I may follow without any rashness? Perhaps it were: but, it being so great a matter, thatyou are by reason to come to the knowledge of God, do you think that all are qualified to understandthe reasons, by which the human soul is led to know God, or many, or few? Few I think, you say.
Do you believe that you are in the number of these? It is not for me, you say, to answer this.
Therefore you think it is for him to believe you in this also: and this indeed he does: only do you
remember, that he hath already twice believed you saying things uncertain; that you are unwilling
to believe him even once admonishing you in a religious spirit. But suppose that it is so, and thatyou approach with a true mind to receive religion, and that you are one of few men in such sense
as to be able to take in the reasons by which the Divine Power1735 is brought into certain knowledge;
what? do you think that other men, who are not endued with so serene a disposition, are to be denied
religion? or do you think that they are to be led gradually by certain steps unto those highest innerrecesses? You see clearly which is the more religious. For you cannot think that any one whateverin a case where he desires so great a thing, ought by any means to be abandoned or rejected. But
do you not think, that, unless he do first believe that he shall attain unto that which he purposes;
and do yield his mind as a suppliant; and, submitting to certain great and necessary precepts, doby a certain course of life thoroughly cleanse it, that he will not otherwise attain the things that are
purely true? Certainly you think so. What, then, is the case of those, (of whom I already believe
you to be one,) who are able most easily to receive divine secrets by sure reason, will it, I ask, beto them any hindrance at all, if they so come as they who at the first believe? I think not. But yet,you say, what need to delay them? Because although they will in no way harm themselves by what1735

Vis divina.

474

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

is done, yet they will harm the rest by the precedent. For there is hardly one who has a just notionof his own power: but he who has a less notion must be roused; he who has a greater notion must
be checked: that neither the one be broken by despair, nor the other carried headlong by rashness.
And this is easily done, if even they, who are able to fly, (that they be not alluring the occasion of
any into danger,) are forced for a short time to walk where the rest also may walk with safety. Thisis the forethought of true religion: this the command of God: this what hath been handed downfrom our blessed forefathers, this what hath been preserved even unto us: to wish to distrust andoverthrow this, is nothing else than to seek a sacrilegious way unto true religion. And whoso do
this, not even if what they wish be granted to them are they able to arrive at the point at which theyaim. For whatever kind of excellent genius they have, unless God be present, they creep on the
ground. But He is then present, if they, who are aiming at God, have a regard for their fellow men.
Than which step there can be found nothing more sure Heavenward. I for my part cannot resist thisreasoning, for how can I say that we are to believe nothing without certain knowledge? whereas
both there can be no friendship at all, unless there be believed something which cannot be provedby some reason, and often stewards, who are slaves, are trusted by their masters without any fault
on their part. But in religion what can there be more unfair than that the ministers1736 of God believe
us when we promise an unfeigned mind, and we are unwilling to believe them when they enjoin
us any thing. Lastly, what way can there be more healthful, than for a man to become fitted toreceive the truth by believing those things, which have been appointed by God to serve for theprevious culture and treatment of the mind? Or, if you be already altogether fitted, rather to makesome little circuit where it is safest to tread, than both to cause yourself danger, and to be a precedent
for rashness to other men?

359

25. Wherefore it now remains to consider, in what manner we ought not to follow these, who
profess that they will lead by reason. For how we may without fault follow those who bid us tobelieve, hath been already said: but unto these who make promises of reason certain think that theycome, not only without blame, but also with some praise: but it is not so. For there are two (classesof) persons, praiseworthy in religion; one of those who have already found, whom also we mustneeds judge most blessed; another of those who are seeking with all earnestness and in the rightway. The first, therefore, are already in very possession, the other on the way, yet on that way
whereby they are most sure to arrive.1737 There are three other kinds of men altogether to be
1736
1737

Antistites.
cf. Retract. b. i. ch. xiv. 2. “I also said, ‘For there are two &c.’ In these words of mine if ‘those who have already found’whom we have said to be ‘now in possession,’ are in such sort understood to be ‘most happy,’ as that they are so not in thislife, but in that we hope for, and aim at by the path of faith, the meaning is free from error: for they are to be judged to havefound that which is to be sought, who are now there, whither we by seeking and believing, that is by keeping the path of faith,
do seek to come. But if they are thought to be or to have been such in this life that seems to me not to be true: not that in thislife no truth at all can be found that can be discerned by the mind, not believed on faith; but because it is but so much, what
there is of it, as not to make men ‘most blessed.’ For neither is that which the Apostle says, We see now through a glass in ariddle and now I know in part (1 Cor. xiii. 12), incapable of being discerned by the mind. It is discerned, clearly, but does not
yet make us most blessed. For that makes men most blessed which he saith, but then face to face, and, then I shall know evenas I am known. They that have found this, they are to be said to stand in possession of bliss, to which leads that path of faith
which we keep, and whither we desire to arrive at by believing. But who are those most blessed, who are already in that possession
whither this path leads, is a great question. And for the holy Angels indeed, there is no question but they be there. But of holy

475

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

disapproved of and detested. One is of those who hold an opinion,1738 that is, of those who thinkthat they know what they know not. Another is of those who are indeed aware that they know not,but do not so seek as to be able to find. A third is of those who neither think that they know, nor
wish to seek. There are also three things, as it were bordering upon one another, in the minds ofmen well worth distinguishing; understanding, belief, opinion. And, if these be considered bythemselves, the first is always without fault, the second sometimes with fault, the third never without
fault. For the understanding of matters great, and honorable, and even divine, is most blessed.1739
But the understanding of things unnecessary is no injury; but perhaps the learning was an injury,in that it took up the time of necessary matters. But on the matters themselves that are injurious, it
is not the understanding, but the doing or suffering them, that is wretched. For not, in case any
understand how an enemy may be slain without danger to himself, is he guilty from the mere
understanding, not the wish; and, if the wish be absent, what can be called more innocent? But
belief is then worthy of blame, when either any thing is believed of God which is unworthy of Him,or any thing is over easily believed of man. But in all other matters if any believe aught, provided
he understand that he knows it not, there is no fault. For I believe that very wicked conspirators
were formerly put to death by the virtue of Cicero; but this I not only know not, but also I know
for certain that I can by no means know. But opinion is on two accounts very base; in that both he
who hath persuaded himself that he already knows, cannot learn; provided only it may be learnt;
and in itself rashness is a sign of a mind not well disposed. For even if any suppose that he knowwhat I said of Cicero, (although it be no hindrance to him from learning, in that the matter itself isincapable of being grasped by any knowledge;) yet, (in that he understands not that there is a great
difference, whether any thing be grasped by sure reason of mind, which we call understanding, orwhether for practical purposes it be entrusted to common fame or writing, for posterity to believeit,) he assuredly errs, and no error is without what is base. What then we understand, we owe toreason; what we believe, to authority; what we have an opinion on, to error.1740 But every one who
understands also believes, and also every one who has an opinion believes; not every one who
believes understands, no one who has an opinion understands. Therefore if these three things bereferred unto the five kinds of men, which we mentioned a little above; that is, two kinds to beapproved, which we set first, and three that remain faulty; we find that the first kind, that of themen already departed, whether so much may yet be said of them as that they stand already in that possession, is fairly made aquestion. For they are already freed from the corruptible body that weigheth down the soul (Wisd. 9.), but they still wait for theredemption of their body (Rom. 8.), and their flesh resteth in hope, nor is yet glorified in the incorruption that is to come. (Ps.
16.) But whether for all that they are none the less qualified to contemplate the truth with the eyes of the heart, as it is said,
Face to face, there is not space to discuss here.”
1738
Opinantium.
1739
cf. Retract. b. i. ch. 14. 2. “Also what I said, ‘for to know great and noble and even divine things,’ we should refer tothe same blessedness. For in this life whatsoever there be of it known amounts not to perfect bliss, because that part of it which
remains unknown is far more without all comparison.”1740
cf. Retract. b. i. ch. xiv. 3. “And what I said ‘that there is a great difference whether anything be grasped by sure reasonof mind, which we call knowing, or whether for practical purposes it be entrusted to common fame or writing, for posterity tobelieve it,’ and presently after, ‘what therefore we know, we owe to reason; what we believe to authority;’ is not to be so taken
as that in conversation we should fear to say we ‘know’ what we believe of suitable witnesses. For when we speak strictly weare said to know that only which by the mind’s own firm reason we comprehend. But when we speak in words more suited tocommon use, as also Divine Scripture speaketh, we should not hesitate to say we know both what we have perceived with ourbodily senses, and what we believe of trustworthy witnesses, whilst however between one and the other we are aware what
difference exists.”476

NPNF (V1-03)

360

Philip Schaff

blessed, believe the truth itself; but the second kind, that of such as are earnest after, and lovers of,
the truth, believe authority. In which kinds, of the two, the act of belief is praiseworthy. But in thefirst of the faulty kinds, that is, of those who have an opinion that they know what they know not,there is an altogether faulty credulity. The other two kinds that are to be disapproved believe nothing,both they who seek the truth despairing of finding it, and they who seek it not at all. And this only
in matters which pertain unto any system of teaching. For in the other business of life, I am utterly
ignorant by what means a man can believe nothing. Although in the case of those also they who
say that in practical matters they follow probabilities, would seem rather to be unable to know thanunable to believe. For who believes not what he approves?1741 or how is what they follow probable,
if it be not approved? Wherefore there may be two kinds of such as oppose the truth: one of those
who assail knowledge alone, not faith; the other of those who condemn both: and yet again, I am
ignorant whether these can be found in matters of human life. These things have been said, in orderthat we might understand, that, in retaining faith, even of those things which as yet we comprehend
not, we are set free from the rashness of such as have an opinion. For they, who say that we are tobelieve nothing but what we know, are on their guard against that one name “opining,”1742 whichmust be confessed to be base and very wretched, but, if they consider carefully that there is a very
great difference, whether one think that he knows, or moved by some authority believe that which
he understands that he knows not, surely he will escape the charge of error, and inhumanity, andpride.

26. For I ask, if what is not known must not be believed, in what way may children do service
to their parents, and love with mutual affection those whom they believe not to be their parents?
For it cannot, by any means, be known by reason. But the authority of the mother comes in, that it
be believed of the father; but of the mother it is usually not the mother that is believed, but midwives,
nurses, servants. For she, from whom a son may be stolen and another put in his place, may she
not being deceived deceive? Yet we believe, and believe without any doubt, what we confess wecannot know. For who but must see, that unless it be so, filial affection, the most sacred bond of
the human race, is violated by extreme pride of wickedness? For what madman even would think
him to be blamed who discharged the duties that were due to those whom he believed to be his
parents, although they were not so? Who, on the other hand, would not judge him to deservebanishment, who failed to love those who were perhaps his true parents, through fear lest he should
love pretended. Many things may be alleged, whereby to show that nothing at all of human society
remains safe, if we shall determine to believe nothing, which we cannot grasp by full
apprehension.1743

27. But now hear, what I trust I shall by this time more easily persuade you of. In a matter ofreligion, that is, of the worship and knowledge of God, they are less to be followed, who forbid us
1741
1742
1743

Probat.
Opinationis.
Tenere perceptum.

477

NPNF (V1-03)

361

Philip Schaff

to believe, making most ready professions of reason. For no one doubts that all men are either fools
or wise.1744 But now I call wise, not clever and gifted men, but those, in whom there is, so muchas may be in man, the knowledge of man himself and of God most surely received, and a life andmanners suitable to that knowledge; but all others, whatever be their skill or want of skill, whatever
their manner of life, whether to be approved or disapproved, I would account in the number offools. And, this being so, who of moderate understanding but will clearly see, that it is more usefuland more healthful for fools to obey the precepts of the wise, than to live by their own judgment?
For everything that is done, if it be not rightly done, is a sin, nor can that any how be rightly done
which proceeds not from right reason. Further, right reason is very virtue. But to whom of men isvirtue at hand, save to the mind of the wise? Therefore the wise man alone sins not. Therefore every
fool sins, save in those actions, in which he hath obeyed a wise man: for all such actions proceedfrom right reason, and, so to say, the fool is not to be accounted master of his own action, he being,as it were, the instrument and that which ministers1745 to the wise man. Wherefore, if it be betterfor all men not to sin than to sin; assuredly all fools would live better, if they could be slaves of thewise. And, if no one doubts that this is better in lesser matters, as in buying and selling, andcultivating the ground, in taking a wife, in undertaking and bringing1746 up children, lastly, in the
management of household property, much more in religion. For both human matters are more easy
to distinguish between, than divine; and in all matters of greater sacredness and excellence, thegreater obedience and service we owe them, the more wicked and the more dangerous is it to sin.
Therefore you see henceforth1747 that nothing else is left us, so long as we are fools, if our heart be
set on an excellent and religious life, but to seek wise men, by obeying whom we may be enabledboth to lessen the great feeling of the rule of folly, whilst it is in us, and at the last to escape fromit.

28. Here again arises a very difficult question. For in what way shall we fools be able to finda wise man, whereas this name, although hardly any one dare openly, yet most men lay claim toindirectly: so disagreeing one with another in the very matters, in the knowledge of which wisdom
consists, as that it must needs be that either none of them, or but some certain one be wise? But
when the fool enquires, who is that wise man? I do not at all see, in what way he can be distinguishedand perceived. For by no signs whatever can one recognize any thing, unless he shall have known

1744

cf. Retract. b. i. ch. 14. 4. “Also what I said, ‘No one doubts that all men are either fools or wise,’ may seem contrary
to what is read in my third book On Free Will, (c. 24.) ‘as though human nature admitted of no middle state between folly andwisdom.’ But that is said when the question was about the first man, whether he was made wise, or foolish, or neither: since
we could in no wise call him foolish, who was made without fault, since folly is a great fault, and how we could call him wise,
who was capable of being led astray, did not appear. So for shortness I thought well to say, ‘as though human nature admittedof no middle state between folly and wisdom.’ I also had infants in view, whom though we confess to bear with them originalsin, yet we cannot properly call either wise or foolish, not as yet using free will either well or ill. But now I said that men were
either wise or foolish, meaning those to be understood who are already using reason, by which they are distinguished fromcattle, so as to be men; as we say that ‘all men wish to be happy.’ For can we in so true and manifest a statement be in fear of
being supposed to mean infants, who have not yet the power of so wishing?”
1745
Ministerium.
1746
Or “begetting,”—suscipiendis.
1747
Ben. ed.—a modo. Mss. admodum.

478

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffthat thing, whereof these are signs. But the fool is ignorant of wisdom. For not, as, in the case ofgold and silver and other things of that kind, it is allowed both to know them when you see themand not to have them, thus may wisdom be seen by the mind’s eye of him who hath it not. For
whatever things we come into contact with by bodily sense, are presented to us from without; andtherefore we may perceive by the eyes what belong to others, when we ourselves possess not anyof them or of that kind. But what is perceived by the understanding is within in the mind, and tohave it is nothing else than to see. But the fool is void of wisdom, therefore he knows not wisdom.
For he could not see it with the eyes: but he cannot see it and not have it, nor have it and be a fool.
Therefore he knoweth it not, and, so long as he knoweth it not, he cannot recognize it in anotherplace. No one, so long as he is a fool, can by most sure knowledge find out a wise man, by obeying
whom he may be set free from so great evil of folly.

29. Therefore this so vast difficulty, since our enquiry is about religion, God alone can remedy:
nor indeed, unless we believe both that He is, and that He helps men’s minds, ought we even toenquire after true religion itself. For what I ask do we with so great endeavor desire to search out?
What do we wish to attain unto? Whither do we long to arrive? Is it at that which we believe notexists or pertains to us? Nothing is more perverse than such a state of mind. Then, when you would
not dare to ask of me a kindness, or at any rate would be shameless in daring, come you to demand
the discovery of religion, when you think that God neither exists, nor, if He exist, hath any care forus? What, if it be so great a matter, as that it cannot be found out, unless it be sought carefully andwith all our might? What, if the very extreme difficulty of discovery be an exercise for the mindof the inquirer, in order to receive what shall be discovered? For what more pleasant and familiar
to our eyes than this light? And yet men are unable after long darkness to hear and endure it. What
more suited to the body exhausted by sickness than meat and drink? And yet we see that persons
who are recovering are restrained and checked, lest they dare to commit themselves to the fullnessof persons in health, and so bring to pass by means of their very food their return to that disease
which used to reject it. I speak of persons who are recovering. What, the very sick, do we not urge
them to take something? Wherein assuredly they would not with so great discomfort obey us, if
they believed not that they would recover from that disease. When then will you give yourself up
to a search very full of pains and labor? When will you have the heart to impose upon yourself so
great care and trouble as the matter deserves, when you believe not in the existence of that which
you are in search of? Rightly therefore hath it been ordained by the majesty of the Catholic systemof teaching, that they who approach unto religion be before all things persuaded to have faith.

30. Wherefore that heretic, (inasmuch as our discourse is of those who wish to be called
Christians,) I ask you, what reason he alleges to me? What is there whereby for him to call me backfrom believing, as if from rashness? If he bid me believe nothing; I believe not that this very true
religion hath any existence in human affairs; and what I believe not to exist, I seek not. But He, as

479

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

I suppose, will show it to me seeking it: for so it it written, “He that seeketh shall find.”1748 Therefore
I should not come unto him, who forbids me to believe, unless I believed something. Is there any
greater madness, than that I should displease him by faith alone, which is founded on no knowledge,
which faith alone led me to him?

362

31. What, that all heretics exhort us to believe in Christ? Can they possibly be more opposedto themselves? And in this matter they are to be pressed in a twofold way. In the first place we mustask of them, where is the reason which they used to promise, where the reproof of rashness, where
the assumption of knowledge? For, if it be disgraceful to believe any without reason, what do you
wait for, what are you busied about, that I believe some one without reason, in order that I may themore easily be led by your reason? What, will your reason raise any firm superstructure on thefoundation of rashness? I speak after their manner, whom we displease by believing. For I not only
judge it most healthful to believe before reason, when you are not qualified to receive reason, andby the very act of faith thoroughly to cultivate the mind to receive the seeds of truth, but altogether
a thing of such sort as that without it health cannot return to sick souls. And in that this seems tothem matter for mockery and full of rashness, surely they are shameless in making it their businessthat we believe in Christ. Next, I confess that I have already believed in Christ, and have convincedmyself that what He hath said is true, although it be supported by no reason; is this, heretic, what
you will teach me in the first place? Suffer me to consider a little with myself, (since I have notseen Christ Himself, as He willed to appear unto men, Who is said to have been seen by them, evenby common eyes,) who they are that I have believed concerning Him, in order that I may approach
you already furnished beforehand with such a faith. I see that there are none that I have believed,
save the confirmed opinion and widely extended report of peoples and nations: and that the mysteriesof the Church Catholic have in all times and places had possession of these peoples. Why therefore
shall I not of these, in preference to others, inquire with all care, what Christ commanded, by whose
authority I have been moved already to believe that Christ hath commanded something that is
profitable? Are you likely to be a better expounder to me of what He said, Whose past or present
existence I should not believe, if by you I were to be recommended to believe thus? This therefore
I have believed, as I said, trusting to report strengthened by numbers, agreement, antiquity. But
you, who are both so few, and so turbulent, and so new, no one doubts that ye bring forward nothingworthy of authority. What then is that so great madness? Believe them, that you are to believe inChrist, and learn from us what He said. Why, I pray you? For were they to fail and to be unable toteach me any thing with much greater ease could I persuade my self, that I am not to believe inChrist, than that I am to learn any thing concerning Him, save from those through whom I had
believed in Him. O vast confidence, or rather absurdity! I teach you what Christ, in Whom you
believe, commanded. What, in case I believed not in Him? You could not, could you, teach me any
thing concerning Him? But, says he, it behoves you to believe. You do not mean, do you, that I am
(to believe) you when you commend Him to my faith? No, saith he, for we lead by reason them
who believe in Him. Why then should I believe in Him? Because report hath been grounded.
Whether is it through you, or through others? Through others, saith he. Shall I then believe them,
1748

Matt. vii. 8.

480

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

in order that you may teach me? Perhaps I ought to do so, were it not that they gave me this chief
charge, that I should not approach you at all; for they say that you have deadly doctrines. You willanswer, They lie. How then shall I believe them concerning Christ, Whom they have not seen, (and)not believe them concerning you, whom they are unwilling to see? Believe the Scriptures, saith he.
But every writing,1749 if it be brought forward new and unheard of, or be commended by few, withno reason to confirm it, it is not it that is believed, but they who bring it forward. Wherefore, forthose Scriptures, if you are they who bring them forward, you so few and unknown, I am not pleased
to believe them. At the same time also you are acting contrary to your promise, in enforcing faithrather than giving a reason. You will recall me again to numbers and (common) report. Curb, I prayyou, your obstinacy, and that untamed lust, I know not what, of spreading your name: and advise
me rather to seek the chief men of this multitude, and to seek with all care and pains rather to learnsomething concerning these writings from these men, but for whose existence, I should not knowthat I had to learn at all. But do you return into your dens, and lay not any snares under the nameof truth, which you endeavor to take from those, to whom you yourself grant authority.

363

32. But if they say that we are not even to believe in Christ, unless undoubted reason shall begiven us, they are not Christians. For this is what certain pagans say against us, foolishly indeed,
yet not contrary to, or inconsistent with, themselves. But who can endure that these profess tobelong to Christ, who contend that they are to believe nothing, unless they shall bring forward tofools most open reason concerning God? But we see that He Himself, so far as that history, which
they themselves believe, teaches, willed nothing before, or more strongly than, that He should be
believed in: whereas they, with whom He had to do, were not yet qualified to receive the secretthings of God. For, for what other purpose are so great and so many miracles, He Himself also
saying, that they are done for no other cause, than that He may be believed in? He used to leadfools by faith, you lead by reason. He used to cry out, that He should be believed in, ye cry out
against it. He used to praise such as believe in Him, ye blame them. But unless either He shouldchange water into wine,1750 to omit other (miracles), if men would follow Him, doing no such, but(only) teaching; either we must make no account of that saying, “Believe ye God, believe also
Me;”1751 or we must charge him with rashness, who willed not that He should come into his house,believing that the disease of his servant would depart at His mere command.1752 Therefore He
bringing to us a medicine such as should heal our utterly corrupt manners, by miracles procured toHimself authority,1753 by authority obtained Himself belief, by belief drew together a multitude,
by a multitude possessed antiquity, by antiquity strengthened religion: so that not only the utterly
foolish novelty of heretics dealing deceitfully, but also the inveterate error of the nations opposingwith violence, should be unable on any side to rend it asunder.

1749
1750
1751
1752
1753

Scripturæ.
John ii. 7–9.
John xiv. 1.
Matt. viii. 8, 9.
Meruit.

481

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

33. Wherefore, although I am not able to teach, yet I cease not to advise, that, (whereas many
wish to appear wise, and it is no easy matter to discern whether they be fools,) with all earnestness,
and with all prayers, and lastly with groans, or even, if so it may be, with tears, you entreat of God
to set you free from the evil of error; if your heart be set on a happy life. And this will take place
the more easily, if you obey with a willing mind His commands, which He hath willed should be
confirmed by so great authority of the Catholic Church. For whereas the wise man is so joined to
God in mind, as that there is nothing set between to separate; for God is Truth; and no one is byany means wise, unless his mind come into contact with the Truth; we cannot deny that between
the folly of man, and the most pure Truth of God, the wisdom of man is set, as something in the
middle. For the wise man, so far as it is given unto him, imitates God; but for a man who is a fool,
there is nothing nearer to him, than a man who is wise, for him to imitate with profit: and since, as
has been said, it is not easy to understand this one by reason, it behoved that certain miracles bebrought near to the very eyes, which fools use with much greater readiness than the mind, that,men being moved by authority, their life and habits might first be cleansed, and they thus renderedcapable of receiving reason. Whereas, therefore, it needed both that man be imitated, and that our
hope be not set in man, what could be done on the part of God more full of kindness and grace,
than that the very pure, eternal, unchangeable Wisdom of God, unto Whom it behoves us to cleave,
should deign to take upon Him (the nature of) man? That not only He might do what should invite
us to follow God, but also might suffer what used to deter us from following God. For, whereas noone can attain unto the most sure and chief good, unless he shall fully and perfectly love it; which
will by no means take place, so long as the evils of the body and of fortune are dreaded; He by
being born after a miraculous manner and working caused Himself to be loved; and by dying andrising again shut out fear. And, further, in all other matters, which it were long to go through, He
shewed Himself such, as that we might perceive unto what the clemency of God could be reachedforth, and unto what the weakness of man be lifted up.

364

34. This is, believe me, a most wholesome authority, this a lifting up first of our mind fromdwelling on the earth, this a turning from the love of this world unto the True God. It is authority
alone which moves fools to hasten unto wisdom. So long as we cannot understand pure (truths), it
is indeed wretched to be deceived by authority, but surely more wretched not to be moved. For, if
the Providence of God preside not over human affairs, we have no need to busy ourselves about
religion. But if both the outward form of all things, which we must believe assuredly flows fromsome fountain of truest beauty, and some, I know not what, inward conscience exhorts, as it were,in public and in private, all the better order of minds to seek God, and to serve God; we must notgive up all hope that the same God Himself hath appointed some authority, whereon, resting as ona sure step, we may be lifted up unto God. But this, setting aside reason, which (as we have oftensaid) it is very hard for fools to understand pure, moves us two ways; in part by miracles, in partby multitude of followers: no one of these is necessary to the wise man; who denies it? But this is
now the business in hand, that we may be able to be wise, that is, to cleave to the truth; which thefilthy soul is utterly unable to do: but the filth of the soul, to say shortly what I mean, is the loveof any things whatsoever save God and the soul: from which filth the more any one is cleansed,
the more easily he sees the truth. Therefore to wish to see the truth, in order to purge your soul,482

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

when as it is purged for the very purpose that you may see, is surely perverse and preposterous.
Therefore to man unable to see the truth, authority is at hand, in order that he may be made fitted
for it, and may allow himself to be cleansed; and, as I said a little above, no one doubts that thisprevails, in part by miracles, in part by multitude. But I call that a miracle, whatever appears thatis difficult or unusual above the hope or power of them who wonder. Of which kind there is nothing
more suited for the people, and in general for foolish men, than what is brought near to the senses.
But these, again, are divided into two kinds; for there are certain, which cause only wonder, but
certain others procure also great favor and good-will. For, if one were to see a man flying, inasmuch
as that matter brings no advantage to the spectator, beside the spectacle itself, he only wonders.
But if any affected with grievous and hopeless disease were to recover straightway, upon being
bidden, his affection for him who heals, will go beyond even his wonder at his healing. Such weredone at that time at which God in True Man appeared unto men, as much as was enough. The sickwere healed, the lepers were cleansed; walking was restored to the lame, sight to the blind, hearing
to the deaf. The men of that time saw water turned into wine, five thousand filled with five loaves,seas passed on foot, dead rising again: thus certain provided for the good of the body by more open
benefit, certain again for the good of the soul by more hidden sign, and all for the good of men by
their witness to Majesty: thus, at that time, was the divine authority moving towards Itself thewandering souls of mortal men. Why, say you, do not those things take place now? because theywould not move, unless they were wonderful, and, if they were usual, they would not be
wonderful.1754 For the interchanges of day and night, and the settled order of things in Heaven, therevolution of years divided into four parts, the fall and return of leaves to trees, the boundless powerof seeds, the beauty of light, the varieties of colors, sounds, tastes, and scents, let there be some
one who shall see and perceive them for the first time, and yet such an one as we may converse
with; he is stupified and overwhelmed with miracles: but we contemn all these, not because they
are easy to understand, (for what more obscure than the causes of these?) but surely because they
constantly meet our senses. Therefore they were done at a very suitable time, in order that, by thesea multitude of believers having been gathered together and spread abroad, authority might be turned
with effect upon habits.

35. But any habits whatever have so great power to hold possession of men’s minds, that evenwhat in them are evil, which usually takes place through excess of lusts, we can sooner disapproveof and hate, than desert or change. Do you think that little hath been done for the benefit of man,that not some few very learned men maintain by argument, but also an unlearned crowd of males
and females in so many and different nations both believe and set forth, that we are to worship as
God nothing of earth, nothing of fire, nothing, lastly, which comes into contact with the senses ofthe body, but that we are to seek to approach Him by the understanding only? that abstinence isextended even unto the slenderest food of bread and water, and fastings not only for the day,1755
1754

cf. Retract. b. i. c. 14. 5. “In another place, where I had made mention of the miracles, which our Lord Jesus did, while
He was here in the Flesh, I added, saying, ‘Why, say you, do not those things take place now?’ and I answered, ‘Because theywould not move unless they were wonderful, and if they were usual they would not be wonderful.’ But this I said because notso great miracles, nor all take place now, not because there are none wrought even now.”
1755
Quotidiana, i.e. each day till evening.

483

NPNF (V1-03)

365

Philip Schaff

but also continued through several days together; that chastity is carried even unto the contempt ofmarriage and family; that patience even unto the setting light by crosses and flames; that liberality
even unto the distribution of estates unto the poor; that, lastly, the contempt of this whole world
even unto the desire of death? Few do these things, yet fewer do them well and wisely: but whole
nations approve, nations hear, nations favor, nations, lastly, love. Nations accuse their own weakness
that they cannot do these things, and that not without the mind being carried forward unto God,nor without certain sparks of virtue. This hath been brought to pass by the Divine Providence,
through the prophecies of the Prophets, through the manhood and teaching of Christ, through thejourneys of the Apostles, through the insults, crosses, blood, of the Martyrs, through the praiseworthy
life of the Saints, and, in all these, according as times were seasonable, through miracles worthyof so great matters and virtues. When therefore we see so great help of God, so great progress andfruit, shall we doubt to hide ourselves in the bosom of that Church, which even unto the confessionof the human race from [the] apostolic chair1756 through successions of Bishops,1757 (heretics invain lurking around her and being condemned, partly by the judgment of the very people, partly
by the weight of councils, partly also by the majesty of miracles,) hath held the summit of authority.
To be unwilling to grant to her the first place,1758 is either surely the height of impiety, or is headlong
arrogance. For, if there be no sure way unto wisdom and health of souls, unless where faith preparethem for reason, what else is it to be ungrateful for the Divine help and aid, than to wish to resist
authority furnished with so great labor?1759 And if every system of teaching, however mean andeasy, requires, in order to its being received, a teacher or master, what more full of rash pride, than,in the case of books of divine mysteries,1760 both to be unwilling to learn from such as interpretthem, and to wish to condemn them unlearned?

36. Wherefore, if either our reasoning or our discourse hath in any way moved you, and if you
have, as I believe, a true care for yourself, I would you would listen to me, and with pious faith,
lively hope, and simple charity, entrust yourself to good teachers of Catholic Christianity; and cease
not to pray unto God Himself, by Whose goodness alone we were created, and suffer punishment
by His justice, and are set free by His mercy. Thus there will be wanting to you neither precepts
and treatises of most learned and truly Christian men, nor books, nor calm thoughts themselves,
whereby you may easily find what you are seeking. For do you abandon utterly those wordy andwretched men, (for what other milder name can I use?) who, whilst they seek to excess whence isevil, find nothing but evil. And on this question they often rouse their hearers to inquire; but afterthat they have been roused, they teach them such lessons as that it were preferable even to sleep
for ever, than than thus to be awake. For in place of lethargic they make them frantic, between
which diseases, both being usually fatal, there is still this difference, that lethargic persons die
without doing violence to others; but the frantic person many who are sound, and specially they1756

He clearly means the Apostolic office and presidency in general. For illustration, see St. Cyprian on the Unity of the
Church, §. 3 and 4. vid. Oxf. Tr. p. 134, and note.
1757
The plural “successiones.” Compare Con. Faustus, b. xiii. § 13, xxxii. § 19, xxxiii. § 6, 9.
1758
Primas.
1759
al. strength.
1760
Sacramentorum.

484

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

who wish to help him, have reason to fear. For neither is God the author of evil, nor hath it everrepented Him that He hath done aught, nor is He troubled by storm of any passion of soul, nor isa small part of earth His Kingdom: He neither approves nor commands any sins or wickedness, He
never lies. For these and such like used to move us, when they used them to make great andthreatening assaults, and charged this as being the system of teaching of the Old Testament, which
is most false. Thus then I allow that they do right in censuring these. What then have I learnt? What
think you, save that, when these are censured, the Catholic system of teaching is not censured. Thus
what I had learnt among them that is true, I hold, what is false that I had thought I reject. But the
Catholic Church hath taught me many other things also, which those men of bloodless bodies, butcoarse minds, cannot aspire unto; that is to say, that God is not corporeal, that no part of Him canbe perceived by corporeal eyes, that nothing of His Substance or Nature can any way suffer violenceor change, or is compounded or formed; and if you grant me these, (for we may not think otherwise
concerning God,) all their devices are overthrown. But how it is, that neither God begot or createdevil, nor yet is there, or hath there been ever, any nature and substance, which God either begot notor created not, and yet that He setteth us free from evil, is proved by reasons so necessary, that it
cannot at all be matter of doubt; especially to you and such as you; that is, if to a good disposition
there be added piety and a certain peace of mind, without which nothing at all can be understoodconcerning so great matters. And here there is no rumor concerning smoke, and I know not what
Persian vain fable, unto which it is enough to lend an ear, and soul not subtile, but absolutely
childish. Far altogether, far otherwise is the truth, than as the Manichees dote. But since this discourseof ours hath gone much further than I thought, here let us end the book; in which I wish you toremember, that I have not yet begun to refute the Manichees, and that I have not yet assailed that
nonsense; and that neither have I unfolded any thing great concerning the Catholic Church itself,
but that I have only wished to root out of you, if I could, a false notion concerning true Christians
that was maliciously or ignorantly suggested to us, and to arouse you to learn certain great anddivine things. Wherefore let this volume be as it is; but when your soul becomes more calmed, I
shall perhaps be more ready in what remains.1761
366

369

On the Creed:
A Sermon to the Catechumens.
1761

cf. Retr. b. i. ch. 14. 6. “But in the end of the book I say, ‘But since this discourse of ours, &c.’ This I did not say in such
sort as though I had not hitherto written anything against the Manichæans, or had not committed to writing anything at all about
Catholic doctrine, when so many volumes before published were witnesses that I had not been silent on either subject; but inthis book written to him I had not yet begun to refute the Manichæans, and had not yet attacked those follies, nor had I as yet
opened anything great concerning the Catholic Church itself; because I hoped that after that beginning made, I should write tothat same person what I had not yet here written.”485

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff[De Symbolo Ad Catechumenos.]
Translated by the Rev. C. L. Cornish, M.A., of Exeter College, Oxford
1. Receive, my children, the Rule of Faith, which is called the Symbol (or Creed1762). And
when ye have received it, write it in your heart, and be daily saying it to yourselves; before ye sleep,
before ye go forth, arm you with your Creed. The Creed no man writes so as it may be able to beread: but for rehearsal of it, lest haply forgetfulness obliterate what care hath delivered, let yourmemory be your record-roll:1763 what ye are about to hear, that are ye to believe; and what ye shallhave believed, that are about to give back with your tongue. For the Apostle says, “With the heart
man believeth unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.”1764 For
this is the Creed which ye are to rehearse and to repeat in answer. These words which ye have heard
are in the Divine Scriptures scattered up and down: but thence gathered and reduced into one, thatthe memory of slow persons might not be distressed; that every person may be able to say, able tohold, what he believes. For have ye now merely heard that God is Almighty? But ye begin to have
him for your father, when ye have been born by the church as your Mother.

2. Of this, then, ye have now received, have meditated, and having meditated have held, thatye should say, “I believe in God the Father Almighty.” God is Almighty, and yet, though Almighty,
He cannot die, cannot be deceived, cannot lie; and, as the Apostle says, “cannot deny Himself.”1765
How many things that He cannot do, and yet is Almighty! yea therefore is Almighty, because He
cannot do these things. For if He could die, He were not Almighty; if to lie, if to be deceived, if to
do unjustly, were possible for Him, He were not Almighty: because if this were in Him, He should
not be worthy to be Almighty. To our Almighty Father, it is quite impossible to sin. He does
whatsoever He will: that is Omnipotence. He does whatsoever He rightly will, whatsoever He justly
will: but whatsoever is evil to do, He wills not. There is no resisting one who is Almighty, that Heshould not do what He will. It was He Who made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in themis, invisible and visible. Invisible such as are in heaven, thrones, dominions, principalities, powers,
archangels, angels: all, if we shall live aright, our fellow-citizens. He made in heaven the things
visible; the sun, the moon, the stars. With its terrestrial animals He adorned the earth, filled the air
with things that fly, the land with them that walk and creep, the sea with them that swim: all He
filled with their own proper creatures. He made also man after His own image and likeness, in themind: for in that is the image of God. This is the reason why the mind cannot be comprehended
even by itself, because in it is the image of God. To this end were we made, that over the othercreatures we should bear rule: but through sin in the first man we fell, and are all come into an
inheritance of death. We were brought low, became mortal, were filled with fears, with errors: this

1762
1763
1764
1765

Symbolum.
Codex.
Rom. x. 10.
2 Tim. ii. 13.

486

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

by desert of sin: with which desert and guilt is every man born.1766 This is the reason why, as ye
have seen to-day, as ye know, even little children undergo exsufflation, exorcism; to drive awayfrom them the power of the devil their enemy, which deceived man that it might possess mankind.
It is not then the creature of God that in infants undergoes exorcism or exsufflation: but he underwhom are all that are born with sin; for he is the first1767 of sinners. And for this cause by reasonof one who fell and brought all into death, there was sent One without sin, Who should bring unto
life, by delivering them from sin, all that believe on Him.
370

3. For this reason we believe also in His Son, that is to say, God the Father Almighty’s, “His
Only Son, our Lord.” When thou hearest of the Only Son of God, acknowledge Him God. For it
could not be that God’s Only Son should not be God. What He is, the same did He beget, though
He is not that Person Whom He begot. If He be truly Son, He is that which the Father is; if He be
not that which the Father is, He is not truly Son. Observe mortal and earthly creatures: what eachis, that it engendereth. Man besets not an ox, sheep besets not dog, nor dog sheep. Whatever it bethat begetteth, that which it is, it begetteth. Hold ye therefore boldly, firmly, faithfully, that the
Begotten of God the Father is what Himself is, Almighty. These mortal creatures engender bycorruption. Does God so beget? He that is begotten mortal generates that which himself is; theImmortal generates what He is: corruptible begets corruptible, Incorruptible begets Incorruptible:
the corruptible begets corruptibly, Incorruptible, Incorruptibly: yea, so begetteth what Itself is, thatOne begets One, and therefore Only. Ye know, that when I pronounced to you the Creed, so I said,
and so ye are bounden to believe; that we “believe in God the Father Almighty, and in Jesus Christ
His Only Son.” Here too, when thou believest that He is the Only, believe Him Almighty: for it is
not to be thought that God the Father does what He will, and God the Son does not what He will.
One Will of Father and Son, because one Nature. For it is impossible for the will of the Son to be
any whit parted from the Father’s will. God and God; both one God: Almighty and Almighty; both
One Almighty.

4. We do not bring in two Gods as some do, who say, “God the Father and God the Son, but
greater God the Father and lesser God the Son.” They both are what? Two Gods? Thou blushest
to speak it, blush to believe it. Lord God the Father, thou sayest, and Lord God the Son: and theSon Himself saith, “No man can serve two Lords.”1768 In His family shall we be in such wise, that,like as in a great house where there is the father of a family and he hath a son, so we should say,the greater Lord, the lesser Lord? Shrink from such a thought. If ye make to yourselves such likein your heart, ye set up idols in the “one soul.” Utterly repel it. First believe, then understand. Now
to whom God gives that when he has believed he soon understands; that is God’s gift, not humanfrailness. Still, if ye do not yet understand, believe: One God the Father, God Christ the Son ofGod. Both are what? One God. And how are both said to be One God? How? Dost thou marvel?
1766
1767
1768

Gen. i-iii.
Princeps.
Matt. vi. 24.

487

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

In the Acts of the Apostles, “There was,” it says, “in the believers, one soul and one heart.”1769
There were many souls, faith had made them one. So many thousands of souls were there; they
loved each other, and many are one: they loved God in the fire of charity, and from being many
they are come to the oneness of beauty. If all those many souls the dearness of love1770 made one
soul, what must be the dearness of love in God, where is no diversity, but entire equality! If on
earth and among men there could be so great charity as of so many souls to make one soul, where
Father from Son, Son from Father, hath been ever inseparable, could They both be other than One
God? Only, those souls might be called both many souls and one soul; but God, in Whom is ineffableand highest conjunction, may be called One God, not two Gods.

371

5. The Father doeth what He will, and what He will doeth the Son. Do not imagine an Almighty
Father and a not Almighty Son: it is error, blot it out within you, let it not cleave in your memory,
let it not be drunk into your faith, and if haply any of you shall have drunk it in, let him vomit itup. Almighty is the Father, Almighty the Son. If Almighty begat not Almighty, He begat not very
Son. For what say we, brethren, if the Father being greater begat a Son less than He? What said I,
begat? Man engenders, being greater, a son being less: it is true: but that is because the one grows
old, the other grows up, and by very growing attains to the form of his father. The Son of God, if
He groweth not because neither can God wax old, was begotten perfect. And being begotten perfect,
if He groweth not, and remained not less, He is equal. For that ye may know Almighty begotten of
Almighty, hear Him Who is Truth. That which of Itself Truth saith, is true. What saith Truth? Whatsaith the Son, Who is Truth? “Whatsoever things the Father doeth, these also the Son likewise
doeth.”1771 The Son is Almighty, in doing all things that He willeth to do. For if the Father doeth
some things which the Son doeth not, the Son said falsely, “Whatsoever things the Father doeth,
these also the Son doeth likewise.” But because the Son spake truly, believe it: “Whatsoever things
the Father doeth, these also the Son doeth likewise,” and ye have believed in the Son that He is
Almighty. Which word although ye said not in the Creed, yet this is it that ye expressed when ye
believed in the Only Son, Himself God. Hath the Father aught that the Son hath not? This Arian
heretic blasphemers say, not I. But what say I? If the Father hath aught that the Son hath not, theSon lieth in saying, “All things that the Father hath, are Mine.”1772 Many and innumerable are thetestimonies by which it is proved that the Son is Very Son of God the Father, and the Father God
hath His Very-begotten Son God, and Father and Son is One God.

6. But this Only Son of God, the Father Almighty, let us see what He did for us, what He suffered
for us. “Born of the Holy Ghost and of the Virgin Mary.” He, so great God, equal with the Father,born of the Holy Ghost and of the Virgin Mary, born lowly, that thereby He might heal the proud.
Man exalted himself and fell; God humbled Himself and raised him up. Christ’s lowliness, what
1769
1770
1771
1772

Acts iv. 32.
Charitas.
John v. 19.
John xvi. 15.

488

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

is it? God hath stretched out an hand to man laid low. We fell, He descended: we lay low, He
stooped. Let us lay hold and rise, that we fall not into punishment. So then His stooping to us isthis, “Born of the Holy Ghost and of the Virgin Mary.” His very Nativity too as man, it is lowly,
and it is lofty. Whence lowly? That as man He was born of men. Whence lofty? That He was bornof a virgin. A virgin conceived, a virgin bore, and after the birth was a virgin still.

7. What next? “Suffered under Pontius Pilate.” He was in office as governor and was the judge,
this same Pontius Pilate, what time as Christ suffered. In the name of the judge there is a mark of
the times, when He suffered under Pontius Pilate: when He suffered, “was crucified, dead, andburied.” Who? what? for whom? Who? God’s Only Son, our Lord. What? Crucified, dead, andburied. For whom? for ungodly and sinners. Great condescension, great grace! “What shall I render
unto the Lord for all that He hath bestowed on me?”1773

8. He was begotten before all times, before all worlds. “Begotten before.” Before what, He in
Whom is no before? Do not in the least imagine any time before that Nativity of Christ whereby
He was begotten of the Father; of that Nativity I am speaking by which He is Son of God Almighty,
His Only Son our Lord; of that am I first speaking. Do not imagine in this Nativity a beginning oftime; do not imagine any space of eternity in which the Father was and the Son was not. Since
when the Father was, since then the Son. And what is that “since,” where is no beginning? Therefore
ever Father without beginning, ever Son without beginning. And how, thou wilt say, was He
begotten, if He have no beginning? Of eternal, coeternal. At no time was the Father, and the Son
not, and yet Son of Father was begotten. Whence is any manner of similitude to be had? We areamong things of earth, we are in the visible creature. Let the earth give me a similitude: it gives
none. Let the element of the waters give me some similitude: it hath not whereof to give. Someanimal give me a similitude: neither can this do it. An animal indeed engenders, both what engenders
and what is engendered: but first is the father, and then is born the son. Let us find the coeval andimagine it coeternal. If we shall be able to find a father coeval with his son, and son coeval withhis father, let us believe God the Father coeval with His Son, and God the Son coeternal with His
Father. On earth we can find some coeval, we cannot find any coeternal. Let us stretch1774 the coeval
and imagine it coeternal. Some one, it may be, will put you on the stretch,1775 by saying, “When is
it possible for a father to be found coeval with his son, or son coeval with his father? That the father
may beget he goes before in age; that the son may be begotten, he comes after in age: but this father
coeval with son, or son with father, how can it be?” Imagine to yourselves fire as father, its shining
as son; see, we have found the coevals. From the instant that the fire begins to be, that instant it
begets the shining: neither fire before shining, nor shining after fire. And if we ask, which begets
which? the fire the shining, or the shining the fire? Immediately ye conceive by natural sense, by
the innate wit of your minds ye all cry out, The fire the shining, not the shining the fire. Lo, here
1773
1774
1775

Ps. cxvi. 12.
Intendamus.
Intentos.

489

NPNF (V1-03)

372

Philip Schaff

you have a father beginning; lo, a son at the same time, neither going before nor coming after. Lo,
here then is a father beginning, lo, a son at the same time beginning. If I have shown you a father
beginning, and a son at the same time beginning, believe the Father not beginning, and with Him
the Son not beginning either; the one eternal, the other coeternal. If ye get on with your learning,
ye understand: take pains to get on. The being born, ye have; but also the growing, ye ought tohave; because no man begins with being perfect. As for the Son of God, indeed, He could be born
perfect, because He was begotten without time, coeternal with the Father, long before all things,
not in age, but in eternity. He then was begotten coeternal, of which generation the Prophet said,“His generation who shall declare?”1776 begotten of the Father without time, He was born of theVirgin in the fullness of times. This nativity had times going before it. In opportunity of time, when
He would, when He knew, then was He born: for He was not born without His will. None of us isborn because he will, and none of us dies when he will: He, when He would, was born; when He
would, He died: how He would, He was born of a Virgin: how He would, He died; on the cross.
Whatever He would, He did: because He was in such wise Man that, unseen,1777 He was God; God
assuming, Man assumed;1778 One Christ, God and Man.

9. Of His cross what shall I speak, what say? This extremest kind of death He chose, that not
any kind of death might make His Martyrs afraid. The doctrine He shewed in His life as Man, theexample of patience He demonstrated in His Cross. There, you have the work, that He was crucified;example of the work, the Cross; reward of the work, Resurrection. He shewed us in the Cross what
we ought to endure, He shewed in the Resurrection what we have to hope. Just like a consummate
task-master in the matches of the arena, He said, Do, and bear; do the work and receive the prize;
strive in the match and thou shall be crowned. What is the work? Obedience. What the prize?
Resurrection without death. Why did I add, “without death?” Because “Lazarus rose, and died:
Christ rose again, “dieth no more, death will no longer have dominion over Him.”1779

10. Scripture saith, “Ye have heard of the patience of Job, and have seen the end of the Lord.”1780
When we read what great trials Job endured, it makes one shudder, it makes one shrink, it makes
one quake. And what did he receive? The double of what he had lost. Let not a man therefore withan eye to temporal rewards be willing to have patience, and say to himself, “Let me endure loss,
God will give me back sons twice as many; Job received double of all, and begat as many sons as
he had buried.” Then is this not the double? Yes, precisely the double, because the former sons still
lived. Let none say, “Let me bear evils, and God will repay me as He repaid Job:” that it be now
no longer patience but avarice. For if it was not patience which that Saint had, nor a brave enduringof all that came upon him; the testimony which the Lord gave, whence should he have it? “Hast
1776
1777
1778
1779
1780

Is. liii. 8. [See R.V.]
Ut lateret Deus.
Susceptor susceptus.
Rom. vi. 9.
James v. 11.

490

NPNF (V1-03)

373

Philip Schaff

thou observed,” saith the Lord, “my servant Job? For there is not like him any on the earth, a man
without fault,1781 true worshipper of God.” What a testimony, my brethren, did this holy man deserveof the Lord! And yet him a bad woman sought by her persuasion to deceive, she too representingthat serpent, who, like as in Paradise he deceived the man whom God first made, so likewise hereby suggesting blasphemy thought to be able to deceive a man who pleased God. What things hesuffered, my brethren! Who can have so much to suffer in his estate, his house, his sons, his flesh,yea in his very wife who was left to be his tempter! But even her who was left, the devil would
have taken away long ago, but that he kept her to be his helper: because by Eve he had mastered
the first man, therefore had he kept an Eve. What things, then, he suffered! He lost all that he had;
his house fell; would that were all! it crushed his sons also. And, to see that patience had great placein him, hear what he answered; “The Lord gave, the Lord hath taken away; as it pleased the Lord,so hath it been done;1782 blessed be the name of the Lord.”1783 He hath taken what He gave, is He
lost Who gave? He hath taken what He gave. As if he should say, He hath taken away all, let Him
take all, send me away naked, and let me keep Him. What shall I lack if I have God? or what is thegood of all else to me, if I have not God? Then it came to his flesh, he was stricken with a woundfrom head to foot; he was one running sore, one mass of crawling worms: and showed himself
immovable in his God, stood fixed. The woman wanted, devil’s helper as she was not husband’s
comforter, to put him up to blaspheme God. “How long,” said she, “dost thou suffer” so and so;“speak some word against the Lord,1784 and die.”1785 So then, because he had been brought low, he
was to be exalted. And this the Lord did, in order to show it to men; as for His servant, He kept
greater things for him in heaven. So then Job who was brought low, He exalted; the devil who waslifted up, He brought low: for “He putteth down one and setteth up another.”1786 But let not any
man, my beloved brethren, when he suffers any such-like tribulations, look for a reward here: for
instance, if he suffer any losses, let him not peradventure say, “The Lord gave, the Lord hath taken
away; as it pleased the Lord, so is it done: blessed be the name of the Lord;” only with the mind toreceive twice as much again. Let patience praise God, not avarice. If what thou hast lost thou seekest
to receive back twofold, and therefore praisest God, it is of covetousness thou praisest, not of love.
Do not imagine this to be the example of that holy man; thou deceivest thyself. When Job wasenduring all, he was not hoping for to have twice as much again. Both in his first confession when
he bore up under his losses, and bore out to the grave the dead bodies of his sons, and in the second
when he was now suffering torments of sores in his flesh, ye may observe what I am saying. Of
his former confession the words run thus: “The Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away: as it
pleased the Lord, so is it done: blessed be the name of the Lord.”1787 He might have said, “The Lordgave, and the Lord hath taken away; He that took away can once more give; can bring back morethan He took.” He said not this, but, “As it pleased the Lord,” said he, “so is it done:” because it
pleases Him, let it please me: let not that which hath pleased the good Lord misplease His submissive

1781
1782
1783
1784
1785
1786
1787

Querela.
Lat. from LXX.
Job i. 21.
Lat. from LXX.
Job ii. 9.
Ps. lxxv. 7.
Job i. xxi.

491

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

servant; what pleased the Physician, not misplease the sick man. Hear his other confession: “Thouhast spoken,” said he to his wife, “like one of the foolish women. If we have received good at thehand of the Lord, why shall we not bear evil?”1788 He did not add, what, if he had said it, would
have been true. “The Lord is able both to bring back my flesh into its former condition, and thatwhich He hath taken away from us, to make manifold more:” lest he should seem to have enduredin hope of this. This was not what he said, not what he hoped. But, that we might be taught, did the
Lord that for him, not hoping for it, by which we should be taught, that God was with him: because
if He had not also restored to him those things, there was the crown indeed, but hidden, and we
could not see it. And therefore what says the divine Scripture in exhorting to patience and hope ofthings future, not reward of things present? “Ye have heard of the patience of Job, and have seen
the end of the Lord.” Why is it, “the patience of Job,” and not, Ye have seen the end of Job himself?
Thou wouldest open thy mouth for the “twice as much;” wouldest say, “Thanks be to God; let mebear up: I receive twice as much again, like Job.” “Patience of Job, end of the Lord.” The patienceof Job we know, and the end of the Lord we know.1789 What end of the Lord? “My God, my God,
why hast Thou forsaken Me?” They are the words of the Lord hanging on the cross. He did as itwere leave Him for present felicity, not leave Him for eternal immortality. In this is “the end of theLord.” The Jews hold Him, the Jews insult, the Jews bind Him, crown Him with thorns, dishonor
Him with spitting, scourge Him, overwhelm Him with revilings, hang Him upon the tree, pierce
Him with a spear, last of all bury Him. He was as it were left: but by whom? By those insulting
ones. Therefore thou shall but to this end have patience, that thou mayest rise again and not die,that is, never die, even as Christ. For so we read, “Christ rising from the dead henceforth diethnot.”1790

11. “He ascended into heaven:” believe. “He sitteth at the right hand of the Father:” believe.
By sitting, understand dwelling: as [in Latin] we say of any person, “In that country he dwelt (sedit)
three years.” The Scripture also has that expression, that such an one dwelt (sedisse) in a city forsuch a time.1791 Not meaning that he sat and never rose up? On this account the dwellings of men
are called seats (sedes).1792 Where people are seated (in this sense), are they always sitting? Is there
no rising, no walking, no lying down? And yet they are called seats (sedes). In this way, then,believe an inhabiting of Christ on the right hand of God the Father: He is there. And let not yourheart say to you, What is He doing? Do not want to seek what is not permitted to find: He is there;
it suffices you. He is blessed, and from blessedness which is called the right hand of the Father, ofvery blessedness the name is, right hand of the Father. For if we shall take it carnally, then because
He sitteth on the right hand of the Father, the Father will be on His left hand. Is it consistent withpiety so to put Them together, the Son on the right, the Father on the left? There it is all right-hand,because no misery is there.

1788
1789
1790
1791
1792

Job ii. 10.
Ps. xxii. 1.
Rom. vi. 9. The Article of the descent into Hell appears not to have been included in this Creed.
1 Kings ii. 38. LXX.
Cf. Serm. 214, n. 8. Ben.

492

NPNF (V1-03)

374

Philip Schaff

12. “Thence He shall come to judge the quick and dead.” The quick, who shall be alive andremain; the dead, who shall have gone before. It may also be understood thus: The living, the just;the dead, the unjust. For He judges both, rendering unto each his own. To the just He will say inthe judgment, “Come, ye blessed of My Father, receive the kingdom prepared for you from the
beginning of the world.”1793 For this prepare yourselves, for these things hope, for this live, and so
live, for this believe, for this be baptized, that it may be said to you, “Come ye blessed of My Father,receive the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.” To them on the left hand,
what? “Go into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels.”1794 Thus will they be judged
by Christ, the quick and the dead. We have spoken of Christ’s first nativity, which is without time;spoken of the other in the fullness of time, Christ’s nativity of the Virgin; spoken of the passion of
Christ; spoken of the coming of Christ to judgment. The whole is spoken, that was to be spoken of
Christ, God’s Only Son, our Lord. But not yet is the Trinity perfect.

13. It follows in the Creed, “And in the Holy Ghost.” This Trinity, one God, one nature, one
substance, one power; highest equality, no division, no diversity, perpetual dearness of love.1795
Would ye know the Holy Ghost, that He is God? Be baptized, and ye will be His temple. The
Apostle says, “Know ye not that your bodies are the temple within you of the Holy Ghost, Whomye have of God?”1796 A temple is for God: thus also Solomon, king and prophet, was bidden tobuild a temple for God. If he had built a temple for the sun or moon or some star or some angel,
would not God condemn him? Because therefore he built a temple for God he showed that heworshipped God. And of what did he build? Of wood and stone, because God deigned to makeunto Himself by His servant an house on earth, where He might be asked, where He might be hadin mind. Of which blessed Stephen says, “Solomon built Him an house; howbeit the Most Highdwelleth not in temples made by hand.”1797 If then our bodies are the temple of the Holy Ghost,what manner of God is it that built a temple for the Holy Ghost? But it was God. For if our bodies
be a temple of the Holy Ghost, the same built this temple for the Holy Ghost, that built our bodies.
Listen to the Apostle saying, “God hath tempered the body, giving unto that which lacked thegreater honor;”1798 when he was speaking of the different members that there should be no schisms
in the body. God created our body. The grass, God created; our body Who created? How do weprove that the grass is God’s creating? He that clothes, the same creates. Read the Gospel, “If thenthe grass of the fields,” saith it, “which to-day is, and to-morrow is cast into the oven, God soclotheth.”1799 He, then, creates Who clothes. And the Apostle: “Thou fool, that which thou sowest
is not quickened except it die; and that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be,
but a bare grain, as perchance of wheat, or of some other corn; but God giveth it a body as He

1793
1794
1795
1796
1797
1798
1799

Matt. xxv. 34.
Matt. xxv. 41.
Charitas.
1 Cor. vi. 19.
Acts vii. 47, 48.
1 Cor. xii. 24.
Matt. vi. 30.

493

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

would, and to each one of seeds its proper body.”1800 If then it be God that builds our bodies, God
that builds our members, and our bodies are the temple of the Holy Ghost, doubt not that the Holy
Ghost is God. And do not add as it were a third God; because Father and Son and Holy Ghost is
One God. So believe ye.

14. It follows after commendation of the Trinity, “The Holy Church.” God is pointed out, andHis temple. “For the temple of God is holy,” says the Apostle, “which (temple) are ye.”1801 Thissame is the holy Church, the one Church, the true Church, the catholic Church, fighting against allheresies: fight, it can: be fought down, it cannot. As for heresies, they went all out of it, like as
unprofitable branches pruned from the vine: but itself abideth in its root, in its Vine, in its charity.
“The gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”1802375

15. “Forgiveness of sins.” Ye have [this article of] the Creed perfectly in you when ye receive
Baptism. Let none say, “I have done this or that sin: perchance that is not forgiven me.” What hastthou done? How great a sin hast thou done? Name any heinous thing thou hast committed, heavy,
horrible, which thou shudderest even to think of: have done what thou wilt: hast thou killed Christ?
There is not than that deed any worse, because also than Christ there is nothing better. What adreadful thing is it to kill Christ! Yet the Jews killed Him, and many afterwards believed on Him
and drank His blood: they are forgiven the sin which they committed. When ye have been baptized,
hold fast a good life in the commandments of God, that ye may guard your Baptism even unto theend. I do not tell you that ye will live here without sin; but they are venial, without which this life
is not. For the sake of all sins was Baptism provided; for the sake of light sins, without which wecannot be, was prayer provided.1803 What hath the Prayer? “Forgive us our debts, as we also forgive
our debtors.”1804 Once for all we have washing in Baptism, every day we have washing in prayer.
Only, do not commit those things for which ye must needs be separated from Christ’s body: which
be far from you! For those whom ye have seen doing penance,1805 have committed heinous things,
either adulteries or some enormous crimes: for these they do penance. Because if theirs had beenlight sins, to blot out these daily prayer would suffice.

16. In three ways then are sins remitted in the Church; by Baptism, by prayer, by the greater
humility of penance; yet God doth not remit sins but to the baptized. The very sins which He remits
first, He remits not but to the baptized. When? when they are baptized. The sins which are after

1800
1801
1802
1803
1804
1805

1 Cor. xv. 36–38.
1 Cor. iii. 17.
Matt. xvi. 18. [See R.V.]
Inventus.
Matt. vi. 12. [See R.V.]“Agere pœnitentiam.”

494

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

remitted upon prayer, upon penance, to whom He remits, it is to the baptized that He remitteth. For
how can they say, “Our Father,” who are not yet born sons? The Catechumens, so long as they besuch, have upon them all their sins. If Catechumens, how much more Pagans? how much moreheretics? But to heretics we do not change their baptism. Why? because they have baptism in thesame way as a deserter has the soldier’s mark:1806 just so these also have Baptism; they have it, but
to be condemned thereby, not crowned. And yet if the deserter himself, being amended, begin to
do duty as a soldier, does any man dare to change his mark?

17. We believe also “the resurrection of the flesh,” which went before in Christ: that the body
too may have hope of that which went before in its Head. The Head of the Church, Christ: theChurch, the body of Christ. Our Head is risen, ascended into heaven: where the Head, there also
the members. In what way the resurrection of the flesh? Lest any should chance to think it like as
Lazarus’s resurrection, that thou mayest know it to be not so, it is added, “Into life everlasting.”
God regenerate you! God preserve and keep you! God bring you safe unto Himself, Who is theLife Everlasting. Amen.

1806“Characterem.”

495

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

379

On Continence.
[De Continentia.]
Translated by Rev. C. L. Cornish, M.A., of Exeter College, Oxford.
ST. Augustin speaks of his work On Continence in Ep. 231, Ad Darium Comitem. [See vol.
1. of this edition, p. 584.—P.S.] Possidius, Ind. c. 10, mentions it, and it is cited in the Collectanea
of Bede or Florus, and by Eugypius. Erasmus is therefore wrong in ascribing it to Hugo on the
ground of the style, which is not unlike that of the earlier discourses. It is evidently a discourse,
and probably for that reason unnoticed in the Retractations. The Manichæan heresy is impugned
after the manner of his early works.—(Abridged from Benedictine ed. vol. vi.)
1. It is difficult to treat of the virtue of the soul, which is called Continence, in a manner fully
suitable and worthy; but He, whose great gift this virtue is, will help our littleness under the burdenof so great a weight. For He, who bestows it upon His faithful ones when they are continent, Himself
gives discourse of it to His ministers when they speak. Lastly, of so great a matter purposing to
speak what Himself shall grant, in the first place we say and prove that Continence is the gift of
God.1807 We have it written in the Book of Wisdom, that no one can be continent, unless God grantit. But the Lord, concerning that greater and more glorious Continence itself, whereby there iscontinence from the marriage bond, says, “Not all can receive this saying, but they to whom it isgiven.”1808 And since marriage chastity also itself cannot be guarded, unless there be Continencefrom unlawful intercourse, the Apostle declared both to be the gift of God, when He spake of both
lives, that is, both that of marriage and that without marriage, saying, “I would that all men wereso as myself; but each hath his own gift from God; one in this manner, another in that manner.”1809

2. And lest it should seem that necessary Continence was to be hoped for from the Lord only
in respect of the lust of the lower parts of the flesh, it is also sung in the Psalm; “Set, O Lord, awatch to my mouth, and a door of Continence around my lips.”1810 But in this witness of the divine
speech, if we understand “mouth” as we ought to understand it, we perceive how great a gift of
God Continence there set is. Forsooth it is little to contain the mouth of the body, lest any thing
burst forth thence, which is not for the better, through the sound of the voice. For there is, within,
the mouth of the heart, where he, who spake these words, and wrote them for us to speak, desiredof the Lord that the watch and door of Continence should be set for him. For many things we say
not with the mouth of the body, and cry aloud with the heart: but there goes forth from the mouthof the body no word of any thing, whereof there is silence in the heart. Therefore what flows not
1807
1808
1809
1810

Wis. viii. 21.
Matt. xix. 11.
1 Cor. vii. 7.
Ps. cxli. 3.

496

NPNF (V1-03)

380

Philip Schaff

forth thence, sounds not abroad: but what flows forth thence, if it be evil, although it move not the
tongue, defiles the soul. Therefore Continence must be set there, where the conscience even ofthem who are silent speaks. For it is brought to pass by means of the door of Continence, that there
go not forth thence that, which, even when the lips of the flesh are closed, pollutes the life of him
that hath the thought.

3. Lastly, to show more plainly the inner mouth, which by these words he meant, after having
said, “Set a watch, O Lord, to my mouth, and a door of Continence around my lips,” he added
straightway, “Cause not my heart to fall aside into evil words.”1811 The falling aside of the heart,
what is it but the consent? For he hath not yet spoken, whosoever in his heart hath with no fallingaside of the heart consented unto suggestions that meet him of each several thing that is seen. But,
if he hath consented, he hath already spoken in his heart, although he hath not uttered sound by themouth; although he hath not done with hand or any part whatever of the body, yet hath he done
what in his thought he hath already determined that he is to do: guilty by the divine laws, althoughhidden to human senses; the word having been spoken in the heart, no deed having been committed
through the body. But in no case would he have moved the limb without, in a deed, the beginningof which deed had not gone before within in word. For it is no lie that is written, that “the beginningof every work is a word.”1812 Forsooth men do many things with mouth closed, tongue quiet, voicebridled; but yet they do nothing by work of the body, which they have not before spoken in theheart. And through this since there are many sins in inward sayings which are not in outward deeds,
whereas there are none in outward deeds, which do not go before in inward sayings, there will be
purity of innocence from both, if the door of Continence be set around the inward lips.

4. For which cause our Lord Himself also with His own mouth saith, “Cleanse what are within,
and what are without will be clean.”1813 And, also, in another place, when He was refuting thefoolish speeches of the Jews, in that they spake evil against His disciples, eating with unwashen
hands; “Not what entereth into the mouth,” said He, “defileth the man: but what cometh forth outof the mouth, that defileth the man.”1814 Which sentence, if the whole of it be taken of the mouthof the body, is absurd. For neither doth vomit defile him, whom food defileth not. Forsooth foodentereth into the mouth, vomit proceedeth forth out of the mouth. But without doubt the former
words relate to the mouth of the flesh, where He says, “Not what entereth into the mouth defileth
the man,” but the latter words to the mouth of the heart, where He saith, “But what proceedeth forthout of the mouth, this defileth the man.”1815 Lastly, when the Apostle Peter sought of Him an
explanation of this as of a parable, He answered, “Are ye also yet without understanding? understandye not, that whatsoever entereth into the mouth, goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?”
1811
1812
1813
1814
1815

Ps. cxli. 4. [See R.V.]
Ecclus. xxxvii. 16. LXX.
Matt. xxiii. 26.
Matt. xv. 11.
Matt. xv. 17–20.

497

NPNF (V1-03)

381

Philip Schaff

Here surely we perceive the mouth of the flesh, into which the food enters. But in what He next
adds, in order that we might recognize the mouth of the heart, the slowness of our heart would not
follow, did not the Truth deign to walk even with the slow. For He saith, “But what things go forthfrom the mouth, go out of the heart;” as though He should say, When you hear it said “from themouth,” understand “from the heart.” I say both, but I set forth one by the other. The inner man
hath an inner mouth, and this the inner ear discerns: what things go forth from this mouth, go outof the heart, and they defile the man. Then having left the term mouth, which may be understoodalso of the body, He shows more openly what He is saying. “For from the heart go out,” saith He,“evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies; these are what
defile the man.” There is surely no one of those evils, which can be committed also by the membersof the body, but that the evil thoughts go before and defile the man, although something hinder the
sinful and wicked deeds of the body from following. For if, because power is not given, the handis free from the murder of a man, is the heart of the murderer forsooth therefore clean from sin?
Or if she be chaste, whom one unchaste wishes to commit adultery with, hath he on that accountfailed to commit adultery with her in his heart? Or if the harlot be not found in the brothel, dothhe, who seeks her, on that account fail to commit fornication in his heart? Or if time and place bewanting to one who wishes to hurt his neighbor by a lie, hath he on that account failed already to
speak false witness with his inner mouth? Or if any one fearing men, dare not utter aloud blasphemywith tongue of flesh, is he on this account guiltless of this crime, who saith in his heart, “There is
no God.”1816 Thus all the other evil deeds of men, which no motion of the body performs, of which
no sense of the body is conscious, have their own secret criminals, who are also polluted by consent
alone in thought, that is, by evil words of the inner mouth. Into which he (the Psalmist) fearing lest
his heart should fall aside, asks of the Lord that the door of Continence be set around the lips ofthis mouth, to contain the heart, that it fall not aside into evil words: but contain it, by not suffering
thought to proceed to consent: for thus, according to the precept of the Apostle, sin reigneth not in
our mortal body, nor do we yield our members as weapons of unrighteousness unto sin.1817 Fromfulfilling which precept they are surely far removed, who on this account turn not their members
to sin, because no power is allowed them; and if this be present, straightway by the motions of theirmembers, as of weapons, they show, who reigneth in them within. Wherefore so far as is inthemselves, they yield their members weapons of unrighteousness unto sin; because this is what
they wish, which for this reason they yield not, because they are not able.

5. And on this account that, which, the parts that beget being bridled by modesty, is most chiefly
and properly to be called Continence, is violated by no transgression, if the higher Continence,
concerning which we have been some time speaking, be preserved in the heart. For this reason theLord, after He had said, “For from the heart go forth evil thoughts,” then went on to add what it isthat belongs to evil thoughts, “murders, adulteries,” and the rest. He spake not of all; but, having
named certain by way of instance, He taught that we are to understand others also. Of which there
is no one that can take place, unless an evil thought have gone before, whereby that is prepared

1816
1817

Ps. xiv. 1.
Rom. vi. 12, 13.

498

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

within which is done without, and going forth out of the mouth of the heart already defiles the man,although, through no power being granted, it be not done without by means of the members of the
body. When therefore a door of Continence hath been set in the mouth of the heart, whence go out
all that defile the man, if nothing such be permitted to go out thence, there followeth a purity,
wherein now the conscience may rejoice; although there be not as yet that perfection, wherein
Continence shall not strive with vice. But now, so long as “the flesh lusteth against the spirit, andthe spirit against the flesh,”1818 it is enough for us not to consent unto the evils which we feel in us.
But, when that consent takes place, then there goeth out of the mouth of the heart what defileth theman. But when through Continence consent is withheld, the evil of the lust of the flesh, against
which the lust of the spirit fights, is not suffered to harm.

6. But it is one thing to fight well, which now is, when the strife1819 of death is resisted; anotherthing not to have an adversary, which will then be, when death, “the last enemy,”1820 shall be
destroyed. For Continence also itself, when it curbs and restrains lusts, at once both seeks the good
unto the immortality of which we aim, and rejects the evil with which in this mortality we contend.
Of the one it is forsooth the lover and beholder, but of the other both the enemy and witness: bothseeking what becomes, and fleeing what misbecomes. Assuredly Continence would not labor in
curbing lusts, if we had no wishes contrary to what is becoming, if there were no opposition on thepart of evil lust unto our good will. The Apostle cries aloud, “I know,” saith he, “that there dwelleth
not in me, that is in my flesh, good. For to will lieth near to me, but to accomplish good I findnot.”1821 For now good can be done, so far as that there be no assent given unto evil lust: but good
will be accomplished, when the evil lust itself shall come to an end. And also the same teacher of
the Gentiles cries aloud, “I take pleasure together with the law of God after the inner man: but I
see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind.”1822

7. This conflict none experience in themselves, save such as war on the side of the virtues, andwar down the vices: nor doth any thing storm the evil of lust, save the good of Continence. But
there are, who, being utterly ignorant of the law of God, account not evil lusts among their enemies,
and through wretched blindness being slaves to them, over and above think themselves also blessed,by satisfying them rather than taming them. But whoso through the Law have come to know them,(“For through the Law is the knowledge of sin,”1823 and, “Lust,” saith he, “I knew not, unless theLaw should say, Thou shalt not lust after,”1824 and yet are overcome by their assault, because they
live under the Law, whereby what is good is commanded, but not also given: they live not under
1818
1819
1820
1821
1822
1823
1824

Gal. v. 17.
(Reading νεῖκος.)1 Cor. xv. 55; ib. 26.
Rom. vii. 18.
Rom. vii. 22, 23.
Rom. iii. 20.
Rom. vii. 7. [See R.V.]

499

NPNF (V1-03)

382

Philip Schaff

Grace, which gives through the Holy Spirit what is commanded through the Law: unto these theLaw therefore entered, that in them the offense might abound. The prohibition increased the lust,
and made it unconquered:1825 that there might be transgression also, which without the Law wasnot, although there was sin, “For where there is not Law, neither is there transgression.”1826 Thus
the Law, Grace not helping, forbidding sin, became over and above the strength of sin; whence theApostle saith, “The Law is the strength of sin.”1827 Nor is it to be wondered at, that man’s weakness
even from the good Law added strength to evil, whilst it trusts to fulfill the Law itself of its own
strength. Forsooth being ignorant of the righteousness of God,1828 which He gives unto the weak,
and wishing to establish his own, of which the weak is void, he was not made subject to therighteousness of God, reprobate and proud. But if the Law, as a schoolmaster, lead unto Grace one
made an offender, as though for this purpose more grievously wounded, that he may desire a
Physician; against the baneful sweetness, whereby lust prevailed, the Lord gives a sweetness thatworketh good, that by it Continence may the more delight, and “our land giveth her fruit,”1829
whereby the soldier is fed, who by the help of the Lord wars down sin.

8. Such soldiers the Apostolic trumpet enkindles for battle with that sound, “Therefore let not,”saith he, “sin reign in your mortal body to obey its lusts; nor yield your members weapons of
unrighteousness unto sin; but yield yourselves unto God, as living in place of dead, and yourmembers weapons of righteousness unto God. For sin shall not rule over you. For ye are not under
the law, but under Grace.”1830 And in another place, “Therefore,” saith he, “brethren, we are debtors,
not to the flesh, to live after the flesh. For if ye shall live after the flesh, ye shall die; but if by the
Spirit ye shall mortify the deeds of the flesh, ye shall live. For as many as are led by the Spirit ofGod, these are sons of God.”1831 This therefore is the business in hand, so long as this our mortallife under Grace lasts, that sin, that is the lust of sin, (for this he in this place calls by the name ofsin,) reign not in this our mortal body. But it is then shown to reign, if obedience be yielded to its
desires. There is therefore in us lust of sin, which must not be suffered to reign; there are its desires,
which we must not obey, lest obeying it reign over us. Wherefore let not lust usurp our members,
but let Continence claim them for herself; that they be weapons of righteousness unto God, thatthey be not weapons of unrighteousness unto sin; for thus sin shall not rule over us. For we are notunder the Law, which indeed commandeth what is good yet giveth it not: but we are under Grace,
which, making us to love that which the Law commands, is able to rule over the free.

1825
1826
1827
1828
1829
1830
1831

Rom. v. 20.
Rom. iv. 15.
1 Cor. xv. 56.
Rom. x. 3.
Ps. lxxxv. 12.
Rom. vi. 12, 13, 14.
Rom. viii. 12, 13, 14.

500

NPNF (V1-03)

383

Philip Schaff

9. And also, when he exhorts us, that we live not after the flesh, lest we die, but that by the
Spirit we mortify the deeds of the flesh, that we may live; surely the trumpet which sounds, shows
the war in which we are engaged, and enkindles us to contend keenly, and to do our enemies todeath,1832 that we be not done to death by them. But who those enemies are, it hath set forth plainly
enough. For those are they, whom it willed should be done to death by us, that is to say, the worksof the flesh. For so it saith, “But if by the Spirit ye shall mortify the deeds of the flesh, ye shalllive.” And in order that we may know what these are, let us hear the same in like manner writing
unto the Galatians, and saying, “But the works of the flesh are manifest, which are, fornications,
uncleannesses, luxuries, idolatry, witchcrafts, hatreds, contentions, emulations, wraths, strifes,
heresies, envyings, drunkennesses, revellings, and such like; of which I foretell to you, as I haveforetold, that they who do such things shall not possess the kingdom of God.”1833 For the very war
there also was he showing, that he should speak of these, and unto the death-doing of these enemies
was he calling up the soldiers of Christ by the same heavenly and spiritual trumpet. For he had said
above, “But I say, walk in the Spirit, and perform ye not the lusts of the flesh. For the flesh lusteth
against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh. For these are opposed one to the other, that ye
do not what ye would. But if ye are led by the Spirit, ye are not under the Law.”1834 Therefore being
set under Grace, he would have them have that conflict against the works of the flesh. And in orderto point out these works of the flesh, he added what I have mentioned above. “But the works of theflesh are manifest, which are, fornications,” and the rest, whether what he mentioned, or whether
what he admonished were to be understood, chiefly as he added, “and such like.” Lastly, in thisbattle, against what is in a manner the carnal army leading forth as it were another spiritual line,“But the fruit of the Spirit is,” saith he, “charity, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, goodness,faith, gentleness, continence; against such there is no law.”1835 He saith not “against these,” lest
they should be thought to be alone: although even were he to say this, we ought to understand all,whatever goods of the same kind we could think of: but he saith, “against such,” that is to say, boththese and whatsoever are such like. However, in that among the goods of which he made mention,
he set Continence in the last1836 place, (concerning which we have now undertaken to treat, and on
account of which we have already said much,) he willed that it should in an especial manner cleave
to our minds. Forsooth this same is of great avail in this case, wherein the Spirit lusteth against theflesh; forasmuch as in a certain way it crucifies the lusts of the flesh. Whence, after the Apostle
had thus spoken, he added straightway, “But they who are Jesus Christ’s have crucified their own
flesh, with the passions and lusts.”1837 This is the acting of Continence: thus the works of the flesh
are done to death. But they do to death those, whom falling away from Continence lust draweth
into consent to do such works.

1832
1833
1834
1835
1836
1837

Mortificare.
Gal. v. 19–21.
Gal. v. 16-18. [See R.V.]
Gal. v. 22, 23.
Vulg. adds, “patientia, modestia, castitas.”Gal. v. 24.

501

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

10. But in order that we fall not away from Continence, we ought to watch specially against
those snares of the suggestions of the devil, that we presume not of our own strength. For, “Cursed
is every one that setteth his hope in man.”1838 And who is he, but man? We cannot therefore truly
say that he setteth not his hope in man, who setteth it in himself. For this also, to “live after man,”what is it but to “live after the flesh?” Whoso therefore is tempted by such a suggestion, let him
hear, and, if he have any Christian feeling, let him tremble. Let him hear, I say, “If ye shall live
after the flesh, ye shall die.”11. But some one will say to me that it is one thing to live after man, another thing to live after
the flesh; because man forsooth is a rational creature, and there is in him a rational soul, whereby
he differs from the beast: but the flesh is the lowest and earthly part of man, and thus to live after
it is faulty: and for this reason, he who lives after man, assuredly lives not after the flesh, but rather
after that part of man, whereby he is man, that is, after the spirit of the mind whereby he excels thebeasts. But this discussion is perhaps of some force in the schools of philosophers: but we, in orderto understand the Apostle of Christ, ought to observe in what manner the Christian books are used
to speak; at any rate it is the belief of all of us, to whom to live is Christ, that Man was taken unto
Himself by the Word of God, not surely without a rational soul, as certain heretics will have it; andyet we read, “The Word was made flesh.”1839 What is to be here understood by “flesh,” but Man?
“And all flesh shall see the salvation of God.”1840 What can be understood, but all men? “Unto Thee
shall all flesh come.”1841 What is it, but all men? “Thou hast given unto Him power over all flesh.”1842
What is it, but all men? “Of the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified.”1843 What is it, but noman shall be justified? And this the same Apostle in another place confessing more plainly saith,“Man shall not be justified of the works of the Law.”1844 The Corinthians also he rebukes, saying,“Are ye not carnal, and walk after man?”1845 After he had called them carnal, he saith not, ye walkafter the flesh, but after man, forasmuch as by this also what would he have understood, but after
the flesh? For surely if to walk, that is, to live, after the flesh deserved blame, but after man deserved
praise, he would not say by way of rebuke, “ye walk after man.” Let man recognize the reproach;let him change his purpose, let him shun destruction. Hear thou man: walk not thou after man, but
after Him Who made man. Fall not thou away from Him Who made thee, even unto thyself. For aman said, who yet lived not after man, “Not that we are sufficient to think any thing from ourselves,as though of ourselves: but our sufficiency is of God.”1846 Consider if he lived after man, who spakethese things with truth. Therefore the Apostle, admonishing man not to live after man, restores man
to God. But whoso liveth not after man, but after God, assuredly liveth not even after himself,
1838
1839
1840
1841
1842
1843
1844
1845
1846

Jer. xvii. 5.
John i. 14.
Luke iii. 6.
Ps. lxv. 2.
John xvii. 2.
Rom. iii. 20.
Gal. ii. 16.
1 Cor. iii. 3.
1 Cor. iii. 5.

502

NPNF (V1-03)

384

Philip Schaff

because himself also is a man. But he is therefore said also to live after the flesh, when he so lives;because also when the flesh alone hath been named, man is understood, as we have already shown:just as when the soul alone hath been named, man is understood: whence it is said, “Let every soulbe subject unto the higher powers,”1847 that is, every man; and, “Seventy-five souls went down into
Egypt with Jacob,”1848 that is, seventy-five men. Therefore live thou not after thyself, O man: thou
hadst thence perished, but thou wast sought. Live not then, I say, after thyself, O man; thou hadst
thence perished, but thou wast found. Accuse not thou the nature of the flesh, when you hear it
said, “If ye shall live after the flesh, ye shall die.”1849 For thus could it be said, and most truly could
it, If ye shall live after yourselves ye shall die. For the devil hath not flesh, and yet, because hewould live after himself, “he abode not in the truth.”1850 What wonder therefore, if, living after
himself, “when he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own,” which the Truth spake truly of him.

12. When, therefore, you hear it said, “Sin shall not reign over you;”1851 have not thou confidenceof thyself, that sin reign not over thee, but of Him, unto Whom a certain Saint saith in prayer,“Direct my paths after Thy Word, and let no iniquity have dominion over me.”1852 For lest haply,
after that we had heard, “sin shall not reign over you,” we should lift up ourselves, and lay this to
our own strength, straightway the Apostle saw this, and added, “For ye are not under the Law, but
under Grace.” Therefore, Grace causeth that sin reign not over you. Do not thou, therefore, haveconfidence of thyself, lest it thence reign much more over thee. And, when we hear it said, “If by
the Spirit ye shall mortify the deeds of the flesh, ye shall live,”1853 let us not lay this so great good
unto our own spirit, as though of itself it can do this. For, in order that we should not entertain thatcarnal sense, the spirit being dead rather than that which putteth others to death, straightway headded, “For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.”1854 Therefore that by
our spirit we may mortify the works of the flesh, we are led by the Spirit of God, Who gives
Continence, whereby to curb, tame, overcome lust.

13. In this so great conflict, wherein man under Grace lives, and when, being aided, he fights
well, rejoices in the Lord with trembling, there yet are not wanting even to valiant warriors, andmortifiers however unconquered of the works of the flesh, some wounds of sins, for the healing of
which they may say daily, “Forgive us our debts:”1855 against the same vices, and against the devil
the prince and king of vices, striving with much greater watchfulness and keenness by the very

1847
1848
1849
1850
1851
1852
1853
1854
1855

Rom. xiii. 1.
Gen. xlvi. 27.
Rom. viii. 13.
John viii. 44.
Rom. vi. 14.
Ps. cxix. 133.
Rom. viii. 13.
Rom. viii. 14.
Matt. vi. 12.

503

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

prayer, that his deadly suggestions avail not aught, whereby he further urges the sinner to excuse
rather than accuse his own sins; and thus those wounds not only be not healed, but also, although
they were not deadly, yet may be pressed home to grievous and fatal harm. And here therefore
there is need of a more cautious Continence, whereby to restrain the proud appetite of man; whereby
he is self-pleased, and unwilling to be found worthy of blame, and disdains, when he sins, to beconvicted that he himself has sinned; not with healthful humility taking upon him to accuse himself,
but rather with fatal arrogance seeking to find an excuse. In order to restrain this pride, he, whose
words I have already set down above, and, as I could, commended, sought Continence from theLord. For, after that he had said, “Set, O Lord, a watch to my mouth, and a door of Continencearound my lips. Make not my heart to fall aside unto evil words;”1856 explaining more clearly
whereof he spake this, he saith, “to make excuses in sins.” For what more evil than these words,
whereby the evil man denies that he is evil, although convicted of an evil work, which he cannot
deny. And since he cannot hide the deed, or say that it is well done, and still sees that it is clear that
it was done by him, he seeks to refer to another what he hath done, as though he could remove
thence what he hath deserved. Being unwilling that himself be guilty, he rather adds to his guilt,
and by excusing, not accusing, his own sins, he knows not that he is putting from him, notpunishment, but pardon. For before human judges, forasmuch as they may be deceived, it seems
to profit somewhat for the time, to cleanse as it were what hath been done amiss by any deceit
whatever; but before God, Who cannot be deceived, we are to use, not a deceitful defense, but atrue confession of sins.

385

14. And some indeed, who are used to excuse their own sins, complain that they are driven tosin by fate, as though the stars had decreed this, and heaven had first sinned by decreeing such, inorder that man should after sin by committing such, and thus had rather impute their sin to fortune:
who think that all things are driven to and fro by chance accidents, and yet contend that this their
wisdom and assertion is not of chance rashness, but of ascertained reason. What madness then isit, to lay to reason their discussions, and to make their actions subject to accidents! Others refer tothe devil the whole of what they do ill: and will not have even a share with him, whereas they may
suspect whether he by hidden suggestions hath persuaded them to evil, and on the other hand cannot
doubt that they have consented to those suggestions, from whatever source they have come. There
are also they who extend their defense of self unto an accusation of God, wretched by the divine
judgment, but blasphemers by their own madness. For against Him they bring in from a contrary
principle a substance of evil rebelling, which He could not have resisted, had He not blended withthat same that was rebelling a portion of His own Substance and Nature, for it to contaminate andcorrupt; and they say that they then sin when the nature of evil prevails over the nature of God.
This is that most unclean madness of the Manichæans, whose devilish devices the undoubted truth
most easily overthrows; which confesses that the nature of God is incapable of contamination andcorruption. But what wicked contamination and corruption do they not deserve to have believedof them, by whom God, Who is good in the very highest degree, and in a way that admits not ofcomparison, is believed to be capable of contamination and corruption?
1856

Ps. cxli. 3, 4.

504

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

15. And there are also they who in excuse of their sins so accuse God, as to say that sins arepleasing to Him. For, if they were displeasing, say they, surely by His most Almighty power He
would by no means suffer them to take place. As though indeed God suffered sins to be unpunished,even in the case of those whom by remission of sins He frees from eternal punishment! No one
forsooth receives pardon of more grievous punishment due, unless he hath suffered some punishment,
be it what it may, although far less than what was due: and the fullness of mercy is so conveyed,as that the justice also of discipline is not abandoned. For also sin, which seems unavenged, hathits own attendant punishment, so that there is no one but by reason of what he hath done either
suffers pain from bitterness, or suffers not through blindness. As therefore you say, Why doth He
permit those things, if they are displeasing? so I say, Why doth He punish them, if they are pleasing?
And thus, as I confess that those things would not take place at all, unless they were permitted by
the Almighty, so confess thou that what are punished by the Just One ought not to be done; in order
that, by not doing what He punishes, we may deserve to learn of Him, why He permits to exist
what He punishes. For, as it is written, “solid food is for the perfect,”1857 wherein they who havemade good progress already understand, that it pertained rather unto the Almighty power of God,to allow the existence of evils coming from the free choice of the will. So great forsooth is His
Almighty goodness, as that even of evil He can make good, either by pardoning, or by healing, orby fitting and turning unto the profit of the pious, or even by most justly taking vengeance. For allthese are good, and most worthy a good and Almighty God: and yet they are not made save of evils.
What therefore better, what more Almighty, than He, Who, whereas He maketh no evil, even ofevils maketh well? They who have done ill cry unto Him, “Forgive us our debts;”1858 He hears, He
pardons. Their own evils have hurt the sinners; He helps and heals their sicknesses. The enemiesof His people rage; of their rage He makes martyrs. Lastly, also, He condemns those, whom He
judges worthy of condemnation; although they suffer their own evils, yet He doeth what is good.
For what is just cannot but be good, and assuredly as sin is unjust, so the punishment of sin is just.

16. But God wanted not power to make man such as that he should not be able to sin: but He
chose rather to make him such, as that it should lie in his power1859 to sin, if he would; not to sin,
if he would not; forbidding the one, enjoining the other; that it might be to him first a good desert
not to sin, and after a just reward not to be able to sin. For such also at the last will He makes His
Saints, as to be without all power to sin. Such forsooth even now hath He His angels, whom in Him
we so love, as to have no fear for any of them, lest by sinning he become a devil. And this we
presume not of any just man in this mortal life. But we trust that all will be such in that immortal
life. For Almighty God Who worketh good even of our evils, what good will He give, when He
shall have set us free from all evils? Much may be said more fully and more subtilely on the gooduse of evil; but this is not what we have undertaken in our present discourse, and we must avoid in
it excess of length.

1857
1858
1859

Heb. v. 14.
Matt. vi. 12.
Cui adjaceret.

505

NPNF (V1-03)

386

Philip Schaff

17. Now therefore let us return to that, wherefore we have said what we have. We have needof Continence, and we know it to be a divine gift, that our heart fall not away unto evil words, tomake excuses in sins. But what sin is there but that we have need of Continence, to restrain it frombeing committed, since it is this very Continence which, in case it have been committed, restrains
it from being defended by wicked pride? Universally therefore we have need of Continence, inorder to turn away from evil. But to do good seems to pertain to another virtue, that is, torighteousness.1860 This the sacred Psalm admonishes us, where we read, “Turn away from evil, anddo good.” But with what end we do this, it adds bye and bye, saying, “Seek peace, and ensue it.”1861
For we shall then have perfect peace, when, our nature cleaving inseparably to its Creator, we shallhave nothing of ourselves opposed to ourselves. This our Saviour also Himself would have us tounderstand, so far as seems to me when He said, “Let your loins be girt, and your lamps burning.”1862
What is it, to gird the loins? To restrain lusts, which is the work of continence. But to have lamps
burning is to shine and glow with good works, which is the work of righteousness. Nor was He
here silent with what end we do these things, adding and saying, “And you like unto men waiting
for their Lord, when He cometh from the marriage.”1863 But, when He shall have come, He will
reward us, who have kept ourselves from those things which lust, and have done those things whichcharity hath bidden us: that we may reign in His perfect and eternal peace, without any strife ofevil, and with the highest delight of good.

18. All we therefore, who believe in the Living and True God, Whose Nature, being in thehighest sense good and incapable of change, neither doth any evil, nor suffers any evil, from Whomis every good, even that which admits of decrease, and Who admits not at all of decrease in His
own Good, Which is Himself, when we hear the Apostle saying, “Walk in the Spirit, and perform
ye not the lusts of the flesh. For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh:
For these are opposed one to another, that ye do not what ye would.”1864 Far be it from us to believe,
what the madness of the Manichees believes, that there are here shown two natures or principles
contrary one to another at strife, the one nature of good, the other of evil. Altogether these two areboth good; both the Spirit is a good, and the flesh a good: and man, who is composed of both, one
ruling, the other obeying, is assuredly a good, but a good capable of change, which yet could not
be made save by a Good incapable of change, by Whom was created every good, whether small or
great; but how small soever, yet made by What is Great; and how great soever, yet no way to becompared with the greatness of the Maker. But in this nature of man, that is good, and well formed
and ordered by One That is Good, there is now war, since there is not yet health. Let the sickness
be healed, there is peace. But that sickness fault hath deserved, not nature hath had. And this fault
indeed through the laver of regeneration the grace of God hath already remitted unto the faithful;
but under the hands of the same Physician nature as yet striveth with its sickness. But in such a

1860
1861
1862
1863
1864

Justitiam.
Ps. xxxiv. 14.
Luke xii. 35.
Luke xii. 36.
Gal. v. 16, 17.

506

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

conflict victory will be entire soundness; and that, soundness not for a time, but for ever: wherein
not only this sickness is to come to an end, but also none to arise after it. Wherefore the just man
addresseth his soul and saith, “Bless the Lord, O my soul, and forget not all His returns: Who
becometh propitious to all thy iniquities, Who healeth all thy sicknesses.”1865 He becometh propitious
to our iniquities, when He pardons sins: He heals sicknesses when He restrains evil desires. He
becometh propitious unto iniquities by the grant of forgiveness: He heals sicknesses, by the grantof continence. The one was done in Baptism to persons confessing; the other is done in the strife
to persons contending; wherein through His help we are to overcome our disease. Even now the
one is done, when we are heard, saying, “Forgive us our debts;”1866 but the other, when we areheard, saying, “Lead us not into temptation. For every one is tempted,” saith the Apostle James,“being drawn away and enticed by his own lust.”1867 And against this fault there is sought the helpof medicine from Him, Who can heal all such sicknesses, not by the removal of a nature that isalien from us, but in the renewal of our own nature. Whence also the above-mentioned Apostle
saith not, “Every one is tempted” by lust, but added, “by his own:” that he who hears this may
understand, how he ought to cry, “I said, Lord, have mercy upon me, heal my soul, for I have sinned
against Thee.”1868 For it would not have needed healing, had it not corrupted1869 itself by sinning,
so that its own flesh should lust against it, that is, itself should be opposed to itself, on that side,
wherein in the flesh it was made sick.

387

19. For the flesh lusts after nothing save through the soul, but the flesh is said to lust against
the spirit, when the soul with fleshly lust wrestles against the spirit. This whole are we: and theflesh itself, which on the departure of the soul dies, the lowest part of us is not put away as what
we are to flee from, but is laid aside as what we are to receive again, and, after having received it,
never again to leave. But “there is sown an animal body, there shall rise again a spiritual body.”1870
Then from that time the flesh will not lust after any thing against the spirit, when as itself also shallbe called spiritual, forasmuch as not only without any opposition, but also without any need of
bodily aliment, it shall be for ever made subject unto the spirit, to be quickened by Christ. Therefore
these two things, which are now opposed the one to the other within us, since we exist in both, let
us pray and endeavor that they may agree. For we ought not to think the one of them an enemy,
but the fault, whereby the flesh lusteth against the spirit: and this, when healed, will itself cease toexist, and either substance will be safe, and no strife between either. Let us hear the Apostle; “I
know,” saith he, “that there dwelleth not in me, that is, in my flesh, any good.”1871 This certainly
he saith; that the fault of the flesh, in a good thing, is not good; and, when this shall have ceased
to exist, it will be flesh, but it will not be now corrupted or faulty1872 flesh. And yet that this pertains
1865
1866
1867
1868
1869
1870
1871
1872

Ps. ciii. 2, 3.
Matt. vi. 12, 13.
James i. 14.
Ps. xli. 4.
Vitiasset.
1 Cor. xv. 44.
Rom. vii. 18.
Vitiata vel vitiosa.

507

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

to our nature the same teacher shows, by saying, first, “I know that there dwelleth not in me,” inorder to expound which, he added, “that is, in my flesh, any good.” Therefore he saith that his flesh
is himself. It is not then itself that is our enemy: and when its faults are resisted, itself is loved,
because itself is cared for; “For no one ever hated his own flesh,”1873 as the Apostle himself saith.
And in another place he saith, “So then I myself with the mind serve the Law of God, but with theflesh the Law of sin.” Let them hear that have ears. “So then I myself;” I with the mind, I with theflesh, but “with the mind I serve the Law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.”1874 How “withthe flesh the law of sin?” was it at all by consenting unto fleshly lust? Far be it! but by having there
motions of desires which he would not have, and yet had. But, by not consenting to them, with themind he served the Law of God, and kept his members from becoming weapons of sins.

20. There are therefore in us evil desires, by consenting not unto which we live not ill: there
are in us lusts of sins, by obeying not which we perfect not evil, but by having them do not as yet
perfect good. The Apostle shows both, that neither is good here perfected, where evil is so lusted
after, nor evil here perfected, whereas such lust is not obeyed. The one forsooth he shows, where
he says, “To will is present with me, but to perfect good is not;”1875 the other, where he says, “Walkin the Spirit, and perfect not the lusts of the flesh.”1876 For neither in the former place doth he saythat to do good is not with him, but “to perfect,” nor here doth he say, Have not “lusts of the flesh,”but “perfect not.” Therefore there take place in us evil lusts, when that pleases which is not lawful;
but they are not perfected, when evil lusts are restrained by the mind serving the Law of God. And
good takes place, when that, which wrongly pleases, takes not place through the good delight
prevailing. But the perfection of good is not fulfilled, so long as by the flesh serving the law of sin,
evil lust entices, and, although it be restrained, is yet moved. For there would be no need for it tobe restrained, were it not moved. There will be at some time also the perfection of good, when thedestruction of evil: the one will be highest, the other will be no more. And if we think that this is
to be hoped for in this mortal state, we are deceived. For it shall be then, when death shall not be;
and it shall be there, where shall be life eternal. For in that world,1877 and in that kingdom, there
shall be highest good, no evil: when there shall be, and where there shall be, highest love of wisdom,no labor of continence. Therefore the flesh is not evil, if it be void of evil, that is, of fault, whereby
man was rendered faulty, not made ill, but himself making. For on either part, that is, both soul andbody, being made good by the good God, himself made the evil, whereby he was made evil. Fromthe guilt of which evil being already also set free through forgiveness,1878 that he may not think
what he hath done to be light, he yet wars with his own fault through continence. But far be it that
there be any faults in such as reign in that peace which shall be hereafter; since in this state of war

1873
1874
1875
1876
1877
1878

Eph. v. 29.
Rom. vii. 25.
Rom. vii. 18.
Gal. v. 16.
Sæculo.
Indulgentiam.

508

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

there are lessened daily in such as make progress, not sins only, but the very lusts also, with which,by not consenting, we strive, and by consenting unto which we sin.

388

21. That, therefore, the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, that there dwelleth not in our flesh good,that the law in our members is opposed to the law of the mind, is not a mingling of two naturescaused of contrary principles, but a division of one against itself caused through desert of sin. We
were not so in Adam, before that nature, having listened to and followed its deceiver, had despisedand offended its Creator: that is, not the former life of man created, but the latter punishment ofman condemned. From which condemnation when set free by Grace, through Jesus Christ, being
free they contend with their punishment, having received not as yet full salvation, but already apledge of salvation: but when not set free, they are both guilty by reason of sins, and involved inpunishments. But after this life for the guilty there will remain for ever punishment for their crime:
for the free there will no more remain for ever either crime or punishment: but the good substances,spirit and flesh, will continue for ever, which God, Who is good, and incapable of change, createdgood although capable of change. But they will continue having been changed for the better, neverfrom this time to be changed for the worse: all evil being utterly destroyed, both what man hathunjustly done, and what he hath justly suffered. And, these two kinds of evil perishing utterly,
whereof the one is of iniquity going before, the other of unhappiness following after, the will ofman will be upright without any depravity. There it will be clear and plain to all, what now manyof the faithful believe, few understand, that evil is not a substance: but that, as a wound in a body,so in a substance, which hath made itself faulty, it hath begun to exist, when the disease hathcommenced, and ceaseth to exist in it, when the healing hath been perfected. Therefore, all evil
having arisen from us, and having been destroyed in us, our good also having been increased andperfected unto the height of most happy incorruption and immortality, of what kind shall either ofour substances be? forasmuch as now, in this corruption and mortality, when as yet “the corruptible
body weigheth down the soul;”1879 and, what the Apostle saith, “the body is dead by reason ofsin;”1880 yet the same himself beareth such witness unto our flesh, that is, to our lowest and earthly
part, as to say, what I made mention of a little above, “No one ever hated his own flesh.”1881 And
to add straightway, “but nourisheth and cherisheth it, as also Christ the Church.”

22. I say not, therefore, with what error, but with what utter madness, do the Manichees attributeour flesh to some, I know not what, fabled “race of darkness,”1882 which they will have hath had
its own nature without any beginning ever evil: whereas the true teacher exhorts men to love theirown wives by the pattern of their own flesh, and exhorts them unto this very thing by the patternalso of Christ and the Church. Lastly, we must call to mind the whole place itself of the Epistle of
the Apostle, relating greatly unto the matter in hand. “Husbands,” saith he, “love your wives, as
1879
1880
1881
1882

Wisd. ix. 15.
Rom. viii. 10.
Eph. v. 29.
See De Ag. Christ. § 4.

509

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Christ also loved the Church, and delivered Himself up for it, that He might sanctify it, cleansing
it by the laver of the water in the word: that He might set forth unto Himself a glorious Church, nothaving spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing, but that it may be holy and unspotted. So,” saith he,“husbands also ought to love their own wives, as their own bodies. Whoso loveth his own wife,
loveth himself.”1883 Then he added, what we have already made mention of, “For no man ever hated
his own flesh, but nourisheth it, and cherisheth it; as also Christ the Church.”1884 What saith themadness of most impure impiety in answer to these things? What say ye in answer to these things,
ye Manichees; ye who wish to bring in upon us, as if out of the Epistles of the Apostles, two natures
without beginning, one of good, the other of evil: and will not listen to the Epistles of the Apostles,
that they may correct you from that sacrilegious perverseness? As ye read, “The flesh lusteth against
the spirit,”1885 and, “There dwelleth not in my flesh any good;”1886 so read ye, “No one ever hated
his own flesh, but nourisheth and cherisheth it, as also Christ the Church.”1887 As ye read, “I see
another law in my members, opposed to the law of my mind;”1888 so read ye, “As Christ loved the
Church, so also ought men to love their own wives, as their own bodies.” Be not ye crafty in theformer witnesses of Holy Scripture, and deaf in this latter, and ye shall be correct in both. For, if
ye receive the latter as right is, ye will endeavor to understand the former also as truth is.

389

23. The Apostle has made known to us certain three unions, Christ and the Church, husband
and wife, spirit and flesh. Of these the former consult for the good of the latter, the latter wait upon
the former. All the things are good, when, in them, certain set over by way of pre-eminence, certain
made subject in a becoming manner, observe the beauty of order. Husband and wife receive
command and pattern how they ought to be one with another. The command is, “Let wives be
subject unto their own husbands, as unto the Lord; because the husband is the head of the wife;”1889
and, “Husbands, love your wives.” But there is given a pattern, unto wives from the Church, unto
husbands from Christ: “As the Church,” saith he, “is subject unto Christ, so also wives unto theirown husbands in all things.” In like manner also, having given command to husbands to love theirown wives, he added a pattern, “As Christ loved the Church.” But husbands he exhorted to it froma lower matter also, that is, from their own body: not only from a higher, that is, from their Lord.
For he not only saith, “Husbands, love your wives, as Christ also loved the Church,” which is froman higher: but he said also, “Husbands ought to love their own wives, as their own bodies,” whichis from a lower: because both higher and lower are all good. And yet the woman received not patternfrom the body, or flesh, to be so subject to the husband as the flesh to the spirit; but either the
Apostle would have understood by consequence, what he omitted to state: or haply because theflesh lusteth against the spirit in the mortal and sick estate of this life, therefore he would not set
the woman a pattern of subjection from it. But the men he would for this reason, because, although
1883
1884
1885
1886
1887
1888
1889

Eph. v. 25–28.
Eph. v. 29.
Gal. v. 17.
Rom. vii. 18.
Eph. v. 29.
Rom. vii. 23.
Eph. v. 22–28.

510

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

the spirit lusteth against the flesh, even in this it consults for the good of the flesh: not like as theflesh lusting against the spirit, by such opposition consulteth neither for the good of the spirit, nor
for its own. Yet the good spirit would not consult for its good, whether by nourishing and cherishingits nature by forethought, or by resisting its faults by continence, were it not that each substanceshoweth God to be the Creator of each, even by the seemliness of this its order. What is it, therefore,that with true madness ye both boast yourselves to be Christians, and with so great, perverseness
contend against the Christian Scriptures, with eyes closed, or rather put out, asserting both that
Christ hath appeared unto mortals in false flesh, and that the Church in the soul pertains to Christ,
in the body to the devil, and that the male and female sex are works of the devil, not of God, andthat the flesh is joined unto the spirit, as an evil substance unto a good substance?

24. If what we have made mention of out of the Apostolic Epistles seem to you to fall short ofan answer, hear yet others, if ye have ears. What saith the utterly mad Manichæan of the Flesh of
Christ? That it was not true, but false. What saith the blessed Apostle to this? “Remember that
Christ Jesus rose again from the dead of the seed of David, according to my Gospel.”1890 And ChristJesus Himself saith, “Handle and see, that a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me to have.”1891
How is there truth in their doctrine, which asserts that in the Flesh of Christ there was falsehood?
How was there in Christ no evil, in Whom was so great a lie? Because forsooth to men over-clean
true flesh is an evil, and false flesh instead of true is not an evil: it is an evil, true flesh of one bornof the seed of David, and it is no evil, false tongue of one saying, “Handle, and see, that a spirit
hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me to have.” Of the Church what saith the deceiver of men withdeadly error? That on the side of souls it pertains unto Christ, on the side of bodies unto the devil?
What to this saith the Teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth? “Know ye not,” saith he, “that yourbodies are members of Christ?”1892 Of the sex of male and female what saith the son of perdition?
That either sex is not of God, but of the devil. What to this saith the Vessel of Election? “As,” saithhe, “the woman from out the man, so also the man through the woman: but all things of God.”1893
Of the flesh what saith the unclean spirit through the Manichæan? That it is an evil substance, andnot the creation of God, but of an enemy. What to this saith the Holy Spirit through Paul? “For as
the body is one,” saith he, “and hath many members, but all the members of the body, being many,are one body: so also is Christ.”1894 And a little after; “God hath set,” saith he, “the members, eachone of them in the body, as He willed.”1895 Also a little after; “God,” saith he, “hath tempered thebody, giving greater honor unto that to which it was wanting, that there should be no schisms inthe body, but that the members have the self-same care one for another: and whether one member
suffer, all the members suffer with it: or one member be glorified, all the members rejoice withit.”1896 How is the flesh evil, when the souls themselves are admonished to imitate the peace of its
1890
1891
1892
1893
1894
1895
1896

2 Tim. ii. 8.
Luke xxiv. 39.
1 Cor. vi. 15.
1 Cor. xi. 12.
1 Cor. xii. 12.
1 Cor. xii. 18.
1 Cor. xii. 24, 25, 26.

511

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

members? How is it the creation of the enemy, when the souls themselves, which rule the bodies,take pattern from the members of the body, not to have schisms of enmities among themselves, inorder that, what God hath granted unto the body by nature, this themselves also may love to haveby grace? With good cause, writing to the Romans, “I beseech you,” saith he, “brethren, by themercy of God, that ye present your bodies a sacrifice, living, holy, pleasing to God.”1897 Without
reason we contend that darkness is not light, nor light darkness, if we present a sacrifice, living,holy, pleasing to God, of the bodies of the “nation of darkness.”390

25. But, say they, how is the flesh by a certain likeness compared unto the Church? What! doth
the Church lust against Christ? whereas the same Apostle said, “The Church is subject unto
Christ.”1898 Clearly the Church is subject unto Christ; because the spirit therefore lusteth against
the flesh, that on every side the Church may be made subject to Christ; but the flesh lusteth against
the spirit, because not as yet hath the Church received that peace which was promised perfect. And
for this reason the Church is made subject unto Christ for the pledge of salvation, and the flesh
lusteth against the spirit from the weakness of sickness. For neither were those other than membersof the Church, unto whom he thus spake, “Walk in the spirit, and fulfill not the lusts of the flesh.
For the flesh lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh; for these are opposed the one
to the other; that ye do not what we would.”1899 These things were assuredly spoken unto the Church,which if it were not made subject unto Christ, the spirit would not in it lust against the flesh throughcontinence. By reason of which they were indeed able not to perfect the lusts of the flesh, but
through the flesh lusting against the Spirit they were not able to do the things which they would,
that is, not even to have the very lusts of the flesh. Lastly, why should we not confess that in spiritual
men the Church is subject unto Christ, but in carnal men yet lusteth against Christ? Did not theylust against Christ unto whom it was said, “Is Christ divided?”1900 and, “I could not speak unto you
as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal. I have given unto you milk to drink as unto babes in Christ,
not meat, for ye were not as yet able; but not even now are ye able: for ye are still carnal. For
whereas there is among you emulation, and strife, are ye not carnal?”1901 Against whom dothemulation and strife lust, but against Christ? For these lusts of the flesh Christ healeth in His own,
but loveth in none. Whence the holy Church, so long as it hath such members, is not yet without
spot or wrinkle. To these are added those other sins also, for which the daily cry of the whole Churchis, “Forgive us our debts:”1902 and, that we should not think spiritual persons exempt from these,
not any one soever of carnal persons, nor any one soever of spiritual persons themselves, but he,
who lay on the breast of the Lord,1903 and whom He loved before others, saith, “If we shall say that
we have not sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.”1904 But in every sin, more in what
1897
1898
1899
1900
1901
1902
1903
1904

Rom. xii. 1.
Eph. v. 24.
Gal. v. 16, 17.
1 Cor. i. 13.
1 Cor. iii. 1, 2, 3.
Matt. vi. 12.
John xiii. 23.
1 John i. 8.

512

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

is greater, less in what is less, there is an act of lust against righteousness. And of Christ it is written:“Who was made unto us by God, Wisdom, and Righteousness, and Sanctification, andRedemption.”1905 In every sin therefore without doubt there is an act of lust against Christ. But
when He, Who “healeth all our sicknesses,”1906 shall have led His Church unto the promised healingof sickness, then in none of its members shall there be any, even the very least spot or wrinkle.
Then in no way shall the flesh lust against the spirit, and therefore there shall be no cause why thespirit also lust against the flesh. Then all this conflict shall come to an end, then there shall be thehighest concord of both substances; then to such a degree shall no one there be carnal, that eventhe flesh itself shall be spiritual. What therefore each one living after Christ doth with his flesh,whereas he both lusts against its evil lust, which he restrains, hereafter to be healed, which he holds,
not yet healed; and yet nourisheth and cherisheth its good nature, since “no one ever hated his own
flesh,”1907 this also Christ doth with the Church, so far as it is lawful to compare lesser with greater
matters. For He both represses it with rebukes, that it burst not being puffed up with impunity; andraises it up with consolations, that it sink not being weighed down with infirmity. Hence is that of
the Apostle, “For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged; but when we are judged,
we are rebuked of the Lord, that we be not condemned with this world.”1908 And that in the Psalm,“After the multitude of my griefs in my heart, Thy consolations have gladdened my soul.”1909 We
are therefore then to hope for perfect soundness of our flesh without any opposition, when there
shall be sure security of the Church of Christ without any fear.

391

26. Thus much will suffice to have treated on behalf of true Continence against the Manichees
deceitfully continent, lest the fruitful and glorious labor of Continence, when it restrains and curbs
the lowest part of us, that is, the body, from immoderate and unlawful pleasures, be believed nothealthfully to chasten, but hostilely to persecute. Forsooth the body is indeed different from thenature of the soul, yet is it not alien from the nature of man: for the soul is not made up of body,but yet man is made up of soul and body: and assuredly, whom God frees, He frees the whole man.
Whence our Saviour Himself also took upon Him the whole man, having deigned to free in us allthat He made. They who hold contrary to this truth, what doth it profit them to restrain lusts? if,that is, they restrain any. What in them can be made clean through Continence, whose suchContinence is unclean? and which ought not to be called Continence. Forsooth to hold what theyhold is the poison of the devil; but Continence is the gift of God. But as not every one who suffers
any thing, or with the greatest endurance suffers any pain whatever, possesses that virtue, which
in like manner is the gift of God, and is called Patience; for many endure many torments, in order
not to betray either such as are wickedly privy with them in their crimes, or themselves; many inorder to satiate glowing lusts, and to obtain, or not to abandon those things, whereunto they arebound by chain of evil love; many on behalf of different and destructive errors, whereby they are

1905
1906
1907
1908
1909

1 Cor. i. 30.
Ps. ciii. 3.
Eph. v. 29.
1 Cor. xi. 31, 32.
Ps. xciv. 19.

513

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

strongly held: of all of whom far be it from us to say that they have true patience: thus not every
one, who contains in any thing, or who marvellously retrains even the very lusts of the flesh, ormind, is to be said to possess that continence, of the profit and beauty of which we are treating. For
certain, what may seem marvellous to say, through incontinence contain themselves: as if a woman
were to contain herself from her husband, because she hath sworn this to an adulterer. Certain
through injustice, as if spouse yield not to spouse the due of sexual intercourse, because he or she
is already able to overcome such appetite of the body. Also certain contain deceived by false faith,and hoping what is vain, and following after what is vain: among whom are all heretics, andwhosoever under the name of religion are deceived by any error: whose continence would be true,
if their faith also were true: but, whereas that is not to be called faith, on this account, because it isfalse; without doubt that also is unworthy the name of continence. For what? are we prepared tocall continence, which we must truly say is the gift of God, sin? Far be from our hearts so hatefulmadness. But the blessed Apostle saith “Every thing that is not of faith is sin.”1910 What therefore
hath not faith, is not to be called continence.

27. There are also they who, in doing open service to evil demons, contain from pleasures ofthe body, that, through their means, they may satisfy unlawful pleasures, the violence and glow
whereof they contain not. Whence also, (to name one case, and pass over the rest in silence byreason of the length of the discourse,) certain come not near even unto their own wives, whilst, as
though clean, they essay through magic arts to gain access unto the wives of others. O marvellous
continence, nay rather, singular wickedness and uncleanness! For, if it were true continence, thelust of the flesh ought rather to contain from adultery, than, in order to commit adultery, frommarriage. Forsooth marriage continence is wont to ease this lust of the flesh, and to check its curb
but thus far, that neither in marriage itself it run riot by immoderate license, but that a measure beobserved, either such as is due to the weakness of the spouse, unto whom the Apostle enjoins not
this, as of command, but yields it as of permission;1911 or such as is suited for the begetting of sons,which was formerly the one alone occasion of sexual intercourse to both holy fathers and mothers.
But continence doing this, that is, moderating, and in a certain way limiting in married persons thelust of the flesh, and ordering in a certain way within fixed limits its unquiet and inordinate motion,
uses well the evil of man, whom it makes and wills to make perfect good: as God uses even evilmen, for their sake whom He perfects in goodness.

28. Far be it therefore that we say of continence, of which Scripture saith. “And this very thing
was wisdom, to know whose gift it was,”1912 that even they possess it, who, by containing, either
serve errors, or overcome any lesser desires for this purpose, that they may fulfill others, by thegreatness of which they are overcome. But that continence which is true, coming from above, wills
not to repress some evils by other evils, but to heal all evils by goods. And, briefly to comprehend
1910
1911
1912

Rom. xiv. 23.
1 Cor. vii. 6.
Wisd. viii. 21.

514

NPNF (V1-03)

392

Philip Schaff

its mode of action, it is the place of continence to keep watch to restrain and heal all delights
whatsoever of lust, which are opposed to the delight of wisdom. Whence without doubt they set it
within too narrow bounds, who limit it to restraining the lusts of the body alone: certainly they
speak better, who say that it pertains to Continence to rule in general lust or desire. Which desire
is set down as a fault, nor is it only of the body, but also of the soul. For, if the desire of the body
be in fornications and drunkennesses; hard enmities, strifes, emulations, lastly, hatreds, their exercise
in the pleasure of the body, and not rather in the motion and troubled states of the soul? Yet the
Apostle called all these “works of the flesh,” whether what pertained to the soul, or what pertained
properly to the flesh, calling forsooth the man himself by the name of the flesh.1913 Forsooth they
are the works of man, whatsoever are not called works of God; forasmuch as man, who does these,
lives after himself, not after God, so far as he does these. But there are other works of man, which
are rather to be called works of God. “For it is God,”1914 saith the Apostle, “Who worketh in you
both to will and to do, according to His good pleasure.” Whence also is that, “For as many as are
led by the spirit of God, these are sons of God.”1915

29. Thus the spirit of man, cleaving unto the Spirit of God, lusts against the flesh, that is, against
itself: but for itself, in order that those motions, whether in the flesh or in the soul, after man, notafter God, which as yet exist through the sickness man hath gotten, may be restrained by continence,that so health may be gotten; and man, not living after man, may now be able to say, “But I live,
now not I, but there liveth in me Christ.”1916 For where not I, there more happily I: and, when any
evil motion after man arises, unto which he, who with the mind serves the Law of God, consents
not, let him say that also, “Now it is not I that do this.”1917 To such forsooth are said those words,
which we, as partners and sharers with them, ought to listen to.1918 “If ye have risen together with
Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is sitting at the Right Hand of God: mind1919
the things that are above, not what are upon earth. For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ
in God: when Christ your life shall have appeared, then ye also shall appear with Him in glory.”
Let us understand unto whom he is speaking, yea, rather, let us listen with more attention. For whatmore plain than this? what more clear? He is certainly speaking unto those, who had risen again
with Christ, not yet surely in the flesh, but in the mind: whom he calls dead, and on this accountthe more living: for “your life,” saith he, “is hid with Christ in God.” Of such dead the speech is:“But I live, now not I, but there liveth in me Christ.” They therefore, whose life was hidden in God,are admonished and exhorted to mortify their members, which are upon the earth. For this follows,“Mortify, therefore, your members, which are upon the earth.” And, lest any through excess ofdullness should think that such are to mortify the members of the body that are seen, straightway
opening what it is he saith, “Fornication,” saith he, “uncleanness, passion, evil lust, and covetousness,
1913
1914
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919

Gal. v. 19, 20, 21.
Phil. ii. 13.
Rom. viii. 14.
Gal. ii. 20.
Rom. vii. 17.
Col. iii. 1–4.
Sapite.

515

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

which is idolatry.”1920 But is it so to be believed, that they, who were already dead, and their life
hidden with Christ in God, were still committing fornication, were still living in unclean habits andworks, were still slaves to passions of evil lust and covetousness? What madman would thus thinkof such? What, therefore, would he that they mortify, save the motions themselves still living in acertain intrusion1921 of their own, without the consent of our mind, without the action of the membersof the body? And how are they mortified by the work of continence, save when we consent not tothem with the mind, nor are the members of the body yielded to them as weapons; and, what isgreater, and to be looked to with yet greater watchfulness of continence, our very thought itself,
although in a certain way it be touched by their suggestion, and as it were, whisper, yet turns awayfrom these, that it receive not delight from them, and turns to more delightful thoughts of things
above: on this account naming them in discourse, that men abide not in them, but flee from them.
And this is brought to pass, if we listen effectually, with His help, Who, through His Apostle gives
this command, “Seek things that are above, where Christ is sitting at the Right Hand of God. Mindthe things that are above, not what are on earth.”1922

30. But, after that he had made mention of these evils, he added and said, “On account of whichcometh the wrath of God on the sons of unbelief.”1923 Surely it was a wholesome alarm that believers
might not think that they could be saved on account of their faith alone, even although they should
live in these evils: the Apostle James with most clear speech crying out against that notion, andsaying, “If any say that he have faith, and have not works, shall his faith be able to save him?”1924
Whence also here the Teacher of the Gentiles said, that on account of these evils the wrath of God
cometh on the sons of unbelief. But when he saith, “Wherein ye also walked sometime, when ye
were living therein;”1925 he shows sufficiently that now they were not living therein. Forsooth unto
these they had died, that their life might be hidden in God with Christ. When then they were now
not living in them, they were now bidden to mortify such. Forsooth, themselves not living in thesame, the things were living, as I have already shown a little above, and were called their members,that is to say, those faults which dwelt in their members; by a way of speech, that which is contained
through that which contains; as it is said, The whole Forum talks of it, when men talk who are in
the Forum. In this very way of speech it is sung in the Psalm, “Let all the earth worship Thee:”1926
that is, all men who are in the earth.

1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
1926

Col. iii. 5.
Interpellatione.
Col. iii. 1, 2.
Col. iii. 6.
James ii. 14.
Col. iii. 7.
Ps. lxvi. 4.

516

NPNF (V1-03)

393

Philip Schaff

31. “But now do ye also,” saith he, “put down all;”1927 and he makes mention of several moreevils of that sort. But what is it, that it is not enough for him to say, “Do ye put down all,” but that
he added the conjunction and said, “ye also?” save that lest they should not think that they did thoseevils and lived in them with impunity on this account, because their faith set them free from wrath,which cometh upon the sons of unbelief, doing these things, and living in them without faith. Do
ye also, saith he, put down those evils, on account of which cometh the wrath of God on the childrenof unbelief; nor promise yourselves impunity of them on account of merit of faith. But he would
not say, “put ye down,” unto those who had already laid down so far as that they consented not tosuch faults, nor were yielding their members to them as weapons of sin, save that the life of Saints
stands in this past deed, and is still engaged in this work, so long as we are mortal. For, so long as
the Spirit lusteth against the flesh, this business proceeds with great earnestness, resistance is offered
unto evil delights, unclean lusts, carnal and shameful motions, by the sweetness of holiness, by thelove of chastity, by spiritual vigor, and by the beauty of continence; thus they are laid down bythem who are dead to them, and who live not in them by consenting. Thus, I say, they are put down,
whilst they are weighed down by continued continence, that they rise not again. Whosoever, as
though secure, shall cease from this laying aside of them, straightway they will assault the Citadelof the mind, and will themselves put it down thence, and will reduce it into slavery to them, captive
after a base and unseemly fashion. Then sin will reign in the mortal body of man to obey its desires;
then will it yield its members weapons of unrighteousness unto sin:1928 and the last state of thatman shall be worse than the former.1929 For it is much more tolerable not to have begun a contestof this kind, than after one hath begun to have left the conflict, and to have become in place of agood warrior, or even in place of a conqueror, a captive. Whence the Lord saith not, whoso shallbegin, but “Whoso shall persevere unto the end, he shall be saved.”1930

32. But whether keenly contending, that we be not overcome, or overcoming divers times, oreven with unhoped and unlooked for ease, let us give the glory unto Him Who giveth continence
unto us. Let us remember that a certain just man said, “I shall never be moved:” and that it was
showed him how rashly he had said this, attributing as though to his own strength, what was given
to him from above. But this we have learnt from his own confession: for soon after he added, “Lord,
in Thy will Thou hast given strength to my beauty; but Thou hast turned away Thy Face, and I wastroubled.”1931 Through a remedial Providence he was for a short time deserted by his Ruler, in orderthat he might not himself through deadly pride desert his Ruler. Therefore, whether here, where
we engage with our faults in order to subdue and make them less, or there, as it shall be in the end,
where we shall be void of every enemy, because of all infection,1932 it is for our health that we arethus dealt with, in order that, “whoso glorieth, he may glory in the Lord.”1933
1927
1928
1929
1930
1931
1932
1933

Col. iii. 8.
Rom. vi. 12, 13.
Matt. xii. 45.
Matt. x. 22.
Ps. xxx. 6, 7.
“Peste.”1 Cor. i. 31.

517

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

397

On the Good of Marriage.
[De Bono Conjugali.]Translated by Rev. C. L. Cornish, M.A., of Exeter College, Oxford.
This treatise, and the following, were written against somewhat that still remained of theheresy of Jovinian. S. Aug. mentions this error in b. ii. c. 23, de Nuptiis et Conc. “Jovinianus,”
he says, “who a few years since tried to found a new heresy, said that the Catholics favored the
Manichæans, because in opposition to him they preferred holy Virginity to Marriage.” And in
his book on Heresies, c. 82. “That heresy took its rise from one Jovinianus, a Monk, in our own
time, when we were yet young.” And he adds that it was soon overborne and extinguished, sayabout A.D. 390, having been condemned first at Rome, then at Milan. There are letters of Pope
Siricius on the subject to the Church of Milan, and the answer sent him by the Synod of Milan,
at which St. Ambrose presided. Jerome had refuted Jovinian, but was said to have attempted
the defense of the excellency of the virgin state, at the expense of condemning marriage. That
Augustin might not be subject to any such complaint or calumny, before speaking of thesuperiority of Virginity, he thought it well to write on the Good of Marriage.
This work we learn to have been finished about the year 401, not only from the order of his
Retractations, but also from his books on Genesis after the Letter, begun about that year. For
in b. ix. on Genesis, c. 7, where he commends the Good of Marriage, he says: “Now this isthreefold, faithfulness, offspring, and the Sacrament. For faithfulness, it is observed, that there
be no lying with other man or woman, out of the bond of wedlock: for the offspring, that it belovingly welcomed, kindly nourished, religiously brought up: for the Sacrament, that marriage
be not severed, and that man or woman divorced be not joined to another even for the sake ofoffspring. This is as it were the rule of Marriages by which rule either fruitfulness is madeseemly, or the perverseness of incontinence is brought to order. Upon which since we havesufficiently discoursed in that book, which we lately published, on the Good of Marriage, where
we have also distinguished the Widow’s continence and the Virgin’s excellency, according to
the worthiness of their degrees, our pen is not to be now longer occupied.” This very work is
referred to in Book I. on the Deserts and Remission of Sins, c. 29.—Bened. Ed.

398

NOTICE.
The Editors are, of course, aware of the danger there is in reading a treatise like the following
in a spirit of idle curiosity, and they beg any reader who has not well assured himself that his aim
is right and holy to abstain from perusing it. At the same time it must not be forgotten, that something
far other than a mere shrinking from subjects offensive to modern delicacy is needed, in order topurify the thoughts with respect to the holy estate of Matrimony. The mind that will but seriously
attend to it in that light, will certainly be strengthened against evil suggestions by seeing in thewhole subject a field of Christian duty.
It seemed further requisite to bring forward a work calculated to remove the imputation so
falsely cast on the holy Fathers, that they regarded Matrimony as unholy, and almost agreed with518

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

the Manichean view of it, as a defilement and degradation to the Christian. They did, it is true,
prefer Virginity to Marriage, but as St. Augustin expressly states, as the “better of two good things,”
not as though one were good, and the other evil.
In estimating the work and the writer, the age in which it was written must be kept in view, andwhat that age required must not be imputed as a fault to him or to his religion. And perhaps what
was written for another age may serve the more safely towards our improvement and guidancefrom the very circumstance that the style and manner of antiquity has become a kind of veil, whichtakes off somewhat from the strength and vividness of first impressions, and leaves the mind more
at liberty to use what is laid before it as it will, than a more modern way of speaking would be
likely to do. Let that liberty be used rightly and conscientiously, and the effect of reading will be
good.—Eds. of the Oxford Library.

399

1. Forasmuch as each man is a part of the human race, and human nature is something social,and hath for a great and natural good, the power also of friendship; on this account God willed tocreate all men out of one, in order that they might be held in their society not only by likeness ofkind, but also by bond of kindred. Therefore the first natural bond of human society is man andwife. Nor did God create these each by himself, and join them together as alien by birth: but He
created the one out of the other, setting a sign also of the power of the union in the side, whence
she was drawn, was formed.1934 For they are joined one to another side by side, who walk together,and look together whither they walk. Then follows the connexion of fellowship in children, whichis the one alone worthy fruit, not of the union of male and female, but of the sexual intercourse.
For it were possible that there should exist in either sex, even without such intercourse, a certain
friendly and true union of the one ruling, and the other obeying.

2. Nor is it now necessary that we enquire, and put forth a definite opinion on that question,
whence could exist the progeny of the first men, whom God had blessed, saying, “Increase, and be
ye multiplied, and fill the earth;”1935 if they had not sinned, whereas their bodies by sinning deserved
the condition of death, and there can be no sexual intercourse save of mortal bodies. For there haveexisted several and different opinions on this matter; and if we must examine, which of them berather agreeable to the truth of Divine Scriptures, there is matter for a lengthened discussion.1936
Whether, therefore, without intercourse, in some other way, had they not sinned, they would have
had sons, from the gift of the Almighty Creator, Who was able to create themselves also withoutparents, Who was able to form the Flesh of Christ in a virgin womb, and (to speak even to unbelievers
themselves) Who was able to bestow on bees a progeny without sexual intercourse; or whether
many things there were spoken by way of mystery and figure, and we are to understand in anothersense what is written, “Fill the earth, and rule over it;” that is, that it should come to pass by fullness
and perfection of life and power, so that the very increase and multiplication, whereby it is said,
1934
1935
1936

Gen. ii. 21, 22.
Gen. i. 28.
See De Civ. Dei, b. xiv.

519

NPNF (V1-03)

400

Philip Schaff“Increase, and be ye multiplied,” be understood to be by advance of mind, and abundance of virtue,
as it is set in the Psalm, “Thou shall multiply me in my soul by virtue;”1937 and that succession ofprogeny was not given unto man, save after that, by reason of sin, there was to be hereafter departurein death: or whether the body was not made spiritual in the case of these men, but at the first animal,
in order that by merit of obedience it might after become spiritual, to lay hold of immortality, notafter death, which by the malice of the devil entered into the world, and was made the punishmentof sin; but after that change, which the Apostle signifies, when he says, “Then we living, who
remain, together with them, shall be caught up in the clouds, to meet Christ, into the air,”1938 that
we may understand both that those bodies of the first pair were mortal, in the first forming, and yetthat they would not have died, had they not sinned, as God had threatened: even as if He should
threaten a wound, in that the body was capable of wounds; which yet would not have happened,
unless what He had forbidden were done. Thus, therefore, even through sexual intercourse there
might take place generations of such bodies, as up to a certain point should have increase, and yetshould not pass into old age; or even into old age, and yet not into death; until the earth were filledwith that multiplication of the blessing. For if to the garments of the Israelites1939 God granted theirproper state without any wearing away during forty years, how much more would He grant unto
the bodies of such as obeyed His command a certain most happy temperament of sure state, until
they should be changed for the better, not by death of the man, whereby the body is abandoned by
the soul, but by a blessed change from mortality to immortality, from an animal to a spiritual quality.
Of these opinions which be true, or whether some other or others yet may be formed out of thesewords, were a long matter to enquire and discuss.

3. This we now say, that, according to this condition of being born and dying, which we know,
and in which we have been created, the marriage of male and female is some good; the compact
whereof divine Scripture so commends, as that neither is it allowed one put away by her husband
to marry, so long as her husband lives: nor is it allowed one put away by his wife to marry another,unless she who have separated from him be dead. Therefore, concerning the good of marriage,
which the Lord also confirmed in the Gospel, not only in that He forbade to put away a wife,1940
save because of fornication, but also in that He came by invitation to a marriage,1941 there is good
ground to inquire for what reason it be a good. And this seems not to me to be merely on accountof the begetting of children, but also on account of the natural society itself in a difference of sex.
Otherwise it would not any longer be called marriage in the case of old persons, especially if either
they had lost sons, or had given birth to none. But now in good, although aged, marriage, albeit
there hath withered away the glow of full age between male and female, yet there lives in full vigor
the order of charity between husband and wife: because, the better they are, the earlier they havebegun by mutual consent to contain from sexual intercourse with each other: not that it should be

1937
1938
1939
1940
1941

Ps. cxxxviii. 3. LXX.
1 Thess. iv. 17.
Deut. xxix. 5.
Matt. xix. 9.
John ii. 2.

520

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

matter of necessity afterwards not to have power to do what they would, but that it should be matterof praise to have been unwilling at the first, to do what they had power to do. If therefore there be
kept good faith of honor, and of services mutually due from either sex, although the members ofeither be languishing and almost corpse-like, yet of souls duly joined together, the chastity1942
continues, the purer by how much it is the more proved, the safer, by how much it is the calmer.
Marriages have this good also, that carnal or youthful incontinence, although it be faulty, is brought
unto an honest use in the begetting of children, in order that out of the evil of lust the marriage
union may bring to pass some good. Next, in that the lust of the flesh is repressed, and rages in a
way more modestly, being tempered by parental affection. For there is interposed a certain gravity
of glowing pleasure, when in that wherein husband and wife cleave to one another, they have inmind that they be father and mother.

401

4. There is this further, that in that very debt which married persons pay one to another, even
if they demand it with somewhat too great intemperance and incontinence, yet they owe faith alike
one to another. Unto which faith the Apostle allows so great right, as to call it “power,” saying,“The woman hath not power of her own body, but the man; again in like manner also the man hathnot power of his own body, but the woman.”1943 But the violation of this faith is called adultery,when either by instigation of one’s own lust, or by consent of lust of another, there is sexualintercourse on either side with another against the marriage compact: and thus faith is broken,
which, even in things that are of the body, and mean, is a great good of the soul: and therefore it iscertain that it ought to be preferred even to the health of the body, wherein even this life of ours is
contained. For, although a little chaff in comparison of much gold is almost nothing; yet faith, when
it is kept pure in a matter of chaff, as in gold, is not therefore less because it is kept in a lesser
matter. But when faith is employed to commit sin, it were strange that we should have to call it
faith; however of what kind soever it be, if also the deed be done against it, it is the worse done;save when it is on this account abandoned, that there may be a return unto true and lawful faith,that is, that sin may be amended, by correction of perverseness of the will. As if any, being unable
alone to rob a man, should find a partner in his iniquity, and make an agreement with him to do it
together, and to divide the spoil; and, after the crime hath been committed, should take off thewhole to himself alone. That other grieves and complains that faith hath not been kept with him,
but in his very complaint he ought to consider, that he himself rather ought to have kept faith withhuman society in a good life, and not to make unjust spoil of a man, if he feels with how great
injustice it hath failed to be kept with himself in a fellowship of sin. Forsooth the former, being
faithless in both instances, must assuredly be judged the more wicked. But, if he had been displeased
at what they had done ill, and had been on this account unwilling to divide the spoil with his partnerin crime, in order that it might be restored to the man, from whom it had been taken, not even afaithless man would call him faithless. Thus a woman, if, having broken her marriage faith, she
keep faith with her adulterer, is certainly evil: but, if not even with her adulterer, worse. Further,

1942
1943

Perhaps “charity.”
1 Cor. vii. 4.

521

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

if she repent her of her sin, and returning to marriage chastity, renounce all adulterous compacts
and resolutions, I count it strange if even the adulterer himself will think her one who breaks faith.

5. Also the question is wont to be asked, when a male and female, neither the one the husband,nor the other the wife, of any other, come together, not for the begetting of children, but, by reason
of incontinence, for the mere sexual intercourse, there being between them this faith, that neither
he do it with any other woman, nor she with any other man, whether it is to be called marriage.1944
And perhaps this may, not without reason, be called marriage,1945 if it shall be the resolution1946 ofboth parties until the death of one, and if the begetting of children, although they came not together
for that cause, yet they shun not, so as either to be unwilling to have children born to them, or evenby some evil work to use means that they be not born. But, if either both, or one, of these be wanting,I find not how we can call it marriage. For, if a man should take unto him any one for a time, until
he find another worthy either of his honors or of his means, to marry as his compeer; in his soulitself he is an adulterer, and that not with her whom he is desirous of finding, but with her, withwhom he so lies, as not to have with her the partnership of a husband. Whence she also herself,
knowing and willing this, certainly acts unchastely in having intercourse with him, with whom she
has not the compact of a wife. However, if she keep to him faith of bed, and after he shall havemarried, have no thought of marriage herself, and prepare to contain herself altogether from any
such work, perhaps I should not dare lightly to call her an adulteress; but who shall say that she
sins not, when he is aware that she has intercourse with a man, not being his wife? But further, iffrom that intercourse, so far as pertains to herself, she has no wish but for sons, and suffers unwillingwhatever she suffers beyond the cause of begetting; there are many matrons to whom she is to bepreferred; who, although they are not adulteresses, yet force their husbands, for the most part also
wishing to exercise continence, to pay the due of the flesh, not through desire of children, but
through glow of lust making an intemperate use of their very right; in whose marriages, however,this very thing, that they are married, is a good. For for this purpose are they married, that the lust
being brought under a lawful bond, should not float at large without form and loose; having of itself
weakness of flesh that cannot be curbed, but of marriage fellowship of faith that cannot be dissolved;of itself encroachment of immoderate intercourse, of marriage a way of chastely begetting. For,although it be shameful to wish to use a husband for purposes of lust, yet it is honorable to be
unwilling to have intercourse save with an husband, and not to give birth to children save from ahusband. There are also men incontinent to that degree, that they spare not their wives even whenpregnant. Therefore whatever that is immodest, shameless, base, married persons do one withanother, is the sin of the persons, not the fault of marriage.

6. Further, in the very case of the more immoderate requirement of the due of the flesh, which
the Apostle enjoins not on them by way of command, but allows to them by way of leave, that they
1944
1945
1946

Nuptiœ.
Connubium.
Placuerit.

522

NPNF (V1-03)

402

Philip Schaff

have intercourse also beside the cause of begetting children; although evil habits impel them tosuch intercourse, yet marriage guards them from adultery or fornication. For neither is that committed
because of marriage, but is pardoned because of marriage. Therefore married persons owe one
another not only the faith of their sexual intercourse itself, for the begetting of children, which isthe first fellowship of the human kind in this mortal state; but also, in a way, a mutual service ofsustaining1947 one another’s weakness, in order to shun unlawful intercourse: so that, althoughperpetual continence be pleasing to one of them, he may not, save with consent of the other. For
thus far also, “The wife hath not power of her own body, but the man: in like manner also the man
hath not power of his own body, but the woman.”1948 That that also, which, not for the begettingof children, but for weakness and incontinence, either he seeks of marriage, or she of her husband,they deny not the one or the other; lest by this they fall into damnable seductions, through temptationof Satan, by reason of incontinence either of both, or of whichever of them. For intercourse of
marriage for the sake of begetting hath not fault; but for the satisfying of lust, but yet with husband
or wife, by reason of the faith of the bed, it hath venial fault: but adultery or fornication hath deadly
fault, and, through this, continence from all intercourse is indeed better even than the intercourseof marriage itself, which takes place for the sake of begetting. But because that Continence is oflarger desert, but to pay the due of marriage is no crime, but to demand it beyond the necessity ofbegetting is a venial fault, but to commit fornication or adultery is a crime to be punished; charityof the married ought to beware, lest whilst it seek for itself occasion of larger honor, it do that for
its partner which cause condemnation. “For whosoever putteth away his wife, except for the causeof fornication, maketh her to commit adultery.”1949 To such a degree is that marriage compact
entered upon a matter of a certain sacrament, that it is not made void even by separation itself,
since, so long as her husband lives, even by whom she hath been left, she commits adultery, in caseshe be married to another: and he who hath left her, is the cause of this evil.

7. But I marvel, if, as it is allowed to put away a wife who is an adulteress, so it be allowed,
having put her away, to marry another. For holy Scripture causes a hard knot in this matter, in that
the Apostle says, that, by commandment of the Lord, the wife ought not to depart from her husband,
but, in case she shall have departed, to remain unmarried, or to be reconciled to her husband;1950
whereas surely she ought not to depart and remain unmarried, save from an husband that is an
adulterer, lest by withdrawing from him, who is not an adulterer, she cause him to commit adultery.
But perhaps she may justly be reconciled to her husband, either he being to be borne with, if shecannot contain herself, or being now corrected. But I see not how the man can have permission to
marry another, in case he have left an adulteress, when a woman has not to be married to another,in case she have left an adulterer. And, this being the case, so strong is that bond of fellowship in
married persons, that, although it be tied for the sake f begetting children, not even for the sake ofbegetting children is it loosed. For it is in a man’s power to put away a wife that is barren, and

1947
1948
1949
1950

Excipiendæ.
1 Cor. vii. 4.
Matt. v. 32.
1 Cor. vii. 10, 11.

523

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

marry one of whom to have children. And yet it is not allowed; and now indeed in our times, andafter the usage of Rome, neither to marry in addition, so as to have more than one wife living: and,surely, in case of an adulteress or adulterer being left, it would be possible that more men should
be born, if either the woman were married to another, or the man should marry another. And yet,if this be not lawful, as the Divine Rule seems to prescribe, who is there but it must make him
attentive to learn, what is the meaning of this so great strength of the marriage bond? Which I by
no means think could have been of so great avail, were it not that there were taken a certain sacramentof some greater matter from out this weak mortal state of men, so that, men deserting it, and seeking
to dissolve it, it should remain unshaken for their punishment. Seeing that the compact of marriage
is not done away by divorce intervening; so that they continue wedded persons one to another, evenafter separation; and commit adultery with those, with whom they shall be joined, even after theirown divorce, either the woman with a man, or the man with a woman. And yet, save in the City of
our God, in His Holy Mount, the case is not such with the wife.1951 But, that the laws of the Gentiles
are otherwise, who is there that knows not; where, by the interposition of divorce, without any
offense of which man takes cognizance, both the woman is married to whom she will, and the man
marries whom he will. And something like this custom, on account of the hardness of the Israelites,
Moses seems to have allowed, concerning a bill of divorcement.1952 In which matter there appears
rather a rebuke, than an approval, of divorce.1953

403

8. “Honorable,” therefore, “is marriage in all, and the bed undefiled.”1954 And this we do notso call a good, as that it is a good in comparison of fornication: otherwise there will be two evils,of which the second is worse: or fornication will also be a good, because adultery is worse: for it
is worse to violate the marriage of another, than to cleave unto an harlot: and adultery will be agood, because incest is worse; for it is worse to lie with a mother than with the wife of another:and, until we arrive at those things, which, as the Apostle saith, “it is a shame even to speak of,”1955
all will be good in comparison of what are worse. But who can doubt that this is false? Therefore
marriage and fornication are not two evils, whereof the second is worse: but marriage and continence
are two goods, whereof the second is better, even as this temporal health and sickness are not two
evils, whereof the second is worse; but that health and immortality are two goods, whereof thesecond is better. Also knowledge and vanity are not two evils, whereof vanity is the worse: but
knowledge and charity are two goods, whereof charity is the better. For “knowledge shall be
destroyed,”1956 saith the Apostle: and yet it is necessary for this time: but “charity shall never fail.”Thus also this mortal begetting, on account of which marriage takes place, shall be destroyed: but
freedom from all sexual intercourse is both angelic exercise1957 here, and continueth for ever. But
as the repasts of the Just are better than the fasts of the sacrilegious, so the marriage of the faithful
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957

Ps. xlviii. 1.
Deut. xxiv. 1.
Matt. xix. 8.
Heb. xiii. 4. [See R.V.]
Eph. v. 12.
1 Cor. xiii. 8.
Meditatio.

524

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

is to be set before the virginity of the impious. However neither in that case is repast preferred to
fasting, but righteousness to sacrilege; nor in this, marriage to virginity, but faith to impiety. For
for this end the righteous, when need is, take their repast, that, as good masters, they may give totheir slaves, i.e., their bodies, what is just and fair: but for this end the sacrilegious fast, that they
may serve devils. Thus for this end the faithful are married, that they may be chastely joined unto
husbands, but for this end the impious are virgins, that they may commit fornication away fromthe true God. As, therefore, that was good, which Martha was doing, being engaged in the ministering
unto the Saints, but that better, which Mary, her sister, sitting at the feet of the Lord, and hearing
His word; thus we praise the good of Susanna1958 in married chastity, but yet we set before her thegood of the widow Anna,1959 and, much more, of the Virgin Mary.1960 It was good that they were
doing, who of their substance were ministering necessaries unto Christ and His disciples: but better,
who left all their substance, that they might be freer to follow the same Lord. But in both thesecases of good, whether what these, or whether what Martha and Mary were doing, the better could
not be done, unless the other had been passed over or left. Whence we are to understand, that weare not, on this account, to think marriage an evil, because, unless there be abstinence from it,
widowed chastity, or virgin purity, cannot be had. For neither on this account was what Martha
was doing evil, because, unless her sister abstained from it, she could not do what was better: noron this account is it evil to receive a just man or a prophet into one’s house, because he, who wills
to follow Christ unto perfection, ought not even to have a house, in order to do what is better.

9. Truly we must consider, that God gives us some goods, which are to be sought for their own
sake, such as wisdom, health, friendship: but others, which are necessary for the sake of somewhat,such as learning, meat, drink, sleep, marriage, sexual intercourse. For of these certain are necessary
for the sake of wisdom, as learning: certain for the sake of health, as meat and drink and sleep:
certain for the sake of friendship, as marriage or sexual intercourse: for hence subsists the propagationof the human kind, wherein friendly fellowship is a great good. These goods, therefore, which arenecessary for the sake of something else, whoso useth not for this purpose, wherefore they were
instituted, sins; in some cases venially, in other cases damnably. But whoso useth them for thispurpose, wherefore they were given doeth well. Therefore, to whomsoever they are not necessary,
if he use them not, he doeth better. Wherefore, these goods, when we have need, we do well towish; but we do better not to wish than to wish: because ourselves are in a better state, when we
account them not necessary. And on this account it is good to marry, because it is good to begetchildren, to be a mother of a family: but it is better not to marry,1961 because it is better not to standin need of this work, in order to human fellowship itself. For such is the state of the human race
now, that (others, who contain not, not only being taken up with marriage, but many also waxing
wanton through unlawful concubinages, the Good Creator working what is good out of their evils)
there fails not numerous progeny, and abundant succession, out of which to procure holy friendships.

1958
1959
1960
1961

Hist. of Susanna, 22, 23.
Luke ii. 37.
Luke i. 27, 28.
1 Tim. v. 14.

525

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Whence we gather, that, in the first times of the human race, chiefly for the propagation of thePeople of God, through whom the Prince and Saviour of all people should both be prophesied of,and be born, it was the duty of the Saints to use this good of marriage, not as to be sought for its
own sake, but necessary for the sake of something else: but now, whereas, in order to enter upon
holy and pure fellowship, there is on all sides from out all nations an overflowing fullness of spiritual
kindred, even they who wish to contract marriage only for the sake of children, are to be admonished,that they use rather the larger good of continence.

404

10. But I am aware of some that murmur: What, say they, if all men should abstain from allsexual intercourse, whence will the human race exist? Would that all would this, only in “charity
out of a pure heart, and good conscience, and faith unfeigned;”1962 much more speedily would theCity of God be filled, and the end of the world hastened. For what else doth the Apostle, as is
manifest, exhort to, when he saith, speaking on this head, “I would that all were as myself;”1963 orin that passage, “But this I say, brethren, the time is short: it remains that both they who have wives,
be as though not having: and they who weep, as though not weeping: and they who rejoice, as
though not rejoicing: and they who buy, as though not buying: and they who use this world as
though they use it not. For the form of this world passeth by. I would have you without care.” Thenhe adds, “Whoso is without a wife thinks of the things of the Lord, how to please the Lord: but
whoso is joined in marriage, thinks of the things of the world, how to please his wife: and a womanthat is unmarried and a virgin is different: she that is unmarried is anxious about the things of theLord, to be holy both in body and spirit: but she that is married, is anxious about the things of theworld, how to please her husband.”1964 Whence it seems to me, that at this time, those only, who
contain not, ought to marry, according to that sentence of the same Apostle, “But if they containnot, let them be married: for it is better to be married than to burn.”1965

11. And yet not to these themselves is marriage a sin; which, if it were chosen in comparisonof fornication, would be a less sin than fornication, and yet would be a sin. But now what shall wesay against the most plain speech of the Apostle, saying, “Let her do what she will; she sinneth not,if she be married;”1966 and, “If thou shalt have taken a wife, thou hast not sinned: and, if a virgin
shall have been married, she sinneth not.”1967 Hence surely it is not lawful now to doubt that marriage
is no sin. Therefore the Apostle alloweth not marriage as matter “of pardon:”1968 for who can doubtthat it is extremely absurd to say, that they have not sinned, unto whom “pardon” is granted. But
he allows, as matter of “pardon,” that sexual intercourse, which takes place through incontinence,

1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968

1 Tim. i. 5.
1 Cor. vii. 7.
Ver. 29–34.
1 Cor. vii. 9.
1 Cor. vii. 36.
Ver. 28.
Veniam.

526

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

not alone for the begetting of children, and, at times, not at all for the begetting of children; and it
is not that marriage forces this to take place, but that it procures pardon for it; provided however
it be not so in excess as to hinder what ought to be set aside as seasons of prayer, nor be changed
into that use which is against nature, on which the Apostle could not be silent, when speaking of
the excessive corruptions of unclean and impious men. For necessary sexual intercourse for begetting
is free from blame, and itself is alone worthy of marriage. But that which goes beyond this necessity,
no longer follows reason, but lust.1969 And yet it pertains to the character of marriage, not to exact
this, but to yield it to the partner, lest by fornication the other sin damnably. But, if both are set
under such lust, they do what is plainly not matter of marriage. However, if in their intercourse
they love what is honest more than what is dishonest, that is, what is matter of marriage more thanwhat is not matter of marriage, this is allowed to them on the authority of the Apostle as matter ofpardon: and for this fault, they have in their marriage, not what sets them on to commit it, but what
entreats pardon for it, if they turn not away from them the mercy of God, either by not abstaining
on certain days, that they may be free to pray, and through this abstinence, as through fasting, maycommend their prayers; or by changing the natural use into that which is against nature, which ismore damnable when it is done in the case of husband or wife.

405

12. For, whereas that natural use, when it pass beyond the compact of marriage, that is, beyond
the necessity of begetting, is pardonable in the case of a wife, damnable in the case of an harlot;that which is against nature is execrable when done in the case of an harlot, but more execrable inthe case of a wife. Of so great power is the ordinance of the Creator, and the order of Creation,
that, in matters allowed us to use, even when the due measure is exceeded, it is far more tolerable,than, in what are not allowed, either a single, or rare excess. And, therefore, in a matter allowed,
want of moderation, in a husband or wife, is to be borne with, in order that lust break not forth intoa matter that is not allowed. Hence is it also that he sins far less, who is ever so unceasing inapproaches to his wife, than he who approaches ever so seldom to commit fornication. But, whenthe man shall wish to use the member of the wife not allowed for this purpose, the wife is moreshameful, if she suffer it to take place in her own case, than if in the case of another woman.
Therefore the ornament of marriage is chastity of begetting, and faith of yielding the due of theflesh: this is the work of marriage, this the Apostle defends from every charge, in saying, “Both if
thou shall have taken a wife, thou hast not sinned: and if a virgin shall have been married, shesinneth not:” and, “Let her do what she will: she sinneth not if she be married.”1970 But an advancebeyond moderation in demanding the due of either sex, for the reasons which I have stated above,is allowed to married persons as matter of pardon.

13. What therefore he says, “She, that is unmarried, thinketh of the things of the Lord, that she
may be holy both in body and spirit;” we are not to take in such sense, as to think that a chaste
Christian wife is not holy in body. Forsooth unto all the faithful it was said, “Know ye not that your
1969
1970

Rom. i. 26, 27.
1 Cor. vii. 28, 36.

527

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

bodies are a temple of the Holy Ghost within you, Whom ye have from God?”1971 Therefore thebodies also of the married are holy, so long as they keep faith to one another and to God. And that
this sanctity of either of them, even an unbelieving partner does not stand in the way of, but rather
that the sanctity of the wife profits the unbelieving husband, and the sanctity of the husband profits
the unbelieving wife, the same Apostle is witness, saying, “For the unbelieving husband is sanctified
in the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in a brother.”1972 Wherefore that was said according
to the greater sanctity of the unmarried than of the married, unto which there is also due a greater
reward, according as, the one being a good, the other is a greater good: inasmuch as also she has
this thought only, how to please the Lord. For it is not that a female who believes, keeping married
chastity, thinks not how to please the Lord; but assuredly less so, in that she thinks of the things of
the world, how to please her husband. For this is what he would say of them, that they may, in acertain way, find themselves obliged by marriage to think of the things of the world, how to please
their husbands.

14. And not without just cause a doubt is raised, whether he said this of all married women, orof such as so many are, as that nearly all may be thought so to be. For neither doth that, which hesaith of unmarried women, “She, that is unmarried, thinkest of the things of the Lord, to be holyboth in body and spirit:”1973 pertain unto all unmarried women: whereas there are certain widows
who are dead, who live in delights. However, so far as regards a certain distinction and, as it were,character of their own, of the unmarried and married; as she deserves the excess of hatred, who
containing from marriage,1974 that is, from a thing allowed, does not contain from offenses, eitherof luxury, or pride, or curiosity and prating; so the married woman is seldom met with, who, in thevery obedience of married life, hath no thought save how to please God, by adorning herself, notwith plaited hair, or gold and pearls and costly attire,1975 but as becometh women making professionof piety, through a good conversation. Such marriages, forsooth, the Apostle Peter also describesby giving commandment. “In like manner,” saith he, “wives obeying their own husbands; in order
that, even if any obey not the word, they may be gained without discourse through the conversationof the wives, seeing your fear and chaste conversation: that they be not they that are adorned withoutwith crispings of hair, or clothed with gold or with fair raiment; but that hidden man of your heart,in that unbroken continuance of a quiet and modest spirit, which before the Lord also is rich. For
thus certain holy women, who hoped in the Lord, used to adorn themselves, obeying their own
husbands: as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him Lord: whose daughters ye are become, when ye
do well, and fear not with any vain fear. Husbands in like manner living at peace and in chastity
with your wives, both give ye honor as to the weaker and subject vessel, as with co-heirs of grace,and see that your prayers be not hindered.”1976 Is it indeed that such marriages have no thought of

1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976

1 Cor. vi. 19.
1 Cor. vii. 14.
1 Cor. vii. 34.
1 Tim. v. 6.
1 Tim. ii. 9, 10.
1 Peter iii. 1–7.

528

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

the things of the Lord, how to please the Lord? But they are very rare: who denies this? And, being,as they are, rare, nearly all the persons who are such, were not joined together in order to be such,but being already joined together became such.

406

15. For what Christian men of our time being free from the marriage bond, having power tocontain from all sexual intercourse, seeing it to be now “a time,” as it is written, “not of embracing,but of abstaining from embrace,”1977 would not choose rather to keep virginal or widowed continence,
than (now that there is no obligation from duty to human society) to endure tribulation of the flesh,without which marriages cannot be (to pass over in silence other things from which the Apostle
spares.) But when through desire reigning they shall have been joined together, if they shall after
overcome it, because it is not lawful to loose, in such wise as it was lawful not to tie, the marriage
bond, they become such as the form of marriage makes profession of, so as that either by mutual
consent they ascend unto a higher degree of holiness, or, if both are not such, the one who is such
will not be one to exact but to yield the due, observing in all things a chaste and religious concord.
But in those times, wherein as yet the mystery of our salvation was veiled in prophetic sacraments,
even they who were such before marriage, yet contracted marriage through the duty of begetting
children, not overcome by lust, but led by piety, unto whom if there were given such choice as in
the revelation of the New Testament there hath been given, the Lord saying “Whoso can receive,
let him receive;”1978 no one doubts that they would have been ready to receive it even with joy,
who reads with careful attention what use they made of their wives, at a time when also it wasallowed one man to have several, whom he had with more chastity, than any now has his one wife,of these, unto whom we see what the Apostle allows by way of leave.1979 For they had them in thework of begetting children, not “in the disease of desire, as the nations which know not God.”1980
And this is so great a thing, that many at this day more easily abstain from all sexual intercourse
their whole life through, than, if they are joined in marriage, observe the measure of not coming
together except for the sake of children. Forsooth we have many brethren and partners in theheavenly inheritance of both sexes that are continent, whether they be such as have made trial of
marriage, or such as are entirely free from all such intercourse: forsooth they are without number:yet, in our familiar discourses with them, whom have we heard, whether of those who are, or of
those who have been, married, declaring to us that he has never had sexual intercourse with hiswife, save with the hope of conception? What, therefore, the Apostles command the married, thisis proper to marriage, but what they allow by way of pardon, or what hinders prayers, this marriage
compels not, but bears with.

16. Therefore if haply, (which whether it can take place, I know not; and rather think it cannot
take place; but yet, if haply), having taken unto himself a concubine for a time, a man shall have
1977
1978
1979
1980

Eccles. iii. 5.
Matt. xix. 12.
1 Cor. vii. 6.
1 Thess. iv. 5.

529

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffsought sons only from this same intercourse; neither thus is that union to be preferred to the marriage
even of those women, who do this, that is matter of pardon.1981 For we must consider what belongs
to marriage, not what belongs to such women as marry and use marriage with less moderation thanthey ought. For neither if each one so use lands entered upon unjustly and wrongly, as out of theirfruits to give large alms, doth he therefore justify rapine: nor if another brood over, through avarice,an estate to which he has succeeded, or which he hath justly gained, are we on this account to blame
the rule of civil law, whereby he is made a lawful owner. Nor will the wrongfulness of a tyrannicalrebellion deserve praise, if the tyrant treat his subjects with royal clemency: nor will the order ofroyal power deserve blame, if a king rage with tyrannical cruelty. For it is one thing to wish to use
well unjust power, and it is another thing to use unjustly just power. Thus neither do concubines
taken for a time, if they be such in order to sons, make their concubinage lawful; nor do married
women, if they live wantonly with their husbands, attach any charge to the order of marriage.

407

17. That marriage can take place of persons first ill joined, an honest decree following after, ismanifest. But a marriage once for all entered upon in the City of our God, where, even from thefirst union of the two, the man and the woman, marriage bears a certain sacramental character, canno way be dissolved but by the death of one of them. For the bond of marriage remains, althougha family, for the sake of which it was entered upon, do not follow through manifest barrenness; sothat, when now married persons know that they shall not have children, yet it is not lawful for themto separate even for the very sake of children, and to join themselves unto others. And if they shallso do, they commit adultery with those unto whom they join themselves, but themselves remainhusbands and wives. Clearly with the good will of the wife to take another woman, that from her
may be born sons common to both, by the sexual intercourse and seed of the one, but by the rightand power of the other, was lawful among the ancient fathers: whether it be lawful now also, I
would not hastily pronounce. For there is not now necessity of begetting children, as there thenwas, when, even when wives bare children, it was allowed, in order to a more numerous posterity,
to marry other wives in addition, which now is certainly not lawful. For the difference that separates
times causes the due season to have so great force unto the justice and doing or not doing any thing,that now a man does better, if he marry not even one wife, unless he be unable to contain. But thenthey married even several without any blame, even those who could much more easily contain,
were it not that piety at that time had another demand upon them. For, as the wise and just man,1982
who now desires to be dissolved and to be with Christ, and takes more pleasure in this, the best,
now not from desire of living here, but from duty of being useful1983, takes food that he may remainin the flesh, which is necessary for the sake of others; so to have intercourse with females in rightof marriage, was to holy men at that time a matter of duty not of lust.

1981
1982
1983

Veniale.
Phil. i. 23.
Consulendi.

530

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

18. For what food is unto the conservation of the man, this sexual intercourse is unto theconservation of the race: and both are not without carnal delight: which yet being modified, andby restraint of temperance reduced unto the use after nature, cannot be lust.1984 But what unlawful
food is in the supporting of life, this sexual intercourse of fornication or adultery is in the seekingof a family. And what unlawful food is in luxury of belly and throat, this unlawful intercourse isin lust that seeks not a family. And what the excessive appetite of some is in lawful food, this thatintercourse that is matter of pardon is in husband and wife. As therefore it is better to die of hunger
than to eat things offered unto idols: so it is better to die without children, than to seek a family
from unlawful intercourse. But from whatever source men be born, if they follow not the vices of
their parents, and worship God aright, they shall be honest and safe. For the seed of man, from out
what kind of man soever, is the creation of God, and it shall fare ill with those who use it ill, yetshall not, itself at any time be evil. But as the good sons of adulterers are no defense of adulteries,
so the evil sons of married persons are no charge against marriage. Wherefore as the Fathers of thetime of the New Testament taking food from the duty of conservation, although they took it withnatural delight of the flesh, were yet in no way compared with the delight of those who fed on what
had been offered in sacrifice, or of those who, although the food was lawful, yet took it to excess:so the Fathers of the time of the Old Testament from the duty of conservation used sexual intercourse;
and yet that their natural delight, by no means relaxed unto unreasonable and unlawful lust, is not
to be compared either with the vileness of fornications, or with the intemperance of married persons.
Forsooth through the same vein1985 of charity, now after the spirit, then after the flesh, it was a duty
to beget sons for the sake of that mother Jerusalem: but it was nought save the difference of times
which made the works of the fathers different. But thus it was necessary that even Prophets, notliving after the flesh, should come together after the flesh; even as it was necessary that Apostles
also, not living after the flesh, should eat food after the flesh.

19. Therefore as many women as there are now, unto whom it is said, “if they contain not, let”them be married,1986 are not to be compared to the holy women then, even when they married.
Marriage itself indeed in all nations is for the same cause of begetting sons, and of what character
soever these may be afterward, yet was marriage for this purpose instituted, that they may be bornin due and honest order. But men, who contain not, as it were ascend unto marriage by a step ofhonesty: but they, who without doubt would contain, if the purpose of that time had allowed this,in a certain measure descended unto marriage by a step of piety. And, on this account, although
the marriages of both, so far as they are marriages, in that they are for the sake of begetting, areequally good, yet these men when married are not to be compared with those men as married. For
these have, what is allowed them by the way of leave, on account of the honesty of marriage,
although it pertain not to marriage; that is, the advance which goes beyond the necessity of begetting,which they had not. But neither can these, if haply there be now any found, who neither seek, nor
1984

Retract. b. ii. c. xxii. 2. “it was meant that the good and right use of lust is not lust, for as it is evil will to use good things,
so is it good will to use evil things.”
1985“Vena.”
1986
1 Cor. vii. 9.

531

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

desire, in marriage any thing, save that wherefore marriage was instituted, be made equal to thosemen. For in these the very desire of sons is carnal, but in those it was spiritual, in that it was suited
to the sacrament of that time. Forsooth now no one who is made perfect in piety seeks to have sons,save after a spiritual sense; but then it was the work of piety itself to beget sons even after a carnal
sense: in that the begetting of that people was fraught with tidings of things to come, and pertained
unto the prophetic dispensation.

408

20. And on this account, not, so as it was allowed one man to have even several wives, was itallowed one female to have several husbands, not even for the sake of a family, in case it should
happen that the woman could bear, the man could not beget. For by a secret law of nature things
that stand chief love to be singular; but what are subject are set under, not only one under one, but,
if the system of nature or society allow, even several under one, not without becoming beauty. For
neither hath one slave so several masters, in the way that several slaves have one master. Thus weread not that any of the holy women served two or more living husbands: but we read that manyfemales served one husband, when the social state1987 of that nation allowed it, and the purpose of
the time persuaded to it: for neither is it contrary to the nature of marriage. For several females canconceive from one man: but one female cannot from several, (such is the power of things principal:)as many souls are rightly made subject unto one God. And on this account there is no True God ofsouls, save One: but one soul by means of many false gods may commit fornication, but not bemade fruitful.

21. But since out of many souls there shall be hereafter one City of such as have one soul andone heart1988 towards God; which perfection of our unity shall be hereafter, after this sojourn in a
strange land, wherein the thoughts of all shall neither be hidden one from another, nor shall be inany matter opposed one to another; on this account the Sacrament of marriage of our time hathbeen so reduced to one man and one wife, as that it is not lawful to ordain any as a steward of the
Church, save the husband of one wife.1989 And this they have understood more acutely who havebeen of opinion, that neither is he to be ordained,1990 who as a catechumen or as a heathen1991 hada second wife. For it is a matter of sacrament, not of sin. For in baptism all sins are put away. But
he who said, “If thou shall have taken a wife, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin shall have beenmarried, she sinneth not:”1992 and, “Let her do what she will, she sinneth not, if she be married,”hath made it plain enough that marriage is no sin. But on account of the sanctity of the Sacrament,
as a female, although it be as a catechumen that she hath suffered violence, cannot after Baptism

1987

Societas.
Acts iv. 32.
1989
1 Tim. iii. 2.
1990
Tit. i. 6.
1991
Thus Ambrose, Verellæ, and ancient Jerome, Ep. ad Ocean. and harshly against Ep. to Ch. of general custom, speaks
strongly this interpretation, and says, b. i. near the end, that Ruffinus had found fault with him for this. Ben.
1992
1 Cor. vii. 28, 36.
1988

532

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

be consecrated among the virgins of God: so there was no absurdity in supposing of him who had
exceeded the number of one wife, not that he had committed any sin, but that he had lost a certain
prescript rule1993 of a sacrament necessary not unto desert of good life, but unto the seal of ecclesiastic
ordination; and thus, as the many wives of the old Fathers signified our future Churches out of allnations made subject unto one husband, Christ: so our chief-priest,1994 the husband of one wife,
signifies unity out of all nations, made subject unto one husband, Christ: which shall then be
perfected, when He shall have unveiled the hidden things of darkness,1995 and shall have mademanifest the thoughts of the heart, that then each may have praise from God. But now there aremanifest, there are hidden, dissensions, even where charity is safe between those, who shall behereafter one, and in one; which shall then certainly have no existence. As therefore the Sacramentof marriage with several of that time signified the multitude that should be hereafter made subject
unto God in all nations of the earth, so the Sacrament of marriage with one of our times signifies
the unity of us all made subject to God, which shall be hereafter in one Heavenly City. Therefore
as to serve two or more, so to pass over from a living husband into marriage with another, wasneither lawful then, nor is it lawful now, nor will it ever be lawful. Forsooth to apostatise from the
One God, and to go into adulterous superstition of another, is ever an evil. Therefore not even forthe sake of a more numerous family did our Saints do, what the Roman Cato is said to have done,1996
to give up his wife, during his own life, to fill even another’s house with sons. Forsooth in themarriage of one woman the sanctity of the Sacrament is of more avail than the fruitfulness of the
womb.

409

22. If, therefore, even they who are united in marriage only for the purpose of begetting, forwhich purpose marriage was instituted, are not compared with the Fathers, seeking their very sonsin a way far other than do these; forasmuch as Abraham, being bidden to slay his son, fearless anddevoted, spared not his only son, whom from out of great despair he had received1997 save that helaid down his hand, when He forbade him, at Whose command he had lifted it up; it remains that
we consider, whether at least continent persons among us are to be compared to those Fathers who
were married; unless haply now these are to be preferred to them, to whom we have not yet foundpersons to compare. For there was a greater good in their marriage, than is the proper good of
marriage: to which without doubt the good of Continence is to be preferred: because they sought
not sons from marriage by such duty as these are led by, from a certain sense of mortal nature
requiring succession against decease. And, whoso denies this to be good he knows not God, theCreator of all things good, from things heavenly even unto things earthly, from things immortal
even unto things mortal. But neither are beasts altogether without this sense of begetting, and chiefly
birds, whose care of building nests meets us at once, and a certain likeness to marriages, in order
to beget and nurture together. But those men, with mind far holier, surpassed this affection of mortal

1993
1994
1995
1996
1997

Normam.
Antistes.
1 Cor. iv. 5.
Cato minor, cf. Plutarch. p. 771.
Gen. xxii. 12.

533

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

nature, the chastity whereof in its own kind, there being added thereto the worship of God, as somehave understood, is set forth as bearing first thirty-fold; who sought sons of their marriage for thesake of Christ; in order to distinguish His race after the flesh from all nations: even as God waspleased to order, that this above the rest should avail to prophesy of Him, in that it was foretold ofwhat race also, and of what nation, He should hereafter come in the flesh. Therefore it was a far
greater good than the chaste marriages of believers among us, which father Abraham knew in his
own thigh, under which he bade his servant to put his hand, that he might take an oath concerning
the wife, whom his son was to marry. For putting his hand under the thigh of a man, and swearing
by the God of Heaven,1998 what else did he signify, than that in that Flesh, which derived its origin
from that thigh, the God of Heaven would come? Therefore marriage is a good, wherein marriedpersons are so much the better, in proportion as they fear God with greater chastity and faithfulness,
specially if the sons, whom they desire after the flesh, they also bring up after the spirit.

23. Nor, in that the Law orders a man to be purified even after intercourse with a wife, doth itshow it to be sin: unless it be that which is allowed by way of pardon, which also, being in excess,hinders prayers. But, as the Law sets1999 many things in sacraments and shadows of things to come;a certain as it were material formless state of the seed, which having received form will hereafter
produce the body of man, is set to signify a life formless, and untaught: from which formless state,forasmuch as it behoves that man be cleansed by form and teaching of learning; as a sign of this,that purification was ordered after the emission of seed. For neither in sleep also doth it take placethrough sin. And yet there also a purification was commanded. Or, if any think this also to be sin,
thinking that it comes not to pass save from some lust of this kind, which without doubt is false;
what? are the ordinary menses also of women sins? And yet from these the same old Law
commanded that they should be cleansed by expiation; for no other cause, save the material formlessstate itself, in that which, when conception hath taken place, is added as it were to build up thebody, and for this reason, when it flows without form, the Law would have signified by it a soulwithout form of discipline, flowing and loose in an unseemly manner. And that this ought to receive
form, it signifies, when it commands such flow of the body to be purified. Lastly, what? to die, isthat also a sin? or, to bury a dead person, is it not also a good work of humanity? and yet apurification was commanded even on occasion of this also; because also a dead body, life abandoning
it, is not sin, but signifies the sin of a soul abandoned by righteousness.2000

24. Marriage, I say, is a good, and may be, by sound reason, defended against all calumnies.
But with the marriage of the holy fathers, I inquire not what marriage, but what continence, is on
a level: or rather not marriage with marriage; for it is an equal gift in all cases given to the mortal
nature of men; but men who use marriage, forasmuch as I find not, to compare with other men who
used marriage in a far other spirit, we must require what continent persons admit of being compared
1998
1999
2000

Gen. xxiv. 2–4.
Infirmitas.
Numb. xix. 11.

534

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

with those married persons. Unless, haply, Abraham could not contain from marriage, for the sakeof the kingdom of heaven, he who, for the sake of the kingdom of heaven, could fearless sacrifice
his only pledge of offspring, for whose sake marriage was dear!

410

25. Forsooth continence is a virtue, not of the body, but of the soul. But the virtues of the soul
are sometimes shown in work, sometimes lie hid in habit, as the virtue of martyrdom shone forthand appeared by enduring sufferings; but how many are there of the same virtue of mind, unto
whom trial is wanting, whereby what is within, in the sight of God, may go forth also into the sightof men, and not to men begin to exist, but only become known? For there was already in Job
patience, which God knew, and to which He bore witness: but it became known unto men by testof trial:2001 and what lay hid within was not produced, but shown, by the things that were broughton him from without. Timothy also certainly had the virtue of abstaining from wine,2002 which Paul
took not from him, by advising him to use a moderate portion of wine, “for the sake of his stomach
and his often infirmities,” otherwise he taught him a deadly lesson, that for the sake of the healthof the body there should be a loss of virtue in the soul: but because what he advised could takeplace with safety to that virtue, the profit of drinking was so left free to the body, as that the habitof continence continued in the soul. For it is the habit itself, whereby any thing is done, when thereis need;2003 but when it is not done, it can be done, only there is no need. This habit, in the matterof that continence which is from sexual intercourse, they have not, unto whom it is said, “If they
contain not, let them be married.”2004 But this they have, unto whom it is said, “Whoso can receive,
let him receive.”2005 Thus have perfect souls used earthly goods, that are necessary for somethingelse, through this habit of continence, so as, by it, not to be bound by them, and so as by it, to havepower also not to use them, in case there were no need. Nor doth any use them well, save who hathpower also not to use them. Many indeed with more ease practise abstinence, so as not to use, thanpractise temperance, so as to use well. But no one can wisely use them, save who can also continently
not use them. From this habit Paul also said, “I know both to abound, and to suffer want.”2006
Forsooth to suffer want is the part of any men soever; but to know to suffer want is the part of greatmen. So, also, to abound, who cannot? but to know also to abound, is not, save of those, whomabundance corrupts not.

26. But, in order that it may be more clearly understood, how there may be virtue in habit,
although it be not in work, I speak of an example, about which no Catholic Christian can doubt.
For that our Lord Jesus Christ in truth of flesh hungered and thirsted, ate and drank, no one doubts
of such as out of the Gospel are believers. What, then, was there not in Him the virtue of continence
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006

Job i. 8.
1 Tim. v. 23.
Or “work.”
1 Cor. vii. 9.
Matt. xix. 12.
Phil. iv. 12.

535

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

from meat and drink, as great as in John Baptist? “For John came neither eating nor drinking; andthey said, He hath a devil; the Son of Man came both eating and drinking; and they said, “Lo, a
glutton and wine-bibber, a friend of publicans and sinners.”2007 What, are not such things said also
against them of His household, our fathers, from another kind of using of things earthy, so far as
pertains to sexual intercourse; “Lo, men lustful and unclean, lovers of women and lewdness?” And
yet as in Him that was not true, although it were true that He abstained not, even as John, fromeating and drinking, for Himself saith most plainly and truly, “John came, not eating, nor drinking;the Son of Man came eating and drinking:” so neither is this true in these Fathers; although there
hath come now the Apostle of Christ, not wedded, nor begetting, so that the heathen say of him,
He was a magician; but there came then the Prophet of Christ, marrying and begetting sons, so that
the Manichees say of him, He was a man fond of women: “And wisdom,” saith He, “hath been
justified of her children.”2008 What the Lord there added, after He had thus spoken of John and ofHimself; “But wisdom,” saith He, “hath been justified of her children.” Who see that the virtue ofcontinence ought to exist even in the habit of the soul, but to be shown forth in deed, according toopportunity of things and times; even as the virtue of patience of holy martyrs appeared in deed;but of the rest equally holy was in habit. Wherefore, even as there is not unequal desert of patiencein Peter, who suffered, and in John, who suffered not; so there is not unequal desert of continencein John who made no trial of marriage,2009 and in Abraham, who begat sons. For both the celibateof the one, and the marriage estate of the other, did service as soldiers to Christ, as times wereallotted; but John had continence in work also, but Abraham in habit alone.

27. Therefore at that time, when the Law also, following upon the days of the Patriarchs,2010
pronounced accursed, whoso raised not up seed in Israel, even he, who could, put it not forth, but
yet possessed it. But from the period that the fullness of time hath come,2011 that it should be said,“Whoso can receive, let him receive,”2012 from that period even unto this present, and from hencefortheven unto the end, whoso hath, worketh: whoso shall be unwilling to work, let him not falsely say,that he hath. And through this means, they, who corrupt good manners by evil communications,2013
with empty and vain craft, say to a Christian man exercising continence, and refusing marriage,
What then, are you better than Abraham? But let him not, upon hearing this, be troubled; neither
let him dare to say, “Better,” nor let him fall away from his purpose: for the one he saith not truly,
the other he doth not rightly. But let him say, I indeed am not better than Abraham, but the chastityof the unmarried is better than the chastity of marriage; whereof Abraham had one in use, both inhabit. For he lived chastely in the marriage state: but it was in his power to be chaste without

2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013

Matt. xi. 18–19.
Matt. xi. 19.
S. Jerome agt. Jovinianus.
Deut. xxv. 5, 10.
Gal. iv. 4.
Matt. xix. 12.
1 Cor. xv. 33.

536

NPNF (V1-03)

411

Philip Schaff

marriage, but at that time it behoved not. But I with more ease use not marriage, which Abraham
used, than so use marriage as Abraham used it: and therefore I am better than those, who throughincontinence of mind cannot do what I do; not than those, who, on account of difference of time,
did not do what I do. For what I now do, they would have done better, if it had been to be done atthat time; but what they did, I should not so do, although it were now to be done. Or, if he feels
and knows himself to be such, as that, (the virtue of continence being preserved and continued in
the habit of his mind, in case he had descended unto the use of marriage from some duty of religion,)he should be such an husband, and such a father, as Abraham was; let him dare to make plain answer
to that captious questioner, and to say, I am not indeed better than Abraham, only in this kind ofcontinence, of which he was not void, although it appeared not: but I am such, not having otherthan he, but doing other. Let him say this plainly: forasmuch as, even if he shall wish to glory, hewill not be a fool, for he saith the truth. But if he spare, lest any think of him above what he sees
him,2014 or hears any thing of him; let him remove from his own person the knot of the question,and let him answer, not concerning the man, but concerning the thing itself, and let him say, Whoso
hath so great power is such as Abraham. But it may happen that the virtue of continence is less in
his mind, who uses not marriage, which Abraham used: but yet it is greater than in his mind, whoon this account held chastity of marriage, in that he could not a greater. Thus also let the unmarried
woman, whose thoughts are of the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and spirit,2015
when she shall have heard that shameless questioner saying, What, then, are you better than Sara?
answer, I am better, but than those, who are void of the virtue of continence, which I believe notof Sara: she therefore together with this virtue did what was suited to that time, from which I am
free, that in my body also may appear, what she kept in her mind.

28. Therefore, if we compare the things themselves, we may no way doubt that the chastity ofcontinence is better than marriage chastity, whilst yet both are good: but when we compare thepersons, he is better, who hath a greater good than another. Further, he who hath a greater of thesame kind, hath also that which is less; but he, who only hath what is less, assuredly hath not thatwhich is greater. For in sixty, thirty also are contained, not sixty also in thirty. But not to work fromout that which he hath, stands in the allotment of duties, not in the want of virtues: forasmuch asneither is he without the good of mercy, who finds not wretched persons such as he may mercifully
assist.

29. And there is this further, that men are not rightly compared with men in regard of some one
good. For it may come to pass, that one hath not what another hath, but hath another thing, whichmust be esteemed of more value. The good of obedience is better than of continence. For marriage
is in no place condemned by authority of our Scriptures, but disobedience is in no place acquitted.
If therefore there be set before us a virgin about to continue so, but yet disobedient, and a married
woman who could not continue a virgin, but yet obedient, which shall we call better? shall it be
2014
2015

2 Cor. xii. 6.
1 Cor. vii. 34.

537

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff(the one) less praiseworthy, than if she were a virgin, or (the other) worthy of blame, even as she
is a virgin? So, if you compare a drunken virgin with a sober married woman, who can doubt topass the same sentence? Forsooth marriage and virginity are two goods, whereof the one is greater;
but sobriety and drunkenness, even as obedience and stubbornness, are, the one good, and the otherevil. But it is better to have all goods even in a less degree, than great good with great evil: forasmuch
as in the goods of the body also it is better to have the stature of Zacchæus with sound health, thanthat of Goliah with fever.

412

30. The right question plainly is, not whether a virgin every way disobedient is to be compared
to an obedient married woman, but a less obedient to a more obedient: forasmuch as that also of
marriage is chastity, and therefore a good, but less than virginal. Therefore if the one, by so muchless in the good of obedience, as she is greater in the good of chastity, be compared with the other,which of them is to be preferred that person judges, who in the first place comparing chastity itself
and obedience, sees that obedience is in a certain way the mother of all virtues. And therefore, forthis reason, there may be obedience without virginity, because virginity is of counsel, not of precept.
But I call that obedience, whereby precepts are complied with. And, therefore, there may beobedience to precepts without virginity, but not without chastity. For it pertains unto chastity, notto commit fornication, not to commit adultery, to be defiled by no unlawful intercourse: and whoso
observe not these, do contrary to the precepts of God, and on this account are banished from thevirtue of obedience. But there may be virginity without obedience, on this account, because it ispossible for a woman, having received the counsel of virginity, and having guarded virginity, toslight precepts: even as we have known many sacred virgins, talkative, curious, drunken, litigious,
covetous, proud: all which are contrary to precepts, and slay one, even as Eve herself, by the crimeof disobedience. Wherefore not only is the obedient to be preferred to the disobedient, but a moreobedient married woman to a less obedient virgin.

31. From this obedience that Father, who was not without a wife, was prepared to be without
an only son,2016 and that slain by himself. For I shall not without due cause call him an only son,”concerning whom he heard the Lord say, “In Isaac shall there be called for thee a seed.2017 Therefore
how much sooner would he hear it, that he should be even without a wife, if this he were bidden?
Wherefore it is not without reason that we often consider, that some of both sexes, containing fromall sexual intercourse, are negligent in obeying precepts, after having with so great warmth caught
at the not making use of things that are allowed. Whence who doubts that we do not rightly compare
unto the excellence of those holy fathers and mothers begetting sons, the men and women of ourtime, although free from all intercourse, yet in virtue of obedience inferior: even if there had been
wanting to those men in habit of mind also, what is plain in the deed of the latter. Therefore let

2016

Retract. b. ii. c. 22. 2. “I do not quite approve this; as one should rather believe that he believed his son would presently
be restored to him by resurrection, as we read in the Epistle to the Hebrews.”
2017
Gen. xxi. 12.

538

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

these follow the Lamb, boys singing the new song, as it is written in the Apocalypse, “who havenot defiled themselves with women:”2018 for no other reason than that they have continued virgins.
Nor let them on this account think themselves better than the first holy fathers, who used marriage,
so to speak, after the fashion of marriage. Forsooth the use of it is such, as that, if in it there hathtaken place through carnal intercourse aught which exceeds necessity of begetting, although in a
way that deserves pardon, there is pollution. For what doth pardon expiate, if that advance cause
no pollution whatever? From which pollution it were strange if boys following the Lamb were free,unless they continued virgins.

32. Therefore the good of marriage throughout all nations and all men stands in the occasionof begetting, and faith of chastity: but, so far as pertains unto the People of God, also in the sanctityof the Sacrament, by reason of which it is unlawful for one who leaves her husband, even when
she has been put away, to be married to another, so long as her husband lives, no not even for thesake of bearing children: and, whereas this is the alone cause, wherefore marriage takes place, noteven where that very thing, wherefore it takes place, follows not, is the marriage bond loosed, saveby the death of the husband or wife. In like manner as if there take place an ordination of clergy inorder to form a congregation of people, although the congregation of people follow not, yet there
remains in the ordained persons the Sacrament of Ordination; and if, for any fault, any be removed
from his office, he will not be without the Sacrament of the Lord once for all set upon him, albeit
continuing unto condemnation. Therefore that marriage takes place for the sake of begetting children,
the Apostle is a witness thus, “I will,” says he, “that the younger women be married.” And, as
though it were said to him, For what purpose? straightway he added, “to have children, to be mothersof families.” But unto the faith of chastity pertains that saying, “The wife hath not power of her
own body, but the husband: likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but thewife.”2019 But unto the sanctity of the Sacrament that saying, “The wife not to depart from her
husband, but, in case she shall have departed, to remain unmarried, or to be reconciled to herhusband: and let not the husband put away his wife.”2020 All these are goods, on account of whichmarriage is a good; offspring, faith, sacrament. But now, at this time, not to seek offspring after
the flesh, and by this means to maintain a certain perpetual freedom from every such work, and to
be made subject after a spiritual manner unto one Husband Christ, is assuredly better and holier;provided, that is, men so use that freedom, as it is written, so as to have their thoughts of the thingsof the Lord, how to please the Lord; that is, that Continence2021 at all times do take thought, thatobedience fall not short in any matter: and this virtue, as the root-virtue, and (as it is wont to becalled) the womb, and clearly universal, the holy fathers of old exercised in deed; but that Continence
they possessed in habit of mind. Who assuredly, through that obedience, whereby they were justand holy, and ever prepared unto every good work, even if they were bidden to abstain from all

2018
2019
2020
2021

Rev. xiv. 4.
1 Cor. vii. 4.
1 Cor. vii. 10, 11.
1 Cor. vii. 32.

539

NPNF (V1-03)

413

Philip Schaff

sexual intercourse, would perform it. For how much more easily could they, at the bidding or
exhortation of God, not use sexual intercourse, who, as an act of obedience, could slay the child,for the begetting of which alone they used the ministry of sexual intercourse?

33. And, the case being thus, enough and more than enough answer has been made to theheretics, whether they be Manichees, or whosoever other that bring false charges against the Fathersof the Old Testament, on the subject of their having several wives, thinking this a proof whereby
to convict them of incontinence: provided, that is, that they perceive, that that is no sin, which iscommitted neither against nature, in that they used those women not for wantonness, but for the
begetting of children: nor against custom, forasmuch as such things were usually done at thosetimes: nor against command, forasmuch as they were forbidden by no law. But such as used women
unlawfully, either the divine sentence in those Scriptures convicts them, or the reading sets themforth for us to condemn and shun, not to approve or imitate.

34. But those of ours who have wives we advise, with all our power, that they dare not to judgeof those holy fathers after their own weakness, comparing, as the Apostle says, themselves withthemselves;2022 and therefore, not understanding how great strength the soul hath, doing service
unto righteousness against lusts, that it acquiesce not in carnal motions of this sort, or suffer themto glide on or advance unto sexual intercourse beyond the necessity of begetting children, so far as
the order of nature, so far as the use of custom, so far as the decrees of laws prescribe. Forsooth itis on this account that men have this suspicion concerning those fathers, in that they themselves
have either chosen marriage through incontinence, or use their wives with intemperance. But
however let such as are continent, either men, who, on the death of their wives, or, women, who,on the death of their husbands, or both, who, with mutual consent, have vowed continence unto
God, know that to them indeed there is due a greater recompense than marriage chastity demands;
but, (as regards) the marriages of the holy Fathers, who were joined after the manner of prophecy,
who neither in sexual intercourse sought aught save children, nor in children themselves aught save
what should set forward Christ coming hereafter in the flesh, not only let them not despise them incomparison of their own purpose, but let them without any doubting prefer them even to their own
purpose.

35. Boys also and virgins dedicating unto God actual chastity we do before all things admonish,that they be aware that they must guard their life meanwhile upon earth with so great humility, by
how much the more what they have vowed is heavenly. Forsooth it is written, “How great soever
thou art, by so much humble thyself in all things.”2023 Therefore it is our part to say something of
their greatness, it is their part to have thought of great humility. Therefore, except certain, those

2022
2023

2 Cor. x. 12.
Ecclus. iii. 18.

540

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

holy fathers and mothers who were married, than whom these although they be not married are notbetter, for this reason, that, if they were married, they would not be equal, let them not doubt thatthey surpass all the rest of this time, either married, or after trial made of marriage, exercisingcontinence; not so far as Anna surpasses Susanna; but so far as Mary surpasses both. I am speakingof what pertains unto the holy chastity itself of the flesh; for who knows not, what other deserts
Mary hath? Therefore let them add to this so high purpose conduct suitable, that they may have anassured security of the surpassing reward; knowing of a truth, that, unto themselves and unto all
the faithful, beloved and chosen members of Christ, coming many from the East, and from theWest, although shining with light of glory that differeth one from another, according to their deserts,
there is this great gift bestowed in common, to sit down in the kingdom of God with Abraham, andIsaac, and Jacob,2024 who not for the sake of this world, but for the sake of Christ, were husbands,
for the sake of Christ were fathers.

417

Of Holy Virginity.
[De Virginitate.]
Translated by Rev. C. I. Cornish, M.A., of Exeter College, Oxford
Retr. ii. 23. “After I had written ‘on the Good of Marriage,’ it was expected that I should
write on Holy Virginity; and I did not delay to do so: and that it is God’s gift, and how great agift, and with what humility to be guarded, so far as I was able I set forth in one volume. This
book begins,” &c.

1. We lately put forth a book “of the Good of Marriage,” in which also we admonished andadmonish the virgins of Christ, not, on account of that greater gift which they have received, todespise, in comparison of themselves, the fathers and mothers of the People of God; and not tothink those men,2025 (whom the Apostle sets forth as the olive, that the engrafted wild olive be notproud,) who did service to Christ about to come hereafter, even by the begetting of sons, on thisaccount of less desert, because by divine right continence is preferred to wedded life, and pious
virginity to marriage. Forsooth in them were being prepared and brought forth future things, which
now we see fulfilled in a marvellous and effectual manner, whose married life also was prophetic:
whence, not after the wonted custom of human wishes and joys, but by the very deep counsel ofGod, in certain of them fruitfulness obtained to be honored, in certain also barrenness to be made

2024
2025

Matt. viii. 11.
Rom. xi. 17, 18.

541

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

fruitful. But at this time, towards them unto whom it is said, “if they contain not, let them bemarried,”2026 we must use not consolation, but exhortation. But them, unto whom it is said, “Whoso
can receive, let him receive,”2027 we must exhort, that they be not alarmed; and alarm that they be
not lifted up. Wherefore virginity is not only to be set forth, that it may be loved, but also to beadmonished, that it be not puffed up.

2. This we have undertaken in our present discourse: may Christ help us, the Son of a virgin,
and the Spouse of virgins, born after the flesh of a virgin womb, and wedded after the Spirit invirgin marriage. Whereas, therefore, the whole Church itself is a virgin espoused unto one Husband
Christ,2028 as the Apostle saith, of how great honor are its members worthy, who guard this evenin the flesh itself, which the whole Church guards in the faith? which imitates the mother of her
husband, and her Lord. For the Church also is both a mother and a virgin. For whose virgin purity
consult we for, if she is not a virgin? or whose children address we, if she is not a mother? Marybare the Head of This Body after the flesh, the Church bears the members of that Body after the
Spirit. In both virginity hinders not fruitfulness: in both fruitfulness takes not away virginity.
Wherefore, whereas the whole Church is holy both in body and spirit, and yet the whole is not
virgin in body but in spirit; how much more holy is it in these members, wherein it is virgin bothin body and spirit?
418

3. It is written in the Gospel, of the mother and brethren of Christ, that is, His kindred after theflesh, that, when word had been brought to Him, and they were standing without, because they
could not come to Him by reason of the crowd, He made answer, “Who is My mother? or who are
My brethren? and stretching forth His Hand over His disciples, He saith, These are My brethren:
and whosoever shall have done the will of My Father, that man is to Me brother, and mother, andsister.”2029 What else teaching us, than to prefer to kindred after the flesh, our descent after the
Spirit: and that men are not blessed for this reason, that they are united by nearness of flesh unto
just and holy men, but that, by obeying and following, they cleave unto their doctrine and conduct.
Therefore Mary is more blessed in receiving the faith of Christ, than in conceiving the flesh of
Christ. For to a certain one who said, “Blessed is the womb, which bare Thee,”2030 He Himself
made answer, “Yea, rather, blessed are they who hear the Word of God, and keep it.” Lastly, to
His brethren, that is, His kindred after the flesh, who believed not in Him, what profit was there inthat being of kin? Thus also her nearness as a Mother would have been of no profit to Mary, had
she not borne Christ in her heart after a more blessed manner than in her flesh.

2026
2027
2028
2029
2030

1 Cor. vii. 9.
Matt. xix. 12.
2 Cor. xi. 2.
Matt. xii. 46–50.
Luke xi. 27, 28.

542

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

4. Her virginity also itself was on this account more pleasing and accepted, in that it was notthat Christ being conceived in her, rescued it beforehand from a husband who would violate it,
Himself to preserve it; but, before He was conceived, chose it, already dedicated to God, as thatfrom which to be born. This is shown by the words which Mary spake in answer to the Angelannouncing to her her conception; “How,” saith she, “shall this be, seeing I know not a man?”2031
Which assuredly she would not say, unless she had before vowed herself unto God as a virgin. But,
because the habits of the Israelites as yet refused this, she was espoused to a just man, who would
not take from her by violence, but rather guard against violent persons, what she had already vowed.
Although, even if she had said this only, “How shall this take place?” and had not added, “seeing
I know not a man,” certainly she would not have asked, how, being a female, she should give birth
to her promised Son, if she had married with purpose of sexual intercourse. She might have beenbidden also to continue a virgin, that in her by fitting miracle the Son of God should receive theform of a servant, but, being to be a pattern to holy virgins, lest it should be thought that she alone
needed to be a virgin, who had obtained to conceive a child even without sexual intercourse, she
dedicated her virginity to God, when as yet she knew not what she should conceive, in order thatthe imitation of a heavenly life in an earthly and mortal body should take place of vow, not ofcommand; through love of choosing, not through necessity of doing service. Thus Christ by beingborn of a virgin, who, before she knew Who was to be born of her, had determined to continue avirgin, chose rather to approve, than to command, holy virginity. And thus, even in the female
herself, in whom He took the form of a servant, He willed that virginity should be free.

5. There is, therefore, no reason why the virgins of God be sad, because themselves also cannot,
keeping their virginity, be mothers of the flesh. For Him alone could virginity give birth to withfitting propriety, Who in His Birth could have no peer. However, That Birth of the Holy Virgin is
the ornament of all holy virgins; and themselves together with Mary are mothers of Christ, if they
do the will of His Father. For Mary also is on this account the Mother of Christ in a way more fullof praise and blessing, according to His sentence mentioned above. “Whosoever doeth the will of
my Father Who is in heaven, that one is to Me brother, and sister, and mother.” All these degrees
of nearness of kin to Himself, He shows forth in a spiritual manner, in the People whom He hathredeemed: as brothers and sisters He hath holy men and holy women, forasmuch as they all areco-heirs in the heavenly inheritance. His mother is the whole Church, because she herself assuredly
gives birth to His members, that is, His faithful ones. Also His mother is every pious soul, doing
the will of His Father with most fruitful charity, in them of whom it travaileth, until Himself2032 be
formed in them. Mary, therefore, doing the will of God, after the flesh, is only the mother of Christ,
but after the Spirit she is both His sister and mother.

6. And on this account, that one female, not only in the Spirit, but also in the flesh, is both amother and a virgin. And a mother indeed in the Spirit, not of our Head, Which is the Saviour
2031
2032

Luke i. 34.
Gal. iv. 19.

543

NPNF (V1-03)

419

Philip Schaff

Himself, of Whom rather she was born after the Spirit: forasmuch as all, who have believed in Him,among whom is herself also, are rightly called “children of the Bridegroom:”2033 but clearly themother of His members, which are we: in that she wrought together by charity, that faithful ones
should be born in the Church, who are members of That Head: but in the flesh, the mother of the
Head Himself. For it behoved that our Head, on account of a notable miracle, should be born after
the flesh of a virgin, that He might thereby signify that His members would be born after the Spirit,of the Church a virgin: therefore Mary alone both in Spirit and in flesh is a mother and a virgin:
both the mother of Christ, and a virgin of Christ; but the Church, in the Saints who shall possess
the kingdom of God, in the Spirit indeed is altogether the mother of Christ, altogether a virgin ofChrist: but in the flesh not altogether, but in certain a virgin of Christ, in certain a mother, but notof Christ. Forsooth both faithful women who are married, and virgins dedicated to God, by holymanners, and charity out of a pure heart,2034 and good conscience, and faith unfeigned, because
they do the will of the Father, are after a spiritual sense mothers of Christ. But they who in married
life give birth to (children) after the flesh, give birth not to Christ, but to Adam, and therefore run,that their offspring having been dyed2035 in His Sacraments, may become members of Christ,
forasmuch as they know what they have given birth to.

7. I have said this, lest haply married fruitfulness dare to vie with virgin chastity, and to set
forth Mary herself, and to say unto the virgins of God, She had in her flesh two things worthy of
honor, virginity and fruitfulness; inasmuch as she both continued a virgin, and bore: this happiness,since we could not both have the whole, we have divided, that ye be virgins, we be mothers: forwhat is wanting to you in children, let your virginity, that hath been preserved, be a consolation:
for us, let the gain of children make up for our lost virginity. This speech of faithful women married,
unto holy virgins, would any how be to be endured, if they gave birth to Christians in the flesh;that in this alone, save virginity, the fruitfulness of Mary in the flesh should be more excellent, thatshe gave birth to the Head Himself of these members, but they to the members of That Head: butnow, although by this speech there vie such as on this one account wed and have intercourse withhusbands, that they may have sons, and have no other thought of their sons, than to gain them for
Christ, and do this so soon as they can: yet are not Christians born of their flesh, but made so
afterwards: the Church giving them birth, through this, that in a spiritual manner she is the motherof the members of Christ, of Whom also after a spiritual manner she is the virgin. And unto thisholy birth mothers also who have not borne in the flesh Christians, are workers together, that they
may become what they know that they could not give birth to in the flesh: yet are they workers
together through this, wherein themselves also are virgins and mothers2036 of Christ, that is to say,in “faith which worketh through love.”2037

2033

Matt. ix. 15. [See R.V.]
1 Tim. i. 5.
2035
Imbuti.
2036
It has been proposed to omit “que,” making the sense, “wherein the virgins themselves also are mothers of Christ,” butthe sense is good as it stands.
2037
Gal. v. 6.
2034

544

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

8. Therefore no fruitfulness of the flesh can be compared to holy virginity even of the flesh.
For neither is itself also honored because it is virginity, but because it hath been dedicated to God,
and, although it be kept in the flesh, yet is it kept by religion and devotion of the Spirit. And by
this means even virginity of body is spiritual, which continence of piety vows and keeps. For, evenas no one makes an immodest use of the body, unless the sin have been before conceived in thespirit, so no one keeps modesty in the body, unless chastity have been before implanted in the spirit.
But, further, if modesty of married life, although it be guarded in the flesh, is yet attributed to thesoul, not to the flesh, under the rule and guidance of which, the flesh itself hath no intercourse withany beside its own proper estate of marriage; how much more, and with how much greater honor,
are we to reckon among the goods of the soul that continence, whereby the virgin purity of the flesh
is vowed, consecrated, and kept, for the Creator Himself of the soul and flesh.

420

9. Wherefore neither are we to believe that their fruitfulness of the flesh, who at this time seek
in marriage nothing else save children, to make over unto Christ, can be set against the loss ofvirginity. Forsooth, in former times, unto Christ about to come after the flesh, the race itself of theflesh was needful, in a certain large and prophetic nation: but now, when from out every race ofmen, and from out all nations, members of Christ may be gathered unto the People of God, andCity of the kingdom of heaven, whoso can receive sacred virginity, let him receive it; and let her
only, who contains not, be married.2038 For what, if any rich woman were to expend much moneyon this good work, and to buy, from out different nations, slaves to make Christians, will she notprovide for the giving birth to members of Christ in a manner more rich, and more numerous, thanby any, how great soever, fruitfulness of the womb? And yet she will not therefore dare to compare
her money to the offering2039 of holy virginity. But if for the sake of making such as shall be born
Christians, fruitfulness of the flesh shall with just reason be set against the loss of chastity, thismatter will be more fruitful, if virginity be lost at a great price of money, whereby many morechildren may be purchased to be made Christians, than could be born from the womb, however
fruitful, of a single person. But, if it be extreme folly to say this, let the faithful women that are
married possess their own good, of which we have treated, so far as seemed fit, in another volume;and let them more highly honor, even as they are most rightly used to do, in the sacred virgins,
their better good, of which we are treating in our present discourse.

10. For not even herein ought such as are married to compare themselves with the deserts ofthe continent, in that of them virgins are born: for this is not a good of marriage, but of nature:
which was so ordered of God, as that of every sexual intercourse whatever of the two sexes ofhuman kind, whether in due order and honest, or base and unlawful, there is born no female savea virgin, yet is none born a sacred virgin: so it is brought to pass that a virgin is born even of
fornication, but a sacred virgin not even of marriage.

2038
2039

Matt. xix. 12; 1 Cor. vii. 9.
Muneri.

545

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

11. Nor do we ourselves set forth this in virgins, that they are virgins; but that they are virgins
dedicated unto God by pious continence. For it is not at a venture that I may say, a married woman
seems to me happier than a virgin about to be married: for the one hath what the other as yet desires,
especially if she be not yet even the betrothed of any one. The one studies to please one, unto whom
she hath been given; the other many, in doubt unto whom she is to be given: by this one thing she
guards modesty of thought from the crowd, that she is seeking, not an adulterer, but a husband, inthe crowd. Therefore that virgin is with good reason set before a married woman, who neither sets
herself forth for the multitude to love, whereas she seeks from out the multitude the love of one;nor, having now found him, orders herself2040 for one, taking thought of the things of the world,“how to please her husband;”2041 but hath so loved “Him of fair beauty above the sons of men,”2042
as that, because she could not, even as Mary, conceive Him in her flesh, she hath kept her flesh
also virgin for Him conceived in her heart. This kind of virgins no fruitfulness of the body hathgiven birth to: this is no progeny of flesh and blood. If of these the mother be sought for, it is the
Church. None bears sacred virgins save a sacred virgin, she who hath been espoused to be presented
chaste unto one Husband, Christ.2043 Of her, not altogether in body, but altogether in spirit virgin,
are born holy virgins both in body and in spirit.

12. Let marriages possess their own good, not that they beget sons, but that honestly, that
lawfully, that modestly, that in a spirit of fellowship they beget them, and educate them, after they
have been begotten, with cooperation, with wholesome teaching, and earnest purpose: in that theykeep the faith of the couch one with another; in that they violate not the sacrament of wedlock. All
these, however, are offices of human duty: but virginal chastity and freedom through pious continencefrom all sexual intercourse is the portion of Angels, and a practice,2044 in corruptible flesh, of
perpetual incorruption. To this let all fruitfulness of the flesh yield, all chastity of married life; theone is not in (man’s) power, the other is not in eternity; free choice hath not fruitfulness of the flesh,heaven hath not chastity of married life. Assuredly they will have something great beyond othersin that common immortality, who have something already not of the flesh in the flesh.

13. Whence they are marvellously void of wisdom, who think that the good of this continence
is not necessary for the sake of the kingdom of heaven, but for the sake of the present world: inthat, forsooth, married persons are strained different ways by earthly cares more and more straitened,from which trouble virgins and continent persons are free: as though on this account only it were
better not to be married, that the straits of this present time may be escaped, not that it is of any
profit unto a future life. And, that they may not seem to have put forth this vain opinion from out
the vanity of their own heart, they take the Apostle to witness, where he saith, “But concerning
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044

Componit.
1 Cor. vii. 34.
Ps. xlv. 2.
2 Cor. xi. 2.
Meditatio.

546

NPNF (V1-03)

421

Philip Schaff

virgins I have not command of the Lord, but I give counsel, as having obtained mercy from God
to be faithful. Therefore I think that this is good on account of the present necessity, because it isgood for a man so to be.”2045 Lo, say they, where the Apostle shows “that this is good on accountof the present necessity,” not on account of the future eternity. As though the Apostle would haveregard for the present necessity, otherwise than as providing and consulting for the future; whereas
all his dealing2046 calls not save unto life eternal.

14. It is, therefore, the present necessity that we are to avoid, but yet such as is a hindrance tosomewhat of the good things to come; by which necessity the married life is forced to have thoughtof the things of the world, how to please, the husband the wife or the wife the husband. Not thatthese separate from the kingdom of God, as there are sins, which are restrained by command, notby counsel, on this account, because it is matter of condemnation not to obey the Lord when He
commands: but that, which, within the kingdom of God itself, might be more largely possessed, if
there were larger thoughts how they were to please God, will assuredly be less, when as this very
thing is less thought of by necessity of marriage. Therefore he says, “Concerning virgins I havenot command of the Lord.”2047 For whosoever obeys not a command, is guilty and liable forpunishment. Wherefore, because it is not sin to marry a wife or to be married, (but if it were a sin,
it would be forbidden by a “Command,”) on this account there is no “Command” of the Lord
concerning virgins. But since, after we have shunned or had forgiveness of sins, we must approach
eternal life, wherein is a certain or more excellent glory, to be assigned not unto all who shall live
for ever, but unto certain there; in order to obtain which it is not enough to have been set free fromsins, unless there be vowed unto Him, Who setteth us free, something, which it is no matter of fault
not to have vowed, but matter of praise to have vowed and performed; he saith, “I give counsel, as
having obtained mercy from God that I should be faithful.” For neither ought I to grudge faithfulcounsel, who not by my own merits, but by the mercy of God, am faithful. “I think therefore that
this is good, by reason of the present necessity.”2048 This, saith he, on which I have not commandof the Lord, but give counsel, that is concerning virgins, I think to be good by reason of the present
necessity. For I know what the necessity of the present time, unto which marriages serve, compels,that the things of God be less thought of than is enough for the obtaining that glory, which shallnot be of all, although they abide in eternal life and salvation: “For star differeth from star inbrightness; so also the Resurrection of the dead.2049 It is,” therefore, “good for a man so to be.”15. After that the same Apostle adds, and says, “Thou art bound to a wife, seek not loosening:
thou art loosed from a wife, seek not a wife.”2050 Of these two, that, which be set first, pertains unto
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050

1 Cor. vii. 25, 26.
Dispensatio.
1 Cor. vii. 25.
1 Cor. vii. 26.
1 Cor. xv. 41, 42.
1 Cor. vii. 27.

547

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

command, against which it is not lawful to do. For it is not lawful to put away a wife, save becauseof fornication,2051 as the Lord Himself saith in the Gospel. But that, which he added, “Thou art
loosed from a wife, seek not a wife,” is a sentence of counsel, not of command; therefore it is lawful
to do, but it is better not to do. Lastly, he added straightway, “Both if thou shalt have taken a wife,
thou hast not sinned; and, if a virgin shall have been married, she sinneth not.”2052 But, after thatformer saying of his, “Thou art bound to a wife, seek not loosening,” he added not, did he, “Andif thou shalt have loosed, thou hast not sinned?” For he had already said above, “But to these, who
are in marriage, I command, not I, but the Lord, that the wife depart not from her husband: but, if
she shall have departed, that she remain unmarried, or be reconciled unto her own husband;” for it
may come to pass that she depart, not through any fault of her own, but of her husband. Then hesaith, “And let not the man put away his wife,” which, nevertheless, he set down of command of
the Lord: nor did he then add, And, if he shall have put her away, he sinneth not. For this is acommand, not to obey which is sin: not a counsel, which if you shall be unwilling to use, you willobtain less good, not do any ill. On this account, after he had said, “Thou art loosed from a wife,
seek not a wife;” because he was not giving command, in order that there be not evil done, but was
giving counsel, in order that there be done what is better: straightway he added, “Both, if thou shallhave taken a wife, thou hast not sinned; and, if a virgin shall have been married, she sinneth not.”422

16. Yet he added, “But such shall have tribulation of the flesh, but I spare you:”2053 in thismanner exhorting unto virginity, and continual continence, so as some little to alarm also frommarriage, with all modesty, not as from a matter evil and unlawful, but as from one burdensome
and troublesome. For it is one thing to incur dishonor of the flesh, and another to have tribulationof the flesh: the one is matter of crime to do, the other of labor to suffer, which for the most partmen refuse not even for the most honorable duties. But for the having of marriage, now at this time,
wherein there is no service done unto Christ about to come through descent of flesh by the begettingof the family itself, to take upon one to bear that tribulation of the flesh, which the Apostle foretells
to such as shall be married, would be extremely foolish, did not incontinent persons fear, lest,through the temptation of Satan, they should fall into damnable sins. But whereas he says that hespares them, who he saith will have tribulation of the flesh, there suggests itself to me in the mean
while no sounder interpretation, than that he was unwilling to open, and unfold in words, thisself-same tribulation of the flesh which he fore-announced to those who choose marriage, in
suspicions of jealousy of married life, in the begetting and nurture of children, in fears and sorrowsof childlessness. For how very few, after they have bound themselves with the bonds of marriage,
are not drawn and driven to and fro by these feelings? And this we ought not to exaggerate, lest
we spare not the very persons, who the Apostle thought were to be spared.

2051
2052
2053

Matt. xix. 9.
1 Cor. vii. 10, 11.
1 Cor. vii. 28.

548

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

17. Only by this, which I have briefly set down, the reader ought to be set on his guard against
those, who, in this that is written, “but such shall have tribulation of the flesh but I spare you,”falsely charge marriage, as indirectly condemned by this sentence; as though he were unwilling toutter the condemnation itself, when he saith, “But I spare you;” so that, forsooth, when he spares
them, he spared not his own soul, as saying falsely, “And, if thou shalt have taken a wife, thou hastnot sinned; and if a virgin shall have been married, she sinneth not.” And this, whoso believe or
would have believed concerning holy Scripture, they, as it were prepare for themselves a way forliberty of lying, or for defense of their own perverse opinion, in whatever case they hold othersentiments than what sound doctrine demands. For if there shall be alleged any plain statementfrom the divine books, whereby to refute their errors, this they have at hand as a shield, whereby
defending themselves as it were against the truth, they lay themselves bare to be wounded by thedevil: to say that the author of the book did not speak the truth in this instance, at one time in orderto spare the weak, at another in order to alarm despisers: just as a case shall come to hand, wherein
to defend their own perverse opinion: and thus, whilst they had rather defend than amend their own
opinions, they essay to break the authority of holy Scripture, whereby alone all proud and hardnecks are broken.

18. Wherefore I admonish both men and women who follow after perpetual continence andholy virginity, that they so set their own good before marriage, as that they judge not marriage anevil: and that they understand that it was in no way of deceit, but of plain truth that it was said by
the Apostle, “Whoso gives in marriage does well; and whoso gives not in marriage, does better;and, if thou shalt have taken a wife, thou hast not sinned; and, if a virgin shall have been married,
she sinneth not;”2054 and a little after, “But she wilt be more blessed, if she shall have continued
so, according to my judgment.” And, that the judgment should not be thought human, he adds, “ButI think I also have the Spirit of God.” This is the doctrine of the Lord, this of the Apostles, this true,
this sound, so to choose greater gifts, as that the lesser be not condemned. The truth of God, in the
Scripture of God, is better than virginity of man in the mind or flesh of any. Let what is chaste beso loved, as that what is true be not denied. For what evil thought may they not have even concerning
their own flesh, who believe that the tongue of the Apostle, in that very place, wherein he wascommending virginity of body, was not virgin from corruption of lying. In the first place, therefore,
and chiefly, let such as choose the good of virginity, hold most firmly that the holy Scriptures havein nothing spoken lies; and, thus, that that also is true which is said, “And if thou shall have taken
a wife, thou hast not sinned; and, if a virgin shall have been married, she sinneth not.” And let themnot think that the so great good of virgin chastity is made less, if marriage shall not be an evil. Yea
rather, let her hence feel confident, rather, that there is prepared for her a palm of greater glory,
who feared not to be condemned, in case she were married, but desired to receive a more honorable
crown, in that she was not married. Whoso therefore shall be willing to abide without marriage, letthem not flee from marriage as a pitfall of sin; but let them surmount it as a hill of the lesser good,in order that they may rest in the mountain of the greater, continence. It is on this condition, forsooth,that this hill is dwelt on; that one leave it not when he will. For, “a woman is bound, so long as her
2054

1 Cor. vii. 38, 28, 40.

549

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

husband liveth.”2055 However unto widowed continence one ascends from it as from a step: but forthe sake of virgin continence, one must either turn aside from it by not consenting to suitors, oroverleap it by anticipating suitors.

423

19. But lest any should think that of two works, the good and the better, the rewards will beequal, on this account it was necessary to treat against those, who have so interpreted that sayingof the Apostle, “But I think that this is good by reason of the present necessity,”2056 as to say thatvirginity is of use not in order to the kingdom of heaven, but in order to this present time: as though
in that eternal life, they, who had chosen this better part, would have nothing more than the rest ofmen. And in this discussion when we came to that saying of the same Apostle, “But such shall havetribulation of the flesh, but I spare you;”2057 we fell in with other disputants, who so far from making
marriage equal to perpetual virginity, altogether condemned it. For whereas both are errors, either
to equal marriage to holy virginity, or to condemn it: by fleeing from one another to excess, these
two errors come into open collision, in that they have been unwilling to hold the mean of truth:
whereby, both by sure reason and authority of holy Scriptures, we both discover that marriage is
not a sin, and yet equal it not to the good either of virginal or even of widowed chastity. Some
forsooth by aiming at virginity, have thought marriage hateful even as adultery: but others, bydefending marriage, would have the excellence of perpetual continence to deserve nothing morethan married chastity; as though either the good of Susanna be the lowering of Mary: or the greater
good of Mary ought to be the condemnation of Susanna.

20. Far be it, therefore, that the Apostle so said, unto such as are married or are about to marry,“But I spare you,” as if he were unwilling to say what punishment is due to the married in anotherlife. Far be it that she, whom Daniel set free from temporal judgment, be cast by Paul into hell! Far
be it that her husband’s bed be unto her punishment before the judgment seat of Christ, keeping
faith to which she chose, under false charge of adultery, to meet either danger, or death! To what
effect that speech, “It is better for me to fall into your hands, than to sin in the sight of God:”2058 if
God had been about, not to set her free because she kept married chastity, but to condemn her
because she had married? And now so often as married chastity is by truth of holy Scripture justified
against such as bring calumnies and charges against marriage, so often is Susanna by the Holy
Spirit defended against false witnesses, so often is she set free from a false charge, and with muchgreater ado. For then against one married woman, now against all; then of hidden and untrue
adultery, now of true and open marriage, an accusation is laid. Then one woman, upon what theunjust elders said, now all husbands and wives, upon what the Apostle would not say, are accused.
It was, forsooth, your condemnation, say they, that he was silent on, when he said, “But I spareyou.” Who (saith) this? Surely he, who had said above; “And, if thou shalt have taken a wife, thou
2055
2056
2057
2058

1 Cor. vii. 39.
1 Cor. vii. 26.
1 Cor. vii. 28.
Hist. of Sus. 23.

550

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

hast not sinned; and, if a virgin shall have been married, she sinneth not.”2059 Why, therefore,
wherein he hath been silent through modesty, suspect ye a charge against marriage; and wherein
he hath spoken openly, recognize ye not a defense of marriage? What, doth he condemn by hissilence them whom he acquitted by his words? Is it not now a milder charge, to charge Susanna,
not with marriage, but with adultery itself, than to charge the doctrine of the Apostle with falsehood?
What in so great peril could we do, were it not as sure and plain that chaste marriage ought not tobe condemned, as it is sure and plain that holy Scripture cannot lie?

424

21. Here some one will say, What has this to do with holy virginity, or perpetual continence,the setting forth of which was undertaken in this discourse? To whom I make answer in the firstplace, what I mentioned above, that the glory of that greater good is greater from the fact that, inorder to obtain it, the good of married life is surmounted, not the sin of marriage shunned. Otherwise
it would be enough for perpetual continence, not to be specially praised, but only not to be blamed:
if it were maintained on this account, because it was a crime to wed. In the next place, because it
is not by human judgment, but by authority of Divine Scripture, that men must be exhorted unto
so excellent a gift, we must plead not in a common-place manner, or merely by the way, that divine
Scripture itself seem not to any one in any matter to have lied. For they discourage rather thanexhort holy virgins, who compel them to continue so by passing sentence on marriage. For whence
can they feel sure that that is true, which is written, “And he, who gives her not in marriage, does
better:”2060 if they think that false, which yet is written close above, “Both he, who gives his virgin,
does well?” But, if they shall without all doubt have believed Scripture speaking of the good of
marriage, confirmed by the same most true authority of the divine oracle, they will hasten beyond
unto their own better part with glowing and confident eagerness. Wherefore we have already spoken
enough for the business which we have taken in hand, and, so far as we could, have shown, thatneither that saying of the Apostle, “But I think that this is good by reason of the present necessity,”2061
is so to be understood, as though in this life holy virgins are better than faithful women married,
but are equal in the kingdom of heaven, and in a future life: nor that other, where he saith of suchas wed, “But such shall have tribulation of the flesh, but I spare you;”2062 is to be so understood,
as though he chose rather to be silent on, than to speak of, the sin and condemnation of marriage.
Forsooth two errors, contrary the one to the other, have, through not understanding them, taken
hold of each one of these two sentences. For that concerning the present necessity they interpret intheir own favor, who contend to equal such as wed to such as wed not: but this, where it is said,“But I spare you,” they who presume to condemn such as wed. But we, according to the faith andsound doctrine of holy Scriptures, both say that marriage is no sin, and yet set its good not only
below virginal, but also below widowed continence; and say that the present necessity of marriedpersons is an hindrance to their desert, not indeed unto life eternal, but unto an excellent glory andhonor, which is reserved for perpetual continence: and that at this time marriage is not expedient

2059
2060
2061
2062

1 Cor. vii. 28.
1 Cor. vii. 38.
1 Cor. vii. 26.
1 Cor. vii. 28.

551

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

save for such as contain not; and that on the tribulation of the flesh, which cometh from the affectionof the flesh, without which marriages of incontinent persons cannot be, the Apostle neither wished
to be silent, as forewarning what was true, nor to unfold more fully, as sparing man’s weakness.

22. And now by plainest witnesses of divine Scriptures, such as according to the small measureof our memory we shall be able to remember, let it more clearly appear, that, not on account of thepresent life of this world, but on account of that future life which is promised in the kingdom ofheaven, we are to choose perpetual continence. But who but must observe this in that which thesame Apostle says a little after, “Whoso is without a wife has thought of the things of the Lord,
how to please the Lord: but whoso is joined in marriage has thought of the things of the world, how
to please his wife. And a woman unmarried and a virgin is divided;2063 she that is unmarried is
careful about the things of the Lord, to be holy both in body and spirit: but she that is married is
careful about the things of the world, how to please her husband.”2064 Certainly he saith not, haththought of the things of a state without care in this world, to pass her time without weightier troubles;
nor doth he say that a woman unmarried and a virgin is divided, that is, distinguished, and separated
from her who is married, for this end, that the unmarried woman be without care in this life, inorder to avoid temporal troubles, which the married woman is not free from: but, “She hath thought,”
saith he, “of the things of the Lord, how to please the Lord; and is careful about the things of theLord, to be holy both in body and spirit.” Unless to such a degree, perchance, each be foolishlycontentious, as to essay to assert, that it is not on account of the kingdom of heaven, but on accountof this present world, that we wish to “please the Lord,” or that it is on account of this present life,
not on account of life eternal, that they are “holy both in body and spirit.” To believe this, whatelse is it, than to be more miserable than all men? For so the Apostle saith, “If in this life only weare hoping in Christ, we are more miserable than all men.”2065 What? is he who breaks his breadto the hungry, if he do it only on account of this life, a fool; and shall he be prudent, who chastens
his own body even unto continence, whereby he hath no intercourse even in marriage, if it shallprofit him nought in the kingdom of heaven?

23. Lastly, let us hear the Lord Himself delivering most plain judgment on this matter. For,
upon His speaking after a divine and fearful manner concerning husband and wife not separating,save on account of fornication, His disciples said to Him, “If the case be such with a wife, it is notgood to marry.”2066 To whom He saith, “Not all receive this saying. For there are eunuchs who
were so born: but there are others who were made by men: and there are eunuchs, who madethemselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven: whoso can receive, let him receive.”
What could be said more true, what more clear? Christ saith, the Truth saith, the Power and Wisdomof God saith, that they, who of pious purpose have contained from marrying a wife, make themselves
2063
2064
2065
2066

cf. de Bon. Conj. 10.
1 Cor. vii. 32, 33, 34.
1 Cor. xv. 19.
Matt. xix. 10, 11, 12.

552

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven: and against this, human vanity with impious rashness
contends, that they, who do so, shun only the present necessity of the troubles of married life, but
in the kingdom of heaven have no more than others.

425

24. But concerning what eunuchs speaketh God by the prophet Isaiah, unto whom He saith that
He will give in His house and in His wall a place by name, much better than of sons anddaughters,2067 save concerning these, who make themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdomof heaven? For for these, whose bodily organ is without strength, so that they cannot beget, (suchas are the eunuchs of rich men and of kings,) it is surely enough, when they become Christians,
and keep the commands of God, yet have this purpose, that, if they could, they would have wives,to be made equal to the rest of the faithful in the house of God, who are married, who bring up in
the fear of God a family which they have lawfully and chastely gotten, teaching their sons to set
their hope on God; but not to receive a better place than of sons and daughters. For it is not of virtueof the soul, but of necessity of the flesh, that they marry not wives. Let who will contend that theProphet foretold this of those eunuchs who have suffered mutilation of body; that even also helps
the cause which we have undertaken. For God hath not preferred these eunuchs to such as have noplace in His house, but assuredly to those who keep the desert of married life in begetting sons.
For, when He saith, “I will give unto them a place much better;” He shows that one is also given
unto the married, but much inferior. Therefore, to allow that in the house of God there will be theeunuchs after the flesh spoken of above, who were not in the People of Israel: because we see thatthese also themselves, whereas they become not Jews, yet become Christians: and that the Prophet
spake not of them, who through purpose of continence seeking not marriage, make themselves
eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven: is any one so madly opposed to the truth as tobelieve that eunuchs made so in the flesh have a better place than married persons in the house ofGod, and to contend that persons being of pious purpose continent, chastening the body even unto
contempt of marriage, making themselves eunuchs, not in the body, but in the very root of
concupiscence, practising an heavenly and angelic life in an earthly mortal state, are on a level withthe deserts of the married; and, being a Christian, to gainsay Christ when He praises those whohave made themselves eunuchs, not for the sake of this world, but for the sake of the kingdom ofheaven, affirming that this is of use for the present life, not for a future? What else remains forthese, save to assert that the kingdom of heaven itself pertains unto this temporal life, wherein we
now are? For why should not blind presumption advance even to this madness? And what more
full of phrensy than this assertion? For, although at times the Church, even that which is at thistime, is called the kingdom of heaven; certainly it is so called for this end, because it is being
gathered together for a future and eternal life. Although, therefore, it have the promise of the present,
and of a future life, yet in all its good works it looks not to “the things that are seen, but to what
are not seen. For what are seen are temporal; but what are not seen, are eternal.”2068

2067
2068

Is. lvi. 4, 5. [See R.V.]
2 Cor. iv. 18; 1 Tim. iv. 8.

553

NPNF (V1-03)

426

Philip Schaff

25. Nor indeed hath the Holy Spirit failed to speak what should be of open and unshaken avail
against these men, most shamelessly and madly obstinate, and should repel their assault, as of wild
beasts, from His sheep-fold, by defences that may not be stormed. For, after He had said concerning
eunuchs, “I will give unto them in My house and in My wall a named place, much better than ofsons and daughters;”2069 lest any too carnal should think that there was any thing temporal to be
hoped for in these words, straightway He added, “An eternal name I will give unto them, nor shallit ever fail:” as though He should say, Why dost thou draw back, impious blindness? Why dost
thou draw back? Why dost thou pour the clouds of thy perverseness over the clear (sky) of truth?
Why in so great light of Scriptures dost thou seek after darkness from out which to lay snares? Why
dost thou promise temporal advantage only to holy persons exercising continence? “An eternalname I will give unto them:” why, where persons keep from all sexual intercourse, and also in thevery fact that they abstain from these, have thought of the things of the Lord, how to please theLord, do you essay to refer them unto earthly advantage? “An eternal name I will give unto them.”
Why contend you that the kingdom of heaven, for the sake of which holy eunuchs have madethemselves eunuchs, is to be understood in this life only? “An eternal name I will give unto them.”
And if haply in this place you endeavor to take the word itself eternal in the sense of lasting for along time, I add, I heap up, I tread in, “nor shall it ever fail.” What more seek you? What more say
you? This eternal name, whatever it be, unto the eunuchs of God, which assuredly signifies a certain
peculiar and excellent glory, shall not be in common with many, although set in the same kingdom,
and in the same house. For on this account also, perhaps, it is called a name, that it distinguishes
those, to whom it is given, from the rest.

26. What then, say they, is the meaning of that penny, which is given in payment to all alikewhen the work of the vineyard is ended? whether it be to those who have labored from the firsthour, or to those who have labored one hour?2070 What assuredly doth it signify, but something,which all shall have in common, such as is life eternal itself, the kingdom of heaven itself, whereshall be all, whom God hath predestinated, called, justified, glorified? “For it behoveth that thiscorruptible put on incorruption, and this mortal put on immortality.”2071 This is that penny, wages
for all. Yet “star differeth from star in glory; so also the resurrection of the dead.”2072 These are thedifferent merits of the Saints. For, if by that penny the heaven were signified, have not all the stars
in common to be in the heaven? And yet, “There is one glory of the sun, another glory of the moon,another of the stars.” If that penny were taken for health of body, have not all the members, when
we are well, health in common; and, should this health continue even unto death, is it not in allalike and equally? And yet, “God hath set the members, each one of them, in the body, as He
would;”2073 that neither the whole be an eye, nor the whole hearing, nor the whole smelling: and,whatever else there is, it hath its own property, although it have health equally with all. Thus because

2069
2070
2071
2072
2073

Is. lvi. 4, 5. [See R.V.]
Matt. xx. 9, 10.
1 Cor. xv. 53.
1 Cor. xv. 41, 42.
1 Cor. xii. 18.

554

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

life eternal itself shall be alike to all, an equal penny was assigned to all; but, because in that life
eternal itself the lights of merits shall shine with a distinction, there are “many mansions” in thehouse of the Father:2074 and, by this means, in the penny not unlike, one lives not longer than another;but in the many mansions, one is honored with greater brightness than another.

27. Therefore go on, Saints of God, boys and girls, males and females, unmarried men, andwomen; go on and persevere unto the end. Praise more sweetly the Lord, Whom ye think on morerichly: hope more happily in Him, Whom ye serve more instantly: love more ardently Him, whom
ye please more attentively. With loins girded, and lamps burning, wait for the Lord, when He
cometh from the marriage.2075 Ye shall bring unto the marriage of the Lamb a new song, which ye
shall sing on your harps. Not surely such as the whole earth singeth, unto which it is said, “Sing
unto the Lord a new song; sing unto the Lord, the whole earth”2076: but such as no one shall be able
to utter but you. For thus there saw you in the Apocalypse a certain one2077 beloved above othersby the Lamb, who had been wont to lie on His breast, and who used to drink in, and burst2078 forth,the Word of God above wonders of heaven. He saw you twelve times twelve thousand of holyharpers, of undefiled virginity in body, of inviolate truth in heart; and he wrote of you, that yefollow the Lamb whithersoever He shall go. Where think we that This Lamb goeth, where no one
either dares or is able to follow save you? Where think we that He goeth? Into what glades andmeadows? Where, I think, the grass are joys; not vain joys of this world, lying madnesses; nor joys
such as shall be in the kingdom of God itself, for the rest that are not virgins; but distinct from theportion of joys of all the rest. Joy of the virgins of Christ, of Christ, in Christ, with Christ, after
Christ, through Christ, for Christ. The joys peculiar to the virgins of Christ, are not the same as ofsuch as are not virgins, although of Christ. For there are to different persons different joys, but tonone such. Go (enter) into these, follow the Lamb, because the Flesh of the Lamb also is assuredly
virgin. For this He retained in Himself when grown up, which He took not away from His Motherby His conception and birth. Follow Him, as ye deserve,2079 in virginity of heart and flesh,wheresoever He shall have gone. For what is it to follow, but to imitate? Because “Christ hathsuffered for us,”2080 leaving us an example, as saith the Apostle Peter, “that we should follow His
steps.” Him each one follows in that, wherein he imitates Him: not so far forth as He is the only
Son of God, by Whom all things were made; but so far forth as, the Son of Man, He set forth in
Himself, what behoved for us to imitate. And many things in Him are set forth for all to imitate:
but virginity of the flesh not for all; for they have not what to do in order to be virgins, in whom it
hath been already brought to pass that they be not virgins.

2074
2075
2076
2077
2078
2079
2080

John xiv. 2.
Luke xii. 35, 36.
Ps. xcvi. 1.
Rev. xiv. 1–5.
“Eructuabat.” cf. Ps. xlv. 1. Vulg.
Merito.
1 Peter ii. 21.

555

NPNF (V1-03)

427

Philip Schaff

28. Therefore let the rest of the faithful, who have lost virginity, follow the Lamb, notwhithersoever He shall have gone, but so far as ever they shall have been able. But they are able
every where, save when He walks in the grace of virginity. “Blessed are the poor in spirit;”2081
imitate Him, Who, whereas “He was rich, was made poor for your sakes.”2082 “Blessed are themeek;” imitate Him, Who said, “Learn of Me, for I am meek and lowly of heart.”2083 “Blessed arethey that mourn;” imitate Him, Who “wept over” Jerusalem.2084 “Blessed are they, who hunger andthirst after righteousness;” imitate Him, Who said, “My meat is to do the will of Him Who sent
Me.”2085 “Blessed are the merciful;” imitate Him, Who came to the help of him who was woundedby robbers, and who lay in the way half-dead and despaired of.2086 “Blessed are the pure in heart;”
imitate Him, “Who did no sin, neither was guile found in His mouth.”2087 “Blessed are thepeace-makers;” imitate Him, Who said on behalf of His persecutors, “Father, forgive them, forthey know not what they do.”2088 “Blessed are they, who suffer persecution for righteousness sake;”
imitate Him, Who “suffered for you, leaving you an example, that ye follow His steps.”2089 These
things, whoso imitate, in these they follow the Lamb. But surely even married persons may go inthose steps, although not setting their foot perfectly in the same print,2090 yet walking in the same
paths.

29. But, lo, That Lamb goeth by a Virgin road, how shall they go after Him, who have lost what
there is no way for them to recover? Do ye, therefore, do ye go after Him, His virgins; do ye thither
also go after Him, in that on this one account whithersoever He shall have gone, ye follow Him:for unto any other gift whatsoever of holiness, whereby to follow Him, we can exhort marriedpersons, save this which they have lost beyond power of recovery. Do ye, therefore, follow Him,by holding with perseverance what ye have vowed with ardor. Go when ye can, that the good ofvirginity perish not from you, unto which ye can do nothing, in order that it may return. The restof the multitude of the faithful will see you, which cannot unto this follow the Lamb; it will see
you, it will not envy you: and by rejoicing together with you, what it hath not in itself, it will havein you. For that new song also, which is your own, it will not be able to utter; but it will not be
unable to hear, and to be delighted with your so excellent good: but ye, who shall both utter andhear, in that what ye shall say, this ye shall hear of yourselves, will exult with greater happiness,and reign with greater joy. But they will have no sorrow on account of your greater joy, to whom
this shall be wanting. Forsooth That Lamb, Whom ye shall follow whithersoever He shall havegone, will not desert those who cannot follow Him, where you can. Almighty is the Lamb, of Whom
2081
2082
2083
2084
2085
2086
2087
2088
2089
2090

Matt. v. 3–10.
2 Cor. viii. 9.
Matt. xi. 29.
Luke xix. 41.
John iv. 34.
Luke x. 30–35.
1 Peter ii. 22.
Luke xxiii. 34.
1 Peter ii. 21.
Forma.

556

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

we speak. He both will go before you, and will not depart from them, when God shall be all inall.2091 And they, who shall have less, shall not turn away in dislike from you: for, where there isno envying, difference exists with concord. Take to you,2092 then, have trust, be strong, continue,
ye who vow and pay unto the Lord your God vows of perpetual continence, not for the sake of thispresent world, but for the sake of the kingdom of Heaven.

30. Ye also who have not yet made this vow, who are able to receive it, receive it.2093 Run withperseverance, that ye may obtain.2094 Take ye each his sacrifices, and enter ye into the courts2095 of
the Lord, not of necessity, having power over your own will.2096 For not as, “Thou shall not commit
adultery, Thou shall not kill,”2097 can it so be said, Thou shalt not wed. The former are demanded,
the latter are offered. If the latter are done, they are praised: unless the former are done, they arecondemned. In the former the Lord commands us what is due; but in the latter, if ye shall havespent any thing more, on His return He will repay you.2098 Think of (whatever that be) within His
wall “a place named, much better than of sons and of daughters.”2099 Think of “an eternal name”
there.2100 Who unfolds of what kind that name shall be? Yet, whatever it shall be, it shall be eternal.
By believing and hoping and loving this, ye have been able, not to shun marriage, as forbidden,
but to fly past it, as allowed.

31. Whence the greatness of this service,2101 unto the undertaking of which we have according
to our strength exhorted, the more excellent and divine it is, the more doth it warn our anxiety, tosay something not only concerning most glorious chastity, but also concerning safest humility.
When then such as make profession of perpetual chastity, comparing themselves with marriedpersons, shall have discovered, that, according to the Scriptures, the others are below both in work
and wages, both in vow and reward, let what is written straightway come into their mind, “By how
much thou art great, by so much humble thyself in all things: and thou shalt find favor before
God.”2102 The measure of humility for each hath been given from the measure of his greatness
itself: unto which pride is full of danger, which layeth the greater wait against persons the greater

2091
2092
2093
2094
2095
2096
2097
2098
2099
2100
2101
2102

1 Cor. xv. 28.
“Præsumite.”Matt. xix. 12.
1 Cor. ix. 24.
Ps. xcvi. 8.
1 Cor. vii. 37.
Ex. xx. 14, 13.
“Supererogaveritis.”
Luke x. 35. See § 48.
Is. lvi. 5.
Muneris.
Ecclus. iii. 18.

557

NPNF (V1-03)

428

Philip Schaff

they be. On this followeth envying, as a daughter in her train; forsooth pride straightway giveth
birth to her, nor is she ever without such a daughter and companion. By which two evils, that is,
pride and envying, is the devil (a devil). Therefore it is against pride, the mother of envying, thatthe whole Christian discipline chiefly wars. For this teaches humility, whereby both to gain and tokeep charity; of which after that it had been said, “Charity envieth not;”2103 as though we wereasking the reason, how it comes to pass that it envieth not, he straightway added, “is not puffedup;” as though he should say, on this account it hath not envying, in that neither hath it pride.
Therefore the Teacher of humility, Christ, first “emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant,made in the likeness of men, and found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself, made obedienteven unto death, even the death of the Cross.”2104 But His teaching itself, how carefully it suggests
humility, and how earnest and instant it is in commanding this, who can easily unfold, and bring
together all witnesses for proof of this matter? This let him essay to do, or do, whosoever shall wish
to write a separate treatise on humility; but of this present work the end proposed is different, andit hath been undertaken on a matter so great, as that it hath chiefly to guard against pride.

32. Wherefore a few witnesses, which the Lord deigns to suggest to my mind, I proceed tomention, from out the teaching of Christ concerning humility, such as perhaps may be enough formy purpose. His discourse, the first which He delivered to His disciples at greater length, beganfrom this. “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven.”2105 And these
without all controversy we take to be humble. The faith of that Centurion He on this account chiefly
praised, and said that He had not found in Israel so great faith, because he believed with so great
humility as to say, “I am not worthy that thou shouldest enter under my roof.”2106 Whence also
Matthew for no other reason said that he “came” unto Jesus, (whereas Luke most plainly signifies
that he came not unto Him himself, but sent his friends,) save that by his most faithful humility hehimself came unto Him more than they whom he sent. Whence also is that of the Prophet, “TheLord is very high, and hath respect unto things that are lowly: but what are very high He notethafar off;”2107 assuredly as not coming unto Him. Whence also He saith to that woman of Canaan,“O woman, great is thy faith; be it done unto thee as thou wilt;”2108 whom above He had called adog, and had made answer that the bread of the sons was not to be cast to her. And this she taking
with humility had said, “Even so, Lord; for the dogs also eat of the crumbs which fall from theirmasters’ table.” And thus what by continual crying she obtained not, by humble confession she
earned.2109 Hence also those two are set forth praying in the Temple, the one a Pharisee, and theother a Publican, for the sake of those who seem to themselves just and despise the rest of men,and the confession of sins is set before the reckoning up of merits. And assuredly the Pharisee wasrendering thanks unto God by reason of those things wherein he was greatly self-satisfied. “I render
2103
2104
2105
2106
2107
2108
2109

1 Cor. xiii. 4. [See R.V.]
Phil. ii. 7, 8. [See R.V.]
Matt. v. 3.
Matt. viii. 5–10; Luke vii. 6, 7.
Ps. cxxxviii. 6.
Matt. xv. 22–28.
Promeruit.

558

NPNF (V1-03)

429

Philip Schaff

thanks to Thee,” saith he, “that I am not even as the rest of men, unjust, extortioners, adulterers,
even as also this publican. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all things whatsoever I possess.
But the Publican was standing afar off, not daring to lift up his eyes to Heaven, but beating his
breast, saying, God be merciful unto me a sinner.” But there follows the divine judgment, “Verily
I say unto you, the Publican went down from the Temple justified more than that Pharisee.”2110
Then the cause is shown, why this is just; “Forasmuch as he who exalteth himself shall be humbled,
and whoso humbleth himself shall be exalted.” Therefore it may come to pass, that each one bothshun real evils, and reflect on real goods in himself, and render thanks for these unto “the Fatherof lights, from Whom cometh down every best gift, and every perfect gift,”2111 and yet be rejectedby reason of the sin of haughtiness, if through pride, even in his thought alone, which is before
God, he insult other sinners, and specially when confessing their sins in prayer, unto whom is due
not upbraiding with arrogance, but pity without despair. What is it that, when His disciples werequestioning among themselves, who of them should be greater, He set a little child before theireyes, saying, “Unless ye shall be as this child, ye shall not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven?”2112
Did He not chiefly commend humility, and set in it the desert of greatness? Or when unto the sonsof Zebedee desiring to be at His side in lofty seats He so made answer,2113 as that they should rather
think of having to drink the Cup of His Passion, wherein He humbled Himself even unto death,even the death of the Cross,2114 than with proud desire demand to be preferred to the rest; what did
He show, save, that He would be a bestower of exaltation upon them, who should first follow Him
as a teacher of humility? And now, in that, when about to go forth unto His Passion, He washedthe feet of His disciples, and most openly taught them to do for their fellow-disciples andfellow-servants this, which He their Lord and Master had done for them; how greatly did He
commend humility?2115 And in order to commend this He chose also that time, wherein they werelooking on Him, as immediately about to die, with great longing; assuredly about to retain in theirmemory this especially, which their Master, Whom they were to imitate, had pointed out to themas the last thing. But He did this at that time, which surely He could have done on other days also
before, wherein He had been conversant with them; at which time if it were done, this same would
indeed be delivered, but certainly would not be so received.

33. Whereas, then, all Christians have to guard humility, forasmuch as it is from Christ thatthey are called Christians, Whose Gospel no one considers with care, but that he discovers Him to
be a Teacher of humility; specially is it becoming that they be followers and keepers of this virtue,
who excel the rest of men in any great good, in order that they may have a great care of that, which
I set down in the beginning, “By how much thou art great, by so much humble thyself in all things,
and thou shall find grace before God.”2116 Wherefore, because perpetual Continence and specially
2110
2111
2112
2113
2114
2115
2116

Luke xviii. 11–14.
James i. 17.
Matt. xviii. 1–3.
Matt. xx. 21, 22.
Phil. ii. 8.
John xiii. 1–17.
Ecclus. iii. 18.

559

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

virginity, is a great good in the Saints of God, they must with all watchfulness beware, that it be
not corrupted with pride.

34. Paul the Apostle censures evil unmarried women, curious and prating, and says that thisfault comes of idleness. “But at the same time,” saith he, “being idle they learn to go about tohouses: but not only idle, but curious also and prating, speaking what they ought not.”2117 Of thesehe had said above, “But younger widows avoid; for when they have past their time in delights, theywish to wed in Christ; having condemnation, in that they have made void their first faith:” that is,have not continued in that, which they had vowed at the first. And yet he saith not, they marry, but“they wish to marry.” For many of them are recalled from marrying, not by love of a noble purpose,but by fear of open shame, which also itself comes of pride, whereby persons fear to displease men
more than God. These, therefore, who wish to marry, and do not marry on this account, because
they cannot with impunity, who would do better to marry than to be burned, that is, than to be laid
waste in their very conscience by the hidden flame of lust, who repent of their profession, and who
feel their confession irksome; unless they correct and set right their heart, and by the fear of God
again overcome their lust, must be accounted among the dead; whether they pass their time indelights, whence the Apostle says, “But she who passes her time in delights, living, is dead;”2118
or whether in labors and fastings, which are useless where there is no correction of the heart, andserve rather for display than amendment. I do not, for my part, impose on such a great regard for
humility, in whom pride itself is confounded, and bloodstained by wound of conscience. Nor onsuch as are drunken, or covetous, or who are lying in any other kind whatever of damnable disease,at the same time that they have profession of bodily continence, and through perverse manners areat variance with their own name, do I impose this great anxiety about pious humility: unless haply
in these evils they shall dare even to make a display of themselves, unto whom it is not enough,that the punishments of these are deferred. Nor am I treating of these, in whom there is a certain
aim of pleasing, either by more elegant dress than the necessity of so great profession demands, orby remarkable manner of binding the head, whether by bosses of hair swelling forth, or by coverings
so yielding, that the fine network below appears: unto these we must give precepts, not as yetconcerning humility, but concerning chastity itself, or virgin modesty. Give me one who makes
profession of perpetual continence, and who is free from these, and all such faults and spots ofconduct; for this one I fear pride, for this so great good I am in alarm from the swelling of arrogance.
The more there is in any one on account of which to be self-pleased, the more I fear, lest, by pleasing
self, he please not Him, Who “resisteth the proud, but unto the humble giveth grace.”2119

35. Certainly we are to contemplate in Christ Himself, the chief instruction and pattern ofvirginal purity. What further precept then concerning humility shall I give to the continent, than

2117
2118
2119

1 Tim. v. 11, 12, 13. [See R.V.]
1 Tim. v. 6.
James iv. 6.

560

NPNF (V1-03)

430

Philip Schaff

what He saith to all, “Learn of Me, in that I am meek and lowly of heart?”2120 when He had mademention above of His greatness, and, wishing to show this very thing, how great He was, and how
little He had been made for our sakes, saith, “I confess to Thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth,in that Thou hast hidden these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto little
children. Even so, O Father, in that so it hath been pleasing before Thee. All things have beendelivered unto Me of My Father: and no one knoweth the Son, save the Father; and no one knoweth
the Father, save the Son, and he to whom the Son shall have willed to reveal Him. Come unto Me,
all ye who labor and are burdened, and I will refresh you. Take My yoke upon you, and learn of
Me, in that I am meek and lowly of heart.”2121 He, He, unto Whom the Father hath delivered allthings, and Whom no one knoweth but the Father, and Who alone, (and he, unto whom He shallhave willed to reveal Him), knoweth the Father, saith not, “Learn of Me” to make the world, or toraise the dead, but, “in that I am meek and lowly of heart.” O saving teaching? O Teacher and Lordof mortals, unto whom death was pledged and passed on in the cup of pride, He would not teachwhat Himself was not, He would not bid what Himself did not. I see Thee, O good Jesu, with theeyes of faith, which Thou hast opened for me, as in an assembly of the human race, crying out andsaying, “Come unto Me, and learn of Me.” What, I beseech Thee, through Whom all things were
made, O Son of God, and the Same Who was made among all things, O Son of Man: to learn whatof Thee, come we to Thee? “For that I am meek,” saith He, “and lowly of heart.” Is it to this that
all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge hidden in Thee2122 are brought, that we learn this ofThee as a great thing, that Thou art “meek and lowly of heart?” Is it so great a thing to be little,
that it could not at all be learned unless it were brought to pass by Thee, Who art so great? So indeed
it is. For by no other way is there found out rest for the soul, save when the unquiet swelling hathbeen dispersed, whereby it was great unto itself, when it was not sound unto Thee.

36. Let them hear Thee, and let them come to Thee, and let them learn of Thee to be meek andlowly, who seek Thy Mercy and Truth, by living unto Thee, unto Thee, not unto themselves. Let
him hear this, laboring and laden, who is weighed down by his burthen, so as not to dare to lift up
his eyes to heaven, that sinner beating his breast, and drawing near from afar.2123 Let him hear, thecenturion, not worthy that Thou shouldest enter under his roof.2124 Let him hear, Zaccheus, chiefof publicans, restoring fourfold the gains of damnable sins.2125 Let her hear, the woman in the citya sinner, by so much the more full of tears at Thy feet, the more alien she had been from Thy
steps.2126 Let them hear, the harlots and publicans, who enter into the kingdom of heaven before
the Scribes and Pharisees.2127 Let them hear, every kind of such ones, feastings with whom were
cast in Thy teeth as a charge, forsooth, as though by whole persons who sought not a physician,
2120
2121
2122
2123
2124
2125
2126
2127

Matt. xi. 29.
Matt. xi. 25–29.
Col. ii. 3.
Luke xviii. 13.
Matt. viii. 8.
Luke xix. 2–8.
Luke vii. 37, 38.
Matt. xxi. 31.

561

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

whereas Thou camest not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.2128 All these, when they
are converted unto Thee, easily grow meek, and are humbled before Thee, mindful of their own
most unrighteous life, and of Thy most indulgent mercy, in that, “where sin hath abounded, grace
hath abounded more.”2129

37. But regard the troops of virgins, holy boys and girls: this kind hath been trained up in Thy
Church: there for Thee it hath been budding from its mother’s breasts; for Thy Name it hath loosed
its tongue to speak, Thy Name, as through the milk of its infancy, it hath had poured in and hathsucked, no one of this number can say, “I, who before was a blasphemer, and persecutor, andinjurious, but I obtained mercy, in that I did in being ignorant, in unbelief.”2130 Yea more, that,which Thou commandedst not, but only didst set forth, for such as would, to seize, saying, “Whoso
can receive, let him receive;” they have seized, they have vowed, and, for the sake of the kingdomof heaven, not for that Thou threatenedst, but for that Thou exhortedst, they have made themselves
eunuchs.2131 To these cry out, let these hear Thee, in that Thou art “meek and lowly of heart.” Letthese, by how much they are great, by so much humble themselves in all things, that they may findgrace before Thee. They are just: but they are not, are they, such as Thou, justifying the ungodly?
They are chaste: but them in sins their mothers nurtured in their wombs.2132 They are holy, but
Thou art also Holy of Holies. They are virgins, but they are not also born of virgins. They are wholly
chaste both in spirit and in flesh: but they are not the Word made flesh.2133 And yet let them learn,
not from those unto whom Thou forgivest sins, but from Thee Thyself, The Lamb of God Who
takest away the sins of the world,2134 in that Thou art “meek and lowly of heart.”

431

38. I send thee not, soul that art religiously chaste, that hast not given the reins to fleshly appetite
even so far as to allowed marriage, that hast not indulged thy body about to depart even to thebegetting one to succeed thee, that hast sustained aloft thy earthly members, afloat to accustom
them to heaven; I send thee not, in order that thou mayest learn humility, unto publicans and sinners,
who yet enter into the kingdom of heaven before the proud: I send thee not to these: for they, whohave been set free from the gulf of uncleanness, are unworthy that undefiled virginity be sent tothem to take pattern from. I send thee unto the King of Heaven, unto Him, by Whom men werecreated, and Who was created among men for the sake of men; unto Him, Who is fair of beauty
above the sons of men,2135 and despised by the sons of men on behalf of the sons of men: unto Him,
Who, ruling the immortal angels, disdained not to do service unto mortals. Him, at any rate, not

2128
2129
2130
2131
2132
2133
2134
2135

Matt. ix. 11–13. [See R.V.]
Rom. v. 20.
1 Tim. i. 13.
Matt. xix. 12.
Ps. li. 5.
John i. 14.
John i. 29.
Ps. xlv. 2.

562

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

unrighteousness, but charity, made humble; “Charity, which rivalleth not, is not puffed up, seeketh
not her own;”2136 forasmuch as “Christ also pleased not Himself, but, as it is written of Him, The
reproaches of such as reproached Thee have fallen upon Me.”2137 Go then, come unto Him, andlearn, in that He is “meek and lowly of heart.” Thou shall not go unto him, who dared not by reasonof the burden of unrighteousness to lift up his eyes to heaven, but unto Him, Who by the weight ofcharity came down from heaven.2138 Thou shalt not go unto her, who watered with tears the feet ofher Lord, seeking forgiveness of heavy sins; but thou shalt go unto Him, Who, granting forgivenessof all sins, washed the feet of His own disciples.2139 I know the dignity of thy virginity; I propose
not to thee to imitate the Publican humbly accusing his own faults; but I fear for the Pharisee proudly
boasting of his own merits.2140 I say not, Be thou such as she, of whom it was said, “There are
forgiven unto her many sins, in that she hath loved much;”2141 but I fear lest, as thinking that thouhast little forgiven to thee, thou love little.

39. I fear, I say, greatly for thee, lest, when thou boastest that thou wilt follow the Lambwheresoever He shall have gone, thou be unable by reason of swelling pride to follow Him throughstrait ways. It is good for thee, O virgin soul, that thus, as thou art a virgin, thus altogether keeping
in thy heart that thou hast been born again, keeping in thy flesh that thou hast been born, thou yetconceive of the fear of the Lord, and give birth to the spirit of salvation.2142 “Fear,” indeed, “there
is not in charity, but perfect charity,” as it is written, “casteth out fear:”2143 but fear of men, not of
God: fear of temporal evils, not of the Divine Judgment at the last. “Be not thou high-minded, but
fear.”2144 Love thou the goodness of God; fear thou His severity: neither suffers thee to be proud.
For by loving you fear, lest you grievously offend One Who is loved and loves. For what moregrievous offense, than that by pride thou displease Him, Who for thy sake hath been displeasing
to the proud? And where ought there to be more that “chaste fear abiding for ever and ever,”2145
than in thee, who hast no thought of the things of this world, how to please a wedded partner; butof the things of the Lord, how to please the Lord?2146 That other fear is not in charity, but this chaste
fear quitteth not charity. If you love not, fear lest you perish; if you love, fear lest you displease.
That fear charity casteth out, with this it runneth within. The Apostle Paul also says, “For we have
not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but we have received the spirit of adoption of sons,
wherein we cry, Abba, Father.”2147 I believe that he speaks of that fear, which had been given in

2136
2137
2138
2139
2140
2141
2142
2143
2144
2145
2146
2147

1 Cor. xiii. 4, 5.
Rom. xv. 3.
John vi. 38.
John xiii. 5.
Luke xviii. 10–14.
Luke vii. 38, 47.
Is. xxvi. 18. See LXX.
1 John iv. 18. [See R.V.]
Rom. xi. 20.
Ps. xix. 9.
1 Cor. vii. 32.
Rom. viii. 15.

563

NPNF (V1-03)

432

Philip Schaff

the Old Testament, lest the temporal goods should be lost, which God had promised unto those notyet sons under grace, but as yet slaves under the law. There is also the fear of eternal fire, to serve
God in order to avoid which is assuredly not yet of perfect charity. For the desire of the reward is
one thing, the fear of punishment another. They are different sayings, “Whither shall I go awayfrom Thy Spirit, and from Thy face whither shall I flee?”2148 and, “One thing I have sought of theLord, this I will seek after; that I may dwell in the house of the Lord through all the days of mylife, that I may consider the delight of the Lord, that I be protected in His temple:”2149 and, “Turnnot away Thy face from me:”2150 and, “My soul longeth and fainteth unto the courts of the Lord.”2151
Those sayings let him have had, who dared not to lift up his eyes to heaven; and she who waswatering with tears His feet, in order to obtain pardon for her grievous sins; but these do thou have,
who art careful about the things of the Lord, to be holy both in body and spirit. With those sayings
there companies fear which hath torment, which perfect charity casteth forth; but with these sayings
there companies chaste fear of the Lord, that abideth for ever and ever. And to both kinds it mustbe said, “Be not thou high-minded, but fear;”2152 that man neither of defense of his sins, nor ofpresumption of righteousness set himself up. For Paul also himself, who saith, “For ye have notreceived the spirit of bondage again to fear;”2153 yet, fear being a companion of charity, saith, “Withfear and much trembling was I towards you:”2154 and that saying, which I have mentioned, that theengrafted wild olive tree be not proud against the broken branches of the olive tree, himself madeuse of, saying, “Be not thou high-minded, but fear;” himself admonishing all the members of Christin general, saith, “With fear and trembling work out your own salvation; for it is God Who worketh
in you both to will and to do, according to His good pleasure;”2155 that it seem not to pertain unto
the Old Testament what is written, “Serve the Lord in fear, and rejoice unto Him with trembling.”2156

40. And what members of the holy body, which is the Church, ought more to take care, thatupon them the holy Spirit may rest, than such as profess virginal holiness? But how doth He rest,
where He findeth not His own place? what else than an humbled heart, to fill, not to leap back from;to raise up, not to weigh down? whereas it hath been most plainly said, “On whom shall rest My
Spirit? On him that is humble and quiet, and trembles at My words.”2157 Already thou livest
righteously, already thou livest piously, thou livest chastely, holily, with virginal purity; as yet,however, thou livest here, and art thou not humbled at hearing, “What, is not human life upon eartha trial?”2158 Doth it not drive thee back from over-confident arrogance, “Woe unto the world because

2148
2149
2150
2151
2152
2153
2154
2155
2156
2157
2158

Ps. cxxxix. 7.
Ps. xxvii. 4.
Ps. xxvii. 9.
Ps. lxxxiv. 2.
Rom. xi. 20.
Rom. viii. 15.
1 Cor. ii. 3.
Phil. ii. 12, 13. [See R.V.]
Ps. ii. 11.
Is. lxvi. 2.
Job. vii. 1. LXX.

564

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

of offenses?”2159 Dost thou not tremble, lest thou be accounted among the many, whose “lovewaxeth cold, because that iniquity abounds?”2160 Dost thou not smite thy breast, when thou hearest,“Wherefore, whoso thinketh that he standeth, let him see to it lest he fall?”2161 Amid these divine
warnings and human dangers, do we yet find it so hard to persuade holy virgins to humility?

41. Or are we indeed to believe that it is for any other reason, that God suffers to be mixed up
with the number of your profession, many, both men and women, about to fall, than that by the fallof these your fear may be increased, whereby to repress pride; which God so hates, as that against
this one thing The Highest humbled Himself? Unless haply, in truth, thou shalt therefore fear less,and be more puffed up, so as to love little Him, Who hath loved thee so much, as to give up Himself
for thee,2162 because He hath forgiven thee little, living, forsooth from childhood, religiously,
piously, with pious chastity, with inviolate virginity. As though in truth you ought not to love withmuch greater glow of affection Him, Who, whatsoever things He hath forgiven unto sinners upon
their being turned to Him, suffered you not to fall into them. Or indeed that Pharisee,2163 who
therefore loved little, because he thought that little was forgiven him, was it for any other reason
that he was blinded by this error, than because being ignorant of the righteousness of God, andseeking to establish his own, he had not been made subject unto the righteousness of God?2164 But
you, an elect race, and among the elect more elect, virgin choirs that follow the Lamb, even you“by grace have been saved through faith; and this not of yourselves, but it is the gift of God: notof works, lest haply any be elated. For we are His workmanship, created in Jesus Christ in goodworks, which God hath prepared, that in them we may walk.”2165 What therefore, by how muchthe more ye are adorned by His gifts, shall ye by so much the less love Him? May He Himself turnaway so dreadful madness! Wherefore forasmuch as the Truth has spoken the truth, that he, unto
whom little is forgiven, loveth little; do ye, in order that ye may love with full glow of affection
Him, Whom ye are free to love, being loosened from ties of marriage, account as altogether forgiven
unto you, whatever of evil, by His governance, ye have not committed. For “your eyes ever unto
the Lord, forasmuch as He shall pluck out of the net your feet,”2166 and, “Except the Lord shallhave kept the city, in vain hath he watched who keepeth it.”2167 And speaking of Continence itself
the Apostle says, “But I would that all men were as I myself; but each one hath his own proper giftfrom God; one in this way, and another in that way.”2168 Who therefore bestoweth these gifts? Who
distributeth his own proper gifts unto each as He will?2169 Forsooth God, with Whom there is not
2159
2160
2161
2162
2163
2164
2165
2166
2167
2168
2169

Matt. xviii. 7. [See R.V.]
Matt. xxiv. 12.
1 Cor. x. 12.
Gal. ii. 20.
Luke vii. 36–47.
Rom. x. 3.
Eph. ii. 8–10. [See R.V.]
Ps. xxv. 15.
Ps. cxxvii. 1.
1 Cor. vii. 7.
1 Cor. xii. 11.

565

NPNF (V1-03)

433

Philip Schaff

unrighteousness,2170 and by this means with what equity He makes some in this way, and others inthat way, for man to know is either impossible or altogether hard: but that with equity He maketh,
it is not lawful to doubt. “What,” therefore, “hast thou, which thou hast not received?”2171 And by
what perversity dost thou less love Him, of Whom thou hast received more?

42. Wherefore let this be the first thought for the putting on of humility, that God’s virgin think
not that it is of herself that she is such, and not rather that this best “gift cometh down from abovefrom the Father of Lights, with Whom is no change nor shadow of motion.”2172 For thus she will
not think that little hath been forgiven her, so as for her to love little, and, being ignorant of therighteousness of God, and wishing to establish her own, not to be made subject to the righteousnessof God. In which fault was that Simon who was surpassed by the woman, unto whom many sins
were forgiven, because she loved much. But she will have more cautious and true thoughts, that
we are so to account all sins as though forgiven, from which God keeps us that we commit themnot. Witnesses are those expressions of pious prayers in holy Scriptures, whereby it is shown, thatthose very things, which are commanded by God, are not done save by His Gift and help, Whocommands. For there is a falsehood in the asking for them, if we could do them without the helpof His grace. What is there so generally and chiefly charged, as obedience whereby theCommandments of God are kept? And yet we find this wished for. “Thou,” saith he, “hast charged,that Thy commandments be greatly kept.” Then it follows, “O that my ways were directed to keep
Thy righteousnesses: then shall I not be confounded, whilst I look unto all Thy commandments.”2173
That which he had set down above that God had commanded, that he wished might of himself befulfilled. This is done assuredly, that there be not sin; but, if there hath been sin, the command isthat one repent; lest by defense and excuse of sin he perish through pride, who hath done it, whilst
he is unwilling that what he hath done perish through repentance. This also is asked of God, so thatit may be understood that it is not done, save by His grant from Whom it is asked. “Set,” saith he,“O Lord, a watch to my mouth, and a door of continence around my lips: let not my heart turn away
unto evil words, to make excuses in sins, with men that work unrighteousness.”2174 If, therefore,both obedience, whereby we keep His commandments, and repentance whereby we excuse not oursins, are wished for and asked, it is plain that, when it is done, it is by His gift that it is possessed,
by His help that it is fulfilled, yet more openly is it said by reason of obedience, “By the Lord thesteps of a man are directed, and He shall will His way:”2175 and of repentance the Apostle says, “ifhaply God may grant unto them repentance.”2176

2170
2171
2172
2173
2174
2175
2176

Rom. ix. 16.
1 Cor. iv. 7.
James i. 17. [See R.V.]
Ps. cxix. 4–6.
Ps. cxli. 3, 4.
Ps. xxxvii. 23.
2 Tim. ii. 25.

566

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

43. Concerning continence also itself hath it not been most openly said, “And when I knew thatno one can be continent unless God give it, this also itself was a part of wisdom, to know whose
gift it was?”2177 But perhaps continence is the gift of God, but wisdom man bestows upon himself,
whereby to understand, that that gift is, not his own, but of God. Yea, “The Lord maketh wise theblind:”2178 and, “The testimony of the Lord is faithful, it giveth wisdom unto little ones:”2179 and,“If any one want wisdom, let him ask of God, Who giveth unto all liberally, and upbraideth not,and it shall be given to him.”2180 But it becometh virgins to be wise, that their lamps be notextinguished.2181 How “wise,” save “not having high thoughts, but consenting unto the lowly.”2182
For Wisdom Itself hath said unto man, “Lo, piety is wisdom!”2183 If therefore thou hast nothing,which thou hast not received, “Be not high-minded, but fear.”2184 And love not thou little, as though
Him by Whom little hath been forgiven to thee; but, rather, love Him much, by Whom much hathbeen given to thee. For if he loves, unto whom it hath been given not to repay: how much moreought he to love, unto whom it hath been given to possess. For both, whosoever continues chastefrom the beginning, is ruled by Him; and whosoever is made chaste instead of unchaste, is correctedby Him; and whosoever is unchaste even unto the end, is abandoned by Him. But this He can doby secret counsel, by unrighteous He cannot: and perhaps it is for this end that it lies hid, that there
may be more fear, and less pride.

434

44. Next let not man, now that he knoweth that by the grace of God he is what he is, fall intoanother snare of pride, so as by lifting up himself for the very grace of God to despise the rest. By
which fault that other Pharisee both gave thanks unto God for the goods which he had, and yet
vaunted himself above the Publican confessing his sins. What therefore should a virgin do, whatshould she think, that she vaunt not herself above those, men or women, who have not this so great
gift? For she ought not to feign humility, but to set it forth: for the feigning of humility is greater
pride. Wherefore Scripture wishing to show that humility ought to be true, after having said, “Byhow much thou art great, by so much humble thyself in all things,” added soon after, “And thoushalt find grace before God:”2185 assuredly where one could not humble one’s self deceitfully.

45. Wherefore what shall we say? is there any thought which a virgin of God may truly have,by reason of which she dare not to set herself before a faithful woman, not only a widow, but evenmarried? I say not a reprobate virgin; for who knows not that an obedient woman is to be set before
a disobedient virgin? But where both are obedient unto the commands of God, shall she so tremble
2177
2178
2179
2180
2181
2182
2183
2184
2185

Wisd. viii. 21.
Ps. cxlvi. 8.
Ps. xix. 7.
James i. 5.
Matt. xxv. 4.
Rom. xii. 16.
Job xxviii. 28. LXX.
Rom. xi. 20.
Ecclus. iii. 18.

567

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

to prefer holy virginity even to chaste marriage, and continence to wedded life, the fruit anhundred-fold to go before the thirty-fold? Nay, let her not doubt to prefer this thing to that thing;
yet let not this or that virgin, obeying and fearing God, dare to set herself before this or that woman,obeying and fearing God; otherwise she will not be humble, and “God resisteth the proud!”2186
What, therefore, shall she have in her thoughts? Forsooth the hidden gifts of God, which nought
save the questioning of trial makes known to each, even in himself. For, to pass over the rest,whence doth a virgin know, although careful of the things of the Lord, how to please the Lord2187
but that haply, by reason of some weakness of mind unknown to herself, she be not as yet ripe formartyrdom, whereas that woman, whom she rejoiced to set herself before, may already be able todrink the Cup of the Lord’s humiliation,2188 which He set before His disciples, to drink first, whenenamored of high place? Whence, I say, doth she know but that she herself be not as yet Thecla,that other be already Crispina.2189 Certainly unless there be present trial, there takes place no proofof this gift.

46. But this is so great, that certain understand it to be the fruit an hundred-fold.2190 For theauthority of the Church bears a very conspicuous witness, in which it is known to the faithful inwhat place the Martyrs, in what place the holy nuns deceased, are rehearsed at the Sacraments of
the Altar.2191 But what the meaning is of that difference of fruitfulness, let them see to it, who
understand these things better than we; whether the virginal life be in fruit an hundred-fold, insixty-fold the widowed, in thirty-fold the married; or whether the hundred-fold fruitfulness be
ascribed unto martyrdom, the sixty-fold unto continence, the thirty-fold unto marriage; or whether
virginity, by the addition of martyrdom, fill up the hundred-fold, but when alone be in sixty-fold,but married persons bearing thirty-fold arrive at sixty-fold, in case they shall be martyrs: or whether,what seems to me more probable, forasmuch as the gifts of Divine grace are many, and one isgreater and better than another, whence the Apostle says, “But emulate ye the better gifts;”2192 weare to understand that they are more in number than to allow of being distributed under thosedifferent kinds. In the first place, that we set not widowed continence either as bearing no fruit, or
set it but level with the desert of married charity, or equal it unto virgin glory; or think that the
Crown of Martyrdom, either established in habit of mind, although proof of trial be wanting, or in
actual making trial of suffering, be added unto either one of those these chastities, without any
increase of fruitfulness. Next, when we set it down that many men and women so keep virginal
2186

James iv. 6.
1 Cor. vii. 32.
2188
Matt. xx. 22.
2189
A married woman, who was beheaded in the persecution under Diocletian and Maximian at Thebeste in Africa. See Ser.
354, ad Continentes, n. 5. where he says, “bethink you that in the time of persecution not only Agnes the Virgin was crowned,
but likewise Crispina, the wife; and perchance, as there is no doubt, some of the continent then failed, and many of the wedded
fought and conquered.” Ben. ed.
2190
St. Jerome mentions this interpretation; but b. 1. agt. Jovinian, and on Matt. 18, takes that which assigns the hundred-foldto virginity. Ben. ed.
2191
Ser. 159, he says, “Martyrs are in such place rehearsed at the Altar of God as that prayer is not made for them; but forthe other deceased that are mentioned prayer is made.” Ben. ed.
2192
1 Cor. xii. 31.
2187

568

NPNF (V1-03)

435

Philip Schaff

chastity, as that yet they do not the things which the Lord saith, “If thou willest to be perfect, go,sell all that thou hast, and give unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in Heaven: and come,follow me;”2193 and dare not unite themselves to those dwelling together, among whom no one
saith that any thing is his own, but all things are unto them common;2194 do we think that there isno addition of fruitfulness unto the virgins of God, when they do this? or that the virgins of God
are without any fruit, although they do not this? Therefore there are many gifts, and some brighterand higher than others, each than each. And at times one is fruitful in fewer gifts, but better; anotherin lower gifts, but more. And in what manner they be either made equal one to another, or
distinguished one from another, in receiving eternal honors, who of men would dare to pronounce?
whereas yet it is plain both that those differences are many, and that the better are profitable notfor the present time, but for eternity. But I judge that the Lord willed to make mention of threedifferences of fruitfulness, the rest He left to such as understand.2195 For also another Evangelist
hath made mention only of the hundred-fold:2196 we are not, therefore, are we, to think that he either
rejected, or knew not of, the other two, but rather that he left them to be understood?

47. But, as I had begun to say, whether the fruit an hundred-fold be virginity dedicated to God,or whether we are to understand that interval of fruitfulness in some other way, either such as wehave made mention of, or such as we have not made mention of; yet no one, as I suppose, will havedared to prefer virginity to martyrdom, and no one will have doubted that this latter gift is hidden,
if trial to test it be wanting. A virgin, therefore, hath a subject for thought, such as may be of profit
to her for the keeping of humility, that she violate not that charity, which is above all gifts, without
which assuredly whatever other gifts she shall have had, whether few or many, whether great or
small, she is nothing. She hath, I say, a subject for thought, that she be not puffed up, that she rival
not; forsooth that she so make profession that the virginal good is much greater and better than themarried good, as that yet she know not whether this or that married woman be not already able tosuffer for Christ, but herself as yet unable, and she herein spared, that her weakness is not put tothe question by trial. “For God,” saith the Apostle, “is faithful, Who will not suffer you to be tried
above what ye are able but will make with the trial a way out, that ye may be able to bear it.”2197
Perhaps, therefore, those men or women keeping a way of married life praiseworthy in its kind,
are already able, against an enemy forcing to unrighteousness, to contend even by tearing in pieces
of bowels, and shedding of blood; but these men or women, continent from childhood, and making
themselves eunuchs for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven, still are not as yet able to endure such,
either for righteousness, or for chastity itself. For it is one thing, for truth and an holy purpose, notto consent unto one who would persuade and flatter, but another thing not to yield even to one who
tortures and strikes. These lie hid in the powers and strength of souls, by trial they are unfolded,
by actual essay they come forth. In order, therefore, that each be not puffed up by reason of that,

2193
2194
2195
2196
2197

Matt. xix. 21.
Acts ii. 44, 4, 32.
Matt. xiii. 8.
Luke viii. 8.
1 Cor. x. 13.

569

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

which he sees clearly that he can do, let him humbly consider that he knows not that there isperchance something more excellent which he cannot do, but that some, who neither have nor
profess that of which he is lawfully self-conscious, are able to do this, which he himself cannot do.
Thus will be kept, not by feigned but by true humility, “In honor preventing one another,”2198 and,“esteeming each the other higher than himself.”2199

48. What now shall I say concerning the very carefulness and watchfulness against sin? “Whoshall boast that he hath a chaste heart? or who shall boast that he is clean from sin?”2200 Holyvirginity is indeed inviolate from the mother’s womb; but “no one,” saith he, “is clean in Thy sight,
not even the infant whose life is of one day upon the earth.”2201 There is kept also in faith inviolatea certain virginal chastity, whereby the Church is joined as a chaste virgin unto One Husband: but
That One Husband hath taught, not only the faithful who are virgin in mind and body, but all
Christians altogether, from spiritual even unto carnal, from Apostles even unto the last penitents,
as though from the height of heaven even unto the bounds of it,2202 to pray, and in the prayer itself
hath admonished them to say, “And forgive us our debts, even as we also forgive our debtors:”2203
where, by this which we seek, He shews what also we should remember that we are. For neither
on behalf of those debts, which for our whole past life we trust have been forgiven unto us in
Baptism through His peace, hath He charged us to pray, saying, “And forgive us our debts, evenas we also forgive our debtors:” otherwise this were a prayer which Catechumens rather ought topray up to the time of Baptism; but whereas it is what baptized persons pray, rulers and people,
pastors and flocks; it is sufficiently shown that in this life, the whole of which is a trial, no one
ought to boast himself as though free from all sins.2204

49. Wherefore also the virgins of God without blame indeed, “follow the Lamb whithersoever
He shall have gone,” both the cleansing of sins being perfected, and virginity being kept, which,were it lost, could not return: but, because that same Apocalypse itself, wherein such unto one such
were revealed, in this also praises them, that “in their mouth there was not found a lie:”2205 let them
remember in this also to be true, that they dare not say that they have not sin. Forsooth the same
John, who saw that, hath said this, “If we shall have said that we have not sin, we deceive our own
selves, and the truth is not in us; but if we shall have confessed our faults, He is faithful and just,so as to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. But if we shall have said
436

2198
2199
2200
2201
2202
2203
2204
2205

Rom. xii. 10. [See R.V.]
Phil. ii. 3.
Prov. xx. 9.
Job xxv. 4.
Matt. xxiv. 31. [See R.V.]
Matt. vi. 12.
Job vii. 1.
Rev. xiv. 4, 5.

570

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffthat we have not sinned, we shall make Him a liar, and His word shall not be in us.”2206 This surely
is not said unto these or those, but unto all Christians, wherein virgins also ought to recognize
themselves. For thus they shall be without a lie, such as in the Apocalypse they appeared. And by
this means so long as there is not as yet perfection in heavenly height, confession in lowlinessmaketh them without blame.

50. But, again, lest by occasion of this sentence, any one should sin with deadly security, andshould allow himself to be carried away, as though his sins were soon by easy confession to beblotted out, he straightway added, “My little children, these things have I written unto you, that ye
sin not; and, if one shall have sinned, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ therighteous, and Himself is a propitiation of our sins.”2207 Let no one therefore depart from sin as
though about to return to it, nor bind himself as it were by compact of alliance of this kind withunrighteousness, so as to take delight rather to confess it than to shun it. But, forasmuch as evenupon such as are busy and on the watch not to sin, there creep by stealth, in a certain way, fromhuman weakness, sins, however small, however few, yet not none; these same themselves become
great and grievous, in case pride shall have added to them increase and weight: but by the Priest,
Whom we have in the heavens, if by pious humility they be destroyed, they are with all easecleansed.

51. But I contend not with those, who assert that a man can in this life live without any sin: I
contend not, I gainsay not. For perhaps we take measure of the great from out our own misery, and,comparing ourselves with ourselves, understand not.2208 One thing I know, that those great ones,
such as we are not, such as we have not as yet made proof of, by how much they are great, by somuch humble themselves in all things, that they may find grace before God. For, let them be how
great soever they will, “there is no servant greater than his Lord, nor disciple greater than his
master.”2209 And assuredly He is the Lord, Who saith, “All things have been delivered unto Me of
My Father;”2210 and He is the Master, Who saith, “Come unto Me, all ye who labor, and learn ofMe;” and yet what learn we? “In that I am meek,” saith He, “and lowly of heart.”

52. Here some one will say, This is now not to write of virginity, but of humility. As though
truly it were any kind of virginity, and not that which is after God, which we had undertaken to set
forth. And this good, by how much I see it to be great, by so much I fear for it, lest it be lost, thethief pride. Therefore there is none that guardeth the virginal good, save God Himself Who gave

2206
2207
2208
2209
2210

1 John i. 8–10. [See R.V.]
1 John ii. 1, 2.
2 Cor. x. 12.
John xiii. 16.
Matt. xi. 27, 28.

571

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

it: and God is Charity.2211 The Guardian therefore of virginity is Charity: but the place of this
Guardian is humility. There forsooth He dwelleth, Who said, that on the lowly and quiet, and thattrembleth at His words, His Spirit resteth.2212 What, therefore, have I done foreign from my purpose,
if wishing the good, which I have praised, to be more securely guarded, I have taken care also to
prepare a place for the Guardian? For I speak with confidence, nor have I any fear lest they be
angry with me, whom I admonish with care to fear for themselves together with me. More easily
do follow the Lamb, although not whithersoever He shall have gone, yet so far as they shall have
had power, married persons who are humble, than virgins who are proud. For how doth one follow
Him, unto Whom one wills not to approach or how doth one approach Him, unto Whom one comes
not to learn, “in that I am meek and lowly of heart?” Wherefore those the Lamb leadeth following
whithersoever He shall have gone, in whom first Himself shall have found where to lay His Head.
For also a certain proud and crafty person had said to Him, “Lord, I will follow Thee whithersoever
Thou shalt have gone;”2213 to whom He made answer, “Foxes have dens, and fowls of heaven nests:
but the Son of Man hath not where to lay His Head.” By the term of foxes He reproved wily
craftiness, and by the name of birds puffed-up arrogance, wherein He found not pious humility torest in. And by this no where at all did he follow the Lord, who had promised that he would follow
Him, not unto a certain point of progress, but altogether whithersoever He should have gone.

437

53. Wherefore this do ye, virgins of God, this do ye: follow ye the Lamb, whithersoever He
shall have gone. But first come unto Him, Whom ye are to follow, and learn, in that He is meek
and lowly of heart. Come ye in lowly wise unto the Lowly, if ye love: and depart not from Him,lest ye fall. For whoso fears to depart from Him asks and says, “Let there not come to me foot of
pride.”2214 Go on in the way of loftiness with the foot of lowliness; Himself lifteth up such as follow
in lowly wise, Who thought it not a trouble to come down unto such as lay low. Commit ye His
gifts unto Him to keep, “guard ye your strength unto Him.”2215 Whatever of evil through His
guardianship ye commit not, account as forgiven unto you by Him: lest, thinking that you havelittle forgiven unto you, ye love little, and with ruinous boasting despise the publicans beating theirbreasts. Concealing that strength of yours which hath been tried beware, that ye be not puffed up,
because ye have been able to bear something: but concerning that which hath been untried pray,that ye be not tempted above that ye are able to bear. Think that some are superior to you in secret,than whom ye are openly better. When the good things of others, haply unknown to you, are kindly
believed by you, your own that are known to you are not lessened by comparison, but strengthened
by love: and what haply as yet are wanting, are by so much the more easily given, by how muchthey are the more humbly desired. Let such among your number as persevere, afford to you an
example: but let such as fall increase your fear. Love the one that ye may imitate it; mourn over
the other, that ye be not puffed up. Do not ye establish your own righteousness; submit yourselves

2211
2212
2213
2214
2215

1 John iv. 8.
Is. lxvi. 2.
Matt. viii. 19, 20.
Ps. xxxvi. 11.
Ps. lix. 9. [See R.V.]

572

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

unto God Who justifies you. Pardon the sins of others, pray for your own: future sins shun bywatching, past sins blot out by confessing.

54. Lo, already ye are such, as that in the rest of your conduct also ye correspond with thevirginity which ye have professed and kept. Lo, already not only do ye abstain from murders,devilish sacrifices and abominations, thefts, rapines, frauds, perjuries, drunkennesses, and all luxury
and avarice, hatreds, emulations, impieties, cruelties; but even those things, which either are, or
are thought, lighter, are not found nor arise among you: not bold face, not wandering eyes, notunbridled tongue, not petulant laugh, not scurrilous jest, not unbecoming mien, not swelling or
loose gait; already ye render not evil for evil, nor curse for curse;2216 already, lastly, ye fulfill thatmeasure of love, that ye lay down your lives for your brethren.2217 Lo, already ye are such, because
also such ye ought to be. These, being added to virginity, set forth an angelic life unto men, andthe ways of heaven unto the earth. But, by how much ye are great, whosoever of you are so great,“by so much humble yourselves in all things, that ye may find grace before God,” that He resist
you not as proud, that He humble you not as lifting up yourselves, that He lead you not throughstraits as being puffed up: although anxiety be unnecessary, that, where Charity glows, humility
be not wanting.

55. If, therefore, ye despise marriages of sons of men, from which to beget sons of men, love
ye with your whole heart Him, Who is fair of form above the sons of men; ye have leisure; yourheart is free from marriage bonds. Gaze on the Beauty of your Lover: think of Him equal to the
Father, made subject also to His Mother: ruling even in the heavens, and serving upon the earth:creating all things, created among all things. That very thing, which in Him the proud mock at,gaze on, how fair it is: with inward eyes gaze on the wounds of Him hanging, the scars of Him
rising again, the blood of Him dying, the price of him that believes, the gain of Him that redeems.
Consider of how great value these are, weigh them in the scales of Charity; and whatever of love
ye had to expend upon your marriages, pay back to Him.

56. It is well that He seeks your beauty within, where He hath given unto you power to become
daughters of God:2218 He seeks not of you a fair flesh, but fair conduct, whereby to bridle also theflesh. He is not one unto Whom any one can lie concerning you, and make him rage throughjealousy. See with how great security ye love Him, Whom ye fear not to offend by false suspicions.
Husband and wife love each other, in that they see each other: and what they see not, that they fear
between themselves: nor have they sure delight in what is visible, while in what is concealed theyusually suspect what is not. Ye in Him, Whom ye see not with the eyes, and behold by faith, neither

2216
2217
2218

1 Pet. iii. 9. [See R.V.]
1 John iii. 16.
John i. 12.

573

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

have what is real to blame, nor fear lest haply ye offend Him by what is false. If therefore ye should
owe great love to husbands, Him, for Whose sake ye would not have husbands, how greatly ought
ye to love? Let Him be fixed in your whole heart, Who for you was fixed on the Cross: let Him
possess in your soul all that, whatever it be, that ye would not have occupied by marriage. It is notlawful for you to love little Him, for Whose sake ye have not loved even what were lawful. So
loving Him Who is meek and lowly of heart, I have no fear for you of pride.

438

57. Thus, after our small measure, we have spoken enough both of sanctity, whereby ye areproperly called “sanctimoniales,” and of humility, whereby whatever great name ye bear is kept.
But more worthily let those Three Children, unto whom He, Whom they loved with full glow ofheart, afforded refreshing in the fire, admonish you concerning this our little work, much more
shortly indeed in number of words, but much more greatly in weight of authority, in the Hymn
wherein God is honored by them. For joining humility unto holiness in such as praise God, they
have most plainly taught, that each, by how much he make any more holy profession, by so muchdo beware that he be not deceived by pride. Wherefore do ye also praise Him, Who grants unto
you, that in the midst of the flames of this world, although ye be not joined in marriage, yet ye be
not burned: and praying also for us, “Bless ye the Lord, ye holy and humble men of heart; utter anhymn, and exalt Him above all forever.”2219

441

On the Good of Widowhood.
[De Bono Viduitatis.]
Translated by Rev. C. L. Cornish, M.A., of Exeter College, Oxford.
This work is not mentioned in the Retractations, probably because it is a letter, and as suchit is reckoned by Possidius, cap. 7. It is also marked as St. Augustin’s by its references to hisother works, De Bono Conjugali, etc. cap. 15. Ep. to Proba, cap. 23. The date is marked by the
recent consecration of Demetrias, which was in 413. The admonition for which he is thanked
by Juliana, Ep. 188, may be that against Pelagianism.
An objection has been raised from its disagreement with the fourth Council of Carthage,an. 398. can. 104, which excommunicates widows who marry again after consecration, andpronounces them guilty of adultery, whereas in cap. 10 and 11, the opinion that such marriages
are no marriages, and that they ought to return to continence, is refuted. The two, however, are
not wholly irreconcileable, as there may be a guilt similar to that of adultery incurred, and it

2219

Song of Three Children 65.

574

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

may be visited with a censure in the form of excommunication, and yet the marriage may remain
valid. The 16th Canon of Chalcedon imposes such a penalty, with power to the Bishop to relax
it.—Abridged from the Benedictine Edition.

Augustin the Bishop, servant of Christ, and of the servants of Christ, unto the religious
handmaiden of God, Juliana, in the Lord of lords health.
Not any longer to be in debt of my promise to your request and love in Christ, I have seized
the occasion as I could, amid other my very pressing engagements, to write to you somewhat
concerning the profession of holy widowhood, forasmuch as, when I was present, you laded mewith entreaty, and, when I had not been able to deny you this, you often by letters demanded mypromise. And in this work of ours, when you shall find in reading that some things pertain not at
all unto your own person, or unto the person of you, who are living together in Christ, nor are
strictly necessary to give counsel unto your life, it will be your duty not on this account to judge
them superfluous. Forsooth this letter, although it be addressed to you, was not to be written for
you alone; but certainly it was a matter for us not to neglect, that it should profit others also throughyour means. Whatsoever, therefore, you shall find here, such as either hath been at no time necessary
for you, or is not so now, and which yet you shall perceive to be necessary for others, grieve noteither to possess or to lend to read; that your charity also may be the profit of others.

442

2. Whereas, therefore, in every question, which relates to life and conduct, not only teaching,but exhortation also is necessary; in order that by teaching we may know what is to be done, andby exhortation may be incited not to think it irksome to do what we already know is to be done;
what more can I teach you, than what we read in the Apostle? For holy Scripture setteth a rule toour teaching, that we dare not “be wise more than it behoveth to be wise;”2220 but be wise, as himself
saith, “unto soberness, according as unto each God hath allotted the measure of faith.”2221 Be it nottherefore for me to teach you any other thing, save to expound to you the words of the Teacher,and to treat of them as the Lord shall have given to me.

3. Therefore (thus) saith the Apostle, the teacher of the Gentiles, the vessel of election, “But I
say unto the unmarried and the widows, that it is good for them, if they shall have so continued,
even as I also.”2222 These words are to be so understood, as that we think not that widows ought
not to be called unmarried, in that they seem to have made trial of marriage: for by the name ofunmarried women he means those, who are not now bound by marriage, whether they have been,or whether they have not been so. And this in another place he opens, where he says, “Divided is

2220
2221
2222

So V.
Rom. xii. 3.
τοῖς, ταῖς: 1 Cor. vii. 8.

575

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

a woman unmarried and a virgin.”2223 Assuredly when he adds a virgin also, what would he haveunderstood by an unmarried woman, but a widow? Whence also, in what follows, under the oneterm “unmarried” he embraces both professions, saying, “She who is unmarried is careful of thethings of the Lord, how to please the Lord: but she who is married is careful of the things of theworld, how to please her husband.”2224 Certainly by the unmarried he would have understood, notonly her who hath never married, but her also, who, being by widowhood set free from the bondof marriage, hath ceased to be married; for on this account also he calleth not married, save her,
who hath an husband; not her also, who hath had, and hath not. Wherefore every widow is unmarried;but, because not every unmarried woman is a widow, for there are virgins also; therefore he hathhere set both, where he says, “But I say unto the unmarried and the widows;” as if he should say,What I say unto the unmarried, I say not unto them alone, who are virgins, but unto them also who
are widows; “that it is good for them, if they shall have so continued, even as also I.”2225

4. Lo, there is your good compared to that good, which the Apostle calls his own, if faith bepresent: yea, rather, because faith is present. Short is this teaching, yet not on this account to be
despised, because it is short; but on this account to be retained the more easily and the more dearly,
in that in shortness it is not cheap. For it is not every kind of good soever, which the Apostle would
here set forth, which he hath unambiguously placed above the faith of married women. But how
great good the faith of married women, that is, of Christian and religious women joined in marriage,
hath, may be understood from this, that, when he was giving charge for the avoiding of fornication,
wherein assuredly he was addressing married persons also, he saith, “Know ye not that your bodies
are the members of Christ?”2226 So great then is the good of faithful marriage, that even the very
members are (members) of Christ. But, forasmuch as the good of widowed continence is better
than this good, the purpose of this profession is, not that a catholic widow be any thing more thana member of Christ, but that she have a better place, than a married woman, among the membersof Christ. Forsooth the same Apostle says, “For, as in one body we have many members, but all
members have not the same course of action; so being many we are one body in Christ, and eachmembers one of another: having gifts diverse according unto the grace, which hath been given untous.”2227

5. Wherefore also when he was advising married persons not to defraud one another of the dueof carnal intercourse; lest, by this means, the one of them, (the due of marriage being denied tohim,) being through his own incontinence tempted of Satan, should fall away into fornication, hesaith, “But this I say of leave, not of command; but I would that all men were as I myself; but each

2223
2224
2225
2226
2227

ἡ γυνὴ καὶ ἡ παρθ™νος.
1 Cor. vii. 34.
1 Cor. vii. 8.
1 Cor. vi. 15.
Rom. xii. 4–6.

576

NPNF (V1-03)

443

Philip Schaff

one hath his own proper gift from God; but one in this way, and another in that.”2228 You see thatwedded chastity also, and the marriage faith of the Christian bed, is a “gift,” and this of God; sothat, when as carnal lust exceeds somewhat the measure of sensual intercourse, beyond what isnecessary for the begetting of children, this evil is not of marriage, but venial by reason of the goodof marriage. For not concerning marriage, which is contracted for the begetting of children, andthe faith of wedded chastity, and the sacrament (indissoluble, so long as both live) of matrimony,
all which are good; but concerning that immoderate use of the flesh, which is recognized in the
weakness of married persons, and is pardoned by the intervention of the good of marriage, theApostle saith, “I speak of leave, not of command.” Also, when he says, “The woman is bound, solong as her husband lives: but, in case her husband shall have died, she is set free: let her be married
to whom she will, only in the Lord: but she shall be more blessed, if she shall have so continued,
according to my counsel;”2229 he shows sufficiently that a faithful woman is blessed in the Lord,even when she marries a second time after the death of her husband, but that a widow is more
blessed in the same Lord; that is, to speak not only in the words, but by instances also, of the
Scriptures, that Ruth is blessed, but that Anna is more blessed.

6. Wherefore this in the first place you ought to know, that by the good, which you have chosen,
second marriages are not condemned, but are set in lower honor. For, even as the good of holy
virginity, which thy daughter hath chosen, doth not condemn thy one marriage; so neither doth thy
widowhood the second marriage of any. For hence, specially, the heresies of the Cataphryges andof the Novatians swelled, which Tertullian also, inflated with cheeks full of sound not of wisdom,whilst with railing tooth he attacks2230 second marriages, as though unlawful, which the Apostle
with sober mind allows2231 to be altogether lawful. From this soundness of doctrine let no man’s
reasoning, be he unlearned, or be he learned, move thee; nor do thou so extol thy own good, as tocharge as evil that of another’s which is not evil; but do thou rejoice so much the more of thy own
good, the more thou seest, that, by it, not only are evils shunned, but some goods too surpassed.
For adultery and fornication are evils. But from these unlawful things she is very far removed, who
hath bound herself by liberty of vow, and, not by command of law, but by counsel of charity, hathbrought to pass that even things lawful should not be lawful to her. And marriage chastity is a good,
but widowed continence is a better good. Therefore this better good is honored by the submissionof that other, not that other condemned by the praise of this that is better.

7. But whereas the Apostle, when commending the fruit of unmarried men and women, in thatthey have thought of the things of the Lord, how to please God, added and saith, “But this I say foryour profit, not to cast a snare on you,”2232 that is, not to force you; “but in order to that which is
2228
2229
2230
2231
2232

1 Cor. vii. 6, 7.
1 Cor. vii. 39, 40.
“Concidit.”“Concedit.”
1 Cor. vii. 35.

577

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

honorable;” we ought not, because he saith that the good of the unmarried is honorable, therefore
to think that the bond of marriage is base; otherwise we shall condemn first marriages also, which
neither Cataphryges, nor Novatians, nor their most learned upholder Tertullian dared to call base.
But as, when he says, “But I say unto the unmarried and widows, that it is good for them if theyshall have so continued;”2233 assuredly he set down “good” for “better,” since every thing, which,when compared with a good, is called better, this also without doubt is a good; for what else is itthat it is so called better, save that it is more good? and yet we do not on this account suppose him
by consequence to have thought that it was an evil, in case they married, in that he said, “it is goodfor them, if they shall have so continued;” so also, when he says, “but in order to that which ishonest,” he hath not shown that marriage is base, but that which was honester than (another thingalso) honest, he hath commended by the name of honest in general. Because what is honester, save
what is more honest? But what is more honest is certainly honest. Forsooth he plainly showed that
this is better than that other that is good, where he says, “Whoso giveth to marry, doeth well; but
whoso giveth not to marry, doeth better.”2234 And this more blessed than that other that is blessed,
where he saith, “But she shall be more blessed, if she shall have so continued.”2235 As, therefore,
there is than good a better, and than blessed a more blessed, so is there than honest an honester,which he chose to call honest. For far be it that that be base, of which the Apostle Peter speaking
saith, “Husbands, unto your wives, as unto the weaker and subject vessel, give honor, as unto
co-heirs of grace;” and addressing the wives, he exhorts them, by the pattern of Sarah, to be subject
unto their husbands; “For so,” saith he, “certain holy women, who hoped in God, adorned themselves,
obeying their own husbands; even as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord, whose daughters
ye are made, well-doing, and not fearing any disturbance.”2236

444

8. Whence, also, what the Apostle Paul said of the unmarried woman, “that she may be holyboth in body and spirit;”2237 we are not so to understand, as though a faithful woman being marriedand chaste, and according to the Scriptures subject unto her husband, be not holy in body, but onlyin spirit. For it cannot come to pass, that when the spirit is sanctified, the body also be not holy, of
which the sanctified spirit maketh use: but, that we seem not to any to argue rather than to prove
this by divine saying; since the Apostle Peter, making mention of Sarah, saith only “holy women,”and saith not, “and in body;” let us consider that saying of the same Paul, where forbidding
fornication he saith, “Know ye not, that your bodies are members of Christ? Taking, therefore,
members of Christ, shall I make them members of an harlot? Far be it.”2238 Therefore let any one
dare to say that the members of Christ are not holy; or let him not dare to separate from the membersof Christ the bodies of the faithful that are married. Whence, also, a little after he saith, “Your bodyis the temple within you of the Holy Spirit, Whom ye have from God; and ye are not your own; for

2233
2234
2235
2236
2237
2238

1 Cor. vii. 8.
1 Cor. vii. 38.
ver. 40.
1 Pet. iii. 5–7. [See R.V.]
1 Cor. vii. 34.
1 Cor. vi. 15. [See R.V.]

578

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

ye have been bought with a great price.”2239 He saith that the body of the faithful is both membersof Christ, and the temple of the Holy Spirit, wherein assuredly the faithful of both sexes areunderstood. There therefore are married women, there unmarried women also; but distinct in theirdeserts, and as members preferred to members, whilst yet neither are separated from the body.
Whereas, therefore, he saith, speaking of an unmarried woman, “that she may be holy both in bodyand spirit,” he would have understood a fuller sanctification both in body and in spirit, and hathnot deprived the body of married women of all sanctification.

9. Learn, therefore, that thy good, yea, rather, remember what thou hast learned, that thy good
is more praised, because there is another good than which this is better, than if this could not on
any other condition be a good, unless that were an evil, or altogether were not. The eyes have greathonor in the body, but they would have less, if they were alone, and there were not other membersof less honor. In heaven itself the sun by its light surpasses, not chides, the moon; and star fromstar differs in glory,2240 not is at variance through pride. Therefore, “God made all things, and, lo,very good;”2241 not only “good,” but also “very;” for no other reason, than because “all.” For ofeach several work throughout it was also said, “God saw that it is good.” But, when “all” werenamed, “very” was added; and it was said, “God saw all things which He made, and, lo, very good.”
For certain several things were better than other several, but all together better than any several.
Therefore, may the sound doctrine of Christ make thee in His Body sound through His Grace, that,what thou hast better than others in body and spirit, the self-same thy spirit, which ruleth the body,may neither extol with insolence, nor distinguish with lack of knowledge.

10. Nor, because I called Ruth blessed, Anna more blessed, in that the former married twice,
the latter, being soon widowed of her one husband, so lived long, do you straightway also thinkthat you are better than Ruth. Forsooth different in the times of the Prophets was the dispensationof holy females, whom obedience, not lust, forced to marry, for the propagation of the people of
God,2242 that in them Prophets of Christ might be sent beforehand; whereas the People itself also,
by those things which in figure happened among them, whether in the case of those who knew, orin the case of those who knew not those things, was nothing else than a Prophet of Christ, of whomshould be born the Flesh also of Christ. In order therefore for the propagation of that people, he
was accounted accursed by sentence of the Law, whoso raised not up seed in Israel.2243 Whence
also holy women were kindled, not by lust of sensual intercourse, but by piety of bearing; so that
we most rightly believe of them that they would not have sought sensual intercourse, in case afamily could have come by any other means. And to the husbands was allowed the use of several
wives living; and that the cause of this was not lust of the flesh, but forethought of begetting, is
2239
2240
2241
2242
2243

1 Cor. vi. 19, 20.
1 Cor. xv. 41.
Gen. i. 31.
l Cor. x. 11.
Deut. xxv. 5–10

579

NPNF (V1-03)

445

Philip Schaff

shown by the fact, that, as it was lawful for holy men to have several wives living, it was not likewise
lawful for holy women to have intercourse with several husbands living; in that they would be byso much the baser, by how much the more they sought what would not add to their fruitfulness.
Wherefore holy Ruth, not having seed such as at that time was necessary in Israel, on the death ofher husband sought another of whom to have it. Therefore than this one twice married, Anna once
married a widow was on this account more blessed, in that she attained also to be a prophetess ofChrist; concerning whom we are to believe, that, although she had no sons, (which indeed Scripture
by keeping silence hath left uncertain,) yet, had she by that Spirit foreseen that Christ would
immediately come of a virgin, by Which she was enabled to recognize Him even as a child: whence,with good reason, even without sons, (that is, assuming she had none,) she refused a second marriage:in that she knew that now was the time wherein Christ were better served, not by duty of bearing,
but by zeal of containing: not by fruitfulness of married womb, but by chastity of widowed conduct.
But if Ruth also was aware that by her flesh was propagated a seed, whereof Christ should hereafter
have flesh, and by marrying set forth her ministering to this knowledge, I dare not any longer saythat the widowhood of Anna was more blessed than her fruitfulness.

11. But thou who both hast sons, and livest in that end of the world, wherein now is the time
not of casting stones, but of gathering; not of embracing, but of abstaining from embracing;2244
when the Apostle cries out, “But this I say, brethren, the time is short; it remains, that both they
who have wives be as not having;”2245 assuredly if thou hadst sought a second marriage, it would
have been no obedience of prophecy or law, no carnal desire even of family, but a mark ofincontinence alone. For you would have done what the Apostle says, after he had said, “It is goodfor them, if they shall have so continued, even as I;”2246 forsooth he straightway added, “But if they
contain not themselves, let them marry; for I had rather that they marry than be burned.” For thishe said, in order that the evil of unbridled desire might not be carried headlong into criminal baseness,being taken up by the honest estate of marriage. But thanks be to the Lord, in that thou hast given
birth to what thou wouldest not be, and the virginity of thy child hath compensated for the loss of
thy virginity. For Christian doctrine, having diligent question made of it, makes answer, that a firstmarriage also now at this time is to be despised, unless incontinence stand in the way. For he, who
said, “If they contain not themselves, let them marry,” could have said, “If they have not sons, letthem marry,” if, when now after theResurrection and Preaching of Christ, there is unto all nations
so great and abundant supply of sons to be spiritually begotten, it were any such duty to beget sonsafter the flesh as it was in the first times. And, whereas in another place he saith, “But I will thatthe younger marry, bear children, be mothers of families,”2247 he commends with apostolic sobriety
and authority the good of marriage, but doth not impose the duty of bearing, as though in order toobey the law, even on those who “receive” the good of continence. Lastly, why he had said this,he unfolds, when he adds and says, “To give no occasion of speaking evil to the adversary; for

2244
2245
2246
2247

Eccl. iii. 5.
1 Cor. vii. 29. [See R.V.]
1 Cor. vii. 8, 9.
1 Tim. v. 14, 15.

580

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

already certain have turned back after Satan:” that by these words of his we may understand, thatthose, whom he would have marry, could have done better to contain than marry; but better tomarry than to go back after Satan, that is, to fall away from that excellent purpose of virginal orwidowed chastity, by looking back to things that are behind, and perish. Wherefore, such as containnot themselves, let them marry before they make profession of continence, before they vow unto
God, what, if they pay not, they are justly condemned. Forsooth in another place he saith of such,“For when they have lived in delights in Christ, they wish to marry: having condemnation, in thatthey have made of none effect their first faith;”2248 that is, they have turned aside their will fromthe purpose of continence unto marriage. Forsooth they have made of none effect the faith, whereby
they formerly vowed what they were unwilling by perseverance to fulfill. Therefore the good of
marriage is indeed ever a good: but in the people of God it was at one time an act of obedience
unto the law; now it is a remedy for weakness, but in certain a solace of human nature. Forsooth
to be engaged in the getting of children, not after the fashion of dogs by promiscuous use of females,
but by honest order of marriage, is not an affection such as we are to blame in a man; yet thisaffection itself the Christian mind, having thoughts of heavenly things, in a more praiseworthy
manner surpasses and overcomes.

446

12. But since, as the Lord saith, “Not all receive this word;”2249 therefore let her who can receiveit, receive it; and let her, who containeth not, marry; let her, who hath not begun, deliberate; lether, who hath undertaken it, persevere; let there be no occasion given unto the adversary, let there
be no oblation withdrawn from Christ. Forsooth in the marriage bond if chastity be preserved,
condemnation is not feared; but in widowed and virginal continence, the excellence of a greater
gift2250 is sought for: and, when this has been sought, and chosen, and by debt of vow offered, fromthis time not only to enter upon marriage, but, although one be not married, to wish to marry ismatter of condemnation. For, in order to show this, the Apostle saith not, “When they shall have
lived in delights, in Christ” they marry;2251 but “they wish to marry; having,” saith he, “condemnation,in that they have made of none effect their first faith,” although not by marrying, yet by wishing;
not that the marriages even of such are judged matter of condemnation; but there is condemned awrong done to purpose, there is condemned a broken faith of vow, there is condemned not a relief
by lower good, but a fall from higher good: lastly, such are condemned, not because they haveentered upon marriage faith afterwards, but because they have made of none effect the first faithof continence. And in order to suggest this in few words, the Apostle would not say, that they havecondemnation, who after purpose of greater sanctity marry, (not because they are not condemned,
but lest in them marriage itself should be thought to be condemned:) but, after he had said, “theywish to marry,” he straightway added, “having condemnation.” And he stated the reason, “in thatthey have made of none effect their former faith,” in order that it may appear that it is the will whichfell away from its purpose, which is condemned, whether marriage follow, or fail to follow.

2248
2249
2250
2251

1 Tim. v. 11, 12. [See R.V.]
Matt. xix. 11.
Muneris.
1 Tim. v. 11, 12.

581

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

13. Wherefore they who say that the marriages of such are not marriages, but rather adulteries,
seem not to me to consider with sufficient acuteness and care what they say; forsooth they, aremisled by a semblance of truth. For, whereas they, who of Christian sanctity marry not, are said tochoose the marriage of Christ, hence certain argue saying, If she, who during the life of her husband
is married to another, be an adulteress, even as the Lord Himself hath laid down in the Gospel;
therefore, during the life of Christ, over Whom death hath no more dominion,2252 if she who had
chosen His marriage, be married to a man, she is an adulteress. They, who say this, are moved
indeed with acuteness, but fail to observe, how great absurdity in fact follows on this reasoning.
For whereas it is praiseworthy that, even during the life of her husband, by his consent, a female
vow continence unto Christ, now, according to the reasoning of these persons, no one ought to do
this, lest she make Christ Himself, what is impious to imagine, an adulterer, by being married to
Him during the life of her husband. Next, whereas first marriages are of better desert than second,
far be it that this be the thought of holy widows, that Christ seem unto them as a second husband.
For Himself they used heretofore also to have, (when they were subject and did faithful service totheir own husbands,) not after the flesh, but after the Spirit a Husband; unto Whom the Church
herself, of which they are members, is the wife; who by soundness of faith, of hope, of charity, notin the virgins alone, but in widows also, and faithful married women, is altogether a virgin. Forsooth
unto the universal Church, of which they all are members, the Apostle saith, “I joined you unto one
husband a chaste virgin to present unto Christ.”2253 But He knoweth how to make fruitful, without
marring of chastity, a wife a virgin, Whom even in the flesh itself His Mother could without violationof chastity conceive. But there is brought to pass by means of this ill-considered notion, (whereby
they think that the marriages of women who have fallen away from this holy purpose, in case theyshall have married, are no marriages,) no small evil, that wives be separated from their husbands,
as though they were adulteresses, not wives; and wishing to restore to continence the women thus
separated, they make their husbands real adulterers, in that during the life of their wives they havemarried others.

14. Wherefore I cannot indeed say, of females who have fallen away from a better purpose, incase they shall have married, that they are adulteries, not marriages; but I plainly would not hesitate
to say, that departures and fallings away from a holier chastity, which is vowed unto the Lord, areworse than adulteries. For if, what may no way be doubted, it pertains unto an offense against
Christ, when a member of Him keepeth not faith to her husband; how much graver offense is it
against Him, when unto Himself faith is not kept, in a matter which He requires when offered, Who
had not required that it should be offered. For when each fails to render that which, not by force ofcommand, but by advice of counsel, he vowed, by so much the more doth he increase theunrighteousness of the wrong done to his vow, by how much the less necessity he had to vow.
These matters I for this reason treat of, that you may not think either that second marriages are
criminal, or that any marriages whatsoever, being marriages, are an evil. Therefore let this be yourmind, not that you condemn them, but that you despise them. Therefore the good of widowed

2252
2253

Rom. vi. 9.
2 Cor. xi. 2. [See R.V.]

582

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

chastity is becoming after a brighter fashion, in that in order to make vow and profession of it,
females may despise what is both pleasing and lawful. But after profession of vow made they must
continue to rein in, and overcome, what is pleasing, because it is no longer lawful.

447

15. Men are wont to move a question concerning a third or fourth marriage, and even more
numerous marriages than this. On which to make answer strictly, I dare neither to condemn any
marriage, nor to take from these the shame of their great number. But, lest the brevity of this myanswer may chance to displease any, I am prepared to listen to my reprover treating more fully.
For perhaps he alleges some reason, why second marriages be not condemned, but third becondemned. For I, as in the beginning of this discourse I gave warning, dare not to be more wise
than it behoveth to be wise.2254 For who am I, that I should think that that must be defined which
I see that the Apostle hath not defined? For he saith, “A woman is bound, so long as her husband
liveth.”2255 He said not, her first; or, second; or, third; or, fourth;2256 but, “A woman,” saith he, “isbound, so long as her husband liveth; but if her husband shall be dead, she is set free; let her bemarried to whom she will, only in the Lord: but she shall be more blessed, if she shall have socontinued.” I know not what can be added to, or taken from, this sentence, so far as relates to thismatter. Next I hear Himself also, the Master and Lord of the Apostles and of us, answering the
Sadducees, when they had proposed to Him a woman not once-married, or twice-married, but, if
it can be said, seven-married,2257 whose wife she should be in the resurrection? For rebuking them,
He saith, “Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God. For in the resurrection theyshall neither be married, nor marry wives;2258 for they shall not begin to die, but shall be equal to
the Angels of God.”2259 Therefore He made mention of their resurrection, who shall rise again unto
life, not who shall rise again unto punishment. Therefore He might have said, Ye do err, knowing
not the Scriptures, nor the power of God: for in that resurrection it will not be possible that there
be those that were wives of many; and then added, that neither doth any there marry. But neither,
as we see, did He in this sentence show any sign of condemning her who was the wife of so manyhusbands. Wherefore neither dare I, contrary to the feeling of natural shame, say, that, when her
husbands are dead, a woman marry as often as she will; nor dare I, out of my own heart, beside theauthority of holy Scripture, condemn any number of marriages whatever. But, what I say to awidow, who hath had one husband, this I say to every widow; you will be more blessed, if you
shall have so continued.

16. For that also is no foolish question which is wont to be proposed, that whoso can may say,which widow is to be preferred in desert; whether one who hath had one husband, who, after having

2254
2255
2256
2257
2258
2259

Rom. xii. 3.
1 Cor. vii. 39, 40.
Al. “or any number.”
Septiviram.
Matt. xxii. 29, 30.
Luke xx. 35, 36.

583

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

lived a considerable time with her husband, being left a widow with sons born to her and alive,
hath made profession of continence; or she who as a young woman having lost two husbands within
two years, having no children left alive to console her, hath vowed to God continence, and in it
hath grown old with most enduring sanctity. Herein let them exercise themselves, if they can, by
discussing, and by showing some proof to us, who weigh the merits of widows by number ofhusbands, not by the strength itself of continence. For, if they shall have said, that she who hath
had one husband is to be preferred to her who hath had two; unless they shall have alleged somespecial reason or authority, they will assuredly be found to set before excellence of soul, not greater
excellence of soul, but good fortune of the flesh. Forsooth it pertained unto good fortune of theflesh, both to live a long time with her husband, and to conceive sons. But, if they prefer her noton this account, that she had sons; at any rate the very fact that she lived a long time with her
husband, what else was it than good fortune of the flesh? Further, the desert of Anna herself isherein chiefly commended, in that, after she had so soon buried her husband, through her protracted
life she long contended with the flesh, and overcame. For so it is written, “And there was Anna, aprophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Aser; she was far advanced in many days; andhad lived with her husband seven years from her virginity; and she was a widow even unto
eighty-four years, who used not to depart from the Temple, by fastings and prayers serving day
and night.”2260 You see how the holy widow is not only commended in this, that she had had one
husband, but also, that she had lived few years with a husband from her virginity, and had with sogreat service of piety continued her office of widowed chastity even unto so great age.

448

17. Let us therefore set before our eyes three widows, each having one of the things, the wholeof which were in her: let us suppose one who had had one husband, in whose case is wanting bothso great length of widowhood, in that she hath lived long with her husband, and so great zeal ofpiety, in that she doth not so serve with fasts and prayers: a second, who after the very short life ofher former husband, had quickly lost a second also, and is now long time a widow, but yet herself
also doth not so set herself to the most religious service of fasts and prayers: a third, who not only
hath had two husbands, but also hath lived long with each of them singly, or with one of them, andbeing left a widow at a later period of life, wherein indeed, in case she had wished to marry, shemight also conceive sons, hath taken upon her widowed continence; but is more intent on God,
more careful to do always the things that please Him, day and night, like Anna, serving by prayers
and fasts. If a question be raised, which of these is to be preferred in deserts, who but must see thatin this contest the palm must be given to the greater and, more glowing piety? So also if three others
be set, in each of whom are two of those three, but one of the three in each wanting, who can doubtthat they will be the better, who shall have in a more excellent manner in their two goods pious
humility, in order that there may be lofty piety?

2260

Luke ii. 36, 37.

584

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

18. No one indeed of these six widows could come up to your standard. For you, in case thatyou shall have maintained this vow even unto old age, mayest have all the three things wherein thedesert of Anna excelled. For both thou hast had one husband, and he lived not long with thee inthe flesh; and, by this means, in case that thou shall show forth obedience to the words of theApostle, saying, “But she who is a widow indeed and desolate, hath hoped in the Lord, andpersevereth in prayers night and day,”2261 and with sober watchfulness shall shun what follows,“But she who passes her time in delights, living is dead,” all those three goods, which were Anna’s,
shall be thine also. But you have sons also, which haply she had not. And yet you are not on thisaccount to be praised, that you have them, but that you are zealous to nurture and educate thempiously. For that they were born to thee, was of fruitfulness; that they are alive, is of good fortune;that they be so brought up, is of your will and disposal.2262 In the former let men congratulate you,in this let them imitate you. Anna, through prophetic knowledge, recognized Christ with His virgin
Mother; thee the grace of the Gospel hath made the mother of a virgin of Christ. Therefore thatholy virgin,2263 whom herself willing and seeking it ye have offered unto Christ, hath added
something of virginal desert also unto the widowed deserts of her grandmother and mother. For ye
who have her, fail not to have something thence; and in her ye are, what in yourselves ye are not.
For that holy virginity should be taken from you at your marriage, was on this account brought topass, in order that she should be born of you.

19. These discussions, therefore, concerning the different deserts of married women, and ofdifferent widows, I would not in this work enter upon, if, what I am writing unto you, I were writing
only for you. But, since there are in this kind of discourse certain very difficult questions, it was
my wish to say something more than what properly relates to you, by reason of certain, who seemnot to themselves learned, unless they essay, not by passing judgment to discuss, but by rending
to cut in pieces the labors of others: in the next place, that you yourself also may not only keep
what you have vowed, and make advance in that good; but also know more carefully and more
surely, that this same good of yours is not distinguished from the evil of marriage, but is set before
the good of marriage. For let not such, as condemn the marriage of widowed females, although
they exercise their continence in abstaining from many things, which you make use of, on thisaccount lead you astray, to think what they think, although you cannot do what they do. For no one
would be a madman, although he see that the strength of a madman is greater than of men in theirsound senses. Chiefly, therefore, let sound doctrine both adorn and guard goodness of purpose.
Forsooth it is from this cause that catholic females, even after that they have been married morethan once, are by just judgment preferred, not only to the widows who have had one husband, butalso to the virgins of heretics. There are indeed on these three matters, of marriage, widowhood,and virginity, many winding recesses of questions, many perplexities; and in order by discussion
to enter deeply into and solve these, there is required both greater care, and a fuller discourse; that2261

1 Tim. v. 5, 6.
Potestatis.
2263
Demetrias, whose grandmother was Proba Faltonia, her mother, Juliana. See S. Aug. Ep. 130. and 150. Vol. I, pp. 459,
503, sqq.
2262

585

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

either we may have a right mind in all those things, or, if in any matter we be otherwise minded,this also God may reveal unto us. However, what there also the Apostle saith next after, “Whereunto
we have arrived, in that let us walk.”2264 But we have arrived, in what relates to this matter on which
we are speaking, so far as to set continence before marriage, but holy virginity even before widowed
continence; and not to condemn any marriages, which yet are not adulteries but marriages, by praiseof any purpose whatever of our own or of our friends. Many other things on these matters we havesaid in a Book concerning the Good of Marriage, and in another Book concerning Holy Virginity,
and in a Book which we composed with as great pains as we could against Faustus the Manichee;since, by most biting reproaches in his writings of the chaste marriages of Patriarchs and Prophets,
he had turned aside the minds of certain unlearned persons from soundness of faith.
449

20. Wherefore, forasmuch as in the beginning of this little work I had proposed certain twonecessary matters, and had undertaken to follow them out; one which related to doctrine, the otherto exhortation; and I have not failed in the former part, to the best of my power, according to thebusiness which I had undertaken; let us come to exhortation, in order that the good which is known
wisely, may be pursued ardently. And in this matter I give you this advice first, that, how greatsoever love of pious continence you feel to be in you, you ascribe it to the favor of God, and give
Him thanks, Who of His Holy Spirit hath freely given unto you so much, as that, His love being
shed abroad in your heart, the love of a better good should take away from you the permission ofa lawful matter. For it was His gift to you that you should not wish to marry, when it was lawful,in order that now it should not be lawful, even if you wished; and that by this means the wish not
to do it might be the more settled, lest what were now unlawful be done, which was not done evenwhen lawful; and that, a widow of Christ, you should so far attain as to see your daughter also avirgin of Christ; for whilst you are praying as Anna, she hath become what Mary was. These by
how much the more you know them to be gifts of God, by so much the more are you by the same
gifts blessed; yea, rather, you are not so otherwise than as you know from Whom you have what
you have. For listen to what the Apostle said on this matter, “But we have received not the spiritof this world, but the Spirit Which is of God, that we may know what things have been given to us
by God.”2265 Forsooth many have many gifts of God, and by not knowing from Whom they havethem, come to boast themselves with impious vanity. But there is no one blessed with the gifts ofGod, who is ungrateful to the Giver. Forasmuch as, also, whereas in the course of the sacred
Mysteries we are bidden to “lift up our hearts,” it is by His help that we are able, by Whose bidding
we are admonished; and therefore it follows, that, of this so great good of the heart lifted up, wegive not the glory to ourselves as of our own strength, but render thanks unto our Lord God. Forof this we are straightway admonished, that “this is meet,” “this is right.” You remember whence
these words are taken, you recognize by what sanction2266, and by how great holiness they arecommended within. Therefore hold and have what you have received, and return thanks to theGiver. For, although it be yours to receive and have, yet you have that, which you have received;

2264
2265
2266

Phil. iii. 15, 16.
1 Cor. ii. 12.
“Intus qua sanctione,” al. “inter quas actiones,” “amongst what actions;” there are other various readings besides.

586

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

forasmuch as to one waxing proud, and impiously glorying of that which he had, as though he had
it of himself, the Truth saith by the Apostle, “But what hast thou, which thou hast not received?
But, if thou hast received, why boastest thou, as if thou hadst not received?”2267

450

21. These things I am compelled to admonish by reason of certain little discourses of somemen, that are to be shunned and avoided, which have begun to steal through the ears unto the minds
of many, being (as must be said with tears) hostile to the grace of Christ, which go to persuade that
we count not as necessary for us prayer unto the Lord, that we enter not into temptation. For theyso essay to defend the free will of man, as that by it alone, even without help of the grace of God,
we are able to fulfill what is commanded us of God. And thus it follows, that the Lord in vain said,“Watch and pray, lest ye enter into temptation;”2268 and in vain daily in the Lord’s Prayer itself wesay, “Lead us not into temptation.”2269 For if it is of our own power alone that we be not overcome
by temptation, why do we pray that we enter not, nor be led into it? Rather let us do what is of ourown free will, and most absolute power; and let us mock at the Apostle, saying, “God is faithful,
Who will not suffer you to be tempted above what ye are able;”2270 and let us oppose him, and say,Why seek I of the Lord, what He hath set in my own power? But far be it, that he be so minded,
who is sound minded. Wherefore let us seek that He may give, what He bids us that we have. For
to this end He bids us have this, which as yet we have not, to admonish as what to seek; and thatwhen we shall have found the power to do what He hath bidden, we may understand, of this also,
whence we have received it; lest, being puffed and lifted up by the spirit of this world, we know
not what things have been given unto us of God. Wherefore the free choice of the human will we
by no means destroy, when the Grace of God, by which the free choice itself is helped, we deny
not with ungrateful pride, but rather set forth with grateful piety. For it is ours to will: but the willitself is both admonished that it may arise, and healed, that it may have power;2271 and enlarged,that it may receive; and filled, that it may have. For were not we to will, certainly neither should
we receive the things that are given, nor should we have. For who would have continence, (among
the rest of the gifts of God to speak of this rather, of which I am speaking to you,) who, I say, would
have continence, unless willing? forasmuch as also no one would receive unless willing. But if you
ask, Whose gift it is, that it can be by our will received and had? listen to Scripture; yea, rather,because thou knowest, recollect what thou hast read, “Whereas I knew,” saith he, “that no one canbe continent, unless God give it, and this itself was of wisdom, to know whose gift it was.”2272
Great are these two gifts, wisdom and continence; wisdom, forsooth, whereby we are formed in
the knowledge of God; but continence, whereby we are not conformed unto this world. But God
bids us that we be both wise and continent, without which goods we cannot be just and perfect. But
let us pray that He give what He bids, by helping and inspiring, Who hath admonished us what to

2267
2268
2269
2270
2271
2272

1 Cor. iv. 7.
Matt. xxvi. 41.
Matt. vi. 13.
1 Cor. x. 13.
Or “be sound.”Wisd. viii. 21.

587

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

will by commanding and calling. Whatsoever of this He hath given, let us pray that He preserve;
but what He hath not given as yet, let us pray that He supply; yet let us pray and give thanks forwhat we have received; and for what we have not yet received, from the very fact that we are notungrateful for what we have received, let us trust that we shall receive it. For He, Who hath given
power unto the faithful who are married to contain from adulteries and fornications, Himself hathgiven unto holy virgins and widows to contain from all sexual intercourse; in the case of which
virtue now the term inviolate chastity2273 or continence is properly used. Or is it haply that from
Him indeed we have received continence, but from ourselves have wisdom? What then is it that
the Apostle James saith, “But if any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, Who giveth unto allliberally, and upbraideth not, and it shall be given unto him.”2274 But on this question, already inother little works of ours, so far as the Lord hath helped us, we have said many things; and at othertimes, so far as through Him we shall be able, when opportunity is given, we will speak.

22. Now it has been my wish on this account to say something on this subject, by reason ofcertain of our brethren most friendly and dear to us, and without willful guilt indeed entangled inthis error, but yet entangled; who think, that, when they exhort any to righteousness and piety, theirexhortation will not have force, unless the whole of that, wherein they would work upon man thatman should work, they set in the power of man, not helped by the grace of God, but put forth by
the alone choice of the free will; as though there can be free will to perform a good work, unless
set free by the gift of God! And they mark not that this very thing themselves also have by the giftof God, that with such power they exhort, as to excite the dull wills of men to enter upon a good
life, to enkindle the cold, to correct such as are in error, to convert such as are turned aside, to pacify
such as are opposed. For thus they are able to succeed in persuading what they would persuade to,or if they work not these things in the wills of men, what is their work? wherefore speak they? Letthem leave them rather to their own choice. But if in them they work these things, what? I pray,
doth man, in the will of man, work so great things by speaking, and doth God work nothing thereby helping? Yea rather, with how great soever power of discourse man may prevail, as that by skillof discussion, and sweetness of speech, he in the will of man implant truth, nourish charity, by
teaching remove error, by exhortation remove sloth, “Neither he who planteth is any thing, nor he
who watereth, but God Who giveth the increase.”2275 For in vain would the workman use all means
without, unless the Creator should work secretly within. I hope therefore that this letter of mine by
the worthy deed2276 of your Excellence will soon come into the hands of such also; on this accountI thought that I ought to say something on this subject. Next that both you yourself, and whatsoever
other widows shall read this, or hear it read, may know that you make more advance unto the loveand profession of the good of continence by your own prayers than by our exhortations; forasmuch

2273
2274
2275
2276

“Integritas.”
James i. 5.
1 Cor. iii. 7.
Merito.

588

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

as if it be any help to you that our addresses also are supplied to you, the whole must be assigned
to His grace, “in Whose Hand,” as it is written, “are both we and our discourses.”2277

451

23. If, therefore, you had not as yet vowed unto God widowed continence, we would assuredly
exhort you to vow it; but, in that you have already vowed it, we exhort you to persevere. And yet
I see that I must so speak as to lead those also who had as yet thought of marriage to love it and toseize on it. Therefore let us give ear unto the Apostle, “She who is unmarried,” saith he, “is careful
about the things of the Lord, to be holy both in body and spirit; but she who is married is careful
about the things of the world, how to please her husband.”2278 He saith not, is careful about thethings of the world, so as not to be holy; but certainly that that marriage holiness2279 is less, in regardof that portion of cares, which hath thought of the pleasure of the world. Whatever, therefore, I of
earnest purpose of mind would be expended also on these things whereby she would have to pleasea husband, the unmarried Christian woman ought in a certain way to gather and bring together untothat earnest purpose whereby she is to please the Lord. And consider, Whom she pleases, who
pleases the Lord; and assuredly she is by so much the more blessed by how much the more shepleases Him; but by how much the more her thoughts are of the things of the world, by so muchthe less does she please Him. Therefore do ye with all earnest purpose please Him, Who is “’fairof form above the sons of men.”2280 For that ye please Him, it is by His grace which is “shed abroadon His lips.” Please ye Him in that portion of thought also, which would be occupied by the world,
in order to please a husband. Please ye Him, Who displeased the world, in order that such as please
Him might be set free from the world. For This One, fair of form above the sons of men, men saw
on the Cross of the Passion; “and He had not form or beauty, but His face cast down, and His
posture unseemly.”2281 Yet from this unseemliness of your Redeemer flowed the price of yourbeauty, but of a beauty within, for “all the beauty of the King’s daughter is within.”2282 By thisbeauty please ye Him, this beauty order ye with studious care and anxious thought. He loves notdyes of deceits; the Truth delighteth in things that are true, and He, if you recognize what you have
read, is called the Truth. “I am,” saith He, “the Way, and the Truth, and the Life.”2283 Run ye to
Him through Him, please ye Him of Him; live ye with Him, in Him, of Him. With true affections
and holiest chastity love ye to be loved by such a Husband.

24. Let the inner ear of the virgin also, thy holy child, hear these things. I shall see2284 how far
she goes before you in the Kingdom of That King: it is another question. Yet ye have found, mother

2277
2278
2279
2280
2281
2282
2283
2284

Wisdom vii. 16.
1 Cor. vii. 34.
Most mss. “but certainly that divine holiness.”
Ps. xlv. 2.
Is. liii. 2. [See R.V.]
Ps. lxv. 13. [See R.V.]
John xiv. 6.
One ms “to see.”589

NPNF (V1-03)

452

Philip Schaff

and daughter, Him, Whom by beauty of chastity ye ought to please together, having despised, sheall, you second, marriage. Certainly if there were husbands whom ye had to please, by this time,perhaps, you would feel ashamed to adorn yourself together with your daughter; now let it notshame you, to set yourselves to do what may adorn you both together; because it is not matter ofblame, but of glory, that ye be loved both together by That One. But white and red, feigned andlaid on with paints, ye would not use, even if ye had husbands; not thinking that they were fit
persons for you to deceive, or yourselves such as ought to deceive; now therefore That King, Who
had longed for the beauty of His Only Spouse, of Whom ye are members, do ye with all truth
together please, together cleave unto; she with virginal chastity, you with widowed continence,both with spiritual beauty. In which beauty also her grandmother, and your mother-in-law, who by
this time surely hath grown old, is beautiful together with you. Forsooth whilst charity carries thevigor of this beauty into things that are before, length of years causeth not in it a wrinkle. You havewith you a holy aged woman, both in your house and in Christ, whom to consult concerning
perseverance; how you are to fight with this or that temptation, what you are to do, that it may be
the more easily overcome; what safeguard you are to take, that it may not easily again lay wait;
and if there be any thing of this sort, she teaches you, who is now by time fixed, by love awell-wisher, by natural affection full of cares, by age secure. Do you specially, do you in suchthings consult her, who hath made trial of what you have made trial of. For your child sings thatsong,2285 which in the Apocalypse none save virgins can sing. But for both of you she prays more
carefully than for herself, but she is more full of care for her granddaughter, for whom there remains
a longer space of years to overcome temptations; but you she sees nearer to her own age, and motherof a daughter of such an age, as that, had you seen her married, (which now is not lawful, and far
be it from her,) I think you would have blushed to bear children together with her. How much thenis it that now remains to you of a dangerous age, who are on this account not called a grandmother,in order that together with your daughter you may be fruitful in offspring of holy thoughts andworks? Therefore not without reason is the grandmother more full of care for her, for whom you
also the mother; because both what she hath vowed is greater, and the whole of what she hath justnow begun remains to her. May the Lord hear her prayers, that ye may holily follow her gooddeserts, Who in youth gave birth to the flesh of your husband,2286 in old age travaileth with theheart of your daughter. Therefore do ye all, alike and with one accord, by conduct please, by prayers
press upon, That One Husband of One Wife, in Whose Body by One Spirit ye are living.

25. The past day returns not hereafter, and after yesterday proceeds to-day, and after to-day
will proceed to-morrow; and, lo, all times and the things of time pass away, that there may comethe promise that shall abide; and “whoso shall have persevered even unto the end, this one shall besaved.”2287 If the world is now perishing, the married woman, for whom beareth she? Or in heart
about to bear, and in flesh not about to bear, why doth she marry? But if the world is still about tolast, why is not He more loved, by Whom the world was made? If already enticements of this life

2285
2286
2287

Rev. xiv. 3, 4. [See R.V.]
Olibrius, see S. Jerome to Demetr. Ben. ed.
Matt. x. 22.

590

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

are failing, there is not any thing for a Christian soul with desire to seek after; but if they shall yet
remain, there is what with holiness he may despise. For the one of these two there is no hope oflust, in the other greater glory of charity. How many or how long are the very years, in which theflower of carnal age seems to flourish? Some females having thoughts of marriage, and with ardor
wishing it, whilst they are being despised or put off, on a sudden have grown old, so as that now
they would feel shame, rather than desire, to marry. But many having married, their husbands
having set out into distant countries very soon after their union, have grown aged expecting theirreturn, and, as though soon left widows, at times have not even attained so as at least as old women
to receive their old men on their return. If therefore, when betrothed bridegrooms despised ordelayed, or when husbands were abroad, carnal desire could be restrained from commission of
fornication or adultery, why cannot it be restrained from commission of sacrilege? If it hath been
repressed, when being deferred it was glowing, why is it not put down, when having been cut off
it had grown cold? For they in greater measure endure glowing of desire, who despair not of thepleasure of the same desire. But whoso of unmarried persons vow chastity to God, withdraw thatvery hope, which is the fuel of love. Hence with more ease is desire bridled, which is kindled by
no expectation; and yet, unless against this prayer be made, in order to overcome it, itself as unlawful
is the more ardently wished for.

26. Therefore let spiritual delights succeed to the place of carnal delights in holy chastity;
reading, prayer, psalm, good thought, frequency in good works, hope of the world to come, and aheart upward; and for all these giving of thanks unto the Father of lights, from Whom, without any
doubt, every good gift, and every perfect gift, as Scripture bears witness, cometh down.2288 For
when, in stead of the delights of married women, which they have in the flesh of their husbands,
the use of other carnal delights is taken, as it were to solace them, why should I speak of the evils
which follow, when the Apostle hath said in short, that the widow, who lives in delights, living isdead.2289 But far be it from you, that ye be taken with lust of riches instead of lust of marriage, orthat in your hearts money succeed to the place of love of a husband. For looking into men’s
conversation, we have often found by experience, that in certain persons, when wantonness hathbeen restrained, avarice hath increased. For, as, in the senses themselves of the body, they who see
not hear more keenly, and discern many things by touch, nor have such as have the use of theireyes so great life in their touch; and in this instance it is understood that, when the exertion of thepower of attention2290 hath been restrained in one approach, that is, of the eyes, it puts itself forth
into other senses, more ready with keenness to distinguish, as though it essayed to supply from theone what was denied in the other; thus also often carnal lust, being restrained from pleasure ofsensual intercourse, with greater strength reaches itself forth to desire money, and when turned
away from the one, turns itself with more glow of passion to the other. But in you let the love of
riches grow cold together with the love of marriage, and let a pious use of what property you possess
be directed to spiritual delights, that your liberality wax warm rather in helping such as are in want

2288
2289
2290

James i. 17.
1 Tim. v. 6.
Intentione.

591

NPNF (V1-03)

453

Philip Schaff

than in enriching covetous persons. Forsooth into the heavenly treasury are sent not gifts to the
covetous, but alms to the needy, which above measure help the prayers of widows. Fastings, also,
and watchings, so far as they disturb not health, if they be spent in praying, singing psalms, reading,and meditating in the Law of God, even the very things which seem laborious are turned into
spiritual delights. For no way burdensome are the labors of such as love, but even of themselvesdelight, as of such as hunt, fowl, fish, gather grapes, traffic, delight themselves with some game.
It matters therefore what be loved. For, in the case of what is loved, either there is no labor, or thelabor also is loved. And consider how it should be matter for shame and grief, if there be pleasure
in labor, to take a wild beast, to fill cask and purse,2291 to cast a ball, and there be no pleasure inlabors to win God!

27. Indeed in all spiritual delights, which unmarried women enjoy, their holy conversation
ought also to be with caution; lest haply, though their life be not evil through haughtiness, theirreport be evil through negligence. Nor are they to be listened to, whether they be holy men or
women, when (upon occasion of their neglect in some matter being blamed, through which it comesto pass that they fall into evil suspicion, from which they know that their life is far removed) they
say that it is enough for them their conscience before God, despising what men think of them, notonly imprudently2292 but also cruelly; when they slay the souls of others; whether of such as
blaspheme the way of God, who following their suspicion are displeased at what is the chaste lifeof the Saints, as though it were shameful, or of such also as make excuse, and imitate, not what
they see, but what they think. Wherefore whosoever guards his life from charges of shameful andevil deeds, does good to himself; but whosoever guards his character too, is merciful also towards
others. For unto ourselves our own life is necessary, unto others our character; and certainly evenwhat we mercifully minister unto others, for their health, abounds also to our own profit. Whence
not in vain the Apostle, “We provide good things,” saith he, “not only before God, but also beforemen;”2293 also he saith, “Please ye all men through all things; even as I also please all men throughall things, not seeking what is of profit unto myself, but what unto many, that they may be saved.”2294
Also in a certain exhortation he says, “For the rest, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoeverthings are holy, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are mostdear, whatsoever things are of good report; if any virtue, if any praise, these things think on, which
ye have both learned, and received, and heard, and seen in me.”2295 You see how among manythings, unto which by exhortation he admonished them, he neglected not to set, “whatsoever things
are of good report;” and in two words included all things, where he saith, “if any virtue, if any
praise.” For unto virtue pertain the good things of which He made mention above; but good report
unto praise. I think that the Apostle took not the praise of men for any great thing, saying in another

2291
2292
2293
2294
2295

Cupa et sacculus.
al. “impudenter,” “with lack of modesty.”
2 Cor. viii. 21. [See R.V.]
1 Cor. x. 33.
Phil. iv. 8, 9.

592

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

place, “But to me it is the least thing, that I be judged of you, or of day of man;”2296 and in anotherplace, “If I were pleasing men, I should not be a servant of Christ;”2297 and again, “For our glory
is this, the testimony of our conscience.”2298 But of these two, that is, of a good life, and a goodreport, or as is said more shortly, of virtue and praise, the one for his own sake he most wisely kept,
the other for the sake of others he most mercifully provided. But, forasmuch as human caution,
how great soever, cannot on every side avoid most malevolent suspicions, when for our good report
we shall have done whatever we rightly can, if any, either by falsely pretending evil things of us,or from believing evil of us, endeavor to stain our fair fame, let there be present the solace of
conscience, and clearly also the joy, in that our reward is great in Heaven, even when men say
many evil things of us,2299 and we yet live godly and righteously. For that reward is as the pay ofsuch as serve as soldiers, through the arms of righteousness, not only on the right hand, but on theleft also; that is to say, through glory and mean estate, through ill report and good report.2300

454

28. Go on therefore in your course, and run with perseverance, in order that ye may obtain; andby pattern of life, and discourse of exhortation, carry away with you into this same your course,
whomsoever ye shall have had power. Let there not bend you from this earnest purpose, whereby
ye excite many to follow, the complaint of vain persons, who say, How shall the human race subsist,
if all shall have been continent? As though it were for any other reason that this world is delayed,save that the predestined number of the Saints be fulfilled, and were this the sooner fulfilled,assuredly the end of the world would not be put off. Nor let it stay you from your earnest purposeof persuading others to the same good ye have, if it be said to you, Whereas marriage also is good,
how shall there be all goods in the Body of Christ, both the greater, forsooth, and the lesser, if all
through praise and love of continence imitate? In the first place, because with the endeavor that all
be continent, there will still be but few, for “not all receive this word.” But forasmuch as it is written,“Whoso can receive, let him receive;”2301 then do they receive who can, when silence is not kept
even toward those who cannot. Next, neither ought we to fear lest haply all receive it, and someone of lesser goods, that is, married life, be wanting in the body of Christ. For if all shall haveheard, and all shall have received, we ought to understand that this very thing was predestinated,that married goods already suffice in the number of those members which so many have passedout of this life. For neither now, if all shall have been continent, will they give the honor of thecontinent to those who have already borne into the garners of the Lord the fruit thirty-fold, if thatbe understood of married good. Therefore all these goods will have there their place, although fromthis time no woman wish to be married, no man wish to marry a wife. Therefore without anxiety
urge on whom ye can, to become what ye are; and pray with watchfulness and fervor, that by thehelp of the Right Hand of the Most High, and by the abundance of the most merciful grace of the

2296
2297
2298
2299
2300
2301

1 Cor. iv. 3.
Gal. i. 10.
2 Cor. i. 12.
Matt. v. 11, 12.
2 Cor. vi. 7, 8.
Matt. xix. 11, 12.

593

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Lord, ye may both persevere in that which ye are, and may make advances unto that which ye shallbe.

29. Next I entreat you, by Him, from Whom ye have both received this gift, and hope for the
rewards of this gift, that ye be mindful to set me also in your prayers with all your household Church.
Forsooth it hath come to pass in most proper order, that I should write unto your Mother now aged
a letter2302 concerning prayer; unto her, forsooth, it chiefly pertains by praying to contend on yourbehalf, who is less full of care for herself than for you; and that for you rather than for her I should
compose this little work concerning widowed continence; because unto you it remaineth to overcome,what her age hath already overcome. But the holy virgin your child, if she desire aught concerning
her profession from our labors, she hath a large book on Holy Virginity to read. Concerning thereading of which I had also admonished you, forasmuch as it contains many things necessary unto
either chastity, that is, virginal and widowed, which things on this account I have here partly touchedon lightly, partly altogether passed over, because I there discussed them more fully.
May you persevere in the grace of Christ.

457

On Lying.
[De Mendacio.]Translated by
Rev. H. Browne, M.A.,
of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, Late Principal of the Diocesan College, Chichester.
This book appears from its place in the Retractations to have been written about a.d. 395,
as it is the last work named in the first book, which contains those which he wrote before he
was Bishop. Some editions represent it as addressed to Consentius, but not the mss. The latterare probably right, as his other work on the subject was written in answer to the inquiries ofConsentius on the case of the Priscillianists many years later.—Bened. Ed.
Retractations, Book I. last Chapter.
“I have also written a Book on Lying, which though it takes some pains to understand,contains much that is useful for the exercise of the mind, and more that is profitable to morals,
in inculcating the love of speaking the truth. This also I was minded to remove from my works,
because it seemed to me obscure, and intricate, and altogether troublesome; for which reason
I had not sent it abroad. And when I had afterwards written another book, under this title, Against

2302

Ep. 150, ad Probam. Vol. I. p. 503.

594

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Lying, much more had I determined and ordered that the former should cease to exist; which
however was not done. Therefore in this retractation of my works, as I have found this still inbeing, I have ordered that it should remain; chiefly because therein are to be found somenecessary things which in the other are not. Why the other has for its title, Against Lying, but
this, Of Lying, the reason is this, that throughout the one is an open assault upon lying, whereas
great part of this is taken up with the discussion of the question for and against. Both, however,are directed to the same object. This book begins thus: “Magna quæstio est de Mendacio.”458

1. There is a great question about Lying, which often arises in the midst of our every day
business, and gives us much trouble, that we may not either rashly call that a lie which is not such,or decide that it is sometimes right to tell a lie, that is, a kind of honest, well-meant, charitable lie.
This question we will painfully discuss by seeking with them that seek: whether to any good purpose,
we need not take upon ourselves to affirm, for the attentive reader will sufficiently gather from thecourse of the discussion. It is, indeed, very full of dark corners, and hath many cavern-like windings,
whereby it oft eludes the eagerness of the seeker; so that at one moment what was found seems toslip out of one’s hands, and anon comes to light again, and then is once more lost to sight. At last,however, the chase will bear down more surely, and will overtake our sentence. Wherein if there
is any error, yet as Truth is that which setteth free from all error, and Falsehood that which entangleth
in all error, one never errs more safely, methinks, than when one errs by too much loving the truth,
and too much rejecting of falsehood. For they who find great fault say it is too much, whereas
peradventure Truth would say after all, it is not yet enough. But whoso readest, thou wilt do wellto find no fault until thou have read the whole; so wilt thou have less fault to find. Eloquence thoumust not look for: we have been intent upon things, and upon dispatch in putting out of hand amatter which nearly concerns our every day life, and therefore have had small pains, or almost
none, to bestow upon words.

2. Setting aside, therefore, jokes, which have never been accounted lies, seeing they bear withthem in the tone of voice, and in the very mood of the joker a most evident indication that he meansno deceit, although the thing he utters be not true: touching which kind of discourse, whether it bemeet to be used by perfect minds, is another question which we have not at this time taken in handto clear; but setting jokes apart, the first point to be attended to, is, that a person should not bethought to lie, who lieth not.

3. For which purpose we must see what a lie is. For not every one who says a false thing lies,
if he believes or opines that to be true which he says. Now between believing and opining there is
this difference, that sometimes he who believes feels that he does not know that which he believes,(although he may know himself to be ignorant of a thing, and yet have no doubt at all concerningit, if he most firmly believes it:) whereas he who opines, thinks he knows that which he does not
know. Now whoever utters that which he holds in his mind either as belief or as opinion, even595

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

though it be false, he lies not. For this he owes to the faith of his utterance, that he thereby producethat which he holds in his mind, and has in that way in which he produces it. Not that he is without
fault, although he lie not, if either he believes what he ought not to believe, or thinks he knows
what he knows not, even though it should be true: for he accounts an unknown thing for a known.
Wherefore, that man lies, who has one thing in his mind and utters another in words, or by signsof whatever kind. Whence also the heart of him who lies is said to be double; that is, there is adouble thought: the one, of that thing which he either knows or thinks to be true and does notproduce; the other, of that thing which he produces instead thereof, knowing or thinking it to befalse. Whence it comes to pass, that he may say a false thing and yet not lie, if he thinks it to be so
as he says although it be not so; and, that he may say a true thing, and yet lie, if he thinks it to befalse and utters it for true, although in reality it be so as he utters it. For from the sense of his own
mind, not from the verity or falsity of the things themselves, is he to be judged to lie or not to lie.
Therefore he who utters a false thing for a true, which however he opines to be true, may be called
erring and rash: but he is not rightly said to lie; because he has not a double heart when he uttersit, neither does he wish to deceive, but is deceived. But the fault of him who lies, is, the desire ofdeceiving in the uttering of his mind; whether he do deceive, in that he is believed when uttering
the false thing; or whether he do not deceive, either in that he is not believed, or in that he utters atrue thing with will to deceive, which he does not think to be true: wherein being believed, he does
not deceive though it was his will to deceive: except that he deceives in so far as he is thought toknow or think as he utters.

459

4. But it may be a very nice question whether in the absence of all will to deceive, lying is
altogether absent. Thus, put the case that a person shall speak a false thing, which he esteems to befalse, on the ground that he thinks he is not believed, to the intent, that in that way falsifying his
faith he may deter the person to whom he speaks, which person he perceives does not choose tobelieve him. For here is a person who tells a lie with studied purpose of not deceiving, if to tell alie is to utter any thing otherwise than you know or think it to be. But if it be no lie, unless whensomething is uttered with wish to deceive, that person lies not, who says a false thing, knowing or
thinking it to be false, but says it on purpose that the person to whom he speaks by not believing
him may not be deceived, because the speaker either knows or thinks the other will not believehim. Whence if it appear to be possible that a person should say a false thing on purpose that he towhom it is said may not be deceived, on the other hand there is this opposite case, the case of aperson saying the truth on purpose that he may deceive. For if a man determines to say a true thing
because he perceives he is not believed, that man speaks truth on purpose that he may deceive: forhe knows or thinks that what is said may be accounted false, just because it is spoken by him.
Wherefore in saying a true thing on purpose that it may be thought false, he says a true thing on
purpose to deceive. So that it may be inquired, which rather lies: he who says a false thing that hemay not deceive, or he who says a true thing that he may deceive? the one knowing or thinking
that he says a false thing, and the other knowing or thinking that he says a true thing? For we havealready said that the person who does not know the thing to be false which he utters, does not lie
if he thinks it to be true; and that that person rather lies who utters even a true thing when he thinks
it false: because it is by the sense of their mind that they are to be judged. Concerning these persons

596

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

therefore, whom we have set forth, there is no small question. The one, who knows or thinks hesays a false thing, and says it on purpose that he may not deceive: as, if he knows a certain road tobe beset by robbers, and fearing lest some person for whose safety he is anxious should go by thatroad, which person he knows does not trust him, should tell him that that road has no robbers, on
purpose that he may not go by it, as he will think there are robbers there precisely because the otherhas told him there are none, and he is resolved not to believe him, accounting him a liar. The other,
who knowing or thinking that to be true which he says, says it on purpose that he may deceive: for
instance, if he tells a person who does not believe him, that there are robbers in that road where hereally knows them to be, that he to whom he tells it may the rather go by that road and so fall amongrobbers, because he thinks that to be false, which the other told him. Which then of these lies? theone who has chosen to say a false thing that he may not deceive? or the other who has chosen to
say a true thing that he may deceive? that one, who in saying a false thing aimed that he to whom
he spake should follow the truth? or this one, who in saying a true thing aimed that he to whom hespake should follow a falsehood? Or haply have both lied? the one, because he wished to say afalse thing: the other, because he wished to deceive? Or rather, has neither lied? not the one, because
he had the will not to deceive: not the other, because he had the will to speak the truth? For thequestion is not now which of them sinned, but which of them lied: as indeed it is presently seenthat the latter sinned, because by speaking a truth he brought it about that a person should fall amongrobbers, and that the former has not sinned, or even has done good, because by speaking a false
thing he has been the means of a person’s avoiding destruction. But then these instances may beturned the other way, so that the one should be supposed to wish some more grievous suffering to
the person whom he wishes not to be deceived; for there are many cases of persons who throughknowing certain things to be true, have brought destruction upon themselves, if the things weresuch as ought to have continued unknown to them: and the other may be supposed to wish someconvenience to result to the person whom he wishes to be deceived; for there have been instancesof persons who would have destroyed themselves had they known some evil that had really befallen
those who were dear to them, and through deeming it false have spared themselves: and so to be
deceived has been a benefit to them, as to others it has been a hurt to know the truth. The question
therefore is not with what purpose of doing a kindness or a hurt, either the one said a false thingthat he might not deceive, or the other a true thing that he might deceive: but, setting apart theconvenience or inconvenience of the persons spoken to, in so far as relates to the very truth andfalsehood, the question is, whether both of them or neither has lied. For if a lie is an utterance withwill of uttering a false thing, that man has rather lied who willed to say a false thing, and said what
he willed, albeit he said it of set purpose not to deceive. But if a lie is any utterance whatever withwill to deceive; then not the former has lied, but the latter, who even in speaking truth willed todeceive. And if a lie is an utterance with will of any falsity, both have lied; because both the former
willed his utterance to be false, and the latter willed a false thing to be believed concerning his
utterance which was true. Further, if a lie is an utterance of a person wishing to utter a false thingthat he may deceive, neither has lied; because both the former in saying a false thing had the will
to make a true thing believed, and the latter to say a true thing in order that he might make a false
thing believed. We shall be clear then of all rashness and all lying, if, what we know to be true orright to be believed, we utter when need is, and wish to make that thing believed which we utter.
If, however, either thinking that to be true which is false, or accounting as known that which is to
us unknown, or believing what we ought not to believe, or uttering it when need is not, we yet have597

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

no other aim than to make that believed which we utter; we do not stand clear indeed of the errorof temerity, but we do stand clear of all lying. For there is no need to be afraid of any of thosedefinitions, when the mind has a good conscience, that it utters that which to be true it either knows,
or opines, or believes, and that it has no wish to make any thing believed but that which it utters.
460

5. But whether a lie be at some times useful, is a much greater and more concerning question.
Whether, as above, it be a lie, when a person has no will to deceive, or even makes it his businessthat the person to whom he says a thing shall not be deceived although he did wish the thing itself
which he uttered to be false, but this on purpose that he might cause a truth to be believed; whether,again, it be a lie when a person willingly utters even a truth for the purpose of deceiving; this may
be doubted. But none doubts that it is a lie when a person willingly utters a falsehood for the purposeof deceiving: wherefore a false utterance put forth with will to deceive is manifestly a lie. But
whether this alone be a lie, is another question. Meanwhile, taking this kind of lie, in which all
agree, let us inquire, whether it be sometimes useful to utter a falsehood with will to deceive. They
who think it is, advance testimonies to their opinion, by alleging the case of Sarah,2303 who, when
she had laughed, denied to the Angels that she laughed: of Jacob questioned by his father, andanswering that he was the elder son Esau:2304 likewise that of the Egyptian midwives, who to savethe Hebrew infants from being slain at their birth, told a lie, and that with God’s approbation andreward:2305 and many such like instances they pick out, of lies told by persons whom you would
not dare to blame, and so must own that it may sometimes be not only not blameworthy, but evenpraiseworthy to tell a lie. They add also a case with which to urge not only those who are devoted
to the Divine Books, but all men and common sense, saying, Suppose a man should take refuge
with thee, who by thy lie might be saved from death, wouldest thou not tell it? If a sick man should
ask a question which it is not expedient that he should know, and might be more grievously afflictedeven by thy returning him no answer, wilt thou venture either to tell the truth to the destruction of
the man’s life, or rather to hold thy peace, than by a virtuous and merciful lie to be serviceable tohis weak health? By these and such like arguments they think they most plentifully prove, that if
occasion of doing good require, we may sometimes tell a lie.

6. On the other hand, those who say that we must never lie, plead much more strongly, using
first the Divine authority, because in the very Decalogue it is written “Thou shall not bear false
witness;”2306 under which general term it comprises all lying: for whoso utters any thing bears
witness to his own mind. But lest any should contend that not every lie is to be called false witness,
what will he say to that which is written, “The mouth that lieth slayeth the soul:”2307 and lest any
should suppose that this may be understood with the exception of some liars, let him read in another
2303
2304
2305
2306
2307

Gen. xviii. 15.
Gen. xxvii. 19.
Exod. i. 19, 20.
Exod. xx. 16.
Wisdom i. 11. Os quod mentitur. “The mouth that belieth,” E.V., στόμα καταψευδόμενον.

598

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

place, “Thou wilt destroy all that speak leasing.”2308 Whence with His own lips the Lord saith, “Let
your communication be yea, yea; nay, nay; for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.”2309
Hence the Apostle also in giving precept for the putting off of the old man, under which name allsins are understood, says straightway, “Wherefore putting away lying, speak ye truth.”2310

461

7. Neither do they confess that they are awed by those citations from the Old Testament which
are alleged as examples of lies: for there, every incident may possibly be taken figuratively, although
it really did take place: and when a thing is either done or said figuratively, it is no lie. For every
utterance is to be referred to that which it utters. But when any thing is either done or said
figuratively, it utters that which it signifies to those for whose understanding it was put forth.
Whence we may believe in regard of those persons of the prophetical times who are set forth as
authoritative, that in all that is written of them they acted and spoke prophetically; and no less, that
there is a prophetical meaning in all those incidents of their lives which by the same prophetic Spirit
have been accounted worthy of being recorded in writing. As to the midwives, indeed, they cannot
say that these women did through the prophetic Spirit, with purpose of signifying a future truth,
tell Pharaoh one thing instead of another, (albeit that Spirit did signify something, without theirknowing what was doing in their persons:) but, they say that these women were according to theirdegree approved and rewarded of God. For if a person who is used to tell lies for harm’s sake comesto tell them for the sake of doing good, that person has made great progress. But it is one thing thatis set forth as laudable in itself, another that in comparison with a worse is preferred. It is one sortof gratulation that we express when a man is in sound health, another when a sick man is getting
better. In the Scripture, even Sodom is said to be justified in comparison with the crimes of thepeople Israel. And to this rule they apply all the instances of lying which are produced from the
Old Books, and are found not reprehended, or cannot be reprehended: either they are approved on
the score of a progress towards improvement and hope of better things, or in virtue of some hidden
signification they are not altogether lies.

8. For this reason, from the books of the New Testament, except the figurative pre-significations
used by our Lord, if thou consider the life and manners of the Saints, their actions and sayings,
nothing of the kind can be produced which should provoke to imitation of lying. For the simulationof Peter and Barnabas is not only recorded, but also reproved and corrected.2311 For it was not, assome suppose,2312 out of the same simulation that even Paul the Apostle either circumcised Timothy,or himself celebrated certain ceremonies2313 according to the Jewish rite; but he did so, out of thatliberty of his mind whereby he preached that neither are the Gentiles the better for circumcision,
2308
2309
2310
2311
2312
2313

Psalm v. 6.
Matt. v. 37. [See R.V.]
Eph. iv. 25.
Gal. ii. 12–21.
S. Jerome Ep. inter Augustinianas, 75, n. 9–11.
Sacramenta.

599

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

nor the Jews the worse. Wherefore he judged that neither the former should be tied to the customof the Jews, nor the Jews deterred from the custom of their fathers. Whence are those words of his:
“Is any man called being circumcised let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in
uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised. Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing,but the keeping of the commandments of God. Let every man abide in the same calling wherein
he was called.”2314 How can a man become uncircumcised after circumcision? but let him not doso, saith he: let him not so live as if he had become uncircumcised, that is, as if he had coveredagain with flesh the part that was bared, and ceased to be a Jew; as in another place he saith, “Thycircumcision is become uncircumcision.”2315 And this the Apostle said, not as though he would
compel either those to remain in uncircumcision, or the Jews in the custom of their fathers: but thatneither these nor those should be forced to the other custom; and, each should have power of abiding
in his own custom, not necessity of so doing. For neither if the Jew should wish, where it would
disturb no man, to recede from Jewish observances, would he be prohibited by the Apostle, since
the object of his counselling to abide therein was that Jews might not by being troubled about
superfluous things be hindered from coming to those things which are necessary to salvation.
Neither would it be prohibited by him, if any of the Gentiles should wish to be circumcised for the
purpose of showing that he does not detest the same as noxious, but holds it indifferently, as aseal,2316 the usefulness of which had already passed away with time; for it did not follow that, if
there were now no salvation to be had from it, there was destruction to be dreaded therefrom. And
for this reason, Timothy, having been called in uncircumcision, yet because his mother was a Jewess
and he was bound, in order to gain his kindred, to show them that he had not learnt in the Christiandiscipline to abominate the sacraments of the old Law, was circumcised by the Apostle;2317 that inthis way they might prove to the Jews, that the reason why the Gentiles do not receive them, is notthat they are evil and were perniciously observed by the Fathers, but because they are no longer
necessary to salvation after the advent of that so great Sacrament, which through so long times thewhole of that ancient Scripture in its prophetical prefigurations did travail in birth withal. For hewould circumcise Titus also, when the Jews urged this,2318 but that false brethren, privily broughtin, wished it to be done to the intent they might have it to disseminate concerning Paul himself asa token that he had given place to the truth of their preaching, who said that the hope of Gospel
salvation is in circumcision of the flesh and observances of that kind, and that without these Christ
profiteth no man: whereas on the contrary Christ would nothing profit them, who should becircumcised because they thought that in it was salvation; whence that saying, “Behold, I Paul say
unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.”2319 Out of this liberty, therefore,
did Paul keep the observances of his fathers, but with this one precaution and express declaration,that people should not suppose that without these was no Christian salvation. Peter, however, by
his making as though salvation consisted in Judaism, was compelling the Gentiles to judaize; as is

2314
2315
2316
2317
2318
2319

1 Cor. vii. 18–20.
Rom. ii. 25.
Signaculum.
Acts xvi. 1–3.
Gal. ii. 3, 4.
Gal. v. 2.

600

NPNF (V1-03)

462

Philip Schaff

shown by Paul’s words, where he says, “Why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?”2320
For they would be under no compulsion unless they saw that he observed them in such manner as
if beside them could be no salvation. Peter’s simulation therefore is not to be compared to Paul’sliberty. And while we ought to love Peter for that he willingly received correction, we must not
bolster up lying even by the authority of Paul, who both recalled Peter to the right path in thepresence of them all, lest the Gentiles through him should be compelled to judaize; and bare witness
to his own preaching, that whereas he was accounted hostile to the traditions of the fathers in that
he would not impose them on the Gentiles, he did not despise to celebrate them himself according
to the custom of his fathers, and therein sufficiently showed that this has remained in them at theComing of Christ; that neither to the Jews they are pernicious, nor to the Gentiles necessary, norhenceforth to any of mankind means of salvation.2321

9. But if no authority for lying can be alleged, neither from the ancient Books, be it becausethat is not a lie which is received to have been done or said in a figurative sense, or be it because
good men are not challenged to imitate that which in bad men, beginning to amend, is praised incomparison with the worse; nor yet from the books of the New Testament, because Peter’s correction
rather than his simulation, even as his tears rather than his denial, is what we must imitate: then,as to those examples which are fetched from common life, they assert much more confidently that
there is no trust to be given to these. For first they teach, that a lie is iniquity, by many proofs ofholy writ, especially by that which is written, “Thou, Lord, hatest all workers of iniquity, thou shalldestroy them that speak leasing.”2322 For either as the Scripture is wont, in the following clause it
expounds the former; so that, as iniquity is a term of a wider meaning, leasing is named as theparticular sort of iniquity intended: or if they think there is any difference between the two, leasing
is by so much worse than iniquity as “thou wilt destroy” is heavier than “thou hatest.” For it may
be that God hates a person to that degree more mildly, as not to destroy him, but whom He destroys
He hates the more exceedingly, by how much He punisheth more severely. Now He hateth all who
work iniquity: but all who speak leasing He also destroyeth. Which thing being fixed, who of themwhich assert this will be moved by those examples, when it is said, suppose a man should seek
shelter with thee who by thy lie may be saved from death? For that death which men are foolishly
afraid of who are not afraid to sin, kills not the soul but the body, as the Lord teacheth in the Gospel;
whence He charges us not to fear that death:2323 but the mouth which lies kills not the body but thesoul. For in these words it is most plainly written, “The mouth that lieth slayeth the soul.”2324 Howthen can it be said without the greatest perverseness, that to the end one man may have life of thebody, it is another man’s duty to incur death of the soul? The love of our neighbor hath its bounds
in each man’s love of himself. “Thou shall love,” saith He, “thy neighbor as thyself.”2325 How can

2320
2321
2322
2323
2324
2325

Gal. ii. 14.
Salutares.
Ps. v. 5, 6. [See R.V.]
Matt. x. 28.
Wisd. i. 11; “belieth,” E.V.
Levit. xix. 18; Matt. xxii. 39.

601

NPNF (V1-03)

463

Philip Schaff

a man be said to love as himself that man, for whom that he may secure a temporal life, himself
loseth life eternal? Since if for his temporal life he lose but his own temporal life, that is not to loveas himself, but more than himself: which exceeds the rule of sound doctrine. Much less then is heby telling a lie to lose his own eternal for another’s temporal life. His own temporal life, of course,
for his neighbor’s eternal life a Christian man will not hesitate to lose: for this example has gone
before, that the Lord died for us. To this point He also saith, “This is my commandment, that yelove one another as I have loved you. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down hislife for his friends.”2326 For none is so foolish as to say that the Lord did other than consult for theeternal salvation of men, whether in doing what He hath charged us to do, or in charging us to dowhat Himself hath done. Since then by lying eternal life is lost, never for any man’s temporal life
must a lie be told. And as to those who take it ill and are indignant that one should refuse to tell alie, and thereby slay his own soul in order that another may grow old in the flesh; what if by ourcommitting theft, what if by committing adultery, a person might be delivered from death: are we
therefore to steal, to commit whoredom? They cannot prevail with themselves in a case of this kind:
namely, if a person should bring a halter and demand that one should yield to his carnal lust,
declaring that he will hang himself unless his request be granted: they cannot prevail with themselvesto comply for the sake of, as they say, saving a life. If this is absurd and wicked, why should a man
corrupt his own soul with a lie in order that another may live in the body, when, if he were to givehis body to be corrupted with such an object, he would in the judgment of all men be held guiltyof nefarious turpitude? Therefore the only point to be attended to in this question is, whether a lie
be iniquity. And since this is asserted by the texts above rehearsed, we must see that to ask, whether
a man ought to tell a lie for the safety of another, is just the same as asking whether for another’ssafety a man ought to commit iniquity. But if the salvation of the soul rejects this, seeing it cannot
be secured but by equity, and would have us prefer it not only to another’s, but even to our own
temporal safety: what remains, say they, that should make us doubt that a lie ought not to be told
under any circumstances whatsoever? For it cannot be said that there is aught among temporal
goods greater or dearer than the safety and life of the body. Wherefore if not even that is to bepreferred to truth, what can be put in our way for the sake of which they who think it is sometimes
right to lie, can urge that a lie ought to be told?

10. As concerning purity of body; here indeed a very honorable regard seems to come in theway, and to demand a lie in its behalf; to wit, that if the assault of the ravisher may be escaped bymeans of a lie, it is indubitably right to tell it: but to this it may easily be answered, that there is no
purity of body except as it depends on integrity of mind; this being broken, the other must needs
fall, even though it seem intact; and for this reason it is not to be reckoned among temporal things,
as a thing that might be taken away from people against their will. By no means therefore must themind corrupt itself by a lie for the sake of its body, which it knows remaineth incorrupt if from themind itself incorruptness depart not. For that which by violence, with no lust foregoing, the bodysuffereth, is rather to be called deforcement than corruption. Or if all deforcement is corruption,then not every corruption hath turpitude, but only that which lust hath procured, or to which lust
2326

John xv. 12, 13.

602

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

hath consented. Now by how much the mind is more excellent than the body, so much the moreheinous is the wickedness if that be corrupted. There, then, purity can be preserved, because there
none but a voluntary corruption can have place. For assuredly if the ravisher assault the body, andthere is no escaping him either by contrary force, or by any contrivance or lie, we must needs allowthat purity cannot be violated by another’s lust. Wherefore, since no man doubts that the mind isbetter than the body, to integrity of body we ought to prefer integrity of mind, which can be preservedfor ever. Now who will say that the mind of him who tells a lie hath its integrity? Indeed lust itself
is rightly defined, An appetite of the mind by which to eternal goods any temporal goods whateverare preferred. Therefore no man can prove that it is at any time right to tell a lie, unless he be able
to show that any eternal good can be obtained by a lie. But since each man departs from eternity
just in so far as he departs from truth, it is most absurd to say, that by departing therefrom it ispossible for any man to attain to any good. Else if there be any eternal good which truth compriseth
not, it will not be a true good, therefore neither will it be good, because it will be false. But as themind to the body, so must also truth be preferred to the mind itself, so that the mind should desire
it not only more than the body, but even more than its own self. So will the mind be more entire
and chaste, when it shall enjoy the immutability of truth rather than its own mutability. Now if
Lot,2327 being so righteous a man that he was meet2328 to entertain even Angels, offered his daughtersto the lust of the Sodomites, to the intent, that the bodies of women rather than of men might becorrupted by them; how much more diligently and constantly ought the mind’s chasteness in thetruth to be preserved, seeing it is more truly preferable to its body, than the body of a man to thebody of a woman?

11. But if any man supposes that the reason why it is right for a person to tell a lie for anotheris, that he may live the while, or not be offended in those things which he much loveth, to the end
he may attain unto eternal truth by being taught: that man doth not understand, in the first place,that there is no flagitious thing which he may not upon the same ground be compelled to commit,
as has been above demonstrated; and in the next place, that the authority of the doctrine itself is
cut off and altogether undone if those whom we essay to bring thereunto, are by our lie made tothink that it is somewhiles right to lie. For seeing the doctrine which bringeth salvation consisteth
partly in things to be believed, partly in things to be understood; and there is no attaining unto those
things which are to be understood, unless first those things are believed, which are to be believed;
how can there be any believing one who thinks it is sometimes right to lie, lest haply he lie at the
moment when he teacheth us to believe? For how can it be known whether he have at that moment
some cause, as he thinks, for a well-meant2329 lie, deeming that by a false story a man may befrightened and kept from lust, and in this way account that by telling a lie he is doing good evenin spiritual things? Which kind of lie once admitted and approved, all discipline of faith is subverted
altogether; and this being subverted, neither is there any attaining to understanding, for the receiving

2327
2328
2329

Gen. xix. 8.
“Ut mereretur.”
Officiosi.

603

NPNF (V1-03)

464

Philip Schaffof which that discipline nurtureth the babes: and so all the doctrine of truth is done away, giving
place to most licentious falsehood, if a lie, even well-meant, may from any quarter have place
opened for it to enter in. For either whoso tells a lie prefers temporal advantages, his own oranother’s, to truth; than which what can be more perverse? or when by aid of a lie he wishes tomake a person fit for gaining the truth, he bars the approach to truth, for by wishing when he lies
to be accommodating,2330 it comes to pass that when he speaks the truth, he cannot be depended
upon. Wherefore, either we must not believe good men, or we must believe those whom we thinkobliged sometimes to tell a lie, or we must not believe that good men sometimes tell lies: of thesethree the first is pernicious, the second foolish; it remains therefore that good men should nevertell lies.

12. Thus has the question been on both sides considered and treated; and still it is not easy topass sentence: but we must further lend diligent hearing to those who say, that no deed is so evil,
but that in avoidance of a worse it ought to be done; moreover that the deeds of men include not
only what they do, but whatever they consent to be done unto them. Wherefore, if cause have arisenthat a Christian man should choose to burn incense to idols, that he might not consent to bodily
defilement which the persecutor threatened him withal, unless he should do so, they think they
have a right to ask why he should not also tell a lie to escape so foul a disgrace. For the consent
itself to endure violation of the person rather than to burn incense to idols, this, they say, is not apassive thing, but a deed; which rather than do, he chose to burn incense. How much more readily
then would he have chosen a lie, if by a lie he might ward off from a holy body so shocking a
disgrace?

13. In which proposition these points may well deserve to be questioned: whether such consent
is to be accounted as a deed: or whether that is to be called consent which hath not approbation: orwhether it be approbation, when it is said, “It is expedient to suffer this rather than do that;” andwhether the person spoken of did right to burn incense rather than suffer violation of his body; andwhether it would be right rather to tell a lie, if that was the alternative proposed, than to burnincense? But if such consent is to be accounted as a deed, then are they murderers who have chosenrather to be put to death than bear false witness, yea, what is worse, they are murderers of themselves.
For why, at this rate, should it not be said that they have slain themselves, because they chose that
this should be done to them that they might not do what they were urged to do? Or, if it be accounted
a worse thing to slay another than himself, what if these terms were offered to a Martyr, that, upon
his refusing to bear false witness of Christ and to sacrifice to demons, then, before his eyes, notsome other man, but his own father should be put to death; his father entreating him that he would
not by his persevering permit that to be done? Is it not manifest, that, upon his remaining steadfast
in his purpose of most faithful testimony, they alone would be the murderers who should slay his
father, and not he a parricide into the bargain? As therefore, in this case, the man would be no party

2330

Aptus.

604

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

to this so heinous deed, for choosing, rather than violate his faith by false testimony, that his own
father should be put to death by others, (yea, though that father were a sacrilegious person whosesoul would be snatched away to punishment;) so the like consent, in the former case, would not
make him a party to that so foul disgrace, if he refused to do evil himself, let others do what theymight in consequence of his not doing it. For what do such persecutors say, but, “Do evil that we
may not?” If the case were so, that our doing evil would make them not to have done it, even thenit would not be our duty by doing wickedness ourselves to vote them harmless; but as in fact they
are already doing it when they say nothing of the kind,2331 why are they to have us to keep themcompany in wickedness rather than be vile and noisome by themselves? For that is not to be called
consent; seeing that we do not approve what they do, always wishing that they would not, and, asmuch as in us lies, hindering them that they should not do it, and, when it is done, not only notcommitting it with them, but with all possible detestation condemning the same.

465

14. “How,” sayest thou, “is it not his doing as well as theirs, when they would not do this, if hewould do that?” Why, at this rate we go housebreaking with house-breakers, because if we did not
shut the door, they would not break it open: and we go and murder with highwaymen, if it chance
we know that they are going to do it, because if we killed them out of hand, they would not killothers. Or, if a person confess to us that he is going to commit a parricide, we commit it along withhim, if, being able, we do not slay him before he can do the deed when we cannot in some otherway prevent or thwart him. For it may be said, word for word as before, “Thou hast done it as wellas he; for he had not done this, hadst thou done that.” With my good will, neither ill should be done;
but only the one was in my power, and I could take care that this should not be done; the otherrested with another, and when by my good advice I could not quench the purpose, I was not boundby my evil deed to thwart the doing. It is therefore no approving of a sinner, that one refuses to sin
for him; and neither the one nor the other is liked by him who would that neither were done; but
in that which pertains to him, he hath the power to do it or not, and with that he perpetrateth it not;in that which pertains to another, he hath only the will to wish it or not, and with that he condemneth.
And therefore, on their offering those terms, and saying, “If thou burn not incense, this shalt thousuffer;” if he should answer, “For me, I choose neither, I detest both, I consent unto you in noneof these things:” in uttering these and the like words, which certainly, because they would be true,
would afford them no consent no approbation of his, let him suffer at their hands what he might,
to his account would be set down the receipt of wrongs, to theirs the commission of sins. “Ought
he then,” it may be asked, “to suffer his person to be violated rather than burn incense?” If thequestion be what he ought, he ought to do neither. For should I say that he ought to do any of thesethings, I shall approve this or that, whereas I reprobate both. But if the question be, which of thesehe ought in preference to avoid, not being able to avoid both but able to avoid one or other: I willanswer, “His own sin, rather than another’s; and rather a lighter sin being his own, than a heavier
being another’s.” For, reserving the point for more diligent inquiry, and granting in the mean whilethat violation of the person is worse than burning incense, yet the latter is his own, the former
another’s deed, although he had it done to him; now, whose the deed, his the sin. For though murder
2331

Al. when they say such things.

605

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

is a greater sin than stealing, yet it is worse to steal than to suffer murder. Therefore, if it were
proposed to any man that, if he would not steal he should be killed, that is, murder should becommitted upon him; being he could not avoid both, he would prefer to avoid that which would
be his own sin, rather than that which would be another’s. Nor would the latter become his act forbeing committed upon him, and because he might avoid it if he would commit a sin of his own.

15. The whole stress, then, of this question comes to this; whether it be true universally that nosin of another, committed upon thee, is to be imputed to thee, if, being able to avoid it by a lighter
sin of thine own, thou do it not; or whether there be an exception of all bodily defilement. No man
says that a person is defiled by being murdered, or cast into prison, or bound in chains, or scourged,
or afflicted with other tortures and pains, or proscribed and made to suffer most grievous losses
even to utter nakedness, or stripped of honors, and subjected to great disgrace by reproaches ofwhatsoever kind; whatever of all these a man may have unjustly suffered, no man is so senselessas to say that he is thereby defiled. But if he have filth poured all over him, or poured into his mouth,or crammed into him, or if he be carnally used like a woman; then almost all men regard him witha feeling of horror, and they call him defiled and unclean. One must conclude then that the sins ofothers, be they what they may, those always excepted which defile him on whom they are committed,
a man must not seek to avoid by sin of his own, either for himself or for any other, but rather hemust put up with them, and suffer bravely; and if by no sins of his own he ought to avoid them,
therefore not by a lie: but those which by being committed upon a man do make him unclean, these
we are bound to avoid even by sinning ourselves; and for this reason those things are not to becalled sins, which are done for the purpose of avoiding that uncleanness. For whatever is done, inconsideration that the not doing it were just cause of blame, that thing is not sin. Upon the same
principle, neither is that to be called uncleanness when there is no way of avoiding it; for even inthat extremity he who suffers it has what he may do aright, namely, patiently bear what he cannot
avoid. Now no man while acting aright can be defiled by any corporal contagion. For the unclean
in the sight of God is every one who is unrighteous; clean therefore is every one who is righteous;
if not in the sight of men, yet in the sight of God, Who judges without error. Nay, even in the actof suffering that defilement with power given of avoiding it, it is not by the mere contact that the
man is defiled; but by the sin of refusing to avoid it when he might. For that would be no sin,whatever might be done for the avoiding of it. Whoever therefore, for the avoiding of it, shall tella lie, sinneth not.

466

16. Or, are some lies, also, to be excepted, so that it were better to suffer this than to commit
those? If so, then not every thing that is done in order to the avoiding of that defilement ceases tobe sin; seeing there are some lies to commit which is worse than to suffer that foul violence. For,suppose quest be making after a person that his body may be deflowered, and that it be possible toscreen him by a lie; who dares to say that even in such a case a lie ought not be told? But, if the lie
by which he may be concealed be one which may hurt the fair fame of another, by bringing upon
him a false accusation of that very uncleanness, to suffer which the other is sought after; as, if itshould be said to the inquirer, “Go to such an one,” (naming some chaste man who is a stranger to606

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

vices of this kind,) “and he will procure for you one whom you will find a more willing subject,for he knows and loves such;” and thereby the person might be diverted from him whom he sought:
I know not whether one man’s fair fame ought to be violated by a lie, in order that another’s bodymay not be violated by lust to which he is a stranger. And in general, it is never right to tell a lie
for any man, such as may hurt another, even if the hurt be slighter than would be the hurt to him
unless such a lie were told. Because neither must another man’s bread be taken from him against
his will, though he be in good health, and it is to feed one who is weak; nor must an innocent man,against his will, be beaten with rods, that another may not be killed. Of course, if they are willing,
let it be done, because they are not hurt if they be willing that so it should be: but whether, evenwith his own consent, a man’s fair fame ought to be hurt with a false charge of foul lusts, in orderthat lust may be averted from another’s body, is a great question. And I know not whether it beeasy to find in what way it can be just that a man’s fair fame, even with his consent, should be
stained with a false charge of lust, any more than a man’s body should be polluted by the lust itself
against his will.

17. But yet if the option were proposed to the man who chose to burn incense to idols rather
than yield his body to abominable lust, that, if he wished to avoid that, he should violate the fameof Christ by some lie; he would be most mad to do it. I say more: that he would be mad, if, to avoid
another man’s lust, and not to have that done upon his person which he would suffer with no lustof his own, he should falsify Christ’s Gospel with false praises of Christ; more eschewing that
another man should corrupt his body, than himself to corrupt the doctrine of sanctification of souls
and bodies. Wherefore, from the doctrine of religion, and from those utterances universally, which
are uttered on behalf of the doctrine of religion, in the teaching and learning of the same, all lies
must be utterly kept aloof. Nor can any cause whatever be found, one should think, why a lie should
be told in matters of this kind, when in this doctrine it is not right to tell a lie for the very purposeof bringing a person to it the more easily. For, once break or but slightly diminish the authority oftruth, and all things will remain doubtful: which unless they be believed true, cannot be held ascertain. It is lawful then either to him that discourses, disputes, and preaches of things eternal, or
to him that narrates or speaks of things temporal pertaining to edification of religion and piety, toconceal at fitting time whatever seems fit to be concealed: but to tell a lie is never lawful, therefore
neither to conceal by telling a lie.

18. This being from the very first and most firmly established, touching other lies the question
proceeds more securely. But by consequence we must also see that all lies must be kept aloof whichhurt any man unjustly: because no man is to have a wrong, albeit a lighter one is done to him, that
another may have a heavier kept from him. Nor are those lies to be allowed, which, though theyhurt not another, yet do nobody any good, and are hurtful to the persons themselves who gratuitously
tell them. Indeed, these are the persons who are properly to be called liars. For there is a difference
between lying and being a liar. A man may tell a lie unwillingly; but a liar loves to lie, and inhabits
in his mind in the delight of lying. Next to such are those to be placed who by a lie wish to pleasemen, not that they may do wrong or bring reproach upon any man; for we have already before put
607

NPNF (V1-03)

467

Philip Schaff

away that kind; but that they may be pleasant in conversation. These, differ from the class in which
we have placed liars in this respect, that liars delight in lying, rejoicing in deceit for its own sake:but these lust to please by agreeable talk, and yet would rather please by saying things that weretrue, but when they do not easily find true things to say that are pleasant to the hearers, they chooserather to tell lies than to hold their tongues. Yet it is difficult for these sometimes to undertake astory which is the whole of it false; but most commonly they interweave falsehood with truth, where
they are at a loss for something sweet. Now these two sorts of lies do no harm to those who believethem, because they are not deceived concerning any matter of religion and truth, or concerning any
profit or advantage of their own. It suffices them, to judge the thing possible which is told, and tohave faith in a man of whom they ought not rashly to think that he is telling a lie. For where is theharm of believing that such an one’s father or grandfather was a good man, when he was not? orthat he has served with the army even in Persia, though he never set foot out of Rome? But to thepersons who tell these lies, they do much harm: to the former sort, because they so desert truth as
to rejoice in deceit: to the latter, because they want to please people better than the truth.

19. These sorts of lies having been without any hesitation condemned, next follows a sort, as
it were by steps rising to something better, which is commonly attributed to well-meaning and goodpeople, when the person who lies not only does no harm to another, but even benefits somebody.
Now it is on this sort of lies that the whole dispute turns, whether that person does harm to himself,
who benefits another in such sort as to act contrary to the truth. Or, if that alone may be called truth
which illustrateth the very minds of men with an intimate and incommutable light, at least he acts
contrary to some true thing, because although the bodily senses are deceived, yet he acts contrary
to a true thing who says that a thing is so or not so, whereof neither his mind nor senses nor his
opinion or belief giveth him any report. Whether therefore he does not hurt himself in so profiting
another, or in that compensation not hurt himself in which he profiteth the other, is a great question.
If it be so, it should follow that he ought to profit himself by a lie which damages no man. But thesethings hang together, and if you concede that point, it necessarily draws in its train some very
embarrassing consequences. For should it be asked, what harm it does to a person rolling insuperfluous wealth, if from countless thousands of bushels of wheat he lose one bushel, whichbushel may be profitable as necessary food to the person stealing it; it will follow that theft also
may be committed without blame, and false witness borne without sin. Than which, what can be
mentioned more perverse? Or truly, if another had stolen the bushel, and thou sawest it done, andwert questioned, wouldest thou tell a lie with honesty for the poor man, and if thou do it for thineown poverty wilt thou be blamed? As if it were thy duty to love another more than thyself. Boththen are disgraceful, and must be avoided.

20. But haply some may think that there is an exception to be added; that there be some honestlies which not only hurt no man, but profit some man, excepting those by which crimes are screened
and defended: so that the reason why the aforesaid lie is disgraceful, is that, although it hurt noman, and profit the poor, it screens a theft; but if it should in such sort hurt nobody and profit
somebody as not to screen and defend any sin, it would not be morally wrong. As, put the case that608

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

some one should in thy sight hide his money that he might not lose it by theft or violence, andthereupon being questioned thou shouldest tell a lie; thou wouldest hurt no man, and wouldest serve
him who had need that his money were hidden, and wouldest not have covered a sin by telling alie. For it is no sin if a man hide his property which he fears to lose. But, if we therefore sin not intelling a lie, for that, while covering no man’s sin, we hurt nobody and do good to somebody, what
are we about as concerning the sin itself of a lie? For where it is laid down, “Thou shalt not steal,”
there is also this, “Thou shall not bear false witness.”2332 Since then each is severally prohibited,
why is false witness culpable if it cover a theft or any other sin, but if without any screening of sin
it be done by itself, then not culpable, whereas stealing is culpable in and by itself, and so othersins? Or is it so that to hide a sin is not lawful; to do it, lawful?

21. If this be absurd, what shall we say? Is it so, that there is no “false witness,” but when one
tells a lie either to invent a crime against some man, or to hide some man’s crime, or in any way
to oppress any man in judgment? For a witness seems to be necessary to the judge for cognizanceof the cause. But if the Scripture named a “witness” only so far as that goes, the Apostle would notsay, “Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that He raised
up Christ: whom He raised not up.”2333 For so he shows that it is false witness to tell a lie, yea, infalsely praising a person.
Or peradventure, doth the person who lies then utter false witness when he either invents or
hides any man’s sin, or hurts any man in whatever way? For, if a lie spoken against a man’s temporal
life is detestable, how much more one against eternal life? as is every lie, if it take place in doctrineof religion. And it is for this reason that the Apostle calls it false witness, if a man tell a lie about
Christ, yea, one which may seem to pertain to His praise. Now if it be a lie that neither inventethor hideth any man’s sin, nor is answered to a question of the judge, and hurteth no man, and profits
some man, are we to say that it is neither false witness, nor a reprehensible lie?
468

22. What then, if a homicide seek refuge with a Christian, or if he see where the homicide havetaken refuge, and be questioned of this matter by him who seeks, in order to bring to punishment
a man, the slayer of man? Is he to tell a lie? For how does he not hide a sin by lying, when he forwhom he lies has been guilty of a heinous sin? Or is it because he is not questioned concerning his
sin, but about the place where he is concealed? So then to lie in order to hide a person’s sin is evil;
but to lie in order to hide the sinner is not evil? “Yea, surely:” says some one: “for a man sins notin avoiding punishment, but in doing something worthy of punishment. Moreover, it pertaineth toChristian discipline neither to despair of any man’s amendment, nor to bar against any man theway of repentance.” What if thou be led to the judge, and then questioned concerning the very place
where the other is in hiding? Art thou prepared to say, either, “He is not there,” when thou knowest
him to be there; or, “I know not, and have not seen,” what thou knowest and hast seen? Art thouthen prepared to bear false witness, and to slay thy soul that a manslayer may not be slain? Or, up
2332
2333

Exodus xx. 15, 16.
1 Cor. xv. 15.

609

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

to the presence of the judge wilt thou lie, but when the judge questions thee, then speak truth thatthou be not a false witness? So then thou art going to slay a man thyself by betraying him. Surely
the betrayer too is one whom the divine Scripture detesteth. Or haply is he no betrayer, who inanswer to the judge’s interrogation gives true information; but would be a betrayar, if, unasked, heshould delate a man to his destruction? Put the case with respect to a just and innocent man, thatthou know where he is in hiding, and be questioned by the judge; which man, however, has beenordered to be taken to execution by a higher power, so that he who interrogates is charged with theexecution of the law, not the author of the sentence? Will it be no false witness that thou shall lie
for an innocent man, because the interrogator is not a judge, but only charged with the execution?
What if the author of the law interrogate thee, or any unjust judge, making quest of an innocent
man to bring him to punishment? What wilt thou do? wilt thou be false witness, or betrayer? Or
will he be a betrayer, who to a just judge shall ultroneously delate a lurking homicide; and he notso, who to an unjust judge, interrogating him of the hiding-place of an innocent man whom he seeks
to slay, shall inform against the person who has thrown himself upon his honor? Or between thecrime of false witness and that of betrayal, wilt thou remain doubtful and unable to make up thy
mind? Or by holding thy peace or professing that thou wilt not tell, wilt thou make up thy mind to
avoid both? Then why not do this before thou come to the judge, that thou mayest shun the lie also?
For, having kept clear of a lie, thou wilt escape all false witness; whether every lie be false witness,or not every: but by keeping clear of all false witness in thy sense of the word, thou wilt not escape
all lying. How much braver then, how much more excellent, to say, “I will neither betray nor lie?”

23. This did a former Bishop of the Church of Thagasta, Firmus by name, and even more firmin will. For, when he was asked by command of the emperor, through officers sent by him, for a
man who was taking refuge with him, and whom he kept in hiding with all possible care, he madeanswer to their questions, that he could neither tell a lie, nor betray a man; and when he had sufferedso many torments of body, (for as yet emperors were not Christian,) he stood firm in his purpose.
Thereupon being brought before the emperor, his conduct appeared so admirable, that he without
any difficulty obtained a pardon for the man whom he was trying to save. What conduct could be
more brave and constant? But peradventure some more timid person may say, “I can be prepared
to bear any torments, or even to submit to death, that I may not sin; but, since it is no sin to tell alie such that you neither hurt any man, nor bear false witness, and benefit some man, it is foolishand a great sin, voluntarily and to no purpose to submit to torments, and, when one’s health andlife may haply be useful, to fling them away for nothing to people in a rage.” Of whom I ask; Why
he fears that which is written, “Thou shall not bear false witness,”2334 and fears not that which issaid unto God, “Thou wilt destroy all them that speak leasing?”2335 Says he, “It is not written, Everylie: but I understand it as if it were written, Thou wilt destroy all that speak false witness.” Butneither there is it said, All false witness. “Yes, but it is set there,” saith he, “where the other things
are set down which are in every sort evil.” What, is this the case with what is set down there, “Thou

2334
2335

Exod. xx. 16.
Ps. v. 6.

610

NPNF (V1-03)

469

Philip Schaff

shalt not kill?”2336 If this be in every sort evil, how shall one clear of this crime even just men, who,
upon a law given, have killed many? “But,” it is rejoined, “that man doth not himself kill, who isthe minister of some just command.” These men’s fear, then, I do accept, that I still think that
laudable man who would neither lie, nor betray a man, did both better understand that which is
written, and what he understood did bravely put in practice.

24. But one sometimes comes to a case of this kind, that we are not interrogated where theperson is who is sought, nor forced to betray him, if he is hidden in such manner, that he cannot
easily be found unless betrayed: but we are asked, whether he be in such a place or not. If we know
him to be there, by holding our peace we betray him, or even by saying that we will in no wise tellwhether he be there or not: for from this the questioner gathers that he is there, as, if he were not,nothing else would be answered by him who would not lie nor betray a man, but only, that he is
not there. So, by our either holding our peace, or saying such words, a man is betrayed, and he who
seeks him hath but to enter in, if he have the power, and find him: whereas he might have been
turned aside from finding him by our telling a lie. Wherefore if thou know not where he is, there
is no cause for hiding the truth, but thou must confess that thou knowest not. But, if thou know
where he is, whether he be in the place which is named in the question or elsewhere; thou must notsay, when it is asked whether he be there or not, “I will not tell thee what thou askest,” but thoumust say, “I know where he is, but I will never show.” For if, touching one place in particular thouanswer not and profess that thou wilt not betray, it is just as if thou shouldest point to that sameplace with thy finger: for a sure suspicion is thereby excited. But if at the first thou confess thatthou know where he is, but will not tell, haply the inquisitor may be diverted from that place, andbegin now to ply thee that the place where he is may be betrayed. For which good faith and humanity
whatever thou shall bravely bear, is judged to be not only not culpable, but even laudable; save
only these things which if a man suffer he is said to suffer not bravely, but immodestly and foully.
For this is the last description of lie, concerning which we must treat more diligently.

25. For first to be eschewed is that capital lie and far to be fled from, which is done in doctrineof religion; to which lie a man ought by no consideration to be induced. The second, that he should
hurt some man unjustly: which is such that it profits no man and hurts some man. The third, which
so profits one as to hurt another, but not in corporal defilement. The fourth, that which is done
through only lust of lying and deceiving, which is an unmixed lie. The fifth, what is done withdesire of pleasing by agreeableness in talk. All these being utterly eschewed and rejected, there
follows a sixth sort which at once hurts nobody and helps somebody; as when, if a person’s money
is to be unjustly taken from him, one who knows where the money is, should say that he does notknow, by whomsoever the question be put. The seventh, which hurts none and profits some: except
if a judge interrogate: as when, not wishing to betray a man who is sought for to be put to death,
one should lie; not only a just and innocent, but also a culprit; because it belongs to Christian2336

Exod. xx. 13.

611

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

discipline neither to despair of any man’s amendment, nor to bar the way of repentance against
any. Of which two sorts, which are wont to be attended with great controversy, we have sufficiently
treated, and have shown what was our judgment; that by taking the consequences, which are
honorably and bravely borne, these kinds also should be eschewed by brave and faithful and truthful
men and women. The eighth sort of lie is that which hurts no man, and does good in the preserving
somebody from corporal defilement, at least that defilement which we have mentioned above. For
even to eat with unwashen hands the Jews thought defilement. Or if a person think this also a
defilement, yet not such that a lie ought to be told to avoid it. But if the lie be such as to do an injury
to any man, even though it screen a man from that uncleanness which all men abhor and detest;
whether a lie of this kind may be told provided the injury done by the lie be such as consists not inthat sort of uncleanness with which we are now concerned, is another question: for here the question
is no longer about lying, but it is asked whether an injury ought to be done to any man, evenotherwise than by a lie, that the said defilement may be warded off from another. Which I should
by no means think: though the case proposed be the slightest wrongs, as that which I mentioned
above, about a single measure of wheat; and though it be very embarrassing whether it be our duty
not to do even such an injury to any man, if thereby another may be defended or screened from alustful outrage upon his person. But, as I said, this is another question: at present let us go on withwhat we have taken in hand: whether a lie ought to be told, if even the inevitable condition be
proposed that we either do this, or suffer the deed of lust or some execrable pollution; even thoughby lying we do no man harm.
470

26. Touching which matter, there will be some place open for consideration, if first the divine
authorities which forbid a lie be diligently discussed: for if these give no place, we vainly seek aloophole; for we are bound to keep in every way the command of God, and the will of God in allthat through keeping His command we may suffer, it is our duty with an even mind to follow: but
if by some relaxation any outlet be allowed, in such a case we are not to decline a lie. The reason
why the Divine Scriptures contain not only God’s commands, but the life and character of the just,is this: that, if haply it be hidden in what way we are to take that which is enjoined, by the actionsof the just it may be understood. With the exception, therefore, of those actions which one may
refer to an allegorical significance, although none doubts that they really took place, as is the casewith almost all the occurrences in the books of the Old Testament. For who can venture to affirmof any thing there, that it does not pertain to a figurative foretelling? Seeing the Apostle, speakingof the sons of Abraham, of whom of course it is most easily said that they were born and did livein the natural order of propagating the people, (for not monsters and prodigies were born, to leadthe mind to some presignification,) nevertheless asserteth that they signify the two Testaments;2337
and saith of that marvellous benefit which God bestowed upon His people Israel to rescue themout of the bondage in which they in Egypt were oppressed, and of the punishment which avenged
their sin on their journey, that these things befell them in a figure:2338 what actions wilt thou find,from which thou mayest set aside that rule, and take upon thee to affirm that they are not to be

2337
2338

Gal. iv. 22–24.
1 Cor. x. 1–11.

612

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

reduced to some figure? Excepting therefore these, the things which in the New Testament are doneby the Saints, where there is a most evident commending of manners to our imitation, may avail
as examples for the understanding of the Scriptures, which things are digested in the commands.

27. As, when we read in the Gospel, “Thou hast received a blow in the face, make ready theother cheek.”2339 Now as an example of patience can none be found than that of the Lord Himself
more potent and excellent; but He, when smitten on the cheek, said not, Behold here is the othercheek, but He said, “If I have spoken ill, bear witness of the evil; but if well, why smitest thouMe?”2340 Where He shows that the preparation of the other cheek is to be done in the heart. Whichalso the Apostle Paul knew, for he, too, when he was smitten on the face before the high priest, did
not say, Smite the other cheek: but, “God,” saith he, “shall smite thee, thou whited wall: and sittest
thou to judge me according to law, and contrary to law commandest me to be smitten?”2341 withmost deep insight beholding that the priesthood of the Jews was already become such, that in nameit outwardly was clean and fair, but within was foul with muddy lusts; which priesthood he saw inspirit to be ready to pass away through vengeance of the Lord, when he spake those words: but yet
he had his heart ready not only to receive other blows on the cheek, but also to suffer for the truth
any torments whatever, with love of them from whom he should suffer the same.

28. It is also written, “But I say unto you, Swear not at all.” But the Apostle himself has usedoaths in his Epistles.2342 And so he shows how that is to be taken which is said, “I say unto you,
Swear not at all:” that is, lest by swearing one come to a facility in swearing, from facility to acustom, and so from a custom there be a downfall into perjury. And therefore he is not found tohave sworn except in writing, where there is more wary forethought, and no precipitate tongue
withal. And this indeed came of evil, as it is said, “Whatever is more than these is of evil:”2343 not
however from evil of his own, but from the evil of infirmity which was in them, in whom he evenin this way endeavored to work faith. For that he used an oath in speaking, while not writing, I
know not that any Scripture has related concerning him. And yet the Lord says, “Swear not at all:”for He hath not granted license thereof to persons writing. Howbeit, because to pronounce Paul
guilty of violating the commandment, especially in Epistles written and sent forth for the spiritual
life and salvation of the nations, were an impiety, we must understand that word which is set down,“At all,” to be set down for this purpose, that as much as in thee lies, thou affect not, love not, nor
as though it were for a good thing, with any delight desire, an oath.

2339
2340
2341
2342
2343

Matt. v. 39.
John xviii. 22, 23.
Acts xxiii. 3.
Rom. ix. 1; Phil. i. 8; Gal. i. 20.
Matt. v. 34, 37.

613

NPNF (V1-03)

471

Philip Schaff

29. As that, “Take no thought for the morrow,” and, “Take therefore no thought what ye shalleat, or what ye shall drink, or what ye shall put on.”2344 Now when we see that the Lord Himself
had a bag in which was put what was given,2345 that it might be kept for necessary uses as the timeshould require; and that the Apostles themselves made much provision for the indigence of thebrethren, not only for the morrow, but even for the more protracted time of impending dearth, as
we read in the Acts of the Apostles;2346 it is sufficiently clear that these precepts are so to beunderstood, that we are to do nothing of our work as matter of necessity, through love of obtaining
temporal things, or fear of want.

30. Moreover, it was said to the Apostles that they should take nothing with them for theirjourney, but should live by the Gospel.2347 And in a certain place too the Lord Himself signified
why He said this, when He added, “The laborer is worthy of his hire:”2348 where He sufficiently
shows that this is permitted, not ordered; lest haply he who should do this, namely, that in this workof preaching the word he should take aught for the uses of this life from them to whom he preached,should think he was doing any thing unlawful. And yet that it may more laudably not be done issufficiently proved in the Apostle Paul: who, while he said, “Let him that is taught in the word,
communicate unto him, that teacheth in all things,”2349 and showed in many places that this iswholesomely done by them to whom he preached the word, “Nevertheless,” saith he, “I have notused this power.”2350 The Lord, therefore, when He spake those words, gave power, not bound men
by a command. So in general, what in words we are not able to understand, in the actions of theSaints we gather how it is meet to be taken, which would easily be drawn to the other side, unless
it were recalled by an example.

31. Thus then what is written, “The mouth that lieth, slayeth the soul;”2351 of what mouth it
speaketh, is the question. For in general when the Scripture speaks of the mouth, it signifies thevery seat of our conception2352 in the heart, where is approved and decreed whatever also by thevoice, when we speak the truth, is uttered: so that he lieth with the heart who approveth a lie; yetthat man may possibly not lie with the heart, who uttereth other than is in his mind, in such sortthat he knows it to be for the sake of avoiding a greater evil that he admitteth an evil, disapproving
withal both the one and the other. And they who assert this, say that thus also is to be understood

2344
2345
2346
2347
2348
2349
2350
2351
2352

Matt. vi. 34, 31.
John xii. 6. [See R.V.]
Acts xi. 28–30.
Luke ix. 3; x. 4, 7.
Matt. x. 10.
Gal. vi. 6.
1 Cor. ix. 12. [See R.V.]
Wisd. i. 11.
Conceptaculum.

614

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffthat which is written, “He that speaketh the truth in his heart:”2353 because always in the heart truth
must be spoken; but not always in the mouth of the body, if any cause of avoiding a greater evil
require that other than is in the mind be uttered with the voice. And that there is indeed a mouth of
the heart, may be understood even from this, that where there is speech, there a mouth is with noabsurdity understood: nor would it be right to say, “Who speaketh in his heart,” unless it were rightto understand that there is also a mouth in the heart. Though in that very place where it is written,“The mouth that lieth, slayeth the soul,” if the context of the lesson be considered, it may
peradventure be taken for no other than the mouth of the heart. For there is an obscure response
there, where it is hidden from men, to whom the mouth of the heart, unless the mouth of the bodysound therewith, is not audible. But that mouth, the Scripture in that place saith, doth reach to thehearing of the Spirit of the Lord, Who hath filled the whole earth; at the same time mentioning lips
and voice and tongue in that place; yet all these the sense permitteth not to be taken, but concerning
the heart, because it saith of the Lord, that what is spoken is not hidden from Him: now that whichis spoken with that sound which reacheth to our ears, is not hidden from men either. Thus, namely,is it written: “The Spirit of wisdom is loving, and will not acquit an evil-speaker of his lips: for of
his reins God is witness, and of his heart a true searcher, and of his tongue a hearer. For the Spiritof the Lord hath filled the whole earth, and that which containeth all things hath knowledge of thevoice. Therefore he that speaketh unrighteous things cannot be hid: but neither shall the judgment
when it punisheth pass by him. For in the thoughts of the ungodly shall there be interrogation; andthe hearing of his words shall come from the Lord, to the punishment of his iniquities.2354 For theear of jealousy heareth all things, and the tumult of murmurings will not be hid. Therefore keep
yourselves from murmuring, which profiteth nothing, and from backbiting refrain your tongue:
because an obscure response will not go into the void.2355 But the mouth that lieth, slayeth thesoul.”2356 It seems then to threaten them who think that to be obscure and secret, which they agitate
and turn over in their heart. And this, it would show, is so clear to the ears of God, that it even calls
it “tumult.”

472

32. Manifestly also in the Gospel we find the mouth of the heart: so that in one place the Lord
is found to have mentioned the mouth both of the body and of the heart, where he saith, “Are ye
also yet without understanding? Do ye not 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 themouth come forth from the heart, and they defile the man. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts,
murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: these are the things which
defile a man.”2357 Here if thou understand but one mouth, that of the body, how wilt thou understand,“Those things which proceed out of the mouth, come forth from the heart;” since spitting also andvomiting proceed out of the mouth? Unless peradventure a man is but then defiled when he eateth

2353
2354
2355
2356
2357

Ps. xv. 2.
A Domino, “unto the Lord.” E.V.
Obscurum responsum in vacuum non ibit, “There is no word so secret that shall go for nought.” E.V.
Wisd. i. 6–11.
Matt. xv. 16–20.

615

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

aught unclean, but is defiled when he vomits it up. But if this be most absurd, it remains that weunderstand the mouth of the heart to have been expounded by the Lord, when He saith, “The things
which proceed out of the mouth, come forth from the heart.” For being that theft also can be, andoften is, perpetrated with silence of the bodily voice and mouth; one must be out of his mind so tounderstand it as then to account a person to be contaminated by the sin of theft, when he confesses
or makes it known, but when he commits it and holds his peace, then to think him undefiled. But,
in truth, if we refer what is said to the mouth of the heart, no sin whatever can be committed tacitly:for it is not committed unless it proceed from that mouth which is within.

33. But, like as it is asked of what mouth the Scripture saith, “The mouth that lieth, slayeth thesoul,” so it may be asked, of what lie. For it seems to speak of that lie in particular, which consists
in detraction. It says, “Keep yourselves from murmuring, which profiteth nothing, and fromdetraction refrain your tongue.” Now this detraction takes place through malevolence, when any
man not only with mouth and voice of the body doth utter what he forgeth against any, but even
without speaking wisheth him to be thought such; which is in truth to detract with the mouth of theheart; which thing, it saith, cannot be obscure and hidden from God.

34. For what is written in another place, “Wish not to use every lie;”2358 they say is not of force
for this, that a person is not to use any lie. Therefore, when one man shall say, that according tothis testimony of Scripture we must to that degree hold every sort and kind of lie in detestation,that even if a man wish to lie, yea, though he lie not, the very wish is to be condemned; and to thissense interpreteth, that it is not said, Do not use every lie, but, “Do not wish to use every lie;” that
one must not dare not only to tell, but not even to wish to tell, any lie whatever: saith another man,
“Nay, in that it saith, Do not wish to use every lie, it willeth that from the mouth of the heart we
exterminate and estrange lying: so that while from some lies we must abstain with the mouth of
the body, as are those chiefly which pertain to doctrine of religion; from some, we are not to abstain
with the mouth of the body, if reason of avoiding a greater evil require; but with the mouth of theheart we must abstain utterly from every lie.” Where it behoveth to be understood what is said,“Do not wish:” namely, the will itself is taken as it were the mouth of the heart, so that it concerneth
not the mouth of the heart when in shunning a greater evil we lie unwillingly. There is also a third
sense in which thou mayest so take this word, “not every,” that, except some lies, it giveth theeleave to lie. Like as if he should say, wish not to believe every man: he would not mean to advisethat none should be believed; but that not all, some however, should be believed. And that which
follows, “For assiduity thereof will not profit for good,” sounds as if, not lying, but assiduous lying,that is, the custom and love of lying, should seem to be that which he would prohibit. To whichthat person will assuredly slide down,2359 who either shall think that every lie may be boldly used(for so he will shun not that even which is committed in the doctrine of piety and religion; than
2358

Ecclus. vii. 13. μ ™
“Every” is used for “any.”
2359
Abutendum.

‚, noli velle mentiri omne mendacium. “Use not to make any manner of lie,” E.V.

616

NPNF (V1-03)

473

Philip Schaff

which what more abominably wicked thing canst thou easily find, not among all lies, but among
all sins?) or to some lie (no matter how easy, how harmless,) shall accommodate the inclination of
the will; so as to lie, not unwillingly for the sake of escaping a greater evil, but willingly and withliking. So, seeing there be three things which may be understood in this sentence, either “Everylie, not only tell thou not, but do not even wish to tell:” or, “Do not wish, but even unwillingly tella lie when aught worse is to be avoided:” or, “Not every,” to wit, that except some lies, the rest areadmitted: one of these is found to make for those who hold that one is never to lie, two for those
who think that sometimes one may tell a lie. But yet what follows, “For assiduity thereof will not
profit to good,” I know not whether it can countenance the first sentence of these three; except
haply so, that while it is a precept for the perfect not only not to lie, but not even to wish; assiduityof lying is not permitted even to beginners. As if, namely, on laying down the rule at no time
whatever not merely to lie but so much as to have a wish to lie, and this being gainsaid by examples,in regard that there are some lies which have been even approved by great authority, it should berejoined that those indeed are lies of beginners, which have, in regard of this life, some kind of
duty of mercy; and yet to that degree is every lie evil, and by perfect and spiritual minds in every
way to be eschewed, that not even beginners are permitted to have assiduous custom thereof. For
we have already spoken concerning the Egyptian midwives, that it is in respect of the promise of
growth and proficiency to better things that they while lying are spoken of with approval: because
it is some step towards loving the true and eternal saving of the soul, when a person doth mercifully
for the saving of any man’s albeit mortal life even tell a lie.

35. Moreover what is written “Thou wilt destroy all that speak leasing:”2360 one saith that nolie is here excepted, but all condemned. Another saith: Yea verily: but they who speak leasing fromthe heart, as we disputed above; for that man speaketh truth in his heart, who hateth the necessityof lying, which he understands as a penalty of the moral life. Another saith: All indeed will God
destroy who speak leasing, but not all leasing: for there is some leasing which the Prophet was atthat time insinuating, in which none is spared; that is, if refusing to confess each one his sins, hedefend them rather, and will not do penance,2361 so that not content to work iniquity, he must needs
wish to be thought just, and succumb not to the medicine of confession: as the very distinction of
the words may seem to intimate no other, “Thou hatest all that work iniquity;”2362 but wilt not
destroy them if upon repenting they speak the truth in confession, that by doing that truth they may
come to the light; as is said in the Gospel according to John, “But be that doeth truth cometh unto
the light.2363 Thou wilt destroy all who” not only work what Thou hatest, but also “speak leasing;”2364
in holding out before them false righteousness, and not confessing their sins in penitence.

2360
2361
2362
2363
2364

Ps. v. 6.
Agere pœnitentiam.
Ps. v. 5.
John iii. 21.
Ps. v. 6, 7.

617

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

36. For, concerning false witness, which is set down in the ten commands of the Law, it canindeed in no wise be contended that love of truth may at heart be preserved, and false witness
brought forth to him unto whom the witness is borne. For, when it is said to God only, then it is
only in the heart that the truth is to be embraced: but when it is said to man, then must we with themouth also of the body bring forth truth, because man is not an inspector of the heart. But then,touching the witness itself, it is not unreasonably asked, to whom one is a witness? For not towhomsoever we speak unto are we witnesses, but to them to whom it is expedient and due that theyby our means should come to know or believe the truth; as is a judge, that he may not err in judging;or he who is taught in doctrine of religion, that he may not err in faith, or by very authority of theteacher waver in doubt. But when the person who interrogates thee or wishes to know aught fromthee seeks that which concerneth him not, or which is not expedient for him to know, he craveth
not a witness, but a betrayer. Therefore if to him thou tell a lie, from false witness peradventure
thou wilt be clear, but from a lie assuredly not. So then with this salvo, that to bear false witness
is never lawful, the question is, whether it be lawful sometimes to tell a lie. Or if it be false witness
to lie at all, it is to be seen whether it admit of compensation, to wit, that it be said for the sake of
avoiding a greater sin: as that which is written, “Honor father and mother,”2365 under stress of apreferable duty is disregarded; whence the paying of the last honors of sepulture to a father, isforbidden to that man who by the Lord Himself is called to preach the kingdom of God.

474

37. Likewise, touching that which is written, “A son which receiveth the word shall be far fromdestruction: but receiving, he receiveth it for himself, and no falsehood proceedeth out of his
mouth:”2366 some one may say, that what is here set down, “A son which receiveth the word,” isto be taken for no other than the word of God, which is truth. Therefore, “A son receiving the truth
shall be far from destruction,” refers to that which is written, “Thou wilt destroy all that speakleasing.” But when it follows, “Receiving he receiveth for himself,” what other doth this insinuate
than what the Apostle saith, “But let every man prove his own work, and then he shall have glorying
in himself and not in another?”2367 For he that receiveth the word, that is, truth, not for himself, but
for men-pleasing, keepeth it not when he sees they can be pleased by a lie. But whoso receiveth itfor himself, no falsehood proceedeth out of his mouth: because even when the way to please men
is to lie, that man lieth not, who receiving the truth not thereby to please them but to please God,hath received it for himself. Therefore there is no reason why it should be said here He will destroy
all who speak leasing, but not all leasing: because all lies, universally, are cut off in this saying,“And no falsehood proceedeth out of his mouth.” But another saith, it is to be so taken as the Apostle
Paul took our Lord’s saying, “But I say unto you, Swear not at all.”2368 For here also all swearing
is cut off; but from the mouth of the heart, that it should never be done with approbation of the will,
but through necessity of the weakness of another; that is, “from the evil” of another, when it shows
2365

Exod. xx. 12.
Prov. xxix. 27. Lat. Not in the Hebrew, but LXX. xxiv. 23. λόγον φυλασσόμενος υἱ& 232·ς ἀπωλείας ἐκτὸς žσταιδεχόμενος δš ἐδ™ξατο αὐτόν. Μηδšν ψεῦδος ἀτὸ γλώσσης βασιλ™ως λεγ™σθω, καὶ οὐδšν ψεῦδος ἀπο γλώσσης αὐτοῦ οὐ μὴ
ἐξ™λθη.
2367
Gal. vi. 4.
2368
Matt. v. 34.
2366

618

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffthat he cannot otherwise be got to believe what is said, unless faith be wrought by an oath; or, fromthat “evil” of our own, that while as yet involved in the skins of this mortality we are not able toshow our heart: which thing were we able to do, of swearing there were no need. Though moreoverin this whole sentence, if the saying, “A son receiving the word shall be far from destruction,” besaid of none other than that Truth,2369 by Whom all things were made, which remaineth everincommutable; then, because the doctrine of Religion strives to bring men to the contemplation ofthis Truth, it may seem that the saying, “And no falsehood proceedeth out of his mouth,” is said tothis purpose, that he speaketh no falsehood that pertaineth to doctrine. Which sort of lie is upon nocompensation whatever to be gone into, and is utterly and before all to be eschewed. Or if thesaying, “No falsehood,” is absurdly taken if it be not referred to every lie, the saying, “From his
mouth,” should, as was argued above, be taken to mean the mouth of the heart, in the opinion of
him who accounts that sometimes one may tell a lie.

38. Certain it is, albeit all this disputation go from side to side, some asserting that it is neverright to lie, and to this effect reciting divine testimonies: others gainsaying, and even in the midstof the very words of the divine testimonies seeking place for a lie; yet no man can say, that he finds
this either in example or in word of the Scriptures, that any lie should seem a thing to be loved, or
not had in hatred; howbeit sometimes by telling a lie thou must do that thou hatest, that what ismore greatly to be detested may be avoided. But then here it is that people err; they put the precious
beneath the vile. For when thou hast granted that some evil is to be admitted, that another and moregrievous may not be admitted; not by the rule of truth, but by his own cupidity and custom dotheach measure the evil, accounting that to be the more grievous, which himself more greatly dreads,
not which is in reality more greatly to be fled from. All this fault is engendered by perversity ofloving. For being there are two lives of ours; the one eternal, which is promised of God; the othertemporal, in which we now are: when a man shall have begun to love this temporal more than that
eternal, for the sake of this which he loveth he thinks all things right to be done; and there are notany, in his estimation, more grievous sins than those which do injury to this life, and either takeaway from it any commodity unjustly and unlawfully, or by inflicting of death take it utterly away.
And so thieves, and robbers, and ruffians, and torturers, and slayers, are more hated of them thanlascivious, drunken, luxurious men, if these molest no man. For they do not understand or at allcare, that these do wrong to God; not indeed to any inconvenience of Him, but to their own pernicious
hurt; seeing they corrupt His gifts bestowed upon them, even His temporal gifts, and by their very
corruptions turn away from eternal gifts: above all, if they have already begun to be the Temple ofGod; which to all Christians the Apostle saith thus: “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God,and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? Whoso shall corrupt God’s temple, God will corrupt
him. For the temple of God is holy: which temple are ye.”2370

2369
2370

Or “of Him who is Truth itself.”
1 Cor. iii. 16, 17.

619

NPNF (V1-03)

475

Philip Schaff

39. And all these sins, truly, whether such whereby an injury is done to men in the comforts ofthis life, or whereby men corrupt themselves and hurt none against his will: all these sins, then,even though they seem to mean well by this temporal life to the procuring of any delight or profit,(for no man commits any of these things with any other purpose and end;) yet in regard of that life
which is forever and ever, they do entangle and in all ways hinder. But there are some of these thathinder the doers only, others likewise those on whom they are done. For as to the things whichpeople keep safe for the sake of utility to this life, when these are taken away by injurious persons,they alone sin and are hindered from eternal life who do this, not they to whom they do it. Therefore,
even if a person consent to the taking of them from him, either that he may not do some evil, orthat he may not in these very things suffer some greater inconvenience; not only does he not sin,but in the one case he acts bravely and laudably, in the other usefully and unblameably. But as tothose things which are kept for the sake of sanctity and religion, when injurious persons wish to
violate these, it is right, if the condition be proposed and the means given, to redeem them even bysins of lesser moment, yet not by wrongs to other men. And then do these things thenceforth cease
to be sins, which are undertaken in order to the avoidance of greater sins. For as in things useful,for instance in pecuniary or any other corporal commodity, that is not called a loss which is parted
with in order to a greater gain; so in things holy, that is not called sin which is admitted lest a worse
be admitted. Or if that is called loss, which one foregoes that he may not forego more; let this also
be called sin, while however the necessity of undertaking it in order to the eschewing of a greater
is no more to be doubted, than that, in order to avoid a greater loss, it is right to suffer a smallerone.

40. Now the things which are to be kept safe for sanctity’s sake are these: pudicity of body, andchastity of soul,2371 and verity of doctrine. Pudicity of body, without consent and permission of thesoul, doth no man violate. For, whatever against our will and without our empowering the same isby greater force done upon our body, is no lewdness. Howbeit, of permitting there may be somereason, but of consenting, none. For we consent, when we approve and wish: but we permit even
not willing, because of some greater turpitude to be eschewed. Consent, truly, to corporal lewdness
violates also chastity of mind. For the mind’s2372 chastity consists in a good will and sincere love,
which is not corrupted, unless when we love and desire that which Truth teaches ought not to be
loved and desired. We have therefore to guard the sincerity of love toward God and our neighbor;for in this is chastity of mind sanctified: and we must endeavor with all the strength in our power,
and with pious supplication, that, when the pudicity of our body is sought to be violated, not eventhat outermost sense of the soul,2373 which is entangled with the flesh, may be touched with any
delight; but if it cannot this, at least the mind and thought2374 in not consenting may have its chastity
preserved entire. Now what we have to guard in chastity of mind,2375 is, as pertaining to the love

2371
2372
2373
2374
2375

Animæ.
Animi.
Animæ.
Mentis.
Animi.

620

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffof our neighbor, innocence and benevolence; as pertaining to the love of God, piety. Innocence isthat we hurt no man; benevolence, that we also do good to whom we can; piety, that we worship
God. But as for verity of doctrine, of religion and piety, that is not violated unless by a lie; whereas
the highest and inmost Verity Itself, Whose that doctrine is, can in no wise be violated: which Truth
to attain unto, and in It on every wise to remain, and to It thoroughly to cleave, will not be permitted,
but when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on
immortality. But, because all piety in this life is practice by which we tend to that life, which practicehath a guidance afforded unto it from that doctrine, which in human words and signs2376 of corporalsacraments doth insinuate and intimate Truth herself: for this cause this also, which by lying ispossible to be corrupted, is most of all to be kept incorrupt; that so, if aught in that chastity of mind
be violated, it may have that wherefrom it may be repaired. For once corrupt authority of doctrine,
and there can be none either course or recourse to chastity of mind.

476

41. There resulteth then from all these this sentence, that a lie which doth not violate the doctrineof piety, nor piety itself, nor innocence, nor benevolence, may on behalf of pudicity of body be
admitted. And yet if any man should propose to himself so to love truth, not only that which consistsin contemplation, but also in uttering the true thing, which each in its own kind of things is true,
and no otherwise to bring forth with the mouth of the body his thought than in the mind it isconceived and beheld; so that he should prize the beauty of truth-telling honesty, not only above
gold and silver and jewels and pleasant lands, but above this temporal life itself altogether andevery good thing of the body, I know not whether any could wisely say that that man errs. And if
he should prefer this and prize it more than all that himself hath of such things; rightly also would
he prefer it to the temporal things of other men, whom by his innocence and benevolence he wasbound to keep and to help. For he would love perfect faith, not only of believing aright those things
which by an excellent authority and worthy of faith should to himself be spoken, but also of faith
fully uttering what himself should judge right to be spoken, and should speak. For faith hath its
name in the Latin tongue, from that the thing is done which is said:2377 and thus it is manifest that
one doth not exhibit when telling a lie. And even if this faith be less violated, when one lies in such
sort that he is believed to no inconvenience and no pernicious hurt, with added intention moreoverof guarding either one’s life or corporal purity; yet violated it is, and a thing is violated which ought
to be kept safe in chastity and sanctity of mind. Whence we are constrained, not by opinion of men,which for the most part is in error, but by truth itself, truth which is eminent above all, and alone
is most invincible, to prefer even to purity of body, perfect faith. For chastity of mind is, love wellordered, which does not place the greater below the smaller. Now it is less, whatever in the bodythan whatever in the mind can be violated. For assuredly when for corporal chasteness a man tells
a lie, he sees indeed that his body is threatened with corruption, not from his own, but from another’slust, but is cautious lest by permitting at least, he be a party. That permission, however, where isit but in the mind? So then, even corporal chasteness cannot be corrupted but in the mind; which
not consenting nor permitting, it can by no means be rightly said that corporal chasteness is violated

2376
2377

Signaculis.
“Fides, quia fit quod dicitur.”

621

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

whatever in the body be perpetrated by another’s lust. Whence it is gathered, that much more mustthe chastity of the mind be preserved in the mind, in the which is the guardianship of the pudicityof the body. Wherefore, what in us lies, both the one and the other must by holy manners andconversation be walled and hedged round, lest from another quarter it be violated. But when bothcannot be, which is to be slighted in comparison of which, who doth not see? when he seeth which
to which is to be preferred, the mind to the body, or the body to the mind; and which is more to beshunned among sins, the permitting of another’s deed, or the committing of the deed thyself.

42. It clearly appears then, all being discussed, that those testimonies of Scripture have noneother meaning than that we must never at all tell a lie: seeing that not any examples of lies, worthyof imitation, are found in the manners and actions of the Saints, as regards those Scriptures which
are referred to no figurative signification, such as is the history in the Acts of the Apostles. For all
those sayings of our Lord in the Gospel, which to more ignorant minds seem lies, are figurative
significations. And as to what the Apostle says: “I am made all things to all men, that I might gainall;”2378 the right understanding is, that he did this not by lying, but by sympathy; so that he dealt
with them in liberating them with so great charity, as if he were himself in that evil from which hewished to make them whole. There must therefore be no lying in the doctrine of piety: it is a heinous
wickedness, and the first sort of detestable lie. There must be no lying of the second sort; because
no man must have a wrong done to him. There must be no lying of the third sort; because we are
not to consult any man’s good to the injury of another. There must be no lying of the fourth sort,that is, for the lust of lying, which of itself is vicious. There must be no lying of the fifth sort,because not even the truth itself is to be uttered with the aim of men-pleasing, how much less a lie,
which of itself, as a lie, is a foul thing? There must be no lying of the sixth sort; for it is not rightthat even the truth of testimony be corrupted for any man’s temporal convenience and safety. But
unto eternal salvation none is to be led by aid of a lie. For not by the ill manners of them that convert
him is he to be converted to good manners: because if it is meet to be done towards him, himself
also ought when converted to do it toward others; and so is he converted not to good, but to illmanners, seeing that is held out to be imitated by him when converted, which was done unto him
in converting him. Neither in the seventh sort must there be any lying; for it is meet that not any
man’s commodity or temporal welfare be preferred to the perfecting of faith. Not even if any man
is so ill moved by our right deeds as to become worse in his mind, and far more remote from piety,are right deeds therefore to be foregone: since what we are chiefly to hold is that whereunto weought to call and invite them whom as our own selves we love; and with most courageous mind
we must drink in that apostolic sentence: “To some we are a savor of life unto life, to others a savorof death unto death; and who is sufficient for these things?”2379 Nor in the eighth sort must there
be lying: because both among good things chastity of mind is greater than pudicity of body; andamong evil things, that which ourselves do, than that which we suffer to be done. In these eightkinds, however, a man sins less when he tells a lie, in proportion as he emerges to the eighth: more,

2378
2379

1 Cor. ix. 22.
2 Cor. ii. 16.

622

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

in proportion as he diverges to the first. But whoso shall think there is any sort of lie that is not sin,
will deceive himself foully, while he deems himself honest as a deceiver of other men.
477

43. So great blindness, moreover, hath occupied men’s minds, that to them it is too little if we
pronounce some lies not to be sins; but they must needs pronounce it to be sin in some things if werefuse to lie: and to such a pass have they been brought by defending lying, that even that first kindwhich is of all the most abominably wicked they pronounce to have been used by the Apostle Paul.
For in the Epistle to the Galatians, written as it was, like the rest, for doctrine of religion and piety,they say that he has told a lie, in the passage where he says concerning Peter and Barnabas, “WhenI saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the Gospel.”2380 For, while they wish
to defend Peter from error, and from that pravity of way into which he had fallen; the very way ofreligion in which is salvation for all men, they by breaking and mincing the authority of the Scriptures
do endeavor themselves to overthrow. In which they do not see that it is not only lying, but perjury
that they lay to the charge of the Apostle in the very doctrine of piety, that is, in an Epistle in which
he preaches the Gospel; seeing that he there saith, before he relates that matter, “What I write unto
you, behold, before God, I lie not.”2381 But it is time that we set bounds to this disputation: in theconsideration and treatment whereof altogether there is nothing more meet to be, before all else,
borne in mind and made our prayer, than that which the same Apostle saith: “God is faithful, Whowill not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able to bear, but will with the temptation makealso a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.”2382

481

Against Lying.
To Consentius[Contra Mendacium.]Translated by the Rev. H. Browne, M.A.
of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, Late Principal of the Diocesan College, Chichester.
From the Retractations, Book II. Chap. 60.

2380
2381
2382

Gal. ii. 14.
Gal. i. 20.
1 Cor. x. 13.

623

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff“ Then2383 also I wrote a Book against Lying, the occasion of which work was this. In order
to discover the Priscillianist heretics, who think it right to conceal their heresy not only bydenial and lies, but even by perjury, it seemed to certain Catholics that they ought to pretended
themselves Priscillianists, in order that they might penetrate their lurking places. In prohibitionof which thing, I composed this book. It begins: Multa mihi legenda misisti.”482

1. A great deal for me to read hast thou sent, my dearest brother Consentius: a great deal forme to read: to the which while I am preparing an answer, and am drawn off first by one, then byanother, more urgent occupation, the year has measured out its course, and has thrust me into suchstraits, that I must answer in what sort I may, lest the time for sailing being now favorable, and thebearer desirous to return, I should too long detain him. Having therefore unrolled and read throughall that Leonas, servant of God, brought me from thee, both soon after I received it, and afterwards
when about to dictate this reply, and having weighed it with all the consideration in my power, I
am greatly delighted with thy eloquence, and memory of the holy Scripture, and cleverness of wit,
and the resentment with which thou bitest negligent Catholics, and the zeal with which thou gnashest
against even latent heretics. But I am not persuaded that it is right to unearth them out of their hiding
places by our telling lies. For to what end do we take such pains in tracking them out and runningthem down, but that having taken them and brought them forth into open day, we may either teachthem the truth, or at least having convicted them by the truth, may not allow them to hurt others?
to this end, therefore, that their lie may be blotted out, or shunned, and God’s truth increased. How
then by a lie shall I rightly be able to prosecute lies? Or is it by robbery that robberies and bysacrilege that sacrileges, and by adultery that adulteries, are to be prosecuted? “But if the truth of
God shall abound by my lie,” are we too to say, “Let us do evil that good may come?”2384 A thingwhich thou seest how the Apostle detesteth. For what else is, “Let us lie, that we may bring heretic
liars to the truth,” but, “Let us do evil that good may come?” Or, is a lie sometimes good, orsometimes a lie not evil? Why then is it written, “Thou hatest, Lord, all that work iniquity; Thouwilt destroy all that speak leasing.”2385 For he hath not excepted some, or said indefinitely, “Thouwilt destroy them that speak leasing;” so as to permit some, not all, to be understood: but it is anuniversal sentence that he hath passed, saying, “Thou wilt destroy all who speak leasing.” Or, because it is not said, Thou wilt destroy all who speak all leasing, or, who speak any leasing
whatsoever; is it therefore to be thought that there is place allowed for some lie; to wit, that there
should be some leasing, and them who speak it, God should not destroy, but destroy them all which
speak unjust leasing, not what lie soever, because there is found also a just lie, which as such ought
to be matter of praise, not of crime?

2383

i.e. A.D. 420, the work mentioned just before belonging to the early part of that year. Consentius is thought to be thewriter of ep. 119, to Augustin, and ep. 120, and 205, are addressed to him. This is the work referred to in the Enchiridion, ch.
18, p. 243.
2384
Rom. iii. 7, 8.
2385
Psalm v. 6, 7. [See R.V.] “Thou wilt destroy them that speak a lie,” Heb. π€ντας τοὺς λαλοῦντας τὸ ψεῦδος, LXX.

624

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

2. Perceivest thou not how much this reasoning aideth the very persons whom as great gamewe make ado to catch by our lies? For, as thyself hast shown, this is the sentiment of the Priscillianists
to prove which, they apply testimonies from the Scriptures exhorting their followers to lie, as thoughby the examples of Patriarchs, Prophets, Apostles, Angels; not hesitating to add even the Lord
Christ Himself; and deeming that they cannot otherwise prove their falsehood truthful, unless they
pronounce Truth to be a liar. It must be refuted, this; not imitated: nor ought we to be partners with
the Priscillianists in that evil in which they are convicted to be worse than other heretics. For theyalone, or at least they in the greatest degree, are found to make a dogma of lying for the purposeof hiding their truth, as they call it: and this so great evil therefore to esteem just, because they saythat in the heart must be held that which is true, but with the mouth to utter unto aliens a false thing,
is no sin; and that this is written, “Who speaketh the truth in his heart:”2386 as though this wereenough for righteousness, even though a person do with his mouth speak a lie, when not his neighbor
but a stranger is he that heareth it. On this account they think the Apostle Paul, when he had said,“Putting away lying, speak ye truth,” to have immediately added, “Every man with his neighbor,for we are members one of another.”2387 Meaning, that with them who are not our neighbors insociety of the truth, nor, so to say, our co-members,2388 it is lawful and right to speak a lie.

3. Which sentence dishonoreth the holy Martyrs, nay rather taketh away holy martyrdoms
altogether. For they would do more justly and wisely, according to these men, not to confess totheir persecutors that they were Christians, and by confessing make them murderers: but rather by
telling a lie, and denying what they were, should both themselves keep safe the convenience of theflesh and purpose of the heart, and not allow those to accomplish the wickedness which they had
conceived in their mind. For they were not their neighbors in the Christian faith, that with them itshould be their duty to speak the truth in their mouth which they spake in their heart; but moreover
enemies of Truth itself. For if Jehu (whom it seems they do prudently to single out unto themselves
to look unto as an example of lying) falsely gave himself out for a servant of Baal, that he mightslay Baal’s servants: how much more justly, according to their perversity, might, in time ofpersecution, the servants of Christ falsely give themselves out, for servants of demons, that theservants of demons might not slay servants of Christ; and sacrifice to idols that men might not be
killed, if Jehu sacrificed to Baal that he might kill men? For what harm would it do them, according
to the egregious doctrine of these speakers of lies, if they should lyingly pretend a worship of theDevil in the body, when the worship of God was preserved in the heart? But not so have the Martyrs
understood the Apostle, the true, the holy Martyrs. They saw and held that which is written, “Withthe heart man believeth unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto
salvation;”2389 and, “In their mouth was found no lie:”2390 and so they departed irreproachable, tothat place where to be tempted by liars any further they will not fear; because they will not have

2386
2387
2388
2389
2390

Ps. xv. 2.
Eph. iv. 25.
Commembres.
Rom. x. 10.
Rev. xiv. 5. ψεῦδος, Griesbach; δόλος, text rec.; guile, E.V.

625

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

liars any more in their heavenly assemblies, either for strangers or neighbors. As for that Jehu, by
an impious lie and a sacrilegious sacrifice making inquisition for impious and sacrilegious men forto kill them, they would not imitate him, no, not though the Scripture had said nothing concerninghim, what manner of man he was. But, seeing it is written that he had not his heart right with
God;2391 what profited it him, that for some obedience which, concerning the utter destruction of
the house of Ahab, he exhibited for the lust of his own domination. he received some amount oftransitory wages in a temporal kingdom? Let, rather, the truth-telling sentence of the Martyrs bethine to defend: to this I exhort thee, my brother, that thou mayst be against liars, not a teacher oflying, but an asserter of truth. For, I pray thee, attend diligently to what I say, that thou mayest find
how needful to be shunned is that which, with laudable zeal indeed towards impious men, that they
may be caught and corrected, or avoided, but yet too incautiously, is thought fit to be taught.

483

4. Of lies are many sorts, which indeed all, universally, we ought to hate. For there is no lie
that is not contrary to truth. For, as light and darkness, piety and impiety, justice and iniquity, sin
and right-doing, health and weakness, life and death, so are truth and a lie contrary the one to theother. Whence by how much we love the former, by so much ought we to hate the latter. Yet intruth there be some lies which to believe does no harm: although even by such sort of lie to wish
to deceive, is hurtful to him that tells it, not to him that believes it. As though, if that brother, theservant of God, Fronto, in the information which he gave thee, should (though far be the thought!)
say some things falsely; he would have hurt himself assuredly, not thee, although thou, without
iniquity of thine, hadst believed all, upon his telling it. Because, whether those things did so takeplace or not so, yet they have not any thing, which if a person believe to have been so, though it
were not so, he by the rule of truth and doctrine of eternal salvation should be judged worthy of
blame. Whereas, if a person tell a lie which if any believe he will be an heretic against the doctrineof Christ, by so much is he who tells the lie more hurtful, by how much he that believes it is moremiserable. See then, what manner of thing it is, if against the doctrine of Christ we shall tell a lie
which whoso believes shall perish, in order that we may catch the enemies of the same doctrine,to the end we may bring them to the truth, while we recede from it; nay rather, when we catch liars
by lying, teach worse lies. For it is one thing what they say when they lie, another when they aredeceived. For, when they teach their heresy, they speak the things in which they are deceived; butwhen they say that they think what they do not think, or that they do not think what they do think,they say the things in which they lie. In that any believeth them, what though he do not find themout, himself perisheth not. For it is no receding from the catholic rule, if, when a heretic lyingly
professes the catholic doctrines, one believes him to be a catholic: and therefore it is not pernicious
to him; because he is mistaken in the mind of a man, of which, when latent, he cannot judge, notin the faith of God which it is his duty to keep safe planted within him. Moreover, when they teachtheir heresy, whoso shall believe them, in thinking it truth, will be partaker, as of their error, so of
their damnation. So it comes to pass, that when they fable their nefarious dogmas in which they
are with deadly error deceived, then whoso believeth them is lost: whereas when we preach catholic
dogmas, in which we hold the right faith, then if he shall believe, that man is found, whoso was2391

2 Kings x. 31.

626

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

lost. But when, they being Priscillianists, do, in order that they may not betray their venom, lyingly
give themselves out to be of us; whoever of us believes them, even while they escape detection,himself perseveres a Catholic: we on the other hand, if, in order to attain to the discovery of them,
we falsely give ourselves out for Priscillianists, because we shall praise their dogmas as though
they were our own, whoso shall believe the same, will either be confirmed among them, or will betransferred to them in the meantime straightway: but what the coming hour may bring forth, whether
they shall be afterwards set free therefrom by us when speaking true things, who were deceived by
us when speaking false; and whether they will be willing to hear one teaching whom they havethus experienced telling a lie,who can know for certain? who can be ignorant that this is uncertain?
Whence it is gathered, that it is more pernicious, or to speak more mildly, that it is more perilous
for Catholics to lie that they may catch heretics, than for heretics to lie that they may not be foundout by Catholics. Because, whoso believes Catholics when they tell a lie to tempt people, is either
made or confirmed a heretic; but whoso believes heretics when they tell a lie to conceal themselves,
doth not cease to be a Catholic. But that this may become more plain, let us propose some cases
by way of example, and from those writings in preference which thou hast sent me to read.

484

5. Well then, let us set before our eyes a cunning spy as he makes up to the person whom hehas already perceived to be a Priscillianist; he begins with Dictinius the bishop, and lyingly bepraises
either his life, if he knew him, or his fame, if he knew him not; this is more tolerable thus far,because Dictinius is accounted to have been a Catholic, and to have been corrected of that error.
Then, passing on to Priscillian, (for this comes next in the art of lying,) he shall make reverend
mention of him, of an impious and detestable person, condemned for his nefarious wickedness andcrimes! In which reverend mention, if haply the person for whom this sort of net is spread, had notbeen a firm Priscillianist, by this preaching of him, he will be confirmed. But when the spy shallgo on to discourse of the other matters, and saying that he pities them whom the author of darkness
hath invoked in such darkness of error, that they acknowledge not the honor of their own soul, andthe brightness of their divine ancestry: then speaking of Dictinius’s Book, which is called “thePound,” because it treats, first and last, of a dozen questions, being as the ounces which go to thepound, shall extol it with such praise, as to protest that such a “Pound” (in which awful blasphemies
are contained) is more precious than many thousands of pounds of gold; truly, this astuteness of
him who tells the lie slays the soul of him who believes it, or, that being slain already, doth in thesame death sink, and hold it down. But, thou wilt say, “afterwards it shall be set at liberty.” What
if it come not to pass, either upon something intervening that prevents what was begun from being
completed, or through obstinacy of an heretical mind denying the same things over again, althoughof some it had already begun to make confession? especially because, if he shall find out that hehas been tampered with by a stranger, he will just the more boldy study to conceal his sentiments
by a lie, when he shall have learned much more certainly that this is done without blame, even by
the example of the very person who tampered with him. This, truly, in a man who thinks it right tohide the truth by telling a lie, with what face can we blame, and dare to condemn what we teach?

627

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

6. It remains, then, that what the Priscillianists think, according to the nefarious falsity of theirheresy, of God, of the soul, of the body, and the rest, we hesitate not with truthful pity to condemn;
but what they think of the right of telling a lie to hide the truth is to be to us and them (which God
forbid!) a common dogma. This is so great an evil, that even though this attempt of ours, whereby
we desire by means of a lie to catch them and change them, should so prosper that we do catch andchange them, there is no gain that can compensate the damage of making ourselves wrong withthem in order to set them right. For through this lie shall both we be in that respect perverse, andthey but half corrected; seeing that their thinking it right to tell a lie on behalf of the truth is a fault
which we do not correct in them, because we have learned and do teach the same thing, and lay it
down that it is fit to be done, in order that we may be able to attain to the amending of them. Whomyet we amend not, for their fault, with which they think right to hide the truth, we take not away,rather we make ourselves faulty when by such a fault we seek them; nor do we find how we canbelieve them, when converted, to whom, while perverted, we have lied; lest haply what was doneto them that they might be caught, they do to us when caught; not only because to do it hath been
their wont, but because in us also, to whom they come, they find the same.

7. And, what is more miserable, even they, already made as it were our own, cannot find how
they may believe us. For if they suspect that even in the catholic doctrines themselves we speak
lyingly, that we may conceal I know not what other thing which we think true; of course to one
suspecting the like thou shalt say, I did this then only to catch thee: but what wilt thou answer when
he says, Whence then do I know whether thou art not doing it even now, lest thou be caught by
me? Or indeed, can any man be made to believe that a man does not lie not to be caught, who lies
to catch? Seest thou whither this evil tends? that is, that not only we to them, and they to us, butevery brother to every brother shall not undeservedly become suspected? And so while that which
is aimed at by means of the lie, is that faith may be taught, the thing which is brought about is,rather, that there shall be no having faith in any man. For if we speak even against God when wetell a lie, what so great evil will people be able to discover in any lie, that, as though it were a mostwretched thing, we should be bound in every way to eschew it?

8. But now observe how more tolerable in comparison with us is the lying of the Priscillianists,
when they know that they speak deceitfully: whom by our own lying we think right to deliver fromthose false things in which they by erring are decayed. A Priscillianist saith, that the soul is a partof God, and of the same nature and substance with Him. This is a great and detestable blasphemy.
For it follows that the nature of God may be taken captive, deceived, cheated, disturbed, and defiled,condemned and tortured. But if that man also saith this, who from so great an evil desires to delivera man by a lie, let us see what is the difference between the one blasphemer and the other. “Verymuch,” sayest thou: “for this the Priscillianist saith, also believing it so: but the catholic not sobelieving, though so speaking.” The one, then, blasphemes without knowing, the other withknowledge: the one against science, the other against conscience; the one hath the blindness of
thinking false things, but in them hath at least the will of saying true things; the other in secret seeth
truth, and willingly speaketh false. “But the one;” thou wilt say, “teacheth this, that he may make628

NPNF (V1-03)

485

Philip Schaff

men partakers of his error and madness: the latter saith it that from that error and madness he may
deliver men.” Now I have already shown above how hurtful is this very thing which people believe
will do good: but meanwhile if we weigh in these two the present evils, (for the future good whicha catholic seeks from correcting a heretic is uncertain,) who sins worse? who deceives a man without
knowing it, or he who blasphemes God, knowing it? Assuredly which is the worse, that man
understands, who with solicitous piety preferreth God to man. Add to this, that, if God may be
blasphemed in order that we may bring men to praise Him, without doubt we do by our example
and doctrine invite men not only to praise, but also to blaspheme God: because they whom throughblasphemies against God we plot to bring to the praises of God, verily, if we do bring them, willlearn not only to praise, but also to blaspheme. These be the benefits we confer on them whom, by
blaspheming not ignorantly but with knowledge, we deliver from heretics! And whereas the Apostledelivered men to Satan himself that they might learn not to blaspheme,2392 we endeavor to rescue
men from Satan, that they may learn to blaspheme not with ignorance, but with knowledge. And
upon ourselves, their masters, we bring this so great bane, that, for the sake of catching heretics,
we first become, which is certain, blasphemers of God, in order that we may for the sake of delivering
them, which is uncertain, be able to be teachers of His truth.

9. When therefore we teach ours to blaspheme God that the Priscillianists may believe them
theirs, let us see what evil themselves say when they therefore lie that we may believe them ours.
They anathematize Priscillian, and detest him according to our mind; they say that the soul is acreature of God, not a part; they execrate the Priscillianists’ false martyrdoms; the catholic bishops
by whom that heresy has been stripped, attacked, prostrated, they extol with great praises, and soforth. Behold, themselves speak truth when they lie: not that the very thing which is a lie can betrue at the same time; but when in one thing they lie, in another they speak truth: for when, in saying
they are of us, they lie, of the catholic faith they speak truth. And therefore they, that they may not
be found out for Priscillianists, speak in lying manner the truth: but we, that we may find them out,
not only speak lyingly, that we may be believed to belong to them; but we also speak false things
which we know to belong to their error. Therefore as for them, when they wish to be thought ofus, it is both false in part, and true in part, what they say; for it is false that they are of us, but truethat the soul is not a part of God: but as for us, when we wish to be thought to belong to them, it isfalse, both the one and the other that we say, both that we are Priscillianists, and that the soul is apart of God. They, then, praise God, not blaspheme, when they conceal themselves; and when they
do not so, but utter their own sentiments, they know not that they blaspheme. So that if they beconverted to the catholic faith, they console themselves, because they can say what the Apostle
said: who when among other things he had said, “I was before a blasphemer; but,” saith he, “Iobtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly.”2393 We on the contrary, in order that they may open
themselves to us, if we utter this as if it were a just lie for deceiving and catching them, do assuredly
both say that we belong to the blaspheming Priscillianists, and that they may believe us, do without

2392
2393

1 Tim. i. 20.
1 Tim. i. 13.

629

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

excuse of ignorance blaspheme. For a catholic, who by blaspheming wishes to be thought a heretic,
cannot say, “I did it ignorantly.”

10. Ever, my brother, in such cases, it behoves with fear to recollect, “Whoso shall deny Me
before men, I will deny him before My Father which is in heaven.”2394 Or truly is it no denying ofChrist before men, to deny Him before Priscillianists, that when they hide themselves, one may by
a blasphemous lie strip them and catch them? But who doubts, I pray thee, that Christ is denied,when so as He is in truth, we say that He is not; and so as the Priscillianist believes Him, we saythat He is?

486

11. “But, hidden wolves,” thou wilt say, “clad in sheep’s clothing, and privily and grievously
wasting the Lord’s flock, can we no otherwise find out.” Whence then have the Priscillianists
become known, ere this way of hunting for them with lies was ex-cogitated? Whence was theirvery author, more cunning doubtless, and therefore more covert, got at in his bed? Whence so manyand so great persons made manifest and condemned, and the others innumerable partly corrected,
partly as if corrected, and in the Church’s compassion gathered into her fold? For many ways giveth
the Lord, when He hath compassion, whereby we may come to the discovery of them: two of which
are more happy than others; namely, that either they whom they have wished to seduce, or they
whom they had already seduced, shall, when they repent and are converted, point them out. Whichis more easily effected, if their nefarious error, not by lying tricks, but by truthful reasonings beoverthrown. In the writing of which it behoves thee to bestow thy pains, since God hath bestowed
the gift that thou canst do this: which wholesome writings whereby their insane perversity is
destroyed, becoming more and more known, and being by catholics, whether prelates who speakin the congregations, or any studious men full of zeal for God, every where diffused, these will beholy nets in which they may be caught truthfully, not with lies hunted after. For so being taken,
either, of their own accord, they will confess what they have been, and others whom they know to
be of the evil fellowship they will either kindly2395 correct, or mercifully betray. Or else, if theyshall be ashamed to confess what with long-continued simulation they have concealed, by thehidden hand of God healing them shall they be made whole.

12. “But,” thou wilt say, “we more easily penetrate their concealment if we pretend to beourselves what they are.” If this were lawful or expedient, Christ might have instructed his sheepthat they should come clad in wolves’ clothing to the wolves, and by the cheat of this artifice
discover them: which He hath not said, no, not when He foretold that He would send them forth in
the midst of wolves.2396 But thou wilt say: “They needed not at that time to have inquisition made

2394
2395
2396

Matt. x. 33.
“Concorditer”—“Misericorditer.”Matt. x. 16.

630

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

for them, being most manifest wolves; but their bite and savageness were to be endured.” What,when foretelling later times, He said that ravening wolves would come in sheep’s clothing? Was
there not room there to give this advice and say, And do ye, that ye may find them out, assume
wolves’ clothing, but within be ye sheep still? Not this saith He: but when he had said, “Many will
come to you in sheep’s clothing, but within are ravening wolves;”2397 He went on to say, not, By
your lies, but, “By their fruits ye shall know them.” By truth must we beware of, by truth must we
take, by truth must we kill, lies. Be it far from us, that the blasphemies of the ignorant we by
wittingly blaspheming should overcome: far from us, that the evils of deceitful men we by imitating
should guard against. For how shall we guard against them if in order to guard against them weshall have them? For if in order that he may be caught who blasphemes unwittingly, I shall blaspheme
wittingly, worse is the thing I do than that which I catch. If in order that he may be found whodenies Christ unwittingly, I shall deny Him wittingly, to his undoing will he follow me whom I
shall so find, since in order that I may find him out, I first am undone.

13. Or haply is it so, that he who plots in this way to find out Priscillianists, denies not Christ,
forasmuch as with his mouth he utters what with his heart he believes not? As if truly (which I also
said a little above) when it was said, “With the heart man believeth unto righteousness,” it wasadded to no purpose, “with the mouth confession is made unto salvation?”2398 Is it not so that almost
all who have denied Christ before the persecutors, held in their heart what they believed of Him?
And yet, by not confessing with the mouth unto salvation, they perished, save they which throughpenitence have lived again? Who can be so vain,2399 as to think that the Apostle Peter had that in
his heart which he had on his lips when he denied Christ? Surely in that denial he held the truth
within and uttered the lie without. Why then did he wash away with tears the denial which he utteredwith his mouth, if that sufficed for salvation that with the heart he believed? Why, speaking thetruth in his heart, did he punish with so bitter weeping the lie which he brought forth with his mouth,
unless because he saw it to be a great and deadly evil, that while with his heart he believed unto
righteousness, with his mouth he made not confession unto salvation?

14. Wherefore, that which is written, “Who speaketh the truth in his heart,”2400 is not so to betaken, as if, truth being retained in the heart, in the mouth one may speak a lie. But the reason why
it is said, is, because it is possible that a man may speak with his mouth a truth which profiteth him
nothing, if he hold it not in his heart, that is, if what he speaketh, himself believe not; as the heretics,
and, above all, these same Priscillianists do, when they do, not indeed believe the catholic faith,
but yet speak it, that they may be believed to be of us. They speak therefore the truth in their mouth,
not in their heart. On this account were they to be distinguished from him of whom it is written,“He that speaketh truth in his heart.” Now this truth the catholic as in his heart he speaketh, because
2397
2398
2399
2400

Matt. vii. 15, 16.
Rom. x. 10.
Evanescat.
Ps. xv. 2.

631

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

so he believeth, so also in his mouth ought he, that so he may preach it; but against it, neither inheart nor in mouth have falsehood, that both with the heart he may believe unto righteousness, andwith the mouth may make confession unto salvation. For also in that psalm, after it had been said,“Who speaketh truth in his heart,” presently this is added, “Who hath used no deceit in his
tongue.”2401

487&gt;15. And as for that saying of the Apostle, “Putting away lying, speak every man truth withhis neighbor, for we are members one of another,”2402 far be it that we should so understand it, as
though he had permitted to speak a lie with those who are not yet with us members of the body of
Christ. But the reason why it is said, is, because each one of us ought to account every man to bethat which he wishes him to become, although he be not yet become such; as the Lord showed thealien Samaritan to be neighbor to him unto whom he showed mercy.”2403 A neighbor then, and not
an alien, is that man to be accounted, with whom our concern is that he remain not an alien; and ifon the score of his not being yet made partaker of our Faith and Sacrament, there be some truths
that must be concealed from him, yet is that no reason why false things should be told him.

16. For there were even in the Apostles’ times some who preached the truth not in truth, thatis, not with truthful mind: of whom the Apostle saith that they preached Christ not chastely, but ofenvy and strife. And on this account even at that time some were tolerated while preaching truth
not with a chaste mind: yet not any have been praised as preaching falsehood with a chaste mind.
Lastly, he saith of those, “Whether in pretence or in truth Christ be preached:”2404 but in no wise
would he say, In order that Christ may after be preached, let Him be first denied.

17. Wherefore, though there be indeed many ways in which latent heretics may be sought out,
without vituperating the catholic faith or praising heretical impiety, yet if there were no other way
at all of drawing out heretical impiety from its caverns, but that the catholic tongue should deviate
from the straight path of truth; more tolerable were it that that should be hid, than that this should
be precipitated; more tolerable that the foxes should lurk in their pits unseen, than for the sake ofcatching them the huntsmen should fall into the pit of blasphemy; more tolerable that the perfidy
of Priscillianists should be covered with the veil of truth, than that the faith of catholics, lest it
should of lying Priscillianists be praised, should of believing catholics be denied. For if lies, not ofwhatsoever kind, but blasphemous lies, are therefore just because they are committed with intent
to detect hidden heretics; it will be possible at that rate, if they be commuted with the same intention,that there should be chaste adulteries. For put the case that of a number of lewd Priscillianists, some

2401
2402
2403
2404

Ps. xv. 2.
Eph. iv. 25.
Luke x. 30–37.
Phil. i. 15–18.

632

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

woman should cast her eye upon a catholic Joseph, and promise him that she will betray their hidden
retreats if she obtain from him that he lie with her, and it be certain that if he consent unto her she
will make good her promise: shall we judge that it ought to be done? Or shall we understand thatby no means must such a price be paid in purchase of that kind of merchandise? Why then do we
not rout out heretics, in order to their being caught, by the flesh committing lasciviousness inadultery, and yet think right to rout them out by a mouth committing fornication in blasphemy?
For either it will be lawful to defend both the one and the other with equal reason, that these things
be therefore said to be not unjust, because they were done with intention of finding out the unjust:or if sound doctrine willeth not even for the sake of finding out heretics that we should have to dowith unchaste women, albeit only in body, not in mind, assuredly not even for the sake of findingout heretics willeth it that by us, albeit only in voice not in mind, either unclean heresy werepreached, or the chaste Catholic Church blasphemed. Because even the very sovereignty of themind, to which every inferior motion of the man ought to be obedient, will not lack deserved
opprobrium, when a thing is done that ought not to be done, whether by member or by word.
Although even when it is done by word, it is done by member: because the tongue is a member,by which the word is made; nor is any deed of ours by any member brought to the birth unless it
is first conceived in the heart; or rather being by our inwardly thinking upon and consenting unto
it already brought to the birth, it is brought forth abroad in our doing of it, by a member. It istherefore no excusing the mind from the deed, when any thing is said to be done not after the
purpose of the mind,2405 which yet were not done, unless the mind decreed it to be done.

488

18. It does indeed make very much difference, for what cause, with what end, with what intention
a thing be done: but those things which are clearly sins, are upon no plea of a good cause, with noseeming good end, no alleged good intention, to be done. Those works, namely of men, which are
not in themselves sins, are now good, now evil, according as their causes are good or evil; as, togive food to a poor man is a good work, if it be done because of pity, with right faith; as to lie witha wife, when it is done for the sake of generation, if it be done with faith to beget subjects forregeneration. These and the like works according to their causes are good or evil, because theself-same, if they have evil causes, are turned into sins: as, if for boasting sake a poor man is fed;
or for lasciviousness a man lies with his wife; or children are begotten, not that they may be nurtured
for God, but for the devil. When, however, the works in themselves are evil, such as thefts,
fornications, blasphemies, or other such; who is there that will say, that upon good causes they may
be done, so as either to be no sins, or, what is more absurd, just sins? Who is there that would say,That we may have to give to the poor, let us commit thefts upon the rich: or, Let us sell false witness,
especially if innocent men are not hurt thereby, but rather guilty men are rescued from the judges
who would condemn them? For two good things are done by selling of this lie, that money may betaken wherewith a poor man may be fed, and a judge deceived that a man be not punished. Evenin the matter of wills, if we can, why not suppress the true, and forge false wills that inheritancesor legacies may not come to unworthy persons, who do no good with them; but rather to those bywhom the hungry are fed, the naked clothed, strangers entertained, captives redeemed, Churches
2405

Ex animo.

633

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

builded? For why should not those evil things be done for the sake of these good things, if, for thesake of these good things, those are not evil at all? Nay, further, if lewd and rich women are likely
to enrich moreover their lovers and paramours, why should not even these parts and arts beundertaken by a man of merciful heart, to use them for so good a cause as that he may have whence
to bestow upon the needy; and not hear the Apostle saying, “Let him that stole steal no more, butrather let him labor, working with his hands that which is good, that he may have to give to himthat needeth?”2406 If indeed not only theft itself, but also false witness and adultery and every evil
work will be not evil but good, if it be done for the sake of being the means of doing good. Who
can say these things, except one who endeavors to subvert human affairs and all manners and laws?
For of what most heinous deed, what most foul crime, what most impious sacrilege, may it not be
said that it is possible for it to be done rightly and justly; and not only with impunity, but evengloriously, that in perpetrating thereof not only no punishments should be feared, but there should
be hope even of rewards: if once we shall concede in all evil works of men, that not what is done,
but wherefore done, must be the question; and this, to the end that whatever are found to have been
done for good causes, not even they should be judged to be evil? But if justice deservedly punishetha thief, albeit he shall say and shew that he therefore withdrew superfluities from a rich that hemight afford necessaries to a poor man; if deservedly she punisheth a forger, albeit he prove thathe therefore corrupted another’s will, that he might be heir, who should thence make large alms,
not he who should make none; if deservedly she punisheth an adulterer yea, though he shalldemonstrate that of mercy he did commit adultery, that through her with whom he did it he mightdeliver a man from death; lastly, to draw nearer to the matter in question, if deservedly she
punishment him who hath with that intent mixed in adulterous embrace with some woman, privy
to the turpitude of the Priscillianists, that he might enter into their concealments; I pray thee, whenthe Apostle saith, “Neither yield ye your members instruments of unrighteousness unto sin;”2407
and therefore neither hands, nor members of generation, nor other members, can it be right to yield
unto flagitious deeds with intent that we may be able to find out Priscillanists; what hath our tongue,
what our whole mouth, what the organ of the voice, offended us, that we should yield these as
instruments to sin, and to so great a sin, in which, that we may apprehend and rescue Priscillianists
from blaspheming in ignorance, we, without excuse of ignorance, are to blaspheme our God?

19. Some man will say, “So then any thief whatever is to be accounted equal with that thief
who steals with will of mercy?” Who would say this? But of these two it does not follow that any
is good, because one is worse. He is worse who steals through coveting, than he who steals throughpity: but if all theft be sin, from all theft we must abstain. For who can say that people may sin,even though one sin be damnable, another venial? but now we are asking, if a man shall do this orthat, who will not sin or will sin? not, who will sin more heavily or lightly. For even thefts themselves
are more lightly punished by law than crimes of lust: they are, however, both sins, albeit the one
lighter, the other heavier; so that a theft which is committed of concupiescence is held to be lighter

2406
2407

Eph. iv. 28.
Rom. vi. 13.

634

NPNF (V1-03)

489

Philip Schaff

than an act of lust which is committed for doing a good turn. Namely, in their own kind these
become lighter than other sins of the same kind, which appear to be committed with a good intention;
when yet the same compared with sins of another kind lighter in respect of the kind itself, are foundto be heavier. It is a heavier sin to commit theft of avarice than of mercy; and likewise it is a heavier
sin to perpetrate lewdness of luxury, than of mercy; and yet is it a heavier sin to commit adulteryof mercy, than to commit theft of avarice. Nor is it our concern now, what is lighter or what heavier,but what are sins or are not. For no man can say that it was a duty for a sin to be done, where it isclearly a sin; but we say that it is a duty, if the sin were done so or so, to forgive or not to forgive.

20. But, what must be confessed, to human minds certain compensative sins do cause suchembarrassment, that they are even thought meet to be praised, and rather to be called right deeds.
For who can doubt it to be a great sin, if a father prostitute his own daughters to the fornicationsof the impious? And yet hath there arisen a case in which a just man thought it his duty to do this,when the Sodomites with nefarious onset of lust were rushing upon his guests. For he said, “I have
two daughters which have not known man; I will bring them out to you, and do ye to them as isgood in your eyes: only unto these men do ye no wrong, for that they have come under coveringof my roof.”2408 What shall we say here? Do we not so abhor the wickedness which the Sodomites
were attempting to do to the guests of the just man, that, whatever were done so this were not done,
he should deem right to be done? Very much also moveth us the person of the doer, which by meritof righteousness was obtaining deliverance from Sodom, to say that, since it is a less evil for womento suffer lewdness than for men, it even pertained to the righteousness of that just man, that to hisdaughters he chose this rather to be done, than to his guests; not only willing this in his mind, butalso offering it in word, and, if they should assent, ready to fulfill it in deed. But then, if we shallopen this way to sins, that we are to commit less sins, in order that others may not commit greater;
by a broad boundary, nay rather, with no boundary at all, but with a tearing up and removing of all
bounds, in infinite space, will all sins enter in and reign. For, when it shall be defined, that a man
is to sin less, that another may not sin more; then, of course, by our committing thefts shall othermen’s committing of lewdness be guarded against, and incest by lewdness; and if any impiety shallseem even worse than incest, even incest shall be pronounced meet to be done by us, if in such
wise it can be wrought that that impiety be not committed by others: and in each several kind ofsins, both thefts for thefts, and lewdness for lewdness, and incest for incest, shall be accounted
meet to be done: our own sins for other men’s, not only less for greater, but even if it come to thevery highest and worst, fewer for more; if the stress of affairs so turns, that otherwise other men
would not abstain from sin unless by our sinning, somewhat less indeed, but still sinning; so thatin every case where an enemy who shall have power of this sort shall say, “Unless thou be wicked,
I will be more wicked, or unless thou do this wickedness, I will do more such,” we must seem toadmit wickedness in ourselves, if we wish to refrain (others) from wickedness. To be wise in thissort, what is it but to lose one’s wits, or rather, to be downright mad? Mine own iniquity, not2408

Gen. xix. 8.

635

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

another’s, whether perpetrated upon me or upon others, is that from which I must beware of
damnation. For “the soul that sinneth, it shall die.”2409

490

21. If then to sin, that others may not commit a worse sin, either against us or against any,
without doubt we ought not; it is to be considered in that which Lot did, whether it be an example
which we ought to imitate, or rather one which we ought to avoid. For it seems meet to be more
looked into and noted, that, when so horrible an evil from the most flagitious impiety of theSodomites was impending over his guests, which he wished to ward off and was not able, to sucha degree may even that just man’s mind have been disturbed, that he was willing to do that which,not man’s fear with its misty temper, but God’s Law in its tranquil serenity, if it be consulted byus, will cry aloud, must not be done, and will command rather that we be so cautious not to sin
ourselves, that we sin not through fear of any sins whatever of other men. For that just man, by
fearing other men’s sins, which cannot defile except such as consent thereto, was so perturbed that
he did not attend to his own sin, in that he was willing to subject his daughters to the lusts of impious
men. These things, when we read in holy Scriptures, we must not, for that we believe them done,
therefore believe them meet to be done; lest we violate precepts while we indiscriminately follow
precedents. Or, truly, because David swore to put Nabal to death, and, upon more considerate
clemency, did it not,2410 shall we therefore say that he is to be imitated, so that we may swear to doa thing which afterwards we may see to be not meet to be done? But as fear perturbed the one, sothat he was willing to prostitute his daughters, so did anger the other, that he swore rashly. In short,
if it were allowed us to inquire of them both, by asking them to tell us why they did these things,
the one might answer, “Fearfulness and trembling came upon me, and darkness covered me;”2411
the other too might say, “Mine eye was troubled through wrath:”2412 so that we should not marvel
either that the one in the darkness of fear, or the other with troubled eye, saw not what was meetto have been seen, that they might not do what was not meet to have been done.

22. And to holy David indeed it might more justly be said, that he ought not to have been angry;
no, not with one however ungrateful and rendering evil for good; yet if, as man, anger did steal
over him, he ought not to have let it so prevail, that he should swear to do a thing which either bygiving way to his rage he should do, or by breaking his oath leave undone. But to the other, set as
he was amid the libidinous frenzy of the Sodomites, who would dare to say, “Although thy guests
in thine own house, whither to enter in thou by most violent humanity hast compelled them, be laid
hold upon by lewd men, and being deforced be carnally known as women, fear thou not a whit,
care for it not a whir, have no dread, no horror, no trembling?” What man, even a companion of
those wretches, would dare to say this to the pious host? But assuredly it would be most rightly
said, “Do what thou canst, that the thing be not done which thou deservedly fearest: but let not this
2409
2410
2411
2412

Ezek. xviii. 4.
1 Sam. xxv. 22–35.
Ps. lv. 5.
Ps. vi. 7, turbatus est prœ ira, as in LXX. “Mine eye is consumed because of grief.” E.V.

636

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

fear of thine drive thee to do a thing which if thy daughters be willing that it be done unto them,
they will through thee do wickedness with the Sodomites, if unwilling, will through thee from theSodomites suffer violence. Commit not thou a great crime of thine own, while thou dreadest agreater crime of other men; for be the difference as great as thou wilt between thine own and thatof others, this will be thine own, that other men’s.” Unless perchance in defending this man one
should so crowd himself into a corner, as to say, “Since to receive a wrong is better than to do one,and those guests were not about to do but to suffer a wrong, that just man chose that his daughtersshould suffer wrong rather than his guests, acting upon his rights as his daughters’ lord; and heknew that it would be no sin in them if the thing were done, because they would but bear themwhich did the sin, not consenting unto them, and so without sin of their own. In fine, they did notoffer themselves (albeit better females than males) to be carnally known instead of those guests,
lest they should be rendered guilty, not by the suffering of others’ lust, but by consenting of theirown will: nor yet did their father permit it to be done unto himself, when they essayed to do it,
because he would not betray his guests to them, (albeit there had been less of evil, if it were done
to one man than to two;) but as much as he could he resisted, lest himself also should be defiled
by any assent of his own, though even if the frenzy of others’ lust had prevailed by strength ofbody, it would not have defiled him so long as he consented not. Now as the daughters sinned not,neither did he sin in their persons, because he was not making them to sin, if they should be deforced
against their will, but only to bear them that did the sin. Just as if he should offer his slaves to bebeaten by ruffians, that his guests might not suffer the wrong of beating.” Of which matter I shallnot dispute, because it would take long to argue, whether even a master may justly use his right ofpower over his slave, so as to cause an unoffending slave to be smitten, that his unoffending friend
may not be beaten in his house by violent bad men. But certainly, as concerning David, it is no
wise right to say that he ought to have sworn to do a thing which afterwards he would perceive that
he ought not to do. Whence it is clear that we ought not to take all that we read to have been doneby holy or just men, and transfer the same to morals, but hence too we must learn how widely thatsaying of the Apostle extends, and even to what persons it reaches: “Brethren, if a man be overtaken
in a fault, ye which are spiritual restore such an one in the spirit of meekness, considering thyself
also, lest thou be tempted.”2413 The being overtaken in a fault happens, either while one does notsee at the time what is right to be done, or while, seeing it, one is overcome; that is, that a sin isdone, either for that the truth is hidden, or for that infirmity compelleth.

491

23. But in all our doings, even good men are very greatly embarrassed in the matter ofcompensative sins; so that these are not esteemed to be sins, if they have such causes for the which
they be done, and in the which it may seem to be rather sin, if they be left undone. And chiefly as
concerning lies hath it come to this pass in the opinion of men that those lies are not accounted
sins, nay rather are believed to be rightly done, when one tells a lie for the benefit of him for whom
it is expedient to be deceived, or lest a person should hurt others, who seems likely to hurt unlesshe be got rid of by lies. In defense of these kinds of lies, very many examples from holy Scripture
are accounted to lend their support. It is not, however, the same thing to hide the truth as it is to2413

Gal. vi. 1.

637

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

utter a lie. For although every one who lies wishes to hide what is true, yet not every one who
wishes to hide what is true, tells a lie. For in general we hide truths not by telling a lie, but byholding our peace. For the Lord lied not when He said, “I have many things to say unto you, but
ye cannot bear them now.”2414 He held His peace from true things, not spoke false things; for the
hearing of which truths He judged them to be less fit. But if He had not indicated this same to them,that is, that they were not able to bear the things which He was unwilling to speak, He would indeed
hide nevertheless somewhat of truth but that this may be rightly done we should peradventure notknow, or not have so great an example to confirm us. Whence, they who assert that it is sometimes
meet to lie, do not conveniently mention that Abraham did this concerning Sarah, whom he said
to be his sister. For he did not say, She is not my wife, but he said, “She is my sister;”2415 because
she was in truth so near akin, that she might without a lie be called a sister. Which also afterwards
he confirmed, after she had been given back by him who had taken her, answering him and saying,“And indeed she is my sister, by father, not by mother;” that is, by the father’s kindred, not themother’s. Somewhat therefore of truth he left untold, not told aught of falsehood, when he left wife
untold, and told of sister. This also did his son Isaac: for him too we know to have gotten a wife
near of kin.2416 It is not then a lie, when by silence a true thing is kept back, but when by speech a
false thing is put forward.

24. Touching Jacob, however, that which he did at his mother’s bidding, so as to seem to deceive
his father, if with diligence and in faith it be attended to, is no lie, but a mystery. The which if weshall call lies, all parables also, and figures designed for the signifying of any things soever, which
are not to be taken according to their proper meaning, but in them is one thing to be understoodfrom another, shall be said to be lies: which be far from us altogether. For he who thinks this, mayalso in regard of tropical expressions of which there are so many, bring in upon all of them thiscalumny; so that even metaphor, as it is called, that is, the usurped transferring of any word fromits proper object to an object not proper, may at this rate be called a lie. For when he speaks ofwaving corn-fields, of vines putting forth gems,2417 of the bloom of youth, of snowy hairs; without
doubt the waves, the gems, the bloom, the snow, for that we find them not in those objects to which
we have from other transferred these words, shall by these persons be accounted lies. And Christa Rock, and the stony heart of the Jews; also, Christ a Lion, and the devil a lion, and innumerable
such like, shall be said to be lies.2418 Nay, this tropical expression reaches even to what is called
antiphrasis, as when a thing is said to abound which does not exist, a thing said to be sweet which
is sour; “lucus quod non luceat, Parcæ quod non parcant.” Of which kind is that in holy Scripture,“If he will not bless2419 Thee to Thy face;” which the devil saith to the Lord concerning holy Job,
and the meaning is “curse.” By which word also the feigned crime of Naboth is named by his

2414
2415
2416
2417
2418
2419

John xvi. 12.
Gen. xx. 2, 12.
Gen. xxvi. 7, and xxiv.
“Gemmare.”1 Cor. x. 4; Ezek. xxxvi. 26; Rev. v. 5; 1 Pet. v. 8.
Job ii. 5, benedixerit: as LXX. εὐλογήσει: E.V. “curse.”

638

NPNF (V1-03)

492

Philip Schaff

calumniators; for it is said that he “blessed2420 the king,” that is, cursed. All these modes of speaking
shall be accounted lies, if figurative speech or action shall be set down as lying. But if it be no lie,
when things which signify one thing by another are referred to the understanding of a truth, assuredly
not only that which Jacob did or said to his father that he might be blessed, but that too which
Joseph spoke as if in mockery of his brothers,2421 and David’s feigning of madness,2422 must be
judged to be no lies, but prophetical speeches and actions, to be referred to the understanding of
those things which are true; which are covered as it were with a garb of figure on purpose to exercise
the sense of the pious inquirer, and that they may not become cheap by lying bare and on the surface.
Though even the things which we have learned from other places, where they are spoken openly
and manifestly, these, when they are brought out from their hidden retreats, do, by our (in somesort) discovering of them, become renewed , and by renewal sweet. Nor is it that they are begrudged
to the learners, in that they are in these ways obscured; but are presented in a more winning manner,that being as it were withdrawn, they may be desired more ardently, and being desired may withmore pleasure be found. Yet true things, not false, are spoken; because true things, not false, aresignified, whether by word or by deed; the things that are signified namely, those are the things
spoken. They are accounted lies only because people do not understand that the true things which
are signified are the things said, but believe that false things are the things said. To make this plainer
by examples, attend to this very thing that Jacob did. With skins of the kids, no doubt, he did cover
his limbs; if we seek the immediate cause, we shall account him to have lied; for he did this, thathe might be thought to be the man he was not: but if this deed be referred to that for the signifyingof which it was really done, by skins of the kids are signified sins; by him who covered himself
therewith, He who bare not His own, but others’ sins. The truthful signification, therefore, can in
no wise be rightly called a lie. And as in deed, so also in word. Namely, when his father said tohim, “Who art thou my son?”2423 he answered, “I am Esau, thy first-born.” This, if it be referred tothose two twins, will seem a lie; but if to that for the signifying of which those deeds and words
are written, He is here to be understood, in His body, which is His Church, Who, speaking of thisthing, saith, “When ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets in the kingdomof God, and yourselves cast out. And they shall come from the east and from the west and fromthe north and from the south, and shall sit down in the kingdom of God; and, behold, there are lastwhich shall be first, and there are first which shall be last.”2424 For so in a certain sort the younger
brother did bear off the primacy of the elder brother, and transfer it to himself. Since then things
so true, and so truthfully, be signified, what is there here that ought to be accounted to have been
done or said lyingly? For when the things which are signified are not in truth things which are not,but which are, whether past or present or future, without doubt it is a true signification, and no lie.
But it takes too long in the matter of this prophetical signification by stripping off the shell to searchout all,2425 wherein truth hath the palm, because as by being signified they were fore-announced,
so by ensuing have they become clear.

2420
2421
2422
2423
2424
2425

1 Kings xxi. 10, 13. LXX. εὐλόγηκας: E.V. “didst blaspheme.”
Gen. xlii.
1 Sam. xxi. 13.
Gen. xxvii. 16–19.
Luke xiii. 28–30.
Enucleate cuncta rimari.

639

NPNF (V1-03)

493

Philip Schaff

25. Nor have I undertaken that in the present discourse, as it more pertains to thee, who hastlaid open the hiding-places of the Priscillianists, so far as relates to their false and perverse dogmas;
that they may not seem to have been in such sort investigated as if they were meet to be taught, notto be argued against. Make it therefore more thy work that they be beaten down and laid low, as
thou hast made it, that they should be betrayed and laid open; lest while we wish to get at thediscovery of men practising falsehood, we allow the falsehoods themselves, as if insuperable, tostand their ground; when we ought rather even in the hearts of latent heretics to destroy falsehoods,
than by sparing falsehoods to find out the deceivers who practise falsehood. Moreover, among
those dogmas of theirs which are to be subverted, is this which they dogmatize, namely, that inorder to hide religion religious people ought to lie, to that degree that not only concerning othermatters, not pertaining to doctrine of religion, but concerning religion itself, it is meet to lie, thatit may not become exposed to aliens; to wit, that one may deny Christ, in order that one may in the
midst of His enemies be in secret a Christian. This impious and nefarious dogma do thou likewise,
I beseech thee, overthrow; to bolster up which they in their argumentations do gather from the
Scriptures testimonies to make it appear that lies are not only to be pardoned and tolerated, buteven honored. To thee therefore it pertains, in refuting that detestable sect, to show that thosetestimonies of Scripture are so to be received, that either thou shalt teach those to be no lies which
are accounted to be such, if they be understood in that manner in which they ought to be understood;or, that those are not to be imitated which be manifestly lies; or in any wise at last, that concerning
those matters at least which pertain to doctrine of religion, it is in no wise meet to tell a lie. For
thus are they truly from the very foundation overthrown, while that is overthrown wherein theylurk: that in that very matter they be judged least fit for us to follow, most fit to be shunned, in that
they, for the hiding of their heresy, do profess themselves liars. This it is in them that must fromthe very first be assaulted, this which is, as it were, their fitting bulwark must with blows of Truthbe battered and cast down. Nor must we afford them another lurking-place, which they had not,wherein they may take refuge, to wit, that being perhaps betrayed of them whom they have essayed
to seduce but could not, they should say, “We only wanted to try them, because prudent Catholics
have taught that to find out heretics it is right to do this.” But it is necessary with somewhat moreearnest be-speaking of thy favor to say why this seems to me a tripartite method of disputing against
those who want to apply the divine Scriptures as advocates of their lies; to wit, by showing thatsome which are there accounted to be lies, are not what they are accounted, if rightly understood;
next, that if there be there any manifest lies, they are not meet to be imitated; thirdly, contrary to
all opinions of all persons who think it pertains to the duty of a good man sometimes to lie, that it
must in every way be held that in doctrine of religion there must in no wise a lie be told. For these
are the three things to follow up which I shortly before recommended, and in some sort enjoinedthee.

26. To show then that some things in the Scriptures which are thought to be lies are not what
they are thought, if they be rightly understood, let it not seem to thee to tell little against them, that
it is not from Apostolic but from Prophetical books that they find as it were precedents of lying.
For all those which they mention by name, in which each lied, are read in those books in which not
only words but many deeds of a figurative meaning are recorded, because it was also in a figurative640

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

sense that they were done. But in figures that which is spoken as a seeming lie, being wellunderstood, is found to be a truth. The Apostles, however, in their Epistles spoke in another sort,and in another sort are written the Acts of the Apostles, to wit, because now the New Testament
was revealed, which was veiled in those prophetic figures. In short, in all those Apostolic Epistles,
and in that large book in which their acts are narrated with canonical truth, we do not find any
person lying, such that from him a precedent can be set forth by these men for license of lying. For
that simulation of Peter and Barnabas with which they were compelling the Gentiles to Judaize,
was deservedly reprehended and set right, both that it might not do harm at the time, and that it
might not weigh with posterity as a thing to be imitated. For when the Apostle Paul saw that theywalked not uprightly according to the truth of the Gospel, he said to Peter in the presence of themall, “If thou, being a Jew, livest as the Gentiles; and not as do the Jews, how compellest thou theGentiles to Judaize?”2426 But in that which himself did, to the intent that by retaining and acting
upon certain observances of the law after the Jewish custom he might show that he was no enemy
to the Law and to the Prophets, far be it from us to believe that he did so as a liar. As indeed
concerning this matter his sentence is sufficiently well known, whereby it was settled that neither
Jews who then believed in Christ were to be prohibited from the traditions of their fathers, nor
Gentiles when they became Christians to be compelled thereunto: in order that those sacred rites2427
which were well known to have been of God enjoined, should not be shunned as sacrileges; nor
yet accounted so necessary, now that the New Testament was revealed, as though without them
whoso should be converted unto God, could not be saved. For there were some who thought so andpreached, albeit after Christ’s Gospel received; and to these had feignedly consented both Peterand Barnabas, and so were compelling the Gentiles to Judaize. For it was a compelling, to preachthem to be so necessary as if, even after the Gospel received, without them were no salvation in
Christ. This the error of certain did suppose, this Peter’s fear did feign, this Paul’s liberty did beatdown. What therefore he saith, “I am made all things to all, that I might gain all,”2428 that did he,by suffering with others, not by lying. For each becomes as though he were that person whom hewould fain succor, when he succoreth with the same pity wherewith he would wish himself to be
succored, if himself were set in the same misery. Therefore he becomes as though he were that
person, not for that he deceives him, but for that he thinks himself as him. Whence is that of theApostle, which I have before rehearsed, “Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are
spiritual restore such an one in the spirit of meekness, considering thyself lest thou also be
tempted.”2429 For if, because he said, “To the Jews became I as a Jew, and to them which were
under the law as under the law,”2430 he is therefore to be accounted to have in a lying manner taken
up the sacraments of the old law, he ought in the same manner to have taken up, in a lying way,
the idolatry of the Gentiles, because he hath said that to them which were without law he became
as without law; which thing in any wise he did not. For he did not any where sacrifice to idols oradore those figments and not rather freely as a martyr of Christ show that they were to be detested

2426
2427
2428
2429
2430

Gal. ii. 13, 14.
“Sacramenta.”
1 Cor. ix. 22. [See R.V.]
Gal. vi. 1.
1 Cor. ix. 20.

641

NPNF (V1-03)

494

Philip Schaff

and eschewed. From no apostolic acts or speeches, therefore, do these men allege things meet forimitation as examples of lying. From prophetical deeds or words, then, the reason why they seemto themselves to have what they may allege, is only for that they take figures prenunciative to belies, because they are sometimes like unto lies. But when they are referred to those things for thesignifying of which they were so done or said, they are found to be significations full of truth, andtherefore in no wise to be lies. A lie, namely, is a false signification with will of deceiving. But thatis no false signification, where, although one thing is signified by another, yet the thing signified
is a true thing, if it be rightly understood.

27. There are some things of this sort even of our Saviour in the Gospel, because the Lord of
the Prophets deigned to be Himself also a Prophet. Such are those where, concerning the woman
which had an issue of blood, He said, “Who touched Me?”2431 and of Lazarus. “Where have ye laidhim?”2432 He asked, namely, as if not knowing that which in any wise He knew. And He did on
this account feign that He knew not, that He might signify somewhat else by that His seeming
ignorance: and since this signification was truthful, it was assuredly not a lie. For those weresignified, whether by her which had the issue, or by him which had been four days dead, whom
even He Who knew all things did in a certain sort know not. For both she bore the type of the peopleof the Gentiles, whereof the prophecy had gone before, “A people whom I have not known hathserved Me:”2433 and Lazarus, removed from the living, did as it were in that place lie in significative
similitude where He lay, Whose voice that is, “I am cast out of the sight of thine eyes.”2434 And
with that intent, as though it were not known by Christ, both who she was and where he was laid,by His words of interrogating a figure was enacted and by truthful signification all lying left apart.

28. Hence is also that which thou hast mentioned that they speak of, that the Lord Jesus, after
He was risen, walked in the way with two disciples; and upon their drawing near to the villagewhither they were going, He made as though He would have gone farther: where the Evangelist,
saying, “But He Himself feigned that He would go further,”2435 hath put that very word in whichliars too greatly delight, that they may with impunity lie: as if every thing that is feigned is a lie,
whereas in a truthful way, for the sake of signifying one thing by another, so many things use to
be feigned. If then there had been no other thing that Jesus signified, in that He feigned to be goingfurther, with reason might it be judged to be a lie: but then if it be rightly understood and referredto that which He willed to signify, it is a mystery. Else will all things be lies which, on account ofa certain similitude of things to be signified, although they never were done, are related to havebeen done. Of which sort is that concerning the two sons of one man, the elder who tarried with

2431
2432
2433
2434
2435

Luke viii. 45.
John xi. 34.
Ps. xviii. 44—“Servivit.”
Ps. xxxi. 22.
Luke xxiv. 28—“Finxit.”

642

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

his father, and the younger who went into a far country, which is narrated so much at length.2436 In
which sort of fiction, men have put even human deeds or words to irrational animals and things
without sense, that by this sort of feigned narrations but true significations, they might in more
winning manner intimate the things which they wished. Nor is it only in authors of secular letters,
as in Horace,2437 that mouse speaks to mouse, and weasel to fox, that through a fictitious narration
a true signification may be referred to the matter in hand; whence the like fables of Æsop beingreferred to the same end, there is no man so untaught as to think they ought to be called lies: butin Holy Writ also, as in the book of Judges, the trees seek them a king, and speak to the olive, tothe fig and to the vine and to the bramble.2438 Which, in any wise, is all feigned, with intent that
one may get to the thing which is intended, by a feigned narration indeed, yet not a lying one, butwith a truthful signification. This I have said on account of that which is written concerning Jesus,“And Himself feigned to be going further:” lest any from this word, like the Priscillianists, wishing
to have license of lying, should contend that beside others even Christ did lie. But whoso would
understand what He by feigning that did prefigure, let him attend to that which He by acting did
effect. For when afterwards He did go further, above all heavens, yet deserted He not His disciples.
In order to signify this which in the future He did as God, at the present He feigned to do that asMan. And therefore was a veritable signification caused in that feigning to go before, because inthis departure the verity of that signification did follow after. Let him therefore contend that Christ
did lie by feigning, who denieth that He fulfilled by doing that which He signified.

495

29. Because, therefore, lying heretics find not in the books of the New Testament any precedents
of lying which are meet to be imitated, they esteem themselves to be most copious in their disputation
wherein they opine that it is right to lie, when from the old prophetical books, because it doth notappear therein, save to the few who understand, to what must be referred the significative sayingsand doings which as such be true, they seem to themselves to find out and allege many that be lies.
But desiring to have, wherewith they may defend themselves, precedents of deceit seemingly meet
to be imitated, they deceive themselves, and “their iniquity lieth unto itself.”2439 Those persons,however, of whom it is not there to be believed that they wished to prophesy, if in doing or saying
they feigned aught with will of deceiving, however it may be that from the very things also which
they did or said somewhat prophetical may be shapen out, being by His omnipotence afore deposited
therein as a seed and pre-disposed, Who knoweth how to turn to good account even the ill-deedsof men, yet as far as regards the persons themselves, without doubt they lied. But they ought not
to be esteemed meet for imitation simply for that they are found in those books which are deservedly
called holy and divine: for those books contain the record of both the ill deeds and the good deedsof men; the one to be eschewed, the other to be followed after: and some are so put, that upon themis also sentence passed; some, with no judgment there expressed, are left permitted for us to judge

2436

Luke xv. 11–32.
Serm. ii. 6; Epist. i. 7.
2438
Judg. ix. 8–15.
2439
Ps. 26 (Heb. xxvii), 12. “Mentitur eorum iniquitas sibi.” LXX. ἐψεύσατο ἡ ἀδικία ›αυτῆ. Heb. and E.V. “And such as
breathe out cruelty.”
2437

643

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

of: because it was meet that we should not only be nourished by that which is plain, but exercisedby that which is obscure.

30. But why do these persons think they may imitate Tamar telling a lie, and not think they
may imitate Judah committing fornication?2440 For there they have read both, and nought of thesehath that Scripture either blamed or praised, but has merely narrated both, and to our judgment
dismissed both: but it is marvellous if it hath permitted aught of these to be imitated with impunity.
For, that Tamar not through lust of playing the harlot, but through wish of conceiving seed, did tell
the lie, we know. But fornication also, howbeit Judah’s was not such, yet some man’s may be suchwhereby to procure that a man may be delivered, just as her lie was in order that a man might beconceived; is it right then to commit fornication on this account, if on that account it is thought that
it was right to lie? Not therefore concerning lying only, but concerning all works of men in which
there arise as it were compensative sins, must we consider what sentence we ought to pass; lest we
open a way not only to small sins whatsoever, but even to all wickednesses, and there remain nooutrageous, flagitious, sacrilegious deed, in which there may not arise a cause upon which it may
rightly seem a thing meet to be done, and so universal probity of life be by that opinion subverted.

31. But he who says that some lies are just, must be judged to say no other than that some sins
are just, and therefore some things are just which are unjust: than which what can be more absurd?
For whence is a thing a sin, but for that it is contrary to justice? Be it said then that some sins are
great, some small, because it is true; and let us not listen to the Stoics who maintain all to be equal:
but to say that some sins are unjust, some just, what else is it than to say that there be some unjust,some just iniquities? When the Apostle John saith, “Every man who doeth sin, doeth also iniquity
and sin is iniquity.”2441 It is impossible therefore that a sin should be just, unless when we put thename of sin upon another thing in which one doth not sin, but either doeth or suffereth aught forsin. Namely, both sacrifices for sins are named “sins,” and the punishments of sins are sometimes
called sins. These doubtless can be understood to be just sins, when just sacrifices are spoken of,or just punishments. But those things which are done against God’s law cannot be just. It is said
unto God, “Thy law is truth:”2442 and consequently, what is against truth cannot be just. Now who
can doubt that every lie is against truth? Therefore there can be no just lie. Again, what man doth
not see clearly that every thing which is just is of the truth? And John crieth out, “No lie is of thetruth.”2443 No lie therefore is just. Wherefore, when from holy Scriptures are proposed to us examplesof lying, either they are not lies, but are thought to be so while they are not understood; or, if lies
they be, they are not meet to be imitated, because they cannot be just.

2440
2441
2442
2443

Gen. xxxviii. 14–18.
1 John iii. 4. [See R.V.]
Ps. cxix. 142.
1 John. ii. 21.

644

NPNF (V1-03)

496

Philip Schaff

32. But, as for that which is written, that God did good to the Hebrew midwives, and to Rahab
the harlot of Jericho,2444 this was not because they lied, but because they were merciful to God’s
people. That therefore which was rewarded in them was, not their deceit, but their benevolence;
benignity of mind, not iniquity of lying.2445 For, as it would not be marvellous and absurd if God
on account of good works after done by them should be willing to forgive some evil works at
another time before committed, so it is not to be marvelled at that God beholding at one time, in
one cause, both these, that is, the thing done of mercy and the thing done of deceit, did both reward
the good, and for the sake of this good forgive that evil. For if sins which are done of carnal
concupiscence, not of mercy, are for the sake of after works of mercy remitted,2446 why are notthose through merit of mercy remitted which of mercy itself are committed? For more grievous isa sin which with purpose of hurting, than that which with purpose of helping, is wrought. And
consequently if that is blotted out by a work of mercy thereafter following, why is this, which isless heinous, not blotted out by the mercy itself of the man, both going before that he may sin, andgoing along with him while he sins? So indeed it may seem: but in truth it is one thing to say, “Iought not to have sinned, but I will do works of mercy whereby I may blot out the sin which I did
before;” and another to say, “I ought to sin, because I cannot else show mercy.” It is, I say, one
thing to say, “Because we have already sinned, let us do good,” and another to say, “Let us sin,that we may do good.” There it is said, “Let us do good, because we have done evil;” but here, “Letus do evil that good may come.”2447 And, consequently, there we have to drain off the sink of sin,here to beware of a doctrine which teacheth to sin.

33. It remains then that we understand as concerning those women, whether in Egypt or in
Jericho, that for their humanity and mercy they received a reward, in any wise temporal, which
indeed itself, while they wist not of it, should by prophetical signification prefigure somewhat
eternal. But whether it be ever right, even for the saving of a man’s life, to tell a lie, as it is a question
in resolving which even the most learned do weary themselves, it did vastly surpass the capacityof those poor women, set in the midst of those nations, and accustomed to those manners. Therefore
their ignorance in this as well as in those other things of which they were alike unknowing, butwhich are to be known by the children not of this world but of that which is to come, the patienceof God did bear withal: Who yet, for their human kindness which they had shown to His servants,
rendered unto them rewards of an earthly sort, albeit signifying somewhat of an heavenly. And
Rahab, indeed, delivered out of Jericho, made transition into the people of God, where, being
proficient, she might attain to eternal and immortal prizes which are not to be sought by any lie.
Yet at that time when she did for the Israelite spies that good, and, for her condition of life, laudable
work, she was not as yet such that it should be required of her, “In your mouth let Yea be yea, Naynay.”2448 But as for those midwives, albeit Hebrewesses, if they savored only after the flesh, what

2444
2445
2446
2447
2448

Exod. i. 17–20; Josh. ii., and vi. 25.
Mentis, mentientis.
Dimittuntur.
Rom. iii. 8.
Matt. v. 37.

645

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

or how great is the good they got of their temporal reward in that they made them houses, unlessby making proficiency they attained unto that house of which is sung unto God, “Blessed are theythat dwell in thine house; for ever and ever they will praise thee?”2449 It must be confessed, however,that it approacheth much unto righteousness, and though not yet in reality, even now in respect ofhopefulness and disposition that mind is to be praised, which never lies except with intention andwill to do good to some man, but to hurt no man. But as for us, when we ask whether it be the partof a good man sometimes to lie, we ask not concerning a person pertaining to Egypt, or to Jericho,
or to Babylon, or still to Jerusalem itself, the earthly, which is in bondage with her children;2450 but
concerning a citizen of that city which is above and free, our mother, eternal in the heavens. And
to our asking it is answered, “No lie is of the truth.”2451 The sons of that city, are sons of the Truth.
That city’s sons are they of whom it is written,“In their mouth was found no lie:”2452 son of thatcity is he of whom is also written, “A son receiving the word shall be far from destruction: butreceiving, he hath received that for himself, and nothing false proceedeth out of his mouth.”2453
These sons of Jerusalem on high, and of the holy city eternal, if ever, as they be men, a lie of whatkind soever doth worm itself into them, they ask humbly for pardon, not therefrom seek moreover
glory.

497

34. But some man will say, Would then those midwives and Rahab have done better if they
had shown no mercy, by refusing to lie? Nay verily, those Hebrew women, if they were such asthat sort of persons of whom we ask whether they ought ever to tell a lie, would both eschew to
say aught false, and would most frankly refuse that foul service of killing the babes. But, thou wilt
say, themselves would die. Yea, but see what follows. They would die with an heavenly habitation
for their incomparably more ample reward than those houses which they made them on earth could
be: they would die, to be in eternal felicity, after enduring of death for most innocent truth. Whatof her in Jericho? Could she do this? Would she not, if she did not by telling a lie deceive theinquiring citizens, by speaking truth betray the lurking guests? Or could she say2454 to theirquestionings, I know where they are; but I fear God, I will not betray them? She could indeed say
this, were she already a true Israelitess in whom was no guile:2455 which thing she was about to be,when through the mercy of God passing over into the city of God. But they, hearing this (thou wiltsay), would slay her, would search the house. But did it follow that they would also find them,whom she had diligently concealed? For in the foresight of this, that most cautious woman had
placed them where they would have been able to remain undiscovered if she, telling a lie, should
not be believed. So both she, if after all she had been slain by her countrymen for the work of mercy,
would have ended this life, which must needs come to an end, by a death precious in the sight of

2449
2450
2451
2452
2453
2454
2455

Ps. lxxxiv. 4.
Gal. iv. 25, 26.
1 John ii. 21.
Rev. xiv. 5.
Prov. xxix. 27. Lat. (not in Hebrew).
mss. and edd. “An posset;” but Ben. ed. propose “an non posset,” “Could she not?”John i. 47.

646

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

the Lord,2456 and towards them her benefit had not been in vain. But, thou wilt say, “What if themen who sought them, in their thorough-going search had come to the place where she had concealed
them?” In this fashion it may be said: What if a most vile and base woman, not only telling, but
swearing a lie, had not got them to believe her? Of course even so would the things have been liketo come to pass, through fear of which she lied. And where do we put the will and power of God?
or haply was He not able to keep both her, neither telling a lie to her own townsmen, nor betraying
men of God, and them, being His, safe from all harm? For by Whom also after the woman’s lie
they were guarded, by Him could they, even if she had not lied, have in any wise been guarded.
Unless perchance we have forgotten that this did come to pass in Sodom, where males burning
towards males with hideous lust could not so much as find the door of the house in which were themen they sought; when that just man, in a case altogether most similar, would not tell a lie for his
guests, whom he knew not to be Angels, and feared lest they should suffer a violence worse thandeath. And doubtless, he might have given the seekers the like answer as that woman gave inJericho. For it was in precisely the like manner that they sought by interrogating. But that justperson was not willing that for the bodies of his guests his soul should be spotted by his own tellingof a lie, for which bodies he was willing that the bodies of his daughters by iniquity of others’ lust
should be deforced.2457 Let then a man do even for the temporal safety of men what he can; butwhen it comes to that point that to consult for such saving of them except by sinning is not in his
power, thenceforth let him esteem himself not to have what he may do, when he shall perceive that
only to be left him which he may not rightly do. Therefore, touching Rahab in Jericho, because sheentertained strangers, men of God, because in entertaining of them she put herself in peril, because
she believed on their God, because she diligently hid them where she could, because she gave them
most faithful counsel of returning by another way, let her be praised as meet to be imitated evenby the citizens of Jerusalem on high. But in that she lied, although somewhat therein as propheticalbe intelligently expounded, yet not as meet to be imitated is it wisely propounded: albeit that God
hath those good things memorably honored, this evil thing mercifully overlooked.

35. Since these things are so, because it were too long to treat thoroughly of all that in that
“Pound”2458 of Dictinius are set down as precedents of lying, meet to be imitated, it seemeth to me
that this is the rule to which not only these, but whatever such there be, must be reduced. Namely,
either what is believed to be a lie must be shown not to be such; whether it be where a truth is left
untold, and yet no falsehood told; or where a true signification willeth one thing to be understoodof another, which kind of figurative either sayings or doings abounds in the prophetical writings.
Or, those which are convicted to be lies, must be proved to be not meet to be imitated: and if any(as other sins) should stealthily creep in upon us, we are not to attribute righteousness to them, but
to ask pardon for them. So indeed it seems to me, and to this sentence the things above disputed
do compel me.

2456
2457
2458

Ps. cxvi. 15.
Gen. xix. 5–11.
Or “Balance.”

647

NPNF (V1-03)

498

Philip Schaff

36. But for that we are men and among men do live, and I confess that I am not yet in the numberof them whom compensative sins embarrass not, it oft befalleth me in human affairs to be overcome
by human feeling, nor am I able to resist when it is said to me, “Lo, here is a sick man in peril of
his life with a grievous disease, whose strength will no more be able to bear it, if the death of his
only and most dear son be announced to him; he asks of thee whether his son liveth, and thouknowest that he is departed this life; what wilt thou reply, when, whatever thou shall say beside
one of these three; either, He is dead; or, He liveth; or, I know not; he believes no other than that
he is dead; which thing he perceives thee to be afraid to tell, and unwilling to tell a lie?” It comesto the same thing, if thou altogether hold thy peace. But of those three, two are false, He liveth,
and, I know not; and they cannot be said by thee but by telling a lie. Whereas if thou shall say that
one thing which is true, that is, that he is dead, and the man be so perturbed that death follow, people
will cry out that thou hast killed him. And who can bear men casting up to him what a mischief it
is to shun a lie that might save life, and to choose truth which murders a man? I am moved by theseobjections exceedingly, but it were marvelous whether also wisely. For, when I shall set before theeyes of my heart (such as they be) the intellectual2459 beauty of Him out of Whose mouth nothing
false proceedeth, albeit where truth in her radiance doth more and more brighten upon me, there
my weak and throbbing sense is beaten back: yet I am with love of that surpassing comeliness so
set on fire, that I despise all human regards which would thence recall me. But it is much that thisaffection persevere to that degree, that in temptation it lack not its effect. Nor doth it move me
while contemplating that luminous Good in which is no darkness of a lie, that, when we refuse tolie, and men through hearing of a truth do die, truth is called a murderer. For if a lewd woman craveof thee the gratification of her lust, and, when thou consentest not, she perturbed with the fiercenessof her love should die, will chastity also be a murderer? Or, truly, because we read, “We are a sweet
savor of Christ in every place, both in them which are saved and in them which perish;”2460 to theone, indeed, a savor of life unto life, to others a savor of death unto death; shall we pronounce eventhe savor of Christ to be a murderer? But, for that we, being men, are in questions and contradictionsof this sort for the most part overcome or wearied out by our feeling as men, for that very reason
hath the Apostle also presently subjoined, “And who is sufficient for these things?”

37. Add to this, (and here is cause to cry out more piteously,) that, if once we grant it to havebeen right for the saving of that sick man’s life to tell him the lie, that his son was alive, then, bylittle and little and by minute degrees, the evil so grows upon us, and by slight accesses to such aheap of wicked lies does it, in its almost imperceptible encroachments, at last come, that no place
can ever be any where found on which this huge mischief, by smallest additions rising into boundlessstrength, might be resisted. Wherefore, most providently is it written, “He that despiseth smallthings shall fall by little and little.”2461 Nay more: for these persons who are so enamored of thislife, that they hesitate not to prefer it to truth, that a man may not die, say rather, that a man who
must some time die may die somewhat later, would have us not only to lie, but even to swear fasely;

2459
2460
2461

Intelligibilem.
2 Cor. ii. 15, 16. [See R.V.]
Ecclus. xix. 1.

648

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

to wit, that, lest the vain health of man should somewhat more quickly pass away, we should takethe name of the Lord our God in vain! And there are among them learned men who even fix rules,
and set bounds when it is a duty, when not a duty, to commit perjury! O, where are ye, fountainsof tears? And what shall we do? whither go? where hide us from the ire of truth, if we not only
neglect to shun lies, but dare moreover to teach perjuries? For look they well to it, who uphold anddefend lying, what kind, or what kinds, of lying they shall delight to justify: at least in the worshipof God let them grant that there must be no lying; at least let them keep themselves from perjuries
and blasphemies; at least there, where God’s name, where God as witness, where God’s oath2462
is interposed, where God’s religion is the matter of discourse or colloquy, let none lie, none praise,none teach and enjoin, none justify a lie: of the other kinds of lies let him choose him out that which
he accounteth to be the mildest and most innocent kind of lying, he who will have it to be right tolie. This I know, that even he who teaches that it is meet to tell lies, wishes to be thought to teacha truth. For if it be false which he teaches, who would care to give heed to false doctrine, in which
both he deceives that teaches and he is deceived that learns? But if, in order that he may be able tofind some disciple, he upholds that he teaches a truth when he teaches that it is meet to lie, howwill that lie be of the truth, when the Apostle John reclaimeth, “No lie is of the truth?”2463 It istherefore not true, that it is sometimes right to lie; and that which is not true to no man is at all tobe persuaded.

499

38. But infirmity pleadeth its part, and with favor of the crowds proclaims itself to have a cause
invincible. Where it contradicts, and says, “What way is there among men, who without doubt by
being deceived are turned aside from a deadly harm to others or themselves, to succor men in peril,
if our affection as men may not incline us to lie?” If it will hear me patiently, this crowd of mortality,
crowd of infirmity, I will say somewhat in answer on the behalf of truth. Surely at the least pious,
true, holy chastity is not otherwise than of the truth: and whoso acts against it, acts against truth.
Why then, if otherwise it be not possible to succor men in peril, do I not also commit whoredom,which is therefore contrary to truth, for that it is contrary to chastity, and yet, to succor men in peril,do speak a lie which most openly is contrary to truth itself? Wherein hath chastity so highly deserved
at our hands, and truth offended us? When all chastity is of the truth, and not the body’s but themind’s chastity is truth, yea, in the mind dwelleth even the body’s chastity. Lastly, as I shortly
before said, and say again, whoever for the recommending and defending of any lie speaks againstme, what speaks he, if he speaks not truth? Now if he is therefore to be heard because he speaks
truth, how wishes he to make me, by speaking truth, a liar? How does lying take unto itself truth
as its patroness? Or, is it for her own adversary that she conquers, that by herself she may beconquered? Who can bear this absurdity? In no wise therefore may we say, that they who assertthat it is sometimes right to lie, in asserting that are truthful; lest, what is most absurd and foolishto believe, truth should teach us to be liars. For what sort of thing is it, that no man learns of chastitythat we may commit adultery; that we may offend God none learns of piety; that we may do any
man harm, none learns of kindness; and that we may tell lies, we are to learn of truth! But then if

2462
2463

“Sacramentum.”
1 John ii. 21.

649

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

this thing truth teaches not, it is not true; if not true, it is not meet to be learned; if not meet to belearned, never therefore is it meet to tell a lie.

39. But, some man will say, “Strong meat is for them that are perfect.”2464 For in many things
a relaxation by way of indulgence is allowed to infirmity, although in her utmost sincerity the things
be nowise pleasing to truth. Let him say this, whoever dreads not the consequences which are to
be dreaded, if once there shall be in any way any lies permitted. In nowise, however, must they bepermitted to climb up to such a height as to reach to perjuries and blasphemies: nor must any plea
whatever be held out, for which it should be right that perjury should be committed, or, what ismore execrable, that God should be blasphemed. For it does not follow that because the blaspheming
is only in pretence and a lie, therefore He is not blasphemed. For at this rate it might be said that
perjury is not committed, because it is by a lie that it is committed: for who can be by truth aperjurer? So also by truth can no man be a blasphemer. Doubtless it is a milder kind of false swearing,when a person does not know that thing to be false and believes it to be true, which he swears: likeas also Saul blasphemed more excusably, because he did it ignorantly.2465 But the reason why it isworse to blaspheme than to perjure one’s self, is, that in false swearing God is taken to witness a
false thing, but in blaspheming false things are spoken of God Himself. Now by so much is a man
more inexcusable, whether perjurer or blasphemer, by how much the more, while asserting thethings wherein they perjure or blaspheme, they know or believe them to be false. Whoever therefore
says that for an imperilled man’s temporal safety or life a lie may be told, doth too much himself
swerve from the path of eternal safety and life, if he says that on that behalf one may even swear
by God, or even blaspheme God.

40. But sometimes a peril to eternal salvation itself is put forth against us;2466 which peril, they
cry out, we by telling a lie, if otherwise it cannot be, must ward off. As, for instance, if a person
who is to be baptized be in the power of impious and infidel men, and cannot be got at that he may
be washed with the laver of regeneration, but by deceiving his keepers with a lie. From this mostinvidious cry, by which we are compelled, not for a man’s wealth or honors in this world which
are fleeting by, not for the life itself of this present time, but for the eternal salvation of a humanbeing, to tell a lie, whither shall I betake me for refuge but unto thee, O truth? And by thee is put
forth before me,2467 Chastity. For why, if those keepers may be enticed to admit us to baptize theman, by our committing lewdness, do we refuse to do things contrary to chastity, and yet, if by alie they may be deceived, consent to do things contrary to truth? when without doubt no man would
faithfully think chastity amiable, but because it is enjoined of truth? So then, to get at a man tobaptize him, let the keepers be deceived by lying, if truth bid it. But how can truth bid in order thata man may be baptized, that we should tell a lie, if chastity biddeth not, in order that a man be
2464
2465
2466
2467

Heb. v. 14.
1 Tim. i. 13.
Opponitur.
Proponitur.

650

NPNF (V1-03)

500

Philip Schaff

baptized, that we should commit whoredom? Now why doth chastity not bid this, but because thistruth teacheth not? If then, save what truth teacheth, we ought not to do, when truth teacheth noteven for the sake of baptizing a man to do what is contrary to chastity, how shall she teach us to
do for the sake of baptizing a man what is contrary to herself, the truth? But like as eyes not strong
enough to look upon the sun yet do gladly look upon the objects which are by the sun enlightened,so, souls which have already strength to delight in the beauty of chastity are yet not straightway
able to consider in her very self that truth whence charity hath her light, insomuch that when itcometh to the doing of somewhat that is adverse to truth, they should so start back in horror as they
do start back in horror if aught be proposed to be done that is adverse to chastity. But that son, who,
receiving the word shall be far from perdition, and nothing false cometh forth of his mouth,2468
accounts it as much debarred from him if, to the succoring of his fellow man he be urged to passthrough a lie, as if it were through the deed of lewdness. And the Father heareth and granteth his
prayer that he may avail without a lie to succor whom the Father Himself, Whose judgments are
unsearchable, willeth to be succored. Such a son therefore so keeps watch against a lie, as he dothagainst sin. For indeed sometimes the name of lie is put for the name of sin: whence is that saying,“All men are liars.”2469 For it is so said, as if it were said, “All men are sinners.” And that: “But if
the truth of God hath abounded through my lie.”2470 And therefore, when he lies as a man he sins
as a man, and will be held by that sentence in which it is said, “All men are liars;” and, “If we saythat we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.”2471 But when nothing false
cometh forth of his mouth, according to that grace will it so be, of which is said: “He that is bornof God, sinneth not.”2472 For were this nativity by itself alone in us, no man would sin: and whenit shall be alone, no man will sin. But now, we as yet drag on that which we were born corruptible:
although, according to that which we are new-born, if we walk aright, from day to day we arerenewed inwardly.2473 But when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, life will swallow
it up wholly, and not a sting of death will remain.2474 Now this sting of death is sin.

41. Either then we are to eschew lies by right doing, or to confess them by repenting: but not,while they unhappily abound in our living, to make them more by teaching also. But let him who
thinks this, choose out whereby he may help his fellow man being in peril, to what safety he will,
what kinds soever of lies; provided yet even of such men we obtain our demand, that upon no causemust we be carried on to false-swearing and to blaspheming. These wickednesses at least let us
judge either greater than deeds of lewdness, or certainly not smaller. For indeed it is worth thinkingof, that very often men, where they suspect them of adultery, challenge their wives to an oath:
which surely they would not do, unless they believed that even they who were not afraid to perpetrate
adultery, might be afraid of perjury. Because in fact also some lewd women who were not afraid
2468
2469
2470
2471
2472
2473
2474

Prov. xxix. 27. Lat.
Ps. cxvi. 11. [See R.V.]
Rom. iii. 7.
1 John i. 8.
1 John iii. 9.
2 Cor. iv. 16.
1 Cor. xv. 53–56. [See R.V.]

651

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

by unlawful embraces to deceive their husbands, have been afraid to call God deceitfully to witness
unto those same husbands whom they had deceived. What cause then can there be, that a chaste
and religious person should be unwilling by adultery to help a man to baptism, yet be willing tohelp him by perjury, which even adulterers are wont to dread? And then, if it be shocking to do
this by perjuring one’s self, how much rather by blaspheming? Far be it then from a Christian todeny and blaspheme Christ, that he may make another man a Christian; and by losing himself seek
to find one, whom, if he teach him such things, he may cause to be lost when found. The book thenwhich is called “the Pound,” thou must in this method refute and destroy; namely, that head of it
in which they dogmatize that for the purpose of concealing religion a lie may be told, this thoushall understand must be the first to be amputated; in such manner, that their testimonies by which
they labor to advance the Holy Books as patrons of their lies, thou must demonstrate partly not tobe lies, partly, even those which are such, to be not meet to be imitated: and if infirmity usurps toherself thus much, that somewhat shall be venially permitted unto her which truth approve not, yetthat thou unshakenly hold and defend, that in divine religion it is at no time whatever right to tella lie. And, as for concealed heretics, that, as we are not to find out concealed adulterers bycommitting of adulteries, nor murderers by committing of murders, nor practisers of black arts2475
by practising of black arts, so neither must we seek to find out liars by telling lies or blasphemers
by blaspheming: according to the reasonings which we have in this volume so copiously set forth,that unto the goal of the same, which we fixed to be in this place, we have with difficulty come at
last.

503

Of the Work of Monks.
[De Opere Monachorum.]Translated by Rev. H. Browne, M.A.
Of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge; Late Principal of the Diocesan College, Chichester.
From the Retractations, ii. 21.
To write the Book on the Work of Monks, the need which compelled me was this. Whenat Carthage there had begun to be monasteries, some maintained themselves by their own hands,
obeying the Apostle; but others wished so to live on the oblations of the faithful, that doing nowork whence they might either have or supply the necessaries of life, they thought and boasted
that they did rather fulfill the precept of the Gospel, where the Lord saith, Behold the fowls ofheaven, and the lilies of the field, (Matt. vi. 26). Whence also among laics of inferior purpose,

2475

Maleficos.

652

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

but yet fervent in zeal, there had begun to arise tumultuous contests, whereby the Church wastroubled, some defending the one, others the other part. Add to this, that some of them who
were for not working, wore their hair long. Whence contentions between those who reprehended
and those who justified the practice, were, according to their party affections, increased. On
these accounts the venerable old Aurelius, Bishop of the Church of the same city, desired me
to write somewhat of this matter; and I did so. This Book begins, “Jussioni tuæ, sancte frater
Aureli.”This work is placed in the Retractations next after that “On the Good of Marriage” which
belongs to the year 401.

1. Thy bidding, holy brother Aurelius, it was meet that I should comply withal, with so muchthe more devotion, by how much the more it became clear unto me Who, out of thee, did speakthat bidding. For our Lord Jesus Christ, dwelling in thine inner part, and inspiring into thee asolicitude of fatherly and brotherly charity, whether our sons and brothers the monks, who neglect
to obey blessed Paul the Apostle, when he saith, “If any will not work, neither let him eat,”2476 are
to have that license permitted unto them; He, assuming unto His work thy will and tongue, hathcommanded me out of thee, that I should hereof write somewhat unto thee. May He therefore
Himself be present with me also, that I may obey in such sort that from His gift, in the very usefulnessof fruitful labor, I may understand that I am indeed obeying Him.

504

2. First then, it is to be seen, what is said by persons of that profession, who will not work: then,if we shall find that they think not aright, what is meet to be said for their correction? “It is not,”say they, “of this corporal work in which either husbandmen or handicraftsmen labor, that the
Apostle gave precept, when he said, ‘If any will not work, neither let him eat.’” For he could not
be contrary to the Gospel, where the Lord Himself saith, “Therefore I say unto you, be not solicitousfor your life, what ye shall eat, neither for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more thanmeat, and the body than raiment? Consider the fowls of heaven, that they sow not, nor reap, norgather into barns; and your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are not ye rather of more worth than
they? But who of you by taking thought can add to his stature one cubit? And concerning raiment,
why are ye solicitous? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they labor not, neither spin;
but I say unto you, that not even Solomon in all his glory was arrayed like one of these. But if thegrass of the field, which today is, and tomorrow is cast into the oven, God so clotheth; how much
more you, (O ye) of little faith! Be not therefore solicitous, saying, What shall we eat, or what shallwe drink, or wherewithal shall we be clad? for all these things do the Gentiles seek. And yourheavenly Father knoweth that ye need all these. But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and His
righteousness, and all these shall be added unto you. Be not therefore solicitous for the morrow:for the morrow will be solicitous for itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.”2477 Lo, say
2476
2477

2 Thess. iii. 10. [R.V.]
Matt. vi. 25–34.

653

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

they, where the Lord biddeth us be without care concerning our food and clothing: how then could
the Apostle think contrary to the Lord, that he should instruct us that we ought to be in such sortsolicitous, what we shall eat, or what we shall drink, or wherewithal we shall be clothed, that heshould even burden us with the arts, cares, labors of handicraftsmen? Wherefore in that he saith,“If any will not work, neither let him eat;” works spiritual, say they, are what we must understand:of which he saith in another place, “To each one according as the Lord hath given: I have planted,
Apollos hath watered; but God gave the increase.”2478 And a little after, “Each one shall receive
his reward according to his own labor. We are God’s fellow-workers; God’s husbandry, God’sbuilding are ye: according to the grace which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder I have laid
the foundation.” As therefore the Apostle worketh in planting, watering, building, andfoundation-laying, in that way whoso will not work, let him not eat. For what profiteth in eating
spiritually to be fed with the word of God, if he do not thence work others’ edification? As thatslothful servant, what did it profit to receive a talent and to hide it, and not work for the Lord’s
gain? Was it that it should be taken from him at last, and himself cast into outer darkness? So, saythey, do we also. We read with the brethren, who come to us fatigued from the turmoil of the world,that with us, in the word of God, and in prayers, psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, they may findrest. We speak to them, console, exhort, building up in them whatever unto their life, according totheir degree, we perceive to be lacking. Such works if we wrought not, with peril should we receiveof the Lord our spiritual sustenance itself. For this is it the Apostle said, “If any one will not work,neither let him eat.” Thus do these men deem themselves to comply with the apostolic and evangelic
sentence, when both the Gospel they believe to have given precept concerning the not caring forthe corporal and temporal indigence of this life, and the Apostle concerning spiritual work and foodto have said, “If any will not work, neither let him eat.”

3. Nor do they attend to this, that if another should say, that the Lord indeed, speaking in parables
and in similitudes concerning spiritual food and clothing, did warn that not on these accounts should
His servants be solicitous; (as He saith, “When they shall drag you to judgment-seats, take nothought what ye shall speak. For it will be given you in that hour what ye shall speak: but it is notye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father that speaketh in you.”2479 For the discourse of spiritual
wisdom is that for which He would not that they should take thought, promising that it should begiven unto them, nothing solicitous thereof;) but the Apostle now, in manner Apostolical, more
openly discoursing and more properly, than figuratively speaking, as is the case with much, indeed
well-nigh all, in his Apostolic Epistles, said it properly of corporal work and food, “If any will not
work, neither let him eat:” by those would their sentence be rendered doubtful, unless, considering
the other words of the Lord, they should find somewhat whereby they might prove it to have beenof not caring for corporal food and raiment that He spoke when He said, “Be not solicitous what
ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink, or wherewithal ye shall be clothed.” As, if they should observe
what He saith, “For all these things do the Gentiles seek;” for there He shows that it was of very
corporal and temporal things that He spake. So then, were this the only thing that the Apostle has

2478
2479

1 Cor. iii. 5–10.
Matt. x. 19, 20.

654

NPNF (V1-03)

505

Philip Schaff

said on this subject, “If any will not work, neither let him eat;” these words might be drawn overto another meaning: but since in many other places of his Epistles, what is his mind on this point,
he most openly teaches, they superfluously essay to raise a mist before themselves and others, thatwhat that charity adviseth they may not only refuse to do, but even to understand it themselves, or
let it be understood by others; not fearing that which is written, “He would not understand that hemight do good.”2480

4. First then we ought to demonstrate that the blessed Apostle Paul willed the servants of God
to work corporal works which should have as their end a great spiritual reward, for this purposethat they should need food and clothing of no man, but with their own hands should procure these
for themselves: then, to show that those evangelical precepts from which some cherish not only
their sloth but even arrogance, are not contrary to the Apostolical precept and example. Let us seethen whence the Apostle came to this, that he should say, “If any will not work, neither let him
eat,” and what he thereupon joineth on, that from the very context2481 of this lesson may appear his
declared sentence. “We command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye
withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh unquietly, and not according to the tradition
which they have received2482 of us. For yourselves know how ye ought to imitate us; for we were
not unquiet among you, neither ate we bread of any man for nought, but in labor and travail nightand day working that we might not burden any of you: not for that we have not power, but that wemight give ourselves as a pattern to you in which ye should imitate us. For also when we were withyou, we gave you this charge, that if any will not work, let him not eat. For we have heard thatcertain among you walk unquietly, working not at all, but being busy-bodies. Now them that aresuch we charge and beseech in our Lord Jesus Christ, that with silence they work, and eat theirown bread.”2483 What can be said to these things, since, that none might thereafter have license tointerpret this according to his wish, not according to charity, he by his own example hath taught
what by precept he hath enjoined? To him, namely, as to an Apostle, a preacher of the Gospel, asoldier of Christ, a planter of the vineyard, a shepherd of the flock had the Lord appointed that heshould live by the Gospel; and yet himself exacted not the pay which was his due, that he mightmake himself a pattern to them which desired what was not their due; as he saith to the Corinthians,“Who goeth a warfare at any time at his own charges? Who planteth a vineyard, and of its fruit
eateth not? Who feedeth a flock, and of the milk of the flock partaketh not?”2484 Therefore, what
was due to him, he would not receive, that by his example they might be checked, who, although
not so ordained in the Church, did deem the like to be due to themselves. For what is it that he saith,“Neither ate we bread of any man for naught, but in labor and travail night and day working that
we might not burden any of you; not for that we have not power, but that we might give ourselves
as a pattern to you wherein ye should follow us?” Let them, therefore, hear to whom he hath given

2480
2481
2482
2483
2484

Ps. xxxvi. 3, (35, 4.) “noluit intelligere ut bene ageret.”“Circumstantia.”“Acceperunt.”
2 Thess. iii. 6–12.
1 Cor. ix. 1–7.

655

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

this precept, that is, they which have not this power which he had, to wit, that while only spirituallyworking they should eat bread by corporal labor not earned:2485 and as he says, “We charge andbeseech in Christ that with silence they work and eat their own bread,” let them not dispute against
the most manifest words of the Apostle, because this also pertaineth to that “silence” with which
they ought to work and eat their own bread.

506

5. I would, however, proceed to a more searching2486 and diligent consideration and handlingof these words, had I not other places of his Epistles much more manifest, by comparing which,both these are made more clearly manifest, and if these were not in existence, those others would
suffice. To the Corinthians, namely, writing of this same thing, he saith thus, “Am I not free? am
I not an Apostle?2487 Have I not seen Christ Jesus our Lord? Are not ye my work in the Lord? If toothers I am not an Apostle, to you assuredly I am. For the seal of mine Apostleship are ye in theLord. My defense to them which interrogate me is this. Have we not power to eat and to drink?
Have we not power to lead about a woman who is a sister,2488 as also the other Apostles, and thebrethren of the Lord, and Cephas?” See how first he shows what is lawful to him, and therefore
lawful for that he is an Apostle. For with that he began, “Am I not free? am I not an Apostle?” andproves himself to be an Apostle, saying, “Have I not seen Christ Jesus our Lord? Are not ye mywork in the Lord?” Which being proved, he shows that to be lawful to him which was so to theother Apostles; that is, that he should not work with his hands, but live by the Gospel, as the Lord
appointed, which in what follows he has most openly demonstrated; for to this end did also faithful
women which had earthly substance go with them, and minister unto them of their substance, thatthey might lack none of those things which pertain to the necessities of this life. Which thing blessed
Paul demonstrates to be lawful indeed unto himself, as also the other Apostles did it, but that hehad not chosen to use this power he afterwards mentions. This thing some not understanding, haveinterpreted not “a woman which is a sister,” when he said, “Have we not power to lead about asister a woman;” but, “a sister a wife.” They were misled by the ambiguity of the Greek word,
because both “wife” and “woman” is expressed in Greek by the same word. Though indeed theApostle has so put this that they ought not to have made this mistake; for that he neither says “awoman” merely, but “a sister woman;” nor “to take” (as in marriage), but “to take about” (as on ajourney). Howbeit other interpreters have not been misled by this ambiguity, and they haveinterpreted “woman” not “wife.”

6. Which thing whoso thinks cannot have been done by the Apostles, that with them womenof holy conversation should go about wheresoever they preached the Gospel, that of their substancethey might minister to their necessities, let him hear the Gospel, and learn how in this they did after
the example of the Lord Himself. Our Lord, namely, according to the wont of His pity, sympathizing
2485
2486
2487
2488

Gratuitum.
Enucleatius.
So Griesbach amd Lachmann. But text recept. “Am I not an Apostle? am I not free?”“Sororem mulierem.”

656

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

with the weak, albeit Angels might minister unto Him, had both a bag in which should be put themoney which was bestowed doubtless by good and believing persons, as necessary for their living,(which bag He gave in charge to Judas, that even thieves, if we could not keep clear of such, we
might learn to tolerate in the Church. He, namely, as is written of him, “stole2489 what was put
therein:”) and He willed that women should follow Him for the preparing and ministering what
was necessary, showing what was due to evangelists and ministers of God as soldiers, from thepeople of God as the provincials; so that if any should not choose to use that which is due unto
him, as Paul the Apostle did not choose, he might bestow the more upon the Church, by not exacting
the pay which was due to him, but by earning his daily living of his own labors. For it had been
said to the inn-keeper to whom that wounded man was brought, “Whatever thou layest out more,at my coming again I will repay thee.”2490 The Apostle Paul, then, did “lay out more,”2491 in that
he, as himself witnesseth, did at his own charges go a warfare. In the Gospel, namely, it is written,“Thereafter also Himself was making a journey through cities and villages preaching andevangelizing of the kingdom of God; and the twelve with Him, and certain women which had been
healed of evil spirits and infirmities: Mary who is called Magdalene, out of whom seven devils hadgone forth, and Joanna wife of Chuza Herod’s steward, and Susanna, and many others, who
ministered unto Him of their substance.”2492 This example of the Lord the Apostles did imitate, toreceive the meat which was due unto them; of which the same Lord most openly speaketh: “As yego,” saith He, “preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand. Heal the sick, raise the dead,cleanse lepers, cast out devils. Freely have ye received, freely give. Possess not gold nor silver nor
money in your purses, neither scrip on your journey, neither two coats, neither shoes, neither staff:
for the workman is worthy of his meat.”2493 Lo, where the Lord appointeth the very thing which
the Apostle doth mention. For to this end He told them not to carry all those things, namely, that
where need should be, they might receive them of them unto whom they preached the kingdom ofGod.

7. But lest any should fancy that this was granted only to the twelve, see also what Luke relateth:“After these things,” saith he, “the Lord chose also other seventy and two, and sent them by two
and two before His face into every city and place whither He was about to come. And He said unto
them, The harvest indeed is plentiful, but the laborers few: ask ye therefore the Lord of the harvest,that He would send forth laborers into His harvest. Go your ways: behold, I send you as lambs inthe midst of wolves. Carry neither purse nor scrip nor shoes, and salute no man by the way. Intowhatsoever house ye shall enter, first say, Peace be to this house. And if the son of peace be there,
your peace shall rest upon him: if not, it shall return to you. And in the same house remain, eating
and drinking such things as are with them: for the workman is worthy of his hire.”2494 Here it appears
that these things were not commanded, but permitted, that whoso should choose to use, might use
2489
2490
2491
2492
2493
2494

“Auferebat.”
Luke x. 35.
1 Cor. ix. 7–15; and 2 Cor. xi. 7.
Luke viii. 1–3. [See R.V.]
Matt. x. 7–10.
Luke x. 1–7.

657

NPNF (V1-03)

507

Philip Schaffthat which was lawful unto him by the Lord’s appointment; but if any should not choose to use it,
he would not do contrary to a thing commanded, but would be yielding up his own right, by
demeaning himself more mercifully and laboriously in the Gospel in the which he would not accept
even the hire which was his due. Otherwise the Apostle did contrary to a command of the Lord:
for, after he had shown it to be lawful unto him, he hath straightway subjoined, “But yet have I not
used this power.”

8. But let us return to the order of our discourse, and the whole of the passage itself of the Epistle
let us diligently consider. “Have we not,” saith he, “leave2495 to eat and to drink? have we not leave
to lead about a woman, a sister?” What leave meant he, but what the Lord gave unto them whom
He sent to preach the kingdom of heaven, saying, “Those things which are (given) of them, eatye;2496 for the workman is worthy of his hire;” and proposing Himself as an example of the same
power, to Whom most faithful women did of their means minister such necessaries? But the Apostle
Paul hath done more, from his fellow-Apostles alleging a proof of this license permitted of theLord. For not as finding fault hath he subjoined, “As do also the other Apostles, and the brethrenof the Lord, and Cephas;” but that hence he might show that this which he would not accept wasa thing which, that it was lawful for him to accept was proved by the wont of the rest also his
fellow-soldiers. “Or I only and Barnabas, have we not power to forbear working?” Lo, he hathtaken away all doubt even from the slowest hearts, that they may understand of what working hespeaks. For to what end saith he, “Or I only and Barnabas, have we not power to forbear working?”
but for that all evangelists and ministers of God’s word had power received of the Lord, not to workwith their hands, but to live by the Gospel, working only spiritual works in preaching of the kingdomof heaven and edifying of the peace of the Church? For no man can say that it is of that very spiritual
working that the Apostle said, “Or I only and Barnabas, have we not power to forbear working?”
For this power to forbear working all those had: let him say then, who essays to deprave and pervert
precepts Apostolical; let him say, if he dares that all evangelists received of the Lord power toforbear preaching the Gospel. But if this is most absurd and mad to say, why will they not understandwhat is plain to all, that they did indeed receive power not to work, but works bodily, whereby to
get a living, because “the workman is worthy of his hire,” as the Gospel speaks. It is not therefore
that Paul and Barnabas only had not power to forbear working; but that all alike had this power ofwhich these availed not themselves in “laying out more” upon the Church; so as in those places
where they preached the Gospel they judged to be meet for the weak. And for this reason, that hemight not seem to have found fault with his fellow-Apostles, he goes on to say: “Who goeth a
warfare at any time at his own charges? Who feedeth a flock, and of the milk of the flock partaketh
not? Speak I these things as a man? Saith not the Law the same? For in the law of Moses it is
written, Thou shall not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God care for oxen? Or saith
he it for our sake altogether? For our sakes truly is it written, because he that plougheth ought toplough in hope, and he that thresheth in hope of partaking of the fruits.”2497 By these words the

2495
2496
2497

Licentiam.
Luke x. 7. “Ea quæ ab ipsis sunt.”
1 Cor. ix. 7–10. [See R.V.]

658

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Apostle Paul sufficiently indicates, that it was no usurping unto themselves of aught beyond theirdue on the part of his fellow-Apostles, that they wrought not bodily, whence they might have thethings which to this life are necessary, but as the Lord ordained, should, living by the Gospel, eat
bread gratuitously given of them unto whom they were preaching a gratuitous grace. Their charges,
namely, they did like soldiers receive, and of the fruit of the vineyard by them planted, they did,as need was, freely gather; and of the milk of the flock which they fed, they drank; and of thethreshing-floor on which they threshed, they took their meat.

508

9. But he speaks more openly in the rest which he subjoins, and altogether removes all causesof doubting. “If we unto you,” saith he, “have sown spiritual things, is it a great matter if we shallreap your carnal things?” What are the spiritual things which he sowed, but the word and mysteryof the sacrament of the kingdom of heaven? And what the carnal things which he saith he had aright to reap, but these temporal things which are indulged to the life and indigency of the flesh?
These however being due to him he declares that he had not sought nor accepted, lest he shouldcause any impediment to the Gospel of Christ. What work remaineth for us to understand him tohave wrought, whereby he should get his living, but bodily work, with his own bodily and visible
hands? For if from spiritual work he sought food and clothing, that is, to receive these of themwhom he was edifying in the Gospel, he could not, as he does, go on to say, “If others be partakersof this power over you, are not we rather? Nevertheless, we have not used this power, but tolerate
all things that we may not cause any hindrance to the Gospel of Christ.”2498 What power doth hesay he had not used, but that which he had over them, received of the Lord, the power to reap theircarnal things, in order to the sustenance of this life which is lived in the flesh? Of which power
were others also partakers, who did not at the first announce the Gospel to them, but came thereafter
to their Church preaching the self-same. Therefore, when he had said, “If we have sown unto you
spiritual things, is it a great matter if we shall reap your carnal things?” he subjoined, “If others bepartakers of this power over you, are not we rather?” And when he had demonstrated what power
they had: “Nevertheless we have not used,” saith he, “this power; but we put up with all things,
lest we should cause any impediment to the Gospel of Christ.” Let therefore these persons say inwhat way from spiritual work the Apostle had carnal food, when himself openly says that he had
not used this power. But if from spiritual work he had not carnal food, it remains that from bodily
work he had it and thereof saith, “Neither did we eat any man’s bread for nought; but wrought withlabor and travail night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you: not because we havenot power, but to make ourselves an example unto you to follow us.2499 All things,” saith he, “wesuffer, lest we cause any hindrance to the Gospel of Christ.”

10. And he comes back again, and in all ways, over and over again, enforceth what he hath theright to do, yet doeth not. “Do ye not know,” saith he, “that they which work in the temple, eat of
the things which are in the temple? they which serve the altar, have their share with the altar? So
2498
2499

1 Cor. ix. 12.
2 Thess. iii. 8, 9.

659

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

hath the Lord ordained for them which preach the Gospel, to live of the Gospel. But I have usednone of these things.”2500 What more open than this? what more clear? I fear lest haply, while I
discourse wishing to expound this, that become obscure which in itself is bright and clear. For they
who understand not these words, or feign not to understand, do much less understand mine, or
profess to understand: unless perchance they do therefore quickly understand ours, because it isallowed them to deride them being understood; but concerning the Apostle’s words this same is
not allowed. For this reason, where they cannot interpret them otherwise according to their own
sentence, be it ever so clear and manifest, they answer that it is obscure and uncertain because
wrong and perverse they dare not call it. Cries the man of God, “The Lord hath ordained for themwhich preach the Gospel, of this Gospel to live; but I have used none of these things;” and flesh
and blood essayeth to make crooked what is straight; what open, to shut; what serene, to cloud
over. “It was,” saith it, “spiritual work that he was doing, and thereof did he live.” If it be so, of
the Gospel did he live: why then doth he say, “The Lord hath ordained for them which preach theGospel, of the Gospel to live; but I have used none of these things?” Or if this very word, “to live”
which is here used, they will needs also interpret in respect of spiritual life, then had the Apostle
no hope towards God, in that he did not live by the Gospel, because he hath said, “I have used noneof these things.” Wherefore, that he should have certain hope of life eternal the Apostle did of theGospel in any wise spiritually live. What therefore he saith, “But I have used none of these things,”
doth without doubt make to be understood of this life which is in the flesh, that which he hath saidof the Lord’s ordaining to them which preach the Gospel, that of the Gospel they should live; thatis, this life which hath need of food and clothing, they by the Gospel shall sustain; as above he saidof his fellow-apostles; of whom the Lord Himself saith, “The workman is worthy of his meat;”
and, “The workman is worthy of his hire.” This meat, then, and this hire of the sustenance of thislife, due to evangelists, this of them to whom he evangelized the Apostle accepted not, saying atrue thing, “I have used none of these things.”

509

11. And he goes on, and adjoins, lest perchance any should imagine that he only therefore
received not, because they had not given: “But I have not written these things that they may be sodone unto me: good is it for me rather to die than that any make void my glory.”2501 What glory,
unless that which he wished to have with God, while in Christ suffering with the weak? As he ispresently about to say most openly; “For if I shall have preached the Gospel, there is not to me any
glory: for necessity is laid upon me;”2502 that is, of sustaining this life. “For woe will be to me,” hesaith, “if I preach not the Gospel:” that is, to my own will shall I forbear to preach the Gospel,because I shall be tormented with hunger, and shall not have whereof to live. For he goes on, andsays; “For if willingly I do this, I have a reward.” By his doing it willingly, he means, if he do it
uncompelled by any necessity of supporting this present life; and for this he hath reward, to wit,with God, of glory everlasting. “But if unwilling,” saith he, “a dispensation is entrusted unto me:”2503

2500
2501
2502
2503

1 Cor. ix. 13–15.
1 Cor. ix. 15.
1 Cor. ix. 16. [See R.V.]
1 Cor. ix. 17.

660

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffthat is, if being unwilling, I am by necessity of passing through this present life, compelled to preachthe Gospel, “a dispensation is entrusted unto me;” to wit, that by my dispensation as a steward,
because Christ, because the truth, is that which I preach, howsoever because of occasion, howsoever
seeking mine own, howsoever by necessity of earthly emolument compelled so to do, other men
do profit, but I have not that glorious and everlasting reward with God. “What then,” saith he, “shallbe my reward?” He saith it as asking a question: therefore the pronunciation must be suspended,until he give the answer. Which the more easily to understand, let, as it were, us put the question
to him, “What, then, will be thy reward, O Apostle, when that earthly reward due to good evangelists,
not for its sake evangelizing, but yet taking it as the consequence and offered to them by the Lord’s
appointment, thou acceptest not? What shall be thy reward then?” See what he replies: “That,
preaching the Gospel, I may make the Gospel of Christ without charge;” that is, that the Gospel
may not be to believers expensive, lest they account that for this end is the Gospel to be preachedto them, that its preachers should seem as it were to sell it. And yet he comes back again and again,that he may show what, by warrant of the Lord, he hath a right unto, yet doeth not: “that I abuse
not,” saith he, “my power in the Gospel.”2504

12. But now, that as bearing with the infirmity of men he did this, let us hear what follows:“For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain themore. To them that are under the law, I became as under the law, that I might gain them that areunder the law; to them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but
under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.”2505 Which thing he did, notwith craftiness of simulation, but with mercy of compassion with others; that is, not as if to feign
himself a Jew, as some have thought, in that he observed at Jerusalem the things prescribed by theold law.2506 For he did this in accordance with his free and openly declared sentence, in which hesays, “Is any called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised.” That is, let him not so
live, as though he had become uncircumcised, and covered that which he had laid bare: as in anotherplace he saith, “Thy circumcision is become uncircumcision.”2507 It was in accordance then withthis his sentence, in which he saith, “Is any called being circumcised? let him not become
uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised;”2508 that he did those
things, in which, by persons not understanding and not enough attending, he has been accounted
to have feigned. For he was a Jew, and was called being circumcised; therefore he would not become
uncircumcised; that is, would not so live as if he had not been circumcised. For this he now had in
his power to do. And “under” the law, indeed, he was not as they who servilely wrought it; but yet“in” the law of God and of Christ. For that law was not one, and the law of God another, as accursed
Manicheans are wont to say. Otherwise, if when he did those things he is to be accounted to havefeigned, then he feigned himself also a pagan, and sacrificed to idols, because he says that he became

2504
2505
2506
2507
2508

1 Cor. ix. 18.
1 Cor. ix. 19–21.
S. Jerome in Ep. inter Augustinianas, 75, n. 9–11.
Rom. ii. 25.
1 Cor. vii. 18.

661

NPNF (V1-03)

510

Philip Schaff

to those without law, as without law. By whom, doubtless, he would have us to understand no otherthan Gentiles whom we call Pagans. It is one thing therefore to be under the law, another in thelaw, another without law. “Under the law,” the carnal Jews; “in the law,” spiritual men, both Jews
and Christians; (whence the former kept that custom of their fathers, but did not impose unwonted
burdens upon the believing Gentiles; and therefore they also were circumcised;) but “without law,”
are the Gentiles which have not yet believed, to whom yet the Apostle testifieth himself to havebecome like, through sympathy of a merciful heart, not simulation of a changeable exterior; thatis, that he might in that way succor carnal Jew or Pagan, in which way himself, if he were that,would have wished to be succored: bearing, to wit, their infirmity, in likeness of compassion, notdeceiving in fiction of lying; as he straightway goes on, and says, “I became to the weak as weak,that I might gain the weak.”2509 For it was from this point that he was speaking, in saying all thoseother things. As then, that he became to the weak as weak, was no lie; so all those other things
above rehearsed. For what doth he mean his weakness towards the weak to have been, but that ofsuffering with them, insomuch that, lest he should appear to be a seller of the Gospel, and by falling
into an ill suspicion with ignorant men, should hinder the course of God’s word, he would not
accept what by warrant of the Lord was his due? Which if he were willing to accept, he would notin any wise lie, because it was truly due to him; and for that he would not, he did not in any wiselie. For he did not say, it was not due; but he showed it to be due, and that being due he had notused it, and professed that he would not at all use it, in that very thing becoming weak; namely, inthat he would not use his power; being, to wit, with so merciful affection endued, that he thought
in what way he should wish to be dealt withal, if himself also were made so weak, that possibly,
if he should see them by whom the Gospel was preached to him, accepting their charges, he might
think it a bringing of wares to market, and hold them in suspicion accordingly.

13. Of this weakness of his, he saith in another place, “We made ourselves small among you,even as a nurse cherisheth her children.”2510 For in that passage the context indicates this: “Forneither at any time,” saith he, “used we flattering words, as ye know, nor an occasion of
covetousness; God is witness: nor of men sought we glory, neither of you, nor yet of others when
we might have been burdensome to you as the Apostles of Christ: but we made ourselves small
among you, even as a nurse cherisheth her children.” What therefore he saith to the Corinthians,that he had power of his apostleship, as also the other Apostles, which power he testifieth that hehad not used; this also he saith in that place to the Thessalonians, “When we might have beenburdensome to you as Christ’s Apostles:” according to that the Lord saith, “The workman is worthyof his hire.” For that of this he speaks, is indicated by that which he above set down, “Neither foroccasion of coveteousness, God is witness.” By reason, namely, of this which by right of the Lord’s
appointment was due to good evangelists, who not for its sake do evangelize but seek the kingdomof God, so that all these things should be added unto them, others were taking advantage thereof,of whom he also saith, “For they that are such serve not God, but their own belly.”2511 From whom

2509
2510
2511

1 Cor. ix. 22.
“Parvuli.” 1 Thess. ii. 5–7. [See R.V.]
Rom. xvi. 18.

662

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

the Apostle wished so to cut off this occasion, that even what was justly due to him, he would
forego. For this himself doth openly show in the second to the Corinthians, speaking of otherChurches supplying his necessities. For he had come, as it appears, to so great indigence, that fromdistant Churches were sent supplies for his necessities, while yet from them among whom he was,he accepted nothing of that kind. “Have I committed a sin, “saith he, “in humbling myself that ye
might be exalted, because I have preached to you the Gospel of God freely? Other Churches I
despoiled, taking wages of them to minister unto you: and when I was present with you and wanted,
to no man was I burdensome. For that which was lacking to me the brethren which came fromMacedonia supplied, and in all things I have kept myself from being burdensome to you, and willkeep myself. It is the truth of Christ in me, that this glory shall not be infringed in me in the regionsof Achaia. Wherefore? because I love you not? God knoweth. But what I do, I also mean to do,that I may cut off occasion from them which seek occasion, that wherein they glory they may befound as also we.”2512 Of this occasion, therefore, which he here saith that he cuts off, he would
have that understood which he saith in the former place, “Neither for occasion of covetousness,
God is witness.” And what he here saith, “In humbling myself that ye might be exalted:” this in
the first to the same Corinthians, “I became to the weak as weak;” this to the Thessalonians, “I
became small among you, as a nurse cherisheth her children.”2513 Now then observe what follows:“So,” saith he, “being affectionately desirous of you, we are minded to impart unto you not alone
the Gospel of God, but our own souls also; because ye are become most dear to us. For ye remember,brethren, our labor and toil, night and day working, that we might not burden any of you.” For thishe said above, “When we might be burdensome to you, as Christ’s Apostles.” Because, then, theweak were in peril, lest, agitated by false suspicions, they should hate an, as it were, venal Gospel,
for this cause, trembling for them as with a father’s and a mother’s bowels of compassion, did hethis thing. So too in the Acts of the Apostles he speaks the same thing, when, sending from Miletus
to Ephesus, he had called thence the presbyters of the Church, to whom, among much else, “Silver,”saith he, “and gold, or apparel of no man have I coveted; yourselves know, that to my necessities
and theirs who were with me these hands have ministered. In all things have I shown you that solaboring it behoveth to help the weak, mindful also of the words of the Lord Jesus, for that He said,
More blessed is it rather to give than to receive.”2514

511

14. Here peradventure some man may say, “If it was bodily work that the Apostle wrought,whereby to sustain this life, what was that same work, and when did he find time for it, both towork and to preach the Gospel?” To whom I answer: Suppose I do not know; nevertheless that hedid bodily work, and thereby lived in the flesh, and did not use the power which the Lord had given
to the Apostles, that preaching the Gospel he should live by the Gospel, those things above-said
do without all doubt bear witness. For it is not either in one place or briefly said, that it should bepossible for any most astute arguer with all his tergiversation to traduce and pervert it to anothermeaning. Since then so great an authority, with so mighty and so frequent blows mauling the

2512
2513
2514

2 Cor. xi. 7–12. [See R.V.]
1 Thess. ii. 7–9.
Acts xx. 33–35.

663

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

gainsayers, doth break in pieces their contrariness, why ask they of me either what sort of work hedid, or when he did it? One thing I know, that he neither did steal, nor was a housebreaker or
highwayman, nor chariot-driver or hunter or player, nor given to filthy lucre: but innocently andhonestly wrought things which are fitted for the uses of men; such as are the works of carpenters,builders, shoemakers, peasants, and such like. For honesty itself reprehends not what their pride
doth reprehend, who love to be called, but love not to be, honest. The Apostle then would notdisdain either to take in hand any work of peasants, or to be employed in the labor of craftsmen.
For he who saith, “Be ye without offense to Jews and to Greeks and to the Church of God,”2515
before what men he could possibly stand abashed, I know not. If they shall say, the Jews; thePatriarchs fed cattle: if the Greeks, whom we call also Pagans; they have had philosophers, held inhigh honor, who were shoemakers: if the Church of God; that just man, elect to the testimony of a
conjugal and ever-during virginity, to whom was betrothed the Virgin Mary who bore Christ, wasa carpenter.2516 Whatever therefore of these with innocence and without fraud men do work, isgood. For the Apostle himself takes precaution of this, that no man through necessity of sustaining
life should turn aside to evil works. “Let him that stole,” saith he, “steal no more; but rather let him
labor good with his hands, that he may have to impart to him that needeth.”2517 This then is enoughto know, that also in the very work of the body the Apostle did work that which is good.

15. But when he might use to work, that is, in what spaces of time, that he might not be hinderedfrom preaching the Gospel, who can make out? Though, truly, that he wrought at hours of both day
and night himself hath not left untold.2518 Yet these men truly, who as though very full of businessand occupation inquire about the time of working, what do they? Have they from Jerusalem roundabout even to Illyricum filled the lands with the Gospel?2519 or whatever of barbarian nations hathremained yet to be gone unto, and to be filled of the peace of the Church, have they undertaken?
We know them into a certain holy society, most leisurely gathered together. A marvellous thing
did the Apostle, that in very deed amid his so great care of all the Churches, both planted and to
be planted, to his care and labor appertaining, he did also with his hands work: yet on that account,when he was with the Corinthians, and wanted, was burdensome to no man of those among whom
he was, but altogether that which was lacking to him the brethren which came from Macedonia
supplied.2520

16. For he himself also, with an eye to the like necessities of saints, who, although they obey
his precepts, “that with silence they work and eat their own bread,” may yet from many causes
stand in need of somewhat by way of supplement to the like sustenance, therefore, after he had
2515
2516
2517
2518
2519
2520

1 Cor. x. 32.
Matt. xiii. 55.
Eph. iv. 28.
1 Thess. ii. 9; 2 Thess. iii. 8.
Rom. xv. 19.
2 Cor. xi. 9.

664

NPNF (V1-03)

512

Philip Schaff

thus said, teaching and premonishing, “Now them which are such we command and beseech in our
Lord Jesus Christ, that with silence they work and eat their own bread;”2521 yet, lest they which had
whereof they might supply the needs of the servants of God, should hence take occasion to wax
lazy, providing against this he hath straightway added, “But ye, brethren, become not weak inshowing beneficence.”2522 And when he was writing to Titus, saying, “Zenas the lawyer and Apollos
do thou diligently send forward, that nothing may be wanting to them;”2523 that he might show fromwhat quarter nothing ought to be wanting to them, he straightway subjoined, “But let ours also
learn to maintain good works2524 for necessary use, that they be not unfruitful.” In the case of
Timothy also,2525 whom he calls his own most true2526 son, because he knew him weak of body,(as he shows, in advising him not to drink water, but to use a little wine for his stomach’s sake andhis often infirmities,) lest then haply, because in bodily work he could not labor, he being unwillingto stand in need of daily food at their hands, unto whom he ministered the Gospel, should seeksome business in which the stress of his mind would become entangled; (for it is one thing to laborin body, with the mind free, as does a handicraftsman, if he be not fraudulent and avaricious andgreedy of his own private gain; but another thing, to occupy the mind itself with cares of collecting
money without the body’s labor, as do either dealers, or bailiffs, or undertakers, for these with careof the mind conduct their business, not with their hands do work, and in that regard occupy theirmind itself with solicitude of getting;) lest then Timothy should fall upon such like ways, becausefrom weakness of body he could not work with his hands, he thus exhorts, admonishes, and comforts
him: “Labor,” saith he, “as a good soldier of Jesus Christ. No man, going a warfare for God,entangleth himself with secular business; that he may please Him to whom he hath proved himself.2527
For he that striveth for masteries, is not crowned except he strive lawfully.”2528 Hereupon, lest theother should be put to straits, saying, “Dig I cannot, to beg I am ashamed,”2529 he adjoined, “Thehusbandman that laboreth must be first partaker of the fruits:” according to that which he had said
to the Corinthians, “Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? Who planteth a vineyard,
and eateth not of the fruit thereof? Who feedeth a flock, and partaketh not of the milk of theflock?”2530 Thus did he make to be without care a chaste evangelist, not to that end working as anevangelist that he might sell the Gospel, but yet not, having strength to supply unto himself withhis own hands the necessities of this life; for that he should understand whatever being necessary
for himself he was taking of them whom as provincials he as a soldier was serving, and whom asa vineyard he was culturing, or as a flock was feeding, to be not matter of mendicity, but of power.

2521
2522
2523
2524
2525
2526
2527
2528
2529
2530

2 Thess. iii. 12, 13.
Infirmari benefacientes.
Tit. iii. 13, 14.
Bonis operibus præesse, καλῶν žργων προΐστασθαι. E.V. in margin, “profess honest trades.”1 Tim. i. 2.
“Germanissimum.” 1 Tim. v. 23.
Cui se probavit.
2 Tim. ii. 3–6.
Luke xvi. 3. [See R.V.]
1 Cor. ix. 7.

665

NPNF (V1-03)

513

Philip Schaff

17. On account then of these either occupations of the servants of God, or bodily infirmities,
which cannot be altogether wanting, not only doth the Apostle permit the needs of saints to besupplied by good believers, but also most wholesomely exhorteth. For, setting apart that power,
which he saith himself had not used, which yet that the faithful must serve unto, he enjoins, saying,“Let him that is catechised in the word, communicate unto him that doth catechise him, in all goodthings:”2531 setting apart, then, this power, which that the preachers of the word have over them towhom they preach, he often testifieth; speaking, moreover, of the saints who had sold all that they
had and distributed the same, and were dwelling at Jerusalem in an holy communion of life, notsaying that any thing was their own, to whom all things were in common,2532 and their soul andheart one in the Lord: that these by the Churches of the Gentiles should have what they needed
bestowed upon them, he chargeth and exhorteth. Thence is also that to the Romans: “Now therefore
I will go unto Jerusalem, to minister unto the saints. For it hath pleased Macedonia and Achaia tomake a certain contribution for the poor of the saints which are at Jerusalem. For it hath pleased
them; and their debtors they are. For if in their spiritual things the Gentiles have communicated,
they ought also in carnal things to minister unto them.”2533 This is like that which he says to theCorinthians: “If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we reap your carnalthings?”2534 Also to the Corinthians in the second Epistle: “Moreover, brethren, we do you to witof the grace of God bestowed on the Churches of Macedonia; how that in a great trial of affliction
the abundance of their joy and their deep poverty abounded in the riches of their liberality; for totheir power, I bear record, yea, and beyond their power, they were willing of themselves; with manyprayers beseeching of us the grace and the fellowship of the ministering to the saints: and not as
we hoped, but first they gave their own selves to the Lord, and unto us by the will of God, insomuch,that we desired Titus, that as he had begun, so he would also finish in you the same grace also. But
as ye abound in every thing, in faith, and utterance, and knowledge, and in all diligence, and inyour love to us, see that ye abound in this grace also. I speak not by commandment, but by occasionof the forwardness of others, and to prove the exceeding dearness of your love. For ye know thegrace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though He was rich, yet for your sakes He became poor, thatye through His poverty might be made rich. And herein I give advice: for this is expedient for you,
who have begun before, not only to do, but also to be willing a year ago; now therefore perfect itin the doing; that as there is a readiness to will, so of performance also out of that which each hath.
For if there be first a ready mind, it is acceptable according to that a man hath, not according tothat he hath not. Not, namely, that others may have ease, and ye straits; but by an equality, that
now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may
become a supply for your want: that there may be equality, as it is written, He that had gatheredmuch had nothing over; and he that had gathered little had no lack. But thanks be to God, which
put the same earnest care for you into the heart of Titus: for indeed he accepted the exhortation;
but being more forward, of his own accord he went forth unto you. And we have sent with him thebrother, whose praise is in the Gospel throughout all the Churches; and not that only, but he wasalso ordained of the Churches as a companion of our travail, with this grace which is administered
2531
2532
2533
2534

Gal. vi. 6.
Acts ii. 44: iv. 32.
Rom. xv. 25–27.
1 Cor. ix. 11.

666

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

by us to the glory of the Lord, and our ready mind: avoiding this, that no man should blame us inthis abundance which is administered by us. For we provide for honest things, not only in the sightof the Lord, but also in the sight of men.”2535 In these words appeareth how much2536 the Apostle
willed it not only to be the care of the holy congregations2537 to minister necessaries to the holy
servants of God, giving counsel in this, because this was profitable more to the persons themselves
who did this, than to them towards whom they did it, (for to those another thing was profitable,that is, that they should make of this service of their brethren towards them an holy use, and notwith an eye to this serve God, nor take these things but to supply necessity, not to feed laziness:)but likewise his own care the blessed Apostle saith to be so great in this ministration which was
now in transmitting through Titus, that a companion of his journey was on this account, he tells us,
ordained by the Churches, a man of God well reported of, “whose praise,” says he, “is in the Gospel
throughout all the Churches.” And to this end, he says, was the same ordained to be his companion,that he might avoid men’s reprehensions, lest, without witness of saints associated with him in thisministry, he should be thought by weak and impious men to receive for himself and turn aside into
his own bosom, what he was receiving for supplying the necessities of the saints, by him to bebrought and distributed to the needy.

18. And a little after he saith, “For as touching the ministering to the saints, it is superfluous
for me to write to you. For I know the forwardness of your mind, for which I boast of you to themof Macedonia, that Achaia was ready a year ago; and your zeal hath provoked very many. Yet have
we sent the brethren, lest our boasting of you should be in vain in this behalf; that, as I said, ye may
be ready: lest haply if they of Macedonia come with me, and find you unprepared, we (that we say
not, ye) should be ashamed in this substance. Therefore I thought it necessary to exhort the brethren,that they would go before unto you, and make up beforehand this your long promised benediction,that the same might be ready, as benediction, and not as covetousness. But this I say, He whichsoweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth in benediction shall reap also in
benediction. Every man according as he hath purposed in his heart, not grudgingly, or of necessity:for God loveth a cheerful giver. And God is able to make all grace abound in you; that ye, always
having all sufficiency in all things, may abound to every good work: as it is written, He hathdispersed abroad; he hath given to the poor: his righteousness remaineth for ever. But He that
ministereth seed to the sower will both minister bread for your food, and multiply your seed sown,and increase the growing fruits of your righteousness; that ye may be enriched in every thing to allbountifulness, which causeth through us thanksgiving to God: for the administration of this service
not only supplieth the want of the saints, but makes them also to abound by thanksgiving unto Godof many, while by the proof of this ministration they glorify God for the obedience of your confession
unto the Gospel of Christ, and for your liberal distribution unto them, and unto all men; and in thepraying for you of them which long after you for the excellent grace of God in you. Thanks be unto

2535
2536
2537

2 Cor. viii. 1–21.
Read perhaps “quantam;” “how great the Apostle willed to be the care.”
Plebium.

667

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

God for His unspeakable gift.”2538 In what richness of holy gladness must the Apostle have been
steeped, while he speaks of the mutual supply of the need of Christ’s soldiers and His othersubjects,2539 on the one part of carnal things to those, on the other of spiritual things to these, toexclaim as he does, and as it were in repletion of holy joys to burst out2540 with, “Thanks be to God
for His unspeakable gift!”

514

19. As therefore the Apostle, nay rather the Spirit of God possessing and filling and actuating
his heart, ceased not to exhort the faithful who had such substance, that nothing should be lacking
to the necessities of the servants of God, who wished to hold a more lofty degree of sanctity in the
Church, in cutting off all ties of secular hope, and dedicating a mind at liberty to their godly serviceof warfare: likewise ought themselves also to obey his precepts, in sympathizing with the weak,
and unshackled by love of private wealth, to labor with their hands for the common good, andsubmit to their superiors without a murmur; that there may be made up for them out of the oblationsof good believers that which, while they labor and do some work whereby they may get their living,
yet still by reason of bodily infirmities of some, and by reason of ecclesiastical occupations or
erudition of the doctrine which bringeth salvation, they shall account to be lacking.

20. For what these men are about, who will not do bodily work, to what thing they give up theirtime, I should like to know. “To prayers,” say they, “and psalms, and reading, and the word ofGod.” A holy life, unquestionably, and in sweetness of Christ worthy of praise; but then, if fromthese we are not to be called off, neither must we eat, nor our daily viands themselves be prepared,that they may be put before us and taken. Now if to find time for these things the servants of God
at certain intervals of times by very infirmity are of necessity compelled, why do we not makeaccount of some portions of times to be allotted also to the observance of Apostolical precepts?
For one single prayer of one who obeyeth is sooner heard than ten thousand of a despiser. As fordivine songs, however, they can easily, even while working with their hands, say them, and like as
rowers with a boat-song,2541 so with godly melody cheer up their very toil. Or are we ignorant how
it is with all workmen, to what vanities, and for the most part even filthinesses, of theatrical fables
they give their hearts and tongues, while their hands recede not from their work? What then hinders
a servant of God while working with his hands to meditate in the law of the Lord, and sing unto
the Name of the Lord Most High?2542 provided, of course, that to learn what he may by memory
rehearse, he have times set apart. For to this end also those good works of the faithful ought not tobe lacking, for resource of making up what is necessary, that the hours which are so taken up instoring of the mind that those bodily works cannot be carried on, may not oppress with want. But
they which say that they give up their time to reading, do they not there find that which the Apostle
2538
2539
2540
2541
2542

2 Cor. ix.
Provincialium.
“Eructuare.”Celeumate.
Ps. i. 2; xiii. 6.

668

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

enjoineth? Then what perversity is this, to refuse to be ruled by his reading while he wishes to giveup his time thereto; and that he may spend more time in reading what is good, therefore to refuse
to do what is read? For who knows not that each doth the more quickly profit when he reads goodthings, the quicker he is in doing what he reads?

515

21. Moreover, if discourse must be bestowed upon any, and this so take up the speaker that hehave not time to work with his hands, are all in the monastery able to hold discourse unto brethren
which come unto them from another kind of life, whether it be to expound the divine lessons, orconcerning any questions which may be put, to reason in an wholesome manner? Then since not
all have the ability, why upon this pretext do all want to have nothing else to do? Although even
if all were able, they ought to do it by turns; not only that the rest might not be taken up fromnecessary works, but also because it sufficeth that to many hearers there be one speaker. To come
now to the Apostle; how could he find time to work with his hands, unless for the bestowing of theword of God he had certain set times? And indeed God hath not willed this either to be hidden fromus. For both of what craft he was a workman, and at what times he was taken up with dispensing
the Gospel, holy Scripture has not left untold. Namely, when the day of his departure caused him
to be in haste, being at Troas, even on the first day of the week when the brethren were assembled
to break bread, such was his earnestness, and so necessary the disputation, that his discourse wasprolonged even until midnight,2543 as though it had slipped from their minds that on that day it was
not a fast:2544 but when he was making longer stay in any place and disputing daily, who can doubtthat he had certain hours set apart for this office? For at Athens, because he had there found moststudious inquirers of things, it is thus written of him: “He disputed therefore with the Jews in the
synagogue, and with the Gentile inhabitants2545 in the market every day to those who were there.”2546
Not, namely, in the synagogue every day, for there it was his custom to discourse on the sabbath;but “in the market,” saith he, “every day;” by reason, doubtless, of the studiousness of the Athenians.
For so it follows: “Certain however of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers conferred with him.”
And a little after, it says: “Now the Athenians and strangers which were there spent their time innothing else but either to tell or to hear some new thing.” Let us suppose him all those days that he
was at Athens not to have worked: on this account, indeed, was his need supplied from Macedonia,
as he says in the second to the Corinthians:2547 though in fact he could work both at other hours
and of nights, because he was so strong in both mind and body. But when he had gone from Athens,
let us see what says the Scripture: “He disputed,” saith it, “in the synagogue every sabbath;”2548
this at Corinth. In Troas, however, where through necessity of his departure being close at hand,
his discourse was protracted until midnight, it was the first day of the week, which is called the2543

Acts xx. 7.
S. Augustin therefore assumes that the Christians of the Apostolic age did not break their fast before receiving the
Eucharist. See St. Chrys. on Stat. Hom. ix. § 2. Tr. p. 159, and note g.
2545Τοῖς ᾽Ιουδαίοις καὶ τοῖς σεβομ™νοις καὶ ἐν τῇ ἀγορ’ κατὰ π‚σαν ἡμ™ραν πρὸς τοὺς παρατυγχ€νοντας. For καὶ τοῖςσεβομ™νοις Aug. has et Gentibus incolis: for which some mss. have Gentibus in viculis.
2546
Acts xvii. 17, 18, 21.
2547
2 Cor. xi. 9.
2548
Acts xviii. 4.
2544

669

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Lord’s Day: whence we understand that he was not with Jews but with Christians; when also thenarrator himself saith they were gathered together to break bread. And indeed this same is the best
management, that all things be distributed to their times and be done in order, lest becoming ravelledin perplexing entanglements, they throw our human mind into confusion.

22. There also is said at what work the Apostle wrought. “After these things,” it says, “hedeparted from Athens and came to Corinth; and having found a certain Jew, by name Aquila, ofPontus by birth, lately come from Italy, and Priscilla his wife, because that Claudius had ordered
all Jews to depart from Rome, he came unto them, and because he was of the same craft he abodewith them, doing work: for they were tent-makers.”2549 This if they shall essay to interpret
allegorically, they show what proficients they be in ecclesiastical learning, on which they glory
that they bestow all their time. And, at the least, touching those sayings above recited, “Or I only
and Barnabas, have we not power to forbear working?” and, “We have not used this power;”2550
and, “When we might be burdensome to you, as Apostles of Christ,”2551 and, “Night and day working
that we might not burden any of you;”2552 and, “The Lord hath ordained for them which preach theGospel, of the Gospel to live; but I have used none of these things:”2553 and the rest of this kind,
let them either expound otherwise, or if by most clear shining light of truth they be put to it, letthem understand and obey; or if to obey they be either unwilling or unable, at least let them own
them which be willing, to be better, and them which be also able, to be happier men than they. For
it is one thing to plead infirmity of body, either truly alleged, or falsely pretended: but another soto be deceived and so to deceive, that it shall even be thought a proof of righteousness obtaining
more mightily in servants of God, if laziness have gotten power to reign among a set of ignorantmen. He, namely, who shows a true infirmity of body, must be humanely dealt withal; he who
pretends a false one, and cannot be convicted, must be left unto God: yet neither of them fixeth apernicious rule; because a good servant of God both serves his manifestly infirm brother; and, when
the other deceives, if he believes him because he does not think him a bad man, he does not imitate
him that he may be bad; and if he believe him not; he thinks him deceitful, and does, nevertheless,not imitate him. But when a man says, “This is true righteousness, that by doing no bodily work
we imitate the birds of the air, because he who shall do any such work, goes against the Gospel:”
whoso being infirm in mind hears and believes this, that person, not for that he so bestows all his
time, but for that he so erreth, must be mourned over.

23. Hence arises another question; for peradventure one may say, “What then? did the other
Apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas, sin, in that they did not work? Or did theyoccasion an hindrance to the Gospel, because blessed Paul saith that he had not used this power on
2549
2550
2551
2552
2553

Acts xviii. 1–3.
1 Cor. ix. 6–12.
1 Thess. ii. 6.
2 Thess. iii. 8.
1 Cor. ix. 14, 15.

670

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

purpose that he might not cause any hindrance to the Gospel of Christ? For if they sinned because
they wrought not, then had they not received power not to work, but to live instead by the Gospel.
But if they had received this power, by ordinance of the Lord, that they which preach the Gospelshould live by the Gospel; and by His saying, “The workman is worthy of his meat;” which power
Paul, laying out somewhat more,2554 would not use; then truly they sinned not. If they sinned not,they caused no hindrance. For it is not to be thought no sin to hinder the Gospel.2555 If this be so,“to us also,” say they, “it is free either to use or not to use this power.”516

24. This question I should briefly solve, if I should say, because I should also justly say, that
we must believe the Apostle. For he himself knew why in the Churches of the Gentiles it was notmeet that a venal Gospel were carried about; not finding fault with his fellow-apostles, but
distinguishing his own ministry; because they, without doubt by admonition of the Holy Ghost,had so distributed among them the provinces of evangelizing, that Paul and Barnabas should go
unto the Gentiles, and they unto the Circumcision.2556 But that he gave this precept to them who
had not the like power, those many things already said do make manifest. But these brethren ofours rashly arrogate unto themselves, so far as I can judge, that they have this kind of power. For
if they be evangelists, I confess, they have it: if ministers of the altar, dispensers of sacraments, ofcourse it is no arrogating to themselves, but a plain vindicating of a right.

25. If at the least they once had in this world wherewithal they might easily without handiworksustain this life, which property, when they were converted unto God, they disparted to the needy,
then must we both believe their infirmity, and bear with it. For usually such persons, having been,
not better brought up, as many think, but what is the truth, more languidly brought up, are not able
to bear the labor of bodily works. Such peradventure were many in Jerusalem. For it is also written,
that they sold their houses and lands, and laid the prices of them at the Apostles’ feet, that distribution
might be made to every one as he had need.2557 Because they were found, being near, and were
useful to the Gentiles, who, being afar off,2558 were thence called from the worship of idols, as it
is said, “Out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem,”2559 therefore
hath the Apostle called the Christians of the Gentiles their debtors: “their debtors,” saith he, “theyare:” and hath added the reason why, “For if in their spiritual things the Gentiles have communicated,
they ought also in carnal things to minister unto them.”2560 But now there come into this professionof the service of God, both persons from the condition of slaves, or also freed-men, or persons on
this account freed by their masters or about to be freed, likewise from the life of peasants, and from

2554
2555
2556
2557
2558
2559
2560

Amplius aliquid erogans.
1 Cor. ix. 12.
Acts xiii. 2; Gal. ii. 9.
Acts ii. 45; iv. 34.
Acts ii. 39.
Is. ii. 3.
Rom. xv. 27.

671

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

the exercise and plebeian labor of handicraftsmen, persons whose bringing up doubtless has been
all the better for them, the harder it has been: whom not to admit, is a heavy sin. For many of thatsort have turned out truly great men and meet to be imitated. For on this account also “hath God
chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty, and the foolish thingsof the world hath He chosen to confound them who are wise; and ignoble things of the world, andthings which are not, as though they were, that the things that are may be brought to nought: thatno flesh may glory before God.”2561 This pious and holy thought, accordingly, causeth that evensuch be admitted as bring no proof of a change of life for the better. For it doth not appear whether
they come of purpose for the service of God, or whether running away empty from a poor andlaborious life they want to be fed and clothed; yea, moreover, to be honored by them of whom they
were wont to be despised and trampled on. Such persons therefore because they cannot excuse
themselves from working by pleading infirmity of body, seeing they are convicted by the customof their past life, do therefore shelter themselves under the screen of an ill scholarship, that fromthe Gospel badly understood they should essay to pervert precepts apostolical: truly “fowls of theair,” but in lifting themselves on high through pride; and “grass of the field,” but in being carnallyminded.

26. That, namely, befalleth them which in undisciplined younger widows, the same Apostle
saith must be avoided: “And withal they learn to be idle; and not only idle, but also busy bodies
and full of words, speaking what they ought not.”2562 This very thing said he concerning evil women,
which we also in evil men do mourn and bewail, who against him, the very man in whose Epistles
we read these things, do, being idle and full of words, speak what they ought not. And if there be
any among them who did with that purpose come to the holy warfare,2563 that they may please Him
to whom they have proved themselves, these, when they be so vigorous in strength of body, andsoundness of health, that they are able not only to be taught, but also, agreeably unto the Apostle,
to work, do, by receiving of these men’s idle and corrupt discourses, which they are unable, by
reason of their unskilled rawness, to judge of, become changed by pestiferous contagion into thesame noisomeness: not only not imitating the obedience of saints which quietly work, and of othermonasteries2564 which in most wholesome discipline do live after the apostolic rule; but also insulting
better men than themselves, preaching up laziness as the keeper of the Gospel, accusing mercy as
the prevaricator therefrom. For a much more merciful work is it to the souls of the weak, to consult
for the fair fame of the servants of God, than it is to the bodies of men, to break bread to the hungry.
Wherefore I would to God that these, which want to let their hands lie idle, would altogether let
their tongues lie idle too. For they would not make so many willing to imitate them, if the examples
they set were not merely lazy ones, but mute withal.

2561
2562
2563
2564

1 Cor. i. 27–29.
1 Tim. v. 13.
2 Tim. ii. 4. [See R.V.]
Cassian. de Inst. x. 22.

672

NPNF (V1-03)

517

Philip Schaff

27. As it is, however, they, against the Apostle of Christ, recite a Gospel of Christ. For somarvellous are the works of the sluggards, hindered that they want to have that very thing by Gospel,
which the Apostle enjoined and did on purpose that the Gospel itself should not be hindered. And
yet, if from the very words of the Gospel we should compel them to live agreeably with their wayof understanding it, they will be the first to endeavor to persuade us how they are not to be understoodso as they do understand them. For certainly, they say that they therefore ought not to work, forthat the birds of the air neither sow nor reap, of which the Lord hath given us a similitude that weshould take no thought about such necessaries. Then why do they not attend to that which follows?
For it is not only said, that “they sow not, neither reap;”2565 but there is added, “nor gather in
apothecas.” Now “apothecæ” may be called either “barns,” or word for word, “repositories.” Then
why do these persons want to have idle hands and full repositories? Why do they lay by and keep
what they receive of the labors of others, that thereof may be every day somewhat forthcoming?
Why, in short, do they grind and cook? For the birds do not this. Or, if they find some whom they
may persuade to this work also, namely, to bring unto them day by day viands ready made; at least
their water they either fetch them from springs, or from cisterns and wells draw and set it by: thisthe fowls do not. But if so please them, let it be the study of good believers and most devoted
subjects of the Eternal King, to carry their service to His most valiant soldiers even to that length,that they shall not be forced even to fill a vessel of water for themselves, if now-a-days people havesurpassed even them which at that time were at Jerusalem, in a new grade of righteousness, steppingout beyond them. To them, namely, by reason of famine being imminent, and foretold by theProphets which were at that time,2566 good believers sent out of Greece supplies of corn; of which
I suppose they made them bread, or at least procured to be made; which thing the birds do not. But
if now-a-days these persons, as I began to say, have surpassed these in some grade of righteousness,and do altogether in things pertaining to the maintenance of this life, as do the birds; let them show
us men doing such service unto birds as they wish to be done unto them, except indeed birds caught
and caged because they are not trusted, lest if they fly they come not back: and yet these would
rather enjoy liberty and receive from the fields what is enough, than take their food by men laid
before them and made ready.

28. Here then shall these persons in their turn be in another more sublime degree of righteousness
outdone, by them who shall so order themselves, that every day they shall betake them into thefields as unto pasture, and at what time they shall find it, pick up their meal, and having allayed
their hunger, return. But plainly, on account of the keepers of the fields, how good were it, if theLord should deign to bestow wings also, that the servants of God being found in other men’s fields
should not be taken up as thieves, but as starlings be scared off. As things are, however, such an
one will do all he can to be like a bird, which the fowler shall not be able to catch. But, lo, let all
men allow this to the servants of God, that when they will they should go forth into their fields,
and thence depart fearless and refreshed: as it was ordered to the people Israel by the law, that none
should lay hands on a thief in his fields, unless he wanted to carry any thing away with him from

2565
2566

Matt. vi. 26.
Acts xi. 28–30.

673

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

thence;2567 for if he laid hands on nothing but what he had eaten, they would let him go away free
and unpunished. Whence also when the disciples of the Lord plucked the ears of corn, the Jews
calumniated them on the score of the sabbath2568 rather than of theft. But how is one to manage
about those times of year, at which food that can be taken on the spot is not found in the fields?
Whoso shall attempt to take home with him any thing which by cooking he may prepare for himself,
he shall, according to these persons’ understanding of it, be accosted from the Gospel with, “Putit down; for this the birds do not.”518

29. But let us grant this also, that the whole year round there may in the fields be found eitherof tree or of herbs or of any manner of roots, that which may be taken as food uncooked; or, at any
rate, let so great exercise of body be used, that the things which require cooking, may be taken even
raw without hurt, and people may even in winter weather, no matter how rough, go forth to theirfodder; and so it shall be the case that nothing be taken away to be prepared, nothing laid up forthe morrow. Yet will not those men be able to keep these rules, who for many days separating
themselves from sight of men, and allowing none access to them, do shut themselves up, living in
great earnestness of prayers. For these do use to shut up with themselves store of aliments, suchindeed as are most easily and cheaply had, yet still a store which may suffice for those days during
which they purpose that no man shall see them; which thing the birds do not. Now touching these
men’s exercising of themselves in so marvellous continency, seeing that they have leisure for the
doing of these things, and not in proud elation but in merciful sanctity do propose themselves formen’s imitation, I not only do not blame it, but know not how to praise it as much as it deserves.
And yet what are we to say of such men, according to these persons’ understanding of the evangelicalwords? Or haply the holier they be, the more unlike are they to the fowls? because unless they lay
by for themselves food for many days, to shut themselves up as they do they will not have strength?
Howbeit, to them as well as us is it said, “Take therefore no thought for the morrow.”2569

30. Wherefore, that I may briefly embrace the whole matter, let these persons, who from perverse
understanding of the Gospel labor to pervert apostolical precepts, either take no thought for themorrow, even as the birds of the air; or let them obey the Apostle, as dear children: yea rather, letthem do both, because both accord. For things contrary to his Lord, Paul the servant of Jesus Christ
would never advise.2570 This then we say openly to these persons; If the birds of the air ye in such
wise understand in the Gospel, that ye will not by working with your hands procure food andclothing; then neither must ye put any thing by for the morrow, like as the birds of the air do put
nothing by. But if to put somewhat by for the morrow, is possibly not against the Gospel where itis said, “Behold the birds of the air, for they neither sow nor reap nor gather into stores;”2571 then
2567
2568
2569
2570
2571

Deut. xxiii. 24, 25.
Matt. xii. 1, 2.
Matt. vi. 34.
Rom. i. 1.
Matt. vi. 26.

674

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

is it possibly not against the Gospel nor against similitude of the birds of the air, to maintain thislife of the flesh by labor of corporal working.

31. For if they be urged from the Gospel that they should put nothing by for the morrow, they
most rightly answer, “Why then had the Lord Himself a bag in which to put by the money which
was collected?2572 Why so long time beforehand, on occasion of impending famine, were supplies
of corn sent to the holy fathers?2573 Why did Apostles in such wise provide things necessary forthe indigence of saints lest there should be lack thereafter, that most blessed Paul should thus write
to the Corinthians in his Epistle: “Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given
order to the Churches of Galatia, even so do ye. Upon the first day of the week let every one of you
lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that the gatherings be not then first made when I
come. And when I come, whomsoever ye shall approve by your letters, them will I send to bringyour liberality unto Jerusalem. And if it be meet that I go also, they shall go with me?”2574 Theseand much else they most copiously and most truly bring forward. To whom we answer: Ye seethen, albeit the Lord said, “Take no thought for the morrow,” yet ye are not by these words
constrained to reserve nothing for the morrow: then why do ye say that by the same words ye areconstrained to do nothing? Why are the birds of the air not a pattern unto you for reserving nothing,and ye will have them to be a pattern for working nothing?

32. Some man will say: “What then does it profit a servant of God, that, having left the former
doings which he had in the world he is converted unto the spiritual life and warfare, if it still behove
him to do business as of a common workman?” As if truly it could be easily unfolded in words,
how greatly profiteth what the Lord, in answer to that rich man who was seeking counsel of laying
hold on eternal life, told him to do if he would fain be perfect: sell that he had, distribute all to theindigence of the poor, and follow Him?2575 Or who with so unimpeded course hath followed theLord, as he who saith, “Not in vain have I run, nor in vain labored?”2576 who yet both enjoined
these works, and did them. This unto us, being by so great authority taught and informed, ought tosuffice for a pattern of relinquishing our old resources, and of working with our hands. But we too,
aided by the Lord Himself, are able perchance in some sort to apprehend what it doth still profit
the servants of God to have left their former businesses, while they do yet thus work. For if a personfrom being rich is converted to this mode of life, and is hindered by no infirmity of body, are we
so without taste of the savor of Christ, as not to understand what an healing it is to the swelling of
the old pride, when, having pared off the superfluities by which erewhile the mind was deadly
inflamed, he refuses not, for the procuring of that little which is still naturally necessary for thispresent life, even a common workman’s lowly toil? If however he be from a poor estate converted
2572
2573
2574
2575
2576

John xii. 6.
Acts xi. 28–30.
1 Cor. xvi. 1–4.
Matt. xix. 21.
Phil. ii. 16.

675

NPNF (V1-03)

519

Philip Schaff

unto this manner of life, let him not account himself to be doing that which he was doing aforetime,
if foregoing the love of even increasing his ever so small matter of private substance, and now no
more seeking his own but the things which be Jesu Christ’s,2577 he hath translated himself into thecharity of a life in common, to live in fellowship of them who have one soul and one heart toGodward, so that no man saith that any thing is his own, but they have all things common.2578 For
if in this earthly commonwealth its chief men in the old times did, as their own men of letters arewont in their most glowing phrase to tell of them, to that degree prefer the common weal of thewhole people of their city and country to their own private affairs, that one of them,2579 for subduingof Africa honored with a triumph, would have had nothing to give to his daughter on her marriage,
unless by decree of the senate she had been dowered from the public treasury: of what mind ought
he to be towards his commonwealth, who is a citizen of that eternal City, the heavenly Jerusalem,but that even what with labor of his own hands he earns, he should have in common with his brother,and if the same lack any thing, supply it from the common store; saying with him whose precept
and example he hath followed, “As having nothing, and possessing all things?”2580

33. Wherefore even they which having relinquished or distributed their former, whether ample
or in any sort opulent, means, have chosen with pious and wholesome humility to be numberedamong the poor of Christ; if they be so strong in body and free from ecclesiastical occupations,(albeit, bringing as they do so great a proof of their purpose, and conferring from their former
havings, either very much, or not a little, upon the indigence of the same society, the common funditself and brotherly charity owes them in return a sustenance of their life,) yet if they too work with
their hands, that they may take away all excuse from lazy brethren who come from a more humble
condition in life, and therefore one more used to toil; therein they act far more mercifully than when
they divided all their goods to the needy. If indeed they be unwilling to do this, who can venture
to compel them? Yet then there ought to be found for them works in the monastery, which if more
free from bodily exercise, require to be looked unto with vigilant administration, that not even they
may eat their bread for nought, because it is now become the common property. Nor is it to be
regarded in what monasteries, or in what place, any man may have bestowed his former having
upon his indigent brethren. For all Christians make one commonwealth. And for that cause whoso
shall have, no matter in what place, expended upon Christians the things they needed, in what place
soever he also receiveth what himself hath need of, from Christ’s goods2581 he doth receive it.
Because in what place soever himself has given to such, who but Christ received it? But, as forthem who before they entered this holy society got their living by labor of the body, of which sort
are the more part of them which come into monasteries, because of mankind also the more part aresuch; if they will not work, neither let them eat. For not to that end are the rich, in this Christian
warfare, brought low unto piety, that the poor may be lifted up unto pride. As indeed it is by no

2577
2578
2579
2580
2581

Phil. ii. 21.
Acts iv. 32.
Scipio ap. Val. iv. 4.
2 Cor. vi. 10.
De Christi.

676

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

means seemly that in that mode of life where senators become men of toil, there common workmen
should become men of leisure; and whereunto there come, relinquishing their dainties, men who
had been masters of houses and lands, there common peasants should be dainty.

520

34. But then the Lord saith, “Be not solicitous for your life what ye shall eat, nor for the body,what ye shall put on.” Rightly: because He had said above, “Ye cannot serve God and mammon.”For he who preaches the Gospel with an eye to this, that he may have whereof he may eat andwhereof be clothed, accounts that he at the same time both serves God, because he preaches theGospel; and mammon, because he preaches with an eye to these necessaries: which thing the Lordsaith to be impossible. And hereby he who doth for the sake of these things preach the Gospel isconvicted that he serves not God but mammon; however God may use him, he knows not how, toother men’s advancement. For to this sentence doth He subjoin, saying “Therefore I say unto you,
Be not solicitous for your life what ye shall eat, nor for your body what ye shall put on:” not thatthey should not procure these things, as much as is enough for necessity, by what means theyhonestly may; but that they should not look to these things, and for the sake of these do whateverin preaching of the Gospel they are bidden to do. The intention, namely, for which a thing is done,
He calls the eye: of which a little above He was speaking with purpose to come down to this, andsaying, “The light of thy body is thine eye: if thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of
light; but if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness;” that is, such will be thy
deeds as shall be thine intention for which thou doest them. For indeed that He might come to this,He had before given precept concerning alms, saying, “Lay not up for yourselves treasures on earth
where rust and moth doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal. But lay up foryourselves treasure in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do notbreak through nor steal. For where thy treasure shall be, there will thy heart be also.”2582 Thereupon
He subjoined, “The light of thy body is thine eye:” that they, to wit, which do alms, do them notwith that intention that they should either wish to please men, or seek to have repayment on earthof the alms they do. Whence the Apostle, giving charge to Timothy for warning of rich men, “Let
them,” says he “readily give, communicate, treasure up for themselves a good foundation for thetime to come, that they may lay hold on the true life.”2583 Since then the Lord hath to the future life
directed the eye of them which do alms, and to an heavenly reward, in order that the deeds themselves
may be full of light when the eye shall be simple, (for of that last retribution is meant that which
He says in another place, “He that receiveth you receiveth Me, and he that receiveth Me receiveth
Him that sent Me. He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet shall receive a prophet’s
reward; and he that receiveth a righteous man in the name of a righteous man shall receive a righteous
man’s reward. And whosoever shall give to drink unto one of these little ones a cup of cold water
only in the name of a disciple, verily I say unto you, his reward shall not be lost,”2584) lest haply
after he had reproved the eye2585 of them which bestow things needful upon the indigent both

2582
2583
2584
2585

Matt. vi. 19–22.
1 Tim. vi. 18, 19.
Matt. x. 40–42.
Correpto oculo.

677

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

prophets and just men and disciples of the Lord, the eye of the persons to whom these things weredone should become depraved, so that for the sake of receiving these things they should wish toserve Christ as His soldiers: “No man,” saith He, “can serve two masters.” And a little after: “Yecannot,” saith He, “serve God and mammon.”2586 And straightway He hath added, “Therefore I say
unto you, be not solicitous for your life what ye shall eat, nor for the body what ye shall put on.”521

35. And that which follows concerning birds of the air and lilies of the field, He saith to thisend, that no man may think that God careth not for the needs of His servants; when His most wise
Providence reacheth unto these in creating and governing those. For it must not be deemed that it
is not He that feeds and clothes them also which work with their hands. But lest they turn aside theChristian service of warfare unto their purpose of getting these things, the Lord in this premonisheth
His servants that in this ministry which is due to His Sacrament, we should take thought, not forthese, but for His kingdom and righteousness: and all these things shall be added unto us, whether
working by our hands, or whether by infirmity of body hindered from working, or whether boundby such occupation of our very warfare that we are able to do nothing else. For neither does it
follow that because the Lord hath said, “Call upon Me in the day of tribulation and I will deliver
thee, and thou shalt glorify Me,”2587 therefore the Apostle ought not to have fled, and to be let downby the wall in a basket that he might escape the hands of a pursuer,2588 but should rather have waited
to be taken, that, like the three children from the midst of the fires, the Lord might deliver him. Or
for this reason ought not the Lord either to have said this, “If they shall persecute you in one city,
flee ye to another,”2589 namely, because He hath said, “If ye shall ask of the Father any thing in My
name, He will give it you.”2590 As then whoever to Christ’s disciples when fleeing from persecution
should cast up this sort of question, why they did not rather stand, and by calling upon God obtainthrough His marvellous works in such wise deliverance, as Daniel from the lions, as Peter from his
chains, they would answer that they ought not to tempt God, but He would then and then only do
the like for them, if it should please Him, when they had nothing that they could do; but when He
put flight in their power, although they were thereby delivered, yet were they not delivered but by
Him: so likewise to servants of God having time and strength after the example and precept of theApostle to get their living by their own hands, if any from the Gospel shall raise a question
concerning the birds of the air, which sow not nor reap nor gather into stores, and concerning liliesof the field that they toil not neither do they spin; they will easily answer, “If we also, by reasonof any either infirmity or occupation cannot work, He will so feed and clothe us, as He doth thebirds and the lilies, which do no work of this kind: but when we are able, we ought not to tempt
our God; because this very ability of ours, we have it by His gift, and in living by it, we live by His
bounty Who hath bounteously bestowed upon us that we should have this ability. And therefore
concerning these necessary things we are not solicitous; because when we are able to do these

2586
2587
2588
2589
2590

Matt. vi. 24, 25, 34.
Ps. l. 15.
Acts ix. 25; 2 Cor. xi. 33.
Matt. x. 23.
John xvi. 23.

678

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

things, He by Whom mankind are fed and clothed doth feed and clothe us: but when we are notable to do these things, He feeds and clothes us by Whom the birds are fed and the lilies clothed,because we are more worth than they. Wherefore in this our warfare, neither for the morrow takewe thought: because not for the sake of these temporal things, whereunto pertaineth To-morrow,
but for the sake of those eternal things, where it is evermore To-day, have we proved ourselves
unto Him, that, entangled in no secular business, we may please Him.2591

36. Since these things are so, suffer me awhile, holy brother, (for the Lord giveth me throughthee great boldness,) to address these same our sons and brethren whom I know with what love
thou together with us dost travail in birth withal, until the Apostolic discipline be formed in them.
O servants of God, soldiers of Christ, is it thus ye dissemble the plottings of our most crafty foe,
who fearing your good fame, that so goodly odor of Christ, lest good souls should say, “We will
run after the odor of thine ointments,”2592 and so should escape his snares, and in every way desiring
to obscure it with his own stenches, hath dispersed on every side so many hypocrites under the garbof monks, strolling about the provinces, no where sent, no where fixed, no where standing, nowhere sitting. Some hawking about limbs of martyrs, if indeed of martyrs; others magnifying theirfringes and phylacteries;2593 others with a lying story, how they have heard say that their parents
or kinsmen are alive in this or that country, and therefore be they on their way to them: and all
asking, all exacting, either the costs of their lucrative want, or the price of their pretended sanctity.
And in the meanwhile wheresoever they be found out in their evil deeds, or in whatever way they
become notorious, under the general name of monks, your purpose is blasphemed, a purpose sogood, so holy, that in Christ’s name we desire it, as through other lands so through all Africa, togrow and flourish. Then are ye not inflamed with godly jealousy? Does not your heart wax hot
within you, and in your meditation a fire kindle,2594 that these men’s evil works ye should pursue
with good works, that ye should cut off from them occasion of a foul trafficking, by which yourestimation is hurt, and a stumbling-block put before the weak? Have mercy then and havecompassion, and show to mankind that ye are not seeking in ease a ready subsistence, but throughthe strait and narrow way of this purpose, are seeking the kingdom of God. Ye have the same cause
which the Apostle had, to cut off occasion from them which seek occasion, that they who by theirstinks are suffocated, by your good odor may be refreshed.

37. We are not binding heavy burdens and laying them upon your shoulders, while we with afinger will not touch them. Seek out, and acknowledge the labor of our occupations, and in someof us the infirmities of our bodies also, and in the Churches which we serve, that custom now grownup, that they do not suffer us to have time ourselves for those works to which we exhort you. For
though we might say, “Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? Who planteth a vineyard,
2591
2592
2593
2594

2 Tim. ii. 4.
Cant. i. 3, 4.
Reg. S. Ben. c. l. Cass. Coll. xviii. 7.
Ps. xxxix. 3. [See R.V.]

679

NPNF (V1-03)

522

Philip Schaff

and eateth not of the fruit thereof? Who feedeth a flock, and partaketh not of the milk of theflock?”2595 yet I call our Lord Jesus, in Whose name I fearlessly say these things, for a witness upon
my soul, that so far as it concerns mine own convenience, I would much rather every day at certain
hours, as much as is appointed by rule in well-governed monasteries, do some work with my hands,
and have the remaining hours free for reading and praying, or some work pertaining to Divine
Letters,2596 than have to hear these most annoying perplexities of other men’s causes about secularmatters, which we must either by adjudication bring to an end, or by intervention cut short. Whichtroubles the same Apostle hath fastened us withal, (not by his own sentence, but by His who spake
through him,) while yet we do not read that he had to put up with them himself: indeed his was not
the sort of work to admit of it, while running to and fro in his Apostleship. Nor hath he said, “Ifthen ye have secular law-suits, bring them before us;” or, “Appoint us to judge them;” but, “Themwhich are contemptible in the Church, these,” saith he, “put ye in place. To your abashment I say
it: is it so that there is not among you any wise man who can judge between his brother, but brothergoeth to law with brother, and that before infidels?”2597 So then wise believers and saints, having
their stated abode in the different places, not those who were running hither and hither on thebusiness of the Gospel, were the persons whom he willed to be charged with examination of suchaffairs. Whence it is no where written of him that he on any occasion gave up his time to suchmatters; from which we are not able to excuse ourselves, even though we be contemptible; because
he willed even such to be put in place, in case there were lack of wise men, rather than have theaffairs of Christians to be brought into the public courts. Which labor, however, we not without
consolation of the Lord take upon us, for hope of eternal life, that we may bring forth fruit withpatience. For we are servants unto His Church, and most of all to the weaker members, whatsoever
members we in the same body may chance to be. I pass by other innumerable ecclesiastical cares,
which perchance no man credits but he who hath experienced the same. Therefore we do not bindheavy burdens and place them on your shoulders, while we ourselves touch them not so much aswith a finger; since indeed if with safety to our office we might, (He seeth it, Who tries our hearts!)
we would rather do these things which we exhort you to do, than the things which we ourselves
are forced to do. True it is, to all both us and you, while according to our degree and office welabor, both the way is strait in labor and toil; and yet, while we rejoice in hope, His yoke is easyand His burden light, Who hath called us unto rest, Who passed forth before us from the vale oftears, where not Himself either was without pressure of griefs. If ye be our brethren, if our sons, if
we be your fellow-servants, or rather in Christ your servants, hear what we admonish, acknowledge
what we enjoin, take what we dispense. But if we be Pharisees, binding heavy burdens and laying
them on your shoulders;2598 yet do ye the things we say, even though ye disapprove the things we
do. But to us it is a very small thing that we be judged by you,2599 or of any human assize.2600 Of
how near and dear2601 charity is our care on your behalf, let Him look into it Who hath given what

2595
2596
2597
2598
2599
2600
2601

1 Cor. ix. 7.
Reg. S. Ben. c. xlviii.
1 Cor. vi. 4–6.
Matt. xxiii. 3.
1 Cor. iv. 3.
Ab humano die.
Germana.

680

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

we may offer to be looked into by His eyes. In fine: think what ye will of us: Paul the Apostle
enjoins and beseeches you in the Lord, that with silence, that is, quietly and obediently ordered, ye
do work and eat your own bread.2602 Of him, as I suppose, ye believe no evil, and He who by him
doth speak, on Him have ye believed.

38. These things, my brother Aurelius, most dear unto me, and in the bowels of Christ to bevenerated, so far as He hath bestowed on me the ability Who through thee commanded me to doit, touching work of Monks, I have not delayed to write; making this my chief care, lest goodbrethren obeying apostolic precepts, should by lazy and disobedient be called even prevaricatorsfrom the Gospel: that they which work not, may at the least account them which do work to bebetter than themselves without doubt. But who can bear that contumacious persons resisting mostwholesome admonitions of the Apostle, should, not as weaker brethren be borne withal, but evenbe preached up as holier men; insomuch that monasteries founded on sounder doctrine should beby this double enticement corrupted, the dissolute license of vacation from labor, and the falsename of sanctity? Let it be known then to the rest, our brethren and sons, who are accustomed tofavor such men, and through ignorance to defend this kind of presumption, that they need themselves
most chiefly to be corrected, in order that those may be corrected, nor that they become “weary inwell-doing.”2603 Truly, in that they do promptly and with alacrity minister unto the servants of God
the things they need, not only we blame them not, but we most cordially embrace them: only letthem not with perverse mercy more hurt these men’s future life, than to their present life they render
aid.

523

39. For there is less sin, if people do not praise the sinner in the desires of his soul, and speak
good of him who practiseth iniquities.2604 Now what is more an iniquity than to wish to be obeyed
by inferiors, and to refuse to obey superiors? The Apostle, I mean, not us: insomuch that they even
let their hair grow long: a matter, of which he would have no disputing at all, saying, “If any chooseth
to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the Church of God.2605 Now this I command;”2606
which gives us to understand that it is not cleverness of reasoning that we are to look for, butauthority of one giving command to attend unto. For whereunto, I pray thee, pertaineth this also,that people so openly against the Apostle’s precepts wear long hair? Is it that there must be in such
sort vacation, that not even the barbers are to work? Or, because they say that they imitate theGospel birds, do they fear to be, as it were, plucked, lest they be not able to fly? I shrink from saying
more against this fault, out of respect for certain long-haired brethren, in whom, except this, wefind much, and well-nigh every thing, to venerate. But the more we love them in Christ, the more

2602

2 Thess. iii. 12.
2 Thess. iii. 13.
2604
Ps. x. 3 [ix. 24].
2605
1 Cor. xi. 16, 17.
2606
E.V. follows text rec. τοῦτο δš παραγγελλων οὐκ ἐπαινῶ, but good mss. and Versions besides the Ital. and Vulg, haveτοῦτο δš παραγγελλω οὐκ ἐπαινῶν, hoc autem prœcipio non laudans.
2603

681

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

solicitously do we admonish them. Nor are we afraid indeed, lest their humility reject our admonition;seeing that we also desire to be admonished by such as they, wherever we chance to stumble or to
go aside. This then we admonish so holy men, not to be moved by foolish quibblings of vain persons,and imitate in this perversity them whom in all else they are far from resembling. For those persons,hawking about a venal hypocrisy, fear lest shorn sanctity be held cheaper than long-haired; because
forsooth he who sees them shall call to mind those ancients whom we read of, Samuel and the rest
who did not cut off their hair.2607 And they do not consider what is the difference between thatprophetic veil, and this unveiling which is in the Gospel, of which the Apostle saith, “When thoushall go over2608 unto Christ, the veil shall be taken away.”2609 That, namely, which was signified
in the veil interposed between the face of Moses and the beholding of the people Israel,2610 thatsame was also signified in those times by the long hair of the Saints. For the same Apostle saith,that long hair is also instead of a veil: by whose authority these men are hard pressed. Seeing hesaith openly, “If a man wear long hair, it is a disgrace to him.” “The very disgrace,” say they, “wetake upon us, for desert of our sins:” holding out a screen of simulated humility, to the end that
under cover of it they may carry on their trade of self-importance.2611 Just as if the Apostle wereteaching pride when he says, “Every man praying or prophesying with veiled head shameth his
head;”2612 and, “A man ought not to veil his head, forsomuch as he is the image and glory ofGod.”2613 Consequently he who says, “Ought not,” knows not perchance how to teach humility!
However, if this same disgrace in time of the Gospel, which was a thing of a holy meaning2614 intime of Prophecy, be by these people courted as matter of humility, then let them be shorn, and veil
their head with haircloth. Only then there will be none of that attracting of people’s eyes in which
they trade,2615 because Samson was veiled not with haircloth, but with his long hair.

40. And then that further device of theirs, (if words can express it), how painfully ridiculous isit, which they have invented for defense of their long locks! “A man,” say they, “the Apostle hathforbidden to have long hair: but then they who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of
God are no longer men.” O dotage unparalleled! Well may the person who says this arm himself
against Holy Scripture’s most manifest proclamations, with counsel of outrageous impiety, andpersevere in a tortuous path, and essay to bring in a pestiferous doctrine that not “Blessed is theman who hath not walked in the counsel of the ungodly, and in the way of sinners hath not stood,
and in the chair of noisome wickedness2616 hath not sat.”2617 For if he would meditate in God’s law

2607
2608
2609
2610
2611
2612
2613
2614
2615
2616
2617

Numb. vi. 5.
Cum transieris. Gr. ἡνίκα δ᾽ ‰ν ἐπιστρ™ψη, sc. ὁ ᾽Ισραὴλ Chrys. Theod. or τὶς Origen.
2 Cor. iii. 16.
Exod. xxxiv. 33.
Venalem typhum.
1 Cor. xi. 4.
1 Cor. xi. 14.
Sacramentum.
Species illa venalis.
Pestilentiæ.
Ps. i. 1.

682

NPNF (V1-03)

524

Philip Schaff

day and night, there he should find the Apostle Paul himself, who assuredly professing highest
chastity saith, “I would that all men were even as I:” and yet shows himself a man, not only in sobeing, but also in so speaking. For he saith, “When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understoodas a child, I thought as a child; when I became a man, I put away childish things.”2618 But why
should I mention the Apostle, when concerning our Lord and Saviour Himself they know not what
they think who say these things. For of Whom but Him is it said, “Until we come all to unity offaith and to knowledge of the Son of God, to the Perfect Man, to the measure of the age of thefullness of Christ; that we be no longer babes, tossed and carried about with every wind of doctrine,
in sleight of men, in cunning craftiness for machination of error.”2619 With which sleight these
persons deceive ignorant people, with which cunning craftiness and machinations of the enemy
both they themselves are whirled round, and in their whirling essay to make the minds of the weak
which cohere unto them so (in a manner) to spin round with them, that they also may not know
where they are. For they have heard or read that which is written, “Whosoever of you have been
baptized in Christ, have put on Christ: where is no Jew nor Greek; no bond nor free; no male nor
female.”2620 And they do not understand that it is in reference to concupiscence of carnal sex2621
that this is said, because in the inner man, wherein we are renewed in newness of our mind, no sexof this kind exists. Then let them not deny themselves to be men, just because in respect of theirmasculine sex they work not. For wedded Christians also who do this work, are of course not
Christians on the score of that which they have in common with the rest who are not Christians andwith the very cattle. For that is one thing that is either to infirmity conceded or to mortal propagation
paid as a debt, but another that which for the laying hold of incorrupt and eternal life is by faithfulprofession signified. That then which concerning not veiling of the head is enjoined to men, in the
body indeed it is set forth in a figure, but that it is enacted in the mind, wherein is the image andglory of God, the words themselves do indicate: “A man indeed,” it saith, “ought not to veil his
head, forsomuch as he is the image and glory of God.” For where this image is, he doth himself
declare, where he saith, “Lie not one to another; but stripping off the old man with his deeds, put
ye on the new, which is renewed to the acknowledging of God, according to the image of Him who
created him.”2622 Who can doubt that this renewing takes place in the mind? But and if any doubt,
let him hear a more open sentence. For, giving the same admonition, he thus saith in another place:“As is the truth in Jesus, that ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, him whichis corrupt according to the lust of deception; but be ye renewed in the spirit of your mind, and put
on the new man, him which after God is created.”2623 What then? Have women not this renewal ofmind in which is the image of God? Who would say this? But in the sex of their body they do notsignify this; therefore they are bidden to be veiled. The part, namely, which they signify in the very
fact of their being women, is that which may be called the concupiscential part, over which themind2624 bears rule, itself also subjected to its God, when life is most rightly and orderly conducted.

2618
2619
2620
2621
2622
2623
2624

1 Cor. xiii. 11. [See R.V.]
Eph. iv. 13, 14.
Gal. iii. 27, 28. [See R.V.]
2 Cor. iv. 16.
Col. iii. 9, 10.
Eph. iv. 21–24. [See R.V.]
Mens.

683

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

What, therefore, in a single individual human being is the mind and the concupiscence, (that ruling,
this ruled; that lord, this subject,) the same in two human beings, man and woman, is in regard of
the sex of the body exhibited in a figure. Of which sacred import2625 the Apostle speaks when hesays, that the man ought not to be veiled, the women ought. For the mind doth the more gloriously
advance to higher things, the more diligently the concupiscence is curbed from lower things; until
the whole man together with even this now mortal and frail body in the last resurrection be clothedwith incorruption and immortality, and death be swallowed up in victory.2626

41. Wherefore, they which will not do right things, let them give over at least to teach wrong
things. Howbeit they be others whom in this speech we reprove: but as for those who by this one
fault, of letting their hair contrary to apostolic precept grow long, offend and trouble the Church,
because when some being unwilling to think of them any thing amiss are forced to twist the manifest
words of the Apostle into a wrong meaning, others choose to defend the sound understanding of
the Scriptures rather than fawn upon any men, there arise between the weaker and the stronger
brethren most bitter and perilous contentions: which things perchance if they knew, these would
correct without hesitation this also, in whom we admire and love all else. Those then we not reprove,
but ask and solemnly beseech by the Godhead and the Manhood of Christ and by the charity of theHoly Ghost, that they no more put this stumbling-block before the weak for whom Christ died, andaggravate the grief and torment of our heart when we bethink us how much more readily evil men
can imitate this evil thing for deceiving of mankind, when they see this in them whom on the scoreof other so great good we with deserved offices of Christian love do honor. If however, after thisadmonition, or rather this solemn entreaty of ours, they shall think fit to persevere in the same, weshall do nothing else but only grieve and mourn. This let them know; it is enough. If they be servantsof God, they have pity. If they have not pity, I will not say any thing worse. All these things,
therefore, in the which peradventure I have been more loquacious than the occupations both of theeand of me could wish, if thou approve the same, make thou to be known to our brethren and sons,on whose behalf thou hast deigned to put this burden upon me: but if aught seem to thee meet tobe withdrawn or amended, by reply of your Blessedness I shall know the same.

527

On Patience[De Patientia.]
Translated by Rev. H. Browne, M.A.

2625
2626

Sacramentum.
1 Cor. xv. 54.

684

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge; Late Principal of the Diocesan College, Chichester.
Erasmus infers from the style and language of this piece, that it is not S. Augustin’s, putting
it in the same category with the treatises On Continence, On substance of Charity, On Faith ofthings invisible. The Benedictine editors acknowledge that it has peculiarities of style which
are calculated to move suspicion; (especially the studied assonances and rhyming endings, e.g.
“cautior fuit iste in doloribus quam ille in nemoribus . . . consensit ille oblectamentis, non cessit
ille tormentis,” chap. 12.); yet they feel themselves bound to retain it among the genuine works
by Augustin’s own testimony, who mentions both this piece and that On Continence in his
Epistle to Darius, 231. chap. 7. [Vol. I. 584.] That it is not named in the Retractations isaccounted for by the circumstance that it appears to have been delivered as a sermon, see chap.
1. and 3, and Augustin did not live to fulfill his intention of composing a further book ofretractations on review of his popular discourses and letters. Ep. 224. chap. 2. In point of matterand doctrine this treatise has nothing contrary to or not in harmony with S. Augustin’s known
doctrine and sentiments.

1. That virtue of the mind which is called Patience, is so great a gift of God, that even in Him
who bestoweth the same upon us, that, whereby He waiteth for evil men that they may amend, isset forth by the name of Patience, [or long-suffering.] So, although in God there can be no
suffering,2627 and “patience” hath its name a patiendo, from suffering, yet a patient God we not
only faithfully believe, but also wholesomely confess. But the patience of God, of what kind andhow great it is, His, Whom we say to be impassible,2628 yet not impatient, nay even most patient,in words to unfold this who can be able? Ineffable is therefore that patience, as is His jealousy, as
His wrath, and whatever there is like to these. For if we conceive of these as they be in us, in Him
are there none. We, namely, can feel none of these without molestation: but be it far from us tosurmise that the impassible nature of God is liable to any molestation. But like as He is jealous
without any darkening of spirit,2629 wroth without any perturbation, pitiful without any pain, repenteth
Him without any wrongness in Him to be set right; so is He patient without aught of passion. Now
therefore as concerning human patience, which we are able to conceive and beholden to have, ofwhat sort it is, I will, as God granteth and the brevity of the present discourse alloweth, essay to
set forth.

2. The patience of man, which is right and laudable and worthy of the name of virtue, isunderstood to be that by which we tolerate evil things with an even mind, that we may not with amind uneven desert good things, through which we may arrive at better. Wherefore the impatient,while they will not suffer ills, effect not a deliverance from ills, but only the suffering of heavier

2627
2628
2629

Pati.
Nihil patientem.
Livore.

685

NPNF (V1-03)

528

Philip Schaff

ills. Whereas the patient who choose rather by not committing to bear, than by not bearing tocommit, evil, both make lighter what through patience they suffer, and also escape worse ills inwhich through impatience they would be sunk. But those good things which are great and eternal
they lose not, while to the evils which be temporal and brief they yield not: because “the sufferingsof this present time are not worthy to be compared,” as the Apostle says, “with the future glory thatshall be revealed in us.”2630 And again he says, “This our temporal and light tribulation doth ininconceivable manner work for us an eternal weight of glory.”2631

3. Look we then, beloved, what hardships in labors and sorrows men endure, for things which
they viciously love, and by how much they think to be made by them more happy, by so much
more unhappily covet. How much for false riches, how much for vain honors, how much for
affections of games and shows, is of exceeding peril and trouble most patiently borne! We see men
hankering after money, glory, lasciviousness, how, that they may arrive at their desires, and having
gotten not lose them, they endure sun, rain, icy cold, waves, and most stormy tempests, theroughnesses and uncertainties of wars, the strokes of huge blows, and dreadful wounds, not of
inevitable necessity but of culpable will. But these madnesses are thought, in a manner, permitted.
Thus avarice, ambition, luxury, and the delights of all sorts of games and shows, unless for themsome wicked deed be committed or outrage which is prohibited by human laws, are accounted topertain to innocence: nay moreover, the man who without wrong to any shall, whether for getting
or increasing of money, whether for obtaining or keeping of honors, whether in contending in thematch, or in hunting, or in exhibiting with applause some theatrical spectacle, have borne greatlabors and pains, it is not enough that through popular vanity he is checked by no reproofs, but heis moreover extolled with praises: “Because,” as it is written, “the sinner is praised in the desiresof his soul.”2632 For the force of desires makes endurance of labors and pains: and no man save forthat which he enjoyeth, freely takes on him to bear that which annoyeth. But these lusts, as I said,
for the fulfilling of which they which are on fire with them most patiently endure much hardshipand bitterness, are accounted to be permitted, and allowed by laws.

4. Nay more; for is it not so that even for open wickednesses, not to punish but to perpetratethem, men put up with many most grievous troubles? Do not authors of secular letters tell of acertain right noble parricide of his country, that hunger, thirst, cold, all these he was able to endure,and his body was patient of lack of food and warmth and sleep to a degree surpassing belief?2633
Why speak of highway robbers, all of whom while they lie in wait for travellers endure wholenights without sleep, and that they may catch, as they pass by, men who have no thought of harm,
will, no matter how foul the weather, plant in one spot their mind and body, which are full of
thoughts of harm? Nay it is said that some of them are wont to torture one another by turns, to that
2630
2631
2632
2633

Rom. viii. 18.
2 Cor. iv. 17.
Ps. x. 3.
Sallust Catilin, c. v.

686

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

degree that this practice and training against pains is not a whit short of pains. For, not so muchperchance are they excruciated by the Judge, that through smart of pain the truth may be got at, as
they are by their own comrades, that through patience of pain truth may not be betrayed. And yet
in all these the patience is rather to be wondered at than praised: nay neither wondered at nor praised,seeing it is no patience; but we must wonder at the hardness, deny the patience: for there is nothing
in this rightly to be praised, nothing usefully to be imitated; and thou wilt rightly judge the mind
to be all the more worthy of greater punishment, the more it yields up to vices the instruments ofvirtues. Patience is companion of wisdom, not handmaid of concupiscence: patience is the friendof a good conscience, not the foe of innocence.

5. When therefore thou shall see any man suffer aught patiently, do not straightway praise it as
patience; for this is only shown by the cause of suffering. When it is a good cause, then is it true
patience: when that is not polluted by lust, then is this distinguished from falsity. But when that isplaced in crime, then is this much misplaced in name. For not just as all who know are partakers
of knowledge, just so are all who suffer partakers of patience: but they which rightly use thesuffering, these in verity of patience are praised, these with the prize of patience are crowned.

529

6. But yet, seeing that for lusts’ sake, or even wickednesses, seeing, in a word, that for this
temporal life and weal men do wonderfully bear the brunt of many horrible sufferings, they muchadmonish us how great things ought to be borne for the sake of a good life, that it may also hereafter
be eternal life, and without any bound of time, without waste or loss of any advantage, in true
felicity secure. The Lord saith, “In your patience ye shall possess your souls:”2634 He saith not, yourfarms, your praises, your luxuries; but, “your souls.” If then the soul endures so great sufferings
that it may possess that whereby it may be lost, how great ought it to bear that it may not be lost?
And then, to mention a thing not culpable, if it bear so great sufferings for saving of the flesh under
the hands of chirurgeons cutting or burning the same, how great ought it to bear for saving of itself
under the fury of any soever enemies? Seeing that leeches, that the body may not die, do by pains
consult for the body’s good; but enemies by threatening the body with pains and death, would urge
us on to the slaying of soul and body in hell.

7. Though indeed the welfare even of the body is then more providently consulted for if its
temporal life and welfare be disregarded for righteousness’ sake, and its pain or death most patiently
for righteousness’ sake endured. Since it is of the body’s redemption which is to be in the end, that
the Apostle speaks, where he says, “Even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting the adoptionof sons, the redemption of our body.”2635 Then he subjoins, “For in hope are we saved. But hopewhich is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he also hope for? But if what we see not

2634
2635

Luke xxi. 19.
Rom. viii. 23–25.

687

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

we hope for, we do by patience wait for it.” When therefore any ills do torture us indeed, yet not
extort from us ill works, not only is the soul possessed through patience; but even when throughpatience the body itself for a time is afflicted or lost, it is unto eternal stability and salvation resumed,
and hath through grief and death an inviolable health and happy immortality laid up for itself.
Whence the Lord Jesus exhorting his Martyrs to patience, hath promised of the very body a future
perfect entireness, without loss, I say not of any limb, but of a single hair. “Verily I say unto you,”saith He, “a hair of your head shall not perish.”2636 That so, because, as the Apostle says, “no man
ever hated his own flesh,”2637 a faithful man may more by patience than by impatience take vigilant
care for the state of his flesh, and find amends for its present losses, how great soever they may be,in the inestimable gain of future incorruption.

8. But although patience be a virtue of the mind, yet partly the mind exercises it in the mind
itself, partly in the body. In itself it exercises patience, when, the body remaining unhurt anduntouched, the mind is goaded by any adversities or filthinesses of things or words, to do or to saysomething that is not expedient or not becoming, and patiently bears all evils that it may not itself
commit any evil in work or word. By this patience we bear, even while we be sound in body, thatin the midst of the offenses of this world our blessedness is deferred: of which is said what I cited
a little before, “If what we see not we hope for, we do by patience wait for it.” By this patience,holy David bore the revilings of a railer,2638 and, when he might easily have avenged himself, notonly did it not, but even refrained another who was vexed and moved for him; and more put forth
his kingly power by prohibiting than by exercising vengeance. Nor at that time was his body afflictedwith any disease or wound, but there was an acknowledging of a time of humility, and a bearingof the will of God, for the sake of which there was a drinking of the bitterness of contumely withmost patient mind. This patience the Lord taught, when, the servants being moved at the mixing
in of the tares and wishing to gather them up, He said that the householder answered, “Leave bothto grow until the harvest.”2639 That, namely, must be patience put up with, which must not be inhaste put away. Of this patience Himself afforded and showed an example, when, before the passionof His Body, He so bore with His disciple Judas, that ere He pointed him out as the traitor, He
endured him as a thief;2640 and before experience of bonds and cross and death, did, to those lips
so full of guile, not deny the kiss of peace.2641 All these, and whatever else there be, which it were
tedious to rehearse, belong to that manner of patience, by which the mind doth, not its own sins
but any evils so ever from without, patiently endure in itself, while the body remains altogether
unhurt. But the other manner of patience is that by which the same mind bears any troubles andgrievances whatsoever in the sufferings of the body; not as do foolish or wicked men for the sakeof getting vain things or perpetrating crimes; but as is defined by the Lord, “for righteousness’

2636
2637
2638
2639
2640
2641

Luke xxi. 18.
Eph. v. 29.
2 Sam. xvi. 5–12.
Matt. xiii. 30.
John xii. 6; xiii. 29.
Matt. xxvi. 49.

688

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

sake.”2642 In both kinds, the holy Martyrs contended. For both with scornful reproofs of the ungodly
were they filled, where, the body remaining intact, the mind hath its own (as it were) blows andwounds, and bears these unbroken: and in their bodies they were bound, imprisoned, vexed withhunger and thirst, tortured, gashed, torn asunder, burned, butchered; and with piety immovable
submitted unto God their mind, while they were suffering in the flesh all that exquisite cruelty
could devise in its mind.
530

9. It is indeed a greater fight of patience, when it is not a visible enemy that by persecution andrage would urge us into crime which enemy may openly and in broad day be by not consenting
overcome; but the devil himself, (he who doth likewise by means of the children of infidelity, as
by his vessels, persecute the children of light) doth by himself hiddenly attack us, by his rage putting
us on to do or say something against God. As such had holy Job experience of him, by both
temptations vexed, but in both through steadfast strength of patience and arms of piety unconquered.
For first, his body being left unhurt, he lost all that he had, in order that the mind, before excruciationof the flesh, might through withdrawal of the things which men are wont to prize highly, be broken,
and he might say something against God upon loss of the things for the sake of which he wasthought to worship Him. He was smitten also with sudden bereavement of all his sons so that whom
he had begotten one by one he should lose all at once, as though their numerousness had been not
for the adorning of his felicity, but for the increasing of his calamity. But where, having enduredthese things, he remained immovable in his God, he cleaved to His will, Whom it was not possible
to lose but by his own will; and in place of the things he had lost he held Him who took them away,
in Whom he should find what should never be lost. For He that took them away was not that enemy
who had will of hurting, but He who had given to that enemy the power of hurting. The enemy next
attacked also the body, and now not those things which were in the man from without, but the manhimself, in whatever part he could, he smote. From the head to the feet were burning pains, werecrawling worms, were running sores; still in the rotting body the mind remained entire, and horrid
as were the tortures of the consuming flesh, with inviolate piety and uncorrupted patience it endured
them all. There stood the wife, and instead of giving her husband any help, was suggesting blasphemy
against God. For we are not to think that the devil, in leaving her when he took away the sons, went
to work as one unskilled in mischief: rather, how necessary she was to the tempter, he had alreadylearned in Eve. But now he had not found a second Adam whom he might take by means of awoman. More cautious was Job in his hours of sadness, than Adam in his bowers of gladness, theone was overcome in the midst of pleasant things, the other overcame in the midst of pains; theone consented to that which seemed delightsome, this other quailed not in torments mostaffrightsome. There stood his friends too, not to console him in his evils, but to suspect evil in him.
For while he suffered so great sorrows, they believed him not innocent, nor did their tongue forbear
to say that which his conscience had not to say; that so amid ruthless tortures of the body, his mind
also might be beaten with truthless reproaches. But he, bearing in his flesh his own pains, in hisheart others’ errors, reproved his wife for her folly, taught his friends wisdom, preserved patiencein each and all.
2642

Matt. v. 10.

689

NPNF (V1-03)

531

Philip Schaff

10. To this man let them2643 look who put themselves to death when they are sought for to havelife put upon them; and by bereaving themselves of the present, deny and refuse also that which is
to come. Why, if people were driving them to deny Christ or to do any thing contrary torighteousness, like true Martyrs, they ought rather to bear all patiently than to dare death impatiently.
If it could be right to do this for the sake of running away from evils, holy Job would have killed
himself, that being in so great evils, in his estate, in his sons, in his limbs, through the devil’s cruelty,
he might escape them all. But he did it not. Far be it from him, a wise man, to commit upon himself
what not even that unwise woman suggested. And if she had suggested it, she would with goodreason here also have had that answer which she had when suggesting blasphemy; “Thou hastspoken as one of the foolish women. If we have received good at the hand of the Lord, shall we
not bear evil?”2644 Seeing even he also would have lost patience, if either by blasphemy as she hadsuggested, or by killing himself which not even she had dared to speak of, he should die, and beamong them of whom it is written, “Woe unto them that have lost patience!”2645 and rather increase
than escape pains, if after the death of his body he should be hurried off to punishment either of
blasphemers, or of murderers, or of them which are worse even than parricides. For if a parricide
be on that account more wicked than any homicide, because he kills not merely a man but a near
relative; and among parricides too, the nearer the person killed, the greater criminal he is judged
to be: without doubt worse still is he who kills himself, because there is none nearer to a man thanhimself. What then do these miserable persons mean, who, though both here they have inflicted
pain upon themselves, and hereafter not only for their impiety towards God but for the very cruelty
which they have exercised upon themselves will deservedly suffer pains of His inflicting, do yetseek moreover the glories of Martyrs? since, even if for the true testimony of Christ they sufferedpersecution, and killed themselves, that they might not suffer any thing from their persecutors, itwould be rightly said to them, “Woe unto them which have lost patience!” For how hath patience
her just reward, if even an impatient suffering receives the crown? or how shall that man be judged
innocent, to whom is said, “Thou shall love thy neighbor as thyself,”2646 if he commit murder upon
himself which he is forbidden to commit upon his neighbor?

11. Let then the Saints hear from holy Scripture the precepts of patience: “My son, when thoucomest to the service of God, stand thou in righteousness and fear, and prepare thy soul for
temptation: bring thine heart low, and bear up; that in the last end thy life may increase. All thatshall come upon thee receive thou, and in pain bear up, and in thy humility have patience. For in
the fire gold and silver is proved, but acceptable men in the furnace2647 of humiliation.”2648 And inanother place we read: “My son, faint not thou in the discipline of the Lord, neither be wearied
when thou art chidden of Him. For whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth, and scourgeth every son

2643
2644
2645
2646
2647
2648

Donatists.
Job ii. 10.
Ecclus. ii. 14.
Matt. xix. 19.
Receptibiles.
Ecclus. ii. 1–5.

690

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

whom He receiveth.”2649 What is here set down, “son whom He receiveth,” the same in the above
mentioned testimony is, “acceptable men.” For this is just, that we who from our first felicity of
Paradise for contumacious appetence of things to enjoy were dismissed, through humble patienceof things that annoy may be received back: driven away for doing evil, brought back by suffering
evil: there against righteousness doing ill, here for righteousness’ sake patient of ills.

12. But concerning true patience, worthy of the name of this virtue, whence it is to be had, must
now be inquired. For there are some2650 who attribute it to the strength of the human will, not which
it hath by Divine assistance, but which it hath of free-will. Now this error is a proud one: for it isthe error of them which abound, of whom it is said in the Psalm, “A scornful reproof to them whichabound, and a despising to the proud.”2651 It is not therefore that “patience of the poor” which“perisheth not forever.”2652 For these poor receive it from that Rich One, to Whom is said, “My
God art Thou, because my goods Thou needest not:”2653 of Whom is “every good gift, and every
perfect gift;”2654 to Whom crieth the needy and the poor, and in asking, seeking, knocking, saith,“My God, deliver me from the hand of the sinner, and from the hand of the lawless and unjust:because Thou art my patience, O Lord, my hope from my youth up.”2655 But these which abound,and disdain to be in want before God, lest they receive of Him true patience, they which glory intheir own false patience, seek to “confound the counsel of the poor, because the Lord is his hope.”2656
Nor do they regard, seeing they are men, and attribute so much to their own, that is, to the humanwill, that they run into that which is written, “Cursed is every one who putteth his hope in man.”2657
Whence even if it chance them that they do bear up under any hardships or difficulties, either thatthey may not displease men, or that they may not suffer worse, or in self-pleasing and love of theirown presumption, do with most proud will bear up under these same, it is meet that concerning
patience this be said unto them, which concerning wisdom the blessed Apostle James saith, “Thiswisdom cometh not from above, but is earthly, animal, devilish.”2658 For why may there not be afalse patience of the proud, as there is a false wisdom of the proud? But from Whom cometh true
wisdom, from Him cometh also true patience. For to Him singeth that poor in spirit, “Unto God is
my soul subjected, because from Him is my patience.”2659

2649
2650
2651
2652
2653
2654
2655
2656
2657
2658
2659

Prov. iii. 11, 12.
Pelagians.
Ps. cxxiii. 4.
Ps. ix. 18.
Ps. xvi. 2.
James i. 17.
Ps. lxxi. 4, 5.
Ps. xiv. 6.
Jer. xvii. 5.
James iii. 15.
Ps. lxii. 5.

691

NPNF (V1-03)

532

Philip Schaff

13. But they answer and speak, saying, “If the will of man without any aid of God by strengthof free choice2660 bears so many grievous and horrible distresses, whether in mind or body, that it
may enjoy the delight of this mortal life and of sins, why may it not be that in the same manner the
self-same will of man by the same strength of free-choice, not thereunto looking to be aided ofGod, but unto itself by natural possibility sufficing, doth, in all of labor or sorrow that is put uponit, for righteousness and eternal life’s sake most patiently sustain the same? Or is it so, say they,that the will of the unjust is sufficient, without aid of God, for them, yea even to exercise themselvesin undergoing torture for iniquity, and before they be tortured by others; sufficient the will of themwhich love the respiting of this life that, without aid of God, they should in the midst of mostatrocious and protracted torments persevere in a lie, lest confessing their misdeeds they be ordered
to be put to death; and not sufficient the will of the just, unless strength be put into them fromabove, that whatever be their pains, they should, either for beauty’s sake of very righteousness orfor love of eternal life, bear the same?”

14. They which say these things, do not understand that as well each one of the wicked is inthat measure for endurance of any ills more hard, in what measure the lust of the world is mightierin him; as also that each one of the just is in that measure for endurance of any ills more brave, inwhat measure in him the love of God is mightier. But lust of the world hath its beginning fromchoice of the will, its progress from enjoyableness of pleasure, its confirmation from the chain ofcustom, whereas “the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts,”2661 not verily from ourselves, but“by the Holy Spirit which is given unto us.” And therefore from Him cometh the patience of thejust, by Whom is shed abroad their love (of Him). Which love (of charity) the Apostle praising andsetting off, among its other good qualities, saith, that it “beareth all things.”2662 “Charity,” saith he,“is magnanimous.”2663 And a little after he saith, “endureth all things.” The greater then is in saints
the charity (or love) of God, the more do they endure all things for Him whom they love, and thegreater in sinners the lust of the world, the more do they endure all things for that which they lust
after. And consequently from that same source cometh true patience of the righteous, from which
there is in them the love of God; and from that same source the false patience of the unrighteous,from which is in them the lust of the world. With regard to which the Apostle John saith; “Lovenot the world, neither the things that be in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the
Father is not in him: because all that is in the world, is lust of the flesh, and lust of the eyes, andpride of life;2664 which is not of the Father, but is of the world.”2665 This concupiscence, then, which
is not of the Father, but is of the world, in what measure it shall in any man be more vehement andardent, in that measure becometh each more patient of all troubles and sorrows for that which helusteth after. Therefore, as we said above, this is not the patience which descendeth from above,
but the patience of the godly is from above, coming down from the Father of lights. And so that is
2660
2661
2662
2663
2664
2665

Liberi arbitrii.
Rom. v. 5.
1 Cor. xiii. 4, 7.
Magnanima.
Ambitio sæculi.
1 John ii. 15, 16.

692

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

earthly, this heavenly; that animal, this spiritual; that devilish, this Godlike.2666 Because
concupiscence, whereof it cometh that persons sinning suffer all things stubbornly, is of the world;but charity, whereof cometh that persons living aright suffer all things bravely, is of God. And
therefore to that false patience it is possible that, without aid of God, the human will may suffice;harder, in proportion as it is more eager of lust, and bearing ills with the more endurance the worse
itself becometh: while to this, which is true patience, the human will, unless aided and inflamed
from above, doth not suffice, for the very reason that the Holy Spirit is the fire thereof; by Whomunless it be kindled to love that impassible Good, it is not able to bear the ill which it suffereth.

15. For, as the Divine utterances testify, “God is love, and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth inGod, and God dwelleth in him.”2667 Whoso therefore contends that love of God may be had without
aid of God, what else does he contend, but that God may be had without God? Now what Christian
would say this, which no madman would venture to say? Therefore in the Apostle, true, pious,
faithful patience, saith exultingly, and by the mouth of the Saints; “Who shall separate us from thelove of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, orsword? As it is written, For Thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep forthe slaughter. Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him that loved us:”not through ourselves, but, “through Him that loved us.”2668 And then he goes on and adds; “For I
am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things
present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate
us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.” This is that “love of God” which “isshed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit which is given unto us.” But the concupiscence of thebad, by reason of which there is in them a false patience, “is not of the Father,”2669 as saith theApostle John, but is of the world.

533

16. Here some man shall say; “If the concupiscence of the bad, whereby it comes that they bear
all evils for that which they lust after, be of the world, how is it said to be of their will?” As if,
truly, they were not themselves also of the world, when they love the world, forsaking Him by
Whom the world was made. For “they serve the creature more than the Creator, Who is blessed forever.”2670 Whether then by the word “world,” the Apostle John signifies lovers of the world, thewill, as it is of themselves, is therefore of the world: or whether under the name of the world hecomprises heaven and earth, and all that is therein, that is the creature universally, it is plain thatthe will of the creature, not being that of the Creator, is of the world. For which cause to such the
Lord saith, “Ye are from beneath, I am from above: ye are of this world, I am not of this world.”2671
2666
2667
2668
2669
2670
2671

Deifica.
1 John iv. 16.
Rom. viii. 35–39.
1 John ii. 16.
Rom. i. 25.
John viii. 23.

693

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

And to the Apostle He saith, “If ye were of the world, the world would love his own.” But lest theyshould arrogate more unto themselves than their measure craved, and when He said that they were
not of the world, should imagine this to be of nature, not of grace, therefore He saith, “But because
ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.” Itfollows, that they once were of the world: for, that they might not be of the world, they were chosen
out of the world.

17. Now this election the Apostle demonstrating to be, not of merits going before in good works,
but election of grace, saith thus: “And in this time a remnant by election of grace is saved. But if
by grace, then is it no more of works, otherwise grace is no more grace.”2672 This is election ofgrace; that is, election in which through the grace of God men are elected: this, I say, is election ofgrace which goes before all good merits of men. For if it be to any good merits that it is given, thenis it no more gratuitously given, but is paid as a debt, and consequently is not truly called grace;
where “reward,” as the same Apostle saith, “is not imputed as grace, but as debt.”2673 Whereas if,that it may be true grace, that is, gratuitous, it find nothing in man to which it is due of merit, (whichthing is well understood in that saying, “Thou wilt save them for nothing,”2674) then assuredly itself
gives the merits, not to merits is given. Consequently it goes before even faith, from which it isthat all good works begin. “For the just,” as is written, “shall live by faith.”2675 But, moreover, grace
not only assists the just, but also justifies the ungodly. And therefore even when it does aid the justand seems to be rendered to his merits, not even then does it cease to be grace, because that which
it aids it did itself bestow. With a view therefore to this grace, which precedes all good merits ofman, not only was Christ put to death by the ungodly, but “died for the ungodly.”2676 And ere that
He died, He elected the Apostles, not of course then just, but to be justified: to whom He saith, “Ihave chosen you out of the world.” For to whom He said, “Ye are not of the world,” and then, lest
they should account themselves never to have been of the world, presently added, “But I havechosen you out of the world;” assuredly that they should not be of the world was by His own electionof them conferred upon them. Wherefore, if it had been through their own righteousness, not throughHis grace, that they were elected, they would not have been chosen out of the world, because theywould already not be of the world if already they were just. And again, if the reason why they were
elected was, that they were already just, they had already first chosen the Lord. For who can berighteous but by choosing righteousness? “But the end of the law is Christ, for righteousness is to
every one that believeth.2677 Who is made unto us wisdom of God, and righteousness, andsanctification, and redemption: that, as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.”2678
He then is Himself our righteousness.

2672
2673
2674
2675
2676
2677
2678

Rom. xi. 5, 6.
Rom. iv. 4.
Psalm lvi. 7, Lat. and LXX. πšρ τοῦ μηθενὸς σὡσεις αὐτούς. But Heb. and E.V. “shall they escape by iniquity?”
Habak. ii. 4.
Rom. v. 6.
Rom. x. 4.
1 Cor. i. 30, 31.

694

NPNF (V1-03)

534

Philip Schaff

18. Whence also the just of old, before the Incarnation of the Word, in this faith of Christ, andin this true righteousness, (which thing Christ is unto us,) were justified; believing this to comewhich we believe come: and they themselves by grace were saved through faith, not of themselves,
but by the gift of God, not of works, lest haply they should be lifted up.2679 For their good works
did not come before God’s mercy, but followed it. For to them was it said, and by them written,
long ere Christ was come in the flesh, “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I willshow compassion on whom I will have compassion.”2680 From which words of God the Apostle
Paul, should so long after say; “It is not therefore of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but
of God that showeth mercy.” It is also their own voice, long ere Christ was come in the flesh, “MyGod, His mercy shall prevent me.”2681 How indeed could they be aliens from the faith of Christ,
by whose charity even Christ was fore-announced unto us; without the faith of Whom, not any ofmortals either hath been, or is, or ever shall be able to be, righteous? If then, being already just, theApostles were elected by Christ, they would have first chosen Him, that just men might be chosen,because without Him they could not be just. But it was not so: as Himself saith to them, “Not ye
have chosen Me, but I have chosen you.” Of which the Apostle John speaks, “Not that we loved
God, but that He loved us.”2682

19. Since the case is so, what is man, while in this life he uses his own proper will, ere he choose
and love God, but unrighteous and ungodly? “What,” I say, “is man,” a creature going astray fromthe Creator, unless his Creator “be mindful of him,”2683 and choose2684 him freely, and love2685 him
freely? Because he is himself not able to choose or love, unless being first chosen and loved he behealed, because by choosing blindness he perceiveth not, and by loving laziness is soon wearied.
But perchance some man may say: In what manner is it that God first chooses and loves unjustmen, that He may justify them, when it is written, “Thou hatest, Lord, all that work iniquity?”2686
In what way, think we, but in a wonderful and ineffable manner? And yet even we are able toconceive, that the good Physician both hates and loves the sick man: hates him, because he is sick;loves him, that he may drive away his sickness.

20. Let thus much have been said with regard to charity, without which in us there cannot betrue patience, because in good men it is the love of God which endureth all things, as in bad men
the lust of the world. But this love is in us by the Holy Spirit which was given us. Whence, ofWhom cometh in us love, of Him cometh patience. But the lust of the world, when it patiently bears

2679
2680
2681
2682
2683
2684
2685
2686

Eph. ii. 8, 9.
Ex. xxxiii. 19; Rom. ix. 15, 16.
Ps. lix. 10.
1 John iv. 10.
Ps. viii. 4.
Eligere.
Diligere.
Ps. v. 5.

695

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

the burdens of any manner of calamity, boasts of the strength of its own will, like as of the stuporof disease, not robustness of health. This boasting is insane: it is not the language of patience, butof dotage. A will like this in that degree seems more patient of bitter ills, in which it is more greedyof temporal good things, because more empty of eternal.

21. But if it be goaded on and inflamed with deceitful visions and unclean incentives by thedevilish spirit, associated and conspiring therewith in malignant agreement, this spirit makes thewill of the man either frantic with error, or burning with appetite of some worldly delight; andhence, it seems to show a marvellous endurance of intolerable evils: but yet it does not follow fromthis that an evil will without instigation of another and unclean spirit, like as a good will without
aid of the Holy Spirit, cannot exist. For that there may be an evil will even without any spirit either
seducing or inciting, is sufficiently clear in the instance of the devil himself, who is found to havebecome a devil, not through some other devil, but of his own proper will. An evil will therefore,
whether it be hurried on by lust, whether called back by fear, whether expanded by gladness, whether
contracted by sadness, and in all these perturbations of mind enduring and making light of whatever
are to others, or at another time, more grievous, this evil will may, without another spirit to goadit on, seduce itself, and in lapsing by defection from the higher to the lower, the more pleasant it
shall account that thing to be which it seeks to get or fears to lose, or rejoices to have gotten, or
grieves to have lost, the more tolerably for its sake bear what is less for it to suffer than that is to
be enjoyed. For whatever that thing be, it is of the creature, of which one knows the pleasure.
Because in some sort, the creature loved approaches itself to the creature loving in fond contact
and connection, to the giving experience of its sweetness.

22. But the pleasure of the Creator, of which is written, “And from the river of Thy pleasure
wilt Thou give them to drink,”2687 is of far other kind, for it is not, like us, a creature. Unless thenits love be given to us from thence there is no source whence it may be in us. And consequently, agood will, by which we love God, cannot be in man, save in whom God also worketh to will. This
good will therefore, that is, a will faithfully subjected to God,2688 a will set on fire by sanctity ofthat ardor which is above, a will which loves God and his neighbor for God’s sake; whether throughlove, of which the Apostle Peter makes answer, “Lord, Thou knowest that I love Thee;”2689 whether
through fear, of which says the Apostle Paul, “In fear and trembling work out your own
salvation;”2690 whether through joy, of which he says, “In hope rejoicing, in tribulation patient;”2691
whether through sorrow, with which he says he had great grief for his brethren;2692 in whateverway it endure what bitterness and hardships soever, it is the love of God which “endureth all

2687
2688
2689
2690
2691
2692

Ps. xxxvi. 9.
Phil. ii. 13.
John xxi. 15.
Phil. ii. 12.
Rom. xii. 12.
Rom. ix. 2.

696

NPNF (V1-03)

535

Philip Schaff

things,”2693 and which is not shed abroad in our hearts but by the Holy Spirit given unto us.2694
Whereof piety makes no manner of doubt, but, as the charity of them which holily love, so thepatience of them which piously endure, is the gift of God. For it cannot be that the divine Scripture
deceiveth or is deceived, which not only in the Old Books hath testimonies of this thing, when it
is said unto God, “My Patience art Thou,” and, “From Him is my patience;”2695 and where anotherprophet saith, that we receive the spirit of fortitude;2696 but also in the Apostolic writings we read,“Because unto you is given on behalf of Christ, not only to believe on Him, but to suffer for Him.”2697
Therefore let not that make the mind to be as of its own merit uplifted, wherewith he is told that
he is of Another’s mercy gifted.

23. But if moreover any not having charity, which pertaineth to the unity of spirit and the bondof peace whereby the Catholic Church is gathered and knit together, being involved in any schism,
doth, that he may not deny Christ, suffer tribulations, straits, hunger, nakedness, persecution, perils,
prisons, bonds, torments, swords, or flames, or wild beasts, or the very cross, through fear of helland everlasting fire; in nowise is all this to be blamed, nay rather this also is a patience meet to be
praised. For we cannot say that it would have been better for him that by denying Christ he should
suffer none of these things, which he did suffer by confessing Him: but we must account that it
will perhaps be more tolerable for him in the judgment, than if by denying Christ he should avoid
all those things: so that what the Apostle saith, “If I shall give my body to be burned, but have notcharity, it profiteth me nothing,”2698 should be understood to profit nothing for obtaining the kingdomof heaven, but not for having more tolerable punishment to undergo in the last judgment.

24.2699 But it may well be asked, whether this patience likewise be the gift of God, or to be
attributed to strength of the human will, by which patience, one who is separated from the Church
doth, not for the error which separated him but for the truth of the Sacrament or Word which hathremained with him, for fear of pains eternal suffer pains temporal. For we must take heed lest haply,
if we affirm that patience to be the gift of God, they in whom it is should be thought to belong also
to the kingdom of God; but if we deny it to be the gift of God, we should be compelled to allowthat without aid and gift of God there can be in the will of man somewhat of good. Because it is
not to be denied that it is a good thing that a man believe he shall undergo pain of eternal punishment
if he shall deny Christ, and for that faith endure and make light of any manner of punishment of
man’s inflicting.

2693
2694
2695
2696
2697
2698
2699

1 Cor. xiii. 7.
Rom. v. 5.
Ps. lxxi. 5; and lxii. 5.
Is. xi. 2.
Phil. i. 29.
1 Cor. xiii. 3.
See on Profit of Believing, c. 1, p. 347.

697

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

25. So then, as we are not to deny that this is the gift of God, we are thus to understand that
there be some gifts of God possessed by the sons of that Jerusalem which is above,2700 and free,
and mother of us all, (for these are in some sort the hereditary possessions in which we are “heirs
of God and joint-heirs with Christ:”) but some other which may be received even by the sons ofconcubines to whom carnal Jews and schismatics or heretics are compared. For though it be written,“Cast out the bondmaid and her son, for the son of the bondmaid shall not be heir with my son
Isaac:”2701 and though God said to Abraham, “In Isaac shall thy seed be called:” which the Apostle
hath so interpreted as to say, “That is, not they which be sons of the flesh, these be the sons of God;but the sons of the promise are counted for the seed;”2702 that we might understand the seed ofAbraham in regard of Christ to pertain by reason of Christ to the sons of God, who are Christ’s
body and members, that is to say, the Church of God, one, true, very-begotten, catholic, holding
the godly faith; not the faith which works through elation or fear, but “which worketh by love;”2703
nevertheless, even the sons of the concubines, when Abraham sent them away from his son Isaac,
he did not omit to bestow upon them some gifts, that they might not be left in every way empty,
but not that they should be held as heirs. For so we read: “And Abraham gave all his estate unto
Isaac; and to the sons of his concubines gave Abraham gifts, and sent them away from his son
Isaac.”2704 If then we be sons of Jerusalem the free, let us understand that other be the gifts of themwhich are put out of the inheritance, other the gifts of them which be heirs. For these be the heirs,
to whom is said, “Ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear, but ye have received
the spirit of adoption of sons, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.”2705

536

26. Cry we therefore with the spirit of charity, and until we come to the inheritance in which
we are alway to remain, let us be, through love which becometh the free-born, not through fear
which becometh bondmen, patient of suffering. Cry we, so long as we are poor, until we be withthat inheritance made rich. Seeing how great earnest thereof we have received, in that Christ to
make us rich made Himself poor; Who being exalted unto the riches which are above, there wassent One Who should breathe into our hearts holy longings, the Holy Spirit. Of these poor, as yet
believing, not yet beholding; as yet hoping, not yet enjoying; as yet sighing in desire, not yet reigningin felicity; as yet hungering and thirsting, not yet satisfied: of these poor, then, “the patience shallnot perish for ever:”2706 not that there will be patience there also, where aught to endure shall notbe; but “will not perish,” meaning that it will not be unfruitful. But its fruit it will have for ever,therefore it “shall not perish for ever.” For he who labors in vain, when his hope fails for which helabored, says with good cause, “I have lost so much labor:” but he who comes to the promise of
his labor says, congratulating himself, I have not lost my labor. Labor then is said not to perish (orbe lost), not because it lasts perpetually, but because it is not spent in vain. So also the patience of
2700
2701
2702
2703
2704
2705
2706

Gal. iv. 26.
Gal. iv. 30; and Gen. xxi. 10.
Gen. xxi. 12; and Rom. ix. 7, 8.
Gal. v. 6.
Gen. xxv. 5, 6.
Rom. viii. 15.
Ps. ix. 18.

698

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

the poor of Christ (who yet are to be made rich as heirs of Christ) shall not perish for ever: notbecause there also we shall be commanded patiently to bear, but because for that which we havehere patiently borne, we shall enjoy eternal bliss. He will put no end to everlasting felicity, Who
giveth temporal patience unto the will: because both the one and the other is of Him bestowed asa gift upon charity, Whose gift that charity is also.

539

On Care to Be Had for the Dead.
[De Cura Pro Mortuis.]
Translated by Rev. H. Browne, M.A.
Of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge; Late Principal of the Diocesan College, Chichester.
From the Retractations, Book ii. Chap. 64.
The book, On care to be had for the dead, I wrote, having been asked by letter whether it
profits any person after death that his body shall be buried at the memorial of any Saint.2707 The
book begins thus: Long time unto your Holiness, my venerable fellow-bishop Paulinus.

1. Long time, my venerable fellow-bishop Paulinus, have I been thy Holiness’s debtor for ananswer; even since thou wrotest to me by them of the household2708 of our most religious daughter
Flora, asking of me whether it profit any man after death that his body is buried at the memorialof some Saint. This, namely, had the said widow begged of thee for her son deceased in those parts,and thou hadst written her an answer, consoling her, and announcing to her concerning the bodyof the faithful young man Cynegius, that the thing which she with motherly and pious affection
desired was done, to wit, by placing it in the basilica of most blessed Felix the Confessor. Upon
which occasion it came to pass, that by the same bearers of thy letter thou didst write also to me,raising the like question, and craving that I would answer what I thought of this matter, at the sametime not forbearing to say what are thine own sentiments. For thou sayest that to thy thinking these
be no empty motions of religious and faithful minds, which take this care for their deceased friends.

2707

The date may be conjectured from the order of the Retractations, where this book is mentioned next after the Enchiridion
ad Laurentium, which was not finished earlier than A.D. 421. The first two paragraphs of this treatise will be found quoted byAugustin in his Book On Eight Questions of Dulcitius, Quæst. ii. 2, 3. Ben. ed. Paulinus, to whom it was addressed, was Bishop
of Nolæ, and took great pains to honor the memory of St. Felix, who is mentioned in the beginning of it. Several poems of hison the subject are extant.
2708
Homines.

699

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Thou addest, moreover, that it cannot be void of effect2709 that the whole Church is wont to supplicate
for the departed: so that hence it may be further conjectured that it doth profit a person after death,
if by the faith of his friends for the interment of his body such a spot be provided wherein may beapparent the aid, likewise in this way sought, of the Saints.

540

2. But this being the case, how to this opinion that should not be contrary which the Apostle
says, “For we shall all stand before the judgment-seat of Christ, that each may receive according
to the things he hath done by the body,2710 whether good or bad;”2711 this, thou signifiest, thou dost
not well see. For this apostolic sentence doth before death admonish to be done, that which may
profit after death; not then, first, when there is to be now a receiving of that which a person shallhave done before death. True, but this question is thus solved, namely, that there is a certain kindof life by which is acquired, while one lives in this body, that it should be possible for these things
to be of some help to the departed; and, consequently, it is “according to the things done by thebody,” that they are aided by the things which shall, after they have left the body, be religiously
done on their behalf. For there are whom these things aid nothing at all, namely, when they aredone either for persons whose merits are so evil, that neither by such things are they worthy to be
aided; or for persons whose merits are so good, that of such things they have no need as aids. Of
the kind of life, therefore, which each hath led by the body, doth it come, that these things profit
or profit not, whatever are piously done on his behalf when he has left the body. For touching meritwhereby these things profit, if none have been gotten in this life, it is in vain sought after this life.
So it comes to pass as well that not unmeaningly2712 doth the Church, or care of friends, bestow
upon the departed whatever of religion it shall be able; as also that, nevertheless, each receiveth“according to the things which he hath done by the body, whether it be good or bad,” the Lord
rendering unto each according to his works. For, that this which is bestowed should be capable ofprofiting him after the body, this was acquired in that life which he hath led in the body.

3. Possibly thy inquiry is satisfied by this my brief reply. But what other considerations moveme, to which I think meet to answer, do thou for a short space attend. In the books of the Maccabees
we read of sacrifice offered for the dead.2713 Howbeit even if it were no where at all read in the Old
Scriptures, not small is the authority, which in this usage is clear, of the whole Church, namely,that in the prayers of the priest which are offered to the Lord God at His altar, the Commendationof the dead hath also its place. But then, whether there be some profit accruing unto the soul of thedead from the place of its body, requires a more careful inquiry. And first, whether it make any
difference in causing or increasing of misery after this life to the spirits of men if their bodies be
not buried, this must be looked into, not in the light of opinion however commonly received, but
2709
2710
2711
2712
2713

Vacare.
Per corpus.
2 Cor. v. 10.
Inaniter.
2 Mac. xii. 43.

700

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

rather of the holy writ of our religion. For we are not to credit that, as is read in Maro, the unburied
are prohibited from navigating and crossing the infernal stream: because forsooth“To none is giv’n to pass the hideous banks
And waters hoarse, ere in their meet abodeThe bones have sunk to rest.”2714
Who can incline a Christian heart to these poetical and fabulous figments, when the Lord Jesus,
to the intent that under the hands of their enemies, who should have their bodies in their power,
Christians might lie down without a fear, asserts that not a hair of their head shall perish, exhortingthat they should not fear them which when they have killed the body have nothing more that they
can do?2715 Of which in the first book “On the City of God,” I have methinks enough spoken, to
break the teeth in their mouths who, in imputing to Christian times the barbarous devastation,
especially that which Rome has lately suffered, do cast up to us this also, that Christ did not there
come to the succor of His own. To whom when it is answered that the souls of the faithful were,according to the merits of their faith, by Him taken into protection, they insult over us with talkingof their corpses left unburied. All this matter, then, concerning burial I have in such words as these
expounded.

4. “But” (say I) “in such a slaughter-heap of dead bodies, could they not even be buried? notthis, either, doth pious faith too greatly dread, holding that which is foretold that not even consuming
beasts will be an hindrance to the rising again of bodies of which not a hair of the head shallperish.2716 Nor in any wise would Truth say, “Fear not them which kill the body, but cannot kill
the soul;” if it could at all hinder the life to come whatever enemies might choose to do with thebodies of the slain. Unless haply any is so absurd as to contend that they ought not to be feared
before death, lest they kill the body, but ought to be feared after death, lest, having killed the body,they suffer it not to be buried. Is that then false which Christ says, “Who kill the body, and afterwards
have no more that they can do,” if they have so great things that they can do on dead bodies? Far
be the thought, that that should be false which Truth hath said. For the thing said is, that they dosomewhat when they kill, because in the body there is feeling while it is in killing, but afterward
they have nothing more that they can do because there is no feeling in the body when killed. Many
bodies, then, of Christians the earth hath not covered: but none of them hath any separated fromheaven and earth, the whole of which He filleth with presence of Himself, Who knoweth whence
to resuscitate that which He created. It is said indeed in the Psalm, “The dead bodies of thy servants
have they given for meat unto the fowls of the heaven, the flesh of thy saints unto the beasts of theearth: they have shed their blood like water round about Jerusalem, and there was no man to bury

2714
2715
2716

Æneidvi. 327, 328.
Matt. x. 28.
Luke xxi. 18; xii. 4–7; Matt. x. 28–30.

701

NPNF (V1-03)

541

Philip Schaff

them:”2717 but more to heighten the cruelty of them who did these things, not to the infelicity ofthem who suffered them. For, however, in sight of men these things may seem hard and dire, yet“precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of His saints.”2718 So, then, all these things, care offuneral, bestowal in sepulture, pomp of obsequies, are more for comfort of the living, than for help
to the dead. If it at all profit the ungodly to have costly sepulture, it shall harm the godly to havevile sepulture or none. Right handsome obsequies in sight of men did that rich man who was cladin purple receive of the crowd of his housefolk; but far more handsome did that poor man who wasfull of sores obtain of the ministry of Angels; who bore him not out into a marble tomb, but into
Abraham’s bosom bore him on high.2719 All this they laugh at, against whom we have undertaken
to defend the City of God: but for all that their own philosophers, even, held care of sepulture incontempt; and often whole armies, while dying for their earthly country, cared not where theyshould after lie, or to what beasts they should become meat; and the poets had leave to say of thismatter with applause“though all unurn’d he lie,
His cov’ring is the overarching sky.”2720
How much less ought they to make a vaunting about unburied bodies of Christians, to whom
the flesh itself with all its members, re-fashioned, not only from the earth, but even from the otherelements, yea, from their most secret windings, whereinto these evanished corpses have retired, isassured to be in an instant of time rendered back and made entire as at the first, according to His
promise?

5. Yet it follows not that the bodies of the departed are to be despised and flung aside, and above
all of just and faithful men, which bodies as organs and vessels to all good works their spirit hathholily used. For if a father’s garment and ring, and whatever such like, is the more dear to thosewhom they leave behind, the greater their affection is towards their parents, in no wise are thebodies themselves to be spurned, which truly we wear in more familiar and close conjunction thanany of our putting on. For these pertain not to ornament or aid which is applied from without, but
to the very nature of man. Whence also the funerals of the just men of old were with dutiful piety
cared for, and their obsequies celebrated, and sepulture provided:2721 and themselves while living
did touching burial or even translation of their bodies give charge to their sons. Tobias also, to haveby burying of the dead obtained favor with God, is by witness of an Angel commended.2722 The
Lord Himself also, about to rise on the third day, both preaches, and commends to be preached,
the good work of a religious woman, that she poured out a precious ointment over His limbs, and
did it for His burial:2723 and they are with praise commemorated in the Gospel, who having received
2717
2718
2719
2720
2721
2722
2723

Ps. lxxix. 2, 3.
Ps. cxvi. 15.
Luke xvi. 19–22.
Lucan vii. 819, speaking of the slain in the battle of Pharsalia, whose bodies Caesar forbad to burn or inter.
Gen. xxiii.; xxv. 9, 10; xlvii. 30.
Tobit ii. 7; xii. 12.
Matt. xxvi. 7–13.

702

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

His Body from the cross did carefully and with reverend honor see it wound and laid in thesepulchre.2724 These authorities however do not put us upon thinking that there is in dead bodies
any feeling; but rather, that the Providence of God (Who is moreover pleased with such offices ofpiety) doth charge itself with the bodies also of the dead, this they betoken, to the intent our faithof resurrection might be stayed up thereby. Where also is wholesomely learned, how great may be
the reward for alms which we do unto the living and feeling, if not even that be lost before God,
whatever of duty and of diligence is paid to the lifeless members of men. There are indeed also
other things, which in speaking of the bestowal or removal of their bodies the holy Patriarchs willed
to be understood as spoken by the prophetic Spirit: but this is not the place to treat thoroughly ofthese things, seeing that sufficeth which we have said. But if the lack of those things which arenecessary for sustentation of the living, as food and clothing, however heavy affliction attend thelacking, do not break in good men the manly courage of bearing and enduring, nor eradicate piety
from the mind, but by exercising make it more fruitful; how much more doth lack of those things
which are wont to be applied for care of funerals and bestowal of bodies of the departed, not makethem wretched, now that in the hidden abodes of the pious they are at rest! And therefore, whenthese things have to dead bodies of Christians in that devastation of the great City or of other towns
also been lacking, there is neither fault of the living, who could not afford these things, nor pain of
the dead who could not feel the same.2725 This is my opinion concerning the ground and reason of
sepulture. Which I have therefore from another book of mine transferred to this, because it waseasier to rehearse this, than to express the same matter in another way.

542

6. If this be true, doubtless also the providing for the interment of bodies a place at the Memorials
of Saints, is a mark of a good human affection towards the remains of one’s friends: since if there
be religion in the burying, there cannot but be religion in taking thought where the burying shallbe. But while it is desirable there should be such like solaces of survivors, for the showing forth oftheir pious mind towards their beloved, I do not see what helps they be to the dead save in this way:that upon recollection of the place in which are deposited the bodies of those whom they love, theyshould by prayer commend them to those same Saints, who have as patrons taken them into theircharge to aid them before the Lord. Which indeed they would be still able to do, even though they
were not able to inter them in such places. But then the only reason why the name Memorials or
Monuments is given to those sepulchres of the dead which become specially distinguished, is thatthey recall to memory, and by putting in mind cause us to think of, them who by death are withdrawn
from the eyes of the living, that they may not by forgetfulness be also withdrawn from men’s hearts.
For both the term Memorial2726 most plainly shews this, and Monument is so named from monishing,that is, putting in mind. For which reason the Greeks also call that μνημεῖον which we call a
Memorial or Monument: because in their tongue the memory itself, by which we remember, iscalled μνήμη. When therefore the mind recollects where the body of a very dear friend lies buried,
and thereupon there occurs to the thoughts a place rendered venerable by the name of a Martyr, to
2724
2725
2726

John xix. 38, 39.
On the City of God, book i. chap. xii. 13. Vol. ii. p. 10.
Memoria.

703

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffthat same Martyr doth it commend the soul in affection of heartfelt recollection2727 and prayer. And
when this affection is exhibited to the departed by faithful men who were most dear to them, there
is no doubt that it profits them who while living in the body merited that such things should profit
them after this life. But even if some necessity should through absence of all facility not allow
bodies to be interred, or in such places interred, yet should there be no pretermitting of supplications
for the spirits of the dead: which supplications, that they should be made for all in Christian andcatholic fellowship departed, even without mentioning of their names, under a generalcommemoration, the Church hath charged herself withal; to the intent that they which lack, forthese offices, parents or sons or whatever kindred or friends, may have the same afforded unto themby the one pious mother which is common to all. But if there were lack of these supplications,which are made with right faith and piety for the dead, I account that it should not a whit profit
their spirits, howsoever in holy places the lifeless bodies should be deposited.

543

7. When therefore the faithful mother of a faithful son departed desired to have his body depositedin the basilica of a Martyr, forasmuch as she believed that his soul would be aided by the merits of
the Martyr, the very believing of this was a sort of supplication, and this profited, if aught profited.
And in that she recurs in her thoughts to this same sepulchre, and in her prayers more and morecommends her son, the spirit of the departed is aided, not by the place of its dead body, but by thatwhich springs from memory of the place, the living affection of the mother. For at once the thought,
who is commended and to whom, doth touch, and that with no unprofitable emotion, the religious
mind of her who prays. For also in prayer to God,2728 men do with the members of their bodies thatwhich becometh suppliants, when they bend their knees, when they stretch forth their hands, oreven prostrate themselves on the ground, and whatever else they visibly do, albeit their invisible
will and heart’s intention be known unto God, and He needs not these tokens that any man’s mind
should be opened unto Him: only hereby one more excites himself to pray and groan more humbly
and more fervently. And I know not how it is, that, while these motions of the body cannot be madebut by a motion of the mind preceding, yet by the same being outwardly in visible sort made, thatinward invisible one which made them is increased: and thereby the heart’s affection which precededthat they might be made, groweth because they are made. But still if any be in that way held, oreven bound, that he is not able to do these things with his limbs, it does not follow that the inner
man does not pray, and before the eyes of God in its most secret chamber, where it hath compunction,
cast itself on the ground. So likewise, while it makes very much difference, where a person deposits
the body of his dead, while he supplicates for his spirit unto God, because both the affection
preceding chose a spot which was holy, and after the body is there deposited the recalling to mindof that holy spot renews and increases the affection which had preceded; yet, though he may not
be able in that place which his religious mind did choose to lay in the ground him whom he loves,in no wise ought he to cease from necessary supplications in commending of the same. For
wheresoever the flesh of the departed may lie or not lie, the spirit requires rest and must get it: forthe spirit in its departing from thence took with it the consciousness without which it could make

2727
2728

Recordationis.
Orantes.

704

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

no odds how one exists, whether in a good estate or a bad: and it does not look for aiding of its life
from that flesh to which it did itself afford the life which it withdrew in its departing, and is torender back in its returning; since not flesh to spirit, but spirit unto flesh procureth merit even ofvery resurrection, whether it be unto punishment or unto glory that it is to come to life again.

8. We read in the Ecclesiastical History which Eusebius wrote in Greek, and Ruffinus turned
into the Latin tongue, of Martyr’s bodies in Gaul exposed to dogs, and how the leavings of thosedogs and bones of the dead were, even to uttermost consumption, by fire burned up; and the ashesof the same scattered on the river Rhone, lest any thing should be left for any sort whatever ofmemorial.2729 Which thing must be believed to have been to no other end divinely permitted, butthat Christians should learn in confessing Christ, while they despise this life, much more to despise
sepulture. For this thing, which with savage rage was done to the bodies of Martyrs, if it could any
whit hurt them, to impair the blessed resting of their most victorious spirits, would assuredly nothave been suffered to be done. In very deed therefore it was declared, that the Lord in saying, “Fearnot them which kill the body, and afterward have no more that they can do,”2730 did not mean that
He would not permit them to do any thing to the bodies of His followers when dead; but thatwhatever they might be permitted to do, nothing should be done that could lessen the Christianfelicity of the departed, nothing thereof reach to their consciousness while yet living after death;nothing avail to the detriment, no, not even of the bodies themselves, to diminish aught of theirintegrity when they should rise again.

9. And yet, by reason of that affection of the human heart, whereby “no man ever hateth his
own flesh,”2731 if men have reason to know that after their death their bodies will lack any thingwhich in each man’s nation or country the wonted order of sepulture demandeth, it makes themsorrowful as men; and that which after death reacheth not unto them, they do before death fear for
their bodies: so that we find in the Books of Kings, God by one prophet threatening another prophet
who had transgressed His word, that his carcase should not be brought into the sepulchre of his
fathers. Which the Scripture hath on this wise: “Thus saith the Lord, Because thou hast beendisobedient to the mouth of the Lord, and hast not kept the charge which the Lord thy God
commanded thee, and hast returned and eaten bread and drunk water in the place in which He
commanded thee not to eat bread, nor drink water, thy carcase shall not be brought into the sepulchreof thy fathers.”2732 Now if in considering what account is to be made of this punishment, we go by
the Gospel, where we have learned that after the slaying of the body there is no cause to fear lest
the lifeless members should suffer any thing, it is not even to be called a punishment. But if we
consider a man’s human affection towards his own flesh, it was possible for him to be frightened
2729

Eusebius, H. E. book v. chap. i. relates, that the bodies of these martyrs of Lyons lay exposed in the open air for six days
successively, and were then burned and cast into the Rhone.—Ben. ed.
2730
Matt. x. 28; Luke xii. 4.
2731
Eph. v. 29.
2732
1 Kings xiii. 21, 22.

705

NPNF (V1-03)

544

Philip Schaff

or saddened, while living, by that of which he would have no sense when dead: and this was apunishment, because the mind was pained by that thing about to happen to its body, howsoever
when it did happen it would feel no pain. To this intent, namely, it pleased the Lord to punish His
servant, who not of his own contumacy had spurned to fulfill His command, but by deceit ofanother’s falsehood thought himself to be obeying when he obeyed not. For it is not to be thoughtthat he was killed by the teeth of the beast as one whose soul should be thence snatched away tothe torments of hell: seeing that over his very body the same lion which had killed it did keep watch,while moreover the beast on which he rode was left unhurt, and along with that fierce beast did
with intrepid presence stand there beside his master’s corpse. By which marvellous sign it appeareth,that the man of God was, say rather, checked temporally even unto death, than punished after death.
Of which matter, the Apostle when on account of certain offenses he had mentioned the sicknesses
and deaths of many, says, “For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged of the Lord.
But when we are judged we are chastened of the Lord, that we may not be condemned with theworld.”2733 That Prophet, truly, the very man who had beguiled him, did with much respect buryin his own tomb, and took order for his own burying beside his bones: in hope that thereby his own
bones might be spared, when, according to the prophecy of that man of God, Josiah king of Judahdid in that land disinter the bones of many dead, and with the same bones defile the sacrilegious
altars which had been set up for the graven images. For he spared that tomb in which lay the prophet
who more than three hundred years before predicted those things, and for his sake neither was thesepulture of him who had seduced him violated. By that affection namely, which causes that no
man ever hateth his own flesh, this man had taken forethought for his carcase, who had slain witha lie his own soul. By reason then of this, the natural love which every man hath for his own flesh,
it was both to the one a punishment to learn that he should not be in the sepulchre of his fathers,
and to the other a care to take order beforehand that his own bones should be spared, if he should
lie beside him whose sepulchre no man should violate.

10. This affection the Martyrs of Christ contending for the truth did overcome: and it is no
marvel that they despised that whereof they should, when death was overpast, have no feeling,when they could not by those tortures, which while alive they did feel, be overcome. God was able,
no doubt, (even as He permitted not the lion when it had slain the Prophet, to touch his body further,and of a slayer made it to be a keeper): He was able, I say, to have kept the slain bodies of His own
from the dogs to which they had been flung; He was able in innumerable ways to have deterred therage of the men themselves, that to burn the carcases, to scatter the ashes, they should not dare: but
it was fit that this experience also should not be lacking to manifold variety of temptations, lest thefortitude of confession which would not for the saving of the life of the body give way to thesavageness of persecution, should be tremblingly anxious for the honor of a sepulchre: in a word,
lest faith of resurrection should dread the consuming of the body. It was fit then, that even thesethings should be permitted, in order that, even after these examples of so great horror, the Martyrs,
fervent in confession of Christ, should become witnesses of this truth also, in which they had learned

2733

1 Cor. xi. 31, 32. [See R.V.]

706

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaffthat they by whom their bodies should be slain had after that no more that they could do.2734 Because,
whatever they should do to dead bodies, they would after all do nothing, seeing that in flesh devoidof all life, neither was it possible for him to feel aught who had thence departed, nor for Him tolose aught thereof, Who created the same. But while these things were doing to the bodies of theslain, albeit the Martyrs, not frightened by them, did with great fortitude suffer, yet among thebrethren was there exceeding sorrow, because there was given them no means of paying the lasthonors to the remains of the Saints, neither secretly to withdraw any part thereof, (as the same
history testifies,) did the watchings of cruel sentinels permit. So, while those which had been slain,in the tearing asunder of their limbs, in the burning up of their bones, in the dispersion of theirashes, could feel no misery; yet these who had nothing of them that they could bury, did suffer
torture of exceeding grief in pitying them; because what those did in no sort feel, these in some
sort did feel for them, and where was henceforth for those no more suffering, yet these did in woful
compassion suffer for them.

11. In regard to that woful compassion which I have mentioned, are those praised, and by kingDavid blessed, who to the dry bones of Saul and Jonathan afforded mercy of sepulture.2735 But yet
what mercy is that, which is afforded to them that have feeling of nothing? Or haply is this to bechallenged back to that conceit of an infernal river which men unburied were not able to pass over?
Far be this from the faith of Christians: else hath it gone most ill with so great a multitude of Martyrs,
for whom there could be no burying of their bodies, and Truth did cheat them when It said, “Fearnot them which kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do,”2736 if these have beenable to do to them so great evils, by which they were hindered to pass over to the places which theylonged for. But, because this without all doubt is most false, and it neither any whit hurts the faithful
to have their bodies denied sepulture, nor any whit the giving of sepulture unto infidels advantageth
them; why then are those who buried Saul and his son said to have done mercy, and for this areblessed by that godly king, but because it is a good affection with which the hearts of the pitiful
are touched, when they grieve for that in the dead bodies of other men, which, by that affection
through which no man ever hateth his own flesh, they would not have done after their own deathto their own bodies; and what they would have done by them when they shall have no more feeling,that they take care to do by others now having no feeling while themselves have yet feeling?

545

12. Stories are told of certain appearances or visions,2737 which may seem to bring into this
discussion a question which should not be slighted. It is said, namely, that dead men have at times
either in dreams or in some other way appeared to the living who knew not where their bodies lay
unburied, and have pointed out to them the place, and admonished that the sepulture which waslacking should be afforded them. These things if we shall answer to be false, we shall be thought
2734
2735
2736
2737

Matt. x. 28.
2 Sam. ii. 5.
Luke xii. 4.
Visa.

707

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

impudently to contradict the writings of certain faithful men, and the senses of them who assure
us that such things have happened to themselves. But it is to be answered, that it does not followthat we are to account the dead to have sense of these things, because they appear in dreams to say
or indicate or ask this. For living men do also appear ofttimes to the living as they sleep, while they
themselves know not that they do appear; and they are told by them, what they dreamed, namely,that in their dream the speakers saw them doing or saying something. Then if it may be that a person
in a dream should see me indicating to him something that has happened or even foretelling
something about to happen, while I am perfectly unwitting of the thing and altogether regardless
not only what he dreams, but whether he is awake while I am asleep, or he asleep while I am awake,or whether at one and the same time we are both awake or asleep, at what time he has the dreamin which he sees me: what marvel if the dead be unconscious and insensible of these things, and,for all that, are seen by the living in their dreams, and say something which those on awaking find
to be true? By angelical operations, then, I should think it is effected, whether permitted from above,or commanded, that they seem in dreams to say something about burying of their bodies, when
they whose the bodies are are utterly unconscious of it. Now this is sometimes serviceably done;
whether for some sort of solace to the survivors, to whom pertain those dead whose likenesses2738
appear to them as they dream; or whether that by these admonitions the human race may be madeto have regard to humanity of sepulture, which, allow that it be no help to the departed, yet is there
culpable irreligiousness in slighting of it. Sometimes however, by fallacious visions,2739 men are
cast into great errors, who deserve to suffer this. As, if one should see in a dream, what Æneas bypoetic falsity is told to have seen in the world beneath: and there should appear to him the likenessof some unburied man, which should speak such words as Palinurus is said to have spoken to him;
and when he awakes, he should find the body in that place where he heard say while dreaming,that it lay unburied, and was admonished and asked to bury it when found; and because he finds
this to be true, should believe that the dead are buried on purpose that their souls may pass to placesfrom which he dreamed that the souls of men unburied are by an infernal law prohibited: does henot, in believing all this, exceedingly swerve from the path of truth?

13. Such, however, is human infirmity, that when in a dream a person shall see a dead man, hethinks it is the soul that he sees: but when he shall in like manner dream of a living man, he has no
doubt that it is not a soul nor a body, but the likeness of a man that has appeared to him: just as if
it were not possible in regard of dead men, in the same sort unconscious of it, that it should not be
their souls, but their likenesses that appear to the sleepers. Of a surety, when we were at Milan, we
heard tell of a certain person of whom was demanded payment of a debt, with production of his
deceased father’s acknowledgment,2740 which debt unknown to the son the father had paid,
whereupon the man began to be very sorrowful, and to marvel that his father while dying did nottell him what he owed when he also made his will. Then in this exceeding anxiousness of his, his

2738
2739
2740

Imagines.
Visis.
Cautio.

708

NPNF (V1-03)

546

Philip Schaff

said father appeared to him in a dream, and made known to him where was the counter2741
acknowledgment by which that acknowledgment was cancelled. Which when the young man had
found and showed, he not only rebutted the wrongful claim of a false debt, but also got back his
father’s note2742 of hand which the father had not got back when the money was paid. Here thenthe soul of a man is supposed to have had care for his son, and to have come to him in his sleep,
that, teaching him what he did not know, he might relieve him of a great trouble. But about thevery same time as we heard this, it chanced at Carthage that the rhetorician Eulogius, who had been
my disciple in that art, being (as he himself, after our return to Africa, told us the story) in courseof lecturing to his disciples on Cicero’s rhetorical books, as he looked over the portion of reading
which he was to deliver on the following day, fell upon a certain passage, and not being able tounderstand it, was scarce able to sleep for the trouble of his mind: in which night, as he dreamed,
I expounded to him that which he did not understand; nay, not I, but my likeness, while I was
unconscious of the thing, and far away beyond the sea, it might be, doing, or it might be dreaming,some other thing, and not in the least caring for his cares. In what way these things come about, I
know not: but in what way soever they come, why do we not believe it comes in the same way fora person in a dream to see a dead man, as it comes that he sees a living man? both, no doubt, neither
knowing nor caring who, or where, or when, dreams of their images.

14. Like dreams, moreover, are also some visions of persons awake, who have had their senses
troubled, such as phrenetic persons, or those who are mad in any way: for they too talk to themselves
just as though they were speaking to people verily present, and as well with absent as with present,
whose images they perceive, whether persons living or dead. But just as they which live, areunconscious that they are seen of them and talk with them; for indeed they are not really themselvespresent, or themselves make speeches, but through troubled senses, these persons are wrought uponby such-like imaginary visions; just so they also who have departed this life, to persons thus affected
appear as present, while they be absent, and whether any man sees them in regard of their image,2743
are themselves utterly unconscious.

15. Similar to this is also that condition when persons, with their senses more profoundedly inabeyance than is the case in sleep, are occupied with the like visions. For to them also appear imagesof quick and dead; but then, when they return to their senses, whatever dead they say they haveseen are thought to have been verily with them: and they who hear these things pay no heed to thecircumstance that there were seen in like manner the images of certain living persons, absent andunconscious. A certain man by name Curma, of the municipal town of Tullium, which is hard by
Hippo, a poor member of the Curia,2744 scarcely competent to serve the office of a duumvir2745 of
2741
2742
2743
2744
2745

Recautum.
Chirographum.
Imaginaliter.
Curialis.
Duumviralitius.

709

NPNF (V1-03)

547

Philip Schaffthat place, and a mere rustic, being ill, and all his senses entranced, lay all but dead for several
days: a very slight breathing in his nostrils, which on applying the hand was just felt, and barely
betokened that he lived, was all that kept him from being buried for dead. Not a limb did he stir,nothing did he take in the way of sustenance, neither in the eyes nor in any other bodily sense washe sensible of any annoyance that impinged upon them. Yet he was seeing many things like as ina dream, which, when at last after a great many days he woke up, he told that he had seen. And
first, presently after he opened his eyes, Let some one go, said he, to the house of Curma the smith,and see what is doing there. And when some one had gone thither, the smith was found to havedied in that moment that the other had come back to his senses, and, it might almost be said, revived
from death. Then, as those who stood by eagerly listened, he told them how the other had beenordered to be had up, when he himself was dismissed; and that he had heard it said in that placefrom which he had returned, that it was not Curma of the Curia, but Curma the smith who had beenordered to be fetched to that place of the dead. Well, in these dream-like visions of his, among
those deceased persons whom he saw handled according to the diversity of their merits, he recognizedalso some whom he had known when alive. That they were the very persons themselves I might
perchance have believed, had he not in the course of this seeming dream of his seen also some whoare alive even to this present time, namely, some clerks of his district, by whose presbyter there he
was told to be baptized at Hippo by me, which thing he said had also taken place. So then he hadseen a presbyter, clerks, myself, persons, to wit, not yet dead, in this vision in which he afterwards
also saw dead persons. Why may he not be thought to have seen these last in the same way as hesaw us? that is, both the one sort, and the other, absent and unconscious, and consequently not thepersons themselves, but similitudes of them just as of the places? He saw, namely, both a plot ofground where was that presbyter with the clerks, and Hippo where he was by me seemingly baptized:
in which spots assuredly he was not, when he seemed to himself to be there. For what was at thattime going on there, he knew not: which, without doubt, he would have known if he had verily
been there. The sights beheld, therefore, were those which are not presented in the things themselves
as they are, but shadowed forth in a sort of images of the things. In fine, after much that he saw,
he narrated how he had, moreover, been led into Paradise, and how it was there said to him, when
he was thence dismissed to return to his own family, “Go, be baptized, if thou wilt be in this placeof the blessed.” Thereupon, being admonished to be baptized by me, he said it was done already.
He who was talking with him replied, “Go, be truly baptized; for that thou didst but see in thevision.” After this he recovered, went his way to Hippo. Easter was now approaching, he gave hisname among the other Competents, alike with very many unknown to us; nor did he care to makeknown the vision to me or to any of our people. He was baptized, at the close of the holy days hereturned to his own place. After the space of two years or more, I learned the whole matter; first,
through a certain friend of mine and his at my own table, while we were talking about some suchmatters: then I took it up, and made the man in his own person tell me the story, in the presence ofsome honest townsmen of his attesting the same, both concerning his marvellous illness, how helay all but dead for many days, and about that other Curma the smith, what I have mentioned above,
and about all these matters; which, while he was telling me, they recalled to mind, and assured me,that they had also at that time heard them from his lips. Wherefore, just as he saw his own baptism,and myself, and Hippo, and the basilica, and the baptistery, not in the very realities, but in a sortof similitudes of the things; and so likewise certain other living persons, without consciousness on

710

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

the part of the same living persons: then why not just so those dead persons also, without
consciousness on the part of the same dead persons?

16. Why should we not believe these to be angelic operations through dispensation of theprovidence of God, Who maketh good use of both good things and evil, according to the unsearchable
depth of His judgments? whether thereby the minds of mortals be instructed, or whether deceived;
whether consoled, or whether terrified: according as unto each one there is to be either a showingof mercy, or a taking of vengeance, by Him to Whom, not without a meaning, the Church doth sing“of mercy and of judgment.”2746 Let each, as it shall please him, take what I say. If the souls of thedead took part in the affairs of the living, and if it were their very selves that, when we see them,
speak to us in sleep; to say nothing of others, there is my own self, whom my pious mother would
no night fail to visit, that mother who by land and sea followed me that she might live with me. Far
be the thought that she should, by a life more happy, have been made cruel, to that degree that when
any thing vexes my heart she should not even console in his sadness the son whom she loved withan only love, whom she never wished to see mournful. But assuredly that which the sacred Psalm
sings in our ears, is true; “Because my father and my mother have forsaken me, but the Lord hathtaken me up.”2747 Then if our parents have forsaken us, how take they part in our cares and affairs?
But if parents do not, who else are there of the dead who should know what we are doing, or what
we suffer? Isaiah the Prophet says, “For Thou art our Father: because Abraham hath not known us,
and Israel is not cognizant of us.”2748 If so great Patriarchs were ignorant what was doing towards
the People of them begotten, they to whom, believing God, the People itself to spring from theirstock was promised; how are the dead mixed up with affairs and doings of the living, either forcognizance or help? How say we that those were favored who deceased ere the evils came which
followed hard upon the decease, if also after death they feel whatever things befall in thecalamitousness of human life? Or haply do we err in saying this, and in accounting them to bequietly at rest whom the unquiet life of the living makes solicitous? What then is that which to themost godly king Josias God promised as a great benefit, that he should first die, that he might not
see the evils which He threatened should come to that place and People? Which words of God arethese: “Thus saith the Lord God of Israel: concerning My words which thou hast heard, and didst
fear before My face when thou didst hear what I have spoken concerning this place and them whichdwell therein, that it should be forsaken and under a curse; and hast rent thy garments, and wept
before Me, and I have heard thee, saith the Lord of Sabaoth: not so; behold, I will add thee unto
thy fathers, and thou shalt be added unto them in peace; and thine eyes shall not see all the evils
which I am bringing upon this place and upon them that dwell therein.”2749 He, frightened by God’scomminations, had wept, and rent his garments, and is made, by hastening on of his death, to bewithout care of all future evils, because he should so rest in peace, that all those things he should
not see. There then are the spirits of the departed, where they see not whatever things are doing, or

2746
2747
2748
2749

Ps. ci. 1.
Ps. xxvii. 10.
Is. lxiii. 16.
2 Kings xxii. 18–20.

711

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

events happening, in this life to men. Then how do they see their own graves, or their own bodies,
whether they lie cast away, or buried? How do they take part in the misery of the living, when they
are either suffering their own evils, if they have contracted such merits; or do rest in peace, as waspromised to this Josiah, where they undergo no evils, either by suffering themselves, or bycompassionate suffering with others, freed from all evils which by suffering themselves or withothers while they lived here they did undergo?
548

17. Some man may say: “If there be not in the dead any care for the living, how is it that therich man, who was tormented in hell, asked father Abraham to send Lazarus to his five brothers
not as yet dead, and to take course with them, that they should not come themselves also into thesame place of torments?”2750 But does it follow, that because the rich man said this, he knew what
his brethren were doing, or what they were suffering at that time? Just in that same way had he carefor the living, albeit what they were doing he wist not at all, as we have care for the dead, albeit
what they do we confessedly wot not. For if we cared not for the dead, we should not, as we do,
supplicate God on their behalf. In fine, Abraham did not send Lazarus, and also answered, that they
have here Moses and the Prophets, whom they ought to hear that they might not come to those
torments. Where again it occurs to ask, how it was that what was doing here, father Abraham himself
wist not, while he knew that Moses and the Prophets are here, that is, their books, by obeying which
men should escape the torments of hell: and knew, in short, that rich man to have lived in delights,
but the poor man Lazarus to have lived in labors and sorrows? For this also he says to him; “Son,remember that thou in thy lifetime hast received good things, but Lazarus evil things.” He knew
then these things which had taken place of course among the living, not among the dead. True, but
it may be that, not while the things were doing in their lifetime, but after their death, he learned
these things, by information of Lazarus: that it be not false which the Prophet saith, “Abraham hath
not known us.”2751

18. So then we must confess that the dead indeed do not know what is doing here, but while it
is in doing here: afterwards, however, they hear it from those who from hence go to them at their
death; not indeed every thing, but what things those are allowed to make known who are sufferedalso to remember these things; and which it is meet for those to hear, whom they inform of thesame. It may be also, that from the Angels, who are present in the things which are doing here, thedead do hear somewhat, which for each one of them to hear He judgeth right to Whom all things
are subject. For were there not Angels, who could be present in places both of quick and dead, theLord Jesus had not said, “It came to pass also that the poor man died, and was carried by the angels
into Abraham’s bosom.”2752 Therefore, now here, now there, were they able to be, who from hence
bore thither whom God willed. It may be also, that the spirits of the dead do learn some things
which are doing here, what things it is necessary that they should know, and what persons it is
2750
2751
2752

Luke xvi. 24–29.
Is. lxiii. 16.
Luke xvi. 22.

712

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

necessary should know the same, not only things past or present, but even future, by the Spirit of
God revealing them: like as not all men, but the Prophets while they lived here did know, nor even
they all things, but only what things to be revealed to them the providence of God judged meet.
Moreover, that some from the dead are sent to the living, as, on the other hand, Paul from the living
was rapt into Paradise, divine Scripture doth testify.2753 For Samuel the Prophet, appearing to Saul
when living, predicted even what should befall the king:2754 although some think it was not Samuelhimself, that could have been by magical arts evoked, but that some spirit, meet for so evil works,
did figure his semblance:2755 though the book Ecclesiasticus, which Jesus, son of Sirach, is reputed
to have written, and which on account of some resemblance of style is pronounced to be
Solomon’s,2756 contains in the praise of the Fathers, that Samuel even when dead did prophesy. But
if this book be spoken against from the canon of the Hebrews,2757 (because it is not contained
therein,) what shall we say of Moses, whom certainly we read both in Deuteronomy to have died,2758
and in the Gospel to have, together with Elias who died not, appeared unto the living?2759

549

19. Hence too is solved that question, how is it that the Martyrs, by the very benefits which are
given to them that pray, indicate that they take an interest in the affairs of men, if the dead know
not what the quick are doing. For not only by effects of benefits, but in the very beholding of men,
it is certain,2760 that the Confessor Felix (whose denizenship among you thou piously lovest) appeared
when the barbarians were attacking Nola, as we have heard not by uncertain rumors, but by sure
witnesses. But such things are of God exhibited, far otherwise than as the usual order hath itself,
unto each kind of creatures apportioned. For it does not follow because water was, when it pleased
the Lord, in a moment changed into wine, that we are not to regard the worth and efficacy of waterin the proper order of the elements, as distinct from the rarity, or rather singularity, of that divine
work: nor because Lazarus rose again, therefore that every dead man rises when he will; or that alifeless man is raised up by a living, in the same way as a sleeping man by one who is awake. Other
be the limits of human things, other the signs of divine virtues: other they be that are naturally,other that be miraculously done: albeit both unto nature God is present that it may be, and unto
miracles nature is not lacking. We are not to think then, that to be interested in the affairs of theliving is in the power of any departed who please, only because to some men’s healing or help the
Martyrs be present: but rather we are to understand that it must needs be by a Divine power that
the Martyrs are interested in affairs of the living, from the very fact that for the departed to be by
their proper nature interested in affairs of the living is impossible.

2753
2754
2755
2756
2757
2758
2759
2760

2 Cor. xii. 4.
1 Sam. xxviii. 11–19.
Quæst. ad Simplicianum, lib. ii. qu. 4.
Retract. ii. 4, and “On Christian Doctrine,” book ii. chap. viii., vol. ii. p. 539. Ben. ed.
Ecclus. xlvi. 20.
Deut. xxxiv. 5.
Matt. xvii. 3.
Inquilinatum.

713

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

20. Howbeit it is a question which surpasses the strength of my understanding, after what manner
the Martyrs aid them who by them, it is certain, are helped; whether themselves by themselves bepresent at the same time in so different places, and by so great distance lying apart one from another,either where their Memorials are, or beside their Memorials, wheresoever they are felt to be present:
or whether, while they themselves, in a place congruous with their merits, are removed from all
converse with mortals, and yet do in a general sort pray for the needs of their suppliants, (like as
we pray for the dead, to whom however we are not present, nor know where they be or what they
be doing,) God Almighty, Who is every where present, neither bounded in2761 with us nor remotefrom us, hearing and granting the Martyrs’ prayers, doth by angelic ministries every where diffused
afford to men those solaces, to whom in the misery of this life He seeth meet to afford the same,and, touching His Martyrs, doth where He will, when He will, how He will, and chiefest throughtheir Memorials, because this He knoweth to be expedient for us unto edifying of the faith of Christ
for Whose confession they suffered, by marvellous and ineffable power and goodness cause their
merits to be had in honor. A matter is this, too high that I should have power to attain unto it, too
abstruse that I should be able to search it out; and therefore which of these two be the case, orwhether perchance both one and the other be the case, that sometimes these things be done by very
presence of the Martyrs, sometimes by Angels taking upon them the person of the Martyrs, I dare
not define; rather would I seek this at them who know it. For it is not to be thought that no man
knows these things: (not indeed he who thinks he knows, and knows not,) for there be gifts of God,Who bestows on these some one, on those some other, according to the Apostle who says, that “toeach one is given the manifestation of the Spirit to profit withal; to one2762 indeed,” saith he, “isgiven by the Spirit discourse of wisdom; to another2763 discourse of science according to the same
Spirit; while to another2764 faith in the same Spirit; to another2765 the gift of healings in one Spirit;
to one2766 workings of miracles; to one2767 prophecy; to one2768 discerning of spirits; to one2769 kindsof tongues; to one2770 interpretation of discourses. But all these worketh one and the same spirit,
dividing to every man severally as He will.”2771 Of all these spiritual gifts, which the Apostle hathrehearsed, to whomsoever is given discerning of spirits, the same knoweth these things as they aremeet to be known.

21. Such, we may believe, was that John the Monk, whom the elder Theodosius, the Emperor,
consulted concerning the issue of the civil war: seeing he had also the gift of prophecy. For that

2761
2762
2763
2764
2765
2766
2767
2768
2769
2770
2771

Concretus.
Alii, ˆλλῳ.
Alii, ˆλλῳ.
Alteri, ›τ™ρῳ.
Alteri, ›τ™ρῳ.
Alii, ˆλλῳ.
Alii, ˆλλῳ.
Alii, ˆλλῳ.
Alii, ˆλλῳ.
Alii, ˆλλῳ.
1 Cor. xii. 7–10.

714

NPNF (V1-03)

550

Philip Schaff

not each several person has a several one of those gifts, but that one man may have more gifts thanone, I make no question. This John, then, when once a certain most religious woman desired to seehim, and to obtain this did through her husband make vehement entreaty, refused indeed this request
because he had never allowed this to women, but “Go,” said he, “tell thy wife, she shall see methis night, but in her sleep.” And so it came to pass: and he gave her advice, whatever was meet to
be given to a wedded believing woman. And she, on her awaking, made known to her husband that
she had seen a man of God, such as he knew him to be, and what she had been told by him. The
person who learned this from them, reported it to me, a grave man and a noble, and most worthy
to be believed. But if I myself had seen that holy monk, because (it is said) he was most patient inhearing questions and most wise in answering, I would have sought of him, as touching our question,
whether he himself came to that woman in sleep, that is to say, his spirit in the form of his body,just as we dream that we see ourselves in the form of our own body; or whether, while he himself
was doing something else, or, if asleep, was dreaming of something else, it was either by an Angelor in some other way that such vision took place in the woman’s dream; and that it would so be,
as he promised, he himself foreknew by the Spirit of prophecy revealing the same. For if he washimself present to her in her dream, of course it was by miraculous grace that he was enabled so
to do, not by nature; and by God’s gift, not by faculty of his own. But if, while he was doing someother thing or sleeping and occupied with other sights, the woman saw him in her sleep, thendoubtless some such thing took place, as that is which we read in the Acts of the Apostles, where
the Lord Jesus speaks to Ananias concerning Saul,2772 and informs him that Saul has seen Ananias
coming unto him, while Ananias himself wist not of it. The man of God would make answer to meof these things as the case might be, and then about the Martyrs I should go on to ask of him,
whether they be themselves present in dreams, or in whatever other way to those who see them inwhat shape they will; and above all when the demons in men confess themselves tormented by the
Martyrs, and ask them to spare them; or whether these things be wrought through angelic powers,
to the honor and commendation of the Saints for men’s profit, while those are in supreme rest, andwholly free for other far better sights, apart from us, and praying for us. For it chanced at Milan at(the tomb of) the holy Martyrs Protasius and Gervasius, that Ambrose the bishop, at that time living,
being expressly named, in like manner as were the dead whose names they were rehearsing, thedemons confessed him and besought him to spare them, he being the while otherwise engaged, andwhen this was taking place, altogether unwitting of it. Or whether indeed these things are wrought,
somewhiles by very presence of the Martyrs, otherwhiles by that of Angels; and whether it bepossible, or by what tokens possible, for us to discriminate these two cases; or whether to perceive
and to judge of these things none be able, but he which hath that gift through God’s Spirit, “dividing
unto every man severally as He will:”2773 the same John, methinks, would discourse to me of allthese matters, as I should wish; that either by his teaching I might learn, and what I should be told
should know to be true and certain; or I should believe what I knew not, upon his telling me whatthings he knew. But if peradventure he should make answer out of holy Scripture, and say, “Things
higher than thou, seek thou not; and things stronger than thou, search thou not; but what the Lordhath commanded thee, of those things bethink thee alway:”2774 this also I should thankfully accept.
2772
2773
2774

Acts ix. 12.
1 Cor. xii. 11.
Ecclus. iii. 22.

715

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

For it is no small gain if, when any things are obscure and uncertain to us, and we not able tocomprehend them, it be at any rate clear and certain that we are not to seek them; and what thing
each one wishes to learn, accounting it to be profitable that he should know it, he should learn that
it is no harm that he know it not.

22. Which things being so, let us not think that to the dead for whom we have a care, any thing
reaches save what by sacrifices either of the altar, or of prayers, or of alms, we solemnly supplicate:although not to all for whom they are done be they profitable, but to them only by whom while
they live it is obtained that they should be profitable. But forasmuch as we discern not who thesebe, it is meet to do them for all regenerate persons, that none of them may be passed by to whomthese benefits may and ought to reach. For better it is that these things shall be superfluously doneto them whom they neither hinder nor help, than lacking to them whom they help. More diligently
however doth each man these things for his own near and dear friends, in order that they may be
likewise done unto him by his. But as for the burying of the body, whatever is bestowed on that,is no aid of salvation, but an office of humanity, according to that affection by which “no man everhateth his own flesh.”2775 Whence it is fitting that he take2776 what care he is able for the flesh of
his neighbor, when he is gone that bare2777 it. And if they do these things who believe not theresurrection of the flesh, how much more are they beholden to do the same who do believe; thatso, an office of this kind bestowed upon a body, dead but yet to rise again and to remain to eternity,
may also be in some sort a testimony of the same faith? But, that a person is buried at the memorialsof the Martyrs, this, I think, so far profits the departed, that while commending him also to the
Martyrs’ patronage, the affection of supplication on his behalf is increased.

551

23. Here, to the things thou hast thought meet to inquire of me, thou hast such reply as I havebeen able to render: which if it be more than enough prolix, thou must excuse this, for it was done
through love of holding longer talk with thee. For this book, then, how thy charity shall receive it,let me, I pray thee, know by a second letter: though doubtless it will be more welcome for its
bearer’s sake, to wit our brother and fellow-presbyter Candidianus, whom, having been by thy letter
made acquainted with him, I have welcomed with all my heart, and am loath to let him depart. For
greatly in the charity of Christ hath he by his presence consoled us, and, to say truth, it was at his
instance that I have done thy bidding. For with so great businesses is my heart distraught, that had
not he by ever and anon putting me in mind not suffered me to forget it, assuredly to thy questioning
reply of mind had not been forthcoming.

2775
2776
2777

Eph. v. 29.
Gerat.
Gerebat.

716

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Indexes
Index of Scripture References
Genesis1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:4 1:4 1:5 1:5 1:20-25 1:20-25 1:24 1:24 1:26 1:26 1:26 1:26
1:26 1:26 1:26 1:26 1:26 1:26 1:26 1:26 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27
1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:28 1:28 1:28 1:28 1:31 1:31
1:31 1:31 2:1-3 2:1-3 2:17 2:17 2:20-22 2:20-22 2:21 2:21 2:22 2:22 2:22 2:22
2:22 2:22 2:24 2:24 2:24 2:24 3 3:1 3:1 3:1-6 3:1-6 3:4 3:4 3:5 3:5 3:5 3:5
3:7 3:7 3:8-10 3:8-10 3:14-19 3:14-19 3:21 3:21 4:14 4:14 6:3 6:3 6:7 6:7 6:7
6:7 6:22 6:22 7:22 7:22 10 11:7 12:1 12:1 12:1 12:1 12:7 12:7 16:7 16:7 17:1
17:1 17:4 17:4 17:19 18 18:1 18:1 18:1 18:1 18:2 18:2 18:4 18:4 18:15 18:15
18:20 18:20 18:33 18:33 18:33 18:33 19:1 19:1 19:1-19 19:1-19 19:2 19:2 19:2
19:5-11 19:5-11 19:8 19:8 19:8 19:8 19:17-21 19:17-21 19:18-20 19:18-20 19:21
19:21 19:22 19:22 19:24 19:24 20:2 20:2 20:12 20:12 21:10 21:10 21:12 21:12
21:12 21:12 22 22:6 22:6 22:12 22:12 22:12 22:12 22:18 22:18 22:18 22:18 23
23 24 24:2-4 24:2-4 25:5 25:5 25:6 25:6 25:9 25:26 25:26 25:26 25:26 26:7 26:7
27:16-19 27:16-19 27:19 28:18 28:18 28:18 28:18 28:18 28:18 30:37-41 30:37-41
30:41 30:41 32:24 32:24 32:25 32:25 37:33 37:33 38:14-18 38:14-18 38:27-30 42
46:27 46:27 46:27 46:27 47:30
Exodus
1:17-20 1:17-20 1:19 1:19 1:20 1:20 2:15 2:15 3:1-6 3:1-6 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:6
3:6 3:7 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:21 3:21 3:22 3:22 4:3
4:3 4:4 4:4 7 7 7:10 7:10 7:12 7:12 7:12 7:12 8 8:7 8:18 8:19 9:16 9:16 12
12 13:21 13:21 13:22 13:22 16:10-12 16:10-12 17:8-16 17:8-16 19:6 19:6 19:16
19:16 19:18 19:18 19:19 19:19 20:5 20:5 20:5 20:5 20:12 20:12 20:13 20:13 20:13
20:13 20:14 20:14 20:15 20:15 20:16 20:16 20:16 20:16 20:16 20:16 20:18 20:18
20:21 20:21 21:18 21:18 24:10 24:10 24:17 24:17 32:4 32:4 32:31 32:31 33:11-23
33:11-23 33:19 33:19 33:19 33:19 34:28 34:28 34:33 34:33
Leviticus
11:20 11:20 19:18 19:18
Numbers
6:5 6:5 11:17 11:17 17:8 17:8 19:11 19:11 21:7 21:7 21:9 21:9
Deuteronomy
5:9 5:9 6:4 6:4 6:4 6:4 6:4 6:4 6:5 6:5 6:5 6:5 6:5 6:5 6:13 6:13 6:13 6:13
10:22 10:22 23:24 23:24 23:25 23:25 24:1 24:1 25:5 25:5 25:5-10 25:5-10 25:10
25:10 29:5 29:5 34:5 34:5
Joshua2 2 6:25
Judges717

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

9:8-15 9:8-15
1 Samuel
21:13 21:13 25:22-35 25:22-35 28:11-19 28:11-19
2 Samuel
2:5 2:5 7:3 16:5-12 16:5-12
1 Kings
2:38 2:38 11:13 11:13 11:30 11:30 11:31 11:31 13:21 13:21 13:22 13:22 18:45
18:45 21:10 21:10 21:13 21:13
2 Kings
10:31 10:31 22:18-20 22:18-20
Job
1 1:8 1:21 1:21 2 2:5 2:9 2:10 2:10 7:1 7:1 7:1 14:1 25:4 28:8 28:28 28:28
28:28 28:28
Psalms1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:2 1:2 1:2 1:2 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:8 2:8 2:8
2:8 2:11 2:11 2:26 2:26 2:27 2:27 2:27 3:2 3:3 3:3 3:3 3:3 3:5 3:8 3:8 3:8 3:8
4:4 4:6 4:8 4:8 5:3 5:4 5:4 5:4 5:4 5:4 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:6
5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:12 5:12 6:7 6:7
6:7 6:7 7:14 7:14 8:4 8:4 8:5 8:5 8:5 8:8 8:8 9 9:17 9:17 9:18 9:18 9:18 9:18
9:24 10:1 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 11:2 11:5 11:5 11:5
11:5 11:6 11:6 12 12:7 12:8 13:6 14:1 14:1 14:1 14:1 14:2 14:2 14:6 14:6 15:1
15:1 15:2 15:2 15:2 15:2 15:2 15:2 15:2 15:2 15:3 15:3 15:3 15:3 16 16 16:2
16:2 16:11 16:11 16:11 16:12 16:15 16:15 17:2 17:2 17:8 17:8 18:22 18:29 18:29
18:44 18:44 19:1 19:1 19:3 19:3 19:3 19:3 19:4 19:4 19:4 19:4 19:4 19:4 19:4-6
19:5 19:5 19:7 19:7 19:9 19:9 19:133 19:142 20:8 20:8 22:1 22:1 22:1 22:1 22:3
22:16 22:16 22:17 22:17 22:18 22:18 22:27 22:27 22:27 22:27 22:28 22:28 23:4
23:6 23:6 25:15 25:15 25:18 25:18 26 26 26:1 27:1 27:1 27:1 27:4 27:4 27:4
27:4 27:4 27:4 27:9 27:9 27:10 27:10 30:6 30:6 30:7 30:7 31:19 31:19 31:20
31:20 31:21 31:21 31:22 31:22 31:22 31:22 32:4 32:4 32:5 32:5 32:8 32:8 34:1
34:1 34:5 34:5 34:14 34:14 35:19 35:19 36:3 36:3 36:4 36:9 36:9 36:9 36:9 36:11
36:11 36:35 37:23 37:23 38:3 38:6 38:9 38:9 38:10 38:10 38:10 38:10 39:3 39:3
39:3 39:3 39:5 39:5 39:5 39:6 39:6 39:6 39:7 39:7 39:7 39:7 39:8 39:8 41:3
41:3 41:3 41:4 41:4 41:4 41:4 41:4 41:5 41:6-8 41:6-8 41:9 41:9 41:10 41:10
43:1 43:1 43:2 43:2 45 45:1 45:1 45:2 45:2 45:2 45:2 45:2 45:2 45:5 45:5 45:6-17
45:6-17 45:7 45:7 46:8 46:8 46:8 48:1 48:1 48:2 48:5 48:8 48:8 49:12 49:12
50:15 50:15 51:5 51:5 51:5 51:5 51:10 51:10 51:17 51:17 51:17 51:17 54:1 54:1
55:5 55:5 56:7 56:7 57:6 57:6 59:9 59:9 59:9 59:9 59:10 59:10 59:10 59:10 59:10
59:10 59:11 59:11 59:17 59:17 62:5 62:5 62:5 62:5 62:5 65:2 65:2 65:13 65:13
66:4 66:4 68:9 68:9 68:18 68:18 68:18 68:18 69:4 69:4 69:21-23 69:21-23 69:32
69:32 71:4 71:4 71:5 71:5 71:5 71:5 71:5 71:5 72:18 72:18 73:1 73:1 73:23 73:23
75:7 75:7 77:9 77:9 77:9 77:9 77:27 77:27 77:28 77:28 78 79:2 79:2 79:3 79:3
79:11 79:11 80:1 80:1 81:8 81:8 81:10 81:10 82:6 82:6 82:6 82:6 84:2 84:2 84:4
84:4 85:11 85:11 85:12 85:12 86:10 86:10 88:5 88:5 90 90:1 90:1 90:1 90:9 90:9
91:9 91:9 91:16 91:16 94:8 94:8 94:9 94:9 94:11 94:11 94:12-15 94:12-15 94:19
718

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

94:19 96:1 96:1 96:8 96:8 101:1 101:1 102:26 102:26 102:27 102:27 102:27 103:2
103:3 103:3 103:3 103:3 103:5 104:4 104:6 105:3 105:4 105:4 105:4 105:4 105:4
108:5 110:1 110:3 111 111:2 112:7 112:8 115:3 115:3 116:11 116:12 116:15 116:15
118:22 119:4-6 119:133 119:142 120 122:3 123:4 126:1 127:1 138 138:3 138:6
139:5 139:6 139:7 139:7 139:8 139:8 141:3 141:3 141:3 141:4 141:4 141:4 141:5
143:2 143:2 146:8 148:2 148:5 148:8 148:8
Proverbs
3:11 3:11 3:12 3:12 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:25 8:25 8:30 8:30 9:8 9:8 10:19 10:19
16:1 16:1 16:1 16:1 19:21 19:21 19:21 19:21 20:9 20:9 29:27 29:27 29:27 29:27
29:27 29:27 30:15 30:15
Ecclesiastes
1:18 1:18 3:5 3:5 3:5 3:5 3:21 3:21
Song of Solomon
1:3 1:3 1:3 1:4 1:4 1:11 1:11 1:12 1:12 2:2
Isaiah2:3 2:3 5:7 5:7 5:18 5:18 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 6:10 6:10 7:9 7:9 7:9 7:9 7:9
7:9 7:14 7:14 7:14 7:14 9:6 9:6 9:6 9:6 11:2 11:2 26:10 26:10 26:18 26:18 28:11
28:11 28:16 28:16 40:6 40:6 40:8 40:8 48:16 48:16 53:2 53:2 53:7 53:7 53:8
53:8 55:6 55:6 55:7 55:7 56:4 56:4 56:4 56:4 56:5 56:5 56:5 56:5 56:5 56:5
61:1 61:1 63:16 63:16 63:16 63:16 66:1 66:1 66:2 66:2 66:2 66:2 66:2 66:2
Jeremiah
16:19 16:19 16:19 16:19 16:20 16:20 17:5 17:5 17:5 17:5 17:5 17:5 23:24 23:24
25:12 25:12 25:12 25:12 25:18 25:18 29:1 29:4-7 29:4-7 29:10 31:1 31:1 31:2
31:2
Ezekiel
18:2 18:2 18:4 18:4 34 36:26 36:26 37:1-10 37:1-10
Daniel
2:47 2:47 3:29 6:26 7:9-14 7:9-14 9:21 9:21
Hosea
4:8 4:8 6:6 6:6
Joel
2:32
Jonah
3
Habakkuk
2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4
Zephaniah
2:11 2:11
Zechariah
1:9 1:9 9:17 9:17 12:10 12:10 12:10 12:10 13:7-13 13:7-13
Malachi
1:2 1:2 1:3 1:3
Matthew

719

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

1:17 1:17 1:18 1:20 1:20 1:23 1:23 2:12 2:20 3:3 3:11 3:13-15 3:16 3:16 3:16
3:16 3:16 3:16 3:16 3:17 3:17 4:1-11 5:3 5:3-10 5:6 5:8 5:8 5:8 5:8 5:8 5:10
5:11 5:12 5:14 5:22 5:23 5:27 5:27 5:28 5:28 5:32 5:34 5:34 5:37 5:37 5:37
5:37 5:37 5:37 5:39 5:40 5:44 5:44 5:44 5:44 6:8 6:9 6:9 6:9 6:9 6:10 6:11
6:11-13 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:13 6:13 6:14 6:15 6:15
6:19-22 6:24 6:24 6:25 6:25-34 6:26 6:26 6:26 6:30 6:31 6:34 6:34 6:34 7:7 7:7
7:8 7:12 7:15 7:16 7:16 7:18 7:21 7:21 7:22 8:5-10 8:5-10 8:8 8:8 8:9 8:11 8:19
8:20 8:22 9:2-4 9:11-13 9:15 10:7-10 10:10 10:16 10:16 10:19 10:20 10:20 10:21
10:22 10:22 10:23 10:28 10:28 10:28 10:28 10:28 10:28 10:28 10:28-30 10:28-30
10:33 10:40-42 11:13 11:18-19 11:19 11:21 11:25-29 11:27 11:27 11:27 11:27 11:27
11:28 11:28 11:28 11:29 11:29 11:29 12:1 12:2 12:3 12:4 12:28 12:32 12:32 12:33
12:35 12:37 12:39 12:40 12:40 12:45 12:46-50 12:48 13:8 13:9 13:15 13:15 13:30
13:47-50 13:55 14:26 14:26 14:31 15:10-20 15:11 15:16-20 15:17-20 15:22-28 15:28
16:18 16:18 16:21-23 17:3 17:5 17:27 18 18:1-3 18:7 19:8 19:8 19:9 19:9 19:10
19:11 19:11 19:11 19:11 19:12 19:12 19:12 19:12 19:12 19:12 19:12 19:12 19:12
19:12 19:17 19:19 19:21 20:9 20:10 20:21 20:22 20:22 20:23 21:31 22:13 22:29
22:30 22:30 22:37 22:37 22:37 22:37-40 22:37-40 22:37-40 22:37-40 22:37-40 22:39
22:39 22:39 22:40 22:40 22:40 22:40 23:3 23:9 23:15 23:26 23:26 23:37 23:37
24:12 24:19 24:31 25:4 25:21 25:23 25:26 25:27 25:31 25:31 25:31 25:31-46 25:32
25:33 25:34 25:34 25:34 25:34 25:37 25:40 25:41 25:41 25:41 25:46 25:46 26:7-13
26:38 26:39 26:41 26:49 26:70-74 27:23-50 27:46 27:46
Mark
1:11 1:11 3:27 3:27 13:32 13:32 13:32 13:32 15:37 15:37 15:39 15:39 15:42-46
15:42-46 15:43 15:43 15:44 15:44 17:5
Luke
1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:17 1:17 1:26-32 1:26-32 1:27 1:27 1:28 1:28 1:28 1:28
1:30 1:30 1:34 1:34 1:34 1:34 1:35 1:35 1:35 1:35 1:41 1:41-79 1:80 1:80 2:14
2:14 2:25-38 2:25-38 2:36 2:36 2:37 2:37 2:37 2:37 2:52 2:52 3:6 3:6 3:6 3:6
3:21-23 3:21-23 3:22 3:22 4:1 4:18 4:18 4:19 4:19 5:21 5:21 5:22 5:22 6:19 6:19
6:30 6:30 6:45 6:45 7:6 7:6 7:7 7:7 7:36-47 7:36-47 7:37 7:37 7:38 7:38 7:38
7:38 7:47 7:47 8:1-3 8:1-3 8:8 8:8 8:21 8:21 8:45 8:45 9:3 9:3 10:1-7 10:1-7
10:4 10:7 10:7 10:7 10:27 10:27 10:27 10:27 10:30 10:30 10:30-35 10:30-35
10:30-37 10:30-37 10:30-42 10:30-42 10:34 10:34 10:35 10:35 10:35 10:35 10:39
10:39 11:20 11:20 11:20 11:20 11:27 11:27 11:28 11:28 11:37-41 11:37-41 11:41
11:41 11:41 11:41 11:42 11:42 11:42 11:42 11:42 11:42 12:4 12:4 12:4 12:4 12:4-7
12:17 12:17 12:20 12:20 12:35 12:35 12:35 12:35 12:36 12:36 12:36 12:36 13:6-17
13:6-17 13:28-30 13:28-30 15:11-32 15:11-32 16:3 16:3 16:19-22 16:19-22 16:22
16:22 16:24-29 16:24-29 18:10-14 18:10-14 18:11-14 18:11-14 18:13 18:13 18:18
18:18 18:19 18:19 19:2-8 19:2-8 19:41 19:41 20:35 20:35 20:36 20:36 20:36 20:36
20:36 20:36 20:36 20:36 20:36 20:36 21:18 21:18 21:18 21:18 21:18 21:18 21:19
21:19 22:61 22:61 23:34 23:34 23:34 23:34 24:28 24:28 24:39 24:39 24:39 24:39
24:39 24:39 24:39 24:39 24:44 24:44
John

720

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1
1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1-14 1:1-14 1:2 1:2 1:2 1:2 1:2 1:2 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3
1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:5 1:5
1:5 1:5 1:9 1:9 1:9 1:9 1:9 1:9 1:10 1:10 1:10 1:10 1:10 1:10 1:11 1:11 1:12
1:12 1:12 1:12 1:12-14 1:12-14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14
1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14
1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:18 1:18
1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:29 1:29 1:29 1:29 1:29 1:29 1:47 1:47 2:2 2:2 2:4 2:4
2:7-9 2:7-9 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:19 2:19 2:19-21 2:19-21 2:20 2:20 3:2 3:2 3:5 3:5
3:6 3:6 3:6 3:6 3:8 3:8 3:14 3:14 3:15 3:15 3:17 3:17 3:21 3:21 3:35 3:35 3:35
3:35 3:36 3:36 3:36 3:36 4:7-14 4:7-14 4:10 4:10 4:13 4:13 4:24 4:24 4:24 4:24
4:24 4:24 4:24 4:24 4:24 4:24 4:34 4:34 5:2 5:2 5:19 5:19 5:19 5:19 5:19 5:19
5:19 5:19 5:19 5:19 5:21 5:21 5:22 5:22 5:22 5:22 5:22 5:22 5:22-29 5:22-29
5:24 5:24 5:25 5:25 5:25 5:25 5:26 5:26 5:26 5:26 5:26 5:26 5:26 5:26 5:26
5:26 5:26 5:26 5:27 5:27 5:29 5:29 5:46 5:46 6:38 6:38 6:38 6:38 6:67 6:67
7:16 7:16 7:16 7:16 7:16 7:16 7:16 7:16 7:37-39 7:37-39 7:39 7:39 7:39 8:15
8:15 8:23 8:23 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:31 8:31 8:32 8:32 8:36 8:36
8:42 8:42 8:44 8:44 8:50 8:50 9:6 9:6 9:7 9:7 10:17 10:17 10:18 10:18 10:18
10:18 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30
10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:36 10:36 11:34
11:34 11:51 11:51 12:6 12:6 12:6 12:6 12:6 12:6 12:28 12:28 12:28 12:28 12:44
12:44 12:47 12:47 12:47-50 12:47-50 12:48 12:48 13:1 13:1 13:1-17 13:1-17 13:5
13:5 13:16 13:16 13:21-24 13:21-24 13:23 13:23 13:29 14:1 14:1 14:1 14:1 14:2
14:2 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:8 14:8 14:9 14:9
14:9 14:9 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:11 14:11 14:11 14:11 14:15-17
14:15-17 14:16-23 14:16-23 14:17 14:17 14:21 14:21 14:21 14:21 14:21 14:21 14:21
14:21 14:22 14:22 14:23 14:23 14:23 14:23 14:25 14:25 14:26 14:26 14:26 14:26
14:26 14:26 14:26 14:26 14:26 14:26 14:28 14:28 14:28 14:28 14:28 14:28 14:28
14:28 14:28 14:28 14:28 14:28 14:30-31 14:30-31 15:2 15:2 15:5 15:5 15:5 15:12
15:12 15:13 15:13 15:13 15:13 15:13 15:13 15:15 15:25 15:25 15:26 15:26 15:26
15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26
15:26 15:26 15:26 16:6 16:6 16:7 16:7 16:7 16:7 16:7 16:7 16:12 16:12 16:12
16:12 16:13 16:13 16:13 16:13 16:13 16:13 16:13-15 16:13-15 16:15 16:15 16:15
16:15 16:22 16:22 16:23 16:23 16:25-28 16:25-28 16:28 16:28 16:28 16:28 17:1
17:1 17:2 17:2 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3-5 17:3-5
17:4 17:4 17:5 17:5 17:5 17:5 17:10 17:10 17:11 17:11 17:11 17:11 17:15 17:15
17:19 17:19 17:20-22 17:20-22 17:21 17:23 17:23 17:23 18:22 18:22 18:23 18:23
19:14 19:14 19:23 19:23 19:24 19:24 19:26 19:26 19:27 19:27 19:30 19:30 19:30-34
19:30-34 19:34 19:34 19:38 19:38-39 19:39 19:41 19:41 19:41 19:41 19:42 19:42
20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:22 20:22 20:22 20:22 20:22
20:22 20:22 20:22 20:23 20:23 20:28 20:28 21:15 21:15
Acts
1:11 1:11 2 2 2:1-4 2:1-4 2:1-4 2:1-4 2:1-4 2:1-4 2:2 2:2 2:2 2:2 2:2-4 2:2-4
2:3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4721

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

2:4 2:32 2:32 2:33 2:33 2:37 2:37 2:37 2:37 2:38 2:38 2:39 2:39 2:41 2:41 2:44
2:44 2:44 2:44 2:44 2:44 2:45 2:45 4:12 4:12 4:32 4:32 4:32 4:32 4:32 4:32
4:32 4:32 4:32 4:34 4:34 5:15 5:15 6:7 6:7 7:2 7:2 7:29-33 7:29-33 7:47 7:47
7:48 7:48 7:51-53 7:51-53 8:18 8:18 8:18-20 8:18-20 8:19 8:19 8:20 8:20 8:20
8:20 8:21-22 8:21-22 9:4 9:4 9:12 9:12 9:25 9:25 10:38 10:38 10:41 10:41 10:44
10:44 10:46 10:46 11:15-17 11:15-17 11:28-30 11:28-30 11:28-30 11:28-30 11:28-30
11:28-30 12:9 12:9 12:9-11 12:9-11 13:2 13:2 13:18 13:18 13:30 13:30 13:33 13:33
15:9 15:9 15:9 15:9 16:1-3 16:1-3 17:17 17:17 17:18 17:18 17:21 17:21 17:27
17:27 17:27 17:27 17:27 17:27 17:28 17:28 17:28 17:28 17:28 17:28 17:28 17:28
17:28 17:28 18:1-3 18:1-3 18:4 18:4 20:7 20:7 20:33-35 20:33-35 21:10-12 21:10-12
23:3 23:3 26:16-18 26:16-18
Romans1:1 1:1 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:4 1:4 1:9 1:9 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17
1:17 1:17 1:17 1:18 1:18 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20
1:20 1:20 1:21 1:21 1:22 1:22 1:23 1:23 1:23 1:23 1:25 1:25 1:25 1:25 1:26
1:26 1:27 1:27 1:30 1:30 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:25 2:25 2:25
2:25 3:7 3:7 3:7 3:7 3:8 3:8 3:8 3:8 3:19 3:19 3:20 3:20 3:20 3:20 3:20 3:20
3:26 3:26 4:4 4:4 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:15 4:15 4:17 4:17 4:25 4:25 5:4 5:4 5:5
5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5
5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:6 5:6 5:6-10 5:6-10 5:8 5:8 5:8 5:8 5:8 5:8 5:8-10 5:8-10 5:9
5:9 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:16 5:16 5:16
5:16 5:18 5:18 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 6:1 6:1 6:1-11 6:1-11
6:3 6:3 6:4 6:4 6:4 6:4 6:5 6:5 6:6 6:6 6:6 6:6 6:9 6:9 6:9 6:9 6:9 6:9 6:9
6:9 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:13 6:13 6:13 6:13 6:13 6:13 6:13 6:13 6:13
6:13 6:13 6:13 6:14 6:14 6:14 6:14 6:23 6:23 7:7 7:7 7:7 7:7 7:14 7:14 7:17
7:17 7:18 7:18 7:18 7:18 7:18 7:18 7:18 7:18 7:22 7:22 7:23 7:23 7:23 7:23
7:24 7:24 7:25 7:25 7:25 7:25 7:25 7:25 8 8 8:9 8:9 8:10 8:10 8:10 8:10 8:10
8:10 8:11 8:11 8:12 8:12 8:13 8:13 8:13 8:13 8:13 8:13 8:14 8:14 8:14 8:14
8:14 8:14 8:14 8:14 8:14 8:14 8:15 8:15 8:15 8:15 8:15 8:15 8:15 8:15 8:15
8:15 8:15-17 8:15-17 8:17 8:17 8:18 8:18 8:22 8:22 8:23 8:23 8:23 8:23 8:23-25
8:23-25 8:24 8:24 8:24 8:24 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:26 8:26 8:28 8:28 8:28 8:28
8:28-32 8:28-32 8:29 8:29 8:30 8:30 8:30 8:30 8:31 8:31 8:31 8:31 8:31 8:31
8:32 8:32 8:32 8:32 8:32 8:32 8:32 8:32 8:32 8:32 8:34 8:34 8:35-39 8:35-39 9:1
9:1 9:2 9:2 9:5 9:5 9:5 9:5 9:5 9:5 9:7 9:7 9:8 9:8 9:12 9:12 9:13 9:13 9:14
9:14 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:16 9:16 9:16 9:16 9:16 9:16 9:16 9:16 9:17 9:17
9:18 9:18 9:18 9:18 9:19 9:19 9:20 9:20 9:21 9:21 9:21 9:21 9:22 9:22 9:23
9:23 9:23 9:23 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:4 10:4 10:9 10:9
10:10 10:10 10:10 10:10 10:10 10:10 10:10 10:10 10:14 10:14 10:17 10:17 11:5
11:5 11:6 11:6 11:6 11:6 11:17 11:17 11:18 11:18 11:20 11:20 11:20 11:20 11:20
11:20 11:33-36 11:33-36 11:36 11:36 11:36 11:36 11:36 11:36 11:36 11:36 11:36
11:36 11:36 11:36 11:36 11:36 12:1 12:1 12:2 12:2 12:2 12:2 12:2 12:2 12:2
12:2 12:3 12:3 12:3 12:3 12:3 12:3 12:4-6 12:4-6 12:10 12:10 12:12 12:12 12:16
12:16 12:17 12:17 13:1 13:1 13:1 13:1 13:7 13:7 13:8 13:8 13:9 13:9 13:10 13:10

722

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:10 14:10 14:23 14:23 15:3 15:3 15:4 15:4 15:19 15:19
15:25-27 15:25-27 15:27 15:27 16:18 16:18 16:19 16:19
1 Corinthians
1:13 1:13 1:20 1:20 1:21 1:21 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24
1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:25 1:25 1:25 1:25 1:27-29 1:27-29
1:30 1:30 1:30 1:30 1:30 1:30 1:31 1:31 1:31 1:31 1:31 1:31 1:31 1:31 2:2 2:2
2:2 2:2 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:6 2:6 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:11 2:11 2:12
2:12 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:14 3:1 3:1 3:1 3:1 3:1 3:1 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:3
3:3 3:3 3:3 3:5 3:5 3:5-10 3:5-10 3:6 3:6 3:7 3:7 3:7 3:7 3:8 3:8 3:9 3:9 3:11
3:11 3:11-15 3:11-15 3:11-15 3:13-15 3:13-15 3:15 3:15 3:16 3:16 3:16 3:16 3:16
3:16 3:16 3:16 3:17 3:17 3:17 3:17 3:19 3:19 3:22 3:22 3:22 3:22 3:23 3:23
3:23 3:23 4:3 4:3 4:3 4:3 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:7 4:7 4:7 4:7 4:7 4:7 4:7
4:7 6:1 6:1 6:4-6 6:4-6 6:4-6 6:4-6 6:7 6:7 6:9 6:9 6:10 6:10 6:10 6:10 6:15
6:15 6:15 6:15 6:15 6:15 6:15 6:15 6:15 6:15 6:16 6:16 6:17 6:17 6:17 6:17
6:17 6:17 6:18 6:18 6:19 6:19 6:19 6:19 6:19 6:19 6:19 6:19 6:19 6:19 6:19
6:19 6:19 6:19 6:20 6:20 6:20 6:20 6:20 6:20 6:20 6:20 6:20 6:20 7:1 7:1 7:4
7:4 7:4 7:4 7:4 7:4 7:5 7:5 7:6 7:6 7:6 7:6 7:6 7:6 7:6 7:6 7:7 7:7 7:7 7:7
7:7 7:7 7:7 7:7 7:8 7:8 7:8 7:8 7:8 7:8 7:8 7:8 7:9 7:9 7:9 7:9 7:9 7:9 7:9
7:9 7:9 7:9 7:9 7:9 7:10 7:10 7:10 7:10 7:10 7:10 7:11 7:11 7:11 7:11 7:11
7:11 7:14 7:14 7:18 7:18 7:18-20 7:18-20 7:25 7:25 7:25 7:25 7:25 7:25 7:25
7:25 7:26 7:26 7:26 7:26 7:26 7:26 7:26 7:26 7:27 7:27 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28
7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:29 7:29 7:29-34 7:32
7:32 7:32 7:32 7:32 7:32 7:32 7:32 7:32 7:32 7:33 7:33 7:33 7:33 7:34 7:34
7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:35 7:35 7:36
7:36 7:36 7:36 7:36 7:36 7:37 7:37 7:38 7:38 7:38 7:38 7:38 7:38 7:39 7:39
7:39 7:39 7:39 7:39 7:40 7:40 7:40 7:40 7:40 7:40 7:40 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1
8:2 8:2 8:3 8:3 8:5 8:5 8:6 8:6 8:6 8:6 8:6 8:6 9:1-7 9:1-7 9:6-12 9:6-12 9:7
9:7 9:7 9:7 9:7-10 9:7-10 9:7-15 9:7-15 9:11 9:11 9:12 9:12 9:12 9:12 9:12 9:12
9:13-15 9:13-15 9:14 9:14 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:16 9:16 9:17 9:17 9:18 9:18
9:19-21 9:19-21 9:20 9:20 9:22 9:22 9:22 9:22 9:22 9:22 9:22 9:22 9:24 9:24
10:1-11 10:1-11 10:1-11 10:1-11 10:4 10:4 10:4 10:4 10:11 10:11 10:11 10:11
10:11 10:12 10:12 10:13 10:13 10:13 10:13 10:13 10:13 10:13 10:13 10:13 10:13
10:13 10:13 10:32 10:32 10:33 10:33 11:3 11:3 11:3 11:3 11:3 11:3 11:3 11:3
11:3 11:3 11:4 11:4 11:5 11:5 11:7 11:7 11:7 11:7 11:7 11:7 11:7 11:7 11:10
11:10 11:12 11:12 11:14 11:14 11:16 11:16 11:17 11:17 11:31 11:31 11:31 11:31
11:31 11:31 11:32 11:32 11:32 11:32 11:32 11:32 12:3 12:3 12:6 12:6 12:6-11
12:6-11 12:7 12:7 12:7-10 12:7-10 12:8 12:8 12:8 12:8 12:10 12:10 12:11 12:11
12:11 12:11 12:11 12:11 12:12 12:12 12:13 12:13 12:18 12:18 12:18 12:18 12:24
12:24 12:24 12:24 12:25 12:25 12:26 12:26 12:29 12:29 12:31 12:31 12:31 12:31
13:1-3 13:1-3 13:3 13:3 13:4 13:4 13:4 13:4 13:4 13:4 13:4 13:4 13:5 13:5 13:7
13:7 13:7 13:7 13:8 13:8 13:11 13:11 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12
13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12
13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12
13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12
723

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:13 13:13 13:13 13:13 13:13 13:13 14:14 14:14 14:21
14:21 15:15 15:15 15:19 15:19 15:21 15:21 15:22 15:22 15:23 15:23 15:24 15:24
15:24 15:24 15:24 15:24 15:24-28 15:24-28 15:24-28 15:24-28 15:25 15:25 15:26
15:27 15:27 15:28 15:28 15:28 15:28 15:28 15:28 15:28 15:28 15:33 15:33 15:36-38
15:36-38 15:39 15:39 15:40 15:40 15:41 15:41 15:41 15:41 15:41 15:41 15:42
15:42 15:42 15:42 15:43 15:43 15:44 15:44 15:44 15:44 15:44 15:44 15:44 15:44
15:45 15:45 15:47 15:47 15:49 15:49 15:50 15:50 15:50 15:50 15:50 15:50 15:51
15:51 15:52 15:52 15:52 15:52 15:52 15:52 15:52 15:52 15:53 15:53 15:53 15:53
15:53-56 15:53-56 15:54 15:54 15:54 15:54 15:55 15:55 15:55 15:55 15:56 15:56
16:1-4 16:1-4
2 Corinthians
1:12 1:12 1:19 1:19 2:15 2:15 2:16 2:16 2:16 2:16 3:6 3:6 3:14 3:14 3:16 3:16
3:16 3:16 3:17 3:17 3:17 3:17 3:18 3:18 3:18 3:18 4:6 4:6 4:13 4:13 4:16 4:16
4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:17 4:17 4:18
4:18 5:5 5:5 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7
5:7 5:7 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:13 5:13 5:14 5:14 5:20 5:20 5:21 5:21 6:2-10
6:2-10 6:7 6:7 6:8 6:8 6:10 6:10 8:1-21 8:1-21 8:9 8:9 8:21 8:21 9 9:7 9:7 9:7
9:7 10:12 10:12 10:12 10:12 10:17 10:17 11:2 11:2 11:2 11:2 11:2 11:2 11:7
11:7 11:7-12 11:7-12 11:9 11:9 11:9 11:9 11:14 11:14 11:14 11:14 11:33 11:33
12:4 12:4 12:6 12:6 12:9 12:9 12:15 12:15 13:4 13:4
Galatians
1:10 1:10 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 2:3 2:3 2:4 2:4 2:9 2:9 2:12-21 2:12-21 2:13 2:13
2:14 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:16 2:16 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20
2:20 3:11 3:11 3:19 3:19 3:24 3:24 3:26-28 3:26-28 3:27 3:27 3:28 3:28 4:4 4:4
4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:5
4:5 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:6 4:6 4:10 4:10 4:11 4:11 4:19 4:19 4:19 4:19
4:22-24 4:22-24 4:22-26 4:22-26 4:24 4:24 4:25 4:25 4:26 4:26 4:26 4:26 4:26
4:26 4:26 4:26 4:26 4:26 4:30 4:30 5:2 5:2 5:4 5:4 5:5 5:5 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6
5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:13 5:13 5:14
5:14 5:16 5:16 5:16 5:16 5:16 5:16 5:16-18 5:16-18 5:17 5:17 5:17 5:17 5:17
5:17 5:17 5:17 5:17 5:17 5:19 5:19 5:19-21 5:19-21 5:20 5:20 5:21 5:21 5:22
5:22 5:23 5:23 5:24 5:24 5:24 5:24 6:1 6:1 6:1 6:1 6:2 6:2 6:4 6:4 6:6 6:6 6:6
6:6 6:14 6:14
Ephesians
1:4 1:4 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:10 1:10 1:14 1:14 1:22 1:22 1:23 1:23 2:1-3 2:1-3
2:3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8-10 2:8-10 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:10 2:10
3:7 3:7 3:8 3:8 4:3 4:3 4:5 4:5 4:7 4:7 4:7-12 4:7-12 4:8 4:8 4:8 4:8 4:8 4:8
4:13 4:13 4:14 4:14 4:21-24 4:21-24 4:22-25 4:22-25 4:23 4:23 4:23 4:23 4:24
4:24 4:24 4:24 4:25 4:25 4:25 4:25 4:25 4:25 4:28 4:28 4:28 4:28 5:1 5:1 5:8
5:8 5:12 5:12 5:14 5:14 5:22-28 5:22-28 5:24 5:24 5:25-28 5:25-28 5:29 5:29 5:29
5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 6:5 6:5 83
120 130 131 137 143 150 188
Philippians724

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

1:8 1:8 1:15-18 1:15-18 1:18 1:18 1:23 1:23 1:23 1:23 1:29 1:29 2:3 2:3 2:5-11
2:5-11 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6
2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7
2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8
2:8 2:8 2:8-11 2:8-11 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:12 2:12 2:12 2:12 2:13 2:13 2:13 2:13
2:13 2:13 2:13 2:13 2:16 2:16 2:17 2:17 2:21 2:21 3:3 3:3 3:6 3:6 3:12-14
3:12-14 3:13-15 3:13-15 3:15 3:15 3:15 3:15 3:16 3:16 3:20 3:20 3:21 3:21 3:21
3:21 4:7 4:7 4:8 4:8 4:9 4:9 4:12 4:12
Colossians
1:9 1:13 1:13 1:13 1:13 1:14 1:14 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:16 1:16 1:16 1:16 1:16
1:16 1:17 1:17 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:19 1:19
1:20 1:20 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 2:1-3 2:1-3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:11 2:11 2:11 2:11
2:15 2:15 2:20 2:20 3:1 3:1 3:1 3:1 3:1-3 3:1-3 3:1-4 3:1-4 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:3
3:3 3:4 3:4 3:4 3:4 3:5 3:5 3:6 3:6 3:7 3:7 3:8 3:8 3:9 3:9 3:9 3:9 3:9 3:9
3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10
1 Thessalonians
2:5-7 2:5-7 2:6 2:6 2:7 2:7 2:7-9 2:7-9 2:9 2:9 2:13 2:13 4:5 4:5 4:17 4:17
5:6-8 5:6-8
2 Thessalonians
3:6-12 3:6-12 3:8 3:8 3:8 3:8 3:8 3:8 3:9 3:9 3:10 3:10 3:12 3:12 3:12 3:12
3:13 3:13 3:13 3:13
1 Timothy
1:1 1:1 1:2 1:2 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5
1:5 1:13 1:13 1:13 1:13 1:13 1:13 1:15 1:15 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:20
1:20 2:1 2:1 2:1-4 2:1-4 2:2 2:2 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5
2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:9 2:9 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:15 3:2 3:2 3:16 3:16
4:8 4:8 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:11 5:11 5:11
5:11 5:11 5:11 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:13 5:13 5:13 5:13 5:14 5:14
5:14 5:14 5:15 5:15 5:23 5:23 5:23 5:23 6:10 6:10 6:14-16 6:14-16 6:15 6:15
6:16 6:16 6:16 6:16 6:16 6:16 6:16 6:16 6:18 6:18 6:19 6:19
2 Timothy
2:3-6 2:3-6 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:8 2:8 2:13 2:13 2:19 2:19 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25
4:1 4:1 4:2 4:2
Titus
1:6 1:6 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 3:13 3:13 3:14 3:14
Hebrews
1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:8 1:8 1:9 1:9 1:13 1:13 1:13 1:13 1:14 1:14
2:1-4 2:1-4 2:4 2:4 2:9 2:9 2:11 2:11 5:5 5:5 5:14 5:14 5:14 5:14 5:14 5:14 7
7:17 7:17 10:38 10:38 11:1 11:1 11:1 11:1 12:3 12:3 12:7 12:7 12:11 12:11 13:4
13:4
James
1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:15 1:15 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17
1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:17 2:17 2:19 2:19 2:19 2:19 3:2 3:2
3:15 3:15 4:6 4:6 4:6 4:6 5:11 5:11
725

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

1 Peter
1:10 1:10 1:11 1:11 1:17 1:17 1:20 1:20 1:24 1:24 1:25 1:25 2:21 2:21 2:21
2:21 2:21 2:21 2:22 2:22 3:1-7 3:1-7 3:5-7 3:5-7 3:9 3:9 5:8 5:8
2 Peter
1:4 1:4 2:4 2:4 2:19 2:19 2:19 2:19
1 John1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:8 1:8 1:8 1:8 1:8 1:8 1:8-10 1:8-10 2:1 2:1 2:2 2:2
2:10 2:10 2:15 2:15 2:16 2:16 2:16 2:16 2:21 2:21 2:21 2:21 2:21 2:21 3:1 3:1
3:1 3:1 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:4 3:4 3:4
3:4 3:9 3:9 3:16 3:16 3:16 3:16 4:6 4:6 4:7 4:7 4:7-19 4:7-19 4:8 4:8 4:8 4:8
4:8 4:8 4:8 4:8 4:10 4:10 4:10 4:10 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16
4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:18 4:18 4:18 4:18 4:19
4:19 4:20 4:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20
Revelation
1:5 1:5 1:7 1:7 1:8 1:8 2:2 2:2 5:5 5:5 5:6 5:6 5:11 5:11 14:1-5 14:1-5 14:3
14:3 14:4 14:4 14:4 14:4 14:4 14:4 14:5 14:5 14:5 14:5 14:5 14:5 21:8 21:8
Tobit
2:7 12:12
Wisdom of Solomon
1:6-11 1:6-11 1:7 1:7 1:11 1:11 1:11 1:11 1:11 1:13 1:13 2:1 2:1 3:9 3:9 6:1
6:1 6:23 6:23 6:24 6:24 6:26 6:26 7:16 7:24 7:24 7:25 7:25 7:25-27 7:25-27 7:27
7:27 7:27 7:27 7:27 7:27 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1
8:1 8:21 8:21 8:21 8:21 8:21 8:21 8:21 8:21 9 9 9:10 9:10 9:10 9:10 9:14 9:14
9:14-17 9:14-17 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15
9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 11:17 11:17 11:20 11:20 11:20 11:20 11:20 11:20 11:21 11:21
12:18 12:18 13:1-5 13:1-5 16:24 16:24 16:25 16:25
Susanna
1:22 1:23 1:23 1:23
Bel and the Dragon
1:41 1:41
2 Maccabees
12:43 12:43
1 Esdras
2:7 2:7
Sirach1:1 1:1 1:5 1:5 2:1-5 2:1-5 2:5 2:14 2:14 3:18 3:18 3:18 3:18 3:18 3:18 3:18
3:18 3:22 3:22 3:30 3:30 7:13 7:13 10:12 10:12 10:15 10:15 15:20 15:20 18:7
18:7 19:1 19:1 19:1 19:1 23:20 23:20 24:3 24:3 24:5 24:5 24:5 24:5 24:29 24:29
27:5 27:5 30:23 30:24 30:24 30:24 30:24 37:16 37:16 37:20 37:20 39:16 39:16
40:1 40:1 43:29 43:29 46:20 46:20
Genesis1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:4 1:4 1:5 1:5 1:20-25 1:20-25 1:24 1:24 1:26 1:26 1:26 1:26
1:26 1:26 1:26 1:26 1:26 1:26 1:26 1:26 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27
1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:28 1:28 1:28 1:28 1:31 1:31
726

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

1:31 1:31 2:1-3 2:1-3 2:17 2:17 2:20-22 2:20-22 2:21 2:21 2:22 2:22 2:22 2:22
2:22 2:22 2:24 2:24 2:24 2:24 3 3:1 3:1 3:1-6 3:1-6 3:4 3:4 3:5 3:5 3:5 3:5
3:7 3:7 3:8-10 3:8-10 3:14-19 3:14-19 3:21 3:21 4:14 4:14 6:3 6:3 6:7 6:7 6:7
6:7 6:22 6:22 7:22 7:22 10 11:7 12:1 12:1 12:1 12:1 12:7 12:7 16:7 16:7 17:1
17:1 17:4 17:4 17:19 18 18:1 18:1 18:1 18:1 18:2 18:2 18:4 18:4 18:15 18:15
18:20 18:20 18:33 18:33 18:33 18:33 19:1 19:1 19:1-19 19:1-19 19:2 19:2 19:2
19:5-11 19:5-11 19:8 19:8 19:8 19:8 19:17-21 19:17-21 19:18-20 19:18-20 19:21
19:21 19:22 19:22 19:24 19:24 20:2 20:2 20:12 20:12 21:10 21:10 21:12 21:12
21:12 21:12 22 22:6 22:6 22:12 22:12 22:12 22:12 22:18 22:18 22:18 22:18 23
23 24 24:2-4 24:2-4 25:5 25:5 25:6 25:6 25:9 25:26 25:26 25:26 25:26 26:7 26:7
27:16-19 27:16-19 27:19 28:18 28:18 28:18 28:18 28:18 28:18 30:37-41 30:37-41
30:41 30:41 32:24 32:24 32:25 32:25 37:33 37:33 38:14-18 38:14-18 38:27-30 42
46:27 46:27 46:27 46:27 47:30
Exodus
1:17-20 1:17-20 1:19 1:19 1:20 1:20 2:15 2:15 3:1-6 3:1-6 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:6
3:6 3:7 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:21 3:21 3:22 3:22 4:3
4:3 4:4 4:4 7 7 7:10 7:10 7:12 7:12 7:12 7:12 8 8:7 8:18 8:19 9:16 9:16 12
12 13:21 13:21 13:22 13:22 16:10-12 16:10-12 17:8-16 17:8-16 19:6 19:6 19:16
19:16 19:18 19:18 19:19 19:19 20:5 20:5 20:5 20:5 20:12 20:12 20:13 20:13 20:13
20:13 20:14 20:14 20:15 20:15 20:16 20:16 20:16 20:16 20:16 20:16 20:18 20:18
20:21 20:21 21:18 21:18 24:10 24:10 24:17 24:17 32:4 32:4 32:31 32:31 33:11-23
33:11-23 33:19 33:19 33:19 33:19 34:28 34:28 34:33 34:33
Leviticus
11:20 11:20 19:18 19:18
Numbers
6:5 6:5 11:17 11:17 17:8 17:8 19:11 19:11 21:7 21:7 21:9 21:9
Deuteronomy
5:9 5:9 6:4 6:4 6:4 6:4 6:4 6:4 6:5 6:5 6:5 6:5 6:5 6:5 6:13 6:13 6:13 6:13
10:22 10:22 23:24 23:24 23:25 23:25 24:1 24:1 25:5 25:5 25:5-10 25:5-10 25:10
25:10 29:5 29:5 34:5 34:5
Joshua2 2 6:25
Judges
9:8-15 9:8-15
1 Kings
2:38 2:38 11:13 11:13 11:30 11:30 11:31 11:31 13:21 13:21 13:22 13:22 18:45
18:45 21:10 21:10 21:13 21:13
1 Samuel
21:13 21:13 25:22-35 25:22-35 28:11-19 28:11-19
2 Samuel
2:5 2:5 7:3
2 Kings
10:31 10:31
2 Samuel727

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

16:5-12 16:5-12
2 Kings
22:18-20 22:18-20
Job
1 1:8 1:21 1:21 2 2:5 2:9 2:10 2:10 7:1 7:1 7:1 14:1 25:4 28:8 28:28 28:28
28:28 28:28
Psalms1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:2 1:2 1:2 1:2 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:8 2:8 2:8
2:8 2:11 2:11 2:26 2:26 2:27 2:27 2:27 3:2 3:3 3:3 3:3 3:3 3:5 3:8 3:8 3:8 3:8
4:4 4:6 4:8 4:8 5:3 5:4 5:4 5:4 5:4 5:4 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:6
5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:12 5:12 6:7 6:7
6:7 6:7 7:14 7:14 8:4 8:4 8:5 8:5 8:5 8:8 8:8 9 9:17 9:17 9:18 9:18 9:18 9:18
9:24 10:1 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 11:2 11:5 11:5 11:5
11:5 11:6 11:6 12 12:7 12:8 13:6 14:1 14:1 14:1 14:1 14:2 14:2 14:6 14:6 15:1
15:1 15:2 15:2 15:2 15:2 15:2 15:2 15:2 15:2 15:3 15:3 15:3 15:3 16 16 16:2
16:2 16:11 16:11 16:11 16:12 16:15 16:15 17:2 17:2 17:8 17:8 18:22 18:29 18:29
18:44 18:44 19:1 19:1 19:3 19:3 19:3 19:3 19:4 19:4 19:4 19:4 19:4 19:4 19:4-6
19:5 19:5 19:7 19:7 19:9 19:9 19:133 19:142 20:8 20:8 22:1 22:1 22:1 22:1 22:3
22:16 22:16 22:17 22:17 22:18 22:18 22:27 22:27 22:27 22:27 22:28 22:28 23:4
23:6 23:6 25:15 25:15 25:18 25:18 26 26 26:1 27:1 27:1 27:1 27:4 27:4 27:4
27:4 27:4 27:4 27:9 27:9 27:10 27:10 30:6 30:6 30:7 30:7 31:19 31:19 31:20
31:20 31:21 31:21 31:22 31:22 31:22 31:22 32:4 32:4 32:5 32:5 32:8 32:8 34:1
34:1 34:5 34:5 34:14 34:14 35:19 35:19 36:3 36:3 36:4 36:9 36:9 36:9 36:9 36:11
36:11 36:35 37:23 37:23 38:3 38:6 38:9 38:9 38:10 38:10 38:10 38:10 39:3 39:3
39:3 39:3 39:5 39:5 39:5 39:6 39:6 39:6 39:7 39:7 39:7 39:7 39:8 39:8 41:3
41:3 41:3 41:4 41:4 41:4 41:4 41:4 41:5 41:6-8 41:6-8 41:9 41:9 41:10 41:10
43:1 43:1 43:2 43:2 45 45:1 45:1 45:2 45:2 45:2 45:2 45:2 45:2 45:5 45:5 45:6-17
45:6-17 45:7 45:7 46:8 46:8 46:8 48:1 48:1 48:2 48:5 48:8 48:8 49:12 49:12
50:15 50:15 51:5 51:5 51:5 51:5 51:10 51:10 51:17 51:17 51:17 51:17 54:1 54:1
55:5 55:5 56:7 56:7 57:6 57:6 59:9 59:9 59:9 59:9 59:10 59:10 59:10 59:10 59:10
59:10 59:11 59:11 59:17 59:17 62:5 62:5 62:5 62:5 62:5 65:2 65:2 65:13 65:13
66:4 66:4 68:9 68:9 68:18 68:18 68:18 68:18 69:4 69:4 69:21-23 69:21-23 69:32
69:32 71:4 71:4 71:5 71:5 71:5 71:5 71:5 71:5 72:18 72:18 73:1 73:1 73:23 73:23
75:7 75:7 77:9 77:9 77:9 77:9 77:27 77:27 77:28 77:28 78 79:2 79:2 79:3 79:3
79:11 79:11 80:1 80:1 81:8 81:8 81:10 81:10 82:6 82:6 82:6 82:6 84:2 84:2 84:4
84:4 85:11 85:11 85:12 85:12 86:10 86:10 88:5 88:5 90 90:1 90:1 90:1 90:9 90:9
91:9 91:9 91:16 91:16 94:8 94:8 94:9 94:9 94:11 94:11 94:12-15 94:12-15 94:19
94:19 96:1 96:1 96:8 96:8 101:1 101:1 102:26 102:26 102:27 102:27 102:27 103:2
103:3 103:3 103:3 103:3 103:5 104:4 104:6 105:3 105:4 105:4 105:4 105:4 105:4
108:5 110:1 110:3 111 111:2 112:7 112:8 115:3 115:3 116:11 116:12 116:15 116:15
118:22 119:4-6 119:133 119:142 120 122:3 123:4 126:1 127:1 138 138:3 138:6
139:5 139:6 139:7 139:7 139:8 139:8 141:3 141:3 141:3 141:4 141:4 141:4 141:5
143:2 143:2 146:8 148:2 148:5 148:8 148:8
Proverbs
728

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

3:11 3:11 3:12 3:12 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:25 8:25 8:30 8:30 9:8 9:8 10:19 10:19
16:1 16:1 16:1 16:1 19:21 19:21 19:21 19:21 20:9 20:9 29:27 29:27 29:27 29:27
29:27 29:27 30:15 30:15
Song of Solomon
1:3 1:3 1:3 1:4 1:4 1:11 1:11 1:12 1:12 2:2
Isaiah2:3 2:3 5:7 5:7 5:18 5:18 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 6:10 6:10 7:9 7:9 7:9 7:9 7:9
7:9 7:14 7:14 7:14 7:14 9:6 9:6 9:6 9:6 11:2 11:2 26:10 26:10 26:18 26:18 28:11
28:11 28:16 28:16 40:6 40:6 40:8 40:8 48:16 48:16 53:2 53:2 53:7 53:7 53:8
53:8 55:6 55:6 55:7 55:7 56:4 56:4 56:4 56:4 56:5 56:5 56:5 56:5 56:5 56:5
61:1 61:1 63:16 63:16 63:16 63:16 66:1 66:1 66:2 66:2 66:2 66:2 66:2 66:2
Jeremiah
16:19 16:19 16:19 16:19 16:20 16:20 17:5 17:5 17:5 17:5 17:5 17:5 23:24 23:24
25:12 25:12 25:12 25:12 25:18 25:18 29:1 29:4-7 29:4-7 29:10 31:1 31:1 31:2
31:2
Ezekiel
18:2 18:2 18:4 18:4 34 36:26 36:26 37:1-10 37:1-10
Daniel
2:47 2:47 3:29 6:26 7:9-14 7:9-14 9:21 9:21
Hosea
4:8 4:8 6:6 6:6
Joel
2:32
Jonah
3
Habakkuk
2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4
Zephaniah
2:11 2:11
Zechariah
1:9 1:9 9:17 9:17 12:10 12:10 12:10 12:10 13:7-13 13:7-13
Malachi
1:2 1:2 1:3 1:3
Matthew
1:17 1:17 1:18 1:20 1:20 1:23 2:12 2:20 3:3 3:11 3:13-15 3:16 3:16 3:16 3:16
3:16 3:16 3:16 3:17 3:17 4:1-11 5:3 5:3-10 5:6 5:8 5:8 5:8 5:8 5:8 5:10 5:11
5:12 5:14 5:22 5:23 5:27 5:28 5:32 5:34 5:34 5:37 5:37 5:37 5:37 5:37 5:37
5:39 5:40 5:44 5:44 5:44 6:8 6:9 6:9 6:9 6:10 6:11 6:11-13 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12
6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:13 6:13 6:14 6:15 6:15 6:19-22 6:24 6:24 6:25 6:25-34
6:26 6:26 6:30 6:31 6:34 6:34 6:34 7:7 7:7 7:8 7:12 7:15 7:16 7:16 7:18 7:21
7:21 7:22 8:5-10 8:8 8:8 8:9 8:11 8:19 8:20 8:22 9:2-4 9:11-13 9:15 10:7-10
10:10 10:16 10:16 10:19 10:20 10:20 10:21 10:22 10:22 10:23 10:28 10:28 10:28
10:28 10:28 10:28 10:28-30 10:33 10:40-42 11:13 11:18-19 11:19 11:21 11:25-29
11:27 11:27 11:27 11:27 11:27 11:28 11:28 11:28 11:29 11:29 11:29 12:1 12:2
729

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

12:3 12:4 12:28 12:32 12:32 12:33 12:35 12:37 12:39 12:40 12:40 12:45 12:46-50
12:48 13:8 13:9 13:15 13:30 13:47-50 13:55 14:26 14:31 15:10-20 15:11 15:16-20
15:17-20 15:22-28 15:28 16:18 16:18 16:21-23 17:3 17:5 17:27 18:1-3 18:7 19:8
19:8 19:9 19:9 19:10 19:11 19:11 19:11 19:11 19:12 19:12 19:12 19:12 19:12
19:12 19:12 19:12 19:12 19:17 19:19 19:21 20:9 20:10 20:21 20:22 20:22 20:23
21:31 22:13 22:29 22:30 22:30 22:37 22:37 22:37-40 22:37-40 22:37-40 22:37-40
22:37-40 22:39 22:39 22:40 22:40 22:40 23:3 23:9 23:15 23:26 23:26 23:37 23:37
24:12 24:19 24:31 25:4 25:21 25:23 25:26 25:27 25:31 25:31 25:31-46 25:32 25:33
25:34 25:34 25:34 25:34 25:37 25:40 25:41 25:41 25:41 25:46 25:46 26:7-13 26:38
26:39 26:41 26:49 26:70-74 27:23-50 27:46
Mark
1:11 1:11 3:27 3:27 13:32 13:32 13:32 13:32 15:37 15:37 15:39 15:39 15:42-46
15:42-46 15:43 15:43 15:44 15:44 17:5
Luke
1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:17 1:17 1:26-32 1:26-32 1:27 1:27 1:28 1:28 1:28 1:28
1:30 1:30 1:34 1:34 1:34 1:34 1:35 1:35 1:35 1:35 1:41 1:41-79 1:80 1:80 2:14
2:14 2:25-38 2:25-38 2:36 2:36 2:37 2:37 2:37 2:37 2:52 2:52 3:6 3:6 3:6 3:6
3:21-23 3:21-23 3:22 3:22 4:1 4:18 4:18 4:19 4:19 5:21 5:21 5:22 5:22 6:19 6:19
6:30 6:30 6:45 6:45 7:6 7:6 7:7 7:7 7:36-47 7:36-47 7:37 7:37 7:38 7:38 7:38
7:38 7:47 7:47 8:1-3 8:1-3 8:8 8:8 8:21 8:21 8:45 8:45 9:3 9:3 10:1-7 10:1-7
10:4 10:7 10:7 10:7 10:27 10:27 10:27 10:27 10:30 10:30 10:30-35 10:30-35
10:30-37 10:30-37 10:30-42 10:30-42 10:34 10:34 10:35 10:35 10:35 10:35 10:39
10:39 11:20 11:20 11:20 11:20 11:27 11:27 11:28 11:28 11:37-41 11:37-41 11:41
11:41 11:41 11:41 11:42 11:42 11:42 11:42 11:42 11:42 12:4 12:4 12:4 12:4 12:4-7
12:17 12:17 12:20 12:20 12:35 12:35 12:35 12:35 12:36 12:36 12:36 12:36 13:6-17
13:6-17 13:28-30 13:28-30 15:11-32 15:11-32 16:3 16:3 16:19-22 16:19-22 16:22
16:22 16:24-29 16:24-29 18:10-14 18:10-14 18:11-14 18:11-14 18:13 18:13 18:18
18:18 18:19 18:19 19:2-8 19:2-8 19:41 19:41 20:35 20:35 20:36 20:36 20:36 20:36
20:36 20:36 20:36 20:36 20:36 20:36 21:18 21:18 21:18 21:18 21:18 21:18 21:19
21:19 22:61 22:61 23:34 23:34 23:34 23:34 24:28 24:28 24:39 24:39 24:39 24:39
24:39 24:39 24:39 24:39 24:44 24:44
John
1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1
1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1-14 1:1-14 1:2 1:2 1:2 1:2 1:2 1:2 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3
1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:5 1:5
1:5 1:5 1:9 1:9 1:9 1:9 1:9 1:9 1:10 1:10 1:10 1:10 1:10 1:10 1:11 1:11 1:12
1:12 1:12 1:12 1:12-14 1:12-14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14
1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14
1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:18 1:18
1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:29 1:29 1:29 1:29 1:29 1:29 1:47 1:47 2:2 2:2 2:4 2:4
2:7-9 2:7-9 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:19 2:19 2:19-21 2:19-21 2:20 2:20 3:2 3:2 3:5 3:5
3:6 3:6 3:6 3:6 3:8 3:8 3:14 3:14 3:15 3:15 3:17 3:17 3:21 3:21 3:35 3:35 3:35
3:35 3:36 3:36 3:36 3:36 4:7-14 4:7-14 4:10 4:10 4:13 4:13 4:24 4:24 4:24 4:24
4:24 4:24 4:24 4:24 4:24 4:24 4:34 4:34 5:2 5:2 5:19 5:19 5:19 5:19 5:19 5:19
730

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

5:19 5:19 5:19 5:19 5:21 5:21 5:22 5:22 5:22 5:22 5:22 5:22 5:22-29 5:22-29
5:24 5:24 5:25 5:25 5:25 5:25 5:26 5:26 5:26 5:26 5:26 5:26 5:26 5:26 5:26
5:26 5:26 5:26 5:27 5:27 5:29 5:29 5:46 5:46 6:38 6:38 6:38 6:38 6:67 6:67
7:16 7:16 7:16 7:16 7:16 7:16 7:16 7:16 7:37-39 7:37-39 7:39 7:39 7:39 8:15
8:15 8:23 8:23 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:31 8:31 8:32 8:32 8:36 8:36
8:42 8:42 8:44 8:44 8:50 8:50 9:6 9:6 9:7 9:7 10:17 10:17 10:18 10:18 10:18
10:18 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30
10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:36 10:36 11:34
11:34 11:51 11:51 12:6 12:6 12:6 12:6 12:6 12:6 12:28 12:28 12:28 12:28 12:44
12:44 12:47 12:47 12:47-50 12:47-50 12:48 12:48 13:1 13:1 13:1-17 13:1-17 13:5
13:5 13:16 13:16 13:21-24 13:21-24 13:23 13:23 13:29 14:1 14:1 14:1 14:1 14:2
14:2 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:8 14:8 14:9 14:9
14:9 14:9 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:11 14:11 14:11 14:11 14:15-17
14:15-17 14:16-23 14:16-23 14:17 14:17 14:21 14:21 14:21 14:21 14:21 14:21 14:21
14:21 14:22 14:22 14:23 14:23 14:23 14:23 14:25 14:25 14:26 14:26 14:26 14:26
14:26 14:26 14:26 14:26 14:26 14:26 14:28 14:28 14:28 14:28 14:28 14:28 14:28
14:28 14:28 14:28 14:28 14:28 14:30-31 14:30-31 15:2 15:2 15:5 15:5 15:5 15:12
15:12 15:13 15:13 15:13 15:13 15:13 15:13 15:15 15:25 15:25 15:26 15:26 15:26
15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26
15:26 15:26 15:26 16:6 16:6 16:7 16:7 16:7 16:7 16:7 16:7 16:12 16:12 16:12
16:12 16:13 16:13 16:13 16:13 16:13 16:13 16:13-15 16:13-15 16:15 16:15 16:15
16:15 16:22 16:22 16:23 16:23 16:25-28 16:25-28 16:28 16:28 16:28 16:28 17:1
17:1 17:2 17:2 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3-5 17:3-5
17:4 17:4 17:5 17:5 17:5 17:5 17:10 17:10 17:11 17:11 17:11 17:11 17:15 17:15
17:19 17:19 17:20-22 17:20-22 17:21 17:23 17:23 17:23 18:22 18:22 18:23 18:23
19:14 19:14 19:23 19:23 19:24 19:24 19:26 19:26 19:27 19:27 19:30 19:30 19:30-34
19:30-34 19:34 19:34 19:38 19:38-39 19:39 19:41 19:41 19:41 19:41 19:42 19:42
20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:22 20:22 20:22 20:22 20:22
20:22 20:22 20:22 20:23 20:23 20:28 20:28 21:15 21:15
Acts
1:11 1:11 2 2 2:1-4 2:1-4 2:1-4 2:1-4 2:1-4 2:1-4 2:2 2:2 2:2 2:2 2:2-4 2:2-4
2:3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4
2:4 2:32 2:32 2:33 2:33 2:37 2:37 2:37 2:37 2:38 2:38 2:39 2:39 2:41 2:41 2:44
2:44 2:44 2:44 2:44 2:44 2:45 2:45 4:12 4:12 4:32 4:32 4:32 4:32 4:32 4:32
4:32 4:32 4:32 4:34 4:34 5:15 5:15 6:7 6:7 7:2 7:2 7:29-33 7:29-33 7:47 7:47
7:48 7:48 7:51-53 7:51-53 8:18 8:18 8:18-20 8:18-20 8:19 8:19 8:20 8:20 8:20
8:20 8:21-22 8:21-22 9:4 9:4 9:12 9:12 9:25 9:25 10:38 10:38 10:41 10:41 10:44
10:44 10:46 10:46 11:15-17 11:15-17 11:28-30 11:28-30 11:28-30 11:28-30 11:28-30
11:28-30 12:9 12:9 12:9-11 12:9-11 13:2 13:2 13:18 13:18 13:30 13:30 13:33 13:33
15:9 15:9 15:9 15:9 16:1-3 16:1-3 17:17 17:17 17:18 17:18 17:21 17:21 17:27
17:27 17:27 17:27 17:27 17:27 17:28 17:28 17:28 17:28 17:28 17:28 17:28 17:28
17:28 17:28 18:1-3 18:1-3 18:4 18:4 20:7 20:7 20:33-35 20:33-35 21:10-12 21:10-12
23:3 23:3 26:16-18 26:16-18
Romans731

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

1:1 1:1 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:4 1:4 1:9 1:9 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17
1:17 1:17 1:17 1:18 1:18 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20
1:20 1:20 1:21 1:21 1:22 1:22 1:23 1:23 1:23 1:23 1:25 1:25 1:25 1:25 1:26
1:26 1:27 1:27 1:30 1:30 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:25 2:25 2:25
2:25 3:7 3:7 3:7 3:7 3:8 3:8 3:8 3:8 3:19 3:19 3:20 3:20 3:20 3:20 3:20 3:20
3:26 3:26 4:4 4:4 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:15 4:15 4:17 4:17 4:25 4:25 5:4 5:4 5:5
5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5
5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:6 5:6 5:6-10 5:6-10 5:8 5:8 5:8 5:8 5:8 5:8 5:8-10 5:8-10 5:9
5:9 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:16 5:16 5:16
5:16 5:18 5:18 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 6:1 6:1 6:1-11 6:1-11
6:3 6:3 6:4 6:4 6:4 6:4 6:5 6:5 6:6 6:6 6:6 6:6 6:9 6:9 6:9 6:9 6:9 6:9 6:9
6:9 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:13 6:13 6:13 6:13 6:13 6:13 6:13 6:13 6:13
6:13 6:13 6:13 6:14 6:14 6:14 6:14 6:23 6:23 7:7 7:7 7:7 7:7 7:14 7:14 7:17
7:17 7:18 7:18 7:18 7:18 7:18 7:18 7:18 7:18 7:22 7:22 7:23 7:23 7:23 7:23
7:24 7:24 7:25 7:25 7:25 7:25 7:25 7:25 8 8 8:9 8:9 8:10 8:10 8:10 8:10 8:10
8:10 8:11 8:11 8:12 8:12 8:13 8:13 8:13 8:13 8:13 8:13 8:14 8:14 8:14 8:14
8:14 8:14 8:14 8:14 8:14 8:14 8:15 8:15 8:15 8:15 8:15 8:15 8:15 8:15 8:15
8:15 8:15-17 8:15-17 8:17 8:17 8:18 8:18 8:22 8:22 8:23 8:23 8:23 8:23 8:23-25
8:23-25 8:24 8:24 8:24 8:24 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:26 8:26 8:28 8:28 8:28 8:28
8:28-32 8:28-32 8:29 8:29 8:30 8:30 8:30 8:30 8:31 8:31 8:31 8:31 8:31 8:31
8:32 8:32 8:32 8:32 8:32 8:32 8:32 8:32 8:32 8:32 8:34 8:34 8:35-39 8:35-39 9:1
9:1 9:2 9:2 9:5 9:5 9:5 9:5 9:5 9:5 9:7 9:7 9:8 9:8 9:12 9:12 9:13 9:13 9:14
9:14 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:16 9:16 9:16 9:16 9:16 9:16 9:16 9:16 9:17 9:17
9:18 9:18 9:18 9:18 9:19 9:19 9:20 9:20 9:21 9:21 9:21 9:21 9:22 9:22 9:23
9:23 9:23 9:23 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:4 10:4 10:9 10:9
10:10 10:10 10:10 10:10 10:10 10:10 10:10 10:10 10:14 10:14 10:17 10:17 11:5
11:5 11:6 11:6 11:6 11:6 11:17 11:17 11:18 11:18 11:20 11:20 11:20 11:20 11:20
11:20 11:33-36 11:33-36 11:36 11:36 11:36 11:36 11:36 11:36 11:36 11:36 11:36
11:36 11:36 11:36 11:36 11:36 12:1 12:1 12:2 12:2 12:2 12:2 12:2 12:2 12:2
12:2 12:3 12:3 12:3 12:3 12:3 12:3 12:4-6 12:4-6 12:10 12:10 12:12 12:12 12:16
12:16 12:17 12:17 13:1 13:1 13:1 13:1 13:7 13:7 13:8 13:8 13:9 13:9 13:10 13:10
14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:10 14:10 14:23 14:23 15:3 15:3 15:4 15:4 15:19 15:19
15:25-27 15:25-27 15:27 15:27 16:18 16:18 16:19 16:19
1 Corinthians
1:13 1:13 1:20 1:20 1:21 1:21 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24
1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:25 1:25 1:25 1:25 1:27-29 1:27-29
1:30 1:30 1:30 1:30 1:30 1:30 1:31 1:31 1:31 1:31 1:31 1:31 1:31 1:31 2:2 2:2
2:2 2:2 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:6 2:6 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:11 2:11 2:12
2:12 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:14 3:1 3:1 3:1 3:1 3:1 3:1 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:3
3:3 3:3 3:3 3:5 3:5 3:5-10 3:5-10 3:6 3:6 3:7 3:7 3:7 3:7 3:8 3:8 3:9 3:9 3:11
3:11 3:11-15 3:11-15 3:11-15 3:13-15 3:13-15 3:15 3:15 3:16 3:16 3:16 3:16 3:16
3:16 3:16 3:16 3:17 3:17 3:17 3:17 3:19 3:19 3:22 3:22 3:22 3:22 3:23 3:23
3:23 3:23 4:3 4:3 4:3 4:3 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:7 4:7 4:7 4:7 4:7 4:7 4:7
4:7 6:1 6:1 6:4-6 6:4-6 6:4-6 6:4-6 6:7 6:7 6:9 6:9 6:10 6:10 6:10 6:10 6:15
732

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

6:15 6:15 6:15 6:15 6:15 6:15 6:15 6:15 6:15 6:16 6:16 6:17 6:17 6:17 6:17
6:17 6:17 6:18 6:18 6:19 6:19 6:19 6:19 6:19 6:19 6:19 6:19 6:19 6:19 6:19
6:19 6:19 6:19 6:20 6:20 6:20 6:20 6:20 6:20 6:20 6:20 6:20 6:20 7:1 7:1 7:4
7:4 7:4 7:4 7:4 7:4 7:5 7:5 7:6 7:6 7:6 7:6 7:6 7:6 7:6 7:6 7:7 7:7 7:7 7:7
7:7 7:7 7:7 7:7 7:8 7:8 7:8 7:8 7:8 7:8 7:8 7:8 7:9 7:9 7:9 7:9 7:9 7:9 7:9
7:9 7:9 7:9 7:9 7:9 7:10 7:10 7:10 7:10 7:10 7:10 7:11 7:11 7:11 7:11 7:11
7:11 7:14 7:14 7:18 7:18 7:18-20 7:18-20 7:25 7:25 7:25 7:25 7:25 7:25 7:25
7:25 7:26 7:26 7:26 7:26 7:26 7:26 7:26 7:26 7:27 7:27 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28
7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:29 7:29 7:29-34 7:32
7:32 7:32 7:32 7:32 7:32 7:32 7:32 7:32 7:32 7:33 7:33 7:33 7:33 7:34 7:34
7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:35 7:35 7:36
7:36 7:36 7:36 7:36 7:36 7:37 7:37 7:38 7:38 7:38 7:38 7:38 7:38 7:39 7:39
7:39 7:39 7:39 7:39 7:40 7:40 7:40 7:40 7:40 7:40 7:40 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1
8:2 8:2 8:3 8:3 8:5 8:5 8:6 8:6 8:6 8:6 8:6 8:6 9:1-7 9:1-7 9:6-12 9:6-12 9:7
9:7 9:7 9:7 9:7-10 9:7-10 9:7-15 9:7-15 9:11 9:11 9:12 9:12 9:12 9:12 9:12 9:12
9:13-15 9:13-15 9:14 9:14 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:16 9:16 9:17 9:17 9:18 9:18
9:19-21 9:19-21 9:20 9:20 9:22 9:22 9:22 9:22 9:22 9:22 9:22 9:22 9:24 9:24
10:1-11 10:1-11 10:1-11 10:1-11 10:4 10:4 10:4 10:4 10:11 10:11 10:11 10:11
10:11 10:12 10:12 10:13 10:13 10:13 10:13 10:13 10:13 10:13 10:13 10:13 10:13
10:13 10:13 10:32 10:32 10:33 10:33 11:3 11:3 11:3 11:3 11:3 11:3 11:3 11:3
11:3 11:3 11:4 11:4 11:5 11:5 11:7 11:7 11:7 11:7 11:7 11:7 11:7 11:7 11:10
11:10 11:12 11:12 11:14 11:14 11:16 11:16 11:17 11:17 11:31 11:31 11:31 11:31
11:31 11:31 11:32 11:32 11:32 11:32 11:32 11:32 12:3 12:3 12:6 12:6 12:6-11
12:6-11 12:7 12:7 12:7-10 12:7-10 12:8 12:8 12:8 12:8 12:10 12:10 12:11 12:11
12:11 12:11 12:11 12:11 12:12 12:12 12:13 12:13 12:18 12:18 12:18 12:18 12:24
12:24 12:24 12:24 12:25 12:25 12:26 12:26 12:29 12:29 12:31 12:31 12:31 12:31
13:1-3 13:1-3 13:3 13:3 13:4 13:4 13:4 13:4 13:4 13:4 13:4 13:4 13:5 13:5 13:7
13:7 13:7 13:7 13:8 13:8 13:11 13:11 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12
13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12
13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12
13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12
13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:13 13:13 13:13 13:13 13:13 13:13 14:14 14:14 14:21
14:21 15:15 15:15 15:19 15:19 15:21 15:21 15:22 15:22 15:23 15:23 15:24 15:24
15:24 15:24 15:24 15:24 15:24-28 15:24-28 15:24-28 15:24-28 15:25 15:25 15:26
15:27 15:27 15:28 15:28 15:28 15:28 15:28 15:28 15:28 15:28 15:33 15:33 15:36-38
15:36-38 15:39 15:39 15:40 15:40 15:41 15:41 15:41 15:41 15:41 15:41 15:42
15:42 15:42 15:42 15:43 15:43 15:44 15:44 15:44 15:44 15:44 15:44 15:44 15:44
15:45 15:45 15:47 15:47 15:49 15:49 15:50 15:50 15:50 15:50 15:50 15:50 15:51
15:51 15:52 15:52 15:52 15:52 15:52 15:52 15:52 15:52 15:53 15:53 15:53 15:53
15:53-56 15:53-56 15:54 15:54 15:54 15:54 15:55 15:55 15:55 15:55 15:56 15:56
16:1-4 16:1-4
2 Corinthians
1:12 1:12 1:19 1:19 2:15 2:15 2:16 2:16 2:16 2:16 3:6 3:6 3:14 3:14 3:16 3:16
3:16 3:16 3:17 3:17 3:17 3:17 3:18 3:18 3:18 3:18 4:6 4:6 4:13 4:13 4:16 4:16
733

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:17 4:17 4:18
4:18 5:5 5:5 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7
5:7 5:7 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:13 5:13 5:14 5:14 5:20 5:20 5:21 5:21 6:2-10
6:2-10 6:7 6:7 6:8 6:8 6:10 6:10 8:1-21 8:1-21 8:9 8:9 8:21 8:21 9 9:7 9:7 9:7
9:7 10:12 10:12 10:12 10:12 10:17 10:17 11:2 11:2 11:2 11:2 11:2 11:2 11:7
11:7 11:7-12 11:7-12 11:9 11:9 11:9 11:9 11:14 11:14 11:14 11:14 11:33 11:33
12:4 12:4 12:6 12:6 12:9 12:9 12:15 12:15 13:4 13:4
Galatians
1:10 1:10 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 2:3 2:3 2:4 2:4 2:9 2:9 2:12-21 2:12-21 2:13 2:13
2:14 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:16 2:16 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20
2:20 3:11 3:11 3:19 3:19 3:24 3:24 3:26-28 3:26-28 3:27 3:27 3:28 3:28 4:4 4:4
4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:5
4:5 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:6 4:6 4:10 4:10 4:11 4:11 4:19 4:19 4:19 4:19
4:22-24 4:22-24 4:22-26 4:22-26 4:24 4:24 4:25 4:25 4:26 4:26 4:26 4:26 4:26
4:26 4:26 4:26 4:26 4:26 4:30 4:30 5:2 5:2 5:4 5:4 5:5 5:5 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6
5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:13 5:13 5:14
5:14 5:16 5:16 5:16 5:16 5:16 5:16 5:16-18 5:16-18 5:17 5:17 5:17 5:17 5:17
5:17 5:17 5:17 5:17 5:19 5:19 5:19-21 5:19-21 5:20 5:20 5:21 5:21 5:22 5:22
5:23 5:23 5:24 5:24 5:24 5:24 6:1 6:1 6:1 6:1 6:2 6:2 6:4 6:4 6:6 6:6 6:6 6:6
6:14 6:14
Ephesians
1:4 1:4 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:10 1:10 1:14 1:14 1:22 1:22 1:23 1:23 2:1-3 2:1-3
2:3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8-10 2:8-10 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:10 2:10
3:7 3:7 3:8 3:8 4:3 4:3 4:5 4:5 4:7 4:7 4:7-12 4:7-12 4:8 4:8 4:8 4:8 4:8 4:8
4:13 4:13 4:14 4:14 4:21-24 4:21-24 4:22-25 4:22-25 4:23 4:23 4:23 4:23 4:24
4:24 4:24 4:24 4:25 4:25 4:25 4:25 4:25 4:25 4:28 4:28 4:28 4:28 5:1 5:1 5:8
5:8 5:12 5:12 5:14 5:14 5:22-28 5:22-28 5:24 5:24 5:25-28 5:25-28 5:29 5:29 5:29
5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 6:5 6:5 83
120 130 131 137 143 150 188
Philippians
1:8 1:8 1:15-18 1:15-18 1:18 1:18 1:23 1:23 1:23 1:23 1:29 1:29 2:3 2:3 2:5-11
2:5-11 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6
2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7
2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8
2:8 2:8 2:8-11 2:8-11 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:12 2:12 2:12 2:12 2:13 2:13 2:13 2:13
2:13 2:13 2:13 2:13 2:16 2:16 2:17 2:17 2:21 2:21 3:3 3:3 3:6 3:6 3:12-14
3:12-14 3:13-15 3:13-15 3:15 3:15 3:15 3:15 3:16 3:16 3:20 3:20 3:21 3:21 3:21
3:21 4:7 4:7 4:8 4:8 4:9 4:9 4:12 4:12
Colossians
1:9 1:13 1:13 1:13 1:13 1:14 1:14 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:16 1:16 1:16 1:16 1:16
1:16 1:17 1:17 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:19 1:19
1:20 1:20 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 2:1-3 2:1-3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:11 2:11 2:11 2:11
2:15 2:15 2:20 2:20 3:1 3:1 3:1 3:1 3:1-3 3:1-3 3:1-4 3:1-4 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:3

734

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

3:3 3:4 3:4 3:4 3:4 3:5 3:5 3:6 3:6 3:7 3:7 3:8 3:8 3:9 3:9 3:9 3:9 3:9 3:9
3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10
1 Thessalonians
2:5-7 2:5-7 2:6 2:6 2:7 2:7 2:7-9 2:7-9 2:9 2:9 2:13 2:13 4:5 4:5 4:17 4:17
5:6-8 5:6-8
2 Thessalonians
3:6-12 3:6-12 3:8 3:8 3:8 3:8 3:8 3:8 3:9 3:9 3:10 3:10 3:12 3:12 3:12 3:12
3:13 3:13 3:13 3:13
1 Timothy
1:1 1:1 1:2 1:2 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5
1:5 1:13 1:13 1:13 1:13 1:13 1:13 1:15 1:15 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:20
1:20 2:1 2:1 2:1-4 2:1-4 2:2 2:2 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5
2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:9 2:9 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:15 3:2 3:2 3:16 3:16
4:8 4:8 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:11 5:11 5:11
5:11 5:11 5:11 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:13 5:13 5:13 5:13 5:14 5:14
5:14 5:14 5:15 5:15 5:23 5:23 5:23 5:23 6:10 6:10 6:14-16 6:14-16 6:15 6:15
6:16 6:16 6:16 6:16 6:16 6:16 6:16 6:16 6:18 6:18 6:19 6:19
2 Timothy
2:3-6 2:3-6 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:8 2:8 2:13 2:13 2:19 2:19 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25
4:1 4:1 4:2 4:2
Titus
1:6 1:6 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 3:13 3:13 3:14 3:14
Hebrews
1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:8 1:8 1:9 1:9 1:13 1:13 1:13 1:13 1:14 1:14
2:1-4 2:1-4 2:4 2:4 2:9 2:9 2:11 2:11 5:5 5:5 5:14 5:14 5:14 5:14 5:14 5:14 7
7:17 7:17 10:38 10:38 11:1 11:1 11:1 11:1 12:3 12:3 12:7 12:7 12:11 12:11 13:4
13:4
James
1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:15 1:15 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17
1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:17 2:17 2:19 2:19 2:19 2:19 3:2 3:2
3:15 3:15 4:6 4:6 4:6 4:6 5:11 5:11
1 Peter
1:10 1:10 1:11 1:11 1:17 1:17 1:20 1:20 1:24 1:24 1:25 1:25 2:21 2:21 2:21
2:21 2:21 2:21 2:22 2:22 3:1-7 3:1-7 3:5-7 3:5-7 3:9 3:9 5:8 5:8
2 Peter
1:4 1:4 2:4 2:4 2:19 2:19 2:19 2:19
1 John1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:8 1:8 1:8 1:8 1:8 1:8 1:8-10 1:8-10 2:1 2:1 2:2 2:2
2:10 2:10 2:15 2:15 2:16 2:16 2:16 2:16 2:21 2:21 2:21 2:21 2:21 2:21 3:1 3:1
3:1 3:1 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:4 3:4 3:4
3:4 3:9 3:9 3:16 3:16 3:16 3:16 4:6 4:6 4:7 4:7 4:7-19 4:7-19 4:8 4:8 4:8 4:8
4:8 4:8 4:8 4:8 4:10 4:10 4:10 4:10 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16
4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:18 4:18 4:18 4:18 4:19
4:19 4:20 4:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20
735

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Revelation
1:5 1:5 1:7 1:7 1:8 1:8 2:2 2:2 5:5 5:5 5:6 5:6 5:11 5:11 14:1-5 14:1-5 14:3
14:3 14:4 14:4 14:4 14:4 14:4 14:4 14:5 14:5 14:5 14:5 14:5 14:5 21:8 21:8
Wisdom of Solomon
1:6-11 1:7 1:11 1:11 1:13 2:1 3:9 6:1 6:23 6:24 6:26 7:24 7:25 7:25-27 7:27
7:27 7:27 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:21 8:21 8:21 8:21 9 9:10 9:10 9:14
9:14-17 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 11:17 11:20 11:20 11:20 11:21
12:18 13:1-5 16:24 16:25
Susanna
1:22 1:23 1:23 1:23
Bel and the Dragon
1:41 1:41
2 Maccabees
12:43 12:43
1 Esdras
2:7 2:7
Sirach1:1 1:1 1:5 1:5
Ecclesiastes
1:18 1:18
Sirach2:1-5 2:1-5 2:5 2:14 2:14
Ecclesiastes
3:5
Sirach3:5
Ecclesiastes
3:5 3:5
Sirach3:18 3:18 3:18 3:18 3:18 3:18 3:18 3:18
Ecclesiastes
3:21 3:21
Sirach3:22 3:22 3:30 3:30 7:13 7:13 10:12 10:12 10:15 10:15 15:20 15:20 18:7 18:7
19:1 19:1 19:1 19:1 23:20 23:20 24:3 24:3 24:5 24:5 24:5 24:5 24:29 24:29 27:5
27:5 30:23 30:24 30:24 30:24 30:24 37:16 37:16 37:20 37:20 39:16 39:16 40:1
40:1 43:29 43:29 46:20 46:20

Index of Greek Words and Phrases•

736

NPNF (V1-03)

•
•
•
•
•

Philip Schaff

μ

& 232
μ ™

•μ
• μ
•
,
•
š
•
• .
•
μ
•, sc.
•.
•ˆ
•
•
μ™
•
™
•
•
•
•
ž
•
μ™
•
•
•
•μ μ
•μ μ
•μ
•
•
‰
™
•
μ
•
•š
μ
•
•
μ
•
•€
•€
• μ
μ
• μ
• ,
•
š

ž

μ

’

š ™

‚

μ™

737

.

š

™

€

™ ,

š

NPNF (V1-03)

•
μ
•
•™
•
•
•
• ™
• μ
),
•
›
•
•
•
•
•
•›
•
•
•
•
•
•
μ
& 232
μ ™
•μ
• μ
•
,
•
š
•
• .
•
μ
•, sc.
•.
•ˆ
•
•
μ™
•
™
•
•
•
•
ž
•
μ™
•
•
•
•μ μ

Philip Schaff

ž

μ

’

š ™

‚

μ™

738

.

š

™

€

™ ,

š

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

•μ μ
•μ
•
•
‰
™
•
μ
•
•š
μ
•
•
μ
•
•€
•€
• μ
μ
• μ
• ,
•
š
•
μ
•
•™
•
•
•
• ™
• μ
),
•
›
•
•
•
•
•
•›

Index of Pages of the Print Edition
i iii iv v 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55
56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81
82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105
106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125
126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145
146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165

739

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185
186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205
206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225
226 227 228 229 231 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251
252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271
272 273 274 275 276 277 279 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295
296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315
317 318 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 337 338 339 340 341
342 343 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364
365 366 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389
390 391 392 393 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412
413 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435
436 437 438 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 457 458 459
460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 481 482
483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 503 504
505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524
527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548
549 550 551
i iii iv v 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55
56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81
82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105
106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125
126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145
146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165
166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185
186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205
206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225
226 227 228 229 231 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251
252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271
272 273 274 275 276 277 279 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295
296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315
317 318 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 337 338 339 340 341
342 343 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364
365 366 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389
390 391 392 393 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412
413 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435
436 437 438 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 457 458 459
460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 481 482
483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 503 504
505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524
527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548
549 550 551

740

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Indexes
Index of Scripture References
Genesis1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:4 1:4 1:5 1:5 1:20-25 1:20-25 1:24 1:24 1:26 1:26 1:26 1:26
1:26 1:26 1:26 1:26 1:26 1:26 1:26 1:26 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27
1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:27 1:28 1:28 1:28 1:28 1:31 1:31
1:31 1:31 2:1-3 2:1-3 2:17 2:17 2:20-22 2:20-22 2:21 2:21 2:22 2:22 2:22 2:22
2:22 2:22 2:24 2:24 2:24 2:24 3 3:1 3:1 3:1-6 3:1-6 3:4 3:4 3:5 3:5 3:5 3:5
3:7 3:7 3:8-10 3:8-10 3:14-19 3:14-19 3:21 3:21 4:14 4:14 6:3 6:3 6:7 6:7 6:7
6:7 6:22 6:22 7:22 7:22 10 11:7 12:1 12:1 12:1 12:1 12:7 12:7 16:7 16:7 17:1
17:1 17:4 17:4 17:19 18 18:1 18:1 18:1 18:1 18:2 18:2 18:4 18:4 18:15 18:15
18:20 18:20 18:33 18:33 18:33 18:33 19:1 19:1 19:1-19 19:1-19 19:2 19:2 19:2
19:5-11 19:5-11 19:8 19:8 19:8 19:8 19:17-21 19:17-21 19:18-20 19:18-20 19:21
19:21 19:22 19:22 19:24 19:24 20:2 20:2 20:12 20:12 21:10 21:10 21:12 21:12
21:12 21:12 22 22:6 22:6 22:12 22:12 22:12 22:12 22:18 22:18 22:18 22:18 23
23 24 24:2-4 24:2-4 25:5 25:5 25:6 25:6 25:9 25:26 25:26 25:26 25:26 26:7 26:7
27:16-19 27:16-19 27:19 28:18 28:18 28:18 28:18 28:18 28:18 30:37-41 30:37-41
30:41 30:41 32:24 32:24 32:25 32:25 37:33 37:33 38:14-18 38:14-18 38:27-30 42
46:27 46:27 46:27 46:27 47:30
Exodus
1:17-20 1:17-20 1:19 1:19 1:20 1:20 2:15 2:15 3:1-6 3:1-6 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:6
3:6 3:7 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:21 3:21 3:22 3:22 4:3
4:3 4:4 4:4 7 7 7:10 7:10 7:12 7:12 7:12 7:12 8 8:7 8:18 8:19 9:16 9:16 12
12 13:21 13:21 13:22 13:22 16:10-12 16:10-12 17:8-16 17:8-16 19:6 19:6 19:16
19:16 19:18 19:18 19:19 19:19 20:5 20:5 20:5 20:5 20:12 20:12 20:13 20:13 20:13
20:13 20:14 20:14 20:15 20:15 20:16 20:16 20:16 20:16 20:16 20:16 20:18 20:18
20:21 20:21 21:18 21:18 24:10 24:10 24:17 24:17 32:4 32:4 32:31 32:31 33:11-23
33:11-23 33:19 33:19 33:19 33:19 34:28 34:28 34:33 34:33
Leviticus
11:20 11:20 19:18 19:18
Numbers
6:5 6:5 11:17 11:17 17:8 17:8 19:11 19:11 21:7 21:7 21:9 21:9
Deuteronomy
5:9 5:9 6:4 6:4 6:4 6:4 6:4 6:4 6:5 6:5 6:5 6:5 6:5 6:5 6:13 6:13 6:13 6:13
10:22 10:22 23:24 23:24 23:25 23:25 24:1 24:1 25:5 25:5 25:5-10 25:5-10 25:10
25:10 29:5 29:5 34:5 34:5
Joshua2 2 6:25
Judges741

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

9:8-15 9:8-15
1 Samuel
21:13 21:13 25:22-35 25:22-35 28:11-19 28:11-19
2 Samuel
2:5 2:5 7:3 16:5-12 16:5-12
1 Kings
2:38 2:38 11:13 11:13 11:30 11:30 11:31 11:31 13:21 13:21 13:22 13:22 18:45
18:45 21:10 21:10 21:13 21:13
2 Kings
10:31 10:31 22:18-20 22:18-20
Job
1 1:8 1:21 1:21 2 2:5 2:9 2:10 2:10 7:1 7:1 7:1 14:1 25:4 28:8 28:28 28:28
28:28 28:28
Psalms1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:2 1:2 1:2 1:2 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:8 2:8 2:8
2:8 2:11 2:11 2:26 2:26 2:27 2:27 2:27 3:2 3:3 3:3 3:3 3:3 3:5 3:8 3:8 3:8 3:8
4:4 4:6 4:8 4:8 5:3 5:4 5:4 5:4 5:4 5:4 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:6
5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:12 5:12 6:7 6:7
6:7 6:7 7:14 7:14 8:4 8:4 8:5 8:5 8:5 8:8 8:8 9 9:17 9:17 9:18 9:18 9:18 9:18
9:24 10:1 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 11:2 11:5 11:5 11:5
11:5 11:6 11:6 12 12:7 12:8 13:6 14:1 14:1 14:1 14:1 14:2 14:2 14:6 14:6 15:1
15:1 15:2 15:2 15:2 15:2 15:2 15:2 15:2 15:2 15:3 15:3 15:3 15:3 16 16 16:2
16:2 16:11 16:11 16:11 16:12 16:15 16:15 17:2 17:2 17:8 17:8 18:22 18:29 18:29
18:44 18:44 19:1 19:1 19:3 19:3 19:3 19:3 19:4 19:4 19:4 19:4 19:4 19:4 19:4-6
19:5 19:5 19:7 19:7 19:9 19:9 19:133 19:142 20:8 20:8 22:1 22:1 22:1 22:1 22:3
22:16 22:16 22:17 22:17 22:18 22:18 22:27 22:27 22:27 22:27 22:28 22:28 23:4
23:6 23:6 25:15 25:15 25:18 25:18 26 26 26:1 27:1 27:1 27:1 27:4 27:4 27:4
27:4 27:4 27:4 27:9 27:9 27:10 27:10 30:6 30:6 30:7 30:7 31:19 31:19 31:20
31:20 31:21 31:21 31:22 31:22 31:22 31:22 32:4 32:4 32:5 32:5 32:8 32:8 34:1
34:1 34:5 34:5 34:14 34:14 35:19 35:19 36:3 36:3 36:4 36:9 36:9 36:9 36:9 36:11
36:11 36:35 37:23 37:23 38:3 38:6 38:9 38:9 38:10 38:10 38:10 38:10 39:3 39:3
39:3 39:3 39:5 39:5 39:5 39:6 39:6 39:6 39:7 39:7 39:7 39:7 39:8 39:8 41:3
41:3 41:3 41:4 41:4 41:4 41:4 41:4 41:5 41:6-8 41:6-8 41:9 41:9 41:10 41:10
43:1 43:1 43:2 43:2 45 45:1 45:1 45:2 45:2 45:2 45:2 45:2 45:2 45:5 45:5 45:6-17
45:6-17 45:7 45:7 46:8 46:8 46:8 48:1 48:1 48:2 48:5 48:8 48:8 49:12 49:12
50:15 50:15 51:5 51:5 51:5 51:5 51:10 51:10 51:17 51:17 51:17 51:17 54:1 54:1
55:5 55:5 56:7 56:7 57:6 57:6 59:9 59:9 59:9 59:9 59:10 59:10 59:10 59:10 59:10
59:10 59:11 59:11 59:17 59:17 62:5 62:5 62:5 62:5 62:5 65:2 65:2 65:13 65:13
66:4 66:4 68:9 68:9 68:18 68:18 68:18 68:18 69:4 69:4 69:21-23 69:21-23 69:32
69:32 71:4 71:4 71:5 71:5 71:5 71:5 71:5 71:5 72:18 72:18 73:1 73:1 73:23 73:23
75:7 75:7 77:9 77:9 77:9 77:9 77:27 77:27 77:28 77:28 78 79:2 79:2 79:3 79:3
79:11 79:11 80:1 80:1 81:8 81:8 81:10 81:10 82:6 82:6 82:6 82:6 84:2 84:2 84:4
84:4 85:11 85:11 85:12 85:12 86:10 86:10 88:5 88:5 90 90:1 90:1 90:1 90:9 90:9
91:9 91:9 91:16 91:16 94:8 94:8 94:9 94:9 94:11 94:11 94:12-15 94:12-15 94:19
742

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

94:19 96:1 96:1 96:8 96:8 101:1 101:1 102:26 102:26 102:27 102:27 102:27 103:2
103:3 103:3 103:3 103:3 103:5 104:4 104:6 105:3 105:4 105:4 105:4 105:4 105:4
108:5 110:1 110:3 111 111:2 112:7 112:8 115:3 115:3 116:11 116:12 116:15 116:15
118:22 119:4-6 119:133 119:142 120 122:3 123:4 126:1 127:1 138 138:3 138:6
139:5 139:6 139:7 139:7 139:8 139:8 141:3 141:3 141:3 141:4 141:4 141:4 141:5
143:2 143:2 146:8 148:2 148:5 148:8 148:8
Proverbs
3:11 3:11 3:12 3:12 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:25 8:25 8:30 8:30 9:8 9:8 10:19 10:19
16:1 16:1 16:1 16:1 19:21 19:21 19:21 19:21 20:9 20:9 29:27 29:27 29:27 29:27
29:27 29:27 30:15 30:15
Ecclesiastes
1:18 1:18 3:5 3:5 3:5 3:5 3:21 3:21
Song of Solomon
1:3 1:3 1:3 1:4 1:4 1:11 1:11 1:12 1:12 2:2
Isaiah2:3 2:3 5:7 5:7 5:18 5:18 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 6:10 6:10 7:9 7:9 7:9 7:9 7:9
7:9 7:14 7:14 7:14 7:14 9:6 9:6 9:6 9:6 11:2 11:2 26:10 26:10 26:18 26:18 28:11
28:11 28:16 28:16 40:6 40:6 40:8 40:8 48:16 48:16 53:2 53:2 53:7 53:7 53:8
53:8 55:6 55:6 55:7 55:7 56:4 56:4 56:4 56:4 56:5 56:5 56:5 56:5 56:5 56:5
61:1 61:1 63:16 63:16 63:16 63:16 66:1 66:1 66:2 66:2 66:2 66:2 66:2 66:2
Jeremiah
16:19 16:19 16:19 16:19 16:20 16:20 17:5 17:5 17:5 17:5 17:5 17:5 23:24 23:24
25:12 25:12 25:12 25:12 25:18 25:18 29:1 29:4-7 29:4-7 29:10 31:1 31:1 31:2
31:2
Ezekiel
18:2 18:2 18:4 18:4 34 36:26 36:26 37:1-10 37:1-10
Daniel
2:47 2:47 3:29 6:26 7:9-14 7:9-14 9:21 9:21
Hosea
4:8 4:8 6:6 6:6
Joel
2:32
Jonah
3
Habakkuk
2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4
Zephaniah
2:11 2:11
Zechariah
1:9 1:9 9:17 9:17 12:10 12:10 12:10 12:10 13:7-13 13:7-13
Malachi
1:2 1:2 1:3 1:3
Matthew

743

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

1:17 1:17 1:18 1:20 1:20 1:23 1:23 2:12 2:20 3:3 3:11 3:13-15 3:16 3:16 3:16
3:16 3:16 3:16 3:16 3:17 3:17 4:1-11 5:3 5:3-10 5:6 5:8 5:8 5:8 5:8 5:8 5:10
5:11 5:12 5:14 5:22 5:23 5:27 5:27 5:28 5:28 5:32 5:34 5:34 5:37 5:37 5:37
5:37 5:37 5:37 5:39 5:40 5:44 5:44 5:44 5:44 6:8 6:9 6:9 6:9 6:9 6:10 6:11
6:11-13 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:13 6:13 6:14 6:15 6:15
6:19-22 6:24 6:24 6:25 6:25-34 6:26 6:26 6:26 6:30 6:31 6:34 6:34 6:34 7:7 7:7
7:8 7:12 7:15 7:16 7:16 7:18 7:21 7:21 7:22 8:5-10 8:5-10 8:8 8:8 8:9 8:11 8:19
8:20 8:22 9:2-4 9:11-13 9:15 10:7-10 10:10 10:16 10:16 10:19 10:20 10:20 10:21
10:22 10:22 10:23 10:28 10:28 10:28 10:28 10:28 10:28 10:28 10:28-30 10:28-30
10:33 10:40-42 11:13 11:18-19 11:19 11:21 11:25-29 11:27 11:27 11:27 11:27 11:27
11:28 11:28 11:28 11:29 11:29 11:29 12:1 12:2 12:3 12:4 12:28 12:32 12:32 12:33
12:35 12:37 12:39 12:40 12:40 12:45 12:46-50 12:48 13:8 13:9 13:15 13:15 13:30
13:47-50 13:55 14:26 14:26 14:31 15:10-20 15:11 15:16-20 15:17-20 15:22-28 15:28
16:18 16:18 16:21-23 17:3 17:5 17:27 18 18:1-3 18:7 19:8 19:8 19:9 19:9 19:10
19:11 19:11 19:11 19:11 19:12 19:12 19:12 19:12 19:12 19:12 19:12 19:12 19:12
19:12 19:17 19:19 19:21 20:9 20:10 20:21 20:22 20:22 20:23 21:31 22:13 22:29
22:30 22:30 22:37 22:37 22:37 22:37-40 22:37-40 22:37-40 22:37-40 22:37-40 22:39
22:39 22:39 22:40 22:40 22:40 22:40 23:3 23:9 23:15 23:26 23:26 23:37 23:37
24:12 24:19 24:31 25:4 25:21 25:23 25:26 25:27 25:31 25:31 25:31 25:31-46 25:32
25:33 25:34 25:34 25:34 25:34 25:37 25:40 25:41 25:41 25:41 25:46 25:46 26:7-13
26:38 26:39 26:41 26:49 26:70-74 27:23-50 27:46 27:46
Mark
1:11 1:11 3:27 3:27 13:32 13:32 13:32 13:32 15:37 15:37 15:39 15:39 15:42-46
15:42-46 15:43 15:43 15:44 15:44 17:5
Luke
1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:17 1:17 1:26-32 1:26-32 1:27 1:27 1:28 1:28 1:28 1:28
1:30 1:30 1:34 1:34 1:34 1:34 1:35 1:35 1:35 1:35 1:41 1:41-79 1:80 1:80 2:14
2:14 2:25-38 2:25-38 2:36 2:36 2:37 2:37 2:37 2:37 2:52 2:52 3:6 3:6 3:6 3:6
3:21-23 3:21-23 3:22 3:22 4:1 4:18 4:18 4:19 4:19 5:21 5:21 5:22 5:22 6:19 6:19
6:30 6:30 6:45 6:45 7:6 7:6 7:7 7:7 7:36-47 7:36-47 7:37 7:37 7:38 7:38 7:38
7:38 7:47 7:47 8:1-3 8:1-3 8:8 8:8 8:21 8:21 8:45 8:45 9:3 9:3 10:1-7 10:1-7
10:4 10:7 10:7 10:7 10:27 10:27 10:27 10:27 10:30 10:30 10:30-35 10:30-35
10:30-37 10:30-37 10:30-42 10:30-42 10:34 10:34 10:35 10:35 10:35 10:35 10:39
10:39 11:20 11:20 11:20 11:20 11:27 11:27 11:28 11:28 11:37-41 11:37-41 11:41
11:41 11:41 11:41 11:42 11:42 11:42 11:42 11:42 11:42 12:4 12:4 12:4 12:4 12:4-7
12:17 12:17 12:20 12:20 12:35 12:35 12:35 12:35 12:36 12:36 12:36 12:36 13:6-17
13:6-17 13:28-30 13:28-30 15:11-32 15:11-32 16:3 16:3 16:19-22 16:19-22 16:22
16:22 16:24-29 16:24-29 18:10-14 18:10-14 18:11-14 18:11-14 18:13 18:13 18:18
18:18 18:19 18:19 19:2-8 19:2-8 19:41 19:41 20:35 20:35 20:36 20:36 20:36 20:36
20:36 20:36 20:36 20:36 20:36 20:36 21:18 21:18 21:18 21:18 21:18 21:18 21:19
21:19 22:61 22:61 23:34 23:34 23:34 23:34 24:28 24:28 24:39 24:39 24:39 24:39
24:39 24:39 24:39 24:39 24:44 24:44
John

744

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1
1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1-14 1:1-14 1:2 1:2 1:2 1:2 1:2 1:2 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3
1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:5 1:5
1:5 1:5 1:9 1:9 1:9 1:9 1:9 1:9 1:10 1:10 1:10 1:10 1:10 1:10 1:11 1:11 1:12
1:12 1:12 1:12 1:12-14 1:12-14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14
1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14
1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:18 1:18
1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:29 1:29 1:29 1:29 1:29 1:29 1:47 1:47 2:2 2:2 2:4 2:4
2:7-9 2:7-9 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:19 2:19 2:19-21 2:19-21 2:20 2:20 3:2 3:2 3:5 3:5
3:6 3:6 3:6 3:6 3:8 3:8 3:14 3:14 3:15 3:15 3:17 3:17 3:21 3:21 3:35 3:35 3:35
3:35 3:36 3:36 3:36 3:36 4:7-14 4:7-14 4:10 4:10 4:13 4:13 4:24 4:24 4:24 4:24
4:24 4:24 4:24 4:24 4:24 4:24 4:34 4:34 5:2 5:2 5:19 5:19 5:19 5:19 5:19 5:19
5:19 5:19 5:19 5:19 5:21 5:21 5:22 5:22 5:22 5:22 5:22 5:22 5:22-29 5:22-29
5:24 5:24 5:25 5:25 5:25 5:25 5:26 5:26 5:26 5:26 5:26 5:26 5:26 5:26 5:26
5:26 5:26 5:26 5:27 5:27 5:29 5:29 5:46 5:46 6:38 6:38 6:38 6:38 6:67 6:67
7:16 7:16 7:16 7:16 7:16 7:16 7:16 7:16 7:37-39 7:37-39 7:39 7:39 7:39 8:15
8:15 8:23 8:23 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:31 8:31 8:32 8:32 8:36 8:36
8:42 8:42 8:44 8:44 8:50 8:50 9:6 9:6 9:7 9:7 10:17 10:17 10:18 10:18 10:18
10:18 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30
10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:36 10:36 11:34
11:34 11:51 11:51 12:6 12:6 12:6 12:6 12:6 12:6 12:28 12:28 12:28 12:28 12:44
12:44 12:47 12:47 12:47-50 12:47-50 12:48 12:48 13:1 13:1 13:1-17 13:1-17 13:5
13:5 13:16 13:16 13:21-24 13:21-24 13:23 13:23 13:29 14:1 14:1 14:1 14:1 14:2
14:2 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:8 14:8 14:9 14:9
14:9 14:9 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:11 14:11 14:11 14:11 14:15-17
14:15-17 14:16-23 14:16-23 14:17 14:17 14:21 14:21 14:21 14:21 14:21 14:21 14:21
14:21 14:22 14:22 14:23 14:23 14:23 14:23 14:25 14:25 14:26 14:26 14:26 14:26
14:26 14:26 14:26 14:26 14:26 14:26 14:28 14:28 14:28 14:28 14:28 14:28 14:28
14:28 14:28 14:28 14:28 14:28 14:30-31 14:30-31 15:2 15:2 15:5 15:5 15:5 15:12
15:12 15:13 15:13 15:13 15:13 15:13 15:13 15:15 15:25 15:25 15:26 15:26 15:26
15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26 15:26
15:26 15:26 15:26 16:6 16:6 16:7 16:7 16:7 16:7 16:7 16:7 16:12 16:12 16:12
16:12 16:13 16:13 16:13 16:13 16:13 16:13 16:13-15 16:13-15 16:15 16:15 16:15
16:15 16:22 16:22 16:23 16:23 16:25-28 16:25-28 16:28 16:28 16:28 16:28 17:1
17:1 17:2 17:2 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3-5 17:3-5
17:4 17:4 17:5 17:5 17:5 17:5 17:10 17:10 17:11 17:11 17:11 17:11 17:15 17:15
17:19 17:19 17:20-22 17:20-22 17:21 17:23 17:23 17:23 18:22 18:22 18:23 18:23
19:14 19:14 19:23 19:23 19:24 19:24 19:26 19:26 19:27 19:27 19:30 19:30 19:30-34
19:30-34 19:34 19:34 19:38 19:38-39 19:39 19:41 19:41 19:41 19:41 19:42 19:42
20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:22 20:22 20:22 20:22 20:22
20:22 20:22 20:22 20:23 20:23 20:28 20:28 21:15 21:15
Acts
1:11 1:11 2 2 2:1-4 2:1-4 2:1-4 2:1-4 2:1-4 2:1-4 2:2 2:2 2:2 2:2 2:2-4 2:2-4
2:3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4745

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

2:4 2:32 2:32 2:33 2:33 2:37 2:37 2:37 2:37 2:38 2:38 2:39 2:39 2:41 2:41 2:44
2:44 2:44 2:44 2:44 2:44 2:45 2:45 4:12 4:12 4:32 4:32 4:32 4:32 4:32 4:32
4:32 4:32 4:32 4:34 4:34 5:15 5:15 6:7 6:7 7:2 7:2 7:29-33 7:29-33 7:47 7:47
7:48 7:48 7:51-53 7:51-53 8:18 8:18 8:18-20 8:18-20 8:19 8:19 8:20 8:20 8:20
8:20 8:21-22 8:21-22 9:4 9:4 9:12 9:12 9:25 9:25 10:38 10:38 10:41 10:41 10:44
10:44 10:46 10:46 11:15-17 11:15-17 11:28-30 11:28-30 11:28-30 11:28-30 11:28-30
11:28-30 12:9 12:9 12:9-11 12:9-11 13:2 13:2 13:18 13:18 13:30 13:30 13:33 13:33
15:9 15:9 15:9 15:9 16:1-3 16:1-3 17:17 17:17 17:18 17:18 17:21 17:21 17:27
17:27 17:27 17:27 17:27 17:27 17:28 17:28 17:28 17:28 17:28 17:28 17:28 17:28
17:28 17:28 18:1-3 18:1-3 18:4 18:4 20:7 20:7 20:33-35 20:33-35 21:10-12 21:10-12
23:3 23:3 26:16-18 26:16-18
Romans1:1 1:1 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:4 1:4 1:9 1:9 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17
1:17 1:17 1:17 1:18 1:18 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20
1:20 1:20 1:21 1:21 1:22 1:22 1:23 1:23 1:23 1:23 1:25 1:25 1:25 1:25 1:26
1:26 1:27 1:27 1:30 1:30 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:25 2:25 2:25
2:25 3:7 3:7 3:7 3:7 3:8 3:8 3:8 3:8 3:19 3:19 3:20 3:20 3:20 3:20 3:20 3:20
3:26 3:26 4:4 4:4 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:15 4:15 4:17 4:17 4:25 4:25 5:4 5:4 5:5
5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5
5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:6 5:6 5:6-10 5:6-10 5:8 5:8 5:8 5:8 5:8 5:8 5:8-10 5:8-10 5:9
5:9 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:16 5:16 5:16
5:16 5:18 5:18 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 6:1 6:1 6:1-11 6:1-11
6:3 6:3 6:4 6:4 6:4 6:4 6:5 6:5 6:6 6:6 6:6 6:6 6:9 6:9 6:9 6:9 6:9 6:9 6:9
6:9 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:13 6:13 6:13 6:13 6:13 6:13 6:13 6:13 6:13
6:13 6:13 6:13 6:14 6:14 6:14 6:14 6:23 6:23 7:7 7:7 7:7 7:7 7:14 7:14 7:17
7:17 7:18 7:18 7:18 7:18 7:18 7:18 7:18 7:18 7:22 7:22 7:23 7:23 7:23 7:23
7:24 7:24 7:25 7:25 7:25 7:25 7:25 7:25 8 8 8:9 8:9 8:10 8:10 8:10 8:10 8:10
8:10 8:11 8:11 8:12 8:12 8:13 8:13 8:13 8:13 8:13 8:13 8:14 8:14 8:14 8:14
8:14 8:14 8:14 8:14 8:14 8:14 8:15 8:15 8:15 8:15 8:15 8:15 8:15 8:15 8:15
8:15 8:15-17 8:15-17 8:17 8:17 8:18 8:18 8:22 8:22 8:23 8:23 8:23 8:23 8:23-25
8:23-25 8:24 8:24 8:24 8:24 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:26 8:26 8:28 8:28 8:28 8:28
8:28-32 8:28-32 8:29 8:29 8:30 8:30 8:30 8:30 8:31 8:31 8:31 8:31 8:31 8:31
8:32 8:32 8:32 8:32 8:32 8:32 8:32 8:32 8:32 8:32 8:34 8:34 8:35-39 8:35-39 9:1
9:1 9:2 9:2 9:5 9:5 9:5 9:5 9:5 9:5 9:7 9:7 9:8 9:8 9:12 9:12 9:13 9:13 9:14
9:14 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:16 9:16 9:16 9:16 9:16 9:16 9:16 9:16 9:17 9:17
9:18 9:18 9:18 9:18 9:19 9:19 9:20 9:20 9:21 9:21 9:21 9:21 9:22 9:22 9:23
9:23 9:23 9:23 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:4 10:4 10:9 10:9
10:10 10:10 10:10 10:10 10:10 10:10 10:10 10:10 10:14 10:14 10:17 10:17 11:5
11:5 11:6 11:6 11:6 11:6 11:17 11:17 11:18 11:18 11:20 11:20 11:20 11:20 11:20
11:20 11:33-36 11:33-36 11:36 11:36 11:36 11:36 11:36 11:36 11:36 11:36 11:36
11:36 11:36 11:36 11:36 11:36 12:1 12:1 12:2 12:2 12:2 12:2 12:2 12:2 12:2
12:2 12:3 12:3 12:3 12:3 12:3 12:3 12:4-6 12:4-6 12:10 12:10 12:12 12:12 12:16
12:16 12:17 12:17 13:1 13:1 13:1 13:1 13:7 13:7 13:8 13:8 13:9 13:9 13:10 13:10

746

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:10 14:10 14:23 14:23 15:3 15:3 15:4 15:4 15:19 15:19
15:25-27 15:25-27 15:27 15:27 16:18 16:18 16:19 16:19
1 Corinthians
1:13 1:13 1:20 1:20 1:21 1:21 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24
1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:25 1:25 1:25 1:25 1:27-29 1:27-29
1:30 1:30 1:30 1:30 1:30 1:30 1:31 1:31 1:31 1:31 1:31 1:31 1:31 1:31 2:2 2:2
2:2 2:2 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:6 2:6 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:11 2:11 2:12
2:12 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:14 3:1 3:1 3:1 3:1 3:1 3:1 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:3
3:3 3:3 3:3 3:5 3:5 3:5-10 3:5-10 3:6 3:6 3:7 3:7 3:7 3:7 3:8 3:8 3:9 3:9 3:11
3:11 3:11-15 3:11-15 3:11-15 3:13-15 3:13-15 3:15 3:15 3:16 3:16 3:16 3:16 3:16
3:16 3:16 3:16 3:17 3:17 3:17 3:17 3:19 3:19 3:22 3:22 3:22 3:22 3:23 3:23
3:23 3:23 4:3 4:3 4:3 4:3 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:7 4:7 4:7 4:7 4:7 4:7 4:7
4:7 6:1 6:1 6:4-6 6:4-6 6:4-6 6:4-6 6:7 6:7 6:9 6:9 6:10 6:10 6:10 6:10 6:15
6:15 6:15 6:15 6:15 6:15 6:15 6:15 6:15 6:15 6:16 6:16 6:17 6:17 6:17 6:17
6:17 6:17 6:18 6:18 6:19 6:19 6:19 6:19 6:19 6:19 6:19 6:19 6:19 6:19 6:19
6:19 6:19 6:19 6:20 6:20 6:20 6:20 6:20 6:20 6:20 6:20 6:20 6:20 7:1 7:1 7:4
7:4 7:4 7:4 7:4 7:4 7:5 7:5 7:6 7:6 7:6 7:6 7:6 7:6 7:6 7:6 7:7 7:7 7:7 7:7
7:7 7:7 7:7 7:7 7:8 7:8 7:8 7:8 7:8 7:8 7:8 7:8 7:9 7:9 7:9 7:9 7:9 7:9 7:9
7:9 7:9 7:9 7:9 7:9 7:10 7:10 7:10 7:10 7:10 7:10 7:11 7:11 7:11 7:11 7:11
7:11 7:14 7:14 7:18 7:18 7:18-20 7:18-20 7:25 7:25 7:25 7:25 7:25 7:25 7:25
7:25 7:26 7:26 7:26 7:26 7:26 7:26 7:26 7:26 7:27 7:27 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28
7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:28 7:29 7:29 7:29-34 7:32
7:32 7:32 7:32 7:32 7:32 7:32 7:32 7:32 7:32 7:33 7:33 7:33 7:33 7:34 7:34
7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:34 7:35 7:35 7:36
7:36 7:36 7:36 7:36 7:36 7:37 7:37 7:38 7:38 7:38 7:38 7:38 7:38 7:39 7:39
7:39 7:39 7:39 7:39 7:40 7:40 7:40 7:40 7:40 7:40 7:40 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1
8:2 8:2 8:3 8:3 8:5 8:5 8:6 8:6 8:6 8:6 8:6 8:6 9:1-7 9:1-7 9:6-12 9:6-12 9:7
9:7 9:7 9:7 9:7-10 9:7-10 9:7-15 9:7-15 9:11 9:11 9:12 9:12 9:12 9:12 9:12 9:12
9:13-15 9:13-15 9:14 9:14 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:16 9:16 9:17 9:17 9:18 9:18
9:19-21 9:19-21 9:20 9:20 9:22 9:22 9:22 9:22 9:22 9:22 9:22 9:22 9:24 9:24
10:1-11 10:1-11 10:1-11 10:1-11 10:4 10:4 10:4 10:4 10:11 10:11 10:11 10:11
10:11 10:12 10:12 10:13 10:13 10:13 10:13 10:13 10:13 10:13 10:13 10:13 10:13
10:13 10:13 10:32 10:32 10:33 10:33 11:3 11:3 11:3 11:3 11:3 11:3 11:3 11:3
11:3 11:3 11:4 11:4 11:5 11:5 11:7 11:7 11:7 11:7 11:7 11:7 11:7 11:7 11:10
11:10 11:12 11:12 11:14 11:14 11:16 11:16 11:17 11:17 11:31 11:31 11:31 11:31
11:31 11:31 11:32 11:32 11:32 11:32 11:32 11:32 12:3 12:3 12:6 12:6 12:6-11
12:6-11 12:7 12:7 12:7-10 12:7-10 12:8 12:8 12:8 12:8 12:10 12:10 12:11 12:11
12:11 12:11 12:11 12:11 12:12 12:12 12:13 12:13 12:18 12:18 12:18 12:18 12:24
12:24 12:24 12:24 12:25 12:25 12:26 12:26 12:29 12:29 12:31 12:31 12:31 12:31
13:1-3 13:1-3 13:3 13:3 13:4 13:4 13:4 13:4 13:4 13:4 13:4 13:4 13:5 13:5 13:7
13:7 13:7 13:7 13:8 13:8 13:11 13:11 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12
13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12
13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12
13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12
747

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

13:12 13:12 13:12 13:12 13:13 13:13 13:13 13:13 13:13 13:13 14:14 14:14 14:21
14:21 15:15 15:15 15:19 15:19 15:21 15:21 15:22 15:22 15:23 15:23 15:24 15:24
15:24 15:24 15:24 15:24 15:24-28 15:24-28 15:24-28 15:24-28 15:25 15:25 15:26
15:27 15:27 15:28 15:28 15:28 15:28 15:28 15:28 15:28 15:28 15:33 15:33 15:36-38
15:36-38 15:39 15:39 15:40 15:40 15:41 15:41 15:41 15:41 15:41 15:41 15:42
15:42 15:42 15:42 15:43 15:43 15:44 15:44 15:44 15:44 15:44 15:44 15:44 15:44
15:45 15:45 15:47 15:47 15:49 15:49 15:50 15:50 15:50 15:50 15:50 15:50 15:51
15:51 15:52 15:52 15:52 15:52 15:52 15:52 15:52 15:52 15:53 15:53 15:53 15:53
15:53-56 15:53-56 15:54 15:54 15:54 15:54 15:55 15:55 15:55 15:55 15:56 15:56
16:1-4 16:1-4
2 Corinthians
1:12 1:12 1:19 1:19 2:15 2:15 2:16 2:16 2:16 2:16 3:6 3:6 3:14 3:14 3:16 3:16
3:16 3:16 3:17 3:17 3:17 3:17 3:18 3:18 3:18 3:18 4:6 4:6 4:13 4:13 4:16 4:16
4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:17 4:17 4:18
4:18 5:5 5:5 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7
5:7 5:7 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:10 5:13 5:13 5:14 5:14 5:20 5:20 5:21 5:21 6:2-10
6:2-10 6:7 6:7 6:8 6:8 6:10 6:10 8:1-21 8:1-21 8:9 8:9 8:21 8:21 9 9:7 9:7 9:7
9:7 10:12 10:12 10:12 10:12 10:17 10:17 11:2 11:2 11:2 11:2 11:2 11:2 11:7
11:7 11:7-12 11:7-12 11:9 11:9 11:9 11:9 11:14 11:14 11:14 11:14 11:33 11:33
12:4 12:4 12:6 12:6 12:9 12:9 12:15 12:15 13:4 13:4
Galatians
1:10 1:10 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 2:3 2:3 2:4 2:4 2:9 2:9 2:12-21 2:12-21 2:13 2:13
2:14 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:16 2:16 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20 2:20
2:20 3:11 3:11 3:19 3:19 3:24 3:24 3:26-28 3:26-28 3:27 3:27 3:28 3:28 4:4 4:4
4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:5
4:5 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:5 4:6 4:6 4:10 4:10 4:11 4:11 4:19 4:19 4:19 4:19
4:22-24 4:22-24 4:22-26 4:22-26 4:24 4:24 4:25 4:25 4:26 4:26 4:26 4:26 4:26
4:26 4:26 4:26 4:26 4:26 4:30 4:30 5:2 5:2 5:4 5:4 5:5 5:5 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6
5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:13 5:13 5:14
5:14 5:16 5:16 5:16 5:16 5:16 5:16 5:16-18 5:16-18 5:17 5:17 5:17 5:17 5:17
5:17 5:17 5:17 5:17 5:17 5:19 5:19 5:19-21 5:19-21 5:20 5:20 5:21 5:21 5:22
5:22 5:23 5:23 5:24 5:24 5:24 5:24 6:1 6:1 6:1 6:1 6:2 6:2 6:4 6:4 6:6 6:6 6:6
6:6 6:14 6:14
Ephesians
1:4 1:4 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:10 1:10 1:14 1:14 1:22 1:22 1:23 1:23 2:1-3 2:1-3
2:3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8-10 2:8-10 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:10 2:10
3:7 3:7 3:8 3:8 4:3 4:3 4:5 4:5 4:7 4:7 4:7-12 4:7-12 4:8 4:8 4:8 4:8 4:8 4:8
4:13 4:13 4:14 4:14 4:21-24 4:21-24 4:22-25 4:22-25 4:23 4:23 4:23 4:23 4:24
4:24 4:24 4:24 4:25 4:25 4:25 4:25 4:25 4:25 4:28 4:28 4:28 4:28 5:1 5:1 5:8
5:8 5:12 5:12 5:14 5:14 5:22-28 5:22-28 5:24 5:24 5:25-28 5:25-28 5:29 5:29 5:29
5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 5:29 6:5 6:5 83
120 130 131 137 143 150 188
Philippians

748

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

1:8 1:8 1:15-18 1:15-18 1:18 1:18 1:23 1:23 1:23 1:23 1:29 1:29 2:3 2:3 2:5-11
2:5-11 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6
2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7
2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8
2:8 2:8 2:8-11 2:8-11 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:12 2:12 2:12 2:12 2:13 2:13 2:13 2:13
2:13 2:13 2:13 2:13 2:16 2:16 2:17 2:17 2:21 2:21 3:3 3:3 3:6 3:6 3:12-14
3:12-14 3:13-15 3:13-15 3:15 3:15 3:15 3:15 3:16 3:16 3:20 3:20 3:21 3:21 3:21
3:21 4:7 4:7 4:8 4:8 4:9 4:9 4:12 4:12
Colossians
1:9 1:13 1:13 1:13 1:13 1:14 1:14 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:16 1:16 1:16 1:16 1:16
1:16 1:17 1:17 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:19 1:19
1:20 1:20 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 2:1-3 2:1-3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:3 2:11 2:11 2:11 2:11
2:15 2:15 2:20 2:20 3:1 3:1 3:1 3:1 3:1-3 3:1-3 3:1-4 3:1-4 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:3
3:3 3:4 3:4 3:4 3:4 3:5 3:5 3:6 3:6 3:7 3:7 3:8 3:8 3:9 3:9 3:9 3:9 3:9 3:9
3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10 3:10
1 Thessalonians
2:5-7 2:5-7 2:6 2:6 2:7 2:7 2:7-9 2:7-9 2:9 2:9 2:13 2:13 4:5 4:5 4:17 4:17
5:6-8 5:6-8
2 Thessalonians
3:6-12 3:6-12 3:8 3:8 3:8 3:8 3:8 3:8 3:9 3:9 3:10 3:10 3:12 3:12 3:12 3:12
3:13 3:13 3:13 3:13
1 Timothy
1:1 1:1 1:2 1:2 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5
1:5 1:13 1:13 1:13 1:13 1:13 1:13 1:15 1:15 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:20
1:20 2:1 2:1 2:1-4 2:1-4 2:2 2:2 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5
2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:5 2:9 2:9 2:10 2:10 2:15 2:15 3:2 3:2 3:16 3:16
4:8 4:8 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:5 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:6 5:11 5:11 5:11
5:11 5:11 5:11 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:12 5:13 5:13 5:13 5:13 5:14 5:14
5:14 5:14 5:15 5:15 5:23 5:23 5:23 5:23 6:10 6:10 6:14-16 6:14-16 6:15 6:15
6:16 6:16 6:16 6:16 6:16 6:16 6:16 6:16 6:18 6:18 6:19 6:19
2 Timothy
2:3-6 2:3-6 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:4 2:8 2:8 2:13 2:13 2:19 2:19 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25
4:1 4:1 4:2 4:2
Titus
1:6 1:6 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 3:13 3:13 3:14 3:14
Hebrews
1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:8 1:8 1:9 1:9 1:13 1:13 1:13 1:13 1:14 1:14
2:1-4 2:1-4 2:4 2:4 2:9 2:9 2:11 2:11 5:5 5:5 5:14 5:14 5:14 5:14 5:14 5:14 7
7:17 7:17 10:38 10:38 11:1 11:1 11:1 11:1 12:3 12:3 12:7 12:7 12:11 12:11 13:4
13:4
James
1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:15 1:15 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17
1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:17 2:17 2:19 2:19 2:19 2:19 3:2 3:2
3:15 3:15 4:6 4:6 4:6 4:6 5:11 5:11
749

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

1 Peter
1:10 1:10 1:11 1:11 1:17 1:17 1:20 1:20 1:24 1:24 1:25 1:25 2:21 2:21 2:21
2:21 2:21 2:21 2:22 2:22 3:1-7 3:1-7 3:5-7 3:5-7 3:9 3:9 5:8 5:8
2 Peter
1:4 1:4 2:4 2:4 2:19 2:19 2:19 2:19
1 John1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:8 1:8 1:8 1:8 1:8 1:8 1:8-10 1:8-10 2:1 2:1 2:2 2:2
2:10 2:10 2:15 2:15 2:16 2:16 2:16 2:16 2:21 2:21 2:21 2:21 2:21 2:21 3:1 3:1
3:1 3:1 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:4 3:4 3:4
3:4 3:9 3:9 3:16 3:16 3:16 3:16 4:6 4:6 4:7 4:7 4:7-19 4:7-19 4:8 4:8 4:8 4:8
4:8 4:8 4:8 4:8 4:10 4:10 4:10 4:10 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16
4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:18 4:18 4:18 4:18 4:19
4:19 4:20 4:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20
Revelation
1:5 1:5 1:7 1:7 1:8 1:8 2:2 2:2 5:5 5:5 5:6 5:6 5:11 5:11 14:1-5 14:1-5 14:3
14:3 14:4 14:4 14:4 14:4 14:4 14:4 14:5 14:5 14:5 14:5 14:5 14:5 21:8 21:8
Tobit
2:7 12:12
Wisdom of Solomon
1:6-11 1:6-11 1:7 1:7 1:11 1:11 1:11 1:11 1:11 1:13 1:13 2:1 2:1 3:9 3:9 6:1
6:1 6:23 6:23 6:24 6:24 6:26 6:26 7:16 7:24 7:24 7:25 7:25 7:25-27 7:25-27 7:27
7:27 7:27 7:27 7:27 7:27 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1 8:1
8:1 8:21 8:21 8:21 8:21 8:21 8:21 8:21 8:21 9 9 9:10 9:10 9:10 9:10 9:14 9:14
9:14-17 9:14-17 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15
9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 11:17 11:17 11:20 11:20 11:20 11:20 11:20 11:20 11:21 11:21
12:18 12:18 13:1-5 13:1-5 16:24 16:24 16:25 16:25
Susanna
1:22 1:23 1:23 1:23
Bel and the Dragon
1:41 1:41
2 Maccabees
12:43 12:43
1 Esdras
2:7 2:7
Sirach1:1 1:1 1:5 1:5 2:1-5 2:1-5 2:5 2:14 2:14 3:18 3:18 3:18 3:18 3:18 3:18 3:18
3:18 3:22 3:22 3:30 3:30 7:13 7:13 10:12 10:12 10:15 10:15 15:20 15:20 18:7
18:7 19:1 19:1 19:1 19:1 23:20 23:20 24:3 24:3 24:5 24:5 24:5 24:5 24:29 24:29
27:5 27:5 30:23 30:24 30:24 30:24 30:24 37:16 37:16 37:20 37:20 39:16 39:16
40:1 40:1 43:29 43:29 46:20 46:20

750

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

Index of Greek Words and Phrases
•
•
•
•
•
•

μ

& 232
μ ™

•μ
• μ
•
,
•
š
•
• .
•
μ
•, sc.
•.
•ˆ
•
•
μ™
•
™
•
•
•
•
ž
•
μ™
•
•
•
•μ μ
•μ μ
•μ
•
•
‰
™
•
μ
•
•š
μ
•
•
μ
•
•€
•€

ž

μ

’

š ™

‚

μ™

751

.

š

™

€

™ ,

š

NPNF (V1-03)

• μ
• μ
• ,
•
š
•
μ
•
•™
•
•
•
• ™
• μ
•
•
•
•
•
•
•›

Philip Schaff

μ

),
›

Index of Pages of the Print Edition
i iii iv v 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55
56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81
82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105
106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125
126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145
146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165
166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185
186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205
206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225
226 227 228 229 231 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251
252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271
272 273 274 275 276 277 279 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295
296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315
317 318 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 337 338 339 340 341
342 343 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364
365 366 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389
390 391 392 393 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412
413 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435

752

NPNF (V1-03)

Philip Schaff

436 437 438 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 457 458 459
460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 481 482
483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 503 504
505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524
527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548
549 550 551

753